Using Monte Cook's "stunts system" in Castles & Crusades

[Turanil]

Here below are two examples of "stunts" (drawn from the Crying Freeman movie). How something like that could be emulated by a monk (or other character) in Castles & Crusades?

First photo:
The character is pursued by a yakusa; both have katanas in their hands. Reaching the building, the character uses it to propel himself, jump, and back-flip until he lands behind his opponent, thus gaining the advantage of striking him in the back. There are no rules for doing this in C&C, and D&D 3e could painfully emulate that with enough feats, but the circumstances to do this will then be rare...

Second photo:
The character is attacked by two yakusa; one strikes at his head, the second at his legs. So the character jumps betwen the blades, lands behind them and then strikes one in the back. What if a monk PC wants to attempt the same thing? If it's just for the sake of doing it, chances are that PCs won't try to do that, ever. But they could be tempted to do it if they can gain something, such as a bonus to strike in the back.

I want simple rules to not purely rely on my own fiat when adjucating such things. This is where I hope the new Iron Heroes stunts system would help. Now that this system is based on skills, will easily be replaced with being based on atribute checks and siege engine.

 

[Denaes]

-- Barrel Throw: Combat is happening amidst a fair or a basement. Then, Jubal notices that he is fighting right besides a barrel. So he forfeits an attack and instead throws the barrel into the legs of Klorgut, his opponent.

So, how would that work, and what would be the benefits? I guess it just requires a Dexterity check. Now, if the barrel is full of something, it will also require a Strength check, but will impose an increased penalty to Klorgut. So, as Jubal is successful in swiftly throwing the barrel into Klorgut's legs, the latter loses his balance. This results in the next round for Klorgut, is to suffer a -4 penalty to AC and BtH if he fails a Dex save, or -2 if the save is successful.

Any comments?

Attacking someone with a barrel would just be an attack. You're using a barrel instead of a sword, grenade, bow or fist. It'll possibly do damage and have some effect if it breaks (haha, you parried it!) and something fun is inside. Now if you are picking it up and throwing it at someone, a Str check might need to be made depending on the weight. Unless it was something heavy like a barrel of horseshoes, water or oil I wouldn't bother with the check.

Stunts are special/unique ways to attacks or do something that take advantage of skills and the environment - not just making an attack in a way you hope you'll gain a benefit with in the future.

A stunt would be to knock over a barrel and kick it towards someone and jump "on top" riding it to the foe further than movement would have taken her this turn.

Or riding the barrel to someone within range and jumping off for an attack - the barrel comming at someone would distract them (like having 2 opponents) and give them a penalty for AC or you a bonus to strike. The barrel would in fact not really have any attack capabilities.

 

[Denaes]

And so the PC notices a barrel and decides to push it into the legs of his opponent. I know it's a Dex check to do it successfully, and maybe a Str check if the barrel is full of ale. What I don't know, is what reasonable effects it will have: does the opponent falls?, does the PC get a bonus to hit?, how much?, what? Normally it's just a matter of pure DM's fiat, which I don't like. I just hope this sytem gives me a frame in which resolve all non-standard combat procedures. I mean: the halfling wants to tumble under the table to strike the ogre from below? Okay, in C&C it's just a Dex check to tumble under the table. But THEN: what? What benefit can reasonably get the halfling?

Considering the whole game is GMs fiat. What opponents there are, what their reactions are, what they do, what their goals are, if you're using a monster you decide if it's a normal "by the book" version or a "special" version. So in that sense I'm okay with fiat. I don't view it as something disdainful that many gms and players do.

Then again I know the pain of comming up with a bonus on the fly and afterwards realizing "I don't want that to be a regular maneuver for how large of a bonus I gave it!"

Having things covered in the book is nice, but has strings attached to it. On one hand it's nice to be able to not worry about thinking or screwing up. On the other hand you're going to slow down play by opening the book and reading what it says as well as show the players you care more about the wording in the book over a flippant movie the PCs thought would be cinematic. Cinematic and fast paced for the character, but slow and drawn out of the player as everyone has to wait.

The only way I'd use this system for stunts would be if it had a good explaination that didn't get into details and clearly listed easy benefits and the penalty. It would have to be something I could write down on a sheet of paper in a table format and not worry about having to read the details to make them work. Otherwise I'll just read it and use it as inspiration for my own fiat.