Default rolls vs. skill rolls replacing attribute rolls

[VIVIT]

One thing that continually perplexes me in GURPS is an unwritten, unexplained distinction between two very similar mechanics: Skill Defaults (p. B173) and That One Idiom Where a Skill Replaces Its Controlling Attribute for the Purpose of a Specific Roll that Wasn't a Default Roll Against the Skill to Begin With (p. used all over the place, but discussed nowhere). And it perplexes me on several levels.

Some skills, like Running, have this skill as their primary use case. This is an oddity for point balance reasons. Normally, 1 point in a skill either lets you do something you previously couldn't do at all, or it buys off what is effectively a −4 penalty to use the skill without a point in it. But Running requires 4 points in it before you see the first +1 of improvement to effective skill. Nominally, that's one sixteenth the value. Why? What is it about Running that the first level of improvement should cost 16 times as much as the first level of improvement in the vast majority of other skills? Anybody can run, but why does it cost so much to be good at running?

Another example of a skill that replaces attribute rolls is Acrobatics. In that case, the attribute replacement isn't main function of the skill, which is to execute difficult acrobatic stunts. But it takes a 8 points before you see improvement in the simple DX stuff, so the question there becomes, why do you have to learn to backflip consistently before you see any improvement in your ability to jump?

I just don't understand the as a design decision. What do these special cases add to the game? Does the game really need this hairsplitting distinction between defaults and these things that are like defaults but not? Where's the value for the added complexity and potential for confusion, and for how unattractive of a deal it makes skills like Running seem?

[Stormcrow]

You need at least 4 points to improve your chances of avoiding fatigue due to running, but Running skill all by itself is used for running races. If you've got Move 5 and so does your opponent in a race, your running skill of HT-1 is still very useful against your opponent's default of HT-5.

Learning only a little Running or Acrobatics isn't no improvement in your ability to run or jump. It's just not enough to change other derived statistics. They can still be used normally.

[VIVIT]

I did see the QC for running races, but it seemed like a really, really marginal use case. I mean, what are the chances that my Move is exactly the same as my opponent's? Doesn't Basic Speed break ties there?

[FrackingBiscuit]

Originally Posted by VIVIT

I did see the QC for running races, but it seemed like a really, really marginal use case. I mean, what are the chances that my Move is exactly the same as my opponent's? Doesn't Basic Speed break ties there?

I think Basic Speed is more for things like reaction time. In the case of a race Running is just a "run good" skill. It does seem pretty marginal, since in all other cases the winner is just determined by Move.

Maybe if there were more situations where characters had to run good instead of just... run. Like rolling flat HT might be fine for just testing general endurance, but knowing how to keep pace might require/be influenced by Running. Or keeping your footing while running through hazardous/difficult terrain might be based on Running, or squeezing out extra speed for a sprint. Things that might ALWAYS use Running rather than just flat HT. As it stands, Running seems to genuinely just be for racing people with the exact same Move, as every other use can benefit from just higher HT or FP (which is probably more useful in general than what amounts to "4 points for each +1 to HT when running).

Or maybe if Running was more like track/cross-country/insert run-good-sport here, which I imagine would function like any other sport skill (assuming there isn't a skill for this already - I don't really think about sports in GURPS much).

[Stormcrow]

Human characters don't have a great deal of variation in their Move scores, so racing against someone of the same Move isn't uncommon.

Basic Speed doesn't break ties of Move. Move tells you a round number of how fast you can travel in one second; a quick contest of Running tells you who wins the race, an outcome that can vary a little from attempt to attempt.

[Witchking]

Meta explanation.

Running used to be one of the 'anyone with a brain takes this' skills (especially in the half point days).

Up until GURPS 4th ed the Running skill/8 was added to your ground Move score.

So if FREX you build your character with HT 11...and took 1/2 point of running skill you would have Running HT/H at skill 8. This would also give you an entire +1 to your Move (at least the Move that counts 99.9% of the time in 99.9% of games).

Arguably this was too good.

In 4th Ed they removed that bonus. They also removed the half point.

Since that time the Running skill (in 99.9% of games IME) has become a 'flavor' skill. Not of much practical/tactical use but for character reasons sometimes taken.

IMHO I would think the Hiking skill more useful. (The skill of moving all day, likely with a load on your back, without injury to one's feet; possibly for multiple days.)

[Fred Brackin]

Originally Posted by Witchking

IMHO I would think the Hiking skill more useful. (The skill of moving all day, likely with a load on your back, without injury to one's feet; possibly for multiple days.)

Maybe useful enough to buy until one has enough money for a horse. Then t's buy Riding.

As a note the 3e running thing may have been even worse. Due to poor differentiation between what is now Basic Speed and Basic Move the running bonus may have added to Dodge. Even now it'd be clearer if it were Basic Speed and Ground Move.

Also, you couldn't buy up Basic Move at all and the ability to buy up Basic Speed was optional and came in whole levels (for 25 pts) only.

[VIVIT]

Originally Posted by Stormcrow

Human characters don't have a great deal of variation in their Move scores, so racing against someone of the same Move isn't uncommon.

Basic Speed doesn't break ties of Move. Move tells you a round number of how fast you can travel in one second; a quick contest of Running tells you who wins the race, an outcome that can vary a little from attempt to attempt.

That's odd. I figured that the rounding off of Basic Speed when calculating Move mattered exclusively for the purposes of tactical combat. Extra effort works on two orders of magnitude lower than that; why would you round off 5.5 to 5 only to then multiply it by 1.2 (for sprinting) and 1.15 (extra effort at −3)?

[Witchking]

Originally Posted by Fred Brackin

Maybe useful enough to buy until one has enough money for a horse. Then t's buy Riding.

Hiking mostly would be useful only for long distance travel in terrain where horses cannot go. Although if circumstances make long distance travel on foot necessary its a lot better to know how. In 4/e I buy it occasionally character concept dependant.

Running would seldom be used for long distance travel, mostly just for tactical map reasons. Although with a high enough level of Running a human could perhaps make more mileage per day than a horse. Humans can eat while running, humans can push themselves beyond the point where a horse will founder, and in the dim distant past one hunting tactic for humans was to run prey down.

In settings where horses are a main means of transportation there are plenty of times when being on horseback are not possible (terrain, urban congestion, etc).

In 1/e through 3/e both Running and Riding (Low Fantasy settings mostly) IMHO were well worth at least a half-point. Usually had both at character creation, sometimes omitted Riding and picked up later in play.

[Fred Brackin]

Originally Posted by Witchking

Hi Although with a high enough level of Running a human could perhaps make more mileage per day than a horse. .

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Endurance_riding

Endurance races for horses do 100 miles per day. Searching does turn up some "ultramarathons" for humans at that distance but I bet the horse is in better shape than a human after running that distance.

Ancient humans may have run down animals with less endurance than a horse but horses are one of the natural world's endurance specialists. There are relatively few of those but many sprinters.