04-21-2013, 12:22 PM | #21 | |
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Brighton
|
Re: Knowing the outcome of an attack before choosing to actively defend
Quote:
However I would take such bad misses (and the implications of them) as being the catered for on the relevant critical miss tables already. I can think of UFC fights etc where something goes spectacularly wrong and someone ends up flat on their ass by mistake. |
|
04-21-2013, 12:46 PM | #22 | |
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Brighton
|
Re: Knowing the outcome of an attack before choosing to actively defend
Quote:
Also it still seems predicated on the idea that an active defence is an qualitative increased response to a more effective attack. Which is still the same issue for me, as it would seem to be a judgement based on hind sight, rather than an attempt to stop something from happening? However we're getting to the semantics of when does an attack become 'successful' for it to be recognised as such, here, so POV is going to going to critical However as I said I might allow both, but give a neg for those who "wait and see" as it were. And the more I think about it it's still iffy in dodging missile attacks where 'waiting and seeing' isn't really a viable option. Last edited by Tomsdad; 04-22-2013 at 12:51 AM. |
|
04-21-2013, 12:53 PM | #23 | |
Join Date: May 2008
Location: CA
|
Re: Knowing the outcome of an attack before choosing to actively defend
Quote:
|
|
04-21-2013, 12:58 PM | #24 |
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Brighton
|
Re: Knowing the outcome of an attack before choosing to actively defend
Sorry I meant given most defence scores are not very low or very high, the ranges for critical success and failure will be the same so if you remove them (by not bothering to make the roll when you don't need to determine success or failure) it's neither an advantage or disadvantage to the 'roller'.
Last edited by Tomsdad; 04-22-2013 at 12:03 AM. |
04-21-2013, 01:10 PM | #25 | |
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Not in your time zone:D
|
Re: Knowing the outcome of an attack before choosing to actively defend
Quote:
I've seen something before about using full skill for defence (with mods to make it the same thing anyway). Could be fun: you're being attacked, do you want to defend before I roll - at full skill, or after I roll - at half+3?
__________________
"Sanity is a bourgeois meme." Exegeek PS sorry I'm a Parthian shootist: shiftwork + out of country = not here when you are:/ It's all in the reflexes |
|
04-21-2013, 02:10 PM | #26 |
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Seattle, WA
|
Re: Knowing the outcome of an attack before choosing to actively defend
Isn't the Pyramid article with Ten Tweaks to Combat focused on RANGED attacks and not melee. I like the idea of DECIDE, but only for ranged attacks.
__________________
-apoc527 My Campaigns Currently Playing: GURPS Banestorm: The Symmetry of Darkness Inactive: Star*Drive: 2525-Hunting for Fun and Profit My THS Campaign-In the Shadows of Venus Yrth--The Legend Begins The XCOM Apocalypse |
04-21-2013, 02:20 PM | #27 |
Doctor of GURPS Ballistics
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Lakeville, MN
|
Re: Knowing the outcome of an attack before choosing to actively defend
There are limited circumstances, usually involving rank amateurs, worry attack is so mind-boggling with obvious that defending is not necessary. Reacting isn't even necessary. I saw this frequently as early martial arts students begin to spar. They grow out of this quite quickly, but usually these involve all out telegraphic attacks. Even with that bonus, they can still miss badly, and obviously.
In fact, that might be the best way to handle it. And attack that is telegraphic does not require a use of your limited defenses if after you declare it misses. You will almost never see a UFC match in which the combatants are so unskilled that this is something to worry about. But when fighting from default, it is much more frequent.
__________________
My blog:Gaming Ballistic, LLC My Store: Gaming Ballistic on Shopify My Patreon: Gaming Ballistic on Patreon |
04-22-2013, 12:01 AM | #28 | ||
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Brighton
|
Re: Knowing the outcome of an attack before choosing to actively defend
Quote:
Quote:
On fighting from default if you do the tweak of penalising wait and see defence you will force the unskilled to make their choice first, which I think is reasonable as they will lack the experience to read the combat and pre-empt that more skilled fighters would have. I like the rules for unskilled fighters going either AoA or AoD in MA for similar reasons. Last edited by Tomsdad; 04-22-2013 at 12:12 AM. |
||
04-22-2013, 07:46 AM | #29 | |
Join Date: Aug 2004
|
Re: Knowing the outcome of an attack before choosing to actively defend
Hi all. There are several old threads discussing DECIDE, and more on my site, so I don't know if there's much new to be said, but quick notes for the curious:
The full write-up is at http://www.gamesdiner.com/decide . It discusses the full what and why, the benefits and drawbacks, the special-case considerations, etc. (The version there also addresses my failed Writing rolls in old write-ups, which I hope has cleared up some early points of confusion.) The sweetly short version that appeared in Pyramid only addresses the most important usage scenario, defense vs bullets. It's the simple rule I'd suggest interested GMs try out. All it says is: People can't actually track and dodge bullets. When the lead flies, don't tell the targets, "Miss... Miss... Oh, this one's going to hit! What do you do?" Instead, tell the targets, "They're shooting at you! What do you do?" That's all. From there, everything proceeds as you'd expect: The targets take action – Drop? Dive for cover? Dodge generically? Hold fast [to Aim, Concentrate, etc.] and hope the bullets miss? – as appropriate for a character under fire. If TH misses, then the gunfire misses, per RAW. If TH hits, then the gunfire might hit: the target checks defense, per RAW. Nothing else to it, other than the consideration of whether to do the same for non-gunfire attacks. It's debatable. I like the effects in melee (see article), but the "why not defend?" reply that jacobmuller posted (I hadn't seen that before) is a fine explanation for GMs who'd prefer to leave melee as it is. No problem there! But for defense vs gunfire, the above tweak is sensible and, IMO, just more fun. Quote:
YMMV, of course! I think there's a misunderstanding here. Per my example above: No extra die roll, no bookkeeping, just character reaction to a life-or-death threat. Anyway, that's it in a nutshell. If you're curious, give it a try in a gun battle!
__________________
T Bone GURPS stuff and more at the Games Diner: http://www.gamesdiner.com Twitter: @Gamesdiner | RSS: here ⬅︎ Updated RSS link | This forum: Site updates thread (occasionally updated) (Latest goods on site: GLAIVE Mini levels up to v2.4. Update to melee weapon design tool, with more example weapons and commentary.) |
|
04-22-2013, 11:43 AM | #30 | |
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Brighton
|
Re: Knowing the outcome of an attack before choosing to actively defend
Quote:
Personally I'd give him some cp's if he stays there because he know's nazi's can't shoot for sh*t and calmly fire's back while the bullets fly around him! *genre depending! |
|
Tags |
combat, house rules |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|