This system is similar to the GURPS advanced combat system, but streamlined for ease of play. I found it easy to understand - more so than GURPS. Beginners will take to it quickly. One aspect of the system I like is that you don't have to keep track of the weight of a character's gear to determine encumbrance. Instead, there are limits on the number of weapons and other items that can be carried. And some items have a minimum strength requirement, with coordination penalties for characters who are too weak.
This system does not offer as wide a range of tactical options as the GURPS system it emulates, however. There are no equivalents to All-Out Defense or Feint under these rules. And you can not build a GURPS-style martial artist. There are no equivalents to the martial arts styles and maneuvers rules in this system.
This was a let down for me. I like realism, and was drawn to GURPS for that reason. But GURPS is a clunky, outdated system. If Compact Combat allowed me to build a detailed martial artist character, and play out combats in which the choice of fighting style affected the tactical options available, then I would likely become an instant fan. But it doesn't. I think this is a serious drawback.
Also, the designers should have done more research. Some of the rules are not realistic. For instance, the Coordination penalty for plate armor is greater than that of mail (a.k.a. chain armor), which is nonsense. (The weight of plate is much better distributed over the body, so, assuming it fits well, it is easier to move around in than mail.) They claim that a buckler can be used while strapped to one's forearm. (Bucklers were grasped by handles, and didn't have straps.) The "Shield Smash" action should be broken down into two actions. (You can club an opponent with a shield, or shove him with it, but not both at the same time.) And these rules allow most hand weapons to be used to either attack or parry in a round, but not both. (Realistically this limitation should apply only to unbalanced weapons like maces.)
These little glitches aren't a serious problem, however. Anyone who knows enough about the subject to notice them can easily come up with house rules to fix them.
(While I'm on the subject, I noticed that the authors don't even seem to know what a longsword is. They seem to think the term is synonymous with cut-and-thrust sword, or some similar lightweight one-handed sword. If they had looked it up, they would know that a longsword is a "hand-and-a-half" sword, the Western equivalent of the katana. This is just a pet peeve, not a real problem with the game, but it is a further indicator of the authors' lack of seriousness about this project.)
Overall, I think this is a very playable system that many people will enjoy. But if you are a hardcore realist, then this will be a disappointment. The system is incomplete. It needs an optional set of detailed, advanced rules for serious players. Until it gets that it cannot be considered a "supertactical" game, as claimed.
|