[combat] giant issue in weapon reach question

[Ji ji]

Hello everybody. I'm Ji ji, role-player from Italy.

I started playing GURPS twenty years ago. Recently I approached 4th edition, and I like the great improvement in the rules, which I already liked in 3rd. With this new edition I passed to tactical combat rules, in order to obtain a greater degree of realism.
Yet, it seems to me that there is a big issue related to combat mechanics (as a simulation) regarding weapon of different reach. I was asking myself if I miss some paragraph and misunderstood overall mechanics.

In my experience, with the right condition, greatest reach give enormous advantages. If we are in open space (for instance, in game terms, a 10x10 grid without any obstacle), a spear is often superior to a shortest sword. In such situation, a spear-armed warrior defeat a knife-armed one 9 on 10, or so. It's similar with a long rapier vs short-sword, and so on.
But this is the less issue. The big it's combat dynamism. In real world, if you look this combat, you see much more attack coming from spear. The shorter weapon wielder will do a lot of parries, and his biggest effort will be enter in the other's guard, going enough close to attack.

In GURPS I see a far excessive mobility, an excessive ease to close to the opponent. I do a pratical example.

A and B have the same physical stastic, but B is slightly healtier (12 instead of 11). So, B has an higher basic move and act first. They are equally trained in martial arts; A is a spear expert, B a knife expert.
They start the fight with two meters (two hexs) between them. A is wielding the spear with a 2-reach grip.
B go first. His action is "wait: if he closes, I step and attack".
Now A make a step to attack. B make a step and attack. With the first parry in a turn, probably they parry both.

Now A and B are in adjacent hexs. B attacks. A must change grip, using the ready action!

This is a very bad simulation. Regardless this specific example, it's far too easy to close distance in combat! The best tactic to take advantage from longer reach weapons is to go forward, and this is very irrealistic. In a real fight, longer weapon wielder can easy mantain his position, keeping shorter weapon wielder at distance. I can't see how simulate this in GURPS combat. Worst, the above strategy is impossible if A has a wall at his back (in real, a wall at back is a great defense).

Is this inability to keep at bay the opponent a real (giant) issue of combat mechanics, or I miss something in tactical overlook of the rules?

[John Smith]

In real life it is actually pretty easy to close the gap between your foe's spear point and himself. Spears are good for keeping enemies at bay only if used in formation, which is reflected by GURPS rules. A spear vs. shortsword (for example) duel between equally skilled fighters usually has the spearman constantly stepping back to maintain his advantage in reach. This usually results in the spearman getting the first attack but nothing more, which is perfectly realistic; historically the best counter to spears on the battlefield was heavy infantry with a shield and a sword or axe (Or a two-handed sword or warhammer once heavy plate became common), who could block the first thrust and hack the spearmen to pieces.

[Dunadin777]

Originally Posted by Ji ji

Is this inability to keep at bay the opponent a real (giant) issue of combat mechanics, or I miss something in tactical overlook of the rules?

First of all: welcome!

Secondly, your example is misleading due to bad tactics. The knife-wielder wants to be the one charging if he acts first, and the spear-wielder ought to take Wait maneuvers. The spear-armed fighter also has the All-out-Attack (long) option, which is detailed in Martial Arts, and adds one to his reach to make it possible to attack from three yards away. But the basic approach is more important: depending on how you handle movement, a cautious and patient spear-armed fighter will usually convert his Wait maneuvers to Move-and-Attack as soon as the knife-armed fighter gets within attack range: he'll then attack and use his movement to back out of range. Even if the knife-fighter does get within range, he gets his attack first (possibly causing the all-important shock) and he retains the option to Dodge and Retreat, which gives him another yard of distance before the next turn.

[vierasmarius]

One thing that comes to mind is the Distance and Defense option from Pyramid 3/34 (pg 27). It gives combatants a bonus to defend if their attacker needed to Step or Move to get in range to attack. I've also considered making Retreats harder if you moved towards the enemy rather than away on your turn. Either of these options should provide benefit to the fighter who can keep his enemy at bay with a longer weapon.

[Walrus]

Originally Posted by Ji ji

Now A and B are in adjacent hexs. B attacks. A must change grip, using the ready action!

"A" should make a retreat during his defense. Voila, he's a yard back. He can move one extra step back and attack then. And now he's two yards away from knife wielder.

Well, he also shouldn't make a step in to attack B. He should wait for attack and then step back. He always should step back to keep distance.

And having a wall at the back is a ruin. This may be a cinematic advantage in one-to-crowd fight against mooks but in one-on-one nearly equal duel no open space to retreat is always disadvantage. Your foe has to evade just one attack to get close to you and make everything he wants. Or you need shoves and tackles and knockback enemy with you spear, shield or off-hand.

[mhd]

The added step you get with a Commited Attack is often worth it, especially if you do spear and shield (Which comes in handy for shoves, too).

[lexington]

The reason people don't rush past a spears guard is because they're liable to get stabbed in the process, not because its impossible to do. Against a person without armor that spear is going to do 10 to 12 points of damage if it hits. That's enough to take the average person completely out of the fight and cripple a tough one. The knife fighter is going to delay because he's a) scared of dying immediately and b) taking Evaluate maneuvers to help raise his active defenses.

[Gef]

Play out a few more versions of this scenario, and allow greater distance to start.

Al and Bob, 3 yards apart.

Al goes first, and this is his tactical situation: Bob can step and attack, and reach him on this turn, but Al needs an extra step to close, and that has a drawback. In the Basic Set, the options are All-Out Attack (no defense) or Move-And-Attack (lousy chance to hit). Martial Arts gives the option of a Committed Attack for an extra step, with penalized defense, or Extra Effort to do the same thing, costing fatigue, and too much use of Extra Effort will put Al out of the fight quick. Another option is to Wait until Bob strikes, then hope to parry before a Step-and-Attack. If Al does that, he cedes the first strike advantage to Bob and he also forfeits the option to retreat for a defense bonus against that first strike. Martial Arts introduces the option to side-step for a reduced bonus, only practical if your defense is a dodge or a parry with fencing, karate, or judo.

Suppose Al does manage to close the distance and attack? Bob retreats, for a nice bonus to his Dodge, and gets back in range for a Reach 2 attack with his spear! Even if Al closes to Reach C, Bob could Retreat and then Step back for his own Step-And-Attack maneuver. As others have noted, the combination of retreat and a step (either direction) gives Bob a pretty good chance to maintain his optimum distance and benefit from the Retreat bonus to defense, while Al will never be able to benefit from a Retreat without opening distance, which will require him to either forfeit an attack or use the extreme measures I listed above to close again.

Al's best bet is to hit hard and keep the pressure up. If he manages to land the first blow, putting Bob at a disadvantage for shock/stun/knockdown, he sets up an opportunity to do it again. There are other tactics that can work, but you start getting into more detailed aspects of the combat system, like grabbing Bob's spear, but even here Bob has the advantage if he's wielding the weapon with two hands.

GEF

[Ji ji]

Thank you for every answer. It's a pleasure joining a community so live.

Interesting points of view. Essentially, the factor more disturbing to me is the odd cinematism of retreat tactics, which favor backstepping, but lack in keeping at bay the opponent without significative movement.

Lexington is right, but in the context enter the high defensive abilities inherent to the system. Perhaps, I could try to give a malus to active defences while used against an attack readied by wait maneuver and involving entering in the max reach hex. This, if the grip make ready this max-reach attack.

I was exampling with spear and knife, but it can extend to longsword and shortword, and so on. I was thinking about the capacity to keep at bay, swinging the greatsword, numerous opponents with short swords.

I'll try with the malus HR to see if it fits with the cinematism that I annex to different-weapon-reach fighting.

[Gef]

If you want to use the tactical combat system, there's no substitute for running several "arena" scenarios with different combinations of weapons and skills and starting conditions. Be sure to try all the maneuvers multiple times to get a feel for when they work, and take the time to look up the details. Don't forget that Retreat is only good for a +1 bonus for Block and most parries; it only gives +3 to Dodge and certain parries (fencing, karate, judo).

If Al attack Bob from behind at Reach C, for instance, Bob "retreats" by stepping forward away from Al (and still takes a penalty to defend), then he uses his "step" to turn around. He's now facing Al at Reach 1, with a weapon of Reach 2. Al will get one more attack before Bob can open the distance, so in this fight the advantage is Al's. Just play out all the combinations before you start tinkering with house rules. The system ain't perfect but it is darn good, and attempts to improve it further often run into a giant wall of complexity.

GEF