Tactics

[garhkal]

Rather than dig up the old thread on this i felt i would start a new one. it was asked a while back what exactly you get from tactics, as the rule book leaves this up to gm discression. Rather than go that route i have made up the following.

1) –“Group tactics must be done before the combat is joined for any benefits to be realized. All in the group benefit even if they were not party to the combined tactics roll, but 3 or more (if a 6 man table, 50% for lesser tables) must do so.
15-25 tactics roll - 1D bonus to the first 2 initiative rolls of the party,
Or
they can immediately act first in the first round of combat
20-30 tactics roll - 1D bonus to the first 4 initiative rolls,
Or
choice to act first in the first 2 rounds of combat. 2D 'wild die' pool to
disseminate to anyone for ONE roll (can be split up), but once used it is
done. Has NO harmful effect if a 1 but explodes as if a wild die.
30-40 tactics roll As with the above, but the wild die bonus goes to 3D
40-50 tactics roll As above, but bonus goes to 4D
50-60 tactics roll As above but instead of a 4D pool, everyone gets 1D to use as they see fit
when ever.
60+ tactics roll Everyone gets 2D to use when ever.
If the opposition has also rolled group tactics, which ever group gets higher than the other consults the above chart but rather than starting at 10 above, it starts at 01.”
_________________
Confucious sayeth, don't wash cat while drunk!

[jmanski]

I likey. You get a cookie, Garhk.
_________________
Blasted rules. Why can't they just be perfect?

[Delkarnu]

I don't care for extra D given for tactics rolls, unless it is very specific tactic used in combat like using fire to distract the enemy can give a bonus to another's sneak roll to get behind the enemy and surprise them.

Generally I use tactics as either the GM hint line, if the players make a tactics roll I give them hints on possible problem solutions, giving the player info that their character would know or has figured out with a good tactics ability. Helpful for those times when the players aren't getting the hints you've laid out. Can also help the players avoid an ambush by figuring out their opponents tactics.

When the players come up with their own plan, I occasionally roll an opposed tactics to see if their opponents will be surprised or anticipate the tactics used, can lead to better rewards or luck for the players, but can also lead to complications when the plan goes wrong.

For direct combat tactics, I use less roll modifiers and instead will let them figure out the other groups tactics to get a surprise going. "You can guess that these two are scouts from their gear, they probably have reinforcements 50 meters behind" So the players can ambush the main group instead of attacking the scouts and alerting the main force or try to take out the scouts silently.
_________________
This new hand, it's a fightin' hand!

[AWAD]

[jmanski]

I like the extra die concept. Trained units will operate more efficiently together than as individuals. Besides, this is a good way to give stormies a little more punch.
_________________
Blasted rules. Why can't they just be perfect?

[Lostboy]

In war everything is position and timing a superior tactics roll might tell you how to find the right position to attack from or get around the enemies patrols and heavy defences etc but actually getting doing any of these things requires the use of the proper skills i.e. sneak to slip past a patrol blasters to shoot. I think that with combined action bonuses getting an extra bonus from tactics is unnessasary. If your tactics are sound then the enemy will have a harder time hearing you when you sneak(you chose the area with visual cover and noise cover e.t.c.), you can get behind e-web or attack from cover or a blind spot e.t.c.

[jmanski]

But doesn't your argument support my stance?

You wrote:

[Lostboy]

Yes high tactical rolls should provide for a better strategic position but this should make the enemies difficulty classes higher. Giving the players access to more dice via good tactics adds to the bucket o dice problem and can potentialy give the characters a massive dice pool when combined with the bonuses given for combining their actions.

In other words a good tactic is it's own reward(avoidance of traps, better attack plans .e.t.c.) any other bonus the gm chooses to give should be a rollplaying choice.

At least that's my position. To each his own.

[vong]

[jmanski]

And, to be honest, how you handle tactics needs to match your campaign setting.

[atgxtg]

How about,

"Tactics Points". The group gets some tactics points based on the roll (say 1 for success +1 per 5 over difficulty) that can be spent by characters on that side like character points. This could give a nice bonus, but since it gets used up, it isn't a powerful as command.

[CRMcNeill]

Here's something I've been considering. Why not just make Tactics a sort of group Enhance Attribute for non-Force users?

Here's my theory (roughly).

The character who is in tactical command of the situation rolls Tactics, either against the opponent's Tactics skill, or just against a base difficulty (modifiers as needed).

Once he makes a successful Tactics roll, he must then pass a Command check which allows him to "disperse" those tactics to the characters under his command.

On a successful Command roll, apply the Tactics result to the chart provided under the Enhance Attribute Force power (it may be necessary to make that chart more open ended to reflect tactical super-geniuses like Thrawn). Once you have that bonus, all characters under the tactician's command may apply that bonus to all skills under the attribute best suited to the kind of combat they are engaged in (i.e. Dexterity for ground combat, and Mechanical for space combat). The skill rolled could be either the general Tactics skill, or specializations like Tactics: Small Squads or Tactics: Starfighters.

It might also be feasible to include a skill bonus based on the degree of success of the Command check. Naturally, there would also be bonuses and penalties applied due to size disparity between forces, as well as ambush situations and the like. Tactics could even be rolled for determining operational or strategic initiative, ala Grand Admiral Thrawn predicting his opponent's actions to the T. Ultimately, Tactics could be used in a similar fashion to Garhkal's situational awareness skill rules.

Thoughts?
_________________
"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

[jmanski]

If you're going that route, why not use a form of battlemind?
_________________
Blasted rules. Why can't they just be perfect?

[garhkal]

Cause i doubt tactics would add to everyone's skills all the time like with battle mind.
_________________
Confucious sayeth, don't wash cat while drunk!

[CRMcNeill]