Yeah, I'm the designer, but given the OP's question, I'm going to second my own game, Fight! (Divine Madness Press).

If you want tactically-rich martial arts combat with meaningful choices and plenty of bolt-ons for added complexity, it does the job and does it well.

I really should mention Thrash! here as well, one fan's homebrew fighting game based on streetfighter/Mortal Kombat/Soul Calibur et al. fighting videogames the only analogy for which I can come up with is a WW Streetfighter Storytelling Game Heartbreaker, in that it starts with a similar premise, and then goes to bloody town with it. I love it for its utter excess. Im not sure I'd ever play it, but it's hell of a lot of fun to read, and was probably a blast to write.

If GURPS' one-second turns don't provide the time precision you need, Phoenix Command's hand-to-hand combat module has rules for determining exactly how long it takes for character A to saw through each of character B's limbs with a chainsaw, by means of highly-authoritative tables, and more tables, and more tables.

I have this game sitting on my shelf, Metal, Magic and Lore.  One of those almost unknown games. It has a very detailed section on combat and armor.  Fantasy game that goes for the more realistic bent (combat, travel, economy and so forth).  One day I'm going to try and run a few combats- I've read that it's good for pit fighting type of games.

Anyway, here's some pics of it:

Armor


Helmets


Has the kind of orcs I love


detailed hit locations


and not even your steeds or birds are safe....

That hit location figure looks just like the one from a pirate rpg that was published ~25 years ago. Like, JUST like it. I'll have to go dig up my original copy to remind myself of the name and other details.

Quote from: RunningLaser;827690I have this game sitting on my shelf, Metal, Magic and Lore.  One of those almost unknown games. It has a very detailed section on combat and armor.  Fantasy game that goes for the more realistic bent (combat, travel, economy and so forth).

Nice pictures, but it looks like a very complicated system!

It's really difficult to make a system that works properly, and the more complexity you add the more difficult it becomes. I find that it usually just slows down the game and just makes it harder for you to foresee the flaws in the system there inevitably are. In the end it becomes far too much like accountancy...

Quote from: JoeNuttall;827747...
It's really difficult to make a system that works properly, and the more complexity you add the more difficult it becomes. I find that it usually just slows down the game and just makes it harder for you to foresee the flaws in the system there inevitably are. In the end it becomes far too much like accountancy...

Yes, usually. Though not always.

Matching complexity level to players' tastes and rules mastery is up to the GM and players.

Rolemaster is actually really cool when you find a way to quickly look up the tables. I also felt the need to house rule quite bit so maybe this one doesn't count. Still, we had a lot of fun with it.

For more by-the-book rules I would go with Stormbringer 5th ed. It gives you some pretty brutal battles while being much simpler than RM. it actually works well with Conan-type games.

Quote from: Matt;826600Obviously the answer is Palladium.

I imagine you were jesting here, but in fact Palladium's combat system is really great, if you get used to running it.

i enjoyed at various times unknown armies (flip-flops, cherries, double whammy...), burning wheel, wfrp 1e & 2e, brp & stormbringer, ad&d 2e (including combat and tactics), cyberpunk 2020 (fun fumbles)...

i hate with a passion pathfinder and 3.5.

currently my fav system is dungeon crawl classics (mighty deeds, luck, crit tables).

Quote from: TristramEvans;826795The same reason McDonalds has the best burgers

Only that quality isn't the issue here. There's no Cordon Bleu of RPG mechanics to compare to a McDonald's of RPG mechanics.  Since taste is subjective, the system with the best network-externalities is the one with the advantage.  For any given individual, D&D's combat system might not be the 'best', but as a general concept, it is the best because you are vastly more likely to find someone who will be familiar and comfortable with how D&D handles combat than how just about any other RPG does it.

Quote from: RPGPundit;828621Only that quality isn't the issue here. There's no Cordon Bleu of RPG mechanics to compare to a McDonald's of RPG mechanics.  Since taste is subjective, the system with the best network-externalities is the one with the advantage.  For any given individual, D&D's combat system might not be the 'best', but as a general concept, it is the best because you are vastly more likely to find someone who will be familiar and comfortable with how D&D handles combat than how just about any other RPG does it.

Taste is subjective with burgers (or music, movies, whatever) as well. A lot of people love McDonald's hamburgers. Since taste is subjective, the restaurant with the best network-externalities is the one with the advantage. For any given individual, McDonald's burgers might not be the 'best', but as a general concept, they are the best because you are vastly more likely to find someone who is familiar and comfortable with McDonald's menu, than with just about any other restaurant (especially if picky kids are involved).

Basically, unless tastes in food are more objective in some sense than tastes in RPG Combat systems, it seems that Tristam's comment is still on point, doesn't it? That seems like a difficult argument to make.

I do think that combat systems in RPGs can be of poor quality. For example, a system with a high handling time that produces nonsensical results that do not jive with the fiction and fluff the game claims it is built to emulate or support. I think you can ask "What do you want to do, combat system?" and then judge its quality based upon how well it does what it (its creator(s)) claimed. If you aren't too concerned about all of that and just need a system to handle your combat reasonably enough so you can move on to other parts of the game, or you are just hungry and need something to fill your belly, the most widely available option is "good enough".

Please stop feeding the troll in this thread.

Mine's another vote for RuneQuest 6. Combat in the system is bloody, visceral, entertaining as hell, and surprisingly swift. One of the great things about it is that instead of just giving you more bonuses to hit as you advance, I've found that there's a sort of tactical player skill element. As players get to know the Special Effects better, they actually turn into better fighters. After a few combats, the tactical side of things really opens up, and certain players who are really into it can become even more dangerous ...
But what's great is that you don't NEED to know them inside out either. The system is fun even without them, or as you're getting to grips with them.

In my most recent campaign we had swashbuckling swords & sorcery Lost World action, fighting carnivorous plants and cultists and tribesmen, giant apes, wyvern hunters, ghouls, and an epic battle against an allosaur. Each combat was different in feel, depending on the situation and tactics used by different foes. The allosaur was a particularly glorious victory, and it prompted the characters to spend a whole evening carving trophies off the body and performing bloody ceremonies to shark gods to commemorate their victory.

I really think that this wouldn't have felt like such a gripping cinematic battle in any other system ...

Quote from: RPGPundit;828586I imagine you were jesting here, but in fact Palladium's combat system is really great, if you get used to running it.

No, I am utterly serious.  It's one of few game systems where it matters what the defender does and actually has give and take and tactics instead of just "I roll to see if I hit you, it doesn't matter what you do."