NEWS

[6e] Deferring actions

  • 63 Replies
  • 8603 Views

Redwulfe

  • *
  • Catalyst Demo Team
  • Omae
  • ***
  • Posts: 770
« Reply #30 on: <04-04-20/0016:19> »
Well i was starting to try and find out if this was possible and found this thread.

At several points it seemed to go back and forth and then I heard that there was no need for a mechanic and I would have to disagree. since the person i disagree with seems to be someone that occasional has the ear of people higher up the food chain I think it is important to concede adding a Mechanic, and yes we can hope that their will be one in firing squad, whenever that comes out.

The reason a mechanic is needed is because without it you are punishing players for doing well especially in Missions play where different GMs will allow or not allow tweaks to the system. The following scenario is why I think that it is important to allow a mechanic to delay an action.

Player group sets up their safe house to get alerted if NPC group tries to attack. NPC group triggers the alert GM tells everyone to roll initiative. PC group rolls well and NPC group is outside. PC groups losses first actions because they did well and played smart. NPC group gets to go first and shoot at PC group which could be deadly to this combat.

There should be a way for the PC group to get their well deserved fist attacks without having to shoot prematurely through a barrier. In this scenario which has happened in a few games i have been in the PCs would have been punished for doing good if the GM had not houseruled it. but in Missions play you can not guarantee your GM will do this, So a mechanic allows the player the option to at least point out the GM that the book allows them something.
There are 10 kinds of people in this world, those who understand binary and those who don't

Red

*Play-by-Post color guide*
Thinking
com
speaking

Shinobi Killfist

  • *
  • Prime Runner
  • *****
  • Posts: 2703
« Reply #31 on: <04-04-20/0143:53> »
Well i was starting to try and find out if this was possible and found this thread.

At several points it seemed to go back and forth and then I heard that there was no need for a mechanic and I would have to disagree. since the person i disagree with seems to be someone that occasional has the ear of people higher up the food chain I think it is important to concede adding a Mechanic, and yes we can hope that their will be one in firing squad, whenever that comes out.

The reason a mechanic is needed is because without it you are punishing players for doing well especially in Missions play where different GMs will allow or not allow tweaks to the system. The following scenario is why I think that it is important to allow a mechanic to delay an action.

Player group sets up their safe house to get alerted if NPC group tries to attack. NPC group triggers the alert GM tells everyone to roll initiative. PC group rolls well and NPC group is outside. PC groups losses first actions because they did well and played smart. NPC group gets to go first and shoot at PC group which could be deadly to this combat.

There should be a way for the PC group to get their well deserved fist attacks without having to shoot prematurely through a barrier. In this scenario which has happened in a few games i have been in the PCs would have been punished for doing good if the GM had not houseruled it. but in Missions play you can not guarantee your GM will do this, So a mechanic allows the player the option to at least point out the GM that the book allows them something.

Yeah, I had assumed I had just missed the rule in the layout of doom.  And just used a fairly normal delay rules from most games.

 How crazy of those players wanting to wait until after the smoke deployed to enter the room and also not lose the first turn of actions.  Way to go smoke throwing dude, by rolling bad on initiative you screwed the rest of the team out of their first turn. But I guess storytelling games don't involve tactics.

Stainless Steel Devil Rat

  • *
  • Errata Coordinator
  • Prime Runner
  • *****
  • Posts: 4572
« Reply #32 on: <04-04-20/1015:38> »
Well, initiative in general has some real problems when it's broken down into player turns where nobody is acting except that one character.  This is true not just of SR but also D&D, and hell pretty much EVERY game ever... at least that I'm familiar with.

Situations like mexican standoffs or a hostage taker holding a gun to a hostage's head are not well simulated via initiative. Another example is jousting.  Or, in a more SR-worthy context, combat biking.  Consider some runners and go-gangers engaging in some motorcycle-mounted melee combat. What SHOULD be happening is both bikers are approaching each other, then they both swing whilst in melee reach of each other, then (assuming neither is eliminated) they both wheel around for another go.  You can't even MODEL that in "A goes, B goes" initiative rules where only one character's motorcycle is in motion during any given character turn.

So, the way SR has always dealt with this is to rely on GM "common sense" first and legislate second. 6th might rely on the GM moreso and legislate less so than prior editions, but it's the same paradigm as 5e and before.

So what do you do with the combat biking example? You might dispense with the movement and turn order, at least as the two jousters relate to each other. (gets more gnarly if these are just two combatants showing off during a larger battle)  They might move simultaneously not via any RAW rule anywhere, but due to "common sense". You might or might not give the initiative winner the right to resolve that melee attack first, or maybe you make them resolve simultaneously.  Maybe if the loser is using a weapon similar to a lance and has a substantial reach advantage, you let that melee attack resolve first no matter who won initiative.  These are answers based on context rather than immutable rules.  GM's perception of common sense is SUPPOSED to trump the RAW.

The example given a few posts upthread, where some NPCs tripped an alarm and the PCs want to turn the tables and ambush the would-be-ambushers?  Sure. Again, a completely plausible scenario.  But, the PCs are only screwed by the GM's lack of common sense, rather than the absence of an explicit rule for delaying actions.  If the NPCs sneaking up on the safe house trigger the PC's silent alarm, the GM should be asking "what do you want to do about it" rather than saying "roll initiative".  If the PCs want to rush to the windows and begin firing on the assailants, fine then go to initiative.  OTOH, if the PCs want to wait and ambush the ambushers AFTER they breach the door, then the combat scene shouldn't even begin until the door is breached.  NOW roll initiative, and if the PCs win, well there's the NPCs right there, all ready to be worked over.

Personally, I think judiciously determining when to "drop the time stop", to use an old MUSH term, is the key tool here.  In the above case where NPCs triggered the PC's alarm, it's "wrong" to roll initiative immediately.  At the point of the alarm, the PCs now have the upper hand.  Combat shouldn't begin immediately unless THEY begin it immediately. If they want to wait for the NPCs to breach, then combat doesn't begin until after the NPCs breach.  This seems obvious to me.  In another example: holding someone at gunpoint.  If A is holding B at gunpoint, warning him not to do anything stupid, etc etc etc then "that's not combat".  That's a (tense) social roleplay scene.  If B wants to rush A, that should be a decision made outside the meta-knowledge of who won initiative.  Depending on contexts, as soon as B begins charging A shoots, and THEN you roll initiative, or perhaps if the context was such that B was close enough that it's plausible that B could reach A before A reacts, then roll init without giving A the "held shot" and let the dice determine whether A reacts in time. Again, GM's discretion is a thing so there's not necessarily any need to legislate whether holding someone at gunpoint allows you to shoot them "if they provoke you" during their action.

Now, while I think that MOST of the time there are better ways to resolve the concept of "held actions" than using turn order shifteroos, sure there are times when something like "spend a Minor to allow your Attack to be Anytime instead of Initiative" might be perfectly appropriate.  Should that be a blanket rule you can do anytime without respect to specific contexts? I'm not sure, but again who knows what the upcoming combat book will institute.



« Last Edit: <04-04-20/1021:49> by Stainless Steel Devil Rat »
RPG mechanics exist to give structure and consistency to the game world, true, but at the end of the day, you’re fighting dragons with algebra and random number generators.

Redwulfe

  • *
  • Catalyst Demo Team
  • Omae
  • ***
  • Posts: 770
« Reply #33 on: <04-04-20/1420:42> »
You are absolutely correct. I don't think I would have any problem with the current lack of delay action if initiative was only called for when combatants actually had contact rather than sudo contact, like knowing the NPCs are on the other side of the wall.

And maybe it is an issue that I think would only effect me in Missions play as I will have a different GM at most tables and I can not garauntee that the GM I am sitting with will drop the time stop at a point that will punish my Sam for having a good initiative. Which is why I think there needs to be a rule even though we shouldn't have to have a rule.

That or we should move this to a missions discussion on writing into modules a short paragraph guideline for dropping people into combat only once contact has actually been made. Even with the current suprise rules if you use ambush then those that have weaker reactions will not walk around the corner until you have already lost your initiative.

In my personally games I am going to have a Overwatch Minor action that I will allow people to use the following and just hope something similar comes along latter.

Overwatch (A)
If an opponent uses the move minor action during the first round of combat and stays outside of Close attack range, you may go out of Initiative order and make an Attack action as long as you have both a Minor and a Major Action still available in this round (because you either are after the attacking player in Initiative order or you deferred some of your actions). This counts as your Attack Major Action for the player turn. If you’re already out of Major Actions this round, you’re drek out of luck. This cannot be used with melee weapons.
There are 10 kinds of people in this world, those who understand binary and those who don't

Red

*Play-by-Post color guide*
Thinking
com
speaking

Shinobi Killfist

  • *
  • Prime Runner
  • *****
  • Posts: 2703
« Reply #34 on: <04-04-20/1428:36> »
Well the joust is handled by the rules fairly well.  The one with initiative moves in and attacks as normal the other party uses an intercept action.  In a sporting event style actual joust I'd probably just fast track it with an opposed test treating it like any other opposed athletic test like arm wresting or something. But combat biking is a ongoing fight so I'd use the above attack/intercept system. Move from full cover attack move into full cover can get really hinky in a turn based system if you don't have held actions.

I can't think of a reason why deferring your actions to a later initiative count or a readied action system hurts the game.  I can see a lot of reasons why not having it hurts the game though.

RuleLawyer

  • *
  • Newb
  • *
  • Posts: 26
« Reply #35 on: <04-05-20/2342:46> »
You hear a weird squishy sound as something heavy hits the outside of your motel room door. “Sticky Bomb” comes to mind so you grab your pistol.

4A: After the door blows in, you shoot the first guy who runs through the door. Full dice pool.

5E: After the door blows in, you shoot the first guy who runs through the door (with -1 to your dice pool).

6W: After the door blows in, the first guy to run through the door shoots you.

RAW
« Last Edit: <04-05-20/2344:40> by RuleLawyer »

Stainless Steel Devil Rat

  • *
  • Errata Coordinator
  • Prime Runner
  • *****
  • Posts: 4572
« Reply #36 on: <04-06-20/0008:26> »
You hear a weird squishy sound as something heavy hits the outside of your motel room door. “Sticky Bomb” comes to mind so you grab your pistol.

4A: After the door blows in, you shoot the first guy who runs through the door. Full dice pool.

5E: After the door blows in, you shoot the first guy who runs through the door (with -1 to your dice pool).

6W: After the door blows in, the first guy to run through the door shoots you.

RAW

If you're not IN combat, you shouldn't be in initiative order.  Ergo, if you don't plan on shooting immediately when you heard the weird sound, you're not rolling initiative.  Only when you intend to shoot when you see that the door's been breached do you even roll initiative (and potentially surprise).  And naturally, then whoever wins shoots first.
RPG mechanics exist to give structure and consistency to the game world, true, but at the end of the day, you’re fighting dragons with algebra and random number generators.

Redwulfe

  • *
  • Catalyst Demo Team
  • Omae
  • ***
  • Posts: 770
« Reply #37 on: <04-06-20/0015:54> »
This might be a good thing to put in a FAQ

Quote
Q. When do you roll initiative to start a combat?
A. When at least two sides of a conflict are able to see each other or when one side of a conflict tries to ambush the another. Basically don't roll for initiative untill both sides can actual have a combat.

Obviously you would word it better, cause I think mine is crap. :)
There are 10 kinds of people in this world, those who understand binary and those who don't

Red

*Play-by-Post color guide*
Thinking
com
speaking

RuleLawyer

  • *
  • Newb
  • *
  • Posts: 26
« Reply #38 on: <04-06-20/0258:28> »
If you're not IN combat, you shouldn't be in initiative order.  Ergo, if you don't plan on shooting immediately when you heard the weird sound, you're not rolling initiative.  Only when you intend to shoot when you see that the door's been breached do you even roll initiative (and potentially surprise).  And naturally, then whoever wins shoots first.
In my example I left out most of the rolls: surprise, initiative, and so on. But I’ve never played as you describe. For all the teams I’ve been on, the initiative roll would happen when the loud, strange thump came from the door. Some magician might get a Physical Barrier or Reinforce spell up before the door-busting explosive goes off. Some Street Sam might Ready a Firearm, Extend it’s folding stock, turn off the safety, activate the laser sight, and choose 3-round bursts before the door explodes inward. In 4A, 5E, and 6W, the fast characters could all fire grenades and spells through the busted-open door before the slow attackers ever appeared in the doorway. By its only in 6W that the defenders are unable to shoot first when the enemy appears in the doorway.

Stainless Steel Devil Rat

  • *
  • Errata Coordinator
  • Prime Runner
  • *****
  • Posts: 4572
« Reply #39 on: <04-06-20/0349:44> »
If you're not IN combat, you shouldn't be in initiative order.  Ergo, if you don't plan on shooting immediately when you heard the weird sound, you're not rolling initiative.  Only when you intend to shoot when you see that the door's been breached do you even roll initiative (and potentially surprise).  And naturally, then whoever wins shoots first.
... I’ve never played as you describe...
... By its only in 6W that the defenders are unable to shoot first when the enemy appears in the doorway...

Well if you play the way I'm describing, whoever wins initiative gets to shoot first.  There IS no "wasted action" before the NPCs barge in because combat hasn't started yet.

Seems to me like that's the way you're SUPPOSED to play. 
« Last Edit: <04-06-20/0357:01> by Stainless Steel Devil Rat »
RPG mechanics exist to give structure and consistency to the game world, true, but at the end of the day, you’re fighting dragons with algebra and random number generators.

Leith

  • *
  • Chummer
  • **
  • Posts: 107
« Reply #40 on: <04-06-20/0456:49> »
You're not. I agree that init should be rolled when it matters. Until the enemy enters the room it is not necessary to know the order of events just the time runners have to prep. Assuming there is no way to attack each other from outside the room it doesn't make sense to roll init until at least one baddy is in.

That doesn't do anything to the other situations though. Like what if the 1st baddy is killed and you have no one to shoot cuz ur faster than the rest. It's not like a huge problem or anything. Minor obstacle, easy to house rule or work around. Still feels like there should have been a rule for it...

Banshee

  • *
  • Catalyst Demo Team
  • Ace Runner
  • ***
  • Posts: 1095
« Reply #41 on: <04-06-20/0846:55> »
Ok, here is why I say there doesn't need to be a "mechanic" for it.

Roll initiative (this is after surprise and ambush factors are dealt with)
Player A goes... takes out the only target
Player B ... well crap I don't have a target. Asks GM can I wait until a target presents itself, knowing more is coming? Gm: yes ... or chooses to do something that doesn't require a target.
1st bad comes through the door .. Player B takes his action

Simple as that .. no special actions or mechanisms involved

Edit: just want to add that in 40 years of gaming over many many different systems this is the way I've always done it and never even looked up or used any given system "rules for deferred actions". The faster players should not be penalized because slower targets can't keep up.
« Last Edit: <04-06-20/0852:18> by Banshee »
Robert "Banshee" Volbrecht
Freelancer & FAQ Committee member
Former RPG Lead Agent
Catalyst Demo Team

Hobbes

  • *
  • Catalyst Demo Team
  • Prime Runner
  • ***
  • Posts: 3078
« Reply #42 on: <04-06-20/1009:42> »
I have to agree with Banshee, there isn't really a need in most games for a specific held action rule.  If you've won initiative that means you're fractions of a second quicker than the other side and you get to shoot first.  If that means you need to wait an eyeblink for someone to pop through the door, so be it.

Turn based games (which is every game I have ever played) all have the same issues trying to simulate multiple parties acting simultaneously.  The way I see it, the folks coming through the door are trying to shoot the folks in the room and the folks in the room are trying to shoot the folks coming through the door.  Initiative is the mechanic used to determine who gets to resolve their shot first.  Everyone is theoretically moving around at the same time, so it's not like someone is actually just standing around for 2 seconds.  They're all moving/reacting/grabbing weapons, checking corners, lining up shots... all at the same time.  Initiative order tells you who's combat action is resolved first.

Lormyr

  • *
  • Catalyst Demo Team
  • Omae
  • ***
  • Posts: 820
« Reply #43 on: <04-06-20/1039:59> »
I agree with Banshee's sentiment and handling of the desired mechanic, but I am also in the camp that would prefer a hard rule for it, primarily to detract from the hardnosed GM's that won't allow it since there is no rule for it. This is less of a concern for home play, but I guarantee it will come up (and be denied) at conventions with Missions.
"TL:DR 6e's reduction of meaningful choices is akin to forcing everyone to wear training wheels. Now it's just becomes a bunch of toddlers riding around on tricycles they can't fall off of." - Adzling

Stainless Steel Devil Rat

  • *
  • Errata Coordinator
  • Prime Runner
  • *****
  • Posts: 4572
« Reply #44 on: <04-06-20/1049:08> »
No amount of rules will prevent GMs from being jerks.   GMs being jerks is a problem that isn't solved by putting the rulebook over their heads.

But, still, I'd be surprised if the combat expansion book does NOT cover this sort of thing.  (along with suppressive fire, which is what *I* found to be an annoying omission in the CRB)
RPG mechanics exist to give structure and consistency to the game world, true, but at the end of the day, you’re fighting dragons with algebra and random number generators.