Thursday, November 5, 2020

Harsh Realism for Long Weapons

GURPS has a generous rule for long weapons, which dates back to the rules in Man-to-Man.

The 4th edition version reads in part as follows:

Attacking Through an Occupied Hex

You can attack “through” someone else in melee if you are using a weapon with a reach of two yards or more. You may attack through a friend at no penalty (this is a basic part of your training with any long weapon). (Campaigns, p. 388)

Is that really true, though? When you learn staff, spear, two-handed sword, longsword, greataxe, maul, glaive, etc. you learn to swing over and around your friends?

Maybe so.

Do your friends learn how to fight in a way that leaves you totally unimpeded to attack through them? And they aren't thrown off in any way, shape, or form by you attacking past them? All on a one second time scale?

I think not. I think earlier versions of GURPS assume some of what was later added under the Teamwork perk. I think a "harsh realism" rule is appropriate here.

Harsh Realism for Long Weapons

GURPS allows long weapons to attack through friendly hexes at no penalty; this rule applies a -4 penalty per occupied hex no matter the relationship to the attacking fighter. This penalty is eliminated if both the attacker and the occupant have the Teamwork perk.

On a critial miss, any "dropped weapon" may hit the occupant of the hex you are attacking through - 1-4 on 1d. This is distracting - -2 to all rolls for that turn (and may be harmful if the weapon is a force sword or similar weapon.) Critical misses that result in hitting a friend will hit the occupied hex's occupant . . . if it's an ally! Otherwise, determine who is hit normally.

Seems a little harsh, but not too harsh. I suppose I can harsh it up . . . but this is a good start. It seems better than you need to have learned to fight with someone before attacking over them without penalizing either of you.


  1. I think your patch rule works well and makes sense.

    In the Fantasy Trip: Melee rules that are (basically) the antecedents of Man-to-Man, you can attack past an ally with a pole weapon only if it's not a direct line through the ally's hex. So, standing behind an ally, you can "jab" at a foe in the front-right or front-left hex of your ally, but not directly in front of your ally. Likewise, you can jab between two allies at a foe standing in the hex straight through between them (if hex orientation is suitable). I wonder why Man-to-Man changed it to allow attacks right through allies.

    I think the -4 penalty is warranted.

  2. This comment has been removed by the author.

  3. Speaking as someone with a significant amount of experience fighting with long weapons in the SCA (including the Pennsic War), consider the following:

    Attacking with a spear or using a polearm as a spear is much, much easier when trying to attack the opponents in front of your buddies than using a great sword. All you have to do is look for gaps and quickly thrust through them. In contrast with a great-sword (or swinging a halberd), you have to press right up behind your buddies and swing over their heads. It helps tremendously if you're taller than your buds and almost impossible if you're not.

    Another point to remember, is that attacking past an enemy is suicidal unless you're part of a spear/pike formation, that is, a wall of spears. That's because a long spear or pike has no defence whatsoever against any weapon at all. But while a wall of spears will stop almost any attack due to superior reach, it is vulnerable to an experienced shield wall. A proper shield wall with overlapping shields is very difficult to stop without artillery.

    I can't give GURPS specific advice, but in d20 systems I'd give the pike/spearmen a penalty of 1-20 (1d20) when attacking through a shield wall and a penalty of 5-20 (5d4) for the great weapons unless the swordsman was huge, like a half-ogre.

    As for a dropped weapon distracting the front-ranker, either I wouldn't bother or reduce it to a -1 on a single attack. Believe me when I tell you that everyone is so amped up on adrenaline and getting constantly jostled that a dropped weapon is almost never noticed.

    On the other hand, if the second rank halberdier or third rank pikeman misses the enemy, does he accidentally hit one of his buddies. . .? Yeah, I did once and it distracted my bud enough for the enemy to kill him. Oops!

    1. Part of the problem with translating SCA formation fighting into GURPS is GURPS doesn't do tight formations. The front line is one fighter per yard, so long weapons from one yard back are more feasible.

      Tight formations are much harder to fight over/through for sure, and certainly much stronger than loose formations, but including them in GURPS is hard with the 1 yard hex.

  4. I slapped down a human silhouette onto a square with ratio 42 (inches wide) to 72 (inches tall). The human front-on look (without gear, and a very non-combat stance) is definitely less than half of that area. A medium shield gives DB +2 and covers about half the target. I think "-2 for pure area, and another -2 for movement within the hex unpredictably" or half coverage is -2 to defend, so -4 to hit" both get there nicely.

    Were I in the mood to be harsher, the Teamwork perk would halve it (b/c you can't always line up just the right shot), but "two points invested makes this nuisance not a nuisance anymore" is probably the best call.


Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...