Topic: Medieval Combat: How do you feel about it?

[OLF, i.e. Olf Le Fol]

RMSS has initiative modifiers for reach.  Is there anything it can't do?

Everything. Historically, the spear and its variant were used not because they merely gave a chance to strike first (initiative modifiers) but because they allow their user to keep their opponent at range. It's not "I may strike you first" but "you cannot touch while I can hit you". Reach is very important in combat, and the above missile point is just about that.

[Arioch]

Everything. Historically, the spear and its variant were used not because they merely gave a chance to strike first (initiative modifiers) but because they allow their user to keep their opponent at range. It's not "I may strike you first" but "you cannot touch while I can hit you". Reach is very important in combat, and the above missile point is just about that.

This would really be something I'd like to see in RM: well designed rules for holding your foe at bay (HARP has a nice rule for that, but still not perfect imho...).

It's also an example of what I meant when I said that rules should make the game fun rather than "realistic". A rule like this would make combat more interesting, and would give more reasons for using certain weapons instead of others.

ON the Keep It Simple Side, John Curtis III used the Moving Manuever Table when he GMed rolemaster combat.  His players would state a target, then he'd give an arbitrary number to hit that specific spot using the Critical Strike tables as a guide.

And why he never wrote this down in the rules?!? 
Sometimes I really hate this old "let the GM come up with something for this" habit!!

[providence13]

Holding at bay......

Would you use some or all of your OB as a reduction on their MM (and DB)?

You stand there with a spear blocking my path.
Init doesn't really matter;
If I come at you-you get a spear attack = my MM actually puts me in harm's way; reducing my DB.
If you come at me- you can still attack because of reach (and who wants to run up a spear? angry boars maybe...note to self: boars get frenzy and always fight with full OB )

So, I intentionally use my MM to put me in harm's way.....That doesn't sound like fun...But carrying a spear sounds better and better

[thrud]

There might be something related in Arms companion? I seem to remember a skill called closing?

[jolt]

There was a rule in 4th Hero System that broke down melee into three "ranges":  short, medium and long (they might have been called something else but you get the idea).  In a fight between two people, one with a spear and the other a dirk, the spear fighter gets bonuses while the dirk fighter gets penalties at long range and the reverse would apply at close range.  I don't remember the exact mechanic for how you changed ranges but in the above example the spear fighter is obviously going to try and keep his foe at a slight distance while the dirk fighter is always going to try and get in as close as possible.  Some weapons were effective at more than single "range"; the 3-sectional staff, for example, never suffered penalties regardless of the range.

jolt

[RandalThor]

MMMM, I wonder why many of you think that revising the combat system to accomodate more "medieval concepts" necesseraly will bring a more complex system.

Largely because of the myriad of possibilities in combat. It would be a very complex system to take everything into account rules-wise, such as terrain which changes just about every fight. That is why I am a big proponent of: UYIS (Use Your Imagination Stupid). The game has skill ranks and total bonuses which reflect how much you know about and how well you use the weapon at hand, so putting in a bunch of other knick-knacks would just bog it down.

Historically, the spear and its variant were used not because they merely gave a chance to strike first (initiative modifiers) but because they allow their user to keep their opponent at range.

That, and the fact that it is a much easier weapon to learn (at the basics) than, say a sword or flail.

D.I. "Here's the pointy stick. Which end do YOU think goes towards the enemy?"

Recruit: "Well, hhmmm, I am guessing the pointy end. Right?"

D.I. "Right! Good, now off with you to the front!"

Recruit: " Uhhh.... what."

[Elton Robb]

That, and the Greeks developed a martial art around the spear.  A natural evolution from 3,000 years of using it.  Someone's bound to teach effective combat techniques with it.  You know, I watched a bunch of men dressed in armor have at it with European Medieval weapons.  It's nothing like you see in the movies.  They were brutal, fast, and agile with their weapons.

Someone ought to stat out a martial art using the Martial Arts Companion . . . .

[OLF, i.e. Olf Le Fol]

There might be something related in Arms companion? I seem to remember a skill called closing?

Oh, as said, I have my own house rule to manage reach, based on ideas from the Arms Companion. Just mentioning that there was no official ruling on the matter.

[providence13]

Please share with the group goodman OLF.

[markc]

 Watching the Deadliest Warrior and all the metrics they use got me to thinking of this thread. In the show they look at the damage a weapon can do upon simulated flesh or animals. So IMO they get the basic idea of how a weapon could damage someone in a perfect swing or attack. But they do not receive any data about what the attacker does or does not do in battle. So what foot movement do they use? How do they get an opponent to make mistakes so they can get the best attack.
 In the past I have enjoyed the various TV shows that look at a martial art and pick 3 moves to lean. IMO you need to get a bunch of those guys together an pick their brains if you want something more life like.

MDC

[OLF, i.e. Olf Le Fol]

Please share with the group goodman OLF.

Np. Just leave me until this weekend, to go home and take my books.

[RandalThor]

Watching the Deadliest Warrior and all the metrics they use got me to thinking of this thread. In the show they look at the damage a weapon can do upon simulated flesh or animals. So IMO they get the basic idea of how a weapon could damage someone in a perfect swing or attack. But they do not receive any data about what the attacker does or does not do in battle. So what foot movement do they use? How do they get an opponent to make mistakes so they can get the best attack.

Although no simulation will ever be perfect - these are merely for entertainment value. The viceral thrill of us seeing our favorite warriors duking it out.

In the past I have enjoyed the various TV shows that look at a martial art and pick 3 moves to lean. IMO you need to get a bunch of those guys together an pick their brains if you want something more life like.

And a kinesiologist (is that the right use/spelling?) wouldn't hurt either.

[markc]

RandalThor;
 Another thought is that when Microsoft's new body motion detector comes to market I can see it being a huge boon to RPG's. You link in with your buds and GM and run a real combat with abilities based on your PC. I can see a lot of "gamers" being thinner over time.

 Yes you cannot forget the kinesiologist [Google chrome says spelling is ok.] IMO it takes people from many different disciplines and experiences. I myself helped a few people in college through the K course but I do not remember anything about it.

MDC

[RandalThor]

Wii Rolemaster the newest and bestest way to lose weight. Get your copy now!

[Arioch]

Wii Rolemaster the newest and bestest way to lose weight.

And limbs, with the new Wii Arms Law! See your friends die gory deaths and stumble on immaginary dead turtles!

[markc]

Wii Rolemaster the newest and bestest way to lose weight.

And limbs, with the new Wii Arms Law! See your friends die gory deaths and stumble on immaginary dead turtles!

 Now we will also need the new O-LED paintable TV screens to cover one of our favorite walls in everyones domicile. Then we can all do some real damage in our favorite RPG.

MDC

[RandalThor]

It coming.........


just not in our lifetimes. 

[markc]

It coming.........


just not in our lifetimes. 

 Paintable O-LED tech is rumored to be almost in the pre-prototype stage and I have seen flexible O-LED screens about 4 years ago. So it is not too far away and I hope I am around to see it.
MDC

[OLF, i.e. Olf Le Fol]

So... Managing reach/combat range.
First, as seen in spreadsheet, I gave each weapon a reach, from 0 to 3. Basing myself on the Arms Companion's Close Quarters Combat (?4.7, p27), I wrote the little table you see at the end of the spreadsheet, giving the OB, DB, Initiative and parry modifiers when fighting, depending the distance from one's foe and one's weapon reach.

For instance, someone with a sword (reach 0) tries to fight someone with a spear (reach 2). At first, both are at a distance of 2, so the spearman can fight normally (0 range for him) while the swordsman can defend normally but not attack (+2 range for him). If the swordsman manages to close to a distance of 1, he fights at -80 OB (+1 range) while the spearman fights at -50 OB, -50 initiative and can parry with 50% of his OB (-1 range for him). If the swordsman manages to close to a distance of 0, he fights normally (0 range for him) while the spearman fights at -100 OB, -50 initiative and can parry with 25% of his OB (-2 range for him).

Now, how to get closer or farer?
First, it's an active action costing 75% activity, 50% OB and -50 initiative.
To resolve it, the one initiating the action (going closer or farer) makes a roll on his Closing skill (1/2 similarity with any weapon, so that someone proficient with a weapon and fighting with it still knows how to get close or far without the Closing skill) + armour MM penalty.
The "defender" then rolls a closing roll (calculated the same as previously i.e. Closing skill, with 1/2 similarity with weapon being used + armour penalty).
Compare both results, winner is the highest roll.

Important: the defender is considered "passive", with "keeping the same distance" giving no penalties to actions.

For instance, our swordsman and our spearman fight.
* They're at a distance of 2, so the swordsman wants to get closer whereas the spearman wants to keep the distance. The swordsman resolves his closing action while the spearman doesn't have anything to do (well, save attacking normally).
* When they reach a distance of 1, the swordsman may wish to get closer whereas the spearman may want to get farer, so two closing actions would be made.
* When they reach a distance of 0, only the spearman may want to get farer, so one closing actions would be made (or the spearman could just throw his spear away and use his sword!).

Of course, results from some criticals may be more obvious.

[RandalThor]

Something I meant to talk about before:

8 ) Armor. Oh boy, where to begin.
8a) Again, somebody at some early point of RM got the notion that certain materials are "better" than others, flat out. That's nonsense (I seem to need this word quite often here...). Different materials and armour styles affect different attack types differently. That's why there is such a broad diversity, they all have a balanced set of advantages and disadvantages which combine protection, movement inhibition, price, weight, and a lot of other factors. Ties in with point 7 though: Armor should be able to alleviate or totally negate hits, but it should not affect the probability of being hit in any way. This is one of the biggest issues I have with RM and "realism".
8b) Armor does not hinder movement anywhere near the excessive penalties given in RM. I have seen people in what RM describes as P19 jog for more than 20 minutes to warm up (admittedly, those were our fittest master fighters). In fact, leg movement is hardly hampered at all, but you may find it difficult to raise your arms above shoulder height in heavy plate (the joints block at some point, depending on your exact armor). Higher-grade armor will have more finely worked joints that allow for more movement.
The real problem with full metal armor is the sheer mass of the suit - you will be exhaustet fairly soon. Super-heavy plate (like a Cuirass) is too heavy to bear at all, and requires to move around on a horse.

A) So a leather jerkin stops a spear thrust just as well as a steel breastplate? I am not a medieval armor & weapons specialist by any stretch of the imagination, but that doesn't seem right. Also, some of the material bonuses that RM grants come from fantasy materials that can be classified as being somewhat magical in origins and effect, so no realism broken there. I agree that armor should really just negate damage, but the way the system is built it would be very hard to alter. As for specific weapon vs armor, anyone remember the old AD&D weapon vs armor type table? That was a detail missing in other areas of the game.

B) Wasn't all of the heavier armors fitted to the individual wearer? Only things like leather jerkins would used "off the rack" right? That means that many armors should benefit from a quality bonus automatically, and there could be non-fitted penalties for those times when it is not. Also, I don't think that modern man truly realises the sheer thugitude (Like it? All me baby!) of knights. I believe they were more brutish than we romanticize. Big, strong, and probably much faster than we give them credit for. I think in the effort to balance things out, so that one way would not be inherently superior over others (which is so each player can feel "good" about their character in relation to the other characters) armor realism has kind of gone out the window. Even those individuals who weren't knights or supremely trained in the use of armor would put on as much as they could before a battle because they knew that it greatly increased their chances of survival. Why? Because in many cases it was extremely hard to hurt the person at all in heavy armor. Just wacking them with your sword usually didn't cut it. (Cut it. Get it? I slay myself! Oh, there I did it again!) You need the right weapon for the job, and/or to somehow out maneuver them so you could apply greater force without opening yourself up to a counter attack.

As for shields, I have always thought they have been shorted. I think a shield should give a much bigger DB modifier, but also give the user a negative mod to their attacks. I can more than imagine that trying to attack around your own shield (what 2-and-a-half feet by three feet, approx.) is more difficult than otherwise. Of course, it does free you up from having to block as much, but maybe that is how it could be handled: The shield user uses their OB to add to DB to a greater effect. Or, perhaps to do the OB/Db thing in another way, without a shield you get a 2DB for 1OB thing, while with a shield you get a 1 for 1. Hmmm, an idea to work on....