Starting to take a 2nd look at melee weapons...

[mrloucifer]

Over the last few weeks, my daughter has been watching this TV show called "The Deadliest Warrior" while I'm doing homework in the background. And I keep hearing snippets of it and how its educative on how specific weaponry is used and what made them so deadly, especially in the hands of someone who knows how to use them.

Anyway, Ive started listening more closely as to what the experts are saying in how they use these weapons, and its started to get me wondering about how some of the these weapons would be of benefit in a BTS setting. Some of these weapons Ive not seen used before, nor explained about how they were designed to be used. I can see some of these unorthodox weapons see being effective against the supernatural, for example:

-Nunchuku's could be used against creatures vulnerable to the material used to create them, for example there's the traditional wood(vampires perhaps), Alabaster (Banshee's), glass (Skin Thief), stone (Gormaglut), bone (Grave Ghouls), or plated in either copper (Gremlins) or coated in Silver (Hell Hounds). W.P. Chain and paired weapons taken together could make them devastating to these creatures.

-9 section chain whips could be useful against creatures vulnerable to silver and copper if coated. entangling arms, neck, can/should be a continuous damage effect.

-Shields are another underrated weapon and can be beneficial for both defense and offense against the supernatural. A shield can be modified with spikes or bolts (with a Munitions Expert skill roll) that can be coated for dealing with the supernatural and changed out as needed. Using "shield bashing" in place of "simultaneous strike" is a house rule I intend to look into as it can potentially block the attack as well as do damage.

-Spears are another underrated weapon to consider getting a W.P. in when dealing with the supernatural. Spears are great at keeping attackers at a distance, sweeping, blocking, thrusting, and they can either trip up or outright skewer a charging monster.

-Crossbow bolts that are poison tipped can be well worth their minimal damage. Repeating crossbows would be well worth their weight in gold in these cases.

While I'm on this subject, I've also been listening to how the training in these weapons heavily rely on how to wield and use the weapon to do more damage. It may be worth a house rule in doing something like "adding +1 to the damage of all melee weapons the character has a W.P. in at levels 2,4,6,8,10,12,14".

I'd love some thoughts on this subject.

[slade the sniper]

Melee weapons really do get a bad rap as being somehow less effective than modern weapons (read: firearms).

The only real benefits of firearms over melee weapons is:

Training time...firearms DO require training to use properly...but the time required to learn is less than that required for most melee weapons. Additionally firearms work on the same general principles whereas melee weapons do not all work on the same principle.
Range...firearms allow attacks to be conducted at range while melee weapons do not. Granted, archery allows for range as well, but firearms allow for much greater range.
Equality of weapon...the WEAPON is what causes the damage, not the user. For a sword, it requires strength, dexterity and training to cause injury, whereas for a firearm...but a 9mm hollowpoint will cause the same amount of damage whether fired by a SWAT officer or a 4 year old girl.

There is NOT an increase in lethality using firearms over melee weapons, but this idea persists due to the PERCEIVED ease of causing injury using a firearm as opposed to a melee weapon. Granted, a 7.62mm round to the face will do a lot of damage...but you can do the same amount of damage with a 16 pound sledgehammer. Weapon choice and target selection play a huge part in the amount of damage caused.

BUT, going back to the OP...melee weapons offer a LOT of flexibility, especially against the supernatural for all of the reasons pointed out in the OP.

As for the house rule, I would leave the weapon damages as written in the equipment section, but I do like the damage bonuses as a WP progression ability. My gripe about PB is that with a large handful of SDC and HP it becomes nearly impossible to get quick lethal effects with any weapon...which goes against the OSM of real life

-STS

[mrloucifer]

My gripe about PB is that with a large handful of SDC and HP it becomes nearly impossible to get quick lethal effects with any weapon...which goes against the OSM of real life

Its kind of one of the those necessary evils of the gaming world... if characters die after one or two good hits, you'd be making new characters weekly. That being said, melee weapons are more lethal in low powered game like BTS because of the generally low S.D.C./H.P. (Ive never seen a "Realistic" character get above 60 S.D.C. in a BTS game)

Keep in mind that things like blood loss can also really effect the high H.P. numbers that higher level characters can have. One of my favorite ways of building tension in a game is when characters are basically bleeding to death.

[mrloucifer]

Another one of my favorite rules is to use "Save Vs. Pain" to help or hinder players.

One of my house rules that's worked well is that whenever the damage taken is higher than the number of the person/supernatural being's P.E. Stat, they need to make a save vs Pain (16 for humans, 14 for supernatural being, use P.E. bonuses to lower the roll needed).

With Human Beings:
If S.D.C. is affected, the failed roll results in being stunned by the sudden flash of pain (loses 1 action).
If H.P. is affected, the failed roll results in unconsciousness due to shock for 1D6 melee rounds.

With The supernatural:
If S.D.C. is affected, the failed roll results in being stunned by the sudden flash of pain (loses 1 action).
If H.P. is affected, the failed result is a loss of 2 actions, and the creatures next action MIGHT be to flee, seek a new tactical position, start using power strikes (if not already), and may opt to parry or dodge more as opposed to using "Simultaneous attack" (one of my favorite things to do to players is simultaneous attacks, especially animal intelligence level creatures).

A supernatural creature getting hit by something its vulnerable to should always needs to roll a save vs pain, regardless of the amount of damage.

[mrloucifer]

One last note by the way is that another of my house rules is that when a natural 20/ double damage attack with a melee weapon is successful, the MINIMUM amount of damage will be the MAXIMUM amount of the melee weapon.

Example, Joe swings a bat and gets a natural 20, the monster failed to dodge/parry.
Joe has no P.S. bonus and rolls a 1D8, and rolls a 1... the damage amount for his critical strike is 2. Yeah, I know. Its insulting as is.

Well, after this happened in one of my early BTS games, I realized that something needed to be done to celebrate that critical strike. So what we came up with was that the minimum amount of the damage in the case will be 8 points.
So if the player rolls 1-3, he does 8 points. If he rolls 5, he does 10 points, 6 is worth 12 points of damage and so on. Point being, the player feels like they got a good swing, regardless of how poorly they rolled.

P.S.: If they have a P.S. bonus, this still works the same way. if the total of their double damage is less than 8, raise it to 8.

[Jasper]

Mrloucifer, I like the direction you're going with what using weapons in creative ways like entangling. You could add pinning also, especially with something like a spear. I've always told my friends that a boar spear would be handy during a (slow) zombie apocalype. One guy could take the charge and impale the creature on the cross sectioned blade while another circles around to deal with it from behind.
I really like Slade's comments regarding firearm use/training/lethality as compared to that of melee weapons. I had a cop tell me once that if a knife wielder was inside 25 feet he wouldn't be able to get his gun out in time (anecdotal, I know, but sounds about right).
How to "fix" this while keeping within the boundaries of Palladium's system is difficult but I agree something needs to change.
I mean my punch does 1d4 plus PS. My karate punch does 2d4. My knife does...1d6? So....I better drop the knife and punch my opponent....I've always houseruled that punch damage gets added to that of the weapon so a karate trained knife wielder does 2d4 plus 1d6 plus PS. So that being said, I agree damage for melee weapons needs to increase. Not sure the best way to do it though. Personally, I'm wary of too much increases in minimum damage. I might move the dice type up instead every once in a while then add dice later but that's not Palladium like at all. Increases to damage might just be the best and simplest way to do it after all.

I like your "Rule of Pain" rules; consider them yoinked.

[ffranceschi]

Melee weapons really do get a bad rap as being somehow less effective than modern weapons (read: firearms).

The only real benefits of firearms over melee weapons is:

Training time...firearms DO require training to use properly...but the time required to learn is less than that required for most melee weapons. Additionally firearms work on the same general principles whereas melee weapons do not all work on the same principle.
Range...firearms allow attacks to be conducted at range while melee weapons do not. Granted, archery allows for range as well, but firearms allow for much greater range.
Equality of weapon...the WEAPON is what causes the damage, not the user. For a sword, it requires strength, dexterity and training to cause injury, whereas for a firearm...but a 9mm hollowpoint will cause the same amount of damage whether fired by a SWAT officer or a 4 year old girl.

There is NOT an increase in lethality using firearms over melee weapons, but this idea persists due to the PERCEIVED ease of causing injury using a firearm as opposed to a melee weapon. Granted, a 7.62mm round to the face will do a lot of damage...but you can do the same amount of damage with a 16 pound sledgehammer. Weapon choice and target selection play a huge part in the amount of damage caused.
-STS

Other benefits:

Speed: it is harder to dodge a bullet than a sword. You can unleash a barrage of bullets in a short period of time.
Firepower: an assault rifle or shotgun gives you a LOT of firepower.
Versatility: you can have bullets made of different materials to hit different monsters and they take less space than melee weapons (more bullets more firepower).
Sustained combat: with melee weapons you are going to tire faster because the physical requirements. Pull the trigger is not that hard on your body.

I can understand that in close quarters, with the element of surprise, melee could win the day but in any other type of encounters the Firearms are King!

P.S.: Just an example: 10 Hell Hounds are closing on you and your group; choose your weapon, a 16 pound sledgehammer or a M249 SAW (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M249_light_machine_gun). Easy, don't you?

[mrloucifer]

P.S.: Just an example: 10 Hell Hounds are closing on you and your group; choose your weapon, a 16 pound sledgehammer or a M249 SAW (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M249_light_machine_gun). Easy, don't you?

I agree completely that ranged weapons in nearly as aspects are superior to melee. My intention here was only to give melee a second look as there are some benefits/tactics against the supernatural.

In the example above, unless your using Silver ammo (hell hounds are impervious to normal weapons), the only option is to run like hell. And 1 hound coming at you is bad enough, but with 10 coming at me... I may run like hell anyway!

In my game, getting such a highly illegal weapon would be just as much of a challenge as getting enough silver ammo to make the SAW effective weapon to begin with in this scenario. But that's part of the fun of dealing with the supernatural; investigating and prepping to be able to deal with them. You could face them head on like this if you've got the ammo, but you could also use psychic abilities to hold them back, or run like hell and evade them until sunrise (at which time the fade away).

P.S. its because of the strategy/tactics involved that I brought over the "Strategy/Tactics" skill from the Nightbane over to my game, although the "Intelligence" skill can also prove useful for this as well.

[ffranceschi]

In the example above, unless your using Silver ammo (hell hounds are impervious to normal weapons), the only option is to run like hell. And 1 hound coming at you is bad enough, but with 10 coming at me... I may run like hell anyway!

In my game, getting such a highly illegal weapon would be just as much of a challenge as getting enough silver ammo to make the SAW effective weapon to begin with in this scenario.

My example was an exaggeration to prove my point. I agree with you that the SAW, as a military weapon, is not easy to get and much less with belts of silver bullets!

Silver melee weapons are very useful in a BTS environment but you need a lot of training to use them and avoid hurting yourself or someone in the process. Of the common melee weapons, I think the Combat Knife is still the most versatile to handle different situations and portable enough to keep it around at all times.

[mrloucifer]

I agree, I mean come on... Rambo took down half an army with a combat knife.

In fact, I keep an old combat knife in the trunk of my car. I've never had to use it for anything (city boy and all) and its probably in desperate need of sharpening, but you just never know when you might need it.

[ffranceschi]

I agree, I mean come on... Rambo took down half an army with a combat knife.

In fact, I keep an old combat knife in the trunk of my car. I've never had to use it for anything (city boy and all) and its probably in desperate need of sharpening, but you just never know when you might need it.

And a Composite Bow, don´t forget the bow!.

I keep a GLOCK 78 Combat Knife at home for self-defense.

[Jefffar]

The big difference between firearms and melee weapons is that a gun allows a poorly trained, nonathletic specimen to easily main and kill a well trained, physically fit opponent. They are a great leveler in combat ability and one of the reasons that armies are no longer the domain of a specialized warrior caste in our society.

In Palladium Games however, we have another issue. While firearms have consistently seen increases in their effect in order to represent their killing power against the new, tougher opponents that each mini-edition update seems to produce, melee weapons have generally lingered or in some cases backslid in the amount of damage they do.

I think there are a few cures for this in a system rework.

1) Determine what a normal average person is going to be like for PE, HP and SDC.
2) Base the lethality of the weapons (ranged and melee) off of this bench mark. This means that characters and NPCs will find themselves tougher and more resistant to injury, but you know what, that is quite fine by me, they are supposed to be. I wouldn't mind a wound mechanic or an ability for weapons to bypass SDC or something similar added at this stage either.
3) Adjust the rules such that experts with the weapons see increased lethality from them as they level, not just in terms of number of attacks and strike bonuses, but also damage bonuses to represent their greater ability to hit the important parts of the target.

[Hendrik]

1) Determine what a normal average person is going to be like for PE, HP and SDC.
2) Base the lethality of the weapons (ranged and melee) off of this bench mark. This means that characters and NPCs will find themselves tougher and more resistant to injury, but you know what, that is quite fine by me, they are supposed to be. I wouldn't mind a wound mechanic or an ability for weapons to bypass SDC or something similar added at this stage either.
3) Adjust the rules such that experts with the weapons see increased lethality from them as they level, not just in terms of number of attacks and strike bonuses, but also damage bonuses to represent their greater ability to hit the important parts of the target.

Absolutely, Jefffar!

Average HPs are: 14 (P.E. average is 10.5 and average roll on a 1D6 is 3.5)
Average SDC are: 18 (rounded up; average of 1D10 is 5.5, plus static bonus of 12).

This is forgetting about PPE boost uses for the Ordinary Person OCC.

I think BtS handles ranged weapons well. From the top of my head it is roughly this:

Pistol damage range 1D8 - 4D6
Submachine gun 2D6 - 4D6
Shotgun 4D6 - 5D6
Rifle 4D6 - 7D6

It could be harsher. However, with close range dodge mali (-10, -5) and the "burst" or "full auto fire" options (extremely nice to use a machine gun for a full auto spray for a x20 damage in one round; might have taken that from Nightbane, though, but it IS aweseome) it comes down to realistic results that are still playable. With the higher damage ranges, like rifle, I see ordinary people who are not augmented (notably by: PPE boosts, great attributes beyond average or because they are trained soldiers, have great physical skills that boost SDC) often fall in one round or in one attack, but they have a shot [pun intended] to survive. Sometimes you have to pump guys full of lead before they fall and as often as not one (big bore) shot will do the job, especially if you crit on it.

Now, melee weapons are less effective as per the rules than that. I agree that one could think about increasing damages there because it really does not matter much for effect - unless we are talking high velocity shots - whether you are run through with a sword or "punctured" by a shot. The relationship between melee weapon damage and modern ranged weapons becomes more lopsidded when you bring martial arts into play, the kickboxing skill from the Nightbane Survival Skill for example. Those are not properly aligned to melee weapon damages. I have never understood why people think that for some reason a karate chop is better than a sword chop-chop. Normal hand-to-hand damage (kicks and punches) are however in my book well done (1D4-1D8 range) and fit bearably well to really well with what kind of damage ranges are offered by "real" weapons.

I like the idea of giving more experienced people a bonus on damage in melee in addition to the usual strike etc. boni. It makes a lot of sense.

I also think that BtS could use some really revised martial arts because it is a modern day game and martial arts schools are after all today pretty wide spread.

Cheers
Hendrik

[Jefffar]

So a target of 32 SDC and HP then.

So this would mean that a weapon capable of killing in 1 hit would have to do at least 2D8 damage to make it possible in game (includes a critical strike).

Which is interesting because the .22LR, one of the weakest of firearms cartridges can and has killed thousands of people in deliberate or accidental shootings since it was introduced. Of course rarely do those hits offer instant incapacitation like reducing your target to 0 HP does.

I think that instead of trying to work through combined SDC and HP, most weapons should instead skip right to Hit Points. That reduces the target to 14 points to kill, with a 2D4 or 1D8 capable of doing that on a critical strike. It also makes the difference between armed and unarmed attacks much more salient.

If we go with the latter idea I think a damage scale that would work reasonably well is:

Pistol Cartridges 1D4 to 1D12
Rifle Cartridges 2D4 to 2D12
1 Handed Melee Weapons 1D4 to 1D12
2 Handed Melee Weapons 2D4 to 2D12
Very Large 2 Handed Melee Weapons 3D4 to 3D12
Unarmed strike: 1D4 to 1D12 but have to wear through SDC to be effective

[Hendrik]

So a target of 32 SDC and HP then.

So this would mean that a weapon capable of killing in 1 hit would have to do at least 2D8 damage to make it possible in game (includes a critical strike).

Which is interesting because the .22LR, one of the weakest of firearms cartridges can and has killed thousands of people in deliberate or accidental shootings since it was introduced. Of course rarely do those hits offer instant incapacitation like reducing your target to 0 HP does.

I think that instead of trying to work through combined SDC and HP, most weapons should instead skip right to Hit Points. That reduces the target to 14 points to kill, with a 2D4 or 1D8 capable of doing that on a critical strike. It also makes the difference between armed and unarmed attacks much more salient.

If we go with the latter idea I think a damage scale that would work reasonably well is:

Pistol Cartridges 1D4 to 1D12
Rifle Cartridges 2D4 to 2D12
1 Handed Melee Weapons 1D4 to 1D12
2 Handed Melee Weapons 2D4 to 2D12
Very Large 2 Handed Melee Weapons 3D4 to 3D12
Unarmed strike: 1D4 to 1D12 but have to wear through SDC to be effective

I do not like the idea of allowing any type of weapon to per se bypass SDC. That is against the core principle of the SDC system and a major system change that IMO offers less benefit than it helps to "cure the ill".

I think that SDC are a core feature of the combat system and a particulary nice one at that. It allows people to come through a fit badly bruised, "bleeding" scratches and all but not necessarily grieviously injured. While that may not be super realistic, it allows more heroism. I mean fights are dangerous enough as is - in a pleasantly exciting way - but you do not need to play "seekin' cover" all the time. Your idea, Jefffar, would lead to that I think.

Instead, I would suggest to rather go the way to slightly increase the melee weapon damages vis-a-vis what they offer now, so that melee and modern ranged weapons are more on par. Modern ranged weapons already have other advantages melee weapons, modern or ancient, do NOT have: notably the capacity to fire auto or burst and attacking from a distance without the dangers of facing a melee.

[Cybermancer]

Some of us remember when the Palladium system didn't give SDC to characters. So a weapon that did 2D6 (double on a crit) was lethal, especially to a first level character.

Then they added SDC to characters as a buffer to really being wounded. The idea was that while you were taking SDC damage, you could shrug it off, like in a fist fight. Except they copy and pasted the old weapon damages so characters were harder to kill but lethal weapons of all sorts (from 9mm pistols to sword) were nerfed because they weren't changed.

As the game has continued to evolved/mutated from what it was, the tendency had been towards making SDC higher (BtS2 has admittedly stepped back from that) and making little to no change to the damage of the weapons. But now the original idea behind SDC for characters has become broken. It's not a buffer for damage a character can shrug off, it's extra hitpoints. The fix that will make the mechanics fit the fluff is to have lethal attacks bypass SDC so that they can be, you know, lethal. And less than lethal attacks (punches and the like) can effect the buffer damage and the hero's can shrug it off before being 'really' hurt.

Another fix would be to cut SDC for characters from the game altogether. I actually don't like that one because I like having a shrug-off damage capacity. I'd also like it to make some sense.

Lethal attacks bypassing SDC makes even more sense if you apply it to creatures with supernatural strength in a horror setting. Imagine the fear the players will feel while their punches and kicks must wear down potentially massive amounts of SDC for a monster while that same monster is tearing them apart with its bare hands. In this way the mechanics begin to actually match the fluff. Though when I am doing this, I'd also do away with the supernatural damage charts. So a creature with a supernatural strength of 30 is doing 1D4+15 points of damage direct to hit points. Feeling the horror yet?

Want to make it even more scary? Creatures with a natural A.R. will shrug off otherwise lethal attacks, meaning lethal weapons still have to chew through their SDC before getting to hit points. This also means that a character wearing body armor is more survivable because even damage that bypasses the AR could also be justified at having to go through SDC before damaging hit points.

Maybe it's just me, but I like my players to feel the apprehension if not fear their characters are when facing down the barrel of a .45 Colt. They become far less likely to take foolish risks and far more likely to invest in body armor under these circumstances.

And before people come back with "killing characters easily is no fun for the players" defense, it hasn't been the case when I run these rules. The players don't take reckless risks and live just as long. In fact the last PC to die in one of my games was two years ago and the player admitted they were being foolish and reckless. In this instance the character tried sneaking up to melee range on a monster that was showing signs of having detected said character. The character was then ripped to pieces, their heroic sacrifice allowing the rest of the party to flee safely. The players next character was much more cautious and that was the only PC death in a four year campaign.

[Jefffar]

Hendrik, while there is some potential for what you are saying to occur I believe Cybermancer does a good job of refuting the concept that added lethality in basic weapons will necessarily lead to characters dying by the truckload and preventing the game from being fun. Among other Palladium games I have played are the original no SDC for you PFRPG and Recon. The latter having a highly streamlined character creation process because characters have no armour and an average of 50 hit points in a game where the typical opposing weapon does 32 points damage on an average hit.

Despite much more fragile characters in these games they did not case being fun to play in the least.

The other thing you may not be considering is that this change wouldn't' happen in isolation. My theory of game design is pretty simple. Make things work around the normal, average and ordinary person. Then make the characters extraordinary. So while an average person would find himself critically injured if not dead after a bullet or sword wound to the chest, the characters will be more resilient and more capable. Yes they will still be in trouble if they leave themselves open to an attack, but that dramatic moment when the hero takes a sword thrust in the guts but still has it together enough to lop the head off the other guy with an axe is certainly possible.

Finally I want to add a note about the Game Master's role in all of this. I have seen many Game Masters who feel that their relationship with the Player Characters is adversarial. I agree that with slightly more lethal combat rules such GMs might rack up a high PC body count. However my view of the GM's relationship with the Player Characters is much more co-operative. Yes the GM must challenge the characters, but those challenges are meant to provide the characters opportunities to grow and improve (not just in ways that can be found in experience points and treasure). Ultimately the GM and the Players are co-operating on building an entertaining story, not trying to see who is smarter or can use the rules to their advantage better.

[Jasper]

I certainly agree that certain weapon types seem rather pitiful when compared to characters with 50 plus SDC but I work around it a bit (at least I did when I was running my campaign).
I simply play things by ear. A firearm at very close range will do damage direct to hit point unless the roll to hit is very bad. I've also done things like apply damage direct to hit points if a solid roll to hit is made against an unaware target (I also roll on the damage chart for massive HP damage as a bonus). I am in total agreement with Jefffar on making combat systems work for two average people first then go from there; I won't mention the system but there's one where two peasants (ashigaru types) in armour will practically never hit each other and even when they did they'd only scratch each other (though maybe it was intentional and that system was NOT designed around average peasants).
I like SDC being a buffer against damage, but not one that is always going to protect you. While certainly not lending itself to streamlined game play for most people I usually have just hand waved certain results, it keeps people on their toes, after all, it's not like their characters have rulebooks. They know firearms/swords etc are dangerous and know better than to ignore them because they have lots of SDC.
I agree that a set of rules are a good idea. I don't mind semi complicated systems where necessary so if anyone has anything I'd love to see it. Usually in the past my ad hoc non-system works something like this:
Solid hit (roll of 18+ with bonuses): direct to hit points. Use judgement to determine if a roll on the massive hit point damage table should be made.
This would address the issue (to a degree) of allowing skilled people do more damage as their hits are direct to hit points and would likely cause penalties.
While many players would demand a hard and clear combat system that they can use/manipulate/argue to their advantage my players in my campaign weren't hard core gamers (though long term ones) and didn't own books and were happy to accept their lack of knowledge as the uncertainties of combat.

[mrloucifer]

After talking with my weekly players and giving it all a test run, we all decided that we liked the idea of melee weapon damage improving with a WP, and that the +1 to damage and levels 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, and 14 works well.

I've since added it to my House Rules, and have added it to the H.R. page on my website