So I’m having a problem about weapons with range. I don’t get how the different ranges interact, and wonder if you need them at all.
Here is an example:
You have a spear, which states that it’s reach turns Attack into versus and Maneuver to independent against melee and other spears. It doesn’t trigger against weapons with greater range.
The problem is that those longer ranged weapons invoke these changes on you. So, if I have a spear I’m getting the Att-v, Man-i change no matter what, either because the spear’s qualities or the opposing missile weapon’s.
It seems like there should just be two ranges (melee and ranged) because pitting any two non-melee ranges together seems to have the same result.
Am I reading this right? Have I missed something?
The important differentiation is when you have a longer weapon and pick Attack, and your opponent with the shorter weapon picks Maneuver. A lot of people read these as reciprocal, but they’re not.
Let’s say I have a bow and you have a spear. I choose an Attack action and you choose a Maneuver action. All of the successes I achieve reduce your disposition. All of the successes you achieve can be spent to do various things to me on the next action, but chances are I’ve just taken you out of the fight. Even if I didn’t, I’ve hurt your team pretty badly.
Now let’s say we have the same weapons and I choose a Maneuver action and you choose an Attack action. In this case, none of our weapon powers are invoked, because they only come about when the longer weapon attacks and the opponent maneuvers. So it remains a versus test. That means only your margin of success against my roll reduces my disposition. Chances are I won’t get a lot of effects from my Maneuver, but I’ve likely either blunted your attack so I only lose a point or two of disposition or blocked your attack entirely.
MINOR CORRECTION: In the second instance, the bow does get +2D to the Maneuver.
Ah, that’s what I’ve been looking for.