TRoS combat

[Eamon Voss]

well, i was just using that as an example, personally, id rather fight with something that doesnt cut, but that just doesnt happen in the time period the game is set in

Heh.  I would rather not fight.  But if I did, long years of martial arts experience with melee weapons leads me to believe that I would rather have a modern automatic firearm at 15 paces than a blunt or edged weapon.  ;)

[deltadave]

That definitely makes a difference.  I can see the rationale now.  It was more of a shift in perspective than anything else.  'AC' is is included in the combat pool - the player can decide dynamically how much he wishes to defend himself or how agressive an attack to mount.  

No problem.

Lets say I am using a properly balanced historical rapier.  Unlike a cheap modern replica, it is like a wand in my hand, and yet it can punch through a person and leave a wide swath of injury in the process.  The rapier, therefore, should be easier to hit with on the thrust, and not so easy on the slash.  It was designed for one move and not the other.

On the other hand, Jake is using a falchion.  It has a heavy blade ideal for cutting things.  Slashing and wacking off limbs.  It is not so handy as the rapier, but devastating in its own right.  It should be easier to hit with on the slash, and not so handy with the thrust.  Furthermore, lacking the careful balance of a saber or longsword, it should not be as accurate on the slash as those more precise weapons.

An AC system can be modified to work with this, but you end up with the same thing as the TN system, just with more math during the middle of combat.  You end up modifying the AC for each attack to handle the different weapon types, rather than just giving each weapon type its own ATN.

Hope that helps!

[Valamir]

That definitely makes a difference.  I can see the rationale now.  It was more of a shift in perspective than anything else.  'AC' is is included in the combat pool - the player can decide dynamically how much he wishes to defend himself or how agressive an attack to mount.  

Bingo.  And when you say dynamically you can add a couple of !! to it.

It is such a seemingly simple thing reading the rules...but man, what a difference it makes.  Rather than trading blows back and forth waiting for the law of averages to hand you a victory and hoping you don't get screwed by a bad roll, you now have a totally different layer of strategy.

There is nothing cooler than watching one guy get 4 or 5 attacks in a row only to screw up, get greedy, or get fooled by the defender who then responds with a single devastating fight ending counter.  Its a thing of beauty.

[Sneaky Git]

That definitely makes a difference.  I can see the rationale now.  It was more of a shift in perspective than anything else.  'AC' is is included in the combat pool - the player can decide dynamically how much he wishes to defend himself or how agressive an attack to mount.  

Bingo.  And when you say dynamically you can add a couple of !! to it.

It is such a seemingly simple thing reading the rules...but man, what a difference it makes.  Rather than trading blows back and forth waiting for the law of averages to hand you a victory and hoping you don't get screwed by a bad roll, you now have a totally different layer of strategy.

There is nothing cooler than watching one guy get 4 or 5 attacks in a row only to screw up, get greedy, or get fooled by the defender who then responds with a single devastating fight ending counter.  Its a thing of beauty.

Couldn't agree with you more.  It's one of the things I love most about TRoS.

In a system based on proficiency with a weapon vs a static AC, strategy goes largely (I did say largely...not totally) out of the window.  TRoS is cool (one reason) because that strategy is oftentimes more important than how big your dice pool is...although in this case, bigger is certainly nicer than smaller.  You can still, however, get yourself in trouble regardless of your DP.

Chris