Maybe I just missed this, but I could not find any rules for breaking away in melee combat. Is there some sort of "attack of opportunity" such as in other game systems? Or does the guy just automatically get away?

One other thing, can pistols be used in melee combat? Reason why I asked is that you always see in movies guys struggling with pistols in h-to-h combat. Is there rules to govern this?

the question about guns in melee has been debated in GREAT depth. Try searching around for the thread. It should answer any questions you may have.

As for the Attack of Opportunity that is a good question and hasn't been asked in a while.

My thinking was maybe the guy who wants to break away must do a "Full Defense" maneuver. If he successfully Dodges the attack, then he breaks away. If not, then the other guy strikes the dodging character as normal

im guessing that if you have a enemy within 1-5 meter of you then you are in melee. you may not be activly fighting but haveing an enemy within that range makes them able to try and hit your gun out of the way if you try to use it.

actually if i hold you you can not just turn away and run, and if i think you might run i might try to hold you, thus a test should be done to see who gets his way.

Rules for interception are one pg 108 SR3. This situation isn't excactly "interception" but it's close enough.

youre right there is a grapple test, but still if someone tried to run from me i could trip them, strike them hard as they turned away (maybe even catching them cold and doing extra damage) tackle them, etc etc. my point is that trying to run away from someone you are still actively engaged with is not something you can just do, you have to successfully execute some plan he will oppose, so i think some sort of test works best, maybe just that you mustve won the last round of melee, or a quickness test, or opposed melee skill test (bare test) or something.

there was no second part, i assume once youve gotten out of someones reach and they are slower than you then you are pretty scot free, its just getting out of their reach without getting killed/sucked back in/whatever that would be hard

well i never meant to say that the guy already has you in a hold, i was referring to the situation that arises when you are in a fight, it is melee after all, im assuming these arent two people standing a meter apart circling, but hotly engaged in a contest that means life or death.

i have been in many fights, and looking back i am confident that if either i or any of my opponents had tried to run, regardless of foot speed, the other man would have had a fair chance to stop him from doing so, and even taking advantage of his attempt to do so.

I contest that it doesnt matter whether it is rather easy to do, or rather difficult, either way we both agree it is not automatic and so there should be some kind of a test. Boxers can not fight in such a way as to stop another guy from running away, because they cant hold. I believe that if 1 wrestler were to turn tail that his opponent could take advantage of that, as could happen in any h2h brawl or sword fight knife fight etc, the one opponent has time to make a move (admittedly very little) before the runner can seperate fully.

what do you mean you dont agree you said rather easy? do you stand by that? or do you mean automatic? i dont know how difficult the test should be, but im sure not very difficult at all (ive already given my suggestions, though one mroe is to maybe give the opponent a free attack resisted just by body if his next init phase comes before the runners). It sounds like we agree to me, we agree that running away from a melee fight you are engaged in is not automatic.

so you believe that it is automatic? okay i dont agree, but to each his own, i think that the original poster can formulate his own ideas about how to handle the situation now, according to his own preferences.

Well, iirc (and I may not) you have to be within 2 meters to be counted as being in melee. Thats roughly 6 feet. And while thats a perfectly reasonable distance to initiate a melee attack from, its also a perfectly reasonable distance to just back up from. Or to shoot in for that matter. Unless theres some kind of grappling involved, the SR system isnt too harsh about going into or out of melee. Probably because its really a range combat based game (yes, melee can be used well enough, but its the age of guns and yea, look around you). Games like DnD are a bit more stringant simply because theyre more melee-centric. So yes you can use guns in melee (think the modifier was +2?) and yes you can leave without any ill effects. Obviously in the case of actual grappling logic dictates otherwise.

If I understand the argument correctly, it all boils down to whether or not your opponent has an opportunity to whack you as you turn your back to run away.

If this is the case, wouldn't a reaction roll decide it?

If the one fleeing gets more successes --> "You turn tail and run like a little girl. You're opponent tries to tag you as you turn, but he's too slow".

If the one fleeing gets fewer successes --> "You turn to run away, but as you're turning your opponent lunges in and gets a final blow in. You're still running away, but before you go you have to roll to soak the damage [gm discretion as to whether he'd get to use combat pool in the roll].

Alternately, the opponent could lunge to tackle/grapple you as you turn in order to keep you in the fight, but would have a modifier to his success roll.

Faster how? Footspeed is nice, but it is directional. Forward. Any direction other than forward and you don't go as fast. A pretty average person can catch the fastest person in the world...if the fast guy decides to run backwards.

You ever watch football? Notice how the fast guys often get tackled? You put a good wide receiver six feet away from a defensive lineman on an open field where they are facing each other and I think you're going to have a wide receiver who's paste quite often.

There should definitely be a test of some sort to escape. If you turn to flee while in melee range, you are asking to get spanked.

6 feet is a big gap when youre both standing there, on the balls of your feet, ready to move. Its not that hard to pivot and move without the other guy not reaching you, especially in an urban area where youre likley to move around stuff. On a football field yea fine, you turn to move, the other guy gets to full speed faster and tackles you. In an office building 6 feet is plenty of room to stay outta arms reach as you run around a cubical. Above ideas work fine to resolve it, but unless youre attacking the players with swarms of sword weilding orcs and goblins Im not sure worrying about a mechanic like that is even worth the time to roll. How often are players darting in and out of melee, really.

I have this problem in my games (two adepts, swordboy and killing hands). They're always in melee combat.
Every now and then they feel the need to leave combat because they're getting pummeled or someone rolled a 4 on the scatter roll. I let them take a new martial art maneuver with very similar rules to the "reaction test" described by Apathy. I used Quickness, but I think I like Reaction better. Thanks!

6 feet is pretty close for polearms... when I melee in amtgaurd with a polearm I try to keep the distance at aruond 10 feet... and I am not a troll... if I were, than the distance would be even greater...

basically, twice the striking distance of my weapon would be melee range for me.

but, if my opponent wants to high tail it, if I ma not fast er than him, he will likely get away, regardless of my skill... so this really gets down to what you consider melee ranges...

if you hink melee range is one weapon length, ie. I can smack you with the sword if you are not actively blocking me, or 2 weapon lengths, which is the range where you are trying to move in on each other and engage.

my experience has shown that most melee combat occurs at the second interpretation, and not the first. but my exp. also is that once you reach the close range, there is no gettng out unless you are more skilled, or lucky.

just my 2 cents...

-Mike R

My interpretation of melee would be that the two opponents are within striking distance of each other. After all, they are trading blows back and forth. [how would anyone every take damage if you stayed 2 weapon lengths apart?]

This implies that at least some of the time they're at less than or equal to weapon's distance apart.

Striking distance is *really* relative guys. If you ever just watch boxing on TV, let alone try this stuff, youll see that you rarely just throw a punch without moving. If youre stationary when you punch, its just your arm muscles. If you take a step into it, or pivot your hips, etc etc you get the mass of your body behind it as well.

Im not trying to explain how it would work "in RL" just saying that weapon or no, you can close a 6 foot gap and throw a kick in very short order. Theres even things like slide-in kicks designed to cover that much ground in one move without stepping based on how you shift your body weight.

So rather than trying to base a GM call off the 'range' of the melee weapon in question, IMO youre better off just sticking with the blanket 2m rule; and applying a reaction test if you wish. Its more fair across the board to treat everyone equally. If anything, give the player with more net reach a bonus on the test, as thats the *only* in game representation of how far away your melee is dangerous.

Only problem you've got with that is when the player of the Troll wielding a polearm against the dwarf with a shockglove tries to disengage - the distance between combatants is likely to be very large and therefore giving the dwarf the same chance to hit the troll if the troll disengages is a little unfair.

If you want the opposed Reaction test then factor Reach into the equation, for example if the person disengaging has Superior reach increase the TN for the opponent by the difference in Reach. If the person disengaging has inferior reach increase their TN by the difference in Reach.