04-07-2019, 04:00 PM | #1 |
Join Date: Jul 2015
|
Sequence and resolution of multiple attacks
I'm probably overthinking, or just not looking in the right place.
I'm curious about how a turn with multiple attacks is resolved. Let's take Extra Attack with a punch for example: The book says "both hands at once", but it also says you can feint and attack, which obviously isn't "at once". So, for Extra attack, which is the proper ruling? Which brings me to my next question. How are attacks resolved? Do you make your multiple attacks and then do defenses and then decide injury? Or do you do the attacks separate and resolve that one attack completely before the next? If I take two attacks, be it a rapid strike, all out attack double, extra attack, or whatever, do I hit the enemy in the face with the first attack, stunning him, giving him shock penalties or whatever and then he has reduced defense on my next attack? Or does he defend all attacks and then suffers injury once my turn is over? |
04-07-2019, 05:22 PM | #2 |
Join Date: Sep 2007
|
Re: Sequence and resolution of multiple attacks
Completely resolve each attack one at a time. (See B369, "Attacking", bottom of the middle column.) Apply the effects immediately. (Note that the phrasing for shock, knockdown, etc, is generally something like "whenever you suffer X", not "at the end of any turn in which you suffer X". Feints are clearly described as affecting a following attack in the same turn; see MA 126-128 for more details.)
The "both hands at once" bit in the description of Extra Attack is just fluff text outlining a way you can justify having that Extra Attack. If you really wanted to attack with "both hands at once", you'd use the Dual-Weapon Attack Technique. That at least gets you the bonuses and penalties for doing them both together. Even then, you resolve the two attacks one at a time (in whichever order you like). Last edited by Anaraxes; 04-07-2019 at 05:27 PM. |
04-07-2019, 06:12 PM | #3 | |
Join Date: Jun 2013
|
Re: Sequence and resolution of multiple attacks
Quote:
__________________
GURPS Overhaul |
|
04-07-2019, 06:43 PM | #4 | |
Join Date: Jul 2015
|
Re: Sequence and resolution of multiple attacks
Quote:
It doesn't say anything about the attacks having to hit. EDIT: Found it B369 Some advantages (e.g., Extra Attack) and combat options (see All- Out Attack, p. 365, and Rapid Strike, p. 370) let you attack more than once. Resolve such attacks one at a time. So I guess you'd treat something like Dual Weapon Attack one attack at a time as well? Last edited by Boge; 04-07-2019 at 06:53 PM. |
|
04-07-2019, 07:13 PM | #5 | |
Join Date: Sep 2007
|
Re: Sequence and resolution of multiple attacks
Quote:
The -1 distraction penalty only makes sense if you declare both attacks against the same target before rolling the first. So in fairness, you shouldn't be able to observe the results of the first attack and then change your mind (say, to attack a different adjacent target after your first blow kills your first target). |
|
04-07-2019, 08:59 PM | #6 |
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Snoopy's basement
|
Re: Sequence and resolution of multiple attacks
|
04-07-2019, 10:36 PM | #7 | |
☣
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Southeast NC
|
Re: Sequence and resolution of multiple attacks
Quote:
* in the sense of the attack starting before the feint finishes.
__________________
RyanW - Actually one normal sized guy in three tiny trenchcoats. |
|
04-08-2019, 04:28 AM | #8 |
Join Date: Sep 2007
|
Re: Sequence and resolution of multiple attacks
|
04-08-2019, 04:53 AM | #9 |
Join Date: Jun 2006
|
Re: Sequence and resolution of multiple attacks
Honestly, everything that happens in a round (strictu sensu, GURPS of course doesn't have a technical definition of "round") may or may not be simultaneous. We resolve turns in a particular order because humans need to be able to play the game, not because that's the "true" order of events. Once you are down on the level of anything separated by less than whatever your model slices to - whether that is turns, hexes, or points of ST or damage, you've exceeded the limits of the model and the "actual" order of the times, distances, orders of magnitude etc. are indeterminate. If you have a case in which it matters if a pair of actions are genuinely simultaneous, the rules generally cannot tell you that, all "at the same time" gets you is "separated by less than the resolution of the model" which in this case is one second. This is reason games have referees. Literally - wargames first got them largely to resolve cases where strict adherence to the turn orders resulted in nonsensical situations like running through a firing envelope without being shot at because you were out of range again before the firing phase or moving through the location of another unit because you hadn't detected it yet.
__________________
-- MA Lloyd |
04-08-2019, 02:36 PM | #10 |
Join Date: Jul 2015
|
Re: Sequence and resolution of multiple attacks
I'm reminded of my Magic The Gathering days. When I played with friends, I was the one that read between the lines in order to get the rulings correct. And in Magic, it really mattered, fine stuff like the order of resolving the "Stack" and stuff like that. I think a lot of that is leaking into my thoughts of Gurps rules and it's honestly hurting my experience of it. I want to just play the game and let the GM make the call during the game. But I'm finding that some of it really does matter.
I'm just driving myself crazy with it all though. I don't know how to let it go. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|