King Arthur and Lancelot circle each other, preparing to duel. They are both wearing armour and fighting with sword and shield. After his knights were soundly beaten by the graceful warrior, Arthur knew Lancelot would be more than a challenge for him (composure checked: passed).

Round 1

Arthur’s turn: Arthur moves into range to attack, and strikes at Lancelot's shield repeatedly.

Lancelet’s response: Lancelot chooses a safe maneuver and blocks with his shield to prevent the blows from knocking him off balance (reflex, bonus from shield: pass for each blow). 

Arthur : ends turn *

Lancelot’s turn: Lancelot  uses his shield to shove Arthur (special technique allows dexterity instead of strength to be used).

Arthur’s Response: Arthur resists the push (strength + shield bonus = pass).

Follow-up: Lancelot tries again, but uses his Concentration effort pool to improve the attack

Arthur’s Response: Arthur resists and uses his last combat action to improve his score (Arthur rolls 2-1=1, Lancelot rolls 4-1=3, which allows him to roll again and gets 3-1=2, so 3+2 = success).  Effect: Lancelot pushes Arthur off balance

Follow-up: Lancelot uses his last attack to strike Arthur in the head. The attack is successful (+4 gradient of success), but because of Arthur's helmet (-3 effect against bladed weapons), the blow only stuns him.  Lancelot is out of actions, so he cannot take advantage of it.

Round 2

Arthur’s turn: Arthur uses an action to recover, but in his anger from being struck, he makes a poor decision and takes a huge cutting blow at Lancelot (power strike; combat action added to improve attack = roll of 3 - power strike penalty of 2 = speed+1).
Lancelot’s response: Lancelot, having excellent dexterity, moves his shield in an arc to parry the blow instead of blocking, which knocks Arthur off balance, and then with the momentum, Lancelot uses the complex maneuver Reverse Parry to immediately follow up with a sweeping blow behind Arthur's knees, which trips him (knockdown effect).

Lancelot could use his last attack to kill Arthur (floored opponent bonus negates 2 effect reduction of armor, not to mention an attack bonus, and since Arthur has no actions left, he's pretty much helpless as his Passive Defense score** is terrible in his position), but merely holds his sword under Arthur’s chin as Arthur huffs, "Yield! I yield!"

Notes

This example demonstrates combat resolution without the use of hit points. This method, combined with the techniques-based actions, also results in an interesting meta-game effect. In other systems, it's common to see the exchange, "You hit for x damage/ You miss", representing what happens in combat. In the example above, combat is depicted in a very concrete, vivid manner in which the aforementioned descriptions can never happen, even with a less verbose GM. Damage and hit points are abstracts, but effects are not.  Also, notice how combat was resolved without any of the combatants getting hurt.

*Using all of your actions at once represents an overzealous attack.  Since several defenses, such as blocking, do not cost actions, you will be at a disadvantage when your opponent counters with his remaining actions because you will not be able to use an active defense; your Passive Defense score is used instead.  Arthur ending his turn in this case represents him preparing for Lancelot’s counter-assault

**Your Passive Defense score represents how well positioned you are at any given moment. In melee combat terms, this number represents the integrity of your stance. To make an example, if a boxer has a high passive defense score, he probably keeps his hands up at all times so that if he can't tell a blow is coming, there's a chance it may be blocked anyway. When he throws a cross, he may be in the habit of leaning his body sideways so that an attack from his opponent thrown at the same time misses.

Question 1
Do you find the combat engine to be engaging?

Question 2
Does the example make sense to you at first glance?

Question 3
Are there any flaws you can point out that need to be addressed?

Question 4
Would you enjoy outwitting the GM with such a system?

Question 1
Do you find the combat engine to be engaging?

Question 3
Are there any flaws you can point out that need to be addressed?

Question 4
Would you enjoy outwitting the GM with such a system?

I personally like the idea of the GM and the players having a battle of wits.  The tightly-machined rules design offers a balance of interactivity between the two entities so that:

1. The GM is discouraged from being cheap, coercive, or otherwise dispelling the suspension of disbelief: an extremely important element in simulationist design.  Because the fortune element is so small and controlled in the semi-diceless system, the GM has few opportunities to arbitrarily fudge events; if he wants to tone down the difficulty, the GM may make a feasible strategic error, and if he wants to pump it up, there will be useful pre-made strategies within NPC descriptions.
2. It's highly improbable, if not impossible, for the player to break the system.  Strategies are transient, therefore you cannot have a single-best strategy to be used repeatedly.

This is why I say the system is intellectually rewarding - because you typically win or lose contests on planning and execution rather than luck or juiced-up player levels.

On another note, I understand your concern for the large skill lists.  I have two methods of approaching this:
1. Technique development takes time.  You pick what you want to learn beforehand and gradually allocate experience hours to that technique until you learn it; you don't just level up and pick it up right then and there.  So, there will probably be some role-playing involved during the training period where you learn how to apply what you are learning in a controlled setting, like sparring, drills, or maybe a mock firefight with paint rounds.
2. The player’s manual will provide sound tactical guidelines so you understand how to utilize your techniques in meaningful ways.  It may go something like “It is typically not a wise idea to begin an assault with the Power Strike unless you are confident that your opponent won’t strike you first or that your opponent’s strike will be ineffective.”

Just seems like having actions instead of hitpoints.

The real change I'd say is that you seem to have a 'one must pass' system, unlike in traditional games where both guys can swing and miss and...nothing happens. Here you set it that even if one guy rolls a 2, if the other guy rolls a 1, one of them connects and hits and something actually happens. I'd say that's the strength of your idea here - not the hitpoints thing.

I feel I need to clarify actions and how they are represented in the combat sequence.  That is part 1 of my response.

Each combatant always receives 3 actions per round.  As opposed to hit points, this number never internally changes. 

“What about speed?”
Speed does not affect how many actions you receive in a round.  It does, however, affect the density of an action: how far you can move in a single action, or if you’re skilled, for example, how many blows you can throw in a combination.  So, there is a wide range of how many potential actions you may use in a single round.  If your character was, say, Muhammad Ali, you’d be able to throw your 7-punch combinations without the system arbitrarily interfering.

“So what do combat actions represent?”
Combat actions represent your ability to time your actions.  When you get distracted, stunned, use an action, or focus on an action, you progressively lose your ability to time your actions because your attention becomes overwhelmed.  If you run out of actions, your Passive Defense score takes the place of your ability to take defensive actions; you won’t automatically lose the fight when you run out! 

“What’s the rationale behind combat actions?”
I would like to first point out that every mechanic in Nevercast is designed to model occurrences within the game-world as realistically as possible.  If an element does not exist, like say hit-points, then it is because said element does not suit the goals of Nevercast’s mechanics.

That said, actions were designed in a manner to balance out combat time and to accurately model real-time combat.  This is why players will be able to utilize strategies that work in real-life.  Without the 3 action point concept, the action/reaction system FALLS APART.

“Why?”
Because with 2 actions, you’re likely to only either act or react.  However, the action/reaction concept STILL falls apart without 1 more element.  Without this element, the system will favor whoever attacks first and completely unbalance combat.

“What’s that?”
The 0-action element.  Some actions are so easy to perform that they do not negatively affect your timing.  Parrying, slipping (not dodging),  blocking, and many follow-up actions cost 0 actions, unless if you have already run out of actions.  This element also models multiple-opponent mechanics gracefully.  Furthermore, it allows the action/reaction system to work against opponents of greater speed, because without it, their high volume of attacks will eat up your actions too fast and disallow you from taking counter-measures.

Response Part 2

“Why are there no hit points in Nevercast?”

Hit points are problematic for my system for several reasons:

1. They’re abstract.  If I hit you for x amount of damage, it doesn’t really represent anything happening.  Therefore, in order to suit Nevercast’s goals for realistic integrity, I would have to add effects tables on top of hit points, based upon how much damage you do in relation to your opponent’s total hit points.  This is a mechanical nightmare. 
Furthermore, I would have to assign hit-point values to each body area if I wanted a realistic targeting system.  With an effects system, I don’t.  No matter if you get cut on your arm, leg, or body, if you suffer the “profuse bleeding” effect, it automatically takes your entire condition into account.  I don’t have to figure out how losing 20 hit points to my arm affects my total hit points.

2.  They are numerous.  I hate crunching numbers.  Nevercast assumes the GM also hates crunching numbers.  It’s time consuming and makes combat boring.  Keeping track of the hit point values and adding/subtracting from them for 6 combatants is annoying.

In conclusion, the effects system does realism better, concretely, more descriptively, affects combat directly, and does it with less calculations.  I love qualifiers, and I hate quantifiers.  If I can represent a mechanic with a name instead of a whole bunch of numbers and tables to translate those numbers, you know exactly what I’m talking about and you can memorize its mechanics with greater ease. 

Let’s compare:
The opponent cuts your abdomen deeply with his sword (he passed his attack by 3), and you start bleeding out (suffer the “profuse bleeding” effect).

VS

The opponent hits you for (rolls dice, and adds modifiers) x amount of damage.  Hold on a second, I need to look up the effects for that.

Hit point based and wound based systems are definitely very different in feel.  In a ahit point system, even when hit points are in a small range, the expectation is that you will be hit and wittled down.  That informs the way you play.  Wound effect systems do not have this assumption, and everyone tries to avoid being hit at all.  Things do play out quite differently as a result.

Ar,
 The mechanics are a bit obscured by the narrative, so I just want to ask some questions:

Round 1
Arthur’s turn: Arthur moves into range to attack, and strikes at Lancelot's shield repeatedly.

Lancelet’s response: Lancelot chooses a safe maneuver and blocks with his shield to prevent the blows from knocking him off balance (reflex, bonus from shield: pass for each blow).

Arthur : ends turn *

Lancelot’s turn: Lancelot  uses his shield to shove Arthur (special technique allows dexterity instead of strength to be used).

Arthur’s Response: Arthur resists the push (strength + shield bonus = pass).

Follow-up: Lancelot tries again, but uses his Concentration effort pool to improve the attack

Arthur’s Response: Arthur resists and uses his last combat action to improve his score (Arthur rolls 2-1=1, Lancelot rolls 4-1=3, which allows him to roll again and gets 3-1=2, so 3+2 = success).  Effect: Lancelot pushes Arthur off balance

Follow-up: Lancelot uses his last attack to strike Arthur in the head. The attack is successful (+4 gradient of success), but because of Arthur's helmet (-3 effect against bladed weapons), the blow only stuns him.  Lancelot is out of actions, so he cannot take advantage of it.

Round 2

Arthur’s turn: Arthur uses an action to recover, but in his anger from being struck, he makes a poor decision and takes a huge cutting blow at Lancelot (power strike; combat action added to improve attack = roll of 3 - power strike penalty of 2 = speed+1).
Lancelot’s response: Lancelot, having excellent dexterity, moves his shield in an arc to parry the blow instead of blocking, which knocks Arthur off balance, and then with the momentum, Lancelot uses the complex maneuver Reverse Parry to immediately follow up with a sweeping blow behind Arthur's knees, which trips him (knockdown effect).

Lancelot could use his last attack to kill Arthur (floored opponent bonus negates 2 effect reduction of armor, not to mention an attack bonus, and since Arthur has no actions left, he's pretty much helpless as his Passive Defense score** is terrible in his position), but merely holds his sword under Arthur’s chin as Arthur huffs, "Yield! I yield!"

“Why is he attacking the enemy's shield? Is there some mechanical incentive to do this?”
Yes.  Against a heavily armored opponent, attacking the shield can be a good opening maneuver because you may be able to knock your opponent off-balance.  If you’re particularly strong or effective, you can destroy a weak shield. 

“If the shield is the target of the blow, how can using your shield provide you a bonus? Was that Arthur's intent all along, knocking down Lancelot?”
A shield provides a reflex bonus for blocking, because it’s a fairly simple and straightforward maneuver.  However, because of its surface area, Arthur gets a bonus to hit for an effect overall.  And yes, as stated above, Arthur’s intent was to knock Lancelot off balance.

“Why does Lancelot get a follow-up? Shouldn't it be Arthur's Turn?”
Lancelot gets a follow-up because 1) he has actions left and 2) he did not end his turn.  As long as you have actions left, you can keep using your remaining actions for the round.  However, your opponent may also use his actions to attack at the same time as you.  Take note that Nevercast uses an action/reaction system.

“Is one damage always a stun? Even if you are already damaged?”
Several effects in the system have a degrading potential.  Stun is not one of them, however, as it is always a superficial hit; a smack in the face could result in a stun.  Stun does not damage you, but it does affect your timing in the chaos of combat, so you lose an action.

“OK, why would Arthur do this attack (and why is it in the system) if it is such a bone-headed maneuver and so easy to counter attack? Does that Reverse Parry use one of Lancelot's attacks? How many successes did Lancelot need to buy this knockdown affect?”
Circumstances dictate when it is or isn’t wise to use the Power Strike.  To make an example, in boxing, it is typically unwise to lead with a cross because it’s telegraphic and you’re almost guaranteeing that your opponent will punch you first.  But a boxer knows the quickest way to end a fight is to knock the opponent out with power shots, so he sets them up.  Nevercast’s combat system allows you to set up your powerful blows, whether it’s by knocking your opponent off-balance, crowding him, distracting him with a feint, or stunning him with a quick jab.  However, In this particular instance, it was unwise and I honestly made Arthur do it because I wanted to keep the combat example short.  The GM is also encouraged to intentionally make tactical errors when utilizing belligerent, less practiced, or less intelligent NPCs.
Reversals are typically follow-up actions that do not use up actions.  These techniques will be covered in my next post.

“How else could Lancelot have won? Is the only victory possible if the enemy is knocked down and out of actions? Could he whittle him down using 1 damage Stun attacks or?”
European martial arts historians insist that combat between armored foes typically went to the ground.  This is likely because armor was very effective against a sword’s blows.  Aside from taking the opponent to the ground, it is known that trained combatants utilized a variety of sword grips in order to penetrate armor:
Example 1: The combatant gripped the blade itself with his free hand in order to leverage a powerful thrust in close range (a power strike in game mechanics).
Example 2: The combatant gripped the blade with both hands and bludgeoned the opponent’s head or face with the hilt.  The hilt in this position could also be used at close range to hook an opponent’s sword.  Therefore, in game mechanics, several weapons will have secondary uses available.

Reversals
A reversal is when you turn a successful defensive maneuver into an offensive maneuver. For example, when an opponent tries to take you down by the legs, you sprawl and catch him in a headlock, or you parry an opponent's punch and turn the parry into an arm lock.
As opposed to a counterattack, a reversal is executed as one fluid action, rather than two individual actions in succession. Also, most reversals cannot be actively defended against and require the usage of Concentration to pull off. These techniques require that you use your Concentration effort pool in order to use because perfect timing is such an important factor.  To maximize realism and to highlight how difficult it really is to time these things, I'm currently debating on whether or not I will require a high Concentration use roll (scoring a 4 on a d4 roll) in order to successfully pull off a reversal. In which case, every time you level up your reversal technique, your chances will improve by 25% (pending: your reversal success rate based off of your Reflex attribute instead).

Ok its enough for me.... I want those rules :-) Do you have a website or .pdf hosted somewhere with them?
M.

Unfortunately, I'm not web savvy.  I also move at a snail's pace, and the bare bones of the system isn't yet complete - once it is I'll release them here.  In the meantime, I am more than willing to comprehensively answer any questions you may have.

I like your combat story boarding system. I too am working on a system without HP but have gone the opposite route of generalizing combat to a point where you declare your intentions, then story board what happened after the dice have revealed the conclusion.
I was wondering, in your system how would a 'fumble' arise and be interpreted? In the above example, something such as one character loosing their footing and failing to perform the action they intended. A more clear example, if we use a more modern setting, is what if you are in a gun fight and your gun jams at a crucial moment? How would that risk exist in your system? When would it come about if ever and how would it effect the flow of combat?

horomancer wrote:
I like your combat story boarding system. I too am working on a system without HP but have gone the opposite route of generalizing combat to a point where you declare your intentions, then story board what happened after the dice have revealed the conclusion.
I was wondering, in your system how would a 'fumble' arise and be interpreted? In the above example, something such as one character loosing their footing and failing to perform the action they intended. A more clear example, if we use a more modern setting, is what if you are in a gun fight and your gun jams at a crucial moment? How would that risk exist in your system? When would it come about if ever and how would it effect the flow of combat?

I'd also like to take a look at your entire system. It sounds quite interesting.

By the way, if you're looking for a different approach to a combat system without hit points, the Amber Diceless RPG does this by comparing Warfare ratings for combat, then Endurance ratings for staying-power, and allowing the story-telling to help dictate when one character is defeated. Your system reminds me a little of that one, only yours seems to have more attributes/skills to work through.

That system was the inspiration for Nevercast's core mechanics.  However, I thought I could get the most bang out of my system if I eclectically combined fortune and diceless principles.  I refer to it as semi-diceless, and I am extremely satisifed with the results: diceless gives me reliability and is strategy-friendly; fortune gives me complexity.

I was floored to hear you toss off descriptions of what is called, in some circles, A "mortschlag" (sp?) and half-swording. Are you familiar with the ARMA?

A game worth checking out to see how someone else very successfully did the same thing is The Riddle of Steel, written by an active member of the ARMA. Unfortunately, it is out of official print, but you should be able to find information on it, at least. If you're interested, and can't find it, PM me and I'll dig for you.

Looking at your description of combat, it seems very opaque, with various maneuvers named and tactical decisions that may not be readily identifiable.. But I think that familiarity with the system would clear up a lot of that. I think the mechanical description does a good job of also being a narrative description, which is definitely a good thing in my book, though.

Thank you for the positiive feedback.

I only have a passing familiarity with Riddle of Steel.  The reason why I made a medieval combat example was to demonstrate the system's fluidity; Nevercast is a science-fiction RPG.  Only Masters of the Martial Arts use modernized blades based off of the Chinese Jian.  (Black tungsten carbide for armor penetration and concealment and perhaps a carbon nanotube cross section to prevent breakage and to attract and store energy from the fuzz's pesky medium range electric weapons?  Just a thought; I have no idea if that could actually work.  Probably not.)

Combat Example

Two masters agree to a duel, using their weapons of choice: Kanu Gon chooses the traditional Outworlder master's weapon, a Sword of Beauty, and the Des Xiac Pratnavahatdu, a progressivist master, chooses a .45 handgun with a 7 round magazine (not expecting the duel to last long).

Pratnavahatdu fakes a shot at Kanu Gon, who only slightly hesitates (Kanu Gon reflex passed). Pratnavahatdu then fires three times at Kanu Gon, who dives and somersaults obliquely towards him (dash pass). Pratnavahatdu fires again twice using an extra combat action to aim as Kanu Gon recovers, but Kanu Gon's instant reflex ability (uses up all concentration) improves his passive defense significantly as he almost precognitively shifts his body to avoid the shots.

Next round

Pratnavahatdu gets nervous as Kanu Gon gets close and quickly fires two rounds using concentration to improve the attack. Kanu Gon reacts with a response quick attack (long range strike ability allows him to lunge for extra reach with his blade), using an extra combat action to focus his blow. Both fighters compare the speed of their attack, and Kanu Gon strikes first as he gets lucky with his randomizer roll. Pratnavahatdu's instant reflex ability almost gets him out of the way but the cut of Kanu Gon's sword manages to split his cheek open (gradient of success +2). (they both now have 1 action remaining as Pratnavahatdu loses an action to recover from the blow)
On Kanu Gon's turn, he follows up with a killing stroke to the neck as Pratnavahatdu desperately tries to shoot him first in a response attack. The speed contest is even as they both pause and hold their weapons to each other. Realizing the stalemate, Kanu Gon and Pratnavahatdu back off of each other and bow, ending the duel.

This is a really interesting system, I'd definitely be interested in having the GM challenge me with this.  To me, the narration seems double good, since it allows people more stake in the encounters, and also makes the fighting cinematic.  That really seems like it would help with the "other dude's turn glaze" that happens in a lot of RPGs.  Additionally, it seems like the way someone describes their actions has strategic meaning for everyone at the table: so listening out to pick up what maneuvers someone is using is very beneficial.   

Your examples all make sense to me.

In your game, is there such a thing as "followers" (similar to the Leadership feat in D&D, where you have "pets" who follow you around)?  If so, do they use your turn for actions/use some of your action points? 

Like, how would something like a fight between a necromancer and his 2 skeletons vs. a single knight play out?

Some professions will give you access to a team or subordinates, or will have that option available upon being promoted.  In most situations, your subordinates will be completely controlled by the GM.  However, players with less experienced characters may also take this role.

A skill type called “small-unit combat tactics” will grant characters the capacity to directly coordinate subordinates in combat.  When the commander issues a command during his turn, the subordinates may act upon it during the same turn order by using a response action (combatants separate their actions amongst turn actions and response actions).  Therefore, you will be able to direct simultaneous action during combat.

So, let’s say the necromancer sees the knight charging at him.  On his first action, he commands the skeletons to hold, on his second action, he casts a spell to shield himself, and he holds off on the third to prepare for the knight.  The knight charges in, and the necromancer uses his last action in response to evade him.  In the next round, the necromancer uses his first action to call his skeletons to fall upon the knight and attack him from behind.  The knight uses up all his actions in response to turn and defend himself from the skeletons as the necromancer comes up from behind, ramming his dagger in the knight’s unprotected armpit.

Ar wrote:
Let’s compare:
The opponent cuts your abdomen deeply with his sword (he passed his attack by 3), and you start bleeding out (suffer the “profuse bleeding” effect).

VS

The opponent hits you for (rolls dice, and adds modifiers) x amount of damage.  Hold on a second, I need to look up the effects for that.

Start a new thread about it.  I will be more than happy to talk about it there.

An example of hand-to-hand combat.

Kanu Gon
6 strength
9 speed
6 endurance
7 agility
7 dexterity
8 reflex
4 awareness
6 focus
7 logic
5 charisma
6 insight

7 power
2 concentration
6 stamina

Meh Kada
10 strength
6 speed
8 endurance
5 agility
6 dexterity
6 reflex
6 awareness
8 focus
8 logic
4 charisma
8 insight

8 power
3 concentration
8 stamina

Round 1

1. Kanu Gon poises himself and waits for Meh Kada.

2. Meh Kada moves a 1 combat step forward, and then another (Kanu Gon responds by backing up 1).  Meh Kada feints, but Kanu Gon reacts minutely (feint failed).

Round 2

1. Kanu Gon feints (pass), and Meh Kada breaks his rhythm as he hesitates and loses an action.
* Kanu Gon  follows up by moving 1 range forward (move-to-attack) for a long range quick attack strike, using 1 concentration (sp+2+1d4-1-1=11).  Meh Kada evades using 1 concentration (ag+2+3=10=1 effect - Effect Reduction=0 effect).  The bursting side kick hits, but isn’t forceful, and Kanu Gon ends his turn.

2. Meh Kada lunges with a jab to the body and hops a combat step forward for a jab to the head (long range quick attack first blow, moving-to-attack quick attack on the second blow; a combination), with concentration added to both blows.  Kanu Gon evades the first blow by shifting back a few inches and then obliquely to the side as the jab passes by his head.  He counterattacks with a heavy uppercut to the ribs (standard strike; stamina used for more power; 2 effect=hurt; -1 passive defense) combined with a huge overhand punch to the head (2 effect=hurt x2=“damaged” effect; -1 all attribute checks and effect reduction; -2 passive defense) and a right hook to the head (3 effect= “damaged“ x2 = “incapacitate“ effect) (overhand and right hook were power attacks; stamina used for more power).  Kanu Gon’s speed easily overwhelms Meh Kada’s passive defense score, and Meh Kada crumbles from the first two blows and gets knocked out from the final blow**.

Tactical Breakdown

*Notice how Kanu Gon frustrates Meh Kada when he tries to move into range and forces him to fight at a distance where he is at a disadvantage.  Using a response attack every time an opponent moves-to-attack is a speed strategy.

*Meh Kada’s strength is so great that Kanu Gon has to both be extremely accurate and muscle his blows in order to even stun him.  When Kanu Gon strikes Meh Kada with his bursting side kick, it doesn’t affect him at all.  The strength strategy is to fight inside where you can absorb anything a weaker fighter has to throw at you, land blows with a greater chance of success, and make up for a lack of striking “crispiness” with sheer power.  Subduing the weaker fighter with grappling is also effective.

*Meh Kada has an environmental disadvantage.  Since they are fighting in an open space, he has no way of cutting off Kanu Gon’s movement and cornering him.

**The more skilled you are, the more time you are allowed by the GM when determining what moves you want to use.  An astute player will be able to figure out when his opponent runs out of actions and take advantage of it.  This is represented in game terms by the fighter having an excellent sense of both timing and his opponent’s intent.

*Effects of the same type stack if you inflict them in time.  For example, the “hurt” effect lasts 1 round, so you have to hurt your opponent again within the same round in order to cause the “damaged” effect.  Thus, with repeated blows in a combination, you may take advantage of the death spiral, which was what Kanu Gon did in order to end the fight in ten seconds.

*Although combinations are effective ways to ensure that you damage your opponent with minimal combat action use, they can be completely nullified if you move out of range on the first blow (unless if the second blow is a move-to-attack, which was what Meh Kada did), preventing the need to deal with every strike.  Also, your passive defense is lowered whenever you throw combinations, making you vulnerable to response attacks.  The greater your character’s speed, the more total attacks you can put in your combination (2 for a slow fighter, 3 for a fast fighter, and 4 for an extremely fast fighter).

*Using strength, speed or power actions for a novice taxes stamina.  The more skilled you are, the less action types you will be required to spend stamina on, as a result of having greater economy of movement.

*Stamina and concentration effort pools may be recovered by spending turn actions to catch your breath and compose yourself.  If you run out of concentration, you may only improve attacks by spending combat actions.  If you run out of stamina, it only means you’re fatigued, and you may continue to use stamina at the risk of becoming more fatigued and suffering greater penalties.

*A “slip” is an evasion technique where you move a few inches at most in order to be in position to counterattack, as opposed to a “dodge” which completely repositions your body.  Although a dodge offers a greater counterattack bonus, a slip is easier to perform and doesn’t require any combat actions to use.

Example 2

Indra
5 strength
6 speed
5 endurance
7 agility
8 dexterity
7 reflex
8 awareness
5 focus
6 logic
7 charisma
8 insight

5 power
3 concentration
5 stamina

Ar Jin Jee Ee
4 strength
6 speed
4 endurance
8 agility
8 dexterity
5 reflex
9 awareness
7 focus
5 logic
6 charisma
8 insight

5 power
4 concentration
4 stamina

Round 1

1. Indra wastes no time and dashes forward, covering her attack by bridging Ar Jin’s guard and follows up with a strike.  Ar Jin wards off the bridge by circling her hand and then jams Indra’s arm (reverse: ward-to-jam: 50% chance; 1d4=1; failed).  The timing is poor, but the bridge is broken and Ar Jin quickly responds to the strike with a parry (pass). 
*Indra continues her assault with a quick two-hit chain punch to Ar Jin’s face.  Ar Jin responds by exchanging blows in the same manner.  The strikes are simultaneous because their speed attributes are equivalent, but both Indra and Ar Jin’s guard protects them against the blows (passive defense 7 Indra, 8 Ar Jin).  Indra ends her turn.

2. Ar Jin attempts to bridge, using concentration, and Indra responds by bridging as well, also using concentration (Ar Jin 1d4=4; Indra 1d4=1).  Ar Jin latches on to Indra’s wrist, and pulls in her into an elbow strike.  Indra’s Instant Reflex ability takes over, adding all of her remaining concentration to add 2 points to her passive defense.  Indra involuntarily reacts by shielding herself from the blow with her elbow.

Round 2

1. Indra quickly takes a deep breath (+1 concentration).  She wards off the grip (defender always passes on even) and reverses it into a grip of her own (50% chance 1d4=3; pass).  She uses her last action for a sharp, quick backhand to the face (stamina added for power) and Ar Jin attempts to parry using concentration.  Indra’s attack hits Ar Jin in the nose and stuns her.  Blood drips out.

2. Ar Jin responds in anger by unleashing a kick combination to Indra’s knee (quick attack) and face (standard strike), with concentration added to the quick attack and for the knee targeting and stamina added to both blows (1d4=3; 9 quick attack, 4 standard; roll for knee strike 1d4=2; fail; standard leg strike).  The blow misses the knee and strikes the shin, which is painful, albeit superficial (hurt effect to leg).  The second kick hits air as Ar Jin’s accuracy is off.  Ar Jin follows up with two roundhouse kicks to the ribs but land “uncrispy” on Indra’s arm and side (Indra passive defense: pass).

Tactical Breakdown
*Because their dexterity is much higher than their other fighting attributes, Indra and Ar Jin naturally use techniques based on dexterity to secure their victory.  Unfortunately, their dexterity attributes are even, and the two fighters end up in a stalemate, even though Ar Jin has some slight advantages.  As a result, the key to winning for them relies on carefully conserving combat actions and concentration.  Thus, the combat pace will start slowing down as they take time to compose their thoughts and jockey for position, and then the pace will pick up again with numerous exchanges of blows.

*I chose two dexterity fighters for this exchange to demonstrate what a kung fu fight would look like using this system.  I also wanted to demonstrate contrast with the last combat example, which was meant to display something like Jeet Kune Do vs. Kickboxing or Muay Thai.