Steve Jackson Games - Site Navigation
Home General Info Follow Us Search Illuminator Store Forums What's New Other Games Ogre GURPS Munchkin Our Games: Home

Go Back   Steve Jackson Games Forums > Roleplaying > GURPS

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 07-27-2009, 08:01 AM   #11
jacobmuller
 
jacobmuller's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Not in your time zone:D
Default Re: Instant Counterattack

Quote:
Originally Posted by Crispythemighty View Post
Why can't you just say that Counterattack or Judo Throw can only be used against the last target you've parried?
Nice. So, if 4 wanted to judo throw 1, his response, to 2, should be a dodge.
Also, the penalty for a second parry with the same weapon/hand starts @ -4.
__________________
"Sanity is a bourgeois meme." Exegeek
PS sorry I'm a Parthian shootist: shiftwork + out of country = not here when you are:/
It's all in the reflexes

Last edited by jacobmuller; 07-27-2009 at 02:22 PM. Reason: got my books out
jacobmuller is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-27-2009, 08:35 AM   #12
kenclary
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Default Re: Instant Counterattack

A possibly much simpler solution:

As a variation of Aggressive Parry, you can Grapple the attacking limb with grappling-skill parry - 1. For -2, you can grapple the offending hand/foot. Now, ignore existing throw/lock off a parry rules, and just do the throw on your next attack, assuming you've maintained the grapple. If you let go to use your arm elsewhere, or your opponent escaped the grapple in the intermediate time, then you've lost the grapple...

Last edited by kenclary; 07-27-2009 at 08:44 AM.
kenclary is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-27-2009, 09:27 AM   #13
Extrarius
 
Extrarius's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Psionic Ward
Default Re: Instant Counterattack

The really, really simple explanation is that the turn-based combat is a gross approximation to the real combat. Real combat doesn't consist of individual moves taken in sequence, and, in reality, only a knowledgeable person can easily draw a line between where one action ends and the next starts. Additionally, multiple rolls don't have to represent separate actions or separate motions, and can instead represent taking full advantage of a single motion. Unfortunately, turn order necessarily influences the mechanical resolution of a combat turn, but all four turns in a four-combatant fight occur simultaneously over a single second. The strict turn order imposed by the game rules is almost entirely a game simplification.
Extrarius is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-27-2009, 12:00 PM   #14
SuedodeuS
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Default Re: Instant Counterattack

Quote:
Originally Posted by Crispythemighty View Post
Why can't you just say that Counterattack or Judo Throw can only be used against the last target you've parried?
I think that makes Counterattack and Judo Throw much less useful against multiple foes than they should be. When you have two guys swinging swords at you, it should be possible to parry the first, take advantage of the opening to cut him open, then parry the second. With two guys punching at you, you should be able to catch the first's arm and throw him into the second - before the second pulls a punch off.

Quote:
Originally Posted by kenclary View Post
A possibly much simpler solution:

As a variation of Aggressive Parry, you can Grapple the attacking limb with grappling-skill parry - 1. For -2, you can grapple the offending hand/foot. Now, ignore existing throw/lock off a parry rules, and just do the throw on your next attack, assuming you've maintained the grapple. If you let go to use your arm elsewhere, or your opponent escaped the grapple in the intermediate time, then you've lost the grapple...
That could work for Judo Throw, although the "grapple" involved there generally isn't one that can be maintained - it's a quick grab to let you throw the enemy, so modeling it as a grapple probably isn't that great. It's also a bit too restrictive.
The main problem with it, however, is that it only addresses Judo Throw. I can't think of a way to modify it so it works for Counterattack.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Extrarius View Post
The really, really simple explanation is that the turn-based combat is a gross approximation to the real combat. Real combat doesn't consist of individual moves taken in sequence, and, in reality, only a knowledgeable person can easily draw a line between where one action ends and the next starts. Additionally, multiple rolls don't have to represent separate actions or separate motions, and can instead represent taking full advantage of a single motion. Unfortunately, turn order necessarily influences the mechanical resolution of a combat turn, but all four turns in a four-combatant fight occur simultaneously over a single second. The strict turn order imposed by the game rules is almost entirely a game simplification.
The strictness is certainly a simplification, but the fact that there is an order is not. When you are attacked by two different people, one of them is going to attack before the other (unless they've coordinated their attack). There is a staggering of action, but it isn't as strict - nor as pronounced - as it must be in a game setting. When an enemy parries an attack after parrying one of yours, he really is parrying an attack that occurred after yours did.
__________________
Quos deus vult perdere, prius dementat.
Latin: Those whom a god wishes to destroy, he first drives mad.
SuedodeuS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-27-2009, 12:20 PM   #15
Crispythemighty
 
Crispythemighty's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Greenville, SC
Default Re: Instant Counterattack

Quote:
Originally Posted by SuedodeuS View Post
I think that makes Counterattack and Judo Throw much less useful against multiple foes than they should be. When you have two guys swinging swords at you, it should be possible to parry the first, take advantage of the opening to cut him open, then parry the second. With two guys punching at you, you should be able to catch the first's arm and throw him into the second - before the second pulls a punch off.
I don't see how, really. The skills can only be used against one foe on the next turn either way. If all attacks take place in a single second and two attacks come at you in that single second your attendance is either split between the attacks or focused on one and then the other. So saying you can only get the advantage of Counterattack or Judo Throw against the "last" attacker makes physical sense and seems fair.

But if you want the ability to choose which attacker you counter then use RAW.
__________________
"Education is not the filling of a pail, but the lighting of a fire." -William Butler Yeats

Cracked Dice Entertainment

Last edited by Crispythemighty; 07-27-2009 at 12:21 PM. Reason: clarification
Crispythemighty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-27-2009, 02:20 PM   #16
Dinadon
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Default Re: Instant Counterattack

Quote:
Originally Posted by SuedodeuS View Post
The strictness is certainly a simplification, but the fact that there is an order is not. When you are attacked by two different people, one of them is going to attack before the other (unless they've coordinated their attack). There is a staggering of action, but it isn't as strict - nor as pronounced - as it must be in a game setting. When an enemy parries an attack after parrying one of yours, he really is parrying an attack that occurred after yours did.
The fact A goes, then B goes, then C goes doesn't mean that A's attack on C has to be before B's, only that you resolve A's before B's. There will always be timing idiosynchronies, but the main point is that combat should be described after action, not during.

The fact 4 uses Judo Throw on 1 could imply that 2's and 3's attacks both happened just before 4's parry against 1.

Or perhaps the parry against 2 actually reflects the fact 4 kept his hand on 1 as 1 went to parry 3. 1 could have been too worried about 3 to shake 4 off.
Dinadon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-27-2009, 02:30 PM   #17
DouglasCole
Doctor of GURPS Ballistics
 
DouglasCole's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Lakeville, MN
Default Re: Instant Counterattack

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dinadon View Post
The fact A goes, then B goes, then C goes doesn't mean that A's attack on C has to be before B's, only that you resolve A's before B's. There will always be timing idiosynchronies, but the main point is that combat should be described after action, not during.
The only issue with this is that I don't think it's universally true. If any of the attacks were strikes, and if they were successful, injury and shock are instantly applied. So the order of striking DOES matter, and we can only get so far with the "it's all simultaneous" argument, even though that's one of my favorite dodges against strict causality here.
__________________
My blog:Gaming Ballistic, LLC
My Store: Gaming Ballistic on Shopify
My Patreon: Gaming Ballistic on Patreon
DouglasCole is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-27-2009, 03:46 PM   #18
Extrarius
 
Extrarius's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Psionic Ward
Default Re: Instant Counterattack

Quote:
Originally Posted by DouglasCole View Post
The only issue with this is that I don't think it's universally true. If any of the attacks were strikes, and if they were successful, injury and shock are instantly applied. So the order of striking DOES matter, and we can only get so far with the "it's all simultaneous" argument, even though that's one of my favorite dodges against strict causality here.
The order matters because of the mechanics, which offer a simplification of reality. It is entirely possible to make a house rule that removes strict ordering as much as possible - for example, change combat to have three phases: 'declarations' where all participants state their chosen course of action, 'resolution' where all rolls are made etc, and 'application' where the consequences of the actions begin. This would require more rules to handle transient conditions (being in range for a part of a second, etc), but it would allow you to do things like choose which attack you apply your best parry towards (since you know two attacks are coming, and since shock penalties etc don't start until the application phase, you can reorder the attack resolutions as necessary)
Extrarius is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-27-2009, 04:10 PM   #19
Mailanka
 
Mailanka's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Eindhoven, the Netherlands
Default Re: Instant Counterattack

I think Dinadon and Exterius have it right. GURPS has 1-second timing, which means they're precisely one second between whatever Judoka 4 did last turn, and him flinging attacker 1 in the example. You could easily interpret that as a flurry of punches and parry/side-steps while the Judoka sees a dozen opportunities for a throw, and exploits one when its his turn. You might even describe the throw set into motion instantly after attacker 1 attacks, but won't be "finalized" and made irreversible until the roll on character 4's turn (ie, he's put his hand on the guy and shifted his weight, but if attacker 2 floors the Judoka first, that attack-motion won't mean anything, anymore than setting up a punch (a counter attack) after parrying someone's punch necessarily means its going to connect).
Mailanka is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-27-2009, 06:01 PM   #20
SuedodeuS
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Default Re: Instant Counterattack

On only countering the final attacker: I don't like this. Although it does have some basis in reality it seems slightly arbitrary and, most importantly, I think it would detract from fun. Being able to toss the guy you just parried into another guy is fun. Hearing "no, you can't do that because someone else attacked you after he did" isn't so fun. There's also balance - I think this sort of restriction would make the Counterattack option much less useful than it should be.

On turn order: I'm perfectly fine with the way turn order currently functions. I don't think a system like what Extrarius has suggested would be very fun to game out in personal-scale combat (although it would work for, say, spaceship combat). The current turn order does result in some unfortunate disconnects, such as the timing of Counterattacks, and I'm just trying to address that here. Any justification I come up with doesn't jive with the way turn order works, so rather than changing turn order, I'd like to change Counterattacks. I think what I've come up with addresses this well, but I'd like some feedback.

In general: I'm not saying this is the way Counterattacks should work in 5e, just that I'd like to have them work this way in my campaigns. The currents system brings about some problems with mental disconnects that I'd like to get rid of. Although it's OK to discuss whether such a change is a good idea or bad, I'd really prefer comments on the mechanics I've offered (or alternative mechanics). Simply put, what problems do you see with what I've recommended?
__________________
Quos deus vult perdere, prius dementat.
Latin: Those whom a god wishes to destroy, he first drives mad.
SuedodeuS is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
counterattack, judo throw

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Fnords are Off
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:40 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.