Rugby

[Grouchy Chris]

Here is a thread on playing American Football with the Mass Combat rules.

[Dinadon]

Originally Posted by Brett

Ordinarily I might, but for the purposes of this campaign I think it is more important to decompose the skill into separate components. I want backs to be better at Running, and forwards to be better at Sumo. I want characters' advisors to be able to say "Looking at this week's Rugby game, I see that your teamwork is improving. But your passing and catching are so back that I can't tell whether you're adjusting to the gravity or not. Work harder. As for your coursework this week...". And I want the character sheets to improve at the underlying skills that will be generically important (particularly Leadership and Tactics) rather than at a sort of expert-skill abstraction. It's like wanting to use a lot of Martial Arts Techniques in a martial arts campaign, rather than just using the combat skills as you would in a Mysteries campaign. You know, "GURPS is a toolbox".

That doesn't mean you need to buy separate skills! I doubt a rugby player can justify that they have full Sumo Sport. Running doesn't seem appropriate because I seriously doubt they do it for long enough on the pitch. Tactics makes no sense to me at all, since you're only learning to play rugby!

Anyway, I would assume player differentiation is far likely to be based on Attributes. The runner would be the one with higher Basic Move for instance.
You could probably justify learning different positions as Techniques of Sports(Rugby). Indeed I'm slightly surprised this wasn't the first choice.

I'm also seeing a disconnect. Skills and skill levels are really an OOC thing, in game they're going to be going off of the outcomes of rolls. A quick contest against the other team's skill seems best. So you would start with a quick contest between the two captains, who would roll against their Sport skill, or their sport tactics technique if better. This determines the team's margin. Other players use Sport, or the technique for the position they are playing if better. They should roll their quick contest against either their opposite numbers (so runners versus runners) or against those who are meant to counter them. You can then compare their margin to their team's margin to tell how well they did. This would be for an entire match in a single roll, a more detailed in game break down should probably use Mass Combat.

[Agemegos]

Originally Posted by Dinadon

That doesn't mean you need to buy separate skills!

Except for Sumo. I want all the separate skills. I want the characters to improve their Running, Throwing, Tactics, and Leadership, improve their fitness and teamwork, buy off disadvantages, and raise SC numbers, because that is the real point of the exercise. The military academy in question is training an army, not a football team. And I want the characters' improvement to be reflected in their performance at Rugby.

I doubt a rugby player can justify that they have full Sumo Sport.

Probably not, but Rugby players (especially forwards, and also I think tackles in American football) train in grabbing and shoving enough to get at least as close to Sumo Combat as Sumo Sport is.

Running doesn't seem appropriate because I seriously doubt they do it for long enough on the pitch.

A sprinter in the 100m only runs for about ten seconds in a race, but there's no question that is running. A Rugby player runs for at least half the time in two 45-minute halves. You don't get to stand around on a Rugby field.

Tactics makes no sense to me at all, since you're only learning to play rugby!

There is a great deal of outguessing and outmanoeuvring the opposition in Rugby, and (owing to the fluid nature of the game and unpredictable positions in its very long 'plays') every player has to think for himself: there can be few set plays. But I reckon you're right: it is sufficiently different from small-unit fighting with firearms that they ought to be very little overlap with Tactics in this setting. What shall I use?

Anyway, I would assume player differentiation is far likely to be based on Attributes. The runner would be the one with higher Basic Move for instance.

Basic Move: good point. That ought to have an effect.

You could probably justify learning different positions as Techniques of Sports(Rugby). Indeed I'm slightly surprised this wasn't the first choice.

Well, backs don't pack down in the scrum. But apart from that, everyone in Rugby does a bit of everything. I could see running, passing, tackling, rucking & mauling, and kicking as different techniques, probably based on different attributes, but as techniques the positions aren't different enough.

I'm also seeing a disconnect. Skills and skill levels are really an OOC thing, in game they're going to be going off of the outcomes of rolls. A quick contest against the other team's skill seems best. So you would start with a quick contest between the two captains, who would roll against their Sport skill, or their sport tactics technique if better. This determines the team's margin. Other players use Sport, or the technique for the position they are playing if better. They should roll their quick contest against either their opposite numbers (so runners versus runners) or against those who are meant to counter them. You can then compare their margin to their team's margin to tell how well they did. This would be for an entire match in a single roll, a more detailed in game break down should probably use Mass Combat.

I do want to know whether the teams win or lose, and how well or badly. I also want to know whether a PC played well or badly, and whether his running, his passing, his tackling, or his Rugby tactics were good or bad. Remember that in Rugby everyone runs the ball and passes, everyone runs in the defence and tackles, everyone rucks and mauls, any player might kick, everyone has to think on his feet, and everyone plays the whole ninety minutes.

[Agemegos]

Originally Posted by Grouchy Chris

Here is a thread on playing American Football with the Mass Combat rules.

Thanks. I'll read Mass Combat, decipher the thread, and give it some thought.

[Dinadon]

Originally Posted by Brett

There is a great deal of outguessing and outmanoeuvring the opposition in Rugby, and (owing to the fluid nature of the game and unpredictable positions in its very long 'plays') every player has to think for himself: there can be few set plays. But I reckon you're right: it is sufficiently different from small-unit fighting with firearms that they ought to be very little overlap with Tactics in this setting. What shall I use?

A mixture of Sports(Rugby) and Games(Rugby), emphasis on the latter since it's even suggested for coaches.

[Icelander]

Originally Posted by Brett

Probably not, but Rugby players (especially forwards, and also I think tackles in American football) train in grabbing and shoving enough to get at least as close to Sumo Combat as Sumo Sport is.

Which is why it is fortunate that The Powers That Be have declared that Sports (Rugby) and similar sports can default to Sumo Wrestling when making slams or shoves at the same -3 as Sumo Sport does.

Originally Posted by Brett

A sprinter in the 100m only runs for about ten seconds in a race, but there's no question that is running. A Rugby player runs for at least half the time in two 45-minute halves. You don't get to stand around on a Rugby field.

GURPS Running is a broad skills that covers both endurance and speed training. Optional Specialisation could distinguish the sprinter from the long-distance runner*.

In any event, it is a recommended skill for boxers in MA, because their training involves so much of it. Based on that, it is clear that it is certainly a skill that is learnt and used by rugby players.

*Why the Optional Specialisation rules are officially limited to IQ skills is beyond me.

Originally Posted by Brett

There is a great deal of outguessing and outmanoeuvring the opposition in Rugby, and (owing to the fluid nature of the game and unpredictable positions in its very long 'plays') every player has to think for himself: there can be few set plays. But I reckon you're right: it is sufficiently different from small-unit fighting with firearms that they ought to be very little overlap with Tactics in this setting. What shall I use?

This is Games (Rugby), canonically. The IQ-based counterpart to Sport (Rugby). It can be used at a default from Sport, -3.

I think you shouldn't worry about having a mutual default with Tactics, but simply note that a Talent affecting one is likely to affect the other and use training in Games (Rugby) as justification for buying up Tactics (or vice versa).

The 200 hours per point is an average. A few hours of intensive training can be enough to give the first point in a physical skill, for example, but, by contrast, even with extreme diligence, a top scientist or renowned artist might have to dedicate long years to his craft before going from IQ+7 to IQ+8 in his primary skill.

Playing rugby is one of the ways, along with elaborate VR tactical simulations, that justifies training Tactics, an IQ skill, up very fast during Imperial Marine training. Assuming 0 points in it before training, the objective is to get the recruits to IQ-level or so. By having the recruits constantly have to exercise similar skills in play as they do in their VR tactical simulations, the mass of dry tactical doctrine that they learn in class goes from information that they can recite to points in skills they can use.

Originally Posted by Brett

I do want to know whether the teams win or lose, and how well or badly. I also want to know whether a PC played well or badly, and whether his running, his passing, his tackling, or his Rugby tactics were good or bad. Remember that in Rugby everyone runs the ball and passes, everyone runs in the defence and tackles, everyone rucks and mauls, any player might kick, everyone has to think on his feet, and everyone plays the whole ninety minutes.

The most effective way I can think of to meet your goal is to roll against the PC's Running skill*, Throwing skill, his tackling skill** and his Games (Rugby)***. If there's something not covered by those, add one general Sport (Rugby) roll. I don't see anything that is missing, but hey, what do I know about rugby?

This tells you, clearly, how the PC performed. Whether he won or lost, however, is different.

The most accurate way to determine this would be to give each aspect of play a relative value. This might be x1 for each of the aspects given above, or, if some are more important than others, might range from x0.5 or so to x2. Then take the margin of success for each task, multiply it for the value of the task, and add all together.

You have how much the PC contributes to victory for his side.

Now, either repeat the process for every player**** or simply make one roll against their Sport (Rugby) skill***** and multiply the MoS (or failure) by the total of the values given above.

Add together the values for all players on each side and the one with a higher aggregate value has won the match. This also gives you a handy dandy guide to which players were the most valuable and, if you care to break it down for each player, how he contributed to his side.

Let's take an example to clarify things.

I'll assume, for now, that the tasks that a player performs during the game are divided into the following aspects:

Running (x2): Roll against HT-based Running; +/- 3 for every point of Move above or below 5.
Evading (x1): Roll against DX-based Sport (Rugby), Acrobatics or Judo. Add +2 for Combat Reflexes, if possessed.
Passing (x2): Roll against Throwing or DX-based Sport (Rugby) (perhaps at a small penalty, to make dedicated throwers better than generalists at this). Since how far and fast you can throw matters, modify by +/- 1 for every 2 points of (Arm) ST above or below 10.
Tackling (x2): Roll against DX-based Sport (Rugby), Brawling-3 or Sumo Wrestling-3. Because slams are very reliant on HP, modify this by +/- 1 for every two HPs above or below 10. The GURPS slam rules are not very granular at human scales, so a +/-1 per 1 HP above or below 10 is not warranted by reference to them, but given how important size is for rugby and other tackling games, I'd still consider doing so.*****
Tactics (x1.5): Roll against Games (Rugby) or IQ-based Sport (Rugby)-3.
Situational Awareness (x1) [seeing chances for plays and being aware of defenders]: Roll against Per-based Sports (Rugby) or Observation.
Other (x0.5) [kicking, catching, any other tasks that don't clearly fall under any of the above, but still might matter to the outcome of a game]: Roll against HT- or DX-based Sport (Rugby), depending on whether the OP thinks that endurance or agility ought to be more important for any odds and ends of rugby play.

Edit: I've added a system for accounting for Fatigue costs. See other post.
---

I've pulled a number for each category out of the recesses of my ignorance about Rugby. The OP, who actually knows it from Adam, will please modify these numers to reflect how important he thinks each part is. The one good thing about my ignorant list is that the values sum to x10.

Now, Cadet Armstrong lord Stone is competing in a rugby match. He succeeds by 1 on his running play, by 0 on his evading play, by 4 on his passing game, by a whomping 8 on his tackling, by 1 on his tactics and by 2 on his situational awareness. He fails critically at his Other roll, though, for a total margin of failure of 10!

Let's sum up:
Running (2x1): 2 points
Evading (1x2): 2 points
Passing (2x4): 8 points
Tackling (2x8): 16 points
Tactics (1.5x1): 1 point (round down)
Situational Awareness (1x2): 2 points
Other (0.5x-10): -5 points
Total: 26 points

Now, clearly, Cadet Stone played a good game of rugby. His passing, in offence, was very effective, and his tackling on defence was a sight to behold. His performance, however, was marred by a couple of disastrously fumbled kicks.

Example of the fatigue rules: Cadet Armstrong lord Stone is determined to atone for his fumbled kick and drives himself to his limit. He has HT 13, 16 FP, Will 14, Fit and Sport (Rugby) at HT+0. This means that his FP cost for an ordinary game is 3 FP (9 FP - 6 FP) and he can spend anywhere from 1 to 13 points on his Extra Effort. He elects to spend 10 FP and make a roll at -4 against his Will-based Sport (Rugby). He succeeds and increases his 26 point contribution by (20%x10) 200% for a total of 78 points.


*Modify it for Move, of course. I'd suggest each point of Move over 5 ought to add +3, at least, as normally a QC of Running is only used in contests between those of the same Move, with a higher Move meaning that no roll is needed to determine that he wins a footrace. Also, if you're using running to cover all movement to avoid being tackled and score goals, I suspect that anything that boosts your Active Defences against the other side's defenders, such as Combat Reflexes, ought to give a bonus. Also, Acrobatics or Judo, seeing as they form the basis for the Evade technique, should enter into it. Either roll against Running seperately (recommended) and add a category for evasion of the defence which is a roll against the Evade technique (defaults to DX, Acrobatics or Judo at full skill, should also default to Sports (Rugby) at full skill) and modify that by Combat Reflexes, or have possessing the above traits modify the running part of the game.
**Brawling can be used, at -3 for being a pure combat skill used in sport, Sumo Wrestling can be used, ditto, and if neither is possessed, the default is to roll against Sport (Rugby) for this part.
***Likely to be IQ-based Sport (Rugby)-3 for a lot of players in the real world, but Imperial Marines might pay more attention to tactics than anything else and improve it from that default.
****The ultra-detailed method, only recommended for those players who are also PCs or significant NPCs.
*****Which you'll assign based on the same weighed average of the tasks given above, either by careful calculation or by ad hoc determination such as "X has Sports (Rugby) 10, but is a swift runner, so I'll say he counts as 12" (recommended).
******That way, a ST 15, HP 20 guy has a +10 advantage over a similarly skilled HP 10 weakling in the tackling aspect.

[Gigermann]

Originally Posted by Icelander

Now, Cadet Armstrong lord Stone is competing in a rugby match. He succeeds by 1 on his running play, by 0 on his evading play, by 4 on his passing game, by a whomping 8 on his tackling, by 1 on his tactics and by 2 on his situational awareness. He fails critically at his Other roll, though, for a total margin of failure of 10!

Let's sum up:
Running (2x1): 2 points
Evading (1x2): 2 points
Passing (2x4): 8 points
Tackling (2x8): 16 points
Tactics (1.5x1): 1 point (round down)
Situational Awareness (1x2): 2 points
Other (0.5x-10): -5 points
Total: 26 points

Now, clearly, Cadet Stone played a good game of rugby. His passing, in offence, was very effective, and his tackling on defence was a sight to behold. His performance, however, was marred by a couple of disastrously fumbled kicks.

This concept would make an excellent addition to Mass Combat, I think, for a little more detail—not to derail the discussion.

[martinl]

Originally Posted by Brett

Not very much time, really. Less than five minutes per PC per game, with enough rolls to let me construct roleplaying opportunities around the outcomes: injuries, reactions by team-mates, captain, coach, and advisor.

Then you may not want to simulate in detail. To do it rigorously in GURPS, you use the same combat system as you would in real combat. That is, as you noted, too much. If you're gonna swag it, swag it to your own and your player's tastes.

I'd just make sure that the GM had a good idea of the players' and npcs' relevant abilities, have the player roll the dice once, and make something up. If you want more, have the player pick a trait he thinks was especially relevant, pick (or roll up randomly) one as the GM, and spin that. Absolute max, set up a mini-combat representing a climatic bit of the game, and even that will blow through your 5 min/player in the first two rounds.

[Luke Bunyip]

Three thoughts:

• Teamwork Actually two sets of teamwork are important. The forwards need to work well with each other, and the backs need to work well together. That is why practice time together is important. So, this could be modelled by a time spent practising, as well as some input from relevant tactical skills or just raw INT. Personal skill is not enough. You need to be able to work together, as well as having a gut feeling as to how your team mates would respond in response to fluid circumstances.
  
  
  
• Fatigue Having played on a muddy field, Rugby can be both physically gruelling and abruptly injurious. But as the former takes toll, the later begin to appear. Random collisions, poorly executed tackles,
  
  
• Forwards Body Mass Quantity has its own quality.

[Icelander]

Originally Posted by Luke Bunyip

Three thoughts:[*]Teamwork Actually two sets of teamwork are important. The forwards need to work well with each other, and the backs need to work well together. That is why practice time together is important. So, this could be modelled by a time spent practising, as well as some input from relevant tactical skills or just raw INT. Personal skill is not enough. You need to be able to work together, as well as having a gut feeling as to how your team mates would respond in response to fluid circumstances.

This is actually one of the few things about rugby practise that is going to translate directly into a useful combat trait for Imperial Marines in GURPS.

The Teamwork (Imperial Marines) as well as all team members having developed a familiarity with each other will be crucial. I think that default assuption in the system I set forth above was that everyone had it, that system being meant to represent a clash between teams of competent athletes.

For someone without the Teamwork Perk, I'd assign a -4 to the Tactics and Situational Awareness Perks. Someone with the Teamwork Perk, but working with team mates that haven't had time to become familiar with each other, will have a -2 to those aspects.

Originally Posted by Luke Bunyip

[*]Fatigue Having played on a muddy field, Rugby can be both physically gruelling and abruptly injurious. But as the former takes toll, the later begin to appear. Random collisions, poorly executed tackles,

Yes, I was thinking that instead of simply having Fit and Very Fit provide a bonus, I'd write up a tiny Fatigue mini-game. Calculate the approximate FP costs of a game based on the character's HT+(fitness trait) and offer the option of blowing any left-over points on pushing himself harder, i.e. Extra Effort that boosted the final points he is worth for this team.

Originally Posted by Luke Bunyip

[*]Forwards Body Mass Quantity has its own quality.

I account for this by HP modifying the Tackles aspect. I think that +/-1 per HP that is above or below 10 would emphasise it heavily.