One of the things I like about Fudge is the simplicity of determining how much damage a mêlée weapon causes. I’ve seen it boiled down to its bare essence in a variety of ways, but I think this version is the best:
-1 unarmed, no formal combat training
+0 unarmed, formal combat training
+0 small weapon
+1 medium weapon
+2 large weapon
+1 sharpness
+1 two-handed
So, if a character enters combat, you ask yourself these questions:
If the character is unarmed, is he formally or informally trained in unarmed combat? (Apply 0 if the former or -1 if the latter.)
If the character is armed, is the weapon small, medium, or large? (Apply 0, +1, or +2 respectively.) If it is sharp, add +1. If it is wielded with two hands, add +1.
Example: A rock is a small blunt weapon (ODF +0). A shillelagh is a medium blunt weapon (+1 medium = ODF +1). A knife is a small sharp weapon (+1 sharpness = ODF +1). A gladius is a medium sharp weapon (+1 medium +1 sharpness = ODF +2). A longsword is a large sharp weapon (+2 large +1 sharpness = ODF +3). A claymore is a large, sharp, two-handed weapon (+2 large +1 sharpness +1 two-handed = ODF +4).
This can easily be used to extrapolate the damage factors of everyday items such as a bowling ball (medium blunt object; ODF +1), a brick (small blunt object; ODF +0), a spade (large, blunt, two-handed tool; ODF +3), or a sickle (medium sharp tool; ODF +2).
This presents a quandary. Why would anyone choose to learn a specific weapon skill if Brawling can give one the ability to use just about anything as effectively? We know that household objects are not as effective as actual weapons, but how can this fact be reflected without complicating the simple formula of which we are so fond? Since the ordinary object is inferior to the weapon possessing similar qualities by virtue of its different design purposes, I think the best way to reflect this is to impose an initiative penalty to the wielder of the ordinary object whenever the two are matched. This would only work if alternating combat turns are being used. If simultaneous combat rounds are being used, one could rule that the wielder of the actual weapon gains a +1 mêlée modifier when engaged against a brawler attacking with a chair or a walking stick or any other object.
I was thinking about this as I was adding the description to the Brawling skill in Optimum Skills for Fudge. The unarmed combat skills are the only skills for which I have not yet written descriptions, and Brawling, being the most basic of all fighting techniques, is the first I have undertaken. On the table above, Brawling qualifies as unarmed, no formal combat training, and thus provides a -1 offensive damage factor. Any other form of unarmed combat requires some amount of formal training (having a default level of Nonexistent) and provides a 0 offensive damage factor. Special attack techniques will bestow a +1 offensive damage factor. To keep things simple, I think the difference between most of the martial arts will be style rather than effect, leaving the description of specific techniques to players if they so desire (and providing some examples in the skill descriptions). Certain skills may have exceptions, such as Aikido, Judo, Jujutsu, and Wrestling, which are more focused on disabling opponents than injuring or killing them (depending on the style and the individual practitioner, of course).
2 Comments
Hmmm, I’ll have to have a look at these Optimum Skills for Fudge.
I’m in the process of putting together a “Combat Fudge” based on some of the stuff I talked about on the Fudge List. One of the nice little things that drop out of it is that similar-level combat Skills, like various Martial Arts, can have distinct differences without being a heavy system.
As for Weapon against Fists issue… I always considered that the domain of the GM to make a call on depending on the type of game you want. Personally, my opinion is, a weapon is always better than fists unless the fighter has some technique to beat the weapon-user (but that’s a very dangerous succeed or get hit with no defence kind of thing).
I agree. My thoughts on martial arts as skills are still somewhat nebulous. Ideally, I think formal martial arts training constitutes an increase in damage-causing potential by a factor of 1, just as in the rules, but I wanted to provide some sort of tangible benefit for anyone willing to master an exotic skill with a default level of Nonexistent beyond its mere exoticism, hence the +1 ODF for special attacks, whatever they might be. These special attacks would presumably be beyond the means of novices. Masters would, I think, credibly inflict wounds equivalent to a medium-sized blunt weapon.
As for how armed and unarmed fare in combat against one another (apart from the issue of damage factors), I think the rules address the question of weapon reach, which would give the armed combatant the advantage, which is definitely appropriate. Only a very special technique should be able to overcome it (possibly expressed as a subskill or a gift).
Post a Comment