Combat Questions

[JohnK]

Hullo, folks,

I've been re-reading the Combat chapter of Book 1 - Universe, and have a few questions.

1. What are the rules for multiple actions in combat? Can a player character take multiple actions in a round? What are the guidelines and the game modifiers for doing so?

2. What are the rules in combat for attacking multiple opponents and defending against multiple opponents? There is the section on Group Combat on page 237, but it doesn't address being attacked by more than one opponent, and how one defends and strikes back against them. So what are the guidelines for this?

3. Not strictly a combat question per se, but what are the guidelines that folks would use for Ambidexterity? While there is a Combat Art (page 238) for Two-weapon Fighting, what guidelines would you use for a character who is Ambidextrous or for one who lacks ambidexterity and wants to use weapons in both hands?

4. Under the Fighting Arts (page 238), there is the one for Parry. However, why is there no mention of being able to Riposte under the Parry section? What would be the guidelines for riposting in combat?

Any answers to these questions and some assistance with these concepts would be appreciated. Thanks, in advance.

[Dragoslav]

I'm hardly an expert on the combat system, but here's my take on it, for what it's worth.

1. What are the rules for multiple actions in combat? Can a player character take multiple actions in a round? What are the guidelines and the game modifiers for doing so?

That's an interesting question. If you're talking about making multiple attacks in a round, then I would say "no, never" because the rules never make mention of taking multiple actions, only a single action per round, and multiple actions would slow down combat. What's more, having a bunch of modifiers specific to such a situation seems antithetical for a "rules light" system like Esteren. If you're talking about a player who wants to use his action to attack or move AND do something else minor as part of that, then that's a different question...

It makes me think of one of the most common complaints about the "action economy" in D&D 4th Edition (skip ahead if you're familiar with this already). On your turn, you have three actions: A Minor action, a Move action, and a Standard action, so you know exactly what your character is capable of doing in a turn. However, people's frustration stems from not quite uncommon scenarios such as this: A player wants to move his character through a closed door, shut it behind him, and then keep moving. By the rules, the player has to use his Move action to move up to the door; then a Minor action to open the door; then he still has his Standard action, which he can use either to close the door or to move away from the door -- he doesn't have enough actions to do both.

For Esteren, however, since combat is supposed to be fast and relatively straightforward, and even though I generally prefer "rules clarity" over "GM handwaving," I would allow a player to perform "incidental" actions as part of his action based on the context. So if a player says, "I'm going to go through the door across the room and shut it behind me," I'd likely allow him to do all of that by taking the "Movement Attitude" as described on page 217. (Incidentally, I think this is one area in which the combat rules could use some expansion or elaboration -- what if a player wants to do something that isn't a move or an attack, like drawing a weapon, closing a door, or mounting a horse?)

2. What are the rules in combat for attacking multiple opponents and defending against multiple opponents? There is the section on Group Combat on page 237, but it doesn't address being attacked by more than one opponent, and how one defends and strikes back against them. So what are the guidelines for this?

Since each combatant only gets one turn per round and one action per turn, you can't attack multiple opponents per round regardless of how many are attacking you. As per the rules, "The Round is resolved normally."

If you're surrounded by opponents, these are the only special rules: You can only be surrounded by a maximum of 4 opponents; an opponent attacking you from behind gets a +2 to its attack roll (you would probably specify which opponent you're facing).

3. Not strictly a combat question per se, but what are the guidelines that folks would use for Ambidexterity? While there is a Combat Art (page 238) for Two-weapon Fighting, what guidelines would you use for a character who is Ambidextrous or for one who lacks ambidexterity and wants to use weapons in both hands?

I would just assume, as in D&D, that all characters are ambidextrous and can use a weapon equally well in either hand (but can't properly fight/defend with two without the TWF Combat Art).

I would say that any character can hold a weapon in each hands, but doesn't get any bonuses associated with the TWF Combat Art (or penalties, for that matter).

4. Under the Fighting Arts (page 238), there is the one for Parry. However, why is there no mention of being able to Riposte under the Parry section? What would be the guidelines for riposting in combat?

It could be because it would add complexity that slows down combat, or because it would be too powerful (so a player would just choose to Parry + Riposte every round). Either way, if you think of melee combat abstractly, the combatants are constantly parrying and riposting as best they can when attacked (represented by the character's Defense rating) -- as per the rules, page 236, "A successful Attack roll means that at least one blow has been dealt during the Round," showing you how abstract a round of combat is meant to be in this system, as one "Attack roll" actually represents not just one single strike, but the combatant's entire effort to damage an opponent during the 6-second round. I would interpret a use of the "Parry" art as dropping into a completely defensive stance that doesn't let the opponent reach you, but which also prevents you from attacking properly.

I hope I haven't misunderstood any of your questions! Like I said, I don't have any practical experience with the combat rules yet, but this is my best interpretation.

[iznurda]

1. What are the rules for multiple actions in combat? Can a player character take multiple actions in a round? What are the guidelines and the game modifiers for doing so?

About the multiple attack I can quote :

C'est un sujet que nous avions traité mais qui n'a pas été retenu pour le livre 1 (manque de place, etc). Mais peut-être qu'à l'avenir cette règle reviendra ? Il s'agissait d'un art de combat et si mes souvenirs sont bons, un personnage pouvait tout simplement dispatcher son score de Combat au contact sur plusieurs attaques. Admettons que tu possède 10 en Discipline Épée ; tu pouvais alors décider de porter deux attaques avec un score de 5 chacune, voire trois attaques avec des scores de 4, 3 et 3. Cette règle n'a guère été testée, je ne saurais dire si elle est déséquilibrée ou pas.

In english : "This is a topic that we discussed but was not selected for the book one (lack of space, etc.). But perhaps in the future this rule back? It was a fighting art and if I remember correctly, a person could simply dispatch his contact Combat score to several attacks. Let's say you have 10 in Discipline sword; then you could decide to bring two attacks with a score of 5 each, or three attacks with scores of 4, 3 and 3. This rule has hardly been tested, I do not know if it is unbalanced or not."

I think it could be apply if you want. Or do as Dragoslav say.

About the point 2, Dragoslav already answered.

3. Not strictly a combat question per se, but what are the guidelines that folks would use for Ambidexterity? While there is a Combat Art (page 238) for Two-weapon Fighting, what guidelines would you use for a character who is Ambidextrous or for one who lacks ambidexterity and wants to use weapons in both hands?

This advantage could permit the character to add is potential to his attack score (he use one to open a space for the other one), his defend (like a shield) or his speed (do more attacks to surprise the ennemy).
Without the advantage everybody can hold two weapons, but with no bonuses.
Or you can simply add a malus in case of lacks ambidexterity =)

4. Under the Fighting Arts (page 238), there is the one for Parry. However, why is there no mention of being able to Riposte under the Parry section? What would be the guidelines for riposting in combat?

The defense rating simulate the aptitude of the player to dodge or deviate the opposite attack. The riposte can be include into the defensive stance. The action description will do the rest.

my 2 daols.

iz

[JohnK]

Hullo, Dragoslav,

I'm hardly an expert on the combat system, but here's my take on it, for what it's worth.

Hey, I'll take any feedback on this that I can get.

1. What are the rules for multiple actions in combat? Can a player character take multiple actions in a round? What are the guidelines and the game modifiers for doing so?

That's an interesting question. If you're talking about making multiple attacks in a round, then I would say "no, never" because the rules never make mention of taking multiple actions, only a single action per round, and multiple actions would slow down combat. What's more, having a bunch of modifiers specific to such a situation seems antithetical for a "rules light" system like Esteren. If you're talking about a player who wants to use his action to attack or move AND do something else minor as part of that, then that's a different question...

Yes, that's precisely what I mean. A character should be able to run up to an opponent and strike him in one combat round, even if he's got a penalty to do so. Or he should be able to draw his weapon and attack in the same round, or perhaps rise to a standing position after having been kneeling and striking his opponent.

It makes me think of one of the most common complaints about the "action economy" in D&D 4th Edition (skip ahead if you're familiar with this already).

Not where I was coming from with this, but I do understand what you mean here.

For Esteren, however, since combat is supposed to be fast and relatively straightforward, and even though I generally prefer "rules clarity" over "GM handwaving," I would allow a player to perform "incidental" actions as part of his action based on the context. So if a player says, "I'm going to go through the door across the room and shut it behind me," I'd likely allow him to do all of that by taking the "Movement Attitude" as described on page 217. (Incidentally, I think this is one area in which the combat rules could use some expansion or elaboration -- what if a player wants to do something that isn't a move or an attack, like drawing a weapon, closing a door, or mounting a horse?)

I agree with this assessment totally. We'll see what some of the folks more knowledgeable about the game come back with.

2. What are the rules in combat for attacking multiple opponents and defending against multiple opponents? There is the section on Group Combat on page 237, but it doesn't address being attacked by more than one opponent, and how one defends and strikes back against them. So what are the guidelines for this?

Since each combatant only gets one turn per round and one action per turn, you can't attack multiple opponents per round regardless of how many are attacking you. As per the rules, "The Round is resolved normally."

Bear in mind that since one doesn't make a Defense roll at all, that doesn't actually count as an action. However, since Defense is determined by one's Stance, that means a combat situation where one is being attacked by multiple attackers is really lethal. Moreso than the one-on-one combat situation.

If you're surrounded by opponents, these are the only special rules: You can only be surrounded by a maximum of 4 opponents; an opponent attacking you from behind gets a +2 to its attack roll (you would probably specify which opponent you're facing).

But that doesn't cover two opponents who are coming at you from the front, or whatever. You have a basic Defense of course, but does the normal Defense value for that round, depending on the Stance you've taken, apply to both attacks, or does every attack after the first incur a Defense penatly (and that doesn't include whether they're coming at you from the side or the rear)?

3. Not strictly a combat question per se, but what are the guidelines that folks would use for Ambidexterity? While there is a Combat Art (page 238) for Two-weapon Fighting, what guidelines would you use for a character who is Ambidextrous or for one who lacks ambidexterity and wants to use weapons in both hands?

I would just assume, as in D&D, that all characters are ambidextrous and can use a weapon equally well in either hand (but can't properly fight/defend with two without the TWF Combat Art).

To be honest, the assumption that all characters are ambidextrous isn't in keeping with the grittiness of the game, since real people aren't all ambidextrous. There should be some sort of penalty for using a weapon in the Primary hand versus a weapon in the Secondary hand. Besides, the Two-weapon fighting doesn't talk about any bonus or penalty for using the weapons in either hand, and since one can't attack twice in the same round, what benefit does it provide you?

Maybe there needs to be an Ambidextrous Advantage?

4. Under the Fighting Arts (page 238), there is the one for Parry. However, why is there no mention of being able to Riposte under the Parry section? What would be the guidelines for riposting in combat?

It could be because it would add complexity that slows down combat, or because it would be too powerful (so a player would just choose to Parry + Riposte every round). Either way, if you think of melee combat abstractly, the combatants are constantly parrying and riposting as best they can when attacked (represented by the character's Defense rating) -- as per the rules, page 236, "A successful Attack roll means that at least one blow has been dealt during the Round," showing you how abstract a round of combat is meant to be in this system, as one "Attack roll" actually represents not just one single strike, but the combatant's entire effort to damage an opponent during the 6-second round. I would interpret a use of the "Parry" art as dropping into a completely defensive stance that doesn't let the opponent reach you, but which also prevents you from attacking properly.

I don't necessarily agree with you here about the stuff you've said above. I think easiest way that this can be handled would likely be if the difference between the Attack roll that fails and the Defense total exceeds a certain value, say 8 or 10, the Defending character gains a free attack at a -2 penalty. How does that work for you?

I hope I haven't misunderstood any of your questions! Like I said, I don't have any practical experience with the combat rules yet, but this is my best interpretation.

I don't think you've misunderstood my questions here. I think you did a bang up job of answering them, given your lack of practical experience with the combat rules to this point!

[JohnK]

Hullo, Iz,

1. What are the rules for multiple actions in combat? Can a player character take multiple actions in a round? What are the guidelines and the game modifiers for doing so?

About the multiple attack I can quote :

C'est un sujet que nous avions traité mais qui n'a pas été retenu pour le livre 1 (manque de place, etc). Mais peut-être qu'à l'avenir cette règle reviendra ? Il s'agissait d'un art de combat et si mes souvenirs sont bons, un personnage pouvait tout simplement dispatcher son score de Combat au contact sur plusieurs attaques. Admettons que tu possède 10 en Discipline Épée ; tu pouvais alors décider de porter deux attaques avec un score de 5 chacune, voire trois attaques avec des scores de 4, 3 et 3. Cette règle n'a guère été testée, je ne saurais dire si elle est déséquilibrée ou pas.

In english : "This is a topic that we discussed but was not selected for the book one (lack of space, etc.). But perhaps in the future this rule back? It was a fighting art and if I remember correctly, a person could simply dispatch his contact Combat score to several attacks. Let's say you have 10 in Discipline sword; then you could decide to bring two attacks with a score of 5 each, or three attacks with scores of 4, 3 and 3. This rule has hardly been tested, I do not know if it is unbalanced or not."

I think it could be apply if you want. Or do as Dragoslav say.

Hmm, I think this solution would work well, as not all fighters would be capable of making multiple attacks per round. Perhaps calling it Multiple Strike or Multiple Attack would work.

That said, is Defense split up the same way when defending against multiple attackers?

3. Not strictly a combat question per se, but what are the guidelines that folks would use for Ambidexterity? While there is a Combat Art (page 238) for Two-weapon Fighting, what guidelines would you use for a character who is Ambidextrous or for one who lacks ambidexterity and wants to use weapons in both hands?

This advantage could permit the character to add is potential to his attack score (he use one to open a space for the other one), his defend (like a shield) or his speed (do more attacks to surprise the ennemy).
Without the advantage everybody can hold two weapons, but with no bonuses.
Or you can simply add a malus in case of lacks ambidexterity =)

In all honesty, people can certainly hold two weapons, one in each hand, but they may not be able to attack or defend with the weapon in the secondary hand. (As I know from my time in the Society for Creative Anachronism.) There should be a separate penalty for attacking with a weapon in the Second hand (which might be required if one states that a wound has crippled the sword fighting arm), a penalty for fighting with weapons in both hands, and a bonus to negate some or all of the penalty for being Ambidextrous. Que pensez-vous?

4. Under the Fighting Arts (page 238), there is the one for Parry. However, why is there no mention of being able to Riposte under the Parry section? What would be the guidelines for riposting in combat?

The defense rating simulate the aptitude of the player to dodge or deviate the opposite attack. The riposte can be include into the defensive stance. The action description will do the rest.

Hmm, good thoughts on this. I rather like that solution. The one I posted in the message to Dragoslav had an idea for handling this in it. Would that work as well?

my 2 daols.

Can I keep these daols?

[Dragoslav]

Hey, I'll take any feedback on this that I can get.

I hear you. Sometimes all you need is just to hear someone else say, "Yeah, that's how I interpreted it, too."

Yes, that's precisely what I mean. A character should be able to run up to an opponent and strike him in one combat round, even if he's got a penalty to do so. Or he should be able to draw his weapon and attack in the same round, or perhaps rise to a standing position after having been kneeling and striking his opponent.

You know, I hadn't even thought of that (likely due to my lack of seeing the combat system in practice) because I'm so used to being able to move and attack in D&D, but you're right -- the rules on page 217 seem to state that you can only move "a few steps" during combat unless you take your entire action to move, in which case you forgo attacking. This seems like it would really punish whoever makes the initial move in combat, because you would have to spend your whole turn moving up to the enemy and then have to stand there while they attack you on their turn.

Bear in mind that since one doesn't make a Defense roll at all, that doesn't actually count as an action. However, since Defense is determined by one's Stance, that means a combat situation where one is being attacked by multiple attackers is really lethal. Moreso than the one-on-one combat situation.

But that doesn't cover two opponents who are coming at you from the front, or whatever. You have a basic Defense of course, but does the normal Defense value for that round, depending on the Stance you've taken, apply to both attacks, or does every attack after the first incur a Defense penatly (and that doesn't include whether they're coming at you from the side or the rear)?

Sorry, looks like I didn't quite understand your question about defending against multiple attackers, or I didn't elaborate enough. When I quoted the rules saying "The Round is resolved normally," included in that is that each attack against you is resolved as normal, unless it is coming from behind, in which case it gets a +2 bonus -- i.e., each attacker rolls his normal Attack roll against your normal Defense score, as though you were fighting them all one-on-one.

Have you played RPGs where being attacked multiple times incurs a defense penalty on the defender? I haven't, so if you have, maybe that explains why we're approaching the question of defending against multiple attackers with two very different presumptions.

Oh, but there is SOMETHING of a penalty in the rules for fighting multiple attackers -- if one attacker manages to hit you hard enough that your Health condition decreases (e.g., from Good to Okay) then the -X penalty to all of your rolls also applies to your Defense score. :O So if two more attackers try to hit you, they'll each have an easier time hitting you.

To be honest, the assumption that all characters are ambidextrous isn't in keeping with the grittiness of the game, since real people aren't all ambidextrous.... Maybe there needs to be an Ambidextrous Advantage?

You're right that it makes the system less realistic; I think it comes down to how much abstraction a player is willing to tolerate.

I think the problem with TWF is that it's so good, from what I can tell. If you use a shield in your off-hand, you don't have to spend XP on buying a Combat Art, but you only get a measly +1 to your Protection rating, AND you can't always get that bonus (if you're being attacked from the wrong side/behind). Compare that to TWF, which gives you a flat +2 bonus to your fighting in any Attitude. So if this bonus goes into your Defense, you're essentially getting the equivalent to a +2 Protection, and you have more versatility than when using a shield.

I don't necessarily agree with you here about the stuff you've said above. I think easiest way that this can be handled would likely be if the difference between the Attack roll that fails and the Defense total exceeds a certain value, say 8 or 10, the Defending character gains a free attack at a -2 penalty. How does that work for you?

Interesting idea. I don't think I would use it in my game, but if you try it and think that it works well, you should post your experiences.

I don't think you've misunderstood my questions here. I think you did a bang up job of answering them, given your lack of practical experience with the combat rules to this point!

Thanks!

[iznurda]

True, the ways are tool box who describe your character. It's the domain wich make the real meaning of the action. Example : empathy+ combat in contact give you more accuracy, more speed. With combativeness it's the action. Your character wants to target a body part? Use reason ! The attack is an act of faith ? Use faith instead of combat in contact. Empathy + relation permit you to negociate or detect lies. Empathy + travel give the direction, combativeness+travel the capacity to cross a falling stone, etc.

That's give me an idea about riposte : use creativity + combat in contact and add the fail score to your attack.

Rules are very flexible, as you see. About rules, however, I don't want add no rule requiring to do more than add / subtract or modify the initial calculation. The starting point of the game is the immersion and not spend 4 hours on a pass weapon.

to JohnK : About using a weapon on no primary hand I estimate that nobody will use it instead of is primary hand. The second weapon is an help, it's why I don't add a malus. If you want one just invalidate the potential bonus if the character try to attack with his no primary hand.

It's more a work of description than a lack of rules, in that case.

[JohnK]

Hullo, Dragoslav,

Hey, I'll take any feedback on this that I can get.

I hear you. Sometimes all you need is just to hear someone else say, "Yeah, that's how I interpreted it, too."

Yes, that pretty much sums the matter up, in my mind.

You know, I hadn't even thought of that (likely due to my lack of seeing the combat system in practice) because I'm so used to being able to move and attack in D&D, but you're right -- the rules on page 217 seem to state that you can only move "a few steps" during combat unless you take your entire action to move, in which case you forgo attacking. This seems like it would really punish whoever makes the initial move in combat, because you would have to spend your whole turn moving up to the enemy and then have to stand there while they attack you on their turn.

That was part of my reason for asking the question in the first place. The last bit that you mention above is my real concern, and as far as I can see, that needs addressing to some extent.

Have you played RPGs where being attacked multiple times incurs a defense penalty on the defender? I haven't, so if you have, maybe that explains why we're approaching the question of defending against multiple attackers with two very different presumptions.

Yes, I have played systems that do that over the last few years. Usually, the Defense penalty is a -1 or a -2 for each attack after the first, but these penalties can be countered somewhat by having an Advantage of some sort. (The Fighting Arts provided with SoE are different enough that I had thought about the possibility of adding a new FA pertaining to this.]

Oh, but there is SOMETHING of a penalty in the rules for fighting multiple attackers -- if one attacker manages to hit you hard enough that your Health condition decreases (e.g., from Good to Okay) then the -X penalty to all of your rolls also applies to your Defense score. :O So if two more attackers try to hit you, they'll each have an easier time hitting you.

Actually, the penalties from wounds to the Health Condition affect *all* rolls in combat, and do reduce Defense as far as I understand them. (If I'm wrong, someone please correct me.) That's completely different than being attacked by two or three opponents at once, and having a reduction to one's Defense just as part of each attack after the first.

]To be honest, the assumption that all characters are ambidextrous isn't in keeping with the grittiness of the game, since real people aren't all ambidextrous.... Maybe there needs to be an Ambidextrous Advantage?

You're right that it makes the system less realistic; I think it comes down to how much abstraction a player is willing to tolerate.

Agreed. However, I can see certain types of combat-oriented characters wanting to use a weapon in each hand on a regular basis. I was thinking of using a penalty when using a weapon in the Secondary hand of -3. Taking the Ambidextrous Advantage (30 points sounds right?) would negate the Secondary hand penalty. Does that work for you (and anyone else who wants to comment on this?)

I think the problem with TWF is that it's so good, from what I can tell. If you use a shield in your off-hand, you don't have to spend XP on buying a Combat Art, but you only get a measly +1 to your Protection rating, AND you can't always get that bonus (if you're being attacked from the wrong side/behind). Compare that to TWF, which gives you a flat +2 bonus to your fighting in any Attitude. So if this bonus goes into your Defense, you're essentially getting the equivalent to a +2 Protection, and you have more versatility than when using a shield.

I can't honestly say that I like the Two-weapon Fighting Art as it's so different in style and feel from advantages and the like similar to it in other game systems. What is the point of striking with a sword and a dagger using this Fighting Art, when one only uses the higher damage of the two weapons to do damage? It effectively means that you're not really using both weapons to attack and strike the target, despite the name of the Fighting Art. I understand where the game is coming from with this, but it's so counter-intuitive. That said, I can live with it.

I don't necessarily agree with you here about the stuff you've said above. I think easiest way that this can be handled would likely be if the difference between the Attack roll that fails and the Defense total exceeds a certain value, say 8 or 10, the Defending character gains a free attack at a -2 penalty. How does that work for you?

Interesting idea. I don't think I would use it in my game, but if you try it and think that it works well, you should post your experiences.

I think I like this, simply based on the fact that it fits a swashbuckling feel to a game. I've tried it out both ways using the two sample character fighter types that I've created, and if I do use this rule for my game, have decided that the Defense total has to be exceeded by 10 to allow for the Riposte. That way, the Defender has to be very good at defending himself in order to use the Riposte ability.

[JohnK]

Hullo, Iz,

That's give me an idea about riposte : use creativity + combat in contact and add the fail score to your attack.

Rules are very flexible, as you see. About rules, however, I don't want add no rule requiring to do more than add / subtract or modify the initial calculation. The starting point of the game is the immersion and not spend 4 hours on a pass weapon.

Hmm, that's an interesting idea on the Riposte, Iz. How about giving me an example here of how that mechanic would work?

to JohnK : About using a weapon on no primary hand I estimate that nobody will use it instead of is primary hand. The second weapon is an help, it's why I don't add a malus. If you want one just invalidate the potential bonus if the character try to attack with his no primary hand.

It's more a work of description than a lack of rules, in that case.

I suppose that's viable and quite workable, though I have to wonder about this. I understand why the rules for combat have been kept down to relatively simplicity, but given the game has a grittiness and realistic feel to it, especially where combat is sooooooooo deadly, it just seems to me--- Ah, never mind, I'll get over it.

[iznurda]

What is the point of striking with a sword and a dagger using this Fighting Art, when one only uses the higher damage of the two weapons to do damage? It effectively means that you're not really using both weapons to attack and strike the target, despite the name of the Fighting Art. I understand where the game is coming from with this, but it's so counter-intuitive. That said, I can live with it.

TWF art don't allow you another attack but helps you during battle. The bonus is finally granted roughly equivalent to another weapon damage (1-3), the damage is calculated on the margin of success. More bonus = more margin = more damage.

Hmm, that's an interesting idea on the Riposte, Iz. How about giving me an example here of how that mechanic would work?

Hmm after some simulation I think the best way to play ripost is simply to add a new attitude : riposte. Add your potential to the attack and substract it to the speed rating. To avoid errors, considers that the ennemy always hit before even the speed scores say otherwise.

here are my personnals rules :

• shields : I add their protection score to the defense. I think the current rule is not sufficient. Protections score are 1 to 3 depending on the model.
• hast (spears, halberds) : you can choose to keep the opponent away. No damage but the adversary must succeed an attack to be again able to hurt you.
• axe : with a battle axe you can use the hooked part to unbalance the opponent. If you succeed you interrupt your attack if he is slower than you and you gain a +2 to your roll on the next turn.
  
  The new ones :
• ambidextry : in a TWF add your potential the part you want. TWF give no maluses or bonuses without these advantage. Hit with his no primary hand invalidate the potential (=always in standard attitude).
• multiple attack : dispatch your attack score between the differents attacks.
• attitude : riposte. Add potentiel to attack, substract from speed. Always after the opposition attack.

It give some options to the fighting system without slow it, and little more flexibility/fun. It's fighting arts (except ambidextry wich is an advantage) so it is necessary to learn it/take it before.

iz