Issues with Retreating Dodge

[khorboth]

Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth

Doesn't work. As B357 says, EE: Mighty Blows allows you to "gain the damage bonus of an All-Out Attack (Strong)". Not the movement profile!

Fair enough. I misread it.

Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth

You could target the weapon, but doing so doesn't hamper your enemy's defenses as far as I know. So I'm not sure why you'd chop the bowstring rather than the archer's arm.

The archer may have armor magical or otherwise. It's a very rare bowstring that can withstand a single slash.

Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth

This works, though if you can successfully land a hit hitting the archer with your sword may be more effective - getting hit with a sword is often a pretty severe impediment to further effective fighting.

Again, this is with the thought of ending the whole incident with a single hit.

If the archer has leather armor and the swordsman rolls poorly, a single hit won't cripple their arm. Additional protections can come into play as well. This is why I was thinking of things other than directly damaging the foe. Sure, targeting the arm or hand would work. Especially on reload turns as mentioned by others, but you could get unlucky. A successful tackle/trip, or a broken weapon is an end to the problem.

[Kromm]

I'm with those saying these things:

• Move into close combat so that nothing triggers a retreat!
• Move and Attack, making a weapon attack just before close combat and then continuing into close combat, whether or not the target retreats.
• Move and Attack with a shield rush, which isn't penalized and which is likely to knock down the target and prevent future retreating. If it fails, continue into close combat if the target retreats.
• All-Out Attack on one of the turns when the archer doesn't have a ready bow, which is two turns in three for a mediocre fighter, every other turn for one with Fast-Draw. Sure, they can decide to kick you, or unready the bow to Fast-Draw a knife and stab you, while your defenses are down . . . but your attack comes first, and AoA (Feint) is rather scary if you have enough skill to feint well and do a Deceptive Attack right away as well.
• If you have GURPS Martial Arts, use Committed Attack, and note how you can step, attack, and step again, pressing a retreating foe.
• If you have GURPS Martial Arts, use Giant Step, Great Lunge, or Heroic Charge.

My practical experience running combat is that swordsmen in this situation just about always go for either a shield rush or, on a "safe" battlefield where nobody but that one archer is an immediate threat, an All-Out Attack (Feint). Both are usually Deceptive Attacks.

[Tomsdad]

Originally Posted by Kromm

I'm with those saying these things:[LIST][*]Move into close combat so that nothing triggers a retreat![*]Move and Attack, making a weapon attack just before close combat and then continuing into close combat, whether or not the target retreats.
...

Just quickly on that. Would you allow someone who had some Mv left after making their attack during their move in a Move & Attack action to choose weather or not to move that last hex (either into CC or keeping up with the target if they retreated)?

I ask because while keeping up with a retreat and at ending at one hex distance is ideal, Broadsword is at a bit of a disadvantage in CC (especially if they have a shield). If they really maxed their Mv to get there he can't retreat out of CC if the archer then tries to grapple him.


Although I guess that if the archer hasn't retreated they've likely taken a whack with a broadsword, and that's often it's own disadvantage to try and overcome...!


EDIT: that last bit said I do like how if the Broadsword has to spend they're Mv the archer has a high risk choice: retreat and be more likely to avoid the attack but risk the broadsword staying in their face, or don't retreat rely on normal dodge, end up in CC and drop the bow and grapple!

[bearit]

Wow, I'm overwhelmed by the amount of detailed responses I've received! With the next roleplay session tonight, the tactics you've all laid out will make combat much more interesting.

However, despite the tactical workarounds, the fact that extra movement is granted in fairly common yet not ubiquitous circumstances (Retreat, Dodge AND Drop, Sacrificial Dodge, etc) seem to me a fault with the system itself.

Originally Posted by Plane

You're interpreting the rules correctly. The problem was known back in 3e and one of the suggested fixes in compendium was that if you use a retreat, you subtract one step (or one movement point) from your next turn's maneuver.

This wasn't carried over into 4e, and it was sort of an incomplete solve because it still gave a temporary movement advantage to targets, who were still borrowing steps from the future.

As such, I'd like to suggest the following houserules:

1) Such extra movement options require their movement from the previous turn. If all movement was used in the previous turn, the option may not be taken.

-OR-

2) A additional 'Step' is given to each Maneuver for the purpose of triggering defensive options OR to be used for tactical movement before the top of the next round.

Option 1 might encourage 'hoarding' of movement for the potential defensive options, and thereby promote a less mobile combat.

Option 2 encourages mobile combat but at the cost of additional minutia to track and do during a turn.

My preference lies with option 1. What are your thoughts?

[MrFix]

Originally Posted by Tomsdad

Just quickly on that. Would you allow someone who had some Mv left after making their attack during their move in a Move & Attack action to choose weather or not to move that last hex (either into CC or keeping up with the target if they retreated)?

I ask because while keeping up with a retreat and at ending at one hex distance is ideal, Broadsword is at a bit of a disadvantage in CC (especially if they have a shield). If they really maxed their Mv to get there he can't retreat out of CC if the archer then tries to grapple him.


Although I guess that if the archer hasn't retreated they've likely taken a whack with a broadsword, and that's often it's own disadvantage to try and overcome...!


EDIT: that last bit said I do like how if the Broadsword has to spend they're Mv the archer has a high risk choice: retreat and be more likely to avoid the attack but risk the broadsword staying in their face, or don't retreat rely on normal dodge, end up in CC and drop the bow and grapple!

No maneuver forces you to move a specific distance, so you can stop at any time.

As for CC disadvantage... See Pummeling at MA111. Also see Knee Strike at B404, it lacks usual Kick disadvantages.

If the enemy archer decides to stick around, drop his bow and try to knife you or whatever, it's you who gets to retreat, and picking stuff up from the floor is 2 maneuvers (Change Posture into Kneeling etc, then Ready. Crouching doesn't count), so it's an advantage for you.

[Celjabba]

Originally Posted by bearit

Wow, I'm overwhelmed by the amount of detailed responses I've received! With the next roleplay session tonight, the tactics you've all laid out will make combat much more interesting.

However, despite the tactical workarounds, the fact that extra movement is granted in fairly common yet not ubiquitous circumstances (Retreat, Dodge AND Drop, Sacrificial Dodge, etc) seem to me a fault with the system itself.



As such, I'd like to suggest the following houserules:

1) Such extra movement options require their movement from the previous turn. If all movement was used in the previous turn, the option may not be taken.

-OR-

2) A additional 'Step' is given to each Maneuver for the purpose of triggering defensive options OR to be used for tactical movement before the top of the next round.

Option 1 might encourage 'hoarding' of movement for the potential defensive options, and thereby promote a less mobile combat.

Option 2 encourages mobile combat but at the cost of additional minutia to track and do during a turn.

My preference lies with option 1. What are your thoughts?

I enjoy the tactics (and chaos) that mobility offer when using tactical combat, so, I like the extra movement options.
If I had to choose, I would take your first house-rule, but my preference would be : neither, to be honest.

Regarding the situation in your first post :
The options suggested above will work -unless your melee fighter is encumbered/injured such that his move is down to 1, obviously.
Also, in most of my games, repeated dodge and retreat would be impaired by uneven ground, walls, obstacles, tactical necessities ...

On the other hand, my players archer will usually go up a tree, a wall, a house, flying, ... to enforce the range if they have any opportunitie to do so.
Staying in move range of a melee fighter is regarded as a bad idea if you have any other choice for a ranged combatant.

[Gnome]

Originally Posted by bearit

Wow, I'm overwhelmed by the amount of detailed responses I've received! With the next roleplay session tonight, the tactics you've all laid out will make combat much more interesting.

However, despite the tactical workarounds, the fact that extra movement is granted in fairly common yet not ubiquitous circumstances (Retreat, Dodge AND Drop, Sacrificial Dodge, etc) seem to me a fault with the system itself.



As such, I'd like to suggest the following houserules:

1) Such extra movement options require their movement from the previous turn. If all movement was used in the previous turn, the option may not be taken.

-OR-

2) A additional 'Step' is given to each Maneuver for the purpose of triggering defensive options OR to be used for tactical movement before the top of the next round.

Option 1 might encourage 'hoarding' of movement for the potential defensive options, and thereby promote a less mobile combat.

Option 2 encourages mobile combat but at the cost of additional minutia to track and do during a turn.

My preference lies with option 1. What are your thoughts?

I would say both options have some flaws.
With Option 1, you might have more work to do tracking movement points used, etc., or you may find that everyone simply keeps one movement point "in reserve" for retreating, which will make this not so different than simply subtracting 1 from everyone's Move score.
With Option 2, I think you'll see some brutal tactics where people try to use their "free" movement point during someone else's turn to catch them in an unfavorable position (typically with a back attack). The thing about Retreat is that it's not a free step, it's quite restricted in what you can do with it, when you can do it, etc.

If forced to pick, I would choose option 1, as it wouldn't introduce a whole new set of tactical possibilities, but after many years of playing I would also say that I like the RAW. Occasionally Retreats are used as a way to actually get somewhere, but I've never had that happen in a way that bothered me; I've seen many movie fight scenes where retreating defenses move someone across the battlefield over multiple attacks, for example. The options in Martial Arts that allow retreating in different directions (slip and sideslip) are really useful for making unarmed combatants more viable, because one problem I have with GURPS is that it's too easy to get out of close combat, so the mobility that comes with retreats can actually help with that a bit (and also hurt, since the armed defender can retreat and get out of close combat whenever he wants).

[David Johnston2]

I have always assumed that you can't take that second step back because you already did. You can't walk backward faster than your foe can walk forward.

[Thamior]

Originally Posted by David Johnston2

I have always assumed that you can't take that second step back because you already did. You can't walk backward faster than your foe can walk forward.

Either that. Or let the attacker make a free step as well. Or penalize the defender's attack roll / defense rolls. I would even go as far as making something akin to Move and Attack attack roll ceiling for the archer. It would only be fair.

[Plane]

Originally Posted by WingedKagouti

This is probably the most important bit. Unless the archer has Heroic Archer and/or Weapon Master (anything that includes Bow) they would have to make not only the Fast Draw (Arrow) roll, but also two Bow rolls at -6 to fire every round in a cinematic game. In a realistic game the archer has an additional -4 on all three rolls.

There's still a problem regardless of the archer's ROF.

Ready normally lets you move 1 step per second, but you're going 2 steps per second if you're using retreats.

By not attacking the swordsman during these readies, you're also removing his ability to "Slip" to get an extra step himself, if he's opting to use Attack or Defensive Attack.

This means the only way he can keep pace is by using Committed Attack (or AOA) and dropping his own defences, or Move and Attack and dropping his accuracy.

C2p68's "Retreating Clarified" is a great start but I think I want to encourage prepping via unused step from preceding turn instead of borrowing unused step from following turn.

Idea: export the "-2 for extra step" from Committed Attack as a general rule reflecting "use NEXT step". Actually make this worse: not just an attack penalty, but a universal -2 DX -2 DX penalty lasting 1 second. This way it would still penalize you even if you didn't take a step the next turn, but wanted to do other stuff. This would also a be a -1 to active defences. The HT penalty would only apply to HT rolls to recover from stun though, not poison and stuff.

You would use this in retreats, resulting in a -1 penalty to active defences if you had already used your step this turn. This would result in slipping dodges having no bonus relative to normal remain-in-hex dodges.

If it's too brutal: as alternate option to taking a step from the next turn, you could consider an already-used step as being a pre-commitment to a "retreat" bonus appropriate to whatever direction future attacks come from. I like the idea of applying this (and defensive feint) to ALL attacks, not just 1 opponent.

Make -0 penalty for "utilize current step". This gives incentive for people to avoid using their step (keep it in reserve) if there may be a need to retreat. That's the step from teh current turn they just hadn't opted to use.

If an unused step is never utilized, maybe give +1 to HT roll to recover AP if using Last Gasp. Consider this built into Do Nothing's +4 bonus.

- -

This deals with the problem of the Readying archer moving faster than the Attacking swordsman... but it still results in them moving at the same pace. That still feels off because as Movement Points shows it ought to be easier to walk forward than backward.

If we required backsteps to use 2 steps (using the above "use next" or "use current" options) then net movement over time ends up being 1 per 2 turns when going backward.

It's still kinda jittery (1/0/1/0) so "half hex" movement might be used, like you might when representing someone with Decreased Time Rate moving forward. Half hexes could instill penalties of -2 to skill per yard instead of -4 to skill per yard, when using weapons to wrap-shot / wrap-parry inside their Reach rating.

Using half-hexes (1.5ft) could also mean more flexibility in rating weapons at various reaches, giving more categories and distinction for more choices. Could maybe distinguish between elbows/punches (make a punch reach 0.5 instead of reach 0/C, so using a punch is -2 to hit at close range)

Originally Posted by David Johnston2

I have always assumed that you can't take that second step back because you already did. You can't walk backward faster than your foe can walk forward.

Maybe instead of "extra step" or "step from next turn", it's just simpler to have retreats only use existing move.

I think we already assume "no retreats on a do nothing" due to "Movement: None" yet other maneuvers don't say "move: step + optional retreats"

In the case of already using a step, rather than a "you can't retreat" perhaps just "you can count your used-step as a retreat in that direction". So if you backed away from a foe, that's used as a +3 traditional dodge whereas if you sidestepped, that could only count as a +2 sideslip dodge, and if you advanced, it could only count as a +1 slip dodge.

In the case of "dive" you could get MA123's +2 dodge/BJKparry / +0 other-parry even if you had used your step per MA98's 4 bullet options to go from standing>prone
*althoguh MA123 mentions the +3 parry for fencing, MA122 "Fencing Parries" says to only keep it at +3 for slip/sideslip, but reduce to +1 when doing a Dive or in a Lying posture.
**I think it might be reasonable to allow a "half-dive" for merely +1 if going stand>kneel/crawl instead of to lying. Maybe instead of fencing parry going from +3 to +1 it should just go to base +2 in that case, so the -1 reduces that to merely +1 to parry.

You can't really combine diving with the other retreats (both cost 1 step) but in cases of adopting a lying posture, whichever part of your body actually relocates the hex it's in (usually upper) could probably count as one of the three hex-change retreats if it was the target (similar to lower body during a Sprawling Parry in TG)

If you wanted to combine the sprawl+dive I think that shouldn't give a bonus for dodging attacks on feet (they're not lowering) and at most +1 for legs/groin (not lowering as much as upper body is). If you wanted to do +1shin/+2knee/+3thigh/+4hip-groin ascending granularity then you'd need progressively huge bonuses for upper body to the point of ridiculouslness (people would be falling to ground very often) so that'd work better if we had active defences based on full DX insetad of 1/2 DX, perhaps applying MoS as a retroactive penalty to the strike it's responding to.