Fatigue for Warriors

[Emerikol]

Caveat: I just meant non-spell casters and not really anything more than that. So warrior was perhaps too narrow.


So I was thinking about a way to have combat be fatiguing without having to keep track of the number of rounds that have passed. It could also account for unusual situations in the abstract.


What if you look over that 3d6 bell curve and choose a number that represents the rate you want fatigue to happen. Natural die rolls no adjustments.

So if you wanted a fatigue point to be charged every 20 times on average an attack or defense is made then maybe on a roll of a 5 or 16 (which is slightly over 5% but close enough) you just expend a FP.

Obviously I arbitrarily chose 1 in 20. You could also just choose 1 in 40 or even 1 in 216 (only when all three dice are 5's for example). But if you roll it twice in a row in some rare circumstance you take 2FP and if you don't roll it over the course of 500 rounds then you don't take any.

[Plane]

Originally Posted by Emerikol

I was thinking about a way to have combat be fatiguing without having to keep track of the number of rounds that have passed. It could also account for unusual situations in the abstract.

Cole's "Last Gasp" in Pyramid is probably the most well-known approach to this. I like the idea of making some extra-crunchy tweaks to it like "no free steps" and "no free pivots" and "modify Action Point cost by a tenth of the margin you roll" (minimum 0.1 cost) sort of thing.

Perhaps also some kind of nominal cost for pulling triggers (however easy that is, maybe in hundredths of AP rather than tenths) for absorbing recoil, keeping a bow drawn or maintaining a grapple on someone who is being resisted but not actively breaking free.

OTOH the idea of dropping AOA/Commited Attack from 2ap to 1fp appeals to me (just make all maneuvers cost 1ap each) and maybe just refund some AP if people don't use all the options their maneuver normally offers to them.

Like for example, if you're doing a Step+Attack but then decide not to use the attack because a Wait interrupted your maneuver, you probably didn't use as much energy as if you delivered that attack.

Another might be just to do "maneuvers are all free, but actually doing the attacks your maneuver gives you costs ap".

Another thing probably worth comparing is considering if the "Double" options for All-Out ought to cost extra, since that makes taking a Determined (+2 defense or +4 attack) or strong (+2 damage) option a lot more appealing.

Originally Posted by Emerikol

What if you look over that 3d6 bell curve and choose a number that represents the rate you want fatigue to happen. Natural die rolls no adjustments.

So if you wanted a fatigue point to be charged every 20 times on average an attack or defense is made then maybe on a roll of a 5 or 16 (which is slightly over 5% but close enough) you just expend a FP.

Obviously I arbitrarily chose 1 in 20. You could also just choose 1 in 40 or even 1 in 216 (only when all three dice are 5's for example). But if you roll it twice in a row in some rare circumstance you take 2FP and if you don't roll it over the course of 500 rounds then you don't take any.

under the action point system you get AP equal to HT (10) and each FP you burn restores 50% of your AP (5) so it's actually a much more intense ratio

under his system you can recover 5 AP much faster than you can recover 1 FP though, so that sorta offsets it

the idea of using a 3d6 nominal bell curve is kinda interesting... substituting 3d/10 (tracking the decimals!) for any situation that normally demands a fixed 1 AP could certainly make actions a lot more dicey. It's some attractive crunch.

One of the things I like about idea of tweaking last gasp so you're discounting tenths equal to MoS (counterbalanced by charging tenths equal to MoF) is that you could make things much less expensive by Telegraphing (+4 to roll effectively -0.4 AP) allowing people to do more than 10 continuous things without resting or tapping FP

Another idea might be to give everyone some kind of nominal AP regeneration regardless of what maneuver they take. Cole assigns 25cp for 1ap/turn so if it was just something like 0.2ap/turn it should probably only cost 5cp.... maybe pay for that with some kind of "reverse second wind" where instead of +10% ap restored per FP burned paying 5 points, you get 5 points for taking -10% ap restored per FP burned

That sort of thing would probably make sense for robots anyway, because if they don't have FP then the ability to burn FP for AP is useless.

[Emerikol]

Originally Posted by Plane

Cole's "Last Gasp" in Pyramid is probably the most well-known approach to this. I like the idea of making some extra-crunchy tweaks to it like "no free steps" and "no free pivots" and "modify Action Point cost by a tenth of the margin you roll" (minimum 0.1 cost) sort of thing.

Perhaps also some kind of nominal cost for pulling triggers (however easy that is, maybe in hundredths of AP rather than tenths) for absorbing recoil, keeping a bow drawn or maintaining a grapple on someone who is being resisted but not actively breaking free.

OTOH the idea of dropping AOA/Commited Attack from 2ap to 1fp appeals to me (just make all maneuvers cost 1ap each) and maybe just refund some AP if people don't use all the options their maneuver normally offers to them.

Like for example, if you're doing a Step+Attack but then decide not to use the attack because a Wait interrupted your maneuver, you probably didn't use as much energy as if you delivered that attack.

Another might be just to do "maneuvers are all free, but actually doing the attacks your maneuver gives you costs ap".

Another thing probably worth comparing is considering if the "Double" options for All-Out ought to cost extra, since that makes taking a Determined (+2 defense or +4 attack) or strong (+2 damage) option a lot more appealing.



under the action point system you get AP equal to HT (10) and each FP you burn restores 50% of your AP (5) so it's actually a much more intense ratio

under his system you can recover 5 AP much faster than you can recover 1 FP though, so that sorta offsets it

the idea of using a 3d6 nominal bell curve is kinda interesting... substituting 3d/10 (tracking the decimals!) for any situation that normally demands a fixed 1 AP could certainly make actions a lot more dicey. It's some attractive crunch.

One of the things I like about idea of tweaking last gasp so you're discounting tenths equal to MoS (counterbalanced by charging tenths equal to MoF) is that you could make things much less expensive by Telegraphing (+4 to roll effectively -0.4 AP) allowing people to do more than 10 continuous things without resting or tapping FP

Another idea might be to give everyone some kind of nominal AP regeneration regardless of what maneuver they take. Cole assigns 25cp for 1ap/turn so if it was just something like 0.2ap/turn it should probably only cost 5cp.... maybe pay for that with some kind of "reverse second wind" where instead of +10% ap restored per FP burned paying 5 points, you get 5 points for taking -10% ap restored per FP burned

That sort of thing would probably make sense for robots anyway, because if they don't have FP then the ability to burn FP for AP is useless.

So for clarity, I was thinking on the attack and defense rolls if a certain number came up it just costs you a FP. While the AP system seems cool, I was seeking a simpler system without any bookkeeping other than marking off FP and restoring it.

[Varyon]

Originally Posted by Emerikol

So for clarity, I was thinking on the attack and defense rolls if a certain number came up it just costs you a FP. While the AP system seems cool, I was seeking a simpler system without any bookkeeping other than marking off FP and restoring it.

Personally, if going for something like this, rather than having it occur on certain numbers on the success roll, I'd be inclined to roll an additional non-standard die (or two) so see if this action cost an FP - that way, you're equally likely to have any result (Critical Success, Success, Failure, Critical Failure) end up burning an FP. Rolling 1d10 and having one result (I'd go with rolling a 1) burn an FP might roughly match the rate at which you burn FP using Last Gasp (on average, you'll lose 1 FP every 10 "potentially fatiguing actions"). This would be fairly easy to roll alongside the 3d6. Optionally, you could have characters with Very Fit (who normally lose FP at 1/2 the rate of other characters) roll 1d20 instead. If you like the way Last Gasp can result in characters pausing to catch their breath, you might allow characters to make a roll to recover an FP when they Do Nothing (or Evaluate, or take another Recovery Maneuver).

If you really wanted to, you could have traits that modify what you roll, ranging from 1d4 to 1d20 or perhaps even d% (roll two d10's, one for the 10's place and one for the 1's place). I've considered something like this in place of the way Critical Successes/Failures work now, but haven't come up with something I really like.

[Emerikol]

Originally Posted by Varyon

Personally, if going for something like this, rather than having it occur on certain numbers on the success roll, I'd be inclined to roll an additional non-standard die (or two) so see if this action cost an FP - that way, you're equally likely to have any result (Critical Success, Success, Failure, Critical Failure) end up burning an FP. Rolling 1d10 and having one result (I'd go with rolling a 1) burn an FP might roughly match the rate at which you burn FP using Last Gasp (on average, you'll lose 1 FP every 10 "potentially fatiguing actions"). This would be fairly easy to roll alongside the 3d6. Optionally, you could have characters with Very Fit (who normally lose FP at 1/2 the rate of other characters) roll 1d20 instead. If you like the way Last Gasp can result in characters pausing to catch their breath, you might allow characters to make a roll to recover an FP when they Do Nothing (or Evaluate, or take another Recovery Maneuver).

If you really wanted to, you could have traits that modify what you roll, ranging from 1d4 to 1d20 or perhaps even d% (roll two d10's, one for the 10's place and one for the 1's place). I've considered something like this in place of the way Critical Successes/Failures work now, but haven't come up with something I really like.

I think if I have to add a die then the opportunity cost of such a system becomes too great. I don't feel I want to complicate GURPS any extra. I play the simpler combat game already and don't do hit locations for the same reason. I don't want hours long combats.

I do agree though that there is such a thing as short term fatigue and long term fatigue. I imagine a lot of combats mostly revolve around short term fatigue that is quickly recovered. With maybe a point of real fatigue like the default rules say. I suppose you could have every round you attack AND defend cost a point of temporary fatigue which you can restore completely with 1 second of doing nothing. That still adds to the bookkeeping though. I don't think I'd do this either just because again I don't want to bog down combat.

[Kalzazz]

I just allow Extra Effort and such to give sluggers a FP use

Also remember Great Haste costs the target FP

[Stormcrow]

Originally Posted by Emerikol

So I was thinking about a way to have combat be fatiguing without having to keep track of the number of rounds that have passed.

Well, you could do all you suggest. It seems like just one more thing to remember during a fight. It also doesn't seem to account for encumbrance. Or you could just wait until the end of a fight and ask yourselves, "Did that seem like at least 10 turns?" If it does seem that way, deduct the appropriate FP.

[Polkageist]

Seconding Extra Effort, it opens up so many options even when running pretty basic combat options.

[Donny Brook]

Originally Posted by Emerikol

So for clarity, I was thinking on the attack and defense rolls if a certain number came up it just costs you a FP. While the AP system seems cool, I was seeking a simpler system without any bookkeeping other than marking off FP and restoring it.

Simple solution: pay 1FP when they make an attack or defense roll spot-on.

More complex: pay 1FP when they make an attack or defense roll spot-on OR option to count the roll as missed and pay no FP.

More complex still: as above but option to pay 2FP to turn a miss by one into a success.

[Emerikol]

Originally Posted by Donny Brook

Simple solution: pay 1FP when they make an attack or defense roll spot-on.

More complex: pay 1FP when they make an attack or defense roll spot-on OR option to count the roll as missed and pay no FP.

More complex still: as above but option to pay 2FP to turn a miss by one into a success.

Well I’m not sure this hits the right percentage chances. It also means those who have a harder time hitting or hit easily are less fatigued. Those in the middle are more fatigued.