Issues with Retreating Dodge

[bearit]

Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth

Or you Committed Attack, which is neither AoA nor wild swings. It's a pretty important maneuver.

I didn't feel the need to speak to each option. But the point still stands. The Pursuer must take an attack option with penalties to keep up with a defender with no penalties.

Committed Attack requires a -2 to hit in order to move the second step. This cancels out the +2 from Determined. In addition you can't defend with the attacking weapon or shield AND your other defenses are at -2. Still hefty penalties for what a retreating defender essentially gets for free.

I like Plane’s research into the RAW. Maybe the base assumption many of us have that Retreating is "free" movement is flawed. Requiring pre existing movement left over from your previous declared Maneuver does clean things up nicely.

[Ulzgoroth]

Originally Posted by Anthony

And is buried in Martial Arts. Which is a useful book but not one you should expect everyone to have.

I don't see how this discussion would benefit from us playing it with only half the library. While I don't think Committed Attack addresses what really is problematic in this situation, it does provide an option for avoiding the especially stark issues of the other maneuvers: no wild swing, and no absolute loss of defenses.

[Celjabba]

Originally Posted by bearit

I didn't feel the need to speak to each option. But the point still stands. The Pursuer must take an attack option with penalties to keep up with a defender with no penalties.

Originally Posted by bearit

while the retreater suffers no penalties while outpacing the pursuer. This does not seem realistic.

Retreating inherently gives a double step and therefore advantage in tactical combat to the retreater at NO penalty, forcing the penalty on the pursuer to "keep up." This is where I and others see the failure of simulation in GURPS and look for a correction.

It has already been said, but I think it should be repeated : there is a huge penalty, not as a number on the dice but tactical : you must move away from the attacker.
(Using only basic book here - you have more options in Martial arts, but so does the attacker)
The attacker is forcing you back, and you loose the freedom of deciding where you go/of staying where you are.
Beside the attacker pushing you away from your friends/toward problems, I cannot remember many fights where a player could have chained multiples retreat+step-back without getting impaired by scenery in some ways.

It obviously can happen, since you ran into it, but in my experience, it is very rare.

In an arena fight with only 2 fighters, one against one in the middle of a vast area of even ground ... you are correct that retreat can be a concern if the attacker also have low move or no skill at all in close combat.
In that case, requiring pre existing movement left over from your previous declared Maneuver seem a nice houserule.

[Gnome]

Folks saying the melee fighter must suffer all kinds of penalties are missing the most basic solution: Move. Not everything has to happen in one second! Even the hardcore simulationists will have to accept that turns can’t slice reality perfectly. The backpedaling archer has little chance of getting away if the swordsman simply moves into his hex on his first turn. This simulates reality just fine for me, putting the archer in a very bad spot (within swing range, forced to Move or Move and Attack if he wishes to escape).

[Tyneras]

Obviously the melee fighter should turn around and taken Retreating Dodges from imaginary enemies as well, keeping on top of the archer. Eventually someone will start failing thirst and hunger checks as they chase each other across this infinitely large flat plane.

[Tomsdad]

Originally Posted by MrFix

No maneuver forces you to move a specific distance, so you can stop at any time.

That's how I rule it, but I know some require movement to be declared and then stuck to. (but as I said I'd allow the broadsword to take the extra step or not as a response to archer's choice to retreat or not)

Originally Posted by MrFix

As for CC disadvantage... See Pummeling at MA111. Also see Knee Strike at B404, it lacks usual Kick disadvantages.

Yeah, but Broadsword gives up their greatest advantage their broadsword vs. a target stuck with a bow in melee.

Originally Posted by MrFix

If the enemy archer decides to stick around, drop his bow and try to knife you or whatever, it's you who gets to retreat, and picking stuff up from the floor is 2 maneuvers (Change Posture into Kneeling etc, then Ready. Crouching doesn't count), so it's an advantage for you.

Depends on how fast you had to be on the prior Move and attack, too fast you might have removed the option for retreat.

Originally Posted by bearit

Wow, I'm overwhelmed by the amount of detailed responses I've received! With the next roleplay session tonight, the tactics you've all laid out will make combat much more interesting.

However, despite the tactical workarounds, the fact that extra movement is granted in fairly common yet not ubiquitous circumstances (Retreat, Dodge AND Drop, Sacrificial Dodge, etc) seem to me a fault with the system itself.



As such, I'd like to suggest the following houserules:

1) Such extra movement options require their movement from the previous turn. If all movement was used in the previous turn, the option may not be taken.

-OR-

2) A additional 'Step' is given to each Maneuver for the purpose of triggering defensive options OR to be used for tactical movement before the top of the next round.

Option 1 might encourage 'hoarding' of movement for the potential defensive options, and thereby promote a less mobile combat.

Option 2 encourages mobile combat but at the cost of additional minutia to track and do during a turn.

My preference lies with option 1. What are your thoughts?

Honestly?

3). committed attack which allows a 2nd step before or after your attack from Martial arts.


This allows you step in attack and step out, or step in attack and follow up on a retreat

Sorry I know it's a bit cheeky to suggest getting an extra book. But if your going to get into the tactical detail of combat in the way that you seem to be doing it's a worthwhile purchase for all sorts of reasons.

Also remember buying an optional book doesn't commit your game to use every single new rule in it!



But as an aside I mentioned it earlier is the archer doing all the fast draws necessary to fire every turn?

[bearit]

Originally Posted by Gnome

Folks saying the melee fighter must suffer all kinds of penalties are missing the most basic solution: Move. Not everything has to happen in one second! Even the hardcore simulationists will have to accept that turns can’t slice reality perfectly. The backpedaling archer has little chance of getting away if the swordsman simply moves into his hex on his first turn. This simulates reality just fine for me, putting the archer in a very bad spot (within swing range, forced to Move or Move and Attack if he wishes to escape).

This is an even better example of the pursuer being penalized. They literally can’t attack that round at all!

Example:
-Sword Move into archers hex. (No attacks) Archer can’t retreat because no attack made. (Current distance 0 yards)
-Archer move back a step. Fires (no penalties). (Current distance 1 yards)
-Sword attacks (no penalties), archer retreats - gains +3 dodge and moves back. Sword follows with their step (current distance 1 yrd).
-Archer takes step back and fast draws and readies bow (with Heroic Archer they take the shot!) (Current distance 2 yards)
-Sword steps to 1 yard and attacks (no penalties), archer retreats to 2 yards with +3 to dodge (current distance 2 yards).
- Archer either fast draw/ readies or fires (Heroic Archer), then steps back (current distance 3 yards.
-Sword must now take Move again into archers hex to restart the cycle.

Essentially, using this method the pursuer must give up attacking every third turn in order keep pace with the retreated.another hefty penalty just to keep up.

Even in an example with two melee fighters, the retreating one still has the clear advantage. Retreating gives +3 to dodge or +1 to parry. Whereas Slipping (Martial Arts gives+1 dodge and -1 parry for the same movement. My players have learned this and continuous kite enemies at penalties around the battlefield.

Originally Posted by Tyneras

Obviously the melee fighter should turn around and taken Retreating Dodges from imaginary enemies as well, keeping on top of the archer. Eventually someone will start failing thirst and hunger checks as they chase each other across this infinitely large flat plane.

As for the idea that there just isnt enough room to retreat like this...in my experience with GURPS combat, several seconds is usually enough time to resolve the combat, especially with all the penalties to the attacker and bonuses to the retreater. At 5 seconds of someone two step retreating backwards, that’s only 30 ft of ground covered. Not a lot at all. No need for infinitely large flat planes.

[bearit]

Originally Posted by Celjabba

It has already been said, but I think it should be repeated : there is a huge penalty, not as a number on the dice but tactical : you must move away from the attacker.
(Using only basic book here - you have more options in Martial arts, but so does the attacker)
The attacker is forcing you back, and you loose the freedom of deciding where you go/of staying where you are.
Beside the attacker pushing you away from your friends/toward problems, I cannot remember many fights where a player could have chained multiples retreat+step-back without getting impaired by scenery in some ways.

It obviously can happen, since you ran into it, but in my experience, it is very rare.

In an arena fight with only 2 fighters, one against one in the middle of a vast area of even ground ... you are correct that retreat can be a concern if the attacker also have low move or no skill at all in close combat.
In that case, requiring pre existing movement left over from your previous declared Maneuver seem a nice houserule.

In my experience with Dungeon Fantasy, fights usually occur allow travel paths, forests, desert merchant routes, and winding caves that allow for plenty of retreat distance back the way the party came. In addition, with the “extra” movement granted by Retreat, who is really doing the tactical redirecting? As far as I can tell from the source materials, a Retreat must be “back”, but it can still be back AND to the side. This plus the normal step allows retreater to effectively kite pursuers (who are taking penalties to keep up) to better positions of the retreater’s choosing.

This is my experience in gameplay and we’re I feel our interpretation of the Retreating step as “free” may need to be reconsidered.

[Thamior]

I was trying to figure out why it happens as it happens and how to reconcile it with "reality". I think what happens is this. Attacker and defender move at equal speed initially. One is advancing, the other is retreating 1 yard apart. Every time the melee attacker decides to make an attack the ranged defender gets the opportunity to skip back 1 more yard widening the distance between them. Seems fair. And then when the ranged defender shoots the melee attacker the latter can slip forward narrowing the distance to 1 yard again and getting the opportunity to attack.
So all in all in this situation they just "trade blows" with the ranged one being at an advantage of +3 dodge vs +1 of the melee one. It's a good advantage but not a decisive.

[Ulzgoroth]

Originally Posted by bearit

As for the idea that there just isnt enough room to retreat like this...in my experience with GURPS combat, several seconds is usually enough time to resolve the combat, especially with all the penalties to the attacker and bonuses to the retreater. At 5 seconds of someone two step retreating backwards, that’s only 30 ft of ground covered. Not a lot at all. No need for infinitely large flat planes.

So the archer only needs maybe two shots to win the fight, but the melee attacker can't win in 5? What kind of skill and defense values are you envisioning here?

Originally Posted by Thamior

I was trying to figure out why it happens as it happens and how to reconcile it with "reality". I think what happens is this. Attacker and defender move at equal speed initially. One is advancing, the other is retreating 1 yard apart. Every time the melee attacker decides to make an attack the ranged defender gets the opportunity to skip back 1 more yard widening the distance between them. Seems fair. And then when the ranged defender shoots the melee attacker the latter can slip forward narrowing the distance to 1 yard again and getting the opportunity to attack.
So all in all in this situation they just "trade blows" with the ranged one being at an advantage of +3 dodge vs +1 of the melee one. It's a good advantage but not a decisive.

You can only retreat against melee attacks. So an arrow shot at you is not an opportunity to slip forwards a yard.

Of course, the thread has run through a multitude of moves that are ways for the melee fighter to gain ground.