[DF] What's worked? What hasn't?

[Peter Knutsen]

Originally Posted by Kromm

Quite a few of those were tested in my campaign, too. I was happy with all of them. I think the dislike some have for Heroic Charge is tied to the overuse of easily impaled humanoid foes. Against greater demons that take dozens of telling hits to take down, and spirits that can just fade into the floor or teleport away, that option didn't really change the face of battle in my game. Its main effect was to let those who invested in extra Basic Speed and Basic Move instead of extra ST (everybody had lots of DX!) have fun in fights vs. mooks.

To me, it sounds as if the problem is with GURPS' implementation of facing rules.

It makes no logical sense that you can pay FP to use a non-supernatural ability to run around a combat-aware being (IQ 3+ and not suffering from Stun, Combat Paralysis or the like) and shiv it in the back.

I vaguely recall that D&D 3rd Edition may have had no facing rules. The tactical rule was about whether a combatant was flanked or not, and based on that I'm inferring that there was ny defined facing, rather everyone was always assumed to be facing in the most logical direction provided the being is aware that he, she or it is involved in combat. Thus if somoene were to pay FP to move real fast to run around the being, the being would naturally turn in response to that, and so it wouldn't be possible to backstab it.

RPG combat is always based around units taking turns to move, whereas in real life movement is simultaneous. But it's still important to make sure that the rules don't encourage actions or combinations of actions that would have absolutely no truck in real life, and I've been in favour of assumed facing, as opposed to explicit facing, for the last many, many years.