allowing a Flying Tackle with attacks other than Slam

[Plane]

I was wondering watching s1e8 of Camp Cretaceous and you see the Carnotaurus "Toro" do a lot of attempts to chomp the children where he ends up falling on the ground on a miss - it's kind of like a suicide dive except instead of a body slam you're going for a bite.

Here for example you see Toro fall to the ground after Darius dodges him:

https://youtu.be/2Ktwd4vbRkw

This isn't something I can imagine humans are built to do (although maybe some might do a flying headbutt like this?) but I'm wondering if that would fall under perk-level technique adaptation if you could use combat options like Flying Tackle on a non-slam attack like a headbutt or a bite?

I realize there could be other approaches to explaining why Toro falls in this scene of course:

1) not a critically failed attack - because then Darius wouldn't have needed to dodge at all, and he's clearly doing a sideslip here

2) maybe a critically successful dodge that induces a crit miss and you roll between 7 and 14 on the unarmed table (B557)

I like to explore possible explanations outside of critical miss tables.

I think the wall behind Darius is of tactical importance here - if you are a fast predator who can outrun your foe, but their back is against a wall, you probably won't run ASAP at them since you need to decelerate to avoid hitting the wall behind them.

However if you decelerate to soon, you're slower and easier to avoid.

Slams (B371) have a special mechanic on when a foe dodges you (move at least 2 yards past) which Toro probably has. If a perk allowed someone to "bite like a slam" then one tradeoff to being able to do a Flying Tackle with your bite (+4 to hit and +1 reach is a big deal) should probably also be that it suffers like a Slam on a miss (forced over-run)

MA107 does have a special rule for Move and Attack which might apply here too:

If your attack delivers thrusting damage, you may substitute slam damage (HP x velocity/100), if that would be better.

This makes a lot more sense for headbutts than for bites to me though, based on the direction you actually applying thrusting damage relative to your direction of movement.

Sort of like if you were running forward and along the way did a Back Strike - if anything that would lessen damage not increase it - you can't put your momentum behind attacking someone the opposite direction you're moving, right?

[Gef]

Perk sounds fine to me, but even that may not be necessary because in general you can slam with pointy bits. Humans don't have those but a critter with the right jaw proportion potentially could, just hange the damage type accordingly. Of course a slam potentially damages both parties, and the fang-slammer would take that damage to the jaw (possible KO).

[Pursuivant]

The video clip looks like AoA (Long) with a Bite attack.

While a Perk is the easiest way to handle a "Flying Tackle" using a Bite or Bite & Grapple, I'm not sure it's needed for creatures with Enhanced Move or Super Jumping and the Born Biter feature. This sort of attack is instinctive for most reptiles, fish, birds, and arthropods, and some mammals.

Likewise, a Flying Tackle using a Claw or Striker attack, either to attack or simultaneously attack and grapple, should be instinctive for any natural creature with such traits. E.g., felines instinctively pounce using an AoA (Long) Claw & Grapple attack.

Instead, allow the distance you can move using a Flying Tackle to be increased based on the better of Enhanced Move, Super Jumping, or similar advantage. Allow any creature with the Born Biter feature to substitute a bite & grapple attack for a regular take-down. Allow any creature with suitable Claws or Striker to do the same with a Claw or Striker attack.

[Plane]

Originally Posted by Pursuivant

The video clip looks like AoA (Long) with a Bite attack.

forgot about the Long option, guess that could explain it, although it begins to make me wonder if the fixed +1 yard makes sense for larger creatures or maybe if it should scale up with more size modifiers, like at some point give +2 yards of reach?

[Gef]

Originally Posted by Plane

forgot about the Long option, guess that could explain it, although it begins to make me wonder if the fixed +1 yard makes sense for larger creatures or maybe if it should scale up with more size modifiers, like at some point give +2 yards of reach?

As in, more than the bonus reach that already goes with SM? Maybe double it for Long attacks?

[Varyon]

Large creatures overbalancing when they lean down to attack a smaller character such that they fall when they miss is a pretty common trope. The rules for characters at different heights/elevations fighting does include the possibility of a target being too short/low to strike with a punch or grapple while standing; I could see allowing for a quick lean down to attack such targets, needing to roll against DX to avoid falling on a miss (much like for a kick), which would cover most such instances. Of course, in the linked incident, the attacker actually ran into a wall - in GURPS I think that would generally only happen if running faster than Move (thanks to having Enhanced Move, for example), although realistically any Slam/Move and Attack should carry the risk of overrunning your target and hitting something behind him/her.

As for doing a Flying Tackle with an attack other than a Slam, really what you'd typically be looking at in that situation is making an attack and also making a Slam - for Move and Attack, I'd toss on a -4 penalty (akin to Dual Weapon Attack), while for an All Out Attack, I'd just used AoA (Double). If you're not trying to Slam into the target but want to lunge forward and faceplant in order to get an extra yard of reach, I'd allow it... but I wouldn't apply the +4 to hit (which I believe is largely meant to represent the character spreading their arms wide or similar, which makes it easier to hit with a tackle but not to strike with a sword or bite or whatever). I don't think I'd generally let it stack with All Out Attack: Long, although if there were weapons that I didn't let get +1 to Reach with that option, I would let them get the +1 if using both AoA: Long and this "Flying Lunge" option.

[Plane]

One thing that also occurred to me about the short arms of creatures like a T-Rex or Carnotaurus - given that AOA (Long) requires you to place an arm on the ground, would having Short Arms prevent this and make a fall automatic?

AOA(Long) doesn't appear to address how Short Arms might influence it.

I figure you might still make a DX roll on MA97 but that would only be to determine if you end up kneeling (normal fail) or falling (critfail)

Or maybe you could do a support-free lunge but there would be a huge penalty to this DX roll since the basic DX roll assumes using a hand for support?

"it can hold a shield, second weapon, etc." might leave option for other things, like if that arm was able to grapple something on the ground as part of the attack.

Originally Posted by Gef

As in, more than the bonus reach that already goes with SM? Maybe double it for Long attacks?

Yeah something like that.

[Pursuivant]

Originally Posted by Gef

As in, more than the bonus reach that already goes with SM? Maybe double it for Long attacks?

If AOA (Long) for a Size 0 attacker gets you +1 Reach with attacks which normally only have Reach 0, you could take that as a +50% or +100% bonus to Reach for larger creatures, rounding down. Using the rules for Size Modifier and Reach (p. B402) to get normal Reach, you can work out the Range bonus using AoA (Long).

Thus,

Reach +50% +100%
Size 1 0* 0* 1
Size 2 1 1.5 2
Size 3 2 3 4
Size 4 3 4.5 6
etc.

*+1 Reach for "C" attacks, or +1 Reach for C,1 attacks at +50%.

The idea of automatically falling down makes a lot of sense in cases where you want to do AoA (long) but can't stabilize yourself as you attack, due to short arms, crippled off hand, downslope directly in front of you, etc.

The idea of allowing a Move & Attack variant to represent a combination Slam + natural attack is also solid, but penalties should be halved for Born Biter and there should be a technique to buy off penalties.

Rather than dinos, I'm thinking of felines, specifically cheetahs and other big cats who typically end a chase with AoA (Long) & Bite + Flying Tackle/Claw.

Success with that attack combo means that the unfortunate ungulate gets bowled off its feet with 100+ pounds of carnivore on its back, digging in with claws and teeth. Any sort of failure means that kitty does a spectacular wipe-out and fast-but-tasty gets to live for another day. (Given that great cats make something like 20 failed attacks before they catch breakfast, that implies the combo is pretty tricky to pull off, even if the cat makes the Quick Contests of Stealth and Running vs. very fast and alert prey.)

[Inky]

Technically, what a cat does seems to be counted as a Pounce move, not a Flying Tackle move.

Originally Posted by Campaigns

Pounce: As flying tackle, but you must have four or more legs. After you attack, make a DX, Acrobatics, or Jumping roll. On a success, you stay on your feet! This is how some animals attack, especially cats: they knock down their foe and then claw or bite. If a mount tries this, the rider must roll vs. Riding-4 or fall off!

Not sure whether that makes any difference to how that might work out.

[Pursuivant]

Originally Posted by Inky

Technically, what a cat does seems to be counted as a Pounce move, not a Flying Tackle move.

This is what any carnivorous 4-legged beastie does with a lunging attack which ends with a grapple - wolves, cats, reptiles, fish, whatever.

The only weakness with RAW is that Pounce is almost always combined with AoA (Long or Determined) with Bite &/or Claws. The predator is always going to try to get a hold on its prey's body as it knocks it down.

Back to the OP's original question, Pounce could be allowed to work for normally bipedal animals with reasonable ability to grapple or balance themselves using their forelimbs, e.g., Jurassic Park style "Velociraptors."