> > the lamentable Generic Close Combat
>
>That's the delightfully generic Close Combat...
>
>Which is probably the touchstone of the divide here. If you think a
>roleplaying game needs more combat skills, you probably want to add
>more skills everywhere. If you see no need for more combat rules
>gunking up your perfectly good stories, you see no need for more
>skill rules elsewhere.
Personally, I think there is a case for adding a bit more detail to Combat. Basically, its a different Robin Laws philosophy, the one from Feng Shui - its OK for the rules to concentrate on the details of combat if that is what the genre is all about.
So, for genres that really concentrate on the details of combat, its OK to have more detail. Make it optional in the main rules, though.
Which leads me to the general position that Close Combat with weapon styles is just about OK, and some addition of extra detail (additive sub-abilities, martial arts mechanics discussed at length in other forums, etc), plus weapon ranks and maybe some special situational rules. But set the game up so if your game isn't much about combat, you can ignore it all.
Cheers David
Powered by hypermail