Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: Marc A Renouf <jormung@*****.UMICH.EDU>
Subject: Re: Aiming in melee
Date: Fri, 22 Nov 1996 12:56:42 -0500
On Fri, 22 Nov 1996, Midn Daniel O Fredrikson wrote:

> Now this may seem dumb, but how do you aim a sword. Are you standing
> there pointing the point towards the person. To use a sword, don't you
> either need to lunge or swing it. I guess I could see preparing oneself
> for one round to make sure you have your balance, but I can't understand
> aiming for four rounds. Does anyone have a good explaination

Don't think of it so much as aiming the sword itself, because the
sword is merely part of your body. What aiming in melee combat reflects
(just a single example) is timing your attack to your opponent's
movements such that your strike will land precisely when his most
vulnerable area is at full exposure. So in essence, you are waiting for
the perfect moment to strike, preparing yourself for the attack. You
are coordinating your movements with those of your opponent, such that
you can take advantage of his weaknesses and vulnerabilities. In short,
you are aiming.
Alternately, you can expose some apparent "weakness" of your own
in an attempt to draw your opponent in. Since you have exposed a target
to your opponent, you know which target the opponent is most likely to go
for, and when he does, WHAM! You were prepared for it and used the
opportunity of knowing which way he was going to throw a vicious counter,
a counter which you had been setting up since the beginning of your
exposure. A counter you had aimed.
A lot of this stuff probably doesn't make a whole lot of sense to
someone who hasn't studied combative martial arts. I didn't understand
some of the "mae" (or "distancing") techniques until I was standing
there
staring at the business end of my sensei's sword. Looking down
three feet of razor-blade wielded by a well-trained opponent makes you
*extremely* conscious of this kind of thing. There's a lot of
psych-ploy, movement, distancing, and subtlety to most of it. It's far
more complicated than "I take a swing at him with my sword."
It's exploiting these kinds of subtleties that are the justification
that I use in my campaign for allowing aiming in melee combat. Note that
this can be done with any weapon, or even with no weapon at all.
Hope this explanation helps...

Marc
Message no. 2
From: David Buehrer <dbuehrer@****.ORG>
Subject: Re: Aiming in melee
Date: Fri, 22 Nov 1996 11:20:15 -0700
Marc A Renouf wrote:
|
|On Fri, 22 Nov 1996, Midn Daniel O Fredrikson wrote:
|
|> Now this may seem dumb, but how do you aim a sword. Are you standing
|> there pointing the point towards the person. To use a sword, don't you
|> either need to lunge or swing it. I guess I could see preparing oneself
|> for one round to make sure you have your balance, but I can't understand
|> aiming for four rounds. Does anyone have a good explaination
|
| Don't think of it so much as aiming the sword itself, because the
|sword is merely part of your body. What aiming in melee combat reflects
|(just a single example) is timing your attack to your opponent's
|movements such that your strike will land precisely when his most
|vulnerable area is at full exposure. So in essence, you are waiting for
|the perfect moment to strike, preparing yourself for the attack. You
|are coordinating your movements with those of your opponent, such that
|you can take advantage of his weaknesses and vulnerabilities. In short,
|you are aiming.
| Alternately, you can expose some apparent "weakness" of your own
|in an attempt to draw your opponent in. Since you have exposed a target
|to your opponent, you know which target the opponent is most likely to go
|for, and when he does, WHAM! You were prepared for it and used the
|opportunity of knowing which way he was going to throw a vicious counter,
|a counter which you had been setting up since the beginning of your
|exposure. A counter you had aimed.

Question: If a PC is in melee and spends two simple
actions to aim, then a couple phases later his opponent
attacks him, and the PC counter-attacks, would that
counter-attack screw up the PC's aim?

-David

/^\/^\/^\/^\/^\/^\/^\ dbuehrer@****.org /^\/^\/^\/^\/^\/^\/^\
"His thoughts tumbled in his head, making and breaking
alliances like underpants in a dryer without Cling Free."
~~~http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/1068/homepage.htm~~~~
Message no. 3
From: hardware@*******.DATANET.AB.CA
Subject: Re: Aiming in melee
Date: Fri, 22 Nov 1996 12:03:08 +0000
[Snip]
> | Don't think of it so much as aiming the sword itself, because the
> |sword is merely part of your body. What aiming in melee combat reflects
> |(just a single example) is timing your attack to your opponent's
> |movements such that your strike will land precisely when his most
> |vulnerable area is at full exposure. So in essence, you are waiting for
> |the perfect moment to strike, preparing yourself for the attack. You
> |are coordinating your movements with those of your opponent, such that
> |you can take advantage of his weaknesses and vulnerabilities. In short,
> |you are aiming.
> Question: If a PC is in melee and spends two simple
> actions to aim, then a couple phases later his opponent
> attacks him, and the PC counter-attacks, would that
> counter-attack screw up the PC's aim?
>
> -David
[Snip]
This entire argument seems academic to me since as far as I can
remember.. last time I looked at the main book or the GM screen,
Aiming was a RANGED COMBAT modifier.. NOT a melee combat modifier. I
guess if you allow aimin in close combat tho.. then this matters..
*wave* :)
Shane Courtrille - hardware@*******.ab.ca
http://www.datanet.ab.ca/users/hardware/index.htm
KnightOwl on Efnet | #mIRC @**
----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK----
Version: 3.1
GCS d- s: a--- C++++ U--- P L- E? W++ N+ o k- w(+++) O- M-- V? PS+ PE+ Y PGP---
t+ 5+++ R+ tv+++ b+++ DI+ D++ G e- h! !r(++) !y-
----END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
Message no. 4
From: Gurth <gurth@******.NL>
Subject: Re: Aiming in melee
Date: Sat, 23 Nov 1996 11:51:38 +0100
David Buehrer said on 11:20/22 Nov 96...

> Question: If a PC is in melee and spends two simple
> actions to aim, then a couple phases later his opponent
> attacks him, and the PC counter-attacks, would that
> counter-attack screw up the PC's aim?

If the PC uses Dice Pool dice, yes: "Characters who are aiming over
multiple Combat Phases /may not/ use Dice Pool dice for any reason
without losing the benefits of the Take Aim actions." (SRII page 82.)

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
Having it all means nothing.
-> NERPS Project Leader & Unofficial Shadowrun Guru <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/plastic.html <-

-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version 3.1:
GAT/! d-(dpu) s:- !a>? C+(++)@ U P L E? W(++) N o? K- w+ O V? PS+ PE
Y PGP- t(+) 5+ X++ R+++>$ tv+(++) b++@ DI? D+ G(++) e h! !r(---) y?
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
Message no. 5
From: The Jestyr <jestyr@*******.DIALIX.COM.AU>
Subject: Re: Aiming in melee
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 1996 08:53:59 +1100
> > Question: If a PC is in melee and spends two simple
> > actions to aim, then a couple phases later his opponent
> > attacks him, and the PC counter-attacks, would that
> > counter-attack screw up the PC's aim?
>
> If the PC uses Dice Pool dice, yes: "Characters who are aiming over
> multiple Combat Phases /may not/ use Dice Pool dice for any reason
> without losing the benefits of the Take Aim actions." (SRII page 82.)

Well *that* sucks. :( I can see why for Combat Pool (in the case of a
melee attack), but I can't see why that applies to Magic Pool. :( Someone
convince me, please...


Lady Jestyr

--------------------------------------------------
A titanic intellect... in a world full of icebergs
--------------------------------------------------
Elle Holmes jestyr@*******.dialix.oz.au
http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/1503
--------------------------------------------------
Message no. 6
From: Midn Daniel O Fredrikson <m992148@****.NAVY.MIL>
Subject: Re: Aiming in melee
Date: Sun, 24 Nov 1996 21:20:50 -0500
> > > Question: If a PC is in melee and spends two simple
> > > actions to aim, then a couple phases later his opponent
> > > attacks him, and the PC counter-attacks, would that
> > > counter-attack screw up the PC's aim?
> >
> > If the PC uses Dice Pool dice, yes: "Characters who are aiming over
> > multiple Combat Phases /may not/ use Dice Pool dice for any reason
> > without losing the benefits of the Take Aim actions." (SRII page 82.)
>
> Well *that* sucks. :( I can see why for Combat Pool (in the case of a
> melee attack), but I can't see why that applies to Magic Pool. :( Someone
> convince me, please...
>
I would say that it depends on what you are using your magic pool for. If
it is spells defence, there shouldn't be any effect on aiming IMHO.
Other uses...I don't know.
Message no. 7
From: Droopy <droopy@*******.NB.NET>
Subject: Re: Aiming in melee
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 1996 01:01:14 +0000
Lady Jestyr wrote:

> > If the PC uses Dice Pool dice, yes: "Characters who are aiming over
> > multiple Combat Phases /may not/ use Dice Pool dice for any reason
> > without losing the benefits of the Take Aim actions." (SRII page 82.)
>
> Well *that* sucks. :( I can see why for Combat Pool (in the case of a
> melee attack), but I can't see why that applies to Magic Pool. :( Someone
> convince me, please...

The act of aiming requires concentration. If you use a dice pool,
you are no longer concentrating on aiming.

Hope that helps.


--Droopy
droopy@**.net
Message no. 8
From: Gurth <gurth@******.NL>
Subject: Re: Aiming in melee
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 1996 12:13:14 +0100
The Jestyr said on 8:53/25 Nov 96...

> > If the PC uses Dice Pool dice, yes: "Characters who are aiming over
> > multiple Combat Phases /may not/ use Dice Pool dice for any reason
> > without losing the benefits of the Take Aim actions." (SRII page 82.)
>
> Well *that* sucks. :( I can see why for Combat Pool (in the case of a
> melee attack), but I can't see why that applies to Magic Pool. :( Someone
> convince me, please...

Well... the way I see them, dice pools in part represent an extra effort
to succeed at what you're doing (getting out of the line of fire, putting
extra force behind your spell, deflecting the incoming sword, etc.) Using
Magic Pool to defend yourself with (as I think you were suggesting) would
be a conscious effort to reduce the effect of the opponent's spell,
requiring you to take your attention off the gun you're aiming -- which
means you're not trying to align your sights with the target's eye
anymore => the aim time bonus is lost.

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
You can't clean the toilet, Neil! It'll lose all its character!
-> NERPS Project Leader & Unofficial Shadowrun Guru <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/plastic.html <-

-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version 3.1:
GAT/! d-(dpu) s:- !a>? C+(++)@ U P L E? W(++) N o? K- w+ O V? PS+ PE
Y PGP- t(+) 5+ X++ R+++>$ tv+(++) b++@ DI? D+ G(++) e h! !r(---) y?
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
Message no. 9
From: Mike Elkins <MikeE@*********.COM>
Subject: Re: Aiming in melee -Reply
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 1996 11:23:26 -0500
> > If the PC uses Dice Pool dice, yes: "Characters who are aiming over
> > multiple Combat Phases /may not/ use Dice Pool dice for any reason
> > without losing the benefits of the Take Aim actions." (SRII page 82.)
>
> Well *that* sucks. :( I can see why for Combat Pool (in the case of a
> melee attack), but I can't see why that applies to Magic Pool. :( Someone
> convince me, please...

Aiming means taking some time concentrating on making a good shot. Dice pools
(all of them) are a way of allocating your concentration. If you use all your
combat pool for defense it means you are concentrating on getting out of the way
of bullets etc. If you are aiming a gun, you are concentrating very hard. If you
have to break concentration to swat an incoming spell out of the sky, you are no
longer aiming.

Double-Domed Mike
Message no. 10
From: Marc A Renouf <jormung@*****.UMICH.EDU>
Subject: Re: Aiming in melee
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 1996 11:23:47 -0500
On Fri, 22 Nov 1996, David Buehrer wrote:

> Question: If a PC is in melee and spends two simple
> actions to aim, then a couple phases later his opponent
> attacks him, and the PC counter-attacks, would that
> counter-attack screw up the PC's aim?

In my game, I make people specify whether they are aiming an
attack or a counterattack. If they are aiming a counterattack and
someone attacks them, they get the benefit of the aim. If their opponent
does not atack and they get sick of waiting and just "take a swing" they
lose their aim bonus.
Alternately, if you are aiming an attack and are forced to
counter, you don't get the benefit of the aim on your counterattack, and
your aiming bonus is lost. It follows the same strictures as aiming in
ranged combat (i.e. you can't really do anything else).
Basically, neither side knows what the other is planning, so
sometimes your aim pays off, sometimes it doesn't. Sometimes both sides
are aiming for the counterattack, both trying to draw the other in. But
since both are wanting to counter, neither side wants to attack. Mexican
standoff of the melee world. What generally happens is one side switches
to aiming for attack (the other side doesn't know this of course), the
goes ahead and strikes. Sometimes, both sides are aiming for the attack,
and it's just a question of who can get the attack off first (who gets
initiative). This is where reflex-enhanced combatants have an advantage,
which makes sense.
Basically, the system allows for some of the circling, feinting,
sizing-up kinds of things you see in actual combat between experienced
foes. Then, in a flurry of blood, it's still over pretty quickly once
you get to the actual swinging. It makes people think a little bit more
when they get into melee combat.

Marc
Message no. 11
From: David Fallon <dfallon@****.EDU>
Subject: Re: Aiming in melee
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 1996 11:39:23 -0800
> On Fri, 22 Nov 1996, David Buehrer wrote:
>
> > Question: If a PC is in melee and spends two simple
> > actions to aim, then a couple phases later his opponent
> > attacks him, and the PC counter-attacks, would that
> > counter-attack screw up the PC's aim?
>
> In my game, I make people specify whether they are aiming an
> attack or a counterattack. If they are aiming a counterattack and
> someone attacks them, they get the benefit of the aim. If their opponent
> does not atack and they get sick of waiting and just "take a swing" they
> lose their aim bonus.
> Alternately, if you are aiming an attack and are forced to
> counter, you don't get the benefit of the aim on your counterattack, and
> your aiming bonus is lost. It follows the same strictures as aiming in
> ranged combat (i.e. you can't really do anything else).
> Basically, neither side knows what the other is planning, so
> sometimes your aim pays off, sometimes it doesn't. Sometimes both sides
> are aiming for the counterattack, both trying to draw the other in. But
> since both are wanting to counter, neither side wants to attack. Mexican
> standoff of the melee world. What generally happens is one side switches
> to aiming for attack (the other side doesn't know this of course), the
> goes ahead and strikes. Sometimes, both sides are aiming for the attack,
> and it's just a question of who can get the attack off first (who gets
> initiative). This is where reflex-enhanced combatants have an advantage,
> which makes sense.
> Basically, the system allows for some of the circling, feinting,
> sizing-up kinds of things you see in actual combat between experienced
> foes. Then, in a flurry of blood, it's still over pretty quickly once
> you get to the actual swinging. It makes people think a little bit more
> when they get into melee combat.
>
> Marc

I'll repeat the earlier point. You cannot aim in melee combat. You may only
aim with "ready ranged weapons". It's a moot point.

David Fallon
Message no. 12
From: David Buehrer <dbuehrer@****.ORG>
Subject: Re: Aiming in melee
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 1996 12:56:47 -0700
David Fallon wrote:
|
| Marc wrote:
|
|> On Fri, 22 Nov 1996, David Buehrer wrote:
|>
|> > Question: If a PC is in melee and spends two simple
|> > actions to aim, then a couple phases later his opponent
|> > attacks him, and the PC counter-attacks, would that
|> > counter-attack screw up the PC's aim?

[snip: Marc's great answer]

Thanks Marc.

|I'll repeat the earlier point. You cannot aim in melee combat. You may only
|aim with "ready ranged weapons". It's a moot point.

In your game yes, in our games no. Kinda my fault I
guess. I should have mentioned that I was asking for help
with a House Rule.

-David

/^\/^\/^\/^\/^\/^\/^\ dbuehrer@****.org /^\/^\/^\/^\/^\/^\/^\
"His thoughts tumbled in his head, making and breaking
alliances like underpants in a dryer without Cling Free."
~~~http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/1068/homepage.htm~~~~
Message no. 13
From: Marc A Renouf <jormung@*****.UMICH.EDU>
Subject: Re: Aiming in melee
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 1996 15:13:57 -0500
On Tue, 26 Nov 1996, David Fallon wrote:

> I'll repeat the earlier point. You cannot aim in melee combat. You may only
> aim with "ready ranged weapons". It's a moot point.

Which is precisely why I prefaced this entire discussion by
pointing out that this was my *house rule.* The words "in my campaign"
have appeared in every post I have made on the subject.
You say, "you cannot aim in melee combat." It was my assertion
that realistically speaking, the option of aiming should *not* be limited to
ranged combat only, and the resulting discussion was about my
justifications of why and the clarifications of the rules I use.
"By the book" you are correct. However, I am trying to illustrate a
useful addition to the rules, and I have never portrayed it as anything
but. And the sharing, comparison, and critique of such ideas is precisely
why this mailing list exists.
Sorry if I confused you.

Marc
Message no. 14
From: Robert Watkins <robertdw@*******.NET.AU>
Subject: Re: Aiming in melee
Date: Fri, 6 Dec 1996 11:33:37 +1100
>> If the PC uses Dice Pool dice, yes: "Characters who are aiming over
>> multiple Combat Phases /may not/ use Dice Pool dice for any reason
>> without losing the benefits of the Take Aim actions." (SRII page 82.)
>
>Well *that* sucks. :( I can see why for Combat Pool (in the case of a
>melee attack), but I can't see why that applies to Magic Pool. :( Someone
>convince me, please...

Simple use of a skill in a simple or reflexive action doesn't break the
train of thought as much. Applying dice pool indicates the involvement of
the character at a level greater than the instinctive.


--
Robert Watkins robertdw@*******.com.au
Real Programmers never work 9 to 5. If any real programmers
are around at 9 am, it's because they were up all night.

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about Aiming in melee, you may also be interested in:

Disclaimer

These messages were posted a long time ago on a mailing list far, far away. The copyright to their contents probably lies with the original authors of the individual messages, but since they were published in an electronic forum that anyone could subscribe to, and the logs were available to subscribers and most likely non-subscribers as well, it's felt that re-publishing them here is a kind of public service.

Thwap!