Topic: Parry or Dodge

[Peter R]

Mind you, if you are strictly parrying with the missile weapon to fend a blow, then you are surely in point-blank range. If you are in the strict old round structure you have already accounted for the shot and so by hurrying the shot even a bow could be used to turn a blow from that opponent with an arrow in his eye .

I can see having a parrying capability with a crossbow, but not so much with a regular bow.

Assuming you are seeing parrying as physical contact between the defender and the attacker or the attacker's weapon. Parrying in game terms doesn't mean that. It just means sacrificing your offensive opportunities to protect yourself.

I would suggest that Hurin's point that being a world class archer shouldn't make you world class at avoiding kicks and blows misses the point. The rules are not attempting to simulate combat. They are trying to maintain game balance. If archers could not parry then they would mostly disappear as a fighting style.

In my game almost no one uses a bow anyway because the general perception of of puncture criticals being the least deadly has severely dented their desirability. Add on top of that the need for ammunition and rate of fire and the other drawbacks as well. If you then could not parry even if you were caught in melee then I think the bow would disappear as a weapon entirely.

[jdale]

The normal defensive strategy for an archer is "don't be in melee". If your opponent dies before reaching you, you don't have to parry. I think the opportunity to achieve that balances out their inability to use their missile OB to parry. If they have a melee OB skill, they might use their bow/crossbow as an improvised weapon (with a penalty) to parry, but breakage checks will be needed for the weapon.

In SCA combat, we always thought of this as a rocks-paper-scissors kind of situation. Pikes kill shields, archers kill pikes, shields kill archers.

In an RPG, the relative value of ranged weapons is highly dependent on the kind of battles you fight. If you tend to engage foes at long range with clear sight lines, bows are great. If you tend to engage foes at close quarters (e.g. in a dungeon) or in terrain with heavy cover (e.g. woods), bows are not very good. So, it comes down to what kind of things your PCs do, and how generous your GM is in providing the battlefield you want. Given how far a RM character can move in one round, you have to be pretty far away for bows to have the advantage, unless you have useful terrain (e.g. you're on a balcony).

[Hurin]

In my game almost no one uses a bow anyway because the general perception of of puncture criticals being the least deadly has severely dented their desirability. Add on top of that the need for ammunition and rate of fire and the other drawbacks as well. If you then could not parry even if you were caught in melee then I think the bow would disappear as a weapon entirely.

It is rare that I disagree with you Peter, but I do here, at least in regards to RMU.

You make a good point about puncture crits being the least desirable, but the other limitations you cite are not ones that affect my game:

--Ammunition is rarely a consideration when characters can carry 20 arrows in a quiver, and extras on their horse. I know some people really do track ammunition, but many groups just don't worry about it at all, because it never comes up even when you do track it. My group falls in the latter class of course.

--RMU has increased the rate of fire for all missile weapons dramatically. Instead of firing once per round with a -30 penalty, a longbow now in RMU fires once per round at no penalty; or (with the Quickdraw talent), even faster than melee: a longbow shot costs 3 AP rather than 4, and you can get 2 attacks off at -25 with a longbow, whereas a melee combatant would be at -50 for doing the same thing.

--Archers in RMU now have an optional skill that works like parry, but costs even less for most classes: Running. Why bother with parrying when you can just Dodge when you're trapped in melee? In previous editions, the archer trapped in melee was at a major disadvantage. Now, they can just apply their base movement skill bonus to their DB, to achieve DBs the likes of which archers in previous editions could never dream of.

--While previous editions disallowed the use of missile weapons in melee, RMU no longer even has penalties for using a missile weapon in melee range. This means that the archer is at range even when he is not at range.

All of these have radically altered the balance between melee and archers.

[Peter R]

In my game almost no one uses a bow anyway because the general perception of of puncture criticals being the least deadly has severely dented their desirability. Add on top of that the need for ammunition and rate of fire and the other drawbacks as well. If you then could not parry even if you were caught in melee then I think the bow would disappear as a weapon entirely.

It is rare that I disagree with you Peter, but I do here, at least in regards to RMU.

You make a good point about puncture crits being the least desirable, but the other limitations you cite are not ones that affect my game:

--Ammunition is rarely a consideration when characters can carry 20 arrows in a quiver, and extras on their horse. I know some people really do track ammunition, but many groups just don't worry about it at all, because it never comes up even when you do track it. My group falls in the latter class of course.

--RMU has increased the rate of fire for all missile weapons dramatically. Instead of firing once per round with a -30 penalty, a longbow now in RMU fires once per round at no penalty; or (with the Quickdraw talent), even faster than melee: a longbow shot costs 3 AP rather than 4, and you can get 2 attacks off at -25 with a longbow, whereas a melee combatant would be at -50 for doing the same thing.

--Archers in RMU now have an optional skill that works like parry, but costs even less for most classes: Running. Why bother with parrying when you can just Dodge when you're trapped in melee? In previous editions, the archer trapped in melee was at a major disadvantage. Now, they can just apply their base movement skill bonus to their DB, to achieve DBs the likes of which archers in previous editions could never dream of.

--While previous editions disallowed the use of missile weapons in melee, RMU no longer even has penalties for using a missile weapon in melee range. This means that the archer is at range even when he is not at range.

All of these have radically altered the balance between melee and archers.

I agree. I am playing RMC at the moment and there is not a single bow in the party and the only bows that we have seen were given to low-level cannon fodder that we were supposed to kill easily during the first few 'accelerated progression' levels.

All rules are negotiable as soon as the GM gets hold of them and running is likely to go the way of footwork and for me any other dodge/evade skills that make it into the final edit. They will be left to fester in the corner along with the passive bonuses.

[Ginger McMurray]

I've never played a dedicated archer. I've also never played a character who had no ranged attacks at all. Sometimes it's a backup skill, sometimes spells. It's always there, though. I don't want to be useless if I find myself in a situation where the enemy isn't two inches from my face.

[Peter R]

I've never played a dedicated archer. I've also never played a character who had no ranged attacks at all. Sometimes it's a backup skill, sometimes spells. It's always there, though. I don't want to be useless if I find myself in a situation where the enemy isn't two inches from my face.

Thrown handaxes, shortsword and spears are not uncommon but by far the most common option is magic. The most popular dedicated missile weapon is the sling. Ammunition is plentiful and free and the krush criticals are often a death sentence to the victim. Once you are stunned you don't tend to live long.

Magically, movement spells are really popular, leaping, leaving and longdoor to close the distances quickly.

We have been adventuring in a classic dungeon, in woods and forests, in cities and we are heading into mountains. The long lines of sight that would make multiple rounds of bow fire useful just do not happen much for us. We have had two encounters with bow users. The first was in the dungeon with them behind a barricade. The distances were pretty short and magic got us over/behind the barrier and in amongst them very quickly. My character is a spear user so I could still pick out targets from my side of the barricade. I am a lay healer so front line fighting was not meant to be my thing.

The second instance was when we ere travelling by barge down river and were attacked by river pirates from the shore. The amount of hard cover we had made the archers completely ineffective, the party returned fire with shockbolts and when some of the pirates boarded the barges I got involved in melee.

That is the sum total of bow use in the campaign.

[Ginger McMurray]

You're right that thrown weapons were the norm for non-magical types. It's just easier to switch up when your main weapons are the same. A lot of folks got returning weapons as soon as they were available. I usually played magical types, so my attacks were spells as well. My monks used movement magic to get in close while mages used it to open the range. Still, there were times when we were ambushed in valleys.

Typically the ranged attack was thematic: warriors threw stuff, elves used bows, and my monks/warrior monks threw shuriken or sais. I can definitely see campaigns where they wouldn't be terribly useful, especially if the GM doesn't design situations where they are. Even then, they tend to be used for just a little while at the low levels and then replaced by ways to get into melee )or just plain having your melee character be much less powerful now and then).

[Hurin]

I tend to play more open environments, and bows were more useful for our groups in RM2. I once put the group up against a bunch of horse archers on the open plain, and those archers caused the group almost endless problems; in fact the whole session became a series of 'attack, disengage, heal up, repeat', as the archers harassed the players repeatedly... until the party Magician finally figured out the combination of fly, invisibility, and fireball allowed him to close the gap to finish.

All of the really significant limitations on bows though -- the fact that they fired more slowly than melee weapons, couldn't be used in melee, and did not allow the wielder to have any defenses beyond quickness bonus -- have been removed in RMU.

I would really like to see at least penalties for trying to wield a bow in melee return. Otherwise, bows seem OP to me.

[Spectre771]

Nearly all of our non-magic users take a bow or CB as a secondary weapon, even if they only buy 1 rank per level.  Sometimes, a few will take Thrown Weapons as a secondary or tertiary weapon.  It's good to be able to pop off a couple of shots at your foe as he closes on you.  Sometimes... its not good to be 2" from your foe! 

[Peter R]

There seems to be a trend, RM2 users seem to use bows more but they are no use in melee. RMC bows are more useful in melee but I have seen them disappearing as a weapon, or as pointed out, only used at low level and RMu that has the most powerful bows.

I wonder if the boosts to bows are to try and make them useful and used again?

[Hurin]

There seems to be a trend, RM2 users seem to use bows more but they are no use in melee. RMC bows are more useful in melee but I have seen them disappearing as a weapon, or as pointed out, only used at low level and RMu that has the most powerful bows.

I wonder if the boosts to bows are to try and make them useful and used again?

That could well be. I just hope that a happy medium can be found.

The point made earlier about parrying being more than actually blocking an attacker's weapon with your own is a fair one, but I find it doesn't always work in some instances. Take for example an instance in which a bowman is caught in a corner by a swordsman. Wouldn't it be quite hard for the Bowman to dodge the swordsman's attacks? Should a bowman -- say with +150 skill in bow -- really be able to make himself virtually untouchable in such a situation? That I find hard to take.

I find it still harder to allow the bowman even more, namely, the option to choose to either be untouchable or attack at full OB, as RMU currently allows. That doesn't seem like a happy medium; it seems both unbalanced and unrealistic.

[MisterK]

As far as I can understand it, the "happy medium" would be to simply drop the restrictions on weapon drawing and dropping.

Let's face it: as long as the target is more than fifteen feet away, the archer has a definite advantage because he can shoot (if the weapon is ready), drop his bow (held in his off hand) and draw a melee weapon (in his main hand). The only disadvantage he would suffer is that equipping a shield would take more time than he probably has. But otherwise, he will be able to shoot AND then defend himself properly.

This is where the combat round definition fails IMHO: basically, movement should be "outside" the combat sequence and initiative, in that you can defend, but not attack in melee during a round in which you move, unless you are already within the "close range" area where an opponent cannot just ignore you.
So if you start combat 60 feet away from an archer (and are determined to go to melee combat), the archer basically has free rein until you reach the "close range" area where you become a problem (what he can do while you run depends on your pace). Once you reach the close range area, you will be able to act at the beginning of the next round. So when you reach your archer opponent, he will probably have already shot you once, dropped his bow, and drawn a melee weapon to be ready for you.
But if you're half smart, you have a shield and he has not, and you had cover during your run and additional DB now that you're in melee.

(the short version is, if you cannot "move in and melee" in a single round).

In order to complete the "happy medium", you would also have to implement a sticky effect of sorts - if you are in the "area of concern" of an opponent, you cannot simply move away without meleeing, this would be an invitation to be skewered. You have to either melee, or try to disengage properly, which is an action in itself that requires activity (off the top of my head, I would state that disengaging requires a 50% activity, leaving the other 50% for defense at half OB. Disengage is successful if you are not hit during the round - at the end of the round, you are considered having "moved out" and can move freely the next round).

[Hurin]

In order to complete the "happy medium", you would also have to implement a sticky effect of sorts...

Ah, my friend, you are preaching to the choir here.

I have been arguing for more 'stickiness' to RM(U) combat for almost 7 years now

[Ginger McMurray]

The point made earlier about parrying being more than actually blocking an attacker's weapon with your own is a fair one, but I find it doesn't always work in some instances. Take for example an instance in which a bowman is caught in a corner by a swordsman. Wouldn't it be quite hard for the Bowman to dodge the swordsman's attacks? Should a bowman -- say with +150 skill in bow -- really be able to make himself virtually untouchable in such a situation? That I find hard to take.

Agreed. I honestly can't remember how we did it years and years ago. I think if a player wants to "play Legolas" I'll probably say you can half parry with a bow. It means you aren't defenseless but you're also not untouchable.

[Peter R]

There seems to be a trend, RM2 users seem to use bows more but they are no use in melee. RMC bows are more useful in melee but I have seen them disappearing as a weapon, or as pointed out, only used at low level and RMu that has the most powerful bows.

I wonder if the boosts to bows are to try and make them useful and used again?

That could well be. I just hope that a happy medium can be found.

The point made earlier about parrying being more than actually blocking an attacker's weapon with your own is a fair one, but I find it doesn't always work in some instances. Take for example an instance in which a bowman is caught in a corner by a swordsman. Wouldn't it be quite hard for the Bowman to dodge the swordsman's attacks? Should a bowman -- say with +150 skill in bow -- really be able to make himself virtually untouchable in such a situation? That I find hard to take.

I find it still harder to allow the bowman even more, namely, the option to choose to either be untouchable or attack at full OB, as RMU currently allows. That doesn't seem like a happy medium; it seems both unbalanced and unrealistic.

Can you remember those scenes in swashbuckling movies where the hero is pinned down and as the villain strikes the move their head to the side and the villains sword lodges into the door frame behind them, or the villain sweeps high and the hero ducks, or the villain sweeps low and the hero jumps over the blade as it passes? All of those are RM parries. They would all also be examples of sacrificing a chance to strike to defend yourself and none of them involve weapon on weapon contact.

Different games have different ways of simulating this sort of thing.
In the first Pirates of the Caribbean movie there is a prolonged fight in the weaponsmiths workshop. During the fight no one is hurt.
In Rolemaster terms, every attack was parried and no damage was done to either combatant.
In D&D terms every blow hit and damage done on every attempt.

HP in D&D represents luck, the ability to parry and favour of the gods and it is the only the last 10 or so that represent physical meat and wounds. This is why HP go up with experience. It was never even suggested that an experienced hero could be stabbed a dozen times with a sword and have a 100% of surviving if they had more HP than the weapon could do. The rational was that it was the heroes skill and experience that made them hard to kill.

In RM Concussion hits are actual meat/fitness and conditioning. Maximum human hits was something like 120 in RM2/RMC and a broadsword could do a maximum of about 35hits. There is no way that a hero could survive being stabbed a dozen times and that is assuming a critical does not get you first, which it almost certainly would through bleeding alone.

The best analogy is that D&D hit points = RM DB inflation.

The master archer with an OB of 150 trying to all-out parry is applying all of their combat experience to not getting hurt.

[Hurin]

Ok, let me ask the other part of the question: is it balanced that the archer can make himself virtually immune to the melee combatant even when the melee combatant has braved a hail of arrows and finally closed the gap?

[Peter R]

Ok, let me ask the other part of the question: is it balanced that the archer can make himself virtually immune to the melee combatant even when the melee combatant has braved a hail of arrows and finally closed the gap?

Please remember that this is an RM2/RMC discussion. What can or cannot happen in RMu is not really on topic. With that out of the way the description of the situation you have given is that the archer has +150 OB. The RMC rules RAW mean that this gives a maximum parry of +75. (Bows are 2 handed weapons as they are impossible to shoot with only one hand under normal circumstances and table 02-04 SHIELD-PARRY TABLE clearly says that two-handed weapons give maximum 50% parry)

I simply do not see a high level character going all out defensive gain +75DB as unbalanced. I think that in RM2 a high level character with 20+ levels of experience gaining no advantage seems harsh. What the RMu character can is moot as none of us have actually seen the rules as they have been submitted to editing.

[Hurin]

Right, fair enough. I agree that this is not much of a problem in RM2, and I'll stop talking about RMu here -- it is a bad habit of mine 

[Peter R]

Right, fair enough. I agree that this is not much of a problem in RM2, and I'll stop talking about RMu here -- it is a bad habit of mine 

Waiting for RMu is like waiting for Christmas but Christmas will come first, mores the pity. It just muddied the waters I think, talking about three different systems at the same time.
What is obvious though is the trend that we have seen in relaxing the rules on bows in melee and that the trend does continue right up to 2020.

@JDale, if you are still reading this thread, I think Hurin should get a review copy of RMu at or before release so he can write a walkthrough or read through on the rolemasterblog in time for its official release.

[Spectre771]

This is a great thread and I've been following it intently and the varying opinions are excellent.  Here's my 4-cents for what it's worth.

Parrying is not "solely" weapon-contacting-weapon-blockage.  Many good points were brought up as a reminder of this.  I have no problem with an archer throwing 150OB into DB to try to save his skin.  Being an archer and being at a disadvantage in melee, I would think he would be very adept and/or creative in using everything to his advantage to stay alive, or at least not get hit.

Parrying does include weapon-on-weapon blocking but it also includes weapon-on-wrist or elbow or shoulder or knees, anything that interrupts the attacker's natural, full on swing.   PC's who use a staff or even a club have the same advantage/disadvantage as a bow user (it's a piece of wood), but they aren't told they can't parry at full because they are using a stick.  Yes, a bowman has to protect the bowstring, but poking at eyes and whacking at a wrist with the bow protects the string.  As does a stick-in-the-groin. 

Parrying also includes a kick to the knee as the opponent strides towards them for an attack.  If the attacker has his lead leg stopped short, his attack and follow through will be weaker.  Imagine a  baseball pitcher who suddenly stubbed his toe in the middle of his stretch, the pitch will most likely be terrible.  Or Quarterback who has his arm hit as he's throwing the ball.  A soccer player whose left foot slips just as he plants it for a kick.  Just enough to throw off the full on force of kicking the ball.

Another useful parry is having a 6' piece of wood being poked at your eyes or throat.  That should certainly throw off an attacker's stride if, in the middle of his attack, the bowman pokes the end of the bow at his eyes.  In Shotokan Karate, all of the blocks have a parry as part of the technique.  That parry  has the look, shape, and feel of a fist!   Not running into a fist is a pretty darned good deterrent to stopping an attack.  Very few people willingly run into a fist (although my cousin did once turn and dodge into one of my kicks. LOL)  Most bows are about 3' - 4' even up to 6' for a long bow.  Having a 6' stick poking at my eyes is a very effective parry.

Don't forget the old adage "Don't want to get hit?  Don't be there when it comes."  Simply moving around and focusing all of your attention to moving out of the way and maybe even ducking, slipping behind a pillar, moving around a chair so the attacker can't get a good solid swing at you.