Is Dodge Overpowering?

[Entropy]

Hi, My group and I are fairly new to GURPS, and we're probably doing this (and a great many things) wrong, but we don't see where we are going wrong.

The problem we're having is that it seems that because Dodge is an unopposed check, high dodge scores seem almost overpoweringly important. The best fighter in the history of fighting can face off against someone, roll well, and it's still pretty easy for anyone with even a half decent DEX and MOVE to have a dodge good enough to dodge most of the time.

The fact that it is not an opposed check gives the defender a HUGE advantage. This is especially ridiculous when you have someone 10 feet away from armed guards with machine guns and they dodge automatic weapon fire and escape! Dodging bullets is already silly enough, but dodging multiple bursts of auto-fire froma skilled marksman is outrageous, and it HAS HAPPENED in our game.

Are we applying it wrong? Is there some mitigating factor that we are missing? We're on the verge of making a house rule to make active defenses an opposed check (which would make it to weak), or something similar because it makes combat take FOREVER because so few attacks actually hit.

[Ogbendog]

with automatic wpns, making the dodge only means you dodge 1 bullet, +1 for each point you made it by. so a good to hit roll (which should = multiple hits) will be hard to dodge.

our group, the highest dodge is an 11, 14 dex and HT and combat reflexes. that's not all that high, what kind of numbers do you have?

[Jimmifett]

Dodge works pretty well for my group (using 4e). Their characters average between 5 and 6 speed which bump up to 8-9 for dodge. that's less than 50% chance of dodging. For fire arms, dodged bullets i believe is ((dodge - success roll) +1). If they took the dodge & drop action, an extra +3 to dodge, but now they are prone on the floor.

This has worked out rather well. More often than not, most bullets hit thier target, with a few here and there being dodged. After that, it's a matter of penetrating DR and will rolls.

I had a Goa'uld with like -12 HP still fighting bc he kept making his will rolls (hard to kill II). Finally he lost the roll and fell unconcious and was taken prisoner and medevac'd. He ended up not surviving, but that's besides the point.

[Entropy]

Originally Posted by Ogbendog

with automatic wpns, making the dodge only means you dodge 1 bullet, +1 for each point you made it by. so a good to hit roll (which should = multiple hits) will be hard to dodge.

I didn't know that. That will make a big difference against automatic weapons fire, but it still seems pretty darn easy to dodge non-automatic attacks. Do you by any chance know where in the books I would find that rule?

Originally Posted by Ogbendog

our group, the highest dodge is an 11, 14 dex and HT and combat reflexes. that's not all that high, what kind of numbers do you have?

That's about right. Our PCs are mostly 8s or lower because we made them before appreciating the power of the dodge, but many of the NPCs are in that 10-12 range where it's pretty easy to make the dodge half the time or better.

[Jimmifett]

Originally Posted by Entropy

That's about right. Our PCs are mostly 8s or lower because we made them before appreciating the power of the dodge, but many of the NPCs are in that 10-12 range where it's pretty easy to make the dodge half the time or better.

Also keep in mind you can't dodge what you can't see. Get shot from behind, or are completely unaware (sniper ambush's first volley?), no dodge.

I don't have my books in front of me, but shotguns have a rather high RoF in close ranges, making dodge rather nil.

Handguns aren't that great except in rather close battles. The range penalties vs the acc bonus tends to keep handgun use limited in my group.

[Ogbendog]

Originally Posted by Entropy

I didn't know that. That will make a big difference against automatic weapons fire, but it still seems pretty darn easy to dodge non-automatic attacks. Do you by any chance know where in the books I would find that rule?

Don't know off hand, but I would assume it's under automatic wpns

Originally Posted by Entropy

That's about right. Our PCs are mostly 8s or lower because we made them before appreciating the power of the dodge, but many of the NPCs are in that 10-12 range where it's pretty easy to make the dodge half the time or better.

10 is only a 50% chance. fire 3 bullets, 2 hit, 1 is dodged, and 1 hit would work, for example. Or attack from a flank or behind.

I don't know if feint of depeceptive attack works with ranged wpns.

[naloth]

Originally Posted by Jimmifett

Dodge works pretty well for my group (using 4e). Their characters average between 5 and 6 speed which bump up to 8-9 for dodge. that's less than 50% chance of dodging. For fire arms, dodged bullets i believe is ((dodge - success roll) +1). If they took the dodge & drop action, an extra +3 to dodge, but now they are prone on the floor.

Here's how I figure it:
5-7 speed average (around 100-150 point characters).
+3 Dodge bonus
+1 if you have combat reflexes (cheap, easy to get, can be acquired through play).

So base dodge should be 8-11.

You can also add:
+2 Acrobatic Dodge (requires successful Acrobatics roll)
+2 All-Out Dodge (and still move 1/2 rate)
+3 Dodge and Drop
+2? Furious Defense (optional rule, costs 1 fatigue and is only good vs 1 attack, unlike the other options).

So if you invest in DX 12 (40), HT 12 (20), Combat Reflexes (15), and Acrobatics-14 (12) you should have a base 6 move, 10 dodge, 12 w/acrobatics that you can boost to 19(?) by doing an all-out furious dodge and drop. :)

[Wundt]

I tend to agree that Dodge (and defense rolls in general) is very powerful, and sometimes get annoying in combat.

I have a thief type of character who has a 17 to throw a dagger. In the last combat, he threw 7 daggers and I rolled a successful hit every time, but only one managed to get through the target's dodge. The one success was because I rolled a crit.

However, what goes around comes around. The same character has a dodge 10 and a high enough acrobatics skill to get the +2 bonus pretty much every time. As a result, he is almost never hit. It would be wrong to complain about my opponent's dodge when I rely on mine so much.

[Digganob]

Keep in mind GURPS tries to model realistic combat. Imagine watching a real sword fight. Two people swing at each other and parry/block/dodge allot. This can go for some time with neither party hitting the other. But when someone finally does land a blow, it's usually over for the other guy.

It only takes one well placed shot/blow to take down an average person. Combined with 1-second combat rounds, this makes a very different experience than the D&D style of hackin each other 10-20 times until someone runs out of HP.

And, in reality, most bullets do miss people who know they are being shot at.

The Rapid Fire rules are on page 373. The mention of dodging Rapid Fire is in the first paragraph of page 375. Special Rules for Rapid Fire start on page 408.

Remember that even semi-automatic weapons (RoF 2-3) use these rules.

[LateCustomer]

Dodge can get pretty overpowering, what with Retreating/Drop-and-Dodge, Feverish Defense ("Burn Dodge" in my group), Acrobatic Dodge, etc. And that's fine, because in the hands of a good GM, the fight being played out can be artistically depicted like something out of a Musketeer or Kung-Fu movie.

However, don't forget that the attackers have options of their own. You can drop your opponent's defenses by using Feints, Deceptive Attacks, and Flanking. If you're a ranged fighter, then rely on your allies a bit and wait for opportunity shots, like when you're flanking your enemy... or better yet, when you're behind him so he has no defense!

All you have to do is get a little crafty ;) Think for a moment. If it would realistically help (like getting behind a distracted opponent), then it probably helps in GURPS.

[Polaris]

Guys,

IMHO (and this is coming from a 3E perspective), I think that defense (and defense rolls) in 4E is probably a bit too good.

I think most of it is an overcorrection to removing PD from the game. The problem is that most of the time PD was less than three (which is what is added now) and there weren't nearly so many options to improve your defense. The result: Even longer combats at the expense of fun.

Don't get me wrong; I love GURPS and it is my favorite system and I am the one that sold it to me group (as Wundt can tell you). However, I think it behooves us to realize that SJG may have blundered a bit on the 4E defense rules.

-Polaris

[Ogbendog]

in 3rd in our games, no fighter had less than 4. 4 is small shield and hvy leather. Most fighters had chain and med shield, which is PD 6/4. many would have plate, which is PD 7

[Polaris]

Originally Posted by Ogbendog

in 3rd in our games, no fighter had less than 4. 4 is small shield and hvy leather. Most fighters had chain and med shield, which is PD 6/4. many would have plate, which is PD 7

You can't include shields because in 4E shields retain their PD bonus (although it isn't called that any longer). In addition to that, in 3E, you always had the option of targeting a poorly armored area (the face was very common as were hands and feat) and so PDs were seldom above two even for heavily armored fighters. Also IMX Plate was almost never used because of encumberance (and the important of move and dodge).

-Polaris

[jahn]

Originally Posted by Polaris

You can't include shields because in 4E shields retain their PD bonus (although it isn't called that any longer).

In 3E did shields work against firearms? In 4E a shield's DB bonus does not work against firearms, excepting certain advantages.

[Polaris]

Originally Posted by jahn

In 3E did shields work against firearms? In 4E a shield's DB bonus does not work against firearms, excepting certain advantages.

No it did not. In 3E the PD for shields did not apply to firearms and/or ultra-tech ranged attacks (like blasters) with the exception of force-shield and sometimes riot shields.....just like it is now.

-Polaris

[Ogbendog]

Originally Posted by Polaris

You can't include shields because in 4E shields retain their PD bonus (although it isn't called that any longer). In addition to that, in 3E, you always had the option of targeting a poorly armored area (the face was very common as were hands and feat) and so PDs were seldom above two even for heavily armored fighters. Also IMX Plate was almost never used because of encumberance (and the important of move and dodge).

-Polaris

so what you meant to say, is that worn armor most of the time provided a bonus of less than 3. so your players generally had chain (3/1) or heavy leather, or less. in my games, there was always at least one person with PD 4.

shields are now with one less, so a hl and med shield guy was PD 5, now is effectivly 5 as well
chain and sheild was pd 6/4, now is effecitvly 5
plate and shield was 7, now is 5

our heavily armored fighters had no locations with a pd of less than 3. plate was often used, heck, I had a player with heavy corselet over chain ! he was dwarf so could carry more, had a 17 st, and used the lighten enchantment.

[Polaris]

Originally Posted by Ogbendog

so what you meant to say, is that worn armor most of the time provided a bonus of less than 3. so your players generally had chain (3/1) or heavy leather, or less. in my games, there was always at least one person with PD 4.

I occassionally saw a base armor PD of 4, but that was pretty rare. The problem was one of weight and movement.

shields are now with one less, so a hl and med shield guy was PD 5, now is effectivly 5 as well
chain and sheild was pd 6/4, now is effecitvly 5
plate and shield was 7, now is 5

Which is still one or two more defense than you had before because of the +3. The problem with the new system is that it favors light fighters a bit too much. Historically, you wore the best armor you could (and for good reason!)

our heavily armored fighters had no locations with a pd of less than 3. plate was often used, heck, I had a player with heavy corselet over chain ! he was dwarf so could carry more, had a 17 st, and used the lighten enchantment.

The problem with that is that in 3E (and even now in 4E to a lesser extent), Strength sucked. To get enough strength to pack that armor effectively, crippled you as a fighter elsewhere especially when you also had to pay for the wealth and status to wear that gear. At least that was my experience. Also guantlets and soilettes had severe penalties if you wore then constantly IIRC and the face could not be armored without affecting your attack and perception rolls (before TL 8). That's my experience at any rate.

-Polaris

[corwyn]

Originally Posted by Polaris

I occassionally saw a base armor PD of 4, but that was pretty rare. The problem was one of weight and movement.



Which is still one or two more defense than you had before because of the +3. The problem with the new system is that it favors light fighters a bit too much. Historically, you wore the best armor you could (and for good reason!)

The numbers provided *include* the +3. The only characters who benefit are those with HL or less and no shield. I don't have a problem with that. The new system is geared more toward playing heroes so defenses can be a little higher for light fighters. Those same heroes have sufficient skill to reduce those defenses, most fodder doesn't. I like that and IMO, isn't a problem.

The problem with that is that in 3E (and even now in 4E to a lesser extent), Strength sucked. To get enough strength to pack that armor effectively, crippled you as a fighter elsewhere especially when you also had to pay for the wealth and status to wear that gear. At least that was my experience. Also guantlets and soilettes had severe penalties if you wore then constantly IIRC and the face could not be armored without affecting your attack and perception rolls (before TL 8). That's my experience at any rate.

-Polaris

[Polaris]

Originally Posted by corwyn

The numbers provided *include* the +3. The only characters who benefit are those with HL or less and no shield. I don't have a problem with that. The new system is geared more toward playing heroes so defenses can be a little higher for light fighters. Those same heroes have sufficient skill to reduce those defenses, most fodder doesn't. I like that and IMO, isn't a problem.

I'm afraid I do have a bit of a problem with it....and it is a problem that has been nagging at me ever since I switched over to 4E.

1. Because the defenses are higher for light fighters, you have to know all the nit-picking little techniques to get past those defense. That makes combat go much slower than it used to (and 3E GURPS combat wasn't fast by any stretch of the imagination) and it makes it much less newbie friendly. This last part concerns me the most.

2. It isn't really realistic. Granted in 3E gear was a bit too good, but SJG has erred the other direction. A light fighter shouldn't have as good a defense as an armored tank.

-Polaris

[Kyle Aaron]

Originally Posted by naloth

So if you invest in DX 12 (40), HT 12 (20), Combat Reflexes (15), and Acrobatics-14 (12) you should have a base 6 move, 10 dodge, 12 w/acrobatics that you can boost to 19(?) by doing an all-out furious dodge and drop. :)

87 character points just to get Dodge 10.

That's a lot.

In other words, Dodge in GURPS is like everything else - if you devote half your character points to it, you'll be very good at that one thing. But not so good at other stuff.

And then someone attacks you by surprise, or uses mind-magic on you, and... you're in trouble.

Imagine your enemy devoted half his points to be able to hit things hard, for example,
Hitting Guy: DX 12 [+40], ST 13 [+30], Greatsword [+16] - 16, for 86 character points.

He swings at you, and 98.1% of the time rolls 16 or under, so you have to Dodge him. With your Dodge 10, you dodge him 50% of the time. So, 49.05% of his hits will connect.

When his thrusts connect, they do 1d+2 impaling damage; when his swings connect, they do 2d+2 cut damage. If your Dodgy guy has no armour and 10 HP, then most of those blows falling will cause a Major Wound, and you'' probably fall down, out of the fight.

Meanwhile, this dedicated hitter still has a Move of 5.5, and so a Dodge of 8. So Dodgy Guy's blows will connect 3/4 the time, but not hurt much; Hitting Guy's Blows will connect only 1/2 the time, but take down Dodgy Guy.

Of course Dodgy Guy can wear armour, but that slows him down and drops his Dodge. And Hitting Guy can wear armour, too.

Naloth, you've simply discovered that if someone puts half his points into one thing, he'll achieve it, but be not so good in other areas. Well, yeah. The same could be said of someone focused on being a mage, or a thief, or anything else.

[Polaris]

Jim-Bob,

While what you are saying is true to an extent, a Dodge of 10 is not hard to come by and it does not make you that much weaker in combat assuming 150pts. What you are forgetting, I think is synergy. That is to say that many of the same points he spend to improve his dodge also improved his ability to hit and his other (non-dodge) defenses.

Allow me to sketch out what I mean.

DX: 14, Ht: 14, Combat Reflexes, High Pain Threshold, Acrobatics-14, Staff-14

This is 120 points in stats, 25 in advantages, and 8 in skills for a total of 153. That seems like a lot but it really isn't considering that a 150 point character has 230 points to spend AND many of the other skills will also depend on DX or Ht. It also leaves plenty for a decent strength or other advantages and still have a few other skills.

Now look at the dodge defense: 7 (speed)+3+1(reflexes) or 11 just to start with. You can boost that up to 20 by means already mentioned.

In addition to that, his parry is 7+3+1 (reflexes)+2 staff for a base of 13 and that is before you add other modifiers to that.

I find this excessive for light fighters. It slows down the game to a crawl in my recent experience.

-Polaris

[NorthSaber]

One house-rule we tried out for a short campaign was to penalize the defense by half of the margin of the attack's success. So, if a skill 14 attacker rolls a 10, the defender gets a -2 on his defense roll. This made those near-critical successes with attacks that much more gratifying, although it did slow down gameplay a bit with the constant calculations (and I tend to keep forgetting non-core house-rules as a GM, so the players had to remind me all the time ^_^). Still, overall it probably made combats deadlier, and thus, shorter.

[Polaris]

Northsabre,

For a long time (in 3E) when I was dealing with martial artists and the like (with very high parries), I did something similiar. I made it a contest between the attack and defense rolls.

This of course is just automatically inserting "deceptive attack" into all the attack and defense rolls after the fact. IIRC Dr. Kromm suggested a system much like yours as a houserule.

-Polaris

[Kyle Aaron]

Originally Posted by Polaris

I find this excessive for light fighters. It slows down the game to a crawl in my recent experience.

Well, there's a couple of things that can be done about that.

Within the game, the guy attacking the light fighter can Feint (p B365). You do a Quick Contest of Melee Weapon skills; if you succeed and he fails, or if you succeed and so does he, you subtract your relative margin of success from his active defence next turn. That aplies even if you Feint and do an All Out Attack (double) - on two attacks, his defence is reduced.

Of course, if the light fighter has a better weapon skill than you, it'll be hard to successfully Feint him. But that's to be expected; it should be hard to defeat guys better than you.

At the meta-game level, you can look at "Extreme Scores," p. B349. If two fighters have scores of 14 or above, "reduce the lower score to 10, and subtract the same amount from the higher score."

Neither solution addresses the perception that "lighter fighters are too tough, man," but they do address the problem of how long the combats would take to resolve.

Remember also that if you get a critical attack success, then the defender gets no Dodge at all. If your own attack score is high, then this will eventually happen. So, two skill 17 fighters would chink away at each-other for ages, then WHAM a big hit.

Whether lighter fighters are too tough, I don't know. The reality hasn't been tested since melee was more common, about four hundred years ago. But there are many many things a warrior could do to counter the lighter, quicker fighter. He could,

• Feint
• Get friends to surround the guy - someone will get a flank or rear attack.
• Let the light guy come to him, firing ranged weapons at him as he comes.
• Wear armour - sure, he hits me, but so what? It doesn't hurt much.
• Use Dirty Tricks (p B405)
• If you know he's coming, prepare traps and so on. "Dodge the ten foot pit, you bastard!" Not every encounter is two guys meeting in a path suddenly and deciding to fight. Remember the Seven Ps. Proper Preparation and Planning Prevents **** Poor Peformance.

The solution is in the rules. You just have to read all of them, and have players with some imagination.

[Polaris]

Jim-Bob,

Let me quote your last sentence:

The solution is in the rules. You just have to read all of them, and have players with some imagination.

This sort of thoughtless elitism really, really torques me off. In fact it illustrates the very problem I have with the defenses as they are now. *I* know how to beat a high defense. I have played GURPS since 1985. However, a newbie can not be expected to know all the rules backwards and forwards...and this snide demand just pisses off the new player.

Do you really want that? I think not.

Also light fighters are too tough. Warriors wore the best armor they could for literally centuries culminating with articulated plate harness which while nowhere near as heavy as hollywood protrays it, wasn't tinfoil either by any means. Why? Because fighters through history learned that the good fighter in armor will almost always beat the master swordsman with no armor. That is realistic and that is what GURPS should model.

-Polaris

[Kyle Aaron]

Originally Posted by Polaris

Now look at the dodge defense: 7 (speed)+3+1(reflexes) or 11 just to start with. You can boost that up to 20 by means already mentioned.

Oh, and no, not 20. 14.

You can do an Acrobatic Dodge (pB375), giving you +2 if you succeed an Acrobatics roll.

or

You can do a Dodge and Drop, giving you +3 to your Dodge for that turn only - but after that, you're Prone. And this is only effective against ranged attacks. If your Staff Dodge Master Guy goes prone against gunfire or missile fire, that's fair enough - but while he's crawling along in the dirt, the other guy can keep shooting at him. He has Move x1/3 (Crawling) or Move 1 (Lying down) (pB367). That guy who just dropped prone better have a ranged weapon himself...

While prone, the lower fighter is at -3 to defend, while the higher fighter is a +3 to defend (p.B402).

So, dropping prone is a good option to avoid the first dangerous ranged attack, and it's good in a fireight where there's lots of cover to hide behind (that is, armour/DR you don't have to carry!) It's a pretty crap option in the open, and when you yourself don't have a ranged weapon.

[cccwebs]

Originally Posted by naloth

Here's how I figure it:
5-7 speed average (around 100-150 point characters).
+3 Dodge bonus
+1 if you have combat reflexes (cheap, easy to get, can be acquired through play).

So base dodge should be 8-11.

You can also add:
+2 Acrobatic Dodge (requires successful Acrobatics roll)
+2 All-Out Dodge (and still move 1/2 rate)
+3 Dodge and Drop
+2? Furious Defense (optional rule, costs 1 fatigue and is only good vs 1 attack, unlike the other options).

So if you invest in DX 12 (40), HT 12 (20), Combat Reflexes (15), and Acrobatics-14 (12) you should have a base 6 move, 10 dodge, 12 w/acrobatics that you can boost to 19(?) by doing an all-out furious dodge and drop. :)

Yep, and now you're prone and a much easier target to hit on the next round. (unless you actually got behind or under cover)

I just don't see where Dodge is so powerful. Each one of your "additions" to dodge can be countered, and even hinders the person using it in some way. The high base dodge is great, if you aren't going to wear armor (even a simple suit of Leather armor will weigh ~19lbs which could keep you in the no encumberence area), but you will sacrifice the extra protection that armor gives when you do get hit. The All-out-Defense is great, but you'll never get in an attack while doing it and you only get 1/2 move anyway (more time for that opponent to keep shooting). The acrobatic dodge is good, but if you fail the skill check you then have a -2 to your dodge. Dodge and Drop will leave you lying down which is a -3 penalty to defense, removes the ability to make an acrobatic dodge, prevents you from Dodge and Drop again, but will allow the All-out-Defense. The Furious Defense will give you that +2, but you spend 1 FP each time, and once you reach 1/3 FP you are going to be slowing down. So to follow your example, you got that 19 dodge, but next turn you cna take an All-out-Defense/Furious Defense dodge and have a nice flat 11 for a dodge. Not too shabby, but it's gonna suck if you are in range of an AoE weapon. And to get up you have to spend a turn to get to kneeling (-2 to your defenses, no All-out-Defense either) and then spend another turn to stand (or combine with the step part of another maneuver).

[Polaris]

Originally Posted by Jim Bob

Oh, and no, not 20. 14.

You can do an Acrobatic Dodge (pB375), giving you +2 if you succeed an Acrobatics roll.

or

You can do a Dodge and Drop, giving you +3 to your Dodge for that turn only - but after that, you're Prone. And this is only effective against ranged attacks. If your Staff Dodge Master Guy goes prone against gunfire or missile fire, that's fair enough - but while he's crawling along in the dirt, the other guy can keep shooting at him. He has Move x1/3 (Crawling) or Move 1 (Lying down) (pB367). That guy who just dropped prone better have a ranged weapon himself...

Since when? As I read the rules acrobatic dodge can be combined with any one dodge attempt if you are moving (which you certainly are with a dodge and drop). So look at it, 7 speed+3+1(reflexes)+2 (acrobatic)+3 (either dodge-and-drop or dodge-and-retreat)+2 (using fatigue)+2 (all out). That's 20.

While prone, the lower fighter is at -3 to defend, while the higher fighter is a +3 to defend (p.B402).

And if the fighter has an XBow and the attack is coming at range (both reasonable), then prone (and ideally behind cover) is where he wants to get to.

I also point out that retreating also adds +3 to dodge.

So, dropping prone is a good option to avoid the first dangerous ranged attack, and it's good in a fireight where there's lots of cover to hide behind (that is, armour/DR you don't have to carry!) It's a pretty crap option in the open, and when you yourself don't have a ranged weapon.

That depends. If you are getting hit with a bunch of ranged attacks early, it may well save your life!

-Polaris

[Kyle Aaron]

Originally Posted by Polaris

However, a newbie can not be expected to know all the rules backwards and forwards...and this snide demand just pisses off the new player.

Oh, hell yeah. GURPS is not at all newbie-friendly. Sorry, SJG, but it ain't. I've played GURPS 3e for 10 or more years, and my GM and I still spend a good chunk of every session looking things up in 4e. Some of the details are just too much. It's horrible for newbies. I don't deny it.

But I didn't think we were talking about newbie-friendliness. I thought we were talking about whether, within the rules as written, you could defeat the Dodgy Guy. And you can.

...fighters through history learned that the good fighter in armor will almost always beat the master swordsman with no armor. That is realistic and that is what GURPS should model.

I think GURPS does model it. Just consider the example I gave again. Sure, the Dodgy Guy won't get hit often by the thug with the Greatsword - but when he's hit, he's going down fast, and he's not getting up. And when the Dodgy Guy with his staff whacks away at the thug with the Greatsword, sure, he'll hit him most of the time - but he won't be doing any damage to speak of.

If you get two fighters built on the same points, one focused on strength and huge hacking blades, wearing armour, and the other focused on quickness and light weapons, with little or no armour - in GURPS, the big strong guy usually wins. That's the way it was in 3e, it's less so in 4e, but there it is still.

Yep, the little quick guy can wear some light armour, too. But that slows him down.

[Polaris]

Originally Posted by Jim Bob

Oh, hell yeah. GURPS is not at all newbie-friendly. Sorry, SJG, but it ain't. I've played GURPS 3e for 10 or more years, and my GM and I still spend a good chunk of every session looking things up in 4e. Some of the details are just too much. It's horrible for newbies. I don't deny it.

But I didn't think we were talking about newbie-friendliness. I thought we were talking about whether, within the rules as written, you could defeat the Dodgy Guy. And you can.

Well, if you go back to my original post on this thread, that was my primary beef with the defense rules as written in 4E. In order to be successful as a fighter, the player is required to have a tactical skill that IMHO is out of line for an RPG. This is also the complaint I have about TRoS (The Riddle of Steel) except that system is far, far worse in that regard than GURPS 4E. My secondary beef is that is makes light fighters too tough and that's not good.

I think GURPS does model it. Just consider the example I gave again. Sure, the Dodgy Guy won't get hit often by the thug with the Greatsword - but when he's hit, he's going down fast, and he's not getting up. And when the Dodgy Guy with his staff whacks away at the thug with the Greatsword, sure, he'll hit him most of the time - but he won't be doing any damage to speak of.

That depends. In the first place, Dodgy guy will likely disarm the plate-mail thug. In the second place because of encumberance, the dodgy guy can literally hit twice and then bust out of weapon range. At best the platemail guy would get a move-and-attack....and possibly not even that. I could go on, but when combined with unreasonable defense values for light fighters, the armored guy isn't good enough (at least when compared with the historical record).

If you get two fighters built on the same points, one focused on strength and huge hacking blades, wearing armour, and the other focused on quickness and light weapons, with little or no armour - in GURPS, the big strong guy usually wins. That's the way it was in 3e, it's less so in 4e, but there it is still.

I don't think so because the hulking brute also has to pay points for wealth and status just to have (and afford!) the gear....and there are too many options for the light fighter in the hands of a rules monkey (like myself admittedly) to completely hose the armored fighter anyway. That is one more place where the game is really newbie unfriendly....and I had the same complaint about TRoS (only more so). I am very dissapointed in GURPS 4E in this one regard.

Yep, the little quick guy can wear some light armour, too. But that slows him down.

Not as bad as you think. The little guy can were light leather and even leather (if he has a slightly better than average strength) and still not be slowed down.

-Polaris

[Kyle Aaron]

Originally Posted by Polaris

Since when? As I read the rules acrobatic dodge can be combined with any one dodge attempt if you are moving (which you certainly are with a dodge and drop). So look at it, 7 speed+3+1(reflexes)+2 (acrobatic)+3 (either dodge-and-drop or dodge-and-retreat)+2 (using fatigue)+2 (all out). That's 20.

My character has DX9 and a rifle, Tactics, and the Quirk "Careful", so I haven't looked into Dodge much, so I might have missed something;) BUT p.375 simply says, "You can combine this option [Acrobatic Dodge] with a retreat (see Retreat, p. 377)".

The wording of "Dodge and Drop", pB377 strongly implies that if you do that, you can't do anything else, such as an Acrobatic Dodge.

Note that Extra Effort in Combat (pB357) is an optional rule. A GM striving for a (realitvely) simple game would disallow it. However - as "Feverish Defence" is worded, it strongly implies that you can use it with any other defence, eg an Acrobatic Dodge.

However, you have to make a Will roll to succeed in any Extra Effort, and it costs you FP whether you succeed or fail. It costs you 1FP to try to get +2 on defence. Assuming an average Will of 10, it works out to 1FP every second round for a +2, and 1FP every second round for nothing. After doing that for six rounds, the average HT guy will have to stop, since doing it for another round will halve his Move, Dodge, and ST. So he'd better win in six rounds!

And of course once the combat is over he gets Fatigue taken from that, too... so he'd better not have to fight another combat soon, or run away from the scene of the event, etc.

And if the fighter has an XBow and the attack is coming at range (both reasonable), then prone (and ideally behind cover) is where he wants to get to.

Definitely! If I have a melee fighter closing with a guy with a crossbow, I'll defintiely Drop & Dodge as he fires, then get up and charge him while he reloads, or readies his melee weapon.

But if he has a non-musket firearm, or buddies with ranged weapons, I'm in trouble.

I also point out that retreating also adds +3 to dodge.

Certainly. But again, it can't be combined endlessly. Most of the various kinds of thigns you can add to Dodge, so far as I can tell, you have to choose one or the other. And once chosen, you're fairly committed.

That depends. If you are getting hit with a bunch of ranged attacks early, it may well save your life!

Yep! I don't deny that. I'm just saying, the Dodgy Guy, he ain't the Uber Guy.

[cccwebs]

Originally Posted by Polaris

This sort of thoughtless elitism really, really torques me off. In fact it illustrates the very problem I have with the defenses as they are now. *I* know how to beat a high defense. I have played GURPS since 1985. However, a newbie can not be expected to know all the rules backwards and forwards...and this snide demand just pisses off the new player.

No, it's the job of the GM to gradually introduce the advanced combat rules to his newbie players. If you are using all the advanced dodge rules and designing super dodge NPC's for a campaign used for newbie players then you have the problem. If your players are designing super dodge characters and know ho to use the advanced combat rules, then they have moved past the newbie stage and need to be facing situations which can challenge them (sniper attacks, high RoF weapons, AoE attacks, ambushes, traps, etc).

[Polaris]

Originally Posted by cccwebs

No, it's the job of the GM to gradually introduce the advanced combat rules to his newbie players. If you are using all the advanced dodge rules and designing super dodge NPC's for a campaign used for newbie players then you have the problem. If your players are designing super dodge characters and know ho to use the advanced combat rules, then they have moved past the newbie stage and need to be facing situations which can challenge them (sniper attacks, high RoF weapons, AoE attacks, ambushes, traps, etc).

I consider this even more thoughless elitism. I am sorry but I do (and I hate to see it in my favorite RPG). Here's the deal. If you are dealing with a new GM and new players, the GM can't be expected to know at first read what is and is not permitted....especially not if the new player sees all these neato options and wants to use them.

-Polaris

[Kyle Aaron]

I was following the way the thread was going, rather than how it started, on focusing on the position of Dodgy Guy, rather than the confusingness for newbies.

In terms of introducing newbies, I think the old D&D method of starting them a bit wimpy helps. I mean, someone playing D&D for the first time would obviously have more trouble designing a 9th level Magic-User than a 1st level one.

Similarly, in GURPS, a newbie player will have a harder time designing a 150/-75 character than a 50/-25 character.

So, with new players, start them off lower-powered. As they build up, they can afford more things, and they get to learn the detailed rules.

But then, I've always had a preference for lower-powered campaigns.

[Kyle Aaron]

Originally Posted by Polaris

I consider this even more thoughless elitism....If you are dealing with a new GM and new players, the GM can't be expected to know at first read what is and is not permitted....especially not if the new player sees all these neato options and wants to use them.

Mate, that's not just GURPS, it's all rpgs. All rpgs expect the GM to know the rules back-to-front compared to the players. I really don't know how you'd get around this. We're talking about the Game Master after all; they should be a master of what they're running. "The GM has to know the rules" isn't elitism. It's just normal.

The most that any game can do is to put the simpler stuff in one section, and the more complicated stuff you can do without in another section. Such as, for example, GURPS Characters and GURPS Campaigns. And put the very complex stuff as "optional rules". Oh, hey, look, they did that!

It's still a bloody complicated game, though. It's not one I'd choose to introduce people new to roleplaying. My GM invited my girlfriend to play, and she does, and enjoys herself, but when it comes to the rules, it's "er, just tell me when to roll the dice."

[cccwebs]

Originally Posted by Polaris

I consider this even more thoughless elitism. I am sorry but I do (and I hate to see it in my favorite RPG). Here's the deal. If you are dealing with a new GM and new players, the GM can't be expected to know at first read what is and is not permitted....especially not if the new player sees all these neato options and wants to use them.

-Polaris

IMHO you seem to have a problem with the term elitism. A new GM should be running GURPS Lite, you know that free PDF download (or that nice booklet which comes with the GM screen) to become familiar with some of the basic rules. Then gradually work up to Tactical Combat with optional rules added in. A new GM should also start off small to learn the rules, have lower point value characters to limit the chances of "super" anything, and build up as they feel comfortable. And the biggest one of all, no GM should ever try to run a game (any game) with only a cursory glance through the rulebook covering the mechanics of gameplay, and they shouldn't be afraid to "look it up" while playing if questions arise.

I haven't seen a system yet (well besides the "clix" or "card" style systems) in which a game can be run just after purchasing the book without some work being required by the GM. It's not elitism, it's fact.

[Polaris]

Originally Posted by Jim Bob

Mate, that's not just GURPS, it's all rpgs. All rpgs expect the GM to know the rules back-to-front compared to the players. I really don't know how you'd get around this. We're talking about the Game Master after all; they should be a master of what they're running. "The GM has to know the rules" isn't elitism. It's just normal.

Jim-Bob, in an ideal situation I would be the first to agree with you. However, 4E is still very, very new and a lot of the rules have changed from 3E. That means that even old GURPS grognards like us don't really know the rules.....and SOMEONE has to GM. Also sometimes, a person is the GM even if they aren't the optimal choice from a strict rules persepctive....and that has happened in one of my current groups.

However, a game should be easy to learn and the new GURPS isn't. Even 3E wasn't very easy to learn but 4E is rapidly turning into a nightmare in this regard. I find it a shame and a pity because 4E is a much stronger and better game.....but no newbie will give it a chance because of this.

The most that any game can do is to put the simpler stuff in one section, and the more complicated stuff you can do without in another section. Such as, for example, GURPS Characters and GURPS Campaigns. And put the very complex stuff as "optional rules". Oh, hey, look, they did that!

No they didn't; not really. If you don't use the optional rules, then you wind up with bloody-high defenses and no idea how to get past them (the topic of this thread in fact). Thus you are forced into the complexity of the game....and have I mentioned that 4E has a rotten index? That used to be a strength of GURPS (another minor dissapointment).

It's still a bloody complicated game, though. It's not one I'd choose to introduce people new to roleplaying. My GM invited my girlfriend to play, and she does, and enjoys herself, but when it comes to the rules, it's "er, just tell me when to roll the dice."

That's just it; it should be possible to play with just the basic rules but it really isn't....and at least one of our new players absolutely insists that he wants to play with all the rules (and all the neat options). :rolleyes:

-Polaris

[Polaris]

Originally Posted by cccwebs

IMHO you seem to have a problem with the term elitism. A new GM should be running GURPS Lite, you know that free PDF download (or that nice booklet which comes with the GM screen) to become familiar with some of the basic rules. Then gradually work up to Tactical Combat with optional rules added in. A new GM should also start off small to learn the rules, have lower point value characters to limit the chances of "super" anything, and build up as they feel comfortable. And the biggest one of all, no GM should ever try to run a game (any game) with only a cursory glance through the rulebook covering the mechanics of gameplay, and they shouldn't be afraid to "look it up" while playing if questions arise.

I haven't seen a system yet (well besides the "clix" or "card" style systems) in which a game can be run just after purchasing the book without some work being required by the GM. It's not elitism, it's fact.

No, it's elitism. Listen to yourself. "A new GM should be running GURPS Lite", i.e. new players aren't 'good enough' for GURPS. I hope you don't mean that, but that is what you are saying. See my response to Jim-Bob for the rest.

-Polaris

[cccwebs]

Originally Posted by Polaris

No, it's elitism. Listen to yourself. "A new GM should be running GURPS Lite", i.e. new players aren't 'good enough' for GURPS. I hope you don't mean that, but that is what you are saying. See my response to Jim-Bob for the rest.

-Polaris

I read your response to Jim Bob, and again what you seem to fail to grasp is that a new GM who hasn't had time to learn "all" da rulz should start out with fewer of them (ala GURPS Lite) and build up as they learn. After all, you don't teach Calculus to a 4th grader do you? (Is that an elitist comment?) No, you start with the basics and work your way up. Now if that newbie GM wants to go "full throttle" then IMHO they should suffer the headache they are going to have while playing that game.

Again, no pen and paper role playing game can be played without some work on the GM/DM/Storyteller/Whatever to learn the rules and be ready for players to try something from out of left field. (Even if that means having to look up the rule during the session.)

Oh, and it's not that "new players aren't 'good enough' for GURPS", it's that new GM's should take time to start from the basics and work up. A GM well versed in the rules will be able to help his newbie players with difficult situations, especially with "super" combat types.

[Polaris]

ccwebbs,

Is GURPS supposed to be an RPG anyone can play or isn't it? I agree that the GM should work to become as familiar as possible with the rules. However, nobody is familiar with GURPS 4E yet...not even the old grognards.

I will have you now that the poor GM in question studied the rules for a solid month, had me help here try to iron out the difficult points, we ran mock combats, and I even did a one-shot with her as a player....and we STILL have having problems.

If you don't think this is a problem, then you are being elitist. You shouldn't need training wheels if the GM/players make a reasonable effort to learn the rules. I am sorry to say this, but if this continues without a fix, GURPS may well go the way of rolemaster.

-Polaris