The Rancor Pit Forum Index
Welcome to The Rancor Pit forums!

The Rancor Pit Forum Index
FAQ   ::   Search   ::   Memberlist   ::   Usergroups   ::   Register   ::   Profile   ::   Log in to check your private messages   ::   Log in

Tactics Skill
Post new topic   Reply to topic    The Rancor Pit Forum Index -> House Rules -> Tactics Skill Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Wajeb Deb Kaadeb
Commodore
Commodore


Joined: 07 Apr 2017
Posts: 1448

PostPosted: Sat Nov 11, 2017 8:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

garhkal wrote:
That doesn't answer the question. Is it the player who would call for the tactics roll, or the DM who would make it in secret?


I think the roll should be made by the player. Like making a Perception roll--to find out what the character notices/sees.

But, like any skill, if a GM wants to roll it in secret, then more power to ya.

Sometimes, its appropriate for the GM to roll PER in secret while most f the time, the player can call for one. Same with Tactics.

So, if a GM sees a good use for Tactics and wants to roll secretly, why not?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Dredwulf60
Line Captain
Line Captain


Joined: 07 Jan 2016
Posts: 910

PostPosted: Sat Nov 11, 2017 9:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Wajeb Deb Kaadeb wrote:


I think the roll should be made by the player. Like making a Perception roll--to find out what the character notices/sees.



What would you do with a paranoid player who wants to make a tactics roll for *each* *and* *every* *round* ?

Logically, there would be no reason not to. Why not get extra advice from the GM every round, especially if you can take it or leave it?

If you have a good tactics skill, the GM is going to likely give you all sorts of goodie info that you probably didn't think about, but is probably good suggestions because the universe is set up in his mind and he knows how things are likely to play out.

So, in the end, the GM is doing more thinking about your characters actions than you as the player are.

With a high enough tactics skill, you might as well turn your character sheet over to the GM to play through tactical decisions for you, with your ability to veto anything blatantly suicidal.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Wajeb Deb Kaadeb
Commodore
Commodore


Joined: 07 Apr 2017
Posts: 1448

PostPosted: Sat Nov 11, 2017 9:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Dredwulf60 wrote:
Wajeb Deb Kaadeb wrote:


I think the roll should be made by the player. Like making a Perception roll--to find out what the character notices/sees.



What would you do with a paranoid player who wants to make a tactics roll for *each* *and* *every* *round* ?

Logically, there would be no reason not to. Why not get extra advice from the GM every round, especially if you can take it or leave it?


That's a very good point.

Allow me to answer that with a question, though.

What would you do with a paranoid player who wants to make a Perception roll for each and every room he walks into, and every round when his character walks down a path, looking for ambushes and stuff that catch his attention?

I had a player who did this, BITD. He played a Lorrdian character, who specialize in PER scores.





The answer is the same.



Here's how I handled the paranoid PER character, and I suspect, this is how I would handle a player who wanted to roll Tactics every chance he got.

I told the player that I will assume that he is rolling every round, but the character benefits too often from knowing his roll total. If he rolls high and notices nothing, the character is sure there's nothing to notice on the PER roll.

If the character rolls low, then the character is still wary--because he knows the result of his throw.

I told the player that I would roll in secret for him, and tell him when he notices something.

Problem solved.

Then, from time to time, if the character wanted to make a Tactics roll, I'd let him. But, if he started doing it too often so that it bogs down the game, I'd go back to rolling in secret--explaining that he's bogging down the game for the other players, but I would make sure that he got his roll in secret.

And, from time to time, that secret Tactics roll might even mean something--I'd pass the player a note.





Special Note: In my game, I use 1E Core Rulebook rules, and we don't have the Tactics skill. That skill is only in R&E.

So...it's not a headache for me.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Wajeb Deb Kaadeb
Commodore
Commodore


Joined: 07 Apr 2017
Posts: 1448

PostPosted: Sat Nov 11, 2017 9:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Dredwulf60 wrote:
With a high enough tactics skill, you might as well turn your character sheet over to the GM to play through tactical decisions for you, with your ability to veto anything blatantly suicidal.


I stated above that information gained from a successful Tactics roll does not have to benefit the character 100%.

The info just has to be an option for the PC at the moment. Taking that option might put the character is a worse/dangerous situation.

I picked the example of Han hiding in the asteroid cave specifically because the cave turns out to be the belly of a space slug. Hiding in the "cave" allows the PCs to evade the Imps for a while longer (success, tactically, in hiding from the enemy) but it also put the PC in peril inside the space slug.



For example, say the PCs in a firefight with some stormtroopers down a dusty street. A successful Tactics roll reveals an idea to punch through the back wall of a store off to the side of the street, taking half the PCs to flank the troopers from an ally.

Any PCs who do flank the troopers, though, run right into an Imperial tank that the Imps had set up in ambush for the PCs--a trap not yet sprung.





Successful Tactics is not a get-out-of-jail-free card. It's an option--and option that, when it's all said and done, may not be the best option.




Also, to address your super Tactics skill guy. Sure, he'll be an expert tactically, but, skill points (or CPs, in 2E) should be a scarce commodity that will force a player to pick and choose the skills that he improves.

If every improvement goes to Tactics, then the character is likely to not be good at other things.

In addition, using Tactics is a skill use. It should take time--not always done in a moment. Maybe the character has to see the entire battlefield before a Tactics roll is allowed, requiring the character to move to multiple spots to get his view.

Being a skill use (sometimes taking more than a round to complete), then using it also means that the character's other skill uses are subject to the multiple action penalty.

Also, sometimes there's just nothing there--no extra tactical information to gain. If a GM can think of anything to tell the player, then just say that. A successful use of Tactics doesn't automatically mean that there's some tactical information to learn. Just like when using PER, there's nothing out of the ordinary to notice.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Wajeb Deb Kaadeb
Commodore
Commodore


Joined: 07 Apr 2017
Posts: 1448

PostPosted: Sat Nov 11, 2017 9:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Here's another example of how a successful Tactics throw provides an option that is not necessarily the best option.

On the forest moon of Endor, the PCs are laying on a ridge. They've discovered a squad of Scout Troopers below them.

Rolling Tactics successfully, the GM tells the PC that the trees provide enough cover for a PC to sneak down the hill and come up behind one of the troopers.

So, the stealthy attempt with have an easier difficulty than normal.

What the GM doesn't tell the PC is that, from all that foliage, the ground there is also thick with dried, dead, fallen limbs, branches, and twigs. It's easier there to make a noise by stepping on a dry twig and snapping it, ruining the sneak attempt.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Bren
Vice Admiral
Vice Admiral


Joined: 19 Aug 2010
Posts: 3868
Location: Maryland, USA

PostPosted: Mon Nov 13, 2017 10:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Wajeb Deb Kaadeb wrote:
Bren wrote:
Wajeb Deb Kaadeb wrote:
Han rolls a Tactics roll and is successful. This is where the GM is allowed to tell the player that the asteroids have caves. The GM suggests that maybe the players can evade the Imperials for a greater amount of time by hiding the ship in one of the caves.
Asteroids having caves has nothing to do with tactics though.


It does. Think of it as a tactic taken in a chase. The Tactics throw made the player aware of caves in the asteroids from which to hide. It's a tactic taken to evade the Imperial pursuers.
I don't think I was clear about my objection. Tactics has nothing to do with whether a character knows that asteroids usually have caves or that asteroids in this specific asteroid field have caves. Knowing that asteroids have caves is Planetary Systems. Once the character knows that there are or ought to be caves in some of these asteroids then using Tactics to tell the player that their character knows that one could use those caves to hide is a reasonable use of the Tactics skill. But using Tactics both to inform the player about the existence of caves and to inform them about the tactic of hiding in caves is what I was objecting to.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
MrNexx
Rear Admiral
Rear Admiral


Joined: 25 Mar 2016
Posts: 2248
Location: San Antonio

PostPosted: Tue Nov 14, 2017 7:35 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

So, I've been mulling this over... what effect should tactics have on gameplay... and trying to come up with options, reasons, and mechanics.

While I am attracted to the idea of tactics providing a bonus to actions, the problem becomes what separates, mechanically, Tactics from Command? If I have both, can I double dip? What's a reasonable limit on Tactics providing bonuses?

The other suggestion... tactics providing lower DCs if a given course of action is taken has a couple problems. One, it is mechanically pretty similar in effect... bonus dice or lower DC, either one results in easier rolls. But the second, in my opinion, is more subtle. Let us say that a player, let's call him Alex, is being chased by scout ships along the frontier with the Ko-dan Empire. Alex's PC has 2D Tactics, but Alex, the player, comes up with the idea to hide in caves on an asteroid all by himself. Does he get the benefit the GM would've given to a successful Tactics roll? In many ways, I think it punishes PLAYER creativity at the expense of CHARACTER skill.

I think the mechanically easiest method that leads to benefit is to allow Tactics to apply a bonus to a Command Group (i.e. characters under a single leader's Command) to a specific course of action, predefined before the engagement begins. Changing that course of action negates the Tactics bonus, unless they can draw off an replan the strategy (taking at least an hour). I would make the bonus +1 per die of Tactics, with the Commander having the option to give someone +1D for a single die roll, but at the cost of everyone losing 1 pip of bonus.

So, let's take an example of the run on the first Death Star. The briefing served to inform everyone of the Tactics, but because General Dodoona can't cover everyone with his Command Score, it falls to the Group Leaders to do so. Gold Leader's course of action is Bomb the Death Star.

Gold leader has a Command of 6D, meaning he can coordinate 6 people, and give them coordination bonuses. His Tactics if 4D, meani g they have 1D+1 Tactics bonus, so long as they follow the Bomb the Death Star plan. This bonus would apply to piloting rolls to get in position and targeting rolls to shoot something roughly womp-rat sized, but wouldn't apply to the dog fighting, shield arranging, or other courses of action not directly related to Bombing the Death Star. If, as Gold 2 lines up a shot on the exhaust port, Gold Leader decides to give Gold 2 a +1D to that shot, he can, but it means future rolls will only get a 1D Tactics bonus, not 1D+1... Gold leader burned one of his Tactics dice to give a bigger bonus, and Gold 2 rolled +2D (regular tactics bonus plus Gold Leader's special boost).

This method does several things. It specifically limits numerical bonuses of Tactics in group situations. It provides clear bonuses, related to the skill of the leader, that disappear once a plan goes belly up (i.e. you stop getting the Tactics bonus once you stop following Plan A). It also allows a leader to provide a dramatically appropriate boost when necessary.
_________________
"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
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Director of Engineering


Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16163
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.

PostPosted: Tue Nov 14, 2017 10:49 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Why not just use Tactics to generate a bonus that stacks with Command? IMO, this represents a character’s understanding of the tactical situation and the appropriate response, which in turn allows him to issue more cogent orders to his subordinates.
_________________
"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
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Wajeb Deb Kaadeb
Commodore
Commodore


Joined: 07 Apr 2017
Posts: 1448

PostPosted: Tue Nov 14, 2017 12:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Are we talking about how Tactics was meant to be used within the rule set? Or, are we talking about alternative methods and House Rules?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Director of Engineering


Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16163
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.

PostPosted: Tue Nov 14, 2017 12:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Wajeb Deb Kaadeb wrote:
Are we talking about how Tactics was meant to be used within the rule set? Or, are we talking about alternative methods and House Rules?

Well, this IS the House Rules section...
_________________
"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
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Bren
Vice Admiral
Vice Admiral


Joined: 19 Aug 2010
Posts: 3868
Location: Maryland, USA

PostPosted: Tue Nov 14, 2017 2:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

MrNexx wrote:
Let us say that a player, let's call him Alex, is being chased by scout ships along the frontier with the Ko-dan Empire. Alex's PC has 2D Tactics, but Alex, the player, comes up with the idea to hide in caves on an asteroid all by himself. Does he get the benefit the GM would've given to a successful Tactics roll? In many ways, I think it punishes PLAYER creativity at the expense of CHARACTER skill.
It can somewhat preference character skill over player skill. That is not necessarily an accidental or unintended effect. Whether it’s an effect you like is a different question. Of course you could give the same mechanical advantage for when the player comes up with a good plan.

Quote:
I think the mechanically easiest method that leads to benefit is to allow Tactics to apply a bonus to a Command Group (i.e. characters under a single leader's Command) to a specific course of action, predefined before the engagement begins. Changing that course of action negates the Tactics bonus, unless they can draw off an replan the strategy (taking at least an hour).
I don’t think that’s how tactics works though. And it’s not how we see tactics being used in the movies where the heroes change tactics during combat. During the Death Star run in ANH the starfighters adjust tactics to screen the lead fighter with one or two trailing fighters. And in the “It’s a trap!” scene in RotJ we see Lando suggesting a new tactic in response to the Imperial trap.
Quote:
Lando Calrissian: We've gotta be able to get some kind of a reading on that shield, up or down.
Nien Nunb: [speaks in Sullustese]
Lando Calrissian: But how could they be jamming us if they don't know... if we're coming?
[over comlink]
Lando Calrissian: Break off the attack! The shield is still up!
Wedge Antilles: I get no reading. Are you sure?
Lando Calrissian: Pull up! All craft, pull up!
Admiral Ackbar: Take evasive action! Green group, stick close to holding section MV-7!
Mon Calamari: Admiral! We have enemy ships in sector 47!
Admiral Ackbar: It's a trap!

Lando Calrissian: Yes, I said *closer*! Move as close as you can, and engage those Star Destroyers at point blank range!
Admiral Ackbar: At that close range we won't last long against those Star Destroyers!
Lando Calrissian: We'll last longer than we will against that Death Star! And we might just take a few of them with us!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
garhkal
Sovereign Protector
Sovereign Protector


Joined: 17 Jul 2005
Posts: 14021
Location: Reynoldsburg, Columbus, Ohio.

PostPosted: Tue Nov 14, 2017 3:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

MrNexx wrote:
Does he get the benefit the GM would've given to a successful Tactics roll? In many ways, I think it punishes PLAYER creativity at the expense of CHARACTER skill.


Well, that's the same if a player comes up with a great speech (Con/Bargain/Persuasion) on his own, but he's playing a sloppy, boisterous and foul mouth turnip, who has 1d+2 in Perception and not spent anything into any skills..
Punishing 'player creativity' over character skill.
_________________
Confucious sayeth, don't wash cat while drunk!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Wajeb Deb Kaadeb
Commodore
Commodore


Joined: 07 Apr 2017
Posts: 1448

PostPosted: Tue Nov 14, 2017 7:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

CRMcNeill wrote:
Wajeb Deb Kaadeb wrote:
Are we talking about how Tactics was meant to be used within the rule set? Or, are we talking about alternative methods and House Rules?

Well, this IS the House Rules section...


True dat. But, I don't feel like the OP has a grasp on how the rule was intended to be played.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Wajeb Deb Kaadeb
Commodore
Commodore


Joined: 07 Apr 2017
Posts: 1448

PostPosted: Tue Nov 14, 2017 7:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Bren wrote:
I don't think I was clear about my objection. Tactics has nothing to do with whether a character knows that asteroids usually have caves or that asteroids in this specific asteroid field have caves.


I don't agree. I think it's a case of skill overlap.

In a different game, I might be more strict on what the skill entails. But, it's reasonable to me that, in a chase in space, the pilot being chased would be thinking tactics--where can I hide? How can I get away from the TIEs?

There ain't much to work with in space. The asteroids are close and obvious. It can be a tactical decision to hide among the asteroids.

I'd allow a Planetary Systems roll to discover the caves, too.

There's no reason why that should be mutually exclusive.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Director of Engineering


Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16163
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.

PostPosted: Tue Nov 14, 2017 7:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Wajeb Deb Kaadeb wrote:
I don't feel like the OP has a grasp on how the rule was intended to be played.

Or perhaps he had enough of a grasp to decide he didn't like how much of a load it placed on the GM (to either become an expert on tactics in the SWU so as to provide good tactical advice to PCs on the result of a good Tactics roll, or to become adept at pulling random tactical-sounding noises out of his pudu-port) in addition to the GMs other duties.
_________________
"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
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    The Rancor Pit Forum Index -> House Rules All times are GMT - 4 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next
Page 3 of 7

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group


v2.0