Non-combat running

[Chris Rice]

Originally Posted by Tenex

My lab may well be irrelevant. What is your reply to the tribesman who ran down a cheetah? And I only claim to outlast black labs! I'm not a real world hard core runner who runs down prey for a lifestyle. While I probably can't outlast wild animals, there ARE humans who do so.

I don't have a reply because it's a situation which doesn't much interest me as far as the game is concerned. Like I said, the rules don't really cater for different sorts of movement rate; there is a brief paragaragh on overland travel on p54 of the new ITL, but that's it. As the publishers have already indicated that they will not be adding rules to the system you're left to come up with something yourself if you really feel the need of it. If we had separate Strength and Stamina characteristics that would help, but we don't. It's probably simpler just to require the Running Talent for anything of that sort, since it's described as being the result of long hours of specific training in jogging etc.

[Skarg]

As RobW just posted, and we've discussed in other threads, combat MA is slow compared to actual speeds of humans (by about half) and other animals (by even more, especially MA 8 bears LOL).

MA also allows you to run in any zig-zag or tight circles you want, which can't be done by real figures at their full running speed. And that starts to be a tactical issue in TFT when figures start getting very high MA (mainly some mounted figures, fliers, and people using Speed Movement magic).

One easy house-rule solution usable even by "OMG GURPS" players, is to say that:

Anyone who is on reasonably clear terrain and has spent the entire previous turn running in basically one direction, can run their "sprint" MA in the same direction the next turn, which for humans would be double their normal combat MA, and for animals would be probably about three times their RAW combat MA (or GM rule it, see the thread where we calculated some, and/or calculate it yourself).

Note that dragons already have pretty much this same rule.

[JLV]

Historically speaking (and physically, as well) a trained human runner CAN run down a horse or other running animal. It's been done many times, even in warfare. The problem is that tactically it's not too useful since the horse can clearly move faster than even a trained runner for short periods (i.e., the duration of an engagement between two units), and has an enormous advantage in impact energy when the two individuals collide. Strategically speaking, though, cavalry clearly isn't that much better than infantry in long-distance movement, especially if the infantry can conduct forced marches (people can eat and drink on the move -- horses have to stop to do both, and after eating need some time to digest before starting up again).

In short, I can see using it as a story element, but not in a tactical situation.

[larsdangly]

We don't have to figure out how people ran down wild animals to understand what is going on here: the issue is that pretty much everyone and everything moves faster than their MA score. 5 seconds is a reasonable 40 yard dash time for an athletic person, meaning millions and millions of people can do it, and everyone ambulatory can come close. So, our MA's should all be 30. MA 10 (40' in 5 seconds) is approximately a brisk walking pace for a human.

This is the issue, but it doesn't mean it is a problem. MA scores are a decent representation of how people move around in chaotic tactical situations. And if you just want to know whether your character can outrun something it will give you a first guess. The only thing its bad at is telling you how far you could get if moving was all you cared about.

[Tenex]

Well, it's somewhat tangential to the OP, but MA isn't a decent representation of how humans move in a tactical situation compared to wolves, bears, and cats in ITL. Those numbers are relatively all out of whack.

I concur that as long as everything is relative it's probably not a big deal. But the animals are not relative to human movement rates in the short term.

[Skarg]

If you're stopped, and want to be able to move in circles, you're not going to move at your full A to B running speed. So it makes good enough sense that combat MA is 1/2 or even 1/3 what a human's full running speed.

But there IS a practical tactical application for running full speed NEAR combat, to get away from it, or to reach it from a distance away, or other adventure situations. GMs and players who understand this may want a Sprinting rule, such as the version I mentioned above.

And, to be realistic about animals such as bears or wolves, you'd want their running speed, at least in sprints if perhaps not in combats for whatever reasoning, to be notably faster than humans when sprinting.

The part about long-term hunting and marching is not relevant to combat MA not particularly to sprinting MA, and is another subject.

[larsdangly]

I think what really drives this issue are some simple game design issues. How many hexes should be on a tactical play map, in order for it to be accessible, readily navigated, etc.? Probably it should not be any bigger than ~20x20. How much of that map should you be able to cross in a single turn? Certainly not all of it, otherwise the game of movement and maneuver will have no give and take. So, your movement score per turn should be 10 or less. How many people should be in a hex? If you want to have facing as a part of play, then normally the answer should be 1. Therefore each hex probably shouldn't be bigger than 5' or so. The only remaining question is the time scale of a turn, which is basically a meaningless choice from a game play perspective, so you can kind of pick whatever you want. In TFT they picked 5s, which is probably a bit on the long side. In GURPS the choice is a possibly more realistic 1s, but now you are committed to a super gritty treatment where an action can't reasonably be anything complex and lots of things will take multiple turns to play out.

[Skarg]

Originally Posted by larsdangly

I think what really drives this issue are some simple game design issues. How many hexes should be on a tactical play map, in order for it to be accessible, readily navigated, etc.?

Those are important game design issues, but there's also the aspect of what the game says it represents, and how closely the mechanics match that. When bears run slower than humans, for example, that can be an issue for some people, too.

Originally Posted by larsdangly

Probably it should not be any bigger than ~20x20.

Why not? And in an RPG outside a walled arena or underground labyrinth, many places where there might be combat don't have boundaries in some/all directions. And situations before, after and adjacent to a combat can be very fun and interesting as context and additional gaming situation around a combat, whether it's a labyrinth, town, road, wilderness or battlefield. How many arrow shots can be got off while someone is trying to run the distance towards the archer, or to someplace out of their line of fire, is pretty vital to be able to have a good answer to.

Originally Posted by larsdangly

How much of that map should you be able to cross in a single turn? Certainly not all of it, otherwise the game of movement and maneuver will have no give and take. So, your movement score per turn should be 10 or less.

Another crucial game-mechanic consideration is whether 1/2 MA is enough to let your walk around an opponent standing two hexes away facing you, to hit them in the side or rear, or not.

Originally Posted by larsdangly

How many people should be in a hex? If you want to have facing as a part of play, then normally the answer should be 1. Therefore each hex probably shouldn't be bigger than 5' or so.

That's also important even without facing, to determine which people are in melee attack range of which foes.