Two attackers vs. one defender

[Beiren]

I was thinking of the idea that two attackers vs one defender should have an advantage.
If there is an enemy you place 2 opponents next to it that both can attack. They both declear that they want to attack him simultaniously. The defender can trow only half his defensive dice (with a minimum of two to make it not to extreme)

For instance 2 heroes attack a fimir. They do this simultanious (and say so). The fimir can defend each attack with 2 dice instead of 3. But if the first heroe kills the fimir then the other heroe has also lost his turn.
Because you have a minimum of 2 dice you won't feel this in the beginning. The better your heroes become the more effect this rule has.
With this rule the main quest will be less easy towards the ends because you're armour and shield that grants you 4 dice can be evaded when 2 monsters attacks you. The heroes will not walk over the last quests.

Any ideas?

Beiren

[Goblin-King]

I'm not a big fan of the part of the mechanic where you need to do something with a model before his turn. How can they attack simultaneously when they are supposed to attack in their respective turns?
Also, do the two attackers roll their combined dice at once in a single powerful attack? If so that seem like enough of a bonus in itself. No need to reduce armor.

An alternative rule could be to grant a passive bonus for surrounding an opponent. An attacker could gain +1 die for each friendly model in melee/adjacent to the defending model. That would grant +3 attack dice against a model surrounded on all four sides.

[The Road Warrior]

I like it, but only as a special rule for monsters. I don't think the Heroes need that kind of help.

do the two attackers roll their combined dice at once in a single powerful attack?

This is the way I would choose to do it.
e.g. 2 Orcs attacking the same Hero would have a combined attack of 6 attack dice.

[torilen]

I think the rules state that heroes and monsters alike only get one defense roll per turn.
So, rolling all of the attackers separately or together achieves the same goal - too many
dice for the defender to defend against.

That being said, I never liked that idea. It does keep the game from slowing down too much,
but can be really bad for a single defender if all the monster gang up, which, if played right,
would happen to the barbarian most of the time - monsters will all go after the hero who seems
most dangerous first.

I like the idea of giving monsters and heroes as many defense rolls as needed, but add 1 attack
dice to each attacker for each additional attacker over 1. SO: the dwarf vs. 3 goblins, each goblin
would get 2 extra attack dice; the barbarian vs. 4 orcs, each orc would get 3 extra attack dice.

Yes, giving heroes and monsters as many defense rolls as needed slows things down, but makes
more sense. These heroes, at least, are supposed to be well trained and experienced. They should
be able to defend against more than one attacker - at least a bit.

[The Road Warrior]

I think the rules state that heroes and monsters alike only get one defense roll per turn.
So, rolling all of the attackers separately or together achieves the same goal - too many
dice for the defender to defend against.

I think this rule is from the BQP and is specific to 'A hero attacked by a monster with multiple attacks...' (BQP pg.7)

but add 1 attack
dice to each attacker for each additional attacker over 1. SO: the dwarf vs. 3 goblins, each goblin
would get 2 extra attack dice; the barbarian vs. 4 orcs, each orc would get 3 extra attack dice.

This seems a bit OP to me. would you really be happy to have a hero attacked by 4 Orcs that each roll 6 attack dice.

Actually now that I think about it with my idea a hero could be attacked by 4 NA rolling a combined attack of...



...time to drink that Potion of Resilience

[torilen]

Well, another option could be to reduce the defenders dice by 1 combat die for each additional
attacker, to a minimum of 2 (that seems to be the base defense for "skin").
Once you reach 2 defense dice, move to having to roll a die twice to confirm success, and then roll
the second die a second twice to confirm success.
Should a defender be attacked by more than 4 - say an attacker is able to attack diagonally and can
get in on the action to give five attackers - well, I don't know then - maybe at that point the fifth
attacker's damage is not defended against.

Or you could add in rolling a red die at some point - perhaps once you reach the minimum of 2 defense
dice, you have to roll a red die. Start by having to roll 2 or above, and with more attackers, you have to
roll higher. This could allow a possible total of:
Say a defender has 4 defense dice.
attacker 1 = 3 defense dice; attacker 2 = 2 defense dice; attacker 3 = roll 2+ on red die;
attacker 4 = roll 3+; attacker 5 = roll 4+; attacker 6 = roll 5+; attacker 7 = must roll a 6 on red die.

Hmmm....what if there is an 8th attacker...WHAT DO WE DO NOW.


hahahaha

[sajungzak]

Sarcasm: Yeah, then they have to pat their head and rub their tummy while whistling yankee doodle. /Sarcasm

[Goblin-King]

While the "gang-up" bonus may seem OP - 4 monsters all getting +3 dice

Remember: The first monster who moves in to attack doesn't get any bonus. The second one only gets +1.
And if this were a rule, heroes would consider positioning a lot more to avoid getting surrounded.

That being said, I'm still not really convinced such a rule is even necessary.
Especially not for the heroes. The problem in later levels are more the heroes being too OP. Borin's + Helmet + Shield + Potion shop = semi immortal

[knightkrawler]

And if this were a rule, heroes would consider positioning a lot more to avoid getting surrounded.

True dat. It's counterproductive on anything I've written, really. Overcomplicating matters, too.
There's a reason why a Defend roll is not an action. The numbers of Defend dice represent not only armor, but also skill in terms of reacting, dodging, stuff like that.
That's why you get to defend against any attack with the notable exception of certain weapons and artifacts that let you attack twice. But that represents the quality of the weapon or some enhanced magical feature. It does not stand for the attacker being able to make two strikes.

I'm slightly digressing. What I'm saying is every strike can be defended against. One on one, attack for attack.

[The Road Warrior]

I like the rule as a special rule for really weak monsters perhaps a 1AD/1DD monster