What's the point of melee? Options

[DocTaotsu]

Are you perhaps speaking about armor piercing jiu jitsu (I fail because I can't find the relevant Schlock Mercenary panel)

[Shrike30]

I was musing about fighting styles specifically geared towards handling people who encase themselves in armor and other common defensive measures. Does grappling subdual damage bypass armor?

It doesn't bypass armor, but it does up the DV a significant amount compared to a basic attack (as it's impossible to avoid, and uses Str rather than Str/2), so it's a lot more effective against someone wearing armor.

The grappler may also choose to do one of the following on each Complex Action he spends to maintain the grapple: ... Inflict Stun damage on the character with a Damage Value equal to his Strength. This requires no test, but the defender resists it as normal. Impact armor applies.

[Ascalaphus]

Hmm. It's a solution, but not really what I was looking for. I was thinking about making a "specialist", who gets hired to deal with people so well-protected that conventional attacks are pointless. Instead of trying to beat armor, use some lateral attack. Preferably non-magical; to be effective at killing mages.

[X-Kalibur]

I wonder if you could use the hydraulic jack a la "Big O" style on someone after making a successful grapple/subdual test.

[DocTaotsu]

You can, and it does a bunch of unresisted damage.

[Saint Hallow]

Someone posted that Attackers with Ranged weapons who get caught in melee suffer a -3 penalty. I had forgotten about that, but it seems to me if someone with a pistol gets the same penalty as someone with an assault cannon in melee doesn't sit comfy with me. As I proposed a long time ago, a nice possible change could be adding the weapon's concealability or size modifier so the smaller/easier the weapon, the easier it is to handle when that unexpected Hand-to-Hand/Melee event comes up in combat.

Just a thought.

[sabs]

Harden the assault cannon, and use it as a club!

[codemonkey_uk]

Bumping this thread to get something clarified:

From Ranged Combat Modifier Table, p152 SR4A.

* Attacker in melee combat –3
* Target point-blank +2

Does this mean that the shooting penalty for firing at a melee opponent is only -1? Or is RAI for the +2 only for "execution" type situations?

Thinking in terms of action movie moments, the "melee to get control of a firearm" situations, generally speaking ,the guy with the gun is at a much more significant disadvantage than a SR -1 DP modifier would imply.

[Whipstitch]

Does this mean that the shooting penalty for firing at a melee opponent is only -1?

If they're at point-blank range, yes. The rules state that Target at Point-Blank can be offset by the Attacker in Melee Combat condition in the Ranged Combat section. I know that sounds like something that could have been rolled into a single situational penalty rather than a situational bonus and a situational penalty added together, but it is important to remember that it is entirely possible that the person you're trying to shoot isn't necessarily the same person who is trying to punch your lights out. Trying to shoot a corporate executive who's running down the hallway while his cybered bodyguard is trying to bash your face in with his extendable baton is quite the trick, after all, and in that case you're taking a -3 plus range and moving target penalties.

[Mäx]

If they're at point-blank range, yes. The rules state that Target at Point-Blank can be offset by the Attacker in Melee Combat condition in the Ranged Combat section. I know that sounds like something that could have been rolled into a single situational penalty rather than a situational bonus and a situational penalty added together, but it is important to remember that it is entirely possible that the person you're trying to shoot isn't necessarily the same person who is trying to punch your lights out. Trying to shoot a corporate executive who's running down the hallway while his cybered bodyguard is trying to bash your face in with his extendable baton is quite the trick, after all, and in that case you're taking a -3 plus range and moving target penalties.

It also needs to be 2 different situational modifiers becouse there are ways to migitate or even completdly nullify the penalty, leaving you with +2 dice bonus to shoot the target thats no futher then 1m away from you.

[sabs]

Actually I would love to see a Gun Fu Maneuver that all it did was remove the penalty for being in melee range and shooting.

[Critias]

You mean like Firefight's advantage?

[Whipstitch]

Yeah, a combination of Firefight and Krav can let you negate it entirely. There's other advantages I'd jump on first, but there really isn't anything stopping you from busting out your best Grammaton Cleric impression if you want to build that way.

[X-Kalibur]

You can, and it does a bunch of unresisted damage.

That's a hydraulic press and it "pinches" for 10P -4AP after subduing and spending a complex action. I want a jack that goes thru the arm so I can grab a guy by the face, lift him up, and have the jack go out the back of my elbow and then straight back towards his face. I suppose I could make up rules for it pretty easily though

[KarmaInferno]

If it shot a bunch of steel cables into his head it'd be even more screen accurate.

(IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)



-karma

[X-Kalibur]

If it shot a bunch of steel cables into his head it'd be even more screen accurate.

(IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)



-karma

Heh, I'm glad someone gets me. Plus, think of the intimidation factor!

[Ascalaphus]

A while back someone suggested that instead of using the Attacker in Melee penalty modifier to gunfire, you could let people in melee range use melee defense (Reaction+Skill or Reaction+Skill+Skill on full defense) instead of the ranged defense (Reaction or Reaction+Dodge on full defense). It would make some sense I'd think.. It also means that melee skills would be a serious assets in CQC even for a gunfighter (also, gun hardening!)

[Shrike30]

Under our current reading of the rules, I only give that +2 point blank modifier if the attacker isn't in melee... that is, he's right next to/standing above someone who *isn't* attacking him, and is putting a round into the guy.

I like Ascalaphus' suggestion of using melee defense against gunfire at melee ranges, though... I might stick with what seems to be RAW (point blank + in melee works out to all of -1) and allow melee defense instead. Plus, the Firefight martial art advantage has that work out as a +1 (+2 with Krav Maga on top of that).

[UmaroVI]

It seems like there's 2 separate things that are both being discussed. One is "why should I learn to fight with and use a katana, when an assault rifle is better" and one is "what is Unarmed Combat" good for. This might be good to keep in mind; I don't think there's really a good reason to use something like a katana, honestly.

If you want Unarmed Combat attacks that bypass armor, either Sonic Sheath (the spell) or Sonic Attack (or whatever the adept power is called) will do that, although they won't hurt anything that doesn't have a Stun monitor. You can get various other elemental effects that do Physical vs. half impact instead, though.

[Kruger]

Or, for the mundanes, there are always stun batons.

The katana, and other melee weapons, are a pink mohawk element. People use them because they can imagine a character leaping and diving and slicing and such. And probably not what would actually happen: them getting shot over and over and over before they even covered the distance. Or, the only slightly less likely scenario where someone sneaks around with three and a half feet of steel in hand and quietly assassinating their enemies ninja style. But, again, it all depends on the style of campaign the GM is running.

In a typical game though, the melee specialist is probably going to be at a disadvantage in conventional combat. And I don't think there is any way, or any need for that matter, to try and balance it out.

[Ascalaphus]

Under our current reading of the rules, I only give that +2 point blank modifier if the attacker isn't in melee... that is, he's right next to/standing above someone who *isn't* attacking him, and is putting a round into the guy.

That's actually another elegant way to fix it. The end result in my opinion should be that you need melee skills for when you bump into enemies in close quarters, which should be happening now and then on infiltration missions.

Or, for the mundanes, there are always stun batons.

The katana, and other melee weapons, are a pink mohawk element. People use them because they can imagine a character leaping and diving and slicing and such. And probably not what would actually happen: them getting shot over and over and over before they even covered the distance. Or, the only slightly less likely scenario where someone sneaks around with three and a half feet of steel in hand and quietly assassinating their enemies ninja style. But, again, it all depends on the style of campaign the GM is running.

In a typical game though, the melee specialist is probably going to be at a disadvantage in conventional combat. And I don't think there is any way, or any need for that matter, to try and balance it out.

Well, there is your aforementioned Pink Mohawk element. It'd be nice to have a coherent set of optional rules that you could toggle on and off to slant your rules to favor Pink Mohawk or Black Trenchcoat.

[Mayhem_2006]

I guess one minor point in favour of melee, going back to one of the archetypes of cyberpunk:

At the beginning of Neuromancer, Case couldn't afford a gun.

***

Also, melee has its place in the slum-apartments of narrow cluttered winding alleyways or corridor, where it becomes almost impossible to hold LOS on a fleeing target. And also, a stray sword shot won't punch through 3 plasterboard walls and kill the single mother of three whilst she's preparing the kids soy-flakes.

[Ascalaphus]

Yeah, but in SR, a decent melee weapon is more expensive than a decent revolver.

If you can't hold LOS, you probably also can't really hit with a blade. But your point about collateral damage is a good one. Unintended wall-perforations are something to keep in mind as an evil GM. *cackle*

[Mooncrow]

Yeah, but in SR, a decent melee weapon is more expensive than a decent revolver.

If you can't hold LOS, you probably also can't really hit with a blade. But your point about collateral damage is a good one. Unintended wall-perforations are something to keep in mind as an evil GM. *cackle*

Ooo, too bad the local Triad boss' niece lived next door to your firefight...

[CanRay]

Doesn't even need to be someone important.

A really cheesed off person who just lost the last member of their family, and found out that Lone Star is only going to dedicate a Detective to the case for 2.7 minutes to find out who it was...

Easy enough to snap, liquidate whatever assets, hire some PIs, buy a firearm, and a lot of ammo.

A whole lot of ammo.