extending/retracting swords quickly in combat as surprises

[Plane]

A couple examples would be:

1) a character who uses this in the Bleach manga/anime (the user controls ice and lengthens/shortens their ice blade on the fly, either to repair sword or give different tactics)

2) a couple characters in Star Wars who sometimes will shorten their blade when the tip is parried (or when the tip parries) to avoid a followup Beat by their opponent, or to make it harder to parry an attack

To get this kind of ice sword or Trakata effect I figure there's a couple related ideas:

A) Fast-Draw (I think "Force Swords" actually use this TWICE: once to quickly remove the handle from your belt, second to actually ignite the button?)

B) Grip Mastery (like MA50 for Katanas)

It seems like it would be different though since we're talking about 1-handed swords where your hand position on handle does not change: instead you use either a button or a mystical ability to change the length.

That might be quicker or slower than changing hand grip on a long handle (as katana allows) depending on how responsive the button/ability: I believe you can do this with whips by uncoiling but it's slow.

Even when you do it quickly as free actions you're physically doing a thing people can observe and react to, so "just a button push" or "magically will my sword to change" even if you knew about it (not a TOTAL surprise) would be hard to perceive...

Would that be like "Low Signature" somehow? Except your Innate Attack (Melee Attack) would not be hard to perceive 100% of the time, instead it's just temporarily hard to perceive only while engaging in length changes.

That's the part I'd struggle with: what kind of discount would you apply to Low Signature enhancement when it comes with that kind of requirement?

Not necessarily "takes extra time" since people could do rapid length-changes, but a length-change is still a mechanical thing and you're limited to 1 free action per turn so you would be limited to your new Reach for the remainder of your maneuver in exchange for getting the Low Sig penefit to penalize their defenses.

Another approach to Low Signature might be "Obscure" w/ limitations that it not only applies just applies when using your weapon, but when using it in this particular way.

A related idea to that might be someone who can draw a sword, slash a foe, then scabbard their sword so quickly that others might not even notice a weapon was used.

Deceptive Attack could be related but this might be something utilizing something other than DX penalties.

[Black Leviathan]

There are very few situations where it's not advantageous for you to have a longer blade. Ultimately the sword arms-race was getting the longest blade possible without exceeding your ability to control it. So if you had a sword who's blade extended a foot when you lunged it would be a pretty great advantage in a fight. Just think of how often you've allowed yourself an all-out attack because you were confident the only enemy in reach would be dead. And now someone has a blade just long enough to step and attack you.

The other benefit, and this is pretty extreme and marginal is if you could shrink your blade to fight in close with someone. Marginal because if you're a sword fighter with someone humping your leg you've already left any place you can be successful. And extreme because landing a blow with a tiny sword does much less for you than managing to disengage and take a full-weight swing of a regular sword. You'd have to basically train in a technique of recklessly charging into a fighter's personal space and shrinking your blade for a quick iffy shiv before expanding the sword to defend yourself.

[Varyon]

A weapon that suddenly extends when you strike with it - or with which you can pull off something like Trakata* - is grounds for causing a defense penalty for the defender. Doing this in combat is typically going to be a bit tricky, so I'd suggest it's appropriate to simply use this as justification for a Technique (designed using the system in Martial Arts) that gives a hefty penalty to various defenses (an extending weapon can easily penalize all defenses, by letting you attack from further away than anticipated, although perhaps Dodge would be the most affected; meanwhile, Trakata won't help much against Block or Dodge, so make it Parry only). Reliance on using a specific weapon design, reliance on spacing (need to strike at Reach 2, say, so that you can surprise your foe with your Reach 1 weapon suddenly extending), and the foe being less likely to fall for the trick in the future could all count as drawbacks, making the Technique less expensive to learn. Alternatively, the GM could just give something more akin to a percent discount - in my Limit Breakers thread, I had a Hard Technique, Shadow Strike, that the Limit Breakers could learn for use with their Breaker Weapons, but only in the instantly-summonable Shadow Form (which is pretty weak - halved injury, and the injury both heals extremely quickly and is highly unlikely to kill). It was akin to Trakata, and I opted to have it be -4 to hit for -4 to the target's defense; this works out to half price, on account of it only being usable with a single ability in its weakened form. It's the same difficulty for characters who can fully summon their weapons instantly as well, but that's because I markedly overcharged for that particular Enhancement (it costs [5], but should probably only cost [1]).

*Trakata is a lightsaber technique (originally fanmade, then was made canon, and now I think is in limbo on if it's canon or Legends material), but any weapon that can change size could pull it off. In the original version, you turn off your lightsaber just as the foe attempts to Parry, then turn it back on as soon as you go past his guard - this essentially lets you strike through the foe's weapon as though it weren't even there. A shape-changing weapon could instead go from greatsword to dagger and back to greatsword to get around the target's defense.

[Plane]

Originally Posted by Black Leviathan

There are very few situations where it's not advantageous for you to have a longer blade. Ultimately the sword arms-race was getting the longest blade possible without exceeding your ability to control it. So if you had a sword who's blade extended a foot when you lunged it would be a pretty great advantage in a fight. Just think of how often you've allowed yourself an all-out attack because you were confident the only enemy in reach would be dead. And now someone has a blade just long enough to step and attack you.

Another aspect might be "ha! I've entered close combat with my foe and his clumsy reach 2 sword, he can only attack me with wrapshots at -8 to hit and he's -4 to parry me, so I can do telegraphed All-Out attacks and he'll just miss me and fail to defend!

But then suddenly they just shorten their sword AS YOU ATTACK (no penalty to parry you) or shorten their sword AS THEY ATTACK.

I guess the latter is already possible w/ grip mastery but should still be more obvious in some way. The former seems like some kind of "power dodge" (using 'free action' ability on opponent's turn instead of yours) so maybe you could borrow borrow dodge rules from Powers, but you'd need to declare you're doing the Reach-adjust before you actually roll the parry: you can't roll and fail the parry by taking reach penalties and THEN decide to shorten it to win retroactively.

In fact: you should probably have to declare it after the attack is declared but before it is rolled: you're reacting to the attack, not knowing the attack hits. Waiting until the hit is rolled is a pure power dodge (can't do any other defense) while doing it prior to the hit avoids that problem of "can't do two defenses".

Originally Posted by Black Leviathan

The other benefit, and this is pretty extreme and marginal is if you could shrink your blade to fight in close with someone.

That too (shrink sword into a knife to knife another sword fighter) but I also like the idea of shrinking your sword to a knife to surprise the arrogant knife guy who thinks he's won because you can't create space (your back is to a wall, he's grappled you, he's stepping after he attacks to cancel out your retreat) and takes risks relying on you to be penalized for close-range attacks/defenses (MA) or inability to attack/defend at all (Basic)

Aside from that though, there should probably just be some inherent confusion aspect: there's no penalty to defend against a -4 wrap shot from a reach 1 weapon used in Close Combat like there would be a -2 to defend against a deceptive attack (even if you define it as using a wrap shot) but I think if you're EXPECTING clumsy wrap shots and suddenly you're getting efficient thrusts from a shorter weapon, that's going to throw someone off somehow.

Basically the more attack options someone has, the harder it should be to predict them. That's why you get +1 to defend against a Combination someone's used against you twice, or from a Style you're familiar with.

Originally Posted by Black Leviathan

Marginal because if you're a sword fighter with someone humping your leg you've already left any place you can be successful. And extreme because landing a blow with a tiny sword does much less for you than managing to disengage and take a full-weight swing of a regular sword.

For some attacks the size of sword might not matter, could be a "weightless" sword for example.

Originally Posted by Black Leviathan

You'd have to basically train in a technique of recklessly charging into a fighter's personal space and shrinking your blade for a quick iffy shiv before expanding the sword to defend yourself.

Another issue (probably relating to feints) is you could get the enemy to react (waste a defense is usually how that defense penalty gets interpreted, even though they technically don't) by trying to parry your attack against their weapon, only for you to shorten your blade and NOT hit their weapon, and then either close in and hit with the short weapon, or stay distant and just extend the weapon to do a followup attack.

It seems like it should give added feinting options (maybe as a bonus to the technique?) since you could make "I can totally parry this, I'm confident I'm parrying this" attacks, but rather than jerking the attack back or redirecting it, you're continuing your momentum and just changing the implement Reach.

[RedMattis]

If it is a magical piece of equipment I'd just write up the attacks of the weapon at full-range and short-range, similar to how many other weapons have varying reaches for different attacks (swing vs thrust usually). In addition to that I'd give a +1 or +2 bonus to the first feint against an enemy who has not seen that feature of your weapon, if it is appropriate in the setting.

[Varyon]

Originally Posted by Plane

Another aspect might be "ha! I've entered close combat with my foe and his clumsy reach 2 sword, he can only attack me with wrapshots at -8 to hit and he's -4 to parry me, so I can do telegraphed All-Out attacks and he'll just miss me and fail to defend!

Just for reference, even if the character has nowhere to go (which would let him potentially Retreat to get back to Reach 1, then Step on his turn to get back to Reach 2, leaving you wide open) and no special abilities of the sort being discussed, this still has a good chance of getting you killed - while the character's Parry is likely better than his Dodge, a Feverish Defense Dodge (at a total +4) is likely to avoid your hit, and now you're wide open for either a kick to the Groin or a pommel strike to the Skull, both of which can be All Out and Telegraphed (for net Brawling+3 for the first, Brawling+1 for the second, and no defense allowed on your part). Honestly, unless you need the battle to end right this second, All Out is almost never a good idea if the foe has a chance to defend, and stacking it with Telegraphic means they're more likely to succeed on that defense.

Originally Posted by Plane

I guess the latter is already possible w/ grip mastery but should still be more obvious in some way. The former seems like some kind of "power dodge" (using 'free action' ability on opponent's turn instead of yours) so maybe you could borrow borrow dodge rules from Powers, but you'd need to declare you're doing the Reach-adjust before you actually roll the parry: you can't roll and fail the parry by taking reach penalties and THEN decide to shorten it to win retroactively.

If you twist things enough, a case can be made that acting on an opponent's turn is possible, but calls for a roll at 3+skill/2 (that is, a Parry is a case of "attacking" on the opponent's turn). Changing Reach normally doesn't require a roll; in many cases it's not inappropriate to think of "no roll required" as "roll at +4" (routine use), so provided you can change Reach as a free action, rolling at 5+skill/2 (+4 becomes +2 due to the skill halving effect) to do so may not be inappropriate; this means the player can essentially opt to make a Parry roll at +2, followed by a Parry roll modified for the new reach. I'd say failure at the first outright invalidates the ability to attempt the second, although I could see cause to instead just have it make the second Parry be at an additional -2 (and still the old Reach).

Do note this involves stretching and bending the existing rules in a manner not unlike making a pretzel, so is very much not RAW, but probably isn't broken.

Originally Posted by Plane

In fact: you should probably have to declare it after the attack is declared but before it is rolled: you're reacting to the attack, not knowing the attack hits. Waiting until the hit is rolled is a pure power dodge (can't do any other defense) while doing it prior to the hit avoids that problem of "can't do two defenses".

I'd say let the player wait until he knows if the attack hits before declaring - after all, you don't need to declare what defense you're using, or if you're defending at all, until after a hit is rolled. This isn't a case of two defenses, because simply shortening your weapon's Reach won't invalidate the foe's attack - it just gives you a better chance of pulling off your own Parry. It's more comparable to an Acrobatic Defense than a Double Defense.

[Plane]

Originally Posted by RedMattis

If it is a magical piece of equipment I'd just write up the attacks of the weapon at full-range and short-range, similar to how many other weapons have varying reaches for different attacks (swing vs thrust usually). In addition to that I'd give a +1 or +2 bonus to the first feint against an enemy who has not seen that feature of your weapon, if it is appropriate in the setting.

It's not so much the different stats (that's straightforward damage/reach) but the benefits of fast transition.

There's definietly a surprise advantage for first time use, but even if you know the capability there should be benefits to having that quick-transition option in combat.

You can potentially perceive "he's held up his sword to parry mine, I can deactivate my Force Sword and then re-activate it BEHIND his blade and hit him" maybe as some kind of enhanced Deceptive Attack or Feint, or as a means of escaping Armed Grappling vs Weapons.

Originally Posted by Varyon

this still has a good chance of getting you killed - while the character's Parry is likely better than his Dodge, a Feverish Defense Dodge (at a total +4) is likely to avoid your hit

true, a little better if they're encumbered (dodge penalty) or fatigued (dodge penalty) though

Originally Posted by Varyon

now you're wide open for either a kick to the Groin or a pommel strike to the Skull, both of which can be All Out and Telegraphed (for net Brawling+3 for the first, Brawling+1 for the second, and no defense allowed on your part).

Armor is definitely a plus here. But since a knife-wielder probably isn't wearing heavy armor, I guess he'd probably at worse choose Committed Attack instead of All-Out Attack, so that he can still do a dodge against counterattacks like these.

Kicks are a risky plan in case you fall down though, and I don't know if a lot of sword fighters necessarily train kicks.

I guess due to Brawling aiding Headbutts and Pummeling, sword fighters who train in these useful CC scrap skills also are always expert kickers/biters... and brawl kicks don't even take encumbrance penalties like karate ones!

It kinda strains belief (can be hard to keep balance on kicks) so I'm wondering if there's ways we could tweak brawling to encourage fewer "I casually high-kick my foe in the chest" situations for platemail warriors, and if they do kick, make it more realistic stuff like stamp kicks (-3) to the lower body (+1) like the foot (-4) or leg (-2) which is somehow harder to do than a thrust kick to the chest (-2)

IMO it'd be easier to stamp-kick someone's shin than their thigh (can matter w/ partial limb armor) due to height, so one idea is to make kicks an ascending -1 per "ascending hit locations" type thing: -0 for foot (it's hard enough), -1 shin, -2 knee, -3 thigh (highest possible target for Stamp Kick).

You could keep going for normal kicks' full options (-4 groin/pelvis -5 chest/shoulder -6 neck -7 face -8 skull) making high kicks prohibitively hard unless the foe has lowered their posture or is a lower SM.

Knees could be easier (subtract 2 from all penalties: you're -0 to knee your opponent in the knee, but also apply a -1 as usual to knee the shin and a -2 to knee the foot of a standing foe.

Exceptions could be made when foes lift feet off ground (temporarily higher: harder to target) and difficulty of targeting the elbow/forearm/hand would depend on what foe is doing: if hands are at side you don't need to kick as high as if they're holding a magic wand overhead.

Originally Posted by Varyon

If you twist things enough, a case can be made that acting on an opponent's turn is possible, but calls for a roll at 3+skill/2 (that is, a Parry is a case of "attacking" on the opponent's turn).

Basically yeah, that's sort of what Power Dodge does too, albeit with non-attack 'free action' abilities so I guess it's more like "readying on an opponent's turn".

In fact: you can ALWAYS act on an opponent's turn w/ a Power Dodge with a "free action" ability, the roll just determines if your reaction takes effect before or after his attack.

IE if I'm turning Insubstantial w/ Requires IQ roll:
if I fail my power dodge, I would suffer shock on my IQ roll but still attempt going insubstantial.
if I succeeded: I make my IQ roll w/o any shock penalties and have higher chance of going insubstantial and avoiding the attack

Originally Posted by Varyon

Changing Reach normally doesn't require a roll; in many cases it's not inappropriate to think of "no roll required" as "roll at +4" (routine use)

I'd even be okay with Readies being DX rolls with max TDM of +10 which you normally ignore due to it reaching skill 15. Just so long as there is actually an underlying skill which you could use in rare situations of massive penalties.

That seems to be how Vision rolls in combat are treated, the +10 for plain sight is assumed to get you to 15 so you don't bother with them. I guess technically people with Per under 5 should be doing them though, or a wider group if fighting in the dark, like to see where people are moving, if someone is approaching your ally to backstab them, etc.

To make vision even more handwaive you might allow "Telegraphic Glimpse" where you're an extra +4 to the +10 (so even Per 1 guys don't need to roll in perfect lighting) but you're obviously gawking so people are +2 to defend against your vision (ie dodge your gaze, if they're watching where you're looking) and maybe something similar for aiming.

Originally Posted by Varyon

I'd say let the player wait until he knows if the attack hits before declaring - after all, you don't need to declare what defense you're using, or if you're defending at all, until after a hit is rolled.

You could allow either option: but if you wait until after the roll you only get ONE defense, whereas if you declare prior to the roll I'd allow unlimited defense attempts, on the caveat that you could end up wasting them or crit-failing and hurting yourself.

For repeating the same defense (ie "I'm rolling ten dodges against this punch I don't know that's gonna hit me") maybe you not only can't know if the attack is going to hit: but also you don't know if your early defenses will work or not? You'd be committed to doing ALL of them regardless of whether the first one succeeds and invalidates the need for the later ones.

This seems like a self-policing thing if you're using the cumulative -1 for dodges (and even if you aren't) because in exchange for better defenses you're heightening chances that you'll crit fail and fall down. It'd be especially bad if Last Gasp charges of 1 AP per dodge also applied.

Originally Posted by Varyon

This isn't a case of two defenses,
because simply shortening your weapon's Reach won't invalidate the foe's attack
- it just gives you a better chance of pulling off your own Parry.
It's more comparable to an Acrobatic Defense than a Double Defense.

I guess you can wait until knowing if attack hits before choosing if you're going to do an acrobatic dodge, though it feels like there should be a benefit to choosing to commit to acrobatics prior to knowing if the attack's gonna hit.

Something like "at free action at start of turn, choose if you're moving acrobatically in general"

Maybe benefit there is it could apply to ALL dodges instead of just one?

[Varyon]

Originally Posted by Plane

You can potentially perceive "he's held up his sword to parry mine, I can deactivate my Force Sword and then re-activate it BEHIND his blade and hit him" maybe as some kind of enhanced Deceptive Attack or Feint, or as a means of escaping Armed Grappling vs Weapons.

Doing all that during a fight is difficult, meaning a penalty to your attack roll is appropriate. This is something that could probably be trained, however, making it eligible for the penalty to be bought off with a Technique. That is, what I said above - this is grounds for a Technique penalizing the target's defense.

Originally Posted by Plane

Kicks are a risky plan in case you fall down though, and I don't know if a lot of sword fighters necessarily train kicks.

With Brawling 10 and no Kick Technique, an All Out (Determined) Telegraphic Attack kick is at skill 16. Targeting the Groin reduces this to 13, but that's still pretty good - and most fighters in this sort of campaign probably have Brawling above 10.

Originally Posted by Plane

You could allow either option: but if you wait until after the roll you only get ONE defense, whereas if you declare prior to the roll I'd allow unlimited defense attempts, on the caveat that you could end up wasting them or crit-failing and hurting yourself.

That's a pretty significant departure from RAW. It might be somewhat self-policing, but honestly I'd expect - in a one-on-one fight - for it to take even longer for someone to land a hit, because everyone will declare taking two Parries (one with each hand) followed by a Dodge or two, and that's pretty hard to get past. Also, it has zero bearing on reality. If you want to give a bonus to predeclaring your defense, that's fine, but I'd argue for it to be more like a +1 to defense than the sort of mess you're proposing.

[Plane]

Originally Posted by Varyon

I'd expect - in a one-on-one fight - for it to take even longer for someone to land a hit, because everyone will declare taking two Parries (one with each hand)

Another idea might be to treat it like Dual-Weapon Attack: -4 to skill but instead of -4 to two attacks it's -2 to two parries.

You could offset that with the +2 for All-Out Defense:Determined Parry which is what we could view AOD Double Parry as being.

This might be cumulative (as with Two Handed Combinations) like -8 to skill for 3 attacks with different hands (-4 to all three parries) or -12 for four hands (-6 to four parries).

It's a little bit more flexible for the "lots of arms" guys than just "cross parry" which assumes the best you can do is add an extra hand for +1 and that they need to be smushed together and suffer same roll / same result.