Beats Suck(?)

[Mailanka]

Originally Posted by Bruno

That might be desirable, but you're also describing a very complex system with a large number of variables. Sorting out a system like that is difficult, and it may not be possible to solve it for the desired result.

Among other things, ST costs half as much as IQ and DX and is already very valuable in combat.

The campaign I have in mind will really embrace tactical complexity, so the fact that rebalancing beat and feint will introduce a slew of choices for players is a feature in this case, not a bug.

I am concerned about your second statement there, though, which is why I'm interested in hearing from people who have playtested their proposed changes.

Originally Posted by Figleaf23

Personally, I would say in fencing a beat is not necessarily a feint or a deceptive attack, though it may be used to initiate such. That is to say, you may feint by beating, or your beat may be real.

In the basic form beat where it is not an attempt to misdirect the opponent, it's really an attack on the weapon to drive it out of the way.

Accordingly to me the only significant flaw of the GURPS model is requiring the set-up.

That kinda bugs me too. On the other hand, the set-up means you're not vulnerable to a Beat unless you let blades touch: If you don't attack him with your blade, or you don't parry his blade with your own, you can't be Beaten. That's kinda neat.

But it does result in wierdness like "I attack/you attack/I beat/you attack/I attack and penetrate your defense"