IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

2 Pages V   1 2 >  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> Edge passes/Movement
almost normal
post Apr 20 2012, 09:27 PM
Post #1


Running Target
***

Group: Banned
Posts: 1,105
Joined: 23-August 10
Member No.: 18,961



How does movement divided by passes work when using edge granted passes?

Example.

Mundane Crosby and Mundane Giroux get in a fight. They both have one pass. They're currently 20 meters from each other, and for the purposes of this argument, both of their speeds are 20 meters. Crosby runs up to Giroux and punches him. Giroux on his turn punches back. Pass 2, neither can normally go, but Giroux spends an edge point for an extra pass. Is Crosby now 10 meters away?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Dr.Rockso
post Apr 20 2012, 09:40 PM
Post #2


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 583
Joined: 6-November 09
From: MTL
Member No.: 17,849



QUOTE (almost normal @ Apr 20 2012, 04:27 PM) *
How does movement divided by passes work when using edge granted passes?

Example.

Mundane Crosby and Mundane Giroux get in a fight. They both have one pass. They're currently 20 meters from each other, and for the purposes of this argument, both of their speeds are 20 meters. Crosby runs up to Giroux and punches him. Giroux on his turn punches back. Pass 2, neither can normally go, but Giroux spends an edge point for an extra pass. Is Crosby now 10 meters away?

I thought you had to declare spending edge for an extra pass at the beginning of the whole combat turn, for that very reason?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
almost normal
post Apr 20 2012, 09:42 PM
Post #3


Running Target
***

Group: Banned
Posts: 1,105
Joined: 23-August 10
Member No.: 18,961



QUOTE (Dr.Rockso @ Apr 20 2012, 04:40 PM) *
I thought you had to declare spending edge for an extra pass at the beginning of the whole combat turn, for that very reason?


See, I had thought the whole point of edge was to use it in emergencies, which are hard to plan for. I'll have to look it up.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Dr.Rockso
post Apr 20 2012, 09:48 PM
Post #4


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 583
Joined: 6-November 09
From: MTL
Member No.: 17,849



Usually, yes. But using it to add an extra pass mid turn mucks up all the movement, as you've seen. Thats why Enhanced Reflexes (I think thats what the + IP spell is called) and drugs and turning on your wired reflexes all add the passes on the next turn.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
SpellBinder
post Apr 20 2012, 11:29 PM
Post #5


Neophyte Runner
*****

Group: Members
Posts: 2,351
Joined: 19-September 09
From: Behind the shadows of the Resonance
Member No.: 17,653



QUOTE (Dr.Rockso @ Apr 20 2012, 03:48 PM) *
Usually, yes. But using it to add an extra pass mid turn mucks up all the movement, as you've seen. Thats why Enhanced Reflexes (I think thats what the + IP spell is called) and drugs and turning on your wired reflexes all add the passes on the next turn.

Improved Reflexes, but I'm sure the majority of us knew what you're talking about anyway.

And as it's written on SR4a, page 145, Initiative & Edge, it says you declare your use of Edge at the beginning of the Initiative Pass.

Also, movement is per Combat Turn, not Initiative Pass (SR4a, page 149). Giroux, who spends a point of Edge for a 2nd IP gets is full movement, not half, since he didn't move during the first IP.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Yerameyahu
post Apr 21 2012, 05:47 AM
Post #6


Advocatus Diaboli
**********

Group: Members
Posts: 13,994
Joined: 20-November 07
From: USA
Member No.: 14,282



If you're just dying for precise movement tracking, it's probably easiest to remember that every Turn has N passes (4 is easy and usually enough), and people always move (Combat Turn total)/4 each Pass.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
FriendoftheDork
post Apr 21 2012, 05:37 PM
Post #7


Running Target
***

Group: Members
Posts: 1,288
Joined: 4-September 06
From: The Scandinavian Federation
Member No.: 9,300



QUOTE (Yerameyahu @ Apr 21 2012, 07:47 AM) *
If you're just dying for precise movement tracking, it's probably easiest to remember that every Turn has N passes (4 is easy and usually enough), and people always move (Combat Turn total)/4 each Pass.


This is the houserule my group(s) use constantly. We found varying movement according to WHO is involved in a combat to be ludicrous. Sure, in a 1vs1 it makes sense: Bill with 3 passes can react and shoot before bob can run his full movement (regardless of bobs' # of passes), but just because there is a mage with 4 passes in the same combat fireballing someone else why would that give Bill even more time to shoot before bob can get close enough?

Assuming Bill is 16 meters away from Bob, in the first example he would be able to charge in pass 3, when the mage is involved he can't until pass 4, meaning Bob gets to shoot his 3rd pass before Bob can gut him, even if Bob is ahead of him in initiative.

The downside to always dividing movement by 4 is.. that people seem very little immobile. Having to move an entire pass seems like you are wasting a potential complex action, and makes melee even less effective. While I do adhere to the "don't bring a knife to a gunfight" philosophy that is disregarded in systems such as D&D and Warhammer, there is a difference between "gets to shoot first" and "can riddle you with 40 bullet holes before you can even strike once."

On another note, I used to like the system in Call of Cthulhu (Chaosium): Melee goes first. Then ranged. THEN movement. Next to a knife wielding cultist? He gets to maul you before you can shoot. If he's not close enough? Well, you get to shoot before he can move.

Hmm I don't have any conclusion to this, any comments?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Yerameyahu
post Apr 21 2012, 06:57 PM
Post #8


Advocatus Diaboli
**********

Group: Members
Posts: 13,994
Joined: 20-November 07
From: USA
Member No.: 14,282



This shouldn't change the action economy at all. You *do* move across all passes, whether you 'admit it' or not. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
FriendoftheDork
post Apr 21 2012, 09:17 PM
Post #9


Running Target
***

Group: Members
Posts: 1,288
Joined: 4-September 06
From: The Scandinavian Federation
Member No.: 9,300



QUOTE (Yerameyahu @ Apr 21 2012, 08:57 PM) *
This shouldn't change the action economy at all. You *do* move across all passes, whether you 'admit it' or not. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)


Yes, and we even allow changing direction etc., so that even those without passes can still DO something. But that still doesn't mean that You can charge someone before he can shoot you, IF one or both have several passes.
t
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Yerameyahu
post Apr 21 2012, 09:43 PM
Post #10


Advocatus Diaboli
**********

Group: Members
Posts: 13,994
Joined: 20-November 07
From: USA
Member No.: 14,282



Ah, I see what you mean.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Thanee
post Apr 21 2012, 11:53 PM
Post #11


jacked in
**********

Group: Admin
Posts: 9,087
Joined: 26-February 02
Member No.: 463



QUOTE (almost normal @ Apr 20 2012, 11:27 PM) *
How does movement divided by passes work when using edge granted passes?


Exactly as when no Edge was spent.

Because Edge cannot increase the number of IPs, that occur during a combat turn.

QUOTE
Mundane Crosby and Mundane Giroux get in a fight. They both have one pass. They're currently 20 meters from each other, and for the purposes of this argument, both of their speeds are 20 meters. Crosby runs up to Giroux and punches him. Giroux on his turn punches back. Pass 2, neither can normally go, but Giroux spends an edge point for an extra pass. Is Crosby now 10 meters away?


This situation is impossible.

Since there is noone involved in the combat, that has more than one IP, the combat turn only has one IP.

Since you have to spend Edge at the beginning of an IP in which you normally have no action, this option never becomes available.

Bye
Thanee
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
FriendoftheDork
post Apr 22 2012, 06:35 AM
Post #12


Running Target
***

Group: Members
Posts: 1,288
Joined: 4-September 06
From: The Scandinavian Federation
Member No.: 9,300



QUOTE (Thanee @ Apr 22 2012, 01:53 AM) *
Exactly as when no Edge was spent.

Because Edge cannot increase the number of IPs, that occur during a combat turn.



This situation is impossible.

Since there is noone involved in the combat, that has more than one IP, the combat turn only has one IP.

Since you have to spend Edge at the beginning of an IP in which you normally have no action, this option never becomes available.

Bye
Thanee


As stated before, this IS possible. You can spend Edge to get an extra pass - if no one else has more than one pass then the round would naturally be extended by another initative pass. The rules does not say that you can only spend Edge to obtain an extra pass if there is anyone else with more passes than you in combat. This looks to me like a cop-out trying to avoid a fuzzy area of the rules... and movement in SR is fuzzy in itself. It even mentions off-hand that "if it is important to find out how far one moves in a single pass...(..)" when is it NOT imortant? How far you move can be important for range of gunfire, ability to attack in melee, ablity to get to cover and size of spell effects. Most other game systems are very particular about how far one can move when taking actions, and most have movement BE actions.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Thanee
post Apr 22 2012, 09:17 AM
Post #13


jacked in
**********

Group: Admin
Posts: 9,087
Joined: 26-February 02
Member No.: 463



QUOTE (FriendoftheDork @ Apr 22 2012, 08:35 AM) *
As stated before, this IS possible.


Based on what?

QUOTE
You can spend Edge to get an extra pass...


Yes you can.

QUOTE
... - if no one else has more than one pass then the round would naturally be extended by another initative pass.


And that is stated where?

In fact, it is stated, that if noone has any extra IPs, the combat round isn't even divided into IPs.

QUOTE
The rules does not say that you can only spend Edge to obtain an extra pass if there is anyone else with more passes than you in combat.


Actually, yes it does. Because it does say, that you must spend it at the beginning of an IP. That requires, that the IP has begun. An IP does not begin, if noone has an action there. Hence, you cannot spend it to increase your number of IPs above the max. number present in the fight already (or 4, which is the hard cap for IPs unless some rule specifically allows more than 4, which is only possible in the Matrix currently).

Bye
Thanee
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Jhaiisiin
post Apr 22 2012, 12:17 PM
Post #14


Running Target
***

Group: Members
Posts: 1,416
Joined: 4-March 06
From: Albuquerque
Member No.: 8,334



Someone with zero initiative passes never takes actions ever. A normal, unaugmented mundane has 1 Initiative Pass. Thus, edge lets them add a 2nd initiative pass for that single combat round.

SR4a Pg 74:
"You may gain 1 extra Initiative Pass for that Combat Turn only (see Initiative and Edge, p. 145)."

Just for completeness, here's the relevant text from SRA p 145:
"Edge can be spent to get an extra Initiative Pass action. A character who only acts once a turn could, for example, spend 1 point of Edge to act during a second Initiative Pass as well. The character must declare this at the beginning of the Initiative Pass—it is not possible to buy an action in the middle of a pass. A character may only purchase 1 extra action this way in each Combat Turn."

Emphasis mine. It explicitly covers the mundane, 1 IP character gaining a second pass. I'm not sure where you came up with the idea that you can't go beyond the max number of passes presented in a combat round (or 4, whichever is less). That's never been the case in 4 editions.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Thanee
post Apr 22 2012, 01:48 PM
Post #15


jacked in
**********

Group: Admin
Posts: 9,087
Joined: 26-February 02
Member No.: 463



It's really quite simple.

"Some characters may have magic or implants that allow them to act more than once in a Combat Turn. When this occurs, the Combat Turn is divided into Initiative Passes." And so on.

"The character must declare this at the beginning of the Initiative Pass."

The combat round only has as many IP as the highest IP combatant brings into the fray. The movement rules also make this rather clear (if the highest IP is 3, you divide movement by 3 to spread it out over the 3 IP).

If two IP 1 mundanes battle it out, there is exactly one IP. A second IP never begins, as the next round has already started by then.

There is no opportunity to spend the Edge, since you would have to do that at the beginning of the second IP, which never happens.



"A character who only acts once a turn could, for example, spend 1 point of Edge to act during a second Initiative Pass as well."

If there is no second IP, you cannot do that.

This rule is there to allow the low-IP characters to keep up somewhat with the high-IP characters. It does not allow the high-IP characters to go even faster.

It's an option for the underdogs, so to say.

Bye
Thanee
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Yerameyahu
post Apr 22 2012, 01:55 PM
Post #16


Advocatus Diaboli
**********

Group: Members
Posts: 13,994
Joined: 20-November 07
From: USA
Member No.: 14,282



*shrug* I prefer to think that every Turn has all 5 (or 4, but only for convenience) IPs… they're just hidden. Your interpretation limits this use of Edge in a very counterintuitive way.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
FriendoftheDork
post Apr 22 2012, 02:01 PM
Post #17


Running Target
***

Group: Members
Posts: 1,288
Joined: 4-September 06
From: The Scandinavian Federation
Member No.: 9,300



QUOTE (Thanee @ Apr 22 2012, 11:17 AM) *
Based on what?



Yes you can.



And that is stated where?

In fact, it is stated, that if noone has any extra IPs, the combat round isn't even divided into IPs.



Actually, yes it does. Because it does say, that you must spend it at the beginning of an IP. That requires, that the IP has begun. An IP does not begin, if noone has an action there. Hence, you cannot spend it to increase your number of IPs above the max. number present in the fight already (or 4, which is the hard cap for IPs unless some rule specifically allows more than 4, which is only possible in the Matrix currently).

Bye
Thanee


I see your "reasoning" there. But I disagree with it. It is not exlicitly said if you can or cannot gain 2 passes in a round where there are no one else with 2 passes, but I believe it IS allowed, as that is the most probable intent. If someone spends Edge to get an extra pass, that means that he has an extra pass.

In other words, you seem to argue that there can be no egg since there is no chicken. I beleive there can be a chicken if you get an egg.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Thanee
post Apr 22 2012, 02:09 PM
Post #18


jacked in
**********

Group: Admin
Posts: 9,087
Joined: 26-February 02
Member No.: 463



QUOTE (FriendoftheDork @ Apr 22 2012, 04:01 PM) *
I see your "reasoning" there. But I disagree with it. It is not exlicitly said if you can or cannot gain 2 passes in a round where there are no one else with 2 passes, ...


But if it were allowed, you would have to get to the beginning of a pass where noone has an action in.

So, to make it happen, you have to change how movement works, because you would then always have passes, that noone acts in, but everyone can move in, etc.

The OPs problem only occurs, if you allow to go over that IP limit, that I think is in place for a combat round.

That interpretation only provides problems, really, that you then have to invent rules for to do away with them.

QUOTE
If someone spends Edge to get an extra pass, that means that he has an extra pass.


Of course. The question is, can everyone in every situation do this, or only some in some situations?

QUOTE
In other words, you seem to argue that there can be no egg since there is no chicken. I beleive there can be a chicken if you get an egg.


But I have some pretty solid rules evidence, too, I might add. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

Bye
Thanee
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Yerameyahu
post Apr 22 2012, 02:15 PM
Post #19


Advocatus Diaboli
**********

Group: Members
Posts: 13,994
Joined: 20-November 07
From: USA
Member No.: 14,282



Even if 'solid rules evidence' trumped 'actually good functionality', this argument still hinges on the idea that a combat contains exactly as many IPs as the highest-IP actor contributes. I've never actually seen a rule for that (nor for what 'in the combat' means, etc.). However, that still doesn't matter, because the conclusions here is so wonky.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Thanee
post Apr 22 2012, 05:27 PM
Post #20


jacked in
**********

Group: Admin
Posts: 9,087
Joined: 26-February 02
Member No.: 463



QUOTE (Yerameyahu @ Apr 22 2012, 04:15 PM) *
Even if 'solid rules evidence' trumped 'actually good functionality', ...


I think it works absolutely fine that way.

QUOTE
...this argument still hinges on the idea that a combat contains exactly as many IPs as the highest-IP actor contributes. I've never actually seen a rule for that (nor for what 'in the combat' means, etc.).


Yep, that is right. It isn't really spelled-out anywhere in any precision. There are enough hints, though, that make it clear, that it can only be like that (i.e. you only have the IPs necessary to perform the highest amount of actions around). The above-quoted part, that you only get to divide the combat round when multiple IPs are present, is a very strong indicator for that. And then we have the whole movement divided by IP part.

QUOTE
However, that still doesn't matter, because the conclusions here is so wonky.


I do understand, what you mean. It might seem a little odd, that it does not apply to everyone, but I actually don't find it that strange, if you go by the reasoning I have posted above (i.e. Edge allows you to draw even, if you are the underdog, but does not allow the souped-up sammy to go even faster; he is not the one that needs luck there, after all).

Also, it does not have any serious rules repercussions, unlike the other method.

Bye
Thanee
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
FriendoftheDork
post Apr 22 2012, 09:13 PM
Post #21


Running Target
***

Group: Members
Posts: 1,288
Joined: 4-September 06
From: The Scandinavian Federation
Member No.: 9,300



QUOTE (Thanee @ Apr 22 2012, 04:09 PM) *
But if it were allowed, you would have to get to the beginning of a pass where noone has an action in.

So, to make it happen, you have to change how movement works, because you would then always have passes, that noone acts in, but everyone can move in, etc.

That interpretation only provides problems, really, that you then have to invent rules for to do away with them.

The OPs problem only occurs, if you allow to go over that IP limit, that I think is in place for a combat round.



Of course. The question is, can everyone in every situation do this, or only some in some situations?



But I have some pretty solid rules evidence, too, I might add. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

Bye
Thanee


I've already changed how movement work in my game, or simplified it I should say by always have 4 passes of movement. It fixes the problem you mentioned while suspending the disbelief in my case. I can see the argument for only having one pass if all combatants have 1 pass, to speed things up and not having multiple passes of "I continue to run 5 meters."

Of course everyone can spend Edge to gain an extra pass, as long as they have that Edge. If it were meant only to allow underdogs to get even with the sammies, it would say so in the rules for spending edge. There is a rule that you can't spend Edge to this in the middle of an IP, as that would mess things up in THAT pass. Apart from that restriction, there seem to be nothing else.

So no.. there is no solid rules evidence. If there were, the rules would specifically say you can only spend edge to gain a pass if there is someone in combat with you that has more than you. The only good reason for this interpretation is that movement rate will always be preset. Or will it? What if mr mage with 4 passes knocks himself out with a stunball in pass 1 in a combat where everyone else has 1 pass only? Does suddenly everyone move faster (just like everyone moves suddently slower if you extend the round with a pass with Edge)? What if grunt a and b had already moved 5 meters and were still waiting to do their complex action? Or does everything stay the same and we have 3 passes each turn where the combatants can only move?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Yerameyahu
post Apr 22 2012, 10:44 PM
Post #22


Advocatus Diaboli
**********

Group: Members
Posts: 13,994
Joined: 20-November 07
From: USA
Member No.: 14,282



It has the serious rule repercussion of *not* letting people use a basic function of edge half the time. That's wonky. Instead, it's so much simpler, easier, and sensible for Edge to let you get an IP under *all* circumstances (up to max, of course). So, given that there's *not* solid rules evidence, why borrow trouble? 'Edge is for pulling even' is something you made up, that's all. A fine house rule, if you want to limit the power of Edge in that way.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Udoshi
post Apr 23 2012, 05:45 AM
Post #23


Runner
******

Group: Members
Posts: 2,782
Joined: 28-August 09
Member No.: 17,566



QUOTE (FriendoftheDork @ Apr 21 2012, 11:37 AM) *
This is the houserule my group(s) use constantly. We found varying movement according to WHO is involved in a combat to be ludicrous. Sure, in a 1vs1 it makes sense: Bill with 3 passes can react and shoot before bob can run his full movement (regardless of bobs' # of passes), but just because there is a mage with 4 passes in the same combat fireballing someone else why would that give Bill even more time to shoot before bob can get close enough?

Hmm I don't have any conclusion to this, any comments?



I've a houserule I use to keep track of this insanity.

First, it EMBRACES the idea that there are four initiative passes all the time - none of this dividing by the combatants with the highest passes crap. There's always four passes, and you always divide by four.
Then, it takes that a step further, and changes all the walking/running rates to divisors of four. (Human/elf/ork goes to 8/24, dwarves to 8/20, trolls to either 12 or 16(walking)/32). Its still about the same, but now easier to do math.
Finally, the Combat Turn Time is adjusted to make it easier to think about. Continuing the trend, fractions are also dropped. Each Initiative Pass is now 1 second, making a combat turn Four seconds long.
The passes exist no matter what; each person with extra passes just gets opportunities to act in them.

Through the course of the turn, you proceed through the Initiative Score, Highest to Lowest(business as usual), then start the next phase, Repeat until done. again, unchanged.

How actual movement is handled is basically the same. On your Initiative Score/Action Phase you move your /4 movement rate right then during your turn- (we don't care if you want to shoot people before, after, or during your samurai gymnastic backflip - and you KEEP moving in subsequent passes.

So basically, the guy with one pass starts running for cover when the bullets start flying - and everyone with more than one pass can try to shoot him before he actually gets there. He moves 8 on pass 1, 8 more on pass 2, 8 more on pass 3, and by the time the turn is over he has moved his full movement rate.

The Action Types for moving are unchanged: Walking remains a Non-Action, Running is a Free, and Sprinting is a Simple.
Sprinting has a slight change: Instead of each hit adding two meters to the running rate for the turn, each hit adds half a meter to the current phases rate instead of the whole turns rate. Effectively, the 'divide by 4' trend is continued.

The benefit to getting more actions/more passes is that you can change what you're doing. The one-pass guy is stuck without a second turn, but the two-pass samurai can start running - or stop moving entirely - on their second go.


What this effectively does is
1) Cut down on Runners Powerwalking Faster Than Olympic Sprinters Syndrome, slightly
2) Makes combat turns a bit easier to grasp
3: Removes annoying fractions entirely to make things smoother.
4) Makes people with augmented reflexes actually able act/react/move faster

It you think about it, it works rather well and takes all of the argh out of the current system, while still providing a dynamic fluid combat system where people CAN intervene as the situation develops.



Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Yerameyahu
post Apr 23 2012, 05:57 AM
Post #24


Advocatus Diaboli
**********

Group: Members
Posts: 13,994
Joined: 20-November 07
From: USA
Member No.: 14,282



Exactly. Honestly, I'm not okay with 5-pass rigging anyway, so 4 passes is *always* enough for me. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Raiki
post Apr 23 2012, 06:02 AM
Post #25


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 233
Joined: 27-September 10
From: New York
Member No.: 19,080



Honestly, for simplicity's sake, my group has always completely ignored the "movement is by round, not pass" rules. Yeah, it makes movement over time seem a bit wonky if you pay attention, but we find that adding the extra bookkeeping detracts more fun than it adds.

Obviously not workable for tables requiring a high level of realism in their epic battles between Inspector Gadget, Zero Cool, Robocop, Gandalf, and a Lesbian-Elf-Stripper-Ninja.


~R~
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

2 Pages V   1 2 >
Reply to this topicStart new topic

 



RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 21st May 2024 - 01:45 AM

Topps, Inc has sole ownership of the names, logo, artwork, marks, photographs, sounds, audio, video and/or any proprietary material used in connection with the game Shadowrun. Topps, Inc has granted permission to the Dumpshock Forums to use such names, logos, artwork, marks and/or any proprietary materials for promotional and informational purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not affiliated with the Dumpshock Forums in any official capacity whatsoever.