Combining GURPS and Hackmaster combat system?
 

Hi,

I've have recently started reading up o GURPS and so far I quite like it! I've have been, however, interested in Hackmaster 5th combat system - if you don't know it, I'll try to briefly explain it:

Hackmaster uses a so called "count up system", where the GM calls up up each second and everyone acts every second (no need to assign an initiave order). Two things are different from the seconds system from GURPS:

1. You may attack only based on your weapon speed, which is given in seconds: so, for example, I if my weapon speed is 6, and I take a swing on second 2, I can take another swing at second 8.
2. Movement speeds take acceleration (so to speak) into account: so, if my running speed is 9 yards per second, I can start moving only at a jog (half speed, in the first second I move) an then proceed to gradually increase the ground covered every second.

I think it's possible to adapt this system to GURPS (movement can be based on based speed and melee weapon speed could be based in ST requirements, maybe half ST?).
I have yet to read up on magic though, and I suspect the whole system may fall apart when it comes to firearms.

What do you guys think? Will it mess up with advantages, skills and such? What about firearms?

This post is a bit of a mess, I can try to explain Hackmaster's combat system better (as much as I understand it) and link to a pdf with a combat example, if someone wants it. There's also the Basic version of the rules, which can be found free online.

Re: Combining GURPS and Hackmaster combat system?
 

The thing is, an ST15 character should be able to move a broadsword faster than an ST8 character can move a short sword.

Re: Combining GURPS and Hackmaster combat system?
 

Good call. The system in Hackmaster takes that into account, I figure it wouldn't be hard to assign a +1 ou +2 (and negatives as well) and so on, depending on char ST.

Re: Combining GURPS and Hackmaster combat system?
 

I don't see a benefit to porting those features over from Hackmaster.

GURPS is already second by second, as you noted. The Turn Sequence accounts for the effects of your personal quickness and dexterity on combat and the rules regarding Ready/Unready weapons coupled with the rules on Weapon Reach (B388) coupled with your choice of Maneuver already account (in a different fashion) for the things that weapon speed would cover.

As for acceleration, that too is already covered. Unless you have Enhanced Move though, you accelerate quite quickly in GURPS, see Sprinting (B354).

Re: Combining GURPS and Hackmaster combat system?
 

I guess I just like the idea and how it supposedly works in a more dynamic way - as in everybody must keep their attention on the count or lose a potential action. Of course this can be enforced in a traditional turn by turn style. I suppose the novelty of it all really caught my attention.

Re: Combining GURPS and Hackmaster combat system?
 

Yes, I can see how it might, but weapon speed would need a lot of work to port over to GURPS. As is, weapon speed would probably have caused people to pay less attention.

If your weapon speed is 6, for the next five turns, you have nothing to do before you can strike again. Whereas under current GURPS rules you could, on average, have made a defense on the turn you made your initial strike (attack) and made five further attacks and five further defenses during those five turns.

I know which condition I'd find more interesting and more liable to keep my attention on the game (It's the same condition for both, getting the opportunity to do something every one second turn.)

Re: Combining GURPS and Hackmaster combat system?
 

Fair enough!

Still, supposing the wait is something my group can handle, do you've any suggestion as to how weapon speed could be applied to firearms, especially those with RoF gretear than one?

I guess a musket or something like would feel right by having a delay of X seconds between shots, not so much so a revolver or a rifle.

Re: Combining GURPS and Hackmaster combat system?
 

Out of curiosity, I checked out Hackmaster Basic (free PDF download).

On the "count up" system for weapon speed, I'll mostly just repeat Curmudgeon here, but some thoughts:

While Hackmaster is presenting this "count up" as something unique, I don't see any real difference from GURPS in general concept: it's a system of checking, second by second, who does what.

The big difference that I see is this:

In GURPS, you can swing your shortsword this second, and then swing it again each second thereafter. Or you can swing your halberd this second, take a Ready maneuver the next second, then swing the halberd again the following second. And so on.

In Hackmaster, you can swing your shortsword this second, and then... take seven (!) Ready maneuvers in a row (borrowing GURPS' terminology; different words, same effect), and then swing your shortsword again. Or you can swing your halberd this second, then take thirteen (!!!) Ready maneuvers in a row, and then swing your halberd again.

Aye yi yi. I don't think I'll be looking to borrow from that...

That said, I can see that in play, things won't be as silly as they sound above. If pretty much every fighter is dealing with those looooong stretches of nothing, a lot of seconds will just whiz right by with nothing to resolve; actual strikes and rolls and deaths and all that will presumably play out as quickly as in any other game, player time-wise.

I guess the main difference is that in between those halberd strikes, Hackmaster characters who aren't swinging weapons have lots of time to do other things. Like move across the map, or cast spells... or maybe enjoy a nice cuppa... : )

Jokes aside, I can appreciate what the Hackmaster designers are looking to achieve: attack speeds that allow for one attack to be slightly faster or slightly slower than another. The system does allow that, though apparently by making the pace of all weapon attacks crazy slow. Not a solution I'm warm to personally, but again, I can appreciate what they're aiming for.

(Final note: I'm basing those comments on a cursory read of the rules. If I'm way off, smack me upside the head.)

Re: Combining GURPS and Hackmaster combat system?
 

Thanks for the input! You actually hit the nail on the head, I think: I do want some weapons attacking faster than others (like daggers being much faster than halberds). Ofc, GURPS models that with the ready action, but I think some more diversity among the weapons could be interesting.

One of the things that make characthers less idle in combat is the way movement works in Hackmaster: if your move speed is 30 feet, on second 1 that you start moving you move only 10 feet, on second 2 you can move up to 20 feet and so on. So you'd spend some of the seconds moving about, I believe. (something along these lines, can remember precisely the increase rates).

Re: Combining GURPS and Hackmaster combat system?
 

Hackmaster seems really slow, like suspension of disbelief breakingly slow. I'm not in any kind of shape, but it wouldn't take me nearly ten seconds to get two attacks off with a sword. If it's supposed to represent looking for an opening, GURPS already has that with the evaluate maneuver. It's not unreasonable for a skilled fighter to get off an attack every second in combat, at least that's the way it looks from everything I've seen.

Re: Combining GURPS and Hackmaster combat system?
 

I thought each pulse was a fraction of a second? That'd be an easy fix in any case.

Re: Combining GURPS and Hackmaster combat system?
 

That could work, but I don't own the new edition of Hackmaster and the old ediiton is back in the old country. So its hard to comment without seeing details.

It would fix the issue in GURPS where the rules encourage everyone to fight like a fury all of the time, but most people most of the time fight less efficiently.

It was a fraction of a second in the earlier edition which I read.

Re: Combining GURPS and Hackmaster combat system?
 

It's nice that GURPS does allow for some diversity in weapon speeds, but it really is quite limited. (I don't mean that as a criticism; this is a hard thing to do in RPG rules, and I'm not aware of any system that has revealed something amazingly realistic and playable in this area.)

On the topic of movement, there are a lot of calls out there (including some fairly recent threads here, I think) for allowing more movement – and readying of arrows, and aiming of missile weapons, and casting of spells, and lots more – to take place between GURPS' flurries of 1-second attacks. A commonly cited example is that a PC who's a few rooms away in the dungeon, or a few dozen yards away on a flat map, can "rush" toward the sound of his colleagues in battle, only to find that the fight's long over by the time he gets there. In GURPS, that's a thing.

What to do about this, or whether to do anything, is a tough call. I tend to accept realism here: if my fighter could hack at a monster a half dozen times or so and take it down in under 10 seconds, then the rules should allow for that; if that means the wizard in the next room and the unready archer don't get to take part, well, them's the breaks.

But that style certainly doesn't maximize group fun! A lot of games use what I think of as "fiction time" or "comic panel" time – that is, forget "realistic" time measures; every round, everyone can probably do something interesting, because that's fun. Rules like that don't care about sword speed vs axe speed, or bow readying times; when your turn comes, you can attack. If you're far off, you may still need to spend your turn moving, but the system might rule that you move as far as needed to do something interesting next turn. And so on.

There are some nice discussions on this forum about making GURPS combat more fun for those out-of-the-violence-loop PCs. There may not be much to be done for the PC who's stuck 60 yards away from the brawl and needs to spend 10 turns sprinting in, but there are, for examples, proposals to turn Aim and Evaluate into rolls that make those maneuvers into something fun (if still not as fun as immediately pounding on a troll). There have been sensible proposals for allowing Ready and Attack as a form of All-Out Attack, something that lets polearm wielders join the fray more readily. And scattered throughout GURPS are all kinds of ways to speed up missile fire, aid colleagues from afar with Tactics rolls and Leadership-based encouragement, etc.

There's even one aid for that movement issue: Basic Combat, which doesn't seem to get discussed much on the forum. Basic Combat doesn't deal with mapped positions, so the GM is free to just wing it and say "yeah, you're close enough to strike" or "okay, just Move for one turn, and then you can join the battle." For those "my PC has nothing to do" issues that still remain, everything noted above about Aim, Evaluate, Ready, etc. can be brought over to Basic Combat.

Hm. Somewhere out there is a GURPS variant waiting to be written up by someone: Cinematic Basic Combat (or some better name), reworking combat expressly into that "fiction time" or "comic panel" time model. Each round (i.e., each cycle of character turns) wouldn't be a strict one second; it'd be 2-ish or 5-ish seconds, or whatever seems cinematically right for the scene. Heavy weapons would ignore their special Ready requirements (the "U Parry" business alone would differentiate them from nimble swords just fine). Missile attack rates would be sped up. Aim and Evaluate could still exist, but would use rolls to make them more fun, and would offer potentially big bonuses to make them meaningful. And movement would simply stick to the existing Basic Combat model: just talk the GM into ruling that, yes, you can run across three rooms and join the battle next turn. : ) (Or, if actual distance moved mattered, Move would be much greater that 5 yards/sec or so, given that each turn represents several seconds.)

Well. That's a bit of a tangent for this thread, as this "Cinematic Basic Combat" would really depart from Hackmaster's detailed weapon speeds. On the other hand, it would seem to share an "everyone gets to do something" approach with games like Hackmaster (and D&D and many others).

Anyway. If the topic of combat timing interests you, I have an old three-part article, beginning here, that looks at how different game systems approach the topic. The article may not give you anything useful, but it is relevant to this thread: it briefly discusses a theoretical action-point system that's really the same thing as Hackmaster's "count up", including a version I actually used long ago (again, essentially the same as "count up", though I used randomly-rolled attack speeds).

Re: Combining GURPS and Hackmaster combat system?
 

Thanks for the reply! I found your article very interesting! Looking up on your GLAIVE model, you pretty much modeled my desired weapon speed with the recovery time column in the sample table at the end of the article (you also go into much more detail). Though I think I'd like to have more inter-spaced attacks than what you rules seem to wield (I believe it would help fixing one of the issues you mention about a character that is 50 yards away reaching the conflict zone with combat over already).

I was inclined to assign a flat speed number to a weapon and then a bonus based on ST, say Short Sword: Speed 3 (meaning one attack every 3 seconds, so second 1, 4, so on). For comparison, a short sword in Hackmaster has an attack speed of 8, though that is modified by strenght and character level, which is something GURPS does not have, and I am unwilling to add advantages or such to increase attack speed (so much lower speeds are warranted, IMO.)

Maybe I could use your recovery values and work them through some constant to give me some values in the ball park I have in mind? Maybe your recovery divided by half ST, rounded up?

Now, I should only need to come up with recovery times for spells and maybe tweak, for balance, the reload time for firearms like old pistols and muskets, eg: in the vanilla system, a crossbow can fire every 5 turns - a 1 to 5 ratio compared to non ready weapons (which shouldn't be too hard, though I have yet read on Spells). Though I don't know what I would do about modern guns, if I ever wished to use them. Perhaps I should not tweak their rules at all, as they are have a much faster "attack speed" in real life.

I should also decide how maneuvers impact weapon speed. Again, seems doable.

One could say that in my case, having yet to play the vanilla game, I shouldn't be worried about tweaking so heavily, but this idea seem to enticing to give up.

As always, any ideas are appreciated.

Re: Combining GURPS and Hackmaster combat system?
 

If I were to adapt a tick-based combat system to GURPS, it would at least have to cope with different attack variants -- and there's a lot of them.
So you couldn't just have a speed value of a "broadsword" in general, you'd have to have different ones for thrusts and cuts, and then probably again for all-out attacks (all of them), deceptive attacks, defensive attacks, reverse grips, defensive grips etc...

Heck, if those attacks remain unchanged at all. It could just be that instead of having a to-hit benefit or defense penalty, some attack maneuvers would change the speed values. (And what about stop-hits, ripostes and counterattacks?)

Also, integrating U parries and double-dagger weaponry might seem appropriate. Possibly changing this from a binary distinction to something graded (i.e. weapons could have a "unbalanced" window of ticks after a parry/attack, or a recovery time that might not be equal to the attack time).

HackMaster elaborated on a rather D&D-ish system, which is about as simple as it gets in RPG-dom (apart from maybe T&T). So adding a different intitiative/round system on top of that doesn't have to affect to many moving parts. With GURPS, there's a lot more bells and whistles that would need to be looked at.

Re: Combining GURPS and Hackmaster combat system?
 

You're right, I'd have to adjust those maneuvers (and others, I believe). Different speeds for swings and thrusts seem appropriate.

From a cursory look, I'd say:

Deceptive attacks need not change, IMO.
Rapid attacks: maybe allow you to attack at half your recovery value, and then reseting your recovery as if you just had attacked?

Deceptive attacks, defensive attacks, reverse grips, defensive grips, ripostes and counterattacks are things I have't read about, and couldn't find them in the basic set, have I missed them? Are they from supplements?

Edit: also stop-hits,

Re: Combining GURPS and Hackmaster combat system?
 

HackMaster combat speed presumes that the attacker is also defending. Movement can happen during combat, so while a PC may not be tap-dancing, they may be circling about a foe.

You also have hold-at-bay with polearms and ranged weapons. For firearms, while the time scale is different, Aces & Eights: Shattered Frontier introduce the Count System.

Keep in mind that in HackMaster, there are talents and specialization which speed up your attack speed.

Some of the talents in HackMaster would nicely simulate the more complex actions available in GURPS combat.

I think if you take into account weapons that become unbalanced after parries, some of the issues will be smaller.

However, since you're rolling 3d6 for attacks and defenses in GURPS and a d20 for attacks and defenses in HackMaster, you'll have more swing in the HackMaster rules than using 3d6 due to dice spreads.

I like GURPS and I like HackMaster, but it would be a lot of work to make the combat systems mesh well.

Re: Combining GURPS and Hackmaster combat system?
 

All from Martial Arts, except Deceptive Attack.

On second thought, all the counterattack options (stop-hit, riposte, counterattack) probably don't need to be changed, as the weapon speed (at least the HackMaster version) is mostly about recovery. So if you're ready to counterattack, that assumes that this recovery period has passed already. The attack itself only takes a single tick.

Also, when you've got a sub-second resolution, that looks like a good place to try to solve the "Evaluate is useless" problem.

Re: Combining GURPS and Hackmaster combat system?
 

Keep in mind that the full GLAIVE rules you refer to were made for 3e*; I never did update them for 4e. I believe there are notes on the main things that would need to be changed. In particular, length and unbalance boost Recovery (a measure of recovery time needed, i.e., slowness) a lot, to get 3e's sl-o-o-o-w axes and polearms; 4e formulas should be set to generate lower Recovery for these weapons, to speed them up. (That's a welcome change, IMO!)

Also, referencing a separate reply of yours: Note that the system specifically yields higher Recovery for swings than for thrusts. That's for pretty much any weapon, swords included, not just polearms and the like. I think that's in line with the effects you're looking for.

Not sure what you mean by wanting "more inter-spaced attacks". Do you mean more seconds between melee attacks for a typical fighter? If so: Well, especially if you use the system's "Detailed rule for readying time", higher Recovery contributes to that effect. On top of that, add in all the other things discussed in this thread and all over the forums (Evaluate, more use of Feint and Wait, possibly harsher fatigue for fighters who never rest, etc.). (FWIW, I'm entirely in favor of slowing down the pace of melee in GURPS. I just want to use reasons why Shortsword Guy wouldn't or shouldn't hack non-stop, instead of decreeing that he's not allowed to do so, or injecting arbitrary "lulls" into fights, etc.)

I'm also not sure what you mean by "your recovery divided by half ST". The Recovery stat in GLAIVE is intended to be – it has to be – divided by strength to be of use. I guess I'm misunderstanding something.

*For the curious: I did make a GLAIVE mini for 4e, but it's very short and only concerned with generating basic melee weapon stats. It doesn't deal in attack speeds, Ready requirements, etc.

Re: Combining GURPS and Hackmaster combat system?
 

That is what I understood as well, that like d&d it is dealing with "effective" attacks, not individual blows (and compared to old d&d's minute per turn actually positively blazing action).

And I suspect this is why the system feels slow. It was designed for a game which literally counted 10ths of a second. This is all well and good when doing a high-noon style duel, as you get to simulate that "fastest gun in the west" idea where fractions of a second in quicker reaction time count, and players get to choose whether they risk those fractions of second aiming for a better shot or go for the quickest shot that might just miss. However, it is far too detailed for most players as a practical combat system, especially because it worsens the movement vs action choice. Movement is so slow (literally 5 or 10 "pulses" between moving 1 space, depending on speed) that it makes it even less of an interesting option than it is in many games ("Ok, I have waited 10 pulses and I get to move 1 space on the battlemat... woo"). For their fantasy set presumably they decided they wanted to allow a bit more movement, so ends up with the 1 second per turn (which allows everyone who wants to move a space every count), but then the action part of the equation becomes unrealistically slow as they decided to retain the reaction speed element of Aces and Eights but on a unrealistically large timescale.

Re: Combining GURPS and Hackmaster combat system?
 

It is, agreed.

Correct. Again, I'm just eye balling it really, but for some reason I think that a dagger or similar should have Weapon Speed of 1 or 2, a short sword 3 or 4, for a ST of 10. Which raises another concern (that is far down the line in terms of things I have to workout): would I cap weapon speed to 1 and be done with it (I want to say yes)? Or should I allow negative weapon speeds, that somehow translate to more than 1 attack per turn? I think I wouldn't like to.


It went over my head, despite being very clearly labeled so, that GLAIVE was made with 3e in mind. I was making an attempt at simplifying your Wield ST, Combat ST and Effective ST back into one single attribute (correct me if I'm wrong, I admit I didn't read GLAIVE in much depth as it deserves.

As I said, I though I could just use your recovery values as they are (from the sample table) and work them through some 4e character value to get a weapon speed that seems "right". It seems that this is not the case then?


I think you're quite correct. The system tries to pose under realism, but I believe it's really just another form of abstraction. To be fair though, so is GURPS, at least when it comes to melee weapons and crossbows, IMO. A halberd attacking every other second seems far fetched to me, as does a crossbow shooting every 5. It doesn't bother me, intrinsically, just pointing it out.


Here's a little table that I put up in a couple minutes to summarize the basics of how I think it could work: https://1drv.ms/x/s!AmLagTm32rl2gb1M5kjRZ7LSF-2tXg

Also, if it seems that this is doable, I might try and do a combat example like this (though maybe even this one might suffice) to show up what I intend: https://www.kenzerco.com/hackmaster/...at_Example.pdf

Re: Combining GURPS and Hackmaster combat system?
 

HackMaster Basic Free edition is missing some of the dials you find in the HackMaster PHB, but the speed works fine in the Count system.

HackMaster speed is closer to an MMO thinking than round-by-round thinking. In an MMO, you are doing stuff while you wait for your effective attack to recharge. If you're playing a fighter who uses longswords or other weapons that are reasonably speedy, you'll attack pretty often if you buy specialization and talents for speed and just level up. Fighters attack faster with everything than other PCs--only fighters and their ilk improve speed by leveling. Thieves with daggers can dual-wield for offense and defense and get cheap improvements on speed.

A thief wielding two daggers offensively is going to attack quickly at the expense of defense.

While the count system can make it so everyone is pondering small units of time in HackMaster or Aces & Eights, if there's no one attacking your character directly and the GM allows it, just take all that movement you want and jump out the count. GMs should be like a good auctioneer, speeding up and slowly down how quickly they call the count to keep the action moving. If everyone's 100 feet away and wants to close, I just find out how far they want to move and up the count. If there's a time-crucial attempt like doing a Stop Hit to destroy a potion held in a hand, then I'll move slower so the PC can time it.

On that note, for those having issues with the Count, here's a clear electronic counter that looks cool and has been used at conventions:

https://www.etsy.com/listing/5349059...?ref=related-1

Again, I think the two combat systems can be combined, but GURPS even allows you multiple attacks in a second and is a 3d6 base as opposed to a 1d20 base. You're going to get something that works, but which isn't going to achieve complete conversion success.

That's why I prefer to borrow non-combat mechanics and ideas from one game and apply it to the other. Your mileage may vary.

Re: Combining GURPS and Hackmaster combat system?
 

Agreed. It should be speed up on the counts where nobody has/desires an action. I think I can make it work smoothly at the table.

Also, nice find on the counter!

Re: Combining GURPS and Hackmaster combat system?
 

GURPS is my favorite overall game system. HackMaster and Aces & Eights are #4 and #3 (2 editions) and #2, so I follow them all.

The counter I linked is made by Jolly Blackburn, the creator of Knights of the Dinner Table and one of the authors of HackMaster and Aces & Eights. Jolly has used it for large tables at conventions.

In any game where tactics and timing matter, it helps to have some kind of marking system to keep track of who is attacking.

Oh, and if you're trying to work the GURPS special strikes to HackMaster, a lot of specialization and the Precision Aiming (missile weapons) or Precision Combatant can simulate called shots. GURPS has far more martial arts moves, but that's because it fits the GURPS milieu better. For anyone wanting the basic rundown of HackMaster, HackMaster Basic Free is like GURPS Lite; it will give you many hours of fun for free and if you want more options then you already know the basic system and can buy the rules you need.

Re: Combining GURPS and Hackmaster combat system?
 

Unless I'm misunderstanding the meaning you give to the numbers, I assume these numbers are linear with respect to time: that dagger with Weapon Speed of 2 can attack twice as often as that shortsword with speed of 4 (with those speeds probably representing "every 2 seconds" and "every 4 seconds", respectively).

If so, a speed faster than 1 wouldn't be 0 or negative; it'd be 0.7 or 0.5 or whatever. A speed of 0 or lower wouldn't be possible.

How to play speeds with a decimal point of precision? Well, you'd have to start using a "count up" in increments of 0.1. It can be done, of course... but by that point, it's starting to sound like an odd game. : )

I'd be wary of allowing too big a spread among those weapon speeds to begin with. Part of the reason can be put down to physics: Sure, the 1-lb. weapon should move faster than the 6-lb. weapon, but not to the tune of attacking 6 times as often! The wielder's arm strength isn't just pushing the weapon mass; it's pushing weapon mass + some effective measure of arm mass, and (6 lb. + effective arm mass) isn't 6 times as heavy as (1 lb. + effective arm mass). On top of that, a combat attack typically won't mean standing stock-still and moving arms alone, like a boxer at his punching bag; it'll mean moving feet and the whole body for better positioning, however long that takes – and switching from a 6-lb. to a 1-lb. weapon would make hardly any difference in that time.

Another part of the reason, IMO, is player psychology. For a lot of combat-loving gamers, attacking as often as humanly possible is really important; "missing out" on an attack while others hack away can just seem unbearable. I think some players will view even a modest speed penalty for that 6-lb. weapon as some horrible Molasses Time hell. : )

All probably obvious stuff to you or anyone reading this, but in short: IMO, any fancy-pants speed system should probably stick to pretty modest relative differences in melee attack speeds, which is both a) realistically justifiable, and b) plenty of difference in terms of players' perception.


Let me make clear: I didn't suggest any needlessly complex use of multiple ST stats. If you want to derive some measure of melee attack speed, there should be just one ST stat that you compare to the corresponding "how heavy and unwieldy the weapon is" stat, as you suggest.

The concept is simple. GLAIVE's attack time rule, in a nutshell, is just this: What's the effective mass to be moved? And what's your effective power for moving it? The ratio of that effective mass to effective power yields the time an attack takes (i.e., its "slowness").

The question, then, becomes what measures to use for that effective mass and that effective power.

The easiest answer for the former is some measure that's linear in weapon mass in lbs. There, that's a good measure of effective mass for thrusts. For swings, you'll want to multiply it somehow for length, and again somehow for unbalance (effectively building moment of inertia into the measure). There, a measure of effective mass for swings.

For effective power... well, ST seems the easy answer, but be careful. GURPS 4e ST doesn't linearly map to ability to move mass; Basic Lift does. So, use Basic Lift together with the above measure of effective mass. OR, use regular ST, and use a measure of effective mass that's based on the square root of weapon mass in lbs. Either way should work.

Finally, note that the power available to the wielder isn't fixed; it can change with something as simple as using two hands instead of one. So you'll want to modify effective power by some appropriate amount for factors like that.

And there you go: You take some measure of effective weapon mass, divide it by some appropriate measure of effective power to move the mass, and you have a result you can tie to "time it takes to attack".

I hope that makes sense. Anything in GLAIVE that looks like a further complication probably isn't. "Combat ST" and "Load ST" aren't further complications; they were just my attempt to create "ST" and "Basic Lift" before GURPS had those. (Doing any fancy stuff involving ST was often just a mess in 3e.) Similarly, "Effective ST" just means "the ST stat after any needed modification for things like number of hands". "Wield ST", too, isn't something new; it's just GURPS' Min ST, given a calculation and a rename. (Whatever you call it, that's a measure of whether you can use a weapon at all, a different matter from how fast you are with the weapon.)


Sorry, I'm not sure exactly what you mean, but for 4e I'd rework the Recovery stats with new formulas. Namely, pare down the factors that boost Swing Recovery for length and unbalance; gotta speed up those axes and halberds for 4e.

Also, for 4e, I think I'd ditch the use of a Recovery that's linear with lbs., and, as noted above, make it map to the square root of lbs. Yes, "square root" makes some people cringe, but we're talking a one-time calculation of a speed factor for weapon tables, not calculation of roots during play. The upside is that you can then use plain ST for all purposes: figuring damage from ST, comparing ST to Min ST (or Wield ST or whatever you call it) to make sure the character can use the weapon, and dividing Recovery by ST to get some measure of time required. Basic Lift can keep completely out of weapon performance. (The wee downside to the method: the Recovery stat for many weapons will appear as figures with decimals, not neat integers.)


Anyway. To bring this back to Hackmaster + GURPS:

You don't have to do any of the above. You could just give GURPS weapons arbitrary "this is how many seconds it takes" speed factors, like (Basic) Hackmaster.

Or to get fancier, set some arbitrary speed factors as above, but then divide by, or otherwise adjust by, GURPS ST.

Or to get fanciest, calculate some speed factor (like GLAIVE), then divide that by, or otherwise adjust by, GURPS ST.

If you create something good, let's see a notice on the forum here!

Re: Combining GURPS and Hackmaster combat system?
 

Remember that Hackmaster is primarily a parody of roleplaying games. The purported designer, Gary Jackson, is a fictional amalgam of Gary Gygax and Steve Jackson, and it's origin is as the game they play in Knights of the Dinner Table. It is supposed to be silly (in a weirdly detail obsessed way).

Re: Combining GURPS and Hackmaster combat system?
 

Just a quick reply before I leave home (I'll reply in full when I get back), but thank you! You pretty much gave me all the info needed, I believe. When I first started I was inclined to assign an arbitrary "recovery" for all weapons, but this approach seems much more elegant.

I have started a spreadsheet that calculates the square roots of weapon weight (so far from 1 to 13, the heaviest there seems to be on Basic), but couldn't come up with how to mathematically work those numbers with ST - none of the approaches I took seemed to consistent/satisfactory results across ST 1 to 18 (my arbitrary "sweet spot" remains a short sword used by a ST 10 character = attacking every 3 or 4 seconds). Will report when I have done some more work.

Re: Combining GURPS and Hackmaster combat system?
 

That pedigree is barely noticeable in the current "fifth" edition. It's the KODT's "HackMaster" about as much as Aces & Eights is CattlePunk.

Re: Combining GURPS and Hackmaster combat system?
 

The last edition I saw still claimed to be the work of Gary Jackson and still had art by Blackburn. No idea what edition that was.

I found Aces and Eights to be unplayable, personally and extremely oddly organized besides. Which is sad because there was a lot to want to like about it but I couldn't even get past character creation.

Re: Combining GURPS and Hackmaster combat system?
 

The issue I have with such schemes is that attacks flying fast on a second scale is pretty realistic (over short bursts, but there are other schemes to introduce realistic lulls, such as Last Gasp). Watch some HEMA sparring or freeplay and you'll see even polearms are surprisingly quick when handled well.

If you slow down attacks to one every few seconds, it breaks my immersion due to my familiarity with actual combat (familiarity, not experience or skill). If you break turns down into fractional seconds, everything becomes tick-tick-tick in a way I suspect would become unplayable. How do you handle movement when a turn is a tenth of a second?

Re: Combining GURPS and Hackmaster combat system?
 

You can still do things in HackMaster while you're waiting for your weapon speed to come up. Players don't have to. Keep in mind, that the opponents are acting to and HackMAster uses an opposed roll for defense so, I've found it to keep players much more involved in combat compared to the traditional D&D systems.

Re: Combining GURPS and Hackmaster combat system?
 

It's always neat to see the person that first introduced me to GURPS posting on the SJ Games forum.

Re: Combining GURPS and Hackmaster combat system?
 

5E even has the actual Knights demonstrating the combat system in comic form (which, by the way, is one of the best play examples I've ever seen). And yes, Gary Jackson and groin stomps (they ditched "gawds", though).

But to me, that seems just allusions to its backstory (both fictional and real), I don't see any system component as a straight-forward parody.

Then again, I'm German. That humor thing is still strange and new to me.

Re: Combining GURPS and Hackmaster combat system?
 

The HackMaster edition which had a lot of parody elements was all in softcover (except Goods and Gear) and used AD&D 2e under license. Using the parody was part of the license requirement, but that version of HackMaster is basically a heavily house-ruled AD&D 2e.

The current version of HackMaster was built from the ground-up and while there are some jokes in there, there are not joke rules. The rules were extensively playtested in open playtests--6 months for the Player's Handbook. The rules aren't GURPS, but they are closer to GURPS since it's opposed attack and defense rules with a lot of tactical options if you use the PHB. HackMaster Basic Free is analogous to GURPS Lite--it will let you do most of what the full game does at zero monetary outlay to you but doesn't have as many dials to play with.

Here's the official history of HackMaster to clear up misconceptions.

http://www.kenzerco.com/hackmaster/p...er_history.pdf

Re: Combining GURPS and Hackmaster combat system?
 

And some more details and comments about Aces and Eights, Hackmaster, and some of Kenzer's design goals and philosophy here:

Gaming Ballistic’s Firing Squad welcomes Kenzer and Company

Re: Combining GURPS and Hackmaster combat system?
 

I'd call the 'History of HackMaster' a more polished piece discussing the game line. It's fairly accurate historically, but has clearly been touched by the marketing department.

The Gaming Ballistic Interview is a conversation between Douglas Cole and David Kenzer about many things Kenzer & Company. Was there any transcript from the first attempt which also included Jolly Blackburn and Steve Johanson, or does that fall into the realm of 'Things Man Was Not Meant to Know?'

Re: Combining GURPS and Hackmaster combat system?
 

Again, very useful insights. I read your GLAIVE system again and hopefully understood it a little better. Following your suggestions, I so far came up with some results that seem to fit the bill. This is what I did:

• Calculated each weapon weight square root
  
• Multiplied it by 15 (I tried other values, 15 seemed to give enough variety between each recovery value, without making the delay between attacks too long - I may tweak this a little more), and then divided by user ST.
  
• The results are displayed here: https://1drv.ms/x/s!AmLagTm32rl2gb1M5kjRZ7LSF-2tXg . Values should be rounded up.
  
• Some tidbits: A ST 10 human can attack with a short sword evey 2 seconds (I remember aiming for 3 or 4). ST 10 can attack with a halberd every 6 seconds.
  
• Limitations: attacking every second becomes possible only at ST 15, and then again, only with 1 pound weapons. There is no differentiation, as of yet, for One handed usage vs two handed, or thrust vs swings, or ST < MIN ST.
  These should achievable using some multipliers, similar as TBONE outlines on his GLAIVE article. I'm inclined to make one handed vs two handed have an impact, though not so sure about the others (they are completely reasonable, but the vanilla rules make no distinction between them on how often they allow you to attack). I suppose better damage and risking more fatigue might be enough differentiation for me.

I think now I'll try to fit muscle powered ranged weapons into the mix. If I have some time on the weekend I'll try to stage some testing combats to see how it goes, namely, how my preliminary rates of movement will work with these recovery values (also on the spreadsheet above). I have to say, I'm so far very happy with what you guys helped me come up with!

Re: Combining GURPS and Hackmaster combat system?
 

Alas, no. We had all video, no audio. Nothing to transcribe.

Re: Combining GURPS and Hackmaster combat system?
 

Needless to say, these are very slow speeds for GURPS – but if those Hackmaster-like speeds are your design goal, then that's a good thing.

You'll no doubt have noticed that there's more to be done, though. If you haven't tackled these already:

• In your hybrid system, what is the GURPS fighter with an attack speed of (say) "every 4 seconds" doing on those three no-action seconds? Are those explicitly Ready maneuvers? In a GURPS fight, what maneuver the fighter is assumed to have chosen is an important thing...
  
• What is and isn't the fighter allowed to do on those three no-action seconds? Can he freely take Move maneuvers (or, as above, is he taking Ready maneuvers that limit him to a Step)? Can he defend without "disrupting" the in-progress attack? If so, does that include the ability to Parry with the same weapon? (How would parrying work, anyway? Is that also once per 4 seconds?)
  
• How would Rapid Strike work? Does the selection of Rapid Strike mean the fighter now attacks every 2 seconds? Or does he still wait til the 4th second, and then instantly attack twice?

And probably much more. I'm not saying that it can't be done, just that there'll be a lot of details to work out.

Or maybe I'm misunderstanding Hackmaster, and therefore your hybrid as well. Assume Mr "Every 4 Sec" Hackmaster fighter strikes on Second 10, and wants to keep on doing so.

I'm imagining that he attacks on Second 10, immediately announces "I attack again!", spend Seconds 11, 12, and 13 making or preparing that next attack (which presumably places some limits on what else he can do), and finally launches that next attack on Second 14. Is that how HM works?

Or are attacks in HM instead more of a "recharge" thing, like a video game: The fighter strikes on Second 10, is free to do what he likes (except attack) on Seconds 11, 12, and 13, and then becomes free to do what he likes (including attack) on Second 14 or later?

Re: Combining GURPS and Hackmaster combat system?
 

From my reading of Aces & Eights, not very well. I think GURPS has the right kind of compromise at this level of detail. Obviously all games abstract elements or compromise "realism" vs playability, but oddly Aces & Eights & Hackmaster end up with different weights even though they are fundamentally based on the same system. Aces and Eights stresses the "realism" of fractions of a second mattering in a gunfight, but then is barely playable when it comes to dealing with movement, while as I think Hackmaster is a more playable compromise, but then ends up with a rather unrealistic slow speed of combat (though this comes from trying to emphasise the "realism" of differing "speeds" of weapons).

Having read Hackmaster (5th/2nd Edition) I actually find the humour of the book... indicative of a lack of humour. The jokes came across to me as the kind of "It was only meant as a joke" humour, when someone is using it to cover the fact it isn't really a joke. The designers actually seem very invested in the system (which would not surprise me, as it started its life in Aces and Eights, which is not a parody game), and consequently seem quite defensive about it. Now, I could be misreading it, and that air I get is actually meant to be a joke in itself, and to be fair I can't think the d10,000 critical table in the Games Master Guide could be designed with any serious intention of using them in play.

Re: Combining GURPS and Hackmaster combat system?
 

The d10000 crit table works almost as quickly in regular HackMaster play as confirming criticals does in D&D 3e.

1. Crits happen on a natural 19 for called shots or a natural 20 on the die. The attacker's roll has to beat the defender's roll.

2. Critical hit severity is determined by the following equation: severity=amount attack succeeded by+rolled weapon damage-defender's DR (damage resistance)

3. If a missile critical hit that is not a called shot, roll a d10000 for location. If a melee critical hit that is not a called shot, look at the target sizes and use the appropriate die. A d10000 is used when both targets are the same size.

4. Read the table for results and apply them.

The current version of HackMaster has no joke elements in its mechanics. It was based in some part, on Aces & Eights, but the decision was to not have separate movement and attacking counts because firearms are different than falchions and other melee weapons.

Combat is thus more abstract than Aces & Eights, because you get a general body blow in HackMaster unless you deliver a critical hit or called shot.

HackMaster and Aces & Eights like GURPS, are games which seem more complicated from an armchair than when you play them. If combat is dragging in any of these games, its because they have many tactical options and a short time window that characters act in. Preparation and pacing is essential to reduce analysis paralysis.

Re: Combining GURPS and Hackmaster combat system?
 

Indeed, there are many details to still work out.

From what I can tell, it's the former of your examples. Though HackMaster doesn't seem to have a number of maneuvers that aren't strictly tied to attacks, like Aim or Evaluate (there's nothing much to do besides attacking and defending)

Without giving much thought about balance, here are some examples of how I think it may work:

Let's assume ST 10 attacking with a Katana, giving him a final "recovery period" of 4 (the time between his attacks). He may attack on 1, and the again on 5.

• He attacks on 1. He may, during his recovery period, Block or Dodge as usual. No rules change. As for Parry, he may parry as usual, but his cumulative penalty for parries are tallied for his entire recovery period, e.g. if he parries an attack at count 2, and then another at count 3, he would be at -4 for his second Parry. Unbalanced weapons are only allowed to parry after half of the recovery period has passed.
  
• All-out attack:he may not actively defend for his entire recovery period.
  
• All-out defense: he commits to this maneuver for a period equivalent to his recovery period.
  
• Aim and evaluate: work as usual, but a character may only select these maneuvers if he's allowed to make an attack at that same second. Otherwise everybody would just stack up these maneuvers while in their recovery period.
  
• Feint: as usual, but your bonus apply to the second your recovery ends, not to your next attack on the next second.
  
• Rapid strike: it's easier for this to work as it is, meaning if you have an attack to make, you can make it as rapid strike describes it. Alternatively, this could be changed to "you may make an attack at half your recovery period, at -6 to hit. This then resets your recovery period as if you had just made a regular attack."
  
• Deceptive attack: as usual.
  
• A more intricate question might be movement. Should characters during the recovery period be allowed to move? As you said, can they only take steps? I'd say this is a fair compromise, though I haven't given much thought to the implications yet.
  

As an interesting note, reading up on Reddit I came across The Last Gasp rules. Upon taking a look at them, it's alternative "short term fatigue" seems to be capable of simulating the "give and take" of combat that I'm striving to achieve with recovery periods, albeit with a very different system. I wonder which would suit my players better, if any.

Edit:
I had not realized Last Gasp was your idea! Seems very solid!

Re: Combining GURPS and Hackmaster combat system?
 

It works better in play than one would think just from reading it. Take the "physical tokens" suggestion very seriously, though - it makes life a lot easier.

Re: Combining GURPS and Hackmaster combat system?
 

I posted this, noticed there were four (!) more pages of discussion I'd somehow overlooked, deleted it... and am now posting it again.

How the Hackmaster "initiative" system is being described sounds fairly similar to my Initiative Overhaul, so you may be able to take some inspiration from that. I have a greatly simplified revision I'll be posting on my blog once it's finished, so if what's linked makes your eyes bleed, you may want to wait for that.