Learning combat

[Densar]

When doing an all-out attack with a knife, using the option to do double attacks, is it ok to first do a swing (cut) and them a thrust (imp) for the second? I would think so since they don't specify otherwise in the book. Seems very cinematic to do that, particularly when the last attack takes care of the opponent...

[johndallman]

Originally Posted by Densar

I completely forgot about this. I'll have to find the reference and add to my cheat sheet so I don't forget in the future.

Page B379, but reading "Damage and Injury", pp. 377-381 will make things clearer.

Originally Posted by Densar

Yes. I figured that she was getting a little desperate. I also wondered if doing all-out defense whenever she had shock would have been a better approach?

It is, under most circumstances. You're probably starting to notice that GURPS combat is quite deadly: a couple of knife hits have C significantly wounded. Two things to appreciate:

It's much easier to get someone to collapse unconscious than it is to kill them. They start having to make HT rolls every second to stay conscious when they reach 0 HP; they don't have to roll to avoid dying until they reach -1xHP, and they don't automatically die until they reach -5xHP.

The best way to do combat for realistic GURPS characters involves sneaking up on opponents, ambushing them, and otherwise getting unfair advantages. Wading into fights, D&D style, will get you into trouble unless you're highly skilled, well-equipped and have a fair grasp of the appropriate tactics.

Originally Posted by Densar

When doing an all-out attack with a knife, using the option to do double attacks, is it ok to first do a swing (cut) and them a thrust (imp) for the second? I would think so since they don't specify otherwise in the book. Seems very cinematic to do that, particularly when the last attack takes care of the opponent...

The rules don't forbid it. The GM certainly can. While GURPS combat is less abstract than most TTRPGs, that kind of detail depends on the group and the game style.

[Densar]

Thanks. Another question: when she did all-out attack (double), can her foe defend against both attack (in effect doing two defenses on her turn) or only the first one?

[Mr_Sandman]

Any character who can defend (if they didn't all out attack, for example), can defend against as many attacks as are made on them. Using the Basic Set rules. They are limited to one block, and each parry after the first is penalized. Dodges are unlimited.

[johndallman]

Originally Posted by Densar

Thanks. Another question: when she did all-out attack (double), can her foe defend against both attack (in effect doing two defenses on her turn) or only the first one?

C can and should defend against the two attacks separately. She can take any number of Dodges, a single Parry (under Basic combat), and zero Blocks, because she doesn't have any kind of shield.

Because these example characters have no encumbrance and are at -1 to parry with their knives, their dodges are as good as their parries; armoured fighters with larger weapons and shields tend to have Parry and Block rolls better than their Dodge. With more combat options active, it is possible to do multiple Parries, at increasing penalties, and given a shield, multiple Blocks, also at increasing penalties.

Fighting multiple opponents is dangerous, because you run out of good active defence options.

[johndallman]

In the revised example, the first mistake I've spotted is in round 6:

C is attacking with no shock penalty, and being below ⅓ HP does not penalise attacks. She rolls a 5 against 16, which is a critical success, so A can't defend.

Less importantly, A does not need to defend against the feint. As far as she's concerned, it just missed.

Under normal circumstances, All-out Attacking should be reserved for opponents who can't attack you even if your attack fails, ones who you're willing to bet can't get through your armour, and ones who you expect to take you down with their next attack.

[Densar]

And if C had chosen All-out defense (double defense) on her turn and A did an all-out attack, she could defend using two different defenses on each of the separate attacks, presumably?

[johndallman]

Originally Posted by Densar

And if C had chosen All-out defense (double defense) on her turn and A did an all-out attack, she could defend using two different defenses on each of the separate attacks, presumably?

Exactly so.

[mlangsdorf]

Originally Posted by Densar

When doing an all-out attack with a knife, using the option to do double attacks, is it ok to first do a swing (cut) and them a thrust (imp) for the second? I would think so since they don't specify otherwise in the book. Seems very cinematic to do that, particularly when the last attack takes care of the opponent...

It's explicitly allowed for a Rapid Strike (see "What is a rapid strike?", Martial Arts p 127). The expanded text for All-Out Attack implies that performing a thrust to a cut is allowed, and I can't see why the reverse would not be allowed.

It doesn't even sound cinematic to me. The fighter slashed with the knife until he met resistance, then stabbed forward.

Each attack interacts with DR and wounding modifiers separately, of course.