A New System for Martial Arts Fighting

[AJ_Flowers]

This is an idea I discussed briefly with Ron at Forge Midwest which he encouraged me to post up to First Thoughts!  Obviously, it's not a fully formed idea, since it's being posted up here, but it's something I've been tossing around for years.

At a local mini-convention several years ago I ran a fun one-shot martial arts/comedy game called "Fighting Game: The Movie!"  Basically all the characters were participants in a martial arts tournament.  I ran the game in a very Story-Game-like way, though I didn't have the Indy Game vocabulary at the time to explain what I was doing with it. Basically, I handed out stats and generic moves lists and such, but players had to provide for their characters the important stats of their Name, Ordinary Occupation, Signature Move, and Reason For Being In The Tournament.  It could be serious or zany, whatever. So we have a character who is in the Tournament with the Goal of "Find Out About Father's Death," but I remember we also had a person whose Ordinary Occupation was "Baker" and thought that winning the tournament would somehow make her better at baking cupcakes.  Her special move was a gun that shot frosting.

So instead of having the players fight a lot of NPCs, I played the Tournament Boss and his Evil Assistant (with a business suit and a whip), and then all the players came up with interesting reasons to arrange matches with one another to achieve their characters' goals.

At the time I used the Big Eyes Small Mouth core system to do this, since it seemed genre suited, but it didn't really encompass all of my needs.  I wanted to come up with a better martial arts/chop saki kind of RPG system, something that could be used for something fun but would also reflect my real experiences with martial arts.

It seems to me, along this vein, that the "roll to hit" mechanic, which is a staple of RPG combat systems for pretty much all-time, is really kind of dumb when you actually think about it. Assume in the setting of my game that any player-character is a reasonably competent combatant/martial artist already.  Why should they have to roll to HIT anything? Martial artists hit boards all the time; "boards don't hit back."  I think it would make more sense in my system to toss out the roll to hit. If you say you are hitting someone, you hit! Unless the other person blocks your hit, which to me is the part that requires a roll.

In my theoretical design there are six "ranges" and the roll is on a D6.

Range 1 is the closest range of combatants, a face-to-face, nose-to-nose range, we'll call it grappling range.  Range 6, the combatants are too far away to hit one another with anything but a ranged weapon, be it gun, bow and arrow, or chi blast if you're doing a setting that has that sort of thing.  The in between ranges represent closeness of body where different moves are available at different ranges.  So for example if you're at Range 3 with someone, you can kick them, but you're too far away to punch.

Your range represents how easy it is to hit someone with certain attacks. The "attack value" of an attack is represented by the maximum range at which that attack will work.  A grapple has an AV of one because it only works at Range 1.  A punch has an AV of 2.  A gun has an AV of 6.  Your AV is considered the result of your "roll to hit."  Your attack ALWAYS hits unless the other person does something to block or evade it, in which case you've provided them with the number they need to roll -- subtract the AV of your attack from the range you're standing at. 

Here I guess is where I kind of run in to my first problems - I've made it impossible for a grapple attack to hit at all, for example, because it requires a range of 1 and has an AV of 1 as a result; 1 - 1 = 0 and the opponent never has to roll anything to automatically block it. Of course if all they do is block, it ends their turn and the other person can attack again, so there's a mechanism for countering. You beat the other person's attack by a value of 2 (3?) and you get a counter attack. It happens immediately, again, there's no need to roll to attack, just declare how you are countering. The other player now has to respond to your attempt at counter.  And so-on.  And you can also choose to not block at all, to accept the results of a grapple attack and try to counter out of that stance instead, with a small bonus, but having taken damage.  What I'm after is a system with very fast rolling.  And I want to eliminate "roll to hit" because in my mind how you respond to an attack is more important than the attack itself.

Now within this, I haven't really added anything yet that would allow for varying skill levels of opponents, and I think there should be this or advancement would feel flat.  So perhaps another D6 that you roll represents the "X factor" of your personal skill?  Or in the case of using weapons, you may have to roll an extra higher target number if you're forced to defend against a weapon, or use a weapon, with which you're unfamiliar.

Is there a way to keep the flow of this and still add advancement and varying skill? Do you think the "range" mechanic would be frustrating if fighting multiple opponents? (Perhaps some kind of Thug Rule could be implemented for Jackie Chan Versus 100 Ninjas type of fights... I'm rather fond of house thug rules.) I'm also after general thoughts, since I know there's a wealth of experience in this group.

[Hereward The Wake]

I have to agree that the way most RPGs deal with close combat, UA/hand weapons is highly unsatifactory to anyone woh has some experience of those skills and many who don't
It seems that your AV numbers should be the other way round, ie the closer you are the higher the AV, as the closer someone is to you the harder it is to react/defend against as the reaction time is less, the further away the more time you have to read what they are doing and stop it.

Having been working on comabt systems for a  long time this is a problem I have been battling with, making the game involved yet fast flowing and playable.

It come down to, I belive the interplay between the tactical choices the players have tomake combined with a simple reselution mechanic. It not something I am happy with yet as I have certain elememnts I want in the games.

I'll be interested to see what comes.

How do you propose to cover the changing of distances, or is that an auto matic based on the attack you choose?
How do you decide wh can act when?

best
JW

[Hereward The Wake]

I have to agree that the way most RPGs deal with close combat, UA/hand weapons is highly unsatifactory to anyone woh has some experience of those skills and many who don't
It seems that your AV numbers should be the other way round, ie the closer you are the higher the AV, as the closer someone is to you the harder it is to react/defend against as the reaction time is less, the further away the more time you have to read what they are doing and stop it.

Having been working on comabt systems for a  long time this is a problem I have been battling with, making the game involved yet fast flowing and playable.

It come down to, I belive the interplay between the tactical choices the players have tomake combined with a simple reselution mechanic. It not something I am happy with yet as I have certain elememnts I want in the games.

I'll be interested to see what comes.

How do you propose to cover the changing of distances, or is that an automatic based on the attack you choose?
How do you decide who can act when?
I ask as these are IMO vital in dertemining much of the action and how it will flow.

best
JW

[AJ_Flowers]

Here is what I had in mind for movement -

There are two ways to choose to move.  There is Defensive movement, which means you're moving on your guard and are slow.  You can change up to two Range values in either direction moving defensively.  You move but don't attack, but get a chance to counter if someone attacks you at the new range.

Or instead, there is Offensive movement. If moving Offensively, you can move as many Ranges as you want in either direction -- maybe Offensive isn't the best word since it can also mean a "hard retreat" kind of mechanic as well as charging in with an attack; open to suggestions on this. If you do this, you can't defend against the next attack and are open to it...or you might be rushing in with an attack. You get the attack as an auto-hit like any other attack, but since you're rushing in the Opponent has a bonus to his roll to defend against it because you are charging; he can see it coming.

I see what you mean by saying the values seem reversed! Here's what I'm trying to get at -- the AV of the attack is the absolute minimum range you need to be at to use it and have it work.  At the extremes you have a gun, which can hit at any Range 1-6.  On the other hand a Grapple only hits at Range 1.  The actual "roll" (I misstated above and it wasn't totally clear) is the result of your Attack Type minus Current Range between you and an opponent.  So for example, if I'm using Chi Blast (which could hit at Range 6), but standing at Range 1, the value my opponent must beat is AV Minus Current Range: 6 - 1 = 5.  If I'm using Chi Blast at Range 5, my total attack roll to beat is 6 - 5 = 1.

Or maybe I should consider the absolute closest range to have a value of 0?

[Hereward The Wake]

OK that clears things up a bit.

What about who goes when? The relation between what you are doing offensive/reactive and who can actually go when will play a part in how successfull an action will be.

JW

[AJ_Flowers]

Initiative is an interesting question.  The standard mechanic of course is "roll off, highest roll goes first." That's pretty easy to use and everyone understands it.

But I'm thinking about the start of an actual martial arts spar and it's very different.

You have two opponents. They get in to position and size one another up. They look at one another's stance, pace around, look each other in the eye, looking for weaknesses.  This may take a very long time. Tension builds as it happens.

Finally someone sees an opening, and exploits it, or, one person just gets impatient, and goes. Normally the person who goes first is actually at a very slight DISadvantage, unless his skill greatly outpaces that of the other person.

It would be great to have a mechanic that captured this tense calm moment.

Ambush attacks, or someone just rushing in suddenly without the size-up, don't need an initiative mechanic.  Someone is rushing you! They either have the drop on you, and you get a slight disadvantage to your roll to defend, or, they're charging you blindly, and you have a slight advantage on your roll to defend.

[Noclue]

I've been working on a system to handle this precise thing. What i've been thinking is this

I want nitiative to be skill based, not random. Skill provides command of the battlefield, awareness of the attackers, and efficient body positioning for maximal defense and offense with the least expenditure of energy. So, the more skillful tends to have control of the action at the start. Various martial arts have this concept. Aikido's "control the first movement" or Iado's "step to the side, and cut immediately" come to mind.

But when does the battle begin? With the thrown punch? Or with the stance? Or with the sizing up of the opponent? I was thinking that you could open the combat with a "seek opportunity" move and essentially roll the hit location before rolling the attack. There's your opening. Now the defender can try to block the opening if they have the ability, but when they do, they create other openings. Meanwhile you can throw feints or use other maneuvers to try to create better openings. What could take minutes in real time could be happening in the space of a heartbeats in-character...until one of you runs out of the resources to close the openings and the other throws the punch. At this point the struggle switches to blocking the actual punch, and maybe you've used up too much resources in closing holes in your guard (i.e. your oponent caught you flat-footed).

Anyway, its a work in progress but I think it has some potential

[slavemind]

I think a good system should provide one mechanic that works well on both close and ranged combat. To hit a tree(/or a board) with a rifle, if you are just standing in front of it is an easy task.

I`ve been working on this for quite a long time and developed a system, where the attack roll determines how hard to block/avoid the attack is and how much damage the defender takes. The defender has to get the same or a better result to block. Fast and easy.

The skill is used for determining how good the attack was - or if untrained characters are fighting - how sloppy...
(The same mechanic is used for every check in the system.) The attacker keeps attacking unless the defender can do a successful countermove or he stops...

At the same time both attacker and defender get tired, depending on the kind of attack, used weapon, etc. Many fights end because one of the combatants can`t move his arm anymore (from wounds) or collapses from exhaustion and loss of blood.

Duels are working really great and are a lot of fun - I hope encounters on a larger scale work as well, but this hasn't been tested yet (, because the "damage vs. armor-part" has been rewritten seven times...)

Only drawback to the point is the need to keep track of the exhaustion, which is always changing and has nice little side effects...

[Noclue]

Could you make exhaustion deplete skill points, rather than being something you have to track? That way as character takes exhaustion, his attacks and defenses get more sloppy.

James

[slavemind]

In fact this is one of the little side effects I mentioned...

For example a fighter with total average attributes and skills scores a "good hit" on 11,12,13,14 (on D20 - 3 times rolled - best counts). If he reaches the first level of exhaustion he gets a penalty of 1, so he only scores good on 11 to13.
Reaching the 4th level he cannot score good anymore (basic rules...).

Exhaustion may decrease in combat as well - therefore I have to keep track of it. I could make it a lot easier, but I tried to create a realistic and intuitive playable system and had to compromise on that...

[Noclue]

couldn't you achieve the same effect by changing the skill level. So an average character falls to sub-par when he takes an exhaustion. When he recovers in combat, just move his skill up to average again.

[slavemind]

Quick and painless:
This would be a mechanic, which would work, but doesn`t fit...
There are 3 levels of success: let`s call them: sloppy, normal and good - ~1/3 possibility each (not exact, because you roll 3D20 and only the best counts... - so it is 1/3 only under worst circumstances...). If I would reduce the effective skill level, the thresholds for getting a normal or good success would have to be recalculated - and stay at 1/3 - what doesn't seem right to me.

It does work on another system (my favorite one - written by a friend of mine):
For every five points (you could also say make it every point - if you like...) you roll under your skill you get an extra effect - so every reduction of the skill level lessens the chance to get additional effects - it is very simple and fits his style best - thus I have another style, I wanted a system to fit my needs...

[CommonDialog]

I see what you mean by saying the values seem reversed! Here's what I'm trying to get at -- the AV of the attack is the absolute minimum range you need to be at to use it and have it work.  At the extremes you have a gun, which can hit at any Range 1-6.  On the other hand a Grapple only hits at Range 1.  The actual "roll" (I misstated above and it wasn't totally clear) is the result of your Attack Type minus Current Range between you and an opponent.  So for example, if I'm using Chi Blast (which could hit at Range 6), but standing at Range 1, the value my opponent must beat is AV Minus Current Range: 6 - 1 = 5.  If I'm using Chi Blast at Range 5, my total attack roll to beat is 6 - 5 = 1.

AJ_Flowers,

I have been chewing on this mechanic and there is something I find about the way AV and attack roll are combined that I find deeply unsatisfying.  Just because a rifle has a longer range, doesn't make it any easier to hit at close range in a martial arts tourney.  In fact, one of the intermediate skills my dojo teaches is what to do when a person attacks you with a firearm and how to at least get the gun pointed away from you.  A person firing a rifle at a trained martial artist at point blank range should get his butt kicked because he's too busy trying to swing the rifle in line while the martials guy is moving the barrell or dancing.

Also, by your examples a kick has a higher attack roll than a punch which, IMHO is inaccurate.  Kicks are slower to develop and happen at a longer range which increases the chances of spotting what is happening and countering.

I love the ranges idea, but I would make it separate from attack roll.  I just can't make the two concepts marry in mind.

That being said... if you can develop a new martial arts system, I think it will be really cool.

[Noclue]

One further nit: The system does not reward you for being inside an attacker's optimal range. If a judoka closes to Range 1 for grappling, he's at a greater disadvantage against the Karateka's Range 2 punch than if he had just stood out there and gotten pummelled. I don't think this was the intended effect.

[AJ_Flowers]

Given the comments, perhaps it would make more sense if range explained which attacks were available to you, but the actual attack value was based on the speed of that type of attack (as well as the skill of the attacker).  Seems to make more sense - thanks for the comments on it!