Keeping a Foe at a Distance with a Longer Weapon

[evileeyore]

Originally Posted by Anthony

It's a timing problem with turn-based combat. If I thrust at someone and they retreat, they can charge me before my next turn, and I cannot do a stop thrust.

What timing problem? Why didn't you setup for a Stop Thrust? You gave up an attack on your opponent's way in to hit them before they started moving.

Realistically, no such timing gap exists; if I thrust at someone and they retreat, I'm going to still be in position and they will need to avoid my weapon a second time to close.

Realistically, you've made an attack and they are reacting by closing.

[Anthony]

Originally Posted by evileeyore

What timing problem? Why didn't you setup for a Stop Thrust? You gave up an attack on your opponent's way in to hit them before they started moving.

That's the realism problem. Realistically, in the specific case of a thrust that is defended against via a retreat, the weapon remains in position for a stop.

[Ulzgoroth]

Originally Posted by Anthony

That's the realism problem. Realistically, in the specific case of a thrust that is defended against via a retreat, the weapon remains in position for a stop.

A retreat isn't necessarily directly along the line of the attack. Even if the retreat is into the hex that's along the line of the attack, which it needn't be.

[Plane]

Originally Posted by ericthered

This is a classic situation: one guy has a long weapon like a spear, the other has a shorter weapon like a knife or is a beast like a wolf with sharp teeth but a short reach. The spearman doesn't try to parry attacks from the wolf as much as he tries to prevent the wolf from closing the distance.

What maneuvers do I use to represent this in Gurps? I don't think its a simple matter of wait maneuvers. I feel like the spearman should be able to attack without letting the wolf close the distance, and I feel like the wolf's attempt to close should be able to end in being driven off rather than either succeeding or getting spitted.

I'm sure the "Holding a Foe at Bay" part of "Dealing with Charging Foes" on page 106 of Martial Arts could play some component of your solution.

I think I see your dilemma: if you "Wait" to do a "Stop Thrust", you may never hit the wolf if it never decides to get in range...

But if you DON'T wait and attack them, then you can no longer do a Stop Thrust to keep them back, and they can close the distance now. HAFAB requires either a parry or obstruction, and both of those mean the wolf is already at your heels.

I'd just do a "half wait", like you can opt to hit at -6 (the first half of a rapid strike) and then "wait" to deliver the 2nd half as a stop-hit, but you lose it if they don't trigger it. That way you can still try some jabs but without losing the opportunity to do stop hits.

Since it's not legal, could treat the ability to divvy up Wait components as a perk. You'd still have to follow usual guidelines like inability to use Move and Attack.

[Anthony]

Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth

A retreat isn't necessarily directly along the line of the attack. Even if the retreat is into the hex that's along the line of the attack, which it needn't be.

A retreat is slow enough that you'll never counterattack fast enough that they aren't in line. I guess you can simply have a retreat leave you immobile for the next turn.

[Gumby Bush]

Originally Posted by Plane

I'd just do a "half wait", like you can opt to hit at -6 (the first half of a rapid strike) and then "wait" to deliver the 2nd half as a stop-hit, but you lose it if they don't trigger it. That way you can still try some jabs but without losing the opportunity to do stop hits.

Since it's not legal, could treat the ability to divvy up Wait components as a perk. You'd still have to follow usual guidelines like inability to use Move and Attack.

I really like this option, although it does add complication. Another option might be to find a fair mechanic to allow disjunctive Wait's, possibly akin to Opportunity Fire (B390) or Rapid Strike. Another way to do it would be to treat Wait as a kind of Concentrate maneuver and use Compartmentalized Mind to open it by allowing two Waits alongside each other (are there rules for "Rapid Concentrate"?).

Re: number of Steps and Retreating, I see roughly 6 options:
Default: one autonomous step, one retreating step.
Douglas Cole's option: one step total: retreat or autonomous.
Generous: two steps total: 2 retreats, 2 autonomous, or one of each.
Extra Effort: one step for free (retreat or autonomous) with the option of gaining +1 for 1FP (an Extra Effort option that can only be used once per turn, basically an expansion of Giant Steps, MA131 and possessing similar restrictions).
Special Training: Default for most people, but a Perk is available to upgrade to Generous (or perhaps Extra Effort only for moving a step instead of adding it--if you do one step, one retreat, it shouldn't cost more with the perk than it does for most people).
DC Special Training: Douglas Cole's option for most people, but a Perk is available to upgrade to, depending on setting/taste, Default, Generous, or EE.

I like the idea of being able to allocate the steps at will--hoping for an enemy's attack to be successful so you can use your retreat is weird--but I don't like the reduced maneuverability of Douglas Cole's option, nor the immense increase thereof of the Generous option. I'm inclined to vote for either Douglas Cole's along with the rule for trading attacks for steps in MA128 being available for everyone, or for EE. One might test it with the regular Special Training option (I think it is worth noting that half of these amount to "Douglas Cole's option with optional rules available to lessen the pain").

[Plane]

Originally Posted by Gumby Bush

I really like this option, although it does add complication. Another option might be to find a fair mechanic to allow disjunctive Wait's, possibly akin to Opportunity Fire (B390) or Rapid Strike.

"Disjunctive Waits" is catchy, best I could think of was "Staggered Wait" or "Split Wait".

Originally Posted by Gumby Bush

Re: number of Steps and Retreating, I see roughly 6 options:

1. Default: one autonomous step, one retreating step.
2. Douglas Cole's option: one step total: retreat or autonomous.
3. Generous: two steps total: 2 retreats, 2 autonomous, or one of each.
4. Extra Effort: one step for free (retreat or autonomous) with the option of gaining +1 for 1FP (an Extra Effort option that can only be used once per turn, basically an expansion of Giant Steps, MA131 and possessing similar restrictions).
5. Special Training: Default for most people, but a Perk is available to upgrade to Generous (or perhaps Extra Effort only for moving a step instead of adding it--if you do one step, one retreat, it shouldn't cost more with the perk than it does for most people).
6. DC Special Training: Douglas Cole's option for most people, but a Perk is available to upgrade to, depending on setting/taste, Default, Generous, or EE.

Do you remember where you saw Cole's option? I don't think it would be Last Gasp since he never actually limits you to 1 total, just 1 that's FREE, you just pay 1 AP for the 2nd step.

3e's Compendium 2 had "Retreating Clarified" - "Retreat and Movement" on pg 68 which would penalize your following maneuver by 1 step if you took a retreat on the previous, which could be seen as option 7. It doesn't limit you to 1 step per turn (you can still step/retreat on your first) but instead limits you to an AVERAGE of 1 step per turn by then stealing the next round's step so you're down to 0.

This doesn't penalize you in any way if you have no desire to step the following round though. It would also seem fairer to "save up" a step for your next maneuver than to "borrow" a step for your next maneuver, as an 8th option.

Originally Posted by Gumby Bush

I'm inclined to vote for either Douglas Cole's along with the rule for trading attacks for steps in MA128 being available for everyone, or for EE.

If we allow those Chambara rules to apply to everybody then if we do have an "Extra Step" advantage it should be priced less than the established 25/level as some kind of Extra Step (limited, only for exchanging for steps -%)

One thing that would also need to be cleared up is what maneuvers you could do this in. Usually you can only use the Extra Attack advantage when you're using a Maneuver which allows an attack, meaning you wouldn't be able to use it on an Evaluate, a Ready, an Aim, an All-Out Defense, a Move or a Concentrate.

That's part of why I do see value in a high cost for an Extra Step that does apply in those situations where Extra Attack would not...

Or if you were to have Extra Attack usable on ALL maneuvers (like Compartmentalized Mind is) then it would probably be worth more, like some kind of Cosmic +300% enhancement.

[DouglasCole]

Originally Posted by Plane

"Disjunctive Waits" is catchy, best I could think of was "Staggered Wait" or "Split Wait".


Do you remember where you saw Cole's option?

I pulled it in from two variants of The Fantasy Trip, as sourced in my original mention of it.