From: sl9b4@cc.usu.edu (Deep Six)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
Subject: Re: Time mechanics
Date: 6 Sep 92 01:27:41 MDT
Distribution: world
Organization: Utah State University

In article <1992Sep4.093659.58625@cc.usu.edu>, slp66@cc.usu.edu writes:

> The fight was 100 yards away at the outer perimeter.  The point is that there
> is no way the PC's could have been involved in the fight.  GURPS fights go too
> fast for characters to be involved unless they are right there.

And real people wouldn't be able to be involved in that fight either, Matt.
It's realistic. I don't have the map in front of me, but I believe that 
attack was about 80 or so yards away, and the PCs were asleep inside a 
building when it happened. You GMed the encounter -- you had the enemy shoot 
about three times and then run away (obviously THEY were able to maneuver
successfully). That took a whole 6 seconds at most. How were the PCs 
supposed to get out there? You're blaming GURPS rules because a fight that 
YOU orcestrated didn't last long enough for the PCs to get involved? The 
enemy was only in range for 5-6 rounds. By your own argument, your AD&D 
PCs wouldn't have been able to get there either.

Your original point was that AD&D is more realistic in terms of time
mechanics (cuz PCs could do more with a round). But that argument
rests on the assumption that in reality, people can do more with a
round. That's pretty dubious, don't you think? Would reality allow
a person a full minute to maneuver in the middle of a fire fight? 
No chance. I am not going to stack AD&D's reality flubs with those of 
GURPS, because that has been done countless times before me by people
who know more about both systems. Suffice to say that GURPS is as 
realistic (if not more so) as AD&D, especially when it comes to 
the quickness of combat.

Now, you also mention that AD&D is more ``forgiving and playable''
because the PCs can ``make realistic choices'' (paraphrase) on what
to do in combat. Is that really true? Let's put the question to your
garden-variety foot soldier. If you asked an infantry man if it is 
adviseable or desireable to move when the enemy is shooting, he'd 
probably say, no, unless you have a damn good reason, some cover fire,
some concealment, a lot of luck and big balls. GURPS reflects this. 
When the bullets (or spells or arrows) start to fly, you shouldn't be
able to take a minute to stroll around the battle ground, checking
this and that, making decisions and then taking an action (like you
can in AD&D). GURPS is more realistic in this sense. For me, that is
both better and more playable. I am not saying that GURPS is more 
realistic overall, but it is clearly the exact opposite of what you
first asserted.

> Ok, in Harn you can run away.  Not in Gurps.  Hey you better stay where you are
> and hope you can fight it out.  Manuevering in GURPS is suicidal.  It's very
> bad.  Don't try it.  You'll get killed.  

If you ever get in combat, better do the same thing. That's good, realistic
advice. GURPS reflects reality in this sense. If you want to move in GURPS,
you better damn sure have some cover fire, maybe some smoke, some masking
terrain, and a prayer in your heart. And if you do move, make sure you only
move 2-3 seconds at time, then take cover again. That is realistic. One minute
rounds are not.

> Now, in AD&D you can manuever and have a chance of surviving.  

Not necessarily true in reality. That make AD&D less realistic, right?

> you can move and engage and if you do it right, you've got it made.  Now, 
> which system is move realistic?  AD&D.  

I think it's safe to say that in AD&D you've always got it made. With a 
full minute to kill (figuratively and literally), you can do practically 
anything. Is that true in real life? Nope.

> In real life you can maneuver and shift positions.  GURPS won't let you 
> do that to save the farm.

Not the way you want to maneuver and shift, no. You want to get up, walk
around, move a quarter mile or so, set up some sandbags, dig a few fox
holes, then obliterate the enemy (like you do in AD&D). You just can't do 
that in real life.

And with that point, if you're so handicapped in terms of maneuverability,
then NPCs will be too, right? So what is the problem? You're both on 
equal footing. It's not as if the PCs are at some sort of disadvantage.

No flames here, I didn't really intend to get involved. But I saw a lot
of points go unanswered here. 

Okay,
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Chadd VanZanten SL9B4@CC.USU.EDU + ``Charlie don't surf!'' --Big Duke in 
Francis Coppala's Apocolypse Now