Dodge

[Trifletraxor]

Dodge – A defensive skill performed in reaction to an attack to avoid damage. The result depends on the level of succes of the dodge compared to the the attack. With five levels of success (fumble, failure, normal, special & critical), the dodgers success can range from 4 levels worse to 4 levels better than the attacker. If the dodge is of equal success level or better, the dodger takes no damage from the attack. If three levels of success better than the attack, the dodger also gets a free attack. If four levels better, the dodger first unblances the attacker so that he fall and then gets the free attack. If the dodge is a failure, the dodger takes the appopriate damage if the attack was a success. If the dodge is a fumble, the attack is considered to be one level of success higher than rolled (except for critical attacks, as they allready are as good as they get).

[table]attack/dodge|fumble|failure|normal|special|critical

fumble|No damage|No damage|No damage|Free attack|Trip attacker & free attacks

failure|Normal damage|No damage|No damage|No damage|Free attack

normal|Special damage|Normal damage|No damage|No damage|No damage

special|Critical damage|Special damage|Normal damage|No damage|No damage

critical|Critical damage|Critical damage|Special damage|Normal damage|No damage[/table]

As long as the dodger is able to give it his full attention (not attacking or spellcasting in the same round), this skill can also be used against missile attacks if a successfull perception roll is made. The full dodge skill can be used against thrown missiles. Projectile fire like arrows, bolts & slingstones, is a hard task to dodge (½ skill).

The more encumbrance a character carries, the harder this skill is to perform. This part of the skill is still under developement. It should restrict heavy armor users, as dodge otherwise would be to powerfull. Possible solutions:

1) For every ENC, subtract 2% from the dodge skill.

2) If carrying more than 7,5 ENC armor, this skill becomes a hard task (1/2 skill).

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

A possible houserule for dodge. What do you think? :ohwell:

SGL.

[frogspawner]

"Meh". I agree that Dodging should be more important in combat, and have my own houserule for it. But your rule is based on the old 'Opposed Roll' concept, which I don't like, so I'd better not comment further - it'd only be negative.

[jean]

It is worth a try.

Maybe the ENC penalty is too high

Maybe 2 free attacks is too much an advantage, I'd give a free attack with a bonus instead

[Merak Gren]

Hmmm

Too many free attacks for my liking. I agree that a good doge should allow you an opening, but the failure in a dodge will just allow the attack to suceed.

Also, the enc penalties. This will depend on the base level of encumbrance that you carried when trained. So if you are a warrior trained to fight sword and shield plus chainmail, your base enc should reflect this and your trained skill is normal for your level of enc.

Alternatively, if you are a primitive warrior with loincloth and spear, your normal skill dodge should apply to mirror that enc.

Just some thoughts.

[Triff]

But your rule is based on the old 'Opposed Roll' concept, which I don't like, so I'd better not comment further - it'd only be negative.

I'd say it's based on levels of success, but then I'm not familiar with the old opposed rules, just the new mrq & brp ones.

It is worth a try.

Maybe the ENC penalty is too high

Also, the enc penalties. This will depend on the base level of encumbrance that you carried when trained. So if you are a warrior trained to fight sword and shield plus chainmail, your base enc should reflect this and your trained skill is normal for your level of enc.

Alternatively, if you are a primitive warrior with loincloth and spear, your normal skill dodge should apply to mirror that enc.

If you are a warrior trained to fight with sword and shield in chainmail, it would be natural that you parried instead. The primitive warrior with loincloth and spear should be a better dodger I think.

With a heavy armor, the dodge skill gets to powerfull, as it will downgrade specials and criticals. Then it becomes much better than parries. With some punishing ENC rules, it would be good for those in light armor. The ENC rules would have to be tweaked so that you would prefer parry with heavy armor, but making dodge a viable alternative for those with light or none armor - maybe the minus should be given based on the type of armor instead of ENC itself.

Maybe 2 free attacks is too much an advantage, I'd give a free attack with a bonus instead

Hmmm

Too many free attacks for my liking. I agree that a good doge should allow you an opening, but the failure in a dodge will just allow the attack to suceed.

2 free attacks for a critical dodge vs. a fumbled attack might be to much. Yup, I'll lower that to one. The attacker will have to roll on the fumble table in addition, so that should be enough.

I'm going with criticals at 1/100th of skill (rounded up), specials at 1/10th of skill and fumbles at above 91%+1/10th of skill (00 always a fumble), so fumbles will happen more often than the new default (with upgrading of your foes attack if you fumble the dodge against him).

SGL.

[frogspawner]

I'd say it's based on levels of success, but then I'm not familiar with the old opposed rules, just the new mrq & brp ones.

Well, you've got a matrix for results: until the other guy does his roll, you don't know what your roll means. For me, that's 'Opposed Rolls'.

[Triff]

Well, you've got a matrix for results: until the other guy does his roll, you don't know what your roll means. For me, that's 'Opposed Rolls'.

Parry influences the meaning of an attack roll just as much.

A rolls his attack, B rolls his dodge or parry, A rolls his damage (or not, if there's no point).

Isn't that the way it usually goes?

SGL.

[Rurik]

As a matter of semantics, 'opposed roll' usually means you are comparing the actual rolls (numbers rolled) against eachother.

I don't have BRPZero but It sounds like that uses a table pretty much like Triffs. It is only comparing levels of success, not actual rolls.

[RMS]

Parry influences the meaning of an attack roll just as much.

A rolls his attack, B rolls his dodge or parry, A rolls his damage (or not, if there's no point).

Isn't that the way it usually goes?

SGL.

This depends. In old RQ (and some other BRP varients?) you still needed to roll damage because it could go through a parrying weapon to do damage, damage the weapon, knock back the defender, etc. In RQ2/3 the amount of damage rolled is determined only by the attack roll and the amount of damage parried is determined by the parry roll.

In general, I like your ideas. However, I might do something a little less drastic:

Succeed by 2 levels and the dodger seizes initiative, but doesn't get a free attack. Granted this only helps if the dodger is 2nd, but it's frequently the person with less armor, lighter/shorter weapons that is dodging so they have a good chance of going last (w/ strike ranks).

Succeed by 3 levels and get a free attack. Succeed by 4 levels and get a free attack, plus some other small bonus.

I'd have a failed dodge simply fail to do anything, and a fumble leaves the character on the ground so they have a lost action getting up: give up an attack, or similar later. I wouldn't give the attacker a free attack based on any attempt to dodge. That's too drastic for me.

[Atgxtg]

Interesting. I agree with too many free attacks. In a RPG where characters get one attack per round 2 free attacks is a lot.

My suggestions:

Replace "free attack" with "sidestep". The dodger gets to mode to the side of the foe. This allows them to move 1 pace/meter/yard/hex, and get a "attacking from unshielded side" bonus worth +10%.

Replace "trip attacker & free attack" as a "sidestep" but have the attacker make a DEX roll or the the dodger gets behind them for double the bonus.

I'd only reserve the "trip" reuslt for when the attacker fumbled rather than just fails. And just chancege the DEX roll to see if he falls down.

I'd replace the gland slam result of "trip attack plus two free attacks" as "sidestep" plus "trip/fall" and a free attack"

That cuts you doen to one free attack, but a lot of chances to get into a advnatagous position.

[Trifletraxor]

In general, I like your ideas. However, I might do something a little less drastic:

Succeed by 2 levels and the dodger seizes initiative, but doesn't get a free attack. Granted this only helps if the dodger is 2nd, but it's frequently the person with less armor, lighter/shorter weapons that is dodging so they have a good chance of going last (w/ strike ranks).

Succeed by 3 levels and get a free attack. Succeed by 4 levels and get a free attack, plus some other small bonus.

I'd have a failed dodge simply fail to do anything, and a fumble leaves the character on the ground so they have a lost action getting up: give up an attack, or similar later. I wouldn't give the attacker a free attack based on any attempt to dodge. That's too drastic for me.

Some good ideas there.

I've toned down the free attack thing (updated the first post) - now the dodger would only get a free attack if making a special or critical dodge against a fumble attack, or critical dodge against a failed attack. I still like the idea that a fumble dodge gets you straight into the path of the attack. In RQ we houseruled that a fumbled dodge meant a automatic hit for the attacker, I'm just worked it abit further along that line.

Also, what about this for an ENC limitation (based on RQ3 ENC):

-Using more than 7,5 ENC of armor (weight of a full bezainted for a medium person) makes this skill a hard task to perform (1/2 skill).

SGL.

[frogspawner]

Parry influences the meaning of an attack roll just as much.

A rolls his attack, B rolls his dodge or parry, A rolls his damage (or not, if there's no point).

Isn't that the way it usually goes?

Well, this is all irrelevant to the real point of your thread, but since you ask...

As a matter of semantics, 'opposed roll' usually means you are comparing the actual rolls (numbers rolled) against eachother.

Although I (and others, it seems) find the number-comparison part of the usual opposed roll mechanisms the really objectionable bit, I think it is the inter-dependence between attack and parry rolls that makes them 'opposed' (and I don't like that part, either!).

In RQ2/3 the amount of damage rolled is determined only by the attack roll and the amount of damage parried is determined by the parry roll.

Exactly. Independent rolls, no linkage - nice and clean. Good system design.

[Atgxtg]

Although I (and others, it seems) find the number-comparison part of the usual opposed roll mechanisms the really objectionable bit, I think it is the inter-dependence between attack and parry rolls that makes them 'opposed' (and I don't like that part, either!).

Exactly. Independent rolls, no linkage - nice and clean. Good system design.

Well the problem with dodge compared to Parry is that Dodge works as an all or nothing effect.

If you wanted to, you could have partial dodging:

Success: Partial Dodge (1/2 damage)

Special Success: Graze (minimum damage)

Critical Success: Dodge (no damage).

That would also balance out Dodge vs. Parry against the heavy damage doers, like dragons.

[frogspawner]

Yes, for a while now I've been using a similar system for Dodge:

Success: -10 damage

Special: -20 damage

Critical: No damage

But I can see that would break down if people typically got into the range of gross damages that have been mentioned hereabouts sometimes, so this very day I thought: "Hmmm, maybe success should halve damage...". Uncanny!

[Nightshade]

Yes, for a while now I've been using a similar system for Dodge:

Success: -10 damage

Special: -20 damage

Critical: No damage

But I can see that would break down if people typically got into the range of gross damages that have been mentioned hereabouts sometimes, so this very day I thought: "Hmmm, maybe success should halve damage...". Uncanny!

Actually, I'd expect the opposite most of the time, where for many attacks there's no difference between success and lower values, and certainly no difference between between a special and a critical (taking more than 20 damage at a hit was unusual even back in the days when we used quasi-Gloranthan style rune lords).

Honestly, I can't see any reason for damage to be relevant to dodging; its dealing with negating the skill of the attacker, not the damage. I can see it reducing his chance of special results the way the new rules do it, but interacting with damage directly is just strange for a dodge.

[Atgxtg]

Actually, I'd expect the opposite most of the time, where for many attacks there's no difference between success and lower values, and certainly no difference between between a special and a critical (taking more than 20 damage at a hit was unusual even back in the days when we used quasi-Gloranthan style rune lords).

Honestly, I can't see any reason for damage to be relevant to dodging; its dealing with negating the skill of the attacker, not the damage. I can see it reducing his chance of special results the way the new rules do it, but interacting with damage directly is just strange for a dodge.

It is actually just as viable as it is for parry. Contrary to how RQ does it, a parry is not soaking up damage with an object (that is a block), but defecting the attack so that it misses the target.

And, you can get partially successful results for both, where you still get hit, but not at full force.

[frogspawner]

...interacting with damage directly is just strange for a dodge.

I look upon it as 'riding the blow' to a certain degree. Most blows only have damage as a property, so what else? Altering the attackers skill would bring it back into the realms of opposed rolling (and I was mentioning it as an example of not using them).

[Nightshade]

It is actually just as viable as it is for parry. Contrary to how RQ does it, a parry is not soaking up damage with an object (that is a block), but defecting the attack so that it misses the target.

Even that still deals with the force of the blow to some degree; no matter how much skill you have, deflecting a powerful blow is going to be harder than an easy one. I just can't see that as relevant to the dodge at all.

And, you can get partially successful results for both, where you still get hit, but not at full force.

I agree to some extent with the parry/deflect, but not really with the dodge. You can perhaps roll with it a little bit, but there's only a limited amount that's going to matter; what usually matters is either not getting hit, or at least not where someone was aiming. And frankly, rolling with it strikes me as more like an unarmed parry than a dodge in the first place.

[Nightshade]

I look upon it as 'riding the blow' to a certain degree. Most blows only have damage as a property, so what else? Altering the attackers skill would bring it back into the realms of opposed rolling (and I was mentioning it as an example of not using them).

I understand that; I'm simply suggesting that for a true dodge, nothing else will represent it properly. As I note above, what you're talking about is more like a full body parry/deflection, and they just aren't the same thing; in fact, what works best for one isn't best for the other.

[Atgxtg]

Even that still deals with the force of the blow to some degree; no matter how much skill you have, deflecting a powerful blow is going to be harder than an easy one. I just can't see that as relevant to the dodge at all.

First with parry.

It really doesn't matter much how powerful the blow is. It's physics. The object has a vector and you are adding a second vector for movement. So if the object is moving in the -axis and you can apply force from the Y- or Z-axis both vectors will affect the object.

What would matter is how fast the object is travelling and it's mass. The whole point of a parry isto the block the attack but redirect it.

Sure you can. Let's say someone is swinging a sword at you. If you step back you might only get hit by the point as opposed to the "sweet spot" farther down the blade.

Or if someone is going for you head you could duck or sidestep and only get scratched or grazed along the top of the skill rather than being decapitated.

It isn't so much rolling with the blow, but avoiding the brunt of the blow. All weapons have a sweet spot that does the real damage, and if you avoid contact with that spot, or initiate contact with another spot, like stepping into a halberd and getting hit by the shaft rather than the axe, you mitigate some of the damage.

[Nightshade]

First with parry.

It really doesn't matter much how powerful the blow is. It's physics. The object has a vector and you are adding a second vector for movement. So if the object is moving in the -axis and you can apply force from the Y- or Z-axis both vectors will affect the object.

What would matter is how fast the object is travelling and it's mass. The whole point of a parry isto the block the attack but redirect it.

Speed plus mass _is_ power. There isn't any meaningful distinction between the two, as its all about deflecting kinetic energy, and within the game, that's a rather big part of the damage component (some is impact point and other things, but some of those are already factored in other areas).

Sure you can. Let's say someone is swinging a sword at you. If you step back you might only get hit by the point as opposed to the "sweet spot" farther down the blade.

Grazes are, I'll admit, a messy case, but for the most part they're also a marginal case; getting hit by the top quarter or the top half of the blade isn't going to typically make a huge difference, because you just end up applying the same force to a smaller area.

Or if someone is going for you head you could duck or sidestep and only get scratched or grazed along the top of the skill rather than being decapitated.

See my comment about that above. As far as I can tell, its likely the case that a graze is a "miss" by the standards of BRP and RQ, as I doubt the damage typically even translates into a point, given the scale involved.

It isn't so much rolling with the blow, but avoiding the brunt of the blow. All weapons have a sweet spot that does the real damage, and if you avoid contact with that spot, or initiate contact with another spot, like stepping into a halberd and getting hit by the shaft rather than the axe, you mitigate some of the damage.

In the majority of cases, I'd argue you eliminate the vast majority of the damage or none doing that; I don't think there's a lot of middle ground.

[Atgxtg]

Speed plus mass _is_ power. There isn't any meaningful distinction between the two, as its all about deflecting kinetic energy, and within the game, that's a rather big part of the damage component (some is impact point and other things, but some of those are already factored in other areas).

On the contrary there is a bit difference. It isn't additive either. It's not speed plus mass. It more Speed x Mass for Momentum. And Speed Squared x mass/contact area and time to get the effect.

Let's say that you got a object moving at high speed. Now if you can apply force to it at a angle other than the one it is heading in, you will alter the trajectory of the object. Ideally you wont to do so at a right agle from the path the object is headed. Depending on how fast the object is traveling, it's inertia, how much force you can apply and at what angel, and just how far along it's path it has already traveled will determine just how much you can alter it's destination.

Grazes are, I'll admit, a messy case, but for the most part they're also a marginal case; getting hit by the top quarter or the top half of the blade isn't going to typically make a huge difference, because you just end up applying the same force to a smaller area.

Not that marginal at all. Getting hit by the the tip of the blade (the top half is what you are shooting for it you are the attacker. Well, more like the top quarter or third) gives you a better chance of getting a glancing blow. Having a 1/2" deep wound is better than having a 3" deep wound.

Plus just what that smaller area is could make a huge difference. Most dodging moves the point of impact to someplace less lethal. A shoulder hit instead of the head, a strike to the outer ribcage instead of the heart. All good from the defender's point of view, and lowering the damage in game terms.

In the majority of cases, I'd argue you eliminate the vast majority of the damage or none doing that; I don't think there's a lot of middle ground.

Actually there is. Go check out an Aikido Dojo and see all the people who partially dodged an attack. It's probably more common that a complete success and certainly more common that a failure.

Most martial arts exploit this idea to some extent. Since the impact force is based partly on the relative speed rather than an absolute, and moving in the same direction of the attack will reduce the impact.

The classic case if a fender bender. If Car A is moving 10 mph and car B is traveling behind it at 15mph, then when B slams into A it is with the same effect as a 5mph crash.

Likewise if Rurik thrusts his spear at A speed of 2X and Blinky the Trollkin backpedals at Speed X, Blinky is going to get hit X rather than 2X.

If Blinky can move in such a way to spread out the time of contact he can reduce the injury further.

[Trifletraxor]

Actually there is. Go check out an Aikido Dojo and see all the people who partially dodged an attack. It's probably more common that a complete success and certainly more common that a failure.

I'm not sure this is the same for weapon fighting though. You can maybe roll with a punch, but that's a lot harder to do with a weapon. I've done quite some training with sticks (filippino martial arts), including full contact sparring with limited protective gear. The speed of the weapons are pretty much too fast for the dodge to work partially. Either you dodge the hit or you don't - and my feeling (highly subjective, but still) is that if you don't dodge it fully, you get the full force from the blow.

SGL.

[Trifletraxor]

Likewise if Rurik thrusts his spear at A speed of 2X and Blinky the Trollkin backpedals at Speed X, Blinky is going to get hit X rather than 2X.

Rurik would be thrusting his spear at a higher speed than double what the trollkin can backpedal. The thrust is very quick, moving a body backwards is not. Anyway, the example is flawed as we all know it's Blinky that impales Rurik, not the other way around.

SGL.

[Rurik]

Hey why don't you just make your sig:

"236/420. Ef plest master, this mighty fine grub!"

And save us all some math?