A thought about combat tables.

[Mugen]

I had a thought yesterday while looking at the actual attack/dodge and attack/parry tables in MRQ : In real life, it is easy to hit somebody that is not defending himself.
That is, somebody that neither dodges nor parries.

What do you think of the following rule change :

*A failed attack roll does only minimum damage (despite the weapon hit the target, it was not really efficient)
*Only a fumble on an attack roll induce a total attack failure.
*Reaction tests must be done even if the attack test fails.
*The tables in MRQ must be used, with the following modifications :

1) Attack failure vs dodge failure : minimum damage is dealt.
2.1) Attack failure vs parry failure : minimum weapon damage is dealt.
2.2) Attack failure vs successfull parry : minimum weapon damage minus parrying weapon's AP is dealt.
2.3) Attack failure vs critical parry : minimum weapon damage minus 2*parrying weapon's AP is dealt. Riposte is possible.

 

[Halfbat]

There are a number of suggested Attack tables up on the RQ Wiki and more are around this forum.

There might be a misunderstanding of what a Dodge or Parry is: if a character runs out of Reactions he isn't standing still, but is just unable to make a specific, focussed reaction to an attack. He will still be trying to defend himself/get out of the way/threaten his opponent, but won't be able to actively make anything of what he is doing. Even someone who is surprised isn't just standing doing nothing: he has a second or so to try and do something (throw up his hands, throw up a shield, throw up a sword) - whilst not actively doing anything against his opponent the reaction (lower case R) still has to be dealt with by the attacker.

From what's described, it's not clear if the two-roll combat system is being used rather than the single-roll outlined in the Player's Guide. In the two-roll system a successful attack which is not parried/dodged gets normal/critical damage, only reduced by the target's AP - pretty good going. If the sort of thing you're talking about is wanted, then it may be the two-roll system will fit you better than playing about with the single-roll results.

(btw A character who is completely unable to defend himself (is helpless) receives an Automatic Critical Hit anyway)

 

[duncan_disorderly]

I had a thought yesterday while looking at the actual attack/dodge and attack/parry tables in MRQ : In real life, it is easy to hit somebody that is not defending himself.
That is, somebody that neither dodges nor parries.

Thye first draft of the playtest rules worked on this basis - A declared attack always hit unless it was countered in some way. I (still) think it is an interesting idea, but it had a number of problems, not least of which was making combat work entirely differently to other skill use.

Also one of the playt testers reported that he had taken a re-enactor friends sword and completely failed to hit a stationary pole with it...

 

[Mugen]

Thye first draft of the playtest rules worked on this basis - A declared attack always hit unless it was countered in some way. I (still) think it is an interesting idea, but it had a number of problems, not least of which was making combat work entirely differently to other skill use.

I know this : I've been in the playtests since the first steps

 

[Mugen]

There are a number of suggested Attack tables up on the RQ Wiki and more are around this forum.

There might be a misunderstanding of what a Dodge or Parry is: if a character runs out of Reactions he isn't standing still, but is just unable to make a specific, focussed reaction to an attack. He will still be trying to defend himself/get out of the way/threaten his opponent, but won't be able to actively make anything of what he is doing. Even someone who is surprised isn't just standing doing nothing: he has a second or so to try and do something (throw up his hands, throw up a shield, throw up a sword) - whilst not actively doing anything against his opponent the reaction (lower case R) still has to be dealt with by the attacker.

From what's described, it's not clear if the two-roll combat system is being used rather than the single-roll outlined in the Player's Guide. In the two-roll system a successful attack which is not parried/dodged gets normal/critical damage, only reduced by the target's AP - pretty good going. If the sort of thing you're talking about is wanted, then it may be the two-roll system will fit you better than playing about with the single-roll results.

(btw A character who is completely unable to defend himself (is helpless) receives an Automatic Critical Hit anyway)

I do use one-roll combat. Rolling twice under attacker's skill is losing time, in my opinion.

My point is that rolling under your skill may not mean that you hit your opponent, but that you used your weapon in an efficient way.

My proposition implies that somebody that doesn't spend a reaction to defend against an attack is simply standing and waiting for the blow. It may be because he ran out of reactions or he is wearing a very heavy/magical armor.