Penalties to Parry due to Bad Footing And Bad Light

[Darakai]

Hello, trying for the third time to post this, problems with internet and a missclick messed up the first 2 atempts.

So, checking for the bonuses and penalties to maneuvers i found that.

Attacks can be penalized up to -10 due from no light.
and
Bad footing can impose aditional -2.

Now, if trying to hit an adult will get such an disadvantage, i imagine that trying to interpose a thin blade coming your way in a manner that avoids any damage to you would be even harder.

In the end of the Basic i found that the GM could apply -1 to parry due to bad footing, but i can't find anything due to bad light. I found something about defending while you can't see the enemy, -4 to dodge, and if you are sucessfull in a hear-2 roll you can parry or block also at -4.

My questioning is, WHY?

ok, i get it that parrying would not rely as much on yout footwork as attacking does, i watched some HEMA videos and i see that except when riposting or counterattacking the one who parries doesn't need to move, while the attacked almost always does, but, why no penalties due to poor light? is this just so parrying doesn't become useless in any low light circunstance? i think, if parrying is usually around 10 if u get a -3 this would be 7 or less and that is abysmal. Other than balancing issues, is there any reason parry should not be affected by bad light?

And again, i think it is easier to wave a big sword in an arc while in total darkness than it is to parry such a blow while also in total darkness. SO... again, why such heavy penalties to attacks while defenses get it easy

[Gollum]

Defense scores are based on the Skill score divided by 2. So, usually, a penalty to the attack roll is halved if it does apply to a defense roll*.

For bad light, or bad footing, I would use that rule. A -10 for sudden total darkness plus -2 for bad footing, that is a -12 for the attack, would then become a -6 for a parry.

But I can be wrong here. Maybe the authors didn't say anything because they consider that the penalties have to be applied fully. After all, as a karateka, I know that parrying is far much harder than attacking.

_____

* See how Deceptive attacks works for instance.

[Gnome]

I think these rules don't exist for realism but rather to increase survivability. Since defenses are generally weak, the game's creators were hesitant to further penalize defenses too often. Not a very good reason (since presumably the rule applies equally to PCs and NPCs), but it's the best I've come up with. I would tend to agree with you that, if anything, lighting should have a greater detrimental effect on defenses than attacks, or at least an equal effect (by which I mean equal to 1/2, since defenses are roughly twice as expensive to raise as attacks).

[Anthony]

Officially, defenses are not penalized due to lighting. Realistically, to hit a person in bad light requires tracking a person-sized object, while defending requires tracking a weapon-sized object, so it should probably be worse for defense than for attack (just an equal penalty to both rolls accomplishes that).

[Donny Brook]

I have played a lot of street hockey as a goalie. The ability to see shots coming declines VERY sharply as twilight comes on.

[afnord]

It's perfectly reasonable to give -1 penalty to defense because of bad footing. You can see for example that kneeling gives -2 to attack and defense.

You get NO defense in total darkness (-10) or against attacks you can't see coming.

Unseen attacks are at -4 to defense, you know of the attack but can't see where it's coming from

Darkness penalties modify your skill so it's having the defense penalty at 1/2 the darkness penalty is in line with -10= no defense and unseen attack is then -8 or -9 divided by 2 and gives you -4.

[Gollum]

Though I do agree with what have been said above about what would or wouldn't be realistic, I believe that Afnord's post is the best answer. It perfectly summarizes what the rules say.

[Gnome]

Originally Posted by afnord

Darkness penalties modify your skill so it's having the defense penalty at 1/2 the darkness penalty is in line with -10= no defense and unseen attack is then -8 or -9 divided by 2 and gives you -4.

This would be a reasonable house rule, but is not in fact RAW. B547-549 summarizes combat modifiers and makes clear that visibility affects attack but not defense.

[Gollum]

Actually, you are right. I made a research in the whole Basic Set,Campaigns* and there is not the least word about visibility in defenses - while there is a lot for attacks, for melee combat as well as range combat (and for vehicle handling too).
____

*CTRL+f (search for) "visibility" in the PDF.

[Ulzgoroth]

With the exception, of course, of entirely unseen attackers.