Parry against miss? - Page 6

Gollum · 09-29-2012, 09:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PeterC

Alright, per RAW you can never use an active defense against a missed attack. If you choose to modify this, it's a house rule. Right?

Yes. That is perfectly right.

Gollum · 09-29-2012, 10:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RyanW

That's not how counterattack works, though. Counterattack doesn't give you any extra attacks. It gives you the option of applying a benefit to your next attack following a successful defense. If you are not hit, you don't lose any attacks, just the right to use Counterattack to reduce the opponent's defenses.

Per RAW:

I attack.
Gollum defends.
Then Gollum attacks me on his turn using counterattack.

Edit: I would let a player use Counterattack to unleash an immediate attack, if he had set up a Wait to that effect. In that case, though, they still don't get any extra attacks, and again just get to apply a benefit to an attack they already would have gotten.

Yes! You're right. Oh my! It's terrible how I misunderstood that technique!

Forgot all what I wrote before! It was absolutely wrong...

Possible to go in the past and change things? No? Sure? What a pity!

Gollum · 09-29-2012, 10:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Icelander

A lot of attacks by people who are inexperienced, drunk, angry or all three will be Committed or All-Out Attacks. Since most people who fight are at least one of the things above, this would cover most attacks that martial artists fondly dream of countering as they practice inside dojos.

If someone makes a Committed or All-Out Attack on you and misses, you can certainly take advantage of their failure. After all, they are now out of position and in a poor position to defend. They may even be completely open to your counter.

That's how GURPS models typical counterattacks or taking advantage of your foe's lapse.

A very good point!

Except that taking benefit of a failed attack is not just a "fondly dream". It is warrior experience since millenniums, no matter the martial art (bare handed or with any kind of weapon). It explains why the "warriors' wisdom" always teach: think to your defense first.

Attacking, no matter how you do it, make you inevitably abandon part of your guard. If it is a good attack, this is not really a problem: your foe will have to defend before doing anything else. But if it is not a good one, too bad for you...

And for those who think that "best defense is attack", they have to know that it is true for surprise attack. But as soon as the foe knows that you will attack and is ready to defend, it becomes wrong.

Icelander · 09-29-2012, 12:02 PM

So, to sum up what to take away from the discussion, there are several mechanical ways in GURPS to model what you'd call a counterattack (or counterpunch, counterstrike, counter, etc.) in real life. To clarify, we'll run through a mental scenario. We have two men. Our hero, the erstwhile Counterattacker ('C') and his foe, the Attacker ('A').

So that we don't have to get into Wait* let's imagine that C is attempting to reason with an angry A. Using the Tactical Shooting** rules for 'The Tactical Mind', C is in mental state Orange (Focused), but instead of Wait, he's using the Diplomacy skill with Concentrate manuevers. This prevents Partial Surprise if A attacks, but by choosing to make an earnest attempt at reasoning with him, C ceded the initiative to A.

A straight Attack maneuver by A might or might not offer a chance for C to counter effectively. On a miss, A retains full defences, which is fair enough because he chose to avoid sacrificing them by selecting a more aggressive Maneuver for his turn. C can still counter his attack, but it's harder than taking advantange of a less cautious move by A.

However, if A tries to go for an early, fight-ending move, requiring Committed Attack or All-Out Attack, he leaves himself open to a counter whether he hits or not. That's because Committed Attacks already penalise defences as much as being the target of a Counterattack and All-Out Attacks allow no defences at all.

Of course, C might not be in a condition to launch any counters if A hits him with a powerful Committed Attack sucker-punch to the solar plexus or seizes him in a grapple and draws him onto a knee to the voolnerables with an All-Out Attack (Double). Which is why a failed attack roll by A would actually serve quite well in providing C with a mistake to exploit in this case.

No matter what Maneuver A chooses for his turn, C gets a normal defence roll if needed, as he wasn't caught by Surprise, Partial or otherwise. And if C makes that roll, he can move on to his own turn without having been incapacitated or even momentarily winded.

This is where the GURPS technique Counterattack would be used. But that technique is far from the only way to capitalise on an opening left by an enemy attack. There's also the Riposte option. By accepting a penalty to his own Parry against A's attack during his first turn, C can cause a penalty to A's defences once his own turn starts and he counters. In real-world terms, he can start his offensive move while defending against A, incorporating his defence into the counter. That describes many cool counters, even though there are martial arts that frown on such risky moves.

Even if A misses, there's still a possibility of taking advantage of the hole left in his defences. C simply has to represent it mechanically by the Deceptive Attack option. One of the many things that this can represent is timing. If C is timing his attack precisely to take advantage of the momentary window in A's defences caused by his attack, that's a Deceptive Attack because it makes C's attack more difficult and A's defence harder.

The real-world justification for C needing the more difficult Deceptive Attack rather than Counterattack is it covers only counters that require contact. C couldn't use his blocking forearm to knock A's striking hand slightly out of line or jam his leg against A's kick and disrupt his balance enough to get in a counter. Because A missed, his attack wasn't of the sort to offer that kind of opportunity. Maybe the 'missed' attack even represented an attack abandoned half-way through because A saw that C was ready to block it and counter.

So, a partial tree of the most plausible possibilities:

A Turn 1: All-Out Attack, rolls a hit.
C Active Defence: Success.
C Turn 1: Counter by any offensive Maneuver.
A Active Defence: None allowed.

A Turn 1: All-Out Attack, rolls a hit.
C Active Defence: Failure.
C Turn 1: Suffering Shock and perhaps Knockdown and/or Stun. If not, can counter as above.
A Active Defence: None allowed.

A Turn 1: All-Out Attack, misses.
C Active Defence: None needed.
C Turn 1: Counter by any offensive Maneuver.
A Active Defence: None allowed.

A Turn 1: Committed Attack, rolls a hit.
C Active Defence: Success. If confident of successful roll beforehand, can use Riposte to lower his effective Parry and cause a penalty to A's defences against his counter.
C Turn 1: Counter by any offensive Maneuver. Can use Counterattack to increase the defence penalties of A.
A Active Defence: Cannot Parry with striking limb, cannot Dodge if he kicked, cannot Retreat.

A Turn 1: Committed Attack, rolls a hit.
C Active Defence: Failure.
C Turn 1: Suffering Shock and perhaps Knockdown and/or Stun. If not, can counter as above.
A Active Defence: Cannot Parry with striking limb, cannot Dodge if he kicked, cannot Retreat.

A Turn 1: Committed Attack, misses.
C Active Defence: None needed.
C Turn 1: Counter by any offensive Maneuver. Can use Deceptive Attack to increase the defence penalties of A.
A Active Defence: Cannot Parry with striking limb, cannot Dodge if he kicked, cannot Retreat.

A Turn 1: Attack, rolls a hit.
C Active Defence: Success. If confident of successful roll beforehand, can use Riposte to lower his effective Parry and cause a penalty to A's defences against his counter.
C Turn 1: Counter by any offensive Maneuver. Can use Deceptive Attack to inflict defence penalties on A.
A Active Defence: Normal aside from any penalties caused by C's Deceptive Attack or Riposte.

A Turn 1: Attack, rolls a hit.
C Active Defence: Failure.
C Turn 1: Suffering Shock and perhaps Knockdown and/or Stun. If not, can counter as above.
A Active Defence: Normal aside from any penalties caused by C's Deceptive Attack.

A Turn 1: Attack, misses.
C Active Defence: None needed.
C Turn 1: Counter by any offensive Maneuver. Can use Deceptive Attack to inflict defence penalties on A.
A Active Defence: Normal aside from any penalties caused by C's Deceptive Attack.

Generic Musings

We need to keep in mind that missing with an attack roll is not necessarily indicative of a novice with low skill. Fighters with low skill scores often make the mistake of thinking that enough power and accuracy will win the fight for them, because they fail to take into account that their opponent won't simply passively stand there as a target for their attacks.

So a stereopytical low-skill attack might be an All-Out Attack (Strong) to a random hit location, made with Telegraphic Attack, for about a 90% chance that even a completely untrained person will roll a hit with a punch. But because it's a Telegraphic Attack, most trained martial artists will have an easy time defending against it and then, because it was an All-Out Attack, they can counter with perfect ease, against an opponent who can't defend.

By contrast, even highly skilled martial artists might 'miss' with a lot of their attacks, particularly against other, highly skilled martial artists. Why? Because they know that 'hitting' with an easy-to-defend-against attack will provide an opportunity to counter. They might choose to take heavy Deceptive Attack penalty to their attacks, maybe even reduce them down to skill 10 (which means missing in a full 50% of cases), specifically to avoid opening themselves up to counters.

Consider the Riposte rule. Offer a very skilled opponent the chance to Parry at full skill and he'll use it to counter with a large penalty to your defences. While Telegraphic Attacks are necessary and common in fights between novices, they are a fight-ending mistake in a fight between masters. Even a basic attack that allows an Active Defence at full skill might be considered a terrible blunder if the opponent has Parry at 16+ and can thus easily afford to use Riposte without risk.

A skilled martial artist knows that by using Deceptive Attack to maximise the penalty to opponent's Active Defences, even if he reduces his own skill so that he misses frequently, the odds of offering a mistake to exploit drop greatly. Either he will successfully hit his foe with an attack that even a master might find it hard to defend against or he will miss cleanly, not offering his foe the advantage of a hole in his defences even for a moment.

A Deceptive Attack like this is the GURPS way of modelling, for example, very fast punches that leave the foe little time to react, either to defend or to take advantage of an opening. It can also model an attack that requires tricky timing to succeed, such as an attempt to take advantage of a slight hole in the defences of another master.

*It should be obvious that if C was just talking and not actually serious about his Diplomacy, he could have been Waiting to attack A as soon as he started any hostile move. C's Wait could then be converted into a Stop Hit or any of the other methods mentioned above to take advantage of an attacking foe.
**This book, while focused on shooting, actually contains a mass of new rules and guidelines for using existing ones that are useful in all any realistic game. The sections relating to the tactical consequences of human psychology, the limits of situational awareness and the effects of adrenaline are crucial for accurately modelling violence.

Gollum · 09-29-2012, 02:21 PM

Wow! Very good explanation. It shows how I was wrong and how GURPS rules as they are written really allow to simulate what I was describing.

A house rule isn't really needed, then. Thank you very much to wrote this post.

09-29-2012, 12:02 PM	#54
Icelander Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Iceland*	Summation So, to sum up what to take away from the discussion, there are several mechanical ways in GURPS to model what you'd call a counterattack (or counterpunch, counterstrike, counter, etc.) in real life. To clarify, we'll run through a mental scenario. We have two men. Our hero, the erstwhile Counterattacker ('C') and his foe, the Attacker ('A'). So that we don't have to get into Wait* let's imagine that C is attempting to reason with an angry A. Using the Tactical Shooting** rules for 'The Tactical Mind', C is in mental state Orange (Focused), but instead of Wait, he's using the Diplomacy skill with Concentrate manuevers. This prevents Partial Surprise if A attacks, but by choosing to make an earnest attempt at reasoning with him, C ceded the initiative to A. A straight Attack maneuver by A might or might not offer a chance for C to counter effectively. On a miss, A retains full defences, which is fair enough because he chose to avoid sacrificing them by selecting a more aggressive Maneuver for his turn. C can still counter his attack, but it's harder than taking advantange of a less cautious move by A. However, if A tries to go for an early, fight-ending move, requiring Committed Attack or All-Out Attack, he leaves himself open to a counter whether he hits or not. That's because Committed Attacks already penalise defences as much as being the target of a Counterattack and All-Out Attacks allow no defences at all. Of course, C might not be in a condition to launch any counters if A hits him with a powerful Committed Attack sucker-punch to the solar plexus or seizes him in a grapple and draws him onto a knee to the voolnerables with an All-Out Attack (Double). Which is why a failed attack roll by A would actually serve quite well in providing C with a mistake to exploit in this case. No matter what Maneuver A chooses for his turn, C gets a normal defence roll if needed, as he wasn't caught by Surprise, Partial or otherwise. And if C makes that roll, he can move on to his own turn without having been incapacitated or even momentarily winded. This is where the GURPS technique Counterattack would be used. But that technique is far from the only way to capitalise on an opening left by an enemy attack. There's also the Riposte option. By accepting a penalty to his own Parry against A's attack during his first turn, C can cause a penalty to A's defences once his own turn starts and he counters. In real-world terms, he can start his offensive move while defending against A, incorporating his defence into the counter. That describes many cool counters, even though there are martial arts that frown on such risky moves. Even if A misses, there's still a possibility of taking advantage of the hole left in his defences. C simply has to represent it mechanically by the Deceptive Attack option. One of the many things that this can represent is timing. If C is timing his attack precisely to take advantage of the momentary window in A's defences caused by his attack, that's a Deceptive Attack because it makes C's attack more difficult and A's defence harder. The real-world justification for C needing the more difficult Deceptive Attack rather than Counterattack is it covers only counters that require contact. C couldn't use his blocking forearm to knock A's striking hand slightly out of line or jam his leg against A's kick and disrupt his balance enough to get in a counter. Because A missed, his attack wasn't of the sort to offer that kind of opportunity. Maybe the 'missed' attack even represented an attack abandoned half-way through because A saw that C was ready to block it and counter. So, a partial tree of the most plausible possibilities: A Turn 1: All-Out Attack, rolls a hit. C Active Defence: Success. C Turn 1: Counter by any offensive Maneuver. A Active Defence: None allowed. A Turn 1: All-Out Attack, rolls a hit. C Active Defence: Failure. C Turn 1: Suffering Shock and perhaps Knockdown and/or Stun. If not, can counter as above. A Active Defence: None allowed. A Turn 1: All-Out Attack, misses. C Active Defence: None needed. C Turn 1: Counter by any offensive Maneuver. A Active Defence: None allowed. A Turn 1: Committed Attack, rolls a hit. C Active Defence: Success. If confident of successful roll beforehand, can use Riposte to lower his effective Parry and cause a penalty to A's defences against his counter. C Turn 1: Counter by any offensive Maneuver. Can use Counterattack to increase the defence penalties of A. A Active Defence: Cannot Parry with striking limb, cannot Dodge if he kicked, cannot Retreat. A Turn 1: Committed Attack, rolls a hit. C Active Defence: Failure. C Turn 1: Suffering Shock and perhaps Knockdown and/or Stun. If not, can counter as above. A Active Defence: Cannot Parry with striking limb, cannot Dodge if he kicked, cannot Retreat. A Turn 1: Committed Attack, misses. C Active Defence: None needed. C Turn 1: Counter by any offensive Maneuver. Can use Deceptive Attack to increase the defence penalties of A. A Active Defence: Cannot Parry with striking limb, cannot Dodge if he kicked, cannot Retreat. A Turn 1: Attack, rolls a hit. C Active Defence: Success. If confident of successful roll beforehand, can use Riposte to lower his effective Parry and cause a penalty to A's defences against his counter. C Turn 1: Counter by any offensive Maneuver. Can use Deceptive Attack to inflict defence penalties on A. A Active Defence: Normal aside from any penalties caused by C's Deceptive Attack or Riposte. A Turn 1: Attack, rolls a hit. C Active Defence: Failure. C Turn 1: Suffering Shock and perhaps Knockdown and/or Stun. If not, can counter as above. A Active Defence: Normal aside from any penalties caused by C's Deceptive Attack. A Turn 1: Attack, misses. C Active Defence: None needed. C Turn 1: Counter by any offensive Maneuver. Can use Deceptive Attack to inflict defence penalties on A. A Active Defence: Normal aside from any penalties caused by C's Deceptive Attack. Generic Musings We need to keep in mind that missing with an attack roll is not necessarily indicative of a novice with low skill. Fighters with low skill scores often make the mistake of thinking that enough power and accuracy will win the fight for them, because they fail to take into account that their opponent won't simply passively stand there as a target for their attacks. So a stereopytical low-skill attack might be an All-Out Attack (Strong) to a random hit location, made with Telegraphic Attack, for about a 90% chance that even a completely untrained person will roll a hit with a punch. But because it's a Telegraphic Attack, most trained martial artists will have an easy time defending against it and then, because it was an All-Out Attack, they can counter with perfect ease, against an opponent who can't defend. By contrast, even highly skilled martial artists might 'miss' with a lot of their attacks, particularly against other, highly skilled martial artists. Why? Because they know that 'hitting' with an easy-to-defend-against attack will provide an opportunity to counter. They might choose to take heavy Deceptive Attack penalty to their attacks, maybe even reduce them down to skill 10 (which means missing in a full 50% of cases), specifically to avoid opening themselves up to counters. Consider the Riposte rule. Offer a very skilled opponent the chance to Parry at full skill and he'll use it to counter with a large penalty to your defences. While Telegraphic Attacks are necessary and common in fights between novices, they are a fight-ending mistake in a fight between masters. Even a basic attack that allows an Active Defence at full skill might be considered a terrible blunder if the opponent has Parry at 16+ and can thus easily afford to use Riposte without risk. A skilled martial artist knows that by using Deceptive Attack to maximise the penalty to opponent's Active Defences, even if he reduces his own skill so that he misses frequently, the odds of offering a mistake to exploit drop greatly. Either he will successfully hit his foe with an attack that even a master might find it hard to defend against or he will miss cleanly, not offering his foe the advantage of a hole in his defences even for a moment. A Deceptive Attack like this is the GURPS way of modelling, for example, very fast punches that leave the foe little time to react, either to defend or to take advantage of an opening. It can also model an attack that requires tricky timing to succeed, such as an attempt to take advantage of a slight hole in the defences of another master. It should be obvious that if C was just talking and not actually serious about his Diplomacy, he could have been Waiting to attack A as soon as he started any hostile move. C's Wait could then be converted into a Stop Hit or any of the other methods mentioned above to take advantage of an attacking foe. *This book, while focused on shooting, actually contains a mass of new rules and guidelines for using existing ones that are useful in all any realistic game. The sections relating to the tactical consequences of human psychology, the limits of situational awareness and the effects of adrenaline are crucial for accurately modelling violence. __________________ Za uspiekh nashevo beznadiozhnovo diela!

09-29-2012, 02:21 PM	#55
Gollum Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: France	Re: Parry against miss? Wow! Very good explanation. It shows how I was wrong and how GURPS rules as they are written really allow to simulate what I was describing. A house rule isn't really needed, then. Thank you very much to wrote this post.