Now, a couple of people have had a crack at complete unarmed systems, but so far I don't think there's been a co-operative effort.

Okay, I realise that getting a final decision out of a group as diverse as Dumpshock could be troublesome, but I think it would be worth while.

The usual caveat applies - constructive criticisms of idea only, please if you want to flame, take it somewhere else.

I'll open the project by suggesting that advanced melee should be based off of manouevres, although not as strictly structured as the CC rules.

Advanced melee should include maneuvers that anyone can learn, rather than being restricted to certain styles. If you don't have a teacher to learn the maneuver from it should cost extra karma (x1.5?).

The base karma cost should depend on how powerful the maneuver is. Unless the system turns out to be incredibly balanced, there should be a seperate karma cost for all maneuvers.

Disarming should be made harder than "I got one net success, you don't have a weapon".

Well, that's the inherent flaw to an abstract dice system like this.

That's one net success, where in a system that means that you did it as well with 1 success as 15 as written. Though in previous editions, they did make allowances for multiple successes in these types of situations.

1 success, you bat the weapon out of the oponents hand.
2 successes, as above but the weapon moves 1d6 meters in a normal grenade scatter pattern
3 successes, the weapon is moved 1d6 meters away from enemies
4 succeses, the weapon is moved 1d6 meters towards an ally
5 or more, if you want, you are holding the weapon, or an ally can make a Reaction (4) test to catch the weapon in a useable manner.

That's the way it works now, or close to it (more successes puts the weapon farther away). I just think it should take more than one net success total to disarm someone. Or there should be some penalty for disarming, such as TN +2 or something similar.

I already did something about it. My group made our own melee combat system and we like it. It works great in play. It was posted here less than a month ago.

Convert it to Use with Hero System and keep the setting.

Cheers

QM

Well one problem is that we all want different things from the melee system. The system that I wrote up was designed with realism in mind, as much realism as could be introduced without fundamentally changing game balance and character power levels.

But a lot of people here would probably approach it from the perspective of game balance or some other criteria first. And this would make us fundamentally disagree.

So, I think that a big group effort is doomed to failure.

No we don't. The advanced melee rules are about as sound as a security door made of toothpicks, but the basic melee system isn't bad at all.

~J

if you're more worried about making the advanced rules internally consistent than you are about realism, these might work. though it should be noted, they've recieved no more than a lukewarm reception in the two days since i proposed them on shadowland.

Broken? No, I don't think it's broken at all. Most issues seem to stem from everyones dislike of the abstract nature of how SR handles melee combat.

Although I have submitted some ideas, my group doesn't modify melee combat much at all.

One of the guys in my group loves the cinematic (hong kong physics) style of roleplaying fights. If I made him take manouevers it would take an hour to roll all the dice for one attack as he describes them.

In other words, I like the abstraction that allows him to describe his moves. I tag on a reasonable modifier to make him think it looks cooler and everyone is happy.

My guy is one level below black belt in Tae Kwan Doe (spelling ?) but still loves the acrobatic and gravity defying stuffin the movies. Hey, I try to give them what they want in the game. It keeps them coming back.

I guess my vote would be to keep the rules as abstract as possible. It helps keep the game rolling along, and the more action we can cover the happier everyone is.

We most definitely do not all agree that the melee rules are broken. I don't mind the regular rules, and can even handle the advanced rules in CC. I just wish that they were extrapolated out to include all forms of melee instead of just Unarmed Combat.

We all agree the melee rules are broken?

Wow. I never got that memo. My bad. I'll update my opinion as soon as possible, boss.

I must say I'm surprised some people seemingly have no problem even with the fact that Dan-the-unaugmented-martial-expert can strike five times in a round Joe-the-wired-cyborg as he attacks, and only against him, while he could strike Rob-the-other-unaugmented-guy only once.

http://forums.dumpshock.com/index.php?showtopic=6698

Since we're discussing alternate rulesets, here was my stab at the problem.

*shrugs* I just shoot the guy. My solution to people who want to fight in melee.

the biggest problem i see with the rules is, they make armed and unarmed melee combat too different. unarmed melee combat has all kinds of fun options and stuff; armed melee combat is just hit, counter, soak.

i dodge, disarm you, then break your neck. huzzah for melee!

And out of desparation with a scene at that.

Do not include everyone in your topid line. Not everyone agrees. You can say most, or some, or many, but not all.

I actually don't have much problem with the unarmed and melee combat rules.
First off, I remember that this is a game and secondly, I remember that the rules are trying to be as simple as possible yet cover as many situations as possible. These two points allow me to have very little problem with the melee and unarmed combat systems as they work now.

That being said, I actually do have 2 problems with "The Rules™".

1) I disagree that it is just as easy for someone to beat the hell out of a person moving 2-4 times as fast as a normal person as it is to beat the hell out of a normal person. (Skill is nice, but if you're moving in slow motion it won't help you much. I don't know any martial arts that have sections for dealing with an opponenet reacting at superhuman speed.) To reflect this, I would implement a TN modifier based on the difference in initiatives. I.E. Joe-Bob the normal "Kung Fu Masta" (8 dice, well say a nice init of 11.) is fighting Shawn the "Hyper Wired Sam-Dude" (4 dice, and an init of 31.) Joe-Bob is alot better at fighting than Shawn, but Shawn is moving 3x as fast as Joe-Bob. So we take the two init scores and subtract the smaller from the larger (31-11=20), we then divide by ten (round down) for a total TN mod of +2 which is applied to the combatant with the lower init. This reflects the added difficulty of fighting with someone who is moving 2-4 times as fast as you. (Joe-Bob still has a slight advantage [he can put more dice into attacks and/ or save his pool for defense/soak] but Shawn's super human speed now actually has a bearing on combat.)

2) The lack of an advanced melee combat system. To fix this I would simply adapt the Martial Arts rules in CC. And yes, most schools of weapon combat teach it as a style. (Like Kendo, or Fencing to name a couple.) You might have to change the name of a couple of maneuvers. (IMHO kick would become lunge, but use the same mechanics.) And some just wouldn't apply. (Throw) And you may have to "invent" a couple of new ones. (Like a disarming maneuver.) But all in all, it wouldn't be that hard to do and it would work while keeping things simple.

re 1:
Shawn is not moving 3 times as fast as Bob unless his quickness is indeed thrice that of Bob. However, Shawn's delay from decision to action is about a third of Bob's. Conveniently, trained reflexes rarely care about that delay so higher skill results in higher ass-kicking regardless of how much a speed freak the opponent is.

And it doesn't matter how much faster your reactions are if they are the wrong reaction.

For example, small amounts of alcohol actually increase reaction time when driving. The problem is that it also increases the chance you'll make the wrong reaction. It doesn't matter how quick you are if you hit the gas when you should have hit the brake.

Basic Physics here people.

To get an object to move from point A to point B 3 times in three seconds requires the object to move at least 3x as fast as it requires for the object to move from point A to point B 1 time in three seconds. Game fluff aside, doing 3 things in 3 seconds means at some level that you have to move 3 x as fast. If you don't basic physics says you can't do it.

To do 3 things in 3 seconds Shawn has to move 3x as fast. (As he is not magical and so has to obey the laws of physics.)

If you attack me while being limited to moving at the rate of a slow motion video, it doesn't really matter how uber your martial skill is, chances are, my limited knowledge on Jiu-Jitsu is gonna be enough to let me kick your butt all over the bar.

Various points on this:

1. I don't think the advanced melee rules are "broken" (i.e. - unusable) at all. They're far from perfect, but entirely usable in a game. It seems, actually, that there are quite a lot of people who don't agree that the melee rules are broken.

2. You can, as I'm sure mfb knows, learn maneuvers for armed combat skills as well. It's just that it's more expensive and you need to have an unarmed combat skill to take them from. Not sure why they did it this way, perhaps because they want you to really pay for it if you insist on having an adept with pole arms + whirling or whatever. That is to say - you need to pay more for armed combat maneuvers since the reach bonus is so much of a bonus already.

3. Yes - quickness differences. Let's say you have a maxed out vampire speed freak with a quickness of 20 or so, and then you also have a regular (mundane, unaugmented) guy with a quickness of oh... 5 - so he's pretty quick, for a regular guy. Both have Brawling 6 and no other bonus dice. Okay, the vampire will have a higher initiative and therefore be the attacker more often, and will likely have a significantly higher combat pool too. BUT I still don't think that makes up enough for the fact that he literally moves four times as fast as the other guy.

Assuming Willpower and Intelligence of 3 each and +1d6 initiative, that means they'll have 13 and 5 combat pool, respectively, with average initiatives of 14.5 and 7.5 respectively. With both having Brawling 6 and no other TN mods, this means the first attack the vampire will be expecting six successes while the normal guy already is only expecting five and a half; moreover, if they tie the vamp does his damage rather than the guy. Second attack the guy can attack and wins ties, but now his combat pool is gone. Third attack, well…

Now kick it up to 6 intelligence and willpower each. 16 combat pool and 8 combat pool, vamp takes two actions before he's rolling under 12 dice with 4 to spare while at that point the human is completely drained.

Now let's kick the vampire back down to 3s while our hero sticks at 6s. 13 and 8 combat pool, Initiative averages of 14.5 and 8.5, and the vamp still eats his combat pool for lunch with a die remaining for dessert.

Now let's try this again with the hero having gotten a 6 on Initiative and the vampire only having gotten a 1. With 11 init he's getting a second action, while the vampire comes out barely ahead at 12. He's still got less combat pool, and with his likely wound mods his last action is more harmful than helpful if he decides to attack.

Your example shows a clear advantage for the vampire.

~J

Yep, all very true. The vampire, as we both state, does have the advantage, particularly in a more drawn out fight. It's just that, in an example like that, I don't think the advantage is enough - particularly in the first phase of combat, which I'd consider to be the most important.

Anyway, it's not that big a deal as combat pool etc balance it out a bit, and it's only a problem when there's a huge difference in quicknesses.

Seriously, the basic melee combat rules arnt broken. They are an abstraction. I think too many people just seem to think its 2 guys trading blows... the advantage the faster guy has is that ties to to the attacker. Thats plenty. It keeps Mr Sammi with unarmed 3 and a 5d6+12 init from destroying the adept with unarmed 7 and 1d6+5.

Well true. Three seconds isn't a long time, except in a shadowrun combat. In that time, one or other is likely to have pummelled the other guy to unconciousness.