Defense in melee, Can I block a firearm Options

[WarpedAzz]

If my character is in melée with someone and instead of attacking with a melée weapon they decide to shoot me do I defend against this attack as if it was a melée attack or a standard ranged attack?
I realize that my opponent has a -2 die pool mod for using a firearm in melée.
I ask as I'm making a troll using two swords and the two weapon style maneuver. But if my opponent can simply out maneuver this defense by using a gun, it hardly seems worth while.

[Makki]

you can't, but he gets -3

[Mäx]

you can't, but he gets -3

Actually its -1 to his dicepool as he also gets the +2 point-blank modifier

[Aerospider]

Standard ranged attack defence, so Reaction on its own or Reaction + Dodge/Gymnastics if you give up an IP.

There are things you can do to make it less of an issue. For one, make sure you have 2 or 3 IPs so that you can use an active defence and still attack back against slower opponents. Maneuvres can help too, like the disarm maneuvre.

This is a very feasible build: With a troll your swords are likely to have the same kind of damage value as a firearm, you can attack twice and you have +2 reach whilst he has -1 for defending a second attack and -3 to hit you in return. Also, on top of your high body rating and natural armour you get to use ballistic whereas he has to use impact, which is commonly the lower of the two.

You might want to discuss it with your GM since he's in control of the modifiers. For example, if I were your GM I might agree a defence penalty to someone wielding a two-handed firearm (like a firearm) in melee since it's a lot harder to dodge, parry or block with hands a fixed width apart.

You know, the more I think about it the more I'm inclined to allow a block or parry defence. The final fight scene in equilibrium is something I never want to make impossible.

[Aerospider]

Actually its -1 to his dicepool as he also gets the +2 point-blank modifier

I thought about that, but decided it was a silly idea. -1 is far too small a penalty for trying to shoot someone as they punch/slice/batter you silly.
I think it's reasonable to assume that the point blank nature of melee is factored into the -3.

He would get a big target bonus though.

[WarpedAzz]

Not being able to use parry is a 10 die pool difference for a 5 skill character who has two weapon maneuver and hasn't got any further defense adds. Lowering your opponents defense by that much is sure worth the penalty, be it -1 or -3.
If any character has someone coming at them with two weapons, even if the defender is good at melée, would probably be better off pulling a gun. As an added bonus guns would be able to shoot twice as opposed to the complex action melée attack.
Wait a minute, I just reread the Ranged Combat- attacker in melée combat,
"If the attacker is attempting to conduct a ranged attack while engaged in melée combat, or if he is aware of another character trying to [/size]block[size="2"] his attack within two metros of him, the attack suffers a -3 modifier(emphasis mine)

Is this a strong argument for allowing the block in melée? How can the attacker be aware of someone trying to bock the attack if you can't block ranged attacks?

[Dakka Dakka]

Don't forget that the point-blank modifier is an optional rule, you are in no way obliged to use it. I agree that a net -1 is to smalll a penalty.

@using two melee weapons: Not only do you get your reach bonus and the defender a penalty for the second attack, you also get a + for friends in melee. The problem with this tactic however is that you have to split your dice pool. So unless you got lots of positive dicepool modifiers and no negative ones, you're probably better off buying the two-weapon styale maneuver and attacking only once. with it you can go on full defence while attacking.

[Mäx]

Don't forget that the point-blank modifier is an optional rule, you are in no way obliged to use it. I agree that a net -1 is to smalll a penalty.

Not in anyway more the any other ranged combat modifier from BBB.

[Dakka Dakka]

Even less so:

All of them are considered optional rules, so before adding these rules to a game, the gamemaster and players should review the rules and agree to their use.

[WarpedAzz]

The rules contradict themselves. The definition of melée combat in the rule book says "or armed combat that does not involve range weapons". So how can an attacker be engaged in melée if he is using a ranged weapon? One of the requirements for the modifier.
As far as the level of penalty, not every character shooting in melée is trying to shoot his immediate opponent. Maybe he is trying to shoot the Mage lurking at the back.

The rules also don't mention defending against armed melée attacks. I'm still interested as to how the shooter can suffer the -3 penalty if he us aware of someone trying to block his attack if blocking ranged attacks isn't possible.

[Ascalaphus]

Personally I'd allow blocking. While ranged combat (simple) actions are described as mostly trigger-pulling, a melee (complex) action is said to be much more; positioning, feinting, seeking openings and protecting yourself.

Also, it seems more balanced. Melee fighters spend complex actions to make attacks after all.

[Mäx]

Even less so:

Target point blank is modifier is in the SR4A corebook, i thought that was kinda obvius from the way i wrote that.

[Aerospider]

@using two melee weapons: Not only do you get your reach bonus and the defender a penalty for the second attack, you also get a + for friends in melee.

Hang on a minute, are you saying that by using two swords to attack twice you are effectively outnumbering your opponent and therefore count as having a +1 friends bonus to each attack?

That's really pushing the bounds of credibility for me. Besides, you've already got the bonus of duplicated modifiers and a -1 penalty to your opponent for receiving a second attack.

[Aerospider]

Not being able to use parry is a 10 die pool difference for a 5 skill character who has two weapon maneuver and hasn't got any further defense adds. Lowering your opponents defense by that much is sure worth the penalty, be it -1 or -3.
If any character has someone coming at them with two weapons, even if the defender is good at melée, would probably be better off pulling a gun. As an added bonus guns would be able to shoot twice as opposed to the complex action melée attack.
Wait a minute, I just reread the Ranged Combat- attacker in melée combat,
"If the attacker is attempting to conduct a ranged attack while engaged in melée combat, or if he is aware of another character trying to [/size]block[size="2"] his attack within two metros of him, the attack suffers a -3 modifier(emphasis mine)

Is this a strong argument for allowing the block in melée? How can the attacker be aware of someone trying to bock the attack if you can't block ranged attacks?

I think they're using another definition of 'block' here. By the way they've said "engaged in melee or ..." I'd imagine they mean you're shooting at a distant target and someone you don't want to shoot is trying to get in the way or put you off or something.

[Dakka Dakka]

Target point blank is modifier is in the SR4A corebook, i thought that was kinda obvius from the way i wrote that.

Oh, It wasn't in SR4. I haven't gone through SR4A with a fine toothed comb. A net -1 for using a gun, any gun even long arms, in melee range is ridiculous.

Hang on a minute, are you saying that by using two swords to attack twice you are effectively outnumbering your opponent and therefore count as having a +1 friends bonus to each attack?

That's really pushing the bounds of credibility for me. Besides, you've already got the bonus of duplicated modifiers and a -1 penalty to your opponent for receiving a second attack.

But those are the rules:

Someone who is simultaneously attacked with two weapons suffers a –1 defense modifier. Note that the defender is also forced
to defend against two attacks with this rule, so also he receives a –1 modifier on the second Defense Test for already defending against a previous attack (see pp. 150–151, SR4). Th is means, in total, the defender suffers –1 against one attack and –2 against the other.

So it is even worse than I said. The first -1 is not a friends in melee modifier but an unnamed one.

Whether this is realistic is of course debatable, just like the net -1 for firing in melee.

Duplicated modifiers are only a bonus in the best of all circumstances. Calculate it with wounds, impaired visibility and something other than your favorite weapon (focus), and dual-wielding quickly becomes a poor choice.

[Aerospider]

But those are the rules:
So it is even worse than I said. The first -1 is not a friends in melee modifier but an unnamed one.

Ah, yes, forgot about that modifier.

It's worth noting, though, that a +1 on one side (like a friends bonus) is almost never probabilistically equivalent to a -1 on the other (like a being-attacked-with-two-weapons penalty).

[Yerameyahu]

I wouldn't invent a -3, and you can't parry. Don't bring a knife to a gun fight.

[WarpedAzz]

I think they're using another definition of 'block' here. By the way they've said "engaged in melee or ..." I'd imagine they mean you're shooting at a distant target and someone you don't want to shoot is trying to get in the way or put you off or something.

Haha. Your tough to convince. So do you think "getting in the way" is a complex or simple action? Presumeably an interrupt? (tongue firmly in check).

Seriously though. Not being able to parry/block also prevents the defender from trying to disarm the firearm (as per the disarm maneuver).

I think Ascalaphus and I are thinking the same.

I can't see how you get "the friends in melée" bonus for attacking with two weapons as well as the defender being -1/-2 defense against the two attacks.

[Dakka Dakka]

I can't see how you get "the friends in melée" bonus for attacking with two weapons as well as the defender being -1/-2 defense against the two attacks.

That was my mistake talking from memory. You only get -1/-2.

[WarpedAzz]

So if the answer is don't bring a knife to a gunfight what is the point of a melée character?

[Yerameyahu]

You could allow a special Disarm action to grab a gun, but unless they're clubbing you with the gun, you're not parrying it.

[Garou]

I see allow parrying in my games. Okay, i know the "no knives in gunfight motto", but once you get into melee range, it is not a gun fight anymore, it is a knife fight, in a way. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif) but speaking seriously, i allow it, even because most long range weapons would leave that fight rather damaged, AND there is a specific modification on Arsenal that allows weapons to be used in melee combat without being damaged or misfire.

[Yerameyahu]

That mod is for hitting people with the weapon. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

I would allow a Disarm, myself, but that's not parrying the gun. There's a difference between stopping a held weapon from striking your body (block/parry) and stopping someone from simply managing to get the muzzle pointed at you. Give the attacker the penalty for firing in melee, and let the defender use Full Dodge.

Maybe require a Take Aim action to get the +2 from Point Blank, to represent the effort of getting a clear shot ready?

[Garou]

I was aware of that, but there is no reason why a sword/staff wielding guy will not just try to hit the oponent's hand/gun to take out his aim, instead of dodging, which takes much more work and more time. But that enters on the whole "realism" thingy that sometimes we allow to slide.

[Mäx]

Oh, It wasn't in SR4. I haven't gone through SR4A with a fine toothed comb. A net -1 for using a gun, any gun even long arms, in melee range is ridiculous.

Yeah sorry, i should have checked to see if its in a non anniversary corebook and indicate that its a new addition, sometimes i kinda forget that not everyone has their books handy when posting and not everyone have SR4A period.

And i kinda agree with you on that only -1 for shooting in a melee fight is a little too small, especially as with smartial arts you can turn that into a net +1(maybe even +2) by redusing the penalty.
I was just posting what the RAW of the matter is.