[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Defend Option - More discussion.

Hi Jeff,
  I know that GURPS turns are one second long.  When I was
saying that Defending in TFT was like GURPS's All Out Defence,
I was emphasizing that there was no attack component, that you
were strictly trying to keep yourself being hit.

  As such, the time scale does not matter.

  Note that in GURPS, the all out defence is very powerful.  You 
get TWO active defences.  (How powerful that defence is, is 
character dependent, but for a dozen or two character points,
this could easily HALVE the chance of being hit.)  Compare 
this to being attacked by a DX 16 figure in TFT.


On 2018-01-31, at 10:44 AM, Jeffrey Vandine wrote:
This is sort of off-topic, but it needs to be said here.

Comparing GURPS and TFT is pretty much apples and oranges.  The time scales are different for the tactical turns, and the maneuvers that can occur in GURPS have to be considered on the TFT timescale before you get carried away with such things.  Effectively, a GURPS character can take 3-5 actions for every SINGLE action that occurs in a TFT turn. 

So really, there's no comparison between the various GURPS actions, taken individually, and any TFT action.  If you want to compare the two, try to figure out what 3-5 actions the GURPS character takes will equate to DEFEND or ATTACK or DISENGAGE.

From: Peter von Kleinsmid <pvk@oz.net>
To: tft@brainiac.com
Cc: tft@brainiac.com; dan nicholson <kootenayvalleydan@yahoo.ca>; Alec Morrison <alphaalec@gmail.com>; Matt Fraser <mathesonfraser@gmail.com>; CJ <chrjames@gmail.com>; Steve Reinhardt <cpassport@mail.com>; Nils Lindeberg <018.591777@telia.com>; Jayson Webster <jayson_webster27@hotmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, January 30, 2018 11:55 PM
Subject: Re: Defend Option - More discussion.

At 10:21 PM 1/30/2018, Rick Smith wrote:
>  Defending is an all out defense in GURPS terms.  You are giving
>up all chance of hitting the other guy.  If you are sacrificing your only
>option this turn.  The defend option, should darn well make you
>harder to hit!
Yes. And Attack in TFT is like All Out Attack in GURPS terms (no thought
to defense, generally pretty reckless).

But those are the most extreme GURPS maneuvers. The others, such as
Attack and Wait, allow you to both attack and do something to avoid
being hit.

>I believe Peter questioned the usefulness of "Defend and Edge Away".
>Wouldn't jut disengaging be faster?  Sure.  But if you are likely to be
>hit and killed if you don't defend, two defends for a free disengage is
>an attractive option.  I've seen plenty of characters take this option for
>good and sensible reasons.
Sure. (Though it seems to me often either I have better DX than my foe so
I disengage without getting attacked, or he has better DX than me, so he
may well make his 4/DX roll to hit me anyway, and so I'd rather only get
hit once than twice.)

I'm sure it has a use, and I don't dislike it. I just think it's
not that generous an effect (but I'm used to GURPS where backing away
happens all the time as there is no engagement).

Though I don't dislike it, I also don't think it does much to address
the main deficiencies of defense in TFT.

As for the 1/3 defense, the way you wrote it is going to have an
uneven effect due to the bell curve and using the To-Hit roll also
for the 1/3 defense roll. It won't be 1/3 chance, and the actual
chance will vary based on the to-hit amount. As I wrote on the SJG
forum, I think the best version would be to roll an extra die at the
same time in another color, and use it to determine whether the
(actual, accurate, independent) 1/3 chance happens. You could even
have the odds vary by the DX and/or weapon talents of the defender,
without it really being any more complicated (in fact, it seems
simpler to me than your "multiple of three" mechanic, as well as more


Post to the entire list by writing to tft@brainiac.com.
Unsubscribe by mailing to majordomo@brainiac.com with the message body
"unsubscribe tft"