 Melee rules?, Help settle a dispute. |
  |
 Jan 25 2005, 06:21 AM
Post
#1
|
|
|
Target  Group: Members Posts: 52 Joined: 3-August 04 Member No.: 6,535  |
Me and another player had a somewhat heated discussion as to how melee combat is conducted.
My claim is that only the attacker spends a complex action. The defender gets to defend "for free". In principle the defender can defend an unlimited amount of attacks during one combat turn. His claim is that if the defender does not also spend a complex action to "engage the other" then the defender does not get to roll his melee (or appropriate) skill and he is auto-hit with any successes. The attacker is merely the one of the two combatants with the highest initiative. The defender only gets to defend as many times as he has complex actions in a combat turn. We could not agree and finally agreed to take the disagreement here. Now who (if any) of us is correct? |
 |
 
|
|
Jan 25 2005, 06:22 AM
Post
#2
|
|||
|
Running Target Group: Members Posts: 1,028 Joined: 9-November 02 From: The Republic of Vermont Member No.: 3,581 |
This is correct. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Jan 25 2005, 06:23 AM
Post
#3
|
|
|
Resident Legionnaire Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 2,136 Joined: 8-August 04 From: Usually Work Member No.: 6,550 |
You are correct, but unfortunately, your buddy has a point. Tell him it's just a game.
Or, just houserule it. |
|
|
|
|
Jan 25 2005, 06:23 AM
Post
#4
|
|
|
Manus Celer Dei Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 17,012 Joined: 30-December 02 From: Boston Member No.: 3,802 |
Our esteemed Green Mountain colleague has it exactly right, as do you. Give that player a wedgie.
~J |
|
|
|
|
Jan 25 2005, 06:24 AM
Post
#5
|
|
|
Running Target Group: Members Posts: 1,088 Joined: 8-October 04 From: Dallas, TX Member No.: 6,734 |
IIRC, only the attacker has to spend a complex action, the defender doesn't have to spend one as well to be able to roll dice.
Edit: Ack, too slow, me sad. |
|
|
|
|
Jan 25 2005, 06:30 AM
Post
#6
|
|
|
Immortal Elf Group: Members Posts: 11,410 Joined: 1-October 03 From: Pittsburgh Member No.: 5,670 |
huh. you know, i can't find anything in the rules that specifically says anything about whether or not the defender has to take an action to defend himself. the closest ruling i can find is on page 108, where it says "A character may attack... by taking a Complex Action". technically, defending is referred to as a counterattack. since there's no listed action for counterattacks, you can conclude that counterattacking doesn't require any actions. that's kinda flimsy, though.
i'm not saying i agree. it's just, y'know, never actually spelled out (that i can find right now) that a defending character doesn't need to expend an action. |
|
|
|
|
Jan 25 2005, 06:32 AM
Post
#7
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 344 Joined: 5-January 05 From: Wherever this piece of meat rests. Member No.: 6,937 |
You are correct. The only advantage you have if you initiated the attack is that you win on a tie. I like the fact all melee combats are opposed skill tests as it keeps those Troll gangers on a much more even playing field with a wired up street sam. That keeps it fun when it gets up close and personal. Plus, it makes guns a lot more vicious.
Me: I come and punch you! You: Haha, I stab at thee with my sword! Me: Damn OR..... Me: I shoot you with my Predator II You: I bleed... a lot. :nuyen: :nuyen: :nuyen: |
|
|
|
|
Jan 25 2005, 06:37 AM
Post
#8
|
|||
|
Manus Celer Dei Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 17,012 Joined: 30-December 02 From: Boston Member No.: 3,802 |
By the same token, I defy you to find a section to say that a Dodge test doesn't take an action, or a Body test to resist damage. ~J |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Jan 25 2005, 06:45 AM
Post
#9
|
|
|
Immortal Elf Group: Members Posts: 11,410 Joined: 1-October 03 From: Pittsburgh Member No.: 5,670 |
well, it does say that making a melee attack takes a complex action. and the text that explains an attacker's actions in melee is word-for-word identical to the text that explains a defender's actions in melee. so, it's not too far outside the realm of reason to conclude that attackers and defenders are both making melee attacks, and must therefore both expend a complex action.
like i said, i don't believe that's the intent of the rules, and i don't think it stacks up when you look very closely at the actual wording. but you do have to look really, really closely at the wording to come to the 'correct' conclusion, and i can see someone reaching an alternate conclusion very easily. it all hinges on whether or not you think counterattacking is the same as attacking. |
|
|
|
|
Jan 25 2005, 07:13 AM
Post
#10
|
|
|
Senior GM Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 1,406 Joined: 12-April 03 From: Redmond, WA Member No.: 4,442 |
A defender is not charged any "Action" for the counterattack. He can counterattack before his first action in a Combat Turn. He can counterattack after his last action in a Combat Turn.
For rules on a similar situation, see "Interception" on page 108 of SR3. If an opponent passes by within 1 meter of a character, the character can 'make a free melee attack' against the moving opponent. Defending yourself against a melee attack is likewise free. |
|
|
|
|
Jan 25 2005, 07:17 AM
Post
#11
|
|||
|
Running Target Group: Members Posts: 1,129 Joined: 11-June 03 From: Tir Tairngire Member No.: 4,712 |
Yeah, that would be a pretty lame rule. Just to be sure though, I did a quick check and didn't find anything either regarding what your friend argued. Out of curiousity, did he cite any rules that helped his case? |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Jan 25 2005, 09:35 AM
Post
#12
|
|||
|
Target Group: Members Posts: 52 Joined: 3-August 04 Member No.: 6,535 |
He argued from the beginning line of the "Melee Combat" section. p.120: "Whenever two or more characters engage in combat........" Claiming this means that both have to call a melee attack action. I argued that (a couple of lines further down): "Rather than a single blow, each attack is a series of moves and counter-moves executed by those involved" Meaning: ONE attack involves MULTIPLE persons (edit: all of whom can be active). It then follows that ONE action is all it takes to engage "two or more characters" in combat. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Jan 25 2005, 11:59 AM
Post
#13
|
|
|
Target Group: Members Posts: 68 Joined: 11-May 02 Member No.: 2,723 |
In ranged combat, there is a +2 modifier to fire a ranged weapon while in melee. This wouldn't be needed if the defender had to match his attacker's action expenses.
|
|
|
|
|
Jan 25 2005, 03:21 PM
Post
#14
|
|
|
Target Group: Members Posts: 52 Joined: 3-August 04 Member No.: 6,535 |
Hehe talked with my buddy today and gloated a bit over the way this thread turned out.
His only response was: "They also dont know how to read and understand" :D I think he´s being stubborn. The good thing is that in the next scenario I´m the GM. :) |
|
|
|
|
Jan 25 2005, 03:25 PM
Post
#15
|
|
|
Neophyte Runner Group: Members Posts: 2,453 Joined: 17-September 04 From: St. Paul Member No.: 6,675 |
You could explain it to your player that the character pressing the attack is the one expending the complex action, and the person defending is not able to press the attach/Dodge/run for his life until his initiatve pass occurs.
|
|
|
|
|
Jan 25 2005, 05:59 PM
Post
#16
|
|
|
Shooting Target Group: Members Posts: 1,754 Joined: 9-July 04 From: Modesto, CA Member No.: 6,465 |
The only time it is mentioned in SR that you must spend actions (Free, Simple, Complex) is during your Turn. Find me a page that says you can pre-spend your Turn and your buddy might have an arguement.
Incidentally, you can attack multiple melee opponents at once, but IIRC, it's +2 per opponent beyond the first, much like spellcasting. |
|
|
|
|
Jan 25 2005, 06:19 PM
Post
#17
|
|
|
Manus Celer Dei Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 17,012 Joined: 30-December 02 From: Boston Member No.: 3,802 |
Free Actions can be spent during anyone's turn, but then again you have one for everyone's turn.
Which creates the interesting situation that in three seconds you can't say much in a two-person combat, but can dictate War and Peace in a Lord of the Rings-style massive war. ~J |
|
|
|
|
Jan 25 2005, 06:30 PM
Post
#18
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 614 Joined: 17-June 03 From: A safehouse about to be compromised by ninjas Member No.: 4,754 |
Man whoever is arguing that defending takes an action doesnt deserve a wedgie. He deserves an atomic wedgie delivered by high powered cyber gnomes using equally high powered drones without lubricant. Furthermore, Id resort to name calling. Tell this guy to get real.
|
|
|
|
|
Jan 25 2005, 06:43 PM
Post
#19
|
|
|
Runner Group: Members Posts: 2,598 Joined: 15-March 03 From: Hong Kong Member No.: 4,253 |
Nah, we still have that body 40 tank eating tractor with the cyberspur equiped mechanicals arms, lets see if we can get it started up...
|
|
|
|
|
Jan 25 2005, 07:17 PM
Post
#20
|
|||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 172 Joined: 16-September 04 From: UK Member No.: 6,671 |
Tell him to come here and say that. Ive played SR for only 3 odd years now and knew he was wrong, but alot of these people having been playing for like 10 - 15 years and they say hes wrong. Only a complete nonse thinks hes right and the whole world is wrong. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Jan 25 2005, 10:09 PM
Post
#21
|
|
|
Target Group: Members Posts: 15 Joined: 11-January 05 From: Minneapolis, MN Member No.: 6,962 |
We have the same house rule (defender spends a complex action if he attacks during a melee round). The thought is, that if a street sammy elf with a initiative of 22 goes hand to hand with a rigger with no legs with a initiative of 9, the elf should be able to dance around him. The elf should be able to try to hit him several more times than he can hit back.
The way the rules are written now, you can have 5 guys with a combined initiative of 120 step into an alley to beat up the paraplegic rigger, and he would have just as much a chance to hurt them during a 3 second combat round as they have to hurt him. Dodging does not take up a combat round. Same as if you were shot at. Hitting the guy back does. Same is if you shot back. |
|
|
|
|
Jan 25 2005, 10:14 PM
Post
#22
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 614 Joined: 17-June 03 From: A safehouse about to be compromised by ninjas Member No.: 4,754 |
Except youre totally wrong. Its *not* the same chance to fight back due to the melee tn mods. Initiative doesnt even enter the equation, it has *zero* bearing on the resolution of melee combat.
Still, trying to compare it to returning fire gets you points for effort... except that moving out of the way in melee is pretty comparable to moving out of the way of a bullet. Ok ok so that doesnt really get you any points. Sorry. |
|
|
|
|
Jan 25 2005, 10:22 PM
Post
#23
|
|||
|
Shooting Target Group: Members Posts: 1,754 Joined: 9-July 04 From: Modesto, CA Member No.: 6,465 |
The great equalizer here is that the Init=22 sam probably has more combat pool than the rigger. He might not go down the first phase, but I'd bet he'll go down once he's out of pool and the sam isn't. The SR melee system has been grossly oversimplified for good reason, leave it alone IMO. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Jan 25 2005, 10:37 PM
Post
#24
|
|||
|
Manus Celer Dei Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 17,012 Joined: 30-December 02 From: Boston Member No.: 3,802 |
Differences: 1) Skill. 2) Combat pool. 3 (the big one) ) Ties go to the attacker. Out of two people with identical skill, identical pool, one with Initiative 9 and one with Initiative 120, the Initiative 9 person can expect to get their arse handed to them. ~J |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Jan 25 2005, 10:37 PM
Post
#25
|
|||
|
Target Group: Members Posts: 15 Joined: 11-January 05 From: Minneapolis, MN Member No.: 6,962 |
I said "House Rule" because I do not believe that the way I stated it, is the way it's presented in SR3. I'm saying that initiative should have a bearing on melee, besides just deciding who initiates the combat. IRL, if you take 2 boxers (melee combatants), one incredibly fast, and one incredibly slow, the slow one should be at a considerable disadvantage when it come to the amount of punches he can throw, no matter who starts punching first. If these 2 fighters go into a 3 second round of punches (a combat turn) the fast fighter one should be able to punch several more times than the slow. For several of those punches, there should not be any way for the slower fighter to hit back. For several of those punches there should be no way for the faster of the two fighter to take damage, no matter what his opponent does. I think this makes sense. I agree. I will leave it alone. I'm just pointing out what I feel are issues with the system. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 23rd July 2025 - 03:13 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.