Updating and expanding the 3e's Bodice Cutting technique

[jbalsle]

Originally Posted by Molokh

Hope you'll know how to handle it. ;)

Okay, so the consensus seems like -4 for 'generic' tricks (much like Initial Carving), at an extra -6 for actually cutting the fabric of clothes...

How possible is it to perform tearing attacks with an epée or smallsword (or other imp-only weapon)? How about using a whip (yes!, she does have a whip...)?

Another issue is what happens if said clothing has a DR of some sort (magic or leather or whatever). How should damage issues be handled?

Thanks!

Note to self. If any character I play ever encounters her, make sure he's wearing the body armor those Starfleet Marines in Star Trek 6 were wearing, preferably with a helmet and faceplate. Anyway...

How would I handle these situations? First, I'd give any fastener 1HP, and an HT ranging from 6 to 8 for most things, up to 10 to 12 for really tough fasteners. DR would likely not apply unless the armor or clothing was enchanted, in which case, DR would equal the armor's base DR, or the fasteners were hardened against this sort of attack (Say, by learning that there is this chick with a habit of de-clothing her opponents on the battlefield just for cheap thrills. "I'm sorry...yes, I'd not mind taking her to bed, but a man's gotta keep his dignity!")

For an impaling only weapon, I would derive the armor's swing damage from the wielders, subtract 1 point per die due to the inappropriate use, and make that cutting. A rapier may be a better weapon for this ... err, lady. The whip would function as normal, assuming she was a good shot with it.


Definitely an ... unusual concept for a character. Dare I ask...what kinda clothing does _she_ fight in?

[Anthony]

How difficult I would make this roll really depends on the style of the game. Realistically, tricks like this are really hard. However, they're also almost totally useless, so I'd probably let someone have a Perk that they can do things like that.

[vicky_molokh]

Originally Posted by jbalsle

Definitely an ... unusual concept for a character. Dare I ask...what kinda clothing does _she_ fight in?

DR1 autumn Leather jacket, DR1 leather pants. For some reason her PC wears DR2 leather armor sleeves and DR2 leather shinguards, despite having DR1 on the torso.

[jbalsle]

Originally Posted by Molokh

DR1 autumn Leather jacket, DR1 leather pants. For some reason her PC wears DR2 leather armor sleeves and DR2 leather shinguards, despite having DR1 on the torso.

Ah. Sexy, but not over-doing it. Anyway...I meant to say 'crushing' instead of cutting with a swung epee or similar weapon attack. Rapiers are better because they do cutting AND don't get tagged with my hacked -1dmg/die rule. ;)

Hopefully that'll help with the lady's little game. :) Give her a -4 for targetted location, and as men start getting wise to her as her reputation grows, slowly start increasing DR to the point where it's not worth her doing so, and maybe have a man decide to return the favor, see what kinda frilly underwear she's wearing under that DR1 leather jacket and pants. :P

[vicky_molokh]

Originally Posted by jbalsle

Ah. Sexy, but not over-doing it. Anyway...I meant to say 'crushing' instead of cutting with a swung epee or similar weapon attack. Rapiers are better because they do cutting AND don't get tagged with my hacked -1dmg/die rule. ;)

Hopefully that'll help with the lady's little game. :) Give her a -4 for targetted location, and as men start getting wise to her as her reputation grows, slowly start increasing DR to the point where it's not worth her doing so, and maybe have a man decide to return the favor, see what kinda frilly underwear she's wearing under that DR1 leather jacket and pants. :P

I don't think it's reach the point of being a Reputation... besides, mostly my campaign is more serious than that. But with 1½ ecchi fans in the party... well, who knows. Anyway, I wonder where this -4 number comes from: it's slightly easier than the head to-hit modifier (-5).

[David Johnston]

Originally Posted by Molokh

I don't think it's reach the point of being a Reputation... besides, mostly my campaign is more serious than that. But with 1½ ecchi fans in the party... well, who knows. Anyway, I wonder where this -4 number comes from: it's slightly easier than the head to-hit modifier (-5).

It comes from things that look cool without being actually, y'know, all that useful, being easier in "cinematic" games. Zorro may have denuded a woman or carved his initials, but when did he ever stab someone in the head? If you aren't doing cinematic, then it should be harder.

[jbalsle]

Originally Posted by Molokh

I don't think it's reach the point of being a Reputation... besides, mostly my campaign is more serious than that. But with 1½ ecchi fans in the party... well, who knows. Anyway, I wonder where this -4 number comes from: it's slightly easier than the head to-hit modifier (-5).

One and...a half ecchi fans? oO Err, someone been playing with knives again? Darn....anyway, it came from the suggestion of -4 to -6. Being a swashbuckling game, I'd expect it to be cinematic enough to avoid the realistic issues of hitting something harder to hit than the head. Besides, it's not _ALL_ that useful. To take full advantage of this in a realistic situation, she'd have to slice off several fasteners to deprive a person of his or her armor or clothing, and if your game is serious, she'll have other things to worry about -- namingly not getting impaled by the other guy's blade. But hey, if the game is swashbuckling enough, four to six displays of skill and finesse resulting in a dashing young man suddenly fencing her shirtless may well be the display needed to end the scene with her swooping away to victory instead of (the rather realistic result of) bloodshed...

[benz72]

another explanation for the seemingly small -4 penalty could be a trade off of acuracy vs damage
you are concentrating on placement, not power and thus negate some of the penalty (for game balance I'd forbid these strikes from doing any actual damage to the target, clothing OK, meat NO)

[Michael Hopcroft]

Originally Posted by benz72

another explanation for the seemingly small -4 penalty could be a trade off of acuracy vs damage
you are concentrating on placement, not power and thus negate some of the penalty (for game balance I'd forbid these strikes from doing any actual damage to the target, clothing OK, meat NO)

I think the idea is to not harm the recipient of the "attack", just to render her less clothed than she was previously.

And I can see some campaign types where this is practically a courtship ritual, and whether proceeding go any further depends on how resentful the victim is of the intrusion.

[vicky_molokh]

Originally Posted by jbalsle

One and...a half ecchi fans? oO Err, someone been playing with knives again?

Well, about 50% per person for three out of four (including me as a GM).

Originally Posted by jbalsle

Darn....anyway, it came from the suggestion of -4 to -6. Being a swashbuckling game, I'd expect it to be cinematic enough to avoid the realistic issues of hitting something harder to hit than the head. Besides, it's not _ALL_ that useful. To take full advantage of this in a realistic situation, she'd have to slice off several fasteners to deprive a person of his or her armor or clothing, and if your game is serious, she'll have other things to worry about -- namingly not getting impaled by the other guy's blade.

Well, this immediately increases the importance of such a detail as the number of fasteners on an armor or clothing item.

Originally Posted by jbalsle

But hey, if the game is swashbuckling enough, four to six displays of skill and finesse resulting in a dashing young man suddenly fencing her shirtless may well be the display needed to end the scene with her swooping away to victory instead of (the rather realistic result of) bloodshed...

Well, the rules of the arena were 'until unconsciousness or surrender'. In fact, doing that trick would probably reduce her SC for Lecherousness (back in 3e's MA, you could get skill penalties for that!).