[Noob Question] Highly Skilled Melee Duel, What Happens?

[DamonJynx]

Very interesting thread. RQ is very different to D&D which seems to be the system you've mainly played. I'm in the same boat. My group started an Elric game a couple of weeks ago and we're having all sorts of discussions on the rules, because it's so different from what we're used to.

I agree with, I think it was Delriad (forgive the spelling), who suggested you actually play RAW for a few sessions to get the feel for how the system actually works.

I ran a session where the PC's were up against Pirates whose combat skills were on par and the encounter lasted about 3 rounds, due mostly to the number of enemies. So IMHO there's really no need to tinker with the combat rules unless you're trying to create something very specific.

To take a leaf out of D&D 4E, you can always re-skin CM's like By-pass Parry or whatever to better reflect the flavour you're after, rather than adding complexity to what should be a simple mechanic. As others have posted, a lot of what you're talking about re feinting etc is already figured into the abstract nature of the combat system.

 

[Mortimer]

Very interesting thread. RQ is very different to D&D which seems to be the system you've mainly played. I'm in the same boat. My group started an Elric game a couple of weeks ago and we're having all sorts of discussions on the rules, because it's so different from what we're used to.

I agree with, I think it was Delriad (forgive the spelling), who suggested you actually play RAW for a few sessions to get the feel for how the system actually works.

I've played every edition of D&D since AD&D, including a couple months of 4.0 before I got fed up with it. I've also dabbled in a few other systems like Paladium, World of Darkness, and Feng Shui. In my experience, no system can be "played RAW." Some interpretation is always required and often there are many situations where one person's interpretation will differ from another's. In the case of RuneQuest, the situation right now is that I'm going to be learning the system and all but one of my players are pretty much just going to rely on me to tell them how things work. That means I need a very solid grasp of all the mechanics before we start playing.

I understand the sentiment of trying to make few actual changes to the rules before trying them, but I think in this system more than most they have made an effort to let the GM decide how he wants to run the game, and not given much ammo to "rules lawyers." The fact that they pulled this off while still making a very crunchy system is something that impressed me a great deal. Your RuneQuest May Vary.



PS: The existence of things like Charge and Leap Attack do set a precedent for alternatives to the "roll and THEN decide what happened" style of play. So I really wasn't suggesting anything too radical.

 

[DamonJynx]

Hey Mortimer,

It's all good. I'm just not a tinkerer.

Look, we have made some modifications, albeit very minor ones, that don't impact on the RAW too much. Mainly they're to do with scale on the battle mat (we do like using mini's) and where the various reach weapons can attack from and so on. Some spaces require closing, others don't.

At the end of the day it's up to you and your group to play the game, you want to play. Whatever works best for you guys and provides the most fun is what it's all about.

We had a combat tonight: Fighter A Combat Style 82%, Fighter B 72% only 10% difference. The fight was over in 2 rounds. Fighter A won. Just need one bad die roll...and it's all down hill.

 

[kintire]

And the way I treat it is that Initiative = 1d10 + Strike Rank - Weapon ENC,

Doesn't this mean that someone with a long weapon will strike after someone with a short one?

 

[Mortimer]

If the long weapon is heavier than the short weapon, the one with the short weapon will have a better chance to act first, but that doesnt mean he will "strike" first.

Let's say someone with L reach is fighting an opponent with S reach. We'll assume that the one with short reach gets a better initiative roll (partly due to his lower weapon ENC), and therefore takes the first Strike Rank.

If the one with short reach wants to attack the one with L reach, what will have to happen is he will try to "close" with his opponent. When he does this, he uses up his Strike Rank and gives the one with L an opportunity to attack vs his evade, or to take a step backwards in order to maintain the distance. Either way, the one with L reach ALSO gets to attack next on his strike rank.

So you see, even if the one with short reach had a massive initiative advantage to go first due to having a lighter weapon, he still doesn't "attack" first, he simply gets the first strike rank. Having a L weapon vs a short weapon is still a significant advantage.

Note that in the above situation where the short reach went first, the L guy can attack twice before the short reach guy gets his first attack.

The other possibility (using RAW this would happen more often), is that the L reach guy may roll higher in the initiative. In that case, he get's a whole extra attack before the short-reach-guy gets to do his closing action. That means the L reach guy gets 3 attacks before the short reach guy can even attack once.

So, is it really such a bad thing to give the guy with short reach a little buff? Also, its not a very huge buff considering that the short reach guy will only have about a 4 point advantage on the L reach guy. So it could basically be 1d10+Strike Rank-0 vs 1d10+Strike Rank-4. As you can see, that clearly doesn't make the one with short reach go first automatically, it just gives him a better chance to go first.

Given all of the above, I would have to answer your question with a "no". It's impossible to strike first with a Short reach weapon vs a long reach weapon, and that has nothing to do with strike rank.

 

[DamonJynx]

Mortimer is quite right in what he says. Regardless of SR, combatants that have to close with an enemy are always at a disadvantage initially. Depending on what the other combatants do, that may change, but it may not.

The significant thing IMHO re this game system - and remember I'm a novice, we've only had 4 game sessions - is the management of Combat Actions.

So far, apart from 1 instance where a PC had run out of CA's and I rolled crap, the combatants with no CA left are beaten every time, usually with 1 attack that either kills them outright (minions etc with general HP), or forces them to make a resilience test to avoid unconsciousness and death.

My group have players have so far not been inclined to take any prisoners in combat or show mercy. Mind you, we are playing Elric and the 2 tanks are both members of the Death Bringers. Bring on the head shot...

Speaking of which, there was a thread that dealt with this issue (PC's going for the same CM time after time), was that on this board or the BRP board?