Alternate combat sequence?

[ebertran]

Okay, so I'm getting ready to start a campaign after a long time...

I don't want to do the 1 action, then you go, then I go again, then you go style of round sequence.

So i think i'll do this...



Han, Chewie and a Stormtrooper are shooting at each other...

Each character rolls PER, players act in order for the rest of the round based on higher roll. (Like D&D)

Han acts first... He decides he's pulling out his gun, shooting, and running, so he acts at a -2d (3 actions). Stormtrooper dodges. It's the end of Han's turn.

Chewie goes next, he's going to shoot and run, acting at a -1d (2 actions). End of his turn.

Stormtrooper will shoot at Han and stand still. He had dodged already, so he'll take a -1d penalty to account for that earlier dodge. Han decides to dodge, so now he'll dodge at a -3d, to account for the Dodge adding to his earlier 3 actions (making it a total of 4 Han actions this round)

End of round.

I think this works.

Thoughts?

[Quetzacotl]

This could easily end with one or the other ranged person slaughtering the enemies before they can do anything, given a high enough skill in any ranged combat for the person and a low enough skill in dodge for the enemies.

The person could shoot 3-4 times in the first round and might disable (either with incapacitate or worse (with a Stun Weapon wounded would be enough already by RAW -.-)) 3-4 enemies before they can do anything if they're not able to dodge...

[nuclearwookiee]

I like the idea, the problem is that d6 doesn't have the action categories (standard, move, swift) that D&D and SAGA have. So, while it may not be too unbalancing to group the actions you suggested (draw, move, shoot), it might upset things a bit to let a really highly-skilled character attack a half-dozen times before anybody else does anything. If you allow this, I would make that character pay a premium on all attacks. If your actions were "move, shoot, shoot," for instance, I might add +5 to the difficulty (range or target's dodge) of both attacks (in addition to the normal MAPs) to account for smooshing multiple attacks together.

[ebertran]

What if i cap actions at 4? Allowing for a hypothetical move, 2 attacks and a possible dodge?

[Grimace]

Arbitrary caps don't make a lot of sense. You put a cap of 4 actions, so no person can take more than 4, and you end up with situations like this:

Character Joe has DEX 2D and Blaster 1D. He can take 4 actions. He shoots once, moves twice, and takes another action.

Character Bob has DEX 4D and Blaster 8D. He can take 4 actions. He shoots 4 times and....... uh....that's all he can do.


So even though Joe has poor skills and abilities, he can do the exact same number of things that Bob can do, even though Bob has better abilities and much more skill.

Sure, Bob has a better chance of hitting with his 4 shots due to his skill, but he gives up his chance to dodge, among other things, by having the arbitrary limit of 4 actions in a round.

If you're going to put a cap, make it related to each character's DEX ability or something. That way Joe could only do 2 Actions (lower DEX) and Bob could perform 4 Action (higher DEX).


If you think that number of actions is too low, then allow 1 action per pip in DEX. So the MAXIMUM number of actions for Joe would be 6. Doesn't matter how good his skill is, he just can't physically take too many actions because of his low DEX. Whereas Bob could perform a max of 12 actions. While he might not be able to do that right away, once his skill gets high enough he can become much more badass.

[cheshire]

I think I've always run it where you take all of your actions, then the next person takes all of his/her actions. It's never really become a problem about spending too much time on one person, since they all have roughly the same amount of character development.
_________________
__________________________________
Before we take any of this too seriously, just remember that in the middle episode a little rubber puppet moves a spaceship with his mind.

[garhkal]

So with your system, who ever wins initiative is almost guaranteed to win.
_________________
Confucious sayeth, don't wash cat while drunk!

[cheshire]

Do you mean clean up the entire combat? Do you mean win the first engagement with the enemy? How exactly do you mean, "win?"
_________________
__________________________________
Before we take any of this too seriously, just remember that in the middle episode a little rubber puppet moves a spaceship with his mind.

[nuclearwookiee]

[ebertran]

Think I'm going to cap it at (DEX+1) so it allows at least 4 actions for those with a 3 DEX, and at least 2 for those with 1 DEX. You'll always have the opportunity to do at least two things.

Gonna play it and see how it works out.

Plus, in my mind I can easily justify that a person with more Dexterity may realistically do more things than a person with less Dexterity.

I'm just not a fan of "action - someone else - other action - someone else" style of play.

I like complete turns. In D&D, there's always the chance of a wizard wiping out a group of kobolds with a fireball if he gets to act first...

Such is luck...

It also means that in my game, a 1 on the wild die will always be a complication now, just to balance things out.

[Quetzacotl]

[garhkal]

[vanir]

I'm having a visual issue with this. Game mechanics are theoretically supposed to provide a ruleset framework for the action sequence, not player sequence.

Thinking in terms of "fictionalised realism for suspension of disbelief" in order to visualise scenes, you could realistically run, dodge and fire at the same time, but taking three shots must be done sequentially. If someone is also firing back at you, realisticallly you could run, dodge and exchange fire, with reactionary dodge for the opponent all concurrently.
What you could not do is realistically, fire three shots whilst he waits and hums a tune then when you're all done return fire, not if he's acting independently of you, and you're both doing all you can to take down the enemy at the first opportunity.

So for me it really depends on the types of actions declared as to how they will be sequenced with enemy declarations for the combat round. And the guiding light on this is the iniative roll, and choice to take or force intiative if won.

[cheshire]

[nuclearwookiee]