"Extra" Reactions

[Gry Sarth]

Page 79 of the 2nd Editions RE Book explains a kind of actions that has bugged me for years, the so-called "extra" reaction roll. It states that even if you've already used up all your called actions for that round, you can still make another reaction roll (dodge, parries, etc), taking multiple action penalties as if you had included this extra action in your initial actions count. My group has always called this a "dodge reaction", and it's usually called with a loud yell and a smirk on the face, cause we all know this is kinda cheating...

What happens is that with this rule, you can say you're only taking one action, making your shot without penalties, and then when the bad guy obviously fires at you, you can make a "dodge reaction" at only -1D. Now, if you has planned for this dodge, you would have called for 2 actions at the beginning of the round, and your initial shot would also had been at -1D. So why do this? No-one ever did...

Now this has always bugged me, it seems to me like a big loophole in the rules: why call your reactions beforehand if you can get them for cheaper later on?

After putting up with it for years, I've finally convinced my group to emmend this rule. Now you can still call for a "dodge reaction" but it costs an extra -1D. So, for example, if you've called just a single action and made you shot at no penalty, when you decide to use a "dodge reaction" it will be rolled with a -2D penalty, instead of the usual -1D for two actions in a round. That seems fair, since you're kinda "rushing" that extra dodge, an action you hadn't planned for beforehand.

What do you guys think of that? What's you experience with these "extra" reactions?

[RedFox]

I have no problem with the original rule as-written. I don't think it's unbalancing because any extra actions are still penalized by the dodge reactions (including more dodge reactions). It allows players a bit of flexibility without getting into really weird number-crunching (anyone familiar with how other games handle this sort of problem *kauffwhitewolfkauff* know what I mean).

If you're feeling "taken advantage of" somehow by it, you can always have enemies with high initiative ratings. If the players are attacked before they get their first action, then that "dodge reaction" is going to penalize them as much as any other extra action.

But in the end... it's a dodge, man! It's not like they can use those extra reactions to make attacks or anything. It's just to help keep your PCs from getting killed in what is (unless you're a wookiiee) a very deadly game.
_________________
Ooo, a droid! Can I fix it?

I have Star Wars stuff!

[Crell Damar]

[Hellcat]

I prefer to think of it as something like having a snowball fight. You've got a target picked out and are just in the midst of throwing a snowball at them when you see one of the folks on their side is doing the same thing and it's already too late for you to just dodge. So you throw the snowball and within a split second or so you dodge. Maybe dodging will keep you from getting hit or maybe it's already too late. But why when it appears you're not going to get hit would you dodge and throw the snowball at the same time when that could increase your chances of missing your target?

The -1D penalty for reacting seems fair causes it's like saying you see at the last minute that even as you make an action someone else is taking action against you. Again, why increase your chances of missing your target by dodging at the same time your taking an action when you don't have to. If it's clear that you and your target are probably going to be firing at each other, then it's understandable that you'd fire and dodge at the same time. If it's clear that as you fire at your target that one of their buddies is probably going to be firing at you, again the same thing. But if you suddenly realize as you fire at your target that you are being fired upon when you previously believed you had a clean, unmolested shot, why should you stand there and accept being hit when you can dodge? And why should you suffer a greater penalty to dodging just because you're reacting at the last instant?

If the players know for certain that their going to be attacked when they declare what actions their making in a round and they do not declare that their going to dodge, then yes, it is unaffair to have them take the penalty for the reaction and be able to make an unpenalized action. But if they don't know it coming, then their making a reaction is fair. If you tell them what to expect after they declared their actions before the actions are taken and they do not alter their declarations, then they should be willing to take their chances as they had the chance to alter things before the action begins.
_________________
FLUFFY for President!!!!

Wanted Poster

[cheshire]

If you don't like it, do what I do. Tell them that they can cut into their dice pool for next round.

Example:

K'Teth, our pilot has decided that he is going to shoot two thugs this round. After he blasts one, and misses the other. Now it's the thug's turn. The thug shoots and makes the base diffiulty. Now, since K'Teth didn't plan on there being any more thugs, he didn't save anything back to dodge. So, I tell him that he can take a -1D penalty to his dodge, and then take a -1D penalty to his blaster as well next round.

[gollummen]

I also allow reaction skills.

We just see it as a benefit from being quick
(if you are faster that the opponent you can attack without penalty and dodge later. The opponent will have to dodge first, and then his attack wil suffer -1D).

[Boomer]

For all extra uncalled actions, -2D, so says the book.
_________________
My backpack has jets!
I'm Boba the Fett!
And I bounty hunt for Jabba Hutt,
to finance my 'vette!

[Grimace]

[garhkal]

Interesting way of handling it grimmy. And yes, i do agree, that it is cheating. But remember, the npcs can also do that.
_________________
Confucious sayeth, don't wash cat while drunk!

[Gry Sarth]

Grimace, if I got that right, it seems your solution is exactly the same as mine, isn't it?
_________________
"He's Gry Sarth, of course he has the stats for them."

[Error]

LOL @ Gry

Yeah, I think so. He just elaborated a little more on the logic behind it.
_________________
The only words of explanation you need for any concept in the entire Star Wars universe are the words Science Fiction and Space Opera.

[entropy]

As a player I have never declared a reaction skill in advance, and as a DM I have never subtracted dice for NPCs' reaction skills in advance. I never saw this as cheating, mostly because it's how ther rules read. Having read these arguments and considered this, here are my thoughts.

The extra die penalty means that you are punishing players for not declaring something in advance (that's how I would feel anyway.) Declaring a reaction skill in advance would indicate that you are doing something that makes your use of that skill obvious. Other characters should be able to determine who is dodging, and who isn't (perhaps with a perception roll?). This will be abused by players. "I'll shoot the one in back because he's not dodging." or "He looks like he's dodging? Ok, I'll run up and punch him instead." You would have to take dice off for every possible reaction.

An extreme example: the speeder bike chases on the moon of Endor. To cover all possible reaction skills each round, a character would have to take off dice for:

Repulsorlift Ops, in case someone shot at your bike.
Dodge, in case someone shot at you.
Brawling parry, in case someone jumped on your bike to push you off.
Acrobatics, to reduce falling damage if you were pushed off.

I could see a rule requiring characters to declare reactions in two circumstances. One, you use the same reaction skill for everything (dodge, melee parry, brawling parry, acrobatics if you fall, etc.) Two, you simply declare you are taking a die off to react, and this applies to all reaction skills you use that round. This way a character can know if someone is fighting defensively, but can't get by with changing up combat forms to take advantage of which defense they have chosen, but doesn't make everyone take a bunch of dice off every round because they don't know how they will be attacked.

Having said all of that, I still prefer the way the rules are written, I don't see it as cheating, and certainly don't think the characters need more penalties to their actions. Besides, think of the poor jedi who's already wasting two actions keeping up lightsaber combat. Now you're telling him he needs to spend a die on lightsaber parry every round too?

[Gry Sarth]

I'll sure tell him that. Think of the 5D-all-around jedi who'll have 8D to his saber attack if he doesn't have to declare his parry....

The thing is that the rules read like this "dodge reaction" thing is a loophole, otherwise why would they say that a player has to declare how many actions he'll take at the beginning of the round, including dodges. They would just say we have to declare all our "attack" actions, since the dodges would be covered by the "dodge reaction" rule.

Anyway, I see why some people won't have a problem with this, it's really just a matter of perspective. But I see that others, like Grimace agree with me and even came to the same solution for it. I have been playing the game with this house-rule in place for a couple of years now and it's playing much better, everybody's satisfied.
_________________
"He's Gry Sarth, of course he has the stats for them."

[gollummen]

[Gry Sarth]

I know what the book says, I'm just not happy with it.
_________________
"He's Gry Sarth, of course he has the stats for them."