suggestion

[khaled]

IGN: babycakes
DATE: 03/20/2021
WHAT YOU NEED TO SUGGEST OR MENTION:
I think that the concept of honor should be reintroduced. Before the rules where you had to "roll to get behind" and "roll to attack" combat was far more clean and compliant + less messy. If you got behind someone and actioned against them, there was no excessive argument about rolling to get behind them and it made sense. People don't have super senses to just notice that someone is creeping up behind them.

I understand if removing the whole "roll to approach from behind" rule isn't removed however I think it should at least be altered. If someone is getting behind someone, maybe roll 20 to notice or maybe in certain situations the action shouldn't be required; for example when someone is in front of Player A, grabbing their attention, this should be the time for Player B to catch them off-guard. Simple requirements, simple roleplay.

Now then onto rolling with weapon vs no weapon. I personally think this makes just about no sense. A man holding a 24 inch blade should have close to no trouble dealing with an unarmed man unless the unarmed man is literally Chuck Norris. Maybe certain weapons would be easier to avoid unarmed etc. knuckle dusters. The staff can choose amongst themselves what should be roll however, I think rolling against weapons should still have repercussions. For example, rolling against a metal bat > winning the roll = damage to your arms for blocking the weapon. Long range weapons shouldn't be dodged and for any roll won against them should be classified as a successful block or parry.

That's about it. Thank you for reading, take into consideration and if what doesn't work from this feedback, mold it into your own ideas and make something work please.

 

[Springwood]

I think that the concept of honor should be reintroduced. Before the rules where you had to "roll to get behind" and "roll to attack" combat was far more clean and compliant + less messy. If you got behind someone and actioned against them, there was no excessive argument about rolling to get behind them and it made sense. People don't have super senses to just notice that someone is creeping up behind them.

I understand if removing the whole "roll to approach from behind" rule isn't removed however I think it should at least be altered. If someone is getting behind someone, maybe roll 20 to notice or maybe in certain situations the action shouldn't be required; for example when someone is in front of Player A, grabbing their attention, this should be the time for Player B to catch them off-guard. Simple requirements, simple roleplay.

I disagree with this one; the reason as to why they added a turning roll-based system, is due to it being way too overpowered for one another to approach somebody from behind without rolling. The one drawing closer to said individual from behind will have the opportunity to just KO them in a number of hits, in case they’re lucky of course. - I feel like adding this rule back will cause major abusing and it just wouldn’t be fair for those who are a casualty (In Character) of these sorts of circumstances. On another note, this doesn’t make CombatRP energizing and or exciting in my opinion. | -1

Now then onto rolling with weapon vs no weapon. I personally think this makes just about no sense. A man holding a 24 inch blade should have close to no trouble dealing with an unarmed man unless the unarmed man is literally Chuck Norris. Maybe certain weapons would be easier to avoid unarmed etc. knuckle dusters. The staff can choose amongst themselves what should be roll however, I think rolling against weapons should still have repercussions. For example, rolling against a metal bat > winning the roll = damage to your arms for blocking the weapon. Long range weapons shouldn't be dodged and for any roll won against them should be classified as a successful block or parry.

I to some degree concur, and oppose this idea to the moment recommendation: this has kind of been suggested by me before, but rather than weapon vs no weapon being honored, you should be able to roll a little higher than those who do not carry a weapon on them. - In spite of the fact that, that would maybe cause a few perplexity separated from this one, hence why it perhaps got denied.

I give you all right about the fact that weapon vs no weapon should be honored, weapons are not easy to be dodged unless your professionally trained of course, but I get why they removed this rule. This rule was perhaps removed due to it being exceptionally, exceptionally unjustifiable to those without a weapon; unarmed players would just lose their character, knowing that they don't stand a chance against those who are carrying a sharp weapon on them. It’s pretty unfair for those who are unarmed, losing their character since they’re hopeless and or do not stand a chance.

Back then, I used to witness players lose their character(s) due to weapon vs no weapon being honored; they didn’t stand a chance against those who are armed. - Therefore I have decided to stand in between this second suggestion, and to just give it a 0.5-1. | +/- 0.5