Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="JohnSnow" data-source="post: 8085790" data-attributes="member: 32164">Many years ago, I had a fencing guy challenge me to a bout because he didn't think that what we did was &quot;real&quot; swordplay. I agreed with one proviso: &quot;their equipment,&quot; but &quot;my rules&quot; (i.e. not fighting on a strip, all targets legal).So we geared up with masks and sabres (the closest analog they had to a rapier/sidesword). He took a standard fencing stance. I squared off, rapier/side-sword style, but with just the blade and my offhand. He lunged at me, and I hand-parried it and stuck the tip in his chest. He complained about me using a hand parry and so the next time he lunged, I sidestepped (dodge) and smacked him in the face with the blade.He was both more athletic and faster than me, but I timed it right. And he forgot we weren't on a strip. But that is absolutely, 100 percent, dodging an attack. So it is possible. Now, you might argue that was a failed attack roll, and, well, I can't totally disagree, but people don't just &quot;stand still.&quot; However, I also agree with you that it is absolutely harder to just dodge a blow (while staying in range) than it is to parry one, and it can also be difficult in fudge-y, non-simulative RPG combat to separate which is which.So, my personal bias would be to call it &quot;defense&quot; and give the player the option to boost it with both parry bonuses (which are easier to acquire) and dodge bonuses (which are less available). And rule that the defense bonus from fighting skill is a somewhat nebulous mix of both those things and reading your opponent. The total defense action would probably involve a combination of parrying and dodging (stepping back, sideways, out of range, etc.).This gets me thinking about wanting to give a character the ability to advance, i.e. &quot;push his opponent back,&quot; without trying to score a wound with his weapon. Must ponder...</blockquote>

[QUOTE="JohnSnow, post: 8085790, member: 32164"] Many years ago, I had a fencing guy challenge me to a bout because he didn't think that what we did was "real" swordplay. I agreed with one proviso: "their equipment," but "my rules" (i.e. not fighting on a strip, all targets legal). So we geared up with masks and sabres (the closest analog they had to a rapier/sidesword). He took a standard fencing stance. I squared off, rapier/side-sword style, but with just the blade and my offhand. He lunged at me, and I hand-parried it and stuck the tip in his chest. He complained about me using a hand parry and so the next time he lunged, I sidestepped (dodge) and smacked him in the face with the blade. He was both more athletic and faster than me, but I timed it right. And he forgot we weren't on a strip. But that is absolutely, 100 percent, dodging an attack. So it is [I]possible[/I]. Now, you might argue that was a failed attack roll, and, well, I can't totally disagree, but people don't just "stand still." However, I also agree with you that it is absolutely [I]harder[/I] to just dodge a blow (while staying in range) than it is to parry one, and it can also be difficult in fudge-y, non-simulative RPG combat to separate which is which. So, my personal bias would be to call it "defense" and give the player the option to boost it with both parry bonuses (which are easier to acquire) and dodge bonuses (which are less available). And rule that the defense bonus from fighting skill is a somewhat nebulous mix of both those things [I]and[/I] reading your opponent. The total defense action would probably involve a combination of parrying and dodging (stepping back, sideways, out of range, etc.). This gets me thinking about wanting to give a character the ability to advance, i.e. "push his opponent back," [I]without[/I] trying to score a wound with his weapon. Must ponder... [/QUOTE]

Verification