[Bibiribobiri]

Nice! I see a lot of great ideas here! :)

Originally Posted by Landwalker

mentions, The Last Gasp (Pyramid 3/44) pretty much solves this problem. I've played in very combat-heavy games that have used this, and the problem you (correctly) identify is rarely anywhere to be found—attacking every second-nonstop, while possible, is a good way to exhaust yourself in a hurry.

I'm going to research Last Gasp, but, If I understood the idea, only takes care of FP. If I have two raging barbarians furiouslly striking to finish a fight real quick, I bet the one with a dagger will strike faster than the one with a broadsword. Remenber, as pointed out in other posts, that a fight can end in the first turns.

Originally Posted by Landwalker

[*]I don't understand why PP apply immediately, instead of applying prospectively (i.e. starting the turn after you accrue them). Why not have Consecutive Attack #1 be unpenalized, Consecutive Attack #2 have one-attack's worth of PP? (It looks like you do it this way for defenses, where the first defense is unpenalized but successive ones without intervening recovery are penalized.)

The idea is to penalize the attack more than the defense. This is done all the time in GURPS RAW to keep “game balance”. In addition, with attacks you can really take your time but with defenses you cannot.

Originally Posted by Landwalker

If your goal is to represent heavier weapons being "slower on the draw," then what you should be using is the Matter of Inches rules (Martial Arts pg. 110). Your Combat Example 1 uses the language that Jerry is attacking with his axe "without any preparation," but having a ready weapon is preparation. If he has truly no preparation, then the weapon isn't ready and can't attack (and yes, it's possible and legal to hold a weapon in your hand and it not actually be Ready).

The idea is not to see who draws first, but to see who attacks fisrt considering both have already drawn weapons. A guy with an axe could attack first (by taking 4 or 5 PP) but he would be roll with -4 or -5 and would be in bad conditions to defend himself (getting -2 or -3 in his defenses) thus making this a bad strategy.

Originally Posted by Landwalker

In fact, the Matter of Inches rules might be a good place to turn for "fixing" your PP assessments, or at least give you a good sense of what else you should consider—in particular, I'd suggest the Relative Weapon Weight and the Swing vs. Thrust (the Absolute Weapon Weight rule has nothing to do with maneuverability of a weapon, and Weapon Length isn't really pertinent here).

Will look into that .

Originally Posted by Landwalker

[*]It seems like you may be double-counting Shield DB in the event of a Block defense—it "counts" once on the attack, as the attacker has to beat Shield DB in order not to hit the shield, and then it "counts" again on the defense roll. [*]I don't understand why PP accrued for making a block apply to subsequently making a Dodge or Parry, or for that matter, an attack (and vice versa).

Yes, it is counted double, but it seems realistic to me. A shield was indeed an “Uber item“ in reality. Almost all western medieval armies would use them.
I actually thought of a shield as moveable cover.

New rule:

7.2*) Shield
A shield provide cover equal to its DB to a user defined hit location. Adjacent hit locations get a cover equal to DB/2 rounded down. The user may change the hit location as a free action during his turn. If the shield is used to block a blow in a particular hit location, the user may move the shield cover to that particular location as a free action.

Combat Example 9:
Tom is wearing a 3 DB shield. In his turn, he decides to cover his torso with it.
Now, attacks to his torso are at -3 and attacks to his head, legs and right-arm are at -1.
At Jerry’s turn, he decides to attack Tom’s face. Tom blocks its blow and now can chose to leave the shield cover at his head.
If he makes this decision, consecutive attacks made by Jerry (or any other attacker), are at -3 to hit Tom’s Face and -1 to hit Tom’s torso.