Solomon Kane said:

Indeed it is, now extrapolated to address the issue pointed by the OP.

It's funny think about previous threads that this is regarding people who never miss. I still haven't seen a situation where this is the case (in combat anyway). Assuming WS 60 (40+4 advances), is there a +5 for mort. +10 for best quality. So at best 3/4 attacks hit. And with LIghtning attack that 3 attacks. Dual weilding is no help because for an extra attack they are all at -10. I've always considered Blade Master to be an extra attack because the chances of hitting with all of them were so low and it can be used to reroll a parry. Do they use All out attack all of the time? Am I forgetting something or are we interperting something differently.

As you can just as easily miss a parry it's a non issue. He can TRY to hit you more times than you can try not getting hit.

All things being equal the defender should have +10 for a balanced weapon on their parries, again I could be wrong but people with Wall o steel also get step asside by then which is one dodge, 2 parries (assuming parries have a higher chance but not nescesarily the case). There should be something that allows an extra dual weilder parry.

There's also the Fast quality which imposes a -20 penalty to parries.

As for shooting and psychic powers, they are not comparable to melee.

Ranged combat, the most an attacker can do is two attacks, which canbe avoided. Or rather, with a ballistic mechandrite you can do more, but then you spend your reaction andgive the opponent the same chance to make an unavoidable attack.

As for psychic powers, I don't know of any that are truly unavoidable. Most get an opposed roll of some sort against the psykers willpower. The others are mostly projectile type powers, I can't think of a single reason why a firebolt should be harder to dodge than a bullet.

Zearoth Kilrathle said:

OK, but surely your new action would actually be mechanically weaker than defensive stance?

Defensive Stance penalises every attack made at you by 20 points and you still retain your defensive reaction(s) as normal, to do with as you will.

Your action means your parries get progressively more difficult to the point of impossibility the more attacks come in against you.

But if your suggestion was a talent that added both together, then it would be very effective and definately would address the OP.

S.K.

As you can just as easily miss a parry it's a non issue. He can TRY to hit you more times than you can try not getting hit.

Of course you actually need a chance to fail to parry otherwise two starting characters would never hurt one another but your failure to parry is at least your fault and as I said properly equiped you should have a bonus compared to the attack itself (which misses most of the time early on) all things being equal.

There's also the Fast quality which imposes a -20 penalty to parries.

Yes there is. It's something to take into consideration, fortuantely I don't think it's unbalancing because the only fast weapons do significantly lower damage and for most people the reduction of parry chance won't take it lower than their dodge chance which is unaffected.

Yes I'm ignoring comparisons to other forms of attack although of course there is some overlap.

Your total number of reactions does include at least one nearly ubiquitous dodge from nearly any attack regardless of it's speed. If you didn't have to worry about that and were fighting one person one on one then you might well argue that it should be easier to parry them.

In fact thinking like that it seems strange that most people get step aside before wall of steel (if they get it at all) but then as I said assassins (for instance) are more worried about evading incoming fire from guards to get to their target than proper fencing.

Eh I'm of the opinion that melee combat is fine where it is right now. Admittidly I would like to see more talents that add special menuvers and attacks but they aren't exactly needed.

As far as the balance of melee attacks to parries it's already balanced, or did you forget that your character is already assumed to be defending with whatever they have in their hands or dodging out of the way of the blows? This represents what you are having an issue with and has already been addressed by the system. If you wan't to become harder to hit, use defensive stance, make talents that make the defensive stance even better. I don't think you need to create any additional talents to add parries because all you are doing is creating a less brutal combat system and slowing game play down with excessive dice rolling.

Remember, with the dodge and the parry talent you have a dodge, a parry, and another of your choice each round to evade attacks... thats 3 attempts after they already have to roll against you. Thats still a hell of a lot of goodness going your way because it is infact easier to parry then it is to hit with an attack, a lot easier in many cases (not all mind you).

The example about the MR is interesting because thats what they do. I would be terrorfied of anyone who could actually parry that many attacks and do them all in the same round. But as stated before, thats what specialists do and the average character should not be able to easily counter a specilist performing their focused abilities. Yes you have some knowledge of swordsmenship but as you already stated, a style that is more of a sport then realistic combat so really I wouldn't bring that up again. Besides, it's a game and we all know realism always takes a back-seat at times =P

If you really really want to make more parry options make sure they are ONLY available to classes who would make sense having them and make sure that they can't just be picked up on a whim. They need a lot of pre-reqs and heavy stat requirements probably higher then that for the attack talents becuase you do have to be even quicker to parry correctly because it is a reaction. I honestly think only the assissin would have access to any of these advanced parry talents and rightly so, what over class is going to have that level of melee training?

karn987 said:

Not knowledge, experience. Which is a great deal different. Knowledge implies that I've only read or heard about it. Practicing it gives me experience, and although kendo was my main concentration when I was into martial arts and sports, I have tried my hand at several different techniques of fencing as well.

As for realistic combat, I don't really feel comfortable discussing the real fights (with weapons) that i've been involved in. Sure I didn't have a sword at those times, but I'll agree to admit that weapons were involved. Hopefully you'll understand me not wanting to go into exact details on the matter, and you'll believe me when I say that I have fought for real in the past, where weapons were involved.

Im telling you this because I want to make it clear that im not just another average geek who's consumed way to many action flicks in his time and have a somewhat odd understanding of violence in general, and whose experience in fights mainly consist of being beat up by your average meathead bully in grade school.

Of course you actually need a chance to fail to parry otherwise two starting characters would never hurt one another but your failure to parry is at least your fault and as I said properly equiped you should have a bonus compared to the attack itself (which misses most of the time early on) all things being equal.

Yes, but the point is that this is another thing that is equal between defence and attack, the fact that you can miss some of your five attacks in a round does not matter since it's the same for defence and you don't get to try as many time

Yes there is. It's something to take into consideration, fortuantely I don't think it's unbalancing because the only fast weapons do significantly lower damage and for most people the reduction of parry chance won't take it lower than their dodge chance which is unaffected.

This seems rather unfair, there are some weapons that give bonuses to parry and others that give a penalty, how come properly equipped only goes one way?

My point is that getting hit or not getting hit is not up to skill against an opponent with dual wielder and lightning attack. It should be.

Yes, but the point is that this is another thing that is equal between defence and attack, the fact that you can miss some of your five attacks in a round does not matter since it's the same for defence and you don't get to try as many time

Just as an aside how are you getting 5 attacks? I counted BM as an additional attack but max hits with LA and dual weilding is 4 as I've counted? And still, without aiming even most trained characters are not likely to muster much above 50% hit chance. With an equal number of reactions most of the time people would match a hit with a parry and still be able to react to an attack or two from another source.

And I do agree that DW is not as good in defence as it is in attack which doesn't play out really considering that historically many DW weapon styles were intended that way.

Even then a free attack at the cost of -10 to hit on all attacks is rarely worth except in rare cases.

This seems rather unfair, there are some weapons that give bonuses to parry and others that give a penalty, how come properly equipped only goes one way?

Do you mean why can you not effect the attack roll of the other person (other than manuevers)?

Just as an aside how are you getting 5 attacks? I counted BM as an additional attack but max hits with LA and dual weilding is 4 as I've counted? And still, without aiming even most trained characters are not likely to muster much above 50% hit chance. With an equal number of reactions most of the time people would match a hit with a parry and still be able to react to an attack or two from another source.

Counter attack let's you attack once for free after a successfull parry. Lightning attack (3) + Dual wielder melee (1) + Counter attack (1) is five attack total in one round, the maximum available to player characters.

And I do agree that DW is not as good in defence as it is in attack which doesn't play out really considering that historically many DW weapon styles were intended that way.

So let's change it then, as simple a modification as allowing a dual wielder to either attack or parry once extra would correct the problems I have with melee.

Even then a free attack at the cost of -10 to hit on all attacks is rarely worth except in rare cases

But when it's worth it, it's really worth it. one or two attacks that the target is not allowed to resist in any way is a really good deal.

Do you mean why can you not effect the attack roll of the other person (other than manuevers)?

No, I mean that if you are setting up an exampleyou can't count on one having equipment bonuses while the other does not get to use them. If the person who parries gets balanced or defensice the attacker should get fast, putting the attacker ahead by at least five.

Counter attack let's you attack once for free after a successfull parry. Lightning attack (3) + Dual wielder melee (1) + Counter attack (1) is five attack total in one round, the maximum available to player characters.

I see now, we are working to the same rules then. I wasn't counting counter attack but it is there in most cases and the is in fact the classic example of reduced chances (-30 for a dw IRC) of additional hit

So let's change it then, as simple a modification as allowing a dual wielder to either attack or parry once extra would correct the problems I have with melee.

That certainly seems fair, I don't have a rule book so there might be something that makes it pointless as is. I'd say it doesn't need a talent (but obviously at low chances unless the talents taken).

No, I mean that if you are setting up an exampleyou can't count on one having equipment bonuses while the other does not get to use them. If the person who parries gets balanced or defensice the attacker should get fast, putting the attacker ahead by at least five.

I still don't think it's unbalancing, you take a real hit in the amount of damage and doesn't effect there chances to dodge. If anything, if you are increasing the number of parries it is going towards making fast weapons better.

Graspar said:

It's called conditional probability. They only need to use a reaction if you hit thus there can be less. At most you get 5 attacks at -10 (Lightning Attack, offhand and Blademaster assuming you miss at least once which is likely). Counter-attack at -30 is not a given as it's done when it's not your but your opponents turn, as part of your parry if you may parry at all. Also Counter-attack is special as it can't be parried or dodged (DH p. 188 Reactions).

The Moritat gets no extra +5 bonus to WS. They get a few Hatred talents however. The best you're looking at is WS 60 and +10 each for Hatred and for best quality. 5 attacks with a 70% chance to hit. Sounds like an average of 3 hitting, which may be reduced to at most 1 hit after reactions (Assassin dodge can achieve 80% and parry is also at least at a +10 for the Balanced quality... and the Fast quality is usually compensated for with less damage, see below).

Then comes even more combat abstraction in terms of damage and wounds: For lack of power swords (light sabres) in RL... if you are unarmored and take anything but a grazing hit with a chain saw in RL you are most likely maimed to the point where you won't fight much longer. Your opponent could flee/go full defense and strike once the bleeding and pain has weakened you. Not so in DH... an average hit with a chain sword 1D10+2+SB-TB damage is perhaps removing half of your wounds but not pushing you into critical damage. That one hit is so that wounds go down and combat doesn't take forever. Not to represent a true hit.

Who's to say anyway that standard fencing is not represented with one using the Multiple Attacks action and the other using the Defensive Stance or Guarded Attack action and hoping for counter-attacks?

Btw. I hate when people (especially players) try to bring RL into abstractions/RAW only to further their argument but silently accept these same abstractions/rules when they benefit from them.

Graspar said:

I have yet to find a Fast (or Flexible) weapon which is not gimped compared to its alternatives... it's so special a quality for something your opponent might choose not to do (they - beasts, daemons or gunslingers - could have no melee weapon drawn to parry with, and to defend I would certainly use one of my 2 dodges first when I realize dodge has a higher chance to succeed) unlike Balanced where I choose when it's more worthwhile to use parry with WS+10 over dodge. It's also consistently used for weapons I'd try to surprise my opponent with, a situation where they wouldn't parry anyway (either by being surprised or no weapon wielded).

Moon Blade (1D10,Pen0,Fast/Primitive/Unwieldy) or Devil's Kiss (1D5,Pen3,Fast/Primitive) or Stiletto (1D5-1,Pen2,Fast/Primitive)

versus Great Weapon (2D10,Pen2,Primitive/Unwieldy) or Sword (1D10,Pen0,Balanced/Primitive) or Combat Knife (1D5+3,Pen0,Primitive)

Serpentine (1D10+2,Pen6,Fast/Power)

versus Power Sword (1D10+5,Pen6, Balanced/Power)

It's called conditional probability. They only need to use a reaction if you hit thus there can be less. At most you get 5 attacks at -10 (Lightning Attack, offhand and Blademaster assuming you miss at least once which is likely).

Yes, and as I've stated many times in response to that argument that one can miss an attack roll does not matter, it's the same for dodge and parry. With that logic, why include reactions at all? It's quite possible to miss every single attack.

How do you not get that my argument is that one shouldn't have to rely on luck to survive in a one on one fight?

Counter-attack at -30 is not a given as it's done when it's not your but your opponents turn, as part of your parry if you may parry at all. Also Counter-attack is special as it can't be parried or dodged (DH p. 188 Reactions).

So.... what exactly? Does this somehow make melee combat more balanced as the attacker now gets a free attack that cannot be parried even if the defender has reactions left? It needs to be in the errata if anything as your interpretation only makes counter attack unbalanced on its own.

The Moritat gets no extra +5 bonus to WS. They get a few Hatred talents however. The best you're looking at is WS 60 and +10 each for Hatred and for best quality. 5 attacks with a 70% chance to hit. Sounds like an average of 3 hitting, which may be reduced to at most 1 hit after reactions (Assassin dodge can achieve 80% and parry is also at least at a +10 for the Balanced quality... and the Fast quality is usually compensated for with less damage, see below).

1) I've never said a word about any kind of moritat character, except to state that my argument is not about the moritat but the lightning attack/dual wield combo.

2) Stop counting equipment bonuses on only one side. Not all weapons have balanced either, the ones that do are slightly penalised. Not as much as the fast weapons of course but they don't give as much bonus either.

3) The averages doesn't matter, sometimes you'll hit all five attacks. Sometimes none. Reactions fail aswell and you only get to try one reaction per attack.

Then comes even more combat abstraction in terms of damage and wounds: For lack of power swords (light sabres) in RL... if you are unarmored and take anything but a grazing hit with a chain saw in RL you are most likely maimed to the point where you won't fight much longer. Your opponent could flee/go full defense and strike once the bleeding and pain has weakened you. Not so in DH... an average hit with a chain sword 1D10+2+SB-TB damage is perhaps removing half of your wounds but not pushing you into critical damage. That one hit is so that wounds go down and combat doesn't take forever. Not to represent a true hit

Errr, not sure what you're getting at here. Yes, it's abstractions, I've never argued otherwise.

Who's to say anyway that standard fencing is not represented with one using the Multiple Attacks action and the other using the Defensive Stance or Guarded Attack action and hoping for counter-attacks?

Who's to say it is?

Btw. I hate when people (especially players) try to bring RL into abstractions/RAW only to further their argument but silently accept these same abstractions/rules when they benefit from them.

I, for one, hate people who try to put words in my mouth. I've never brought realism up in this thread so dont go for that moral high ground just yet.

My only point has been that one ought to get an attempt to get out of the way if someone tries to kill you, that seems fair yes? There should be a way to put together a character of equal level that can at least try not to die.

I have yet to find a Fast (or Flexible) weapon which is not gimped compared to its alternatives... it's so special a quality for something your opponent might choose not to do (they - beasts, daemons or gunslingers - could have no melee weapon drawn to parry with, and to defend I would certainly use one of my 2 dodges first when I realize dodge has a higher chance to succeed) unlike Balanced where I choose when it's more worthwhile to use parry with WS+10 over dodge. It's also consistently used for weapons I'd try to surprise my opponent with, a situation where they wouldn't parry anyway (either by being surprised or no weapon wielded).

Moon Blade (1D10,Pen0,Fast/Primitive/Unwieldy) or Devil's Kiss (1D5,Pen3,Fast/Primitive) or Stiletto (1D5-1,Pen2,Fast/Primitive)

versus Great Weapon (2D10,Pen2,Primitive/Unwieldy) or Sword (1D10,Pen0,Balanced/Primitive) or Combat Knife (1D5+3,Pen0,Primitive)

Serpentine (1D10+2,Pen6,Fast/Power)

versus Power Sword (1D10+5,Pen6, Balanced/Power)

Your very selective comparison of weapons prove nothing. Why not include the chainsword/chainaxe? There you trade two points of damage for balanced. And what about the shock maul/electro flail? The flexible weapon does two points of damage extra.

The point is that if one combatant get's equipment bonuses so should the other.

Graspar said:

You're still not getting it. If you don't need as many reactions as attacks then you don't need as many reactions as attacks. You don't need to spend a reaction for missed attacks (which are spent already) . Whereas a missed dodge or parry does not result in an unspent attack. Simple, isn't it? Getting any more reactions will in most cases result in excess reactions after all attacks of one opponent are spent. Reactions which could then be spent on attacks from other opponents. Perhaps something the designers didn't want. Reactions, mind you, completely independent of enemy WS bonuses for ganging up (and Double Team).

Graspar said:

Balanced to what? IMHO melee combat is quite balanced. Perhaps you can't exchange blows for endless hours but what's exactly wrong with that? And Counter-attack has a penalty of its own, it's down to at most a 40% chance to hit. For most characters we're talking a 20% chance.

Graspar said:

1) The OP mentioned a Moritat. The poster you quoted mentioned a Moritat. So I may as well use the maximum WS a (Moritat) player character may achieve. The maximum, mind you.

2) The best melee weapons (with the highest damage while also one-handed for dual-wielding and allowing Blademaster) are Balanced. This whole thread becomes pointless if you're not using one-handed blades as you're then down to 3-4 attacks. Interesting enough you didn't even respond to how easily Fast is foiled.

3) Actually, the averages do matter the most. You're not trying to argue that extremes should dictate balance? In this case, even in RL as the OP mentioned, a skilled swordfighter could die from decapitation 5 seconds into the fight.

Graspar said:

Oh please. There is a way to model within the combat abstractions what the OP wanted with his RL comparison. There's not much more to do.

Graspar said:

Then defend yourself with one of the many ways to defend yourself? Please.

Graspar said:

And with a Chainaxe you can't use Blademaster. One whole attack less. The Electro Flail is two-handed. No Blademaster. No off-hand attack. Now you've traded two attacks. Wasn't number of attacks what this whole thread was about?

Look, you've misrepresented my opinions and attacked me for something I never did. I've pointed this out to you but you didn't even aknowledge that you were in error.

I wont continue this discussion If you're going to be dishonest.

@Graspar:

If I have understood it right, you're making a game-mechanical point that everyone should always get a chance to defend themself, with no possibility of dying by chance without an opportunity for defence.

The thing is, going back to the abstraction point (sorry Varnias!) you can take a hit because you failed some or all of your reactions, or you can take a hit because your opponent passed all their attacks and therefore left you with too few reactions. They're all a matter of chance, so why complain? Because you didn't get the chance to roll? It's still down to random chance.

As I said earlier in the thread, the real argument, it seems to me, is that in a melee the defender's WS should always be a factor in whether they get hit. I think it's a fair complaint that as the system stands combat is supposed to be an "abstraction" with some minimum level of defending being factored into the basic attack roll, yet the defender's skill makes no difference to that roll.

Cardinalsin said:

Well you shouldnt be putting words in people's mouth boyo.

As for this thread, I think it has just gotten stupid. Varnias, obviously you are unhappy with the system and your not going to be happy until it's a system based on pure realism that fullfills your slightly elitest view. So I'm done with this, there is nothing worthwile out of this thread at all.

@Varnias if you want to purpose a change to the combat system, start a new thread but leave our your self toating. Honestly you have knowledge and some "experience" fine, but you don't need to get your feathers ruffled just because I didn't mention your experience. Others here have experience, experience with games and game mechanics. More important then the realism you want is balance and a working system, because without that you don't have a game and that is what we are all playing. So either start a new thread and tote the improvements as an actual improvemnt to the game system or stay here and rant about your experience and your realism that obviously isn't doing much for you. Your idea was fine, I don't agree but you made some agrument towards it but you need more and you need to focus on game mechanics and balance first and foremost. So I say to you, either put up or shut up.

karn987 said:

I have. Read the full thread and you'll see for yourself. Also I have been thinking of the game mechanics. The fact that you can do more attacks than defensive actions is imbalanced, not only in a realistic sense but from a game mechanical sense as well.

Oh and by the way. You couldn't ruffle my feathers even if you tried.

So, who took the jam out of your doughnut, mate?

karn987 said:

You'll be pleased to learn that I have no intention of doing so. In fact, I'm rather puzzled which bit of what I wrote you're referring to.

PS Boyo? How old do you think I am?

Varnias Tybalt said:

I disagree and here's why. The way parries work in this game, if the defender makes his roll by 1 point, it doen't matter that the attacker got 9 degrees of success on the hit, the attack still fails. Granted the same is true of attack rolls (if it hits it hits) however tha chance of missing an attack roll is already designed to take general defense into consideration (granted its a bit screwy that you have the same chance to hit every target)

With the current system, if you always have a equal number of parries to attacks, then you might at well just skip the attack roll, declare the attack and see if the parry fails before your bother.

Now if attack and parry (or dodge) were opposed rolls with the person who got more degrees winning, then I might be on board with you.

DocIII said:

I have no particular objections to that. Not at the moment at least, because I gotta check if this would screw up the rest of the rules in any sort of way, but I don't think they would.

In fact, it's a bit wierd that melee combat isn't using opposed rolls. It's not like you're taking swipes at a stationary target, but a target that probably tries it's best to defend itself and not getting hit.

So opposed rolls for parries (and degrees of success determine whoever succed in what they try to do). However this does not apply to dodging, because a dodge implies that you simply try to get out of the way of an incoming attack, a parry on the other hand implies that you try to "catch" your opponent's weapon and either deflect the force from it to another direction, or that you try to block it entirely.'

So far, it seems to make sense (despite many accusations I don't strive for total realism, I strive for a system that makes sense which is very different) and at a frist glance it would work from a game balance perspective. But I have to look into it further...

In fact, it's a bit wierd that melee combat isn't using opposed rolls. It's not like you're taking swipes at a stationary target, but a target that probably tries it's best to defend itself and not getting hit.

I imagine that was an abstraction just to speed things up. You could try using it for important one on one fights.

You could even have certain effects from parries (or attacks) that succeed very well such as disarming, throwing off balance etc. I'll leave the details to you.

Face Eater said:

Exactly!

I mean, I wouldn't bother using that many parries in fights with rank-and-file enemies where the combat should be fast paced. But in the case of important encounters with NPC's that are supposed to be awe-inspiring with their fighting skills (like experienced red circus gladiators, Inquisitors and their henchmen etc.) or perhaps when infighting between acolytes in the same group occurs, the combat should offer some more sensible and balanced options rather than the imbalanced system we have now.

As for disarming and throwing opponents off balance, the "Feint" action in the current combat rules is one im very fond of. It doesn't satisfy completely but it is certainly along the right way of thinking in my opinion.

There are plenty of ways that are already built into the game to negate multiple melee attacks, why do you need more? You can, if you're good, keep your opponent from ever getting more than 1 attack, I would think someone with training and skill would know when they're outmatched and find a smarter way to fight than to stand there and slug it out with a superior opponent.

Examples:

Rnd1: Multi-attacker charges, swings, connects, defender parries.

Rnd2: Defender uses the Manuever action to move the opponent back, and shoots him (or attacks in melee 1 standard half action attack) then manuevers him back.

Defender uses a move action to step out of melee (drawing another attack from the attacker that can be parried with wall of steel's 2nd parry), and shoots the attacker at point blank range (this effect made worse if the defender has hip shooting and is dual wielding pistols, change wall of steel for step-aside to dodge his attack of opportunity, netting you 2 pistol attacks, most likely still at point blank range, and if you want to get crazy, make them both pistols with scatter to really wrack up the damage).

Defender returns attacks with multiple attacks, then uses assassin's strike to move away, or simply uses multiple attacks to drill his opponent to the ground first.

Defender uses takedown talent half action, then stabs/shoots him while stunned.

Defender uses Stun action, next round, beats/shoots stunned opponent

Defender uses the disengage action and backs away.

Defender uses a disarm to take their opponent's weapon, or at least stop them from flurrying their attacks as effectively.

Defender uses the Knockdown half action, forcing his opponent to fight from the ground at penalty, or stand and lose 4 attacks.

Defender has counterattack & assassin's strike, parries the attacker's first attack, makes his melee counter attack, and then assassin's step's away, negating any further multiple attacks.

Defender uses a flame pistol to force his opponent to be hit, or make an agility test to avoid being hit and move out of the area of effect and possibly catch fire.

Defender uses the Float psychic power and moves straight up 5 meters, making it impossible for the multi-melee character to reach him, can proceed to take pot shots at him until the attacker gives up and leaves.

Defender uses a weapon with a powerfield to parry, giving him a 75% chance to destroy his opponent's weapon (You could be really cruel and stick to RAW, where a power field can destroy anything that is not a force weapon. There's no "except other power fielded weapons" under the Power Field rule on page 129, only force weapons have the addendum in their descrip, will not be destroyed by a power field.) This will make wall of steel more than enough, because after 2 parries, even if your opponent is dual wielding, there's a large, large chance he will be unarmed after.

Note, assassin's strike doesn't require a successful melee attack, just a melee attack and an acrobatics test. Stun, Disarm, Knockdown, and Manuever are not attacks, and can't be dodged/parried. There are plenty of ways to fight smart built into the game for balance sake, this is not a kendo sparring match. You don't even KNOW the abilities your opponent may or may not have so of course, they may have counters to these things, or use them themselves, but there ARE many ways to negate multi-attack actions. The thread has taken all parties getting successes as the assumption, so the above examples take the same into account, even IF the defender fails to manuever his opponent, there's nothing to stop him from trying a takedown half action right after it, or a knockdown instead.

All things, already built into the rules system to negate numerous melee weapon attacks without having to go change and add parries, all different tactics, using a number of different talents and skills, anyone from another melee oriented character, to a ranged character, to an non-fighter oriented character.

Varnias Tybalt said:

Just like in real life!

bogi_khaosa said:

In real life, one person CAN kick the asses of several in melee. Like this one time when we saw the parallel class of karate and aikido students over at my kendo dojo (we shared premises for training with other martial artists as well). If you put up one of the blackbelts against several of the more moderately ranked people, the black belts would kick their asses without breaking a sweat, despite being outnumbered.

And it wasn't a question of kata training or anything like that, it was just the blackbelt going: "Surround me and come at me any way you like", and still he'd win.

Then add to the fact that it is a lot easier deflecting weapon swings if you have a weapon, than it is deflecting punches and kicks when you're unarmed it's not that hard to see that one person armed with melee weapons could hold several people at bay depending on the skill of each combatant. But this is never the case in Dark Heresy, due to the fact that characters ganging up on a single individual get too much advantages. Not only do they get bonuses to their weapon skill, but all of their attacks (even if they don't have swift attack or lightning attack) combined will ALWAYS be too much to hande, and it doesn't matter if you have extremely high WS or Wall of Steel or anything like that. It just doesn't make sense...