We have a great group, and last night had a great session finally ending The Witch's Song, but some things kinda started to get my goat. We have several players (I was GMing but we switch off) that have Riposte or Counter Blow (a couple have both) and it makes for some weird situations.

The worst offender are those with both which has resulted in (several times) them ending up with 3 attack actions in a single turn. This generally only occurs when fighting an opponent who is tough enough to withstand or turn away multiple attacks, but that is not too uncommon for a party of rank 3 characters. They have the appropriate improved defensive reactions, so they will use Improved Block and Improved Parry against the opponent's attack which makes defending against it easier, and when that single attack misses they are free to (RAW as I understand it) use Riposte and Counter Blow immediately in addition to their attack action they will or may have already used during their initiative order. It starts to become nutty, and I am not sure if I should suggest a house rule that I have a feeling would be resisted.

The other thing is more minor, and probably is a result of a lack of imagination on my part in envisioning the abstract system. The situation was the dwarven damage master decided to ignore the Corsair he was in an engagement with and instead to rush past him to stop a ballista from firing burning pitch all over the characters. We use a very limited version of Attacks of Opportunity house rule, and since the confines were narrow I ruled that the Corsair would get one free melee attack action as a result. The player was fine with it and felt it was an acceptable risk. The part that put me off is that the player, as he has a right to do, used improved block and the attack missed, this gave the player a chance to freely use Counter Blow which tore the Corsair to pieces. The player then just whizzed passed, took a bunch of fatigue, and proceeded to use Reckless Cleave on the NPC about to fire the ballista. The part that is hard for me to imagine, and which we all laughed about like madmen (it was 1:30 am and we had been playing since 5 pm), is that if the Corsair had just decided not to take the AoO he would have been fine and lived, but because he attacked he was able to be attacked for free as well and was killed.

Now I know that this last one is in part due to our house rule, but it would have been the same situation if both the PC and the NPC had the same initiative and the PC had ignored the attacker in the same way.

Regarding Riposte and Counterblow:

First, are you using the recharge rules? Riposte and Counterblow both have Recharge ratings of 4, while Improved Block and Improved Parry have Recharge ratings of 2. This means your players aren't going to be using these actions very often, and will have to be strategic about timing their use of Improved Block and Parry. If you aren't using your the recharge ratings of these cards, they're going to become more powerful than they are.

Second, are you using your A/C/E dice? If you have an important NPC, feel free to start pumping out the A/C/E dice on him or her. As a rule, you should be running through your entire pool of A/C/E dice at least once per encounter. Spend it like there's no tomorrow. Then, once you've run out of A/C/E dice, introduce something new to the encounter and declare a rally step so you can refresh it. You can use this to both bolster your attacks that are being blocked and parried, as well as making it harder on the players to use the same tactic over and over.

Third, are you having your NPCs use the Defensive Actions? Consider giving them to appropriate NPCs, especially those that allow for extra action cards in their creature profile. Surprise a player by having his Counter Blow be parried, followed up by a Counter Blow of your own. You can also hit the player with multiple attacks in a turn, making him or her play more defensively. Also, consider using the henchmen rules to create single-attack creature groups that can nonetheless take a good hit from a PC and keep going.

I would say that you should try using the tactics you have at your disposal against the players if they are building up combat monsters. Start coming up with your own plans and dirty tricks using not just the story but the gameplay . Encounters, with their use of action cards, are meant to be like their own little minigame with the players versus the GM. You as the GM are playing a side in that game. Start playing to win, and see how it goes.

Note: don't take this as advice to be adversarial against the players. Don't try to make them lose . Just think of encounters like little games of chess that you play against each other, and make the players have to think on their feet rather than do all their strategy before the encounter starts. Also, keep in mind that a player rolling a bane or chaos star doesn't have to affect his/her character; sometimes that chaos star means reinforcements or means that someone else becomes a target. Use the Dungeon World list of GM moves for ideas.

• Use a monster, danger, or location move (Time to use that cool action card the NPC has!)
• Reveal an unwelcome truth (Looks like the enemies were using poison blades. make a disease check)
• Show signs of an approaching threat (put out a tracker and let the players know they hear footsteps approaching. They need to finish this fast)
• Deal damage (fatigue, automatic wounds, or even critical wounds)
• Use up their resources (The player is running low on arrows, gets disarmed, or what have you)
• Turn their move back on them (That corsair knows how to parry and riposte as well!)
• Separate them (Force movement on the players)
• Give an opportunity that fits a class’ abilities (A new problem comes up that one character is suited for; but they are in the middle of combat!)
• Show a downside to their class, race, or equipment (The character is faced with an attack or problem he is ill-equipped for)
• Offer an opportunity, with or without cost (looks like the enemy is fleeing back and taunting you. Will you follow him down that dark alley?)
• Put someone in a spot (The floor's falling apart, roll to see if you land okay!)
• Tell them the requirements or consequences and ask (Using that action against the monster is going to expose them to corruption/disease/a condition leaving them very worn out)

Regarding Riposte and Counterblow:

First, are you using the recharge rules? Riposte and Counterblow both have Recharge ratings of 4, while Improved Block and Improved Parry have Recharge ratings of 2. This means your players aren't going to be using these actions very often, and will have to be strategic about timing their use of Improved Block and Parry. If you aren't using your the recharge ratings of these cards, they're going to become more powerful than they are.

Yes, we use recharge, though we use the simpler "remove a recharge and the end of the turn" rule as oppose to when their initiative comes up. This means that the improved defensive actions can effectively be used every other turn, so that is not too much of a speed bump. Riposte and Counter Blow do have hefty recharge, but when you use both in a single turn plus an attack action like Thunderous Blow, combats tend to end quicker anyway.

Second, are you using your A/C/E dice? If you have an important NPC, feel free to start pumping out the A/C/E dice on him or her. As a rule, you should be running through your entire pool of A/C/E dice at least once per encounter. Spend it like there's no tomorrow. Then, once you've run out of A/C/E dice, introduce something new to the encounter and declare a rally step so you can refresh it. You can use this to both bolster your attacks that are being blocked and parried, as well as making it harder on the players to use the same tactic over and over.

Yep, and I totally pad my baddies with them (in part to keep up with mid level characters naturally). I throw them at my players early and heavily too, since saving them is often pointless.

Third, are you having your NPCs use the Defensive Actions?

Yes, though I tend not give them to minions (in part due to the additional record keeping). For more important baddies I will use them liberally, though I will only give them improved version if it makes sense for that NPC.

I get what you are saying about the minigame, but at the same time I don't want to arbitrarily just turn everything up mechanically speaking. I also don't want to punish the players for using the rules as given in a tactical way. We have a good variety of players from 90% story and fluff focused, to 90% mechanic and crunch focused. Our mechanic heavy player loves that aspect of character building and playing and as long as he is within the rules I don't want to take that away from him as long as it is not totally unbalancing. Had I thought about it at the time I could have had the Corsair not take the free attack, but that strikes me as the NPC not acting in the most logical way. He has no information about the mechanical "loophole" that he was opening himself up to. It may be that since I tend to be 60/40 on the side of fluff rather than crunch, me and that player just have a different focus that results in this kind of thing.

Regarding Riposte and Counterblow:

First, are you using the recharge rules? Riposte and Counterblow both have Recharge ratings of 4, while Improved Block and Improved Parry have Recharge ratings of 2. This means your players aren't going to be using these actions very often, and will have to be strategic about timing their use of Improved Block and Parry. If you aren't using your the recharge ratings of these cards, they're going to become more powerful than they are.

Yes, we use recharge, though we use the simpler "remove a recharge and the end of the turn" rule as oppose to when their initiative comes up. This means that the improved defensive actions can effectively be used every other turn, so that is not too much of a speed bump. Riposte and Counter Blow do have hefty recharge, but when you use both in a single turn plus an attack action like Thunderous Blow, combats tend to end quicker anyway.

Second, are you using your A/C/E dice? If you have an important NPC, feel free to start pumping out the A/C/E dice on him or her. As a rule, you should be running through your entire pool of A/C/E dice at least once per encounter. Spend it like there's no tomorrow. Then, once you've run out of A/C/E dice, introduce something new to the encounter and declare a rally step so you can refresh it. You can use this to both bolster your attacks that are being blocked and parried, as well as making it harder on the players to use the same tactic over and over.

Yep, and I totally pad my baddies with them (in part to keep up with mid level characters naturally). I throw them at my players early and heavily too, since saving them is often pointless.

Third, are you having your NPCs use the Defensive Actions?

Yes, though I tend not give them to minions (in part due to the additional record keeping). For more important baddies I will use them liberally, though I will only give them improved version if it makes sense for that NPC.

I get what you are saying about the minigame, but at the same time I don't want to arbitrarily just turn everything up mechanically speaking. I also don't want to punish the players for using the rules as given in a tactical way. We have a good variety of players from 90% story and fluff focused, to 90% mechanic and crunch focused. Our mechanic heavy player loves that aspect of character building and playing and as long as he is within the rules I don't want to take that away from him as long as it is not totally unbalancing. Had I thought about it at the time I could have had the Corsair not take the free attack, but that strikes me as the NPC not acting in the most logical way. He has no information about the mechanical "loophole" that he was opening himself up to. It may be that since I tend to be 60/40 on the side of fluff rather than crunch, me and that player just have a different focus that results in this kind of thing.

I wouldn't think of it as arbitrarily punishing the players. It's just meeting them with greater challenge. If you're already using suggestions 1-3 and players are still slaughtering your NPCs in a single turn or even two, it's time to start throwing up new challenges for them to deal with. I think there comes a point for a lot of GM's where they get the players on the ropes, and then get the urge to either pull their punches or start trying to override the mechanics with narrative. Have you had many points where you've done what felt like a worse move in order to spare a player or keep the players from all losing? Keep in mind that unless their characters are already filled with criticals, the worst that can happen is they all get knocked out and left at your mercy.

Also, this has just occurred to me as another counter to this master swordsman.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=7YyBtMxZgQs#t=10

Just shoot him.

Have you had many points where you've done what felt like a worse move in order to spare a player or keep the players from all losing? Keep in mind that unless their characters are already filled with criticals, the worst that can happen is they all get knocked out and left at your mercy.

If I read your initial post correctly, several players in your group has more than one counter attack. In my games action cards are limited, so each action can only be owned by one player. That way several players cannot have the same powerful combination of action cards and the cards (such as counter blow, hostile redirection and riposte) tend to spread out among the player characters.

If I read your initial post correctly, several players in your group has more than one counter attack. In my games action cards are limited, so each action can only be owned by one player. That way several players cannot have the same powerful combination of action cards and the cards (such as counter blow, hostile redirection and riposte) tend to spread out among the player characters.

Yeah, same here. If everyone can take the same action cards, they easily wind up boringly uniform.

By the way, the possibly best counter to defensive actions(except for just shooting them) is the number of attackers. Defensive actions are extremely powerful against single opponents, but are less and less effective the more incoming attacks there are.

I too do not allow more than one of any "basic" card, except the intentionally "double - printed" Good Witch Hunter / Bad Witch Hunter.

On ignoring NPC's and rushing past, I frequently describe the situation to the same end result as "grid system" would accomplish when terrain right - NPC A is blocking route to NPC B (they are the bodyguard after all, that's their job) and unless a PC engages and keeps busy they will stop you getting to NPC B (any terrain). Corridor/bridge/whatever is narrow, you can't get past the 1 or 2 figures blocking it. If people want to get past in those situations, use a Perform a Stunt!

It was narrow but where they were it was not totally out of the question to get around, and he did make an athletics roll.

I just can't get behind the lack of logic involved in not allowing characters to have the same action trained. Just because one player knows how to perform an improved parry does not mean that another player can't learn the same thing. Quite the contrary- a party that travels together would tend to train together in their off-time.

It's to avoid exactly the problem you have now: Everyone taking "the best" cards. Leading to less interesting diversity in the group and more powergaming. The action card system is a narrative tool and is not intended to represent reality. It allows players to give their character flavour outside of being "one of the guys who hits stuff".

If one guy in the group decides to be a fancy fencer and takes the Riposte and Improved Parry cards, other players have to find other niches for their characters like picking shield actions or two-handed actions. Players then have to learn to share and to delegate roles based on what cards they take. So they, for example, agree that no one takes the Shield Slam or Shield Bash actions so the shield-guy can take them.

I agree that it's not logical, I'm with you on the reasoning that it does make more sense that a group traveling and training together would have similar combat moves (i.e. actions).

Your group seems rather good at combat, so when planning the adventures you should probably have that in mind. Most adventures for WFRP 3ed seem to be designed for a 3 player group where not all players have combat oriented characters. Then the enemies should probably be scaled up either by increasing their numbers or improving the enemies in order to challenge the group. Also, you might want to consider not allowing defences to be used against Attacks of Opportunity? After all, the character has put himself in a vulnerable situation by allowing the AoO in the first place.

Limiting the action cards is a balancing factor in the game as you're avoiding the risk that everyone has the same powerful combination of cards. Also it's making each character more unique. I do believe that RAW states that action cards (and talents and careers) are intended to be limited, but of course it's up to each gaming group.

For me and my group the decrease in logic is worth it as we feel it improves the fun of the game overall. I have more fun creating my own niche with actions/talents etc. instead of having several characters with similar cards. The risk is that everyone ends up with a "best practice" of action cards, which I do not like personally. But obviously this is up to every group to decide what's most fun/works best for them.

Regarding improved defences specifically, there are several of each improved defence so I do not think they were intended to be limited in the same way as the other action cards.

I agree that when I play it is most fun to find a niche for my character, but I don't need meta-mechnics to do so. There are others in our group that really like finding the "best" mechanical synergys for their characters regardless with less concern for flavor. We are adults so we are all pretty committed to providing room for all approaches.

I suppose this may just be an artifact of that.

Yes, improved defences like basic ones can be had by more than one PC.

The reasoning for not otherwise allowing doubling up is narrative and mechanical not simulationist. Can more than one person train the same stunning move, yes of course. Is it interesting if multiple PC's are clones, use the same signature moves etc. - in a story or a RPG, nope. You are not simulating reality in an RPG, you are simulating fiction. Now if you like "realistic fiction" okay duplicate stuff, but if you like "dramatic fiction", then PC's are unique.

At least that's my view which my Players have never objected to.

Yes, when you put it that way it's quite absurd that in a realm where you are alongside wizards and dwarfs, fighting against orcs, goblins, Ratmen and Beastmen not to mention the hordes of Chaos, that people are claiming some of the mechanics are 'not realistic' If you want realism go switch on the news. lol

Making action cards exclusive is just an optional rule of the game.

Said that, I do not really understand what bothers you in the game situation you describe. I mean, it seems you had fun. What is the problem you have? Combats are too easy? You don't like the reaction mechanics?