 
|
|
|
( 21.08.2008 )
|
|
|
|
( 28.07.2008 )
|
|
|
|
( 21.04.2008 )
|
|
|
|
( 12.02.2008 )
|
|
|
|
( 10.02.2008 )
|
|
|
|
( 12.10.2007 )
|
|
|
|
( 17.07.2007 )
|
|
|
|
( 03.07.2007 )
|
|
|
|
( 13.04.2007 )
|
|
|
|
( 29.01.2007 )
|
|
|
Categories
Discussion
Main - Rune Quest
RE:Combat Rules(can't let go)
|
Author:
Bjorn Are Stolen
|
Time:
25.01.2003 13:58
|
Text:
I'm sorry, I had to reply on this one
> To deflect any blow, you must
> apply enough force to the approaching weapon to move it
> from a trajectory that will intersect with your body to one
> that will not. Say that's a foot of distance.
Wrong as it might seem to you, it actually doesn't take that much energy to achieve. Our blades have a tendency to bounce very much when we spar, so a deflection works a bit like when a rubber ball bounce along.
> You also must
> divert the weapon in less time than it takes for the weapon
> to reach you.
Timing and distance is everything in a swordfight. Hand is quicker than the body, so I rais my hands before your body and sweep have reached me.
> As a rough approximation, that is basically
> the time it takes the weapon to travel the length of your
> parrying weapon for a slash, or the thrusting distance of
> the attacking weapon. The attacking
> weapon will continue to advance towards you, sliding up
> your weapon as you apply your deflecting force; if you have
> not deflected it by the time it reaches the hilt of your
> sword, then either your attempt at deflection is now a
> block (using the handguard of your sword) or simply a
> failure, and you get hit.
No. Yes, if you started your deflection too late, because you're too slow, or because you stood too close. Again; hadns are quicker than the body, so I actually have time to percieve that you have initiated a sweep, and still rais my hands in time to make the blades touch eachother far out, and then the blades bounce, they don't slide. The one foot divertion is easily attained.
Actually the parrying move is identical wether you end up blocking or deflecting. (I'm contradicting one of my previous statements now, but I just realized this as I was typing. Just asume the latest stuff I write to bee the valid one) If you just move to block on the crossguard, the opponent can easily change the trajectory midflight and hit where the parrying impliment isn't.
> In comparison, you have a longer time to deflect a typical
> thrust with a given force, since the thrust moves slower
> over a comparable distance.
You're right if the thruster is coming running towards you (IA long distance.) The point is that when someone are very close, you tend to have the weapon between you and the opponent, and from such positions, sweeps simply don't work! (you'd have to rais \ move your arms one way, to get some momentum on the sweep, and then you'd be thrusted 7 times before beeing ready to sweep once.) So thrusts are the only valid attacks from close distances.
> As well, note that the damage
> zone of a thrust is a line, while a slash describes a
> plane; your margin for error in deflecting the plane is
> smaller.
It works the oposite, a thrust is a very small targed say 5cm? whereas a longsword have a 100cm area to deflect on. (angle of attack)
> Now for my second reason, the game philosophy argument.
> Remember that, consistent with our treatment of the melee
> round as a complex interplay of a multitude of attempts,
> feints and gambits, the decision to thrust or slash cannot
> simply be reduced down to a single swing. It rather
> represents a broader tactical stance
Yes, you're right but if you follow your own argument, you remove the reason for stating wether you slash or thrust, as you during 10 seconds usually both thrust and sweep. The GM could roll random which type of attack that hit home.
> Depends on the stance and the conditions of the melee. If a
> lot is happening, a slash can blindside you as well as a
> thrust. One significant difference is that a slash can come
> from nearly any direction, while thrusts are confined to
> one general area.
If your sweep is to come from any direction at close distance, you don't get time to parry when I thrust you, and thus non't have to parray the sweep.
> > -You had allmost convinced me when I stumbeled across a
> > section in rhe rules that I think cover aspcts you now
> > cover.
>
> What section is that?
Page 55, about a critical success damage ignores armour AP, but not the weapons AP if the defender managed a successful parry.
> In comparison, the current RQ3 rules has the same basic
> chance of a peasant hit penetrating, but the final results
> are skewed, because although most hits are rolled as simple
> successes, few simple successes survive the parry, so in
> the end, a disproportionate number of actual damaging hits
> are criticals. You know the problem at the very low end of
> the skill spectrum; you almost never hit, but if you do
> it's almost always a critical.
OK, you've convinced me! Your levelshifting houserule is OK, but in my oppinion so is the RQ rules, so I'll stick to them as they work for me.
|
Message threads
| Topic: |
Author: |
Time: |
|
|
|
Tom Cantine
|
09.01.2003 08:31
|
|
|
|
Bjorn Are Stolen
|
20.01.2003 15:55
|
|
|
|
Tom Cantine
|
23.01.2003 09:08
|
|
|
|
Bjorn Are Stolen
|
23.01.2003 13:43
|
|
|
|
Tom Cantine
|
24.01.2003 09:51
|
|
|
|
Bjorn Are Stolen
|
24.01.2003 11:14
|
|
|
|
Tom Cantine
|
25.01.2003 07:04
|
|
|
|
Bjorn Are Stolen
|
25.01.2003 13:58
|
|
|
|
Tom Cantine
|
26.01.2003 01:18
|
|
|
|
Tom Cantine
|
28.01.2003 06:24
|
|
|
|
Bjorn Are Stolen
|
28.01.2003 15:37
|
|
|
|
Tom Cantine
|
29.01.2003 06:07
|
|
|
|
Bjorn Are Stolen
|
30.01.2003 13:09
|
|
|
|
Tom Cantine
|
01.02.2003 04:50
|
|
For any questions or comments about this site,
contact the webmaster
www.runequest.za.org is hosted by
www.wack.co.za
W&C Information Consultants CC
|
|
|
