Dodge

[Trifletraxor]

Hey why don't you just make your sig:

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

And save us all some math?

Two copies!

SGL.

[Atgxtg]

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.

The example was for demonstration purposes. If I said the spear was moing at 10X and the trollkin backpedaled at X and got hit for 9X the math and example would be just as valid.

Well more like it's is flawed because Rurik attacked Blinky rather than one of the trolls, and thus was vulnerable to Blinky's attack. If Rurik had identified Blinky as a threat and went for him first...

You know one of these day I'll have to print up the Blinky Interview.

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.

From what I've seen it does work partially. I've done it quite a bit against swords. The problem is basically the same as the revised Blinky example. Taking 1 point off of a 10 point hit is not noticeable, but it is there.

We could giver Dodgers a Dodge Die or give the Dodge Points (DPs) based on skill that function like APs. Maybe 1/10th skill? Double that for a special, and no damage for a critical?

So someone with 50 dodge would have 6 DPs, Dodge 12 points of a special and avoid all damage with a critical.

[Nightshade]

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.

I don't recall saying it was additive, A. Please don't imply I did. And while narrow cross section is, all other things equal, easier to deflect, if the force is high enough that's still not a given, and with weapons, unless you're going to use entirely different deflection rules for a mace and a spear, you're not going to be able to handle that right anyway.

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

Of course you will. The question is will you do so enough to _matter_?

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.

But with a cutting weapon there's no guarentee that's what'll happen. You're still applying the same approximate energy, and you've moved the recieving object so it has less space to break. So all you may be doing is trading a long shallow chop for a long shallow slash in a slightly different area (and with no certainty that the area that got it is the better choice).

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

No, most dodging _wants_ to, but often the things most likely to get you out of the way in general, if they don't work, may well actually push it into a worst place. As an example, its entirely possible to catch a swing in the head that otherwise would have caught you in the side of the chest.

good from the defender's point of view, and lowering the damage in game terms.

That's an example of what I refered to as "whole body parries" though; if you're dealing with hit location, it doesn't necessarily reduce the damage, just chose where you want to take it.

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 spent more than three years in a mixed arts dojo when I was in my 20's. I stand by my original statement. Most "partially dodged" attacks might as well not have been dodged at all, and some actually made the problem worse. A few turned blows into grazes, which I've acknowledged, but I consider those to have been the minority cases, and likely "misses" for our purpose.

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.

That's fair enough, but few dodges i include appreciable amount of movement in the game; they're largely shifts in place, and its hard to move your torso or whole body with the same speed someone can move a melee weapon.

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

Its the if I'm questioning in the context of what the game calls a dodge.

[Nightshade]

We could giver Dodgers a Dodge Die or give the Dodge Points (DPs) based on skill that function like APs. Maybe 1/10th skill? Double that for a special, and no damage for a critical?

So someone with 50 dodge would have 6 DPs, Dodge 12 points of a special and avoid all damage with a critical.

The problem is that to the extent I even buy this, I don't think the amount reduced changes, just the likelyhood.

[Atgxtg]

I don't recall saying it was additive, A. Please don't imply I did. And while narrow cross section is, all other things equal, easier to deflect, if the force is high enough that's still not a given, and with weapons, unless you're going to use entirely different deflection rules for a mace and a spear, you're not going to be able to handle that right anyway.

Excuse me, I didn't imply anything

Your words, not mine.

And it is the same math of speed or mace. It has to do with ovecoming the internia.

You can be going at thousands of m/s and still be deflected by a 10m/s force action on you. It's just that by the time it defects you any meaningful distance you will be far away.

Where's RMS when I need a Physics teacher?

Indeed. That is the question. However at the speed and masses of melee weapons, probably so. That is what parrying is all about.

It most every case a long shallow slash is better than a long and relatively not as shallow chop. While the same energy will be in the swing, that does not translate to the same energy to the target.

With a sold hit, the body of the target stops the weapon and soaks up all the energy and momentum of the attack. With a shallow cut, the blade is still moving after contact. Any energy left in the blade is energy not trasnferred to the target.

While location certainly matters, in most cases the location that you will be hit in when dodging is better than the location the attack was orginally going to hit. Typically dodges move the point of impact farther away from the body and father away from the vital spots.

Possible, but unlikely. Very unlikely. Generally you do that by dodging in the wrong direction, like ducking into a chest attack. That is more along the lines of a fumble.

[Gnarsh]

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.

I think you're getting too caught up in specifics. Ultimately, the vector*mass of the weapon attack is represented by the potential damage of that attack (damage rolled and modified based on special/crit result, etc).

In the same way, we can say that the capability of the parry to deflect that damage is represented by the AP of the parrying item. It's an abstraction, but one that "works" within this context. A faster/harder blow from a large weapon will be harder to deflect fully then a slower/softer blow from a smaller weapon. Both of those are represented by damage potential and AP (damage stopped).

There's a reason why heavier/bigger shields block more damage. And it's not just because they're "thicker" (which is the assumption for armor for the most part), but because the combination of mass and size allows the wielder to deflect larger attacks. Again, it's an abstraction, but then so is everything in an RPG, right?

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.

I would argue that a successful dodge means you avoid getting hit. What you're describing is more like a successful dodge making a special hit become a normal hit instead (one that would have connected solidly, resulting in cracked ribs and a collapse to the floor, ends up only slicing you a bit). IMO, the "success level subtracts" system works well for this.

While I understand the objective here, I also think it's possible to overthink rules and try to make them "too realistic". At the end of the day, we're playing a game, and the concepts and abilities within that game have to "work". While it's possible to have a dodge mechanic that operates by subtracting damage instead of reducing hit levels, it then becomes just another way of parrying. More interesting, with the rise of parry rules with a "parry blocks all" mechanic, it puts us on the odd circumstance of actually having completely reversed the mechanical utility of the two abilities. Somewhat arbitrarily I might add...

If two abilities do the exact same thing, why have two? It makes sense to have parry be the one that subtracts damage, while dodge reduces hit levels. It gives each one a distinctive methodology that may each be effective, but not in exactly the same way. From a game design perspective, this offers the players options to choose from and a reason to perhaps develop both skills (situationally, one will usually be better then the other, but not always). This in turn allows for more depth within the combat system, and is a good thing.

Um... On a side note, we actually did make some slight changes to our parry rules to reflect the whole "you're deflecting, not just blocking" idea. On a special parry, we add half the parrying characters max damage bonus to the AP of the shield (for purpose of parrying). This reflects the idea that sometimes a big strong guy can parry better then a small weak guy. He's going to be more able to muscle that shield into the right position and angle to avoid additional damage.

Dunno. It's just a rule we came up with, tried, and really liked.

[Atgxtg]

Gnarsh

Yeah, it like turning a special into a normal hit. That was the idea.

I did this becuase frogspawner didn't like the idea of opposed rolls for Dodging and commented on how much easier/better parrying worked.

Having a Dodge reduce the damage is one way to accomplish that.

[RMS]

Hey why don't you just make your sig:

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

And save us all some math?

Actually, his statement would be 116+120/420 = 116.286 since you resolve 120/420 before doing addition. How's that for pedantic!

And it is the same math of speed or mace. It has to do with ovecoming the internia. You can be going at thousands of m/s and still be deflected by a 10m/s force action on you. It's just that by the time it defects you any meaningful distance you will be far away.

Where's RMS when I need a Physics teacher?

Down sick! I came home after my last lecture today and spent the rest of the day in bad fighting off a fever. I'm feeling better tonight.

mass * velocity = momentum

mass * velocity^2 / 2 = kinetic energy

power = dW/dt where W is the work done over some small time dt, which resolves to P = force * velocity for a constant force. (dW/dt is the derivative, for those who don't recognize the notation.)

In all honesty, I don't think we can really know for certain which is the most important in a real world sense of deflecting or doing damage. In the end, making up something that seems basically right is as close as we're going to get. I'd also note here that for melee weapons and even low velocity projectiles (arrows, javelins, and even early large caliber firearms), velocity is low enough that the difference in momentum and kinetic energy is small enough not to bother getting caught up on. With high velocity firearms, no doubt the difference is large, but for a sword the difference is negligible IMO.

I personally, like the current RQ-style parry. It allows the weapon/shield to deflect a large amount of damage, but it's limited. I love the idea that you can successfully get a weapon in the way and it still isn't sufficient to stop all the damage and that models reality good enough for me.

If I'm not making sense, forgive me. I'm feeling much better, but am still definitely well under the weather.

[Atgxtg]

Actually, his statement would be 116+120/420 = 116.286 since you resolve 120/420 before doing addition. How's that for pedantic!

So Triff should use (116+120)/420.

power = dW/dt where W is the work done over some small time dt, which resolves to P = force * velocity for a constant force. (dW/dt is the derivative, for those who don't recognize the notation.)

Hey, there is no triangle symbol! Made delta-W and delta-t look funny

[Nightshade]

A, I think this is another case where our basic assumptions are enough at odds that the conversation is moot. I simply flat out don't think your basic presumptions about deflection are correct, at least to the degree you're stating them; you need a significant amount of cross-vector in the energy to delect something enough that its a noticeable effect, and there are significant differences in what degree is involved between that being meaningful for something that delivers most of its damage by supplying force over a wide area (like a mace) or a narrow area (like a blade). As you don't seem to agree with either of those, I don't think we can continue to have this conversation except in terms of "Does! Does not!" and I fail to see how that's useful.

[soltakss]

I don't think we can continue to have this conversation except in terms of "Does! Does not!" and I fail to see how that's useful.

I can!

Your turn.

[Sven Norén]

Am I the only one to miss the Defense ability from RQ2?

[Kloster]

Am I the only one to miss the Defense ability from RQ2?

Nope, I find it useful also. But It should be in addition to a dodge skill.

Runequestement votre,

Kloster

[frogspawner]

Am I the only one to miss the Defense ability from RQ2?

No, I do too (or rather, I don't because I still use a variation of it). But I think the RQ2 version was badly flawed: it starts getting silly at about 30% and competent opponents can't hit you; and the higher the skill, the higher the chance of an increase - so it accelerates away badly.

[Trifletraxor]

Well, than you all for the tips. I'm going for the dodge skill as houseruled now in the first post. I'm not sure about the ENC rules yet, but that will wait and see to I get my hand of the book.

SGL.

[Gnarsh]

I did this becuase frogspawner didn't like the idea of opposed rolls for Dodging and commented on how much easier/better parrying worked.

Having a Dodge reduce the damage is one way to accomplish that.

Ah... Yeah. Somewhere as I was following the conversation, I lost track of where/why it started. Hah! Imagine that...

It's certainly a workable solution I suppose. I guess I just don't get why someone would want to avoid using an opposed system in this case. It's not like it's actually very difficult at all, and as I observed, it gives you two defensive combat options that are actually "different" in terms of how they operate. Applying the equivalent of AP to dodge just makes it another parry, and it opens up a whole range of additional balance problems:

1. If it parries as much as a shield, then why would anyone carry a shield around?

2. If it parries less then a shield, then it's not going to be useful in the very situations you'd usually want to dodge (ie: Giant swinging a tree at your head).

3. If you go the other way and give it tons of AP in order to avoid problem number 2, then you've made dodge the "uber skill" since merely making the skill makes you virtually invulnerable to damage. It's the same problem with 1, except multiplied.

There is one way around this, but it's a very very bad one IMO. We had a GM for awhile who for some reason liked dodge as a mechanic. I have my suspicions as to why, but basically he made a successful dodge simply avoid all damage. Period. Didn't matter if the opponent criticalled or not (which is essentially identical to the "tons of AP" option above).

It certainly avoids any sense of using an opposed roll, but becomes overpowered. Here's how he balanced it though. He would decide based on the environment whether you had minuses to your dodge, were at some reduced multiple (half, quarter, etc), or whether you could dodge at all. He'd say things like: "You could try a dodge, but you might slip if you do", or "You can attempt a dodge, but you're fighting right next to that guy waving a greatsword around, so you might get hit....".

Basically, he could control when the players could use their skill or not. Which was one of the most annoying things you can do to players as a GM. It's much much better to come up with systemic methods to balance out the utility of skills on the character sheet, then to use arbitrary seeming GM fiat after the fact to do so. I've seen it first hand and it's painful. I know that some GMs *love* to do this sort of thing, but trust me, players hate it. They want to know that if they have a skill level with something written on their sheet that pretty much any time they want to try to use that skill, that will be their chance. While the occasional modification is acceptable, counting on using them as the primary means to balance out an overpowered skill is a horribly bad idea...

We very quickly switched to using the "levels subtract" method and have never had any problems with it.

[Atgxtg]

Ah... Yeah. Somewhere as I was following the conversation, I lost track of where/why it started. Hah! Imagine that...

It's certainly a workable solution I suppose. I guess I just don't get why someone would want to avoid using an opposed system in this case.

There are some people who don't like the opposed mechanic. Personally, I would rather not use D100 for opposed mechanics but use more degrees of success. Basically, with opposed resolution there is really no reason to use D100. IMO it is better to go with a smaller die and modify the results by the Margin of Success.

It's not like it's actually very difficult at all, and as I observed, it gives you two defensive combat options that are actually "different" in terms of how they operate. Applying the equivalent of AP to dodge just makes it another parry, and it opens up a whole range of additional balance problems:

1. If it parries as much as a shield, then why would anyone carry a shield around?

2. If it parries less then a shield, then it's not going to be useful in the very situations you'd usually want to dodge (ie: Giant swinging a tree at your head).

3. If you go the other way and give it tons of AP in order to avoid problem number 2, then you've made dodge the "uber skill" since merely making the skill makes you virtually invulnerable to damage. It's the same problem with 1, except multiplied.

There is one way around this, but it's a very very bad one IMO. We had a GM for awhile who for some reason liked dodge as a mechanic. I have my suspicions as to why, but basically he made a successful dodge simply avoid all damage. Period. Didn't matter if the opponent criticalled or not (which is essentially identical to the "tons of AP" option above).

A good point. But the , half/minimum/none version balances this off just as well as a limit and balanced out with the always taking some damage (except on a crtical) where a parry can block all the damage most of the time.

Dodge might still be better for 40 and 50 point hits or better, but at that point the difference is minimal.

Another method that would work would be to give the attacker the win on ties, unless the defender retreats. Then the attacker could try to back the defender into a corner.

[Merak Gren]

I haven't read the whole thread, so my apologies if this has been mentioned earlier.

The is a discussion on rpg.net discussing the Dodge v Parry argument.

May be usdful.

http://forum.rpg.net/showthread.php?t=377530