Steve Jackson Games - Site Navigation
Home General Info Follow Us Search Illuminator Store Forums What's New Other Games Ogre GURPS Munchkin Our Games: Home

Go Back   Steve Jackson Games Forums > Roleplaying > The Fantasy Trip > The Fantasy Trip: House Rules

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 08-12-2020, 10:52 AM   #1
larsdangly
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Default 'Reactions' from HaOW as a house rule for LEITL?

There are several things about Heroes and Other Worlds that made me drop it once Legacy Edition ITL came out, but one rule innovation I particularly liked is their treatment of active defenses. They basically introduce the 'reaction' as a way to parry, block or dodge an attack. But with a (good) twist: you can take one and only one reaction at any point you like during the action portion of the turn, but in exchange you may not move during the subsequent turn. HaOW is not very detailed about movement rules, so I would modify this to say you also may not change facing (so the constraint really feels like a significant cost). I am kind of attracted to this idea, but it would seem to steal some of the thunder from the Defend and Dodge actions, so I'm unsure whether I really want to take it for a spin at the table. On the other hand, it introduces some pretty interesting new strategies both for defense and for 'pinning' a foe in place through a threat. What do you think?
larsdangly is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-12-2020, 11:44 AM   #2
hcobb
 
hcobb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Pacheco, California
Default Re: 'Reactions' from HaOW as a house rule for LEITL?

LE has this already in switching to defend or dodge when attacked.
__________________
-HJC
hcobb is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 08-12-2020, 11:59 AM   #3
larsdangly
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Default Re: 'Reactions' from HaOW as a house rule for LEITL?

These two are not equivalent; the 'reactions' in HaOW come in addition to your attack (at least, that is how I remember it) and the cost to you is a limitation on your movement afterwards. Defend comes with a condition that restricts your movement beforehand, prevents an attack on the same turn, and has no implications on your movement afterwards.
larsdangly is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-13-2020, 11:54 PM   #4
Skarg
 
Join Date: May 2015
Default Re: 'Reactions' from HaOW as a house rule for LEITL?

I found it interesting playing LAW (Legends of the Ancient World) by Dark City Games recently... is that what you mean by HaOW? It seems like the same thing. Or are you talking about something different.

It seemed to me though that there was a way I liked to play the defense rule, and a way that I very much disliked to play it, and it's not clear, apparently even to the developer, which way is official.

That is, a figure is allowed to defend against an attack, but they can also counterattack instead, and the part I dislike is the idea that you can't defend against a counterattack. I don't like it because it means that if you attack, you can be counterattacked and then you won't get to defend. Which means that if you want to defend, you need to wait for an opponent to attack you, which ... I really don't like. There's a discussion of the issue with the developer (who seems on the fence about it) here: https://darkcitygames.proboards.com/...rattack-dodged

I also fairly liked trying the character building rules. I liked being able to take a talent multiple times to get a higher level of it for a bonus. And I liked giving PCs a certain number of talent points for combat skills, and other points for other skills, so that it didn't feel like a forced trade-off of combat concentration versus having some non-combat abilities. That seemed to be having people make less optimized-seeming characters, which I liked.

But I also struggled with the general simplifying of TFT rules, losing things such as facing, effects of injury (!), DX order, range penalties, etc...
Skarg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-14-2020, 02:50 AM   #5
larsdangly
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Default Re: 'Reactions' from HaOW as a house rule for LEITL?

Heroes and Other Worlds is a different thing; any ITL enthusiast should be aware of it, at least; I suggest giving it a google - there is quite a lot of material, most of it created about 5-6 years ago. It's 'active defense' rules are somewhat different from those in the Dark City house system.

I too have toyed with the idea of using something like the Dark City house rules, but I never jumped for it because I liked it less than my longstanding 'classic edition' ITL house rules (which permitted an attack and parry on the same turn, but at a penalty of 1-die to the roll for each; i.e., normally they would be rolled on 4d rather than 3d). Also, your parry didn't negate an attack; instead it gave you more armor protection, so a powerful blow could still hurt you through it. My version has seen decades of service in the line of fire and always felt very fair. I could tell it was pretty well measured because the only people who took advantage of it had DX high enough that the risk of missing felt like a chance worth taking, so it effectively provided a way of making high DX figures a bit tougher to pin down, and permitted exchanges between high DX combatants to play out over several turns rather than devolving to a series of automatic hits.

Something I (really!) don't like about either HaOW or Legends is the simplification of the rules for tactical movement and positioning. Melee without the hex map or detailed movement rules is not very special; it is gutted of the chess-like tactical nuance that make ITL combat so interesting and fun.

By the way, I don't really own any Dark City programmed modules, though I've often thought of getting them. Are the NPCs and monsters in them presented in a way that would seamlessly work for Legacy Edition ITL, or would you feel like you needed to adapt them to get the stat totals and talents right?

Last edited by larsdangly; 08-14-2020 at 02:54 AM.
larsdangly is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-14-2020, 07:38 AM   #6
hcobb
 
hcobb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Pacheco, California
Default Re: 'Reactions' from HaOW as a house rule for LEITL?

TFT's defend and run is much better for PCs.
__________________
-HJC
hcobb is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 08-14-2020, 08:48 AM   #7
larsdangly
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Default Re: 'Reactions' from HaOW as a house rule for LEITL?

I agree that a skilled player facing a more or less normal foe (someone with adjDX under 16 or so) will accomplish his or her defensive aims by using Defend and Dodge.

But I think there could be a good outcome of a very well designed, parsimonious optional rule for something like a targeted 'counter' or 'reaction' defense, because it would add a lot more 'zing' to one on one duels, which can be quite dull in standard rules. It should be exciting when two foes go face to face on an open field and duke it out, but this particular situation in Melee often amounts to trading whacks for a couple of rounds until someone falls over. I would hate to over complicate TFT because pretty much every other tactical situation you can think of is more fun with its official rules than any other game, including the otherwise similar GURPS. But if you could add one little tweak, similar in scope to other things that are already there (say, sweeping blows or aimed shots) and have the result be fun, interactive exchanges of crossed swords, then it would be worth it. I have some ideas that I'll perhaps post later.
larsdangly is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-15-2020, 07:31 PM   #8
Steve Plambeck
 
Join Date: Jun 2019
Default Re: 'Reactions' from HaOW as a house rule for LEITL?

As an example of a (re)active defense that did not exclude taking another action on the same turn, my house used a PARRY option of our own.

The figure acting first could elect to either Attack, or Attack With Intent To Parry -- which one had to be declared before the roll to hit. The figure that would be acting second could react at the moment of the incoming attack by either choosing Parry, or Parry With Intent To Attack (aka a riposte) -- again the choice had to be declared before the roll to parry. Changing one's option to Parry when being attacked was a substitute for changing one's option to Defend under the same circumstances.

Anyone who did one thing with the intent to do the other was at -3DX on the rolls to do each. (If the roll to parry was successful, we treated the attack as deflected, and therefore there was no roll for damage -- today I would prefer to change that part to only some damage deflected.)

Attempts to parry then always came not on the round of the defender's adjDX, but on the round of the attacker's. But if you accepted that -3 DX penalty on the roll to Parry, you'd still get to try your -3DX attack when your turn to act in adjDX order came up. You really had to think about the risks and advantages to the odds when you tried the combination of actions instead of dedicating your full DX to a single, all-out attack or all-out defense.

We also permitted a Parry With Intent To Disengage. Like Parry With Intent To Attack, the roll to parry was at -3DX. But then instead of attacking during the turn, the one who parried could Disengage as usual when their chance came, except that they also had to roll 3vsDX not to trip and go down as they backed away from the foe.

TFT never codified reactions as their own list of options, but it already has some built in (like the motionless defender with a set pole weapon meeting a charge attack -- the defender's roll to hit comes immediately, as a reaction). In the latter case of course that has to count as the defender's entire turn, but depending on what you call a reaction there are definitely cases it would be reasonable to allow some other, limited actions on the same turn. Dodge is another example, as it can be picked even after moving 1/2 MA at the moment you're fired on.
__________________
"I'm not arguing. I'm just explaining why I'm right."

Last edited by Steve Plambeck; 08-16-2020 at 03:30 AM.
Steve Plambeck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-17-2020, 11:32 AM   #9
zot
 
Join Date: May 2018
Default Re: 'Reactions' from HaOW as a house rule for LEITL?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Skarg View Post
I found it interesting playing LAW (Legends of the Ancient World) by Dark City Games recently... is that what you mean by HaOW? It seems like the same thing. Or are you talking about something different.
I mentioned this a couple years ago but I think it's more or less relevant here: I like LAW's opposed roll system much better than LE's system (I advocated it when Steve was finalizing LE) -- it scales better, it requires less arithmetic, and it's more dramatic.

I'll lay it out here:
  1. Each player rolls as many dice as they want against their attribute
  2. If both players rolled under their attribute, the player with the highest number wins the opposed roll
  3. My modification: if a character succeeds in #2 and has talents that provide bonuses or change the number of dice they roll, then they add the bonuses and/or dice to their result from #2 before the comparison (exceeding the attribute is OK at this point)

Choosing the number of dice in #1 adds some grit to the roll and the simple comparison means no need to compute margin of success
zot is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Fnords are Off
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:21 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.