Guys,
I am preparing to run a game for my regular group set in Frank Herbert's Dune background. I love this background and I would not be the first person on this forum to point out that the TROS system with it's focus on authentic medieval melee combat and Spirital Attributes is a the perfect system to run such a game with a minimum of drift.

I am currently in the process of adapting the combat system. The base TROS combat system is perfect but the problem I am having is modelling shield-combat. Body shields are effectively man-sized force shields which affects objects passing through the shield at a velocity of more than 6 to 9 inches per second, and prevents the object from penetrating the shield. Neat huh!

Successful attacks through a body-shield are achieved through a slow moving attack with an off-hand and often poisoned blade, normally delivered after a feint or a grapple. I am adding the feature of fatigue in the body shield concept which is only hinted at in the books, such that the charge in a body-shield can be depleted by repeated blows thus leaving the target unprotected and vulnerable.

I am not completely sure how this will play in a TROS combat situation, nor have I given a lot of thought as yet to the detail. One of my worries is that combat could go on a very long time.

Have any of you given any thought to a TROS Dune game and if so do you have any advice for me, or feedback on the above?

thanks in advance,
Gary

This comes up a lot. Here are a couple of examples.

http://www.indie-rpgs.com/viewtopic.php?t=7076
http://www.indie-rpgs.com/viewtopic.php?t=5503

I didn't read too closely, so I'm not sure if there have been any successful implementations.

What I'd do is keep it simple, and descriptive. That is, I'd just say that if you're fighting against a person with a shield, and you don't have one, that you lose. It's just too much of an advantage. If both, or neither have shields, conduct combat as normal, and just describe things appropriately.

No muss, no fuss.

Mike

LO Mike thanks for replying,
I had seen the second of your links a while back I must have missed the first. It was closer to what I was after but not quite ...

I want dueling with shields to be a centrepiece, perhaps the final battle with the antagonist. As such I want the play to be detailed. Feel realistic. The way that TROS does for conventional combat. I don't really want to fluff it and handle it through narration.

It's true I don't want fuss. I guess what I am looking for is an elegant way to model shield fightning within the system.

I'll let you all know how I get on.

Gary

Frank Herbert wrote: Paul directed a parry downward, turned, saw Helleck's rapier catch against the table's edge. Paul flung himself aside, thrust high with rapier and came in across Halleck's neckline with the bodkin. He stopped an inch from the jugular.
'Is this what you seek?' Paul whispered.

See, I don't see the difference in description other than adding words like "slowly", "carefully", "Subtly", "secretly", and "silently". And only occasionally.

That is, in your quote, you see that there was a parry, and a thrust that was a feint. IIRC, what follows is that Gurney points down to where he had actually gotten a knife in to where he would have killed Paul first. Call it a counter or a feint of his own or something.

That is, the descriptions in Dune shield combat seem to be indenitcal, mechanically, to normal combat. The only difference is the speed at which things happen. Otherwise the strategy is the same. So the only difference that I see is that rounds are longer in shield combat, and the actual moves (which TROS does not deal with), are a bit more subtle, complex, whathaveyou.

One thing that does occur to me, in terms of simulating, is that a proficiency learned in terms of shield combat should not be the same as unshielded. That is they should be two different proficeiencies, one defaulting to the other (-2?). This would account for the description of how Paul seems to be "toying" with Chani's husband, when in actuality he just hasn't adjusted for the lack of shields.

Another thing that you might want to do is to take ST and weapon size out of the damage calculation for shield combat. Given that a faster penetration gets slowed proportionally, damage should equal out, I'd think. This is why placement and poison are so important in this sort of combat. I'd just call all damage equal to successes rolled only (and be sure to use alternate TO rules), representing the placement of the blow.

Is that any better?

Mike

You should also rule that pretty much no missile weapons can effect a Shielded person. (I believe there's some few hunter missiles and such)

Which will make dueling that much more important. (thus playing to TROS strength)

Mike Holmes wrote: See, I don't see the difference in description other than adding words like "slowly", "carefully", "Subtly", "secretly", and "silently". And only occasionally.

That is, in your quote, you see that there was a parry, and a thrust that was a feint. IIRC, what follows is that Gurney points down to where he had actually gotten a knife in to where he would have killed Paul first. Call it a counter or a feint of his own or something.

Mike Holmes wrote: That is, the descriptions in Dune shield combat seem to be indenitcal, mechanically, to normal combat. The only difference is the speed at which things happen. Otherwise the strategy is the same. So the only difference that I see is that rounds are longer in shield combat, and the actual moves (which TROS does not deal with), are a bit more subtle, complex, whathaveyou.

Mike Holmes wrote: One thing that does occur to me, in terms of simulating, is that a proficiency learned in terms of shield combat should not be the same as unshielded. That is they should be two different proficeiencies, one defaulting to the other (-2?). This would account for the description of how Paul seems to be "toying" with Chani's husband, when in actuality he just hasn't adjusted for the lack of shields.

Mike Holmes wrote: Another thing that you might want to do is to take ST and weapon size out of the damage calculation for shield combat. Given that a faster penetration gets slowed proportionally, damage should equal out, I'd think. This is why placement and poison are so important in this sort of combat. I'd just call all damage equal to successes rolled only (and be sure to use alternate TO rules), representing the placement of the blow.

Mike Holmes wrote: Is that any better?

See, giving the shield an armor rating is exactly what I'd want to avoid. It says then that the the TO can be overcome with more force. Which is precisely not the case.

Armor is an interesting case. I'd consider it separate from shields. I like your slip-tip idea (though I think it sorta circumvents some of the normal ideas about how the armor rules work). I see another option for killing someone in this circumstance, call it knife wrestling. That is, you grapple with the opponent and try to force the knife into some opening in order to kill them. This requires a successful set up to engage in. The I'd just make this a contest of ST (SAs particularly important here), successes resulting in damage of an equal level. Hence why the slip-tip is so important for those who aren't really strong.

Outside of these two methods, I see characters having real problems killing armored and shielded opponents. By that, I mean that I'd still drop out ST and weapon damage from the calculation per my above post. This is why knives are preferred - they have good TNs and do the same damage. Hmmm.

Thinking about it, I'd make all DTNs better by 4 with shield fighting. Yes, this means that defense is much, much easier, but that seems to make sense as well. And will make tactics much different. And again make knives more viable. If all dice in defense tend to score then it's important to make sure that all dice in offense score as well.

Oh, another thing, shields make the length modifiers moot. You can always close as the weapon slowly penetrates. Another reason to use knives - no advantage for longer weapons. In fact, I might even say that all combat is just considered at shortest range so that longer weapons would be at a disadvantage constantly.

Hmm. Really is more to it than I thought. I wonder if there are any implications for stealing initiative and stuff like that.

Mike

Mike Holmes wrote: See, giving the shield an armor rating is exactly what I'd want to avoid. It says then that the the TO can be overcome with more force. Which is precisely not the case.

Mike Holmes wrote: Armor is an interesting case. I'd consider it separate from shields. I like your slip-tip idea (though I think it sorta circumvents some of the normal ideas about how the armor rules work).

Mike Holmes wrote: I see another option for killing someone in this circumstance, call it knife wrestling. That is, you grapple with the opponent and try to force the knife into some opening in order to kill them. This requires a successful set up to engage in. The I'd just make this a contest of ST (SAs particularly important here), successes resulting in damage of an equal level. Hence why the slip-tip is so important for those who aren't really strong.

Mike Holmes wrote: Hmm. Really is more to it than I thought. I wonder if there are any implications for stealing initiative and stuff like that.

Gary_Bingham wrote: If a wall fell on a shield I would say that the shield energy pack would deplete repelling the force of the attack. so maybe a TO of 20 maybe more appropriate.

I kinda think of shields as virtually impenetrable armour That way you don't have to have to have a completely different system. For normal manouvers the armour applies, for an Attack Sinister manouver the armour does not apply. However the Attack Sinister has a high set-up cost and perhaps a minus to damage so it is difficult to use.

I see Grapples, Counters, Feints and Bind and Strike all being crucial to a shield fighter.

I'll have to consider the rest of your post later Mike I am off to see LOTR: The Return of the King :)

Odd idea, take it what you will:

Shield's TO = (Attacker's Reflex) + 1, with the caveat that an attacker can reduce the shield's TO by reducing the amount of Reflex they put into a hand-to-hand fight (and thus reducing their combat pool). In other words, by moving slower, they reduce the TO.

I'd also drop out ST (but not weapon) damage.

What if a shield on your opponent means that every attack you make has to have a prep cost, representing how hard it is to set up an attack? Maybe a 3 CP cost for each attack?

I like both of those ideas, especially the CP activation cost. I'm using that!

or what if the sheild doesn't stop damage at all but acts like a bonus to defence?

For example:
every die past the first the attacker puts into his attack costs the number of dice already in the attack?

so 1 die is 1 die
2 costs 3
3 costs 6
4 costs 10 etc.

Just adding my ideas to the pool, I don't know if that suits and its been ages since I read Dune.

Lots of great ideas there

I am going to go with assigning a shield a TO value, this keeps the game in-line with the standard TROS system. I know you are against this Mike and I am still open to be convinced but I have based the following mod to the TROS rules on a variable TO for shields as a prototype.

Shield Toughness
Shield TO is variable dependent on the attackers weapon Dam + 5. (the logic here is that in order to beat a shield with a normal attack you will need more than 5 successes tough but not impossible) Shield is countered as separate to and not in addition to conventional armour. Certain attacks can circumvent the TO of a shield but never the armour behind the shield.

Attack-Sinister (aka Slip-Tip)
Activation Cost : 4CP (3CP with a dagger sized weapon)
Benefits : -2 to Targets TO and -1 per addition all CP spent
The Attack Sinister is a slow attack normally with a off-handed dagger designed to penetrate a body shield. The slower the blade the better the penetration, but also the less chance of doing any damage. The attacker must decid how slowly to move the blade. For each CP spent the TO of the shield is reduced by one to the minimum of the TO of the conventional armour worn by the target.

Grapples
This does not mean that Grapples will not work, in fact it makes them more attractive. Grappling to Pin will allow an attacker to pour large amounts of CP into an Attack Sinister. This models an opponent being held down as dagger is slowly pushed through the shield. It may be necessary to increase the activation cost for grappling a shielded target.

Feints
I would add an additional category of Feint, the Feint-and-Attack-Sinister. This would have similar rules to the normal feints with the additional option to reduce the TO of the shield for every CP spent in the manner of a normal Attack Sinister.

Bind and Strike, Block Open and Strike, and Counters
These function as normal in shield fighting. When successfully employed they free up additional CP for the attacker to use an Attack Sinister.

Shield Fighting proficency

Offensive Manouvers
Attack sinister (4/3)
Bind and Strike (0)
Cut (0)
Feint (1)
Simultaneous Block/Strike (0)

Defensive Manouvers
Block (0)
Block Open and Strike (2)
Counter (2)
Explusion (2)
Grapple (2)
Parry (0)

Defaults
Rapier (0)
Dagger (0)
Wrestling (0)
Case of Rapiers -1
Cut & Thrust -2
Doppelhander -4
Greatsword -3
Mass-weapon and Shield -5
Pole-arms -3
Poleaxe -4
Pugilism/Brawling -2
Sword and shield -2

Gary

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

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.

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

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

Valamir wrote: 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.

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

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

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.

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.

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.


I think it would work.

Mike

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.

Mike Holmes wrote: 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.

Mike Holmes wrote: 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.

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

Mike Holmes wrote: 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

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.

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.

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.

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 ;)

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.

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!

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

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.

CP can't be a unit of time.