Comments on: Offensive Damage Factors Considered http://www.fudgery.net/fudgerylog/2008/02/05/82/ Better role-playing through dead reckoning Mon, 30 Aug 2010 03:46:36 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1 By: Gordon A. Cooper http://www.fudgery.net/fudgerylog/2008/02/05/82/comment-page-1/#comment-260 Gordon A. Cooper Wed, 06 Feb 2008 21:02:34 +0000 http://www.fudgery.net/fudgerylog/2008/02/05/82/#comment-260 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). 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).

]]> By: Mark http://www.fudgery.net/fudgerylog/2008/02/05/82/comment-page-1/#comment-256 Mark Wed, 06 Feb 2008 16:54:02 +0000 http://www.fudgery.net/fudgerylog/2008/02/05/82/#comment-256 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). 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).

]]>