I was wrong about darkness penalties in GURPS

I was wrong about darkness penalties in GURPS

Not long ago, I delved into the rules that dealt with invisibility, darkness, and illumination in GURPS. Also, a few days ago we had a new book released – GURPS Tactical Shooting: Extreme Conditions. Inside that book, I found a single line that made me realize something – I’ve been wrong all along! The said line is the following: “Once the target is spotted, the maximum penalty is ‑4 (per p. B394), as the shooter knows the position of that foe within one yard.” Now let me explain why this is very important!

This means that the partial darkness penalty to attack rolls that ranges from -1 to -9 on pages 547 and 548 of GURPS Basic Set is… horseshit. At least in some cases. I am struggling with putting it to words eloquently, so let me demonstrate you how it all works on some examples.

Example #1: Fighter #1 and Fighter #2 both have Perception 10, are 1 yard apart, and the ambient illumination level is -7. Fighter #1 rolls against his Vision to spot Fighter #2. He gets a +10 bonus for the target being in plain sight, and a -7 penalty for illumination, but no range penalty at such close range. He rolls against 13 and rolls 10, which is a success. This means that he has spotted his opponent and now knows where he is. Let’s say that he has his Shortsword skill at level 14. Typically, you would let him make his attack at -7, rolling against 7 to hit, right? But since fighter #1 knows the exact hex where his target is, he actually may use the rules for attacking as if he couldn’t see his foe, but knew his location for sure. That means that the penalty is only -4, but the adjusted skill cannot exceed 9. Thus, Shortsword-14 – 4 is 10, and it is reduced to 9 thanks to this cap. The chance to hit is better, but due to these rules, you cannot target hit locations and have to roll it randomly.

            Thus, Fighter #1 has two options – roll against 9 to hit a random hit location of his opponent, or roll against 7 and elect to target a hit location. This changes a lot.

            Now, there are two questions. First, when does the +10 for being in plain sight apply? From what I gathered, it applies basically all the time, unless the target is deliberately trying to hide itself by using Stealth, Camouflage, Invisibility, etc. I will link a blog post by Douglas Cole that explains this.

            Second, do you have to roll Vision every second? I’d say that no, you don’t. After you spot an opponent, he is considered spotted, until line of sight is broken for a second. Thus, if Fighter #2 would’ve run around Fighter #1 or behind cover, Fighter #1 would’ve had to roll Vision again. I think this is sensible, even though the actual rules are silent on this topic.

 

Example #2: Human with Perception 15 is fighting an elf with Perception 10 and Night Vision 5. The ambient illumination penalty is -5. This is a situation I complained about in the past, as they see everything identically, but the human is supposed to fight at -5, and the elf is unpenalized in combat.

            Let’s say that they are one yard apart again. Human rolls Vision to spot the elf. Since the elf is in plain sight, the +10 bonus applies, as does the -5 darkness penalty. Thus, the human rolls against 15 + 10 – 5 = 20 and, of course, spots the elf. Let’s say that he has Shortsword-12. He may attack the elf at -5 due to darkness, rolling against 7 to hit, and he is able to target hit locations this way. Or he may attack the elf at -4, rolling against 8 to hit, but rolling hit locations randomly, since he knows the exact location of the elf.

            The elf rolls Vision to spot the human. He rolls against 10 + 10 for the human being in plain sight, rolling against 20. Of course, he spots the human. See? They both roll against 20 to see one another. Let’s assume that the elf also has Shortsword-12. The elf may simply attack by rolling against 12 to hit, because his Night Vision negates the darkness penalty.

            But what if the darkness penalty were -8 instead? They both would have to roll against 17 to spot one another. The human would be able to attack either by rolling against 4 to hit precisely, or against 8 to hit randomly. The elf would be able to attack either by rolling against 9 to hit precisely, or against 8 to hit randomly.

            Night Vision still doesn’t feel right, doesn’t it? Let’s try the same situation, but disregard Night Vision negating combat penalties. So, now it will only affect Vision penalties from darkness.

Example #3: The situation is the same – we have to same human and elf in -5 darkness. They still roll against 20 to spot one another. The human still can roll against 7 to hit if he wants to target a hit location, or against 8 to hit a random hit location. The elf has the same options. I feel that this treatment of Night Vision is more fair and sensible, as it basically is limited Acute Vision and not limited Acute Vision and DX. I will have to think about it.

Conclusion:

1. Darkness penalties are weird

2. Night Vision probably shouldn't negate combat penalties

3. Darkness penalties aren't that big of a deal in melee combat, where range penalties are low, so even in almost complete darkness you have a good chance to spot your assailant

4. Darkness penalties are a much bigger deal in ranged combat

5. Vision rolls in combat should be a thing, and Situational Awareness rules in GURPS Tactical Shooting could give you some ideas