Re: (TFT) Re: engagement

["Craig W. Barber" <craigwbar@comcast.net>]

Which implies that the "mad weasel" defense wouldn't ever work in GURPS
either.  Anyone ever tried it?
  ----- Original Message -----
  From: pvk@oz.net
  To: tft@brainiac.com
  Sent: Tuesday, November 21, 2006 3:25 PM
  Subject: Re: (TFT) Re: engagement


  On Tue, November 21, 2006 8:31 am, Craig W. Barber wrote:
  > Right.  This seems to be one of the big divides between TFT and GURPS:
  > higher MA and engagement limits.
  ...

  Also the initiative roll and the seperation of movement and action into
  phases. Engagement is vital in TFT because everyone on one side moves,
  then the other side moves, then all attacks are done, which means that
  without engagement, the side with the initative could move to the side and
  rear with impunity, etc. Since GURPS lets each figure move and then act,
  there aren't the same issues. You might be able to try to run around
  someone, but it's not easy (especially with lower MA), and generally opens
  the runner up to getting nailed himself, except in situations where it
  makes some sense.
  =====
  Post to the entire list by writing to tft@brainiac.com.
  Unsubscribe by mailing to majordomo@brainiac.com with the message body
  "unsubscribe tft"
=====
Post to the entire list by writing to tft@brainiac.com.
Unsubscribe by mailing to majordomo@brainiac.com with the message body
"unsubscribe tft"