Ok, I have finally been able to have a tantalizing taste of TROS, and we are on the verge of starting our first campaign. Let me say first of all, I used to be a little jealous of TROS because when it came out it was so similar to a game I was trying to develop that it kind of burst my bubble. Since then, I've been increasingly charmed by the game and by the many aspects beyond the realistic combat (my favorite part) that make it so much richer than what I had in mind.

I particularly appreciate all the various countries, such an improvement over the generic seemingly single-culture fantasy world or the lame fantasy kingdoms which don't make much sense. Many of these seem to be borrowed from 'real' history which is a good place to find internal consistency and nuance. Iv'e had fun trying to figure out which countries come from which historical originals (so far i think I've identified Italian City states (Genoa and Venice?), Switzerland, Germany (HRE), Germany again (Prussia?), Napoleonic France, Ottoman Turkey, Mongolia (?), The Italian Papal States, Poland / Russia (?), Celtic British Isles, and a few others I'm not sure of yet.

One minor quibble I have with the combat system, which might be just me not understanding the rules fully yet, has to do with endurance and fatigue. I'm not in the best of shape, well truth be told Im fat as a whale, but i have a lot of experience stickfighting, and it seems to me people tend to get worn out pretty quick doing this. And not just fatso's like me, few of the people I spar with can keep it up more than about ten minutes, and a notable drop in performance is usually apparent within 2 or 3 minutes. I think anyone who has stepped in a boxing ring for 3 rounds can remember how quickly it wears you out, and how quickly performance degrades.

Now I realise TROS combat is usually very fast, like real combat usually was, and seldom lasts more than a few seconds let alone several minutes. But theoretically, with shields and especially with heavier armor, a fight could go on for a considerable amount of time. Similarly in a war or a large battle where you might be fighting several different opponents one after another.

To remedy this (with all due respect, I'm hardly an expert at TROS rules yet so bear with me if I'm way out to lunch here) I would propose that the pool should decrease by one point per number of exchanges equal to the fighters endurance. For example, if you had 4 endurance, then you would lose 1 point of pool every two rounds. With an 8, you would have to worry about it until you had fought for four rounds.

Encumberance should be factored in somehow as well, including permanent encumberance from being fat like me.

Assuming this isn't handled in some way I hadn't understood, this would add another element to fighting strategy: the rope a dope. Some fighters, particularly heavily armored ones, will get tired quickly. I know I'm a hell of a lot more lethal in the first couple of exchanges of a fight than I am 2 minutes into it (in the unlikely event that it lasts that long). This way a fighter with less skill but more endurance could fight very defensively until his or her opponent tired out some and lost a few pool points.


Just a thought. Any reactions?

JR

I assume you have your core-book at hand so here goes the explaining:
I myself had my first experience with endurance and fatigue during a tournament in the game during my second session of TROS. It was fun and realistic.. as I was in plate armor and the opponent was in either leather or chain.. in either case his endurance was higher than mine too.
Fatigue is first explained on page 82, where-by a character loses dice at a rate of 1 per the number of his endurance in rounds. I.E. -1CP every 4 rounds if the character's EN is 4(for characters in plate armor). The only thing that differs between your version and the book is that the book uses rounds, as you use exchanges(half of a round). Fatigue gets lessened with sleep and rest as explained on page 96, book 5 chapter 5 'Fatigue and Rest'.
Encumberance for obese people(such as my father, think of the obese dude in the Overburdened picture on page 94...) Table 5.2 on that same page covers modifiers for encumberance to CP and movement rate. This goes to show the level of physical exertion needed in order to perform daily and mundane tasks at different levels of encumberance.
An advocate for reality might take into account that the different levels of encumberance would also fatigue faster.. at 1/4 normal, 1/2 normal or 3/4 the normal rate of someone wearing whatever type of armor.
So here is my hypothetical situation to clarify all of my rambling and ranting.
A 'fat' person, might be considered heavily encumbered, and an obese person overburdened. So take the starting CP for the fight of say 12(reflex and proficiency.. let's say he's more trained than he has speed of body) and subtract 6 dice from the pool at each exchange to reflect the amount of exertion the character has to go through in order to do combat.(encumberance rule) That leaves him with an effective CP of 6, and it would deteriorate as a rate of 1/2. If the character is unarmored as aforementioned 'fat' person is on page 93 under the title of Heavily Encumbered... the normal rate is -1CP every 2xEN rounds... but since he is heavily encumbered.. 1/2 of that would be -1CP every EN rounds.
Now before people fly off the handle at reading table 5.2 you should note the descriptions. Before a fight a normal person can drop his belongings and therefore move down on the encumberance level. A 'fat' person can not just throw away his extra body weight before a fight... which is the sole reason I am writing this whole house rule.
Now then Bob, if you want to change the fatigue rule to use exchanges rather than rounds in calculating modifiers to CP for fatigue, go ahead.. it would speed up combat considerably in my opinion in situations as heavily armored fighters and such.. as their combat pools would be shrinking sooner rather than later.. and one character might decide to launch a 'last ditch effort' using his entire CP in an attack before he no longer has enough CP to hit the guy. And if that is countered by someone using a full CP defensive manouver... and it ties or the character is hit but no damage is done.. just declare it a draw if it's a duel.. or if it's a big battle.. have someone come out of the ranks and finish one of them off.
Duels to the death on the otherhand, would not stop long enough to start negating fatigue... there might be a pause in the fighting.. but not a break.

-Ingenious

No that explains it pretty well. I had asked my Seneschal(sp?) about this but he was apparently not aware of it. As long as there is a rule in the ball park I don't feel the need to tinker with it too much. Thanks for the detailed explanation.

JR

Your Seneschal (namely, me) sometimes forgets rules. Good eye on that one - and I think we'll use your exchanges instead of rounds. If a TROS combat goes more than five rounds, something's wrong.

Given that a round is only a couple of seconds long, I'd stick to rounds.
It is possible to wear down someone in combat, but it does usually take a good 8-10 rounds for the advantage to manifest. That's still less than a minute.

The CP penalty on heavy armor is already pretty severe. If you heap extra fatigue on it (light armor wearers don't fatigue as quickly) I think you might effect armor disproportionately severely.

Yeah, like I said as long as there is a rule, I'm happy with it. Am I right in guessing that one of the reasons combat goes so quickly in TROS is that few characters can afford armor? Or are the armor encumbrance rules so restrictive that you really don't want to wear any? Clinton, in that combat we did between me and the Hess, didn't it go about 5 rounds? That was because the weapon I had (a staff) barely did any damage to the thing, but I was lucky in being able to fend off it's attacks.

With regard to armor, IMHO a helmet and a hauberk (long shirt) of mail wouldn't be incredibly encumbering and should offer quite good protection against most weapons (except for specialist armor piercing weapons). A hauberk would of course basically always be worn with a padded coat underneath. I've worn a mail shirt in sparring matches and while it was heavy, (heavier than I expected) it did not appreciatively effect my attacking ability.

Here is another thought I had, or you could call it a question in need of clarification. When both combattants have opted to attack (as opposed to one attacking and one defending), you do a random tie breaker, is that correct? I think the person with the current reach advantage (longer weapon at normal range, or shorter wepon in short range or a grapple) should have the edge. I think reach is a very, very important factor in combat. Opinions?

JR

Red/red has already manifested intself on the forum.. do a search for it.
It basically amounts to rolling reflexes and see whoever can move faster.

I still would factor into this thing a character's natural encumberance(obesity, or lack there-of). I would stick to rounds also, as Valamir pointed out.. it might take up a bit more real-time.. but it does not translate into that much longer of game-time. The difference is in SECONDS there. 5 rounds would be 20 seconds... give or take. I usually think in 2 second exchanges.. or 4 second rounds. Now tell me this Mr. Nixon.. how a battle or a duel that lasted more than 20 seconds of in-game time be 'wrong' eh? It might be your preference, but it is not mine.. if combat goes on for a long period of time.. just chalk it up to some severely equal combatants. To address the point of armor, yes it is expensive... only the people that can afford it would even have it, and it was not always worn then either.

-Ingenious

Ingenious wrote: Red/red has already manifested intself on the forum.. do a search for it.
It basically amounts to rolling reflexes and see whoever can move faster.

To address the point of armor, yes it is expensive... only the people that can afford it would even have it, and it was not always worn then either.

-Ingenious

I was speaking both historically and in terms of TROS. Armor is expensive when we're talking about plate.. even more so for 'fine plate'.
Reflex is more important than you realize, while the guy with a spear in your opinion might get the first shot.. if the guy with the dagger is fast enough in a red/red situation.. he might close the distance enough in order to be able to hit first.. and through weapon length penalties, the guy with a spear would then have a distinct disadvantage.

-Ingenious

Ingenious wrote: I was speaking both historically and in terms of TROS. Armor is expensive when we're talking about plate.. even more so for 'fine plate'.

Reflex is more important than you realize, while the guy with a spear in your opinion might get the first shot.. if the guy with the dagger is fast enough in a red/red situation.. he might close the distance enough in order to be able to hit first..

and through weapon length penalties, the guy with a spear would then have a distinct disadvantage.
-Ingenious

Here is an example of what I mean about reach. This is a little film clip of a sparring match I had recently with a guy who is an expert at a Philipino stick fighting art called escrima. This was kind of a grudge match and we had both been fighting very hard. Here we have been at it for quite a while and are both pretty exhausted, especially me. You can see how my opponent, who is much quickler on his feet and has at least as good reflexes, makes several attempts to rush me. I'm armed with a great sword (about 58") and he's got a broad sword (about 39") and a buckler. Both weapons are of historically accurate length, width, weight, and balance points.

You'll notice, that even though I'm so tired I can barely stand up, in the six attempts he makes to rush in and strike (before my shoe falls apart and we take a short break), he only gets me one time, (the first time) and thats after I already hit him in the leg, probably hard enough to kill or maim if it were a real sword. And he has the added defensive advantage of a shield. Try to imagine this with no shield and a smaller weapon, and then I think you can see what I'm talking about.

http://bellsouthpwp.net/d/e/deodand23/Henry6-Long-Shoe.mpg

JR

Point taken, but I can still debate you on this. While you would have the reach advantage at the first moment, in TROS terms if I am faster than you I can close in at a rate of 'sprinting'.(four times the move rate in rounds) So say my move is 6.. that's 24 feet per round, or 12 feet per exchange(6-12 feet per second, depending on how long your exchanges are)... so I would get there in reasonably fast fashion. Getting there is no problem, but I see your thoughts as to weapon length and such.

While your challenge to the fight at New Orleans seems tempting.. I'll pass.. I'd rather watch Jake fight you. That would be amusing. I did see a little of that video though.
:edited to note that during the time it took to type this I had downloaded and watched the whole thing, though most of it was too dark.
Also, to add on the New Orleans shin-dig. I don't know how clear my schedule is that weekend. We might have a TROS session here, I might have work, or I might be in other words busy.

Anyways your thoughts on armor have been presented before, and most of what you want is purportedly in TFOB. Mail does protect you from most piercing types of attacks, though no armor is going to protect you completely from the effects of bludgeoning weapons. Longbows especially can cut through chain with little resistance.(given the design of the arrow-head and such)

TROS is still the most realistic RPG system I have played, and it can be molded to make it that much more realistic.
If the contested reflex roll bothers you, don't use it.. come up with something you feel is better. I like it though as it is, it shows that one person might have hesitated in the red/red situation a little more than the other person did... or maybe that person was just faster.

YMMV
-Ingeious

Yeah, I guess we were kind of beating it to death, or was (no pun intended) I'm not really complaining about TROS, just bringing up a possible point of improvement. I don't mean to be obnoxious about it, I just really enjoy getting into the details of anylizing combat.

As for sparring at the Southern Knights event, I do expect Jake and I will cross swords, but I don't make any claims that I'll win except in the unfair weapon combination I described above. I've seen film clips of Jake sparring with Longswords and he's very good. I've never fought an ARMA member before so I'm really looking forward to seeing how well I can do against them. I'm certainly not as well versed in the Fechtbuchs though I do have a lot of experience.

Anyway, back to the game, I just want to be clear, I'm not trying to poke holes in it, I really like it. I'm just having fun examining all the details of the mechanics of the game rules, especially combat, and seing how they compare to the way I understand melee combat (in particular) to work. It's something I've been fascinated with since I was a teenager, and TROS is the best that has ever been done yet.

As far as that goes I really appreciate your making the effort to explain the rules and the rationale behind them.

JR

And now back to reality... after my brief foray into my 4AM delirium. Since the topic seems to have changed to red/red, reflex throws, and alternatives to this.... why don't we just include whatever weapon length penalties in the reflex roll? This seems like a compromise but in my mind's eye it is realistic. Person with the best combination of reflex/weapon length after a roll hits first. Say two people have the same reflex, 6 for all I care.. and one has a +2 bonus due to length, while the other has a -2(hypothetical.. too tired to consult book).Roll the now 8 dice for attacker A against attacker B's natural reflex. And have the now 4 dice attacker B has vs attacker A's natural reflex. Whomever has more successes wins. OR just say roll reflex and modify the TN of the roll due to weapon length bonuses/penalties.

Which would everyone like more in this case? The way it stands now(just rolling reflex). the first option, or the second?

-Ingenious

I think the differing TNs of the weapons combined with the reach penalties sufficiently map out what you need, Bob.

Imagine this:

Your knife fighter and your spear fighter opt red/red. We're going to use the stats listed under Guardsman on page 220 of the corebook for both combatants. They declare their attacks, probably a thrust for each, as that is what their weapons were designed for. They both roll reflex (plus 1 for the thrust, in both cases) so 5 dice apiece. Spearman is rolling against 6, the thrusting ATN of a spear. Knifeman is rolling against a 7, the thrusting ATN of a dagger. I roll the dice, and come up with 2 successes for the dagger, and 3 for the spear. The spearman gets the first shot. Enough said, for the most part.

When the dagger fighter does strike even if he strikes first, he'll have to strike through an additional 3 dice of range penalties. (hand range for the dagger, long range for the spear) The spearman may opt to attempt to buy initiative (perhaps not a good idea in this case, as Guardsmen have a higher Per than Reflex or WP.) which is essentially what you were doing, or defending, in most of your exchanges in the video you linked to.

In all reality, a dagger fighter who found himself forced to fight a spearman would be stupid to attack at all, and would be better served to duck-and-weave, or counter, then use the advantage gleaned in the defense in his attack. I mean this in game as much as in real-life combat.

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.

Valamir wrote: 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.

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

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

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?

Valamir wrote:
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.

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?

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

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

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

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.

Valamir wrote:

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 wrote: 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.

Jake Norwood wrote:


$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

Jake Norwood wrote:

$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

(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?

Deacon Blues wrote: (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?

Drifter Bob wrote:

Mokkurkalfe wrote: 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

Drifter Bob wrote:
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

Jake Norwood wrote:
You want an arming sword and a buckler, and I get a 16" dagger? That's blade, right? My Rondel is probably about 20", and I never use a knife shorter than 18".

Plus, it so happens that an arming sword and a buckler is probably the toughest thing to beat with a knife.

Let's say I get my rondel and you get just the arming sword, but you only have to win 14 out of 15 matches. That'll give you a little more engergy.

Oh, and I take my winnin's in cash, thanks. :-D
Jake

Jake Norwood wrote:

Oh, and I take my winnin's in cash, thanks. :-D

Jake

It so happens that I don't drink, actually. Sounds fair.

Jake

Jake Norwood wrote: It so happens that I don't drink, actually. Sounds fair.

Jake

I'll put $20 on Jake. If these conditions are met:
A. I have the $20 after I get everything paid off.
B. If I actually go to the event which makes me -$70 for the ticket and who knows how much for gas money and a hotel room for a night.
...greedy ARMA so and so's. :-D

In other words.. the $20 will more realistically be reduced to 1 cent.
-Ingenious
TROS session tonight.. look for a recap later this week.

I'm entertained by this.

Cory (Ingenious), now I know what you were referring to as the learning experience that taught you fatigue rules.

How I wish I had the coin to get down there... I'd take Jake's drinks!!!

Of course, if I win, that really does settle the whole reach / range / rush issue once and for all, don't it?

Either way, I'll definately have another little video clip to post here for those of you who can't make it down here to the big easy. You can supply your own booze.

JR

Maybe if we have time we can try a few different weapon combinations, dagger versus sword & shield, dagger versus longsword, dagger versus sword & dagger, dagger versus rapier, dagger versus spear and shield, polearm, flail, whatever. That way we could possibly come up with some statistical information of some use to game designers, which weapon or combination of weapons is hardest to rush with a smaller weapon, that sort of thing.

JR