change your shell color:
change your font size: 60% 70% 80% 90%
Toys for GURPS and other Role Playing Games

tbone wrote: 3. ±X on own

tbone wrote:

3. ±X on own TH for ±Y on own defense

The general idea is to create flexible attack and defense options that are more focused than the generic Step and Attack (and Defend), but not quite All-Out. There's nothing wrong with the general goal, and I've toyed with ideas myself.

But this one keeps popping up: "For every -2 on your TH, take +1 on your defense". Looks sensible for a second – and then, wait a second, doesn't this mean that by dropping attack altogether, I get half my skill added to my defense? That blows way past All-Out Defense and its crummy +2. Similarly, a trade-off that sacrifices defense in favor of TH must not offer a +4 (or better!) TH bonus if any defense remains, or it's broken the All-Out Attack.

With AOD and AOA setting the endpoints for no attack and no defense, respectively, there's very little room available for "semi-All-Out" options. Something simple like "Offensive Stance: +2 TH, -4 defense" and "Defensive Stance: -4 TH, +1 defense" are about it. (The former could be formula-ized: +1 TH per -2 defense, up to +3 TH. No room to make a formula from the latter, though.)

 

Well, GURPS Martial Arts for 4th ed will add options for this (as long as they don't end up edited out, but I doubt it) to make the transition from AoA to normal Attack/Move and Attack to AoD. Stay tuned ;) and check if someone with the appropriate security clearance comes and discloses it ;)

Reply

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • You may quote other posts using [quote] tags.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Use <!--pagebreak--> to create page breaks.

More information about formatting options

CAPTCHA
Sorry, I have to cast Detect Spammer...
atmosphe_e:
Powered by WebRing.