The Rancor Pit Forum Index
Welcome to The Rancor Pit forums!

The Rancor Pit Forum Index
FAQ   ::   Search   ::   Memberlist   ::   Usergroups   ::   Register   ::   Profile   ::   Log in to check your private messages   ::   Log in

yet another lightsaber variant
Post new topic   Reply to topic    The Rancor Pit Forum Index -> House Rules -> yet another lightsaber variant Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10  Next
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Bren
Vice Admiral
Vice Admiral


Joined: 19 Aug 2010
Posts: 3868
Location: Maryland, USA

PostPosted: Fri Jun 24, 2011 4:47 pm    Post subject: yet another lightsaber variant Reply with quote

This is an idea inspired by posts by ZzaphodD and atgxtg and to Dueling Blades by Peter Schweighofer. I have extensively borrowed from their ideas so if you like it, they get credit. I have changed and mixed their ideas so if you don't like it, it might just be my fault. Wink

One goal was to somewhat simplify or take out the some of the subjectivity of Dueling Blades, while retaining separate attack and parry rolls.

Lightsaber Dueling Variant
Limited Damage
Lightsaber combat in Star Wars D6 can be extremely deadly, especially as Jedi increase in ability. One result is that combat may resolve too quickly for an exciting build up or a series of interactions or blows. The first Jedi to strike successfully generally ends the fight. This system is designed to mitigate that to allow fights to take long enough for drama to occur.

Take attack roll minus target’s parry or defense roll including any modifiers for advantage to compute an Attack Result (AR) where AR = Attack Roll – Defense Roll + Modifiers.

    Attack Result.......Effect
    0-3....................Forced back. Defender must retreat or attacker gains +1D6 bonus to his next attack.
    4-8....................Off balance. Attacker gains +1D6 bonus to his next attack.
    9-12..................Glancing blow. Roll damage normally with a maximum result of wounded.
    13-15.................Solid blow. Roll damage normally with a maximum result of incapacitated.
    16+....................Serious blow. Roll damage normally with any wound result possible.
Losing Your Lightsaber
In the movies we frequently see the Jedi and the Sith dropping or having their lightsaber knocked away. On the other hand, we never see them amputate their own limbs. To make combat more cinematic, add the following two rule modifications.

(A) An attacker that rolls below difficult (16-20) with his lightsaber attack or parry is considered to have lost his grip on his lightsaber rather than hitting himself with his own weapon.
(B) A defender who rolls a 1 on the wild die with his lightsaber parry and gets a complication is considered to have lost his grip on their lightsaber. Like all complications this is at the GM’s discretion or the GM may chose to roll or have the player roll a second D6. A second 1 on the die indicates a lost lightsaber.

When a lightsaber is lost, it ends up 1D6 meters away. Roll on the grenade table for direction with the main arrow pointing behind the Jedi.

Thoughts? Comments?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
jmanski
Arbiter-General (Moderator)


Joined: 06 Mar 2005
Posts: 2065
Location: Kansas

PostPosted: Fri Jun 24, 2011 5:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Interesting. Definitely sounds more cinematic.
_________________
Blasted rules. Why can't they just be perfect?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Bren
Vice Admiral
Vice Admiral


Joined: 19 Aug 2010
Posts: 3868
Location: Maryland, USA

PostPosted: Fri Jun 24, 2011 6:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

jmanski wrote:
Interesting. Definitely sounds more cinematic.
Yeah, I'm trying to be a bit more cinematic and to find a way to allow lightsaber duels to be longer than one round and to avoid the current situation where each side must immediately spend a force point in the first round of combat because otherwise the other side may use a force point in the first round of combat and the first side to use a force point when the other side does not immediately wins the duel with an instant kill. Which seems uncinematic and unconducive to dramatic or repeated encounters.

I haven't playtested it yet. What flaws do you see? Are there improvements that could be made?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Raven Redstar
Rear Admiral
Rear Admiral


Joined: 10 Mar 2009
Posts: 2648
Location: Salem, OR

PostPosted: Fri Jun 24, 2011 6:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I will also play test this in my Jedi campaign. It gives me a great reason to re-kindle the story. Also, it makes a huge difference in fighting mooks with blasters or the BBEG with his lightsaber.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Random Numbers
Commander
Commander


Joined: 12 Jan 2010
Posts: 454
Location: Gladsheim

PostPosted: Fri Jun 24, 2011 7:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I like it. Simple and clean. The "hit yourself rule" is really silly so your rule is off course much better.
_________________
Random is who random does...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
jmanski
Arbiter-General (Moderator)


Joined: 06 Mar 2005
Posts: 2065
Location: Kansas

PostPosted: Sat Jun 25, 2011 10:46 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Yeah, I can't see very many Jedi missing hands, arms, or legs due to a mishap.
_________________
Blasted rules. Why can't they just be perfect?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Bren
Vice Admiral
Vice Admiral


Joined: 19 Aug 2010
Posts: 3868
Location: Maryland, USA

PostPosted: Sat Jun 25, 2011 11:51 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Raven Redstar wrote:
I will also play test this in my Jedi campaign. It gives me a great reason to re-kindle the story. Also, it makes a huge difference in fighting mooks with blasters or the BBEG with his lightsaber.
That would be great. Very Happy Please let me know how it goes.

I am definitely thinking of this for dramatic confrontations with a significant NPC. Mostly lightsaber vs. lightsaber, but applying similar rules perhaps something like this might also work for Obi-wan vs. Jango Fett. For ordinary mooks, just assume any lightsaber hit is an AR of 16+ and just roll damage and soak normally.

Random and jmanski, the fixing the hit yourself rule was based on a recent post by atgxtg. I read his post and it was a slap your own forehead moment - you know where you wonder, "Yeah, that rule is so dumb; why the heck didn't a fix occur to me before?" The rest is really a bit of a mish mash and tweak of what ZzaphodD posted and Dueling Blades by Peter Schweighofer. While I'd love to take credit, I'm just playing with and modifying what those three came up with.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Krapou
Lieutenant Commander
Lieutenant Commander


Joined: 21 Mar 2005
Posts: 173
Location: Bordeaux, France

PostPosted: Sun Jun 26, 2011 4:53 pm    Post subject: Re: yet another lightsaber variant Reply with quote

Bren wrote:
Thoughts? Comments?

I like it !

IMHO, the only thing missing (when compared to the movies) is the opportunity to land a kick or punch sometimes (for example after a successful series of blows).

And obviously, the opponent shouldn't be able to defend himself with the lightsaber skill (just standard brawling parry)

Maybe the 'Off balance' result could allow something like that ?
For example :
    Attack Result.......Effect
    4-8....................Off balance. Attacker gains +1D6 bonus to his next attack, or may perform immediately an unarmed strike (using standard MAP). The defender can't use the lightsaber skill to defend but may use the Unarmed Parry skill normally, with standard MAP.

_________________
Star Wars D6 Fanbooks
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ZzaphodD
Rear Admiral
Rear Admiral


Joined: 28 Nov 2009
Posts: 2426

PostPosted: Sun Jun 26, 2011 5:11 pm    Post subject: Re: yet another lightsaber variant Reply with quote

Krapou wrote:
Bren wrote:
Thoughts? Comments?

I like it !

IMHO, the only thing missing (when compared to the movies) is the opportunity to land a kick or punch sometimes (for example after a successful series of blows).

And obviously, the opponent shouldn't be able to defend himself with the lightsaber skill (just standard brawling parry)

Maybe the 'Off balance' result could allow something like that ?
For example :
    Attack Result.......Effect
    4-8....................Off balance. Attacker gains +1D6 bonus to his next attack, or may perform immediately an unarmed strike (using standard MAP). The defender can't use the lightsaber skill to defend but may use the Unarmed Parry skill normally, with standard MAP.


I have put much thought on how to combine lightsaber combat (or any melee) with brawling / martial arts. As one of the characters in our group (of which Random until recently was of...) is a Jedi with a high skill in Martial Arts I wanted to come up with something fun and cinematic.
By the RAW theres really no meaning of using Martial Arts except if you want to go easy on someone or dont want to flash your lightsaber around.

As shown before and again below, kicks and punches can be a very cinematic in lightsaber combat.

http://youtu.be/5lrk2BE4Tqc
_________________
My Biggest Beard Retard award goes to: The Admiral of course..
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
Bren
Vice Admiral
Vice Admiral


Joined: 19 Aug 2010
Posts: 3868
Location: Maryland, USA

PostPosted: Sun Jun 26, 2011 8:58 pm    Post subject: Re: yet another lightsaber variant Reply with quote

Krapou wrote:
Maybe the 'Off balance' result could allow something like that ?
For example :
    Attack Result.......Effect
    4-8....................Off balance. Attacker gains +1D6 bonus to his next attack, or may perform immediately an unarmed strike (using standard MAP). The defender can't use the lightsaber skill to defend but may use the Unarmed Parry skill normally, with standard MAP.
Originally I was thinking that the off balance result could be described as being due to a kick/punch etc. But I guess if we did that the result would be independent of the unarmed combat skill levels of the participants which is a flaw.

Your suggestion is interesting. Very Happy And it gives the attacker an option, not a requirement to use unarmed combat. Maybe something like this:
    Off balance. Attacker gains +1D6 bonus to his next attack or if he has actions remaining he may use an action to immediately perform brawling attack.
    The defender can't use the lightsaber skill to defend but may make a normal reaction brawling parry with standard MAP.
ZzaphodD wrote:
I have put much thought on how to combine lightsaber combat (or any melee) with brawling / martial arts.
So what do you think of Krapou's suggestion? See any flaws? Is that similar to your thoughts or do you have other suggestions? I have not thought a lot about including unarmed combat into a lightsaber duel, though I agree we see it a lot in the prequels. I'd like to see what others who have thought about or tried introducing unarmed combat think.

I reviewed the grenade deviation diagram and I noticed the direction of the diagram specified in the top post could be more clear. It should say:
When a lightsaber is lost, it ends up 1D6 meters away. Roll on the Grenade Deviation Diagram for direction. Align the diagram so that arrow #4 is pointing towards the opponent.

Later we can discuss what happens if he is dueling multiple opponents when he loses his lightsaber. Wink
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Director of Engineering


Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16232
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.

PostPosted: Mon Jul 11, 2011 1:11 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I like the "Losing your grip" rule. Maybe you could maintain the "slashing yourself" rule for people attempting to use a lightsaber without training.
_________________
"No set of rules can cover every situation. It's expected that you will make up new rules to suit the needs of your game." - The Star Wars Roleplaying Game, 2R&E, pg. 69, WEG, 1996.

The CRMcNeill Stat/Rule Index
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Bren
Vice Admiral
Vice Admiral


Joined: 19 Aug 2010
Posts: 3868
Location: Maryland, USA

PostPosted: Mon Jul 11, 2011 1:24 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

crmcneill wrote:
I like the "Losing your grip" rule. Maybe you could maintain the "slashing yourself" rule for people attempting to use a lightsaber without training.
Yeah. That would work.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
dadofett
Sub-Lieutenant
Sub-Lieutenant


Joined: 28 Jun 2011
Posts: 74
Location: North Carolina, USA

PostPosted: Mon Jul 11, 2011 7:32 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I like this a lot. Reading it as a newbie (still going through core rules now), it fits nicely with the "feel" of the original rules...light and crispy! Smile
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Director of Engineering


Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16232
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.

PostPosted: Mon Jul 11, 2011 12:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

With regards to the off balance rules, I would think that the punch / kick / whatever would be what puts the opponent off balance. It could be anything from a physical blow to a feint to a leap or spin to one side, so that the opponent has to somehow adjust to the new combat situation.

I would like to something along the lines of rules for a coup de grace strike, as Maul did to Qui-Gon in TPM. In general, what I'm thinking is that, if the duelist successfully off-balances his opponent, he should be allowed to take advantage of that and make an attack, either unopposed or at an advantage of some kind. Once he delivers that strike, he would be unable to act for the rest of the round, and would thus be vulnerable to another attacker. To me, this would account for Darth Maul's actions in TPM, in that he played a waiting game until he could get Obi-wan and Qui-gon separated. Once they were, he was able to take advantage of Qui-gon's momentary distraction to deliver a lethal blow without having to worry about Obi-wan doing the same to him.
_________________
"No set of rules can cover every situation. It's expected that you will make up new rules to suit the needs of your game." - The Star Wars Roleplaying Game, 2R&E, pg. 69, WEG, 1996.

The CRMcNeill Stat/Rule Index
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Bren
Vice Admiral
Vice Admiral


Joined: 19 Aug 2010
Posts: 3868
Location: Maryland, USA

PostPosted: Mon Jul 11, 2011 4:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

crmcneill wrote:
With regards to the off balance rules, I would think that the punch / kick / whatever would be what puts the opponent off balance.
The thought was that if an opponent with a lightsaber is not off balance it is way too dangerous to try to hit him with a hand or foot, since his reaction parry would amputate it. So first you get him off balance or feinted into position, then you can strike.
Quote:
I would like to [add] something along the lines of rules for a coup de grace strike, as Maul did to Qui-Gon in TPM.
The exisiting rules already lean too much to FP enhanced single strike strike combats for my taste. So I don't feel any need to add anything to enhance that ability beyond the existing target off balance +1D6 to next attack result. I don't actually want to make it easier for the good guys or the bad guys to one shot kill each other.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    The Rancor Pit Forum Index -> House Rules All times are GMT - 4 Hours
Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10  Next
Page 1 of 10

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group


v2.0