Basic Attack and Defense

[Mikus]

Some people like attack/parry to have the same chance with each weapon.  Some like them to be separate.  This is an issue I have banged around before and people seem passionate on both sides and I don't really want to discuss that here.

What I do want to ask is how you handle basic attack and defense %s.  I feel a warrior skilled with a staff who has 88/83 should certainly not get these levels translated when fighting with a short sword but he should not fall back to his basic attack parry characteristic skill %s.  My thoughts are perhaps 1/2 your greatest skill percentage as a base for melee, thrown, missile, siege as long as you comprehend the basics of the weapon adjusted by the basic characteristic skill %..  Shooting a crossbow is really not that much different than shooting a rifle yet swinging a staff is very different than swinging a nun-chuck.   A bare knuckle boxer is not a knife fighter but either one would be able to translate some of his skill into fighting with the other.  So attack +11%, Dagger Attack 73% = 84% Dagger Attack. This would give a base 11+37 = 48% unarmed hand.  Of course, if your unarmed skill is greater than this you would use that instead.

Anyhow, just wondering how others treat this.

[Kloster]

RQ3 is using skill for category of weapons: The 77% you have in broadsword is the same you have with all the 1H swords and you gain nothing for weapons belonging to other categories.

RQG is giving you half your skill in your best weapons in all the other weapons of the same category, and nothing for weapons belonging to other categories.

When playing RQG, I use RQG rule. For all other BRP games, I am using RQ3 rule.

[colinabrett]

I am undecided on this.

I 'cut my teeth' (so to speak) on Stormbringer 3rd edition. That used separate attack/parry skills for each weapon, with each increasing separately through experience. I still have a soft spot for that sort of crunchiness.

However, Magic World uses the broad class of weapons and skill with one = skill with all the others, and I kinda like that, too.

I think it depends on your group. My Stormbringer group were happy with the extra complexity. My Magic World group, almost all of whom were players new to RPGs of any type, prefer the weapon category approach. I'm easy with either.

Colin 

[DreadDomain]

Mixing and matching RQ3, RQG and MW you could:

- Have skills by weapon categories (1h Sword, 2H Axe, Fencing weapons, etc.)

- Have half your best skill in similar combat style (melee, unarmed, missile, thrown)

You can do that even if you choose to have separate attack % and parry %.

 

[Mikus]

1 hour ago, DreadDomain said:

Mixing and matching RQ3, RQG and MW you could:

- Have skills by weapon categories (1h Sword, 2H Axe, Fencing weapons, etc.)

- Have half your best skill in similar combat style (melee, unarmed, missile, thrown)

You can do that even if you choose to have separate attack % and parry %.

 

Yes.  This is what I was thinking and better stated.  Thank you.  Most of my experience is with Stormbringer and RQ3.  I like the categories but I think any degree of melee skill would translate to some degree of skill regardless of the exact weapon.   Simply due to body mechanics, timing, general experience.  I also like separate attack and parry to cover instances such as a Warrior who nearly always enters combat by initially thrusting his spear at 'long' range hoping for an impale. Then leaving it in the opponent to hamper him and switching to sword. (as one simple example) Using a spear like this would allow you a spear ATTACK skill gain roll but your PARRY skill should not get better if you always manage to get the initial attack and never parry.   But this is a separate issue and was unfortunately argued in another post.

Someone who has 100/100 with a 1-h Axe would never have less than 50/50 when in melee using this system.  I like that.  It makes the general warrior more logical and battlefield ready while not taking away from the 'Master of the ......'.

[DreadDomain]

16 minutes ago, Mikus said:

Yes.  This is what I was thinking and better stated.  Thank you.  Most of my experience is with Stormbringer and RQ3.  I like the categories but I think any degree of melee skill would translate to some degree of skill regardless of the exact weapon.   Simply due to body mechanics, timing, general experience.  I also like separate attack and parry to cover instances such as a Warrior who nearly always enters combat by initially thrusting his spear at 'long' range hoping for an impale. Then leaving it in the opponent to hamper him and switching to sword. (as one simple example) Using a spear like this would allow you a spear ATTACK skill gain roll but your PARRY skill should not get better if you always manage to get the initial attack and never parry.   But this is a separate issue and was unfortunately argued in another post.

Because of the way experience and training works in BRP, I believe it is the perfect system to have separate attack and parry skills. I am fine with having them the same but having them separate makes a statement about your character fighting style.

Quote

Someone who has 100/100 with a 1-h Axe would never have less than 50/50 when in melee using this system.  I like that.  It makes the general warrior more logical and battlefield ready while not taking away from the 'Master of the ......'.

And it is so easy to implement.

But if you want more crush, you could even go:

- Skill is for a specific weapon (broadsword)

- If you use a weapon in the same category (1h Sword), you get -20%

- If you use any melee weapon, you get only 50% of your skill.

You can adjust crunch to your heart's desire

Edited January 4, 2021 by DreadDomain

[Mikus]

11 minutes ago, DreadDomain said:

Because of the way experience and training works in BRP, I believe it is the perfect system to have separate attack and parry skills. I am fine with having them the same but having them separate makes a statement about your character fighting style.

And it is so easy to imlement.

Yes.  BRP skill experience defiantly promotes using the skill.  In real life I know fighters who are more prone to the 'rope a dope' wait for an opening defensive style and those who go full on berserk.  BRP allows for this beautifully and adds color and depth to characters based upon their actions in the game.  It really is an elegant system.  I'm just learning HERO and it rocks as well but doubles down on the crunchiness and promotes more dramatic, cinematic play.  Of all the systems I have ever tinkered with RQ3 still seems to be the best for 'realism' in terms of mechanics.  BGB is a great tool kit.

[Mugen]

My solution is to have a dozen broad skills (1 per skill category, plus a few others, not only for combat and weapons) and an undefined number of specialties.

For instance, you might have Melee 45%, and specialties Sword +25% and Axe +15%. While wielding a Sword, you'd have an effective skill of 70%, with an Axe 60%, and with any other Melee weapon 45%. Similarly, you could have Agility 55%, and specialties Climb +25% and Jump +10%

In my opinion, halving your highest skill only works when figuring value for skills you didn't invest in. That is, if you start with Sword 70% and Axe 55% and later improve your sword to 90%, you'd have 45% when using a dagger, but still 55% with an Axe. I don't like the idea your experience only had an impact on weapons you don't know anything about.