From: via RadioMail (ddunham@radiomail.net)
Date: Mon 30 Aug 1993 - 23:30:49 EEST
>> I used to fence saber against a guy who would dodge my attacks. I'd attack,
>> he'd lean slightly and I'd miss, then he'd nail me in the arm. That's an
>> attack and a dodge. (It's Maneuver related, since he had to be at just the
>> right distance for it to work.)
>>
> But by dodging did he throw away his option of parrying, as he'd have to
>in RQIII? (Actually, by the sound of it he did, so much for my argument)
>I think (and I admit I'm no fighter, so tell me if I'm wrong) that the
>two options of "stand still attack & parry" and "dodge about and attack"
>are inaccurate: all three combat options are used in any round. That's
>a point where RQ2 was superior with its Defense skill. I can see why
>they dropped Defense though: it didn't fit into the RQ skill system
>at all.
It fits well with the current RQ4 model where you declare in Statement of
Intent to Defend, and then use what's appropriate.
Fencing (like kendo, like SCA) is very stylized and only approximates real
I'm currently thinking that an Elric-like system where you defend as
combat. And game systems have to be playable -- in fencing, no one person
always attacks first, and sometimes by pressing the attack your opponent is
unable to attack back (on the other hand, sometimes attacking opens
yourself up for a riposte). Neither strike ranks nor melee rounds are much
of a simulation, they're merely game mechanics.
appropriate against each attack (-30% to defend against successive attacks
in a round, and you can choose parry or dodge at the time of the attack) is
more playable (you don't have to roll as often in standard combat, and
don't need statements of intent for defense), and handles the problem of
"throwing away an option of parrying." All-out defense could be +30% on the
first defense; all-out attack could be -30% to your first defense.
> P.S was this saber opponent much better or worse than you? Were you
>evenly matched?
He was definitely better -- people my own skill could barely parry, let
alone dodge.
David Dunham * Software Designer * Pensee Corporation
Voice/Fax: 206-783-7404 * AppleLink: DDUNHAM * Internet: ddunham@radiomail.net
0,,
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.7 : Sat 05 Jul 2003 - 20:29:19 EEST