Evade Technique?

[Kelly Pedersen]

Originally Posted by Lord Carnifex

I'd be comfortable replacing Judo with Sport (Gridiron Football) here, maybe with an additional penalty (-4?) to cover that in gridiron football, you just wind up tackled, not dead.

Eh, I'd just rule that this is a rather unusual example of a Sport skill defaulting to actual combat, and apply the usual -3 penalty. And I wouldn't let you buy it off - if you want a football player who's as good at evading real fighters as they are at evading opposing players, make them buy the Judo skill (or possibly Sumo Wrestling with a Technique Adaptation Perk).

[Peter V. Dell'Orto]

Originally Posted by Kelly Pedersen

Eh, I'd just rule that this is a rather unusual example of a Sport skill defaulting to actual combat, and apply the usual -3 penalty.

I see that, but I also see the -4. The default from a Combat Sport skill to a Combat Skill is -3, but Sports is a non-combat skill. Giving an additional -1 is reasonable - GURPS Martial Arts similarly tacks on an extra -1 to techniques that allow striking skills to grapple or grappling arts to inflict damage. So the -4 seems reasonable.

For a cinematic game, the same kind of cinematic game that allows Sport and Art to default to combat skills at -0 (as suggested in GURPS Martial Arts), of course Sports should work at full skill. :D

[Kromm]

And let's face it, the kinds of games where "rogues" can somehow get behind hostile fighters to backstab them are cinematic in the extreme. Realistically, the rogue would be spitted on a spear (as I said, there are now rules for this), and a man hurtling over or past a line of warriors would be quietly executed out of sight of his allies . . .

[Icelander]

Originally Posted by Kromm

And let's face it, the kinds of games where "rogues" can somehow get behind hostile fighters to backstab them are cinematic in the extreme.

I strongly disagree.

I don't run a very cinematic* game, but the majority of kills in my campaign have been backstabs.

Granted, often the 'hostile fighters' were only theoretically hostile before the first stab. ;)

Humour aside, it's often possible to surround enemies if you outnumber them and can move fast and out of their reach. A lone PC was 'backstabbed' by a flying monster recently, for example, while trying to keeps its ally in his sight.

*In the sense that I use no cinematic rules. The subject matter and the eventual abilities of the PCs tend to cinema, but they start out as competent without any cinematic abilities.

Originally Posted by Kromm

Realistically, the rogue would be spitted on a spear (as I said, there are now rules for this), and a man hurtling over or past a line of warriors would be quietly executed out of sight of his allies . . .

I'd think that a line of six warriors facing another six would be most put out if one of them managed to get behind them.

[Kromm]

My point being that evading in GURPS isn't subtle. If you're trying to get behind enemies by evading -- rather than by starting out there, or by running around their flank -- then you're charging them frontally with the clear intent of getting behind them. It doesn't feel like a roguish move to me; it's closer to a berserk, shield-biting barbarian kind of thing.

I've always handled would-be backstabbers by giving people a penalized Stealth roll at the start of combat to see if they managed to escape notice before the hostilities began.

[Icelander]

Originally Posted by Kromm

My point being that evading in GURPS isn't subtle. If you're trying to get behind enemies by evading -- rather than by starting out there, or by running around their flank -- then you're charging them frontally with the clear intent of getting behind them. It doesn't feel like a roguish move to me; it's closer to a berserk, shield-biting barbarian kind of thing.

Oh, absolutely.

Rogues in my campaign use Evade to escape melee, not to get into a position where there are more enemies. ;)

Originally Posted by Kromm

I've always handled would-be backstabbers by giving people a penalized Stealth roll at the start of combat to see if they managed to escape notice before the hostilities began.

Nice. I'll steal it.

How much do you penalise the roll?

I realise it's circumstantial, but approximately?

[Kromm]

Originally Posted by Icelander

How much do you penalise the roll?

I use -5 for all Stealth rolls where you want to hide from an actively aware enemy, be he a sentry or a foe in combat, and get close enough to strike.

In the case of a sentry, the -5 is just the -5 to stalk to within 15 yards of game. I assume that unpenalized Stealth lets you move in the same general area (floor of a building, backyard of a house, courtyard of a castle) but not right up to the target.

In combat, I have the -5 for hiding in an area with few hiding spots (you start in plain sight) canceled by the +5 that the Pickpocket skill gets for a distracted victim (a melee erupting is pretty distracting), but then I tack on the -5 for moving at faster than Move 1 (since diving for cover fast enough to avoid an enemy rush in combat is probably faster than Move 1). Success means that you take advantage of the swirl of melee to get out of sight in the opening moments and swiftly move behind the enemy.

Oh, and needless to say, this is a Quick Contest vs. the target's Per.

Against conscripts with Per 10, you can probably do this with Stealth at 16-17. Against serious foes with Per 12-14, you'll want a fairly legendary Stealth score. Light Walk helps -- a lot -- and probably ought to be mandatory for fantasy rogues!

[SCHIFTY]

Originally Posted by Anaraxes

Sure you are. It's just that the attack has to be bought with Limited Use (5 / game).

Not with intent to cause serious bodily harm. And I can't think of any players being murdered in a game that wasn't schoolyard rules.

[Peter Knutsen]

Originally Posted by Fred Brackin

This is the easy part. yes, techniques can be absed on Attributes. Neck Snap is a simple examaple, it's based on ST rather than any Skill. There are other ST-based techniques in MA.

Evading is not so obvious. I think I might recall soemthing about Evade for acrobatics in MA but do not ahve the time right now to look it up.

Fred Brackin

In GURPS 3E, you have to make a DX roll, after Kicking, in order to avoid falling prone. I don't recall whether this is also the case in 4E, but it probably is.

Is there any officially legal way to improve this DX roll, short of paying 20 points a level for more DX?

Would a Hard Technique for this, perhaps to a max of DX+3 or DX+4, be balanced?

[Peter Knutsen]

Originally Posted by Kromm

This technique represents training at avoiding opponents who wish to obstruct your movement. Evade (Acrobatics) lets you flip over, tumble under, or twist around your foe, while Evade (Judo) allows you to ward off your enemy's hands as you run past. Either replaces DX when trying to evade (see Evading, p. B368). All normal penalties apply.[/INDENT]Martial Arts also suggests letting people use Jumping to evade, if they can actually jump high enough to clear their enemy. The Skill Adaptation perk would let you base Evade on something else, like Dancing.

The Skill Adaption part is just really neat, Kromm!

I can't wait to get Martial Arts. It should arrive any day now...