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 08-07-2012, 02:02 AM   #41
makke
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Germany, Leonberg
Default Re: Feints dominating fights?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mailanka View Post
You know, Makke, you seem convinced that Feint is, in fact, a problem.
I am, that is the reason why I started this thread. I just hoped that someone came up with a great solution besides "make direct combat less frequent" and thus proves me wrong. I'm rather reluctant to add new houserules when they are not absolutely needed/ enhance the game by a large degree. Hence I would be much happier to find a solution within the raw.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mailanka View Post
Let's not argue about whether or not that's true. Let's take it for granted that it's "too good," and that people use it "too often," by your measure of too often.
As far as I can tell, my point about "there is no more effective option to invest in than the feint-technique" still stands unchallenged(?). I'm not here to get my opinion confirmed but to get impressions of other ppl's games (I hope this doesn't sound snippy. It's not meant that way). So far I got the impression that some other ppl don't have that problem because they play in games in which a feint is not needed because defenses are low enough to be broken down by using other modifiers (like runaround attacks and the like) plus deceptive attack - that sounds like "feint is not overpowered because it is overkill" to me atm.

My big problem with feint is that I'm unable to come up with a character that is able to consistently beat a feint fighter without investing into and/or using feints himself. That five points just seem so universally useful I don't see a reason not to spent them. I do know that this sounds a bit like "Hey, I want a fighter that doesn't use attack to win fights" but the statement is more akin to "I want a fighter that is able to win without using defensive attacks".

This dislike for feint as a universally useful tactic is ultimately rooted in the impressions I got out of reading MA, doing some fencing in my youth and watching some fighting with eyes open. Take (olympic) fencing for example. In the fights that I've seen lately there were only very rarely moves that I would classify as something like a feint. I've seen lot's of deceptive attacks, some counterattacks, some ripostes but feints were the exception not the rule. The same is true for other sports I watched lately (with different techniques used instead, of course). This is kind of a double argument. I think the universality of the technique fails the reality check and it is, rules wise, something I think is disagreeable - believing in the dogma that more options is virtually always better than fewer options.
makke is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-07-2012, 05:02 AM   #42
Witchking
 
Witchking's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: The Athens of America
Default Re: Feints dominating fights?

Quote:
Originally Posted by makke View Post
My big problem with feint is that I'm unable to come up with a character that is able to consistently beat a feint fighter without investing into and/or using feints himself. That five points just seem so universally useful I don't see a reason not to spent them. I do know that this sounds a bit like "Hey, I want a fighter that doesn't use attack to win fights" but the statement is more akin to "I want a fighter that is able to win without using defensive attacks".
Well:

1. If the other side has ONE tank/fencer/mage/etc that is a problem...thats where I like to use teamwork to beat them into the pavement...

2. If you do not want to deal with the tedium of melee dancing..you could go outside the box with Heroic Archer or WM Bow or both...and shoot the boy from 15 hexes away...

Seldom seen too many builds with 5 points invested in Feint Tech...usually Feint IME has just been used off of flat skill by a skilled fighter to degrade the defenses of a lesser skilled target (ie Broadsword + Big Shield) to set the kill...
__________________
My center is giving way, my right is in retreat; situation excellent. I shall attack.-Foch
America is not perfect, but I will hold her hand until she gets well.-unk Tuskegee Airman
Witchking is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-07-2012, 05:12 AM   #43
Deadite
 
Deadite's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Default Re: Feints dominating fights?

Quote:
Originally Posted by makke View Post
I am, that is the reason why I started this thread. I just hoped that someone came up with a great solution besides "make direct combat less frequent" and thus proves me wrong. I'm rather reluctant to add new houserules when they are not absolutely needed/ enhance the game by a large degree. Hence I would be much happier to find a solution within the raw.

As far as I can tell, my point about "there is no more effective option to invest in than the feint-technique" still stands unchallenged(?). I'm not here to get my opinion confirmed but to get impressions of other ppl's games (I hope this doesn't sound snippy. It's not meant that way). So far I got the impression that some other ppl don't have that problem because they play in games in which a feint is not needed because defenses are low enough to be broken down by using other modifiers (like runaround attacks and the like) plus deceptive attack - that sounds like "feint is not overpowered because it is overkill" to me atm.

My big problem with feint is that I'm unable to come up with a character that is able to consistently beat a feint fighter without investing into and/or using feints himself. That five points just seem so universally useful I don't see a reason not to spent them. I do know that this sounds a bit like "Hey, I want a fighter that doesn't use attack to win fights" but the statement is more akin to "I want a fighter that is able to win without using defensive attacks".

This dislike for feint as a universally useful tactic is ultimately rooted in the impressions I got out of reading MA, doing some fencing in my youth and watching some fighting with eyes open. Take (olympic) fencing for example. In the fights that I've seen lately there were only very rarely moves that I would classify as something like a feint. I've seen lot's of deceptive attacks, some counterattacks, some ripostes but feints were the exception not the rule. The same is true for other sports I watched lately (with different techniques used instead, of course). This is kind of a double argument. I think the universality of the technique fails the reality check and it is, rules wise, something I think is disagreeable - believing in the dogma that more options is virtually always better than fewer options.

Maybe you can force players to build their special ability into a poorer combat maneuver? Something dominating, like AoA to teleport your opponent into the dragon's lair. Instead of rolling for damage, you roll for succeeding the spell.

My suggestion is invalid because I haven't bought Gurps' Martial Art. But I just want to throw the idea out there for someone who's more experienced at combat customization.

Last edited by Deadite; 08-07-2012 at 05:16 AM.
Deadite is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-07-2012, 07:51 AM   #44
trooper6
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Medford, MA
Default Re: Feints dominating fights?

Quote:
Originally Posted by makke View Post
As far as I can tell, my point about "there is no more effective option to invest in than the feint-technique" still stands unchallenged(?). I'm not here to get my opinion confirmed but to get impressions of other ppl's games (I hope this doesn't sound snippy. It's not meant that way). So far I got the impression that some other ppl don't have that problem because they play in games in which a feint is not needed because defenses are low enough to be broken down by using other modifiers (like runaround attacks and the like) plus deceptive attack - that sounds like "feint is not overpowered because it is overkill" to me atm.
I have repeatedly challenged your assertion through the discussion of the arena game I was in. My character used other means to break down defenses, but that wasn't because defenses were low enough not to need feint. Defenses were really, really high. People didn't always Feint, not because Feint was overkill, but because other tactics can be more useful than Feint.

My character's parries were regularly at least 17, and since I was dual wielding and a Weapon Master fencer, my defenses stayed really high for multiple defenses. So I your mind people should have been feinting me all the time...but I had a really high skill, so if you fainted me, even if you had the feint technique, you may not beat me, and even if you did beat me, on average, you wouldn't beat me by much...usually between 2-4, which is going to waste one of your attacks for inconsistent benefit that is probably not going to be enough to make me miss my defense.

People who went up against my fighter, rather than feinting, instead did things they knew would be effective...stacking techniques to get massive to hit bonuses which they'd then sink into a really major deceptive attack, or an insane number of rapid strikes...or really heavy weapons that I couldn't parry, etc.

Feint is good sometimes, and some people used it to great effect, but again, my character was the longest lasting one of a very brutal arena game, and I didn't even have the Feint technique until near the very end.

Quote:
Originally Posted by makke View Post
My big problem with feint is that I'm unable to come up with a character that is able to consistently beat a feint fighter without investing into and/or using feints himself. That five points just seem so universally useful I don't see a reason not to spent them. I do know that this sounds a bit like "Hey, I want a fighter that doesn't use attack to win fights" but the statement is more akin to "I want a fighter that is able to win without using defensive attacks".
Just because you can't come up with a fighter that can beat a feint fighter without having feint doesn't mean there is something wrong with feint. I'd posit there is something wrong with the builds and tactics you are using...because not only have I seen it done, I've done it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by makke View Post
Take (olympic) fencing for example. In the fights that I've seen lately there were only very rarely moves that I would classify as something like a feint. I've seen lot's of deceptive attacks, some counterattacks, some ripostes but feints were the exception not the rule.
I don't think you should take Olympic fencing for much of anything. Looks like most of the time they are doing AoA's with deceptive attack, because they don't care about getting hit. Because if they hit first, they get the point and the other point doesn't count...which...with live steel people would be fighting very differently.

Anyhow, based on my experience in a very long running Arena game, and having the longest surviving PC, who was also the top ranked fighter in the end, who didn't even get the Feint technique until shortly before that PC was killed, Feint isn't the end all be all.

Also, while we saw feint in the arena (but again, not as a dominant force), in the games I've run or played in that were regular campaigns not consisting of arena combat, feints rarely come up.
trooper6 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-07-2012, 07:54 AM   #45
trooper6
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Medford, MA
Default Re: Feints dominating fights?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Deadite View Post
Maybe you can force players to build their special ability into a poorer combat maneuver? Something dominating, like AoA to teleport your opponent into the dragon's lair. Instead of rolling for damage, you roll for succeeding the spell.
If you gave me a special ability that was tied into an AoA, I most likely wouldn't use the maneuver. Because after that AoA I have no defenses, and no defenses often means death. So, I rather stick with attacks that won't get me killed if my foe resists or defends.
trooper6 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-07-2012, 10:42 AM   #46
makke
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Germany, Leonberg
Default Re: Feints dominating fights?

Let me compliment my argument about the fencers with some math (probabilities taken from here ):

Assume two fighters. One (F) has invested five points into feint and the other (C) invested the same amount into counterattack. I'm assuming equal stats on everything else and a base skill of 16 in Saber Sport.

F: Saber Sport 16, Parry 11, Feint (Saber Sport) 20,
C: Saber Sport 16, Parry 11, Counterattack (Saber Sport) 15

Available options (with realism mode to the max): Retreat gives +3, AoD +2, Defensive Attack +1.

The chance for a MoV of y or more when feinting for F is: Sum over x: (chance for F to roll exactly x * chance for C to roll x+y-4 or more (-4 for lower feint technique) or more). Did this with Libreoffice Calc and came to the following results:
MoV Prob
>0 85%
>1 79%
>2 72%
>3 63%
>4 54%
>5 45%
>6 36% ...
This seems a bit high to me but neither I nor my friend can spot any mistake so I guess the numbers are correct. If they are feint is even stronger than I feared... I mean this says that you can reduce the defense of an equally skilled fighter by 6 or more with 40% of the feints.
makke is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-07-2012, 10:47 AM   #47
Anthony
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Berkeley, CA
Default Re: Feints dominating fights?

Quote:
Originally Posted by makke View Post
As far as I can tell, my point about "there is no more effective option to invest in than the feint-technique" still stands unchallenged(?).
In one one one duels against equal skilled opponents that may be true. Against weaker foes, straight up weapon skill is usually better, because feint costs a turn and if you're approaching a 50% hit probability without feinting, feint isn't worth the trouble.
Anthony is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-07-2012, 10:54 AM   #48
roguebfl
Dog of Lysdexics
 
roguebfl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Melbourne FL, Formerly Wellington NZ
Default Re: Feints dominating fights?

Quote:
Originally Posted by makke View Post
This seems a bit high to me but neither I nor my friend can spot any mistake so I guess the numbers are correct. If they are feint is even stronger than I feared... I mean this says that you can reduce the defense of an equally skilled fighter by 6 or more with 40% of the feints.
The probability of a successful in GURPS = P(Chance of Crit) + P(Chance of non-crit hit * chance of failed defense)
__________________
Rogue the Bronze Firelizard
Gerald Grenier, Jr. Hail Eris!
Rogue's Weyr

Last edited by roguebfl; 08-08-2012 at 07:41 AM. Reason: fixing quote tag
roguebfl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-07-2012, 11:46 AM   #49
Ulzgoroth
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Default Re: Feints dominating fights?

Quote:
Originally Posted by makke View Post
that sounds like "feint is not overpowered because it is overkill" to me atm.
That is, in fact, one of the major problems with Feint. Feint is sacrificing an attack for a benefit that you may not need.
Quote:
Originally Posted by makke View Post
My big problem with feint is that I'm unable to come up with a character that is able to consistently beat a feint fighter without investing into and/or using feints himself. That five points just seem so universally useful I don't see a reason not to spent them. I do know that this sounds a bit like "Hey, I want a fighter that doesn't use attack to win fights" but the statement is more akin to "I want a fighter that is able to win without using defensive attacks".
If you've got two characters with approximately equal skills and weapons that can effectively parry each other, dropping 5 points in Feint may well be the best way for one to gain advantage over the other.

On the other hand, if one has significantly more skill than the other, it may be that neither gains much from feint. The weaker one isn't going to succeed in their own feints, of course. The stronger one likely doesn't need to feint, and if they did they might not need the extra benefit. (Unless they were up against a weaker opponent who did invest in Feint, of course.) This might not happen in an arena battle (unless the low-skill fighter has some radical alternate approach going on which may invalidate the feint approach) but it could happen quite a lot in adventuring situations...with adventurers on either side.

Or, for another way to invest those 5 points from parity: 4 points to take Flail instead of your Average weapon skill of choice, and 1 point for Shield Wall Training. Your morningstar will nicely muck up a parry-oriented opponent, especially if they're a fencer, while your large shield helps resist any feint-enhanced attacks.
__________________
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 08-07-2012, 12:40 PM   #50
trooper6
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Medford, MA
Default Re: Feints dominating fights?

Quote:
Originally Posted by makke View Post
Let me compliment my argument about the fencers with some math (probabilities taken from here ):

Assume two fighters. One (F) has invested five points into feint and the other (C) invested the same amount into counterattack. I'm assuming equal stats on everything else and a base skill of 16 in Saber Sport.

F: Saber Sport 16, Parry 11, Feint (Saber Sport) 20,
C: Saber Sport 16, Parry 11, Counterattack (Saber Sport) 15

Available options (with realism mode to the max): Retreat gives +3, AoD +2, Defensive Attack +1.
First off I wouldn't recommend the Saber Fighter, if he only has 5pts to go with something not Feint, to go with Counterattack (which is a technique I like, by the way). I'd go with Dual Weapon Attack or another level in Saber, and use the extra cp for Weapon Bond.

Let's ignore DWA for a moment--which could seriously mess up your Feinter and look at the more skill guy.


F: Saber Sport 16, Parry 11, Feint (Saber Sport) 20,
S: Saber Sport 18, Parry 12 (Base Skill 17 +1 for Weapon Bond).

If they both make average rolls, the Feint guy is going to be able to reduce the Skill Guy's defense by 2. But it means giving up a turn every other turn. And that Skill guy's defense only goes down to 10, that is before the +3 for retreating. When Skill guy retreats, his defense is a 13...which is going to be hard to get through.

The skill guy on the other hand, can lower his foe's base defense to 10, every turn with no rolls needed just by doing a -2/-1 Defensive attack...still leaving him with a 16 Skill roll.

Also, since the two fighters are the same, it is up in the air who goes first. If the non-Feinter goes first and hits the Feint guy, that feint guy will have shock penalties that will negatively impact his ability to feint. And if he chooses to feint anyway (because he is crazy wedded to his technique), then the non-Feint guy gets another attack on him before the Feint guy will be able to respond.

If the feint guy goes first and chooses to feint, the non-feint guy still gets to hit him first messing up his feinting ability.

I don't think you can just look at probabilities in absence things like Shock penalties, who goes first, etc.
trooper6 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
combat rules, feints

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 06:01 AM.


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