<div>And then there's those who essentially wait and attack whatever an attacker chooses to attack with.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>I've been thinking of allowing a To Hit bonus = (the waiting character's melee SR minus the attacker's melee SR) * 10%. The bonus improves either the waiting character's Parry or Attack percentage or can be split between both but this kind of attack uses up both a Parry and Attack action and uses a single die roll that must be equal to or under the Parry/Attack skills to be successful. If successful, the limb the attacker is using in his attack is struck.
</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Armor still protects though so this may not be as useful as it sounds (assuming it sounds useful) and I haven't tested this so it may be more trouble than it's worth. I just like giving PCs and NPCs tactical options in combat.
</div>
<div> </div>
<div>David<br> </div>
<div><span class="gmail_quote">On 5/22/06, <b class="gmail_sendername">Tom Cantine</b> <<a href="mailto:tcantine@incentre.net">tcantine@incentre.net</a>> wrote:</span>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="PADDING-LEFT: 1ex; MARGIN: 0px 0px 0px 0.8ex; BORDER-LEFT: #ccc 1px solid">The more I think about this, along with my own experience in fencing,<br>the more I am inclined to drop aiming rules for melee combat. It seems
<br>to me that if I'm trying to hit my opponent in a spot I perceive as<br>especially vulnerable or tactically useful, one of the things I will be<br>doing to enhance my likelihood of hitting there is trying to get him to
<br>defend somewhere else, and that means actively going after those other<br>spots.<br></blockquote></div>