Shields (moved)

[RosenMcStern]

How much easier would it have been to simply say: if the defender wins the opposed roll match damage rolled against the shield and make dodging harder?

Not much easier, as although I followed you in all your previous points I absolutely did not understand this one. What do you mean?

Attacker and parrier both make opposed roll. If attacker wins roll for damage as normal. If parrier wins (ie, he manages to block attack) roll damage vs shield to see if attacker breaks through. I play it like this but it obviously is more complicated when you factor in criticals - but that is the jist. As you can see as an experienced GM you may spot that your players may now favour dodge. So make dodging a little harder or as I do it make it easy to use a shield.

Dodge and parry are equivalent after the update, as parry is now all-or-nothing. The way I do it now is explained here (in the Block paragraph). Basically, I do not use the opposed roll rule for shields, but give them a chance to break if hit hard.

That doesn't make it better, just different...

I personally think that dodging attacks is far too easy in most RPGs, especially if you can use it against attacks from multiple sources at the same time. Most RPGs don't address reach and optimal distance in close combat (arguably the most important things in a real fight) to make it more playable.

I had a lot of debates about this, on the contrary. At present I give a penalty to parries with shorter weapons or dodges if the opponent has a longer weapon, but only with my Italian group where I have some rule realism fanatics.

 

[Sinisalo]

My criticisms weren't really about realism though that has its place. I just felt that the fun stuff like smashing through shields was lost for the sake of the opposed resolution mechanics and my solution does both and pretty much described in one or two paragraphs.

I would add that I lobbied for the opposed roll to be added to combat and still support it on the basis that I don't believe a fight between two 170% skilled individuals should come down to who gets the critical first. Alright I know that's simplistic....

Having the simple roll system for parries and opposed for dodges I thought of as well and it seems a decent way to do it all in all.

Opposed resolution is not new to BRP games so I'm not really sure why mistakes (in my opinion) like the updated parry table get made.

 

[Sinisalo]

That doesn't make it better, just different...

I personally think that dodging attacks is far too easy in most RPGs, especially if you can use it against attacks from multiple sources at the same time. Most RPGs don't address reach and optimal distance in close combat (arguably the most important things in a real fight) to make it more playable.

I think it's virtually impossible except when you are already moving. It is of course hard to say because nobody goes live with sharp hand weapons with the aim of maiming and killing. Or if they do they do it against the defenceless and not other trained figthers.

There is a jui jitsu exercise (which I have done) where you have one guy with a black marker and another with a white t-shirt. The white t-shirt can only block and dodge while the black marker is trying to mark the t-shirt as many times as he can in 30 seconds. How many marks do you think he can make? Dozens! Now give the white t-shirt guy boxing gloves and tell him he can hit black marker guy hard and there is a profound difference.

Moral of the story - defending doesn't really work that well.

All IMHO

 

[RosenMcStern]

Having the simple roll system for parries and opposed for dodges I thought of as well and it seems a decent way to do it all in all.

As stated, I go unopposed for shield blocks, opposed for weapon parries and dodges, and it seems to work.

Opposed resolution is not new to BRP games so I'm not really sure why mistakes (in my opinion) like the updated parry table get made.

I think Loz explained why one year ago. It happens....

BTW, in Rurik's pbp we are having a fight where, as a result of the parry matrix, the only blows that don't do damage are critical hits, and the only parries that allow some damage through are critical parries. Funny but expected....

 

[DirkD]

I think it's virtually impossible except when you are already moving. It is of course hard to say because nobody goes live with sharp hand weapons with the aim of maiming and killing. Or if they do they do it against the defenceless and not other trained figthers.

There is a jui jitsu exercise (which I have done) where you have one guy with a black marker and another with a white t-shirt. The white t-shirt can only block and dodge while the black marker is trying to mark the t-shirt as many times as he can in 30 seconds. How many marks do you think he can make? Dozens! Now give the white t-shirt guy boxing gloves and tell him he can hit black marker guy hard and there is a profound difference.

Moral of the story - defending doesn't really work that well.

Very true. Especially dodging to completely avoid an attack is nearly impossible. If you watch 2 experienced kendo-fighters, there is no chance that one can avoid being hit without blocking, if the other is committed and starts a real attack.

In my opinion the use of a shield should generally be a lot easier than dodging. There may be a reason that using swords without shields is basically unknown in European military history... But all that crazy stylish jumping-around in movie-fights did probably lead to the general perception that this stuff really works. (It looks more spectacular, I give them that).

Btw, I did Jiu Jitsu for 5 years when I was in school. Always nice to hear of another student.