Combination Attack/Attack

[Ten Tigers]

Here is a game mechanics idea I have been kicking around for a while now. Let's see what you guys think of this...

Just as the name implies, Combination Attack/Attack expands upon the "Combination" rules. Instead of being used defensively, this move turns the mechanics to the aggressive.

Spending one Melee Action, the attacker makes two attack rolls. One initial attack, and another one made in rapid succession. Combination Attack/Attack move negates any "automatic" defenses such as Automatic Dodge; however, the defender may not use any of his automatic defenses either. Unlike the attacker, the defender only loses his automatic moves for the instance and not the remainder of the melee round.

The biggest sacrifice for this move is obviously the loss of the Automatic Parry move. From the moment Combo Attack/Attack is used, EVERY defensive action costs a melee action for the remainder of the melee round. Then again, using this move consistently can effectively double a character's Melee Actions. Effective if a character has paired weapons AND Weapon Katas with said weapons...

As I haven't used this yet, I don't even have it written up in an official format. I just wanted to get a little feedback before I crack open Word.

[Guest]

While I agree with the loss of automatic defenses for the attacker, I don't think the defender should be likewise penalized. Keeping within the existing system, this would work better like paired weapons, the defender could defend against the initial attack of the combination. I would further allow the defender to spend an attack (with no bonuses, or maybe half bonuses) to defend against the second attack (which would not, in some cases, require the success of the first attack like the existing combination moves in this game, i.e. grab/kick, etc). Dodges and automatic dodges (as well as multiple dodges and other dodge-like defensive maneuvers which cost an attack to use) would roll once against both attacks, rather than for each attack. This would allow the possibility that the defender could avoid one or both parts of the attack, or neither.

I would also recommend looking into penalties for the attacks, especially a penalty to strike (and/or damage) on the second attack of the combination.

[Mantisking]

Originally posted by Ten Tigers.
Just as the name implies, Combination Attack/Attack expands upon the "Combination" rules. Instead of being used defensively, this move turns the mechanics to the aggressive.

Interesting. I wonder why none of us had thought of this before.

Originally posted by Ten Tigers.
Spending one Melee Action, the attacker makes two attack rolls. One initial attack, and another one made in rapid succession. Combination Attack/Attack move negates any "automatic" defenses such as Automatic Dodge; however, the defender may not use any of his automatic defenses either. Unlike the attacker, the defender only loses his automatic moves for the instance and not the remainder of the melee round.

I'm not sure you need to "disable" the defender's Automatic defenses. Yes, 99% of martial arts styles have Automatic Parry, but only four or five styles have Automatic Dodge.

Originally posted by Ten Tigers.
The biggest sacrifice for this move is obviously the loss of the Automatic Parry move. From the moment Combo Attack/Attack is used, EVERY defensive action costs a melee action for the remainder of the melee round. Then again, using this move consistently can effectively double a character's Melee Actions. Effective if a character has paired weapons AND Weapon Katas with said weapons.

Thinking this through, if you split your actions for the round 50/50 on offense and defense you could still have the same amount of attacks when using this combat skill. Sure , you have to pass up the Automatic Parry, but if you have an advantage in actions is that so bad?

[Ten Tigers]

*bows*

I am pleased that you two seem to like my idea.

I got the whole disabling of "autos" from the base mechanics. If I understand it correctly, if an attacker throws a punch and the defender uses a combination parry/attack, then the attacker can NOT use his automatic parry to defend against the attack portion of the combination.

Unfortunately, here comes the cold water...

If I truly wanted to take an existing model/template approach to this, then there would be no simple application of penalties to strike. No, no. The sad reality of combination moves is they are done with no bonuses of any kind. Period.

Suffice to say, I do not like that, I do not agree with that, and never will.

[Ten Tigers]

I'm inclined to agree.

However, such an indiscretion is easily overcome by replacing the "no bonus" rule to, say, a -3 or -5 penalty on all combination maneuvers. This would help account for differences in skill levels (including natural talent and experience) between characters using combination moves.

Neh?

Unfortunately, even a penalty as small as -3 can completely eliminate all the benefits of a lifetime of martial arts training. Seriously, most martial artforms never even see a +3 much less a +5. At that rate, I'll stick with a strait roll of the dice.

Incidentally, this is why most of my custom martial art forms have higher bonuses than what the books present. Everybody wants to put a neg here or there, but I'm afraid to say that N&S does not support that philosophy. At least not mathematically. But hey, that's just one gamer's opinion.

[Mantisking]

Originally posted by Ten Tigers.
I am pleased that you two seem to like my idea.

{*bows back*} Cool.

Originally posted by Ten Tigers.
I got the whole disabling of "autos" from the base mechanics. If I understand it correctly, if an attacker throws a punch and the defender uses a combination parry/attack, then the attacker can NOT use his automatic parry to defend against the attack portion of the combination.

Makes sense to me.

Originally posted by Ten Tigers.
If I truly wanted to take an existing model/template approach to this, then there would be no simple application of penalties to strike. No, no. The sad reality of combination moves is they are done with no bonuses of any kind. Period.

Suffice to say, I do not like that, I do not agree with that, and never will.

No one does. I think it's fair to say that the "no bonuses on combinations" rule and the "bonuses don't stack between styles" rule are the two major stumbling blocks of the system.

Originally posted by heretic888.
I'm inclined to agree. However, such an indiscretion is easily overcome by replacing the "no bonus" rule to, say, a -3 or -5 penalty on all combination maneuvers. This would help account for differences in skill levels (including natural talent and experience) between characters using combination moves.

Originally posted by Ten Tigers.
Unfortunately, even a penalty as small as -3 can completely eliminate all the benefits of a lifetime of martial arts training. Seriously, most martial artforms never even see a +3 much less a +5. At that rate, I'll stick with a strait roll of the dice.

Heh, this is why we allow stacking of bonuses between styles in our game.

Originally posted by Ten Tigers.
Incidentally, this is why most of my custom martial art forms have higher bonuses than what the books present. Everybody wants to put a neg here or there, but I'm afraid to say that N&S does not support that philosophy. At least not mathematically. But hey, that's just one gamer's opinion.

Wha?!? A gamer with an opinion! Never!

[Guest]

*bows*

I am pleased that you two seem to like my idea.

I got the whole disabling of "autos" from the base mechanics. If I understand it correctly, if an attacker throws a punch and the defender uses a combination parry/attack, then the attacker can NOT use his automatic parry to defend against the attack portion of the combination.

Of course they can't, this logically fits within the existing system. The attacker has lost his chance to automatically parry because they're initiating the phase of combat, the defender is countering his attack with a move of his own (which reminds me, maybe the step by step combat in N&S needs to be revised to reflect counter attacks that the various moves allow...after all with the way it's currently set up, the defender, if using a counter that allows them to attack or do damage (i.e. combination parry/attack, simultaneous attack, paired weapons, etc.) doesn't really have a step to resolve their damage (I personally do one big determine damage step, especially in cases where both opponents take damage)), thus the attacker can't automatically defend against this counter, so they have to spend an attack to do so. However, in the case of Combination Attack/Attack, the defender hasn't done anything for the combat phase where the action is occuring, thus there's no real need to eliminate their automatic defenses.

Unfortunately, here comes the cold water...

If I truly wanted to take an existing model/template approach to this, then there would be no simple application of penalties to strike. No, no. The sad reality of combination moves is they are done with no bonuses of any kind. Period.

Suffice to say, I do not like that, I do not agree with that, and never will.

Actually, I've been looking more and more at penalizing moves by only allowing half bonuses or no bonuses to the move in addition to apply minus numbered penalties. They seem to work out all right, and they already exist in the system. However, I do agree that the combination moves seem to go overboard in many cases with these penalties and lack of bonuses. Some of the moves simply don't rate that degree of penalization.

Interesting. I wonder why none of us had thought of this before.

We have. Several of the new combination moves I've worked out are attack/attack combinations, however I prefer a specific attack approach myself, rather than the generic labelling of "Combination Attack/Attack."

[Ten Tigers]

However, in the case of Combination Attack/Attack, the defender hasn't done anything for the combat phase where the action is occuring, thus there's no real need to eliminate their automatic defenses.

This gets me thinking, but I need to chew on it for a while before I agree or disagree...

Actually, I've been looking more and more at penalizing moves by only allowing half bonuses or no bonuses to the move in addition to apply minus numbered penalties. They seem to work out all right, and they already exist in the system. However, I do agree that the combination moves seem to go overboard in many cases with these penalties and lack of bonuses. Some of the moves simply don't rate that degree of penalization.

Ironically, I have always been for mechanical restrictions rather than just applying a blanket penalty. It is just too hard to find bonuses and too easy to find penalties. I know it's not all about the bonuses, but the bonuses are a defining aspect of all characters.

Aunt May should not step up to Lee Jun Fan. He just has too many damn bonuses...

We have. Several of the new combination moves I've worked out are attack/attack combinations, however I prefer a specific attack approach myself, rather than the generic labelling of "Combination Attack/Attack."

I thought about that at first, but I went with a generic set of mechanics so they would be just as versatile as the rest of the combination moves, yet at the same time, stylized to whatever martial art form(s) the character may know. Combination Parry/Attack can end with anything from an elbow to a leg sweep.

Besides, the way everyone has been approaching it so far has yielded a ton of situation specific moves that cannot be customized without changing the creator's design. Again, the Parry/Attack of somebody with Sumo Wrestling will look totaly different from the Parry/Attack of a fighter with Wing Chun.

[Guest]

I thought about that at first, but I went with a generic set of mechanics so they would be just as versatile as the rest of the combination moves, yet at the same time, stylized to whatever martial art form(s) the character may know. Combination Parry/Attack can end with anything from an elbow to a leg sweep.

Besides, the way everyone has been approaching it so far has yielded a ton of situation specific moves that cannot be customized without changing the creator's design. Again, the Parry/Attack of somebody with Sumo Wrestling will look totaly different from the Parry/Attack of a fighter with Wing Chun.

I use a generic set of mechanics for the way I handle individual moves, only the specifications are different. As for not being able to customize the creator's design, I've never had any need to do so, since all the moves work basically the same way.