From: scasterg@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Stuart M Castergine)
Subject: Re: GURPS Rewrite
Organization: The Ohio State University
Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1992 23:23:11 GMT

In article <ELK.92Aug14160839@cblpo.att.com> elk@cblpo.att.com (elk) writes:
>
> >         One thing I would like to see is a 'fast-resolution' combat for
> > high-defense-roll characters that merges with the normal system. Currently,
> > the only suggestion that GURPS makes is to resolve hitting as a quick
> > contest between attack skill and defense roll - which pretty much makes
> > defenses obselete, and all-out attacks the 'in' choice.
>
>I don't think I can disagree more.

Oh, sure you can, Ed. :-)

>
>My gaming group decided that combats were just taking too darned long.
>We only meet monthly, and we'd rather spend some time role-playing
>instead of all of it resolving a combat.  So, we went to the quick
>contest method of resolving combats.

I'm another player sometimes-GM in the same gaming group, and I too
think the quick contest combat system works fine. I agree with Ed that
defenses are important and not obsolete.

>Defense is *NOT* obsolete.  It is absolutely essential with this
>method.  What we've discovered (and we stuck with quick contest by the
>way) was that if you want to live through combats, you need GOOD
>armour (and plenty of it) and you need those defense skills to be way
>up there.  
>
>All-out attack is useful if you think your opponent can't hit you, or
>if they can't get enough damage through your armour (like someone
>using a rapier on a guy in plate mail).  But, if your all-out attack
>doesn't just put the other guy on his butt THIS round, then you have
>to face an attack on nothing but PD next round.  You will get hit.
>Plain and simple.

I'm the one with the rapier :-). Ed's character is in plate. We've
been doing some mock combats. Armor is the key in this situation. My
character has very good defenses. Her very best parry on an attack to
the torso is 19. (11 for rapier, buckler PD1, torso armor PD2, a
magical bonus of PD2, plus a retreat +3). This can stop even many
all-out attacks with +4 to skill.

Unfortunately Ed's character has the dwarfism disad -- he's got +2
(puts him even up) to hit her legs which are less heavily armored. Her
best parry down there is 18. His all-out attack at +4 is 19.

So the odds are with him. And he only has to hit once, generally, to
cripple her leg, and the combat is over.

But what really makes the difference is his armor. He's wearing chain
overall with a heavy plate corselet and a great helm. His DR on the
head and torso is 9! She can't even damage him with her rapier at 1d6
damage. (but that would be the same without quick contests).

she's only DR3 on torso, DR 1 on the legs, so it doesn't take much to
take her down.

All she can do is plink at his arms and legs, where her impaling damage
doesn't double, doing 1-4 points of damage if she's lucky.

He feels pretty free to all-out attack him without qualms, because she
has a hard time hurting him in all that armor, even if he does't knock
her out quick. but if she was wearing more armor, or if he was wearing
less, things would be different. She's *almost* good enough to where
she'll be able to do an all-out attack on someone's eyeslits and have
a reasonable chance of making it if they can't defend well (like,
they've just all-out attacked). And an impaling shot through the eye
to the brain tends to put people out of action really quick.

She's in a much better position if she's not all alone. When you are
fighting in a melee, if you take an all-out attack, one of the guys
who you didn't hit is going to take the opportunity to make meat out of
you. 

And without people all-out attacking her, my character can fend people
off pretty well. NOTE: Don't try this at home. She's not meant to be a
combat character, she just does a good imitation of one, and she's
hell against the lightly armored rabble. Combat characters should
cover themselves in steel, scale or chain at the minimum. NO
exceptions. Her best combat move is to retreat quickly and scream
"Tiberious! Schol! Help!" (Schol and Tiberious are two majorly
dangerous dudes who she hangs out with).

It all comes down to the "Can a knight beat a fencer" question. I
think no, even though I play a fencer. I know *I* would rather be the
guy in heavy armor, myself.

Combats between un- or lightly-armored opponents tends to be *very*
quick and bloody. High defenses are essential, but hard to come by. If
you have a 15 skill, it is pretty easy to get a 15 parry: 10, plus 2
for heavy leather vest, plus 3 for retreat. You do a lot of retreating.
That's realistic. I've been a very serious fencer at times. Twice at
Division 2 national championships. You do a *lot* of retreating. :-)

In real life, it only takes one good touch. Not five like in fencing.
Bouts would be over *very* fast. I've gotten the first touch on people
much better than me. Sometimes it's been a good solid hit to the chest
that would definitely have been debilitating or fatal if we were
fencing with sharp weapons. Life is rough. I'd be dead a thousand
times over, myself.

GURPS makes the point: Combat is nasty, risky and deadly. Avoid it.






-- 
scasterg@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu -- Stuart M. Castergine
Fiver: "Oh, Hazel, look! The field! It's covered with blood!"
Hazel: "Don't be silly, it's only the light of the sunset." -- Watership Down