Active defense debate o_Ô - Page 9

Luther · 05-23-2005, 09:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cmdicely

I prefer 1/turn with no penalty, with subsequent dodges taking some penalty (though I'm not sure of the best number for the penalty).

If you want to stay as close to the rules as possible, use -1 for each subsequent dodge (cumulative). Overall hit-rate is almost equivalent to rapid-fire rules.

Von Bek · 05-25-2005, 07:53 AM

I totally agree with Ze's mechanic as it's the one I used in 3e myself.

My perception of dodge is one movement away from all attackers, such as inter alia, ducking or leaning backwards. I'm open to opinions, but I think you'd find it difficult, unless the movement was very small, to make more than one dodge in a second, especially when combined with an attack.

Because of this one roll just feels right to me, it's just that Ze and I chuck in a -1 penalty for all successful attacks, with dodge failiures being hit by that many attacks.

Now I haven't played 4e, but in my opinion, the best way to handle deceptive attacks if I'm reading other people posts right would as follows:

Defender dodge 10
Attacker 1 regular attack
Attacker (Major-ish NPC) 2 deceptive attack -2
Attacker 3 regular attack

Defender's dodge roll 8
Attacker 1 effective dodge roll 8 miss
Attacker 2 effective dodge roll 9+1 (due to additional -1 to dodge)=10 miss
Attacker 3 effective dodge roll 10 miss

This is how I deal with dodge anyway, take it or leave it.

What I want to know is if people have any system, for want of another word, partially winning combat to reduce effective defence, ie a flurry of blows driving an attacker away, or knocking a weapon away to leave a foe open etc., even if they do no damage.

I mean, once your on the back foot it's hard to recover. These aren't deceptive attacks as I see them (implied from other posts, and the name!), more combos. Any ideas?

cmdicely · 05-25-2005, 09:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Von Bek

My perception of dodge is one movement away from all attackers, such as inter alia, ducking or leaning backwards.

Which is remotely reasonable if all your attackers are coming from approximately the same direction. Less so if they aren't.

Quote:

I'm open to opinions, but I think you'd find it difficult, unless the movement was very small, to make more than one dodge in a second, especially when combined with an attack.

I agree that its difficult to make more than one dodge per second, which is why I would solve it by -- like Parry -- making it difficult to do more than one Dodge per second. Heck, I think its difficult, though GURPS doesn't, to do one dodge plus one parry plus one block plus one attack per second. I'm almost tempted to allow only 1-2 free active defenses of any type.

sampo · 05-25-2005, 10:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cmdicely

I agree that its difficult to make more than one dodge per second, which is why I would solve it by -- like Parry -- making it difficult to do more than one Dodge per second. Heck, I think its difficult, though GURPS doesn't, to do one dodge plus one parry plus one block plus one attack per second. I'm almost tempted to allow only 1-2 free active defenses of any type.

Well a house rule I toyed with in a playtest session or two was:

Each action you take during your turn (after the first) gives you a cumulative +1 modifier to your die rolls. (thus increasing the chance of rolling 18+ and a critical miss)

Example: Conan is assailed by several beastmen in the Border Kingdom.

Conan (is faster) and fast draws his sword
Conan then attacks cleaving beastman #1 in two (at +1 penalty, 2nd action of his turn)
Beastman #2: attacks and hits,

Conan blocks (at +2 penalty 3rd action of his turn)

Beastman #3: attacks and hits,

Conan parries (at +3 penatly 4rd action of his turn)

Beastman #4 attacks and hits,

Conan now dodges (at +4 penalty, 5th action of his turn

and so on....

This might be something that works for the effect you are looking for CM_Dicely? My players found it too harsh (scared of getting their PC's offed) unless we were playing in the over 250 pt range. So I didn't use it in the campaign. It was designed for 3rd ed so it would have to be tweaked to use in 4th ed.

An intresting thing that started happening in our playtest, is that several players started leaving their attacks as the last thing they did in their turn. Sort of a wait. This left their all important defenses with lower penalties at the expense of giving their attacks the higher penalties. Also, characters attacked by several opponents would also forego their attack (in a given turn) if they had a big enough penalty (don't want that critical miss) providing for that "lull" that many players say doesn't exist in GURPs. You also get alot more relying on Armor DR alone rather than Active Defense rolls using this system.

It does add the complication of tracking your current penalty, we just used a die next to the figure.

Von Bek · 05-26-2005, 08:03 AM

I was thinking about combos etc. and just came up with this:

If a character just manages to parry, or other active defence (definition of just not ready yet!) then they are at -1 to active defences next turn, and cannot attack. Again, I'm thinking and typing at the same time, so this may be little harsh attack wise!

This makes retreats and lulls, if these still exist at 4e, valuable.

Alternatively, or as well as, if you fail to hit but your opponent does then you suffer the same consequences as above.

If you really want to make things hard, should they just succeed again in the next turn, you could give them a -2 penalty and so on.

Opinions?

PoweredByCoffee · 07-05-2005, 01:21 PM

This is a topic of much debate among the gamers in my group. I apologize in advance if I repeat any of the replies to this thread. I read the first few pages and then gave up.

One of your responders said that 4e Deceptive Attacks are your friend. This is true, although you could go with some optional rules in 3e and just penalize the defender's active defense role by an amount equal to half of the successors success margin. The only think I dislike about this is that it might encourage your non-munchkins (if you have any) to join their ranks.

Another option is to implement a particularly nasty house rule with which my group has been experimenting. Every 10 seconds that the characters are involved in combat activities, remove 1 fatigue (plus their level of encumbrance). So, you have a hulking brute with platemail armor but very little fatigue. He'll be sweating in 20 seconds of combat. I like this rule because it forces players to consider a more balanced character.

Finally, I'm sure someone has mentioned this, but you can restrict move to be no more than 30% higher than what it would be if it were simply calculated from HT and DX.

These are just some thoughts... They seem to be working for my gaming group.

-Brian

sir_pudding · 07-05-2005, 01:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PoweredByCoffee

Another option is to implement a particularly nasty house rule with which my group has been experimenting. Every 10 seconds that the characters are involved in combat activities, remove 1 fatigue (plus their level of encumbrance).

I am not sure if you are aware but there is an official rule which covers this (pg. 426).

Quote:

Finally, I'm sure someone has mentioned this, but you can restrict move to be no more than 30% higher than what it would be if it were simply calculated from HT and DX.

This is similar to the official rule on pg. 17.

PoweredByCoffee · 07-05-2005, 02:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sir_pudding

I am not sure if you are aware but there is an official rule which covers this (pg. 426).
This is similar to the official rule on pg. 17.

Yes, I'm aware of the fatigue rule, but it only has you remove a fatigue rating of 1 (plus encumbrance) one time at the end of the battle and only if the battle lasts longer than 10 seconds. Thanks for the heads-up though.

I'm not sure about the rule on page 17 (book is not in front of me), but I do remember reading something about that.

On a side note, I couldn't help but notice the Gamers, Mark the Red quote in your signature. Very funny. Great movie! "You look trustworthy. Perhaps you'd like to join our noble quest."

sampo · 07-05-2005, 06:50 PM

PoweredbyCoffee

Here is a slight variation on your you lose fatigue every 10 seconds HR:

Loss of Fatigue via Exertion
Fatigue Points are Lost for Fighting in Combat.
After:(HT x 1) seconds of combat have elapsed the fighter loses: 1 + (Enc lvl) fatigue
After (HT x 5) more seconds of combat have elapsed the fighter again loses: 1 + (Enc lvl) fatigue
Every (HT x 5) seconds of combat thereafter the fighter rolls vs. HT* or loses: 1 fatigue (2 w crit fail)
*HT roll modifiers (-1 per minute of combat, - (Enc lvl) & - heat)

It may be of use to someone on the list. I've used this in my detail campaigns for years.

Note this was used in a 3rd edtion campaign, of the top of my head I can't think of anything that will need to be tweaked to use it in 4th ed

Luther · 07-06-2005, 07:13 AM

G3 already had rules for fatigue in long fights, they are in G:MA under tournament rules IIRC.

In short, for continuous combat (no rounds):

after 10 seconds you loose 1 FP
after 3 minutes do a HT check or loose 1 FP
after every minute do a HT check at -1 per minute or loose 1 FP

05-25-2005, 07:53 AM	#82
Von Bek Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: Dorset, UK	Re: Active defense debate o_Ô I totally agree with Ze's mechanic as it's the one I used in 3e myself. My perception of dodge is one movement away from all attackers, such as inter alia, ducking or leaning backwards. I'm open to opinions, but I think you'd find it difficult, unless the movement was very small, to make more than one dodge in a second, especially when combined with an attack. Because of this one roll just feels right to me, it's just that Ze and I chuck in a -1 penalty for all successful attacks, with dodge failiures being hit by that many attacks. Now I haven't played 4e, but in my opinion, the best way to handle deceptive attacks if I'm reading other people posts right would as follows: Defender dodge 10 Attacker 1 regular attack Attacker (Major-ish NPC) 2 deceptive attack -2 Attacker 3 regular attack Defender's dodge roll 8 Attacker 1 effective dodge roll 8 miss Attacker 2 effective dodge roll 9+1 (due to additional -1 to dodge)=10 miss Attacker 3 effective dodge roll 10 miss This is how I deal with dodge anyway, take it or leave it. What I want to know is if people have any system, for want of another word, partially winning combat to reduce effective defence, ie a flurry of blows driving an attacker away, or knocking a weapon away to leave a foe open etc., even if they do no damage. I mean, once your on the back foot it's hard to recover. These aren't deceptive attacks as I see them (implied from other posts, and the name!), more combos. Any ideas? __________________ Do the Devil's work

05-26-2005, 08:03 AM	#85
Von Bek Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: Dorset, UK	Re: Active defense debate o_Ô I was thinking about combos etc. and just came up with this: If a character just manages to parry, or other active defence (definition of just not ready yet!) then they are at -1 to active defences next turn, and cannot attack. Again, I'm thinking and typing at the same time, so this may be little harsh attack wise! This makes retreats and lulls, if these still exist at 4e, valuable. Alternatively, or as well as, if you fail to hit but your opponent does then you suffer the same consequences as above. If you really want to make things hard, should they just succeed again in the next turn, you could give them a -2 penalty and so on. Opinions? __________________ Do the Devil's work

07-05-2005, 01:21 PM	#86
PoweredByCoffee Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Austin, TX	Re: Active defense debate o_Ô This is a topic of much debate among the gamers in my group. I apologize in advance if I repeat any of the replies to this thread. I read the first few pages and then gave up. One of your responders said that 4e Deceptive Attacks are your friend. This is true, although you could go with some optional rules in 3e and just penalize the defender's active defense role by an amount equal to half of the successors success margin. The only think I dislike about this is that it might encourage your non-munchkins (if you have any) to join their ranks. Another option is to implement a particularly nasty house rule with which my group has been experimenting. Every 10 seconds that the characters are involved in combat activities, remove 1 fatigue (plus their level of encumbrance). So, you have a hulking brute with platemail armor but very little fatigue. He'll be sweating in 20 seconds of combat. I like this rule because it forces players to consider a more balanced character. Finally, I'm sure someone has mentioned this, but you can restrict move to be no more than 30% higher than what it would be if it were simply calculated from HT and DX. These are just some thoughts... They seem to be working for my gaming group. -Brian

07-05-2005, 06:50 PM	#89
sampo Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: Santa Fe, NM, USA	Re: Active defense debate o_Ô PoweredbyCoffee Here is a slight variation on your you lose fatigue every 10 seconds HR: Loss of Fatigue via Exertion Fatigue Points are Lost for Fighting in Combat. After:(HT x 1) seconds of combat have elapsed the fighter loses: 1 + (Enc lvl) fatigue After (HT x 5) more seconds of combat have elapsed the fighter again loses: 1 + (Enc lvl) fatigue Every (HT x 5) seconds of combat thereafter the fighter rolls vs. HT* or loses: 1 fatigue (2 w crit fail) *HT roll modifiers (-1 per minute of combat, - (Enc lvl) & - heat) It may be of use to someone on the list. I've used this in my detail campaigns for years. Note this was used in a 3rd edtion campaign, of the top of my head I can't think of anything that will need to be tweaked to use it in 4th ed

07-06-2005, 07:13 AM	#90
Luther Grim Reaper Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: Italy	Re: Active defense debate o_Ô G3 already had rules for fatigue in long fights, they are in G:MA under tournament rules IIRC. In short, for continuous combat (no rounds): after 10 seconds you loose 1 FP after 3 minutes do a HT check or loose 1 FP after every minute do a HT check at -1 per minute or loose 1 FP __________________ bye! -- Lut God of the Cult of Stat Normalization