The Utility of High Combat Skills

[Rupert]

Originally Posted by AlexanderHowl

I honestly think that should apply to every contest. Someone with a '30' should gain some benefit against some with a '14'. It would be fair if the person with 30 rolled against a '16' and the person with '14' rolled against a '7'.

Most contests (in my experience) are Quick Contests, and the higher skilled person has a huge advantage if the margin is large. In your example the Skill-14 character can, at best, get a margin of success of 11. With skill-30 any success beats that.

For Regular Contests, B349 tells us to reduce high scores to speed things up. Your suggestion is roughly what is suggested when both scores are 20+.

[Lord Azagthoth]

BS, p 171, a roll of 17 or 18 is automatically a failure with any skill roll.

So you take penalties to any skill above 16 to get extra benefits.

If you abandon the rule of 16, each miss (a roll of 18) is automatically a critical miss. So high-skilled character can never fail without failing very.... very badly.

[DouglasCole]

Some old blog posts of relevance.

https://gamingballistic.com/2013/02/...us-of-awesome/

https://gamingballistic.com/2013/02/...mbat-in-gurps/

https://gamingballistic.com/2013/02/...mbat-in-gurps/

[khorboth]

High combat skills are useful in combat.

In our ongoing DF game, we have a crazy-awesome archer who can reliably use double shot to shoot both of an opponant's eyes at 100 yards. Yes, it's ridiculous, but that's the game. I think the utility is obvious. I don't remember what her skill is, but I believe it's over 30. Unfortunately, without surprise, active defenses frequently work.

In melee, being able to take several levels of deceptive attack and still attack vitals, skull, or some other vulnerable area is again very useful.

While ROLLING against more than a 16 is not useful, having the skill higher is good.

Also consider parry. At a 20, a weapon master with combat reflexes and a non-fencing weapon parries at: 14, 12, 10 and then probably dodges. Every two points of skill gives another point of parry.

[Harald387]

At Skill-14, I can roll to hit you with 90% effectiveness and parry with 50% effectiveness. Trying to do anything difficult - "hit you in the vitals"; "rapid strike, even with Weapon Master"; "deceptive attack to reduce defenses" - is, well, difficult.

At Skill-18, I can roll to hit you with 98% effectiveness and parry with just better than 75% effectiveness. I can afford to take a 2-4 point penalty without tanking my chance to hit below safe thresholds: deceptive attack, strike to the vitals or limbs, or rapid strike (if I'm a Weapon Master).

At Skill-22, I'm still getting 98% hit chance, but more options open up: hitting the face (-5) is easy, reducing the opponent's defense by 3 (Deceptive Attack for -6) can make a difference, and even if I'm not a weapon master, Rapid Strike and Dual Weapon attack are attractive options.

Higher levels of skill allow combining more things: A Skill-26 Weapon Master has the same 98% chance to hit with "Rapid Strike: two attacks to the neck, using deceptive attack for -4 to hit and -2 to defense" as that skill-14 guy from the first example, whose only option without taking penalties is to swing for the torso (or a random hit location).

[RyanW]

Originally Posted by Boge

Failure is a good thing in these games. Without a real risk, the victory is non-existent.

The more powerful the character, the more important forms of "soft failure" become for narrative purposes. Sense of Duty (Companions), Dependents, Codes of Honor that require protection of innocents, etc. Few foes can really harm Superman, but even a thug in an alley can threaten what Superman cares about.

[evileeyore]

Originally Posted by Lord Azagthoth

If you abandon the rule of 16, each miss (a roll of 18) is automatically a critical miss. So high-skilled character can never fail without failing very.... very badly.

The Rule of 16 has nothing to do with most combat rolls.

[mook]

Originally Posted by evileeyore

It's an option straight out of Basic. I have no idea what Kromm is on about in How To Be A GURPS GM.

It seems clear enough, but maybe the full quote will be more helpful.

Originally Posted by Kromm

Yes, the optional rule for reducing skill levels is strictly for Regular Contests. Since combat isn't a Regular Contest, that rule doesn't apply in combat. The core mechanic for bringing high-skill fights down to sensible levels is Deceptive Attack. It's fundamental to making GURPS combat work out . . . yet people tend to miss it. Were I rewriting the Basic Set, I'd probably state that if your effective combat skill is above 16 after all modifiers, you should reduce it to 16 and apply half the reduction to the enemy's defense. It's that important.

Put another way, when I GM or write rules, I tend to think of skill A attacking skill B as A rolling against 16 to hit and B rolling against 11 + (B - A)/2 to defend.

[evileeyore]

Originally Posted by mook

It seems clear enough, but maybe the full quote will be more helpful.

No... I get that. What I mean is "I'm not sure why Kromm would reduce Deceptive Attack from the option it is, being able to go down to skill 10 with it, to 'Nope, skill 16 minimum'."

That's a reduction of options, which is (IMO) anathema to GURPS.

[Rupert]

Originally Posted by evileeyore

No... I get that. What I mean is "I'm not sure why Kromm would reduce Deceptive Attack from the option it is, being able to go down to skill 10 with it, to 'Nope, skill 16 minimum'."

That's a reduction of options, which is (IMO) anathema to GURPS.

That's not what Kromm was suggesting. He was merely suggesting making the reduction to Skill-16 automatic.