alrighty, let's see how well I can answer these....
But it took us 2.5 hours to kill that single foe with 5 players in 3 combat rounds, in fact with a single blow (type VI critical hit). Everything before that was administrating initiative and how and how not a player has to declare actions, how to abort and how to resolve them. Some characters had to traverse 100 yards to the combat scene (of COURSE they split up!), so all they did in that 2.5 hours was trying to reach the action.
Sounds like there was a lot of "being unsure" of how things handled and that this may have bogged things down a bit.
Normally, I don't go into tactical mode (i.e. combat rounds) until the players are close enough to think about attacking.
For example, I would not go into combat rounds until they were entering the house (unless somebody was shooting or casting spells at them from the house).
As for Movement -- I can see that I have some oddities there in the list of declarable actions. Base Movement is 10' as a Snap Action, and a Base Run (2x Base Move, -2 to all other actions) is also a Snap Action.
But as a Full Action, I have 5 x Base Move (50' on average), and only 3x Base Run (60' on average). THe multipliers should be the same (i.e. 5 x Base Run, wiht -10 to other actions done while running)
Somehow some players couldn't understand how to declare an action without knowing if that action could actually be resolved (for example, "How do I know what to do in the future when Bob is blocking the entrance NOW?"). So the lack of a "waiting action" was a big hurdle for my players - an option they are used to from basically every other RPG.
When they are unfamiliar with the system, I normally tell players to "Tell me what you want to do this round" and then work out the possible actions with them - which helps to teach them how to do this themselves...
So, delcaring actions, it is set up so that the slower characters declare first, that way the faster ones realize what they are doing and can adjust their actions.
One thing a lot of folks seem to have issue wrapping their heads around is that this is all happening at the same time and technically, the players will not know what the other players are doing and should declare their action on what they can see NOW, not what they thinks others will do in the future.
If Bob is blocking that doorway now, then what are you going to do? Run up behind Bob and see if you can get around him Push him out of the way? go through a window instead?
It sounds like your players are used to micro-mapping out their actions in advance, which is not always possible.
But I do think the lack of a waiting action could be a problem. Tthere are indeed situations possible where you can do nothing at all.. yet.. and then lose your turn.
Waiting Action -- I refer you to "Holding an Action" on page 57.
In the description for that, it says they declare as normal and then hold, losing a Snap Action for the round. You can do that without making them declare as well....
What I can say as a GM there are a few things that I think are problematic, though
- I don't think it's possible to have a smooth start with only one rule book at hand as it's too much to teach all that in a single adventure. If your players are already sceptical, you can't make a good first impression.
Fair assessment, I would say since you have actually tried it.
- handling a single initiative list is ok, but handling an additional dynamic initiative list where combatants switch places with every attack they do is just too much. So I ignored this instantly (because I knew this would brake my short-term memory).
Ok, now in here, I made some assumptions that may have not come through in the writing.
1) There should only be one initiative list per combat.
2) Players should track any adjustments to their own IP (Initiative Point) themselves and let the GM know when they are acting before or after their normal init.
- remembering all the actions of all combatants before they're resolved is much to ask. It's possible but exhausting on a permanent basis. At least the players should be able to remember their OWN actions.
Agreed, they should.
- thers is no way to make NPCs quick&dirty. I think one get used to it with more experience in the system (so just guessing character values), but it would be nice to have a quick system to make NPCs with just the most necessary values and still know their XP Value.
Start with their Point Values -- a 100 CP NPC will have a maximum of 5 ranks in any given skill. Unless they are exceptional in some way, they have have a stat of 2 across the board (adjusted by race). So, the max bonus for any skill roll will be a +7 (adjusted by race).
You have a 150 point NPC? Max skill ranks will be 8 (and then the stats...)
Remember, a character can only have 1 rank for every 20 CP or XP (or portion thereof) that the character has.
So, a 100 divided by 20 = 5 ranks; 101 to 120 divided by 20 = 6 ranks; 121 to 140 divided 20 = 7 ranks, and so on and so on...
Ok, so my Sage is a 220 point Sage. This means that he will have 11 ranks at most in his best skills (his chosen Lores), and since he is not a Fighter, say only a third of that in a combat skill, so 3 ranks in a weapon skill, but since he grew up poor, we will give him another 3 ranks in dagger (Short Blades, actually).
And he is human, so that is a strait 2 across the board on stats, which gives him a 4 across the board for Secondary Stats (Init, Save bonuses, etc..)
quick and dirty.... tah dah.... heheh
- without a digital character sheet Roll 20 (or any VTT) is a huge detriment to the system. There are around 10 dynamic numbers that can change in an instant (Init, 3 stuns, 3 wounds, hits, bleeding, penalty, fate...). With pen&paper this is doable (hail to the combat tracking sheet) but on PC, it's dizzying. I think Novus works best at the table (that's how I like it).
It was designed for the tabletop, not for a VTT. (and I have no idea how to make a character sheet for a VTT, so it is unlikely to get one soon)
The question is: What's the necessity to have three different kinds of wounds and stuns? What does it bring to the table that 1 Wound and 1 Stun level (like Savage Worlds for exmaple) doesn`t?
I wanted to add in some sort of critical system, but I could not make it exactly like another system did it.
If you don't want to use Wounds, then just ignore them.
So Patches the Dwarven Rogue would, instead of having 44 Hits and 7/5/3 Wounds would have 59 Hits (44 + 7 + 5 + 3 = 59), and a Bash IV Crit would just to a -2 Penalty and delivier 1 round of Stagger (no Wound Damage).
Or!
Think of them as you "below zero" Hits....
Going back to Patches with his 44 Hits. Once those 44 are gone, every 3 hits removes one of the 7, every 5 hits removes one of the 5, and every 7 Hits removes one of the 3 (i.e. if an attack delivers 11 Hits, that would mean it does a Dire and a Minor (11 - 7 = 4 - 3 = 1)
THe only really solid rules are the ones YOU decide to use!! There is no wrong way to have fun!
- the movement distances can be VERY long (3x Base Run). So when declaring actions everyone is counting hexes or measuring distances on a basis where everyone COULD BE to decide what to do for a few minutes or so. This felt a bit like a tedious TableTop game.
When delcaring actions, unless the PCs are talking to one another,
- my players were showered in Fate Points (every roll has the potential to generate one), so TN 15 usually was too easy to achieve, as they simply bought bonuses. I know that awarding Fate Points "is an art of itself" but as a GM you don't have much influence on the outcome of rolls.
How so? They start with a few, and they earn one when they roll two 1's, two 10's, or a 1 and a 10 on the dice. They also only earn them when their total roll is some multiple of 10 points over the TN of the action.
Thus is the TN is a 16, they have to get a total of 26 to earn 1 FP, 36 to earn two, or 46 to earn 3.
The idea is also that they do NOT earn Fate Points on rolls affected by Fate Points.
Outside of the dice mechanics, you essentially only want to award Fate Points if they have less then 10, and then only in special circumstances (i.e. the player come up with a super crazy idea and while it did not work, everybody enjoyed the hell out of it, so I give him a Fate Point when I am awarding CP for the adventure.
- with Full Parry you're set to pull of a fumble as you only get +0 AB (~50%+ chance to fumble!). The solution my players used to get to this problem was just "not attacking at all" and I don't think that's the intention of the combat move Full Parry.
You only Fumble if you roll 1 on both dice. But, players also have an equal chance of rolling 10 on each die as well, so the Fumble/SuperNova roll balances out (and that is what the roll is for, to see if there is some extraordinary happenstance in either direction. Otherwise, they have moved all AB to DT, so they are unlikely to hit the foe without the SuperNova roll.
The roll is for exatraoridinary circumstances. If it is not double 1's or double 10's, you can ignore the results of the roll.
Basically, there is always the chance that you will fall on your sword or that you foe will fall on it...
Fun example -- playing in a game one with a similar full parry rule... was trying to take foe alive... and got the equivalent of a Super Nova roll. GM described it as "You go to Parry, and the foe stumbles, falling onto your blade, killing him instantly"
Conversely, I have also Fumbled while doien a Full Pary and had it described as "You parry the orc, and his strike was so powerful that it knocked the weapon out of your hand.
What I am saying is that the dice roll itself should NOT be considered to affect the Parry itself (you still get the bonus to DT, regardless), it is meant to reflect the possibilities of good or bad things happening WHILE parrying.
As a side note:
What bugs me, just in this single combat scene several new questions came up that I couldn't answer with the book or primer.
- can a move action be splitted? (move->attack->move)
No. That would be two Move actions
And Note 2 on page 54 says only a single Move/Run Action per round.
Now, I do have Combat Moves (not released yet) that allow for attacking WHILE moving....
- how exact has an action declaration to be?
Your game - so as exact as you want it to be.
Your style of play is not my style of play, and it is not Fidoric's style of play. The whole point is that the "rules" are not meant to be set in stone, but to give you structure around which to hang your style of play.
For example, all that hassle about movement, If a player tells me that they want to move to the foe. I take a quick look (just a rough look, NOT counting hexes) at the distance and reply, "That will take you a Full action for the round, what you wanna do with your remaining Snap Action? Do a quick Perception to see if you can figure out what the others are doing?
Or, you are about 100' away. I will let you get there THIS round, but you cannot do anything else until next round and you will not even be aware of what else is going on while you are dashing to that spot.
The "rules" are not written in stone.
- can I get past allies in combat ("walking through them")?
Up to you. Personally, I might allow it, but might also say that it can joggle their elbow, giving them a minus to their action as you move past. It depends on the situation (i.e. is there enough space for them to pass through easily, versus not (like somebody standing in a doorway.
- when buying actions with Fate points, when do you have to pay the cost (when declaring, when acting? can I buy an action ahead and then just drop it for no cost?
Fate Points affect rolls MUST be spent before the roll is made. Yes, there is a chance doing so and then you roll a SuperNova and the FP is wasted...
When you spend a Fate Point, you get the results right away (or as close to right away depending on the action).
Now, if you are declaring actions for the round, and a player says, I am going to attack him and use a Fate Point. Then that is just stating intention. They have not actually spent it yet since they have not actually begun the action that it would affect.
I.e. I am going to use a fate point get an explosive roll to my DT (this happens when delclared, regardless of whether they get attacked or not, since DT applies for the full round.
But, if 3 PCs go at the same time, and the one uses a Fate Point on his attack roll, and then you decide that of the three, the one using the FP actually goes last, and the foe dies before you get to him rolling his attack, that FP is already spent since the "attack" has already begun, even though he had to wait to roll.
Does that make sense?
- Is there a limit of 10 Fate points when accumulating Fate points by rolls?
No, only on what the GM awards. Fate Points earned from dice mechanics may always be received. And then as GM, you should always encourage their use too... heheh.
And bad guys can have Fate Points as well...
- when using stealth against several guards, do you roll against all guards seperately (making the stealth action almost impossible to acomplish?) or does the whole group make a related skill bonus for perception?
Personally, to keep things moving smoothly, I would have the roll be against the Guard with the highest Perception, as if anybody is going to notice it will be that guy.
I wouldn't even use the Related Skill Bonus since the others are not specifically "aiding" the one with the best bonus.
However, If I have a Rogue trying to sneak past 5 guards, I might make the Player's TN be higher, and then have him roll.
If we look at the Opposed Roll example on page 96, I might make the PC's TN be a 21 (18 + Minor Complication) against the Guards. Just as it being a dark and stormy night might be a Major Advantage (+5 to roll OR -5 to TN (doppring it to 16)) for the PC....
- the combat move block lets you add Reflex (two primary stats) + AB (skill rank + primary stat) to the roll. So the block adds three primary stats to the role. This is a huge bonus which the opponent doesn't have, make it almost certain for a good fighter to block everything.
I think you are missing something here....
Let's look at the Pre-Gens Patches and Tyln (a Warrior).
Patches is making an attack, he has an AB of 8 with his Broadsword. Tyln is trying to block with his Long Sword (8 AB).
ok, so for the block, Tyln has a total bonus of 14 (8 AB + 6 Reflexes), and he has to make a Saving Roll against a TN of 18 (10 + 8 AB).
Ok, so Tyln rolls a 13, which gives him more than enough and the attack Patches made strikes Tyln's Long sword and does no damage
- does the blocked foe still gets his attack when blocked? A player can earn FATE points, for an NPCs its obsolete, imho.
The Block is a RESPONSE to an attack. If there is no attack, there cannot be a block.....
Block Versus ParryI know you did not ask, but there are differences...
Block -- Stops attack from hitting, period. No chance of earning Fate Point (since it involves a Saving Roll)
Parry -- attempts to deflect attack, can still be hit and damaged, can still earn Fate Points from roll
- damage and wounds, the rulebook says "round down" when counting hits for wound. So when I get hit with 4 damage with 0 hits and 0 minor wounds, I get no major wound at all?
Did we not have this conversation, back in May?
www.firehawkgames.biz/index.php?topic=19226.msg19602 The round down part if for if you get more hits then the base required....
If you have 0 Hits, and 0 Minor Wounds, 3 Major Wounds, and 1 Dire Wound, and you then take 4 hits, I would round that to the nearest whole increment (I need to add this to errata too).
so 3-7 hits would be rounded to 1 Major wound, 9-12 would be 2 Major wounds, etc..
There are still 2 to 3 sessions to come but I feel I'm already loosing my players interest. The next combat has to rock!
Let's make it happen!!!!
