Active defense debate o_Ô
 

I'd like to have some HO about a problem I encounter using GURPS rules with my players. Some of them are somewhat of munchkins and try to abuse the rules by creating charcters with fantastic Dodge scores (14+). In 3E there was the 13+ rule, wich disapeared in 4E (did I miss something ?), but now that you can buy Speed as a base attribute there's no limit on it. From that point I considered two options:

1- Changing munchkin players for wiser ones
2- Changing the rules

As option 2 was far easier, I find out that ruling active defense as a quick contest (like the 13+ dodge rule in 3E) solved the problem. Here's my revolutionary theory : melee defense is always related to melee skill, from parrying to dodging attacks, as melee weapon skill (but not ranged weapon skill) includes knowledge of taking advantageous position to overcome a foe's defense AND avoid her (omg!!) attacks. This means a skilled swordsman will be good at dodging attacks with a sword in hand, because is accustomed of placing himself using a sword, but not that good at dodging pummeling attacks for example. Considering that basic training emphasizes attack maneuvers i ruled that:

- Speed is used to compute movement rate and initiative
- Dodge becomes a Technique defaulting from Weapon Skill-2 or DX-2, cannot exceed prerequisite (lowers probability of dodging bullets as it can't be improved for range weapons)
- Parry becomes a Technique defaulting from Weapon Skill-2, cannot exceed prerequisite

So what ye thinkin' 'bout it ?

Re: Active defense debate o_Ô
 

High Defences Are not a Problem. Most combats Are ment to a srease of secuffly defeended attacks with the occation "good" one getting though.

And Deceptive attack (and Feint) allowing greater skill opens the ability to lower active defences.


and ther alsoe the Mook rules for speed up un importnat fights

Re: Active defense debate o_Ô
 

Hmmm am I stoOpid. And that would enforce the use of techniques in skilled fights. Thanks for this illuminated reply ^_^

Re: Active defense debate o_Ô
 

What I don't get is this comment. You post here complaining about munchkin players but yet you say non-muchkin players are dull? So which is it?

Just tell them you are limiting the dodges to 13 and be done with it.

Peace out

Re: Active defense debate o_Ô
 

AND, there is always the grenade - or equivalent - if the stakes are that high :P

Cheers...

Re: Active defense debate o_Ô
 

Ack. This board has already beaten this horse beyond death and now some necromancer raises the skeletal remains.

Remember, a character can only Dodge an attack he/she is aware of. <---This is important.
Dodge is much less effective against an area attack.
Deceptive Attacks can work wonders in Melee.

Re: Active defense debate o_Ô
 

True, and a Sub poiount to that, Attacks that you are aware of But can not see the source of, are at -4.

The Über thread and it's decendins go int much detal on the topic 8)

Re: Active defense debate o_Ô
 

My last rewrite of 3e had dodge a bit as an 'all-out' action : if you use it, your next round is at -4 to attacks or whatever. In 4e I might allow players to take -3 to dodge (i.e. use the 3e score) to avoid the -4.

And I'm a dodge bunny. So I was toning down something I use, not something which annoys me. The problem is basically not that dodge is high, it's that dodge is FREE.

Re: Active defense debate o_Ô
 

That you are calling us non-munchkin players dull? ;) (I do play in high-powered games, but high-powered game != MUNCHKIN!).

As rogue said, Deceptive Attack and Feint are your friends. Also, Dodge 14 is not THAT easy to get: (Dodge - Encumbrance) of 8 (hard to get unless you're very strong or wearing minimal armor), Combat Reflexes, Medium Shield and Retreat. If you can't retreat, you have to have a (Dodge - Encumbrance) of 11, which is almost unheard of. Yes, you can boost your Basic Speed, but it costs 5 points per +0.25 (don't confuse this with Increased Move). And you can't retreat AT ALL against missile weapons.

Just have your opponents act intelligently and concentrate on one or two characters at a time instead of just engaging the PCs in a series of one-on-one duels.

Re: Active defense debate o_Ô
 

I read Twyll first solution as "he does not have other players: either Munchkins or dull ones", not as "non-Munchkins equal dull".

Re: Active defense debate o_Ô
 

- Talk to your players, maybe they like beeing Munshkins and there is absolutely nothing wrong with that (At least we munshkins are not dull ;) )*, and maybe with not being able to be a Munshkin they will think your GM-style dull...
-Use some storytelling elements, when nubers stop beeing everything...
-Some people munshkinize their characters for the fun of doing this, they won't mind having less CPs to spend than their LAZY commerades and ultimately everybody will be equally powerfull...

- Just set a limit for Dodge (eg. no more than 13); probabely the much better solution, than creating a technique
- Dodge is quite expensive if you buy up basic speed as Ellie mentionend (Remember 19CP give at least +4 Skill levels and +2 for a Hard Technique!!! Do this for your favourite weapon and for Brawling or something and you are safe... +4 Basic Speed (+1 Dodge) costs 20CP)
- The rest has already been mentioned so no need to repeat it

*In my group we have heroes ranging from Superman to Peter Parker before the Spider-bite but everybody is happy with his role so no problem, and after all not every problem can be solved by force. The point is as long as all players are happy the GM should be happy too.

Re: Active defense debate o_Ô
 

Speed is not a base attribute, its a secondary characteristic with a recommended limit of +/- 2.00 from the calculated value except for nonhumans and supers. I'd be inclined to extend to nonhumans the same limit, but just not count any racial modifier against it.

Re: Active defense debate o_Ô
 

Oh my... I didn't mean to hurt anyone with the words munchkin and dull, i was just trying to er... make some bad joke (i'm not angry at all with my players). Actually my sense of humour might be corrupted by the Dark Side (i have to confess i wasn't always a dull player eh eh). Sorry for the mess guys, i 'll change the text to something more correct. And thanks for your helpfull replies all -)

Re: Active defense debate o_Ô
 

Hmmm evil Cccwebs :-))). I can imagine my next session :

"- You're ambushed by a group of stealthed crossbowmen. You're not cautious at the time, so you won't get a Per roll to spot them. They have Stealth 14, let's see if they hide successfully.
- Aaaargh !!
- Noooooooo !!
- Damn b<biiip>s !!
- Nevermind we have light encombrance and base dodge like 12, we'll dodge and drop and get a 14 roll eh eh.
- Ok they all succeed. You get no dodge roll as you're not aware of the attack. Everyone's got armor ?
- This is a dirty trick, LOL !
- We're all gonna die !!
- Ok I quit GURPS, i won't play anything if it's not D20.
...."

Re: Active defense debate o_Ô
 

I can't speak about the others, but I DID take it as a joke. And my answer (except for the rules part) was meant as a joke also. So no worry.

Re: Active defense debate o_Ô
 

Why deny them the PER roll?

Re: Active defense debate o_Ô
 

A duellist character with DX 13 [60], HT 13 [30] and Speed +0,5 [10] (high power gaming) has a basic Speed of 6.5 + 0,5 = 7,0, for a Dodge of 10. If he has Combat Reflexes, this levels his Dodge to 11. He wears leather armor and a fine sword in combat, wich is no encombrance at all for a ST 10 man. This makes him an excellent swordsman on 1 to one fights, and hence a tough one to take down as HT 13 allows good probability to resist stun and unconsciousness. Here we are for 100 character points. And I'm not talking about the Increased Dodge/Parry advantages, bonuses for acrobatic dodge, retreat, drop prone and the like.

In fact the debate is not about munchkinism, but more about how to make fight sequences not during hours in a munchkin game session.

Re: Active defense debate o_Ô
 

Salvete

Welcome to the forum, Twyll!

Remember, Twyll, that GURPS is a generic game, not intended to model only humans, but all (or almost all) you can conceive. This is the reason there's no limit to Speed, nor Dodge. If you don't want them to have so high a dodge, put a limit. In every case, having a dodge 14+ is not so easy, even if you buy Speed. In order to get a +1 to Dodge buying speed, one should to invest 20CPs. 20CPs for a +1 Speed (and Dodge) isn't cheap, if your PCs are designed on 100 or 150 CPs, they won't be able to buy much Speed, and if they're designed on many CPs, you should expect over the top PCs.

If you want them to have so high a Dodge, but you want to injury them... just remember Deceptive attacks.

Sorry, but I don't know what you mean, I can't remember that rule. Where is it?

I wouldn't do that, because it makes getting a high Dodge or Parry a LOT CHEAPER. If you think it's easy to have a high Dodge, just imagine how it would be if all the points devoted to Dodge went to those techniques and the adequate weapon skill...

I hope it helped.

Valete

Re: Active defense debate o_Ô
 

As has been said on this thread, Deceptive Attacks and Feints are the way to go against someone with a ridiculous Dodge. (A ridiculous Parry is much easier to get, but it's also easier to defeat -- just send multiple attackers, or one attacker with lots of Extra Attacks.) A skilled fighter can give the person a -2 to their Dodge easily, cutting your sample character's odds of Dodging almost in half.

Re: Active defense debate o_Ô
 

It's in the rules, dude (B222, Stealth skill). I think it's a good one as it prevents the proliferation of bulging eyes or dog-eared elf mutants(with Per 20 scores) -)

Re: Active defense debate o_Ô
 

Let me rephrase, why hose them by arbitrarily declaring them to be not on the lookout? You might as well have declared them totally suprised! Otherwise rational players will utterly revolt when you pull this kind of stuff (which you seem to imply in your example), but will go along with it if you give them a fighting chance. Besides, if your players have PER of 20 and dodge of 14, then your solution is simple; give them less points!

Why not ambush them with 6 or so 75 point archers with Bow-13 and Camoflage-14 firing as a volley from a concealed position at a range of 50 yds? Have it happen on a forest road or something, so that there is a darkness penalty (of -2 or so) to see into the forest, but none to see the road. Let the players explain their marching order ect. Only roll Vision (or Observation) for anyone specifically declared to be a dedicated lookout/pointman. Make sure the archers aim for three turns and fire with an AoA:Determined.

Re: Active defense debate o_Ô
 

Otherwise rational players will not utterly revolt when they are ambushed. They will revolt if they have declared they are cautiously advancing forward and then you deny them a Per roll to spot the ambush.

Yes, my gaming sessions can be harsh. I believe in intelligent opponents and expect my players to act with some measure of intelligence also. (though I am very generous in reminding characters of advantages which help them out)

Re: Active defense debate o_Ô
 

I usually give my players a Per roll, modified as appropriate. When you can't see the shooter, it really sucks for them, but they're quite aware of that possibility.

Now as far as the Dodge goes, one of the things I took from the uberthread, was the following House Rule.

You get one Dodge per turn, period. Your success in that one Dodge is applied to all attacks you are aware of as per Rapid Fire. So if half a dozen crossbowmen shoot you, you better have made your dodge by a number equal to the number of missiles you're hoping to avoid.
Also, if you're in melee and have three dogs biting at you, your dodge roll better be good enough to dodge them all.

Re: Active defense debate o_Ô
 

How do you handle something like...

3 attackers, 2 attack, the third waits, for whatever declared reason, then attacks later in the turn. So 2 attacks, 1 dodge, some stuff happens, third attack, ?. Or just opponents of different speeds. Do you just apply the old score?

Re: Active defense debate o_Ô
 

I do. The simultaneaty thing is a bit of a hand wave anyway, it's all happening within a split second of time, so that third attack comes as you are rolling out of the way of the first two attacks, launching an attack of your own, and your dodge shifts to encompass the third attack.

The dodge to me isn't a bob of the head to avoid a missile which will be going through a specific spot, it's more something along the line of an action which you do throughout your turn, to avoid all of the perceived incoming nastiness. Since it's so general, it's not usually as good as something like a parry, which is a focused defense against a specific attack at a specific point.

So you perceive an attack coming from two people in front of you, and you dodge back, you succeed your dodge by 1 and so you dodge them, but if there's a third attack from your side which you also perceive, your dodge will have a body turn as well, but since there's so many attacks coming at once, you may dodge the first, and even the second attack, but that third attack is now much harder to dodge and it hits you.

Of course, if you make your Dodge by 2, then you normally get to Dodge 3 attacks. This sounds like a good thing, but if that third attacker was timing his attack to try to get you off balance after you dodged 2 other people, he then launches his attack as a Deceptive Attack -2 to Defend, and all of a sudden, he's just blown through your supposedly good/successful dodge.

Re: Active defense debate o_Ô
 

I like this option as it works within an existing rule (dodging automatic weapons fire). How do you incorporate Retreats/Drops and Acrobatic Dodges? Do they apply to the whole turn or just against one attack in the turn?

A possible down side to this option is that a malicious GM would know exactly how many attacks you'd be able to dodge in the turn and could take advantage of that (as in your third guy waiting and using just enough Deceptive Attack to overcome the dodgers "good" roll).

Re: Active defense debate o_Ô
 

Since there's only one roll, they apply to all attacks as they normally would.

That just goes back to proper use of the Wait maneuver, since a canny adversary would use his comrades attack to make his attack more likely to succeed. It works for PCs too.

As for using just enough Deceptive Attack, I don't run adversarial games, so I have no need to Meta-Game something like that. The Deceptive Attack will be what it would normally be, if the Dodge is good enough, it'll miss, if the Dodge wasn't good enough, I'm not going to decrease the planned negative modifier for the attacker...
...unless it's something totally obvious, as in where the second attacker manages to hit, then the third attacker might attack with an extra-effort strong attack instead of a Deceptive Attack.

Re: Active defense debate o_Ô
 

Ze', this house rule is interesting, but it prevents a scenario where you can dodge a blow after being hit by another. Once you got hit, you are vulnerable until your next turn. I've to think about it.

Re: Active defense debate o_Ô
 

Not necessarily though.
If attacker number one made a deceptive attack at -3 to defend, and managed to hit, doesn't mean attacker number two or number three will automatically hit.
Since subsequent attackers may think the defender is incompetent because he was hit by the first attack, they may not use any Deceptive Attack and just go strong, which could mean they'll blow FP and miss altogether.

Re: Active defense debate o_Ô
 

-3?

You should have an ability around 17-18 in order to make such a Deceptive Attack useful. Moreover, generally (and mathematically) DA is worth using only for skills 13+ that are not that common around NPCs.

So the "hit spiral" (once you are hit, you are hit by all successive attacks) would still be a problem.

Re: Active defense debate o_Ô
 

Depends on the NPC, if they're ganging up 3:1 on the PC, then they probably believe themselves outclassed, it can be worth it to them to make an attack in the 6-9 range which might get through, vs making an attack in the 12-15 range which will probably not get through, and if they're working together as a team they may willingly try Deceptive Attacks which will miss more often, relying on their comrades to distract their target.

If there's no Parry or Block available to the character, sure, and the next round he'll also have shock issues unless he has High Pain Threshold.
I don't see a problem with this. Once he's hit, he should be more susceptible to follow-up hits unless he can pull back and regroup.
If someone's outnumbered 3:1, unless he's really good, or has friends who can come to the rescue, he's going to get his ass handed to him.

Re: Active defense debate o_Ô
 

You cannot reduce your skill below 10 with Deceptive Attack (B370).

Even if you allow it, mathematically it isn't worth.

NPC broadsword-12, PC dodge-13

normal attack: P(12-)*(1-P(13-)) = 7.2%

deceptive attack -3: P(6-)*(1-P(10-)) = 4.6%

Deceptive attack is useful only for skills 13+, generally speaking.
Yeah, if that's by design, it's fair. However I'd like to avoid the "hit spiral".

Re: Active defense debate o_Ô
 

11 is nowhere near 14. 11+ is what, 63% success? 14+ is around 93%. So this is a major difference.

As was already said, this problem is practically non-existent if you use Deceptive Attacks and/or Feint.

Also, leather armor is at most DR2, so one hit can cause a lot of damage. With HT 13, 8 points of damage puts you at half move and dodge. Also, a major wound to the face or vitals gives a -5 penalty to the HT roll; -10 for the brain.

Re: Active defense debate o_Ô
 

I would take exception to that statment as it implies that a GM goal is to amke his players happy. as opsend to have fun with his friends.

It is distntyl possible for the players to be happy and the GM not. But this is a stong indcation that there migh be a play style mismatch.

Re: Active defense debate o_Ô
 

Neither of these is available for ranged attacks, hence at least part of the problem.

-Polaris

Re: Active defense debate o_Ô
 

I like giving semi-skilled fighters the option of effectively swinging half-wild and possibly connecting.
This is actually pretty realistic when you think about the effect of a semi-skilled fighter fancing an expert, and trying his best to connect by deception.
He's more likely to fail, but he'll still try to do it.

All the more reason to use it, especially for NPCs against PCs at a 3:1 ratio.

Of course, if the NPCs are really scared, and they know which one of them the PC is engaging, the other two might AoA Accurate, and convert the +4 bonus to their 12- skill to a -3 Deceptive attack on a 10- to hit.

I'm not sure I understand what you're trying to avoid, and why.

Re: Active defense debate o_Ô
 

Plus, it's 20pts a level. 20pts is 6 levels of a new skill, or 5 extra levels of an old skill. Consider:

Joe Average, stats all 10, Speed 5, Dodge 8.

He can get Speed 6, and thus Dodge 9, for 20pts.

Or he can get a Melee weapon, 20pts gets him, with a DX/avg skill, Attribute+5, or Skill 15 with that weapon. That's Parry of 10. Plus, he gets to attack.

Of course, if you gave him 200 or 500 points to spend, then he'll just get the extra Speed, AND the weapon skill. But if it's a 50 or 100pt character, then the player starts having to choose between things...

So what's being said here is that, "if you have a 200-pt character, he can do things that are really powerful and not very realistic in flavour, more cinematic." Well, yeah! A high-point character should be able to do crazy stuff like that.

If you don't want munchkins, don't give them munchkin-level points.

Re: Active defense debate o_Ô
 

Jim-Bob,

As I already showed on the Uberthread (and others did as well), it is possible to get a dodge of 13 or even more (as high as 19!) with "default" stat characters (stats of 10). In short, you can get shockingly high Dodge defense scores for a suprisingly low number of points.

-Polaris

Re: Active defense debate o_Ô
 

Sorry, could you tell me what which überthread this is, or could you tell me why getting a Dodge as high as 19 with few points is possible?

I think it's not, but maybe I overlooked something.

Re: Active defense debate o_Ô
 

The überthread aka Is Dodge Overpowering?

Re: Active defense debate o_Ô
 

Thank you, roguebfl, I'll read it.

Re: Active defense debate o_Ô
 

I'm thinking of the unpleasant results of a 'crippling' hit to the leg. With all those points in HT, Speed, etc., a really high HP total isn't likely, so 7 points should be enough. Assuming a cutting weapon that's 5 points after armour, or 7 points of basic damage. A character with ST12 and a broadsward will get this on half their hits. Once that's happened you count as Lame (no legs), and that means you're effectively out of the fight.

Re: Active defense debate o_Ô
 

However, not everyone entirely agreed with your figures, and nor did we find them that shocking once the maths had been done.

Re: Active defense debate o_Ô
 

Good luck. You need it.

Re: Active defense debate o_Ô
 

Still, this is an house rule, and still it doesn't change the fact that Deceptive Attack is mostly worthless for skills 12-
I really don't follow you. I showed in the previous post that your reasoning about hit chances is flawed. So should a competent fighter (skill 12) lower his chance to connect just to save PCs?

And note that to "connect" you have to hit and he has to fail defense.
I don't like the fact that with your house rule:

• Once you get hit, all the following hits connect (barring exceptional cases)
• The GM knows when an NPC will or will not hit.

I call the above problems "hit spiral".

Re: Active defense debate o_Ô
 

Yes, you showed that it is possible under all the right circumstances to have a "default" stat character get a high Dodge. But as was pointed out, the "default" stat character has a Basic Speed of 5, base Dodge of 8. With an All-Out-Defense he gets a Dodge of 10, with a Retreat you can a Dodge of 13 against Melee and with Dodge and Drop you can get a Dodge of 13 against Ranged (one shot as then you are prone and Dodging becomes even harder) Of course, to get these high numbers, you have to pretty much choose to give up attacking your opponent and just hope that you can stay under that 83% chance of not getting hit (that is, if your opponent doesn't use Feints and Deceptive attacks to reduce your Dodge score) Against a single opponent you stand a chance. Against multiple opponents which can surround you, you're gonna have a problem. Against a single ranged opponent, well once you hit the dirt they get -2 to hit and you have -3 to your Dodge and can't get the extra +3 for Dodge and Drop, which brings you to a Dodge of 7 with the All-Out-Defense option. Against multiple ranged attackers, well you can't be aware of all of them so there's a distinct chance that there will be attacks you just can't even roll a Dodge.

Re: Active defense debate o_Ô
 

11 is just a retreat away from 14. But the retreat is only against one opponent, so it doesn't help so much against 3:1.

Re: Active defense debate o_Ô
 

It is also just a "drop for cover" away for ranged attacks, and that *does* apply to all ranged attacks for that second.

-Polaris

Re: Active defense debate o_Ô
 

And who said anything about ranged attacks? Reread the original post.

Re: Active defense debate o_Ô
 

Guys, we are NOT resurrecting the Uber Thread here. Keep the subject on track, and no thread hijacking.

I'm not gonna be patient on this.

Re: Active defense debate o_Ô
 

Please don't, unless you don't mind going insane. It's 2500 posts of people repeating the same thing again and again and again, and yelling at each other (me included).

The gist is some people thought that Dodge was too high, others disagree. That's all. For 2500 posts.

Re: Active defense debate o_Ô
 

Yeah, except on the next round, you defend at -2 because you're kneeling, and you can't retreat.

Nice way to take yourself out of combat.

Re: Active defense debate o_Ô
 

But he can stand up from a kneel as the "Step" part of any maneuver that allows it. So he can't retreat (since he "stepped") but he at least gets to defend normally once he's up.

I'm bookless right now (that was from the GURPS Lite I keep handy at work), but doesn't Dodge and Drop require you to go prone? Having to kneel isn't much of a problem at all -- having to drop to your belly does. That's two rounds of Change Position maneuvers and the full penalty to Dodge until you're back up.

Re: Active defense debate o_Ô
 

AoA makes it 10- to hit and -3 to defend.
It's not an issue of trying to save PCs, but that in the heat of combat many people will do things which aren't mathematically beneficial, by definition trying to get a lucky hit.


How is that any different from any other combat, and how is it in any way not realistic?

Re: Active defense debate o_Ô
 

I suggest you do the same. I said that Feint and Deceptive attacks don't apply against ranged attacks (which is true) which was PART of the problem (alluded to by the orginal poster). Since some attacks are ranged attacks, I was on topic and within my rights.

-Polaris

Re: Active defense debate o_Ô
 

Uffff, I didn't know what I was saying! I even read some parts, but most of that thread is kind of "You did! - No, you did!" and such things I saw when I went to school. I hadn't any fun with such debates when I was a child, and now that I'm a grown up man, I suspect I won't either.

I feel tempted to ask for some explanation of why some people think Dodge is overpowered, but I won't, because
and he, Ellie, is right. Normally I wouldn't have any problem discussing this theme again, and it would be very interesting, but unfortunately some people seem to want to "win" the discussion, instead of discussing friendly of a game we all like. And I see this thread is going in the same direction. Sorry, I disappear.

Re: Active defense debate o_Ô
 

Except that when you Dodge and Drop, you are prone. You have to take a Change Posture maneuver (which means no All-Out-Defense) to get from Prone to Kneeling. That means, while you are on the ground prone you have a -3 to Dodge, and on the turn you decide to start getting up you go to Kneeling which is a -2 to Dodge. Then on your next turn you can stand up as part of your Step/Move.

Re: Active defense debate o_Ô
 

cccwebs is right. Say you dodge and drop. You are now lying on the ground until your next turn, at -4 to attack and -3 to all defenses (not only Dodge). On your next turn, you Change Posture to kneeling, from which you can't retreat and are at -2 to all defenses. Then on the next round you finally Step up.

Re: Active defense debate o_Ô
 

What about an acrobatics roll to stand up in one turn?
I allow a kick-up, or a twirl-up to stand up in one turn, I figured that was still supported in the rules.
I count it as a Step/Move, so characters can still get out a Wild Swing, but not a normal attack after a kick-up.

Re: Active defense debate o_Ô
 

"Still supported" implies that it was once supported. That rule doesn't exist in 3E any more than it exists in 4E.

(If you want to continue to use it as a house rule, go for it. I agree that it's quite appropriate for cinematic games... but it's not canonical.)

Re: Active defense debate o_Ô
 

You know, that's the biggest problem I have in these rules discussions, I sometimes forget where canonical leaves off and where my House Rules begin.

There wasn't something like this in Martial Arts?
I could've sworn there was metion of cinematic acrobatics along these lines in 3e...
Oh well, memory's a strange thing.

Re: Active defense debate o_Ô
 

Asked about the "hit spiral" (neat phrase Luther)

I won't argue the realism of the hit spiral. I know an objection I and some of my players would have (with Ze'Manel Cunha's dodge house rule) is this.

It's some what predetermined. Once you are at the point you have "used up" your sucessful dodges. Every attack thereafter hits you. And you are likely already in trouble, thus there is a hit spiral you (as a PC can do nothing about).

Most of my players would feel cheated by this (It is a style thing), that is getting hit with no chance to save themselves, especially if it is a death dealing hit.

I the house rule I have used for many years is that each dodge (after the first) you take in a single round gives you a +1 modifier to your dodge die roll. Thus, if you try to dodge 6 attacks you are rolling at +5 on the last one. This has several advantages over Ze'Manel Cunha's dodge house rule (IMHO)

#1 Drama & suspense is preserved/predestiantion is elimiated. Even though you won't likely dodge at +5 to your roll still have a shot at it. (The players always love a roll (even at low odds) to avoid a possible death dealing hit.

#2 The likely hood of a critial failure goes up dramaticaly if you try too many dodges (+5 to the die roll gives you an 18 on a roll of 13) And ocassionaly a player (especially if heavly armored) will take the hit rather that risk a critical miss and a fall (possibly injuring a leg)

Of course one major disadvantage to this rule vs Ze'Manel Cunha's is all the additional dodge rolls. (but note it is the same # of dodge rolls as if you have played by the vanilla rules)

Re: Active defense debate o_Ô
 

I tend to have all the attacks resolved at about the same time.

So in the situation where three NPCs are attacking the PC, I describe the NPCs attacks, the PC describes his defense.

ie. GM: The 3 Crossbowmen who have been aiming at you fire, what do you do?
PC: I acrobatically dodge, staying on my feet, so I can charge them next turn.
At which point, player rolls her PCs' acrobatics skill, takes the +2 or -2 to Dodge, and then she rolls her dodge; meanwile I've been rolling the NPCs atttacks.
Player then tells me by how much the PC makes the dodge, and I describe the effect of the incoming bolts and how her PC has fared.

Making the Dodge exactly might mean 2 out of 3 bolts hit, but if two of the NPCs missed, it might mean all the bolts miss, and the PCs looks like she's pulling a Remo Williams.

Different strokes and all, but as far as I'm concerned, they get a roll.

Actually, other than making them roll 6 times, I don't see any effective difference on this between what we're doing.
I suppose if the player rolls real bad on the first roll, he'll get 6 chances to improve it, but if he rolled well on the first roll, he'll get 6 chances to mess up.

Re: Active defense debate o_Ô
 

As a GM of a cinematic campaign, I'd allow it.

Re: Active defense debate o_Ô
 

Ze': I don't think the hit spiral is terribly realistic.

Another problem of the hit spiral is that the player is going to know (barring deceptive attacks and feint, which do not apply to ranged attack) which attack is going to connect and which not. So he can use this info to optimize his defenses (in a way he could not using vanilla GURPS).

Finally, a quick number crunching reveal that using the one-dodge roll (with rapid fire like mechanics) vs vanilla dodge the chances of being hit are only slightly increased, but not much different. IMO the problems aren't worth the solution.

Re: Active defense debate o_Ô
 

That's cool, whatever works for you and your players. I get the impression that your style of play does not invovle the level of detail (in combat) that my players tend to enjoy.

I was just throwing out some alternatives for those on the forums that may want to lower the dodge defense but not use your system.

Having the attacks resolved at the same time (as opposed to when they occur in the turn sequence) is definatley not a style choice my players or I would be comfortable with.

As you said, different strokes.

I think a pro for both your HR and mine it that they speed up resolving combats in real time.

Yours is quick because it condences many dodge rolls into one, and increases the # hits/lethality which will speed combats as combatants drop faster,

Mine speeds play do to the increased # hits/lethality factor only.

I've also see this (lower dodge)rule cause PC's who are outnumbered to aviod combat all together (increased role playing) because the of the lethality increase over vanilla GURPS (under the vanilla rules the PC's with high dodge would just wade thru the NPCs, with the house rule they can't be sure they will)

Re: Active defense debate o_Ô
 

If you think about things like missile weapons, whether it be flying knives, arrows or crossbow bolts, and think over how long it takes missiles to reach characters, ie. one second regardless of distance, then there's really not much of a stretch in having the dodge be used against all the things flying in at them at.

Mainly they tend to choose other defenses as primary, and only use Dodge as a last resort. That's the way I prefer the game style to go.

You don't feel that when someone gets hit/hurt they tend to react a bit off, and therefore open themselves up to follow up attacks unless they pull back to regroup?

Re: Active defense debate o_Ô
 

No more than What the Shock penalties ready simulate. An Indvidual does not need to retreat, toregian their bearings and change tatics. it's group tatics that need to fallback normally to regroup.

Re: Active defense debate o_Ô
 

1) shock penalties are here for a reason

2) in the fraction of second between two blows, it's quite possible that you was already dodging the second one when hit by the first.

3) "they tend to react a bit off": even following your logic, you should penalize Parry and Block too, not only Dodge.

Re: Active defense debate o_Ô
 

I would disagree...not that I'm an expert or anything, but I know when things got dicey and I've walked into a combination or such (sparring), there's a tendency on my part to either close in and go to town, or pull back and try to recenter, this is also tends to be true when I was the one delivering the combination or such. My anectdotal experience and observation tends to reflect this as true for most people as well.
It's one of the things an attacker learns to do, if you overwhelm your opponent, and can keep up a flurry of blows and combinations after you first connect, the person on the receiving end will often feel overwhelmed, and either turtle up, back up fast, or try to break through the attack, in most situations though, their defenses will have been temporarily broken, and if they try to attack through your flurry, then they often open themselves up further.
Think of a boxing continuous combination or an axe flurry or staff-flowering, and the difficulty in breaking out of the receiving end of those. Often the defender, once hit, will continue to get hit, unless he can pull back, strike through, or his opponent's attacks falter due to exhaustion.

Re: Active defense debate o_Ô
 

Agian that what Shock pentiles are for

Re: Active defense debate o_Ô
 

Granted.

Which is why Sampo's suggestion works very well as well.
It's just a choice on how often you want to roll.

I do, it's in the basic rules, there are penalties for Parry and Block after the first.

Re: Active defense debate o_Ô
 

Hope the following clarifies.
I disagree, Sampo's suggestion doesn't suffer the hit spiral problem. I think hit spiral is bad because in the fraction of second between two blows, it's quite possible that you was already dodging the second one when hit by the first.
That's irrelevant. I was talking about the hit spiral, explaining why I don't like it and responding to:So, following your logic, when someone gets hit/hurt (that's different from multiple defenses) you should penalize Parry and Block as well. Your HR doesn't: if you have a more elaborate version, then post it.

Re: Active defense debate o_Ô
 

For a cinematic hollywood actionthe the rules in the rulebook are good. If you want some realism then it should be better to have a good houserule.

Why not reducing dodges to just one per turn? Regarding that one combat turn is just 1 sec. it seems a better simulation than dodging several times.

Another houserule would be a cumulative -2 for each dodge after the first .

And for pistols or guns I would not allow a dodge at all, except maybe in lucky cases where the circumstances are in favor of the dodger, (eg. there are some objects to jump behind, like barrels or so) even if the dodger is aware of the threat.

Re: Active defense debate o_Ô
 

Then go with Sampo's suggestion. I did agree that was a good solution, it just has more dodge rolls than I prefer to use.

It's relevant in that in the overall modeling of the action Parry/Block has minuses for multiple use but Dodge does not.

Regardless if you miss your first parry, your second parry is going to be penalized, and your third and fourth parries are going to be pretty ineffectual, if you can even move that fast. So in that situation, someone trying to parry four blows, will likely be hit by every blow after the first one he misses parrying. Isn't that a hit spiral by your definition?

I don't need a HR for that, it's called Shock, Knockdown, stun, etc., and it's all in basic.

Re: Active defense debate o_Ô
 

All this talk originated from:Well, to make things short: no, I don't consider your HR more realistic than vanilla GURPS. If anything I think it's less realistic, and I already explained why.

Re: Active defense debate o_Ô
 

You know, I sometimes wonder if you actually grok the point of a debate...

You said you don't believe a "hit spiral" to be realistic, that's fine, but where did you clarify what your expectation of a realistic post hit reaction is?

Re: Active defense debate o_Ô
 

Keep in mind that Dodge roll's aren't multiple actions, it's one motion that puts you out of attacks' path. You roll for each attack to see how the Dodge was effective.Seems too harsh. The probabilities show that a cumulative -1 for each dodge after the first is roughly equivalent to Rapid Fire.
If you don't allow a Dodge against firearm, be sure to penalize the attacker due to target's movement. It's a lot easier to shoot at stationary targets.

Re: Active defense debate o_Ô
 

Curious, you make me feel the same.No reason to add a hit spiral. YMMV. <g>

Re: Active defense debate o_Ô
 

I prefer 1/turn with no penalty, with subsequent dodges taking some penalty (though I'm not sure of the best number for the penalty).