Re: A skill that adds CDV (Was: Re: parrying or Multi Skills)

[Steve Ames <steve@virtual-voodoo.com>]

On Mon, Mar 27, 2000 at 10:21:28AM -0000, Lyle H Janney wrote:
> Hmmm, it seems that some people aren't exactly too clear on what
> parrying is all about.  For those of you that are 'cut-to-the-chase'
> kind of people, I will summarize my thoughts first, then I will explain.
> 
> [SKILL EXPLANATION DELETED - MUCH AGREEMENT INCLUDED]
> 
> 1) All weapons wield differently, and all weapons parry differently;
> 	hence, parry skill should be by weapon.

Agreed.

> 2) Warriors are the only ones who would typically be trained to
> 	handle a weapon in this manner; hence it is a Warrior skill.

Agreed.

> 3) Since it is by weapon, the parry skill should be costed in that
> 	manner.  For weapon skill, the base cost is _always_
> 	30 * max damage; getting good at parrying with a weapon
> 	is not easy, so I propose that the base cost for parry should
> 	be 20 * max damage, or 2/3 of the weapon skill.

Two things need to be kept in mind when costing and your experiences
should let you answer both of them:

1 - is it easier to defend than it is to attack?
2 - since base cost determines how often a skill is even bought, how much
    do we want to encourage the existance of a parry skill?

> 4) Of course, this skill is non-defaultable.

Hrm... Agreed.

> 5) A person _can_ learn to parry without being particularly skilled at
> 	hitting with a weapon, so the upper bounds is still CSE and
> 	not the character's existing weapon skill.

Intresting. While I don't doubt that it _is_ possible to learn to parry
without learning to attack... to become skilled at parrying you would 
have to have a good understanding of attack. I can go either way on this.
As a seperate skill its consistent to be stat limited and not limited
by another skill.

> 6) Defense is what this skill is all about, and +2/die is consistent with
> 	several other skills in AQ.

Agreed.

> 7) This bonus is to CDV only because parrying does not equate to just
> 	flailing your weapon about.  It is the focused intention to block
> 	any incoming melee weapons.

What? No kung-fu theatre blocking of incoming arrows? No cutting the
arm off someone who tries to grab you? Sheesh.

> 8) It works until your next action because that is what you are focusing
> 	on during combat, defending yourself.

Agreed.

> 9) And since you are defending, you get to take only one choice shot
> 	during your round.  Make it a good one.

Partial Agreement. I concur with what your saying but allowing only one
hit will slow combat.. especially if you can't use precise attack to
offset your opponents parry. However allowing seperate rolls against
parry and weapon skill is, IMO, un-desirable and too powerful.

> 10) Regarding the possible exception: I am proposing that it be included
> 	because it makes sense and I can see it's usefulness, both to
> 	players and to actors.  Plus, it models real life a little better.

I can get behind the single attack motif... but I'd prefer to just
disclude multi-attack and leave quickdraw, precise and lethal.

> 11) Note that this proposal does not require any extra die rolls and it
> 	maintains general consistency with other AQ skills.

May potentially require more die rolls if some weapon skills are allowed
to work with it.

> 12) I'm very curious of whether this matches Steve's criteria of
> 	simplicity and elegance (it certainly matches mine).

:) Looking pretty good to me. Its in keeping with the way things work
currently. Now that's a neutral statement. the way things work now is
not necessarily the best way. The way you list the skill makes it
reasonably painless to integrate into the way things are now. However
it's also a skill people won't use. Its better (for me as a warrior) to
swing 5 times and kill my opponent than it is to try and defend myself.
Spend the eeps buying DP, not defense. This is because of the way the
game is setup. A moderate overhaul of the combat system is required to
change this form of optimization.

-Steve