IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

booklord
post Aug 16 2003, 03:20 PM
Post #1


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 502
Joined: 14-May 03
From: Detroit, Michigan
Member No.: 4,583



Booklord's House Rules for Melee Combat

I've GM'd a while now. And I've always found that some parts of Shadowrun simply don't work as well as I'd like. In particular is melee combat. Some of these house rules were decided on my own. Some like the "ignoring an opponent" rule came up during the game when a player attempted something the rules didn't really allow, but made sense.

TARGET MODIFIERS

Reach always raises the target number of the character with the lower reach. It
NEVER lowers the target number of the character with the higher reach.

Having friends in melee does not lower your target number. Your opponent having friends in melee combat does raise your target number.

Character's do not lower there target numbers for having a superior position of if the enemy is prone. Instead their opponent raises their target numbers for Inferior Position or Being Prone.

EXPLANATION
I just don't think target numbers for melee combat should fall below 4 ever. In particular the double effect of Friends in Melee is just too unbalancing. Sometimes I wonder if the writers of Shadowrun ever realize the effects of target modifiers run amok.

USING TWO CYBER SPURS OR RAZORS AT ONCE

Rules for using two weapons at once follow the rules found in Cannon Companion not those in the Shadowrun book ( which raise the power level of the attack ). Only one change. Because of the greater ease in using two cyber-implant weapons as opposed to two swords, the skills cyber-implant weaponry and off-hand cyber-implant weaponry are considered linked. ( Meaning characters without off-hand cyber-implant weaponry can default to the cyber-implant weaponry skill (+2 Modifier) rather then their quickness(+4 Modifier).

COUNTER ATTACKING

Each combat turn takes only a few seconds. So to anyone watching it always looks like the defender is counter-attacking. In game terms the effects are that the defender can NEVER hit the attacker during a melee attack he can only defend ( ala Full defense) Yes, it makes using mono-whips more dangerous, but for some reason that doesn't bother me.

The counter-strike ability of adepts is altered as follows. To use the extra-counter attack dice while attacking in an initiative pass the opponent must either have attacked first or the adept must delay his attack in order to let the opponent attack first. Then the adept may "counter-strike" using the extra dice his power provides.

EXPLANATION
It bugs me that characters with low initiative fighting a high initiative character could get a ridiculous number of attacks in a single turn. It also bugs me when that under the standard rules melee combat almost always ends in after a few attacks.


IGNORING AN OPPONENT

There are instances where a character may want to ignore an opponent. For example an armored troll surrounded by 4 human gangers with baseball bats may choose to ignore 3 of his opponents and concentrate his attack on the 4th. The advantage is that the troll gets to ignore the Opponent has friends in melee target modifier. The disadvantage is that the troll cannot use melee skill dice to defend himself from the ignored gangers' attacks. ( only combat pool dice )

This can also be used when running past someone without attacking him. For example a magician with a bodyguard standing in front of him. The magician absolutely has to be taken out now so the character ignores the bodyguard and runs past him. The bodyguard gets a free interception attack and the character can't use melee skill dice to defend himself. However if the character isn't knocked down or unconscious he'll be able get past the bodyguard regardless of the bodyguard's successes and perform a charging attack on the magician.

WEAPON MANUEVERS

This is more of a different reading of the manuevers then others have had. When I first read the rules on combining martial arts manuevers with weapons, I read it like ---> If a character has three manuevers then takes the "weapon" manuever then he may perform any of the previously learned manuevers with that weapon type. Others use a (single manuever-single weapon) manuever system which in retrospect I believe is probably correct. However I liked the way I'm doing it now so.....(exercise GM powers) ..... that's the way it works.

------------------------------

Any comments? snide remarks? criticisms? ideas? I'm curious what you think.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

Posts in this topic
- booklord   House Rules For Melee Combats   Aug 16 2003, 03:20 PM
- - Turtle   QUOTE (booklord) Booklord's House Rules for Me...   Aug 16 2003, 03:46 PM
- - I am Jin   I don't see what the deal is everyone has with...   Aug 16 2003, 05:10 PM
- - booklord   QUOTE I don't see what the deal is everyone ha...   Aug 16 2003, 06:05 PM
- - GunnerJ   One thing I did was too make it so that ties do no...   Aug 16 2003, 07:06 PM
- - Fortune   For counterattacking, I use a house rule whereby t...   Aug 17 2003, 01:41 AM
- - Catsnightmare   From what I can see on a players perspective, some...   Aug 17 2003, 03:28 AM
- - Shockwave_IIc   I brought this up a while back. The guy with spee...   Aug 17 2003, 03:49 AM
- - Talondel   I house-rule it so that Defenders in a melee can c...   Aug 17 2003, 12:41 PM
- - BitBasher   Virtual Dogma's (my) Melee combat This needs ...   Aug 17 2003, 06:48 PM
- - Sepherim   I just made one quick rule, to add some variety to...   Aug 17 2003, 10:08 PM
- - DigitalMage   QUOTE (Fortune)For counterattacking, I use a house...   Aug 18 2003, 03:02 PM
- - booklord   QUOTE This is what I did, its a solution that avoi...   Aug 18 2003, 04:22 PM
- - DigitalMage   The possibility of a counter attack prevents chara...   Aug 19 2003, 08:44 AM
- - booklord   QUOTE Without the possibility of a counterattack y...   Aug 19 2003, 11:10 AM
- - Fortune   QUOTE (booklord)Adam engages Blaze in melee combat...   Aug 19 2003, 03:45 PM
- - DigitalMage   QUOTE (booklord) --Adam engages Blaze in melee com...   Aug 19 2003, 03:48 PM
- - booklord   QUOTE If Adam could have moved away, he could have...   Aug 19 2003, 04:35 PM
- - DigitalMage   QUOTE (booklord) QUOTE If Adam could have moved aw...   Aug 20 2003, 09:21 AM
- - Dhurgan   Why not simply restrict the number of times a pers...   Aug 20 2003, 04:31 PM
- - booklord   QUOTE Why not simply restrict the number of times ...   Aug 20 2003, 05:19 PM


Reply to this topicStart new topic

 

RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 13th June 2025 - 04:55 PM

Topps, Inc has sole ownership of the names, logo, artwork, marks, photographs, sounds, audio, video and/or any proprietary material used in connection with the game Shadowrun. Topps, Inc has granted permission to the Dumpshock Forums to use such names, logos, artwork, marks and/or any proprietary materials for promotional and informational purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not affiliated with the Dumpshock Forums in any official capacity whatsoever.