Resolving move and attack on DWA & Feints

[Plane]

B365 says "within reach", I don't think Move is part of Reach. How would the person you're feinting even know what your Move was? Like feinting with a Shield, maybe this should require demonstrating full Move to the enemy first?

Originally Posted by Kelly Pedersen

Yes, that's how I'd rule it. If all you have are natural weapons, you have to get in appropriate range to use one of them. Note, however, that a kick defaults to DX-2, as well as Brawling and Karate, meaning it's always an option even if you don't have one of those skills.

I wouldn't worry about this, since, as I noted above, kicking is always an option, regardless of whether you have Acrobatic Kicks or not.

Right, you can feint at DX at reach 1, good point. But you might not want to feint at DX if you have Acrobatics bought to higher than DX, so since that perk allows you to make kicks using the skill I think it would be fair to let Acrobatics do Feints at reach 1 (like DX, Brawling or Karate) with it.

[evileeyore]

Originally Posted by Plane

B365 says "within reach", I don't think Move is part of Reach.

Exactly, no Feint if you actually aren't capable of an attack when you roll.



Which is fine if the Mobility Feint is made at the end of the move within weapon reach of the foe.

[Kelly Pedersen]

Originally Posted by Hide

On the ranged feint part, I understand your point; however, what kind of factors play in your skepticism?

Well, as I already mentioned, the description of ranged feints seem to make it much more about reading your opponent, rather than moving deceptively (in fact, I could see a perk that let you do a ranged feint based on Body Language skill). Also note that this is a general trend in most of the ranged combat options: the equivalent of Deceptive Attack for ranged is called "Predictive Shot", for instance.

Also, I'm just not sure that the deceptive value of being acrobatic is the same with ranged attacks as with melee. With a melee attack, the strike could potentially come at any point during the attacker's flip or somersault or whatever. But with a ranged attack, the attacker knows it has to come when the weapon is pointed at them - they can effectively ignore the rest of the attacker's body, and just watch the gun.

Linked to this is the problem that if you do all your acrobatics, then stop and fire, I can't really see how the acrobatics would continue to throw your opponent off, so to make it make sense, you really need to both shoot and make your Acrobatics roll on the same turn, rather than sequentially.

All that said, I suppose there's enough cinematic precedent for Acrobatic movement while firing a gun to be useful that I could see the ranged feint being used. It's effectively even more cinematic than the Mobility Feint I proposed above, though. And it's definitely a different technique - the penalty is going to be different, for one thing, since Move and Attack uses different penalties for melee and ranged attacks.

Here's a stab at it:

Ranged Mobility Feint

Hard

Default: Combination (Acrobatics/Feint-2; Crossbow, Bow, Gun (speciality), Throwing, or Thrown Weapon (speciality)/Torso-2); Cannot exceed Acrobatics+0 or Gun+0.

This is the cinematic technique of moving acrobatically in an unpredictable way while firing a ranged weapon, making it harder for your enemy to anticipate your shot, and thus avoid it. To accomplish this, you can move any distance up to your full Move, and must make a Quick Contest of your Acrobatics against the opponent's best weapon skill, as a normal ranged Feint. Regardless of whether you succeed, you must then attack with your chosen ranged weapon skill. If your opponent lost the Quick Contest, subtract your margin of victory from their defense. However, if you lost the contest, your opponent adds their margin of victory to their defense - you badly telegraphed your attack!
Regardless of the results of the Quick Contest, if you succeeded on your Acrobatics roll, you get +2 to your next dodge, as per normal Acrobatic Dodge.
If you do not have a cinematic advantage such as Gunslinger, Weapon Master, etc. that reduces the penalties for ranged Move and Attack maneuvers and Rapid Strikes, the penalties for both maneuvers in this
technique are much higher: -6 and a further penalty equal to -2 or the Bulk of the weapon you are using, whichever is higher.

[Hide]

Originally Posted by Plane

B365 says "within reach", I don't think Move is part of Reach (…)

Originally Posted by evileeyore

Exactly, no Feint if you actually aren't capable of an attack when you roll.

My friends,

That goes for melee attacks indeed; but move and attack is also a melee attack when you employ melee methods. When you are in combat, and you feint successfully, then you trick the foe into thinking you will attack. That’s how it’s done.

Regarding acrobatics, you are not going to hit the guy with acrobatics. You are just feinting with acrobatics (hitting the guy with any kind of attack is something else). As MA/51 says: “You’ve practiced using gymnastics to catch enemies off-guard. Similar perks might exist for other skills (e.g., “Dancing Feints” for the Dancing skill); see Feints Using Non-Combat Skills (p. 101).” And it does not say you require the perk “acrobatic kicks”.

And, on the other hand, Martial Arts states you can make ranged feints (MA/121).

So you can enter the feint as ranged or melee depending on the situation, because acrobatics “catches the enemy off guard”.

Maybe you just distracting him with graceful maneuvers. Or your enemy could think you are going to throw something against him, or that you are going to slam him or whatever.

Acrobatics itself is expensive, then you need the perk and also a technique. It is not that complicated; If the guy sees you then, you can make the feint. You could also apply it to dancing.

- Hide

[evileeyore]

Originally Posted by Hide

That goes for melee attacks indeed...

Which being what you are performing, means... *drumroll* melee drawbacks.

Regarding acrobatics, you are not going to hit the guy with acrobatics.

Which is why you need a Perk to allow a non-combat skill to function in place of a combat skill. Ostensibly this is being done to use a higher skill, not to "avoid combat drawbacks".

So you can enter the feint as ranged or melee depending on the situation, because acrobatics “catches the enemy off guard”.

No.

Or your enemy could think you are going to throw something against him...

If you have a ranged weapon in hand, yes.

...or that you are going to slam him or whatever.

If you move to within range to hit him (thus reach 1 or C), yes.

Acrobatics itself is expensive...

So is Karate. Your point? Are we just handing out extra unwritten benes to Hard skills now?

...then you need the perk...

To substitute a non-combat skill in place of a combat one, yes.

...and also a technique.

To overcome the Move and Attack skill cap limit, yes.

It is not that complicated; If the guy sees you then, you can make the feint.

False. He also has to believe you're capable of attacking him. Just because you're break dancing 30 feet away does not constitute a situation in which you can melee feint (unless you have a Reach 6 weapon).

You could also apply it to dancing.

That was a distraction, not a feint. There is a difference.

[Hide]

Originally Posted by evileeyore

Which being what you are performing, means... *drumroll* melee drawbacks. Which is why you need a Perk to allow a non-combat skill to function in place of a combat skill. Ostensibly this is being done to use a higher skill, not to "avoid combat drawbacks".

But the point I am stressing here is "the enemy is within the reach of a move and attack while you execute the acrobatic feint".

Originally Posted by Hide

(...) That goes for melee attacks indeed; but move and attack is also a melee attack when you employ melee methods (...)

On the other hand, B365 does not say "within weapon's reach" it says "You cannot Feint someone unless you could have hit him with a melee attack – that is, your weapon is ready and your foe is within reach.". So, if the target is on move and attack's reach, then it means you can hit him with a melee attack or feint.

And about mentioning acrobatics is expensive... that's not a plain bene. It points to making a justified investment: The drawbacks are covered by the technique, the perk is the “accessory” that allows you to commit acrobatics to perform a feint and, that in order to have this working you got to be a very skilled guy (because the hard skill is taking a -7 to make the technique). Only then you can make the acrobatic feint work quite properly.

Originally Posted by Hide

(...)
So you can enter the feint as ranged or melee depending on the situation (...)

Originally Posted by evileeyore

No. (...) False. He also has to believe you're capable of attacking him. (...)

Why not? Imagine this situation: You are standing at 5 yards from your enemy; you hold a sword and you move 3 yards towards your opponent performing the acrobatic feint.

You could have throwing art, you could employ anything to make an effective ranged attack. Hence, you could attack with the sword in a ranged attack maneuver OR you could employ the move and attack maneuver (melee). The feint is effective because the enemy is within reach of these two alternatives to attack.

Originally Posted by evileeyore

That was a distraction, not a feint. There is a difference.

In my opinion, that is the teamwork perk and the "dancing feint" perk. After all, in GURPS terms they did a teamwork attack; maybe some gestures from Drax and Rocket on the first turn, then the dancing feint to distract the guy and lower his defenses (as he ultimately notices the attack when Starlord tells him about it).

[evileeyore]

Originally Posted by Hide

Why not?

So one person can't just stand safely off at a distance Feinting or Rusing at someone and passing the effects of the Feint/Ruse off to a team member because they aren't a threat.

On the other hand, B365 does not say "within weapon's reach" it says "You cannot Feint someone unless you could have hit him with a melee attack – that is, your weapon is ready and your foe is within reach.".

I bolded the important part.

When you are 5 yards away, how is the foe within Reach of your weapon?

Just because you could move over and hit him, after a Move, doesn't mean the foe is in Reach when you are 5 yards away. When you are 5 yards away holding a melee weapon, you are effectively not enough of a threat to Feint.

GURPS combat is just abstraction enough that occasionally you have these cases where what you believe isn't supported by the rules. At that point, just go with the clearest reading of the rules, in this case in order to melee Feint you have to be a clear and present threat to the foe (ie: "your foe is within reach"), not a possible, maybe, potential danger.

You could have throwing art, you could employ anything to make an effective ranged attack.

And if you do so, then you get to make a Ranged Feint.

Hence, you could attack with the sword in a ranged attack maneuver OR you could employ the move and attack maneuver (melee). The feint is effective because the enemy is within reach of these two alternatives to attack.

If you want it that way in your games, go ahead, no judgments.

In my opinion, that is the teamwork perk and the "dancing feint" perk.

He's not within Reach and has no ranged weapons for a Feint. I could see it as a cinematic Ruse, in a game where the rules fly fast and loose (especially if they're using range bands so he is considered 'close'). But it's not RAW.

[GodBeastX]

Originally Posted by Bruno

I would, at least with a small blade (Small Knife or Dagger in GURPS terms).

This is a classic maneuver, called the prison yard rush (for reasons I hope are fairly obvious). The blade is held close to the body in the rear hand in hopes of concealing it and in the collision the blade is thrust forward, while the target is hopefully distracted by the slam (the -1 to defenses).

I wouldn't exempt the knife attack from the 9 maximum skill though, just because the slam is exempted.

Martial Arts has rules for using a slam with an impaling weapon to replace thrust damage.

[GodBeastX]

Is the back and forth about using acrobatics for a ranged feint?

Any object can be thrown at someone. If I have a sword and I threaten to throw it at anyone they are going to flinch or even cover themselves, which might be the point of a ranged feint. If you don't believe me, pick up a book, go to your friend and act like you're going to toss it at them.

Part of the text is to "Draw out the enemy's defense", making people think you're going to hit them. If you got something in your hand you can probably make a ranged feint. If you can MAKE people think you have something in your hand you can probably make a ranged feint. How many times have people fake thrown a tennis ball for a dog only to see the thing run off looking for it?

Keep in mind ranged feints always take distance penalties into account.

Can acrobatics work with this? In a cinematic world anything is possible. Maybe you toss up a grenade, fake the first kick with a flip and soccer kick it after to feint and toss it. Who knows, I seen crazier stuff in the big screen.

[Hide]

Originally Posted by GodBeastX

Is the back and forth about using acrobatics for a ranged feint? Any object can be thrown at someone. If I have a sword and I threaten to throw it at anyone they are going to flinch or even cover themselves, which might be the point of a ranged feint. If you don't believe me, pick up a book, go to your friend and act like you're going to toss it at them. (...)

Yeah, that's the point; so even if it was acrobatics you could threaten your foe with a ranged feint as long as you had a good setup.

And if the enemy was skilled enough, then he would simply "resist the feint".

Originally Posted by GodBeastX

Keep in mind ranged feints always take distance penalties into account.

I agree, indeed.