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 04-14-2022, 11:59 AM   #41
Shostak
 
Shostak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: New England
Default Re: Weapon Expertise: +1 per die of damage

Quote:
Originally Posted by Skarg View Post
Not the way I see it. Declaring an option is merely saying what you intend to do, but you can change your mind and take whatever legal action when your turn to act comes, unless you already took it.

Particularly when you let people say they Defend or Dodge in response to attacks, this makes complete sense, because then no one ever needs to pre-declare an intent do Defend, so if they're not attacked then they certainly don't (and if they are attacked, they rarely do either, because they want to attack).

If you do require pre-declaring Defend, then there is a cost to doing so, in that you must defend if someone attacks you, which most fighters do not want to do.
I think Steve Plambeck has the right idea, simply doing away with declaring actions at all until it is time to act according to adjDX, or declaring Defend in reaction to at attack, at which time, it is cemented in.
__________________
* * * *
Anthony Shostak
myriangia.wordpress.com
Shostak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-14-2022, 12:17 PM   #42
phiwum
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Boston area
Default Re: Weapon Expertise: +1 per die of damage

Here's the situation as I see it. There are two easy cases.
  • If A declares in the movement phase (pre-declares, in other words) that he will Defend and X attacks him, then A must Defend as he said.
  • If A's action comes before X's and he doesn't "hold" it for later, then he does whatever he says he will do.

Now the interesting case is this: X's action comes before A's (whether due to adjDX or holding an action) and A has not declared a Defend action previously. What happens then?

There are a few possibilities I can think of offhand.
  1. A cannot Defend if X attacks. If he had wanted to do that, he should have declared during the Movement phase.
  2. A has a chance to say "I Defend" prior to X's declaration of his action. X will thus know whether A is Defending or not when he chooses to lock in his action.
  3. As above, A has a chance to say "I Defend" prior to X's declaration of an action, but if X does not Attack, A can still switch actions later.
  4. A can wait until X announces his action, at which point he can choose to Defend if X is Attacking. He would, of course, be locked into that action. X has already announced his attack and so he's stuck attacking someone Defending.

(1) limits the ability of A to react to actions by choosing to Defend. It's pretty drastic. (2) can force A to choose to Defend even though he's not Attacked because X chose a different action. (3) gives A the ability to Defend if X attacks and Attack if X doesn't, which puts X in a hard place if A has an ally with him. If X attacks, his target will defend while the other guy attacks. (4) has the same effect.

I don't want (3) and (4), because a one-on-two battle is already hard enough. With those two options, X will have to roll 4 (or more) dice to hit one guy while the other guy rolls 3 to hit him. One-on-two should be deadly, but that's just not even fair.

I have my own half-thought solution, but I don't like it much, so I'd like to hear how others play it.

Last edited by phiwum; 04-14-2022 at 12:27 PM.
phiwum is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 04-14-2022, 12:22 PM   #43
phiwum
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Boston area
Default Re: Weapon Expertise: +1 per die of damage

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shostak View Post
I think Steve Plambeck has the right idea, simply doing away with declaring actions at all until it is time to act according to adjDX, or declaring Defend in reaction to at attack, at which time, it is cemented in.
If you allow declaring Defend in reaction to an attack, then two-on-ones are nigh unwinnable. The lone figure X will always be attacking someone who is defending (if he attacks at all, which is kinda essential to winning), while the other guy will hit with a 3/adjDX roll.

(Skarg's players rarely defend, but I do think that having one guy defend while the other attacks seems like a winning strategy to me in most situations, just so long as their opponent is wasting his attack on the defending fella.)
phiwum is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 04-14-2022, 01:45 PM   #44
Shostak
 
Shostak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: New England
Default Re: Weapon Expertise: +1 per die of damage

Quote:
Originally Posted by phiwum View Post
If you allow declaring Defend in reaction to an attack, then two-on-ones are nigh unwinnable. The lone figure X will always be attacking someone who is defending (if he attacks at all, which is kinda essential to winning), while the other guy will hit with a 3/adjDX roll.

(Skarg's players rarely defend, but I do think that having one guy defend while the other attacks seems like a winning strategy to me in most situations, just so long as their opponent is wasting his attack on the defending fella.)
You don't have to play characters as though they know the rules.
__________________
* * * *
Anthony Shostak
myriangia.wordpress.com
Shostak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-14-2022, 05:08 PM   #45
Skarg
 
Join Date: May 2015
Default Re: Weapon Expertise: +1 per die of damage

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shostak View Post
I think Steve Plambeck has the right idea, simply doing away with declaring actions at all until it is time to act according to adjDX, or declaring Defend in reaction to at attack, at which time, it is cemented in.
Yes, that's the way I think works best:

* It's the fastest and easiest.
* It doesn't require pre-declaring (which never happens in the examples, slows play, and requires remembering what everyone's declared option was.
* No one ends up wasting their turn because they pre-declared an action that ends up being meaningless or inappropriate when their turn to act comes up.
* It lets characters who find themselves confronted by something extra-deadly, try to do something to avoid getting killed.
* It makes Dodge and Defend slightly more useful, and more likely a fighter will actually choose to use it sometimes for tactical reasons, instead of just always choosing Attack.
Skarg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-14-2022, 05:18 PM   #46
Skarg
 
Join Date: May 2015
Default Re: Weapon Expertise: +1 per die of damage

Quote:
Originally Posted by phiwum View Post
...

I don't want (3) and (4), because a one-on-two battle is already hard enough. With those two options, X will have to roll 4 (or more) dice to hit one guy while the other guy rolls 3 to hit him. One-on-two should be deadly, but that's just not even fair.

I have my own half-thought solution, but I don't like it much, so I'd like to hear how others play it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by phiwum View Post
If you allow declaring Defend in reaction to an attack, then two-on-ones are nigh unwinnable. The lone figure X will always be attacking someone who is defending (if he attacks at all, which is kinda essential to winning), while the other guy will hit with a 3/adjDX roll.

(Skarg's players rarely defend, but I do think that having one guy defend while the other attacks seems like a winning strategy to me in most situations, just so long as their opponent is wasting his attack on the defending fella.)
It's not wasting an attack to attack someone who's Defending. You get a chance to hit, and if they Defend, they are losing their attack. Preventing an enemy attack is a big deal, and in many cases, a better result than hitting them (unless it was a minimal threat).

A "2 vs 1" is almost never a case of two foes staying in one's Front hexes for a series of turns - there's almost always more to it, such as an ally who can come help, and possibility of getting away and fleeing. So again, having one of the two foes not attack, tends to be a good outcome.

Also, very frequently, the two figures will move to opposite sides of their single foe. At this point, the single figure can only face one of their foes, and that foe can choose to Defend if they want to, while the other foe attacks the single figure at +2 DX or +4 DX on 3 dice.
Skarg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-15-2022, 07:50 AM   #47
phiwum
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Boston area
Default Re: Weapon Expertise: +1 per die of damage

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shostak View Post
You don't have to play characters as though they know the rules.
Sure, but that's unsatisfying to me. A trained fighter knows a few things about tactical advantages, after all.

Besides, even if I decide that NPCs choose suboptimal tactics, I can't insist my players do the same.
phiwum is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 04-15-2022, 07:52 AM   #48
phiwum
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Boston area
Default Re: Weapon Expertise: +1 per die of damage

Quote:
Originally Posted by Skarg View Post
It's not wasting an attack to attack someone who's Defending. You get a chance to hit, and if they Defend, they are losing their attack. Preventing an enemy attack is a big deal, and in many cases, a better result than hitting them (unless it was a minimal threat).

A "2 vs 1" is almost never a case of two foes staying in one's Front hexes for a series of turns - there's almost always more to it, such as an ally who can come help, and possibility of getting away and fleeing. So again, having one of the two foes not attack, tends to be a good outcome.

Also, very frequently, the two figures will move to opposite sides of their single foe. At this point, the single figure can only face one of their foes, and that foe can choose to Defend if they want to, while the other foe attacks the single figure at +2 DX or +4 DX on 3 dice.
That last paragraph is a good point. Perhaps the negative features of options (3) and (4) aren't so dreadful as I supposed.
phiwum is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 04-15-2022, 10:26 AM   #49
Shostak
 
Shostak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: New England
Default Re: Weapon Expertise: +1 per die of damage

Quote:
Originally Posted by phiwum View Post
If you allow declaring Defend in reaction to an attack, then two-on-ones are nigh unwinnable. The lone figure X will always be attacking someone who is defending (if he attacks at all, which is kinda essential to winning), while the other guy will hit with a 3/adjDX roll.
The way a figure fighting two or more opponents can get an attack in against a non-defending opponent is to delay their action until the others have already attacked. It is dangerous in that it invites two or more attacks, but once someone makes an attack they are no longer able to defend, and the loner might be able to take them out. If they also delay until he acts, the turn is over with no action, which could give time for reinforcements to even the odds.
__________________
* * * *
Anthony Shostak
myriangia.wordpress.com
Shostak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-15-2022, 02:15 PM   #50
phiwum
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Boston area
Default Re: Weapon Expertise: +1 per die of damage

The main thing that bothers me with options (3) and (4) is that the person considering a Defend action has more information available than one considering an Attack action. If A can choose Defend in reaction to X's choice to Attack, then his decision is better informed than X's. X doesn't know what A is doing when X chooses Attack. A knows what X is doing when he chooses Defend (or he can change his order later).

Skarg's right that a two-on-one with both figures in the front hexes of the lone guy isn't usually a stable arrangement. It's usually only one turn. But for that one turn, I see the following possibilities:

(1) X Attacks A. Then A Defends and B Attacks X.
(2) X Defends. Then both A and B change their options to Attack X.

My current houserule is not ideal, but works to undo some of the advantage that A and B have. If A reacts to X's declaration of an Attack by Defending, then X can change his order. This can only happen once per turn, so if B declares that he is also Defending, X can't change to attacking C or back to A.

Similar concerns apply to missile weapons. If A and B are fighting X, all with missile weapons and none moving more than one hex, then either X wastes a shot on a dodging figure while the other figure shoots at X or X dodges while both figures shoot at him (assuming that the figures are keen on dodging, of course). The two-on-one advantage is made worse because those who choose a defensive order do so knowing that the opponent will be attacking them. A Dodge/Defend is thus never wasted, but an Attack order may often be against a suboptimal target.
phiwum is online now   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 02:43 PM.


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