Shadowrun Play > Previous Editions

[SR4] House Rules

<< < (117/119) > >>

Regeta:
People should be reminded how melee combat works in Shadowrun.
Melee is not seen in Shadowrun as "I strike you. You dodge me. Now it is my turn to strike you back."

In reality, if you used Parry + Sword to defend against Unarmed Combat, then you would be mostly reducing their chance to successfully hit by forcing them to not attack you very often at all.

Someone with a sword, defending against unarmed combat, is mostly on the offensive. The moments the Unarmed Combat person has, will be to either try to create a weakness to exploit (feign attacks) or dodge the offensive attacks of the sword user until able to counter.

Instead, Melee is 3 seconds of martial combat. Parrying an Unarmed Attack would mostly be sitting there doing nothing, as the Unarmed combatant only gets a few attacks of opportunity on you. Otherwise, the Unarmed combatant would be sliced to pieces trying to attack, while the swordsman parries.

So "Parry" can actually be, basically, offensive attacking. Just not enough, apparently, to do even a single box of damage.

RHat:

--- Quote from: Regeta on ---So "Parry" can actually be, basically, offensive attacking. Just not enough, apparently, to do even a single box of damage.
--- End quote ---

From what I've heard (my knowledge of editions prior to SR4 being limited), earlier editions had melee combat where whoever won the roll dealt damage.  Counterattacks and such may become an element of SR5 again when the advanced combat options show up.

WorkOver:

--- Quote from: Regeta on ---People should be reminded how melee combat works in Shadowrun.
Melee is not seen in Shadowrun as "I strike you. You dodge me. Now it is my turn to strike you back."

In reality, if you used Parry + Sword to defend against Unarmed Combat, then you would be mostly reducing their chance to successfully hit by forcing them to not attack you very often at all.

Someone with a sword, defending against unarmed combat, is mostly on the offensive. The moments the Unarmed Combat person has, will be to either try to create a weakness to exploit (feign attacks) or dodge the offensive attacks of the sword user until able to counter.

Instead, Melee is 3 seconds of martial combat. Parrying an Unarmed Attack would mostly be sitting there doing nothing, as the Unarmed combatant only gets a few attacks of opportunity on you. Otherwise, the Unarmed combatant would be sliced to pieces trying to attack, while the swordsman parries.

So "Parry" can actually be, basically, offensive attacking. Just not enough, apparently, to do even a single box of damage.

--- End quote ---

While I agree with this point, it seems it is now dubious in SR5. See the cyberarm rules.  If you have a cyberarm, it has it's own stats, and it is literally I punch you, I block you, I punch you.  If it was still abstract like the rest of the editions and rules apply, the cyber arm/legs rules would not work.

JackVII:

--- Quote from: RHat on ---From what I've heard (my knowledge of editions prior to SR4 being limited), earlier editions had melee combat where whoever won the roll dealt damage.  Counterattacks and such may become an element of SR5 again when the advanced combat options show up.

--- End quote ---
Yeah, that's how it used to work. Essentially an opposed test and whoever had the most hits did damage. It made going into melee with a melee focused adept an EXTREMELY bad idea.

Michael Chandra:
Not my idea but I did think it'd make sense: Would it be possible to split this topic into separate SR4 and SR5 Houserule topics?

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page

Go to full version