Simulating Action Genre in PnP games - Help Needed

[Nomadic]

2pm CST is 12pm PST for me, that should work fine. I'll do my best to be on IRC (#thecbg channel of course) at that time if you'd like to talk about the concepts of such a combat system.

Certainly time limits are dependent upon the players in question but I still think some form of time limit would be a good way to force players to keep combat moving (it works quite effectively in other tabletop games like chess for example). I like your idea of keeping everything as a basic roll and it largely falls within my ideas for my system as well. Mine is based off guildschool (a very complex system but mine is a bit dumbed down) so each skill level gives a +x% to your success chance using that skill (it uses a d% for a majority of rolls). You might be level 4 in archery with each level giving you +1-4% in the skill and you rolled well at each level so you have a total of +12% (I'm not yet counting other things which can add bonus modifiers to this roll but they would follow the same basic concept) which means when you roll that d100 you subtract 12 from your roll. Like you said a little complex in the setup but once combat is going things are very basic. Additionally your opponent doesn't have an armor class but instead has a dodge/avoid/etc skill that subtracts from their defense roll. So they roll to answer your attack and if they roll under your roll they manage to avoid the actual blow. If not then you roll damage and they roll damage reduction based on any form of armor or other resistance they have.

[Xathan]

I'm so sorry I missed today, net's been down at home and just got it working again. Would another time work for you?

And that sounds like something I like, though I'm thinking about going d12 because it keeps the numbers smaller, makes each bonus matter much more, and no one's tried it before. A lot of what you described sounds like what I'm going for but I'm going to try and aim for even simpler - perhaps even absurdly simple, but I figure it's easier to build the system to be super simple while still having that satisfying crunch I love and then add complexity than the other way around.

[Nomadic]

Sure I'm pretty free. Tomorrow I will be in the CE game (starts at 1:30pm PST) but as I'm playing NPCs right now I could probably talk with you then on the main #thecbg channel if you want to catch me sometime around then.

[Xathan]

My schedule tomorrow is sporadic, since I work and have school but not consecutive, so I'll try and catch you when we're both on.

[Kindling]

you'll have individual skills that are broadly defined - "Grappling" for example, would be used to grab someone, disarm someone, and a few other things - and if a character comes up with something that isn't overly stated to be covered by one of the skills, it should be simple enough to figure out which skill most applies to what you're trying to do - if it involves grabbing someone or something their holding, it's grappling, if it involves moving someone from their current spot it's tripping, etc.

Reminds me a bit of Savage Worlds, with its even broader "fighting" and "shooting" skills.

[beejazz]

I haven't read everything here yet, but a few thoughts on rules nice for action.


Movement rules must make chase scenes work and be interesting. Fixed movement rates kind of kill chases without special effort. There may be a way to tie movement and initiative, and especially with sliding or tick initiative, actions to delay your foe or catch up could find use in both fights and chases. I don't yet know how you'd implement this.

If you've seen my game, it uses action types that include "reaction" and the ability to trade down. Calling for an active check to defend without limiting how often you can defend seems like just adding a roll to me. That said, static defense and a limited number of rolled "responses" might be cool, with "responses" not just as defense, but as real counters. Maybe a guy tries to hit you and you can try to trip or disarm him.

Also, reaction rules need to handle hostages.

Grappling will need to be different from D&D. In D&D, grappling also makes you grappled. My game has a "grab" option. You can grab a person without being grabbed (though they can grab back). Grabbing by itself doesn't do much beyond preventing movement, but it unlocks a bunch of other options, including pinning, throwing, dragging the guy with you as you move, or holding him hostage. And the action types for all these things are built so you can grab>somethingelse in one turn.

In-combat movement could be simplified without grid-based or fixed movement rates. Just make it a move action to close, disengage, or move to an adjacent zone ("zones" being things like "the stairs" or "that platform over there").

I know "rounds" are fast in the action genre, but I'd just allow one attack per round. Maybe allow a penalty for an "area" melee attack affecting everyone in combat with you. Maybe even an "area" ranged attack on given zones.


Unrelated: Count rolls per turn. More than two may be too many. My system is pretty crunchy, but when I added rolls for defense, I combined rolls for attack/damage. So for most turns it's still only two rolls per turn.

[Kindling]

one way of doing chases: http://www.peginc.com/Downloads/SWD/SWDUpdates_ChaseRules.pdf

I haven't tried it yet but it looks kind of nice on paper.

[Superfluous Crow]

Random ideas:

*What makes fight scenes work is the flow and you will have to simulate that in a way. Every move sets you up for another move, but combos are too cumbersome for rules-light games.    
*Maneuvers basically boil down to two categories: actions that put your opponent at a disadvantage and actions which give you the advantage. Let these two be the only possible actions and let players choose from a list of (dis)advantages (blinded, prone, high ground, unconscious, diarmed). It's a little freeform, but it can be put into a system I think.  
*Somebody mentioned reaction moves. Aside from a person's normal actions, he might get a free reaction/contingency move. Basically, he can state some specific event and associate it with a reaction. Like holding an action in D&D but everyone gets it. It could either be announced or hidden on a piece of paper to keep the DM unbiased.
[\list]
Another type of cinematic fighting style that might be worth emulating, in a way, would actually be the frenzied lightsaber duels from the new trilogy. Not to derail this thread by mentioning something good about the thrice-cursed precursors, but they are very frantic and dynamic with punches and kicks and jumps and dashes included in the fight choreography.

 

[beejazz]

one way of doing chases: http://www.peginc.com/Downloads/SWD/SWDUpdates_ChaseRules.pdf

I haven't tried it yet but it looks kind of nice on paper.

I was thinking this:

For the ticks system, say you've got a list from one to twenty. Roll high and get a high number, or roll low and get a low number. Actions are taken in turn and resolved as they are declared, same as in a standard turn-based system (no delays). Reactions would lower your number on the initiative list (taking effect next turn, in case you pass somebody) as would maneuvers meant to hinder you. Then, either something lets you rise back up or (my preference) sliding to the bottom loops you back up to the top. Because these changes don't take effect until the next round, even being knocked somewhere near the top can still delay your action.

For chase rules, checks are to keep up or get ahead. At this point, the initiative doubles as an abstract measure of distance. The guy in front can try to speed ahead, knock over obstacles, or even attack you in the hopes of getting ahead or knocking you back. The guy in the back can try catching up, evading obstacles, or shooting at the guy he's chasing in the hopes of slowing chased guy down or getting close. The fleeing guy can attempt a "disengage" check modified by his initiative (so the further ahead he is, the better his chance of losing his tail) while the chasing guy can more or less end the chase by attacking the fleeing guy (both grappling options and defense at the expense of initiative can help here).

I'm thinking in all cases that modify initiative, something should be rolled. Fixed init costs on defense would make defending a no brainer if you wouldn't lose your place in line or would make it something you absolutely shouldn't do if you will lose your place in line.

EDIT: The rules could also work for a "slow speed chase" where one character tails another. At this point all you need to do is maybe tack on stealth, bluffing, and noticing skills in place of the usual more athletic skills.

[Tillumni]

well, this is interesting, I've been trying to crunch out a system that fulfill the same purpose.

Instead of repeating what everybody else have said though, then I just have one suggestion for the system, taken from the rules I've been fiddling with.

You could remove the need for rolling for damage, and instead have damage be a set number, based on weapon, mode of attack, stat modifier and anything else that could be relevant, and then mutiplied by the margin of succes.

example, a melee hit have a damage rating of 5(weapon) + 2 (stat) = 7.
A succesfull hit with a margin of 2, would then inflict 2 x 7 = 14 damage. (damage here being a general term and doesn't neccesarely have to be straight hit points)

It would speed up a round, simple by removing the need for rolling and adding up the result.

This also allows highly skilled characters to take out several mooks with a serie of fast but low-powered attacks or using improviced weapon to great effect, since they'll be able to get a larger margin of succes, meaning that even a +2 bonus to damage from using a bottle, would lead to a significant increase in damage.