From:	Marc A Renouf <jormung@*****.UMICH.EDU>
Subject:	Re: Why Close Combat really sucks
Date:	Fri, 23 Jun 1995 15:11:21 -0400

On Thu, 22 Jun 1995, Mr Bob Sagittarian wrote:

> > 3rd : looser rolls his body resistance test and adds it to his melee
> > test. Compare this total to the winners melee test and adjust damage.
> > Lets say the defender gets 2 success. UNder the normal rules he gets from
> > deadly to serious no matter hoe far over deadly you were. With my way,
> > the attacker got 5, defender 3. That makes a net success total of 2 for
> > the attacker, which still kills the defender.
> >
> > what do ya think?

> Your system could work OK, but until I tried it out, I wouldn't know
> for sure. Yeah, the lethality section helps, but I'm playing this game, NOT
> GMing it. Sucks, don't it?

This is the way we've been doing it for pretty much the entire
time. It works well and reflects the fact that if the attacker had *way*
more successes, the defender is screwed. I also allow damage to stage
above deadly (similar to the FoF rule, but slightly different), and that
makes things extremely lethal, even melee weapons.

Marc