A Challenger Appears! Green versus Red

[ericthered]

Ok, that's an interesting set of actions:

• Why are you at 1/2 move? I don't think you've lost that much HP
• why are you halving 5 instead of 6?
• One foe gives you a -2 to all defenses and resistance rolls against people other than that foe.
• I think Any GM ever would forbid using that move.

I don't know what we discussed using for long distance moving. At this point, I think we're sufficiently removed from actually combat to make fair decisions. I seem to remember discussing with Douglas Cole on the main forum a variant where full move costs 2 AP and up to half move costs 1 AP.

[Plane]

Originally Posted by ericthered

Why are you at 1/2 move? I don't think you've lost that much HP

Partial wound to the leg reduces you to 50% Move, I'm at the max tier right before crippling.

Originally Posted by ericthered

why are you halving 5 instead of 6?

We're both suffering -1 to DX and -1 to HT due to FP loss, Basic Speed is calculated by the quartered sum of those, so our Basic Speeds are both down to 5.5 and I think you round down Basic Speed to determine Basic Move.

Originally Posted by ericthered

One foe gives you a -2 to all defenses and resistance rolls against people other than that foe.

Right you are... I forgot about that part. Changing the parry from 15 to 13 is still a pass though since I got a 10.

Originally Posted by ericthered

I think Any GM ever would forbid using that move.

What's wrong with trying to attack yourself? Seems like there should be a way to get that 2nd step without doing a committed attack or getting attacked by someone else.

It's actually not very economical considering you have to pay for the attack, the defense, and the retreat (3AP) which is basically what you'd have to pay for in a committed attack (2 AP for maneuver, 1 for 2nd step) which eliminates the risk of being unable to retreat if the attack fails (unless using rules where you declare and resolve defense prior to resolving attacks)

Originally Posted by ericthered

I don't know what we discussed using for long distance moving. At this point, I think we're sufficiently removed from actually combat to make fair decisions.

Where I'm curious is in respect to momentum build-up. If maintaining a previous turn's momentum is free yet you can also freely accelerate from 0 to 1 then there could be a free 1-step acceleration perspective as long as there's no turning.

Originally Posted by ericthered

I seem to remember discussing with Douglas Cole on the main forum a variant where full move costs 2 AP and up to half move costs 1 AP.

That's from https://gamingballistic.com/2013/08/...ile-using-las/ I think.

Still going to Evaluate?

[ericthered]

Originally Posted by Plane

What's wrong with trying to attack yourself? Seems like there should be a way to get that 2nd step without doing a committed attack or getting attacked by someone else.

I think the problem is less with attacking yourself (though that's actually a pretty awkward action) and more with parrying yourself and retreating from yourself: which direction is backwards? Its silly, and its a bizarre use of rules to do something intended to be done a different way.

Where I'm curious is in respect to momentum build-up. If maintaining a previous turn's momentum is free yet you can also freely accelerate from 0 to 1 then there could be a free 1-step acceleration perspective as long as there's no turning.

I think if you are using the 2 AP for full move spending 1 AP to keep moving is enough. 5 yards a second is really quite fast.

As for steps allowing you to slowly accelerate for free... that doesn't actually feel right. Running at full move should cost at least some AP.

That's from https://gamingballistic.com/2013/08/...ile-using-las/ I think.

That was referenced in the conversation, and is the best source of it.

Still going to Evaluate?

Yep!

[Plane]

Originally Posted by ericthered

I think the problem is less with attacking yourself (though that's actually a pretty awkward action) and more with parrying yourself and retreating from yourself: which direction is backwards?

B377 says "away from your attacker" so facing doesn't really matter (it's a +3 if you retreat forward if the attacker is behind you, for example) so I guess if you were attacking using your left hand then away from it would be towards your right hex?

There's also the "sideslip" (merely +2) which covers a retreat that doesn't change the distance between you and attacker.

Originally Posted by ericthered

I think if you are using the 2 AP for full move spending 1 AP to keep moving is enough. 5 yards a second is really quite fast.

As for steps allowing you to slowly accelerate for free... that doesn't actually feel right. Running at full move should cost at least some AP.

Yeah, maintenance AP. I think the ideal is...
*inherit most momentum, but gradual slowdown is free due to friction
*maintaining top speed means adding to the remaining momentum
*accelerating (even from 0 to 1, normally a free step) always costs, but give some basic free AP to everyone (maybe 1 per second rate) for being alive which is assumed to be spent on steps

I like how that would make Do Nothing even better, since the +4 you get to your HT roll is sorta offset by losing the free step and not getting the 2 AP worth of free defenses AOD gives.

Maybe instead the way AOD should work is no freebies but each 1 AP spent gives you 2 AP towards defenses?

[ericthered]

Originally Posted by Plane

B377 says "away from your attacker" so facing doesn't really matter (it's a +3 if you retreat forward if the attacker is behind you, for example) so I guess if you were attacking using your left hand then away from it would be towards your right hex?

There's also the "sideslip" (merely +2) which covers a retreat that doesn't change the distance between you and attacker.

Its still a munchkiny pile of rules abuse! How do you retreat away from yourself? but I digress.

Yeah, maintenance AP. I think the ideal is...
*inherit most momentum, but gradual slowdown is free due to friction
*maintaining top speed means adding to the remaining momentum
*accelerating (even from 0 to 1, normally a free step) always costs, but give some basic free AP to everyone (maybe 1 per second rate) for being alive which is assumed to be spent on steps

Does that allow for free retreats backwards still?

I like how that would make Do Nothing even better, since the +4 you get to your HT roll is sorta offset by losing the free step and not getting the 2 AP worth of free defenses AOD gives.

So its equivalent to giving do nothing a step?

Maybe instead the way AOD should work is no freebies but each 1 AP spent gives you 2 AP towards defenses?

When would you declare the AP spent? when they attack? That REALLY penalizes AOD. Right now its the default behavior when they're bearing down on you and you're exhausted, and I think that's the correct setting.

[Plane]

Originally Posted by ericthered

Its still a munchkiny pile of rules abuse!

It's kind of a pointless waste of AP, there's a lot of risk of failure for a mere +1 to parry.

Originally Posted by ericthered

Does that allow for free retreats backwards still?

A basic universal AP income (AP for being alive, let's say) replacing the free step would mean you could either spend it on a retreat, a step, an attack, or just let it accrue to rebuild your pool.

Although this gives a "I can punch a boxing bag forever" problem, it doesn't really seem any more absurd than the "I can walk forever" problem with free steps.

Originally Posted by ericthered

So its equivalent to giving do nothing a step?

No, more like guaranteeing a DN gives you 1 AP back.

Another option might be, if guaranteed AP recovery is bad, is to give ALL maneuvers a HT roll to recover AP instead of the free step (so if you pass, you effectively got a free step) and give the ones that already had those rolls better bonuses (so say, +4 for an Evaluate/Waits, +8 for a Do Nothing?)

Originally Posted by ericthered

When would you declare the AP spent? when they attack? That REALLY penalizes AOD. Right now its the default behavior when they're bearing down on you and you're exhausted, and I think that's the correct setting.

Based on how AODs function like Waits (get a HT roll like Evaluate if untriggered) the basic difference is you get a chance to recovery AP or you get 2 potential AP.

I don't totally get why Waits untriggered become recovery maneuvers. I was thinking if untriggered they would just be zero-cost like a Concentrate or an Aim.

But for AOD, the idea seems to be that you get 2 free defence attempts, which is why half-cost defenses sounded like it.

[ericthered]

Originally Posted by Plane

A basic universal AP income (AP for being alive, let's say) replacing the free step would mean you could either spend it on a retreat, a step, an attack, or just let it accrue to rebuild your pool.

Although this gives a "I can punch a boxing bag forever" problem, it doesn't really seem any more absurd than the "I can walk forever" problem with free steps.

hmm. That could work. And if you can do it for more than a minute, you should be able to "Do it forever" from the standpoint of AP. After all, walking for an hour strait isn't a particularly impressive feat.

No, more like guaranteeing a DN gives you 1 AP back.

Which could be spent on a step, or it could be hoarded. Ok, I think I follow you now.

Another option might be, if guaranteed AP recovery is bad, is to give ALL maneuvers a HT roll to recover AP instead of the free step (so if you pass, you effectively got a free step) and give the ones that already had those rolls better bonuses (so say, +4 for an Evaluate/Waits, +8 for a Do Nothing?)

I think I prefer the guaranteed recovery.

Based on how AODs function like Waits (get a HT roll like Evaluate if untriggered) the basic difference is you get a chance to recovery AP or you get 2 potential AP.

I don't totally get why Waits untriggered become recovery maneuvers. I was thinking if untriggered they would just be zero-cost like a Concentrate or an Aim.

But for AOD, the idea seems to be that you get 2 free defense attempts, which is why half-cost defenses sounded like it.

Ok, I see what you are saying. That still weakens AOD, because defending twice and retreating once used to not cost AP and now it costs half an AP, but that's an edge case.

Waits are a huge range of actions: it could just standing there waiting, it could be very actively moving a spear tip around, or anything in between.

[Plane]

So getting back to where we left off, are you saying I should take back that Defensive Attack weirdness and just pay 2 AP as a Move maneuver to move back 2 yards?

A 20% increase to 5 would be 6 and half that would be 3, do you think that would be sprinting speed? I think that's a guaranteed +1 minimum anyway even for someone with Move 1.

Not that I could do it without turning around, which is probably a bad idea.

[ericthered]

Originally Posted by Plane

So getting back to where we left off, are you saying I should take back that Defensive Attack weirdness and just pay 2 AP as a Move maneuver to move back 2 yards?

Yes, I think I am.

A 20% increase to 5 would be 6 and half that would be 3, do you think that would be sprinting speed? I think that's a guaranteed +1 minimum anyway even for someone with Move 1.

Not that I could do it without turning around, which is probably a bad idea.

Well, +20% of a 2.5 is .5, which also gets you to 3. Sprinting speeds don't care if you halve them before or after you apply the sprinting bonus, because it's two multiplications (unless you apply rounding between them).

There is no guaranteed minimum bonus from sprinting, and that rule actually seem to be built more for open ground: it says to round only if you're on hexes.
-----------------------------
We need to decide if we are changing the move costs as per Doug's article.

[Plane]

Assume that even the slowest sprinter gets +1 Move. Thus, sprinters
with Move 9 or less can move one extra hex on a battle map.

Pretty generous for Move 1 (doubled!) vs Move 5 (20%) IMO. Sprint bonuses have one of those "favors the feeble" issues like "Step" and damage bonuses.

Anywho, picking up where we left off, if it only cost me 2 AP then I dropped from 11/12 to 9/12.

You were still at full AP. I think we were at 9/12 FP and 7/10 FP respectively.

(it's a good thing we're not doing it like the ST drop from FP loss dropped max HP or the HT drop from FP loss dropped FP because that'd get weird!)

Still going to do 1-step evaluates?