No fleeing in the Fright Check Table?

[Athanbeli]

After rolling a few random results in the Fr.Ch. Table - always getting similar results - I took a look at it as a whole.
I was surprised when I found out that most results end up in stunning or incapacitating the frightened person. It's very unlikely that he's forced to flee. The result that resembles this most is panic, which is described as a totally incoherent reaction that might turn into disaster, failing to preserve the victim safety. Apart from outright flight, I was expecting results like 'forced to cautiously retreat for X rounds', 'unable to bear youself to your intended task' or 'forced to AoD (if in combat)' and the like.
Is this intentional?
Is my idea of fear derived more from fiction and tabletop wargaming then reality?

[Turhan's Bey Company]

Originally Posted by Athanbeli

I was expecting results like 'forced to cautiously retreat for X rounds', 'unable to bear youself to your intended task' or 'forced to AoD (if in combat)' and the like.

Although I'd prefer to see more "run away" on the fright check table, I'm happy not so see things like this. Freezing, stunning, and running away are irrational, frightful, panicked reactions, which is pretty much what the Fright Check Table is about. Competently defending yourself is not.

[Crispythemighty]

I had a similar question a while ago.

http://forums.sjgames.com/showthread.php?t=21444

Being scared and freezing for a few seconds is pretty realistic. Most people need at least a second for their feet to realize they don't want to be there.

It really sucks in combat second by second but truly represents shocking fear.

[Ulzgoroth]

Fear checks are for when your character breaks. In general, GURPS doesn't tend to dictate character choices except via Disadvantages (failing a Self Control roll for Cowardice would probably lead to the sort of behavior you're talking about). So unless your character is terrified out of their wits, their reactions are up to you. PCs being PCs, 'don't hurt me' reactions are not usually the first things that come to mind...

If you've failed a fright check, your PC is terrified out of their wits. They're not in control enough to coolly withdraw from combat, at least until they've gotten a grip again.

[Athanbeli]

Not having to dictate actions is fine, but in my games it brought to stark contrast between that poor wretch (who failed the check) and the other guys that were able to continue their cohordinated and efficient actions. There was tension among the players, but none of them would have thought of leaving the others behind (because they're players who instinctively think campaign-wise).
I guess that a 'run away, and seek personal safety first' result might fit in the table.

[Ulzgoroth]

Originally Posted by Athanbeli

Not having to dictate actions is fine, but in my games it brought to stark contrast between that poor wretch (who failed the check) and the other guys that were able to continue their cohordinated and efficient actions. There was tension among the players, but none of them would have thought of leaving the others behind (because they're players who instinctively think campaign-wise).

The poor wretch can be back on-pattern the instant his Fright Check result wears off. He's just frozen up for a few seconds, unless he had a really bad result.

Originally Posted by Athanbeli

I guess that a 'run away, and seek personal safety first' result might fit in the table.

I don't really think so. If you're up to seriously analyzing your personal safety, you're probably up to sticking around.

"Run like the legions of hell are nipping at your heels and don't look back" would fit on the table, though.

[Fish]

Originally Posted by Athanbeli

Apart from outright flight, I was expecting results like 'forced to cautiously retreat for X rounds', 'unable to bear youself to your intended task' or 'forced to AoD (if in combat)' and the like.
Is this intentional?

I look at this in several ways:

No action is universally appropriate. A fright check can be made upon looking out the door of your fortress home and seeing a horde of zombies ... or seeing the rise of an Elder God from the frothing, oily surf ... or upon seeing the pilot of your aircraft suddenly get riddled with bullets from anti-aircraft stations ... or upon watching the butler fall out of the closet with a knife in his back ... or upon realizing you're the only one in the city who survived the comet. "Defend yourself," therefore, is not going to fit nicely into every situation, nor is "flee." How do you flee from zombies when you're already as safe as you can be? How do you All-Out-Defend yourself against anti-aircraft fire? How can you cautiously retreat from an Elder God?

Fright Check is as much about showing the nervousness of the character as imparting nervousness to the player. "I'm frightened? Oh, okay. What do I do? Looks like I ... cautiously retreat, weapons drawn. Sounds good." That would never do — if you want to make the player tense, seize control of his character for a moment and have him do something unwise. Like stay rooted to the ground in the face of impending doom. Making the character do something prudent ... well, that's the next problem.

Not every reaction is appropriate to every character. Sure, "retreat cautiously" is a good reaction for a professional adventurer. What about for a child? What about for an old man? What if your IQ is 16, what if it's 6? What if you're a pacifist or a soldier?

In short, Fright Checks aren't garden-variety fear and flight. It's for Total Gonzo Sensory Overload Fetch-My-Brown-Trousers moments.

[Zed]

Just reread the Fright Check results table...

If it were a table describing reactions to fear, running away would fit.

But it is a damage table.

It is bad things happening to your brain and maybe your body because your neurological system is being overloaded. It ranges from mild (stunning for a second) to gaining as many as -30 points of physical disadvantages or -15 of mental disadvantages right up to also losing IQ points at -20 a pop.

~Zed

[David Johnston2]

Originally Posted by Athanbeli

I guess that a 'run away, and seek personal safety first' result might fit in the table.

The lesser kind of fright that you have in mind is best represented using Intimidate checks. When The Chainsaw Maniac is approaching and uses his modified Intimidate 20 on you, even if you are normally a combat capable character running might be a good idea because the penalties to your attack are likely to be fierce.

[Kromm]

Originally Posted by Zed

But it is a damage table.

Yes. It's GURPS' answer to SAN checks, not "Oh, that startled me! Run away!" You make Fright Checks for things that have the potential, however small, to permanently damage your psyche. The table results rate the damage effects, which I would liken unto shock, stun, knockdown, crippling, knockout, etc. I guess you could interpret "run away" a bit like knockback, and that wouldn't break anything, but it's more a constrained tactical choice than psychological harm. Really, Fright Checks are all tests of "Fright, flight, or fight?" Passing one allows flight or fight; you have the option to run away, but we let you roleplay that in accordance with your PC's aggressiveness. Failing means fright; you must stand there and take it.