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 > GURPS

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 12-14-2014, 01:06 PM   #101
vicky_molokh
GURPS FAQ Keeper
 
vicky_molokh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Kyv, Ukraine
Default Re: Unarmed vs. Knife

Quote:
Originally Posted by DouglasCole View Post
What I would do as a player in the situation is state that my rotation came after the end of my step, since my step is only over when I declare it so, and in reality the step in the attack or a continuum of motion. I would certainly repay one egregious rules exploit with another!
Is this rules-legal? Splitting one's step so as to start it before and complete it after the Attack? I'm not saying this is can't be rules-legal (though it seems like it isn't). But I just want to know whether it is a legal choice, so that I can formulate tactics accordingly.

After all, one has to make different choices depending on whether en passant and castling are in play or not.
__________________
Vicky 'Molokh', GURPS FAQ and uFAQ Keeper
vicky_molokh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-14-2014, 01:10 PM   #102
Tomsdad
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Brighton
Default Re: Unarmed vs. Knife

Quote:
Originally Posted by vicky_molokh View Post
You can use any attack in a turn as a Feint, right? IIRC..
Don't think so, I think you can base it off any skill that can be attack, (and se alternative skills for acrobatic feints etc). But not actual attacks that are their own manoeuvres.

The listing for Feint's movement is 1 step, your talking about doing a "CA Feint" with 2 steps because you want the extra step, where's the trade off for that?

I might allow it if you also took the disadvantages of the CA with 2nd step though as the trade off. (Which makes sense your trying to make it look like a CA, so you go to the extra effort and you defence will suffer).

Quote:
Originally Posted by vicky_molokh View Post
Also, two CAs don't give much - it still counts as a Runaround.
yeah for me that's still pretty good, especially when your going to end this with grapple from behind.

Quote:
Originally Posted by vicky_molokh View Post
Now, AoA (Feint + 3 hexes move) then Attack or CA - that's interesting. But you give up your defences in hopes of not getting hit by his Wild Swing; that means no Defensive Arm Locks, and you really better spend your attack on a Defensive Feint there.
That's actually my problem with combining feints with other manoeuvres by accepting the side effects of the attacking manoeuvre. Because unless you absolutely had to get some extra steps in, every single feint ever made in the entire world will be "defensive" feint, because you won't get the reduction in damage (there's no attack) but you'll get the defensive bonus, plus of course the feint itself.

There would be no ordinary feint every again.

Quote:
Originally Posted by vicky_molokh View Post
(After the brief pause, I'm missing some thoughts I had on the whole topic, so let's just forget any possible 'offs', and stick to the Waiting Dancer-Around-Knives.)
No probs

Quote:
Originally Posted by vicky_molokh View Post
Or after a Parry, then?
Yep, I think that would fine

Quote:
Originally Posted by vicky_molokh View Post
This gets fiddly fast, it seems. Alas.
Well no more so that TA's but I would probably just keep an out out for people spamming it. The reality is most combats between individuals don't go on long enough for it to really kick it that often, and TBH I already have other ways to punish fighters who stick to the same things over and over again.
Tomsdad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-14-2014, 01:15 PM   #103
DouglasCole
Doctor of GURPS Ballistics
 
DouglasCole's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Burnsville, MN
Default Re: Unarmed vs. Knife

You're actually going to call me on whether something meets the literal definition, precisely applied in a totally legalistic and game mechanical fashion, after the pages and pages of hairsplitting that you and Tom's dad are doing?


The key is that the wait condition is triggered by the closing of the range. That does not necessarily mean that the step and movement is complete, and I would certainly allow The defender to react to your motion, since all of this attack and defense is not the turn by turn regimented, precisely sequenced, defined it down to the last minutia event that you seem to portray it as. All of this happens at the same time, which means that in the spirit of the rules a rotation to match the attempted run around attack is the right game feel. Everything else, to me, is a bunch of overly legalistic noise.
__________________
Gaming Ballistic, LLC
DouglasCole is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-14-2014, 01:25 PM   #104
roguebfl
Dog of Lysdexics
 
roguebfl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Melbourne FL, Formerly Wellington NZ
Default Re: Unarmed vs. Knife

Quote:
Originally Posted by vicky_molokh View Post
Is this rules-legal? Splitting one's step so as to start it before and complete it after the Attack? I'm not saying this is can't be rules-legal (though it seems like it isn't). But I just want to know whether it is a legal choice, so that I can formulate tactics accordingly.
It most definitely is. Kromm has repeatly stated that of your Move is 11+ you can split your step.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kromm View Post
The movement portion of a maneuver can occur before, during, or after the maneuver's other actions. This is explicit for maneuvers that permit a step:
Quote:
Originally Posted by p. B363
Many maneuvers restrict movement to a "step." This is movement up to 1/10 your Move, minimum 1 yard, in any direction, a change of facing (for instance, to turn around), or both. You can perform your step before or after the rest of the maneuver; for instance, you could step and attack or attack and step.
It is also explicit for Move and Attack:
Quote:
Originally Posted by p. B365
Move as described for the Move maneuver (p. 364), but during or after your move, make a single, poorly aimed attack – either unarmed or with a ready weapon.
And Committed Attack does let you split up movement as you wish:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Martial Arts, p. 100
Movement can come before or after the attack. An attacker who takes two steps can step, attack, and step again – a tactic known as "attack and fly out."
The general pattern is that if you can move at all, you can do none, some, or all of your movement before you attack, and move the remainder of your allowance afterward. This doesn't remove the limitations on how you must move; e.g., forward movement for All-Out Attack.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kromm View Post
Step is simply a unit of distance equal to 1/10 of your Move, rounded up, minimum one yard. You might be accorded it once or rarely twice by your choice of maneuver. You can split up this movement however you wish. There are special cases where changing posture can replace all of this movement:
  • p. B368: You can use a step to go from a kneeling to a standing posture (or vice versa) instead of moving. This requires your entire step, no matter how far you could normally move.
  • Martial Arts, p. 98:
    • Dive forward to go from standing to kneeling, crawling, or lying prone. This counts as your entire step if making an Attack or Committed Attack.
    • Dive forward to go from kneeling to crawling or lying prone. This takes your entire movement allowance in all cases.
    • Fall backward to go from standing to sitting or lying face-up. This takes your entire movement allowance if you make an All-Out Attack, Attack, or Committed Attack.
    • Fall backward to go from kneeling or sitting to lying face-up. This uses up all of your movement in all cases.
All Committed Attack does is give you twice the usual step distance as your movement allowance. It does not allow you to bypass rules that say "instead of moving" or that use up your entire movement allowance.

I agree that it would be clearer if Committed Attack said that it gave you double your usual step as allowed movement, instead of two steps. The latter leaves itself open to rules-lawyering.
__________________
Rogue the Bronze Firelizard
Gerald Grenier, Jr. Hail Eris!
Rogue's Weyr

Last edited by roguebfl; 12-14-2014 at 01:33 PM.
roguebfl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-14-2014, 01:30 PM   #105
vicky_molokh
GURPS FAQ Keeper
 
vicky_molokh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Kyv, Ukraine
Default Re: Unarmed vs. Knife

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tomsdad View Post
Don't think so, I think you can base it off any skill that can be attack, (and se alternative skills for acrobatic feints etc). But not actual attacks that are their own manoeuvres.

The listing for Feint's movement is 1 step, your talking about doing a "CA Feint" with 2 steps because you want the extra step, where's the trade off for that?

I might allow it if you also took the disadvantages of the CA with 2nd step though as the trade off. (Which makes sense your trying to make it look like a CA, so you go to the extra effort and you defence will suffer).
The usual drawbacks of CA: can't use the weapon used to attack (so no more Cross-Parry this turn), no retreat, and -2 to ADs.

We need to check the interchangeability of attacks into feints, I'm pretty sure there's a line on it somewhere. Yep, "The GM should be generous about substituting feints for
attacks, too. All-Out Attack (Feint) is just an All-Out Attack
(Double) that trades the first attack for a feint", MA97.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tomsdad View Post
yeah for me that's still pretty good, especially when your going to end this with grapple from behind.

That's actually my problem with combining feints with other manoeuvres by accepting the side effects of the attacking manoeuvre. Because unless you absolutely had to get some extra steps in, every single feint ever made in the entire world will be "defensive" feint, because you won't get the reduction in damage (there's no attack) but you'll get the defensive bonus, plus of course the feint itself.
I don't get it. Defensive Feints deny (or at least reduce) you the opportunity to Parry, thus no Counterattacks/Ripostes/Defensive Arm Locks/Throws. They're also no use to get through enemy defences.
__________________
Vicky 'Molokh', GURPS FAQ and uFAQ Keeper
vicky_molokh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-14-2014, 01:36 PM   #106
Tomsdad
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Brighton
Default Re: Unarmed vs. Knife

Quote:
Originally Posted by vicky_molokh View Post
True, the assumption is that after all the tricks, the grapple is successful.
But the problem the target is frozen in place before that happens. That successful grapple is not a justification for why previously the target could not turn while all this happened

Quote:
Originally Posted by vicky_molokh View Post
I'm divided here. On one hand, free lunches are bad. On the other, stacking Feint with the technique level of specific attacks seems too fiddly. Maybe just allow Feints to work at -1 per hex beyond reach, up to +Move hexes away (past which striking in one turn is not plausible)? Anyway, this is totally into houserule territory.
I don't know is it a house rule, Pg365 just says role against melee skill and that you have to have been able to hit the target. That pretty clearly implies to me that you'd have to use the melee skill you could have hit your target with. This is rarely ever going to be just one skill, but some circumstances will limit you choices (unarmed at reach 1 for instance) just as they do when actually attacking.

either way this one doesn't strike me as any more fiddly than having the option to attack with more than one skill/tech.

However there is no way I'd ever let people feint up to half move, life would just be one long successions of feints 5 yards apart with no danger of being attacked until someone gets a really good roll, and them bam AoA.

Quote:
Originally Posted by vicky_molokh View Post
OK. I didn't see too many Feints back when mle combat was common. Experiences differ, and I don't claim mine is righter.
Absolutely fair, and neither is mine.

Quote:
Originally Posted by vicky_molokh View Post
Mostly the analogy - both are preparative actions; also, Feint doesn't necessarily represent lowercase feints (fake attacks) - 'Feints aren’t always phony attacks. They include breaks in rhythm, false steps, head fakes, and other ploys to misdirect the foe.'.

Again, this gets pretty far into redesign of rules anyway.
Ah OK, I see what your saying about preparative action, but I'd argue there's big difference in effective range between looking at someone and pretending to attack them (or fake them out etc)

Quote:
Originally Posted by vicky_molokh View Post
Tradeoffs, tradeoffs, conditions.
Only I'd argue they are not equal trade-offs here

Last edited by Tomsdad; 12-14-2014 at 01:49 PM.
Tomsdad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-14-2014, 01:40 PM   #107
vicky_molokh
GURPS FAQ Keeper
 
vicky_molokh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Kyv, Ukraine
Default Re: Unarmed vs. Knife

Quote:
Originally Posted by DouglasCole View Post
You're actually going to call me on whether something meets the literal definition, precisely applied in a totally legalistic and game mechanical fashion, after the pages and pages of hairsplitting that you and Tom's dad are doing? [...]
Mostly was wondering whether you have any precise line from the books or authors directly in memory confirming or denying it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by roguebfl View Post
It most definitely is. Kromm has repeatly stated that of your Move is 11+ you can split your step.
That's not the same as splitting movement and the rotation of a step.
__________________
Vicky 'Molokh', GURPS FAQ and uFAQ Keeper
vicky_molokh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-14-2014, 01:40 PM   #108
Tomsdad
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Brighton
Default Re: Unarmed vs. Knife

Quote:
Originally Posted by DouglasCole View Post
You're actually going to call me on whether something meets the literal definition, precisely applied in a totally legalistic and game mechanical fashion, after the pages and pages of hairsplitting that you and Tom's dad are doing?
.
Hang on, I like to think I'm responding to Vicky's legalistic hair spliting,

....I feel it's important we get this exactly right ;-)!
Tomsdad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-14-2014, 01:46 PM   #109
Tomsdad
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Brighton
Default Re: Unarmed vs. Knife

Quote:
Originally Posted by vicky_molokh View Post
The usual drawbacks of CA: can't use the weapon used to attack (so no more Cross-Parry this turn), no retreat, and -2 to ADs.

We need to check the interchangeability of attacks into feints, I'm pretty sure there's a line on it somewhere. Yep, "The GM should be generous about substituting feints for
attacks, too. All-Out Attack (Feint) is just an All-Out Attack
(Double) that trades the first attack for a feint", MA97.
Yes only that's about exchanging an attack for a feint, you can't say I'm doing a AoA(Double) the first being a Committed attack, the second is a Defensive one.

However it does go on to given AoA(Det) and AoA(L) as feints, but you'll get the hit of no defence so it balances. What I think is telling is that this is mentioned the expansion on AoA's not Feints.

Quote:
Originally Posted by vicky_molokh View Post
I don't get it. Defensive Feints deny (or at least reduce) you the opportunity to Parry, thus no Counterattacks/Ripostes/Defensive Arm Locks/Throws. They're also no use to get through enemy defences.
Ah sorry I meant a feint that was based off a defensive attack (was thinking about attack types I forgot that there's already such a thing a defensive feint).

Last edited by Tomsdad; 12-15-2014 at 12:41 AM.
Tomsdad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-14-2014, 01:47 PM   #110
roguebfl
Dog of Lysdexics
 
roguebfl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Melbourne FL, Formerly Wellington NZ
Default Re: Unarmed vs. Knife

Quote:
Originally Posted by vicky_molokh View Post
That's not the same as splitting movement and the rotation of a step.
Why not? Tactical Combat Movement says that chancing facing is the same thing as 1 yard step. this is on top of the free change you get when you move hexes. [B386]
__________________
Rogue the Bronze Firelizard
Gerald Grenier, Jr. Hail Eris!
Rogue's Weyr
roguebfl is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
martial arts, technical grapping, technical grappling

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 04:26 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.