Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: [SR3]What was the idea behind melee fighting in SR3
Dumpshock Forums > Discussion > Shadowrun
sk8bcn
Ok, I'll describe what I consider beeing the problem.

M. Mike Tyson is an un-cybered boxer. He faces Bloodwing, an elf ranged-assassin, with extrem wired-reflexs. Bloodwing doesn't know melee combat.


Bloodwing dosn't turn on his reflexes, and Tyson knocks him out in something like 10 secs.

But, a day later, Bloodwing comes for revenge, turning reflexes on! And suddenly, Tyson doesn't blow him twice a round, but 4 or 5 times! Out in 3 secs.




Ok so here we go with my question: Why did FASA write melee combat this way (in a melee attack the more successes in the contest hits the other one)?

Was it in order to mak "tank builds" viable and wired reflexes not a must have?

Was the rule not well tought?

Something else?
Maelwys
Well, you could argue that in the second example, Bloodwing was opening himself up more by attacking, and that left him open to being attacked, rather than in the first example, where all he did was hold his gloves up infront of his face, giving few openings.

I always saw the SR3 rules (and SR2 and SR1 mostly) as sort of cinematic combat where during a melee fight, both people are swinging at each other in a flurry of blows, trying to hit the other. Sort of Errol Flynn on the stairs with a sword. He may be the one that swings first, but if his opponent is good enough to parry and riposte, its possible Flynn's taking damage.

As opposed to the SR4 and SR5 combat where the rules lead you to believe that melee combat is simply one person swinging away while the other does nothing but block. Sure, there are probably fights where its something like that, but its not very cinematic.

So yeah. SR3 makes sense to me.
tisoz
I'm not sure about 1st edition as 2nd edition came out about the time I was starting to understand the basics of 1st edition. In 2nd edition, if you didn't have wired reflexes 2 or 3 or some sort of cranked up initiative doing the same thing, you got to at best, watch the rest of the team fight or at worst, take a lot of damage. I'm sure it was different in some games, but not in any I was involved.

If they nerfed wired reflexes in 3rd edition, then good for them. Initiative was KING in 2nd edition. Any wired up, no melee skill character trying to go hand to hand with a brick needs to be shown their place in the universe. If anything, the rules were trying to make melee characters viable. Broken? Maybe. But when the game industry leader's audience one is trying to lure to one's game system is not used to having firearms in their current system, melee is something they can understand and one is inclined to make it viable.
Stahlseele
compared to 1st/2nd in 3rd wired were nerfed pretty harshly if i remember correctly.
they cost more in both money and essence i think?
and in SR3 we had basically the same initiative system they recycled in 5th?
Tymeaus Jalynsfein
Melee Combat in SR 3rd Edition was always an Opposed Contest.
Whoever won that particular contest each round dealt the damage.
So yes, If the Attacker was a Professional Speed Sammy and the Defender was a Troll Ganger who was a brawler, the fight often went to the Troll, even if he was slower.
Moral of the Story: Shoot the Troll... smile.gif

Built a character on that very premise.
It was brutal, and I really liked it a lot. smile.gif
Stahlseele
MOST Melee Fights went to the Troll.
AS IT BLOODY WELL SHOULD BE!

I think somebody did the maths on that once, a normal Troll could win a fight against 4 or 5 humans with knives . .

I usually built maxed out STR Trolls as well. 20D Damage with a 3 reach? YES PLEASE! I'LL TAKE THAT AND MORE!
Tymeaus Jalynsfein
QUOTE (Stahlseele @ Oct 26 2015, 02:18 PM) *
MOST Melee Fights went to the Troll.
AS IT BLOODY WELL SHOULD BE!

I think somebody did the maths on that once, a normal Troll could win a fight against 4 or 5 humans with knives . .

I usually built maxed out STR Trolls as well. 20D Damage with a 3 reach? YES PLEASE! I'LL TAKE THAT AND MORE!


Indeed... Trolls were brutal... Which is why you SHOOT THEM till they are Dead. smile.gif
Of course, some of them are bulletproof as well, which makes that pretty difficult. Mine ignored anything under a Heavy Weapon pretty regularly. smile.gif
Stahlseele
*snickers*
Shotgun with 10D Slug Base Damage. To the face.
*Troll-Body-Roll* *marks one Box of physical damage* "ow."
Tymeaus Jalynsfein
QUOTE (Stahlseele @ Oct 26 2015, 02:34 PM) *
*snickers*
Shotgun with 10D Slug Base Damage. To the face.
*Troll-Body-Roll* *marks one Box of physical damage* "ow."


One whole Box? Piker. smile.gif
But yeah, I know that particular scenario... smile.gif
Sendaz
QUOTE (Stahlseele @ Oct 26 2015, 03:34 PM) *
*snickers*
Shotgun with 10D Slug Base Damage. To the face.
*Troll-Body-Roll* *marks one Box of physical damage* "ow."

Isn't that a Troll Facial Cleanser? nyahnyah.gif
Tymeaus Jalynsfein
QUOTE (Sendaz @ Oct 26 2015, 03:46 PM) *
Isn't that a Troll Facial Cleanser? nyahnyah.gif


Indeed... Equivalent to Clearasil in its effectiveness... smile.gif
Glyph
Melee combat as an opposed test was not a bad idea, but they didn't think all of the implications through. One of them was what the OP posted, that faster characters didn't get an advantage from being faster - they just got their asses kicked faster. The other thing was just how crippling the TN modifiers from friends in melee were. Rolling versus a TN of 8 when your enemies are rolling versus a TN of 2 is where you get the complaints about a troop of girl scouts with pointy sticks being able to take down a kung-fu master.
tisoz
I just remembered how in SR2 a character could get 3 turns before an opponent got to act since initiative was rolled, the highest roll got a turn, you subtracted, and the next highest initiative got to go, etc.. High reaction/initiative guys usually got 2 turns before most characters got any. 3 or 4 turns a round were common, so if you only got 2 or 1, you got to watch or die.

High Quickness is already factored in by increasing Combat Pool. Ties go to the attacker so higher initiative players get that benefit. High Quickness characters can use it to gain Superior Position or stay out of melee range.

Quickness and Reaction are already critical Attributes, having them not heavily influence melee doesn't seem unfair.

If one wants to claim it is more about high initiative, then maybe one needs to remember that initiative is not how quick a character is, but how well they react to conditions. Maybe there should be a modifier for noticing an incoming attack and being quick enough to block or deflect it. Or is this already incorporated in Full Defense?
Maelwys
QUOTE (Glyph @ Oct 26 2015, 07:29 PM) *
Melee combat as an opposed test was not a bad idea, but they didn't think all of the implications through. One of them was what the OP posted, that faster characters didn't get an advantage from being faster - they just got their asses kicked faster. The other thing was just how crippling the TN modifiers from friends in melee were. Rolling versus a TN of 8 when your enemies are rolling versus a TN of 2 is where you get the complaints about a troop of girl scouts with pointy sticks being able to take down a kung-fu master.


I dunno. Under SR3, the faster character doesn't have to engage. He can get away (or atleast force his opponent to move to catch up to him, and that's not guaranteed since movement rates aren't fixed), or use his speed to make the fight more advantageous to him in some way, such as getting into a superior position. And in the beginning of the fight, he might be able to get his weapons ready before his opponent. Its going to suck if the faster guy can get his sword out while the other guy is stuck with just his bare fists. So no. There isn't a mechanical advantage for the faster player in the actual melee combat roll, but the faster player can certainly make use of his speed.

The friends in melee modifiers maybe should've been handled like reach. One modifier, either applying to your attack or your opponent's, not both.

Of course, the 4th edition rules have their issues too. Since its not an opposed test, as far as I can tell, the character with more Initiative Passes can simply beat on a NPC without any worry about being struck in return, and since there are potentially multiple attacks, the defender's defense pool also decreases. There's no drawback not to swing.
sk8bcn
QUOTE (Tymeaus Jalynsfein @ Oct 26 2015, 09:03 PM) *
Melee Combat in SR 3rd Edition was always an Opposed Contest.
Whoever won that particular contest each round dealt the damage.
So yes, If the Attacker was a Professional Speed Sammy and the Defender was a Troll Ganger who was a brawler, the fight often went to the Troll, even if he was slower.
Moral of the Story: Shoot the Troll... smile.gif


What you say is true.

I'll take another exemple:

Mr Troll with no wired reflex, a pole staff fights an Elf assassin who has a katana and good wired reflexes. Both have melee at 6. But the troll has more damages.

If both fights melee, the elf will have trouble winning (range+damages). But if he holds out a gun in his off-hand, shoots at the troll at melee range (with offhand penalty and mlee penalty) at his own initiative passes: taddaaaa! his winning chances just went up by a lot.

sk8bcn
ok I'll ask another question:

What effect would it have if I'd modify the rule into an attack test vs a defense test?
Stahlseele
depends on implementation. generally nothing good. specifically, breaking the whole system in a different direction than the one agreed upon.
Cochise
QUOTE (Stahlseele)
I think somebody did the maths on that once, a normal Troll could win a fight against 4 or 5 humans with knives


That math would have been awfully "off". On average that situation would however lead to a stalemate. The troll would constantly be hit by his attackers and then simply shrug off the damage. You could rinse and repeat until either side rolled a critical failure.

One of my (not necessarily) fondest memories involves such a situation where a GM tried to get players to aid a then "unknown" player character who happened to be a melee troll. But players were meta-gaming players and simply knew that those three elves with knives wouldn't be able to harm the troll while the troll wouldn't be able to hit the elves ... so they (including me) opted for watching the spectacle for a while. When the GM decided to increase pressure by having one of the elves draw an Uzi III things got ugly: One of the (stat wise) worst SMGs in the hands of a just average shooter was met with no successes on the attempted Dodge roll and the consecutive Damage Resistance test ended in one of the few "all 1" rolls with more than 10 dice that I ever witnessed. The Uzi III instantly became a weapon of legend that day.

QUOTE (Stahlseele)
I usually built maxed out STR Trolls as well. 20D Damage with a 3 reach? YES PLEASE! I'LL TAKE THAT AND MORE!


Let's just say that maxing out strength had a clear point of diminishing returns in contrast to maximizing dice pools and simply killing via net successes ... and "as always" in pretty much every Shadowrun Edition magic ultimately was what said "the sky is the limit".


**********************

Now as far as the original question is concerned I can only guess what the devs had in mind there. But going by the description of how melee supposedly works - as a series of blows, kicks and dodges - I'd say that they had a Hollywood-esque approach to visualizing and resolving melee combat: combatant A engages a combatant B as the attacker but ends up with broken nose due to combatant B being the superior fighter. Add in one of the most basic doctrines many reasonable Martial Artists teach and you can see where they came from: Being a successful Martial Artist is not about being fast or strong, it's about using the right technique at the right time with the least amount of thinking.

A high reflex character getting his butt handed even faster when using his reflexes is just a byproduct of the general weakness of the combat sequence with multiple passes.

The thing however is this: The high reflex character is never forced to engage the melee character in the first place. So that 10 second K.O. vs. 3 second K.O. can only occur if the high reflex character is literally dumb enough to pursue the conflict after he received the same amount of beating in the first initiative pass that he'd otherwise have received in one combat turn (where no further initiative passes would have occurred). So the seemingly "unrealistic" result is not only influenced by the mechanics as such but also by the sheer "stupidity" of doing something just because the rules allow you to do it.
Cochise
QUOTE (sk8bcn)
ok I'll ask another question:

What effect would it have if I'd modify the rule into an attack test vs a defense test?


Chances are that you'll "kill" melee as a valid game play option even more. A dedicated melee character is already forced to close the gap between himself and his target in order to bring his skills to bearing. Combining high reflexes with high melee effectiveness in SR - at least SR3 - isn't that easy either. With that kind of solution you'd restrict a melee expert to only ever causing damage during his own combat phases which by all accounts is identical to the situation where he used a gun instead.

Additionally it wouldn't bode too well with the attack of opportunity rules that characters (players and non-players alike) get when someone passes within 1m of their current position outside of combat sequence.
tisoz
QUOTE (Maelwys @ Oct 27 2015, 02:26 AM) *
I dunno. Under SR3, the faster character doesn't have to engage. He can get away (or at least force his opponent to move to catch up to him, and that's not guaranteed since movement rates aren't fixed), or use his speed to make the fight more advantageous to him in some way, such as getting into a superior position. And in the beginning of the fight, he might be able to get his weapons ready before his opponent. Its going to suck if the faster guy can get his sword out while the other guy is stuck with just his bare fists. So no. There isn't a mechanical advantage for the faster player in the actual melee combat roll, but the faster player can certainly make use of his speed.

The friends in melee modifiers maybe should've been handled like reach. One modifier, either applying to your attack or your opponent's, not both.


Building on the this idea, the faster guy can also use his speed to keep the opponents friends out of melee range.
sk8bcn
QUOTE (Cochise @ Oct 27 2015, 06:52 PM) *
The thing however is this: The high reflex character is never forced to engage the melee character in the first place. So that 10 second K.O. vs. 3 second K.O. can only occur if the high reflex character is literally dumb enough to pursue the conflict after he received the same amount of beating in the first initiative pass that he'd otherwise have received in one combat turn (where no further initiative passes would have occurred). So the seemingly "unrealistic" result is not only influenced by the mechanics as such but also by the sheer "stupidity" of doing something just because the rules allow you to do it.


It's not that easy because what doesn't ease me with that rule is the following fact:

I have a samourai who likes to fight melee.

But the point is, how do I trully justify that my cybered adept is not trully better than the go-gang melee fighter?


In reality, quickness and reflexes remain a key in fighting.
sk8bcn
Actually, in SR3's system, there's no real room for the fast-agile dodgy melee fighter. The only model that works is the strong and resilient one.
Maelwys
QUOTE (sk8bcn @ Oct 28 2015, 03:36 AM) *
It's not that easy because what doesn't ease me with that rule is the following fact:

I have a samourai who likes to fight melee.

But the point is, how do I trully justify that my cybered adept is not trully better than the go-gang melee fighter?


In reality, quickness and reflexes remain a key in fighting.


Because speed isn't everything? If you want your cybered adept to be better than the go-gang melee fighter, then he needs to have a higher skill than the go-ganger.

Quickness and reflexes get you alot. They get you more combat pool, they allow you to go first so you can position yourself in the melee better, your quickness influences how fast you can move so that allows you to position yourself better, going first allows you to activate powers that need activation, or cyberware, and it also lets you to get your weapon out and ready it. They're major advantages in combat, but they're not going to let you attack a person with impunity.
Maelwys
QUOTE (sk8bcn @ Oct 27 2015, 08:53 AM) *
ok I'll ask another question:

What effect would it have if I'd modify the rule into an attack test vs a defense test?


One thing to keep in mind is that SR3 does have a full defense rule in the main book. Page 123 and 124 allow for full defense in melee combat where the attacked character doesn't get to do damage if they get more successes.
Cochise
QUOTE (sk8bcn)
It's not that easy because what doesn't ease me with that rule is the following fact:

I have a samourai who likes to fight melee.

But the point is, how do I trully justify that my cybered adept is not trully better than the go-gang melee fighter?


Incorrect stipulation right there: If you have a samurai / cybered adept who favors melee then it's reasonable to assume that he should have a melee related skill that's equal to or exceeds the melee skill of that go-gang melee fighter. And now things get interesting: With multiple initiative passes where your samurai / cybered adept is the attacker he "gains" the advantage of ties going to him instead of his opponent.

QUOTE (sk8bcn)
In reality, quickness and reflexes remain a key in fighting.


As I tried to point out earlier: While quickness and general reflexes do have their part in melee fighting, they aren't necessarily the most important aspects. It's far more important to be "skilled" to a degree where your techniques become "reflexes" themselves. Shadowrun models that aspect via skill ratings and not via the Reaction attribute.

As far as Quickness and "reflexes" being part of the SR3 melee model:
  1. Quickness affects both Reaction and thus Initiative and Combat Pool size. The former influences the number of attacks your character can make within a given time frame while the latter heavily influences the outcome of any opposing tests in the melee resolution mechanic
  2. Quickness also directly affects the amount of armor a character can wear without suffering penalties to Combat Pool and Quickness relates aspects (which includes running!) which in turn has impact on "survival chances" during Damage Resistance tests.
  3. High "reflexes" in form of high Reaction / Initiative provides multiple Initiative passes with the destinct advantage that whenever you're the attacker ties against an otherwise equally skilled melee fighter will still be treated in your favor


QUOTE (sk8bcn)
Actually, in SR3's system, there's no real room for the fast-agile dodgy melee fighter. The only model that works is the strong and resilient one.


I would heavily object to that notion. I'll give you the importance of "Strength" simply due to the fact that it's the (oversimplified) linked attribute to all melee skills just like Quickness is the (equally oversimplified) linked attribute for pretty much all relevant ranged combat skills. Its importance grows due to it also being the base for the vast majority of melee Damage Codes. However, depending on weapon of choice you'll hit a point of diminishing returns quite early.

Resilience in form of high Body however? For a melee fighter not more important than for any other character. If you really aim for a "dodgy" melee fighter chances are that you'll rarely ever see him use his Body because he never gets hit (at least not in melee). The core melee rules are a bit limited as they only provide the Full Defense combat option to support the "fast-agile dodgy" build but once you add things like the Martial Arts rules from Cannon Companion and / or dedicated magic like adept powers and/or spells to the mix you'll end up with a lot of different "fast-agile dodgy" melee builds that only rely on STR as far as getting their melee skill high enough at reasonable karmic / build point cost is concerned.

Side note: The only thing that simply cannot be made viable in SR3 is the Nerve Strike adept power. Whatever you do to make that thing work, will automatically mean that you could just outright K.O. your opponent with a single standard attack.
Stahlseele
If you WANT a fast melee dodge fighter, you need to play an adept anyway.
sk8bcn
Let's say my cybered elf (in my case it's a dwarf but for this exemple I take an elf) with skill 6, claws and wired-reflex face that troll with an iron bar, skill 4.

reach is +2 for the troll, he ain't gonna loose. Even if he was an ork, my cybered elf would struggle to win.

6 to 12 dices TN 5 means 2 to 4 successes in average and 1-2 vs TN 6.

for the skill 4 guy, 4 to 8 dices TN 4 means 2 to 4 successes in average



Or put 2 melee gangers against him... same: he struggles.


For a matter of style, you already lose efficiency by choosing melee instead of range. But not only that, but you are significantely weaker too.


Well anyways, maybe it's not the "winner that hit that I should change" but something has to be changed in the system.
Stahlseele
No.
It.
Does.
Not.
If you want a system where STR and Bod are useless for close combat and quickness rules supreme, you play SR4 or 5.
In SR3, it is perfectly fine as it is, because it is role protection of the strong man.
And as i said before, if you want a dodging close combat speed monkey, you play an adept, not a samurai.

This is just like saying:"My Troll has problems with the social stuff, the system needs to be changed!"
I just doesn't!
You knew what you were building when you were building it. Now you deal with it and stay out of the way.
Maelwys
Since you're faster theoretically with the wired reflexes, and probably faster due to your quickness (but maybe not with a dwarf), then use your speed to get in a superior fighting position, which drops your TN by 1 point. But if you're going up against a troll with a reach weapon, without a reach weapon of your own, then yeah. You're going to be heavily disadvantaged.

Of course, I'm pretty sure that's going to be an issue in any edition.
Cochise
QUOTE (sk8bcn)
Let's say my cybered elf (in my case it's a dwarf but for this exemple I take an elf) with skill 6, claws and wired-reflex face that troll with an iron bar, skill 4.

reach is +2 for the troll, he ain't gonna loose. Even if he was an ork, my cybered elf would struggle to win.


Two things to address right there:

  1. This is not a problem of "fast-agile dodgy" vs. "strong and resilient" in general as far as the melee build itself is concerned. You could build a strong and tanky cyber-elf, dwarf or ork and still face the exact same problem. On mechanics level a troll's natural Reach of +1 simply makes him a strong melee adversary. Now think of a "fast-agile dodgy" troll melee fighter as your character.
  2. It's obvious that you're not using the advanced melee rules because if you did (and at least remembered part of our discussion about a certain 30+ D6 melee dwarf) you'd know that there are ways around any Reach bonuses even when wielding weapons


A more general question there is: What do you expect there exactly in terms of "not struggling" against a decently well trained opponent and how should a "fast-agile dodgy" melee fighter be different in comparison to a "strong and resilient" fighter? Do you really expect this to be a situation where the "fast-agile dodgy" character takes out the "strong and resilient" one in a single strike because he's "fast"?

The basic premise already demands that the "fast-agile dodgy" character has to "work" in order to overcome his opponent. So "one shot" successes are technically out of question and subsequently "struggle" always comes into play whenever the opponent isn't "weak sauce".

QUOTE (sk8bcn)
6 to 12 dices TN 5 means 2 to 4 successes in average and 1-2 vs TN 6.

for the skill 4 guy, 4 to 8 dices TN 4 means 2 to 4 successes in average


Let's just say that the advanced melee rules with Martial Arts maneuvers - something you'd definitely want to educate yourself on when having interest in less one dimensional melee encounters - in addition to correct application of combat options would alter those TNs over the course of a combat turn significantly. The thing that won't change however is the fact that when going up against a troll the fight is bound to turn into a struggle unless you are both the significantly superior fighter and have a high enough base damage output.


QUOTE (sk8bcn)
Or put 2 melee gangers against him... same: he struggles.


Once again no problem that is actually restricted to "fast-agile dodgy" melee builds. Pretty much every melee build will struggle in combat situations where "Friends / Enemies in melee" come into play due to the double-dipping effect. But even if you house rule the double-dipping effect away the nature of opposed tests causes any modifier of +2 and higher to be of high significance.

QUOTE (sk8bcn)
For a matter of style, you already lose efficiency by choosing melee instead of range. But not only that, but you are significantely weaker too.


Then the lesson should be: If you're going for a melee character then do it right ... and no that doesn't necessarily mean that you must choose a troll for race but it demands that you educate yourself on all the options available and that you accept that trolls as well as multiple opponents will always be something that you struggle against when facing anything else than comparatively "very weak" fighters in relation to your own skill rating. But neither is directly linked to the choice of "strong and resilient" melee fighter vs. "fast-agile dodgy" melee fighter.

QUOTE (sk8bcn)
Well anyways, maybe it's not the "winner that hit that I should change" but something has to be changed in the system.


You most certainly should try utilizing the melee rules to their fullest potential before attempting anything like that.
sk8bcn
QUOTE (Cochise @ Oct 29 2015, 11:23 AM) *
Then the lesson should be: If you're going for a melee character then do it right ... and no that doesn't necessarily mean that you must choose a troll for race but it demands that you educate yourself on all the options available and that you accept that trolls as well as multiple opponents will always be something that you struggle against when facing anything else than comparatively "very weak" fighters in relation to your own skill rating. But neither is directly linked to the choice of "strong and resilient" melee fighter vs. "fast-agile dodgy" melee fighter.

You most certainly should try utilizing the melee rules to their fullest potential before attempting anything like that.


I'm GM Shadowrun since a long time and never did I get a guy (new to the game) creating a dwarf with an axe...

He was wisely taught to take some firegun skill. However, since I never had anyone interested in melee, I never took a deep look at optional melee rules.

Now he's in game, and while the elf weapon specialist and the shooting adept kills a goon per IP (SA or BF=2 actions per round) my poor melee dwarf doesn't have anything close to this efficiency.


Ok, let's say that you Cochise and you, Stahlsee are right. Let's suppose beeing melee can be efficient. What rule should *he/I* look at to get him half competent?

By the way, as far as I remember, when I red back then the optional martial artist rules, they were pretty imbalanced. A I wrong about that?
Kliko
AK-97 plus a dikoted bayonet (and some polearm skill).
Stahlseele
He created a Dorf. With an Axe. Oy vey! ^^
That's so clichee! O.o
Max out STR. Max out Body. Max out running Speed to get into reach.
Load him up with good Armor. Both Ballistic and Impact. Boneworks.
Orthoskin. That's what he should have done to begin with.
And what is his skill-level? High? Medium? Does he have enchanced artwinculation?
Because that gives a bonus die already. Suprathyroid Gland. +1 Bonus to all physical attributes.
The Cardio whatsit Heart Bioware that gives +3 die to athletics such as running at people.

If the character is not built specifically for close combat/unarmed, then he will simply have to accept that.
It's like complaining that a rigger is bad at magic!

And even if you completely hardmax close combat/unarmed combat, it's still pretty hit and miss! (heh).
You can do gruesome damage in close combat, but you still want a decent ranged combat skill!
THe AK97 with the Dikote Bayonet and the Pole-Arm-Skill would be pretty decent for example.
Kliko
Don't forget the Attack of Will with decent Willpower and Charisma...

Reach bonus do get taken into account with that (making it a somewhat viable secondary spirit-buster).
Stahlseele
Shadowrun just IS a game that demands a bit of system mastery and focused intent when building a character to do something specific.
And if you can't get the CHARACTER up to speed . . well, you are the GM. Then you have to tailor the opposition better to the Characters.
Cochise
*This posting operates under the stipulation that we're still looking at a character that is more about Quickness and high Reaction / Initiative rather than being a strong and resilient melee "brute" ... despite a dwarf with an axe virtually screaming "I'm a strong and resilient melee brute"*

QUOTE (sk8bcn)
Ok, let's say that you Cochise and you, Stahlsee are right. Let's suppose beeing melee can be efficient. What rule should *he/I* look at to get him half competent?


Well, whatever you do, nothing will turn a melee specialist into someone who drops opponents "by the IP" when facing decently well trained opposition, but for starters you should take a very close look at the advanced melee rules in Cannon Companion beginning with p. 85 for the advanced combat options. Especially have a closer look at

  • Charging Attack: can be stylish and fits the "fast" theme, in case of failure in the attacks is supported by high Quickness ratings to avoid damage and increases melee power by 1 thus making slightly up for lower strength values.
  • Disarming: A successful disarming attack is a great way of completely changing the odds in a melee encounter due to the simple fact that it more than often removes damage capabilities from the opponent and - unless we're talking highly specialized melee experts with multiple melee skills - will force opposition into using lower skill ratings in unarmed melee or even defaulting with the associated TN modifiers and Combat Pool limitations
  • Knockdown Attack: Knocking opposition to the ground will grant "opponent prone" (-2) modifier until the opponent manages to get back up and even in cases where your dwarf fails to knock opponents down the involuntary movement for the attacked person might warrant the "superior position" (-1) modifier for the dwarf during the next melee test


The other combat options - while certainly adding flavor at times - don't work too well due to the TN increases they usually involve.

The next thing you should have a closer look at are the Martial Arts rules starting from p. 86 in Cannon Companion. The interesting parts are Martial Arts maneuvers - commonly limited to usage in conjunction with a normal melee attack unless explicitly noted otherwise:

  • Close Combat: Can totally negate any form of Reach penalties / bonuses for the involved parties at the cost of slightly decreased damage output and giving up on your own Reach modifiers. Typically used whenever you're the one with the lower Reach value.
  • Disorient: Can create increasing TNs for opponents but can only be utilized to its fullest potentials by melee characters that actually have more than one Initiative Pass.
  • Ground Fighting: Can negate the "opponent prone" modifier if you're unlucky enough to find yourself on the floor instead of your opponent.
  • Herding: Perfect for moving an opponent into a bad position where he might suffer a situational +2 modifier during consecutive melee tests and may also warrant the "superior position" modifier to your character in addition to that.
  • Sweep: Can make Knockdown attacks more efficient by re-introducing some of the damage you normally have to give up when making a Knockdown attack
  • Whirling: Can reduce "Friends in melee" modifiers down to a single +1 modifier when facing multiple opponents.
  • Zoning: Similar to Herding with the explicit benefit of being usable with the Full Defense option.


Now the thing is that these maneuvers can typically only be used with their respective Martial Art but some of these Martial Arts do allow to learn their associated maneuvers with armed melee skills as well. So you'll have to figure out which one is suited best. An axe (be it a Reach 2 version with the polearm skill or a Reach 1 with the Edged Weapons skill) would typically indicate something like "Kung Fu" or "Ninjutsu". For Reach 1 axes with the Edged Weapons skill you'd also want to take a look at the "Pentjak-Silat" and "Arnis de Mano" entries.

But be warned there: it can be rather costly in terms of karma / build points to get things up to fullest potential and you certainly can't have everything from start (nor should you expect seeing all of that on a character sheet unless we're talking some serious triple digit karma values). And since it's reasonable to expect that the original build of the dwarf wasn't designed around those rules you might want to give the player some extra karma just for the purpose of integrating some of those aspects without compromising the original idea.


*edit* Of course there isn't much that would prevent a "strong and resilient" melee build to utilize any of the aforementioned things ... just with variations in effectiveness and associated opportunity costs.

QUOTE (sk8bcn)
By the way, as far as I remember, when I red back then the optional martial artist rules, they were pretty imbalanced. A I wrong about that?


The actual imbalance doesn't lie with the advanced melee rules or the Martial Arts rules. The potential "culprits" are the advanced combat rules for ambidexterity (beginning at p. 94 of Cannon Companion) and their effects on armed melee combat. Those can indeed get a bit out of hand (which would bring us back to the already mentioned 30+ D6 melee dwarf) but on the other hand: What's the trouble with a dedicated ambidextrous melee expert who literally shreds targets per Initiative Pass when ranged combatants are already doing so?
And for the record: Pulling off an ambidextrous melee expert that still fits the "fast-agile dodgy" bill is very costly in build points / karma and goes down the path of "one-trick pony". A character like that will rarely be good at anything but melee.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Dumpshock Forums © 2001-2012