Steve Jackson Games - Site Navigation
Home General Info Follow Us Search Illuminator Store Forums What's New Other Games Ogre GURPS Munchkin Our Games: Home

Go Back   Steve Jackson Games Forums > Roleplaying > Play By Post

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 11-14-2018, 08:34 AM   #21
ericthered
Hero of Democracy
 
ericthered's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: far from the ocean
Default Re: A Challenger Appears! Green versus Red

rules thoughts:

  • Roll with the blow is excellent for this game. I would not require AP for it, but I don't feel particuarly strongly about that.
  • Applying shock proportionally to HP is fiddly, but not a bad concept. I'm unsure if damage should be rounded down or to the nearest breakpoint. That doesn't matter for 4 damage to 12 HP, but it does matter for other options.
  • Refunding (and penalizing) AP in tenths for margins of success and failure sounds fundementally broken to me. It encourages telegraphic punches, which for Red averages no loss of AP. It discourages defense, penalizing you yet further for failing the defense roll.
  • I strongly disagree with the crouching ruling. I've shown you a quote by the Gurps Line Editor that disagrees with your ruling. Can we at least just reroll those results on the table?
  • I would read the Roll with the Blow comment about a DX roll as a reminder, not as an additional roll. I wouldn't require AP for that roll, but requiring it for the movement created by knockback sounds fair.
  • The HT roll to absorb damage is extreme and game changing. It should be declared in effect or out of effect at the beginning of a fight. I'm happy to play around with it in later fights, but it strongly changes how the game is played.
__________________
Worlds Beyond Earth -- my blog
ericthered is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-14-2018, 03:41 PM   #22
Plane
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Default Re: A Challenger Appears! Green versus Red

Quote:
Originally Posted by ericthered View Post
So it seems we are playing with every possible combat option turned on, given that we're using both cinematic techniques (like roll with the blow) and gritty realism switches?
Yeah, though it's hard to remember them all so it's like an exercise in trying to remember them too. Gladiators is on the table too.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ericthered View Post
please do not GM abuse. We can always rerun a fight rather than rigging it. Could we stay RAW unless required for this fight and apply those tweaks to the next one?
Well okay (it's just a difference of 1 shock though...) but if higher HP isn't going to help prevent shock then higher skill isn't going to prevent AP loss via margins, so I'll ignore all that decimal stuff I was experimenting with too.

So in that case you were at 7AP not 8.2 AP and I was at 0AP not 0.5AP... and I did lose 4 not 3 to shock so I would be at -1 AP... the FP burn brings me up to 5 AP and then lose another 2 AP from doing the DX check and the Breakfall (presumably no objections to my choosing to do that?) brings me down to 3AP...

Then spending 1 AP to evade brings me down to 2/12 AP and your obstructing that evade brings you down to 6/10AP.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ericthered View Post
I block the evasive retreat through my half of the hex. 14 vs. 12 = success by two.
Okay then in that case, I fall down in our shared hex instead of the hex behind you...

When you fall down you have to occupy 2 hexes though...

I'm actually stuck here, would you happen to know how you determine which of those hexes that would be? Maybe something like rolling d6? Can't remember any rules for it. I know if you had judo flipped me that you would get to choose and if I had chosen to change posture that I would get to choose, but I don't know if anyone gets to choose for falls...

Anyway I might as well resolve that fall now... or wait *reads your 2nd reply* Maybe not?

Quote:
Originally Posted by ericthered View Post
[*]Roll with the blow is excellent for this game. I would not require AP for it, but I don't feel particuarly strongly about that.
1 AP is a bit of a high cost, but I figured doing MoS discounts would mitigate that and give incentive for people to pump the technique higher, unless of course it could be penalized by stuff other than shock... what would you think about applying penalties from Feints or Deceptive Attacks to this too?

It only seems fair to do that if we're going to let it benefit from things like One Foe or All-Out Defense... even if it's not technically active defense (based on full DX not half DX) it's got the spirit of one.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ericthered View Post
[*]Applying shock proportionally to HP is fiddly, but not a bad concept. I'm unsure if damage should be rounded down or to the nearest breakpoint. That doesn't matter for 4 damage to 12 HP, but it does matter for other options.
Although the book says to drop all fractions, I would't mind tracking the fractions...
  • shock penalty is -1 per HP/10 injury
I'm not sure if I'm getting the math right...
  • SP=10*I/HP
So 4 injury to 10 hp is 40/10=4
*while to 20 HP is 40/20 = 2
*while to 12 HP is 40/12 = 10/3 =3⅓
*while to 5 HP is 40/5 = 8

The problem with this approach is of course repeating decimals so to make cumulative shock from multiple hits per second easier to track I'd say round down to single decimal place.

1 injury to 20 HP is 10/20 = 0.5 so they could still suffer 1 shock from a couple of those, even though 1 would not be enough. Something with 101 HP (10/101=0.09900990099) would suffer nothing at all worth tracking though, so you'd drop it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ericthered View Post
[*]Refunding (and penalizing) AP in tenths for margins of success and failure sounds fundementally broken to me. It encourages telegraphic punches, which for Red averages no loss of AP. It discourages defense, penalizing you yet further for failing the defense roll.
Telegraphic attacks are encouraged for those with low skill in MA... however one way to address this concern would be to take a hint from how it affects criticals. Telegraphic attacks do not increase the chances of critical hits, only decrease the chance of critical failures, so based on that, the +4 could count against extra AP loss from MoF but not contribute toward AP refunds for MoS.

Averages of 0 are okay long as a minimum cost of 0.1 is always observed. AP10/FP10 default means someone without refunds punching without pause would reduce to AP0/FP0 in 60 punches. If we look at stuff like speed bags, I'm not sure that's a guarantee even for the untrained, so that's why MoS refunds would stretch AP/FP a little further.

That could be implemented without applying MoF penalties though (Cole never wrote about extra AP loss on critical failures, so there is no precedent) and you have a point about this discouraging active defenses.

Since active defense seems to be lower (based on DX/2 instead of DX) if using margin-based AP variations, that ratio could be recognized
*ADs get a refund equal to MoS/5
*if using penalties, extra cost is merely MoF/20

Do you think that would balance it out?

One reason I thought penalties would be good is actually influenced by defenses. You ALWAYS get an active defense, even if skill is below 3, so it would create some kind of difference between people with "Dodge 3" (which can't get a refund from MoS 0) lower Dodge stats, as MoF is the only way to distinguish their outputs.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ericthered View Post
[*]I strongly disagree with the crouching ruling. I've shown you a quote by the Gurps Line Editor that disagrees with your ruling. Can we at least just reroll those results on the table?
You mean this? You linked the thread but I had to do a reread based on this comment to get more indication of what you were referring to.

How about for radom punches/grabs using upper body...[INDENT]
*we roll to hit before the random hit location table as usual
*if you have MoS 1 and rolled shin or knee, you can opt to half-crouch (only -1 to skill and -1 for ranged to shoot you) and hit that, or not crouch and instead hit that leg's thigh instead (this is all "leg" so it doesn't matter unless leg is differently armored)
**ignore above requirements if leg in question through a kick, knee, leg parry, dodge against attack targetting foot or step in last turn
*if you have MoS 2 and rolled foot or ankle, you can opt to fully crouch and hit the foot, or half-crouch and hit that leg's shin instead, or NOT crouch and hit that leg's thigh instead.
**ignore above requirements if leg in question made a kick last turn
***if leg in question merely made a knee, leg parry, dodge against attack targetting foot or step, shift to previous category (need only MoS 1 and half-crouch to hit foot)
Completely rerolling the randomness seems too random, but I don't think the amount of crouching needed to punch a thigh needs to be statted (combat stance assumes some realistic amount of crouching) so allowing that as an alternative to crouching seems like a good compromise.

Precedents for opportunistic target-shifting by attacker:
how failed Aggressive Parry allows hand to be targeted instead of arm and failed Jam allows foot to be targetted instead of leg, or how if you parry weapons unarmed the attacker can shift from their original target to your arm if you fail.

For the proposed -1, you can also choose to exit out of that at any time as a free action. Feet on the ground are like someone lying, the shin portion of the leg is higher up so it should be easier to hit, but it still seems like an awkward place, mitigated of course by people who actually did something that requires lifting the leg off the ground.
Plane is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-14-2018, 03:43 PM   #23
Plane
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Default Re: A Challenger Appears! Green versus Red

Quote:
Originally Posted by ericthered View Post
[*]I would read the Roll with the Blow comment about a DX roll as a reminder, not as an additional roll.
Okay, I guess I was trying to overcompensate for forgetting to declare it until the last minute by making it hard to do. Especially since it's cinematic and making cinematic techs hard and dangerous seemed like realism.

Since you need 5 damage to actually knock me back if I'm using RWB (doubled to 10 is one multiple of ST 12 minus 2) this means no DX check attempt, no Breakfall attempt, no fall, and no damage to my chest... This saves me some work I guess and skips exploring the question of choosing what other hex I should occupy if I fall in a lying position accidentally.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ericthered View Post
I wouldn't require AP for that roll, but requiring it for the movement created by knockback sounds fair.
I like combat being less tiring for lazy guys who don't bother to Roll With Blow, they're probably going to lose more AP anyway by taking shock. Applying a base 1 AP cost to RWB can still be of net benefit if it results in you losing less AP from shock/injury.

Same with the DX check, it's advantageous to take the effort to try and avoid falling down since that could prevent AP loss from the shock of any injuries caused by the fall.

I do like the idea of additional AP loss by knockback movement though :) This makes shoves a little more appealing and prevents "free steps". Although, perhaps if someoe knocked back had unspent Movement Points (or unspent Free Step) from their previous turn, I would allow those to be exhausted first before charging AP for the movements.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ericthered View Post
[*]The HT roll to absorb damage is extreme and game changing. It should be declared in effect or out of effect at the beginning of a fight. I'm happy to play around with it in later fights, but it strongly changes how the game is played.
Okay, maybe for some future fight :) Cole had proposed multiple ways to implement that and it's hard to pick which is best, plus they all seem a little extreme in how much damage they deduct (low ST high HT creatures could rarely hurt each other)

Like with Shock, I think I'd like to see deductions somehow scaled to how much HP a creature has. If it's written with the assumption of MoS=1 saving HP 10 creatures from 1 damage, it should probably save HP 20 creatures from 2 damage and require MoS=2 to save HP5 creatures from that much (or deduct 0.5 per MoS basically)

- - -

So anyway, I'm going to backpedal on all my falling calculations (and spending AP on the DX and Breakfall) since you've chosen "DX reminder" so I guess I'm merely at 4/12 AP not 2/12AP...with a 4 HP injury to my leg but I didn't fall and hurt my chest too.

It's your choice whether you chose to half-crouch (-1/1) to hit the shin or made no crouch and did a free shin>thigh shift. Shin/Thigh dinstinction on the RHLT are only for the purpose of armor which neither of us has on, so I take the same leg injury regardless.

Now that it's my turn, to ride out this -4 shock penalty (no scaling for high HP this battle!) I'm choosing All-Out-Defense (costing 0 AP, providing 2 AP worth of free active defenses, and if you don't trigger at least 1 defense it functions like an untriggered "Wait" and gives me a HT check to recover APmentioned here, absent in Pyramid)

Taking the "Double" option to let me roll a 2nd defense if 1st fails, so no +2 "determined" bonus.

I won't be using my free step to back away from you, because I'll be wanting that retreat bonus.

Per GURPS Gladiators, I am going to shift my left leg/arm facing away from you and my right arm/leg facing you. I think that does something like +2 to hit my right limbs/extremities, -2 to hit my left ones, +1 to parry with my right limbs, -1 to reach with my left limbs. Can't remember all the details, will check later. Basically trying to minimize further injury to left leg and maximize ability to parry with my on had.

(they should probably create rules on how this might influence Random Hit Location... for now this will only make it less likely to hit the "denied" side on intentional attacks I guess)

I think we should also throw in those "weak hand" realism rules which I think is -4 to DX -2 to ST with our off (left) hands for both hits and parries. Presumably so far we have both been throwing punches with our "on" right hands to avoid them.

I know that you don't apply shock penalties to active defenses, but I don't mind doing that as a house rule for realism, in which case -4 to DX = -2 to parry and -1 to dodge, like what GURPS Martial Arts says for the -4 to DX from Grappling. That will count against my Alex Green now but may count against your Zach Red later if he does get hit. Please tell me whether you want me to implement that before I choose how to defend against your attacks.

My turn is over, reminder of sequence:
  • 1aa) your brawling punch to torso 5<12
    1ab) my boxing parry 8<12
    1ba) my boxing punch to random location 11<16
    1bb) your brawling parry 9<12
    2aa) your brawling punch to leg (8<12 if thigh, 8<11 if shin)
    2ab) my boxing parry 13>11
    2ac) my roll with blow failed, 4 injury, 24 seconds til Partial Injury COUNTDOWN
    2ba) my All-Out-Defense DOUBLE
    2bb) N/A
    3aa) YOUR NEXT MANEUVER

(something tells me this fight might not actually last until adrenaline wears off and I suffer the Partial Injury penalties, that's probably more of a factor for low HT guys... I think it would be cool to have some random element there, maybe just HT+d6 seconds instead of HT*2, thoughts?)

It's the THIRD second, what does Zach Red do next? Reminder I am at 4AP you are at 7AP, if I've adjusted everything right...
Plane is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-2018, 07:24 AM   #24
Greg 1
 
Greg 1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Default Re: A Challenger Appears! Green versus Red

This is a very interesting exercise! I just wish I could keep track of the combat options you guys decided on. Maybe you'd like to put out a cheat sheet summary for anyone who wants to join the game later.
Greg 1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-2018, 10:32 AM   #25
ericthered
Hero of Democracy
 
ericthered's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: far from the ocean
Default Re: A Challenger Appears! Green versus Red

Quote:
Originally Posted by Greg 1 View Post
This is a very interesting exercise! I just wish I could keep track of the combat options you guys decided on. Maybe you'd like to put out a cheat sheet summary for anyone who wants to join the game later.
Quote:
Yeah, though it's hard to remember them all so it's like an exercise in trying to remember them too. Gladiators is on the table too.
I think our expansive ruleset is one of the things we're developing here. We could certainly track a "rules document" listing all the rules we're using. Might be interesting.


Quote:
You mean this? You linked the thread but I had to do a reread based on this comment to get more indication of what you were referring to.
Actually, I was talking about this post, though other parts of the thread were in my mind as well. I'll try to be more precise in the future.

Quote:
Completely rerolling the randomness seems too random, but I don't think the amount of crouching needed to punch a thigh needs to be statted (combat stance assumes some realistic amount of crouching) so allowing that as an alternative to crouching seems like a good compromise.
I'd think that rerolling weird results would make things less random, not more. And once again, crouching is not a posture.

Quote:
That could be implemented without applying MoF penalties though (Cole never wrote about extra AP loss on critical failures, so there is no precedent) and you have a point about this discouraging active defenses.
Its an awful lot of accounting. If you really want to test it out, we can do a fight like that. It still has the effect of discouraging deceptive attacks, but it may make sense to have those cost more. Its probably worth coming up with these ideas as we fight and then applying them in a second fight.

Quote:
For the proposed -1, you can also choose to exit out of that at any time as a free action
Then why does it apply at all? Unless you aren't allowed an infinite number of free actions?

Are we using 1 AP for RWB then, or not?

Be aware scaling HP deduction from HT with HP makes them multiplicative. Not an objection, just an observation.

Lets try shock impeding defenses later. I suspect it will make "first blood" extremely important.

I think your 7 AP vs 4 AP is forgetting to charge AP for the evade contest, so its 6 vs. 3

Quote:
Per GURPS Gladiators, I am going to shift my left leg/arm facing away from you and my right arm/leg facing you. I think that does something like +2 to hit my right limbs/extremities, -2 to hit my left ones, +1 to parry with my right limbs, -1 to reach with my left limbs. Can't remember all the details, will check later. Basically trying to minimize further injury to left leg and maximize ability to parry with my on had.

(they should probably create rules on how this might influence Random Hit Location... for now this will only make it less likely to hit the "denied" side on intentional attacks I guess)
We could have random hits on the far side transfer to the facing side x in 6 times. anywhere from 3 (50%) to 5 (87%) should be fair.
__________________
Worlds Beyond Earth -- my blog
ericthered is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-2018, 10:53 AM   #26
ericthered
Hero of Democracy
 
ericthered's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: far from the ocean
Default Re: A Challenger Appears! Green versus Red

You're presenting your right foot? I believe you're a boxer...

16 (skill) -2 (kick) -2(right leg) +2 (presented leg) -2 (deceptive) =12 vs 15

Its a miss. Dang. Had it hit you'd be facing a -2 to parry with either your foot or hand from the position of the attack.

That burned 1 AP. I'm very glad I didn't go for some of the more AP-rich options I considered.
__________________
Worlds Beyond Earth -- my blog
ericthered is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-2018, 02:42 PM   #27
Plane
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Default Re: A Challenger Appears! Green versus Red

Quote:
Originally Posted by ericthered View Post
I was talking about this post, though other parts of the thread were in my mind as well. I'll try to be more precise in the future.
The thing with:
  • can easily hammer-fist a foot when someone is running and his foot is off the ground
    ..
    flexible person really can drop and punch the foot that easy
    ..
    roll these ifs, ands, buts, and maybes into the -4 to strike the foot

is that:
  • 1) you do explicitly take the crouch option (with a -2) if you're a standing opponent attacking someone lying down

    2) if the -2 was worked into the -4 to hit the foot, that mean based on size the foot is as big as the leg?

    3) doing a technique like "Stomp" which doesn't require any added flexibility still suffers the -4 (as does aiming at the foot with a gun or a spear)

    4) flexible people probably have high DX which allow them to absorb penalties, and they still suffer a -2 to their melee attacks when remaining in a crouching position

    5) Campaigns actually required someone to KNEEL to grab items and pick things up off the ground, so merely requiring a crouch to TOUCH something on the ground is a pretty fair compromise.

My "move the restrictions up a level" idea is a nod to Kromm referencing picking feet off the ground, since a Step/Footdodge/Knee/LegParry would all involve that. Kicks against the upper body would go even further, whereas a kick against your opponent's shin probably doesn't lift your foot any higher than throwing a knee to their body would.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ericthered View Post
I'd think that rerolling weird results would make things less random, not more. And once again, crouching is not a posture.
Correct. It's a variation of the standing posture, like how supine/prone are variations of the lying posture. Notably if you are crouching this affects Movement Point costs in tactical combat, and reduce you to 2/3 speed otherwise. It doesn't take a Change Posture maneuver to enter/exit and is more of a "sub-posture" than a true posture.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ericthered View Post
It still has the effect of discouraging deceptive attacks, but it may make sense to have those cost more. Its probably worth coming up with these ideas as we fight and then applying them in a second fight.
Deceptive attacks sort of balance out because even if they are less likely to get a discount, by applying a penalty to the defense, the defense is also less likely to get a discount.

Your bringing this up cements the importance of ratios in my mind though. The attacker losing a 0.2 discount to block a 0.1 discount for a defender doesn't favor the attacker. If we inherently gave defenders a 0.2*margin discount it would balance out though.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ericthered View Post
Then why does it apply at all? Unless you aren't allowed an infinite number of free actions?
I think you are (not that I'd oppose some kid of sliding cap on those... like how there are growing penalties for multiple fast draws in a single turn) the only downside is that if you exit as a free action, there's no penalty to hit you for people making ranged attacks, and you can't enter the safety of a crouch until the start of your next turn.

There's no incentive to stay in a crouch in already-fighting 1-on-1 pure HTH, so you could enter/hit/exit when delivering low strikes if you wanted.

If someone was sneaking up, that -2 to hit with ranged attacks could probably be applied to perception (similar to a size modifier) though, to notice if they are sneaking up. If the normal -2/-2 is 2/3 speed, would probably assign 3/4 speed to a -1/-1 halfway point.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ericthered View Post
Are we using 1 AP for RWB then, or not?
I think I still ended up including that cost, though you could still pay 0 if you rolled a critical success on it.

Pg 10 of Pyramid 44 does say "Techniques (1 AP or 2 AP)" after all :) Albeit this is probably written from the assumptions of most techniques counting as an attack to do which RWB/PreventFall/BreakFall don't do, so it's a gray area... but they don't appear under "Zero-Cost Events" so that's the closest guideline I can think of.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ericthered View Post
Be aware scaling HP deduction from HT with HP makes them multiplicative. Not an objection, just an observation.
Maybe additive scaling like "roll 3d6 against HT+HP, subtract MoS/10 from damage"?

Average human rolling a 10 against sum 20 would have MoS 1 and subtract 0.1 damage

Quote:
Originally Posted by ericthered View Post
Lets try shock impeding defenses later. I suspect it will make "first blood" extremely important.
Okay :) I was hoping to rely on my Parry so I won't argue.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ericthered View Post
I think your 7 AP vs 4 AP is forgetting to charge AP for the evade contest, so its 6 vs. 3
Ah yeah I forgot that, I had only looked at the stuff prior to all the decimaling. Good catch!

Quote:
Originally Posted by ericthered View Post
We could have random hits on the far side transfer to the facing side x in 6 times. anywhere from 3 (50%) to 5 (87%) should be fair.
I guess whatever best represents the difference of 4 points that now exists between two previously equal locations. I can't get my head around the math so if it happens I'll leave it up to you.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ericthered View Post
You're presenting your right foot? I believe you're a boxer...
Yes, with a -2 to parry kicks, come to think of it. Sumos also have that problem.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ericthered View Post
16 (skill) -2 (kick) -2(right leg) +2 (presented leg) -2 (deceptive) =12 vs 15

Its a miss. Dang. Had it hit you'd be facing a -2 to parry with either your foot or hand from the position of the attack.
Leg Parry can only be done by Brawling / Karate. As for my hand parries it's actually a lot worse...
*-2 from deceptive
*-2 from boxing/sumo inability to deal with kicks
*-2 from using upper body to parry attacks on the lower body

Total -6 :) You could probably do without deceptive attacks and eve make telegraphic attacks in the future, if you wanted to...

Quote:
Originally Posted by ericthered View Post
That burned 1 AP. I'm very glad I didn't go for some of the more AP-rich options I considered.
So now we are down to 5 v 3 AP ...

B231 / MA75 "If you miss with a kick, roll vs. Kicking skill or DX to avoid falling"

Might consider Brawling's "Stamp Kick" in the future, a mere extra -1 to do and failing its DX roll just loses you your retreat instead of falling down, plus it does more damage (I feel like I am signing Alex Green's death warrant here, hopefully Zach Red falls down here!)

Do you think DX checks to avoid falling down (whether prompted by knockback or missed kicks) warrant an AP cost?

You suggested paying AP for the distance you get knocked back, so it occurs to me that if someone falls down, they end up occupying 2 hexes which is like 1 yard of movement (at least for one half of their body) so in the very least it would make sense to charge for that yard of movement if the DX check is failed and they do fall into a lying posture.

Note that if you fail this check and start falling that you have the option to use "Breakfall" first to change a 1 yard fall to a 0 yard fall, lessening the potential damage. Since the option exists to land in a crouched (standing) posture, I assume if that option is taken that if any damage is rolled it would apply to the feet?

In any case, if you fall, whether or not you make the breakfall, if you do roll any damage I'd allow you to use RWB to halve it (as I was going to do with that chest thing until you cancelled out me needing to make a DX check)

if it is enough damage to cause "knockback" (I don't think that's actually possible with a 1 yard fall, it takes 8 damage to knock back someone with HP10, so 4 basic damage if using RWB) then instead of bouncing upward (how I would normally treat knockback from hitting the ground) you can instead choose 1 of 6 directions to roll that many yards in.

All this is moot if you pass the DX check of course =/

I guess since you missed your kick and I don't have to make an active defense, it functions like an untriggered Wait so I get to roll HT to recover AP

Rereading Pyramid 3/44 it seems like I would roll against HT 12 as usual. Although shock penalties apply to the HT roll to mitigate losing AP equal to lost HP, they do't appear to apply to the HT roll made to recover AP, unless I'm missing that somewhere.

I'll make that roll now, but will wait to see what happens regarding your DX check first before choosing my next maneuver.

https://dicelog.com/joinlogdice 282: I rolled a 7 which is a margin of success of 5 against HT 12, so since I passed by 4 full points, I get a +1 bonus and recover a total of 2 AP bringing me up to 5 AP / 12 AP

That's tying you at 5 AP / 10 AP, unless you spend 1 AP on your Kicking Technique to avoid falling, reducing you to 4 AP / 10 AP.

You still have a free step, were you wanting to use that to exit our shared hex (where you could still kick me), or avoid using it so if I attack you next turn you don't need to spend AP?

Last edited by Plane; 11-15-2018 at 02:49 PM.
Plane is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-2018, 03:26 PM   #28
ericthered
Hero of Democracy
 
ericthered's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: far from the ocean
Default Re: A Challenger Appears! Green versus Red

I rolled a 12. I stay up. I think requiring AP for rolls to keep your balance is a little excessive.

I'm keeping close so I can use my retreat.

parry has -5, but dodge would only receive -1 (deceptive is only -1 for -2) and both could get +3 from a retreat, with parry having a generic +1. I want to end this fight sooner rather than later. And as I said, you should always deceptive down to 12.

other feedback later.
__________________
Worlds Beyond Earth -- my blog

Last edited by ericthered; 11-15-2018 at 03:29 PM.
ericthered is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-16-2018, 02:10 PM   #29
Plane
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Default Re: A Challenger Appears! Green versus Red

Quote:
Originally Posted by ericthered View Post
I rolled a 12. I stay up. I think requiring AP for rolls to keep your balance is a little excessive.
The approach is basically "require 1 AP for any roll where a technique can substitute (ie "roll vs Kicking or DX") unless it is listed as 0-cost or recovery".

Personally, when I throw a kick intending to hit an object and end up not hitting it and having my balance thrown off and nearly fall down, avoiding doing so feels a lot more exhausting an time-consuming than the act of throwing in the first place :)

In the case of Stamp Kick, I guess I would lack precedent to charge 1 AP as it says "make a DX roll" not "roll vs Stamp Kick or DX".

Quote:
Originally Posted by ericthered View Post
parry has -5, but dodge would only receive -1 (deceptive is only -1 for -2)
Right you are, I goofed there.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ericthered View Post
and both could get +3 from a retreat, with parry having a generic +1.
I think it's something like dodges always get +3, parries usually +1 but boxing/judo/karate/fencing get +3 on retreating parries. MA124 suggests reducing 3 to 1 if using a dive/roll instead of a step, and to apply dodge-only penalties to these retreating parries.

If I could think of a way to fairly implement it I would love to try out http://www.sjgames.com/gurps/Rolepla...d-Defense.html to guard my legs but that requires a way to state intent hidden from player which you would only reveal to them if they pass a skill check with a bonus equal to the defense bonus you go for... but you would want transparency for those statements of intent for after they had chosen which area to attack to verify that you deserve a bonus for that location...

- - -

you're at 4/10 I'm at 5/12 now that my shock is worn off I'm going to take a normal Attack maneuver. I'm going to be making a (cinematic, at default) Dual Weapon Attack: Left Punch + Right punch.

Strangely, while "Deny Left" option of Focused Defense in Gladiators 21 gives +1/-1 with right/left parries, it doesn't appear to bonus/penalize attacks done with those limbs...

However I do suffer the usual -4 to skill (and -2 to ST = -1 to dmg, "Strong and Weak Hands" MA124) meaning that my punches at at 14-4=10 and 14-8=6 to hit (DWA, unlike Deceptive Attack, seems like it can reduce effective skill below 10)

That seems really likely to miss though and I don't like that so I'm going to make these both Telegraphic Attacks at +4 and give you a +2 to defend against them,

Normally an attack maneuver costs 1 AP but abiding by realism on P44p9 "Maneuvers vs. Actions" going to apply 2 AP reducing me to 3/12 AP.

You are at -1 to defend against both of these attacks (split attention) reducing your bonus to defend against the telegraphic attacks from +2 to +1. You must do separate defenses against both of them since you lack a 2-handed weapon. If you use the same defense, remember to apply cumulative -4 per parry using same arm, a -2 if parrying using your off hand, or -1 per extra dodge.

Right hand punch random location: 11 = Abdomen, roll on sub-table E, rolled a 3 so I'm targetting your digestive tract. Rolling against 14 to hit... got a 13, it's a hit.

Left hand punch random hit location: 8 = Right Arm, roll on sub-table C, rolled a 5, your Upper Arm, no special effects. Roll to hit = 5/10, successful.

I'll wait to see how your defenses go before rolling damage. All of them get the +1 from One Foe and the +2 against Telegraphic Attacks and the -1 againt Dual Weapon Attacks for a net +2 to your base scores, plus possible bonuses if you retreat or use AD-specific options like Cross Parry or Acrobatic Dodge
Plane is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-27-2018, 10:08 AM   #30
ericthered
Hero of Democracy
 
ericthered's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: far from the ocean
Default Re: A Challenger Appears! Green versus Red

Red steps back from his furiously attacking foe, dodging one attack and parrying the other. (dodge at 14, parry at 14, burning 2 AP, and the dodge succeeding by only one).


Red will take evaluate this turn.


The ability to force your opponent to use AP seems to be quite powerful. Telegraphic attacks seem a lot more powerful, because while there is little chance of injuring them, there is a good chance of wearing your foe out.


I really hate that do nothing doesn't allow a step, or he would be taking that.
__________________
Worlds Beyond Earth -- my blog
ericthered is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Fnords are Off
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 12:52 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.