| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16320
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
 Posted: Sun Nov 28, 2021 7:36 pm Post subject: Breaking Up Move Actions |
 |
|
Credit to shootingwomprats for the original concept.
It has always seemed off to me that, because of the turn-based system in 2R&E, a character can technically move as much as 40 meters before the other guy can even get a shot off. However, I couldn't really think of a way to solve it without requiring major changes to the initiative and combat sequence. Then, last night, swr had an idea.
Short version, a character is allowed to move up to their full Move as a single action. If they wish to move more than a full Move, they must declare a second action and wait their turn in the Initiative sequence to complete the move, incurring MAPs as appropriate. For example, a character with a Move of 10 wishes to move 20 meters in a round. After initiative, he declares two Move actions, each 10 meters in length. Once the first is completed, he must wait for all other declared actions to be occur before he can make the second Move and cover the last 10 meters. A character may make up to 1/2 of their Move as a Free Action.
I've got some ideas as to how to apply this with some of my other house rules (like Concurrent Action Penalties), but IMO the concept deserves a topic of its own.
_________________
"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 |
|
 |
Mamatried
Commodore
Joined: 16 Dec 2017
Posts: 1861
Location: Norway
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 28, 2021 8:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I like this.
I was wondering though if the character runs 10m while "aming" a blaster or shooting, this I assume would incur a MAP penalty. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16320
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 28, 2021 9:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Mamatried wrote: | I like this.
I was wondering though if the character runs 10m while "aming" a blaster or shooting, this I assume would incur a MAP penalty. |
Depends on how you structure the round. If the character takes one action to run, then waits until his next turn to fire his blaster, then he would incur a -1D MAP. If you introduce Concurrent Action Penalties, the character could potentially fire his blaster while moving, but would incur both a -1D MAP for two declared actions and a -1D CAP for taking two actions "at once", for a total of -2D.
As in, going by the RAW, you can only take one action during your turn.
_________________
"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 |
|
|
Whill
Dark Lord of the Jedi (Owner/Admin)
Joined: 14 Apr 2008
Posts: 10436
Location: Columbus, Ohio, USA, Earth, The Solar System, The Milky Way Galaxy
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 28, 2021 10:48 pm Post subject: Re: Breaking Up Move Actions |
|
|
| CRMcNeill wrote: | Then, last night, swr had an idea...
IMO the concept deserves a topic of its own. |
He posted this "idea" before last night. He posted it last year in a similarly titled topic of its own: Splitting Movement.
| Quote: | Credit to shootingwomprats for the original concept...
Short version, a character is allowed to move up to their full Move as a single action. If they wish to move more than a full Move, they must declare a second action and wait their turn in the Initiative sequence to complete the move, incurring MAPs as appropriate. For example, a character with a Move of 10 wishes to move 20 meters in a round. After initiative, he declares two Move actions, each 10 meters in length. Once the first is completed, he must wait for all other declared actions to be occur before he can make the second Move and cover the last 10 meters. A character may make up to 1/2 of their Move as a Free Action. |
I wasn't aware that shootingwomprats assisted Bill Smith with designing Blue Vader 2e. 
This is exactly the way movement worked in Blue Vader 2e. In an interview in SWAJ about R&E, Bill said that movement was something that never worked in Blue Vader, which is why it was changed. Problems with this method are, it is extra dice rolling since you roll for each movement action, and characters are nickel and dimed with MAPs. When R&E added a speed dimension to movement difficulties (on top of the existing terrain difficulties), it allowed for all the movement to be incorporated into a single roll (while realistically getting more difficult the more distance you cover). This eliminated the extra dice rolls and MAPs for movement, but introduced a new problem...
| Quote: | It has always seemed off to me that, because of the turn-based system in 2R&E, a character can technically move as much as 40 meters before the other guy can even get a shot off. However, I couldn't really think of a way to solve it without requiring major changes to the initiative and combat sequence...
I've got some ideas as to how to apply this with some of my other house rules (like Concurrent Action Penalties), but IMO the concept deserves a topic |
I agree that is a problem with R&E movement, I don't think going backwards is the solution. It is just trading the current problem for the original problem. I suggested a solution in a few posts of the prior thread, where movements remain single actions of various speeds (with MAPping of R&E), but the movement is spread out over the course of the round as appropriate for the sequence of actions, so some actions may occur during the movement. It does require some GM discretion to implement.
_________________
*
Site Map
Forum Guidelines
Registration/Log-In Help
The Rancor Pit Library
Star Wars D6 Damage |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16320
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 29, 2021 12:24 am Post subject: Re: Breaking Up Move Actions |
|
|
| Whill wrote: | | I wasn't aware that shootingwomprats assisted Bill Smith with designing Blue Vader 2e. |
LOL. I actually double-checked in 1E and the Rules Companion to confirm it wasn't repeating an earlier idea. Figures it was in the one rulebook I didn't check.
Maybe split the difference and do it all on one Die roll, minus any penalties, but split the Move over however many segments the player declared at the beginning of the round? I know you're not a fan of the Concurrent Action Penalty concept, but it does fit in nicely here w/r/t penalizing a character trying to do multiple actions at once, as opposed to merely in rapid succession.
_________________
"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 |
|
|
garhkal
Sovereign Protector
Joined: 17 Jul 2005
Posts: 14214
Location: Reynoldsburg, Columbus, Ohio.
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 29, 2021 3:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
I like the option to see the move actions split up like this..
_________________
Confucious sayeth, don't wash cat while drunk! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
fogger1138
Lieutenant Commander
Joined: 25 Feb 2021
Posts: 104
Location: Maine
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 29, 2021 1:12 pm Post subject: Re: Breaking Up Move Actions |
|
|
| CRMcNeill wrote: | | Whill wrote: | | I agree that is a problem with R&E movement, I don't think going backwards is the solution. It is just trading the current problem for the original problem. I suggested a solution in a few posts of the prior thread, |
Maybe split the difference and do it all on one Die roll, minus any penalties, but split the Move over however many segments the player declared at the beginning of the round? I know you're not a fan of the Concurrent Action Penalty concept, but it does fit in nicely here w/r/t penalizing a character trying to do multiple actions at once, as opposed to merely in rapid succession. |
This is sort of how I handle it in my game, except that the character just declares their speed at the beginning of the round rather than specific move segments. If they are going All-Out, for instance, it’s broken into four segments of their full Move rating.
Seems to work OK, although I will be honest and say that it hasn’t come up all that much yet.
I’ve only had one instance where, halfway through the move, they decided to take a reaction action, and they ended up stopping there. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Whill
Dark Lord of the Jedi (Owner/Admin)
Joined: 14 Apr 2008
Posts: 10436
Location: Columbus, Ohio, USA, Earth, The Solar System, The Milky Way Galaxy
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 29, 2021 8:09 pm Post subject: Re: Breaking Up Move Actions |
|
|
Yup. Sure, incomplete movement can be stopped early on a character's turn in the round, or if something happens to the character that alters the intended final outcome.
| CRMcNeill wrote: | | Whill wrote: | | I agree that is a problem with R&E movement, I don't think going backwards is the solution. It is just trading the current problem for the original problem. I suggested a solution in a few posts of the prior thread, |
Maybe split the difference and do it all on one Die roll, minus any penalties, but split the Move over however many segments the player declared at the beginning of the round? |
That's how I do it, but the player doesn't usually have to get into the nitty gritty of segments. When doing non-move actions with movement in a round, on their first turn they just declare the movement they want to do over the course of the round when they declare the first non-move action and how many total actions on their first turn (movement counts as one action for MAP calculation purposes). Then I parse out the movement according to what all is going on, so I do sometimes think in terms of action segments.
Sometimes a non-move action is required before movement begins, sometimes they can be done while moving (like firing blasters), and sometimes the movement is required first (like running to a control console to activate a machine in the same round). The total distance needed to cover determines the RAW speed (and thus difficulty) for the movement action, and I determine the sequence of things based on approximately how far along the total desired path the character is when every action occurs in the round.
It has only come up a few times for me so far but I have never had an issue with it.
| CRMcNeill wrote: | | I know you're not a fan of the Concurrent Action Penalty concept, but it does fit in nicely here w/r/t penalizing a character trying to do multiple actions at once, as opposed to merely in rapid succession. |
I've always been ok with movement happening concurrently to other actions if it makes sense (again, like shooting a gun while moving). My opposition to the Concurrent Action Penalty concept was only paying a penalty to move subsequent non-move actions forward to be simultaneous with another non-move action, which smacks of "Haste" actions. I have a lot of experience with Haste, and it was a big headache. The whole point of Initiative is to order events so nothing happens simultaneously. I feel haste and concurrent actions are going backwards.
I tweaked initiative slightly by having a derived initiative stat, but otherwise I am happy with the RAW works to order non-move events. My movement system is not much like the Concurrent Action Penalty concept because there are no extra MAPs to do things while moving. It has the normal MAPs which are based on just total actions per round. Literally the only difference from RAW is that movement is over the course of the round (and the character can sometimes do non-move actions during it). Movement is sometimes spread out over the round and not all contained to a single turn of a segment. If non-move action doesn't make sense to be possible while moving, then it can't be done. GM discretion.
My system addresses the RAW issue in a minimal impact way (without radically changing RAW or introducing new mechanics). The only downside is that it may be confusing for new GMs who are themselves still getting the hang of the game, and/or they don't have a knack for mental math on the fly to calculate proportional distances based on the rest of the highest number of actions any character has declared for that round. I admit my solution is not for everyone.
_________________
*
Site Map
Forum Guidelines
Registration/Log-In Help
The Rancor Pit Library
Star Wars D6 Damage |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
garhkal
Sovereign Protector
Joined: 17 Jul 2005
Posts: 14214
Location: Reynoldsburg, Columbus, Ohio.
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 30, 2021 3:34 am Post subject: Re: Breaking Up Move Actions |
|
|
| Whill wrote: | | Yup. Sure, incomplete movement can be stopped early on a character's turn in the round, or if something happens to the character that alters the intended final outcome. |
Such as being WOUNDED!!
_________________
Confucious sayeth, don't wash cat while drunk! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16320
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 01, 2021 2:01 pm Post subject: Re: Breaking Up Move Actions |
|
|
| Whill wrote: | | My opposition to the Concurrent Action Penalty concept was only paying a penalty to move subsequent non-move actions forward to be simultaneous with another non-move action, which smacks of "Haste" actions. |
Well, it does have some similarities to Haste, but IMO it's sufficiently distinct that it's not an issue. It allows, for example, a character with enough dice in Blaster to get off shots at multiple opponents before they can react, which is a trope played out multiple times in action films (and quite fun in a cinematic setting) which isn't possible under the extant Initiative system. To me, it's less the Haste mechanic than it is MAP-squared.
_________________
"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: 16320
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 01, 2021 3:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
An extreme example: Gallandro from Han Solo’s Revenge has 14D+1 in Blaster, 6D in Dodge and 2D in Perception. The only way he has a chance of regularly winning Initiative is with the Speed Draw Rules, and with a 6D Dodge, he’s not exactly blaster proof if somebody gets a shot off.
Now, suppose he’s facing off against four stormtroopers. If he uses the Speed Draw to boost his Initiative, he’ll likely win, but even then, he only gets off one shot at one stormtrooper, and then the other three get to take their shots before he can shoot again. That means there’s a possibility the fastest gunman in the galaxy will get killed before he gets off his second shot.
Various House Rules have been suggested that allow characters to get more actions based on how well they roll their Initiative, but Concurrent Action Penalties tack cleanly onto the existing Initiative with no modification.
_________________
"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 |
|
|
garhkal
Sovereign Protector
Joined: 17 Jul 2005
Posts: 14214
Location: Reynoldsburg, Columbus, Ohio.
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 01, 2021 4:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
But then you get into the issue of 'everyone who's not maxing out their shooting skill, LOSES all the time, to someone who DID'..
_________________
Confucious sayeth, don't wash cat while drunk! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16320
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 01, 2021 4:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| garhkal wrote: | | But then you get into the issue of 'everyone who's not maxing out their shooting skill, LOSES all the time, to someone who DID'.. |
Well, that’s the choice made by the player. If he overspecializes, he’ll be useless outside of that specific set of circumstances.
_________________
"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 |
|
|
Whill
Dark Lord of the Jedi (Owner/Admin)
Joined: 14 Apr 2008
Posts: 10436
Location: Columbus, Ohio, USA, Earth, The Solar System, The Milky Way Galaxy
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 01, 2021 10:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| CRMcNeill wrote: | An extreme example: Gallandro from Han Solo’s Revenge has 14D+1 in Blaster, 6D in Dodge and 2D in Perception. The only way he has a chance of regularly winning Initiative is with the Speed Draw Rules, and with a 6D Dodge, he’s not exactly blaster proof if somebody gets a shot off.
Now, suppose he’s facing off against four stormtroopers. If he uses the Speed Draw to boost his Initiative, he’ll likely win, but even then, he only gets off one shot at one stormtrooper, and then the other three get to take their shots before he can shoot again. That means there’s a possibility the fastest gunman in the galaxy will get killed before he gets off his second shot. |
In RAW, if Gallandro has a high blaster skill, then he can afford the MAPs from multiple actions. If he has a good dodge skill too, then the stormtroopers will likely miss and he'll probably blast all four troopers before the round is over. That's good enough for me.
| CRMcNeill wrote: | | Various House Rules have been suggested that allow characters to get more actions based on how well they roll their Initiative, but Concurrent Action Penalties tack cleanly onto the existing Initiative with no modification. |
| garhkal wrote: | | But then you get into the issue of 'everyone who's not maxing out their shooting skill, LOSES all the time, to someone who DID'.. |
| CRMcNeill wrote: | | Whill wrote: | | My opposition to the Concurrent Action Penalty concept was only paying a penalty to move subsequent non-move actions forward to be simultaneous with another non-move action, which smacks of "Haste" actions... |
Well, it does have some similarities to Haste, but IMO it's sufficiently distinct that it's not an issue. It allows, for example, a character with enough dice in Blaster to get off shots at multiple opponents before they can react, which is a trope played out multiple times in action films (and quite fun in a cinematic setting) which isn't possible under the extant Initiative system. To me, it's less the Haste mechanic than it is MAP-squared. |
I understand the mechanical differences, but those differences do not eliminate the human factor those mechanics bring into the game. garhkal is on to the point. Concurrent Actions would bring into the game the same issues that Haste did for me from 1989-92, where you have characters just trying to out-MAP each other to get actions to happen sooner in the round.
In R&E RAW, if you want a high initiative, then have a high Perception. If a player wants to improve the roll, then the GM might allow the D6 Space option burning one or two CPs. In my game, Dexterity also helps Initiative (which somewhat addresses the 'quickdraw' characters getting an advantage).
The point was, having rules to address Gallandro isn't really necessary for the game, so it's more trouble than it's worth from a gameplay perspective. The point of the game is to create new stories that seem like they could take place in the same universe as the films. The game does not need to function as a full simulation of everything that happens in the SWU. RPG adventures can still feel like they could take place in the same universe as the films without shooting twice before someone else gets to shoot. PCs and their enemies don't need to be the fastest gun in the galaxy for the game system to accomplish its goal.
Concurrent Actions make it easier for power gamers and evil GMs to abuse the system. Initiative is a construct to sequence actions in a round, and it includes a healthy amount of randomness to allow for higher attribute/skilled characters to sometimes lose initiative, which garhkal was hitting at. Game balance, and player acceptance of randomness and waiting for your turn, are more important than having a mechanic for fringe situations like the fastest gun in the galaxy. GMs and players having the option to circumvent initiative hurts the game more than it helps.
But Concurrent Actions are a tangent for this thread about movement. My solution to RAW's movement all taking place in one character's turn of a segment was to spread movement over the course of the round as applicable. Sometimes, if appropriate, non-movement actions may occur during the movements. This is to address the ridiculousness of RAW movement, not to move actions forward to make them happen sooner than they would. In fact, my movement solution sometimes pushes things to later in the round then they would be under RAW, when getting to a destination is required before subsequent actions may be attempted.
_________________
*
Site Map
Forum Guidelines
Registration/Log-In Help
The Rancor Pit Library
Star Wars D6 Damage |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
garhkal
Sovereign Protector
Joined: 17 Jul 2005
Posts: 14214
Location: Reynoldsburg, Columbus, Ohio.
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 02, 2021 3:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
Thanks for the back up Whill...
_________________
Confucious sayeth, don't wash cat while drunk! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
