Basic roleplaying combat system

[Pete Nash]

To quibble though, we can't see from the pics whether the parries (or attacks) they're doing are at full chance. (Which was the actual thought behind my earlier comment).

Would you perhaps take my word as someone who teaches this sort of combat, that there is no reduction in skill when performing these techniques? They are not only deceptively simple to perform, but also brutally effective.

[frogspawner]

No, not unless it blows the "attack on a single SR" and "one attack for the round" ideas out of the water too. The idea behind RQ/BRP combat is that one attack constitutes a series of blows. So what we are seeing, in BRP terms, is the maneuvers that constitute part of an attack.

Realistically, people are fighting throughout the round, not just on the SRs that they make an attack or defense roll.

Certainly. Those ideas don't need 'blowing' - we already know they are just game conventions, not reality. But Mr Nash's diagrams do rather blatantly disprove "No attack and parry on the same SR with a 2h Weapon" - so a more realistic disadvantage to 2hWeapons would be very much better. Axe-elf's idea may be that.

[frogspawner]

Would you perhaps take my word as someone who teaches this sort of combat, that there is no reduction in skill when performing these techniques? They are not only deceptively simple to perform, but also brutally effective.

I would. In fact, I was hoping my comments might elicit such testimony from Those Who Know, such as your good self.

So - do you give us your word that with these techniques it is as easy to hit and parry simultaneously as it is just to hit or parry with other techniques?

[Pete Nash]

So - do you give us your word that with these techniques it is as easy to hit and parry simultaneously as it is just to hit or parry with other techniques?

Definitively, yes.

[axe-elf]

Definitively, yes.

That is interesting information. So, If you can parry and attack each round, but loose your attack if you dodge, do you consider it more realistic?

[nclarke]

I suspect that many of the participants here are not using the same definition of the words Parry or Dodge and may even be thinking of differing amounts of time for a combat round all of which will lead to arguments that make no sense to other participants.

Combat rounds in most BRP type systems vary between 5 and 12 seconds according to which iteration of the BRP mechanisms you are using. Dodge may mean a movement of the body - sway, lean etc., or may encompass actual physical movement or even diving out of the way. Parry could be used to describe the deflection of a weapon or the complete blocking of an attack. Even Attack in BRP systems refers to series of swings and feints, cuts and parries with only the actual impact of the weapon being the result of the opposed Attack/Parry roll.

[axe-elf]

I suspect that many of the participants here are not using the same definition of the words Parry or Dodge and may even be thinking of differing amounts of time for a combat round all of which will lead to arguments that make no sense to other participants.

Combat rounds in most BRP type systems vary between 5 and 12 seconds according to which iteration of the BRP mechanisms you are using. Dodge may mean a movement of the body - sway, lean etc., or may encompass actual physical movement or even diving out of the way. Parry could be used to describe the deflection of a weapon or the complete blocking of an attack. Even Attack in BRP systems refers to series of swings and feints, cuts and parries with only the actual impact of the weapon being the result of the opposed Attack/Parry roll.

Does it make much difference? If an attack is a series of attacks, a parry would e a series of parries, and a dodge a series of dodges.

[RosenMcStern]

That is interesting information. So, If you can parry and attack each round, but loose your attack if you dodge, do you consider it more realistic?

Yes, he does! This is exactly how it works in Pete's latest ruleset, RuneQuest 6: if you Evade, your next action CANNOT be an attack. Or did you change it? I have not read RQ6 yet.

But please note that in RuneQuest, simple Dodging actions are included in the Parry action. This is clearly explained in the rules. The Evade action (renamed Evade to remark this) represents ducking for cover or moving way out of the way, possibly a couple of metres. The Dodge action in BRP is somewhat different: it represents also normal melee evasive actions.

To represent this in BRP, I usually rule that attacking is Difficult if you dodge. This gives a disadvantage to a dodger, but does not make him useless in combat.

[deleriad]

Yes, he does! This is exactly how it works in Pete's latest ruleset, RuneQuest 6: if you Evade, your next action CANNOT be an attack. Or did you change it?

Mostly. There are three ways to try to avoid being hurt in RQ6.

Use a combat style to parry as a reaction. This includes a mixture of avoidance, deflection and blocking depending on the weapon.

Use Evade to throw yourself out of the way as a reaction. This is a desperate move that usually ends with you prone. In theory you can attack from a prone position on your next action but in practice that's usually suicidal.

Use Evade to Outmanoeuvre as a pro-active action. If you succeed your enemy/enemies can't attack you for the rest of the round unless you attack them. Naturally works best when you have the initiative.

It's a different model to BRP in that it combines some elements of BRP dodge and parry into a single reaction that it calls "parry."

[RosenMcStern]

I would. In fact, I was hoping my comments might elicit such testimony from Those Who Know, such as your good self.

So - do you give us your word that with these techniques it is as easy to hit and parry simultaneously as it is just to hit or parry with other techniques?

There is also another point that you should consider, apart from Pete's "Informed Opinion" It is the usual pitfall of considering Strike Rank or DEX Rank as a measure of WHEN something happens ("I start moving on SR 3, so after 3,6 seconds of doing nothing I start moving").

Whatever you do in a round, you do for the WHOLE round, not just "starting on your DEX/Strike Rank". Strike Rank in BRP is simply a measure of who gets the opportunity to disable his foe first, not of when he acts. So, even if you enforce the "No attack and parry with the same weapon on the same SR", the problem does not exist. One of the combatants will delay his attack to the next SR in order to parry, and that's all. Both get an opportunity to to attack and parry. The quickest one has the advantage of not getting attacked if he outmatches his foe by achieving a better level of success and striking through his parry, but if they both succeed at both rolls they strike contemporarily, like in the pictures linked by Peter.

However, things change a lot if you match a single-weapon user vs. a two-weapon user. In this case, if the 2w user waits until the 1w user attacks, parries and then replies in the same SR, the 1w user cannot parry! This emulates the technique of "engaging" the attacking weapon with a parrying weapon and then counterattacking when the attacking weapon is still in contact with your shield or main gauche. I think Pete can confirm that this technique is effective. And it is perfectly modeled by the rules as they are (and as they were in RQ3).

[rust]

Shields and off-hand weapons

Shields and off-hand weapons give an extra parry each round, but no extra attack. You may attack with the shield or off-hand weapon though, after or before parry with weapon in your primary hand. Parrying with off-hand weapons except shields is difficult. Attacking with shields and off-hand weapons is difficult, except for bucklers and parrying daggers.

The problem I have with this is that it might work for certain combat styles, but does

not work at all for some others - the typical problem one tends to run into whenever

one attempts to increase the granularity of a system.

Example A would be rapier and main gauche or buckler. A rapier is a sword used almost

exclusively for thrusting attacks, and it is not difficult at all to parry a rapier attack with

a main gauche or buckler, all one has to achieve to avoid being hit is a combination of a

minimal contact of the main gauche or buckler with the opponent's blade in order to de-

flect it slightly and a simultaneous sideways movement of the body - a standard maneu-

ver of almost all rapier styles, rapier and main gauche or buckler works just fine.

Example B would be sabre and main gauche or buckler. A sabre is a sword used almost ex-

clusively for slashing attacks, and it is indeed extremely difficult to parry a sabre attack

with a main gauche or buckler, because deflecting the opponent's blade only slightly will

not do, the necessary maneuver is actually more like a block than a parry - and a nasty

way to get the wrist of one's off hand damaged or even broken in the case of a mistake,

sabre and main gauche or buckler does not really work.

In the end one would have to design different combat rules for different weapons and sty-

les, the more so the more detailed one intends to simulate a real combat. There simply is

no "one size fits all" if one aims for detail and realism - which is the main reason why I pre-

fer BRP's somewhat abstract approach and low level of detail, it avoids a lot of problems

which are almost impossible to solve.

[Atgxtg]

There is also another point that you should consider, apart from Pete's "Informed Opinion" It is the usual pitfall of considering Strike Rank or DEX Rank as a measure of WHEN something happens ("I start moving on SR 3, so after 3,6 seconds of doing nothing I start moving").

It's not a pitfall, it is exactly how SR are defined in BRP, as well as how they have been used in every Chaoisium RPG that included them.

This optional system allows for a more detailed breakdown

of what actions occur when in a combat round

Each combat round is divided into 10 strike ranks, always

counted out upwards from 1 to 10, so 1 is the fastest, 10

the slowest. The lower your character’s strike rank, the

faster he or she can attack, and vice versa.

In fact, the whole SR system has always been used to represent timing and sequencing. If you shoot somebody before their DEX SR, then they have not moved yet for the round, and if you do damage to someone before their casting SR comes up, you blow their spell.

Whatever you do in a round, you do for the WHOLE round, not just "starting on your DEX/Strike Rank". Strike Rank in BRP is simply a measure of who gets the opportunity to disable his foe first, not of when he acts. So, even if you enforce the "No attack and parry with the same weapon on the same SR", the problem does not exist. One of the combatants will delay his attack to the next SR in order to parry, and that's all. Both get an opportunity to to attack and parry.

No. Look at movement, spell casting and missile fire. A character could in RQ, and still can in BRP, cast a spell, move and then attack with a weapon all in one round. So whatever you do you are NOT doing for the WHOLE round. But...that is how RQ/BRP has handled melee attacks. Ringworld being the exception, where attacks were also for SR duration.

The quickest one has the advantage of not getting attacked if he outmatches his foe by achieving a better level of success and striking through his parry, but if they both succeed at both rolls they strike contemporarily, like in the pictures linked by Peter.

Not in BRP

If two attackers

have the same strike rank, the one with the higher DEX is

assumed to go first.

It is stated directly that if the SR are the same the character with the higher DEX attacks first. Levels of success has nothing to do with it.

[Atgxtg]

The method used in Flashing Blades, HQ, and the RQ3 Land of the Ninja supplelemt might work. Instead of just training by weapon, characters train in a style. Each style encompasses several weapons. For instance, Medevial Sword & Shield, Italian Fencing, and so forth.

Some styles would include one or more types of shields (for a fencing style a buckler, main gauche, baton, or cape might be taught as off hand weapons). It wouldn't be a major change.

As far as axe-elf's new rule, I'd prefer it if the character had to give up either his attack or his parry to dodge, not just his attack. I've sidestepped and attacked, and retreated and lunged.

[axe-elf]

T

In the end one would have to design different combat rules for different weapons and sty-

les, the more so the more detailed one intends to simulate a real combat. There simply is

no "one size fits all" if one aims for detail and realism - which is the main reason why I pre-

fer BRP's somewhat abstract approach and low level of detail, it avoids a lot of problems

which are almost impossible to solve.

Agree that a more abstract approach is preferable, not least because of game flow. More detail also means more time spent on stuff that is not necessary for the story in the rpg.

I lean toward a "change as little as possible" approach to the shield problem. Bonuses on shield parry quickly grows to 95% chances of shield parries, so I do not like those. Maybe shields and off-hand weapons can give an extra unmodified parry, the same way fighting defensively gives an extra doge, then of course without loosing opportunity to attack.

[RosenMcStern]

Argh, it is difficult to quote your quotes

It is stated directly that if the SR are the same the character with the higher DEX attacks first. Levels of success has nothing to do with it.

But what does "go first" mean here? That the higher DEX combatant will ALWAYS strike first? Nonsense: a clever fighter does not always strike first, if the tactical situation does not recommend it. He might feint a maneuver, wait for his opponent to attack, and then counterattack. How is this represented in BRP? Such a manoeuver is still represented, in BRP, by having the higher DEX character roll first, and interpreting the successful roll as "your feint/wait/counterattack maneuver was successful and you managed to hit your foe". Foe still has no chance of striking back: his failed attack is not represented by a roll. Strike rank does not determine who swings first, but who is the first to have a chance to take his foe out.

Other, more detailed systems (GURPS, TRoS, RuneQuest to a certain extent) tell you the exact timing of each blow, and manage shifting initiatives. BRP does not: interpreting SR as "the exact time when" is not correct. DEX/Strike Ranks provide an order, not a timing, for actions.

[RosenMcStern]

Agree that a more abstract approach is preferable, not least because of game flow. More detail also means more time spent on stuff that is not necessary for the story in the rpg.

I lean toward a "change as little as possible" approach to the shield problem. Bonuses on shield parry quickly grows to 95% chances of shield parries, so I do not like those. Maybe shields and off-hand weapons can give an extra unmodified parry, the same way fighting defensively gives an extra doge, then of course without loosing opportunity to attack.

This rule would make the shield useful only when you are attacked multiple times per round. Not very frequent in BRP.

Question: what does a shield have in terms of advantages over a main gauche or other off-hand weapon?

If you find a suitable answer to this question, you will easily find a way to model the advantage in game terms without too much tinkering.

The first half of the answer is certainly "It protects you from ranged fire", and this is already modeled in the game. It is also a sufficient reason for wanting to have a shield.

However, there is a second part of the answer that is about melee? What do you think about it? What does Pete think about it? Has anyone thought of introducing the concept of Block?

[rust]

Question: what does a shield have in terms of advantages over a main gauche or other off-hand weapon?

The only real advantage I am aware of - except its greater size and there-

fore ability to cover a greater area - is that a shield absorbs some of the da-

mage of a hit by a heavy weapon, like for example an axe or a broadsword,

while in the case of a main gauche or buckler the force of the impact would

go straight to the wrist of the person holding it - just imagine the consequen-

ces of an attempt to parry or block a battle axe with a dagger ...

[RosenMcStern]

The only real advantage I am aware of - except its greater size and there-

fore ability to cover a greater area - is that a shield absorbs some of the da-

mage of a hit by a heavy weapon, like for example an axe or a broadsword,

while in the case of a main gauche or buckler the force of the impact would

go straight to the wrist of the person holding it - just imagine the consequen-

ces of an attempt to parry or block a battle axe with a dagger ...

Or in other words: you can block safely with a shield. Do it with a sword or dagger, and either your wrist or the weapon will break. Note that a successful parry [i.e. deflection] with a weapon will not break your wrist. Does the Swordsmaster confirm?

Note that in this case the shield would take some damage. It would not, however, break with a single blow like a dagger would probably do.

[rust]

Or in other words: you can block safely with a shield.

One of the movies' rare comparatively good examples of what blocking a

heavy weapon with a shield looks like is this duel scene from "The 13th

Warrior", which highlights the damage absorbed by the shield(s) instead

of the fighter:

13th Warrior - Viking Duel - YouTube

[Atgxtg]

Argh, it is difficult to quote your quotes

Sorry.

But what does "go first" mean here? That the higher DEX combatant will ALWAYS strike first? Nonsense: a clever fighter does not always strike first, if the tactical situation does not recommend it. He might feint a maneuver, wait for his opponent to attack, and then counterattack. How is this represented in BRP? Such a manoeuver is still represented, in BRP, by having the higher DEX character roll first, and interpreting the successful roll as "your feint/wait/counterattack maneuver was successful and you managed to hit your foe". Foe still has no chance of striking back: his failed attack is not represented by a roll. Strike rank does not determine who swings first, but who is the first to have a chance to take his foe out.

IN BRP the higher DEx/lower SR does indeed always attack first. Take a guy with a 18 DEX and one with a 5 DEX, give them both bows and watch.

Other, more detailed systems (GURPS, TRoS, RuneQuest to a certain extent) tell you the exact timing of each blow, and manage shifting initiatives. BRP does not: interpreting SR as "the exact time when" is not correct. DEX/Strike Ranks provide an order, not a timing, for actions.

THe BRP book isn't written that way.

Now, IMO the problem is that for most actions the SR is when one specific action takes effect. A spell goes off, an arrow is shot, a person moves 3m and so on. But with melee combat, the "attack" represents a combination of actions that culminate in one attack roll. And that is where the rules get fuzzy. Not only is the attack more than one action, but it continues on after the SR where the attack is actually rolled, sort of. IN fact, and in game play, a character can get away with doing something else after his attack SR. There is nothing wrong by the rules with attacking on SR 5 with a reach weapon and then stepping back and casting. It probably shouldn't be okay, but it is.

[Atgxtg]

Or in other words: you can block safely with a shield. Do it with a sword or dagger, and either your wrist or the weapon will break. Note that a successful parry [i.e. deflection] with a weapon will not break your wrist. Does the Swordsmaster confirm?

Not a swordmaster, but...

It is easier. Blocking with a shield is easy. Blocking with a dagger is usually more active than passive. You step into the attack and catch the blade rather than just hide behind the dagger. But you wouldn't want to block a strong blow from a heavy weapon with a dagger. You be better off using both weapons to block, or to dodge. The chances of a dagger breaking are pretty low. Try chopping a dagger with an axe. You might damage the dagger, but you probably won't break it.

Note that in this case the shield would take some damage. It would not, however, break with a single blow like a dagger would probably do.

[frogspawner]

Daggers don't break that easily. It is more likely that a dagger would be knocked out of someone hand...

Now, that is a realistic advantage shields should have, being strapped-on... right?

[rust]

Now, that is a realistic advantage shields should have, being strapped-on... right?

Actually most shield were just held, not strapped on.

[Atgxtg]

Now, that is a realistic advantage shields should have, being strapped-on... right?

For the ones that are strapped on yes.

There is a difference between small shields, which are used to actively block, and larger shields which protect in part by being movable cover. With a buckler the defender has to move the shield around to intercept the attack. But with a Kite Shield, the defender doesn't have to move it to protect the area behind the shield. SO it interfers with the opponent's target selection. To get at an area behind the shiled the attacker has to work at it.

[axe-elf]

However, there is a second part of the answer that is about melee? What do you think about it?

I´ve bougth Mythic Iceland now, and there are some shield rules clarifications there that give meaning if interpreted in a certain way.

Basically they say that in a round parrying with shield, you may parry with full shield skill rating, but then you do not get the shield AP for hit locations (because the shield is moving around when parrying).

If “full skill rating” mean not affected by the cumulative -30% after the first parry, it gives meaning to have a shield skill in close combat. Then you would parry with shield if you have a reasonably high skill rating, and only use weapon parry once or so in a round if it has higher score than the shield skill. To be attacked more than once in a round is quite common in my games, when meeting more enemies.