Failed attack rolls

[tbone]

Originally Posted by Gollum

Which, in GURPS, best corresponds to an All Out and Telegraphic attack (+8!) plus time to evaluate (a further +1, at minimum)...

Technically, Telegraphic Attack doesn't stack with Evaluate, so the total is stuck at +8.

Personally, though, I don't see what harm it would cause to let them stack. Especially if Evaluate were capped at +2 (perhaps as a special condition for stacking with Telegraphic Attack). I say that only because +2 and the above +8 would combine to +10 – a nice, easy-to-remember "all conditions perfect" number (per BS p345). Gotta love a good multiple of 10!

Originally Posted by Gollum

3) I don't see any problem with saying that a missed attack is an hesitation, as long as there is no rule consequence (wasted ammo, unready weapon...). To the contrary, making missed attacks description vary is what makes combat much more fun and living.

Well, that's all fine, and there's no argument from me. Especially since attack hesitations are a good thing for GURPS, I think, letting more archery action, spellcasting, parkour feats, etc. to come into play before the melee ends.

Just for the record, though, the reason why some (a few?) of us aren't so satisfied with "a missed attack is hesitation" is because you do get oddball results – like "Hesitation can happen at any time, unless you use an axe or kick or projectile, and then it never happens." Which is perfectly harmless, true; it just seems... needlessly weird, one could argue.

So you get fussy doofuses like me, who say, "The concept of hesitation sounds good, but if we're going to game it, let's explicitly do it in a way that works right in any situation... otherwise, let's happily file it away under the countless things that we ignore to keep combat simple."

I like that sort of "do it right or not at all" clarity where rules are concerned. Which is just my preference. Needless to say, if you're going more freeform and you're having fun, that's also the right way to do things.

==

Anyway, reading the thread, I had one more idea on how to game the "attack or hesitate" thing, maybe the easiest way of all, with no "axe user vs sword user" weirdness in the mechanics, and no "If you succeed by 1, then..." sort of fussiness. It's this:

• With normal Attack or Defensive Attack, all misses are hesitation. You don't unready your axe, or fall from a kick, or loose your arrow, etc.
  
• With Committed Attack or All-Out Attack, all misses are actual misses. You unready your axe, risk falling from a kick, loose (and lose) your arrow, etc.

That's it. I'm not sure I like it, but it does generate hits, whiffs, and hesitation for any sort of attack, it lets anyone commit to not hesitating if they like (just choose Committed Attack or better), and it should generate plenty of hesitations for less-skilled (and less-committed) fighters.

Interesting idea? Broken in some way I'm not seeing?

[DouglasCole]

Originally Posted by tbone

Anyway, reading the thread, I had one more idea on how to game the "attack or hesitate" thing, maybe the easiest way of all, with no "axe user vs sword user" weirdness in the mechanics, and no "If you succeed by 1, then..." sort of fussiness. It's this:

• With normal Attack or Defensive Attack, all misses are hesitation. You don't unready your axe, or fall from a kick, or loose your arrow, etc.
  
• With Committed Attack or All-Out Attack, all misses are actual misses. You unready your axe, risk falling from a kick, loose (and lose) your arrow, etc.

That's it. I'm not sure I like it, but it does generate hits, whiffs, and hesitation for any sort of attack, it lets anyone commit to not hesitating if they like (just choose Committed Attack or better), and it should generate plenty of hesitations for less-skilled (and less-committed) fighters.

Interesting idea? Broken in some way I'm not seeing?

I touched on this possibility also in my blog post. My only issue with it is that All-Out Attack is quite bad enough from a risk-reward perspective as it is. Making it "worse" by making Defensive and regular Attacks have the option of treating a miss as a hesitation will likely see less use of these likely-common enthusiastic attacks, not more.

That may be as desired, but it's definitely something to think on.

[Gollum]

Originally Posted by JazzJedi

I disagree. In GURPS, punching defaults to DX and Kicking to DX-2. I also have a martial arts background in Karate and Kendo, and I would say that hitting a target with a hand weapon, like a club, spear, baseball bat, etc., is far easier than landing a solid kick or punch. Also, the reach of a weapon is a benefit to combat timing even for beginners. The closer one gets to the enemy in a fight - or the shorter the reach of the weapon - the harder it is to hit them, largely because of panic, fear of getting hit, etc. But hitting someone with a spear or polearm is much easier, but not so according to GURPS - Spear defaults to DX-5 and a kick to DX-2? Is that your experience watching white and yellow belts? If it is, then we are on different planets.

Sorry but I really don't agree.

Handling a weapon (like any kind of tool) is harder than just having to use your bare hands, because as soon as you have something in your hands (especially something dangerous), you have to take his length, his weight, his balance into account, and you also risk to hurt yourself with it. If you don't twist your ankles when striking shomen with a bo, for instance, your will inevitably hurt your legs (or possibly your groin).

Furthermore, a lot of people also assure that it is impossible to miss the face of someone when you try to punch it, as long as he doesn't move at all. They may be right ... if you can take all your time and don't have to worry about being hurt in return.

The length of the weapon doesn't matter to avoid the fear of being hurt. The point is jut can I be hit in return and, what is the most forgotten: how much time have I to do it? One second is more than short. It's not one second after taking all the time required to understand the situation and evaluate everything.

Finally, the default you are listing are right for someone who never trained, someone who just relies on his instincts to fight. He has DX-2 barehanded and DX-4 to DX-6 with a weapon? No problem with that! Using your natural weapons when fighting instinctively is easier than trying to use any other kind of weapon.

But as soon that character will begin to learn how to fight, things will be very different. Karate is a hard skill. And ditto for brawling: the point you have to spend are exactly the same than the ones you will spend to learn to fight with a knife.

[Gollum]

Originally Posted by tbone

Technically, Telegraphic Attack doesn't stack with Evaluate, so the total is stuck at +8.

Yes. Sorry. I forgot that.

Now, the point still remains perfectly valid. Mr Clumsy-And-Untrained, with his DX 8 has the following chance to hit someone: 8 - 2 + 8 = 14 (90.7%). He can be very confident. Until he tries that during a true fight, in less than one second.

With a weapon, it varies between 12 (74.1%) and 10 (50%).

And I didn't even take into account the bonus for non stressful situation here ...

[Gollum]

Originally Posted by tbone

Just for the record, though, the reason why some (a few?) of us aren't so satisfied with "a missed attack is hesitation" is because you do get oddball results – like "Hesitation can happen at any time, unless you use an axe or kick or projectile, and then it never happens." Which is perfectly harmless, true; it just seems... needlessly weird, one could argue.

You're right here. That is the problem, indeed.

My point was just to tell that the "hesitation" is not stupid, and is even fun to make descriptions vary.

Actually, if you look more closely at MMA and other combat videos, you will see that hesitation is what happens most often. Do the fighters really take time to evaluate their foe? ... Sometimes, maybe. But they often hesitate because they perfectly know that attacking means risking to be attacked in return. Which is why they remain conscientiously out of reach until they see an opening in the guard.

It's hard to attack. Harder than we think when comfortably sitting on a chair. And I suppose it would be even harder when risking death (but, fortunately, I never had to live that!).

Originally Posted by tbone

Anyway, reading the thread, I had one more idea on how to game the "attack or hesitate" thing, maybe the easiest way of all, with no "axe user vs sword user" weirdness in the mechanics, and no "If you succeed by 1, then..." sort of fussiness. It's this:

• With normal Attack or Defensive Attack, all misses are hesitation. You don't unready your axe, or fall from a kick, or loose your arrow, etc.
  
• With Committed Attack or All-Out Attack, all misses are actual misses. You unready your axe, risk falling from a kick, loose (and lose) your arrow, etc.

That's it.

That solution is the simplest one, to my mind, and it makes sense!

Kromm's solution is simple too.

Originally Posted by Kromm

• Attack, critical miss: Swooshed clumsily, with bad results for you.
• Attack, miss: Simply didn't act, for want of initiative or an opening.
• Attack, hit, defended: Blow hit enemy's shield or weapon (block or armed parry), connected lightly but ineffectually (unarmed parry), or was ducked or sidestepped (dodge).
• Attack, hit, not defended: Blow arrived faster than enemy's reaction, and hit squarely.
• Attack, critical hit: Blow caught enemy flat-footed – they simply didn't act.

But it rejects all the problems due to failed attacks (unready weapon, wasted ammo...) to critical failures, which already trigger their own special problems.

[Gollum]

Oh, I forgot to tell ...

Originally Posted by Kromm

* One of the most common criticisms of GURPS is in the vein of, "Gee, how can an ordinary person swing a baseball bat at someone's head and miss? But that's what happens with -5 for the default penalty and -5 for the head, even with the +4 for Telegraphic Attack!" The obvious answer is, "They didn't swing."

We can also answer them : "Even with the +4 for Telegraphic Attack, maybe, but not with the +4 for Telegraphic Attack, the +4 for All-out attack and the +4 for non stressful situation (because people who think they can do it easily usually imagine themselves doing it in a dojo, in slow motion, with someone patiently waiting for their blow without trying to sink a sword deeply in their torso ...)."

;-)

[Vaevictis Asmadi]

I wonder if part of the disagreement on this thread stems from comparing apples to oranges.

I see people remarking upon their personal experience with various fighting styles, but comparing swing and thrust attacks directly to each other. Rather, I suspect that attacking and missing might be easier with some attack types than with others.


To swing, you only need to be really precise in one dimension (with a baseball bat, staff, or sword) or two dimensions (with an axe or polearm). Your swing arc covers a range of one dimension, and if the full length of your weapon is dangerous then that covers a range of the distance dimension as well. That is, your opponent can be located anywhere along the arc of your swing, and you will successfully hit.

With a thrust, you must be precise in two dimensions, vertical and horizontal, to hit squarely on target.

With a shot, you must be precise in three dimensions, because distance effects the arc of your shot (except with lasers and bullets). Plus you're attacking from a distance, making it even harder.

[tbone]

Originally Posted by DouglasCole

I touched on this possibility also in my blog post. My only issue with it is that All-Out Attack is quite bad enough from a risk-reward perspective as it is. Making it "worse" by making Defensive and regular Attacks have the option of treating a miss as a hesitation will likely see less use of these likely-common enthusiastic attacks, not more.

It wouldn't do Defensive and regular Attacks any special favors for the bulk of attacks that *don't* carry special problems for a miss; nothing mechanical would change for them.

But, yes, it would make Defensive and regular Attacks more attractive if you're using axes, kicks, ranged weapons, etc.: a "miss" gets to avoid the special consequences of an actual miss. Which isn't necessarily bad, but it's something to think about.

Of course, there's always this option, too: Let a miss be a miss for a normal Attack, Committed Attack, or All-Out Attack. Let only Defensive Attacks gain the special effect of "a miss is a hesitation". And have unskilled or uncertain fighters use Defensive Attack a lot....

But setting that aside and sticking with that "easiest way of all" as I wrote it above:

Little considerations will certainly come up, like the one you mention. Here's another:

If you successfully make a Feint but then foolishly hesitate on the follow-up attack, you throw away your hard-earned Feint. So if a Committed Attack or better is what's needed to ensure no hesitation, then after a Feint, you'll always want to follow up with a Committed Attack or better.

Not necessarily a bad thing – sort of has a "yeah, makes sense; after a feint you gotta really press it home" ring to it – but for good or bad, it is the sort of little consideration that'll pop up.

[Gollum]

Originally Posted by Vaevictis Asmadi

I see people remarking upon their personal experience with various fighting styles, but comparing swing and thrust attacks directly to each other. Rather, I suspect that attacking and missing might be easier with some attack types than with others. [...]

Some swing attacks are still harder than thrust ones because it is when you swing that you have more risk to hit yourself.

[Plane]

Originally Posted by DouglasCole

Unpacking Failed Attack Rolls in GURPS is more in the nature of long musing. I don't really come down on any side, so to speak, but it got too long for a forum post.

I like the idea of Tactical Control Points or whatever you want to call them, but I think it would be simpler that if there is a non-critical miss, allow the attacker to roll Parry based on the "no-contact parry" unarmed rules in Martial Arts, or how parries against Striking at Weapons can represent pulling the weapon out of the way in time to avoid contact.

In this case it avoids fully committing to an attack, recognizing it will whiff and not doing so. This means you end up not losing your ammo, not unreadying, not needing to make a DX check on kicks, not spending FP, etc. Failed rolls mean whiffing as usual.

This means skilled fighters (high parry scores) will usually not throw big misses, but unskilled fighters (low parry) will, which sounds right.

I think if your enemy has successfully used Feint against you last turn, those penalties should apply to this parry roll, as if you were parrying an attack, since it represents having a bad bead on where they are or will be and wrongly thinking there is an opening and foolishly committing to it.