Looking forward to playtesting this. Good job so far though.
Hopefully, if I can get at least very preliminary melee manoeuvring rules in place (as well as core parts of the armoury - the melee weapon profiles will need some sprucing up in order to fit the changed rules), it might even be possible to do some testing at Golden Aegis if it goes ahead and a couple of willing
victims volunteers can be found.
While there are a few other holes in there, most of the rest of them can be patched with 1st edition or the tried and tested method of "winging it". (Doubtless, it'll need some on the fly adjustments anyway).
Some typos:
Page 9: Certain superhuman characters may have very high Characteristic bonuses that are very large the die roll they are modifying.
Page 37: Characters may choose to end a close combat a (unfinished sentence).
Duly noted.
p9 is supposed to read "very large compared to the die roll". p37 is... well, a goof. I needed a passage somewhere to emphasize that close combat is much more open than before.
As IRE doesn't have any "locked" close combat state (turning your back on your opponent and running is going to be difficult/dangerous more than it is forbidden), a close combat will ends in much the same way as as a gunfight might - that is, by the characters deciding to stop hitting each other with swords.
Regarding parrying: Do we still have the half WS for successive parry/dodge reactions? Needs to be made clear if that rule has changed (I'm assuming it has at the moment).
There is no penalty for successive reactions. I've long found the halving WS mechanic to be an awkward mechanic, as it was more stuff to keep track of and fairly slow mathematically. (It wasn't a straight penalty, meaning it required completely recalculating the WS and then applying modifiers every time). I had considered a -10 penalty per parry, but even that's (currently) been dropped.
This aspect of parrying/dodging now comes from the opposed rolling mechanics, where the defender is expected to beat his opponent's attack roll (or at least hope for a critical parry*).
This in a way does a similar job - theoretically, before, more skilled attackers were more likely to hit, would therefore likely hit more times, therefore making their hits harder to parry. Now it's handled by more skilled attackers being more likely to hit
well, and therefore being harder to parry.
*Mostly put in so that there is always that slim chance of parrying, like in 1st edition. Before, characters could always pray for 01-05, but in IRE's opposed mechanics, 01-05 rolls are easily beaten. Hence why "Critical" parries automatically win (a percentage broadly in the 4-8% range), meaning defenders always have a slim chance, even against the most skilled opponents.I feel it has several other advantages:
- It opens the doors for slow, but skilled, swordsmen.
- Before certain characters became
more effective against more skilled opponents. Because the LRB only allowed a parry/counter-attack if the opponent first hit, characters with a high enough counter-attack chance (particularly if they had reduced successive parry modifiers, such as a buckler or shield) could easily get more attacks per turn.
- And because it's now important to not just hit, but hit well (aside from a narrow hit being easier to parry, a missed attack is pretty easy to counter-attack), hopefully characters will instead try to work on positioning rather than just relying on "attack, attack, attack".
Prepared reactions: Can characters save actions if they're expecting to get charged? If so what benefit would the character get?
As far as prepared reactions, they either automatically confirm, or provide a +20 bonus to any defensive reactions. A prepared parry reaction, for example, would give the character a pretty good counter-attack chance.
I have wondered if I do want to provide characters with the option to use stored reserved actions to re-roll parry tests or something (in order that there is still a dynamic with keeping back actions), but I need to think of a rulesy way to word that.
Attack: Feint: A successful feint should do no damage but should reduce the opponents WS for their next parry/dodge attempt. I would suggest the reduction should be the same as the margin of success. I think the feint attempt shouldn't allow for a reaction but if it is failed the opposing player gets an immediate counter attack.
I had similar thoughts. On some level, I feel a more skilled swordsman should be less likely to fall for a feint, but just keeping it as a very simple "passive" action would certainly be a quicker way to handle it.
One thing I'd note is that I want to open up feints to all characters (although only those with the skill will be particularly good at it).
Attack: Precision Strike: Allows the attacker to choose the location struck with an appropriate WS penalty (would -20 be too high?).
Precision Strike is intended to be broadly the same as the "Sure Strike" ability from 1st edition, allowing characters to aim for weak spots in their opponent's armour.
"Calling" melee location has been (perhaps too quietly) added as an optional modifier, where the character can choose to take a -20 to hit penalty in order to get a +/-20 on their hit location roll. The exact numbers there are still up in the air; the hit penalty should perhaps be only -10, but right now I'm more interested in broad mechanics than precise modifiers (which will need to be refined through playtesting).
