Some background:
I've been reading through Shadowrun Anarchy 2.0 (SRA2.0) recently. I was a kickstarter backer, the PDF / print copies will be public soon.
The whole system essentially boils down to test rolls, and in the case of combat, contested rolls that then also use the margin of success for the winner. I've been finding it a very elegant system so far!
There are concepts in the system that gesture towards narrative vs simulation, but they aren't deeply baked into the test system itself, so can be adapted easily into a more simulationist style. I tend to have a mix of both, so it hasn't been a problem for me.
The discovery:
SRA2.0 combat uses contested rolls, and if the attacker beats the defender, they hit. The number of hits / successes gets added to the damage.
All weapons have a base damage, so it's the successes that add some variables to how hard the hit is.
There are a lot of other elements in the book (ranged vs melee, other defender options, etc) but this mechanic just struck me as so elegantly done.
It means that your attack roll and damage roll happen at the same time, and a high success in attacking transfers directly to damage. (Avoiding the sometimes underwhelming result of rolling to hit and then rolling low damage.)
My idea: Apply the overall concept to GURPS.
current method currently is attacker rolls, defender rolls if attacker succeeds, then damage rolls
GURPS Anarchy:
- attacker roll
- defender chooses available defense skill and rolls
- count the margin of success
- standard weapon damage applies plus margin of success
if defender succeeds, possibility of a riposte? Especially if margin of success is high. Maybe riposte is a technique or a sub-maneuver attached to Wait or something.
Questions:
I like this idea quite a bit, but I'd love to get feedback. Would something like this obstruct any useful advantages / disadvantages, etc? (Or could those adapt into this easily?)
note: I've formatted this for readability, but in this strange world, that might make folks think this was generated by an LLM. That is not the case! Every letter was 'generated' with my fingers on the keyboard!
LATER EDIT:
Many have been assuming this is meant to be a Quick Contest in place of the regular combat method. That's not the case. This would be a resisted roll happen at the level of the attack roll, just as it is in normal GURPS combat flow.
None of this is meant to speed up combat. The main point of elegance I enjoyed in SRA2.0, was that of baseline damage for a weapon, modified by the scale of success. It makes that attack roll very interesting, and avoids the up-down experience of landing a hit but then rolling minimal damage. The damage (still having randomness, because it's affected by the attack roll) is addressed at the same time as the attack roll.
So, based on that, let me outline this with a bit more detail.
Resistance Roll. (Page 348)
From the book:
The attacker must succeed to win. He cannot win by having the smallest margin of failure. If he fails his roll, he loses automatically and his subject does not need to attempt a resistance roll.
The attacker must win to affect the subject. All ties go to the defender.
Only done at the moment of the attack roll. Defender declares their defense. The margins being counted are between the attacker's target and the defenders target, not against each other.
Deceptive Attack, Rapid Strike, etc. remain as modifiers.
Masters should expect a very high margin of success baseline, so trying something else shouldn't be enough of a penalty modifier to make the options too risky. (And their attack is just as risky in a resisted roll as it is on their own.)
Still use critical failures and successes.
Melee only? At the very least, only when both combatants are in some way capable of negotiating the outcome... moreso than simply dodging a ranged attack. This is a resistance roll, and melee combat makes more sense in terms of 'resisting' the outcome.
"Partial Victory:" (where it's important to know the attack landed but was interrupted.) We can resolve this because the defender declares their action. If it's a parry, and the defender wins, then any necessary results can follow.
This could make someone very skilled with a simple weapon very deadly, because they'd know exactly how to use it. And someone less skilled but with a more 'powerful' weapon can still be dangerous. (Possibly to themselves, depending on the weapon! A crit miss with a chainsaw could be a problem!)
Much of the above also is meant to address the critiques of Kromm, though he's critiquing Quick Contest, not specifically a resistance roll at the attack roll moment. Kromm's critiques:
https://forums.sjgames.com/showpost.php?p=2585204&postcount=12
Questions I still have: Defense skill is inherently lower based on GURPS history and playtesting. I think for this I'd have to go 'full skill defense' which you can read more about.
Either way, this will require some playtesting.
Optional rule: defender declares before attack roll, as per:
https://www.gamesdiner.com/2007/07/decide-drop-excess-combat-info-from-defense-evaluation-gurps-4e3e/
