[Michael Chandra]

I'd say 'backed into a corner and doubled down on bad design' is a bit of a hostile label. They made a choice, we don't know the exact motives so phrasing that kind of attack on Catalyst is rather rude. If you want them to listen to your feedback as well, that kind of remarks don't help.

I think restricting certain melee (and ranged: machine guns and launchers) weapons based on Strength might be a neat idea, but again, I'm not discussing any houserules until this forum is past the toxic phase it's going through right now.

[Katanarchist]

Assuming Qualities work similarly to previous editions, it seems simple enough to introduce a Quality that would allow a character to factor their Strength into the damage on melee attacks.

[Shinobi Killfist]

Assuming Qualities work similarly to previous editions, it seems simple enough to introduce a Quality that would allow a character to factor their Strength into the damage on melee attacks.

They did that with alchemy in 5e. Using qualities as a patch. I have the same opinion with this. You shouldn’t have to pay to get things to work how they should work from default.

[Lormyr]

I’m fine with adepts being the only way to compete with guns. Melee normally should be weaker

I find myself in the opposite camp on this one. Because guns/bows/ect. have the range/cover advantage I usually prefer melee to be slightly more dangerous to compensate for the fact that those characters have to be in the mix and fully exposed in my gaming.

I'd say 'backed into a corner and doubled down on bad design' is a bit of a hostile label.

Hostility wasn't intended, passionate disagreement was. Me feeling hostile would require a sense of personal offense, which is certainly not the case. I could have phrased that better.

[Shinobi Killfist]

I don’t mind if melee potentially does slightly more damage than guns to compensate for lack of range. But I think overall it should be weaker unless you have a in universe gimmick that makes your melee super powered. Cyber gets some of that but I think adepts should be the true masters.  I want augmentation to wreck the magically active. So at best you break even with a pure adept.

[dezmont]

I think STRless melee could work though. I am in the same boat as 'it doesn't make sense that the average person did so pathetically little damage with melee weapons' when... you know... knives and swords will kill you super dead. Assuming some other melee benefit lands on traditionally strong melee options like having str, it is a good way to solve the problem where swords and clubs are tickle fights, when in the setting they absolutely are not meant to be. Like people say "Melee being bad is realistic" but even if that were true (it is not, there is a reason the marines will ensure you exit with blades 3), it isn't bad 'because it doesn't hurt. The standard assumption is if you get stabbed once you are going to get stabbed lots, and you are going to die. If someone has you at knife point and you are equally trained and auged to them it is super weird and not good that the optimal play is to laugh at them and draw your gun.

Not to mention that it is a huge part of the SR setting that melee IS, in fact, good, and it is good enough that most of the top millitary units of the world dedicate people exclusively to melee combat and muscle powered weapons like bows.

I think there is some 'uncanny valley' in some other mechanics mind. Armor not directly aiding in resisting damage is a big 'what?' and ironically the fact you can ad-hoc it into actually doing that by spending edge to recover health is an even bigger 'huh?' But that is common in most narrative mechanics, I think the reason edge feels weird (Again, noting I have not played with the new edge and this is all gut feel) is that 6e edge is less 'narrative' than other narrative mechanics, which makes a ton of sense because it exists to replace in universe non-narrative situational mods like armor, cover, or bad weather. So you are getting these points not as narrative beats like you might in other games, but specifically for X reason, so its weird when the transfer is... kiiiinda on point but kinda not. Like I buy how my armor helps me shoot back with extra precision more than I buy my armor 'protecting' me because it heals my wounds. I think an easy fix to that though would be using edge to get the chance to auto-buy soak hits rather than heal wounds. Like, yeah that is a really specific problem, but little weird details like that can and do make games weird and almost 'gross' to play.

[Moonshine Fox]

I don't mind STR being there for melee, but I'd also possibly want some way to represent a weapons speed then as a counter. You have a big guy swinging his axe around, he'll hit like a truck, but it takes a lot of effort to move mass like that at higher speeds. While my favorite go to of a skinny stave wielder _{(I blame the Jackie Chan movies and cartoon)} can land several rapid strikes in the time between axe swings. Not much as much damage sure, but more overall blows, something that's not really represented in any of the SR systems. Not really sure how to go about it or if such is even fesable without adding more rolls/rules to bog down combat. Most over systems I know of that had weapon speed rules ended up ditching them after an edition or two.

I think the reason edge feels weird (Again, noting I have not played with the new edge and this is all gut feel) is that 6e edge is less 'narrative' than other narrative mechanics, which makes a ton of sense because it exists to replace in universe non-narrative situational mods like armor, cover, or bad weather.

(If I'm misinterpiting what you're saying I apologize).

I'd put forth that, while not inherently narrative in nature, the new edge rules could be explained in a vareying number of narrative ways. Take the X edge to reroll X dice. You're favorite chummer is getting shot and you want to make that not happen, so you spend some edge and make the attacker reroll those hits. Not narrative in itself, but you could narrate it in different ways depending on what you're playing. If you're a street sam, you put off a quick warning shot across his nose distracting him. If you're a hacker, a quick piece of viral code you've only half compiled. A mage could do a short lived hex. Or it could just be described as dumb luck. A single mechanic could have as many flavors as a luxuray soy-paste dispenser.

That said though, I agree that it's going to lead to some weird really making no sense moments. More open ended mechanics can be great, but that's the downside of them. A strong GM should be able to stop the worst of player abuse though. I do like the idea of buying auto-soak hits as opposed to healing. Basically the same effect, but it helps prevent potential abuse.

[FastJack]

Might the Edge mechanic feeling weird be because we've only been talking about it in Combat situations?

[Shinobi Killfist]

Yeah weapon speed isnt a thing in games for the most part. It’s hard to get right. Realistically a combat axe would almost exclusively be a peak human or higher strength weapon because otherwise it would be clumsy slow attacks. Even if you are strong the top heavy aspect creates a powerful attack but it’s hard to recover from. The base AV might help reflect things like this. Like I’d of had the sword and katana do the same damage but the katana with a higher AV. The slashing effect would be in the same ballpark or damage but the katana is a more controlled weapon. The axe high damage low AV since it’s clumsy. Staff medium/low damage high AV.

But I’d say rapid strikes from a staff really is a reflection of strength. Outside the skill half virtually everything you do in a melee is represented by strength. Pushing past a block, speed, force it’s all strength. I guess if I was being pedantic based on how SR defines stats I’d say strength for the dice pool body for the base damage. Strength providing the acceleration body the mass for the force calculation.

[Shinobi Killfist]

Might the Edge mechanic feeling weird be because we've only been talking about it in Combat situations?

Maybe. I think combat is where it will be at its weakest as I don’t think it will do a good job representing the situation you are in. That’s because generally I think situational modifiers are actually something that dramatically effect your ability to succeed or fail. Edge reflects more minor challenges imo. That might work better in social situations. Like your sin doesn’t come back as you on a routine traffic stop. Given how many sinless there are that’s not a huge situational modifier so a edge seems to work. But if I give 1 edge for the cop there what the fuck do I give the guard in a high security facility when you try to con your way out of it.

[Iron Serpent Prince]

Might the Edge mechanic feeling weird be because we've only been talking about it in Combat situations?

It is certainly possible, but I think it is unlikely.

Out of Combat Edge interactions are just as possibly wonky, if not more so.

Let's take a mid-run Negotiation with a bartender (or whoever) where the PCs need to strike up a deal to get certain information.
The whole thing will need to be tracked in Combat Rounds so that everyone knows when their Edge gain Limit refreshes.
If it isn't tracked in Combat Rounds, the GM might be shortchanging the PCs ability to heal themselves during the talks.
[/sarcasm]

[FastJack]

See, as a GM, I was always more apt to give a bonus modifier if the player described their actions in great detail, or made them sound very cinematic and added to the story. Too often everyone here is talking about modifiers as only being the ones from the book. Have none of you had a game where you got a modifier for good roleplaying?

[Shinobi Killfist]

See, as a GM, I was always more apt to give a bonus modifier if the player described their actions in great detail, or made them sound very cinematic and added to the story. Too often everyone here is talking about modifiers as only being the ones from the book. Have none of you had a game where you got a modifier for good roleplaying?

Occasionally. But people are different some rip that stuff out left and right others are more restrained. It seems like rewarding someone for being a extrovert  and punishing introverts.

[Marcus]

So yeah so some day at  a convention someone is going to sit down and want to make make a classic troll street sam, who packs a combat axe and I'm going to have to have explain to them, they want to max body and dump strength, and then they are gonna look at me like I'm crazy. It is basically inevitable that this will happen one day in the not so distant from now.  They have character build workshops at gencon, I hope those are for 5e. If not someone poor person is gonna have to explain this to crowed of cranky gamers several times, best of luck to whom ever gets that job.

Easy solution to this. You could make melee and ranged weapons go against different soak pools. Impact armor and Ballistic armor. Which could also have solved the armor problem right there. I know, I know that wouldn't be as simple. But it's ok to add a little complexity to save me from having to look that player in the eye and explain that strength outside punching grabbing folks has zero value.

[Moonshine Fox]

Yeah weapon speed isnt a thing in games for the most part. It’s hard to get right. Realistically a combat axe would almost exclusively be a peak human or higher strength weapon because otherwise it would be clumsy slow attacks. Even if you are strong the top heavy aspect creates a powerful attack but it’s hard to recover from. The base AV might help reflect things like this. Like I’d of had the sword and katana do the same damage but the katana with a higher AV. The slashing effect would be in the same ballpark or damage but the katana is a more controlled weapon. The axe high damage low AV since it’s clumsy. Staff medium/low damage high AV.

But I’d say rapid strikes from a staff really is a reflection of strength. Outside the skill half virtually everything you do in a melee is represented by strength. Pushing past a block, speed, force it’s all strength. I guess if I was being pedantic based on how SR defines stats I’d say strength for the dice pool body for the base damage. Strength providing the acceleration body the mass for the force calculation.

Where does that leave finesse style weapons though? Like or not, Strength has a set definition in most games, SR included of being raw power. Usually a second stat like Dexterity or Agility represents the speed you move. A person may not be able to lift more then 50 lbs, but they can move lighting quick, while the guy who can casually pick up 100 lbs may be slower moving. Making only strength, or strength plus body as the only melee characteristics you cut out sizable number of examples of melee combatants and combat styles.