Mythic Hero - Fantasy RPG
David Berg:
Ah, didn't realize it was accessible. That's cool that you have a thorough downloads page.
For anyone else who's interested, combat is here, starting on page 45.
Johanus:
I'm looking forward to your feedback, Dave! I designed this combat system back in 1987. Really should have published this whole game 10 or 15 years ago. It has sat on a shelf for so long...
David Berg:
My first thought on the combat system is that there a good number of mechanically significant decisions that a player can make. Accordingly, I would imagine that playing combats would not just be about celebrating authenticity and uniqueness, but would focus on strategic choice. I could be wrong -- perhaps my choices for each round are more about color than effectiveness, I can't quickly tell for sure -- but that's my first guess. Does that sound true to your experience of playing this?
As for unique choices about what's important to focus on, there are two that I like right off the bat:
1) You can take a Hard Swing. If you miss, you're at a disadvantage the following round. I like the way the type of disadvantage maps to the type of swing. Sounds both like a meaningful risk assessment and like an event that's fun to visualize and describe. Good stuff!
2) Swing types. Sideways, upward, downward, thrusting, high, low. I love specifying things like that in combats. It seems like it should make a difference, and your rules indicate that, in this game, it does. As for how it does, though -- I'm unclear on that. The table with the (a) through (f) labels doesn't seem to amount to much consequence. Downswing does more damage, upswing does less, you can't do high right after low and vice versa... Is that it?
I read quickly and probably missed something. I'll hope to come back later and take a more thorough look, but these are my first impressions.
A suggestion on presentation:
Include a demo combat and/or a bullet point list of what players do in combat. Your combat rules include a lot of full paragraphs. These are necessary to introduce and explain new concepts, but I think some sort of shorter all-in-one presentation might complement them nicely.
Personally, I'm partial to stuff like this:
Player 1: "Well, I could take a high thrust with my sword with (list relevant advantages), or an uppercut with my mace with (list relevant advantages). I think that (logic for choosing), so mace it is!"
GM: "Your opponent opts to attempt a parry! (Logic for why.)"
Player rolls 2d10, gets a 9. Adding strength bonus of 2, skill bonus of 3, (etc.), that's a 14.
GM rolls X, adds Y and Z, gets a 13.
14 beats 13 by 1, which means (what it means).
But that could just be me.
I think something like this helps a lot of folks, though.
Johanus:
Hi David,
I think you've hit the nail on the head with your initial analysis of my intent.I certainly think that combat, even individual combat, is a game of tactics and decision making. And it also depends a little on one's initial reaction / analysis abilities. That was hard to express in the game, so I decided to use an announcement phase where the character with the lowest reaction speed announces first. And then they are able to react according to what the other character's intent is. Of course this doesn't always work... But it sure gives an advantage! And then the one whose usage speed actually strikes first, which can mean that regardless of intent they may simply be hit first and not able to strike back. You wouldn't believe how many times I've seen that happen in sparring! I even lost a provincial tournament against a Japanese style practitioner last year for being slightly slower, even though I was tactically better (I guess I'm getting old and out of shape and slowing down - ten years ago that wouldn't have happened.). :-( I got the silver medal and he got the big fancy trophy. But it proved to me that I have the right idea in that within my game system in trying to mimic reality.
Thanks about the hard swing option! That's another thing I've seen inexperienced martial artists make the mistake of doing... And occasionally, but much less frequently, more experienced. Even done it myself a few times. ;-)
Swing types: True, there isn't much consequence to that, as I felt it was getting cumbersome enough. I'm trying to think of a way to make it more significant and may have it solved, but need to think on it some more. I've also recently added the concept of a feign strike, which isn't in the version you have, where a feign will still do 1 or 2 damage if it hits (unlikely, as it has a penalty of 20 points or 1/2 skill, whichever is less), but then makes it such that the other character can commit to blocking it, allowing the fighter who feigned an advantage in the next strike, since the feign will look to the other like a committed blow.
And will CERTAINLY take your suggestion of the example fight and use that! Thank you!
contracycle:
I find it quite odd that RPG as a whoile has quite a lot of people with martial arts experience of one sort or another but we still only see two system types - abstract rounds ala D&D and concrete individual blows like the above, and others. I'm guilt of this myself but I hope one day we'll break out of this duopoly, becuase both of them are seriously flawed and neither really feel anything like doing actually doing it.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page