Full Attack - Is There A Ruling?, Cause I Think I'm Getting Screwed Over Options

[Leviathan]

Ok, under the "Full Attack" Manouver in Cannon Companion (martial arts section), it states that you get +1 to the damage code of your unarmed attack, and that the defender gets -2TN to hit you.

Now, the way I read this is that the defender gets -2TN to hit you back on counterattack tests, or him just plain hitting you. This makes sense both with reading the rules and my own kung fu training (ie, concentrating fully on attack means you're easier to hit back).

Now, my GM reads it as "-2TN to all melee combat rolls". Meaning that they get -2TN to the roll to *Dodge* your full attack, as well as to hit you. This makes no sense to me and means that the manouver is only useful when your opponent has only 1 dice in melee combat, or they dont know that you are there. (Somehow concentrating only on attacking means it's easier for your opponent to dodge?)


How do you people read it, and is there an 'official' ruling?

[hyzmarca]

The problem is that there is no dodging in SR3 melee, only counterattack. Either the attacker causes damage or the defender does.

The one and only exception is if the character is using full defense. In that case, I would say that the -2 TN applies to the melee skill roll but not the subsequent dodge test. But that's just me.

Yes, Full Offense does suck.

[toturi]

The only time Full Offense doesn't suck is when the person being Fully Offended is Surprised (sometimes not even then, if the GM rules the other way).

[mfb]

you can get a dodge in melee if you use the full defense option.

your GM is insane. have him explain to you exactly why it should be easier to dodge someone who is not attempting to defend himself.

[Velocity]

[Glyph]

Full offense is only viable when you have TN modifiers in you favor to offset your TN penalty. Even then, though, you are usually better off doing a normal attack. +1 do the Damage Code is the equivalent of two successes to stage up damage.

Generally, a -2 to your opponent's counterattack will cost you more than two successes, so you come out worse. Not to mention, you might wind up losing an exchange that you otherwise would have won.

Now, as toturi said, it can be useful in full surprise situations, if the GM rules that surprised opponents get no counterattack. It's kind of ironic that a berserker offense would wind up being most useful to stealthy characters, though.