View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
Naaman Vice Admiral
Joined: 29 Jul 2011 Posts: 3191
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
CRMcNeill Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010 Posts: 16217 Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
Posted: Thu May 28, 2020 11:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Naaman wrote: | So, you "go first" this round, and then alternate taking turns... the effects only matter on the round in which initiative is "won" and then we go back to taking turns? |
Yes. Of course, with the Tactics skill re-write, there are some other advantages, such as the 21+ result allowing the "winning" side to redeclare their actions. I've also considered going by Perception ranked highest to lowest regardless of "side", and allowing the Initiative bonus from the Tactics roll to be applied to Perception when determining Initiative order.
I'm open to suggestions, of course... _________________ "No set of rules can cover every situation. It's expected that you will make up new rules to suit the needs of your game." - The Star Wars Roleplaying Game, 2R&E, pg. 69, WEG, 1996.
The CRMcNeill Stat/Rule Index
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
MrNexx Rear Admiral
Joined: 25 Mar 2016 Posts: 2248 Location: San Antonio
|
Posted: Fri May 29, 2020 2:36 am Post subject: |
|
|
Naaman wrote: | You would have to decide what "having the initiative" really means.
I know of a system wherein you take a turn on your initiative count, and on half of your initiative count, and on half of that count, etc. So if you roll an initiative of 10, you get to act on count 10, on count 5, and count 2 (or something... I'm not sure what the lower limit on initiative is... I think the system is Exalted, if I remember correctly. I'll see if I can look it up and find out.
|
Shadowrun was similar, at least in 1st and 2nd edition. Roll your intiative... then go again on roll -10, then roll -20, etc, until you ran out of numbers. High initiative individuals were incredibly powerful, since they could go several times before anyone else got to... if you connived a 41 initiative roll, and everyone else was hanging out around 12, you were going to get to take several actions before they drew breath. 3rd edition Shadowrun changed this to highest went first, but everyone got their first turns before anyone got their second, and so on.
On initiative, it's always a sticky problem, and some of it comes down to whether you want a declarations phase.
With a declarations phase, I might have the side that won initiative decide if they want to declare first or second, and then proceed through everyone in Perception order.... so my ambushers may declare first during the ambush round, then second on subsequent rounds so they can react to their opponent's plans... But Slow Larry, with the 1D Perception, is going to go last no matter when he declares. You could then allow a Tactics roll to allow initiative to switch hands, if someone was willing to sacrifice their round to coordinate tactics.
Without a declarations phase, I would be more inclined to have Tactics work in lieu of Command, and provide a bonus to rolled initiative. Tactical Tom radios orders to everyone, and when initiative comes up again, you get a bonus based on Tom's tactics roll. _________________ "I've Seen Your Daily Routine. You Are Not Busy!"
“We're going to win this war, not by fighting what we hate, but saving what we love.”
http://rpgcrank.blogspot.com/ |
|
Back to top |
|
|
CRMcNeill Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010 Posts: 16217 Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
Posted: Fri May 29, 2020 8:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
I'm partial to the Concurrent Action Penalty house rule, discussed here. _________________ "No set of rules can cover every situation. It's expected that you will make up new rules to suit the needs of your game." - The Star Wars Roleplaying Game, 2R&E, pg. 69, WEG, 1996.
The CRMcNeill Stat/Rule Index
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
Naaman Vice Admiral
Joined: 29 Jul 2011 Posts: 3191
|
Posted: Fri May 29, 2020 11:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
MrNexx wrote: |
Shadowrun was similar, at least in 1st and 2nd edition. Roll your intiative... then go again on roll -10, then roll -20, etc, until you ran out of numbers. |
That might be what I was thinking, actually, and it makes more sense from a limitation stand point.
In my opinion, this is probably the best way to do initiative, if we want initiative to matter throughout the battle.
One other (very simple) way to increase the meaning of initiative is to reroll it each round. This will allow higher initiative characters to still usually get the "first" turn, but would also provide greater incentive for using skills (such as the proposed house-ruled tactics) to temporarily modify initiative.
CRMcNeill wrote: | I'm partial to the Concurrent Action Penalty house rule, discussed here. |
So are you looking for a way to unify the concept of initiative with the penalty for taking multiple/simultaneous actions (higher initiative gets "free" concurrent actions, or gets them at a reduced penalty)? _________________ .
SpecForce Combat Elements
All About Lightsabers: Designing, Building, and Fighting |
|
Back to top |
|
|
CRMcNeill Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010 Posts: 16217 Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
Posted: Sun May 31, 2020 12:20 am Post subject: |
|
|
I'm thinking something like the Shadowrun system, but with a couple wrinkles.1). Characters can choose to make Concurrent Actions during their turns, but effectively suffer double MAPs. So, if a character chooses to shoot once at two different stormtroopers during the same "turn", they take a -1D MAP plus a -1D CAP for a combined penalty of -2D.
2). The "+1D to Initiative" result on the Tactics skill chart in the OP would also be applied to the Perception Attribute for everyone on the winning side. _________________ "No set of rules can cover every situation. It's expected that you will make up new rules to suit the needs of your game." - The Star Wars Roleplaying Game, 2R&E, pg. 69, WEG, 1996.
The CRMcNeill Stat/Rule Index
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
Naaman Vice Admiral
Joined: 29 Jul 2011 Posts: 3191
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
CRMcNeill Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010 Posts: 16217 Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
Posted: Sun May 31, 2020 2:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Naaman wrote: | Oh, I see.
This already looks pretty good to me, then. |
With the additional twist that the initiative order sticks until the losing side makes a successful Tactics roll, at which point everyone re-rolls to generate a new order.
Also, to clarify, Initiative order would run highest to lowest for all combatants, not alternating from side to side. _________________ "No set of rules can cover every situation. It's expected that you will make up new rules to suit the needs of your game." - The Star Wars Roleplaying Game, 2R&E, pg. 69, WEG, 1996.
The CRMcNeill Stat/Rule Index
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
The Bissler Commander
Joined: 08 Jun 2016 Posts: 260
|
Posted: Sun Aug 02, 2020 4:12 pm Post subject: Re: Tactics: A New Old Approach |
|
|
CRMcNeill wrote: | I came across a 1E rule for the use of Tactics in the Rules Companion. The rules themselves were outdated (The "Haste" Rules got folded into Initiative and MAPs in 2E / 2R&E), but it did get me thinking about alternatives.
The bare bones version of what I'm thinking is this:-To use the Tactics skill, roll your skill level against either a flat Difficulty or against the opposing commander's Tactics roll.
-On a success, refer to the following table:1-10 = Your unit / party receives a +1D bonus to Initiative.
11-20 = Your unit receives a +1D bonus to Initiative, and may ignore 1D of MAP
21+ = Your unit receives a +1D bonus to Initiative, may ignore 1D of MAP, and may redeclare its actions for that round after the enemy has declared theirs.
Any bonuses last until either commander decides to change tactics, at which point the Tactics skill is re-rolled to generate a new result, which takes effect at the beginning of the following round. Naturally, a Command skill roll would be needed to inform the unit as to the new tactic, but I just wanted to get this out there. |
Thanks for drawing my attention to this CR, very interesting! Apologies for my ignorance, but what is MAP? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Whill Dark Lord of the Jedi (Owner/Admin)
Joined: 14 Apr 2008 Posts: 10317 Location: Columbus, Ohio, USA, Earth, The Solar System, The Milky Way Galaxy
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
The Bissler Commander
Joined: 08 Jun 2016 Posts: 260
|
Posted: Sun Aug 02, 2020 6:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Many thanks Whill! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
The Bissler Commander
Joined: 08 Jun 2016 Posts: 260
|
Posted: Fri Aug 07, 2020 10:56 am Post subject: Re: Tactics: A New Old Approach |
|
|
CRMcNeill wrote: | I came across a 1E rule for the use of Tactics in the Rules Companion. The rules themselves were outdated (The "Haste" Rules got folded into Initiative and MAPs in 2E / 2R&E), but it did get me thinking about alternatives.
The bare bones version of what I'm thinking is this:-To use the Tactics skill, roll your skill level against either a flat Difficulty or against the opposing commander's Tactics roll.
-On a success, refer to the following table:1-10 = Your unit / party receives a +1D bonus to Initiative.
11-20 = Your unit receives a +1D bonus to Initiative, and may ignore 1D of MAP
21+ = Your unit receives a +1D bonus to Initiative, may ignore 1D of MAP, and may redeclare its actions for that round after the enemy has declared theirs.
Any bonuses last until either commander decides to change tactics, at which point the Tactics skill is re-rolled to generate a new result, which takes effect at the beginning of the following round. Naturally, a Command skill roll would be needed to inform the unit as to the new tactic, but I just wanted to get this out there. |
@CR It's just occurred to me that on a Capital Ship, the Commander only commands his crews while those crew members would deal with the various actions that the commander has ordered them to carry out, i.e. gunners, pilots, etc. That being the case, why would a Capital Ship suffer Multiple Action Penalties? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
CRMcNeill Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010 Posts: 16217 Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
Posted: Fri Aug 07, 2020 12:20 pm Post subject: Re: Tactics: A New Old Approach |
|
|
The Bissler wrote: | @CR It's just occurred to me that on a Capital Ship, the Commander only commands his crews while those crew members would deal with the various actions that the commander has ordered them to carry out, i.e. gunners, pilots, etc. That being the case, why would a Capital Ship suffer Multiple Action Penalties? |
I'm inclined to say that it wouldn't, but I've penalized Capital Ships in other areas, as well. Of particular note is that I apply Scale modifiers to Maneuvers, so that if a larger Scale craft attempts to duplicate or counter the maneuvers of a smaller Scale craft, it suffers a penalty equal to the Scale difference (which reduces at -2D per round). This makes it easier, for example, for starfighters to maneuver to the aft arc of an ISD and attack it with proton torpedoes, as it will take 1-2 additional rounds for the ISD to turn and bring its broadside to bear (unless the ISD captain decides to risk a Movement Mishap by attempting the Maneuver even with the penalty).
I suppose, for the purposes of this rule, the "ignore 1D of MAP" could be applied as an anti-penalty to offset any Scale-related Maneuver penalties. _________________ "No set of rules can cover every situation. It's expected that you will make up new rules to suit the needs of your game." - The Star Wars Roleplaying Game, 2R&E, pg. 69, WEG, 1996.
The CRMcNeill Stat/Rule Index
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
CRMcNeill Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010 Posts: 16217 Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
Posted: Fri Aug 07, 2020 2:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Alternately, you could apply MAPs to the Captain's Command skill for every action he's ordering the ship to take. So long as the ship is just traveling in a relatively straight line and shooting at the ISD, it would only count as a single action, but if he's also trying to evade incoming fire, or travel at All-Out, then he would have a lot more on his mental plate than he would under other circumstances. MAPs would make sense there. _________________ "No set of rules can cover every situation. It's expected that you will make up new rules to suit the needs of your game." - The Star Wars Roleplaying Game, 2R&E, pg. 69, WEG, 1996.
The CRMcNeill Stat/Rule Index
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
The Bissler Commander
Joined: 08 Jun 2016 Posts: 260
|
Posted: Fri Aug 07, 2020 3:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
CRMcNeill wrote: | Alternately, you could apply MAPs to the Captain's Command skill for every action he's ordering the ship to take. So long as the ship is just traveling in a relatively straight line and shooting at the ISD, it would only count as a single action, but if he's also trying to evade incoming fire, or travel at All-Out, then he would have a lot more on his mental plate than he would under other circumstances. MAPs would make sense there. |
Yes, I think this works. I'm inclined to be a little lenient about MAPs here because actions could pile up quickly, for example:
Capital Ship Piloting (for movement)
Capital Ship Piloting (as reaction)
Capital Ship Gunnery x 6 (3 arcs with 2 weapons each)
...and that's assuming that the crew are dealing with Shields, Sensors, Astrogation without his command (which I would assume, but others may disagree.)
I'm thinking perhaps a -1D penalty for every 2 actions a Commander wants to carry out? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|