View Single Post
Old 10-18-2019, 02:15 PM   #255
Plane
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Default Re: A Challenger Appears! Green versus Red

Quote:
Originally Posted by ericthered View Post
As a GM, I'd could see a justification either way, depending on how he was stunned. Mental stun is probably #2, while physical stun is probably #1. I'd probably tack on a slow non-AP cost deceleration for the mental stun, and for the physical stun they'd be rolling vs. DX to avoid tripping and falling down if they had to burn the AP. Stunning seems like it would be VERY hard on your AP in general.
Mechanically I'm not sure how much difference there's meant to be between mental/physical stun except for whether your roll vs HT or IQ (or Will if fear check) to get out of it. Buying up basic attribute defences being priced differently would be one, as that's 10/20/5 depending (and fear itself I think has a leveled perk for Will rolls ONLY against fear)

Quote:
Originally Posted by ericthered View Post
Doing "Nothing" at -4 does seem like a common occurrence. I'd be ok with allowing an evade at an additional -4 , perhaps with the caveat that its capped at 9 or something.
One thing that occurs to me, is that while in the original system during a Do Nothing you could roll to resist someone trying to break your grapple, in Technical Grappling attempting to resist someone using Break Free is done as an Active Defense, either a Dodge or a Parry...

It actually becomes way harder since -4 on an active defense is much tougher to overcome than -4 on a quick contest, but that's fine, because the idea of someone stunned and unable to attack being competent at maintaining grapples is hard to accept to begin with.

The idea of replacing quick contests with attacks/defenses was also adapted in Pyramid to rolls to use Possession (and resist it) so now I'm wondering how feasible it might be to do this with other kinds of contests, like Evade/Obstruct contests...

In both cases they deal with introducing 'points' though. Due to "Mental Control Points" I like to refer to TG's "Control Points" as "Physical Control Points" instead...

What if a third kind was something like "Hex Control Points" and it had to do with how much influence you have over your own and another's relative positioning? It'd fall somewhere between the others since it would be a mix of mental and physical influence...

Quote:
Originally Posted by ericthered View Post
That still leaves us with possible collision damage though.
Yeah, and ways to make it less impressive than intentional collisions without making them non-damaging and without boosting intentional collisions to unbalanced levels.

Which is why accidental collisions being unlikely to strike (max 9 or less) and easy to avoid if they do (like telegraphed) seems like a way forward without tweaking damage too much.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ericthered View Post
That's a rabbit hole all of its own, but it might work. That's a LOT of rolling though.
Yeah, you roll HT to mitigate AP loss any time you take damage by comparison, but due to active defences people aren't rolling every turn.

If you were rolling anyway (like with rolling to step/trip instead of to hit/miss, as I think I brought up before) the ⅒ AP system could be used.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ericthered View Post
Limiting the free hex direction change to 1 per second seems like a good compromise.
Charging for the hex changes when moving front-left and front-right is a solve, as I'd like to charge for all rotations to incentivize less mobility for conserving energy.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ericthered View Post
RPGs have always struggled with dense formations. Which is odd, given their roots.
Chess-like battle maps? Is that where D&D began?
Plane is offline   Reply With Quote