I had a thought on a possible harsh realism rule that might help address the problem of players of melee fighters in GURPS feeling like it is sub-optimal to do anything other than take attack maneuvers or move so they can take attack maneuvers. Before I get into the actual proposal, I want to make clear that I realize that it is not always sub-optimal to take other maneuvers--like evaluate, feint, beat, grappling (especially with Technical Grappling), etc.--but typically the odds seem to work out that it is better to just attack unless skill is moderately low to low or a difficult location needs to be targeted. Also, I have read The Last Gasp from Alternate GURPS II and I think it does a great job of tackling this problem from the standpoint of how fatiguing real fights are which results in pauses in the action so people can catch their breath.
That said, there is another reason that people do not just attack-attack-attack in a fight: any attack opens you up a little to a counter-attack or an attack from someone else, especially when you consider the one-second almost simultaneous action of GURPS turns. As a result of this, I propose a new Harsh Realism rule to model this (please note that I realize that I am not a master of any martial art and that my proposed rule is based on my observations, logic, and limited personal experience with martial arts instruction and sparring):
Harsh Realism for Attacks Affecting Defenses
Realistically, even properly executed attacks compromise the attackers defenses to some degree. With some exceptions, this will work out as follows:
1) Making a Melee or Ranged attack will result in a penalty of -2 to parries with the attacking weapon or hand and -1 to all other active defenses against all attacks until the start of the attackers next turn.
For melee attacks this represents the weapon/hand being brought out of the guard position and the other defenses being inhibited slightly by the required change in body mechanics to make a standard attack (examples: stepping or rotating into an attack making dodging more difficult, slightly lowering/moving of a shield to allow an attack, the inability of an off hand to defend the attacking hand's side well, etc.). For a ranged attack this represents the moment of stillness, predictable motion, and concentration required to make a normal ranged attack as well as the body mechanics required which make it harder to use other defenses at the same time.
2) Committed Attacks options still do not allow the attacking weapon to parry, but now give a -3 to all other active defenses until the start of the attackers next turn.
3) Defensive attacks: the +1 to one active defense in exchange for the normal damage penalty is cumulative with the new defense penalties. This means that a defensive attack allows a block, dodge, or parry with a different weapon at no penalty or parrying with the attacking weapon at -1. Using a defensive attack to allow a parry with a Parry U weapon after attacking with it results in a -2 to parry with that weapon and -1 to all other active defenses (as per a normal attack with a normal weapon).
4) Defensive ranged attack: a defensive ranged attack is now allowed. This results in same defensive options as the defensive melee attack, but the penalty is -2 to the attack roll instead of damage. This represents moving erratically while firing for an increased dodge, concentrating on shooting less to not leave an opening of some other kind, holding a weapon at an odd angle to take better advantage of a shield, etc. This option is cumulative with the -2 to bow and shield skills for firing a bow while having a ready shield.
5) Feints penalize the parry of the attacking weapon by -1 until the start of the next turn but do not penalize the other active defenses. This is to simulate that the feint is not a full attack and to make it more attractive compared to a regular attack action.
6) Beats give the normal penalties for attacks that a normal attack action does in this new rule. This is because a beat is a full-strength attack unless it is paired with a defensive attack option (I realize this makes beats even worse than they currently are when compared to parries, but I can't come up with a justification for them to not be penalized like a normal attack. I am tempted though, just for balance, to give a beat the same penalties as a feint above and call it good).
7) Missed Grapple attempts penalize the hand(s) that attempted the grapple by -1 while all other defenses remain unpenalized. Exception: grapple attempts with legs or the body (for constriction attacks) penalize dodge by -1 as well as any attempts to parry with the legs or body, respectively.
8) Ready maneuvers penalize the parry of the involved limb by -1, all other defenses are unpenalized. At GM discretion parrying with a limb involved in a ready maneuver may cancel the effect of the ready (example: parrying with an arm being used to ready a crossbow or draw a bow may result in progress being lost).
9) Moving more than 1/2 your encumbrance adjusted move penalizes parry and block by -1. Sprinting or moving with enhanced move penalizes parry and block by -2, dodge by -1. These penalties are because of the difficulties of maintaining a guard position while moving quickly and the additional difficulty of dodging while sprinting.
10) All penalties from an opponent using deceptive attack, riposte, counterattack, and other attack maneuvers that penalize the defender's defenses are cumulative with the above penalties. Example Robert attacks Bruce with his broadsword. Until his next turn, Robert's parry with his broadsword is at -2, all other active defenses are at -1. Bruce then deceptive attacks Robert for a negative -2 penalty to Robert's defenses. If Bruce hits, Robert would parry with his broadsword at -4 and all of his other defenses will be at -3.
I have not play tested this, it may in fact be overly harsh. My hope though is that these rules will result in more defensive attacks and/or evaluate maneuvers, followed by better deceptive attacks, feints, etc., as well as grapples. The object will be to make sure the attack connects in order to either end the fight or at least cause shock penalties, thus mitigating the defensive penalties that the attacker takes. My impression is that combat with deadly weapons tends to be cautious unless it is done by a style that intentionally trains its practitioners to be aggressive, so I hope this models this as well as slowing-down combat.
One other option that I have thought of is to only apply the additional penalties to attack maneuvers if the attacker takes two attack maneuvers in a row. So there will be no penalty on defenses after the first attack maneuver of a flurry, but if the attacker takes an attack maneuver on his immediate next turn, he starts taking penalties. This makes initial attacks not so dangerous, but continuing to press the attack can be risky.
Thoughts?
Harsh Realism for Attacks Affecting Defenses
That said, there is another reason that people do not just attack-attack-attack in a fight: any attack opens you up a little to a counter-attack or an attack from someone else, especially when you consider the one-second almost simultaneous action of GURPS turns. As a result of this, I propose a new Harsh Realism rule to model this (please note that I realize that I am not a master of any martial art and that my proposed rule is based on my observations, logic, and limited personal experience with martial arts instruction and sparring):
Harsh Realism for Attacks Affecting Defenses
Realistically, even properly executed attacks compromise the attackers defenses to some degree. With some exceptions, this will work out as follows:
1) Making a Melee or Ranged attack will result in a penalty of -2 to parries with the attacking weapon or hand and -1 to all other active defenses against all attacks until the start of the attackers next turn.
For melee attacks this represents the weapon/hand being brought out of the guard position and the other defenses being inhibited slightly by the required change in body mechanics to make a standard attack (examples: stepping or rotating into an attack making dodging more difficult, slightly lowering/moving of a shield to allow an attack, the inability of an off hand to defend the attacking hand's side well, etc.). For a ranged attack this represents the moment of stillness, predictable motion, and concentration required to make a normal ranged attack as well as the body mechanics required which make it harder to use other defenses at the same time.
2) Committed Attacks options still do not allow the attacking weapon to parry, but now give a -3 to all other active defenses until the start of the attackers next turn.
3) Defensive attacks: the +1 to one active defense in exchange for the normal damage penalty is cumulative with the new defense penalties. This means that a defensive attack allows a block, dodge, or parry with a different weapon at no penalty or parrying with the attacking weapon at -1. Using a defensive attack to allow a parry with a Parry U weapon after attacking with it results in a -2 to parry with that weapon and -1 to all other active defenses (as per a normal attack with a normal weapon).
4) Defensive ranged attack: a defensive ranged attack is now allowed. This results in same defensive options as the defensive melee attack, but the penalty is -2 to the attack roll instead of damage. This represents moving erratically while firing for an increased dodge, concentrating on shooting less to not leave an opening of some other kind, holding a weapon at an odd angle to take better advantage of a shield, etc. This option is cumulative with the -2 to bow and shield skills for firing a bow while having a ready shield.
5) Feints penalize the parry of the attacking weapon by -1 until the start of the next turn but do not penalize the other active defenses. This is to simulate that the feint is not a full attack and to make it more attractive compared to a regular attack action.
6) Beats give the normal penalties for attacks that a normal attack action does in this new rule. This is because a beat is a full-strength attack unless it is paired with a defensive attack option (I realize this makes beats even worse than they currently are when compared to parries, but I can't come up with a justification for them to not be penalized like a normal attack. I am tempted though, just for balance, to give a beat the same penalties as a feint above and call it good).
7) Missed Grapple attempts penalize the hand(s) that attempted the grapple by -1 while all other defenses remain unpenalized. Exception: grapple attempts with legs or the body (for constriction attacks) penalize dodge by -1 as well as any attempts to parry with the legs or body, respectively.
8) Ready maneuvers penalize the parry of the involved limb by -1, all other defenses are unpenalized. At GM discretion parrying with a limb involved in a ready maneuver may cancel the effect of the ready (example: parrying with an arm being used to ready a crossbow or draw a bow may result in progress being lost).
9) Moving more than 1/2 your encumbrance adjusted move penalizes parry and block by -1. Sprinting or moving with enhanced move penalizes parry and block by -2, dodge by -1. These penalties are because of the difficulties of maintaining a guard position while moving quickly and the additional difficulty of dodging while sprinting.
10) All penalties from an opponent using deceptive attack, riposte, counterattack, and other attack maneuvers that penalize the defender's defenses are cumulative with the above penalties. Example Robert attacks Bruce with his broadsword. Until his next turn, Robert's parry with his broadsword is at -2, all other active defenses are at -1. Bruce then deceptive attacks Robert for a negative -2 penalty to Robert's defenses. If Bruce hits, Robert would parry with his broadsword at -4 and all of his other defenses will be at -3.
I have not play tested this, it may in fact be overly harsh. My hope though is that these rules will result in more defensive attacks and/or evaluate maneuvers, followed by better deceptive attacks, feints, etc., as well as grapples. The object will be to make sure the attack connects in order to either end the fight or at least cause shock penalties, thus mitigating the defensive penalties that the attacker takes. My impression is that combat with deadly weapons tends to be cautious unless it is done by a style that intentionally trains its practitioners to be aggressive, so I hope this models this as well as slowing-down combat.
One other option that I have thought of is to only apply the additional penalties to attack maneuvers if the attacker takes two attack maneuvers in a row. So there will be no penalty on defenses after the first attack maneuver of a flurry, but if the attacker takes an attack maneuver on his immediate next turn, he starts taking penalties. This makes initial attacks not so dangerous, but continuing to press the attack can be risky.
Thoughts?
0 commentaires:
Enregistrer un commentaire