Combat Character Knowledge

[Kuu]

In GURPS, is it immediately obvious for a combatant to know what maneuver their opponent has taken? For example, should a combatant be aware that they were just All-Out Attacked (strong), and not just Attacked or Committed Attacked?

Such information can become crucial in combat; for example, if one knows that an opponent has All-Out Attacked them, it becomes trivial to bash their brains out with an All-Out Telegraphic Attack. I imagine that one would get more information if one is Evaluating or not directly threatened at the moment...

So, my question is as follows: How much information should a GM give to players about their opponent's actions? If anyone could point me to some sort of mechanic for determining such combat knowledge, it would be much appreciated.

[zoncxs]

I would describe the action with some detail, and make a Per based combat roll for the PC in secret to see if they are able to notice if they should attack all out or not.

my example:

NPC barbarian with shield and axe does all out attack strong aimed at the PC's head.

GM - The Barbaric warrior charges forward, leading with his shield, then swipes it away as he over hands his axe, swinging it down aimed at your head as hard as he could...

...*GM rolls a per based combat roll using the PC's best combat skill, if it succeeds*...

GM - ...his shield arm is way out as his weapon arm arcs over at you, his face jagged and teeth gritted, and his arm is stiff as it falls down. His legs are digging into the ground for more leverage.

...*if it failed then I would not give that info*...

[kenclary]

Opponent's maneuver choice is generally obvious. I recall that Kromm has said that only Feint is secret, though rules options in Martial Arts can make even that unneeded. There have been a few threads discussing this, one of them somewhat recently.

For example, that it is obvious is exactly what makes AOA risky.

Tactical Shooting has "Situational Awareness" options that give rules for noticing things in combat that you are not focussing on already.

[vierasmarius]

Kromm has stated in the past that All-Out actions are immediately obvious to other combatants, at least to the extent of knowing they took an All-Out Attack or Defense (so maybe not necessarily which kind). Committed or Defensive Attack I'm less sure of, since they don't involve completely forgoing a defense or attack. In borderline cases, I'd allow combatants and observers to make a roll based on Hoplology or their highest combat skill, with bonuses for things like Style Familiarity or taking the Evaluate maneuver, and possibly penalties for less "obvious" opponent maneuvers.

[starslayer]

Were I to run a game with this sort of detail, I might allow for a feint to be part of a combination or multi-strike with the specific connotation of 'if successful enemies will believe I just all out attacked'. Otherwise I agree that all out attack is going to be pretty obvious if only for the mathematical 'moves so quickly that they were able to hit twice in the same unit of time it should have required to hit once'

[Polydamas]

Originally Posted by Kuu

In GURPS, is it immediately obvious for a combatant to know what maneuver their opponent has taken? For example, should a combatant be aware that they were just All-Out Attacked (strong), and not just Attacked or Committed Attacked?

The combat rules assume that in close combat everyone knows everyone else's choice of Manoeuvre (unless it is a Feint ... there is a bit of overlap between Wait and Evaluate as well). You can use the situational awareness rules from Tactical Shooting in complicated situations.

[Kuu]

Thank you for your responses. I will try to find that Kromm quote that you guys mentioned.

Hmm... The problem I'm having, I think, is that if an All-Out Attack is automatically identified, the maneuver is suicide in practically all combat situations. I understand that it's the intent, yes, but it also feels strange that the defender is able to precisely capitalize on the attacker's opening and end the battle immediately with a blow to the neck or skull. That level of situational awareness and responsiveness just doesn't seem right to me, especially not at lower skill levels.

Of course, I know nothing about real combat, much less been in one. Therefore, I would appreciate it if someone could tell me whether real combats punish All-Out Attacks (or their real-life equivalents) as severely as GURPS does.

Thank you.

[Maz]

If you are indeed fighting low skill people, then the response to an AOA isn't automatically that deadly.

Let's say a skill of 10. Even with telegraphic they still be reduced to skill:9 vs face/neck and assuming average ST that doesn't guarantee a "kill" at all. Choosing to also AOA himself, the low skill char can get up to 13 vs face/neck and even skill:11 vs skull. But that's pretty Damn risky. If you do not get your "kill" your going to die yourself.

And that's not even including wearing big armour.

[kenclary]

Originally Posted by Kuu

Therefore, I would appreciate it if someone could tell me whether real combats punish All-Out Attacks (or their real-life equivalents) as severely as GURPS does.

An AOA usually represents something like throwing caution to the wind, dropping your guard, and lunging forward. This is generally pretty obvious, at least to a fighter with any real experience.

Look at the Untrained Fighters box on MA p. 113. When using an option like that, untrained fighters (who aren't running away) will only AOA or AOD. Furthermore, they do so randomly, meaning they won't be tactically responding to an opponent's maneuver choice, in practice.

(That box also gives a pretty good definition for meaningful combat experience, thus what level you need to be at to usefully recognize someone else's AOA and respond to it.)

[Peter Knutsen]

Originally Posted by Kuu

So, my question is as follows: How much information should a GM give to players about their opponent's actions? If anyone could point me to some sort of mechanic for determining such combat knowledge, it would be much appreciated.

I think it's safe to err on the side of generosity here, and say that any character who has just 1 CP in any one non-Art non-Sport melee-weapon or unarmed combat skill, can know this instantly and infallibly (barring various Feint or Trickery mechanical options used).

It seems to me as if it is one of the very first things you learn.