Dodge

[Trifletraxor]

Originally Posted by RMS

In general, I like your ideas. However, I might do something a little less drastic:

Succeed by 2 levels and the dodger seizes initiative, but doesn't get a free attack. Granted this only helps if the dodger is 2nd, but it's frequently the person with less armor, lighter/shorter weapons that is dodging so they have a good chance of going last (w/ strike ranks).

Succeed by 3 levels and get a free attack. Succeed by 4 levels and get a free attack, plus some other small bonus.

I'd have a failed dodge simply fail to do anything, and a fumble leaves the character on the ground so they have a lost action getting up: give up an attack, or similar later. I wouldn't give the attacker a free attack based on any attempt to dodge. That's too drastic for me.

Some good ideas there.

I've toned down the free attack thing (updated the first post) - now the dodger would only get a free attack if making a special or critical dodge against a fumble attack, or critical dodge against a failed attack. I still like the idea that a fumble dodge gets you straight into the path of the attack. In RQ we houseruled that a fumbled dodge meant a automatic hit for the attacker, I'm just worked it abit further along that line.

Also, what about this for an ENC limitation (based on RQ3 ENC):
-Using more than 7,5 ENC of armor (weight of a full bezainted for a medium person) makes this skill a hard task to perform (1/2 skill).

SGL.

[frogspawner]

Originally Posted by Triff

Parry influences the meaning of an attack roll just as much.
A rolls his attack, B rolls his dodge or parry, A rolls his damage (or not, if there's no point).
Isn't that the way it usually goes?

Well, this is all irrelevant to the real point of your thread, but since you ask...

Originally Posted by Rurik

As a matter of semantics, 'opposed roll' usually means you are comparing the actual rolls (numbers rolled) against eachother.

Although I (and others, it seems) find the number-comparison part of the usual opposed roll mechanisms the really objectionable bit, I think it is the inter-dependence between attack and parry rolls that makes them 'opposed' (and I don't like that part, either!).

Originally Posted by RMS

In RQ2/3 the amount of damage rolled is determined only by the attack roll and the amount of damage parried is determined by the parry roll.

Exactly. Independent rolls, no linkage - nice and clean. Good system design.

[Atgxtg]

Originally Posted by frogspawner

Although I (and others, it seems) find the number-comparison part of the usual opposed roll mechanisms the really objectionable bit, I think it is the inter-dependence between attack and parry rolls that makes them 'opposed' (and I don't like that part, either!).


Exactly. Independent rolls, no linkage - nice and clean. Good system design.

Well the problem with dodge compared to Parry is that Dodge works as an all or nothing effect.


If you wanted to, you could have partial dodging:

Success: Partial Dodge (1/2 damage)
Special Success: Graze (minimum damage)
Critical Success: Dodge (no damage).

That would also balance out Dodge vs. Parry against the heavy damage doers, like dragons.

[frogspawner]

Yes, for a while now I've been using a similar system for Dodge:
Success: -10 damage
Special: -20 damage
Critical: No damage

But I can see that would break down if people typically got into the range of gross damages that have been mentioned hereabouts sometimes, so this very day I thought: "Hmmm, maybe success should halve damage...". Uncanny!

[Nightshade]

Originally Posted by frogspawner

Yes, for a while now I've been using a similar system for Dodge:
Success: -10 damage
Special: -20 damage
Critical: No damage

But I can see that would break down if people typically got into the range of gross damages that have been mentioned hereabouts sometimes, so this very day I thought: "Hmmm, maybe success should halve damage...". Uncanny!

Actually, I'd expect the opposite most of the time, where for many attacks there's no difference between success and lower values, and certainly no difference between between a special and a critical (taking more than 20 damage at a hit was unusual even back in the days when we used quasi-Gloranthan style rune lords).

Honestly, I can't see any reason for damage to be relevant to dodging; its dealing with negating the skill of the attacker, not the damage. I can see it reducing his chance of special results the way the new rules do it, but interacting with damage directly is just strange for a dodge.

[Atgxtg]

Originally Posted by Nightshade

Actually, I'd expect the opposite most of the time, where for many attacks there's no difference between success and lower values, and certainly no difference between between a special and a critical (taking more than 20 damage at a hit was unusual even back in the days when we used quasi-Gloranthan style rune lords).

Honestly, I can't see any reason for damage to be relevant to dodging; its dealing with negating the skill of the attacker, not the damage. I can see it reducing his chance of special results the way the new rules do it, but interacting with damage directly is just strange for a dodge.

It is actually just as viable as it is for parry. Contrary to how RQ does it, a parry is not soaking up damage with an object (that is a block), but defecting the attack so that it misses the target.

And, you can get partially successful results for both, where you still get hit, but not at full force.

[frogspawner]

Originally Posted by Nightshade

...interacting with damage directly is just strange for a dodge.

I look upon it as 'riding the blow' to a certain degree. Most blows only have damage as a property, so what else? Altering the attackers skill would bring it back into the realms of opposed rolling (and I was mentioning it as an example of not using them).

[Nightshade]

Originally Posted by Atgxtg

It is actually just as viable as it is for parry. Contrary to how RQ does it, a parry is not soaking up damage with an object (that is a block), but defecting the attack so that it misses the target.

Even that still deals with the force of the blow to some degree; no matter how much skill you have, deflecting a powerful blow is going to be harder than an easy one. I just can't see that as relevant to the dodge at all.

And, you can get partially successful results for both, where you still get hit, but not at full force.

I agree to some extent with the parry/deflect, but not really with the dodge. You can perhaps roll with it a little bit, but there's only a limited amount that's going to matter; what usually matters is either not getting hit, or at least not where someone was aiming. And frankly, rolling with it strikes me as more like an unarmed parry than a dodge in the first place.

[Nightshade]

Originally Posted by frogspawner

I look upon it as 'riding the blow' to a certain degree. Most blows only have damage as a property, so what else? Altering the attackers skill would bring it back into the realms of opposed rolling (and I was mentioning it as an example of not using them).

I understand that; I'm simply suggesting that for a true dodge, nothing else will represent it properly. As I note above, what you're talking about is more like a full body parry/deflection, and they just aren't the same thing; in fact, what works best for one isn't best for the other.

[Atgxtg]

[quote=Nightshade;8565]Even that still deals with the force of the blow to some degree; no matter how much skill you have, deflecting a powerful blow is going to be harder than an easy one. I just can't see that as relevant to the dodge at all.

First with parry.
It really doesn't matter much how powerful the blow is. It's physics. The object has a vector and you are adding a second vector for movement. So if the object is moving in the -axis and you can apply force from the Y- or Z-axis both vectors will affect the object.

What would matter is how fast the object is travelling and it's mass. The whole point of a parry isto the block the attack but redirect it.

Originally Posted by Nightshade

I agree to some extent with the parry/deflect, but not really with the dodge. You can perhaps roll with it a little bit, but there's only a limited amount that's going to matter; what usually matters is either not getting hit, or at least not where someone was aiming. And frankly, rolling with it strikes me as more like an unarmed parry than a dodge in the first place.

Sure you can. Let's say someone is swinging a sword at you. If you step back you might only get hit by the point as opposed to the "sweet spot" farther down the blade.

Or if someone is going for you head you could duck or sidestep and only get scratched or grazed along the top of the skill rather than being decapitated.

It isn't so much rolling with the blow, but avoiding the brunt of the blow. All weapons have a sweet spot that does the real damage, and if you avoid contact with that spot, or initiate contact with another spot, like stepping into a halberd and getting hit by the shaft rather than the axe, you mitigate some of the damage.