Spear vs Knights... am I missing something?

[Kromm]

Originally Posted by Plane

Is that done purely w/ Binding or could you also do something w/ Modifying ST-based damage to add Area Effect to your melee attack and it buffs not just your punches but your grapples?

It's done by fiat: If the monster gets into your hex, you're overrun and pinned. So, don't let that happen. Monster abilities on the dungeon side of the system aren't "built" using character abilities . . . they just work, fair or not.

[Varyon]

Originally Posted by Kromm

It's done by fiat: If the monster gets into your hex, you're overrun and pinned. So, don't let that happen. Monster abilities on the dungeon side of the system aren't "built" using character abilities . . . they just work, fair or not.

In theory, something like Binding with Aura (perhaps alongside an Innate Attack Aura, for the corrosive effect of being digested once grapple) might work if you wanted to build a DF-style slime as a character (as a PC, or perhaps an Ally/summon)... but that's a pretty significant tangent that should probably go in its own thread.

[Kromm]

Originally Posted by RGTraynor

My concept of knight is "someone who is a knight." GURPS not having character classes, the distinction is entirely social. Sure, people get knighted for brave deeds, but they also get knighted for service, for donating large sums to the crown (see Multi-Millionaire Guy above), for many reasons good or ill ... not to mention those cultures with the concept of hereditary knighthood. The rich guy might never have been within ten yards of a lance, never mind picking up Lance skill.

That's pretty much it.

This is an area of history of which I'm fairly aware due to my late father being a lifelong historian: As a young fantasy gamer, I was convinced that knights were all a bunch of armored hard men who dominated the battlefield. My father took the time to explain how the majority were more analogous to the upper middle class people across town who had bigger houses and cars, paying others to do things for them, and how that started not when the crown took to knighting rock stars, or even when gunpowder began to make knights obsolete, but rather during the reign of Henry I of England (1100-1135).

I was a bit disappointed at the time. ;)

Originally Posted by Rupert

If you want a really scary knight, try William Marshall. Way up the list of people you'd not want to mess with.

Yeah, I think he's one of the archetypes of the fighting knight among those who are into HEMA and such. Said archetype usually get romanticized with a dash of Arthurian chivalry in RPGs. Marshall was storied to a great extent for actually being good at fighting himself, which was noteworthy even at the time . . . a bit of an exception that proves the rule.

[Kromm]

Originally Posted by Varyon

In theory, something like Binding with Aura (perhaps alongside an Innate Attack Aura, for the corrosive effect of being digested once grapple) might work if you wanted to build a DF-style slime as a character (as a PC, or perhaps an Ally/summon)... but that's a pretty significant tangent that should probably go in its own thread.

Most fiat monster abilities could be built with enough effort. We just don't want writers spending their time and our money on that, nor do we want to have to edit the resulting walls of stats. It might be old school, but we're pretty serious about "Monsters aren't meant to be playable characters, so who really cares?" Builds are left as an exercise for those who disagree and do, in fact, care.

I'd probably start with Binding modified with Area Effect and Emanation. You'll likely need lots of other modifiers to let Binding pin, keep the effect on at all times, etc. As with most monster abilities, I suspect that after you've applied all the conventional modifiers, you'll hit some bit that unavoidably demands some form of Cosmic, though.

[Fred Brackin]

Originally Posted by Kromm

It's done by fiat:.

Note that in some extreme situations it's going to need to be adjusted by fiat. If Mr. Goo tries this on Nyx the Barbarian who has ST 22, a Flaming Weapon, Flaming Armor and a Flaming Shield (yeah, she had Pyromania) it's not going to work nearly as well.

The actual "goo monster" story from that game was when Aldehar the Incendiary stuck his Staff into one and triggered an Explosive Fireball. I fiated that the monster did indeed take 3x damage for an internal explosion but everyone else got "hot goo" damage for 50%.

[Varyon]

Originally Posted by Kromm

Most fiat monster abilities could be built with enough effort. We just don't want writers spending their time and our money on that, nor do we want to have to edit the resulting walls of stats. It might be old school, but we're pretty serious about "Monsters aren't meant to be playable characters, so who really cares?" Builds are left as an exercise for those who disagree and do, in fact, care.

I'd probably start with Binding modified with Area Effect and Emanation. You'll likely need lots of other modifiers to let Binding pin, keep the effect on at all times, etc. As with most monster abilities, I suspect that after you've applied all the conventional modifiers, you'll hit some bit that unavoidably demands some form of Cosmic, though.

Using Technical Grappling (or, more appropriately, Fantastic Dungeon Grappling), I believe a "pin" is simply "apply enough Control the target drops to DX 0*," and Binding applies Control rather than functioning as a pseudograpple (although I think you need an Enhancement to let it build Control over time, rather than applying its maximum immediately). You could also use the guidelines for "Swallow Whole" from FDG8; I'd be inclined to treat a character with an engulfing body and such a Binding Aura (I think Emanation requires an action, while this seems like it would be passive, and Area Effect is problematic in that I think the engulfing should require the slime to be in physical contact with the target, not just within x yards) as functionally having something like Born Biter 5 (their entire body is a mouth), allowing the slime to "swallow" anything up to their SM +1 (so an SM -1 slime could spread over and cover a human, eventually suffocating them... although it needs Lifting ST at least equal to the target's to cover them, and at least equal to twice the target's to suffocate them, again making ST useful for the hapless adventurer being slimed).

*Which is actually impossible for foes with DX 13+, although extending the table - -14 to DX at 2.5xControlMax, -16 to DX at 3xControlMax, etc, for an additional -2 to DX per +0.5 to the multiplier - wouldn't be out of the question.

[Gnome]

Regarding "finesse" fighters, GURPS actually makes it pretty easy to make that work, and to avoid needing ST for just about anything.

If you're worried about surprise attacks or traps, buy Perception, Peripheral Vision and Danger Sense.

If you don't want to get grappled or slammed, parry--GURPS is extremely generous about letting you parry just about anything.

If you don't want to be in close combat, step out of close combat (and stay away from corners, fight back-to back with allies, etc., use good tactics). It's actually quite difficult to force someone into close combat who doesn't want to be there.

You don't need DR and HP if you never get hit because you parry everything!

If you don't want a goo monster in your hex, retreat out of the hex when it enters, then whack it with a stick until it's dead (or maybe hope your wizard blows it up--you do need magic for some things, but being strong certainly isn't helping anyone damage a Diffuse entity).


And notice that none of this actually requires a high DX! If anything, DX is overpriced in GURPS as a combat ability (it's great if you're interested in doing other things with it, like circus performance, stage magic, thievery, etc.).
The issue is that melee weapon skill is underpriced (for low tech games where melee combat is a significant factor). It gives you everything you need in one, cheap package.

Don't get me wrong, ST fighters can be awesome, but if they don't invest in high skill first, their attacks get parried, their defenses aren't good enough, and they get stabbed in the eye by higher skill enemies.


Also, it's a bit ironic that people are talking about DFRPG's Giant Spiders and their webs in the context of DX fighters vs. ST fighters when you can avoid those webs with...DX! (according to what's written in the Monsters book)

That said, in DF I generally work hard to make ST matter, to make everyone's abilities matter, and in a world of high fantasy that's definitely possible. But that's just it--I have to work hard to make everyone's abilities matter, but I also have to work hard to make high weapon skill not dominate everything. I never have to worry that a PC didn't get their money's worth out of high skill.

[DouglasCole]

Originally Posted by Varyon

Using Technical Grappling (or, more appropriately, Fantastic Dungeon Grappling), I believe a "pin" is simply "apply enough Control the target drops to DX 0*,"

Very true in FDG, though "low enough to not be able to roll" happens at "whatever you're rolling drops below 3" unless said roll is a defense roll, which I believe can be attempted no matter what the effective skill.

and Binding applies Control rather than functioning as a pseudograpple (although I think you need an Enhancement to let it build Control over time, rather than applying its maximum immediately).

Yah, with control points, binding effects ARE grappling effects.

You could also use the guidelines for "Swallow Whole" from FDG8; I'd be inclined to treat a character with an engulfing body and such a Binding Aura (I think Emanation requires an action, while this seems like it would be passive, and Area Effect is problematic in that I think the engulfing should require the slime to be in physical contact with the target, not just within x yards) as functionally having something like Born Biter 5 (their entire body is a mouth), allowing the slime to "swallow" anything up to their SM +1 (so an SM -1 slime could spread over and cover a human, eventually suffocating them... although it needs Lifting ST at least equal to the target's to cover them, and at least equal to twice the target's to suffocate them, again making ST useful for the hapless adventurer being slimed).

Engulfing came up enough in creating the Bestiary monsters that I defined it explicitly:

Originally Posted by Nordlondr Bestiary, p. 6

Engulfng Attack. The creature’s attack surrounds and
encapsulates the victim. The maximum Size Modifer for
this attack is always listed. Engulfng attacks do double their
usual Control Points the frst time they hit a target. After
the frst hit, such attacks may worry for additional effect as
a free action, but Control Points are not doubled. Victims
may attempt to break free normally by making a grappling
attack. Cutting through an engulfng attack to free the
target is possible, but any such attack has a 9 or less chance
of doing the same damage to the victim!

Originally Posted by Nordlondr Bestiary, p. 7

Swallow Whole. A creature with Swallow Whole can
swallow prey four or more SM less than it once it has
applied Control Points equal to or greater than the Control
Maximum. This may be in one bite or represent grappling
a creature with limbs until they’re restrained enough to
stuff into a gullet. Swallowed creatures begin to suffocate
(Exploits, p. 70); the creature doing the swallowing may
worry for half its usual thrust damage as Control Points
as a free action. To escape, you must grapple your way
out against Control DR equal to the creature’s ST/5. You
may also cut your way out by delivering successful attacks
totaling more than HP+DR injury! On the plus side, internal
injuries count as vitals hits, and creatures cannot defend
with their esophagus or stomach! (Unless they can. Ewww.)

*Which is actually impossible for foes with DX 13+, although extending the table - -14 to DX at 2.5xControlMax, -16 to DX at 3xControlMax, etc, for an additional -2 to DX per +0.5 to the multiplier - wouldn't be out of the question.

It would not be out of the question! We limited it because even at DX 20 you're dealing with one success in four at that point, and GURPS combat is quite rough enough on a turn-by-turn basis. You can also SPEND control points to actively restrict your foe's squirming, and then re-attack to re-apply.

If you have a critter whose ability to apply control is capped at 30, but a victim whose Control Maximum is (say) 10, if the attacker has 30 CP on the target, they're at -12 to DX passively, but if they try anything, the grapply creature can spend up to 10 CP to apply up to an additional -10 to DX for that action, and still not limit the base passive -12. Then on their turn, they might be able to worry for free-action CP, or attack to increase, and "oh no you didn't!" bank gets refilled.

[RGTraynor]

Originally Posted by Kromm

This is an area of history of which I'm fairly aware due to my late father being a lifelong historian: As a young fantasy gamer, I was convinced that knights were all a bunch of armored hard men who dominated the battlefield. My father took the time to explain how the majority were more analogous to the upper middle class people across town who had bigger houses and cars, paying others to do things for them, and how that started not when the crown took to knighting rock stars, or even when gunpowder began to make knights obsolete, but rather during the reign of Henry I of England (1100-1135).

Absolutely. Heck, though it's out of the realm of "medieval," for those of you unaware, my namedropping Sir Walter Scott was ironic in context: the whole notion of "baronets" comes because James I wanted to boost the Crown's coffers, and sold 200 baronetcies with the stipulation that the grantees would maintain a few dozen soldiers at their own expense. The titles were hereditary, and the holders' eldest sons were automatically knighted.

Now sure, as Varyon says, anyone can decide that a "knight" must be a skilled warrior in their own settings. I just don't imagine that the vast majority of settings will be any more immune to politics, rent-seeking, money grubbing, entrenched groups or other chicanery than our culture is.

[Varyon]

Originally Posted by DouglasCole

Very true in FDG, though "low enough to not be able to roll" happens at "whatever you're rolling drops below 3" unless said roll is a defense roll, which I believe can be attempted no matter what the effective skill.

I had thought there was a rule somewhere in GURPS that a character reduced to DX 0 (or ST 0 for that matter) can't really do much, regardless of skill. So, someone with DX 12 and Wrestling at DX+10 who is affected by 2xMaxControl is helpless, while someone with DX 13 and Wrestling at DX+9 (so the same net Wrestling skill of 22) would be able to use Wrestling at 10. Of course, I'd honestly be fine with just using skill - someone with DX 10 and Wrestling at DX+12 would similarly be able to use Wrestling at 10 while under 2xMaxControl, in spite of formally having DX at -2.

Originally Posted by DouglasCole

Engulfing came up enough in creating the Bestiary monsters that I defined it explicitly

Out of curiosity, is there are reason you went from "Swallow Whole at MaxControl+, Suffocate while Swallowed Whole at 2xMaxControl+" in TDG to simply "Swallow Whole and Suffocate at MaxControl+" in the Bestiary? I mean, I guess it makes sense that a swallowed creature wouldn't be able to breathe, but I had considered being Swallowed Whole at less than 2xMaxControl to represent being partially swallowed.

Originally Posted by DouglasCole

It would not be out of the question! We limited it because even at DX 20 you're dealing with one success in four at that point, and GURPS combat is quite rough enough on a turn-by-turn basis. You can also SPEND control points to actively restrict your foe's squirming, and then re-attack to re-apply.

It just seems weird that having DX 13+ (and/or skill 15+) means you cannot be passively (that is, without your captor spending Control) prevented from struggling, while having DX 12- (and/or skill 14-) means you can. More just a conceptual issue than something likely to cause problems at the table, honestly.

Originally Posted by RGTraynor

Now sure, as Varyon says, anyone can decide that a "knight" must be a skilled warrior in their own settings. I just don't imagine that the vast majority of settings will be any more immune to politics, rent-seeking, money grubbing, entrenched groups or other chicanery than our culture is.

Agreed. Indeed, one DF setting I came up with (for some test characters) had knighthoods and noble titles explicitly available for the wealthy to purchase. An important part of two test characters' backgrounds was that their fathers had conspired to get them together to unite the two families - the woman's family was noble but was struggling a bit with their wealth; the man's (mercantile) family had better finances but were commoners. While technically the latter could have purchased a non-hereditary title for his son (which was the minimum the man needed to be legally allowed to marry a noblewoman), doing so would have liquidated too much of his assets (roughly putting the two families on roughly equal grounds, and thus standing nothing to gain by uniting them), so the man opted to go into military service to try to earn a knighthood and associated title (again, non-hereditary, but the woman's title was hereditary). It... ah, it didn't quite work out.

A setting where all knights are actually elite warriors is arguably rather unrealistic, but at the least you could have one where that's true for most of them.