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 04-21-2013, 11:06 AM   #11
Sunrunners_Fire
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Bullhead City, AZ
Default Re: Knowing the outcome of an attack before choosing to actively defend

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tomsdad View Post
So I'm thinking that I might ask my players to decide to actively defend in response to them being attacked not in response to them finding out if they will be hit of they don't.
In my opinion? Eww.

My first response as a player to this rule would be to ask you (assuming you are the GM) if you wanted to run games without combat in them, seeing how you just crippled our ability to survive said combats. My second response would be to retire my existing character and build a dodge/soak monkey (if you wanted to run games with combat) or a politically-inclined merchant (if you wanted to run games without combat) as appropriate.

My first response as a GM would be to look at you (assuming you are one of my players) funny, point out that I regularly send twenty-ish opponents after the group, note how quickly this will result in the player-characters being very, very, dead and ask you if you wanted to play in a non-combat game instead ...

Admittedly I run high-powered games with gobs of enemies and so my experience is going to be a tad different than yours. But still! Heh.
__________________
"Art thou wroth? Wherefore art thou wroth, brother?"
Tag your threads! (Browse tags here.)
Sunrunners_Fire is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-21-2013, 11:16 AM   #12
Tomsdad
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Default Re: Knowing the outcome of an attack before choosing to actively defend

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sunrunners_Fire View Post
In my opinion? Eww.

My first response as a player to this rule would be to ask you (assuming you are the GM) if you wanted to run games without combat in them, seeing how you just crippled our ability to survive said combats. My second response would be to retire my existing character and build a dodge/soak monkey (if you wanted to run games with combat) or a politically-inclined merchant (if you wanted to run games without combat) as appropriate.

My first response as a GM would be to look at you (assuming you are one of my players) funny, point out that I regularly send twenty-ish opponents after the group, note how quickly this will result in the player-characters being very, very, dead and ask you if you wanted to play in a non-combat game instead ...

Admittedly I run high-powered games with gobs of enemies and so my experience is going to be a tad different than yours. But still! Heh.
No worries ;-), if my players ever find themselves surrounded by 20 chaps they know they have to be very on their toes to make it out alive!

Don't get me wrong it's happened but they tend to learn the value of decent armour or discretion over valour at that point.
Tomsdad is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 04-21-2013, 11:35 AM   #13
Langy
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: CA
Default Re: Knowing the outcome of an attack before choosing to actively defend

Quote:
Originally Posted by malloyd View Post
In addition to degrading defenses in combats with multiple foes, the other major downside is probably making combats slower - you are adding one more exchange with the player (to ask what defense they use or not) and one extra die roll (the outcomes of which don't matter much, since only critical failures will change anything) to each failed attack. If a lot of attacks fail, that could be quite a lot of time.
There's no reason to actually roll the defense until the outcome is known; just stating it should be fine.
Langy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-21-2013, 11:44 AM   #14
Mateus
 
Mateus's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Curitiba - PR (Brazil)
Default Re: Knowing the outcome of an attack before choosing to actively defend

I remember to read something about tihs in a Pyramid article, but I cannot find it. Dont seen to be in the Alternate GURPS volumes. I am almost certain that was something writed by T-Bone.
__________________
Link for my DF Campaign Game: http://www.obsidianportal.com/campaigns/panorica
Mateus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-21-2013, 12:00 PM   #15
Tomsdad
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Default Re: Knowing the outcome of an attack before choosing to actively defend

Quote:
Originally Posted by Langy View Post
There's no reason to actually roll the defense until the outcome is known; just stating it should be fine.
Good point, it's just the commitment that's required. (Although if the assumption is it happened you might want to know if you had a critical success on the defence leading to a critical failure for the attacker). Critical successes are on defence rolls are pretty fringe, but if your defending more often it seems a touch unfair to remove you chances of getting extra critical successes, no matter how small. However given the majority of defence skills are between 7-14 I guess they balance out with critical failures so removing both by not rolling probably balances out overall.

Last edited by Tomsdad; 04-22-2013 at 01:52 AM. Reason: What ever the range is for 3-4 and 17-18 crits
Tomsdad is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 04-21-2013, 12:01 PM   #16
Tomsdad
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Default Re: Knowing the outcome of an attack before choosing to actively defend

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mateus View Post
I remember to read something about tihs in a Pyramid article, but I cannot find it. Dont seen to be in the Alternate GURPS volumes. I am almost certain that was something writed by T-Bone.
He did an article on his blog
Tomsdad is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 04-21-2013, 12:04 PM   #17
DouglasCole
Doctor of GURPS Ballistics
 
DouglasCole's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Burnsville, MN
Default Re: Knowing the outcome of an attack before choosing to actively defend

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tomsdad View Post
Good point, it's just the commitment that's required. (Although if the assumption is it happened you might want to know if you had a critical success on the defence leading to a critical failure for the attacker). Critical successes are on defence rolls are pretty fringe, but if your defending more often it seems a touch unfair to remove you chances of getting extra critical successes, no matter how small. However given the majority of defence skills are between 5-15 I guess they balance out with critical failures so removing both by not rolling probably balances out overall.
I think on this one - if you and your players don't mind extra rolling - is to say that some combination of "missed by a lot" and "successful defense roll" means that the attack and positioning for the defense does not trigger the extra penalties typically imparted for multiple block/parry attempts. "The attack is so bad I can just stand there" should be a viable outcome.
__________________
The Deadly Spring "...probably the most infamous Pyramid article of all time."-Jeffro's Car Wars Blog
Gaming Ballistic: Home of Gaming Ballistic, LLC and my blog.
DouglasCole is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-21-2013, 12:11 PM   #18
Pagan
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Default Re: Knowing the outcome of an attack before choosing to actively defend

I've never been in a fight or even seen a real fight where a person threw a feint so bad or missed with an attack so badly that the opponent didn't react to it. Even if it's just getting hit because their reaction was too slow. Even bad blows get blocked, parried or dodged. Not reacting only happens when the opponent is stunned, blindsided or covering up.

What any boxing match or UFC fight fight and see if you can spot one.
__________________
"First Scarran you see, you tell him who his daddy is....tell him Dargo!"
Pagan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-21-2013, 01:15 PM   #19
Tomsdad
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Default Re: Knowing the outcome of an attack before choosing to actively defend

Quote:
Originally Posted by DouglasCole View Post
I think on this one - if you and your players don't mind extra rolling - is to say that some combination of "missed by a lot" and "successful defense roll" means that the attack and positioning for the defense does not trigger the extra penalties typically imparted for multiple block/parry attempts. "The attack is so bad I can just stand there" should be a viable outcome.
So a critical success on a defence against an ordinary failure to hit, would basically count as a free extra defence?
That would seem to be a less favourable outcome than a critical hit on defence against a successful hit on attack?


Or do you mean a Critical failure on a hit combined with a successful defence roll gives a free defence.

I think both are the same margin of difference on the comparative success scales:

Critical success attack - successful attack - missed attack - critical miss on attack

and

Critical success defence - successful defence - failed defence - critically failed defence
Tomsdad is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 04-21-2013, 01:16 PM   #20
jacobmuller
 
jacobmuller's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Not in your time zone:D
Default Re: Knowing the outcome of an attack before choosing to actively defend

Don't know where I read the following but it was probably Kromm:
How come I know when I donít have to defend?
It's important not to imagine that the defender is standing still and only reacting to a direct and successful attack. This creates a bizarre scene where you know the attack is going to miss and just stand there, and the attacker is whacking at the air beside you in an utterly inept manner.
Just because an attack "missed" doesn't mean you aren't defending. It just means the attack was clumsy enough that any sort of defending was minor and required so little effort that it didn't consume your active defence. It only counts as an active defence if the attack was successful and therefore took enough effort to deplete your defences.
Missing, in the chaos of battle, often means that you failed to anticipate your opponentís movements and adjust to them, and ended up attacking somewhere he wasn't, grazing his shield or putting your attack where it could be easily and effortlessly deflected. In practice the enemy is moving about (dodging), hiding behind his shield (blocking) and trying to brush aside your attacks (parrying) the whole time.

I'd be delighted if one of you Gurus could correct me.
__________________
"Sanity is a bourgeois meme." Exegeek
PS sorry I'm a Parthian shootist: shiftwork + out of = not here when you are:/
jacobmuller is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
combat, house rules

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 07:24 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.