| MOVE | Charge | Breaking Off from Melee | - | - |
| AIM (Melee) | Strike Blows | Weaponless Combat: Pummel, Grapple, Overbear | Non-Lethal Combat: Subdual, Vanquishing, Disarming | - |
| AIM (Missile) | - | - | - | - |
| VIEW | - | - | - | - |
| USE | - | - | - | - |
| CAST | Spell Casting During Melee | Meleeing an Opponent Spell Caster | - | - |
| TURN | Turning Undead | - | - | - |
| GUARD | Set Weapons Against Possible Opponent Charge | - | - | - |
| QUICK | - | - | - | - |
| DELAY | - | - | - | - |
| VIEW | - | - | - | - |
| SPEED | - | - | - | - |
| END | - | - | - | - |
Hi Jesse,
I was thinking of how were in a DM-like role when you posed the questions, and that's why I mentioned the dramatic aspect.
No matter what a designer
does in regard to managing combat, there is going to be a number of players
who dislike it.
With some systems it's the
majority of gamers, with others it's a minority of some size, small or
large.
In all cases each system
will have its stalwart champions and vocal opponents.
Rest assured that I was
not in defensive mode when i read and responded to you.
What I posted was simply
the straight-forward reasoning I used in arriving at the system that I
did, and why I did so.
In the Lejendary
Adventure game I used a different
method,
but one that is also streamlined
and not a step-by-step attempt to re-inact hand-to-hand combat with weapons
generally of the medieval period.
As i mentioned before, when
creatures with natural weapons are thrown into such a calculation, the
variables one needs to consider make it a nigh impossible exercise.
Magical elements compound
the difficulties even further.
If you devise a fast-paced
combat system that includes the major elements of actual fighting in armor
with the various weapons usual,
including monsters
and magical attacks and defenses, hats off, and I think the gamers will
beat a path to your door 
Cheers,
Gary
Quote:
Originally Posted by RFisher
Well, sure. But wasn't the
question asking why OAD&D combat wasn't
more simple rather than why it wasn't more complex?
Perhaps, but I read it as
questioning the doubling up on AC and HP
benefits in combat, and not have more realism in the system.
You are correct about the
need for keeping combat abstract in the RPG.
Every complication demands
more rules and explanations, more time spent resolving combat, that's fine
for a military or dueling simulation, but not in an RPG where there are
so many other things to do besides killing things
Cheers,
Gary
Howdy Drifter Bob,
When a search for realistic
combat mechanics begins,
the challenge of devising
a system that meets the "realism" required (that measure being totally
subjective) that does not extend the time and effort
necessary to resolve the matter becomes highly problematic.
Having rules that require players' characters to do something that the player does not wish seems to me to be the antithesis of role-playing--aside from the compulsions of the occasional casting of magic spells that force such compliance and where saving throws are allowed.
None the less, individual
taste can not be disputed.
Good luck in your quest
for the perfect combat resolution system.
If you devise something
that meets that measure broadly, it will likely revolutionize the whole
of the approach to RPGs.
However, any rules governing
how a character must specifically act in key situations move the game system
away from role-playing.
Cheers,
Gary
Drifter Bob,
To cut to the chase here,
for I haven't the time to spare for more point-by-point
reply to so long a missive,
in my considered opinion
detailed "realistic" combat rules are a detriment to the RPG, not a benefit.
There is already undue stress
placed upon combat as the central theme of the game form, while it is in
fact only one of several key elements.
The designer would better
serve the audience by stressing the other elements than would be dine by
spending yet more content space on detailing fighting.
Cheers,
Gary
