Grappled & Ranged Attacks: Martial Arts vs. Tactical Shooting vs. Technical Grappling

[vicky_molokh]

Originally Posted by DouglasCole

Also, remember that most GURPS assumes grapple = no use of ranged weapons AT ALL. So TG is generous by that stance. If you feel that the book didn't go far enough, fine - simply penalize all ranged attacks by a number equal to the total CP inflicted by all grapples on the foe.

Oh, I don't think TG is not generous enough. I don't know precisely where the most reasonable 'enough' lies. I'm just seeing that grappled ranged attacks are treated rather differently between B/MA, TS, and TG, and I wonder how they can be reconciled.

Originally Posted by DouglasCole

We'd introduced enough detail (or complexity, if you will) that "just use your foe's Trained ST" was better than nothing. By and large, we assumed that some of that penalty would be offset by trying to shoot in close combat, whcih means an AoA(Determined)/Telegraphic attack would offset +5 to hit for a pseudo-melee "ranged" attack with a gun. Shooting a foe in a controlled manner at 25yds while also grappled? I'm comfortable with "no frackin' way" in this case.

Actually, it would offset +8, since in Reach C/C,1 (depending on whether using a pistol or a rifle), ranged attacks get +4 from AoA (Determined). But there's also Bulk, and -4 for being grappled (B/MA/TS) or the variable penalty from TG.

[DouglasCole]

Originally Posted by vicky_molokh

Oh, I don't think TG is not generous enough. I don't know precisely where the most reasonable 'enough' lies. I'm just seeing that grappled ranged attacks are treated rather differently between B/MA, TS, and TG, and I wonder how they can be reconciled.

As FAQ-keeper, you of all should know there are many options in the various books that not only cannot be reconciled, but they're not supposed to be. The GM picks the rule appropriate to his game-world and the expectations of his players, and runs with it. If "can't shoot while grappled" is the right feel, than that's the operative rule. If "can shoot, but only at the guy grappling you" is right, that's operative. If he wants to say "you may shoot, but at the usual DX penalty for being grappled" then that's what it is.

[vicky_molokh]

Originally Posted by DouglasCole

As FAQ-keeper, you of all should know there are many options in the various books that not only cannot be reconciled, but they're not supposed to be. The GM picks the rule appropriate to his game-world and the expectations of his players, and runs with it. If "can't shoot while grappled" is the right feel, than that's the operative rule. If "can shoot, but only at the guy grappling you" is right, that's operative. If he wants to say "you may shoot, but at the usual DX penalty for being grappled" then that's what it is.

The situation is that we used to have separate books dealing with non-overlapping stuff. E.g. techbooks dealing with equipment, MA mostly dealing with combat (and a bit of equipment), Social Engineering dealing with social interaction etc. But as time goes by, overlaps appear, sometimes in unexpected places (e.g. HT and LT armour modifications, Technical Grappling and Tactical Shooting, or Supers and Transhuman Space [sic]).

Books also used to follow the 'when in conflict, use the latest', but this gets tricky when contradiction is only partial.

I'm fully expecting that once the questions will subside, there'll be grounds for adding a separate section to the oFAQ.