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 11-10-2015, 03:06 AM   #11
mhd
 
mhd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Land of the Beer, Home of the Dirndls
Default Re: New GURPS Hardcore Battle system (fan made)

Weapon speeds have been done since the time of the ancients (AD&D1), but I'm still not sure whether that properly models an actual real world concept.

I doubt that in a real world situation you'll get much difference between someone stabbing with a dagger than with a rapier or spear. You'll get some difference between swings and thrusts, but even that gets really muddled when you consider all the "non-attack" movements the weapon makes in a turn (parrying, feinting, overcoming reach). So you'll have to include all kinds of combo maneuvers, different degrees of stop thrusts, ripostes etc.

If it's done for game balance reasons, i.e. making every weapon interesting to PCs, that might be a good idea, if a bit complex. But for realism's sake?
mhd is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-10-2015, 03:53 AM   #12
sjard
Stick in the Mud
 
sjard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Rural Utah
Default Re: New GURPS Hardcore Battle system (fan made)

Quote:
Originally Posted by mhd View Post
Weapon speeds have been done since the time of the ancients (AD&D1), but I'm still not sure whether that properly models an actual real world concept.

I doubt that in a real world situation you'll get much difference between someone stabbing with a dagger than with a rapier or spear. You'll get some difference between swings and thrusts, but even that gets really muddled when you consider all the "non-attack" movements the weapon makes in a turn (parrying, feinting, overcoming reach). So you'll have to include all kinds of combo maneuvers, different degrees of stop thrusts, ripostes etc.

If it's done for game balance reasons, i.e. making every weapon interesting to PCs, that might be a good idea, if a bit complex. But for realism's sake?
While some of the historical combat manuals do make distinctions in attack times, they're usually based on what type of movement you're making.

For example, I believe it was George Silver who made distinctions between what he called The Time of the Hand, The Time of the Foot, The Time of the Arm, etc.

Basically, an attack made just by moving your hand tends to be the fastest, the arm to the elbow slightly slower, the whole arm slower still, any of those combined with a small step longer, etc.

But in general you're correct, weapon speeds are done in games occasionally for balancing purposes, and because in actual combat there is far too much variation to really put into rules. You'll have brief moments, in GURPS terms, 1-3 seconds of a flurry of activity (I'm one of those that think even 2 attacks per second can be a bit slow) followed by 3-10 seconds of Evaluation, then another shorter time of flurry of activity. But also in my experience with HEMA most 1v1 fights tend to be over within 1-6 blows, usually within about .5-15 seconds.

Edit: However, I also don't consider the evaluate time, if taking more than about 3 seconds, to be in combat any longer.
__________________
MIB #1457
Scott Anderson
Tavern Blacksmith My RPG and random thought blog. Registration and comments now open... dear dice the spam.

Last edited by sjard; 11-10-2015 at 03:57 AM.
sjard is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-10-2015, 03:55 AM   #13
Whyte
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Default Re: New GURPS Hardcore Battle system (fan made)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bibiribobiri View Post
iii) Shields don’t protect passively.
It would be an easy GM call to rule that even an unknowing target gets a cover bonus from the shield, if it is in the way. Or simply limit the targets the sniper can aim at:
"Nope, you are not going to hit him in the arms or torso. Your available targets are his left leg and his head. Take your pick. Anything else and you will be hitting his shield for sure."

That being said, your Shield DB as a penalty to the attack roll is actually what we had been using in our houserules, too. Easy to remember, which is a bonus, and works just as well in melee as with missiles. You might wish to lower the DB addition to the Block (we used DB/2), or even eliminate it altogether, or shields will become even more uber than they already are in GURPS combat.
Whyte is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-10-2015, 04:25 AM   #14
mhd
 
mhd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Land of the Beer, Home of the Dirndls
Default Re: New GURPS Hardcore Battle system (fan made)

Quote:
Originally Posted by sjard View Post
While some of the historical combat manuals do make distinctions in attack times, they're usually based on what type of movement you're making.
And you can make plenty of different movements with each and every weapon.
While I might be faster doing stabbity-stab-stab against a static pole with an icepick than with a spear, things look different when I try to feint at the face, than stab the thigh, hold two people at bay etc.

Apart from treating things holistically (within a turn or even over several ones), you'd also have to define what rule terms really are. The old "what is a parry really" debate...

And then there's the matter of granularity. The Last Gasp has the same issue. While it might be more exhausting to swing an axe than a dagger, is it really twice as exhausting? So you either increase the range (double digits enough?), or you treat the differences as rounding errors.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sjard View Post
But also in my experience with HEMA most 1v1 fights tend to be over within 1-6 blows, usually within about .5-15 seconds.
Olympic fencing is fast, too. But in both cases, the risks of dying are pretty minute, which tends to skew things slightly...
mhd is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-10-2015, 04:51 AM   #15
lachimba
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Sydney
Default Re: New GURPS Hardcore Battle system (fan made)

I) has been mostly resolved by action points as an optional rule.

Last edited by lachimba; 11-10-2015 at 04:55 AM.
lachimba is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-10-2015, 05:24 AM   #16
fifiste
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Estonia
Default Re: New GURPS Hardcore Battle system (fan made)

Also you might want to balance your games weapons to make it more gamey - but truth is some weapons just are plain better.
fifiste is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-10-2015, 06:52 AM   #17
Tomsdad
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Default Re: New GURPS Hardcore Battle system (fan made)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bibiribobiri View Post
As a “realism” fanatic, i’ve encountered 3 main problems of GURPS battle system. If you want to skip those (and go right to the new rules) go to the next post.

Imagine a 1x1 medieval fight. Tom is a strong ST19 Ogre and Jerry is a sneaky ST10 thief.

i) The figthing pace is too weird:
On GURPS rules, they will usually attack once every second and defend once every second. In seems odd because no one can keep that pace (just watch an UFC fight, for exemple). Even those who could strike once every second (a experienced fighter, like Anderson Silva), rarely do so and when they do, they do it for only a few seconds.

Absolutely a situation that the AP system was designed for (as has already been suggested)




Quote:
Originally Posted by Bibiribobiri View Post
ii) The attacking speed doesn’t depend on the weapon one use:
It also seems odd. That being the case, everyone (who had a bit of money) would just use the heaviest weapon he could wield without penalty. In that case, if wanted to use one-handed weapon optimally, both Tom and Jerry would always choose to use the broadsword.
Thinking in numbers, it would actually make more sense for Jerry to use a heavier weapon, like an axe (proportionally much more damage, no defence), than Tom (proportionally almost the same damage, no defence).
Also, if Jerry used a bastard-sword he would strike as fast as if using a short-sword or a dagger..
OK first point most melee weapons are actually not that heavy, the slow heavy weapon vs. the fast light one is a bit of a myth. (heavier/longer weapons may be more tiring to use quickly, but that can be shown by MinSt)

However IMO GURPS models this in two different ways

1) Weapons that are 0U and or become unready after use. Both of these rules stop you freely attacking and defending with those weapons at the same rate as others.

2). The reach mechanism that drastically effects what weapons are used when. Now this doesn't change who quickly they attack in theory, but it does effect how often they attack in practice

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bibiribobiri View Post
iii) Shields don’t protect passively.
Playing Mount & Blade (the best medieval fighting simulator I know) I noticed that my shield blocked some arrows even if I wasn’t defending. Some times, when I was running (with shield down), my shield caught an arrow from an archer I didn’t even know was there. The same thing should happen if I had a shield strapped on my back. Playing as an archer, I realized that it was much harder to hit
someone who had a shield (even if he didn’t saw me and wasn’t defending).

This rules may feel too much complicated at first, but I bet GURPS also seemed to much complicated as you started playing it. :P
The trick is to annotate everything on the character sheet (thus it only get tricky once).
I'd argue that since there DB extends to dodge and parry that's a kind of passive defence. as in it doesn't require a conscious use of the shield (even it if requires a concious effort to defend). But yep you could quickly work up some location cover for various shields.
Tomsdad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-10-2015, 08:33 AM   #18
Varyon
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Default Re: New GURPS Hardcore Battle system (fan made)

I) As already mentioned plenty of times, this issue is solved rather handily by AP. Of course, that doesn't mean there can't be other ways to do it.


II) This was one of the issues I "fixed" with my Initiative Overhaul. Unfortunately, even that more-simplified version is rather unwieldy in play. Still, I think I got the scaling for weapons about right, and it's much less harsh than yours.

In that, the base cost for a punch is 40 IP, the base cost for a kick is 45 IP. Weapon attacks have a base cost of 60 IP, +5 for swings, and +5 per yard of Reach. Having high ST can reduce costs - -5 IP for having 1.5xMinST, -10 IP for 2xMinST, and -15 IP for 3xMinST (basically, -5 IP for every +1 in A Matter of Inches). You can also pump more or less IP into an attack for a bonus or penalty - you get a +1 to hit for every +10 IP (maximum is +2/3 cost), and you suffer a -1 for every -5 IP (minimum is 10 IP). You can also split a single attack into a Rapid Strike - divide the base cost by 10, round up, and apply this as a penalty to each attack. If this Rapid Strike involves alternating weapons (as a Dual Weapon Attack or similar), you divide by 7 instead.

For defenses, Parries are -35 IP relative to a thrust with the weapon (minimum 10 IP), Blocks are -25 IP, and Dodges are 10 IP. +1 to defense is +5 IP (maximum of double cost), -1 to defense gets you -5 IP (once you're at 10 IP, the penalty is doubled).

Getting back to your system, I'd suggest each character having some reserve that is depleted by attacking and defending. Divide the above costs by 10 to determine how they deplete the reserve. For fractions, round up, but note they can get their first reduction at a reduced price. For example, a punch depletes 4 points, a kick depletes 5, a thrust or swing with a broadsword depletes 7, and so forth. Meanwhile, an unarmed Parry costs 1, while a Parry with that broadsword costs 3, and so forth. Each +1 to cost is +1 to hit (and I'd actually just switch the maximum to +4, rather than the +2/3 cost) or +1 to defense (maximum +2), and you can get a -1 to cost for a -2 to hit (-1 to hit for the first -1 to cost for fractions) or -1 to defense. Once you've hit a cost of 1, dropping to 0 is -4 to hit or -2 to defense. Rapid Strikes have no additional cost, but impose a penalty equal to their base cost for each additional attack. Use 2/3 this value, rounding up, if alternating weapons. So, above, a character who splits one broadsword swing into two suffers a -7 on each attack, and the cost of the maneuver is 7. If he were instead wielding two broadswords, and attacking with each of them, the penalty would only be -5 (cost would still be 7). Characters with Weapon Master or Trained by a Master should halve the above penalties, and when calculating initial cost drop fractions rather than rounding up (so a character with appropriate Weapon Master only pays 6 to thrust with a broadsword, rather than 7).

For the reserve itself, let's call it the Action Reserve (AR). Each character has AR equal to Basic Speedx2. Melee attacks and defenses deplete AR as above. Ranged attacks cost 2 AR for firearms and the like (and you can typically only get a +1 for spending extra AR), while throwing weapons cost the same as using them in melee would. Readying a weapon is -2.5 to AR cost relative to thrusting with it. Moving your full Move costs 5 AR (fractional movement has fractional cost; you get one free Step and/or Retreat each round).

For recovering AR, you automatically recover 10% of your maximum (minimum 1) every round you aren't Stunned, Unconscious, or similar. Taking Evaluate or Wait maneuvers increases this to 30% (minimum 2), while taking a Do Nothing maneuver increases it to 50% (minimum 3). You can actually exceed maximum AR, up to doubling it, but while above maximum the above numbers become -10% (that is, you lose 10% each round), +10%, and +30%. Characters typically start combat at full AR, although ambushes and similar may result in them starting with a fraction of this. You cannot go below 0 AR - meaning while at 0 AR, all of your actions must take a penalty to drop to 0 cost.

Optionally, Injury and Pain can deplete AR. Use the rules from The Last Gasp, replacing AP with AR.


III) See this thread, specifically this Krommpost. I should note that shields realistically enhance Parries above and beyond the effects of merely providing Cover, so applying DB there is still realistic. It does make the Shield skill a bit less attractive, however, so reducing the DB for Parries and Dodges may be appropriate - -1 DB should work out alright.

Last edited by Varyon; 11-10-2015 at 08:37 AM.
Varyon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-10-2015, 10:52 AM   #19
sjard
Stick in the Mud
 
sjard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Rural Utah
Default Re: New GURPS Hardcore Battle system (fan made)

Quote:
Originally Posted by mhd View Post
Olympic fencing is fast, too. But in both cases, the risks of dying are pretty minute, which tends to skew things slightly...
I'll agree with Olympic fencing, if only because it uses techniques that require the safety foil.

As for HEMA... unfortunately insufficient data exists, so we simply cannot know if it skews things slightly or greatly, or at all.
__________________
MIB #1457
Scott Anderson
Tavern Blacksmith My RPG and random thought blog. Registration and comments now open... dear dice the spam.
sjard is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-10-2015, 03:32 PM   #20
Bibiribobiri
 
Bibiribobiri's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Brasil
Default Re: New GURPS Hardcore Battle system (fan made)

Nice! I see a lot of great ideas here! :)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Landwalker View Post
mentions, The Last Gasp (Pyramid 3/44) pretty much solves this problem. I've played in very combat-heavy games that have used this, and the problem you (correctly) identify is rarely anywhere to be found—attacking every second-nonstop, while possible, is a good way to exhaust yourself in a hurry.
I'm going to research Last Gasp, but, If I understood the idea, only takes care of FP. If I have two raging barbarians furiouslly striking to finish a fight real quick, I bet the one with a dagger will strike faster than the one with a broadsword. Remenber, as pointed out in other posts, that a fight can end in the first turns.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Landwalker View Post
[*]I don't understand why PP apply immediately, instead of applying prospectively (i.e. starting the turn after you accrue them). Why not have Consecutive Attack #1 be unpenalized, Consecutive Attack #2 have one-attack's worth of PP? (It looks like you do it this way for defenses, where the first defense is unpenalized but successive ones without intervening recovery are penalized.)
The idea is to penalize the attack more than the defense. This is done all the time in GURPS RAW to keep “game balance”. In addition, with attacks you can really take your time but with defenses you cannot.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Landwalker View Post
If your goal is to represent heavier weapons being "slower on the draw," then what you should be using is the Matter of Inches rules (Martial Arts pg. 110). Your Combat Example 1 uses the language that Jerry is attacking with his axe "without any preparation," but having a ready weapon is preparation. If he has truly no preparation, then the weapon isn't ready and can't attack (and yes, it's possible and legal to hold a weapon in your hand and it not actually be Ready).
The idea is not to see who draws first, but to see who attacks fisrt considering both have already drawn weapons. A guy with an axe could attack first (by taking 4 or 5 PP) but he would be roll with -4 or -5 and would be in bad conditions to defend himself (getting -2 or -3 in his defenses) thus making this a bad strategy.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Landwalker View Post
In fact, the Matter of Inches rules might be a good place to turn for "fixing" your PP assessments, or at least give you a good sense of what else you should consider—in particular, I'd suggest the Relative Weapon Weight and the Swing vs. Thrust (the Absolute Weapon Weight rule has nothing to do with maneuverability of a weapon, and Weapon Length isn't really pertinent here).
Will look into that .
Quote:
Originally Posted by Landwalker View Post
[*]It seems like you may be double-counting Shield DB in the event of a Block defense—it "counts" once on the attack, as the attacker has to beat Shield DB in order not to hit the shield, and then it "counts" again on the defense roll. [*]I don't understand why PP accrued for making a block apply to subsequently making a Dodge or Parry, or for that matter, an attack (and vice versa).
Yes, it is counted double, but it seems realistic to me. A shield was indeed an “Uber item“ in reality. Almost all western medieval armies would use them.
I actually thought of a shield as moveable cover.

New rule:

7.2*) Shield
A shield provide cover equal to its DB to a user defined hit location. Adjacent hit locations get a cover equal to DB/2 rounded down. The user may change the hit location as a free action during his turn. If the shield is used to block a blow in a particular hit location, the user may move the shield cover to that particular location as a free action.

Combat Example 9:
Tom is wearing a 3 DB shield. In his turn, he decides to cover his torso with it.
Now, attacks to his torso are at -3 and attacks to his head, legs and right-arm are at -1.
At Jerry’s turn, he decides to attack Tom’s face. Tom blocks its blow and now can chose to leave the shield cover at his head.
If he makes this decision, consecutive attacks made by Jerry (or any other attacker), are at -3 to hit Tom’s Face and -1 to hit Tom’s torso.
__________________
"The handlebar mustache. It's not right for every occasion. Unless, that is, you find yourself drafted into an old-timey bare-knuckle boxing match."
Bibiribobiri is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
battle, combat, fan made, house rules, shield

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 11:55 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.