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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 07-20-2018, 03:36 AM   #41
Rick_Smith
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Coquitlam B.C.
Default Re: Ignoring engagement rules - free attacks.

Quote:
Originally Posted by zot View Post
Like megahex avert past a "receiving line?"
The way we play, the person with the Avert spell MAY choose to disengage during movement (and so give out a free attack), but is not forced to. If they didn't, then they would then have to take the disengage option when their turn to act comes. (Exactly like the normal rules.)

Warm regards, Rick.
Rick_Smith is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-20-2018, 03:40 AM   #42
Rick_Smith
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Coquitlam B.C.
Default Re: Ignoring engagement rules - free attacks.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Skarg View Post
Well Avert only requires two hexes increased distance, so it'd be a trick to get 10+ that way, but Word of Command: Flee, or:

* a mob of suicidal fanatics or whatever mindset might require them to all jump past someone

* a mob of terrified people, especially if the person being jumped past is standing around a corner so they don't realize what is happening, of the place they are is about to fall into a pit of lava.

* a stampeding crowd

It may never come up, but if it does?
Hi Skarg,
-- If they choose to do so, then they would be chopped down. (It is possible to play people suicidally dumb with the current rules.)

-- They race around the corner, become engaged and stop. Exactly like the normal rules. If they decide that they would rather keep moving, then they can do so, but would give up a free attack.

-- They come into an enemies's reach and become engaged and stop. Exactly like the normal rules. If they want to keep moving & give up free attacks, then they can.

As I've said, I've played for years and it is not a problem.

Warm regards, Rick.
Rick_Smith is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-20-2018, 04:56 AM   #43
zot
 
Join Date: May 2018
Default Re: Ignoring engagement rules - free attacks.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Skarg View Post
Well Avert only requires two hexes increased distance, so it'd be a trick to get 10+ that way, but Word of Command: Flee, or:

* a mob of suicidal fanatics or whatever mindset might require them to all jump past someone

* a mob of terrified people, especially if the person being jumped past is standing around a corner so they don't realize what is happening, of the place they are is about to fall into a pit of lava.

* a stampeding crowd

It may never come up, but if it does?
Here's a document with a really contrived situation that would let one person make 6 opportunity attacks in one turn, but just the kind of thing that clever PCs might engineer. Or a GM might set it up to give the PCs a chance to do it. Or a GM might set it up to try to sucker the PCs into it...

Opportunity attacks in this scenario are not provoked by disengagement, they are provoked by jumping over bodies which are in a figure's front hexes.

I dunno -- maybe allowing multiple opportunity attacks in one turn like this might just be too fun to overrule...

Last edited by zot; 07-20-2018 at 04:58 AM. Reason: clarification
zot is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 07-20-2018, 05:23 AM   #44
Rick_Smith
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Coquitlam B.C.
Default Re: Ignoring engagement rules - free attacks.

Quote:
Originally Posted by zot View Post
...I dunno -- maybe allowing multiple opportunity attacks in one turn like this might just be too fun to overrule...
Hi Zot,
Using my rules, NOTHING can force a person to ignore being engaged. It is always the choice of the person who is engaged to say if they want to ignore being engaged and move.

So in your case above, using my rules, the people with Avert will move away, be engaged, and stop. Then they are forced to take the disengage option. If they WANT to say, "you don't engage me", and keep moving, they can. But only if their armour is so high, (or they think that you so suck), that they believe that they can do so safely.

Warm regards, Rick.
Rick_Smith is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-20-2018, 05:50 AM   #45
zot
 
Join Date: May 2018
Default Re: Ignoring engagement rules - free attacks.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rick_Smith View Post
Hi Zot,
Using my rules, NOTHING can force a person to ignore being engaged. It is always the choice of the person who is engaged to say if they want to ignore being engaged and move.

So in your case above, using my rules, the people with Avert will move away, be engaged, and stop. Then they are forced to take the disengage option. If they WANT to say, "you don't engage me", and keep moving, they can. But only if their armour is so high, (or they think that you so suck), that they believe that they can do so safely.

Warm regards, Rick.
We're discussing opportunity attacks that only happen while people jump over dead bodies in someone else's front hex, which is what the people in the example are doing.
zot is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 07-20-2018, 06:35 AM   #46
Rick_Smith
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Coquitlam B.C.
Default Re: Ignoring engagement rules - free attacks.

Quote:
Originally Posted by zot View Post
We're discussing opportunity attacks that only happen while people jump over dead bodies in someone else's front hex, which is what the people in the example are doing.
OK, sorry!
Rick_Smith is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-20-2018, 10:34 AM   #47
Skarg
 
Join Date: May 2015
Default Re: Ignoring engagement rules - free attacks.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rick_Smith View Post
-- If they choose to do so, then they would be chopped down. (It is possible to play people suicidally dumb with the current rules.)

-- They race around the corner, become engaged and stop. Exactly like the normal rules. If they decide that they would rather keep moving, then they can do so, but would give up a free attack.

-- They come into an enemies's reach and become engaged and stop. Exactly like the normal rules. If they want to keep moving & give up free attacks, then they can.

As I've said, I've played for years and it is not a problem..
Thanks Rick; I like your rule and it's great to hear your experience with it!

I've just been replying on this to keep on the topic of "would it be better to have a limit?" with the (however rare and/or foolish) example "what if a large number of people for whatever reason do choose to give others so many opportunity attacks it feels wrong the number of possible resulting attacks?"


Quote:
Originally Posted by zot View Post
Here's a document with a really contrived situation that would let one person make 6 opportunity attacks in one turn, but just the kind of thing that clever PCs might engineer. Or a GM might set it up to give the PCs a chance to do it. Or a GM might set it up to try to sucker the PCs into it...
Yeah, great example and a sweet diagram!

I can think of other examples that could/would/have come up in my games, where you have sufficiently-motivated fodder minions charging through a door and leaping over a body pile to try to get a breakthrough, or sufficiently-crazed people running for their lives at full speed and much more afraid of what's behind them than someone with a weapon in front of them.


Quote:
Originally Posted by zot View Post
[URL="https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1a5_oxJn-xVe8Oyjy9XsFHjbos_wwQCjllaxH-9J9owE/edit?usp=sharing"]I dunno -- maybe allowing multiple opportunity attacks in one turn like this might just be too fun to overrule...
Yeah I was thinking the same thing, though I also think at some point there's a realistic limit.

As DouglasCole mentioned, GURPS has specific rules for figuring out what happens in situations like this (though some of them are optional and different in different versions). Mob rushes have happened not too infrequently in my TFT & GURPS campaigns, particularly in stampeding mob situations, and with certain creatures and factions (I have a race of subterranean cannibalistic berzerker ghouls whose strategy is basically to suicidally charge as quickly as possible - more casualties means a larger feast. In TFT they're evil with the generic HTH initiation rules. In GURPS you get this whole gritty game of exactly what happens as they pile in and get sliced up but keep coming... exactly how much chopping you can do and exactly how quickly they can pile in determines who lives or dies.
Skarg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-21-2018, 07:23 AM   #48
XRaysVision
 
Join Date: Jul 2018
Default Re: Entering A Hex With A Body

Please note that I'm a TFT neophyte. I have, however, been playing miniatures for 30 years. That said, whatever you decide, keep it simple.

I watched the multi-combatant video on FB and liked the way it worked. I'm not too hung up on "realism" as these are fantasy games after all. But I liked the way the mechanics forced the opponents to consider their movement during play. It made them (or allowed them) to change tactics based on, what was essentially, changing terrain.

One of the driving game design elements that determines replay value of any game is the number and consequence of decisions players have to make. The very simple rule, as it stands, increases the replay value of any given scenario in a easy to to understand, easy to apply, and credible way.

In other words; if it ain't broke, don't fix it.
XRaysVision is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 07-23-2018, 12:21 PM   #49
Nils_Lindeberg
 
Join Date: Jul 2018
Default Re: Entering A Hex With A Body

The bad thing with a 3vsDX is that it give some characters a HUGE disadvantage and others with high DX no disad at all. One could say that sounds realistic, but it is not.

Everyone fights a little worse when they stand on broken ground or step on corpses. A guy with exceptional footwork still fights a little worse. His DX of 24 might be only 22, hardly noticeable, but he sure would prefer not to be stepping on that body.

So I would say that a corpse or broken ground should give the same DX modifier as it gives MA modifier. The all or nothing disad of 3vsDX misses the point, punish everyone differently and some not at all and doesn't give you an advantageous defending position.

So for the only sake that matters. Fun of play and tactical choice. Let people pile up those bodies around them like a barricade or stand behind a real barricade and get that defensive advantage that comes with your enemy being forced to fight on broken ground. And the default rule that standing on broken ground hampers MA just as much as DX is easy to remember.
Nils_Lindeberg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-23-2018, 01:29 PM   #50
Soyt Gose
 
Join Date: Jan 2018
Default Re: Entering A Hex With A Body

Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Jackson View Post
Long story short: as I demonstrate the game to new people, I begin to feel that the current rule (3/DX roll to remain standing if you enter a hex with a fallen character) is annoying and reduces the fluidity of combat.

Would it be overreaction to strike it completely? I could turn it into a DX+4 or so roll, so you USUALLY don't fall down. Or I could just nuke it, and let the players dance freely among the bodies.

If you give me a howitzer on this, make it short and explain why it will speed play.

I can't remember the specific rule, and my 40-ish-year-old copy of the rules is at home, but I like the rules that add strategy to the combat as opposed to mere dice-rolling competitions. That said, it wouldn't be over-reacting to eliminate the rule for an uninhibited person advancing forward into a hex with a body in clear view as opposed to someone who is engaged in combat or stepping sideways or backwards into the hex.

I hope it's not a "Howitzer" aside to say something about this thread reminds me of the pile of dead bards in "Dorkness Rising."
Soyt Gose 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 05:27 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.