Feints don't make sense to me...

[demonsbane]

Originally Posted by DouglasCole

If you say "but it should be harder for them to attack me as well!" then Martial Arts has this option: Defensive Feints, p. 101.

Right. I believe that the Defensive Feints section along with Spotting Feints in Martial Arts, p.101 can be very helpful for understanding GURPS feints -specially for those having any sort of difficulties with them.

Originally Posted by vicky_molokh

While GURPS combat is not as abstract as WoD or D&D, it does have some leeway for interpreting the events.

I also agree very much with this.

Originally Posted by Lord Carnifex

[triple ninja'd!]

That happens! LOL

[Lord Carnifex]

First of all, Feints in GURPS are more than just fake-out attacks. Feints in GURPS are pretty much anything that can be used to reduce the effect of a person's defenses (but also see Beats and Ruses).

So, while fake attacks can be Feints, so can other things:

Rhythm: Attack-parry-attack-parry-attack-attack-parry

Change-up: Jab-cross. Jab-Cross. Jab-Cross. Jab-Thai Kick. Or left-right. Left-right. Left-left-right.

Range: Slowly slide the lead foot forward while leaning back on the rear leg. Then shift weight to suddenly close range.

etc.

The second thing is that GURPS has to map the timing of combat onto a player-turn structure, and some things don't fight without a certain amount of easing. For example, RW combat frequently isn't as simple as I attack, you parry, you attack, I parry. Many attacks set up other maneuvers that in turn can be interrupted. So, for example, I may launch a right-hand cross that flows into a Grapple aimed at the neck. But between my punch Attack and my Grapple attack, you can launch an attack (say a jab). All of the attacks are more or less s heaped up on each other, but GURPS translates it into discrete player turns.

Feints happen similarily. So I may thrust with a rapier in a way intended to bring yours out of line. You move your blade to set up the Parry, but I haven't followed through on my thrust. You thrust with your blade without quite bringing it back into your original en garde position. I dodge your thrust, and then take advantage of you being out of line to Attack while your blade is off-line (which makes it hard to defend). All of these manuevers can look almost simultaneous, but GURPS breaks it down into I Feint, you Attack, I Attack with the advantage of my Feint.

[triple ninja'd!]

[daniel_gudman]

Originally Posted by bocharuk

It doesn't make sense to me that I could feint on my turn, be attacked and defend (or even be hit!) and then gain benefit from my feint on my next turn.

Well, for what it's worth, whenever I'm making Martial Arts (Taekwondo: Sport) checks in real life, this happens a lot.

When someone is attacking, they have to be committed, they have to be extended, they are open. Feinting isn't just a fake attack, it's a fake hole in your own defense, and when someone goes for that (fake) opening, they are vulnerable because they're committed to their attack; so you attack in that vulnerability you've created. But things don't always go smooth, so sometimes even if the opening was supposed to be fake, sometimes they still strike you.

[Anaraxes]

Having my defenses 'refreshed' at the start of my turn indicates there are concrete blocks of action time and that there is some sort of break 'between rounds' or at least 'between turns'.

Character have their own local turns for the sake of measuring an interval. In this case, you get a -4 to Parry when you're having to desperately parry much faster than normal. "Normal" is about once per second. If you're having to parry twice that fast, then you get a -4 to one of those parries.

So, you need to count a rate somehow. If you wanted to, you could start a 1-second timer for every parry, and then for any given attack, see how many outstanding parry timers are running. But if you're a human being, it's easier to mark intervals ("turns") and note when two or three parries fall into the same turn. This can theoretically introduce a little sampling error at those interval boundaries -- but it's a game, played by people around a table, and you need to simplify the bookkeeping somewhere.

there is some sort of break 'between rounds' or at least 'between turns'

I'm not sure where you get this idea. The existence of intervals for the sake of measurement doesn't imply a gap between them, any more than the ticking of a clock on the wall implies little pauses between every second. (And before people jump on me for that analogy, I'll point out it's meant to go only so far as to visualize continuous time. It's already been pointed out that there's not a global turn clock running for everyone, as there is in most games.)

[bocharuk]

Originally Posted by Anaraxes

I'm not sure where you get this idea.

Let's just say that I'm somewhere in the middle of the combat sequence and I'm engaged with two enemies: one who acts just before me and the other who acts last in the sequence. The faster enemy attacks me and I parry. I attack one of them on my turn and they defend. The slower enemy attacks me on their turn and I parry with a -4. Meanwhile, a third enemy, who happens to be first in the sequence has maneuvered into position and now attacks me on his turn. I parry. Now, I'm pretty sure most of us would call this attack is the start of the 'next round' because the fastest guy is acting. The thing is, the time between my last parry and this one is less than the time between the two parries I made 'last round' and yet I incur no penalty. This is what I meant. If 'defenses refresh' as I said, it implies that there are blocks of time with even tinier bits of time between them to allow for the refresh.

Now, I'm only responding to this in order to explain why I thought that way. I think I've already been won over by reading the responses on this thread (thanks to all). Part of the problem was having a very narrow view of what a feint maneuver is, and part of of it was thinking GURPS combat was a little less abstract than it is.

[johndallman]

Originally Posted by bocharuk

If 'defenses refresh' as I said, it implies that there are blocks of time with even tinier bits of time between them to allow for the refresh.

... part of of it was thinking GURPS combat was a little less abstract than it is.

Indeed, it is less abstract than some games, but still not really swing-by-swing. I have seen several attempts to design fully-detailed combat systems for RPGs, and they have all been far too cumbersome for enjoyable play.

[vicky_molokh]

Originally Posted by bocharuk

Let's just say that I'm somewhere in the middle of the combat sequence and I'm engaged with two enemies: one who acts just before me and the other who acts last in the sequence. The faster enemy attacks me and I parry. I attack one of them on my turn and they defend. The slower enemy attacks me on their turn and I parry with a -4. Meanwhile, a third enemy, who happens to be first in the sequence has maneuvered into position and now attacks me on his turn. I parry.

No.

Combat begins.
Fast Enemy Attacks. You Parry at +0.
You Attack. Whoever Parries at +0.
Slow Enemy Attacks. You Parry at +0 (this is your first parry from the moment of your declaration of manoeuvre).
Fast Enemy Attacks. You Parry at -4 (second parry, assuming you have one weapon).
You Attack, one of them Parries at +0. Your defences refresh.
Slow Enemy Attacks. You Parry at +0 (fresh).
Fast Enemy Attacks. You Parry at -4 (second).

I suspect you're thinking of things as if GURPS has 'global' rounds. It doesn't. Defences refresh for you when it becomes your turn to declare attacks. And once the combat started, you always do that in 1-second cycles (even if you get the right to declare multiple actions/manoeuvres each time it becomes your turn to declare them). There is no changing of action order*

* == A Wait allows you to delay an action by up to 1 second, but other, following actions are not delayed.

[DouglasCole]

Vicky has the right of it here. Each person's turn overlaps like shingles on a roof. Other than the somewhat arbitrary fact that combat has to start somewhere, and that the fastest guy goes first, each person's turn is self-contained to them.

Note that if you have five people fighting, this definitely does NOT imply that each person's turn is 0.2 seconds separated from the next guy.

If you have five people fighting, the only thing you can really say is that for each person, they have a one-second clock that marks each time they get to declare actions.

[Gef]

Originally Posted by bocharuk

The Feint rules have always bothered me to the point of totally trying to revamp the combat system with houserule after houserule.

It doesn't make sense to me that I could feint on my turn, be attacked and defend (or even be hit!) and then gain benefit from my feint on my next turn.

This bothers me too, a point I have raised in previous posts. I also find Feint a necessary technique, because of its use to RESIST a feint. A fighter who can't resist a feint is toast: Against an otherwise-equal opponent, he suffers a big defense penalty, and against a substantially better opponent, he suffers a huge penalty instead of one that's merely big.

If you eventually find a house rule you like, please ping me.

GEF

[vicky_molokh]

Originally Posted by Gef

This bothers me too, a point I have raised in previous posts. I also find Feint a necessary technique, because of its use to RESIST a feint. A fighter who can't resist a feint is toast: Against an otherwise-equal opponent, he suffers a big defense penalty, and against a substantially better opponent, he suffers a huge penalty instead of one that's merely big.

If you eventually find a house rule you like, please ping me.

GEF

I, on the other hand, find that Feints (and Parries!) are insufficiently encouraged by the probabilities in-game for regular, non-heroic skill levels (Default, usually 5, to skilled, commonly seen as a 12).