Riddle Of The Spice

[Gary_Bingham]

I am completely 100% failing to see what you're trying to accomplish Gary.

Ralph from a certain perspective fighting with bodyshields is no different from normal combat and could be handled similarly to non-shielded combat with some descriptive fluff. I accept that indeed that would be one way to handle it.

However I want Bodyshield fighting to be different from non-shield fighting. I want it to both feel different and to encourage different tactics than regular combat. I also want the changes to the system to be suitably subtle that the players do not have to relearn the system, and that shields feel part of the system and not the tack on that they indeed are.

I feel that fighting with shields is a sufficently different style of fighting to warrant its own proficency. The proficency system forces the player to fight in a certain way due to limiting the manouver available and tuning the activation costs to match. I feel this is a more elegant way to differentiate between shielded and non-shielded fighting style without the arbitary modifiers suggested

At most you simply need a "shielded" version of each proficiency.

Someone has Knife fighting and Knife fighting (shield) or Rapier and Rapier (shield) as seperate proficiencies.  All of the maneuvers etc. for Rapier (shield) are identical to Rapier.  The damage done is identical to Rapier.  The ATN and DTNs are identical to rapier.  The only difference is that the (shield) version is slowed to account for fighting a shielded opponent.

There are no other rules that you need.

If niether have shields use the rules exactly for TROS now using the non shield version of the proficiency.  If both have shields use the rules exactly for TROS now using the shield version of the proficiency.  If you are using the wrong version of the proficiency you have a penalty (like defaults at -2 as Mike suggested).

That's it.  What other rules could you possibly need that aren't already there.

What happens when a shielded guy fights a non shielded guy?  The non shielded guy dies.  Period.  There is no fight because the shielded guy can attack (using the non shield proficiency) at full speed, while the naked guy has to to attack in slow motion to deal with the speed.

There are alot of guys practicing weapons here, they typically will spar at 1/2 or 1/4 speed to avoid injury.  Ask them what happens if one guy fights at 1/4 speed while the other fights at full.  Pretty lop sided contest.

Now.  One could say the naked guy could defend himself at full speed, its only his attacks that need to be slow.  So maybe you actually want to fight out the naked guy desperately trying to defend himself long enough for help to arrive.

Simple.  Naked guy's ATN gets changed to a 10 to reflect how hard it is to attack in slow motion against an opponent who can defend at full speed.  With no fear of his opponent's attack, shield guy can dump dice into attacks of his own making it pretty much an all out attack vs all out defense engagment.

But if they both have shields, use the normal ATNs because basically the effect of the shield simply puts them on equal footing.  After all, the sole purpose of shields in the story is to allow for duels uninterrupted by gun fire.  Everything else is just techno babble anyway.

In other words, there really isn't anything special you need to do IMO.

You say that Ralph but the system changes that you suggest are just as much as I have done. While I haven't tested my mod as yet I am pretty happy with it though. Using your suggestion the only thing stopping Doppelhander v Doppelhander shield battles is seneshal intervention.

(which is pretty much what Mike has said a couple of times now).

LOL. I respect Mike a lot and pay keen attention to what he says, but this wouldn't be the first time that we have disagreed. It also hasn't stopped us being productive in the past though  (nb. I must take a look at that Taveruun material again it was real good)

Gary

[Gary_Bingham]

On second thoughts I reckon I should offer the Cut manouver and the Thrust manouvers to the Offensive manouvers list for the Shield fighting proficency but given them both a activation cost of 1.

This effectively models the fact that shield fighters are quicker on defense than on attack. And thus gives the shield proficent character a one dice penalty to attack when attacking a non-shield fighter

Gary

[Caz]

Wouldn't it be relatively impossible to deliver an effective cut to someone in a shield, having to move slower and all?  You can still run someone through, by placing your point on them and pushing, or place your blade on them nd slice, but I wouldn't allow the cut at all.

[Gary_Bingham]

I imagine Cuts and Thrusts being employed against a shield purely as a tactic to gain the initiative, while not actually doing any damage. Note by my rules it is still possible to do damage with a Cut or a Thrust it just makes it unlikely as you have to get 6 successes to penetrate the shield. Unlikely but possible. With Cut (1) and Thrust (1) it is more a penalty when fighting non-shielded.

[Mike Holmes]

Actually, I've posed a number of possible things, Ralph. But I'd agree that there may be a simple way to handle it. Your ATN 10 method for non-shielded against shielded could work (but see below). That said, it's an abstraction that we're just detailing out with all the other notes. I'm seeing lots of usable possibilities here.

With your TO method now, Gary, saying that a shield's TO = Dam+5 is just saying what I did - drop out Damage (they'll cancel in the damage phase). My only change would be to add ST to your formula. Then we're doing the same thing with different notation only.

The CP activation thing and sliding scales are not right. After thinking about it a lot the thing that obviates them is that CP isn't effort. It's at most a division of time between activities. But you can't argue that a 6 CP guy using 3 in an attack is employing less actual effort than a 12 CP guy using 6CP. So, at best I'd say that a sliding scale would be based on proportion. But that says that CP can't be representing position, timing, etc. So I'd stay out of that water.

Thinking about it, shields do not make attacks any harder. If I'm not defending at all but have a shield on, then an attack aimed at me will be placed just as well as if I didn't have a shield on. In fact one could argue that the placement is easier since I'm going more slowly. So ATN should not ever be adjusted, IMO.

What's adjusted is the DTN, as it's so much easier to parry a slow attack. So, I'm sticking with what I said above. In the example of the guy who is shielded vs. the unshielded guy, the shielded guy can count on his parry dice, and so can parry with fewer dice than an attack aimed at him. Leaving more dice for attack. Which is the desired effect I think.

So, to recap my set of mods for shields:

[*]Use modified damage system (my method doesn't work with the standard one). I prefer the soak method, but the TO/ST method works fine, too.
[*]Damage from all attacks is based solely on successes-1. This assumes an armed attack, unarmed strikes and throws do no damage (you can still choke a person or crush them somehow with full effects). The reason for the -1 is that this is the damage that the weakest man has with a dagger, IIRC. ST 1 - 2 = -1. Larger weapons do no more damage because they tend only to get the same amount of contact that a dagger gets. That is, normally their damage is based on the advantages of them being a lever arm, which are cancelled by shields.
[*]DTNs are lowered by 4.
[*]Every weapon can be taught (but probably few are) in a mode for use against shields and not. These are separate proficiencies that default at -2. [/list:u]
I think it would work.

Mike

[Gary_Bingham]

I like your method Mike. I am now going to have to try both and see which works best.

Not sure I agree with the separate proficencies, remember there is not a separate proficency for each weapon type. Its more a definition of combat style rather than a definition of the characteristics of weapon types and as such a single Shield fighting proficency defines the style. Then we do not talk about shielded vs non-shield opponents and any modifiers that may apply, but Cut-n-Thrust vs Shield-Fighting proficencies this way I have stayed within the TROS system and the difference is handled under-the-bonnet.

With your TO method now, Gary, saying that a shield's TO = Dam+5 is just saying what I did - drop out Damage (they'll cancel in the damage phase). My only change would be to add ST to your formula. Then we're doing the same thing with different notation only.

Yup, I intended that ST be incorporated into the equation. A Dagger's DAM is listed as ST+0 so a dagger against a shield would resolve as a Shield TO of ST+5. Excellent now we are on the same page as far as shield TO goes. I will note at this point that DAM+5 may be a little high and I may bring this down to +4 or even +3 depending on how a few test combats go.

The CP activation thing and sliding scales are not right. After thinking about it a lot the thing that obviates them is that CP isn't effort. It's at most a division of time between activities. But you can't argue that a 6 CP guy using 3 in an attack is employing less actual effort than a 12 CP guy using 6CP. So, at best I'd say that a sliding scale would be based on proportion. But that says that CP can't be representing position, timing, etc. So I'd stay out of that water.

Oh this is interesting. CP can't be a unit of time. I person with CP10 has no more time in which to perform activities than someone with CP6. Though training and natural ability the CP10 can achieve more in the same time period than the CP6. The CP10 guy acts quicker not having to think as much between activities, whereas CP6 has to concentrate more on what he is doing. CP is therefore a measure of available concentration rather than effort or time.
Certain Proficencies list different activation costs for the same manouvers. I am thinking here of the Doppelhander Cut(1) and the Cut-and-Thrust's Cut(0). The difference here represents the fact that a cut comes more naturally to the Cut-and-Thrust proficent character than the Doppelhander who more naturally will relie on Thrust attacks. Thus an activation cost here is used to indicate a handicap of the Doppelhander in the area of Slash attacks. If both were armed with, say, Poleaxes in which they are both -2, then the Cut-and-Thrust would have a additional 1CP when making Slash attacks. The point of this is to indicate that by increasing activation costs for the the Cut and Thrust manouvers for the Shield-Fighting proficency I have indicated that the Shield fighter must

concentrate more to attack quickly with a Thrust or Slash than a Cut-and-Thrust fighter.

Thinking about it, shields do not make attacks any harder. If I'm not defending at all but have a shield on, then an attack aimed at me will be placed just as well as if I didn't have a shield on. In fact one could argue that the placement is easier since I'm going more slowly. So ATN should not ever be adjusted, IMO.

What's adjusted is the DTN, as it's so much easier to parry a slow attack. So, I'm sticking with what I said above. In the example of the guy who is shielded vs. the unshielded guy, the shielded guy can count on his parry dice, and so can parry with fewer dice than an attack aimed at him. Leaving more dice for attack. Which is the desired effect I think.

I didn't want to mess around with the ATN and DTN as these are listed against each weapon and I didn't want to have to give consideration to various weapon types. But a modifier to DTN makes some sense. I will have to give some thought to this.

Mike I think we are coming at this from slightly different angles, but i think we are getting close.
Gary

[contracycle]

One brief thought: seeing as TROS is broken into 2 sub-rounds, does anyone think that feature could be exploited?  That is, action 1 makes a strike, but because it is slowed by the shield, only in action 2 is it pushed (slowly) into the target.

[Vanguard]

I'm thinking the simplest approach would be for a 'shield' to negate successes.

Much like a suit of armour, the better your shield, the more successes it negates. You assign a rating depending on how well-manufactured the shield is. A military grade shield in good condition might negate upto 8 successes, for example.

In this respect, you can still apply force to a blow, it just takes that extra bit of effort in order to land the sorta blow where force can actually be applied.

Combat of this kind may have to narrated differently. A Cut and Thrust is still allowed. It just acts more like a slice. The -8 success modifier reflects how hard it is to pull off.

A strong man still has the advantage over a weaker man, but the guy who just flails out at things will little thought (i.e: low CP) just ain't gonna get through a shield.

It cums down to skill when you're 8+ successes in excess of your opponent's is needed to get through a shield.

[Caz]

So you're saying it'll act just like armour, or a "normal" energy shield?  You'll have to escribe it differently to make it feel right to the players, or they'll just think they're trying to break through it.

[Vanguard]

Not quite.

What I'm trying to suggest is a system which requires rolling extra successes.

Armour takes away from damage once the blow has actually landed. 'Shields' (i.e: something which distorts or in other ways makes a strike more awkward - a la 'Dune Shield') would instead make it harder to lay that attack to begin with. Before str is even taken into account, you'll first need x amount of successes more than normal before the attack has penetrated.

Once in, however, strength can indeed be applied to the attack, driving a thrust deep, or grinding a slice along flesh. The shield ceases to provide any resistance.

Whereas armour can be relied upon the soak up the dmg of an attack, a shield is used instead to avoid getting struck in the first place.

So yeah. both armour and 'shields' kinda work the same way, but have different impact on combat. Different advantages / weakness.

Hmmm... Full plate and a 'shield' and you're laughing. Having actually been struck, ain't no one got enough successes after getting through that shield left over to inflict any damage.

I'll admit that clubbing attacks still aren't accuratly represented in this system. It just don't sit right.

I dunno...? I just like the idea of a system which doesn't alter combat as it stands too much, and avoids the need for more rules, CP costs, target numbers, etc...

'Dune shields' way fit in with TROS ;)

[Alan]

I had some thoughts on Holtzman Shields for TROS:

Shield  
- stops all attacks the speed of a thrown knife or faster.  Such attacks are just void.
- Lasguns cause feedback explosions that destroy both gun wielder and shield-wearer, and perhaps a radius.
- 3 Armor vs. Slow Pellet guns, Slow Attack maneuver, and Grapples.
- 0 Armor vs. locks, breaks, and strangles if you already have a hold.

Slow Attack Maneuver
- Activation cost = ST used with weapon +1 for Swing, -1 for Thrust, +0 for Slice.  Does damage according to the ST used.  The 3 armor applies.

Slow Pellet Attack
- no ATN penalty for range
- instead, it costs 1MP per range step

Holtzman Shield Block
- As ordinary shield block, but you don't need to encumber a hand with the shield.

This would all have to be fine tuned by play of course.

[Caz]

You coulddo a Holtzman shield block as just an unarmed parry probably.  
   Since I've gotten my guns rules rolling pretty well in play, I'm really wanting to do a fading suns game, whos ideas and setting really goes well with TROS.
  Does anyone have ideas for fading suns shields?  I'm thinking from the sounds of it they'll work just like dune shields, but maybe not quite as well vs.  hand weapons as the dune ones.
   The way they do the mechnics for those is the same as using a minimum and maximum AV for the shields, but I don't think that will work real well with TROS.  Like this-  personal duelling shield, protects with AV 5 to 15.  Less than 5 will get ya, more than 15 will too.  But with wound levels and all that takes out all chance of certain wounds, kinda ruining the feel, and not taking into account toughness and armour and such.  Argh!  This can't be this tough!

[Mike Holmes]

Not sure I agree with the separate proficencies, remember there is not a separate proficency for each weapon type.

I meant for each style. That is, I'd have:

Cut & Thrust (Feyd in the arena)
Knife Fighting (Fremen)
Shielded Knife Fighting (Paul)
etc.

My point is that it seems to me that all maneuvers are different enough in each style to warrant it being a whole new style, essentially.

I will note at this point that DAM+5 may be a little high and I may bring this down to +4 or even +3 depending on how a few test combats go.

I was going to only go to 1, essentially. But maybe two would make more sense. I'm not seeing higher than that, however. Combats would be interminable. Think of it this way, in a normal combat the "lethality rating" is equal to ST+Weap Dam-TO-AR. So in many combats that's about a 0. With what you're suggesting, it's like daggers against plate armor with equal foes. Worse if you use my DTN modifier.

CP can't be a unit of time.

Didn't say it was. Read again, I said "at most" meaning that the division or fraction of time thing is the closest thing to effort that I might accept. I'm with you that it's a "concentration" thing.

A rationale that I might accept based on the source material is that the maneuvers with shield combat have to be more complex to have any chance of success as straightforward maneuvers are just too easy to dodge. Hmmm...

Mike