First off a caveat: This is not a complaint against rules, or against the current game. (my nameless GM is doing an awesome job, long may he reign !)
I'm trying to understand RAW and looking for options for my character to be more effective.

So, onto the question, and if you frequesnt the "other" forums you may have already seen this, so apologies

1) REACH .. at what point is a melee attacker still in reach but not considered "point blank" vs. an opponent with a gun ?

2) Unarmed defender vs armed attacker .. can a hobo with only minimal unarmed skill, parry or block a SAM with a mono-fil sword swinging at his head ? and come away without damage

3) ARMED defender vs UNARMED attacker ... in a similar situation, what happens if a sword blocks or parries an unarmed punch ?

I'm not looking for house rules, but would really appreciate an explanation of the benefit to being Armed in melee,
currently other than a potential of a slightly increased DV for certain weapons, I can't see it .. and that makes me sad.

1.) The book says "A target within one meter can be difficult to miss; apply a +2 dice pool modifier to the attack". So everything above reach 1 or more is still in melee range (provided the reach is there) but not point blank anymore.
2.) Yes, he can, according to RAW. And I see no problem with it, as the samurai will probably have a boatload of dice and the hobo a bare minimum, so he'll take the damage instead. But in the unlikely event that the block or parry went through, yes. No damage. He swatted away the blade (parry) or blocked the samurais wrist or something like that.
3.) Nothing happens, except that the attack is blocked or parried.

1) I'd say if the defender can move away from the gun.
2) IIRC you can't parry if you don't have a weapon. You can only block, and that would be done by blocking the arm/hand that controls the sword rather than the sword itself. It's difficult to do, but that's covered by the reach modifier.
3) No impact.

The only differences when armed are:
- Reach modifiers
- Being able to parry
- Possibly better DV

okay, it seems pretty cut and dry.



That is exactly what I need, wish the book was a bit more concise on the issue, but it is a start at least

so -3 for being in melee, and no +2 for point blank.

I think the same thing...except I can't for the life of me find out where Reach 1 = 1 meter, Reach 2 = 2 meters, etc.

I mean, it seems like common sense, and it's totally how I'd want it played. But does it actually say this in the books?

Ah yes. Correct.
"If they have a melee weapon in hand, they can parry the attack by rolling the appropriate weapon skill + Reaction. If they have Unarmed Combat skill, they can choose to block by rolling Unarmed Combat + Reaction."

No it doesn't. It's abstract. But in light of the fact that melee combat is also abstracted into a series of moves, this is how I handle it.

I don't think that it is quite Reach 1 = 1 meter. A katana (for example) is reach 1 and the weapon in total (hilt and blade) is maybe a meter long. That would make the effective attack range to be under a meter.

It's close, but at least for this question, for the purposes of "what reach makes the attack range further away than Point Blank for a ranged attack" The answer would have to be at least Reach 2...

It's an abstraction for a reason though, because different weapons have reach factors for different reasons. And how you use your reach changes how close the combat is. You might be able to get away with: "A reach of X means you are within X meters of the target in melee." Or for the other direction: "To attack a target you have to get within 'Reach' meters of the target." That would mean you have to be pretty much right on top of someone to hit them unarmed, or with a small weapon. Can be up to a meter away for longer weapons or Troll arms, etc...

Not to mess you up Mach, but a Reach of 1 is probably within that 1 meter range to give a ranged attack the Point Blank bonus.

Isn't that what I wrote? At least it's what I meant

And yes, that's exactly what I meant with abstract. A reach of 1 can mean a kick attack (legs are longer than arms, generally) as in Arsenal, or a blade of 90cms or a blade of 140cms.
The point is not the exact length but rather the average distance between the two combatants. While having a reach of let's say 90cm with a katana means you can hold your enemy at 90cm + your arms length, it doesn't mean that you'll actually do that in a combat turn of 3sec in which you'll move quite a lot.
So, in my opinion it is quite alright to treat a reach of 1 as ~1m of effective length or distance.

well reach 0 is normal unarmed melee combat

So I'd have take the abstract of Reach 1 as far enough away .. just IMO of course. as you generally are further away and only 'reach' in to strike.

so most of the IP you are stood away from point blank ... for example .. watch fencing or sabre fights vs boxing .. that is the difference

The style of fighting seen in points-for-hit sport fighting isn't... What's the word... Real. The focus is extremely different.

This is quite true. Also, a katana is a curved cutting weapon and to make the best use of it, you want to work as much of the cutting edge across the enemy as possible in a strike. You generally don't stab with it.

Reach rules basically simulate the advantage a weapon can provide but increasing a persons options, as well as allowing them to distance themselves at least to some extent.
,
I would agree that generally when using a reach 2 weapon, especially a spear type weapon, you are less likely to be point blank. Though as an actual pistol and rifle shooter, my, money is still on the guy with the gun

..IMO.. it all depends who does first efficient attack...
( troll with combat axe.. one hit,one kill...)

It dosen't hurt that the troll may be able to take the gunshot to the face and just smile.



-k

Oh, it hurts. Even the troll

LOL,

okay so maybe I'm doin' it wrong, I've realised that as a "core" rules Melee .. I need to sneak sneak and silent kill.

is there anything "colourful" that I can do to spice it up though ?

for info .. I'm an Orc with 8 STR, 9 AGI and 5 skill in Blades, no Martial arts (missions char)

wearing good armour and Chameleon suit. wielding a Vibro sword (Claymore just seemed ... a bit huge for sneaking with)

I'm happy to take any ideas

thx

Personalized grip for another die?
Other than that, 15 dice (including reach) sounds pretty solid. You can always charge, too, for 17 dice.

Sneaking of course means that you need to win a surprise check first, but 8P base with -2 AP ... well, that's pretty steep to begin with when soaking. When the attack is unopposed that's almost a guaranteed kill.

aye, got those, specialisation in swords will follow if I live to earn Karma

but if I don't win a surprise test and with some simple modifiers movement + cover and such, suddenly that complex action to strike is suddenly prone to being stopped by a mook
a "lucky" mook admitted if he gets more than my average 4 hits, but yeah ... the whole concept of being a sword wielding combat specialist is suddenly and embarrasingly stopped by a guy who holds his hand up and blocks my arm?

So there's no maneuvers apart from those from Arsenal ?

and hang on a second,

replace me with a TROLL with 12 strength wielding a claymore with Reach 3+
just a thought but the target of that attack with reach ZERO, can still block the attack ? unarmed ?

/scratches head

not wanting to start the argument up again, but I wonder if this is something considered for SR5 ?

***EDIT***
ignore that last bit, I realise you reduce his defence by 3 for reach, it's harder but still possible

None. Missions rules set is kind of a bummer for close combat oriented characters (and even with the martial arts it's not that great either).
Shooting someone in the face from short range is always preferable in SR4

BUT: Your character sounds optimized for what he does. That's 20 dice with specialization later on, and well ... a lucky mook still goes down if you edge.
Besides, he really still needs to notice you. Mooks in Missions usually don't have a lot of vision enhancements and only single digit dice pools in perception. Your chameleon suit alone reduces this by 4, so surprise tests should be likely. It's a rather safe bet, all in all. Not as easy, as just shooting a guy, but infinitely more cool.

..Vibro sword makes sound when it vibrates,,not good...,try nodachi (from Arsenal) with proper modifications..

Yeah, I was going to point out that the vibro sword doesn't make for a good stealth weapon, at least when it's on. Turned off though and it isn't that much worse than a monofilament sword or katana, and with the surprise you can hopefully take them out in one hit, plus if you need something for a more standup fight you just flick the switch and go.

Edit: I'm pretty sure gear mods are allowed in missions, don't forget to slap a personalized grip on it for the extra die

Personalised Grip is on .. TY there any other melee weapon modifications ?
I am aware of ceramic or plasteel parts and camo coating, but that's not a functional mod over actually getting it to where it needs to be.

as for the humm, well it's not specified what kind of action it is to press a thumb button, so I was going for the free action, as long as you don't expect it to be permanently on,
then it's not a hindrance to stealth
especially at the last second as the blade enters some goons rib-cage

and I looked at the nodachi ... but having never seen one the description made it sound like it was overly large,

having done some creative googling, I will be buying one once current mission is over .. it looks perfect for my needs

..always ready to comment..

I really wish melee was more viable. Unarmed can deal superior damage, has superior concealability, and can even inflict elemental effects. Even "stealth" melee isn't worth it, considering how easy it is to silence guns.

The only way I've found to make melee even slightly worthwhile is to use multiple melee weapons and split the dice pool, but that only really becomes worthwhile with extra limbs.

~Umi

I'm with ya, but will add I don't think it needs to be made more powerful . ..
just before we wake the trolls from their under bridge slumber ... it does need some more flavour ! not make it so it's as powerful as firearms .. i understand the benefits.

I dunno if that means adding in a martial art to core so that parry, riposte, lunge etc. can be performed, currently it's all lumped into the base skill and is lost in translation.

you're right, now that I've actually experienced play, my next char will be an unarmed adept, there's little reason not to

you might say reach, but unless you optimize (Troll with a fegging 20 foot long spear etc.) reach is just another one dice modifier for the mundane meta races unless you carry around "this sword wot I found in Arsenal that's designed to be used against mounted cavalrymen" I like the thing but it seems a long way to go to not leave yourself obselete.

I feel like a big change that made melee less viable was how it was resolved. In previous editions, the melee combat was resolved by who was the higher roller. So even if someone attacked you, if you rolled higher, you did damage to them.

Melee in SR4 is just too...slow.

I personally feel that melee actually is too weak, both from a reality standpoint and a mechanics standpoint.

Getting shot sucks, but you're a lot more likely to survive a gunshot wound than you are to survive a solid strike from a katana. Bullets have low mass and high velocity, so they penetrate, but things like swords are high mass and low velocity, so they shred and shear and tear.

Guns have advantages. They have range. They can be modified and take accesories. They can use specialized ammo. They're often small and concealable. And they don't require great personal Strength to make proper use of. This is true both in reality and in the SR system.

Melee already is suboptimal in all those regards - why, then, is it also made less damaging? A light pistol deals 4P + 1 Minimum Net Hit twice, so 10P before staging. In contrast, a normal sword wielded by one of the world's strongest Humans with a strength of 6, deals (6/2) + 3P + 1 Minimum Net Hit, totaling 7P before staging.

This is just absurd. In terms of game systems, there's no reason for a sword to be doing so little damage compared to firearms when it already has countless other detriments. And in terms of reality, if you were forced to receive either two small caliber handgun wounds or one powerful stroke of a sword, your best bet for survival is the bullet wounds.

Changing the damage code to STR + X, or something similar, might be a good first step to take. Working with my previous example, this change would make the sword deal exactly as much combined damage as the two pistol shots while still retaining all the other limitations of a non-ranged weapon. So now the world's strongest natural human swordsman is doing the same amount of damage as a punk with a cheap light pistol (technically sllightly more because the single sword stroke is only resisted once). That still seems a little off, but it's definitely an improvement.

Moreover, such a change would give players more flexibility in deciding how much Strength to invest in, as they would no longer need to improve it by 2 for each 1 additional damage they might wish to inflict, making non-odd Strength totals attractive. It also allows Agility and finesse focused melee fighters to still do decent damage without having to subtantially invest in their Strength, or rely on Electricity weapons.

It also scales reasonably well, even into the more absurd upper strength values. A troll swordsman with a strength of 12 will be dealing 16P, which, while high, seems within reason. Letting a huge monstrous troll hit you with a sword is gonna hurt, and you should count yourself lucky if you don't just get sliced in half. If that sounds like a bad time to you, then maybe shoot him before he reaches you?

~Umi