Committed Attack - two steps and standing up

[Anders]

Originally Posted by Kromm

My only request is that people don't use "wrong" when they mean "ambiguous."

And that we serve you warm sake. :)

[Peter V. Dell'Orto]

Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth

I think the actual wording of Committed Attack is completely incompatible with Peter's version. There's nothing about +1 yard in it.

Take a PC with Move 1-10 and have him Attack. He can step 1 yard.

Have that same guy do a Committed Attack. He can step 2 yards. 2 yards is equal to 1+1. Therefore, when this guy does a Committed Attack, he's getting +1 yard of movement. And per Kromm's post, you can't do the stand-from-kneeling and then step a yard thing that the OP was asking about. Which I also said was the case.

I'm straining to see the total incompatibility, here.

[The Benj]

It's not ambiguous, it just didn't mean what you intended. Errata is a good idea.

[Kromm]

My point is that "step is a different class of rules objects from all other movement, and can be traded in for other things" is incorrect.

Step is literally nothing more than a movement allowance – it's the distance you can move and still do a certain subset of maneuvers. It's in the exact same category as "none" (e.g., Do Nothing), "half your Move" (e.g., All-Out Attack), and "full Move" (e.g., Move); it fits in between "none" and "half your Move." And just as sprinting during a Move maneuver can add 20% to "full Move," Committed Attack can add 100% to "step." Nothing forbids adjustments to these allowances to smooth out the range of options some.

It is the property of maneuvers that give "step" as their movement allowance that you can instead change between certain postures. However, that is a property of those maneuvers. It isn't intrinsic in "step" and it doesn't mean that each unit of "step" can be traded for another such posture change.

The idea that "step" can be traded this way – that it's an object different from "half Move" or "full Move" – is interesting but also the source of the confusion surrounding Committed Attack. Committed Attack itself isn't especially troublesome; the issue is in applying the unorthodox reading of "step" to it. Rewording it as giving +100% to "step" would help to erase this odd interpretation.

As it happens, the idea of "step" as a more action-point like thing that you can possibly have more than one of, and that can be "spent" for posture changes (instead of having Change Posture at all), retreats, and other forms of mobility, intrigues me. It has merit. But it really, truly isn't part of GURPS Fourth Edition.

[McAllister]

Originally Posted by The Benj

It's not ambiguous, it just didn't mean what you intended. Errata is a good idea.

As Supreme Court Justice John Robert said, “People can disagree in good faith on this issue.”

Then again, if I bristle at being called a rules lawyer, I don't think quoting the Supreme Court is really helping my case...

Anyway, thank you, Kromm & Peter, for clarifying the intent, and thank you, other people, for helping establish how it is/can be read.

[Ulzgoroth]

Originally Posted by Peter V. Dell'Orto

Take a PC with Move 1-10 and have him Attack. He can step 1 yard.

Have that same guy do a Committed Attack. He can step 2 yards. 2 yards is equal to 1+1. Therefore, when this guy does a Committed Attack, he's getting +1 yard of movement. And per Kromm's post, you can't do the stand-from-kneeling and then step a yard thing that the OP was asking about. Which I also said was the case.

I'm straining to see the total incompatibility, here.

Because, of course, not all characters have Move 1-10 and thus some have a step that is not 1 yard. You said they should get one additional yard, not two, but Committed Attack doesn't say anything about one yard. An extra step frequently is the same as an extra yard of step, but they have quite different meanings.

[Peter V. Dell'Orto]

Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth

Because, of course, not all characters have Move 1-10 and thus some have a step that is not 1 yard. You said they should get one additional yard, not two, but Committed Attack doesn't say anything about one yard. An extra step frequently is the same as an extra yard of step, but they have quite different meanings.

Unlike Kromm, my postings generally are not exhaustive explanations of all cases of rules and all effects on those cases. This was one of those not-exhaustive posts. It's not incorrect, it's just not complete for all cases.

[Peter V. Dell'Orto]

Let me go just a bit further:

If you showed up to one of my DF Felltower sessions and did a Committed Attack, expecting the Step portion to work like Sean describes here, nothing in my game or my ruling would surprise you or be in any practical way different from that. This is also why I bristle at the charge of incompatibility. It's 100% compatible.

[the_matrix_walker]

Originally Posted by Kromm

My point is that "step is a different class of rules objects from all other movement, and can be traded in for other things" is incorrect.

Also contributing to the confusion may be the Chambara ability to trade an Extra Attack for a Step, as well as the Giant Step allowing you to spend a fatigue for an extra step. That does set step apart from all other movement.

For the record, I try to be a rules "lawyer", as well as a rules "medium" and attempt to take the letter and spirit of the RAW into account.

I don't think it is at all unreasonable that I, and others, came to the conclusion that we did. In my mind, our misinterpretation of the letter of the rules seems more appropriate than what what has been revealed about the spirit.

It seems natural to me that if a character makes a step and attack, and uses that step to legally change positions, that he could use Extra Effort to step again, or if using chambara, could still trade Extra Attacks for steps.

[Erling]

Least of all I wished to set off some kind of grudge.

Actually I was hopeful that "two steps" allow stand up & move, as I believe that GURPS penalizes kneeling too much while making it only valid posture for picking up objects, and "Committed" concept could be a good compromise for both movement and readying (if Committed Attack really allowed two action point-like Steps, it would be a good base for homemade Committed Ready and even Committed Move maneuvers).

The wording is really ambiguous, but I didn't want to offend someone. It's kinda one of the reasons for why these forums exist - for discussing issues like this.