Printable Version of Topic

Posted by: Deadeye Nov 3 2004, 12:49 AM

So an earlier post got me thinking...from a game balance standpoint I've always seen the point of SR3's ruling on initiative, as everyone gets to go once, even if its last in the round. But I have to say, it seems kinda strange that a wired up/magic'd up character would have to wait for a mundane or non-enhanced individual to do his thing before they got to go again. What I'm wondering is which you prefer, why, and does anyone use SR2 initiative rules in SR3? If you have a whole different thing, what is it?

Posted by: mmu1 Nov 3 2004, 01:06 AM

I think the SR3 rules are probably a good idea as far as game balance is concerned, but completely lack verisimilitude, and create tons of idiosyncracies.

I'm not sure whether there was a different practical way of changing the SR2 rules, though...

Posted by: Kagetenshi Nov 3 2004, 02:06 AM

The mages go and go and go too, thanks to a certain spell.

~J

Posted by: Kanada Ten Nov 3 2004, 03:16 AM

Posted by: Wounded Ronin Nov 3 2004, 05:03 AM

I think it's because when most people design a mage they think "slow" and so don't really think in terms of jacking up speed.

Posted by: Kremlin KOA Nov 3 2004, 05:36 AM

ah bt +3d6+ the 1d6 everyone gets and +reaction which would be 5-6 is 19 on average and can easily top 21 so go and go and go can be done

Posted by: GrinderTheTroll Nov 3 2004, 05:57 AM

I guess I can blame it on my lack of reading comprehension, but we've always done initiative like the way SR3 does it. Guess we missed some finer points, but we've never had complaints.

Posted by: Crimson Jack Nov 3 2004, 06:30 AM

Our whole group likes the new SR3 style of initiative over the SR2 version. Three of the five players are magic-oriented slots. As the GM, I like the idea of everyone getting a shot at going first.

Posted by: Doctor Funkenstein Nov 3 2004, 06:36 AM

As far as gameplay is concerned, 3rd Edition's initiative rules are superior to the previous edition. It gives everyone a shot to impact an action scene while still giving a sizable advantage to the insanely augmented characters.

As far as believability goes, the earlier editions handled it better. Logically, it makes a lot more sense that someone who's reflexes are pumped up as high as someone on Wired Reflexes 2 or higher would run circles around those who weren't augmented at all. Those poor mundanes wouldn't know what hit them until they had their intenstines spilling out onto the asphalt three times over.

For me, I'm apparently one of the only two people who voted for the house rules option. Been using and playing around with a few different variants over the years, most of which work out in general but they're all a little bulky and slow down game play compared to the SR3 rules. Most of the time we do, indeed, use the SR3 rules, however. But if I had these three options to choose between, I'd (obviously) go for the home ruled one simply because the SR3 and SR2 both have their glaring weaknesses.

Posted by: Fortune Nov 3 2004, 06:58 AM

Something between the two would be nice ... like the speed-freaks going twice for everyone else's action.

Posted by: Stumps Nov 3 2004, 07:13 AM

I like Cain's Initiative System (and wish I could link to it on the old forums but they're down ).
You claim from the slowest to the fastest as to what you will do, then you resolve from the fastest to the slowest.

I also prefer another system that has no name yet.

You start from the lowest Initiative Value rather than the highest and allow the players to use their actions as interrupts on a regulated level of saying that the interupt can only be used within 10 numeric values of their listed Initiative number.
Other regulations on the interrupts are:
-You may only use half of your Initiative Passes, rounded up, as Interrupts.
-If two players attempt an interrupt at the same time, the player with the highest Initiative Value, to their Initiative Pass that they are using to Interrupt, will go first.
-No player may use an Interrupt to win a Simultaneous Intiative Pass against another player that has the same Initiative Value.
-Damage Modifiers to Initiative has an immediate effect upon the present Intiative Values held by the character receiving the damage.
-If you have more than one Interrupt and you do not use an Interrupt until the time that you have fewer Passes than you do Interrupts, you loose the amount of Interrupts down to the amount of Passes that you do have left.

Meaning:
Markie Mage:
12
2
(one interrupt)

Ricky Rigger:
21
11
1
(two interrupts)

Sam Sammie:
23
13
3
(two interrupts)

Ricky Rigger will go first with a 1 and both Markie Mage and Sam Sammie have the option to interrupt.
Markie with his 2.
Sam with his 3.
If both choose to then Sam would go first because he is faster.

Sam chooses to so Sam will go then Ricky will go.
Sam does not damage Ricky.

Now we have.
Markie Mage:
12
2
(one interrupt)

Ricky Rigger:
21
11
1
(two interrupts)

Sam Sammie:
23
13
3
(one interrupt)

Markie goes next and Ricky is the only one who is within a 10 Intiative Value range so he is the only one who may interrupt, but he chooses not to, because he sees Sam as a threat, so Markie goes.
The result is that Sam suffers a -1 to Initiative from Damage.

Now we have.
Markie Mage:
12
2
(one interrupt)

Ricky Rigger:
21
11
1
(two interrupts)

Sam Sammie:
22
12
3
(one interrupt)

Ricky goes on 11 which means that he will now loose one of his interrupts because he did not use one yet and he has two Interrupts, but he will (after this Pass) only have one Pass left. Since you cannot have more Interrupts than you have Passes, he will lose one of his Interrupts.
Both Sammie and Markie want to Interrupt, but since they both have a 12 they will roll their Quickness against a TN equal to their oppositions Quickness to resolve the Simultaneous Passes.
Markie comes up the winner and damages Sam for a suprising amount and pushes him to a -2 to Initiative from the damage.
Sam damages Ricky badly and Ricky suffers a -1 to Initiative.
Ricky damages Markie badly as well and Markie suffers -1 to Initiative, but since Markie has no more Passes this Round he will just see the -1 to Initiative on his next roll of Initiative like normal.

Now we have.
Markie Mage:
12
2
(no interrupts)

Ricky Rigger:
20
11
1
(one interrupt)

Sam Sammie:
21 (was 23. minus 2 is 21)
12
3
(no interrupts)

Ricky goes next and loses his interrupts all together because he did not use them this Round.
Sam cannot interrupt anymore so Ricky damges Sam again, but no more Initiative modifiers are possible from the damage that Sam's taken.

Now we have.
Markie Mage:
12
2
(no interrupts)

Ricky Rigger:
20
11
1
(no interrupts)

Sam Sammie:
21
12
3
(no interrupts)

Sam goes and damages Ricky very badly and causes him to lose another minus to Intiative making that a -2 to Initiatve and Ricky will see it effect the comming Initiative Roll.

--------------------
I have play tested this out by myself and I like it pretty well. I haven't been able to use it with any players yet though.

Posted by: ES_Riddle Nov 3 2004, 07:20 AM

Well, the way the rules are set up in SR3 the wired folk go and go, then slow pokes, then wired folk twice more. Ah…the joins of rolling 10+dice in a surprise test. Plus you should take at least one of the slow pokes out since they won't have combat pool for your first shot.

Posted by: Kremlin KOA Nov 3 2004, 07:21 AM

try this one where you go from +the highest init rolled to -the highest init rolled and everyone acts every 20 pts cannot act after -what they rolled. EDIT: brief example

Sammy from hell ( ): init 39
adept init (Ad): 22
merc init (Mc) : 21
combat decker (CD): 18
Face ( ) : 15
Shaman (Sh): 13
Sec guards (SGs) : 12 (GM only rolled once for the lot)
Sec Mage (Mg): 9

we get
39}
22} (Ad)
21} (Mc)
19}
18} (CD)
15}
13} (Sh)
12} (SGs)
9} (Mg)
2} (Ad)
1} (Mc)
-1}
-2} (CD)
-5}
-7} (Sh)
-8} (SGs)
-18} (Ad)
-19} (Mc)
-21}

Posted by: Stumps Nov 3 2004, 07:25 AM

Most problems revolving around slow guys getting screwed are solved with the above defined system so far as I've play tested it.

-Kremlin, that just makes it all go by faster with less damage all around. It would be good for those who enjoy role playing more than roll playing that's for sure.

Posted by: Kremlin KOA Nov 3 2004, 07:44 AM

Stumps you will find the same amount of damage being dished out in mine as in Sr2 or 3 the difference is it tries to go halfway between SR2 and SR3 for when the slow guys go

Posted by: Stumps Nov 3 2004, 07:48 AM

take a look over at what I'm presently messing with as an Intitiative system...
It kinda resolves the whole slow guy problem I think.

Posted by: Fortune Nov 3 2004, 07:55 AM

I don't mind Kremlin's example, as it solves my problem by integrating the speed of the hyper-bunny into the rest well. The system itself though is unweildy, and not natural to my aged brain.

Posted by: Kremlin KOA Nov 3 2004, 08:02 AM

yeah well I am a math whiz i will admit

Posted by: Fortune Nov 3 2004, 08:08 AM

Don't get me wrong, I'm no slouch ... I just don't like the feel of it. It doesn't *roll* right, in frame of reference ... my comfort zone ... much like Open tests. I don't know how to explain it better, I mean, the math is simple, and it's somewhat elegant in that it does address my particular concern, but ...

Posted by: Kremlin KOA Nov 3 2004, 08:26 AM

no probs. I will admit the negative corss over hurts me too

Posted by: DrJest Nov 3 2004, 12:11 PM

I have to admit that we just ignored the merit of... what was it, Adrenaline SUrge? I forget, anyway, the one that let you re-roll 6's on a single initiative dice, and used that for any non-augmented character. The wired boys will still go first mostly, but sometimes the unwired will surprise you.

Posted by: DarkShade Nov 3 2004, 02:28 PM

have to say the 2nd ed initiative was more `realistic`
I have a problem describing actions sometimes when the wired 3 street sam is fighting 3 mundane but well armed guards.

in sr2 this street sam will wipe the floor with the guards.. before their first action.

in sr3 the street sam is likely dead. `waiting' for guard nr 3 to nail him before using his second action to kill the remaining guard

am still undecided which approach is best, the new system does mean initiative no longer rules all & street sams are more varied, but it makes a point for `quantity over quality`.. if you have 2 guards and want to handle the wired 3 guy it is better to get a third guard instead of upgrading the 2 guards to wired2..

oh btw, about the poll.. mages that slow? +3d6 initiative is a standard of every single mage I have ever seen, and made permanent or sustained too.. which btw is not munchkinising, any combat mage with a half working sense of self preservation should get this spell asap..

DS

Posted by: Moon-Hawk Nov 3 2004, 04:05 PM

Here is a system that I use, that another dumpshocker posted. I take no credit for this, but I've lost my note where I recorded this and the persons name, so I'm working from memory. Whoever I got this from, speak up and get credit:
Standard SR3 except there are always 5 passes.
Those who act once act in pass 3
Those who act twice act in passes 2 & 4
Those who act three times act in passes 1, 3, & 5
Those who act four times act in passes 1, 2, 4, & 5
Those who act five times act in passes 1, 2, 3, 4, & 5
If you need more actions/passes, add phase 0 and 6. If someone looses an action due to injury, just update their initiative and remove their last action, from whichever pass it occurs, don't try to re-figure which passes they act in. Move-by-wire is a bit tricky. I have to give them extra actions in extra passes, but don't update thier initiative score in the extra ones; but that's hardly ever an issue anyway, handle MBW however you want.

In general, this system is a compromise between SR3 and SR2. It tries to space actions more or less evenly throughout the turn. For small initiative differences (up to 20 points or so) the final order of action looks very similar to SR3, but as you get to larger differences of the uber speed demon vs. the slugs, the speed demon can get a couple hits in before the slugs, then all the slugs go, then the speed demon has a couple more actions.

Posted by: GoldenAri Nov 3 2004, 04:17 PM

Very similar to the Champions initiative phase system, exept that there were 12 phases and which ones you went on were fixed (based on the Speed attribute).

Posted by: Fortune Nov 3 2004, 04:18 PM

I like that ... it bears further testing, but it looks pretty simple and seems like it should run smoothly and seamlessly at the game table.

Speak up and take credit if you are the creator.

Posted by: Moon-Hawk Nov 3 2004, 04:25 PM

I remember them saying that they based it off Champions. (which I've never played)

Posted by: Joe Outside Nov 3 2004, 06:32 PM

I personally find SR3 initiative rules to be both balanced and realistic. The problem is with the visualization.

Posted by: Moon-Hawk Nov 3 2004, 06:42 PM

But that's a question of how fast do you think someone with wired reflexes 3 really is?
If you don't think the sammy really moves that much faster, then why should everyone get one turn and then wait around while sammy takes four more actions?
I don't think SR3 or SR2 init is any more realistic than the other. They just miss the mark on opposite sides.

Posted by: Dashifen Nov 3 2004, 06:56 PM

I've always wanted to use the method that Stumps metioned above (I even call it the Cain/Stumps Initiative System in my book o' house rules) but I've never worked with a group to try it.

Posted by: Stumps Nov 3 2004, 07:03 PM

holy crap!
Someone out there still remembers that arcayne(sp...about to fall over dead tired) ruleset?
Wow...I'm flattered just by that alone.

Posted by: Bigity Nov 3 2004, 07:13 PM

So what about some kind of system like 40k, where the shooting and fighting is all rolled one at a time, but is resolved, or takes places at the same time at end of the turn.

Posted by: Joe Outside Nov 4 2004, 02:04 AM

Posted by: Stumps Nov 4 2004, 02:13 AM

This diagram style works best for describing things to folks who have the idea that everyone sits and waits to start moving.
([----] = time elapsed for one action)

SR3 Standard Initiative:
Slow Guy:......[----------------------------------------] [----------------------------------------]

Medium Guy:..[----------------------] [----------------------] [----------------------]

Fast Guy:.......[------------------] [------------------] [------------------]


SR2 Standard Initiative:
Slow Guy:...............[----------------------------------------] [----------------------------------------]

Medium Guy:.......[----------------------] [----------------------] [----------------------]

Fast Guy:.......[------------------] [------------------] [------------------]


My personal view of combat speeds:
Slow Guy:........[----------------------------------------] [----------------------------------------]

Medium Guy:........[----------------------] [----------------------] [----------------------]

Fast Guy:.................[------------------] [------------------] [------------------]


SR3 basically says everyone starts at the same time but takes longer to accomplish actions.

SR2 says that everyone takes different amounts of time to react and start their actions

My idea of it all is that the faster guys more or less, react to actions started by the slower characters.

Posted by: Joe Outside Nov 4 2004, 02:24 AM

Yeah, that's pretty much what I ws trying to say. Thanks.

And I can see what you're getting at, too. It makes sense, but I still see it the other way, myself. Which is all right, really. It'd be boring if everybody agreed all the time.

Posted by: mmu1 Nov 4 2004, 02:31 AM

Posted by: Doctor Funkenstein Nov 4 2004, 02:46 AM

I think the best thing to do is combine the various rules into one set.

Basically, you start off with SR2's system and then incorporate SR3's philosphy of allowing everyone a chance to affect a scenario. Everyone determines Initiative as per the standard rules. However, instead of starting with the highest number, working down, then subtracting ten, you start with the lowest number and count upwards until everyone gets a phase. At that point, everyone subtracts ten from their roll and continue until no one has any more phases remaining.

This is where we borrow the concept seen in Cain's and other similar systems. While the slower character gets to declare his action first, anyone with a higher Initiative roll than that character can "interupt" the slower character. At that point, the slower character's action is "locked" -- he can't change it in order to respond to the new situation, because he simply can't react as quickly as the faster character can.

The interupting character must then declare his action (at which point it, too, becomes locked). If anyone with a higher Initiative roll wishes to do so, they can in turn interupt that character. Continue until no more interuptions are declared.

At this point, the highest interuption resolves his phase. If his action(s) during that phase change the situation so that one of the characters he interupted can no longer complete their action (the interupting character dives behind an impenetrable wall to avoid a shot from the slower character), the slower character effectively "loses" his action.

Once the slow character and any interupting characters have finished resolving their actions, the next slowest character who didn't interupt gets to declare their action. If anyone else still has an action remaining this phase wishes to interupt, repeat the cycle.

Continue until everyone has declared and resolved their action. Once they have, subtract 10 from everyone's Initiative and repeat as per the standard rules.

It adds a little more complication and bookkeeping to the scenario, but it's a tad bit more believable in its results as far as I'm concerned.

Posted by: Bane Nov 4 2004, 03:00 AM

It's all about your interpretation (that sounds familiar...) when it comes to which style is most believable. I like the sound of some of the suggestions put up (the Cain one and Doc Funk's alternative especially). It's a fantastic balance between the wired-to-hell Sammy blowing everyone away before they can even move and, well, fairness is bad term for it, but I think you get what I mean.

On the other hand, though, some people may view these wired folks to be more reckless and hence not reacting to what other people are doing. At least, not to the extent that some of these systems would allow. The books talk about characters with WR being twitchy, jumpy, prone to reacting without thinking, etc. In a fight, I can see one of these characters just blowing everyone away, uncaring of what they do. Hell, it's almost more of a roleplaying nitpick that can be extrapolated to how combat is handled. In one case the character is using his enhanced reaction speed to react to and counter other characters' actions, while in the other case he's using his enhanced reactions to just...go faster, and perhaps recklessly.

I'm not saying one is better, or more realistic, than the other. Just something to think about.

Posted by: Dashifen Nov 4 2004, 03:21 AM

Posted by: Stumps Nov 4 2004, 05:34 AM

Doc did sum it up very well indeed.

Here's what I believe is a better example of Cain's (and mine with help from others like thunderchild and many more) Initiative system in concept.

Now make note of the system I mentioned above. It IS actually different than the prior Cain's Intiative system but it works the same concepts. I simply tried to simplify it and fix a few things.

REMEMBER: players only get HALF of their passes, rounded up, as interrupts.

ERRATA: I made a serious error in the above posting of this system.
You do not simply resolve starting from the lowest Initiative number to the highest.
You resolve from the slowest player to the fastest. This is a little tricky to explain.
If a mage has 2 passes and the sammie has 3, the Mage will go first no matter if the sammies lowest valued pass is lower in numerical value than the Mage's.
(Forget that the numbers mean anything for a moment here)
Now if we have the Mage, the sammie, and a gaurd that look like:
Mage: 3, 13
Gaurd: 2, 12
Sammie: 1, 11, 21

The mage and the gaurd have the same amount of turns but when this happens, the player with the lowest Initiative goes first, which would be the Gaurd.
Following him will be the Mage, then the Sammie, Gaurd, Mage, Sammie, Sammie.

Now, to bring out the idea more directly that the actions are on going, and since the present system states that we minus 10 from each valued pass to produce the next passes arrival, we are going to say that a simple action is equal to 5 Initiative Value passes (whether a player goes on those values or not) and a complex action is equal to 10 Intiative Value passes.
Now, if you have an Intiative on 3 you will actually roll your first simple action on 8 and your second simple action on 13, right before you start your next action.
However, you will have declared your actions on 3 and 8 for everyone else faster than you to "see".

Now If I have an Intiative on 5, I will actually roll my first simple action on 10, which is 2 passes after your first pass and my second action will be rolled on 15, again 2 passes after your action but my first simple action will be before your second simple action and my second simple action will be after your entire pass.

This is where I have the ability to "F&%^ you up" as I will be shooting at you and have the chance to add modifiers from damage to your second action that will be on 13 when I'm shooting at you on 10.

If one players action roll lands on another players action start then the roll will be resolved before the other player starts their action.

If you are a Mage and you are hit while you are casting a spell, you still cast your Spell or magic if you generate ONE (read, two dice) successes with your Willpower against a Target Number equal to the power rating of the attack.


Did I lose anyone on this??

Posted by: Stumps Nov 4 2004, 06:14 AM

My brain is hurting again...I must be re-working Intiative systems for shadowrun again

Ok...the above one is one way I've been recently thinking about.

This is another.

Shadowrun describes a Round as 3 seconds.

(bare with me)
Until I can convert the basic rolling of Initiative I'm going with the following start up to find Intiative.

Roll Initiative and count the rounds that each player earns and track the order of who is in front of who in numerical order. (I really want to replace this to fit better)

Now, if you have, let's say, 3 passes you will divide that by 3 seconds.
This will give you a result of 1.
This means that this player will perform a complex action every 1 second, or rather, he will perform a simple action every 0.5 seconds.

If you have 2 passes, you will again divide by 3 seconds.
This will give you a result of 1.5.
This means that this player will perform a complex action every 1.5 seconds, or rather, he will perform a simple action every 0.75 seconds.

If you only had 1 pass this round, you will be doing one complex action in 3 seconds, or rather two simple actions in 1.5 seconds.


"So how the hell are we supposed to track this crap if we start using seconds?"
.........2 Passes.....3 Passes
3.0.......__...............__
2.75.....##..............##
2.50.....##..............##
2.25.....##..............##
2.0.......##..............__
1.75.....##..............##
1.50.....__...............##
1.25.....##..............##
1.0.......##..............__
0.75.....##..............##
0.50.....##..............##
0.25.....##..............##
0.0xxxxxx

If you had 2 passes you would claim it on 0.25 and act on 1.5, and claim again on 1.75 and act on 3.0 if both your passes were complex actions.

There's much unfinished with this however.

I really have to go back and rip SR's A$$h@le open again and find out how to convert "(Quickness + Intelligence) / 2 = Reaction" into some easy form of second addition or the like.
Then I have to go into the Dice Rolling and figure out what the dice rolls add up to in seconds.

Then I have to come back to this nice clean graph above and add more intervals between the blocky 0.25 and 0.50 distance in time.
Off hand...I'm guessing it to be in 0.05 incriments.

Posted by: DarkShade Nov 4 2004, 12:45 PM

hmm.. like the idea.. as it solves the `time to move`issue that was such a non issue in sr2..but is one in sr3.. examples..combat drone rigged init 32 wants to get into the riggers apc .. will it make it and will the rigger be able to close the door before the guard in 12 launches a grenade through the open door?.. Will adept init 28 be able to reach & chop at mage initiative 21 & 5 m away before the mage floors the adept with a stun bolt?, will street sammie be able to get into cover behind the bins 5m away before the enemy combat drone fires its 15 d barrage?
these are vital to sr3 as <at least in my games> they happen fairly often, so who is doing what WHEN is needed in more detail.
When the order is first guy init 31 then guy init 7 then 3x times the init 31 guy... it just does not work properly.


btw has anyone ever attempted using the basic sr2 initiative system but adding a die to everyones base initiative? this would give all unaugmented avg 2 actions and might give runners an extra action now and then but balance might be a bit better <3-4 actions/runner vs 2 actions /unaugmented makes initiative less über important which is what the sr3 system tries to do imho >
DS

Posted by: Shockwave_IIc Nov 5 2004, 01:51 AM

House Rule: Modified SLA Industries System

Posted by: Arethusa Nov 5 2004, 04:47 PM

I wrote up a variant on the SLA Industries (or was it Champions? I don't recall, exactly) concept (basically, took it from the last Big Thread On Initiative and refined it). I'll post it here when I get home.

Posted by: Cray74 Nov 5 2004, 05:49 PM

Posted by: GaiasWrath8 Nov 5 2004, 07:01 PM

Umm I forgot, it a full combat round 10 seconds or a min? Just trying to get a feel for the time thing.

Posted by: Doctor Funkenstein Nov 5 2004, 07:02 PM

Approximately 3 seconds. Or are you talking about one of the other systems?

Posted by: hobgoblin Nov 5 2004, 08:12 PM

personaly i dont have a problem with SR3's system at all, atleast it gives the others a bigger chance of survival (and makes the sammie pack more then wired to avoid getting hurt).

still, im wondering about a system where a free, simple or complex action costs you points. points are what you rolled on the initiative test. lets say that free costs you 1, simple costs you 5 and complex costs you 10.

after everyone have rolled the gm starts counting down from the highest initiative. when its your turn you can elect to take any action, substracting the cost and thereby getting when you can act next time. you can allso elect to hold your action, and you as a optional rule you can take a free action any time, thereby dropping your points by 1.

when holding a action you can only react to a action with a another action of equal or lower level, so no going full auto based on someone shouting a word (or if you prefer a very lethal game, go ahead and allow any action as a reaction). after action is done you calculate your new place in the chain based on the current count.

ties are resolved based on reaction stat...

and yes, this is basicly the same system as used in feng shui, with modifications to insert sr style actions.

hmm, another option could be that you can burn as many rounds as you feel like in full auto but every 10 round beyond the first 10 costs you another 1 point in the chain...

Posted by: Moon-Hawk Nov 5 2004, 08:16 PM

Hmmm, a bit more flexibility, that's good. I don't really see any major points of abuse. All the rules still work normally. Well, MBW gets weird, but we can hardly determine merit based on one very wacky bit of gear. I guess things are a touch more cumbersome, but not significantly. Your free actions are less free, I'm not sure how much I like that.
Overall, I think it's a very interesting idea. Also, in a wild-west time "DRAW!" situation then the initiative winner might only get one shot, instead of the faster automatically getting two, I definitely like that better. Hmmmm.

Posted by: hobgoblin Nov 5 2004, 08:24 PM

heh, that made me think of a potential problem. what is the diff of single shot and semi-auto weapons in a system like that?

oh and free actions are never realy free, you can only take one at any given moment in the official system.

heh, and i just got thinking about the nasty diff between a smartlinked gun and a non-smartlinked one in that system...

there are clearly some modifications to be done...

Posted by: Moon-Hawk Nov 5 2004, 08:29 PM

My thoughts:
Single shot you can't take two simple actions to fire the weapon in a row. Some other simple or complex action has to come in the middle.

Free actions are certainly a bit different. In general, you'll be able to act less than in the current system. In the current system you can still take a complex action if your init score is 1, and you get several free actions that are, well, free. In this proposed system it'd be a bit different, but I'm not sure how you'd want to handle that.

The difference between smartlinked and non is certainly significant, but not game-shattering, in my opinion.

Posted by: Kagetenshi Nov 5 2004, 08:36 PM

Posted by: hobgoblin Nov 5 2004, 08:44 PM

the problem with free actions is that they are so wide in effect. some are so simple that they should not realy cost anything to do, others have a real impact on the game and therefor should have atleast a small cost for doing.

as for doing a complex action when you dont have the points for it, no problem as you just use whatever you have left on it (thats how its done in feng shui to, as long as you have atleast 1 left you can do the action even if the cost is more then what you have).

and yes i was thinking that with single shots you cant take two simple actions fireing the same gun in a row. and i guess that recoil carry into the next simple action for burst and semi-auto.

as for mbw, forgot about those giving you extra actions after the fact. but i guess kagetenshi's suggestion is a nice patch for that...

Posted by: Arethusa Nov 6 2004, 12:58 AM

Posted by: Doctor Funkenstein Nov 6 2004, 01:01 AM

Posted by: Jason Farlander Nov 6 2004, 01:14 AM

I dont use the system personally, but, in its defense, the chart is actually fairly simple and intuitive. Using a chart to plot when initiative actions occur is not, conceptually, really any worse than using a table of perception test TN modifiers.

Posted by: Arethusa Nov 6 2004, 01:33 AM

Posted by: Stumps Nov 6 2004, 12:35 PM

Arethusa, you seem to be aiming for the same results I tend to conceptually keep fresh in mind when working on Initiative systems. I like the ideas behind what you've got going.

Ok...I kept working (while medicated which took some persistance) on the system I was trying to work out....
I'm not sure this is quite the final result of what I'm looking for, but...here it goes anyways.

This one is fairly short in explination...but it does require some acceptance of changes that are pretty different than what we are used to in SR systems.
So, bare with that and try to look at it objectively instead of getting hung up on it being so different. (a polite request because I myself had a hard time breaking though standard views to find this one. Thank you Excel spread sheets.)

Stumps Initiative System Version 1,000.3.4.2 (I've lost track)
There are no interrupts
Pass: a simple action.
Complex actions are carried out over the course of two passes.

Roll initiative to find out who goes before who. Do not add Reaction.
Subtract 5 continually until unable to subtract any further to determine each player’s amount of passes.
Throw the Initiative numbers away and keep the amount of passes and the order that the players will act.

These passes reflect the amount of times a player gets to make an active and reactive action.

The player with the lowest amount of passes and the lowest amount of quickness has the option to go first.
If two players have the same amount of passes and the same quickness, they will roll their quickness to determine who goes first. The player that has the least amount of successes against a TN 4 will go first.

Any player may choose to not act on their pass and save their pass for a later time in the cycle of the round. Any passes not used during a round are lost and do not carry over into the next round.

When a player acts aggressively against another player, the targeted player has the option to use one of their passes as a Reactionary pass. Doing this forfeits the pass used as an aggressive pass.

The targeted player will roll their Reaction against a TN equal to the attacking players Quickness. If one success (net) is generated then the player has the option to move defensively without any aggressive actions against the attacking player. If two or more net successes are generated, then the player has the option to attack the player or move defensively before the other player resolves their action.

If a player moves defensively, as defined above, all the moves will simply tally up as modifiers that make it harder for the attacking player to attack.

If a player attacks in reactionary defense, as defined above, then after the normal Stage-down of the damage, the attacking player has to roll a check against the damage taken rolling their Body against a TN as per the chart below. Mages roll their Willpower; instead, against these same TN’s IF they are casting a spell.

Light=2, Medium=4, Serious=6, Deadly=10 (This is for Stun and Physical Damage)

If they fail the check, then they lose the action they were going to do. If they succeed, then they take the damage they took, but still accomplish their action.

Posted by: Stumps Nov 6 2004, 12:44 PM

ok, the only thing I'm thinking about changing to that above is to add interrupts back into the system in a fitting manner.

Something like saying you are only able to use half of your actions rounded down(or maybe up, but I'm thinking down being that your actions are your passes with it being a subtract 5 instead of subtract 10)

The interupt would allow the faster players to act before a slower character which seems to me to make sense to offer as an option to the faster characters.
This is why I'm thinking of re-applying it.

The reason it wasn't in the original idea was because the idea above works off of reactionary actions, basically saying that the slow guys will make the moves that the fast guys will react off of and the fast guys will be able to react more often and still have non-reactive actions left where the slow guys will be more or less forced to choose more closely which actions will be used for reactives and which ones will be used for non-reactives because unlike the fast guys, they don't really get a chance to see what's happening and make adjustments too often because they are taking so long (in comparison to the fast guys) to pull off one action.

Posted by: Sahandrian Nov 7 2004, 03:17 AM

I came up with a house system, not so much to solve issues in the actual system, but just because it was an interesting idea. Basically, everyone rolls Reaction+1d6, but rather than subtacting 10 from their roll each pass, they subtract 10 minus 2 per extra initiative die, down to 0. And they go in order, like SR2. So, to compare...

Street Sam: 12+4d6 (Wired 3)
Combat Decker: 6+3d6 (Synaptic Accel 2)
The Other Guy: 12+1d6 (Cerebral Boosters and Muscle Augmentation)

Let's have them all roll fours.

Standard SR
28: Sam
18: Decker
16: Guy
18: Sam
8: Decker
6: Guy
8: Sam

My System
Sam: 16 (-4 each time)
Decker: 10 (-6 each time)
Guy: 16 (-10 each time)

16: Sam
16: Guy
12: Sam
10: Decker
8: Sam
6: Guy
4: Sam
4: Decker

So, the fast ones still tend to go sooner, but others also get in a fairly early turn. Of course, anyone who gets +5d6 (Boosted + Synap, or MBW) will be all over the place... And nobody in my group uses combat drugs, so it's never come up, but I think they'd just add to the dice rolled.

I have an alternative to D&D d20, too, which I think is pretty realistic, but this is a SR forum, so I'll skip it.

Posted by: Doctor Funkenstein Nov 7 2004, 03:20 AM

That one has a lot of potential, though it still has the problem of leaving players who don't have much in the way of an Initiative (or in this case, Reaction) boost sitting around twiddling their thumbs while everyone else gets to have fun (and in many cases, with the action already over by the time their turn comes up). I like where the idea is going, though.

Posted by: the_dunner Nov 7 2004, 03:51 AM

I've been watching this thread for a bit, and I'm surprised that nobody's made this comment. So, I'm throwing it out there.

After the first action, assuming combat goes multiple rounds, SR3 and SR2 are the same thing. The Wired Sammy gets multiple consecutive actions either way. Yes, the non-boosted guys get an action in first in SR3 relative to when they would in SR2, but the wired guy gets the same series of consecutive actions while everyone else twiddles their thumbs. The only difference is when the dice are rolled.

SR2 example:
Die Roll---
Sammy
Sammy
Mage (w/ Increased Reaction Focus)
NPC Guards
Sammy
Die Roll---
Sammy
Sammy
Mage (w/ Increased Reaction Focus)
Sammy
NPC Guards
Repeat 'til one side is dead.

SR3 Example:
Die Roll---
Sammy
Mage
NPC Guards
Sammy
Sammy
Die Roll---
Sammy
Mage
NPC Guards
Sammy
Sammy

Once I realized that, the SR3 system bugged me a lot less.

Posted by: Doctor Funkenstein Nov 7 2004, 03:57 AM

Actually, no, it's not just the first phase. It's every phase until the slower characters run out of phases (usually after the 2nd one). At that point, the faster characters get to continue hammering it out.

The difference, however, is that all of the characters had a chance to influence the outcome of the situation. It wasn't just the faster characters dominating the scenario until the slower characters eventually got their turn in. It was Everybody > Everybody Except Those With Bad Luck or Moderate to Bad Attributes > Boosted Characters Only > Extremely Boosted Characters Only > Insanely Boosted Characters Only.

In other words, the souped-up characters get to clean up the situation, but everyone got to make the mess. In SR2, due to the fact that augmented characters are almost always combat oriented, by the time the slower characters got a chance to act there was nothing to do because the faster characters had finished everything up. In SR3, everybody gets to have a little fun while still allowing the augmented to dominate the situation.

Posted by: Stumps Nov 7 2004, 04:44 AM

I liked Sahandrian's simple idea...it's not a system fix per say as he said it wasn't, but it is a fun looking idea.

btw, did I lose anyone on the system I posted up there, or was it just that dumb?

Posted by: Voran Nov 7 2004, 02:50 PM

Kinda a half-formed response, as its late and I really should be going to bed. But anyhoo...


My ongoing reaction to the 3rd ed initiative rules is kinda the same it was for melee rules. In my opinion, the basic rules do sorta play against a fast person using their quickness and speed to their advantage. At least in a conventional way.

Ive found when using a high init/reaction character, its better for me to be defensive during the first passes of my init, since usually slower stuff only gets to do 1 thing. And if they choose to attack and burn their combat pool up front, they don't have anything left when the rest of my passes come around. On a gut level, it seems a little backwards, me using a highspeed character to pick off guys at the end of the round rather than upfront.

And for melee, regardless of how quick you are, it is impossible under basic rules to dart in, smack someone and dart back out. And it plays against a higher speed character going on the offensive against a slower speed one because its possible the slower speed one will beat you in all your melee attempts, and get to smack you more times than they can otherwise move in a normal round.

Posted by: Kagetenshi Nov 7 2004, 02:57 PM

You can do all that. It's covered under the Surprise rules.

Also, the melee rules play in the favour of a faster character going on the offensive, because ties go to the attacker.

~J

Posted by: Doctor Funkenstein Nov 7 2004, 03:25 PM