Simpler alternatives to The Last Gasp?

[Michael Thayne]

I've been playing around a lot recently with running many vs. one fights between low-skill "goons" and a single high-skill "martial artist". At first, the goons seemed to have the advantage. Then I started having the martial artist step back after every attack, and make heavy use of retreating. That seemed to shift the advantage back to the martial artist. Then I figured out how to use the goons' Move maneuvers in a maximally efficient way to surround the martial artist and prevent retreating, and the goons had the advantage again. However, the results felt weird and unrealistic.

Then I tried introducing Action Point rules from the Pyramid article "The Last Gasp" (Pyramid #3/44). The absolutely punishing Action Point cost of the Move maneuver suddenly made it much trickier for the goons to effectively surround the martial artist. Fights felt much more realistic. But my god, the bookkeeping. Every Move maneuver required keeping track of three things: Movement Points (from Campaigns), hexes moved, and facing changes (because hexes moved and facing changes cost Action Points independently of each other). Also, retreating can cost an Action Point if you've previously moved that turn, even a step, but not otherwise, and I don't think I ever handled that right.

Does anyone have a way of simplifying the Last Gasp rules that preserves the effects, without quite so much bookkeeping? The simplified rules for NPCs in the sidebar don't really work given one of the key things I like about the rules is how they penalize Move maneuvers, and the sidebar ("NPCs and Action Points: Keeping the GM Sane") doesn't do that. The sidebar is also rather harsh in terms of how long recovery takes. What should I do?

[Gigermann]

Originally Posted by Michael Thayne

Does anyone have a way of simplifying the Last Gasp rules that preserves the effects, without quite so much bookkeeping?

I've been mentally processing a possible "easier way" but I haven't tested it.

The idea is simply: for every prior "active" maneuver taken, take a -1 DX/IQ (just like Shock; doesn't stack), up to a -4 maximum; for every "passive" maneuver taken, reduce the accumulated penalty by one. Result: the more you push, the sloppier you get, until you take a round or two to reorient. Somewhat less bookkeeping—you still have to know what you did last round, and track the current penalty—but I think it achieves the same effect. Maybe give a free round for Fit, and another for Very Fit.

* "Active/passive" maneuvers would be basically the same as Last Gasp—cost points vs not.

[Michael Thayne]

Oh, I missed something important: Martial Arts let's a Trip be used as an Attack of Opportunity, D&D 3.X style. So that helps with stopping flankers.

[Michael Thayne]

After doing some "reality testing", I think the answer might be that charging Action Points for changing facing is a mistake. Repeatedly pivoting 180 degrees once per second (alternating clockwise and counterclockwise pivots to avoid dizziness) is something I can do comfortably for at least 30 seconds—I got bored before I got seriously tired. Similarly, jogging in a tight circle is not any more tiring for me than regular jogging.

On the other hand, I tried a couple ways of simulating a fighter who steps forward to attack and then back to retreat, doing both once per second. Approach one: two steps forward (as in foot movements, not GURPS Steps), two steps back, four total steps per second. Approach two: position my feet about a yard apart, don't move the feet much, but repeatedly shift my center of mass between them about once per second. Both got tiring after 10 seconds, which is consistent with them costing 1 AP per second.

This makes sense in terms of basic physics: turning an upright human in place just takes less energy than moving a human in a line (well, it's acceleration that takes the energy, but you know what I mean). It might be different for horizontal creatures, but for upright ones spinning in place is NBD energy-wise.

[DouglasCole]

Originally Posted by Michael Thayne

After doing some "reality testing", I think the answer might be that charging Action Points for changing facing is a mistake. Repeatedly pivoting 180 degrees once per second (alternating clockwise and counterclockwise pivots to avoid dizziness) is something I can do comfortably for at least 30 seconds—I got bored before I got seriously tired. Similarly, jogging in a tight circle is not any more tiring for me than regular jogging.

On the other hand, I tried a couple ways of simulating a fighter who steps forward to attack and then back to retreat, doing both once per second. Approach one: two steps forward (as in foot movements, not GURPS Steps), two steps back, four total steps per second. Approach two: position my feet about a yard apart, don't move the feet much, but repeatedly shift my center of mass between them about once per second. Both got tiring after 10 seconds, which is consistent with them costing 1 AP per second.

This makes sense in terms of basic physics: turning an upright human in place just takes less energy than moving a human in a line (well, it's acceleration that takes the energy, but you know what I mean). It might be different for horizontal creatures, but for upright ones spinning in place is NBD energy-wise.

Movement in that article was the least satisfying part for me. I wound up talking at length about that issue in a blog post, which you might mine for ideas.

Keep it Simple, Keep it Safe
So, what to do? Well, one suggestion on the forums was to make a “movement only” AP regeneration pool. That’s certainly one way to go, and probably adds the right level of points to the character sheet for those who have reduced movement costs. But if we try and keep it simple, I’d do something like this:

AP Costs
Acceleration up to Move/2 is similar in concept to an Attack. It costs 1 AP. You still get your first step for free, and beyond that, any acceleration up to Move/2 costs that single point.
Acceleration up to Move is like an All-Out Attack, and costs 2 AP. Again, you get the first step for free.
Acceleration from full Move to Sprint speed costs 1 AP.
Deceleration from movement other than a step costs 1 AP if you were moving up to your full Move, and 2 AP to stop dead from a sprint. That should probably involve a DX and/or HT roll to see if you can do this without injury. You may decelerate at up to 20% of your Move per second for free; sort of an anti-step.
Facing changes can either be entirely free, or cost 1 AP for 2-3 facing changes in a move action, or 2 AP for 4+ changes within a move.
AP Maintenance Costs
Moving about is still tiring, but one way to deal with this is that at the beginning of each turn, if you’re moving more than one step at a time and wish to maintain that speed, make a HT roll. Succeed and the AP cost of your movement goes down by 1; succeed by 5+ and the AP cost of your movement goes down by 2. On a critical failure, you slow down by (say) 20% of your move, while on a critical success, you need not spend any AP to continue your speed next turn.

Another way to go, which is more in line with some of my original thoughts many moons ago, would be that you roll HT (or Running) every turn for sprinting, while at lower speeds, you roll every N turns (and I’d probably try and invoke the Speed/Range progression here somehow).

Parting Shot
To create a mobile battlefield, there needs to be a lack of disincentives to move. If you can easily translate from place to place with limited AP spend, but actual fighting is AP intensive and creates incentives to pause, evaluate, and generally chill out, then you have created a situation where players and NPCs can come to each others aid, and repositioning doesn’t simply deliver an exhausted combatant to be ground to dust.

The current movement rules don’t help create that mobile battlefield, and may even be too restrictive even in a realistic mode. Flat-out lowering the AP costs for movement should go a long way to encourage people to fight for position as well as strength of arms.

The other thing that changing AP cost avoids that requiring something like AP Recovery advantage does not is that it can be dropped into existing games with existing characters. You don’t need some expensive (and some of the AP recovery rates are very expensive, on the order of a hundred points or more) advantage to be suddenly tacked on to your character. You just change the costs and go.

That being said, if one were looking for a switch, to allow differentiation between “can move about the battlefield like a ferret on crack” and “everyone else,” I’d probably tack on something equivalent in point cost to Trained by a Master. At 30 points, that’s like getting a 2/3 discount on recovering 5-10 AP per second for use only in movement. So if you’re looking for a design toggle:

New Advantage: Ferret on Crack
30 points
This advantage lets you alter the AP costs for movement to a lower value, as described above. In games where the GM has decided that the AP costs above are just right for realistic characters too, perhaps this halves AP costs (round up), so that it only costs 1 AP to move anything beyond your step, and gives +5 to HT when rolling to avoid AP loss when maintaining speed.
Will it work in play?
No idea! Lowering AP costs for movement seems like a good step in general to enable a more mobile battlefield, and keeping AP costs to the 1 AP for effort and 2 AP for strong effort theme in the original article makes a lot of sense.

[Michael Thayne]

Originally Posted by DouglasCole

Movement in that article was the least satisfying part for me. I wound up talking at length about that issue in a blog post, which you might mine for ideas.


<snip>

Oh, I think this is much better. Running back and forth between two points a few yards apart is tiring, but it's tiring on the scale of like, 10 seconds, not 2 or 3 seconds, which is what the original rules would suggest. And I'll just totally waive AP costs for changing facing.

OTOH Action Points no longer restrict the movement of crowds of mooks that much. But the version of Trip in Martial Arts handles that nicely, so it's OK.

[Michael Thayne]

A few other notes on Action Points: if movement is lightly penalized, it seems to favor larger groups of fighters, because part of the group can rest while other members point away. The outnumbered side, on the other hand, has a much harder time catching a break, and may be forced to spend precious seconds on Do Nothing maneuvers. Also, they really don't create the pattern of "10 seconds on, 10 seconds off" assumed in the sidebar for NPCs—on the one hand, it's very easy to spend 2 or more AP per turn (one attack and one active defense), on the other hand, with above-average HT a single Do Nothing maneuver can restore most of your AP.

[Blind Mapmaker]

Originally Posted by DouglasCole

Movement in that article was the least satisfying part for me. I wound up talking at length about that issue in a blog post, which you might mine for ideas.

/snip

Dang, I must have read that article while on long-term fatigue. This is exactly what I was looking for, but I completely forgot it was. Thanks for reposting!

[Anthony]

Originally Posted by Michael Thayne

Also, they really don't create the pattern of "10 seconds on, 10 seconds off" assumed in the sidebar for NPCs—on the one hand, it's very easy to spend 2 or more AP per turn (one attack and one active defense), on the other hand, with above-average HT a single Do Nothing maneuver can restore most of your AP.

Easily resolved by changing how that recovery works. However, the big problem you're dealing with is a more general one with tracking status on large numbers of characters.

[Plane]

Originally Posted by Michael Thayne

I figured out how to use the goons' Move maneuvers in a maximally efficient way to surround the martial artist and prevent retreating, and the goons had the advantage again. However, the results felt weird and unrealistic.

Can't you still retreat if someone's occupying a hex you want to retreat into (or through) so long as long as you win an Evade contest?

Originally Posted by Michael Thayne

Then I tried introducing Action Point rules from the Pyramid article "The Last Gasp" (Pyramid #3/44). The absolutely punishing Action Point cost of the Move maneuver suddenly made it much trickier for the goons to effectively surround the martial artist.

Given that the martial artist is ALSO punished by that high cost, I don't really see how it makes it harder for them. The "free step" makes a slow-and-steady spreading-out of goons a much more viable tactic. Once they surround you (even if it's a very wide ring) then to outmaneuver them you would need to Evade past them, and since Evade is a technique, it would cost you 1 AP to use!

Originally Posted by Michael Thayne

Fights felt much more realistic. But my god, the bookkeeping. Every Move maneuver required keeping track of three things: Movement Points (from Campaigns), hexes moved, and facing changes (because hexes moved and facing changes cost Action Points independently of each other).

That's another area where the spinny martial artist loses out, since 60 degrees is free but it's extra to do a 2-side change.

Suddenly it becomes much harder for the martial artist to rotate back and forth to hit enemies on either side of them, so I think the MA loses out again due to 'free" low-tier movements which benefit those with superior numbers and inferior agility.

Originally Posted by Michael Thayne

Also, retreating can cost an Action Point if you've previously moved that turn, even a step, but not otherwise, and I don't think I ever handled that right.

We've been using this in a play-test, it is sometimes hard to keep track of. Once AP begin to get low, risking using your free step to advance on an enemy (instead of keeping it in reserve for the no-AP retreat) is something most viable when using All-Out Defense, since you can spend half of the 2 AP it gives you for a retreat if you need to. You'd only end up spending something if you had to make a 2nd defense in that second.

Originally Posted by Michael Thayne

Does anyone have a way of simplifying the Last Gasp rules that preserves the effects, without quite so much bookkeeping? The simplified rules for NPCs in the sidebar don't really work given one of the key things I like about the rules is how they penalize Move maneuvers, and the sidebar ("NPCs and Action Points: Keeping the GM Sane") doesn't do that. The sidebar is also rather harsh in terms of how long recovery takes. What should I do?

I don't know that this would be more simple, but I think it's easier to get your head around if you ignore the "free" stuff (pay 1 AP for the 1st step and first 60 degree facing change in each turn) and just universally exchange 1 AP for 20% worth of Movement Points in all situations.

I don't think AOD should give free AP either, I find we end up using that way too often. AOD:Dedicated give a bonus which increases the chances of a critical success so that an active defense might cost you 0 AP, that seems benefit enough. If it must give something free, I think 1 free AP would be plenty, 2 is somewhat overkill.

I'd also treat a "step" as based on 1/5 your Move rounded down (rather than 1/10 your Move rounded up, which I think is the canon?) and treat maneuvers with a 'Step' as capping you to using 20% of your Movement Points. This still results in step maneuvers giving you 2 yards at Move 10, but scales up a little better in respect to the 1yard/second which the Move 5 brigade enjoys due to Basic Set minimums.

Since lateral/rear movement costs double the base movement points (2 instead of 1) this would mean it's not an option for standard attack maneuvers and would require a Committed Attack, Move, Move and Attack, or All-Out Defense: Determined Dodge.

The exception would be if you use a retreat: retreats effectively give step maneuvers 2 steps worth of movement in their turn, so you could unlock 40% of your Movement Points that way. If someone wanted to waste their retreat to get that 20% bonus, I don't see any downside to it. That's pretty much what Committed Attack already does for -2 on the attack skill, except you wouldn't have to suffer the defensive penalties (but you wouldn't get the bonus to skill or damage either)

People with less than Move 5 should need to take 2 steps (Committed Attack, or a standard Attack followed by a "Slip" defense) to even move a full hex forward and you should get 2-hex steps at Move 10.

If you have Move 1 (maximum 1 Movement Point per second even when using a Move maneuver) preventing the use of anything besides standing while walking forward unencumbered with nothing in your way, then I'd just let them continue building up the required cost of a movement until they paid enough to accomplish it. Until then they would remain in their previous hex/posture.

I don't really like how expensive movement is compared to attacking, personally. I find throwing 1 kick per second to be more exhausting than running 15ft/second. This would make it MORE complicated, but I think since any time you spend 1 AP to throw a kick you have a chance on a critical success to pay 0 AP, that any time you spend 1 AP to buy Movement Points you should get a DX+4 roll and pay 0 AP if it's a critical success.

This makes both moving between hexes and facing changes cheaper since facing changes can be bought with Movement Points too.

Since critical successes would still be pretty rare (even if using the suggestion of counting MoS 10+ as crits) using tenths (discount one tenth per MoS) could make movement more consistently affordable (and DX-2 v DX+4 more meaningful, about 0.6 AP) but it is more book-keeping.

DC suggests lowered AP costs for movement in his post ("Acceleration up to Move/2 is similar in concept to an Attack. It costs 1 AP.") compared to Pyramid 3/44 (which I think varied between 1 AP per 10% MP or 1 AP per 20% MP depending on which of 2 alternate rule systems was used) which more than halves the cost of movement, so saving 0.4 AP any time you rolled an average 10 is sort of a middle ground.

Originally Posted by DouglasCole

one suggestion on the forums was to make a “movement only” AP regeneration pool. That’s certainly one way to go, and probably adds the right level of points to the character sheet for those who have reduced movement costs.

Could also think of it as "leg AP" so you have people choosing whether to run or kick people, neither of which would affect your freedom to punch since you're not noticeably exerting your arms except a little pumping for balance.