Initial impressions

[Valamir]

Lance got there first,

but I'll add emphasis.  The reflex contest is not a to-hit roll.  Its a who moved first roll.  You still have to make a regular attack roll to actually land the blow, and as he points out, that roll will have the standard reach penalties associated with it.  

There is no problem to be solved here.

[Drifter Bob]

Lance got there first,

but I'll add emphasis.  The reflex contest is not a to-hit roll.  Its a who moved first roll.  You still have to make a regular attack roll to actually land the blow, and as he points out, that roll will have the standard reach penalties associated with it.  

There is no problem to be solved here.

Fair enough.

JR

[Mokkurkalfe]

Personally, I let the reflex roll be affected the same way a "to hit"-roll is affected by reach. Fast and simple.

[Drifter Bob]

Personally, I let the reflex roll be affected the same way a "to hit"-roll is affected by reach. Fast and simple.

How do you mean?  You apply a reach bonus or don't you?

DB

[Valamir]

If you count the reach penalty to the Reflex roll than you are basically forcing the shorter weapon to go on the defensive (unless they have a really high reflex).  Throwing red with the shorter weapon would leave the combatant exceedingly vulnerable to getting screwed in a red red exchange and encourage the longer weapon to throw red in the hopes of catching him so vulnerable.

What this would basically do is mean, all else being equal, the longer weapon (at least if more than 1 step longer) would always throw red and the shorter weapon would always throw white.

(if this doesn't happen in your games Mokk, than you either have characters with a real high Ref or players who like to gamble)

Now first question would be.  Is that accurate?  Would the normal, considered, text book approach for a combatant with a short weapon be to take a wait and see approach and try to react to the longer weapon's action?  If not than such an interpretation would make the game less realistic.

Even if so, however, would turning the tension of the red / white throw into a largely forgone conclusion remove a great source of excitement in the game and render such a rule counterproductive regardless of realism?

[Drifter Bob]

What this would basically do is mean, all else being equal, the longer weapon (at least if more than 1 step longer) would always throw red and the shorter weapon would always throw white.

Now first question would be.  Is that accurate?  Would the normal, considered, text book approach for a combatant with a short weapon be to take a wait and see approach and try to react to the longer weapon's action?  If not than such an interpretation would make the game less realistic.

In a word, yes.  If all you have is a single short weapon and your opponent has a longer weapon, you basically have to wait for them to attack and then try to rush.  Otherwise you get nailed like the guy in the clip I posted.  I could show you dozens of others like that, and it's much more pronounced without the protection of a shield.  All other factors being equal, the guy with the longer weapon generally has the initiative.

Even if so, however, would turning the tension of the red / white throw into a largely forgone conclusion remove a great source of excitement in the game and render such a rule counterproductive regardless of realism?

Well, the nice thing about having a game with realistic dynamics is that you don't have to worry about inventing wierd things to make balance work.  Just look to real life and you can often find an answer.  Thats why I really think more people who design games that have melee combat systems in there should go out and try a little light boffer sparring some time.  Even if you do it with very light, very safe weapons and little or no basis in historical training, you can learn a lot about the basic dynamics of weapon combat, more than is in most RPG systems.

Anyway, in real life, (IMHO) some guy with a single short weapon either has to get surprise, or be very very very fast, or (most common solution) use a second weapon or a shield to improve their defense.  A swordsman experienced with the use of two weapons or a shield can go a large way toward effectively neutralizing the reach advantage, simply by boosting the defensive side of the equasion.  

That means the guy with the long weapon has to be very careful, and it means that the guy with the shorter weapon CAN try to rush if willing to take a calculated risk.  And of course once the rush is successful, often the guy with the longer weapon is at a disadvantage.

So in other words, if you have a guy with just a short sword or a dagger facing a guy with a long sword, have him stop and pick up a torch or a candelabra to fight with in his off-hand.  That can help a lot with the dilemma, and can even make the fight more interesting in a swashbuckling kind of way  (many of the fencing manuals I have seen specifically train fighters to use mundane objects in just this way ranging from cloaks to hats to beer mugs and chairs.... maybe using random objects should be a skill if it aint already...)

Also, with the second weapon or shield for blocking, it becomes easier to do things like strike the opponents forarm or hand while they are attacking, which I'm not sure how this is done in TROS but I'm sure there is a way as it's a basic tenet of the Fechtbuchs.

The advantage of reach is just a fact of life.   Thats why infantry in all pre-firearms eras in every country on the planet almost always carry spears, it's such an initial advantage.  The sword is more flexible, but requires more skill.

JR

[Drifter Bob]

I just also want to add, that I'm not definitively saying that any change is necessary or even desirable to TROS rules, I haven't played the game enough yet to have a real nuanced feel for it, and I don't mean to sound like I'm already second guessing the rules.  It may well be that the reach issue is handled well enough by the weapon ratings and length rules as Valimir originally suggested.  

All I'm doing here is just thinking out loud theoretically about how to describe or depict a certain aspect of combat, the effect of reach, which I personally believe to be a very important aspect.

JR

[Vanguard]

I'm very tired and a little stoned, and I'm not entirely sure if it's been mentioned previous (though I think it has) but the simplest and most elegant solution to drifter's quandary that comes to mind would be to apply reach modifiers to the Red/Red Reflex test.

The generic Reflex test TN 7 to determine who strikes first in a Red/Red would be affected either positively or negatively depending on reach. Thus a TN of 4 with pike (+3 reach?) and 9 with a dagger (+2 reach?).

Thus two opponents facing off, both of equal skill, both with identical reflexes; should they both attack simultaneously, it is the bloke hefting the longer weapon gonna that land strike first with greater ease.

A signicantly skilled fighter, fast and agile, with a short weapon, can still land that heroic, conan-esque blow on the spear-wielding guardsman before it raise the alarm. But against an equal, he'd best lay back and wait on his opponent before committing to a move.

An easy and elegant way of simulating the dynamics which seem to rule combat in reality.

But as I said previously. I think others have effectively described this already.

Like a lot of people here, I can imagine; I have some experience in reenactment. But would not consider myself on a par with regular practitioners like Jake et al. I would, however, say the above approach reflects the way it 'feels' when pretending. ;)

Nice discussion bwt. And nice of Drifter to have broached it.

Take care

[Ingenious]

All I did was come up with a solution to a non-existant problem then. I'm just a player, not a GM.. and most of the stuff I have come across was a few instances of red/red.. and in play I hardly notice the mechanics of everything.. as I am more concerned with what my character is doing and what is happening to him. I just get preoccupied with margin of success and damage ratings and such. I'll be paying more attention on Saturday's session and let you guys know how crucial weapon length was in our combat.
Thanks for clarifying everything guys.

-Ingenious

[Valamir]

I agree fully Drifter, but I don't think you need to add the reach rules to the reflex test to get there.  That IMO would be overkill.

If I have a dagger and you have a spear, and I attack first, I'm taking a huge CP hit to my attack.  So I'm already motivated to wait for you to attack me so I can defend (no CP hit), and hopefully fanangle a Counter or some other technique that would give me a good shot at landing a hit and closing the range.

To put that same modifier in the Reflex contest would be double dipping really.  

There's already sufficient incentive to be cautious in such a situation without being drastic about it.  Alls the reflex test does is determine who gets to move first.  It doesn't have anything to do with whether moving is first is a bad idea.

[Drifter Bob]

There's already sufficient incentive to be cautious in such a situation without being drastic about it.  Alls the reflex test does is determine who gets to move first.  It doesn't have anything to do with whether moving is first is a bad idea.

Yeah, I'll chime in on this again after we play through a few combats.  At this point I really can't say.  It will be interesting to see how the mechanics of combat work out.

JR

[Jake Norwood]

With all due respect, I've been doing full contact stick fighting in various forms for 15 years.  I would love to see anybody rush me with a dagger and get the first hit in when I'm armed with say, an arming sword, or even better yet, an arming sword and a shield.  I challenge anybody, you, Jake, John Clements, or the ghost of Bruce Lee, to try that on me any time (like in New Orleans this February).  I'll bet you $50 I'll get the first hit in at least the first 19 times out of twenty.

$50? Ninteen first hits in a row or I get $50? Damn...

How long is your stick? What will you be using? I'll give you a greatsword, how's that sound? Man...$50 or not I've gotta try now!

Jake

[Drifter Bob]

$50? Ninteen first hits in a row or I get $50? Damn...
How long is your stick? What will you be using? I'll give you a greatsword, how's that sound? Man...$50 or not I've gotta try now!

Jake

Ah, so!  19 in a row?  Trying to sweeten the deal just a little?  And I thought TROS was making money hand over fist!  No number one student of the SLUM FU school would attempt such underhanded measures!  

The official deal is you win unless I get the first hit in 19 times out of 20, in any order.  I get my arming sword and buckler, you get a dagger no more than 16" long.   Not very fair but, after 15 or 20 rushes I'll be getting pretty tired so you might pull it off.  Of course, I'll not be pulling my swings, ARMA doctrine demands striking with intent with proper follow-through.... heh heh heh

If you win the bet, payment is redeemable Sunday night at Finn MacCools, the pub around the corner from my house ;)

Then maybe after you drink $50 worth of Guiness and a few belfast bombers we'll try again!  They keep a kern axe I made for them behind the bar!!!

JR

[Drifter Bob]

$50? Ninteen first hits in a row or I get $50? Damn...

How long is your stick? What will you be using? I'll give you a greatsword, how's that sound? Man...$50 or not I've gotta try now!

Jake

For your amusmement Jake, and for everyones smirks and snickers, I happen to have a clip on my homepage right now of a similar scenario to the one above, though with a guy who isn't nearly as skilled as you.  I had uploaded it to display on the ARMA forum in the hopes of being criticised and derided there as per usual, though I don't know if you ever saw it there.

It is a clip of a sparring match I had recently with a guy who was using an unpadded wooden escrima stick (about 30" or so) where I have a short sword (34") and a buckler.  This was to demonstrate another theoretical point: IMHO Asian martial arts don't have many effective options against a shield.  He did get me with his stick a couple of times in the course of this match, though not often, maybe as little as 5% ;)  i still do have one painful lump on my forearm where he tagged me one time.

The guy was an old friend who has become a big fan of filipino martial arts techniques in the last few years, and we had been trying to set up this match for almost two.  I considered the outcome a victory for the ancient Western masters...  

(I'm the fat guy in the clip)

http://bellsouthpwp.net/d/e/deodand23/henry1.mpg

You may hereby observe my bad form and many weaknesses to prepare for our match! ;)

JR

[Deacon Blues]

(can't view the clip as I'm at work)

Did he go for the legs at all?  Or am I thinking of arnis, rather than escrima?