3rd edition thoughts on screwing over the players, How we handle Simple Actions Options

[Kanada Ten]

Yeah, but in SR4 you should have a sensor package looking out for that.

[Shrike30]

Hey, that's what Perception checks are for. You want to tell me what kind of sensor package most PCs carry that would tell the difference between a guard who got killed and fell to the ground behind a low wall, and one who got hit hard and fell down behind a low wall?

It's not like a gunfight is the kind of place where you can make hundredth of a second decisions about "is he still alive or has he just not fallen over yet?" I'm personally a fan of the declare-resolve method.

[Telion]

While enforcing the actions first helps, I've found that straining the use of combat pool is generally more effective. Whenever someone takes a shot at the character, make him decide how much combat pool he wants to use to dodge if any, he doesn't know if its going to hit. having a dozen shots taken at you will drain the pool fairly quickly.

for a non-adept with 12+skill this would move the combat to being primarily offensive to a defensive one. Show the characters how to use cover effectively to save combat pool.

also when it comes time when your surrounded by guards.... you generally think twice about moving to the open, seeing as how you can't dodge only the ones that hit.

also remember that guards could have a few points of combat pool too, I usually assign them average attributes so 2-4 CP depending on effectiveness.

[Kanada Ten]

[Shrike30]

I wasn't aware motion sensors worked through walls, Aliens-style. Cool...

[Kanada Ten]

[Shrike30]

Not really. If they're trying to move past where he fell down, they'll enter his field of view. Even if he does stick his head back up, if it's done on his pass, the best they can do is pull out a Free Action kept in reserve to try and get out of the way.

[Kanada Ten]

[blakkie]

[Austere Emancipa...]

It's probably not a question of taking a dive on purpose. If getting hit doesn't make you fall down, then falling down voluntarily is pretty unlikely.

It's almost impossible to tell whether or how badly this guy is injured as he falls down. It takes about 1.5-2 seconds for him to move after the impact -- nowhere near fast enough for the shooter to figure out he's uninjured in one Initiative Pass.

Seeing through walls is great, but detecting breathing, heartbeat, etc., are pretty useless if you have to immediately figure out if someone is out of the fight. The human body may well continue these functions for several CTs after most fatal hits.

This post has been edited by Austere Emancipator: May 16 2006, 08:43 PM

[Wounded Ronin]

[Wounded Ronin]

[James McMurray]

It's worked iun my group and would continue to work now. The problem is that you don't neccessarily know if you knocked them down because they're dead or because they suffered knockdown from the force of the blow. Some people put an extra round into you just incase.

For instance, it happened in a game I was running at GenCon a while back. A guy popped up out of full cover to shoot through a window. He took a couple shots then got hit fairly hard and knocked down but without taking a lot of actual damage. When his ass came around again he surprised everyone by popping back up to toss in a grenade because they all assume dht down = dead.

[Unrest]

I am completely with the OP on this one. It makes no sense to just roll damage secretly and give the players only a vague description of what was done to the npc. Or just point out that any players abusing ooc information to determine their characters actions will be penalized in an old-school method that may or may not involve a falling mountain or a time warping bus.

Instead lets just add more rules to bog things down. I love the concept of declaring your entire action phase beforehand but why stop there? Since your average turn of combat is supposed to simulate three seconds of real life one can realistically assume that most people will not be able to process what is happening all around them fast enough to react. So any characters with logic/intelligence scores less than three have to declare their actions for both this round and the next. This includes free actions. Those more intellectually swift characters with higher than three in those stats must still declare this every other turn, however if they succeed in a composure test they can change the free action of the next round. Of course that composure test should be made with the proper negative modifiers for stress and being under fire.

[Kagetenshi]

I like it. Done.

Wait, though—sure smart people are smart, but shouldn't they also have to make a Quickness test to see if they physically can change actions? And moving at that speed, I think there should be a Body test to make sure they don't strain anything. Plus a Willpower roll to not piss their pants in fear. Also, you should probably lie to your players a lot to make sure no one has 720-degree vision.

~J

[Shrike30]

I've seen a number of systems that have the players declare their actions in ascending Initiative order, and then they're resolved in descending Initiative order. People can change up their actions if what they were going to do becomes inappropriate (the object they were going to grab is destroyed by a rocket) but usually take a penalty for doing so.

Asking players to declare 2 actions sometimes (sometimes, because complex actions eat their whole pass) is really not going to "bog down gameplay." In execution, I've found it usually speeds up combat, because the player is not asked to reassess his tactical situation between short bursts.

[Unrest]

[Shrike30]

I don't have to house-rule anything. I play SR4, where it works like this as per RAW :P

[Kanada Ten]

[Shrike30]

It's probably player-dependent. My guys take a bit to decide on something, but telling them they have to decide on two somethings with the same logic process really doesn't take much more effort. Usually, it breaks down to "shoot the guy twice, shoot two different targets, or shoot and do something else..."

[stevebugge]

In my games I told my players that doing a damage asessment of your shot counted as a simple action (Observe or observe in detail) this really stopped the I shoot then decide what to shoot next play quite a bit.

[Shrike30]

That's probably a valid approach per RAW. I give my players a decent description of what happens (as the die roll is made behind my screen) and go on with life.