03-19-2011, 01:45 PM | #11 |
Dog of Lysdexics
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Melbourne FL, Formerly Wellington NZ
|
Re: Some Focused Defense questions for playtesters
Which Utterly fails the reality test. stepping in CC you almost open yourself to such counters, not until you successfully there that you gain the CC advantage again reach 1 weapons, it just very hard to get there unharmed.
|
03-19-2011, 01:48 PM | #12 |
GURPS FAQ Keeper
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Kyïv, Ukraine
|
Re: Some Focused Defense questions for playtesters
Why? In reality, long-reach people usually are waiting for the unarmed person to approach. This smells of Attack of Opportunity too much, where people abstract typical wait tactics into free attacks.
|
03-19-2011, 02:12 PM | #13 | |
Join Date: Aug 2004
|
Re: Some Focused Defense questions for playtesters
Quote:
Further, the clarification can't exist for that reason because the clarification never helps you hit somebody on the way in, it only helps you defend against them once they've already stepped in. |
|
03-19-2011, 02:18 PM | #14 | ||
Join Date: Aug 2004
|
Re: Some Focused Defense questions for playtesters
No, it doesn't.
Quote:
Quote:
|
||
03-20-2011, 09:40 AM | #15 | |
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Central Europe
|
Re: Some Focused Defense questions for playtesters
Quote:
Despite what cmdicely says its not any more of a D&D 3e attack of opportunity than a parry is: all maneuvers incorporate an element of "Wait: If someone attacks me and hits, Dodge, Parry, or Block". I just posted three examples of fights where the players had limited ability to Retreat, Sidestep, or Slip.
__________________
"It is easier to banish a habit of thought than a piece of knowledge." H. Beam Piper This forum got less aggravating when I started using the ignore feature |
|
03-20-2011, 09:51 AM | #16 | ||||
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Central Europe
|
Re: Some Focused Defense questions for playtesters
Thanks Gold & Appel.
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Does that meet a reality check from people who have trained with gladiatorial arms? I have trouble envisioning a situation where one can move a shield 2” to bash a thigh, but not move it 2” to knock aside a thrust. Quote:
__________________
"It is easier to banish a habit of thought than a piece of knowledge." H. Beam Piper This forum got less aggravating when I started using the ignore feature |
||||
03-20-2011, 10:14 AM | #17 |
Join Date: Jul 2008
|
Re: Some Focused Defense questions for playtesters
I seem to recall reading that under certain circumstances you could follow a character trying to back out of close combat out-of-turn. Which is the right solution to the problem of easy disengagement, I think...it's not hard to step clear if you're not grappled, but your opponent can keep crowding you.
But I can't find it. Does this sound familiar to anyone?
__________________
I don't know any 3e, so there is no chance that I am talking about 3e rules by accident. |
03-20-2011, 10:18 AM | #18 | |
GURPS FAQ Keeper
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Kyïv, Ukraine
|
Re: Some Focused Defense questions for playtesters
Quote:
Claws (C) vs. Staff (1,2): Claws move from 1 to C and wants to attack Staffer. Staffer parries at no penalty. If Claws wants to move first and then attack, staffer suddenly gets a free attack? Knife (C) vs. Staff (1,2): Knifer moves from 1 to C, and wants to attack the Staffer. Staffer defends at no penalty. If knifer steps first and attacks then, what happens? Long Knife (C,1) vs. S (1,2): K moves from 3 to 2. Should the staffer get a free attack again? |
|
03-20-2011, 01:24 PM | #19 | ||||||
Join Date: Aug 2004
|
Re: Some Focused Defense questions for playtesters
Quote:
Quote:
But, again, that's one of the things the Wait maneuver explicitly addresses. You don't need a special rule for it. In general, the movement that occurs with an attack maneuver can happen either before or after the attack, but the attack happens at a particular range at which the defender and attacker are treated equally. If the defender wants to use a weapon to hold an opponent off and strike their body to prevent them from closing range to attack, the defender Waits. There is no need for a special rule. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
OTOH, with the special case rule, the person with the reach 1 weapon can attack at reach 1, have the grappler slip the attack and close, and still get a full parry when the grappler attacks even though the grappler started at Reach C, since the weapon-wielder started their turn at Reach 1. Quote:
My argument is that it is complication that isn't necessary to model anything, and is needlessly inconsistent with the treatment of like circumstances. It is added complexity that makes the combat rules worse. I never said anything about D&D 3e AoO in relation to this. That was vicky_molokh. |
||||||
03-20-2011, 07:04 PM | #20 | ||
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Central Europe
|
Re: Some Focused Defense questions for playtesters
Vicky, I think understand now. Part of the problem is how to map the three "watching and waiting" manoeuvers (AoD, Evaluate, Wait) into the real world to decide what situations it is reasonable to assume that the defender is Waiting. I can't dig up any Kromm posts discussing why the rule changed (did it change? I don't have my 3e books to hand) between 3e and 4e, and I can think of a case for either version, and this is off topic, so I will leave it be.
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
"It is easier to banish a habit of thought than a piece of knowledge." H. Beam Piper This forum got less aggravating when I started using the ignore feature |
||
Tags |
focused defense, gladiators, maneuvers, martial arts, martial arts: gladiators |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|