The Combat Round

[frogspawner]

Originally Posted by Kloster

Several years ago, we tried to replace the combat turn of En Garde! by one inspired from Flashing Blades...

I don't know Flashing Blades. How does it work?

[Kloster]

Originally Posted by frogspawner

I don't know Flashing Blades. How does it work?

Flashing Blades is an old game by FGU (1984). Actions are resolved by throwing a D20 under a characteristic determined by the skill being used.
Damaged are localized.

From memory (and translating back from french to english):
- each round is split in 2 phases.
- each character writes in secret what actions (offensive and/or moves) he is taking in each phase at the beginning of the round, and what kind of offense he is trying to counter most. Most attacks take 1 phase, but some (the fleche for instance, are taking 2).
- each phase is resolved in order, and if the defender guessed right on his opponent attack, he gets a bonus on his defense roll.
- each style gives bonus and malus on the differents weapons and manoeuvers.

Runequestement votre,

Kloster

[Dredj]

This is a little off subject, but it seems like Flashing Blades is actually a "simplified" version of BRP. Has anyone tried to convert characters between the two systems?

[sladethesniper]

First, I like the combat system as presented by trif. It is quick and easy and fairly realistic. The movement rates are what I use (although, once again, I am sticking to Imperial Feet. Silly world with your Metric system for easy conversions, bah!)

As for combat rules in general:

I participated in two stickfighting matches in switzerland a couple of years ago, where we used very little protection, and the potential for fractures where a real danger. In those fights more time where used for circling, looking for openings and feinting than real commited attacks.

I would go with that explanation for why RPG unarmed combat seems so out of place with reality. Combat to play around is stupid looking...lots of flailing and poor form. Combat to hurt someone is better, especially when done by professionals (look at how Judo masters do it...usually the bout is done in about 10 seconds...most highly skilled fighters versus other highly skilled fighters follow that pattern in my experience....very little flailing, but very measured actions that result in quick victories or a flurry of blows that will quickly decide a "winner")

The exception is MMA where submission seems to be all the rage these days instead of knock outs...meh. Submissions are nice one on one, but a lot of people seem to have friends, and that doesn't work too well IMO.

For people that kill other people for a living or a hobby, they seem to be pretty damn good at it. Serial killers (usually untrained) seem quite able to kill another human quite easily.

Why this disparity between "fighting", "winning" and "killing"? Well, that's pretty simply actually: most people can't/won't fight to kill...the reasons are myriad, but it pretty much boils down to three things: humans can take a LOT of damage before the expire, most people are not trained to use a weapon (any weapon, much less hands and feet) effectively (and thus have a hard time doing damage, much less enough to cause a person to die) and MOST people don't really want to kill another human being...hurt, humiliate, maybe even cripple, but it is rare for someone to think "you know, I want to kill that guy over there" and then do it, much less do it effectively.

The problem with RPG's is that the "baseline" for "most" characters tends to be a highly trained, well armed, sociopath...think about it...there are a lot of games where characters are basically racially motivated mass murderers that specialize in home invasion...

I digress...even in mixed martial arts competitions, police training or "hard core" self defense classes...the RESULT is supposed to be stopping the threat, or defeating the opponent.

In contrast, in RPG's the point (usually) is to quickly and efficiently KILL the monster, bad guy, NPC's, whatever...not stop them, or escape or scare them.

To simulate the fact that killing is the primary point of combat in RPG's, the characters are (usually) sociopathic murderers so that they won't pull punches or feel bad when covered in blood or looking into the eyes of their victim(s) day after day of slaughtering "monsters" (for immoral reasons in most cases), and they are well trained so they won't waste their time punching people in the head or body...they will go directly for genitals, eyes, ears, fingers, shins, nerve clusters and other easily destroyed, "high payoff targets"...

A normal person will punch someone in the face or push them. A fighter will try to punch them in the nose to break it and give them that "wake up call". A killer will kick them in the groin or punch them in the solar plexus, preferably from the shadows...or even better, just stab them in the kidneys from behind and run away to wait for them to die...or the best option is to kill them from hiding, at range and with some friends to help.

RPG game combat is not unrealistic...RPG characters are, especially when compared to the average western educated, middle class gamer.

Just my opinion.

-STS

[Shaira]

Originally Posted by sladethesniper

RPG game combat is not unrealistic...RPG characters are, especially when compared to the average western educated, middle class gamer.

I think that's a really interesting point. What little combat I have witnessed has rarely been heroic, and in fact rather grubby, primitive, savage and, well, murderous. I remember the hand-to-hand scene in Saving Private Ryan - two guys with no real weapons trying to kill each other. Nothing admirable - just gritty and all rather sad.

That's certainly not the paradigm I game in, nor something I'm trying to emulate in my games - great noble battles a la viking sagas, LOTR, etc. Tales of heroism and derring-do, success against impossible odds, saving the world. So you end up with a contradiction: to a certain extent, most RPGs *don't want* super-realistic combat, but rather heroic, feel-good, adventuresome combat.

I agree you can use the BRP rules to simulate "realistic" combat, indeed far more than D20 et al; I personally however am not sure in my games that I'd actually want to! Give me the Battle of Pelennor Fields over two guys scrabbling in the mud any day - the characters in my campaigns are Aragorns, Gandalfs, and Frodos, and occasionally Elrics, not Ted Bundys!

Cheers,

Sarah

[Dredj]

Originally Posted by Shaira

I think that's a really interesting point. What little combat I have witnessed has rarely been heroic, and in fact rather grubby, primitive, savage and, well, murderous. I remember the hand-to-hand scene in Saving Private Ryan - two guys with no real weapons trying to kill each other. Nothing admirable - just gritty and all rather sad.

That's certainly not the paradigm I game in, nor something I'm trying to emulate in my games - great noble battles a la viking sagas, LOTR, etc. Tales of heroism and derring-do, success against impossible odds, saving the world. So you end up with a contradiction: to a certain extent, most RPGs *don't want* super-realistic combat, but rather heroic, feel-good, adventuresome combat.

I agree you can use the BRP rules to simulate "realistic" combat, indeed far more than D20 et al; I personally however am not sure in my games that I'd actually want to! Give me the Battle of Pelennor Fields over two guys scrabbling in the mud any day - the characters in my campaigns are Aragorns, Gandalfs, and Frodos, and occasionally Elrics, not Ted Bundys!

Cheers,

Sarah

Excellent points, but I personally prefer realistic combat in my games as I want my characters fighting zombies, vampires, werewolves, and the occasional psychopath,etc. And I think the realism could make it all the more heroic.

[sladethesniper]

Determining the "flavor" of the game is very important when picking and choosing mods and house rules, especially for combat.

In D20, the idea is that "heroes" run around killing things, taking their stuff, and learning from it which is why Base Attack Bonus goes up every level...the idea is that killing things makes you better. If that were the case, 90% of the world would be 0 level since they never kill anything, much less sentient beings...

I, personally find that idea repugnant.

In BRP the idea is that as you do things, you get better doing the things you are successfully accomplishing. I like that, it seems to fit reality much better.

Also, in BRP, the idea is (generally) not "heroes" running around killing things...it is morally ambiguous (no alignments) characters interacting within their reality (the setting) in the manner that is most advantageous to their goals (the adventure/campaign).

I find BRP to be far superior to any other system for modelling combat. What I have experienced so far is that combat sucks. After a fight you are tired, injured, weapons are dirty, equipment is broken and it generally leaves you feeling angry at your enemy for fighting you and forcing you to kill them. Reproducing that is the job of the GM.

In game terms, very, very few people that have been shot do much else except sit there and bleed. With blades, much the same thing happens, although shock isn't as much of a factor, although a trained swordsman or knife fighter can do as much, if not more damage with a single thrust/hard slash than most pistol rounds.

Many people think that "old" weapons (knives, swords, spears) are somehow less capable than guns...that is incorrect. Modern firearms have superior range and require less skill than archaic weapons, but an expert melee combatant can kill you just as dead as someone with a firearm...hence why people with guns try to stay far away from those with only knives

Also, moving back on topic (sort of)...BRP's lack of "hit point" advancement means that unlike D20 where a character can get shot, stabbed, fireballed and still move and fight, a BRP character will avoid getting hit, placing far more importance on not getting hit and setting up opponents for the "big one" that will take them down quickly instead of whittling down their opponents several hundred hit points.

When taking a group of D20 players and moving them into BRP style combat, most of them will whine and complain that their characters suck and they can't take a hit. They will then charge into combat and usually have their @$$es handed to them. Afterward, they will learn to respect combat and place it back into it's rightful place that it occupies in the real world.

Combat is either the first option (attack from ambush to kill your opponents before they can react so that you stay safe) or the last option after diplomacy, appeals and reason have all failed and a conscious decision is made to engage them because (in the mind of the combatants) there is no other way to achieve their goal.

Sorry to threadjack.

-STS

[Dredj]

Originally Posted by sladethesniper

The problem with RPG's is that the "baseline" for "most" characters tends to be a highly trained, well armed, sociopath...think about it...there are a lot of games where characters are basically racially motivated mass murderers that specialize in home invasion...

Funny thing is that I was debating on creating a vampire rpg based on the characters acting along those lines (no emos). However, I believe that it could be unplayable. But, then again, somebody did create a game about sociopathic assassins that also could specialize in home invasion and theft of their victims:
RPGNow.com - EN Publishing - AssassinX - The 24hour RPG of Bloody Murder
I wonder how many people do play it for a one shot--or even a campaign. And there's a game called Dog Town where the PCs are all criminals:
RPGNow.com - Cold Blooded Games - Dog Town: Core Rules

I don't care what White Wolf publishing or Ann Rice says, vampires are sociopathic mass murderers who specialize in home invasion! At least if you want your vampires to be scary. And I've long thought that the way most PCs are played in rpgs, they would make great vampires in a modern day setting. After all, you see vampires in modern day movies wearing nice modern day clothes, or even living in a modern day house...where do they get the money from?

Wow, I think I may have went a quite a bit off subject...

[sladethesniper]

Wow, I think I may have went a quite a bit off subject...

That's why I always apologize for threadjacking...I'm a sociopathic, threadjacker...woo hoo

-STS