Dodging in melee? Options

[Fu-Man Chu]

Quick basic question: Can one use combat pool dice to perform a dodge test in melee?

[mfb]

only if you're using the Full Defense option, which allows you to use as many cp as you like for dodging. otherwise, you're counterattacking, which means cp use is limited to your melee skill.

[Lilt]

Yes, check the rules for full defense on pages 123-124, SR3.

[Cold-Dragon]

*blinks* aren't dodge tests made up entirely of CP dice?

You have 3 ways of not getting hurt, the passive methods are dodging and your armor ratings. dodge has no dice other than what you put in from CP dice (that's how I remember it). armor ratings use your body dice + CP you add to it.

full defense only lets you roll your melee as normal, but use the results to subtract rom yoru opponents attack. You 'might' be able to add CP dice to that, but I don't believe so. The reason to use full defense is that it allows you to make it even easier to dodge and absorb the beating (since it subtracts from your opponents result).
if dodge or full defense take away all successes, then the attack was avoided or stopped respectively. damage resistance simply lets you tone down what's left to the point where you might not take damage anyway (glancing blow).

Did I somehow mistake melee combat greatly???

[mfb]

you need to re-read the Full Defense section, pgs 123-124. it says specifically that you can make a Dodge test, once the melee tests are resolved.

[Cold-Dragon]

*nods* I know that, but I don't recall you not being able to dodge if you did some things. I recall you do opposed checks, and the one with more successes strikes (unless they used Full defense) You could then opted to try and dodge the results using only your CP dice, and then uses body resistance regardless of if you did or not.

if you used dodge and countered the rest of the successes, then you didn't strike, but you managed not to get hit yourself.

used but didn't counter it fully, then you have don't have as many successes to absorb with resistance.

you can choose not to dodge at all, and dedicate CP dice to resistancing.

but when I get my book back, I'll re-read myself. (a friend is borrowing it).

[mfb]

if you're not doing Full Defense, you can't dodge. you can use cp to supplement your melee skill, though.

[TheScamp]

[TinkerGnome]

Evasion maneuver = Good Thing ™.

[Fu-Man Chu]

Ok, thanks - another question - can one end melee combat voluntarily? (Ie. an unarmed character "O" finds himself up against a shotgun carrying ganger. O wins initiative and engages in melee combat. If ganger doesn't want to have a penalty to fire, can he just choose to Walk and move out of combat?)

The way I have been handling it is using the Intercept rules where if he tries to move out, the other combatant gets a free melee attack. Are there rules anywhere for that?

[TinkerGnome]

So long as the ganger isn't moving past the attacking character, there does not appear to be a rule which lets O attack him. Which is why melee is only for those who can finish it quickly or have their foe cornered.

[TheScamp]

[Luke Hardison]

[TheScamp]

[TinkerGnome]

There's a modifier to firing at someone in melee with you? The "attacker in melee" modifer is explicitly for when you're shooting at someone while someone else is in melee with you. It'd apply if you were in melee with two people, but only at +2.

[TheScamp]

[TinkerGnome]

If you're shooting the guy in melee with you, he obviously isn't covered by the first clause, and I don't think the secnod clause applies, either. If he intercepts the attack, he's like going to be hit by it.

[TheScamp]

So, you're saying that the person that the character is in combat with wouldn't qualify as somemeone within 2 meters trying to block that attack?

[TinkerGnome]

Depends on what your definition of "block the attack" is. Since you're trying to point the weapon at them, much of what they could do would only assist that (in the case of grappling this is obviously not true, but in the case of most melee involving reach weapons, it would be). Either way, the person standing at 0 meters from the person with the gun is going to get hosed.

[TheScamp]

[Austere Emancipa...]

I'd much, much rather be 0 meters away from someone with a gun than 5 meters away, if it's me s/he wants to shoot. So would, I am sure, any human being who doesn't want to die. If the letter of the rule in question would not give any penalties when shooting someone who has engaged you in melee, then the rule is stupid and it makes sense for GMs to simply erase "with another opponent" from his mind.

[Edit]I'm slow.[/Edit]

This post has been edited by Austere Emancipator: Apr 25 2004, 05:17 PM

[TinkerGnome]

The person engaging in melee doesn't have to take a penalty to his melee attack roll to represent his attempt not to get shot by the person with the gun (one would think this would make it at least somewhat harder to hit someone and deal a lot of damage) so why does the person with the gun take a penalty because of this?

I'm all for introducing a mechanic to deal with it, but as it stand now, it doesn't seem to be quite sensical. Yes, it's harder to shoot someone standing right on top of you trying to punch you, but it's also a lot harder to punch someone if you're spending a good portion of your effort avoiding getting shot.

This is generally a moot point since those who engage in melee often do not generally leave their opponent standing to shoot back.

[Austere Emancipa...]

Fighting barehanded against someone with a firearm is just a slightly exaggerated version of what happens when you're fighting a guy with a knife barehanded, let alone something like a monoknife or other hitech weapons that only need to touch you to cut right into you. As it is, there's no inherent penalty in fighting barehanded against a dangerous weapon in melee, so it wouldn't make a lot of sense to introduce one for fighting against someone with a gun.

Reach doesn't work as a mechanic for this, because a monoknife doesn't have reach and has to be avoided just as much. Indeed it might be harder to effectively fight barehanded against someone with a monoknife than against someone with a monosword.

[Mr.Platinum]

I see you already have the answere.

[TinkerGnome]