Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Harlequin)
Subject: Detailed SR Unarmed Combat system
Date: Tue Oct 23 13:10:01 2001
Alright, here it is. Look forward to your input :)

Expanded Unarmed Combat Rules for 3rd Ed. Shadowrun RPG
By Harlequin admin@********.cncdsl.com

Last Modified 10/23/01

Players buy a martial art(s) per SR rules. As long as you have points to
burn you can buy as many as you
would like. Each style listed has numbers assigned to them, each number
is associated to a technique. As
long as the skill level in that style is equal or greater then the level
of the technique they may use
that move in combat. Some moves can be jumping or spinning techniques,
the 'Jump/Spin Able' column
dictates this. During combat the attacker/defender state what moves they
are performing to the GM.

Akido: 18,19,20,21,23,24,25,28,29 (level 5+ 4,5,9)
Capoheria: 1,2,3,5,8,14,15,24,25,26,29
Chi`na: 18,19,20,21,21,24,25,27,28
Chio Li Fut: 3,4,5,6,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,17,21,234,24,26,27,29
Isshin Ryu: 1,2,3,4,5,6,8,9,14,15,17,21,23,24,27,28
Judo: 18,19,20,21,22,23,24,25,28,29,30 (Level 6+ 2,3,6)
Kempo: 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,9,10,11,12,13,14,16,22,24,26
Kung-Fu (Dog): 3,5,6,9,13,23,24,25,30
Kung-Fu (Dragon): 1,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,14,16,21,23,24,26,29
Kung-Fu (Mantis): 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,12,13,17,23,24,25,27,30
Kung-Fu (Panther): 3,4,6,7,8,9,12,14,15,16,17,23,24,29,30
Kung-Fu (Tiger): 4,5,6,7,8,9,11,12,14,15,16,17,21,25,27,29
Ninjitsu: 2,3,4,5,6,9,12,13,17,18,19,22,23,24,25,27,28,29
Sankukai: 1,2,3,6,9,10,12,13,17,21,23,24,29,30
Shaolin Do: 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,12,13,14,21,24,25,26,28,29
Tai Chi: 5,18,20,21,23,24,25,28 (Level 5+ 1,2,9)
Tang Soo Doo: 1,3,4,6,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,16,17,21,23,24,26,27,29
Te: 2,3,4,5,6,9,10,13,21,23,24,25,26
Wing Chun: 1,2,3,4,5,6,9,10,13,18,19,23,24,25,26
"Karate": 1,4,6,9,10,13,17,23,24,29 *

* This is the 'fast food' type martial arts one would gain by going to
such places as the YMCA or Fred Vallarie's. If the character didn't learn
at a established school or quality teacher then this most likely reflects
his or her ability. The GM may go farther and say due to such poor training
all TN are +1.

For Characters who have non-martial arts or related fighting ability use
#31 only, Basic rules.


Technique TN Modifier Physical Dmg Stun Dmg Skill
Required Spin/Jump

1. Back Fist - (S-1)L (S-1)M 1 y/n
2. Elbow Strike +1 (S+1)M - 4 y/n
3. Spear Hand - (S+1)L - 5 n/n
4. Ridge Hand +1 (S-2)S - 3 n/n
5. Palm Strike - (S+1)M (S+1)S 5 y/n
6. Reverse Punch - (S)M - 2 n/n
7. Tiger Claw +2 (S-2)L (S-1)S 6 n/n
8. Spin Hand Attack +2 Increase Dmg by 1 lvl +1 base
Technique
9. Front Kick - (S)L - 1 n/y
10. Round House Kick - (S)L (S)M 1 y/y
11. Axe Kick +3 (S+2)S (S-1)L 4 y/n
12. Hook Kick +1 (S+2)M (S)M 3 y/n
13. Side Kick - (S+1)M (S)L 3 y/y
14. Crescent Kick +1 (S)M - 5 y/y
15. Wheel Kick +3 (S+1)M (S+1)S 6 n/n
16. Spin Kick +2 Increase Dmg by 1 lvl +1 base
Technique
17. Jump Kick +1 Increase Dmg by 1 lvl +1 base
Technique
18. Arm bar +1 4
19. Choke - - (S)L 2
20. Throw +2 - - 3
21. Sweep (Iron Broom) +2 (S)L (S+1)L 5
22. Head Strike - - - 1
23. Kiai - - - 1
24. Block +2 - - 1 in any style
25. Grapple - - - 2
26. Back Kick - - - 4
27. Counter Punch - - - 3
28. Disarm - - - 3
29. Break fall - - - 2
30. Flip - - - 2
31. Basic Punch/Kick Per Rules - (S)M 1 n/n

Notes on Damage: You can use the damage several ways.

a.You can ether have the player state what type of damage s/he is doing
before s/he rolls.

b. Have the move do both types of damage, only for the most 'realistic'
and deadly games.

c. As GM you can determine what type to use for your unarmed combat in
your game, either all stun or all
physical.

The system is fairly flexible in this regard as you can use any of the
three approaches. Please keep in
mind even if option b. makes for the most realistic simulation of a real
hand to hand fight it also
makes for a fairly short fight. Talk to any martial artist and they will
agree that a real altercation
lasts less then a min or a few moves thus b. may be the most realistic
it may lack the drama or action
you are seeking. Please keep this in mind.


Details on techniques:

1. This is using the first two knuckles while making a fist. You strike
out in a horizontal "D" motion.
Normally the target is the temple or head but other vital areas are
possible.

2. Bending your arm in a "V" angle you strike out while said arm is
horizontal to your body. A common
follow up is to grab/cup the back of the head and push it into your on
coming elbow.

3. Have your fingers strait out, palm faced down and thumb across the
palm. Using your 2 longer middle fingers you quickly and
with force 'poke' a vital area. Commonly eyes, throat or groin are
attacked with this move.

4. The hand is similar to a spear hand. Palm facing down, thumb across
palm. Using the fleshy part of your
inner hand above the thumb knuckle to the base of your fore finger you
strike with. The motion is a 'C'
or 'D' depending on the style and situation. The inverted ridge hand is
palm facing up striking with the
flesh part of the hand right below the little finger to wrist. Common
targets are Face, nose and temple.

5. Having your fingers strait and palm facing target and vertical with
your body. You strike with the
upper or/and middle part of your palm in the snap/thrust motion. The
chest, face and solar plexus are
common targets.

6. Using you 'rear' hand in a fighting stance, make a common fist and
keeping it vertical you thrust it
at the target.

7. Also called 'raking' (i.e. Raking the face), you grab a fleshy part
of the body with your fingers and
in a twisting, ripping motion pull away quickly. As if your fingers are
claws ripping away the flesh.
Normally used on arms, legs, face/eyes.

8. And move you spin yourself 180 to 360 degrees to perform.

9. Lift you leg bent as a 'V', knee strait up, then with your toes bent
back you snap out the kick
striking with the ball of your foot. Common targets are knees, groin or
abdomen.

More soon to come...

18. Strength vs Quickness test. If successful defender is held in a arm
bar. (S)L stun damage every round
until broken. Make S vs Q test until broken or a successful hand attack
(assuming the free arm is able
to do so), can not perform any kicking, jumping or spinning moves while
trapped in this move. All other moves added +2 TN.

19. Strength vs Strength test. If defender fails the attacker gets both
hands around his throat for
(S-1)M Stun every round until broken with a S vs S test. Attacker can
perform no other actions and
defender can can not perform any jumping or spinning moves while trapped
in this move. All other moves
added +1 TN.

20. Quickness vs Quickness test. If defender fails he is thrown to the
ground for (S+1)M stun and must
use his next turn to get back on his feet. Or he can continue to lay
prone but can only use kicking
attacks at +1 TN and all targets on him are at -1 TN.

21. Same as 20 except damage is (S)L Physical

22. If successful attack using this move defender is at +1 TN for next
turn due to being dazed.

23. Spirit yell. Only effective once per combat. State use right before
announcing what move you are
performing. Willpower vs Willpower test. If attacker wins they will get
a one time -2 TN bonus.

24. If you choose you can go completely on the defensive and block all
incoming attacks. You will get 4
extra dice to defend while doing this. If with your dice you manage to
counter damage the attacker the
damage will not be applied to him/her.

25. Quickness vs Strength test. If the attackers wins he latches onto
the defender with both hands. For
the next turn attacker get -1 TN to all hand attacks. Can not use leg
attacks.

27. If the attacker uses a hand move on you, perform a quickness vs
quickness test, If you succeed add
those success to your basic defense dice against the on coming hand
move. If you fail at the Q vs Q test
remove the number of failures from your combat pool for the rest of the
combat.

28. If your are unarmed and the attacker is using a single handed hand
held weapon you may try to disarm
him/her. Your Unarmed combat skill vs their Quickness. If you win the
weapon is flung d6/2 meters from
him/her.

29. If you are attacked and fail to defend again 20 or 21 you can try to
reduce the damage by a Strength vs Unarmed combat skill. If you succeed
reduce the power of the fall 1 for every 2 success. If you fail increase
1 for every 2 you failed.


Legal Notice:

The Shadowrun RPG is (c) to Wizkids and use of said name should not
constitute a challenge to
said entity. All other information is (c) 1999,2000,2001,2002 to
Shadowland Enterprises and can not
be published nor used for profit in any way without the express written
consent of Shadowland
Enterprises. You are granted permission to freely distributed this
document as long as said document
is unedited in any way.

Disclaimer:

This document is NOT meant as a guild on how to perform martial arts. It
has taken me years of blood
and sweat to learn what I have and its a never ending process of
learning. If you are interested in
learning martial arts seeks a well qualified school and teacher. No
book, video or document can
really teach you no matter the claims.

The purpose of this document is to give GM's extra flavor when RPing a
scene out. You can replace
"He swings at you but you dodge" with "The thug swings at you put with
your akido you parry the blow
and smack into his chest with a palm strike which sends him crashing to
the ground!". Its pretty obvious
which sounds better.

On top of that I found the unarmed combat system in SR pretty vanilla
and lacking. Perhaps it has to
do with my direct experience with the topic. :)

None the less I hope you enjoy and your feedback is welcome.

Harlequin
Message no. 2
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Marc Renouf)
Subject: Detailed SR Unarmed Combat system
Date: Tue Oct 23 14:50:01 2001
On Tue, 23 Oct 2001, Harlequin wrote:

> Alright, here it is. Look forward to your input :)

Well, here goes...

It's too complicated. Yes, the Shadowrun melee system is perhaps
overly abstract, but you've gone to the other extreme. Detailing
different kinds of strikes, different damage codes, different skill
requirements, etc is all well and fine if you're playing Phoenix Command.
But for Shadowrun, I think it's a little over the top.
First off, recall that a combat round is like three seconds, and
that an unaugmented human can get at most two actions. By making actions
analogous to specific attacks, you are effectively saying that a combatant
is only throwing one or two punches/kicks/whatever in three seconds. If
realism is what you want, this is *not* the case.
The Shadowrun system doesn't really lend itself well to the
complex flurry of blows and counters that are going to go on during those
three seconds of combat (which is an eternity in a real fight). As such,
trying to introduce more complication to this system is kind of like
mixing metaphors.
Finally, I think some of your damage codes are optimistic to say
the least. What separates a good martial artist from a bad one is the
power they develop, the timing of their attacks, and the placement of
those attacks. This is pretty much a matter of skill and skill alone
(though good physical conditioning [and hence a high Strength] can help).
Be that as it may, there's no way that a relatively unskilled person
(skill 3) is going to be able to do base Serious Physical damage with a
ridge hand. Sorry, no. And what's with snap kicks being only Light
Physical? If you don't think that you can generate a tremendous amount of
power that way, let someone who's good at it kick you in the ribs
sometime. This is not your typical Tae Kwon Do "Oooh, I tapped you, I get
a point" kick.
That said, I like a couple of the things you did. I too feel that
there should be both a stun and a physical component to unarmed combat.
Maybe simultaneously, maybe not, it's hard to say (and this applies to
getting shot, too). Your approach definitely makes combat more dangerous,
which it should be.
Similarly, at some point the GM and players need to make a
decision as to what each art is good/bad at, and while I don't necessarily
agree with your conclusions, your approach was well laid out.
And I *loved* the "McDojo" penalty to techniques. :)
But in the end, I don't think that Shadowrun needs quite this
level of detail. It's not just your system, either. I'm not overly wild
about the rules presented in the Cannon Companion because I think they are
too limiting. I agree that combat should be more dynamic and descriptive,
but it is my opinion that virtually all of the tools you need to do this
kind of thing are already built into the rules (or at least the beginnings
are there).

> Disclaimer:
>
> This document is NOT meant as a guild on how to perform martial arts. It
> has taken me years of blood
> and sweat to learn what I have and its a never ending process of
> learning. If you are interested in
> learning martial arts seeks a well qualified school and teacher. No
> book, video or document can
> really teach you no matter the claims.

This is *so* true.

> On top of that I found the unarmed combat system in SR pretty vanilla
> and lacking. Perhaps it has to do with my direct experience with the
> topic. :)

I agree that it's lacking, but take a care that you don't go too
far in the other direction. While it may give more detail, it may not
mesh well with the rest of the system.

Oh, and by the way, it's "ninjutsu", not "ninjitsu". Pet peeve.

Marc Renouf (ShadowRN GridSec - "Bad Cop" Division)

Other ShadowRN-related addresses and links:
Mark Imbriaco <mark@*********.com> List Owner
Adam Jury <adamj@*********.com> Assistant List Administrator
DVixen <dvixen@*********.com> Keeper of the FAQs
Gurth <gurth@******.nl> GridSec Enforcer Division
David Buehrer <graht@******.net> GridSec "Nice Guy" Division
ShadowRN FAQ <http://hlair.dumpshock.com/faqindex.php3>;
Message no. 3
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Harlequin)
Subject: Detailed SR Unarmed Combat system
Date: Wed Oct 24 01:15:01 2001
--------------020606040502070501070900
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit



Marc Renouf wrote:

>
>On Tue, 23 Oct 2001, Harlequin wrote:
>
>>Alright, here it is. Look forward to your input :)
>>
>
> Well, here goes...
>
> It's too complicated. Yes, the Shadowrun melee system is perhaps
>overly abstract, but you've gone to the other extreme. Detailing
>different kinds of strikes, different damage codes, different skill
>requirements, etc is all well and fine if you're playing Phoenix Command.
>But for Shadowrun, I think it's a little over the top.
>
Well the name is "Detailed" SR Unarmed combat system so I am a little
perplex at what you expected :p~~

With that said once you establish the style its pretty much the same
combat procedure as the current rules but rather then generic blows you
are able to pick and choose what you wish to do in comabt. I dont really
see that overly complex. But to each there own. I am sure some will see
it you way and others will find it nice to have a more fleshed out
system that takes much more into account.

>
> First off, recall that a combat round is like three seconds, and
>that an unaugmented human can get at most two actions. By making actions
>analogous to specific attacks, you are effectively saying that a combatant
>is only throwing one or two punches/kicks/whatever in three seconds. If
>realism is what you want, this is *not* the case.
>
Two factors you have to keep in mind. One, not everyone is Bruce Lee who
could throw a punch faster then most people could react to it. He was
the exception rather then the rule. Thus yes it is possible to throw
many more moves in 3 secs or so. But you have to ask yourself is it
always practicle or possible? More cases then not the answer is no. The
second factor is game balance. I dont think I need to detail this point.

>
>
> Finally, I think some of your damage codes are optimistic to say
>the least. What separates a good martial artist from a bad one is the
>power they develop, the timing of their attacks, and the placement of
>those attacks. This is pretty much a matter of skill and skill alone
>(though good physical conditioning [and hence a high Strength] can help).
>

Speaking from expereince skill, flexability and quickness is more
important then strenght in almost all established styles. With that said
I generally agree with your statment. I'll address the dmg codes below.

>
>Be that as it may, there's no way that a relatively unskilled person
>(skill 3) is going to be able to do base Serious Physical damage with a
>ridge hand.
>
Really? Then I suppose the instances when I saw a well placed over the
head ridge hand almost knock someone out was a illusion? I am interested
where you gather your expereince from. If I am not mistaken 3 is
'average' for a skill. Thus someone who has trained to be average in a
style, (around 12 months or so) I felt would have learned that.

Tho I am certainly open to ideas when it comes to damage codes. I have
been tweaking them since I developed this. The damage for a move is not
a exact science. In one style a move may be nothing more then a token
feign. In another style its a hard hitting offensive move. Thus I had to
generalize some of the damage codes to what I felt was the 'average' for
a move. Unless you want to to specify a set of codes for each move for
each style? Now THAT would be a bit over the top detail wise. ;)

> Sorry, no. And what's with snap kicks being only Light
>Physical? If you don't think that you can generate a tremendous amount of
>power that way, let someone who's good at it kick you in the ribs
>sometime. This is not your typical Tae Kwon Do "Oooh, I tapped you, I get
>a point" kick.
>
I assume by snap kick you mean 'front kick'? If so then this is a
perfect example of my above statment about one moves changes from one
style to another. A snap kick and front kick, tho similar are on a
technique level different. But trying to trim down the moves I, again,
used a base move (average) to represent several variations. Unless you
want the list to be about 90 to 100 moves with all the varients of a
move it again would get out of control. Also the reason for a front kick
doing light is a combo of system balance and look at the skill level I
gave it. Hence the low damage.

>
> That said, I like a couple of the things you did. I too feel that
>there should be both a stun and a physical component to unarmed combat.
>Maybe simultaneously, maybe not, it's hard to say (and this applies to
>getting shot, too). Your approach definitely makes combat more dangerous,
>which it should be.
>
Thanks. As I stated in the document the GM can go either way and up to
how deadly or realistic s/he wants to make it.

>
> Similarly, at some point the GM and players need to make a
>decision as to what each art is good/bad at, and while I don't necessarily
>agree with your conclusions, your approach was well laid out.
>

Fair enough, thanks again.

>
> And I *loved* the "McDojo" penalty to techniques. :)
>

hehe.. In tournys my old school used to kick the arses of the fred vall
students, pretty embarrasing for them.

>
> But in the end, I don't think that Shadowrun needs quite this
>level of detail. It's not just your system, either. I'm not overly wild
>about the rules presented in the Cannon Companion because I think they are
>too limiting. I agree that combat should be more dynamic and descriptive,
>but it is my opinion that virtually all of the tools you need to do this
>kind of thing are already built into the rules (or at least the beginnings
>are there).
>
Well I certainly respect your opinion, this isnt for everyone I am sure.
Not everyone wants this amount of detail.

thanks for your feedback!

Harle



--------------020606040502070501070900
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<html>
<head>
</head>
<body>
<br>
<br>
Marc Renouf wrote:<br>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:Pine.GSO.3.95.1011023141205.21511D-100000@******">
<pre wrap=""><br>On Tue, 23 Oct 2001, Harlequin
wrote:<br><br></pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Alright, here it is. Look forward to your input
:)<br></pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!----><br> Well, here
goes...<br><br> It's too complicated. Yes, the Shadowrun melee system is
perhaps<br>overly abstract, but you've gone to the other extreme.
Detailing<br>different kinds of strikes, different damage codes, different
skill<br>requirements, etc is all well and fine if you're playing Phoenix
Command.<br>But for Shadowrun, I think it's a little over the top.</pre>
</blockquote>
Well the name is "Detailed" SR Unarmed combat system so I am a little perplex
at what you expected :p~~<br>
<br>
With that said once you establish the style its pretty much the same combat
procedure as the current rules but rather then generic blows you are able
to pick and choose what you wish to do in comabt. I dont really see that
overly complex. But to each there own. I am sure some will see it you way
and others will find it nice to have a more fleshed out system that takes
much more into account.<br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:Pine.GSO.3.95.1011023141205.21511D-100000@******">
<pre wrap=""><br> First off, recall that a combat round is
like three seconds, and<br>that an unaugmented human can get at most two actions.
By making actions<br>analogous to specific attacks, you are effectively saying that
a combatant<br>is only throwing one or two punches/kicks/whatever in three seconds.
If<br>realism is what you want, this is *not* the case.</pre>
</blockquote>
Two factors you have to keep in mind. One, not everyone is Bruce Lee who
could throw a punch faster then most people could react to it. He was the
exception rather then the rule. Thus yes it is possible to throw many more
moves in 3 secs or so. But you have to ask yourself is it always practicle
or possible? More cases then not the answer is no. The second factor is game
balance. I dont think I need to detail this point.<br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:Pine.GSO.3.95.1011023141205.21511D-100000@******">
<pre wrap=""><br> <br> Finally, I think some of your
damage codes are optimistic to say<br>the least. What separates a good martial
artist from a bad one is the<br>power they develop, the timing of their attacks, and
the placement of<br>those attacks. This is pretty much a matter of skill and skill
alone<br>(though good physical conditioning [and hence a high Strength] can
help).</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
Speaking from expereince skill, flexability and quickness is more important
then strenght in almost all established styles. With that said I generally
agree with your statment. I'll address the dmg codes below.<br>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:Pine.GSO.3.95.1011023141205.21511D-100000@******">
<pre wrap=""><br>Be that as it may, there's no way that a
relatively unskilled person<br>(skill 3) is going to be able to do base Serious
Physical damage with a<br>ridge hand.</pre>
</blockquote>
Really? Then I suppose the instances when I saw a well placed over the head
ridge hand almost knock someone out was a illusion? I am interested where
you gather your expereince from. If I am not mistaken 3 is 'average' for
a skill. Thus someone who has trained to be average in a style, (around 12
months or so) I felt would have learned that. <br>
<br>
Tho I am certainly open to ideas when it comes to damage codes. I have been
tweaking them since I developed this. The damage for a move is not a exact
science. In one style a move may be nothing more then a token feign. In another
style its a hard hitting offensive move. Thus I had to generalize some of
the damage codes to what I felt was the 'average' for a move. Unless you
want to to specify a set of codes for each move for each style? Now THAT
would be a bit over the top detail wise. ;)<br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:Pine.GSO.3.95.1011023141205.21511D-100000@******">
<pre wrap=""> Sorry, no. And what's with snap kicks being
only Light<br>Physical? If you don't think that you can generate a tremendous
amount of<br>power that way, let someone who's good at it kick you in the
ribs<br>sometime. This is not your typical Tae Kwon Do "Oooh, I tapped you, I
get<br>a point" kick.</pre>
</blockquote>
I assume by snap kick you mean 'front kick'? If so then this is a perfect
example of my above statment about one moves changes from one style to another.
A snap kick and front kick, tho similar are on a technique level different.
But trying to trim down the moves I, again, used a base move (average) to
represent several variations. Unless you want the list to be about 90 to
100 moves with all the varients of a move it again would get out of control.
Also the reason for a front kick doing light is a combo of system balance
and look at the skill level I gave it. Hence the low damage.<br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:Pine.GSO.3.95.1011023141205.21511D-100000@******">
<pre wrap=""><br> That said, I like a couple of the
things you did. I too feel that<br>there should be both a stun and a physical
component to unarmed combat.<br>Maybe simultaneously, maybe not, it's hard to say
(and this applies to<br>getting shot, too). Your approach definitely makes combat
more dangerous,<br>which it should be.</pre>
</blockquote>
Thanks. As I stated in the document the GM can go either way and up to how
deadly or realistic s/he wants to make it.<br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:Pine.GSO.3.95.1011023141205.21511D-100000@******">
<pre wrap=""><br> Similarly, at some point the GM
and players need to make a<br>decision as to what each art is good/bad at, and while
I don't necessarily<br>agree with your conclusions, your approach was well laid
out.</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
Fair enough, thanks again.<br>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:Pine.GSO.3.95.1011023141205.21511D-100000@******">
<pre wrap=""><br> And I *loved* the
"McDojo" penalty to techniques. :)</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
hehe.. In tournys my old school used to kick the arses of the fred vall students,
pretty embarrasing for them.<br>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:Pine.GSO.3.95.1011023141205.21511D-100000@******">
<pre wrap=""><br> But in the end, I don't think
that Shadowrun needs quite this<br>level of detail. It's not just your system,
either. I'm not overly wild<br>about the rules presented in the Cannon Companion
because I think they are<br>too limiting. I agree that combat should be more
dynamic and descriptive,<br>but it is my opinion that virtually all of the tools you
need to do this<br>kind of thing are already built into the rules (or at least the
beginnings<br>are there).<br></pre>
</blockquote>
Well I certainly respect your opinion, this isnt for everyone I am sure.
Not everyone wants this amount of detail.<br>
<br>
thanks for your feedback!<br>
<br>
Harle<br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:Pine.GSO.3.95.1011023141205.21511D-100000@******"></blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>

--------------020606040502070501070900--
Message no. 4
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Damion Milliken)
Subject: Detailed SR Unarmed Combat system
Date: Wed Oct 24 01:55:01 2001
Harlequin writes:

> <Snip GIANT Martial Arts rules ;-)>

In general I thought that the system was far too complicated. This, however,
should probably be qualified a little. I personally know very little about
martial arts. Thus, to me, the CC system is significantly detailed enough,
even in it's abstracted form. I do agree, mind you, that the SR base system
is a little plain and sometime uninteresting, though ;-).

On the flip side, I think that a system like this would appeal to anyone who
happened to have some level of detailed knowledge about martial arts. To
such people, like yourself, even the CC system is pretty limited and
innaccurate. However, I would expect that even your system is not actually
detailed _enough_ to satisfy most of these people. As you saw with Marc,
someone with slightly different martial arts training and background saw
many holes, lacking points, and problems in your system.

The issue of different moves doing different damage and having different
effects in different styles I think will probably crop up all too often.
You'll probably find (I think ;-)), that you'll _need_ that massive list of
different manouevers for each different martial art if your system is to
become more widely or generally accepted. OTOH, it's probably fine so long
as you, personally, are the person with the most martial arts experience in
your game ;-).

One of your points of reasoning with introducing this system was to have a
more interesting description of the way an unarmed combat proceeded. So that
rather than having "you hit him, he dodges", GMs could actually use the moves
specified by the characters in the description. I think that this isn't
really a problem. If you have a bit of an idea about martial arts (or even
if you don't, but have a decent memory ;-)), then providing appropriate
descriptions isn't too difficult. A character who rolls a 7 net success Kung
Fu attack on an opponent may well have just pulled off a high level
manouever, and the GM can go nuts with his description and pull some funky
sounding spinning, leaping, combined kick to the head with neck wrench and
elbow smash attack. I don't really think that such moves neccessarily need
to be specified or laid out on paper.

Another point I think is relevent is Marc's comments on Damage Codes.
Remember that Damage Codes can be staged up with additional successes. So
the "well placed head ridge" you describe probably isn't a base S attack, but
rather a base L or M attack with 3-5 net succeses behind it. Similarly,
perhaps, Marc's snap kick to the chest example may simply just be a game
effect of a good amount of net successes on the attacker's part.

I did like, however, the combined Stun and Physical damage bit. Of course,
as you mentioned, it would probably lead to very fast deadly fights...

--
Damion Milliken University of Wollongong
Unofficial Shadowrun Guru E-mail: dam01@***.edu.au
-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.12
GE d- s++:-- a25 C++ US++>+++ P+ L+>++ E- W+ N++ o@ K- w+(--) O-@ M--
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: shadowrn@*********.com (Gurth)
Subject: Detailed SR Unarmed Combat system
Date: Wed Oct 24 05:00:01 2001
According to Marc Renouf, on Tue, 23 Oct 2001 the word on the street was...

> It's too complicated. Yes, the Shadowrun melee system is perhaps
> overly abstract, but you've gone to the other extreme. Detailing
> different kinds of strikes, different damage codes, different skill
> requirements, etc is all well and fine if you're playing Phoenix Command.

Which, unfortunately, doesn't go that far either. Harlequin, you wouldn't
happen to play PCCS and be able to write rules like these up for that
system, would you? :)

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
"Those Who Do Do Not Know the Past are Doomed to Reboot it"
-- Paranoia R&D Catalog
-> NAGEE Editor * ShadowRN GridSec * Triangle Virtuoso <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://plastic.dumpshock.com <-

GC3.12: GAT/! d-(dpu) s:- !a>? C+@ UL 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?
Incubated into the First Church of the Sqooshy Ball, 21-05-1998
Message no. 6
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Bira)
Subject: Detailed SR Unarmed Combat system
Date: Wed Oct 24 08:55:04 2001
> I did like, however, the combined Stun and Physical damage bit. Of course,
> as you mentioned, it would probably lead to very fast deadly fights...

I just about any fight the runners are likely to enter, Stun damage is going to be
just as deadly as Physical, since all the enemy has to do when you fall unconscious is to
apply a "finishing blow"... The GM wouldn't even need to roll for this.

--
Bira -- SysOp da Shadowland.BR
http://www.shadowland.com.br
Redator de Shadowrun da RPG em Revista
http://www.rpgemrevista.f2s.com
Message no. 7
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Graht)
Subject: Detailed SR Unarmed Combat system
Date: Wed Oct 24 11:25:02 2001
At 01:13 AM 10/24/2001 -0400, Harlequin wrote:


>Marc Renouf wrote:
>>
>>
>>On Tue, 23 Oct 2001, Harlequin wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>Be that as it may, there's no way that a relatively unskilled person
>>(skill 3) is going to be able to do base Serious Physical damage with a
>>ridge hand.
>Really? Then I suppose the instances when I saw a well placed over the
>head ridge hand almost knock someone out was a illusion? I am interested
>where you gather your expereince from. If I am not mistaken 3 is 'average'
>for a skill. Thus someone who has trained to be average in a style,
>(around 12 months or so) I felt would have learned that.

Marc did say *base* damage :) Any technique when applied by a skilled
martial artist can be devastating. I think Marc was arguing that the ridge
hand attack should *start* with a lower base damage. He wasn't arguing
that ridge/knife hand attacks aren't effective :)

>> Sorry, no. And what's with snap kicks being only Light
>>Physical? If you don't think that you can generate a tremendous amount of
>>power that way, let someone who's good at it kick you in the ribs
>>sometime. This is not your typical Tae Kwon Do "Oooh, I tapped you, I get
>>a point" kick.
>I assume by snap kick you mean 'front kick'? If so then this is a perfect
>example of my above statment about one moves changes from one style to
>another. A snap kick and front kick, tho similar are on a technique level
>different. But trying to trim down the moves I, again, used a base move
>(average) to represent several variations. Unless you want the list to be
>about 90 to 100 moves with all the varients of a move it again would get
>out of control. Also the reason for a front kick doing light is a combo of
>system balance and look at the skill level I gave it. Hence the low damage.

I'll back up Harl on this one. The snapkick I was taught in Hapkido was a
very quick, low power kick that relied on precision. As one's level of
skill increased advanced techniques could be applied to add significant
power to the snapkick, but I first learned it as a "get someone's
attention" kick.

To Life,
-Graht
ShadowRN Assistant Fearless Leader II
--
Message no. 8
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Harlequin)
Subject: Detailed SR Unarmed Combat system
Date: Wed Oct 24 12:20:05 2001
--------------090706010300050005070909
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit



Gurth wrote:

>According to Marc Renouf, on Tue, 23 Oct 2001 the word on the street was...
>
>> It's too complicated. Yes, the Shadowrun melee system is perhaps
>>overly abstract, but you've gone to the other extreme. Detailing
>>different kinds of strikes, different damage codes, different skill
>>requirements, etc is all well and fine if you're playing Phoenix Command.
>>
>
>Which, unfortunately, doesn't go that far either. Harlequin, you wouldn't
>happen to play PCCS and be able to write rules like these up for that
>system, would you? :)
>
PCCS?

Harle


--------------090706010300050005070909
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<html>
<head>
</head>
<body>
<br>
<br>
Gurth wrote:<br>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:01102410562200.00576@***************">
<pre wrap="">According to Marc Renouf, on Tue, 23 Oct 2001 the word on
the street was...<br><br></pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap=""> It's too complicated. Yes, the Shadowrun melee system
is perhaps<br>overly abstract, but you've gone to the other extreme.
Detailing<br>different kinds of strikes, different damage codes, different
skill<br>requirements, etc is all well and fine if you're playing Phoenix
Command.<br></pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!----><br>Which, unfortunately, doesn't go
that far either. Harlequin, you wouldn't <br>happen to play PCCS and be able to
write rules like these up for that <br>system, would you?
:)<br><br></pre>
</blockquote>
PCCS?<br>
<br>
Harle<br>
<br>
</body>
</html>

--------------090706010300050005070909--
Message no. 9
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Curtis Askren)
Subject: Detailed SR Unarmed Combat system
Date: Wed Oct 24 12:30:02 2001
--- Harlequin <harlequin@********.cncdsl.com> wrote:
>
>
> Gurth wrote:
>
> >According to Marc Renouf, on Tue, 23 Oct 2001 the
> word on the street was...
> >
> >> It's too complicated. Yes, the Shadowrun melee
> system is perhaps
> >>overly abstract, but you've gone to the other
> extreme. Detailing
> >>different kinds of strikes, different damage
> codes, different skill
> >>requirements, etc is all well and fine if you're
> playing Phoenix Command.
> >>
> >
> >Which, unfortunately, doesn't go that far either.
> Harlequin, you wouldn't
> >happen to play PCCS and be able to write rules like
> these up for that
> >system, would you? :)
> >
> PCCS?
>
> Harle
>
>



Erm, is it just me Harle, or is there nothing in your
message?


Dr.Vyk

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Make a great connection at Yahoo! Personals.
http://personals.yahoo.com
Message no. 10
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Harlequin)
Subject: Detailed SR Unarmed Combat system
Date: Wed Oct 24 12:35:01 2001
--------------040804020806000100010702
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit



Damion Milliken wrote:

>Harlequin writes:
>
>><Snip GIANT Martial Arts rules ;-)>
>>
>
>In general I thought that the system was far too complicated. This, however,
>should probably be qualified a little. I personally know very little about
>martial arts. Thus, to me, the CC system is significantly detailed enough,
>even in it's abstracted form. I do agree, mind you, that the SR base system
>is a little plain and sometime uninteresting, though ;-).
>

Certainly this isnt for everyone. I wasnt advocating this for every GM
and every play style. It was just something I desgined and play with and
decided to throw it out these for ppl who wanted to use or tweak with it.

>
>
>On the flip side, I think that a system like this would appeal to anyone who
>happened to have some level of detailed knowledge about martial arts. To
>such people, like yourself, even the CC system is pretty limited and
>innaccurate. However, I would expect that even your system is not actually
>detailed _enough_ to satisfy most of these people. As you saw with Marc,
>someone with slightly different martial arts training and background saw
>many holes, lacking points, and problems in your system.
>
Well as i eluded to in the other msg, unless I break down moves per
style rather then styles per moves some generalizations and 'averages'
need to come into play. Yes I could go even more deeper into detail but
I feel that would alieniate many SR players including myself prob :p As
I cant see myself have differnt charts and the like for each move for
each style. If I cant see myself using something that complrx then
theres little reason for me to go that deep.

>
>
>The issue of different moves doing different damage and having different
>effects in different styles I think will probably crop up all too often.
>You'll probably find (I think ;-)), that you'll _need_ that massive list of
>different manouevers for each different martial art if your system is to
>become more widely or generally accepted. OTOH, it's probably fine so long
>as you, personally, are the person with the most martial arts experience in
>your game ;-).
>
That depends I guess. On the GM, play style and players. I dont feel
theres a cut and dry appeal to something like this.

>
>One of your points of reasoning with introducing this system was to have a
>more interesting description of the way an unarmed combat proceeded. So that
>rather than having "you hit him, he dodges", GMs could actually use the
moves
>specified by the characters in the description. I think that this isn't
>really a problem. If you have a bit of an idea about martial arts (or even
>if you don't, but have a decent memory ;-)), then providing appropriate
>descriptions isn't too difficult. A character who rolls a 7 net success Kung
>Fu attack on an opponent may well have just pulled off a high level
>manouever, and the GM can go nuts with his description and pull some funky
>sounding spinning, leaping, combined kick to the head with neck wrench and
>elbow smash attack. I don't really think that such moves neccessarily need
>to be specified or laid out on paper.
>
True you could just use what you see in movies or read in books. But
then when everyone is using the same limited moves over and over dosent
it become a little lacking it its own right. This gives defined moves
depending on style and also explains how each move is performed. Thus a
GM can add vastly more detail and I hope make the combat more
interesting nd exciting for the group.

>
>Another point I think is relevent is Marc's comments on Damage Codes.
>Remember that Damage Codes can be staged up with additional successes. So
>the "well placed head ridge" you describe probably isn't a base S attack,
but
>rather a base L or M attack with 3-5 net succeses behind it. Similarly,
>perhaps, Marc's snap kick to the chest example may simply just be a game
>effect of a good amount of net successes on the attacker's part.
>
I was thinking about this myself. Since the base dmg for unarmed combat
is (S)M thats assuming a 'average'. Thus If using this chart you reduce
the M to L, you then give head room to lower some of the more severe dmg
codes down. This is because with such a detailed system as this there s
no need for a 'average' generic dmg code to represent all th moves in
one dmg type. Thus basic punch kick could be rediced to (S)M or perhaps
(S-1)L.
.

>
>I did like, however, the combined Stun and Physical damage bit. Of course,
>as you mentioned, it would probably lead to very fast deadly fights...
>
If your going for realism or/and have a deadly setting then thats a good
thing. If you going for a John Woo fight scene, ie M:I-2, then one or
the other is better.


--------------040804020806000100010702
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<html>
<head>
</head>
<body>
<br>
<br>
Damion Milliken wrote:<br>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:200110240551.PAA03990@******.its.uow.edu.au">
<pre wrap="">Harlequin writes:<br><br></pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">&lt;Snip GIANT Martial Arts rules
;-)&gt;<br></pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!----><br>In general I thought that the
system was far too complicated. This, however,<br>should probably be qualified a
little. I personally know very little about<br>martial arts. Thus, to me, the CC
system is significantly detailed enough,<br>even in it's abstracted form. I do
agree, mind you, that the SR base system<br>is a little plain and sometime
uninteresting, though ;-).</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
Certainly this isnt for everyone. I wasnt advocating this for every GM and
every play style. It was just something I desgined and play with and decided
to throw it out these for ppl who wanted to use or tweak with it.<br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:200110240551.PAA03990@******.its.uow.edu.au">
<pre wrap=""><br><br>On the flip side, I think that a
system like this would appeal to anyone who<br>happened to have some level of
detailed knowledge about martial arts. To<br>such people, like yourself, even the CC
system is pretty limited and<br>innaccurate. However, I would expect that even your
system is not actually<br>detailed _enough_ to satisfy most of these people. As you
saw with Marc,<br>someone with slightly different martial arts training and
background saw<br>many holes, lacking points, and problems in your
system.</pre>
</blockquote>
Well as i eluded to in the other msg, unless I break down moves per style
rather then styles per moves some generalizations and 'averages' need to
come into play. Yes I could go even more deeper into detail but I feel that
would alieniate many SR players including myself prob :p As I cant see myself
have differnt charts and the like for each move for each style. If I cant
see myself using something that complrx then theres little reason for me
to go that deep.<br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:200110240551.PAA03990@******.its.uow.edu.au">
<pre wrap=""><br><br>The issue of different moves
doing different damage and having different<br>effects in different styles I think
will probably crop up all too often.<br>You'll probably find (I think ;-)), that
you'll _need_ that massive list of<br>different manouevers for each different
martial art if your system is to<br>become more widely or generally accepted. OTOH,
it's probably fine so long<br>as you, personally, are the person with the most
martial arts experience in<br>your game ;-).<br></pre>
</blockquote>
That depends I guess. On the GM, play style and players. I dont feel theres
a cut and dry appeal to something like this.<br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:200110240551.PAA03990@******.its.uow.edu.au">
<pre wrap=""><br>One of your points of reasoning with
introducing this system was to have a<br>more interesting description of the way an
unarmed combat proceeded. So that<br>rather than having "you hit him, he
dodges", GMs could actually use the moves<br>specified by the characters in the
description. I think that this isn't<br>really a problem. If you have a bit of an
idea about martial arts (or even<br>if you don't, but have a decent memory ;-)),
then providing appropriate<br>descriptions isn't too difficult. A character who
rolls a 7 net success Kung<br>Fu attack on an opponent may well have just pulled off
a high level<br>manouever, and the GM can go nuts with his description and pull some
funky<br>sounding spinning, leaping, combined kick to the head with neck wrench
and<br>elbow smash attack. I don't really think that such moves neccessarily
need<br>to be specified or laid out on paper.<br></pre>
</blockquote>
True you could just use what you see in movies or read in books. But then
when everyone is using the same limited moves over and over dosent it become
a little lacking it its own right. This gives defined moves depending on
style and also explains how each move is performed. Thus a GM can add vastly
more detail and I hope make the combat more interesting nd exciting for the
group. <br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:200110240551.PAA03990@******.its.uow.edu.au">
<pre wrap=""><br>Another point I think is relevent is
Marc's comments on Damage Codes.<br>Remember that Damage Codes can be staged up with
additional successes. So<br>the "well placed head ridge" you describe
probably isn't a base S attack, but<br>rather a base L or M attack with 3-5 net
succeses behind it. Similarly,<br>perhaps, Marc's snap kick to the chest example may
simply just be a game<br>effect of a good amount of net successes on the attacker's
part.<br></pre>
</blockquote>
I was thinking about this myself. Since the base dmg for unarmed combat is
(S)M thats assuming a 'average'. Thus If using this chart you reduce the
M to L, you then give head room to lower some of the more severe dmg codes
down. This is because with such a detailed system as this there s no need
for a 'average' generic dmg code to represent all th moves in one dmg type.
Thus basic punch kick could be rediced to (S)M or perhaps (S-1)L.<br>
.<br>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:200110240551.PAA03990@******.its.uow.edu.au">
<pre wrap=""><br>I did like, however, the combined
Stun and Physical damage bit. Of course,<br>as you mentioned, it would probably lead
to very fast deadly fights...<br><br></pre>
</blockquote>
If your going for realism or/and have a deadly setting then thats a good
thing. If you going for a John Woo fight scene, ie M:I-2, then one or the
other is better.<br>
<br>
</body>
</html>

--------------040804020806000100010702--
Message no. 11
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Harlequin)
Subject: Detailed SR Unarmed Combat system
Date: Wed Oct 24 12:35:05 2001
--------------040105020703020808020906
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit



Bira wrote:

>>I did like, however, the combined Stun and Physical damage bit. Of course,
>>as you mentioned, it would probably lead to very fast deadly fights...
>>
>
> I just about any fight the runners are likely to enter, Stun damage is going
to be just as deadly as Physical, since all the enemy has to do when you fall unconscious
is to apply a "finishing blow"... The GM wouldn't even need to roll for this.
>
True, but with the system it gives the possibilty to kill someone while
involved in combat. Even if your trying to KO someone you can possibly
kill them in any type of unarmed combat. The chance always exists.

--------------040105020703020808020906
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<html>
<head>
</head>
<body>
<br>
<br>
Bira wrote:<br>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:20011024102814.B39D.RA002585@**.unicamp.br">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">I did like, however, the combined Stun and Physical
damage bit. Of course,<br>as you mentioned, it would probably lead to very fast
deadly fights...<br></pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!----><br> I just about any fight the
runners are likely to enter, Stun damage is going to be just as deadly as Physical, since
all the enemy has to do when you fall unconscious is to apply a "finishing
blow"... The GM wouldn't even need to roll for this.<br><br></pre>
</blockquote>
True, but with the system it gives the possibilty to kill someone while involved
in combat. Even if your trying to KO someone you can possibly kill them in
any type of unarmed combat. The chance always exists.<br>
</body>
</html>

--------------040105020703020808020906--
Message no. 12
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Harlequin)
Subject: Detailed SR Unarmed Combat system
Date: Wed Oct 24 12:40:04 2001
Graht wrote:

> At 01:13 AM 10/24/2001 -0400, Harlequin wrote:
>
>
>> Marc Renouf wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, 23 Oct 2001, Harlequin wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Be that as it may, there's no way that a relatively unskilled person
>>> (skill 3) is going to be able to do base Serious Physical damage with a
>>> ridge hand.
>>
>> Really? Then I suppose the instances when I saw a well placed over
>> the head ridge hand almost knock someone out was a illusion? I am
>> interested where you gather your expereince from. If I am not
>> mistaken 3 is 'average' for a skill. Thus someone who has trained to
>> be average in a style, (around 12 months or so) I felt would have
>> learned that.
>
>
> Marc did say *base* damage :) Any technique when applied by a skilled
> martial artist can be devastating. I think Marc was arguing that the
> ridge hand attack should *start* with a lower base damage. He wasn't
> arguing that ridge/knife hand attacks aren't effective :)
>
>>> Sorry, no. And what's with snap kicks being only Light
>>> Physical? If you don't think that you can generate a tremendous
>>> amount of
>>> power that way, let someone who's good at it kick you in the ribs
>>> sometime. This is not your typical Tae Kwon Do "Oooh, I tapped you,
>>> I get
>>> a point" kick.
>>
>> I assume by snap kick you mean 'front kick'? If so then this is a
>> perfect example of my above statment about one moves changes from one
>> style to another. A snap kick and front kick, tho similar are on a
>> technique level different. But trying to trim down the moves I,
>> again, used a base move (average) to represent several variations.
>> Unless you want the list to be about 90 to 100 moves with all the
>> varients of a move it again would get out of control. Also the reason
>> for a front kick doing light is a combo of system balance and look at
>> the skill level I gave it. Hence the low damage.
>
>
> I'll back up Harl on this one. The snapkick I was taught in Hapkido
> was a very quick, low power kick that relied on precision. As one's
> level of skill increased advanced techniques could be applied to add
> significant power to the snapkick, but I first learned it as a "get
> someone's attention" kick.


Another good point. One could add a sub rule where after a certain skill
level the dmg code goes up by one. Idealy you could have 3 dmg codes for
each move to reflect their skill at performing said move. skill 1-2 1
lower dmg code, skill 3-5 base dmg, 6+ one higher dmg code.

Something that prob is worth considering

>
Message no. 13
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Harlequin)
Subject: Detailed SR Unarmed Combat system
Date: Wed Oct 24 12:45:01 2001
--------------060608090909030903080203
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit



Curtis Askren wrote:

>--- Harlequin <harlequin@********.cncdsl.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>Gurth wrote:
>>
>>>According to Marc Renouf, on Tue, 23 Oct 2001 the
>>>
>>word on the street was...
>>
>>>> It's too complicated. Yes, the Shadowrun melee
>>>>
>>system is perhaps
>>
>>>>overly abstract, but you've gone to the other
>>>>
>>extreme. Detailing
>>
>>>>different kinds of strikes, different damage
>>>>
>>codes, different skill
>>
>>>>requirements, etc is all well and fine if you're
>>>>
>>playing Phoenix Command.
>>
>>>Which, unfortunately, doesn't go that far either.
>>>
>>Harlequin, you wouldn't
>>
>>>happen to play PCCS and be able to write rules like
>>>
>>these up for that
>>
>>>system, would you? :)
>>>
>>PCCS?
>>
>>Harle
>>
>>
>
>
>
>Erm, is it just me Harle, or is there nothing in your
>message?
>
>

I said:

PCCS?

Harle


:)


--------------060608090909030903080203
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<html>
<head>
</head>
<body>
<br>
<br>
Curtis Askren wrote:<br>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:20011024162903.32413.qmail@********.mail.yahoo.com">
<pre wrap="">--- Harlequin <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E"
href="mailto:harlequin@********.cncdsl.com">&lt;harlequin@********.cncdsl.com&gt;</a>
wrote:<br></pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap=""><br>Gurth wrote:<br><br></pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">According to Marc Renouf, on Tue, 23 Oct 2001
the<br></pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">word on the street was...<br></pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap=""> It's too complicated. Yes, the Shadowrun
melee<br></pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">system is perhaps<br></pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">overly abstract, but you've gone to the
other<br></pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">extreme. Detailing<br></pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">different kinds of strikes, different
damage<br></pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">codes, different
skill<br></pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">requirements, etc is all well and fine
if you're<br></pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">playing Phoenix
Command.<br></pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Which, unfortunately, doesn't go that
far either.<br></pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">Harlequin, you wouldn't
<br></pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">happen to play PCCS and be able to
write rules like<br></pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">these up for that
<br></pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">system, would you?
:)<br><br></pre>
</blockquote>
<pre
wrap="">PCCS?<br><br>Harle<br><br><br></pre>
</blockquote>
<pre
wrap=""><!----><br><br><br>Erm, is it just me Harle,
or is there nothing in your<br>message?<br><br><br></pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
I said:<br>
<pre
wrap="">PCCS?<br><br>Harle<br></pre>
<br>
:)<br>
<br>
</body>
</html>

--------------060608090909030903080203--
Message no. 14
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Graht)
Subject: Detailed SR Unarmed Combat system
Date: Wed Oct 24 13:00:01 2001
At 12:42 PM 10/24/2001 -0400, Harlequin wrote:

>Graht wrote:
>
>>At 01:13 AM 10/24/2001 -0400, Harlequin wrote:
>>
>>>Marc Renouf wrote:
>>>
>>>> Sorry, no. And what's with snap kicks being only Light
>>>>Physical? If you don't think that you can generate a tremendous amount of
>>>>power that way, let someone who's good at it kick you in the ribs
>>>>sometime. This is not your typical Tae Kwon Do "Oooh, I tapped you,
I get
>>>>a point" kick.
>>>
>>>I assume by snap kick you mean 'front kick'? If so then this is a
>>>perfect example of my above statment about one moves changes from one
>>>style to another. A snap kick and front kick, tho similar are on a
>>>technique level different. But trying to trim down the moves I, again,
>>>used a base move (average) to represent several variations. Unless you
>>>want the list to be about 90 to 100 moves with all the varients of a
>>>move it again would get out of control. Also the reason for a front kick
>>>doing light is a combo of system balance and look at the skill level I
>>>gave it. Hence the low damage.
>>
>>I'll back up Harl on this one. The snapkick I was taught in Hapkido was
>>a very quick, low power kick that relied on precision. As one's level of
>>skill increased advanced techniques could be applied to add significant
>>power to the snapkick, but I first learned it as a "get someone's
>>attention" kick.
>
>Another good point. One could add a sub rule where after a certain skill
>level the dmg code goes up by one. Idealy you could have 3 dmg codes for
>each move to reflect their skill at performing said move. skill 1-2 1
>lower dmg code, skill 3-5 base dmg, 6+ one higher dmg code.
>
>Something that prob is worth considering

Except, that it's already addressed in the mechanics of the rules in that
damage is increased by +1 for every two successes :)

You could add a rule that a character can sacrifice three dice to increase
the damage level by one level. This reflects the character's focus in that
it increases his base damage if he hits, but opens him up to being hit.

Example: George is attacking Fred. George has a skill of 7. Fred has a
skill of 6. George sacrifices three dice to increase his base damage from
Moderate to Serious. George rolls 4 dice and Fred rolls 6 dice.

Just an idea.

To Life,
-Graht
ShadowRN Assistant Fearless Leader II
--
Message no. 15
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Lubzens Opher)
Subject: Detailed SR Unarmed Combat system
Date: Wed Oct 24 13:30:04 2001
<snip harlequin's system>
I think the system is over-detailed for SR, and won't really mesh that
well with the rest of the rules, I see specific attacks and manuevers more
as a matter of roleplaying than anything else, yes the SR mellee system is
very much simplified(I should know, after learning Hung-Gar for seven
years:) but every RPG system is abstraction of RL, and the mellee system
in SR is quite well balanced, so why change what works?(of course, YMMV)

Opher Lubzens
-every light casts shadows
Message no. 16
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Gurth)
Subject: Detailed SR Unarmed Combat system
Date: Wed Oct 24 13:30:08 2001
According to Harlequin, on Wed, 24 Oct 2001 the word on the street was...

> >Which, unfortunately, doesn't go that far either. Harlequin, you
> > wouldn't happen to play PCCS and be able to write rules like these up
> > for that system, would you? :)
>
> PCCS?

I guess that answers that... :)

PCCS = Phoenix Command Combat System; probably _the_ most detailed combat
system around, especially if you use some of the rules expansions published
for it. Unfortunately the hand-to-hand rules lag behind the small arms
rules a bit, in that they're nowhere near as detailed and focus on more
medieval-style combat with swords, axes and clubs instead of oriental-style
martial artists kicking people's asses with their bare hands -- ehh, feet ;)

> ----------------------------------------
> Content-Type: text/html; name="unnamed"
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> Content-Description:
> ----------------------------------------

Please do not post HTML :)

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
"Those Who Do Do Not Know the Past are Doomed to Reboot it"
-- Paranoia R&D Catalog
-> NAGEE Editor * ShadowRN GridSec * Triangle Virtuoso <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://plastic.dumpshock.com <-

GC3.12: GAT/! d-(dpu) s:- !a>? C+@ UL 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?
Incubated into the First Church of the Sqooshy Ball, 21-05-1998
Message no. 17
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Marc Renouf)
Subject: Detailed SR Unarmed Combat system
Date: Wed Oct 24 13:55:01 2001
On Wed, 24 Oct 2001, Harlequin wrote:

> Marc Renouf wrote:
> >
> > It's too complicated.
> >
> Well the name is "Detailed" SR Unarmed combat system so I am a little
> perplex at what you expected :p~~

Well, you can have detail without complexity. A simple solution
is usually better in terms of ease of playability. The worst situation
would be to have complexity with no detail, but I think D&D3E has cornered
that market. ;)

> With that said once you establish the style its pretty much the same
> combat procedure as the current rules but rather then generic blows you
> are able to pick and choose what you wish to do in comabt. I dont really
> see that overly complex. But to each there own. I am sure some will see
> it you way and others will find it nice to have a more fleshed out
> system that takes much more into account.

I think this is probably just a difference in playing styles. For
a long time I ran a game in a medieval setting using Shadowrun-based
rules, so I had to put a lot of thought into fleshing out melee combat.
After much wrangling and playtesting, it turned out that the majority of
the useful stuff was already built into the rules (called shots and
aiming) and just needed to be adapted a little to be used in melee.
Introducing more complexity didn't really change the flavor of combat
appreciably over a few minor modifications, and made it *much* harder for
both the players and the GM to keep track of.

> > First off, recall that a combat round is like three seconds, and
> >that an unaugmented human can get at most two actions. By making actions
> >analogous to specific attacks, you are effectively saying that a combatant
> >is only throwing one or two punches/kicks/whatever in three seconds. If
> >realism is what you want, this is *not* the case.
> >
> Two factors you have to keep in mind. One, not everyone is Bruce Lee who
> could throw a punch faster then most people could react to it. He was
> the exception rather then the rule. Thus yes it is possible to throw
> many more moves in 3 secs or so. But you have to ask yourself is it
> always practicle or possible? More cases then not the answer is no.

I'm not Bruce Lee either, but I can hit people multiple times in
under three seconds. But be that as it may, your skill isn't what
determines how fast you are in game terms; that is the sole province of
your Reaction (Initiative) attribute. So tying actions to specific
attacks breaks the abstraction.
That said, I will back you somewhat in that the rates of fire for
weapons are off, so in some sense the abstraction is already broken.

> The second factor is game balance. I dont think I need to detail this
> point.

Perhaps. You could easily use the rationale that when a character
elects to perform a "ridge hand" attack, that character is in actuality
engaging in a series of feints and counters that "set up" the attack. By
that justification, I have fewer problems with it.

> > Finally, I think some of your damage codes are optimistic to say
> >the least. What separates a good martial artist from a bad one is the
> >power they develop, the timing of their attacks, and the placement of
> >those attacks. This is pretty much a matter of skill and skill alone
> >(though good physical conditioning [and hence a high Strength] can help).
> >
> Speaking from expereince skill, flexability and quickness is more
> important then strenght in almost all established styles. With that said
> I generally agree with your statment. I'll address the dmg codes below.

We are on the same page here. In game terms, skill is reflected
in how many dice you roll, and flexibility and quickness are reflected in
the size of your Combat Pool. Strength determines the Power Level of your
attack, but a skilled combatant can get enough successes to make it very
difficult to stage the damage down even when the power is low. It's
directly analogous to the difference between a shooter with a skill of 2
and a Panther Assault Cannon and a shooter with a skill of 12 and a
holdout pistol. Both of them will probably kill you.

> >Be that as it may, there's no way that a relatively unskilled person
> >(skill 3) is going to be able to do base Serious Physical damage with a
> >ridge hand.
> >
> Really? Then I suppose the instances when I saw a well placed over the
> head ridge hand almost knock someone out was a illusion?

A "well placed" ridge hand implies that the user was either
skilled enough or lucky enough to put the attack in the right place. In
game terms, this is directly analogous to getting a boatload of successes,
something that's a lot easier with a high skill. But notice that I said
*base* damage. The *base* damage is how much damage potential an attack
has in the *absence* of skill. I have a hard time believing that in the
absence of skill that a ridge-hand attack is more than twice as damaging
as a regular punch (base Serious *Physical* as opposed to base Moderate
Stun).

> I am interested where you gather your expereince from.

From nearly 18 years of training in martial arts (in terms of
understanding the mechanics of combat) and 12 years of playing Shadowrun
(in terms understanding the mechanics of the game).

> If I am not mistaken 3 is 'average' for a skill.

Absolutely.

> Thus someone who has trained to be average in a style, (around 12
> months or so) I felt would have learned that.

They may have learned the technique itself, but as I stated above,
the *base* damage code of an attack has nothing to do with skill.

> Unless you want to to specify a set of codes for each move for
> each style? Now THAT would be a bit over the top detail wise. ;)

:) Good gods, no.

> > Sorry, no. And what's with snap kicks being only Light Physical?
> > This is not your typical Tae Kwon Do "Oooh, I tapped you, I get
> > a point" kick.
> >
> I assume by snap kick you mean 'front kick'? If so then this is a
> perfect example of my above statment about one moves changes from one
> style to another. A snap kick and front kick, tho similar are on a
> technique level different.

Yes, and I also saw Dave Buehrer's comment about this being a
"getting your attention" kick. I don't know how you guys do it, but we're
usually trying to put our foot through some poor bastard's ribcage when we
do this. It hurts. A *lot*.
But this just serves to emphasize my point. You yourself make a
distinction between various different types of attacks from differents
schools. If you're not going to have rules for *all* different kinds of
attacks, why bother to have rules for *some* attacks?
The beauty of an abstract system is that it allows for a lot of
fluidity. When I'm GMing, I always make an extra effort to describe melee
combat in terms of what happens (more than just "you attack him, and he
counters"). If the player wants to do anything specific in combat, I've
most often found that using a minor modification of the "called shot"
mechanic works well. Everything else is just descriptive details.

> thanks for your feedback!

You are more than welcome. As soon as I put the finishing touches
on my melee rules, I'd like you to take a look at them as well. I think
that where I'm coming from will make more sense then. Like I said, it's
probably just a difference in playing style.

Marc Renouf (ShadowRN GridSec - "Bad Cop" Division)

Other ShadowRN-related addresses and links:
Mark Imbriaco <mark@*********.com> List Owner
Adam Jury <adamj@*********.com> Assistant List Administrator
DVixen <dvixen@*********.com> Keeper of the FAQs
Gurth <gurth@******.nl> GridSec Enforcer Division
David Buehrer <graht@******.net> GridSec "Nice Guy" Division
ShadowRN FAQ <http://hlair.dumpshock.com/faqindex.php3>;
Message no. 18
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Curtis Askren)
Subject: Detailed SR Unarmed Combat system
Date: Wed Oct 24 18:10:00 2001
> I said:
>
> PCCS?
>
> Harle
>
>
> :)
>
>

Whoops, my bad. ;-)

Dr.Vyk

====Dr.Vyk,
UV scientist and 100th member of the Order

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Make a great connection at Yahoo! Personals.
http://personals.yahoo.com
Message no. 19
From: shadowrn@*********.com (James Zealey)
Subject: Detailed SR Unarmed Combat system
Date: Wed Oct 24 19:45:01 2001
> When I'm GMing, I always make an extra effort
> to describe melee combat in terms of what
> happens (more than just "you attack him, and
> he counters"). If the player wants to do
> anything specific in combat, I've most often
> found that using a minor modification of
> the "called shot" mechanic works well.
> Everything else is just descriptive details.

I'd agree - I think that the cannon companion
rules ARE good (except there should probably be
a default package of maneuvers you get for free
with each art). They also need to allow the use
of the aim maneuver (-1 tn to your next melee
attack/counter per simple action spent aiming).
This brings your speed into the combat (instead
of the current rules where your speed helps you
get beaten faster) as you can aim instead of
laying into someone.

After that, the player can then apply some
tactics - if for instance I have an opponent I
cannot hurt with a normal attack due to lots of
armor/body, but I can repeatedly beat in melee
(a manifested spirit say) then I can disorient
him, spend any extra actions I have over him
aiming, and then subdue him. I can then stuff
him through a ward/fight with willpower/just try
to rip him apart with a considerable advantage.
In terms of real world stuff, this might be
equivalent to a sumo wrestling matches bout of
face slapping, followed by the grab and then
throwing the guy out of the ring.

I'd probably be tempted to allow the acrobatics
rule in CC (you may get extra combat pool for
dodging only by making an athletics(acrobatics)
roll) to apply the combat pool bonus to melee as
well (presuming I want hong-kong action movie
style stuff instead of grittier and perhaps more
realistic combat)

I don't think presenting a player with a list of
damage codes and TN modifiers is likely to do
much for combat - I think you'll find that
players will either get lost in the system and
pick randomly and have no mental image of what
their character is doing, OR they'll find the
move that is the most powerful and always use it
(a problem with Palladiums martial arts in
Ninjas and Superspies - each style pretty much
had a single maneuver that outclassed all the
others). I notice that under your system anyone
with access will quite probably use palm strike
ALL the time as it is the highest damage
maneuver AND it has no TN modifier. Conversely I
cannot see anyone ever using any kick attack
except roundhouse kick (and that only if their
skill is 1).

Remember that when you're designing rules, you
have to treat prospective players as min-max
munchkins. If they were players who valued role-
playing over stats exclusively, then they
wouldn't be asking for rules.


____________________________________________________________
Get your own FREE Web and POP E-mail Service in 14 languages at http://www.zzn.com.
Message no. 20
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Harlequin)
Subject: Detailed SR Unarmed Combat system
Date: Thu Oct 25 02:40:00 2001
Sorry all, but any msg posted to me in the past 24 hrs that I didnt
reply too could you repost? I had a BSoD and long story short had some
file corruption. One of them being my email database. I lost all the
recent msg I just D/L'ed. turns out a mem stick went bad on me.

thanks

Harle
Message no. 21
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Graht)
Subject: Detailed SR Unarmed Combat system
Date: Thu Oct 25 12:20:01 2001
At 02:42 AM 10/25/2001 -0400, Harlequin wrote:
>Sorry all, but any msg posted to me in the past 24 hrs that I didnt reply
>too could you repost? I had a BSoD and long story short had some file
>corruption. One of them being my email database. I lost all the recent msg
>I just D/L'ed. turns out a mem stick went bad on me.

Harlequin,

You can ready any ShadowRN posts you missed at the ShadowRN Archive.

http://lists.dumpshock.com/pipermail/shadowrn/

To Life,
-Graht
ShadowRN Assistant Fearless Leader II
--
Message no. 22
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Harlequin)
Subject: Detailed SR Unarmed Combat system
Date: Fri Oct 26 11:35:00 2001
>Another good point. One could add a sub rule where after a certain skill
>level the dmg code goes up by one. Idealy you could have 3 dmg codes for
>each move to reflect their skill at performing said move. skill 1-2 1
>lower dmg code, skill 3-5 base dmg, 6+ one higher dmg code.
>>Something that prob is worth considering

Except, that it's already addressed in the mechanics of the rules in that
damage is increased by +1 for every two successes :)

You could add a rule that a character can sacrifice three dice to increase
the damage level by one level. This reflects the character's focus in that
it increases his base damage if he hits, but opens him up to being hit.

Example: George is attacking Fred. George has a skill of 7. Fred has a
skill of 6. George sacrifices three dice to increase his base damage from
Moderate to Serious. George rolls 4 dice and Fred rolls 6 dice.

Just an idea.

To Life,
-Graht
ShadowRN Assistant Fearless Leader II

---

Excellent Idea! In fact i toned down the power/dmg codes of several
moves and inserted your idea. I prob should have a 'credits' section on
the doc the more i think of it. Ill add that next revision. :)
Message no. 23
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Harlequin)
Subject: Detailed SR Unarmed Combat system
Date: Fri Oct 26 11:40:01 2001
>
>
><snip harlequin's system>
>I think the system is over-detailed for SR, and won't really mesh that
>well with the rest of the rules, I see specific attacks and manuevers more
>as a matter of roleplaying than anything else, yes the SR mellee system is
>very much simplified(I should know, after learning Hung-Gar for seven
>years:) but every RPG system is abstraction of RL, and the mellee system
>in SR is quite well balanced, so why change what works?(of course, YMMV)
>
>Opher Lubzens
>-every light casts shadow
>

I dont see how it wont 'mesh' quite frankly. The core mechanics are stil
the same. but rather then a bland "I attack him *yawn*" You have the
option of saying "I am going to give him a spinning backfist to get his
attention" I never said the unarded system wasnt balanced in SR. I said
it was basic and overly abstract lacking detail. Why change what works?
Well if more people had that attitude then you'd be going to work on a
horse, doing your work in a ledger and taking your coffee break in a out
house.

My 2 credits

Harle



>
>
>
Message no. 24
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Harlequin)
Subject: Detailed SR Unarmed Combat system
Date: Fri Oct 26 11:55:01 2001
>A "well placed" ridge hand implies that the user was either
skilled enough or lucky enough to put the attack in the right place. In
game terms, this is directly analogous to getting a boatload of successes,
something that's a lot easier with a high skill. But notice that I said
*base* damage. The *base* damage is how much damage potential an attack
has in the *absence* of skill. I have a hard time believing that in the
absence of skill that a ridge-hand attack is more than twice as damaging
as a regular punch (base Serious *Physical* as opposed to base Moderate
Stun).

After the discussion with Graht we covered this and in my updated
ruleset we took that into account. He had a nice idea to insert your
concerns in what I feel is a proper and logical rule. It takes skill
more into account then base dmg.

>But this just serves to emphasize my point. You yourself make a
distinction between various different types of attacks from differents
schools. If you're not going to have rules for *all* different kinds of
attacks, why bother to have rules for *some* attacks?

Well because as you agree to making a set of moves and dmg codes for each style would be a
nightmare. Plus it would also need someone with more then a basic understanding of each
style. I dont know about you but beyond 4 or 5 styles I can not speak in detail or depth.
Thus you have to take into account, and be realsitic, that I can not possibly know all
these is to know about every style. Thus some generalization need to come into play. But
even so the point of the system still does its job well.

Harle
Message no. 25
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Derek Hyde)
Subject: Detailed SR Unarmed Combat system
Date: Fri Oct 26 12:35:01 2001
Ok time for my pocket change on this subject.

IF you want to use some rules of this nature I would suggest you sit
down and start writing detailed rules for EACH individual form of
martial arts and for the ones you don't know intimately consult with
someone that does, this is an all or nothing job, AD&D tried it and
realized that it would fail unless they did something similar, thus they
released detailed martial arts rules in the complete ninja's handbook.
I would suggest to you that you make a simple chart of "BASIC" manuvers
from each martial art (1-2 skill), an "INTERMEDIATE" chart (3-4 skill),
an "ADVANCED" chart (5-6 skill) and a "MASTER" chart (7+ skill)
This is the most simplified way to do this and makes the most sense to
me with the knowledge of martial arts, albeit not extremely extensive,
that I have. You don't want to give people with little knowledge the
ability to do serious physical damage right away, the catch to this
would be that you could also make it a "critical success" clause, it's
always stun damage unless.....you exceed your target number by a certain
amount or you have all 5's or above or whatever you may choose to write
it as (equivilant to a natural 20 in D&D).
I have studied and I do study martial arts not as a martial artist but
as a philosophy stand point, I don't actively practice them I learn the
philosophies in their backgrounds to try to understand them better and
when I find one that I feel the philosophy fits me comfortably then I
will actively begin learning the physical side of it. This may sound
stupid to you but look at it as "choosing a religion" because once you
begin studying a martial art, to become highly proficient at it you must
master both it's philosophy and the art of it and you must also dedicate
yourself to it, this would also apply in SR, you couldn't attain more
than an intermediate (3/4) level of skill in it without letting go of
other things that are not used by the martial art such as firearms and
such.

If you do decide to do a book of that nature I would be more than happy
to give any assistance that I am able to by way of collecting
information for you and also passing it through friends that are more
proficient in the actual arts than I am. REMEMBER that if you do this
you must give the reader a good idea if the art is a hard or soft form
and if it emphasizes on hand work, leg work, or other parts of the body.

Derek
Message no. 26
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Bira)
Subject: Detailed SR Unarmed Combat system
Date: Fri Oct 26 20:35:06 2001
On Fri, 26 Oct 2001 11:39:27 -0400
Harlequin <harlequin@********.cncdsl.com> wrote:

> >
> >
> ><snip harlequin's system>
> >I think the system is over-detailed for SR, and won't really mesh that
> >well with the rest of the rules, I see specific attacks and manuevers more
> >as a matter of roleplaying than anything else, yes the SR mellee system is
> >very much simplified(I should know, after learning Hung-Gar for seven
> >years:) but every RPG system is abstraction of RL, and the mellee system
> >in SR is quite well balanced, so why change what works?(of course, YMMV)
> >
> >Opher Lubzens
> >-every light casts shadow
> >
>
> I dont see how it wont 'mesh' quite frankly. The core mechanics are stil
> the same. but rather then a bland "I attack him *yawn*" You have the
> option of saying "I am going to give him a spinning backfist to get his
> attention"

But you _already_ can do that, and in a simpler way too. A list of maneuvers with
different effects isn't as needed as a willingness of the players and GM do add color to
their descriptions. Without that, you'll only change the same old declaration to "I
attack him with (whatever the most damaging maneuver is), *yawn*".


--
Bira -- SysOp da Shadowland.BR
http://www.shadowland.com.br
Redator de Shadowrun da RPG em Revista
http://www.rpgemrevista.f2s.com
Message no. 27
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Harlequin)
Subject: Detailed SR Unarmed Combat system
Date: Fri Oct 26 23:40:05 2001
Bira wrote:

>On Fri, 26 Oct 2001 11:39:27 -0400
>Harlequin <harlequin@********.cncdsl.com> wrote:
>
>>>
>>>
>>I dont see how it wont 'mesh' quite frankly. The core mechanics are stil
>>the same. but rather then a bland "I attack him *yawn*" You have the
>>option of saying "I am going to give him a spinning backfist to get his
>>attention"
>>
>
> But you _already_ can do that, and in a simpler way too. A list of maneuvers
with different effects isn't as needed as a willingness of the players and GM do add color
to their descriptions. Without that, you'll only change the same old declaration to
"I attack him with (whatever the most damaging maneuver is), *yawn*".
>
>
Perhaps I need to state the following. If you dont like nor, apparently
understand, the purpose of the sytstem thats certainly your choice. But
my objective of posting it was to get feedback on how to improve it and
seek input on things i may have overlooked. In essense how to imporve
it. If you think im going to drop it just becasue you dont see what I am
trying to do your quite mistaken. I dont have any interest justifying my
system to you, as I am not trying to ram this down anyones throat.

I am not holding a gun to your head to use it. If you dont like it so be
it, I am a big boy, I am not going to take anything said personally by
some stranger on the net. Be on your way and you can ignore this thread.
But your reply does not contribute in any meaningful nor helpful way to
the discussion.

Harle
Message no. 28
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Dan Turek)
Subject: detailed SR unarmed combat system
Date: Sat Oct 27 02:20:01 2001
>From: "shadowrun" <shadowrun@********.absa.co.za>
>Subject: re detailed SR unarmed combat system
>Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2001 06:53:43 +0200
>
> > blah blah ...... (monster jumps out and ) .. snippit
>
>okay now you have opened a can of worms with martial arts ,
>how do you compensate for melee weapons , after all there
>
>with the same level of training ( martial artist to
>weapon-master ) i sure as shit would like to have a sword
>
>now once you've answered that , what about guns , i would

>of a gritty world , once (upon a time) there was a system
>called top secret ( long gone ) it had a wow martial arts
>system but that kinda defeated the point of having guns it
>was a hollywoodism , i prefer my SR gritty like CP2020 gone
>bad mixed with paranoia ( just the combat side <the fight
>ain't over till at least one pc is dead> okay i go for
>down )
>
>Kanniemeernie Korperaal
>"do not press a desperate enemy" SUN-TZU
>

I always liked Fringeworthy for realistic damage. Bullets can go through
people and hit the people behind them! Anyone have something for this for
SR?

There are only so many ways the body can move, and a very experience karate
person doesn't look that different from someone with a lot of aikido
experience. Only the beginning moves are different. When attacking unarmed
in SR you can happily pull out any Basic Attack from Lunch Money (no, I
don't sell the game, but it is cool and worth plugging. Fun for when the GM
and decker are getting it on).

I am in some ways disappointed there is no general Physical Attack skill
that covers both armed and unarmed, since the two are so related, but for
Game Balance purposes the 2 are separate in 2nd Ed, and EVERY weapon is
different in 3rd. The maneuvers in the CC are odd too. The example on page
91 of CC talks about an Arnis person learning Close Combat, and then
re-learning it for Edged Weapons, like there is a huge difference. Once
again I attribute it to game balance.

Combat is such a small (though time-consuming and adrenaline driving) part
of SR that I like to keep the rules as simple as possible. I like the idea
of "aiming" and will use that, but the type of blow used may as well be
described by the number of successes.

Do most people use knockdown? How about cyberwear/attribute damage from Stun
hits? If you take a serious and don't roll any sixes, are you taking the
difference as "critical hits" in MM?

One could argue styles for various armed combat - fencing, kendo, kobudo,
etc. but there really are only so many ways to hold and use a sword. A
(beginning) kendo person might have a problem with a pistol-grip foil, and
someone who took fencing and never got to sabre wouldn't be too hot with a
katana, but I see these as diffences in Specializing in the weapons
themselves.

What do people use when they brass knuckles/steel shod boots? Unarmed or
Armed (Blunt Weapons, Brawling)? If I take Big Knuckles from CP for SR does
that have to be Cyber-Implant Weaponry? How do they apply for martial art
techniques? I still don't see a good system for having two melee weapons,
especially if they are different ones (like sword and dagger or club and
chainsaw). I also like the "split your dice to hit several opponents" from
SR1 or 2. The SR3 rule on pgs 122-123 read like you may as well attack
everyone you can and keep your dice to dodge (provided you aren't using a
monowhip) unless you know they are highly skilled (in which case you should
have shot them instead of going into melee if at all possible).

/* Anything below this line was not put there by me */

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
Message no. 29
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Bira)
Subject: Detailed SR Unarmed Combat system
Date: Sat Oct 27 15:25:05 2001
On Fri, 26 Oct 2001 23:40:01 -0400
Harlequin <harlequin@********.cncdsl.com> wrote:

> I am not holding a gun to your head to use it. If you dont like it so be
> it, I am a big boy, I am not going to take anything said personally by
> some stranger on the net. Be on your way and you can ignore this thread.
> But your reply does not contribute in any meaningful nor helpful way to
> the discussion.
>
> Harle

Hey, ease up there. That reply wasn't meant to be hostile, OK? Maybe I should have
added a few smileys to it, or whatever, but there's no need to start behaving like this
over it.

--
Bira -- SysOp da Shadowland.BR
http://www.shadowland.com.br
Redator de Shadowrun da RPG em Revista
http://www.rpgemrevista.f2s.com
Message no. 30
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Patrick Goodman)
Subject: Detailed SR Unarmed Combat system
Date: Sun Oct 28 18:20:01 2001
My goodness. I'm actually posting to the list. Alert the media.

From: Harlequin
Sent: Friday, October 26, 2001 10:40 PM

> Perhaps I need to state the following. If you dont like nor, apparently
> understand, the purpose of the sytstem thats certainly your choice.

I'm one of those who doesn't understand it, Harlequin. I don't see a good
reason to do it in the first place. Combat in SR already takes too damn
long; adding details and complexity to an (already lengthy) abstract system
seems, to this GM, an exercise in pointless masochism. I don't know about
your games, but I dread combat starting because of the length of time it
takes already. Adding more options and complexities would make it take even
longer.

> I dont have any interest justifying my
> system to you, as I am not trying to ram this down anyones throat.

You should, though, have some interest in justifying it if you expect anyone
else to use it. I don't see a benefit, so it would be a really hard sell,
but if you could provide some justification as to why it should be used by
anyone but you, it would sure help me give it a more even look.

> But your reply does not contribute in any meaningful nor helpful way to
> the discussion.

Yeah, it was adding something. He didn't see a purpose behind this, and I
don't either. Explain it to me.

Patrick
Message no. 31
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Derek Hyde)
Subject: Detailed SR Unarmed Combat system
Date: Mon Oct 29 00:10:01 2001
>My goodness. I'm actually posting to the list. Alert the media.
>I'm one of those who doesn't understand it, Harlequin. I don't see a
good
>reason to do it in the first place. Combat in SR already takes too
damn
>long; adding details and complexity to an (already lengthy) abstract
system
>seems, to this GM, an exercise in pointless masochism. I don't know
about
>your games, but I dread combat starting because of the length of time
it
>takes already. Adding more options and complexities would make it take
>even longer.
>> I dont have any interest justifying my
>> system to you, as I am not trying to ram this down anyones throat.
>You should, though, have some interest in justifying it if you expect
>anyone else to use it. I don't see a benefit, so it would be a really
hard >sell, but if you could provide some justification as to why it
should be >used by anyone but you, it would sure help me give it a more
even look.
>> But your reply does not contribute in any meaningful nor helpful way
to
>> the discussion.
>Yeah, it was adding something. He didn't see a purpose behind this,
and I
>don't either. Explain it to me.
>Patrick


Ok here's my thought on your points...it depends on if you have an
extremely combat intensive game or a GM that loves to role play. If you
have the type that's all about role playing then the system can both be
to your advantage and disadvantage. It would allow you to role play
your fights out better than "I pull out my ingram and burp him a 3 round
burst for 10S what's my TN?" The deciding factor is whether or not your
GM has common sense. If you do a knife hand to someone's throat they
WILL stop and grab their throat because the muscles will tighten up and
if you've done it correctly you'll collapse their esophagus which would
be pretty much a "you're down and not getting up" manuver. The average
idiot could do this and could drop anyone that he was lucky enough to
hit correctly so in the aspect of something like that the system would
be great BUT if your GM is a One Delta Ten Tango (1D10T) then you've got
him going "oh...nope your attack didn't do deadly damage on either stun
or physical and he's wasn't damaged before so he's fine and is going to
keep shooting at you as if you hadn't hit him at all cause he's got a
damage compensator" or some moronic bullsh!t like that. However if he
would do like I suggested and make up lists of basic moves, intermediate
moves, advanced moves, and mastery moves and depending on your skill
limiting you to a limited number of "attacks" with the system then you'd
be better off cause you'd balance the system quite well however it still
boils down to it's up to you to decide if you want to use it, take it or
leave it it's up to you. (Personally if he'd even remotely come close
to taking the advice on it I posted I'd be implementing it into my games
within the month of getting it because I've got 3 of my 9 players
that're playing martial arts intensive characters and it would vastly
flesh them out but as it stands it is a bit more of a pain cause anyone
can do anything but the effectiveness is based upon the skill level.
There's just some stuff a beginner won't even know about a martial art
that a master would be flawless with and that's my only real issue with
the thing cause combat is rare in my games and I give them more "free
outs" than "forcings" into combat so when it does occur we play it out
very detailed and have our fun doing it because it's not always about
dropping the guy as fast as you possibly can...play around with him,
have some fun, enjoy every aspect of the game as long as you can!)

Derek
Message no. 32
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Harlequin)
Subject: Detailed SR Unarmed Combat system
Date: Mon Oct 29 12:35:01 2001
Derek Hyde wrote:

>
>
>Ok here's my thought on your points...it depends on if you have an
>extremely combat intensive game or a GM that loves to role play. If you
>have the type that's all about role playing then the system can both be
>to your advantage and disadvantage. It would allow you to role play
>your fights out better than "I pull out my ingram and burp him a 3 round
>burst for 10S what's my TN?"
>

exactly. I didnt really think it even need to be clarified, felt it was
pretty self explaining.

Harle
Message no. 33
From: shadowrn@*********.com (david lowe-rogstad)
Subject: Detailed SR Unarmed Combat system
Date: Mon Oct 29 14:40:02 2001
At 12:35 PM -0500 10/29/01, Harlequin wrote:
>Derek Hyde wrote:
>>
>>Ok here's my thought on your points...it depends on if you have an
>>extremely combat intensive game or a GM that loves to role play. If you
>>have the type that's all about role playing then the system can both be
>>to your advantage and disadvantage. It would allow you to role play
>>your fights out better than "I pull out my ingram and burp him a 3 round
>>burst for 10S what's my TN?"

at the risk on jumping in hereŠ

i can honestly say that some of the best combat scenes i've even
experienced have been in a Call of Cthulhu game. if any one else have
ever played CoC, you know that it's a relatively simplistic combat
system: you go in order of Dex, roll to hit, roll damage. that's
about it. however, the GM had us sweating bullets almost every time.

on the other hand, i've played games that claimed to be "the most
realistic combat system ever" and found that once you get done
consulting chart after chart and rolling die after die, you have to
wake the next player up so they can take their action.

it's been my experience that the faster and more furious, the more
fun, but that's just my preference.

d.
--
david lowe-rogstad
flash designer + developer
dlowe@****.com
Message no. 34
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Sebastian Wiers)
Subject: Detailed SR Unarmed Combat system
Date: Mon Oct 29 23:50:01 2001
>If you do a knife hand to someone's throat they
>WILL stop and grab their throat because the muscles will tighten up and
>if you've done it correctly you'll collapse their esophagus which would
>be pretty much a "you're down and not getting up" manuver. The average
>idiot could do this and could drop anyone that he was lucky enough to
>hit correctly so in the aspect of something like that the system would
>be great

IMO, barring some very special circumstances, the average idiot can't work
up the nerve to hit somebody like that. Being able to make yourself do that
is part of the "unarmed combat" skill, and thus you can't do that kind of
damage without some decent skill.

> BUT if your GM is a One Delta Ten Tango (1D10T) then you've got
>him going "oh...nope your attack didn't do deadly damage on either stun
>or physical and he's wasn't damaged before so he's fine and is going to
>keep shooting at you as if you hadn't hit him at all cause he's got a
>damage compensator" or some moronic bullsh!t like that.

Or he could just say "you'd like to do that, but you simply can't bring
yourself to move quickly and forcefully enough. You score an indecisive hit
to his neck, and the enemy is apprently unnaffected."

Kappa alpha fifty-five.

-Mongoose
Message no. 35
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Harlequin)
Subject: Detailed SR Unarmed Combat system
Date: Tue Oct 30 12:05:03 2001
Sebastian Wiers wrote:

>>If you do a knife hand to someone's throat they
>>WILL stop and grab their throat because the muscles will tighten up and
>>if you've done it correctly you'll collapse their esophagus which would
>>be pretty much a "you're down and not getting up" manuver. The average
>>idiot could do this and could drop anyone that he was lucky enough to
>>hit correctly so in the aspect of something like that the system would
>>be great
>>
>
>IMO, barring some very special circumstances, the average idiot can't work
>up the nerve to hit somebody like that. Being able to make yourself do that
>is part of the "unarmed combat" skill, and thus you can't do that kind of
>damage without some decent skill.
>

I think the whole point of the system is getting lost in over analytical
mush. If you dont have any formal training then as the rules state you
use the basic rules but with (S)L damage.

If you do have formal training then your not really a 'idiot' in this
field are you? By your tone I take your skill on the topic falls on the
fore mentioned. Let me state that anyone trained well in martial arts is
first taught to walk away, avoid a altercation at all costs. If that
isnt possible and all other alternatives are not possible then when you
use force you use it to remove the threat as QUICKLY and EFFICIENTLY as
possible. If that means a side kick to their knee to blow it out, a
spear hand to the eyes or throat or instep kick to their groin then
thats what you do. The quicker you remove their willingness to fight the
better it is for you and any good teacher drills that into your head.

So yes if the person has not skill or formal training they may not know
how to or have the mental conditioning to do a serious move like that.
But the system is to bring skilled chars a less abstract combat
procedure. Thus the goal is to work with char who would know how and
have the mental training to perform the techniques I listed.

As I said the average joe vhar or NPC wouldnt know anything beyond the
basic punch/kick thus the entire system is moot for them.

Harle
Message no. 36
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Derek Hyde)
Subject: Detailed SR Unarmed Combat system
Date: Tue Oct 30 13:00:01 2001
>I think the whole point of the system is getting lost in over
analytical
>mush. If you dont have any formal training then as the rules state you
>use the basic rules but with (S)L damage.
>If you do have formal training then your not really a 'idiot' in this
>field are you? By your tone I take your skill on the topic falls on the

>fore mentioned. Let me state that anyone trained well in martial arts
is
>first taught to walk away, avoid a altercation at all costs. If that
>isnt possible and all other alternatives are not possible then when you

>use force you use it to remove the threat as QUICKLY and EFFICIENTLY as

>possible. If that means a side kick to their knee to blow it out, a
>spear hand to the eyes or throat or instep kick to their groin then
>thats what you do. The quicker you remove their willingness to fight
the
>better it is for you and any good teacher drills that into your head.
>So yes if the person has not skill or formal training they may not know

>how to or have the mental conditioning to do a serious move like that.
>But the system is to bring skilled chars a less abstract combat
>procedure. Thus the goal is to work with char who would know how and
>have the mental training to perform the techniques I listed.
>As I said the average joe vhar or NPC wouldnt know anything beyond the
>basic punch/kick thus the entire system is moot for them.

Many good points you make but I know for a fact that there's a lot of
"martial arts schools" out there that just teach you to kick the crap
out of em, a good example of such a school was the movie karate kid. In
theory IF all the sensei of all of the schools would indeed teach the
philosophy and not continue teaching the student if he didn't believe
the philosophy then it would work indeed as you say but there are those
idiots that've gone to a few lessons and then quit cause it was too hard
for them OR there's the idiots that watch a kung fu movie and think that
they're bruce lee just cause they've watched him throw those kicks and
such time and time again. I'm not implying that just anyone has martial
arts knowledge but I am saying that there are too many that would have
progressed as Tae Kwon Do is now and become more of a sport than an art
and there would definitely be places they could learn it and the teacher
wouldn't even ask them why they wanted to learn as long as they had the
NuYen to pay for the classes. You've got to take these things into
consideration, if you can do it now there's no doubt at all that you
could do it then.

Derek
Message no. 37
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Derek Hyde)
Subject: Detailed SR Unarmed Combat system
Date: Tue Oct 30 13:10:02 2001
>I think the whole point of the system is getting lost in over
>analytical mush. If you dont have any formal training then as the rules
>state you use the basic rules but with (S)L damage.
>If you do have formal training then your not really a 'idiot' in this
>field are you? By your tone I take your skill on the topic falls on the
>fore mentioned. Let me state that anyone trained well in martial arts
>is first taught to walk away, avoid a altercation at all costs. If that

>isnt possible and all other alternatives are not possible then when you
>use force you use it to remove the threat as QUICKLY and EFFICIENTLY as
>possible. If that means a side kick to their knee to blow it out, a
>spear hand to the eyes or throat or instep kick to their groin then
>thats what you do. The quicker you remove their willingness to fight
the
>better it is for you and any good teacher drills that into your head.
>So yes if the person has not skill or formal training they may not know
>how to or have the mental conditioning to do a serious move like that.
>But the system is to bring skilled chars a less abstract combat
>procedure. Thus the goal is to work with char who would know how and
>have the mental training to perform the techniques I listed.
>As I said the average joe vhar or NPC wouldnt know anything beyond the
>basic punch/kick thus the entire system is moot for them.


Oh and to answer the jab at my skill....it never passed green belt in
shotokan karate because I couldn't stand having a sensei that taught an
ART as a SPORT. The martial arts are not something that you learn just
so you can go to tournaments and stupid competitions, they're an art and
should be taught as such. My skill will however begin progressing again
as soon as the next college semester starts up here because they're
starting to offer an Aikido class that I'm told is very good and is
taught as the art and not as some macho I can kick your butt bullsh!t.

Derek
Message no. 38
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Gurth)
Subject: Detailed SR Unarmed Combat system
Date: Tue Oct 30 13:15:01 2001
According to Harlequin, on Tue, 30 Oct 2001 the word on the street was...

> Let me state that anyone trained well in martial arts is
> first taught to walk away, avoid a altercation at all costs.

But to be fair, that's not relevant to a set of martial arts rules, is it?
It would be similar to having a thread about rules for firearms combat and
saying that anyone with proper training keeps their finger away from the
trigger except at the moment they want to actually fire the weapon, or in a
vehicles rules discussion mentioning that good drivers check their tires
before starting the car :)

> If that
> isnt possible and all other alternatives are not possible then when you
> use force you use it to remove the threat as QUICKLY and EFFICIENTLY as
> possible. If that means a side kick to their knee to blow it out, a
> spear hand to the eyes or throat or instep kick to their groin then
> thats what you do. The quicker you remove their willingness to fight the
> better it is for you and any good teacher drills that into your head.

But again, IMHO that's not really important in a set of game rules. In
fact, I'd say that if you want to write up a set of very detailed HTH
combat rules, you should also include ways to attack that deliberately
cause less damage than the maximum possible, in case you only want to
demonstrate what you can do without actually hurting someone. As an example
I once witnessed back in high school, someone I knew was getting pretty
irritated with someone who kept bugging him, so he kicked him on the side
of the head. He only just touched him, but it was enough to let the guy know
that he _could_ hurt him if he wanted to. IMHO this falls under "as QUICKLY
and EFFICIENTLY as possible" but not really in the way most game systems
define those terms.

> So yes if the person has not skill or formal training they may not know
> how to or have the mental conditioning to do a serious move like that.
> But the system is to bring skilled chars a less abstract combat
> procedure. Thus the goal is to work with char who would know how and
> have the mental training to perform the techniques I listed.

So how would you handle characters who haven't got the training but try to
do fancy stuff they see in the movies? I'm guessing that would be at least
half of all people getting into fights...

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
"Those Who Do Do Not Know the Past are Doomed to Reboot it"
-- Paranoia R&D Catalog
-> NAGEE Editor * ShadowRN GridSec * Triangle Virtuoso <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://plastic.dumpshock.com <-

GC3.12: GAT/! d-(dpu) s:- !a>? C+@ UL 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?
Incubated into the First Church of the Sqooshy Ball, 21-05-1998
Message no. 39
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Damion Milliken)
Subject: Detailed SR Unarmed Combat system
Date: Wed Oct 31 07:30:03 2001
Bira writes:

> > I did like, however, the combined Stun and Physical damage bit. Of
> > course, as you mentioned, it would probably lead to very fast deadly
> > fights...
>
> I just about any fight the runners are likely to enter, Stun damage is
> going to be just as deadly as Physical, since all the enemy has to do when
> you fall unconscious is to apply a "finishing blow"... The GM wouldn't even
> need to roll for this.

One of the systems proposed was a dual Physical + Stun system. While in most
circumstances Stun Damage is just as bad to a runner as Physical, getting
hit for both at the same time is probably going to result in faster higher
TN modifiers than getting hit with one or the other. This could be very
dangerous.

--
Damion Milliken University of Wollongong
Unofficial Shadowrun Guru E-mail: dam01@***.edu.au
-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.12
GE d- s++:-- a25 C++ US++>+++ P+ L+>++ E- W+ N++ o@ K- w+(--) O-@ M--
V- PS+ PE- Y+ PGP-@>++ t+ 5 X+>+++ R++ !tv(--) b+ DI+++@ D G+
e++>++++$ h- r++>+++ y->+++
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
Message no. 40
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Damion Milliken)
Subject: detailed SR unarmed combat system
Date: Wed Oct 31 07:50:01 2001
Dan Turek writes:

> Do most people use knockdown? How about cyberwear/attribute damage from Stun
> hits? If you take a serious and don't roll any sixes, are you taking the
> difference as "critical hits" in MM?

The knockdown rules are quite fun. We never used to use them, as they were
just seen as an additional dice roll that slowed down combat even more. But
recently we tried them out, and they're a lot of fun - combat becomes much
more cinematic.

> What do people use when they brass knuckles/steel shod boots? Unarmed or
> Armed (Blunt Weapons, Brawling)? If I take Big Knuckles from CP for SR does
> that have to be Cyber-Implant Weaponry? How do they apply for martial art
> techniques?

These are all damn fine questions! I realise that I've always had an
unwritten house rule that brass knuckles came under unarmed combat.
Actually, don't hardliner gloves and shock gloves come under unarmed?

> I still don't see a good system for having two melee weapons, especially
> if they are different ones (like sword and dagger or club and chainsaw).

Isn't the ambidextrous rule from CC able to handle this?

> I also like the "split your dice to hit several opponents" from SR1 or 2.
> The SR3 rule on pgs 122-123 read like you may as well attack everyone you
> can and keep your dice to dodge (provided you aren't using a monowhip)
> unless you know they are highly skilled (in which case you should have shot
> them instead of going into melee if at all possible).

Yeah, but unless _you're_ highly skilled, you'll just be flailing around and
not landing any hits after the first. It works out if you ask me.

--
Damion Milliken University of Wollongong
Unofficial Shadowrun Guru E-mail: dam01@***.edu.au
-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.12
GE d- s++:-- a25 C++ US++>+++ P+ L+>++ E- W+ N++ o@ K- w+(--) O-@ M--
V- PS+ PE- Y+ PGP-@>++ t+ 5 X+>+++ R++ !tv(--) b+ DI+++@ D G+
e++>++++$ h- r++>+++ y->+++
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
Message no. 41
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Bira)
Subject: detailed SR unarmed combat system
Date: Wed Oct 31 08:40:01 2001
On Wed, 31 Oct 2001 23:51:33 +1100 (EST)
Damion Milliken <dam01@***.edu.au> wrote:

>
> > What do people use when they brass knuckles/steel shod boots? Unarmed or
> > Armed (Blunt Weapons, Brawling)? If I take Big Knuckles from CP for SR does
> > that have to be Cyber-Implant Weaponry? How do they apply for martial art
> > techniques?
>
> These are all damn fine questions! I realise that I've always had an
> unwritten house rule that brass knuckles came under unarmed combat.
> Actually, don't hardliner gloves and shock gloves come under unarmed?

It seems all of them do come under Unarmed Combat, and the Big Knuckles probably
would, too. Inspite of them being weapons, you're still using them to punch just as if you
were unarmed. I suppose Cyber Implany Weaponry is used with spurs, hand razors and other
weapons that are used in other ways.


--
Bira -- SysOp da Shadowland.BR
http://www.shadowland.com.br
Redator de Shadowrun da RPG em Revista
http://www.rpgemrevista.f2s.com

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about Detailed SR Unarmed Combat system, 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!