I suppose the way to handle heroic settings is to have extra-ordinary dodging as a Heroic Ability. Then combat starts out being realistic, but if you want to be like Shadowspawn or Grey Mouser or Pai Mei, then you can be later on. Until then - be lucky, or use a shield. It does mean that you get to be good at dodging by... not dodging, but doing something else until you have some spare Hero Points. That doesn't feel very RuneQuesty.Rasta said:
Rules Question (Combat)
- Thread starter Melkor
- Start date
Alternatively, you could add an (avoid all damage) CM for critical parries.
I think the reason dodge was scrapped was perhaps due to balance issues.
If dodge allows you to avoid all the damage from any attack (close, ranged, charges, magic) then why would anybody carry a shield?
I would want the combat style (2H Sword & Dodge).
While Pai Mei type characters are not what I think of in Runequest, you certainly should houserule this, if a lack of a dodge skill makes the setting not feel Runequesty.
I think the reason dodge was scrapped was perhaps due to balance issues.
If dodge allows you to avoid all the damage from any attack (close, ranged, charges, magic) then why would anybody carry a shield?
I would want the combat style (2H Sword & Dodge).
While Pai Mei type characters are not what I think of in Runequest, you certainly should houserule this, if a lack of a dodge skill makes the setting not feel Runequesty.
languagegeek
Mongoose
Making dodge part of a combat style has me intrigued, I was thinking about it this way... as it stands there's no mechanical reason to take a 1H-only skill: shield and dual-weapons give an extra CA, and 2H gives better damage. So why take 1H?
The shield gives you an extra CA - dodge would not. It does let you try and get out of the way of missile attacks without evading, and out of the way of huge weapons without parrying only ½ damage. I would rule that anything bigger than an arrow would still require evade, and that dodge doesn't work against magic.
Make Dodge only combinable with 1H weapons. So with (Axe & Dodge) you can choose to parry with the axe or dodge out of the way. For settings where tradition or honour discourage shields, someone armed with a rapier would certainly train in techniques covered by this ruling of dodge.
Anyway, I'm still considering this option and am curious to see where this thread goes.
Rasta said:
The shield gives you an extra CA - dodge would not. It does let you try and get out of the way of missile attacks without evading, and out of the way of huge weapons without parrying only ½ damage. I would rule that anything bigger than an arrow would still require evade, and that dodge doesn't work against magic.
Make Dodge only combinable with 1H weapons. So with (Axe & Dodge) you can choose to parry with the axe or dodge out of the way. For settings where tradition or honour discourage shields, someone armed with a rapier would certainly train in techniques covered by this ruling of dodge.
Anyway, I'm still considering this option and am curious to see where this thread goes.
languagegeek said:
As far as I remember, some cultural backgrounds have 1H weapon styles in their list (especially Civilized).
Of course, every reasonable fighter-type will learn another combat style. But scholars will certainly think twice before investing 10% in a new combat style.
Note that in my opinion, there is a rock/paper/scisors game between 2H/2x1H and 1H+Shield styles :
-1H+Shield "beats" 2H because of the +1 CA;
-2x1H "beats" 1H+Shield because of their better offensive ability;
-2H "beats" 2x1H because 1H weapons are rather bad at parrying big 2H weapons.
I think this is why historically, hardly anybody used just 1H weapons. There really is not a tactical benefit to walking onto a battlefield with just a dagger, or just a spear, or just a club.
Of course this changed with the advent of firearms which made shields and armor obsolete.
Interesting ideas all around. I don't think there is anything wrong with going for a more cinematic feel for combat. Personally, I'm sticking with the rules as written.
Loz
Mongoose
There's also the cultural development of fencing as an noble or gentlemanly art. No one would ever expect a gentleman to walk onto a battlefield with a rapier, but you also wouldn't expect to see a gentleman wandering around a town bedecked in armour, carrying a shield and with a bastard sword at his hip.
Different combat styles for different cultures and different circumstances. Both Pete and I are firmly of the opinion that RQII combat styles shouldn't be about mini-maxing to get the best combat advantage, but to reflect cultural differences - even if that means some form of disadvantage against other combat styles.
Different combat styles for different cultures and different circumstances. Both Pete and I are firmly of the opinion that RQII combat styles shouldn't be about mini-maxing to get the best combat advantage, but to reflect cultural differences - even if that means some form of disadvantage against other combat styles.
Mongoose Pete
Mongoose
Precisely. Single sword fighting was king for three hundred years in Europe after shields fell out of fashion, despite their superiority in a fight.Loz said:
Dodge was removed since it always causes problems mechanically. It was also removed for realism. There are no close combat styles in existence which completely rely on dodging for defence.PhilHibbs said:
In real fighting there is very little of what we call dodging. There's disengagements, diving for cover, and maybe pulling an exposed limb back out of range. But a full body dodge against every attack, without a weapon or limb simultaneously providing a supplementary ward is rare.
A better way of explaining this is an Errol Flynn fencing scene. When he's engaged he normally defends against a sword thrust by using his blade to parry (Parrying). However when he becomes outnumbered, or placed in a tight spot where he is flanked, he then stops using his weapon and instead leaps atop furniture or ducks behind the ship's mast - effectively disengaging from his foes and outmanoeuvring them (via the Evade skill). A few seconds later combat starts again, and he attacks and parries as before.
An example of his fighting style...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L10fR31jC1w
Almost every attack is parried, at about 1:18 you see an almost dodge, but Guy is still trying to parry at the same time. At about 1:27 he ducks under a table, but personally I'd call that an evade, since he doesn't immediately counter attack with his sword. The final dagger thrust? Okay that looked like a dodge, or rather Guy being stupid - he should have attacked the base of the throat...
People's misremembering of swashbuckling in the movies has led to the idea that attacks are normally/consistently dodged. This is false, 99 of every hundred blows is parried, with the occasional dodge at the end of the sequence, generally in prelude to changing position. What I'd call disengaging myself.
As always however, if you want to model literary styles (I'm sure myself the Mouser parries a lot though) or the most extreme choreographed movies then feel free to modify the rules as you want to.
Similar threads
