Number of Combat Actions

[gamesmeister]

Yep, I like that idea too. I think I prefer mine simply because I'd like to see a bit more variety in the number of CAs than a norm of 2, but that's just a personal preference. Both ways avoid the arbitary DEX cut-off point, which is the main thing

G

 

[Mad_Irishman]

I have been having the same thoughts about combat actions and reactions. I'd prefer to have the number attack based on the skill being split up. So if you are a master, you can attack twice, heck even three times. But for reactions, I think they are instantaneous, unless you cannot see where the attack is coming from. That is why I'd save reactions for free attacks and what not, but have a cumulative penalty for each dodge or parry in the combat round, say -20 or so. I don't know, I have never played the game, but have owned copies for RQ for many years, so I don't have much to base on. Stinks not having anyone to play with.

-Ian

 

[Mugen]

So if you have 3 CAs, you still get 3 actions and 3 reactions, however, if you attack more then once the second attack is at say -40%. If you dodge twice, the second dodge is at -40%.

Yikes. Those sound kinda tough to me... so if I have a single axe and I use all three of my CAs to attack with it, the third attack is at -80%?

I like the idea, but I'm wondering if -20% might be better.

*shrug*

I suggested something similar a few posts ago :

Personnally, I use Combat Actions as the MAXIMUM number of actions per turn.

In the first step of a combat round, one has to determine how many actions he will perform. For each action over the first, he will get a cumulative -20%.

I apply a similar rule to reactions. After the first reaction, each new reaction adds -20% cumulative modifier.

(examples snipped)

The difference here is that the malus due to multi-actions applies to all actions and reactions.

This is to avoid a problem I encountered with another game with multiple actions that defined a malus for consecutive actions as you suggest (french RPG Prophecy for information).

As there was no real penalty for performing all available actions, the GM always performed ALL combat actions of ALL NPCs even if success chance dropped under 5%...

I also think it make sense that someone that plans to act more than once is actually doing all of these hastily, and not only the following ones.

Note that in order to make this variant less cumbersome, it would be interesting to have a chart on the character sheet quite like this :

| 0 | -20 | -40 | -60 | -80 | -100 |

A token would be used to keep track of the cumulative modifier. At the beginning of the turn, you place it on the number of actions you declared, ans then you move it one rank for each reaction you make.

 

[Mugen]

I have been having the same thoughts about combat actions and reactions. I'd prefer to have the number attack based on the skill being split up. So if you are a master, you can attack twice, heck even three times. But for reactions, I think they are instantaneous, unless you cannot see where the attack is coming from. That is why I'd save reactions for free attacks and what not, but have a cumulative penalty for each dodge or parry in the combat round, say -20 or so. I don't know, I have never played the game, but have owned copies for RQ for many years, so I don't have much to base on. Stinks not having anyone to play with.

-Ian

In short, you prefer Elric!/StormBringer5 combat rules

 

[Mad_Irishman]

In some respects, yes, but I am willing to give the runequest combat a try. It seems very deadly and fun. I'm going to play a combat or few with a buddy and go from there. Again I have never played RQ so it's hard for me to say.

-Ian

 

[Gnarsh]

So if you have 3 CAs, you still get 3 actions and 3 reactions, however, if you attack more then once the second attack is at say -40%. If you dodge twice, the second dodge is at -40%.

Yikes. Those sound kinda tough to me... so if I have a single axe and I use all three of my CAs to attack with it, the third attack is at -80%?

I like the idea, but I'm wondering if -20% might be better.

Not really that tough, if you're coming from a RQ2/3 perspective though.

In RQ3, in order to make two attacks with a weapon, I have to have over 100% skill and split it between the two attacks. That's a minimum of a -50% to both attacks, not just the second one. Applying a cumulative -40% to each action after the first is positively tame in comparison.

Also. I'm only applying this for each successive use of the exact same weapon/parry/dodge. That's how my suggestion is different from the earlier one. Instead of appling a blanket minus to each action after the first, you're allowed to use any/all of your CAs at full skill as long as each one is used to do something different. So, if you equip two weapons, you could attack with each at full skill (and presumably parry with each at full skill as well!). In addition, you could always get one dodge per round at full skill (since you need nothing equiped to do so).

The idea is to retain the ability to perform more actions per round, but still tie the ability to do it "well" to the skill level of the individual. Of course, you can still use CAs to move, reload, cast spells, etc (just as you could use SRs in earlier versions of RQ to do so). Thus, your DEX stat does not have quite as huge an effect on your combat capability, but retains the ability of a high DEX person to do more "stuff" during a round. I just think it's a decent compromise between the new concept in MRQ and the older system in RQ2/3.