[Last Gasp] Action Points and encumbrance, heavy weapon, etc.

[GWJ]

Originally Posted by DouglasCole

Just remember that the system replaces "after 10 sec in combat, lose 1 FP".

So what about with this:

Assess the following costs at the endof the battle:
No Encumbrance:1 FP.
Light Encumbrance:2 FP.
Medium Encumbrance:3 FP.
Heavy Encumbrance:4 FP.
Extra-Heavy Encumbrance:5 FP.

If the day is hot, add 1 FP to the above – or 2 FP for anyone in plate armor, an overcoat, etc.

If you try to use a weapon that requires more ST than you have, you will be at -1 to weapon skill per point of ST you lack and lose one extra FP at the end of any fight that lasts long enough to fatigue you.

My players (and me), was always pay quite attention to the losing FP from this reasons (because there are one of the two main groups of losing-FP-events), and we strongly want to incorporate Last Gasp rules, both Short- and Long-term fatigue, but we don't have any idea how to reflect influence of hot weather, encumbrance, and heavy weapons (our barbarian often fight with heavy improvised weapons, and we want to give him choices: heavier weapon = more damage = more exhausting)) on the action points etc.

[Humabout]

Originally Posted by GWJ

My players (and me), was always pay quite attention to the losing FP from this reasons (because there are one of the two main groups of losing-FP-events), and we strongly want to incorporate Last Gasp rules, both Short- and Long-term fatigue, but we don't have any idea how to reflect influence of hot weather, encumbrance,

Well, for starters, I'd think it'd be reasonable to be tired the day after a battle. That said, as long as you keep your FP loss in the Mild category, you can generally be rested by the following afternoon. Figuring that most combatants have a Medium Load (based on Loadouts - Low-Tech Armor) with cavalry venturing in Heavy. That means 3-4 FP for most combatants (recoverable with a night's rest), and upward of 7 FP for fighting a battle in a desert in full plate (hello heat stroke!). Again, this doesn't sound horrific, considering what you're doing. Anyone who does fight a lot of battles in full plate would be well suited to buy up HT, Lifting ST, and FP (for lots of reasons).

Remember that in a lot of ways, The Last Gasp's long term fatigue rules are kind of a "harsh realism" option. AP add an interesting dynamic, but the longer fatigue recovery times are brutal but not far out there.

Originally Posted by GWJ

and heavy weapons (our barbarian often fight with heavy improvised weapons, and we want to give him choices: heavier weapon = more damage = more exhausting)) on the action points etc.

The barbarian just needs to use weapons he has ST enough to wield. I mean, is he really hefting things that take more than ST 17?! If he is, losing FP doesn't sound horrifically unreasonable, but if it's too stiff a penalty for you, perhaps assign extra AP costs for doing this. Maybe increase the AP cost of any maneuver using a weapon that's beyond your ST by the difference in the weapon's ST and yours? So if you try to attack with a ST 13 weapon and you have ST 11, it costs 3 AP for a normal attack or 4 AP for an All-Out Attack. That actually doesn't sound to bad from a gaming standpoint. Maybe try running a few arena-style playtests with this to home in on a number that everyone likes.

[Mailanka]

My gut says that the best way to represent this is as a penalty on the recovery rolls. An encumbered character needs to spend more time huffing and wheezing before he gets his AP back, and that means he's more tempted to spend fatigue, which means an encumbered character is more likely to fatigue himself, but not necessarily: If he's very fit, or husbands his energy carefully, he might not exhaust himself at all.

(As for heat, while I'd add that as a penalty as well, long-term heat exposure should probably still impact fatigue like normal, though there's a thread where Douglas recommends normally recovery time for that).

[DouglasCole]

Waving heavier weapons around than you can wield should probably cost you slightly more AP per swing, but the quantum of AP means that "more" is "double." Encumbrance tends to lower your movement RATE, which has an AP impact in that you spend AP at a higher rate for a constnat fraction of max speed.

What I'd wind up looking at (need to do math) is to see how hard to hit AP use. There would probably be tiers:

1. At weapon weight less than the ST rating (which is probably a Weight/BL ratio), AP use is as stated in the article

2. At ST a bit less than the Min, but up to a certain point, you don't increase AP cost but you do take a skill penalty.

3. At some ST level, you start needing extra AP to move the thing around. This means using the weapon that way is ridiculously exhausting, though - the skill penalties might be enough.

4. At some even lower ST level (or more accurately, higher and higher weapon weight) you either can't use it, or risk injury if you do. AP costs might increase, but you might have to roll HT or something or else you pull a muscle.


Ultimately, I suspect that the most PLAYABLE way to do this is escalating skill penalties for throwing around heavy weapons, but leave AP costs as they are - or say that beyond a certain weapon weight, you can ONLY AoA with it (which effectively doubles AP costs anyway), and beyond that you can't use it at all.

The Last Gasp is a pretty blunt object the way it's done now, deliberately. If you wanted finer gradations, you might do something crazy and give 10xHT Action Points as a base, and have an attack cost 10AP and an AoA cost 20AP . . . so heavier weapons can have costs like 12, 15, or 18.

But your players might not like you for it. :-)

[Tomsdad]

I think that once you start losing enough FP due to excessive AP use for stats to be reduced. you already get a negative feed back loop when it comes to being heavily encumbered and wielding heavy weapons in ongoing combat.


What I've found is if a combatant get natural breaks in combat they can keep going even in heavily armed and armoured. It's when you don't give them a chance it all kicks in.

The thing is a lot of GURPS combat are over and done in few seconds and the AP system often doesn't kick in as a limiting factor. It's when AP is spent over a action that lasts several minutes that it kicks in.

[Tomsdad]

Originally Posted by DouglasCole

Waving heavier weapons around than you can wield should probably cost you slightly more AP per swing, but the quantum of AP means that "more" is "double." Encumbrance tends to lower your movement RATE, which has an AP impact in that you spend AP at a higher rate for a constnat fraction of max speed.

What I'd wind up looking at (need to do math) is to see how hard to hit AP use. There would probably be tiers:

1. At weapon weight less than the ST rating (which is probably a Weight/BL ratio), AP use is as stated in the article

2. At ST a bit less than the Min, but up to a certain point, you don't increase AP cost but you do take a skill penalty.

3. At some ST level, you start needing extra AP to move the thing around. This means using the weapon that way is ridiculously exhausting, though - the skill penalties might be enough.

4. At some even lower ST level (or more accurately, higher and higher weapon weight) you either can't use it, or risk injury if you do. AP costs might increase, but you might have to roll HT or something or else you pull a muscle.


Ultimately, I suspect that the most PLAYABLE way to do this is escalating skill penalties for throwing around heavy weapons, but leave AP costs as they are - or say that beyond a certain weapon weight, you can ONLY AoA with it (which effectively doubles AP costs anyway), and beyond that you can't use it at all.

The Last Gasp is a pretty blunt object the way it's done now, deliberately. If you wanted finer gradations, you might do something crazy and give 10xHT Action Points as a base, and have an attack cost 10AP and an AoA cost 20AP . . . so heavier weapons can have costs like 12, 15, or 18.

But your players might not like you for it. :-)

One way you could do it is instead of applying a penalty per action, have the starting AP total reduced when wielding heavy weapons and/or starting off encumbered.

Thus forcing more recovery actions and/or requiring the burning of more FP (to get less AP back) overall.

Maybe a penalty of AP equal to difference in MinST and ST, and maybe the encumbrance level as well.

If I was going to do both though I might also allow the positive difference between MinST and ST to be a bonus to AP just to be fair (and that allows for another interplay of choice between different weapons and tactics)!



So for example assuming all else is equal (HT, skill etc) a ST10 chap with a MinST8 short sword starts with 4 more AP than ST10 chap with a MinST12 greatsword





(EDIT: Incidentally I'm experimenting with changing the HT test per second (and replacing it with a test per HPxSeconds) when going negative HP, and instead increasing AP cost of actions at that point to limit actions. As well as having stat loss from FP burning penalising conciousness checks and bleeding to represent over stressing your system at a bad time.)

[Humabout]

I like the idea of doubling AP for using weapons above your ST. I wonder how encumbrance can affect AP expenditures to affect an overall FP use in combat to recover AP that weighs in close to RAW. Then just track heat stroke normally.

Thjnking as I type this, by RAW, a basic battle involves spending 1 FP with encumbrance adding its level to this. Maybe encumbrance adds its level to all AP costs? Seems harsh, but it might fit. I'm not sure. A lot of that FP drain might just be from moving around in combat, in which case, just reduce increase AP costs for movement by encumbrance level. Honestly, I'm not sure about all of this, because I've never fought while carrying a load.

[Tomsdad]

Originally Posted by Humabout

I like the idea of doubling AP for using weapons above your ST. I wonder how encumbrance can affect AP expenditures to affect an overall FP use in combat to recover AP that weighs in close to RAW. Then just track heat stroke normally.

Thjnking as I type this, by RAW, a basic battle involves spending 1 FP with encumbrance adding its level to this. Maybe encumbrance adds its level to all AP costs? Seems harsh, but it might fit. I'm not sure. A lot of that FP drain might just be from moving around in combat, in which case, just reduce increase AP costs for movement by encumbrance level. Honestly, I'm not sure about all of this, because I've never fought while carrying a load.

I think that's why I like my solution of a penalty to starting AP, someone encumbered starts with a penalty but can spend AP normally. But they basically tire more quickly than they otherwise would, so have to spend their AP more wisely, rely on tactics to quickly win a fight before running out or AP, or rely on more frequent recovery actions to keep going without spending FP. But on the actual action by action level they don't see a difference

They also get caught in a bad downward spiral if they are not careful as once that start losing enough FP to take penalties to ST and HT not only will they risk becoming more encumbered (as ST drops so does BL) but there already reduced AP is reduced further by HT dropping.

On the Heavy weapon rule, I would allow someone who had lost some AP due to using a weapon with higher MinST than their ST to gain it back if they dropped that weapon and pulled out something lighter. But of course that requires having on to hand and various ready actions or fast draw rolls).



One other thing the perk armour familiarity that reduces the penalty fencing and karate while encumbered could be extended here to reduce the encumbrance penlity to AP dervived from fighting in armour