Dodge in RQ6

[Nevun]

Am I right in that Dodge is gone as a skill in RQ 6?

It looks like you could use Evade or Acrobatics as available but the option of just not being where the blow is landing seems to be absent. You can only parry (much improved now though - similar to what I house ruled for RQ3).

Has anyone house ruled this in any way?

 

[Baulderstone]

As i understand it, Parry is a combination of using your weapon to make it harder to hit you and moving your body to not be hit. The two really aren't exclusive actions unless you are doing something drastic like a diving Evade action.

[Nevun]

You could be right. It may be just that I need to adjust my thinking. Maybe if I call it "Defend" rather than parry it will feel better.

[Baulderstone]

46 minutes ago, Nevun said:

You could be right. It may be just that I need to adjust my thinking. Maybe if I call it "Defend" rather than parry it will feel better.

While I still call it "Parry", I do think of it as a general defense roll myself. Hopefully it will help. 

[Mankcam]

'Defend' is a reasonable word, but 'Parry' works better, because in RQ6 you cannot defend yourself  to any great extent unless you have a weapon or item to parry with.

There is no action point spent on dodging in RQ6, like you would do in RQ3. It is assumed that, if you are not trying to defend yourself at all, then the attacker would be able to make an attack roll at an advantage (I think 'Very Easy' - double %,  or possibly even an 'Automatic' success). So unless the defender is standing still, it is assumed that there is a bit of movement and dodging happening, and this is why the attacker must make a roll to see if they hit the defender.

You can try to Evade, but this is mainly when you want to jump to cover to avoid missile weapons or blasts etc, as it leaves you Prone - in a melee this would certainly be a disadvantage to your next action.

I don't mind it in many ways, as Dodge was too powerful in RQ3. It often meant it was always better to dodge than to have a shield or to parry with a weapon, so no one would take those options, it was very unbalanced.

For more cinematic fighting styles there is the Daredevil combat trait which allows you to use Evade in melee and not end up Prone, so this essentially works like RQ3 Dodge, except it is only for particular fighting styles rather than being a default option.

I wouldn't try home brewing too many new rules; especially avoid directly porting the RQ3 Dodge skill to RQ6. If you do this you'll have the same issues of unbalancing that RQ3 had in regards to Dodge vs Parry, and it will negate the relevance of the Daredevil combat trait.

One homebrew option that won't break the system is to rule that if a defender is unable to Parry, then that defender has Passive Defence (no Action Point cost), and the opponent's attack roll % is reduced by the defender's DEX. It's not a big modifier, but simulates a more agile character being slightly harder to hit.

Another option may be to rule that a successful Acrobatics roll incurs a Hard modifier on the opponent's attack roll - again this isn't a big modifier, but it does have some benefits.

Both are reasonable options if you are crossing over from RQ3, and shouldn't impact too heavily on the system at all.

 

Edited November 29, 2015 by Mankcam

[Mankcam]

.

Edited November 29, 2015 by Mankcam

[nDervish]

5 hours ago, Mankcam said:

Another option may be to rule that a successful Acrobatics roll incurs a Hard modifier on the opponent's attack roll - again this isn't a big modifier, but it does have some benefits.

It's in RQ6 RAW that "Acrobatics can be substituted for Evade if the situation warrants it. The benefit of this is that if the roll is a success, the character automatically avoids ending up prone.", so I'd say that option is already covered, no ruling required (aside from how you want to define "if the situation warrants it").

[Mankcam]

1 hour ago, nDervish said:

It's in RQ6 RAW that "Acrobatics can be substituted for Evade if the situation warrants it. The benefit of this is that if the roll is a success, the character automatically avoids ending up prone.", so I'd say that option is already covered, no ruling required (aside from how you want to define "if the situation warrants it").

I'm only recently crossed over from BGB to RQ6, I knew I had read about the Acrobatics somewhere but I didn't have the book to check at the time. I've had the RQ6 book in my collection since it was published, but only recently am I using it at the gaming table, so I'm still finding things out about it myself.

So Acrobatics can be substituted for Evade on some occasions, hmm... it is pretty powerful if it acts like Evade with no Prone, so I'm assuming that its not meant to be like RQ3 Dodge, otherwise everyone just chooses Acrobatics. 

I wonder what situations can warrant the use of it in combat?

Edited November 29, 2015 by Mankcam

[soltakss]

Evade is flinging yourself out of the way, with no regard for the consequences.

Acrobatics is neatly flick-flacking out of the way and remaining on your feet.

Neither are really the same as RQ3 Dodge, which was different to RQ2 Defense.

 

[Sunwolfe]

Greetings all:

This subject is covered in serious detail in various threads over at the DM forum. One of the more recent that comes to mind is "Acrobatics for Dodging." Check it out for more information and discussion.

Cheers,

Edited November 29, 2015 by Sunwolfe

[Mankcam]

Ah yes, I remember that thread. I think it managed to sort it out by clarifying that Evade uses the Opposed Roll mechanics, and so does Acrobatics if it is used to replace such.

So the big difference here is that even if you succeed in Acrobatics then it does not automatically mean you negate damage, as the best skill score wins with Opposed Rolls, as opposed to Parry rolls which are Differential Rolls. So its more of a gamble with Acrobatics in some ways.

I wonder if there are situations where you can't use Acrobatics in combat?

Edited November 29, 2015 by Mankcam

[Baragei]

The game also gives you the option to Change Range in melee - which mechanically and thematically isn't unlike the actual act of dodging.

[Antalon]

1 hour ago, Mankcam said:

I wonder if there are situations where you can't use Acrobatics in combat?

Acrobatics and Evade suggest you need room to manoeuvre, without crashing into objects or companions.  Parry may be more feasible in the tight confines of a melee in a shieldwall or dungeon.

Also, acrobatics is a professional skill.  It requires dedication (XP) to get really good, so perhaps suits certain warrior traditions or cults better than others.

Antalon.

[Zit]

11 hours ago, Baulderstone said:

As i understand it, Parry is a combination of using your weapon to make it harder to hit you and moving your body to not be hit. The two really aren't exclusive actions unless you are doing something drastic like a diving Evade action.

If I remember well a life demo by Rick at Bacharach, this is exactly what he showed and said.

[Ragnar]

We still use "Defence" from RQ2. It is simple, yet makes as much sense as any other abstraction. Just subtract it from the attack chance, from hand-to-hand attacks. It does not apply to ranged attacks. We do not use "true percentiles" - Defence is only practical with 5% increments.

Edited November 29, 2015 by Ragnar

[Zit]

5 hours ago, Ragnar said:

We still use "Defence" from RQ2. It is simple, yet makes as much sense as any other abstraction. Just subtract it from the attack chance, from hand-to-hand attacks. It does not apply to ranged attacks. We do not use "true percentiles" - Defence is only practical with 5% increments.

I never understood why this nice, simple and straight forward rule had been left.

Edited November 29, 2015 by Zit

[Ragnar]

2 hours ago, Zit said:

I never understood why this nice, simple and straight forward rule had been left.

I think it was the move to true percentiles. Instead of subtracting 15% from a 75% attack, you wound up subtracting 13% from a 76% attack. That would slow things down too much.

[nDervish]

20 hours ago, Baragei said:

The game also gives you the option to Change Range in melee - which mechanically and thematically isn't unlike the actual act of dodging.

Except that, technically, the Change Range action only allows you to move to your weapon's optimal range or disengage entirely.  If your opponent's weapon has the same reach as yours, you can't Change Range to avoid an attack while remaining engaged.

12 hours ago, Zit said:

I never understood why this nice, simple and straight forward rule had been left.

I'd guess the math.  I've played with several people over the years who are noticeably slower to determine a result when they have to do even single-digit subtraction.

[g33k]

On 11/29/2015, 6:39:52, Antalon said:

Acrobatics and Evade suggest you need room to manoeuvre, without crashing into objects or companions.  Parry may be more feasible in the tight confines of a melee in a shieldwall or dungeon.

Also, acrobatics is a professional skill.  It requires dedication (XP) to get really good, so perhaps suits certain warrior traditions or cults better than others.

Antalon.

Hmmm. How about generalizing this way:  "Evade" is an all-out "escape from the blow" effort, which nearly always leaves you at some sort of disadvantage.  Usually, and by default, it leaves you "Prone;" the GM may call for a different disadvantage, if it seems apt to the situation, or even permit you to Evade without taking any disatvantage (e.g. when you can slam a heavy door in the attacker's face, why would you dive away from the attack, and let them walk through the open doorway to stab your prone body???),  If you are in sufficiently-tight spaces (a shieldwall, an 18"wide passage, etc) you cannot Evade at all.

"Using Acrobatics in place of Evade often allows the same defensive effects of an Evade, but without taking disadvantage.  It is a more-trained skill, so you generally need a teacher to train you, and a studio (or dojo, etc) to practice.  Also, using it in combat sometimes just isn't an option.  It requires a completely free field of motion, so an attempt to roll or flip away from one opponent is liable to get you hit by another one, in a close-set melee, and tumbling straight down a narrow corridor away from a foe is the same as running straight away from them by any other means.  You also need a relatively flat and unobstructed floor.  Attempts to perform Acrobatics on a field of broken boulders, or upon a steep slope, tend to leave you Prone just like an Evade... and possibly injured, too!