predicting attacks from behind to dodge to backfist unseen predictable foes

Plane · 01-31-2022, 10:49 PM

B326 and B374's basic policy:

You may dodge any attack except one that you did not know about

B391 clarifies what that means:

Against a true attack from behind, no active defense is possible, because the victim did not know the attack was coming

A "runaround" is an exception since "by outmaneuvering his victim through sheer speed, the victim does know he’s being attacked".

This seems to only apply if it happens in a single second (or maybe single maneuver? can't recall how Decreased Time Rate / Altered Time Rate work w/ this on either end)

It doesn't cover how to deal with a kind of "prolonged runaround". IE you know the opponent is behind you, but more than a second has passed since he went back there.

For example:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IvSOqd7hZv4

About 2 seconds passes after Roman walks behind Seth to when he attacks Seth from behind, which falls outside normal "Runaround Attack" parameters AFAIK.

"Defending Against Attacks from the Back" discusses default (non-Runaround) policy for dodging: "you cannot defend at all unless you have Peripheral Vision"

So one explanation for how Seth dodged Roman would be "he has peripheral vision". But what about those who don't?

- - -

B394's section on Visibility right after the Tactical Combat section. Where it relates to dodging is "defender cannot see his attacker".

You are -4 to dodge someone you cannot see, which I assume would stack with the -2 to defend against someoen coming in from the sides/rear for a total of -6?

This requires "the defender is aware that he is being attacked" though, so I don't know how you get there.

There is a possibility of a Hearing roll to do a parry or block but this does not pertain to dodges.

Could you make a hearing roll to establish "I'm aware I'm being attacked" (ie hear footsteps approaching) ?

- - -

Arguably Seth could not hear Roman due to the crowd though, and if he had Poor Hearing then that roll would be penalized.

This raises the question: instead of Hearing-based reactions, what about IQ-based?

One way to do that would be to take Danger Sense advantage, but B358 has GMs roll for that only if your normal sense rolls fail.

Perception defaults to IQ so it's effectively like an IQ roll unless you buy down your Per attribute. If you've done that, you could alter it w/ "different roll" enhancement to shift Per to IQ. Or even shift that to a skill check like "tactics".

Perhaps that reflects Seth Rollins (he taught himself Danger Sense? can you even do that via training like you can with Combat Reflexes?) but I wonder about how to emulate this for people who don't own this advantage.

Rather than relying on sensory input (perceiving the data of an incoming attack in progress) I'm wondering about something akin to a tactics roll where you just realize "this guy is probably going to attack me from behind, so I'll duck just in case".

This is easy to do since Seth knows Roman very well (knows he likes to do Superman punches), and has observed his tactics of late being below-the-belt (low blows, attacks from behind, grabbing tights, etc)

This type of prediction would be harder with others, who you might not know well enough not just to know IF they would attack you from behind, but also WHEN and HOW.

- -

AFAIK a Tactics roll seems the best guideline but I don't know how you would apply this.

If someone you're aware of (you just walked past them and bumped shoulders) is behind you and might launch and attack, what sort of roll (or maybe contest?) would make sense to conclude "you should duck 1 second later" or "you should duck 2 seconds later" for reacting to a rear attack as Seth did to Roman?

I imagine Batman might use a combination of a hearing check (hears someone walking behind him, and then pausing and lifting a weapon) along with some IQ/tactics type stuff when he responds to Mercy here with a backfist

https://youtu.be/jGLJN9doJpw

Guessing per B358's "comprehension check" that "This roll is against
IQ for details that anyone could figure out, or against an appropriate
skill if the significance would be lost on anyone but an expert." that Batman would sub something akin to Tactics, or maybe a Firearm skill?

returning to B394, if you got a good enough MoS in your Hearing roll (you perceive to the exact hex where an unseen foe is standing, ie behind you sharing your hex) this probably is "knows his location for sure" where you can attack an invisible foe at only -4 to hit.

A slight MoS in the hearing roll might be more vague (I know someone is in my hex, but not where within that hex) so you know they're in Reach of a punch but maybe you have to roll at -6 to hit?

- - -

MA67's Back Strike says to use MA71's "Elbow Strike" technique for a "back punch, just as MA71 notes that elbow strikes to the front use a standard 'punch' technique.

This is -2 to hit... which is what you would roll if you had 360 degree vision, so it probably stacks with the -4 to hit someone you can't see for a total of -6 to hit?

In the end this would end up being worse than "Wild Swing" (B388) though because that's "the worse of" vision penalties (-4 to hit) or -5 ... though it has the advantage of being able to taret hit locations (extra -1) and no skill cap of 9...

This is something I could see getting reworked and broken up.

- - -

The baseline rule affecting everyone that you cuold split off would be how it works for 360 degree vision guys:

attacks to the back and opposite side at -2 due to the clumsy angle of attack.

This seems to reflect the baseline "elbow strike" penalty.

It seems like this clumsy angle thing should affect people with peripheral/normal vision too, as a discrete penalty instead of being folded in.

The difference between -2 and -5 is an extra -3, which seems to be implied as the penalty to attack an unseen foe, even though it's supposed to be -4 from B394...

All I can figure is having a skill cap of 9 is a drawback (+1) which is what changes -4 to -3 ?

The "does not benefit from the +4 to skill from All-Out Attack: Determined" (not sure about Committed Attack, ban the +2 ?) which could be another +1 drawback.... but I imagine it is offset by a -1 technique benefit of "use the more severe penalties of the two" when Wild Swing is combined with Move and Attack (as otherwise you would stack technique penalties w/ maneuver penalties)

Curmudgeon · 01-31-2022, 11:49 PM

For Roman attacking Seth, it's not at all clear that it is an attack from behind. While Seth's feet are positioned so that Roman is to the rear of them, his torso is twisted to his left. Given that Roman appears to be quite a bit to the left of Seth's feet when he starts his attack, it looks like he's in the area that GURPS would call Seth's front arc and thus that Seth saw Roman attacking him. Seth untwists his torso as he ducks, so at that point it becomes an attack from the rear but by that time, it's also moot as Roman is in mid-leap.

As for Batman, given the way he's been written for at least the past sixty years, he probably saw Mercy reflected in Luthor's eyes.

Plane · 02-01-2022, 01:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Curmudgeon

While Seth's feet are positioned so that Roman is to the rear of them, his torso is twisted to his left.

Guess this touches into the whole "is facing your face or your feet" as there doesn't seem to be a way to reflect "my legs aren't oriented to efficiently move in the direction my nose is pointing"

Quote:

Originally Posted by Curmudgeon

Given that Roman appears to be quite a bit to the left of Seth's feet when he starts his attack, it looks like he's in the area that GURPS would call Seth's front arc

they both seem in line with the centre of the ring, if we count Seth as pivoting 60 degrees this might turn this into "an attack from the left" instead of "an attack from the rear" i guess, but I definitely wouldn't place Roman in the "front-left" direction here

Quote:

Originally Posted by Curmudgeon

Seth untwists his torso as he ducks, so at that point it becomes an attack from the rear but by that time, it's also moot as Roman is in mid-leap.

I guess you could argue that you could defend at -2 per the runaround attack rules (it was 'side' when Seth pivoted) except instead of "attacker moved around to a different facing" it's more like "I shifted my facing as the attacker approached".

Quote:

Originally Posted by Curmudgeon

As for Batman, given the way he's been written for at least the past sixty years, he probably saw Mercy reflected in Luthor's eyes.

never thought of that... although you do hear a kind of click so maybe Batman did the "iris sweep" in response to hearing the click?

Not sure if that was meant to be a safety. As a bodyguard she probably keeps safety on in case she tripped and accidentally shot Lex.

Mercy is initially aiming her gun at the ceiling and you hear the click as she lowers it to aim at Batman, can't recall if we have rules for "I walk around with my gun aimed high" as compared to "aimed at the floor".

Another option might be that the click Batman hears is the 1st portion of a double-action weapon cocking the hammer (I can't even see a hammer but it could just be the angle... do some guns have hidden internal hammers?)

If you got hit w/ a Stop/Hit during an "Aim as Attack" and it caused the weapon to misfire that could make the difference between accidentally shooting a chandelier vs accidentally shooting a foot, perhaps?

(HT and Gun-Fu folks regarding Mercy's magazine attaching in front of the trigger instead of behind the trigger within the handle: any idea why this is done and what benefits might be in GURPS terms of each different type of magazine mount design?)

The distinct delay between hammer-cock and hammer-release is too slow for most to react to but Batman has good reflexes, and I'm sure it would help guys like The Flash too. Do we have Hearing Check rules for dealing w/ this?

Someone who pre-cocks their hammers wouldn't have this risk plus could fire quicker with less pressure on the trigger.... also I need to check if HT had rules for half-cocked vs full-cocked hammers

01-31-2022, 10:49 PM	#1
Plane Join Date: Aug 2018	predicting attacks from behind to dodge to backfist unseen predictable foes B326 and B374's basic policy: You may dodge any attack except one that you did not know about B391 clarifies what that means: Against a true attack from behind, no active defense is possible, because the victim did not know the attack was coming A "runaround" is an exception since "by outmaneuvering his victim through sheer speed, the victim does know he’s being attacked". This seems to only apply if it happens in a single second (or maybe single maneuver? can't recall how Decreased Time Rate / Altered Time Rate work w/ this on either end) It doesn't cover how to deal with a kind of "prolonged runaround". IE you know the opponent is behind you, but more than a second has passed since he went back there. For example: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IvSOqd7hZv4 About 2 seconds passes after Roman walks behind Seth to when he attacks Seth from behind, which falls outside normal "Runaround Attack" parameters AFAIK. "Defending Against Attacks from the Back" discusses default (non-Runaround) policy for dodging: "you cannot defend at all unless you have Peripheral Vision" So one explanation for how Seth dodged Roman would be "he has peripheral vision". But what about those who don't? - - - B394's section on Visibility right after the Tactical Combat section. Where it relates to dodging is "defender cannot see his attacker". You are -4 to dodge someone you cannot see, which I assume would stack with the -2 to defend against someoen coming in from the sides/rear for a total of -6? This requires "the defender is aware that he is being attacked" though, so I don't know how you get there. There is a possibility of a Hearing roll to do a parry or block but this does not pertain to dodges. Could you make a hearing roll to establish "I'm aware I'm being attacked" (ie hear footsteps approaching) ? - - - Arguably Seth could not hear Roman due to the crowd though, and if he had Poor Hearing then that roll would be penalized. This raises the question: instead of Hearing-based reactions, what about IQ-based? One way to do that would be to take Danger Sense advantage, but B358 has GMs roll for that only if your normal sense rolls fail. Perception defaults to IQ so it's effectively like an IQ roll unless you buy down your Per attribute. If you've done that, you could alter it w/ "different roll" enhancement to shift Per to IQ. Or even shift that to a skill check like "tactics". Perhaps that reflects Seth Rollins (he taught himself Danger Sense? can you even do that via training like you can with Combat Reflexes?) but I wonder about how to emulate this for people who don't own this advantage. Rather than relying on sensory input (perceiving the data of an incoming attack in progress) I'm wondering about something akin to a tactics roll where you just realize "this guy is probably going to attack me from behind, so I'll duck just in case". This is easy to do since Seth knows Roman very well (knows he likes to do Superman punches), and has observed his tactics of late being below-the-belt (low blows, attacks from behind, grabbing tights, etc) This type of prediction would be harder with others, who you might not know well enough not just to know IF they would attack you from behind, but also WHEN and HOW. - - AFAIK a Tactics roll seems the best guideline but I don't know how you would apply this. If someone you're aware of (you just walked past them and bumped shoulders) is behind you and might launch and attack, what sort of roll (or maybe contest?) would make sense to conclude "you should duck 1 second later" or "you should duck 2 seconds later" for reacting to a rear attack as Seth did to Roman? I imagine Batman might use a combination of a hearing check (hears someone walking behind him, and then pausing and lifting a weapon) along with some IQ/tactics type stuff when he responds to Mercy here with a backfist https://youtu.be/jGLJN9doJpw Guessing per B358's "comprehension check" that "This roll is against IQ for details that anyone could figure out, or against an appropriate skill if the significance would be lost on anyone but an expert." that Batman would sub something akin to Tactics, or maybe a Firearm skill? returning to B394, if you got a good enough MoS in your Hearing roll (you perceive to the exact hex where an unseen foe is standing, ie behind you sharing your hex) this probably is "knows his location for sure" where you can attack an invisible foe at only -4 to hit. A slight MoS in the hearing roll might be more vague (I know someone is in my hex, but not where within that hex) so you know they're in Reach of a punch but maybe you have to roll at -6 to hit? - - - MA67's Back Strike says to use MA71's "Elbow Strike" technique for a "back punch, just as MA71 notes that elbow strikes to the front use a standard 'punch' technique. This is -2 to hit... which is what you would roll if you had 360 degree vision, so it probably stacks with the -4 to hit someone you can't see for a total of -6 to hit? In the end this would end up being worse than "Wild Swing" (B388) though because that's "the worse of" vision penalties (-4 to hit) or -5 ... though it has the advantage of being able to taret hit locations (extra -1) and no skill cap of 9... This is something I could see getting reworked and broken up. - - - The baseline rule affecting everyone that you cuold split off would be how it works for 360 degree vision guys: attacks to the back and opposite side at -2 due to the clumsy angle of attack. This seems to reflect the baseline "elbow strike" penalty. It seems like this clumsy angle thing should affect people with peripheral/normal vision too, as a discrete penalty instead of being folded in. The difference between -2 and -5 is an extra -3, which seems to be implied as the penalty to attack an unseen foe, even though it's supposed to be -4 from B394... All I can figure is having a skill cap of 9 is a drawback (+1) which is what changes -4 to -3 ? The "does not benefit from the +4 to skill from All-Out Attack: Determined" (not sure about Committed Attack, ban the +2 ?) which could be another +1 drawback.... but I imagine it is offset by a -1 technique benefit of "use the more severe penalties of the two" when Wild Swing is combined with Move and Attack (as otherwise you would stack technique penalties w/ maneuver penalties)

01-31-2022, 11:49 PM	#2
Curmudgeon Join Date: Sep 2011	Re: predicting attacks from behind to dodge to backfist unseen predictable foes For Roman attacking Seth, it's not at all clear that it is an attack from behind. While Seth's feet are positioned so that Roman is to the rear of them, his torso is twisted to his left. Given that Roman appears to be quite a bit to the left of Seth's feet when he starts his attack, it looks like he's in the area that *GURPS* would call Seth's front arc and thus that Seth saw Roman attacking him. Seth untwists his torso as he ducks, so at that point it becomes an attack from the rear but by that time, it's also moot as Roman is in mid-leap. As for Batman, given the way he's been written for at least the past sixty years, he probably saw Mercy reflected in Luthor's eyes.