Steve Jackson Games - Site Navigation
Home General Info Follow Us Search Illuminator Store Forums What's New Other Games Ogre GURPS Munchkin Our Games: Home

Go Back   Steve Jackson Games Forums > Roleplaying > GURPS

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 09-19-2020, 10:37 PM   #81
Rupert
 
Rupert's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Wellington, NZ
Default Re: Issues with Retreating Dodge

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth View Post
Based on the archer targetting the face and the axeman rolling too little damage to wound, I'm inferring that both characters are outfitted with some sort of armor. It just seemingly doesn't do anything to help the melee fighter because it's apparently open-faced and the archer has plenty of extra skill to spare for bypassing it.
In such a case, if the Axeman was doing Move and Attacks capped at 9- they should've been making aimed attacks at unarmoured (or lightly armoured) locations themselves. It costs them nothing, after all.
__________________
Rupert Boleyn

"A pessimist is an optimist with a sense of history."
Rupert is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-19-2020, 10:41 PM   #82
Ulzgoroth
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Default Re: Issues with Retreating Dodge

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rupert View Post
In such a case, if the Axeman was doing Move and Attacks capped at 9- they should've been making aimed attacks at unarmoured (or lightly armoured) locations themselves. It costs them nothing, after all.
For sure, though we're told that those attacks 'failed' so for that particular run of the dice it might not have made any difference.
__________________
I don't know any 3e, so there is no chance that I am talking about 3e rules by accident.
Ulzgoroth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-20-2020, 12:44 AM   #83
Thamior
 
Thamior's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Moscow, Russia
Default Re: Issues with Retreating Dodge

Quote:
Originally Posted by bearit View Post
I feel like those have been spell out plenty already, but I’ll be even more detailed.

Pursuer options (Axe-18, no shield)-
Move and Attack: -4 to hit and skill cap 9
All-Out Attack: +4 to hit, no defenses
Committed Attack (2 Step): net +0 to hit, can’t defend with weapon AND other defenses are at -2
Active Defense: Dodge 10 (8 with Committed, none with AOA)

Retreater options (Bow-18, fast-draw-16)-
Attack: point blank at face, Bow-13
Active Defense: Dodge 14 including retreat

After several failed Move and Attacks and an arrow to the face, pursuer succeed on one of two All-Out Attacks, not enough to wound. Then got another arrow to the face to finish him.
In this situation the melee attacker's best bet would be AoA. It's the only sensible choice. MaA is a clearly bad strategy against such opponent. Might as well just take AoD and hope he runs out of arrows or hits an obstacle.

AoA with first Feint. Since the guy with a bow must have lower melee skill it could be very successful. And then proceed to hit him in the face (18-5=13). Or hit his hand (easily crippled - no bow for him, also knockdown for major wound) or his bow (18-4=14). Whichever is more effective. Either you get him or he gets you on the next turn. Though he still would have 16% chance to miss.
Thamior is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-20-2020, 07:58 AM   #84
AlexanderHowl
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Default Re: Issues with Retreating Dodge

A ST 12 warrior with Axe/Mace-18 possesses a lot of options. First, AOD (Increased Dodge) until they get within charging range. If they only have the axe, they probably have an effective Dodge-13 with AOD. Second, AOA (Accurate) on a turn after archer fires. They would accept a -4 to skill to reduce the archer defense by 2 and target the leg at 16.

Assuming the leg is unarmored, the Axe/Mace warrior deals 1d+4 cutting damage. On an average roll, they deal 7.5 damage, increased to 11.25 with the multiplier. Most likely, the archer falls down.

In general, the archer will probably use AOD to attempt to avoid the attack, which is great because they cannot ready their weapon. At that point, the warrior with the axe only has to keep pressing their attack, as the archer cannot load their bow any turn that they use AOD.
AlexanderHowl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-20-2020, 09:34 AM   #85
Plane
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Default Re: Issues with Retreating Dodge

maybe they try to quick-ready? if roll succeeds and it's free action they could AOD
Plane is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-20-2020, 10:02 AM   #86
Ulzgoroth
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Default Re: Issues with Retreating Dodge

Quote:
Originally Posted by AlexanderHowl View Post
A ST 12 warrior with Axe/Mace-18 possesses a lot of options. First, AOD (Increased Dodge) until they get within charging range. If they only have the axe, they probably have an effective Dodge-13 with AOD. Second, AOA (Accurate) on a turn after archer fires. They would accept a -4 to skill to reduce the archer defense by 2 and target the leg at 16.

Assuming the leg is unarmored, the Axe/Mace warrior deals 1d+4 cutting damage. On an average roll, they deal 7.5 damage, increased to 11.25 with the multiplier. Most likely, the archer falls down.

In general, the archer will probably use AOD to attempt to avoid the attack, which is great because they cannot ready their weapon. At that point, the warrior with the axe only has to keep pressing their attack, as the archer cannot load their bow any turn that they use AOD.
AoD can't be taken reactively. It's a maneuver. As such it makes little sense for the archer to take AoD in this duel. Doing so might make them lose slower, but by preventing their own attacks it always makes them less likely to win. Unless they're somehow using it for advantageous positioning, or to ride out a turn of shock after being hit.
__________________
I don't know any 3e, so there is no chance that I am talking about 3e rules by accident.
Ulzgoroth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-20-2020, 10:03 AM   #87
Fred Brackin
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Default Re: Issues with Retreating Dodge

Quote:
Originally Posted by MrFix View Post
G
Conclusion:
During the 7 round encounter, warrior made 6 attack rolls at respectable SL 12. He defended only 3 times at his full melee Parry, which is 12.
t.
Alas, the axeman is prohibited from doign aParry with his Zxe (even when he doesn't AoA) because he's done an attack with that weapon on his Turn.

I'm wondering whay the axeman doesn't ahve a hield. Axe w/no shield is dumb. I also suspect that with Axe-18 the best mix is Deceptive-2 (or TA:Leg) leaving him with a critical hit at 6 or less (against which no Defense is possible). Experienced Gurpsers should never forget that crits are the most common fight enders.
__________________
Fred Brackin
Fred Brackin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-20-2020, 10:26 AM   #88
WingedKagouti
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Default Re: Issues with Retreating Dodge

Quote:
Originally Posted by Plane View Post
maybe they try to quick-ready? if roll succeeds and it's free action they could AOD
You have to select a maneuver before you can try to take any actions (B324 & B363), the maneuver you select dictates what types of actions you're allowed to make. As I am reading to rules, they mean that you're not allowed to roll for any type of action that requires concious thought before selecting a maneuver.

If you want to Fast-Draw and attack you declare one of the Attack maneuvers and if your Fast-Draw succeeds you can then attack. If you fail, you will per Fast-Draw convert your previous maneuver into a Ready maneuver.

The proposed sequence does not appear to be RAW legal.
WingedKagouti is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-20-2020, 04:21 PM   #89
Plane
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Default Re: Issues with Retreating Dodge

Quote:
Originally Posted by WingedKagouti View Post
You have to select a maneuver before you can try to take any actions (B324 & B363)
363's "attacked before you’ve had a chance to choose" clause defaulting to Do Nothing lets you take active defences prior to selecting one ;)

The "Each turn, you must choose" rule also doesn't apply when 364's "Someone who is conscious but stunned or surprised must take this maneuver." as there is no choice involved.

Quote:
Originally Posted by WingedKagouti View Post
the maneuver you select dictates what types of actions you're allowed to make.

As I am reading to rules, they mean that you're not allowed to roll for any type of action that requires concious thought before selecting a maneuver.
Sure you can (active defences) as prior to the player choosing the player/character had effectively defaulted to Do Nothing.

Plus there is an element of conscious thought regarding will rolls, since you can opt to intentionally not resist will rolls, meaning there is some kind of conscious process going on.

I expect "free action" stuff possible via any maneuver (like dropping something) could probably also be done prior to that choice.

So I think ti's more like maneuvers specify the entirety/extent beyond things applicable to all rolls.

I'm not really sure why you can't just specify "the entire time I'm standing guard I'm taking All-Out Defense: Determined Dodge and going half move" though...

B393 inflicts a mental stun if you lose initiative contests for Partial Surprise (which even those with Combat Reflexes need to make) but I think that just overrides whatever maneuver you might've been in the middle of. (example: you could suffer Total Surprise when using Move maneuvers to walk somewhere).

Tactical Shooting 33's "Threat Recognition" builds upon this nicely. It notes you get Observation or Tactics penalties under even Condition Unaware/White to avoid Total Surprise.

TS34 clarifies some incentives in groups: the Focused Orange / Triggered Red conditions are only way to get +5 to Fright Checks in exchange for being unable to benefit from Task Difficulty bonuses, which requires being in Unaware White or Alert Yellow, while Panicked Black is the worst since it gets neither bonus.

It is clear why you'd want to choose between orange or red: orange only allows you to take Wait maneuvers but costs fewer FP to maintain (1 per 10m unless you fail a will roll). GURPS of course had no fixed ongoing cost for combat-in-session which is where Cole's Last Gasp comes to the rescue.
weirdly I guess this means a mage can't use Concentrate to cast a spell without exiting orange and entering 'Red' as if he's in combat? Same with psi who activate mental advantages using concentrate? That seems odd... and I'm thinking perhaps as a house-rule that at least "All-Out Concentrate" could be allowed under orange to give some flexibility? Perhaps All-Out Defence too on turns you're not attacked, since that's similar to a Wait per Cole's errata? Plus also Evaluates.
Kind of wondering how you would voluntarily try to swap between colors, like if you wanted to shift from orange back to yellow to avoid AP loss.

Since Last Gasp was written for combat I would assume it's HT recovery rolls for AP imply Red/Triggered. Maybe that could be modified for other conditions? -1 for panicked, +1 for orange, +2 for yellow, +3 for white, for example? That could explain why people might actually voluntarily enter "white" condition: an actual incentive to not just remain in Yellow indefinitely. This could be one downside to Combat Reflexes (being unable to enter this condition) unless someone wants to take Switchable on CR.

TS11 Situational Awareness is cited as "now applying" under Orange. I don't get the ref for not suffering -2 for "free action" awares though, because a "glance" is -4 to Per, not -2...

Another thing about SA is the emphasis on noticing "new" attackers... but there should probably be some limit to how many foes you can keep track of at once. If there are hundreds of goblins throwing stones at you from nooks and crannies then even one who you previously noticed might be "new again" if you forgot him because you lost track of him.

Like maybe (lots of crunch but maybe could automate this somehow to be faster) a char could roll every time they change their facing (thus altering FOV) or an enemy changes their position to see if they notice the enemy's new (relative) position, with a huge bonus (maybe +10) to follow someone you're already "visually tracking" because you noticed them previously.

This could peter out by having cumulative penalties (multiple uses) to vision rolls to keep track of multiple foes who remain in your FOV, with failure being automatic for those who exit it. I'm thinking -4 if 'free action' per Cole's "Quick Aim" precedent below, but maybe just -2 (the classic "two things at once") if dedicating Concentrate maneuvers to observation: assume it's like removing a -2 "two things" from "free action" since that combines observation with some other maneuver.

Then anyone who you lost track of would be a "new foe" using Situational Awareness rules w/o the +10.

Those who you "lose visual track of" are not necessarily forgotten though. You could have a separate skill (with it's own cumulative penalties) for "remember the foe exists even if I can no longer see them".

This would suffer the cumulative penalties of any foes you are still tracking visually, plus penalties for however many foes you are trying to remember. Failure causes fewer failures as the penalties disappear when you actually do forget a foe.
Plane is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-20-2020, 04:29 PM   #90
Plane
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Default Re: Issues with Retreating Dodge

Unless you have Eidetic Memory (B51) there isn't an IQ roll to recall SPECIFIC details of things you previously concentrated on, but you don't necessarily to recall specific details in a fight. It's not entirely clear where to draw line on 'specific' though. Like is "he was carrying a knife" specific?

That is "recall, not comprehension" so it implies some other kind of IQ-based roll to actually comprehend the significance of things you remember seeing, too. So maybe you'd roll, if you later noticed "he's no longer carrying a knife", to think "perhaps he threw the knife at my ally" or "perhaps my ally disarmed him" or "perhaps I should look on the ground for that knife".

I think maybe everyone has some form of Eidetic Memory... based on the bonuses given for learning (5/10) it seems kind of like leveled IQ (only for remembering -95%) so maybe it should be an IQ-5 roll to remember "specific" details for anybody, and a lesser penalty (or bonus, or just raw roll) for "non-specific" details?

Remembering a foe means you remember "where I saw them last" meaning you can change your facing to scan that area first to get another chance at a Per, Observation or per-based Soldier or Tactics roll to bring them back up to "aware" status.

Other skills might be used (like IQ tactics) to interpret more useful conclusions from the snapshot you remember like "the enemy was facing in X direction, the enemy was in motion in Y direction, I think the enemy was trying to move to Z location", etc.

I guess since that's actually multiple seconds of observation of an enemy, you're actually dealing with multiple tiers of memory.

Like perhaps you could do something MoS-based where MoS is how many seconds of preceding actions by that foe you are able to remember (0 means none, you only remember their position on that last turn you spotted them).

Perhaps rather than a hard "you fail the IQ roll, you forgot the enemy was ever there" sort of result (rather harsh) you are assumed to remember the foe's existence (even on a crit fail) but you apply the MOF as a penalty to your next second's roll, and count as forgetting them when your effective skill reaches 0? IE goldfish brain.

To avoid penalties to remember/observe PRIME targets (important ones) I could also see will rolls to "intentionally try to overlook" and even "intentionally try to forget" non-prime targets. IE to some degree how Cole's "One Foe" works.

Changing facing is one way to overlook (literally) but otherwise you'd have to try and 'mentally tune out' a foe who remains in field of vision, bringing prime targets into focus (both of vision and attention)

Intentional forgetting would be easier for foes you can't detect...

Maybe there's something like a basic bonus (like +10, maybe more) which has to be spread around, so you can be +10 to remember one person is present, or +1 to remember 10 people were present?

Could use the 'like riding a bike' rules where so long as effective skill is 15 or more and there's +3 TDM (which requires White or Yellow, no TDM bonus for Orange/Red) you don't need to roll at all to observe/remember a foe. Cumulative -2s for "two things at once" would eventually make it possible/necessary for anyone though.

B53's "Enhanced Tracking" should probably help here too, let it do more than just Aim/Evaluate. Somehow impacting TS11's TA rules feels right here. Just not sure what each level should represent... ignoring one instance of the cumulative -2 "doing two things at once" penalties, maybe?

Compartmentalized Minds would make their own separate rolls and mind separately see/remember foe layouts and need to confer with each other to fill in for holes.

More thoughts on ET... at 5/level this just so happens to be what maxing out the Dual-Weapon Attack technique cost (B230) prior to it becoming a perk because of relative cost to ambidexterity.

Where Aim is treated similar to an attack roll... (pyramid 3/77 On Target pg 27 "Aim as Attack") although Cole doesn't explore it, maybe there could be a "Dual-Aim Technique" to aim at two targets simultaneously?

Actually maybe there is? Quick Aim defaults to guns at -6 (similar to Rapid Strike) and there's rules for multiple uses on pg 28... the example uses two hit locations but I guess you could use two foes too.

The major difference between Quick Aim is that it gets penalized by bulk (you're moving the weapon to point at something) whereas observation rolls would not be. Incrementing at -6 instead of -4 (the "free action" threat evaluation w/o a concentrate) makes sense since you're doing 2 things at once: visually tracking AND moving your weapon.

So for that reason, maybe Enhanced Tracking should just give +6 per level only for the purpose of offsetting cumulative penalties for aiming (-6 per) or visually tracking (-4 per) multiple foes?

I'm just guessing at -4 since "multiple targets, spread-out targets, etc.;" on TS11 never gives any guidelines.


Quote:
Originally Posted by WingedKagouti View Post
If you want to Fast-Draw and attack you declare one of the Attack maneuvers and if your Fast-Draw succeeds you can then attack.
If you fail, you will per Fast-Draw convert your previous maneuver into a Ready maneuver.
The proposed sequence does not appear to be RAW legal.
B194 doesn't seem to mention needing to specify the maneuver you'd translate it into first. I'm not sure when that would matter though, unless it could be interrupted by a Wait and you might change your maneuver choice in response to the consequences.

A version of Fast-Draw which doesn't obligate changing to a Ready on a failure (IE if you can't draw the weapon for free, you don't draw it at all) would be interesting, maybe as a -1 benefit technique?

That better emulates the freedom that Cole's Quick Aim adds, where failure doesn't obligate taking an aim maneuver, merely that "failure grants no aim bonus". This allows choosing All-Out Aim or Commited Aim or Normal Aim, but I don't know how the penalties of the first two would come into effect, like i they apply to whatever maneuver it's combined with.

This wouldn't do much to combining Quick All-Out Aim with All-Out Attack Ranged (you're getting "movement: none" and "no defences" twice) but I notice AO/Com require will rolls to STOP aiming, so failing that WOULD force you to take an Aim maneuver normally.

*now picturing someone with Will 3 aiming themself to death because they can't stop aiming to eat*

I'm going to guess that since aiming is condition orange (possibly loss of 1 FP per 10 minutes) that eventually someone unable to stop aiming would just drop from exhaustion. If they have a low Will they won't be able to mitigate that loss (though it's strange there isn't also a HT roll)
Plane is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Fnords are Off
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:53 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.