Initiative/action declaration
Posted: Sun Jun 22, 2014 5:51 pm
Hey all. I'm trying to build an initiative system for a game where the players and antagonists are all robots. One of the things I want to be supported by the system is spending actions on defense - dodging or blocking. I also want speed to be a real advantage for characters.
To support both of these goals at the same time, I'm trying to decide on two axes how to handle turn order:
The four options then are as follows:
Init-order declaration, immediate resolution: The only choice that allows you to fell an enemy "before they have time to react." Strengths: simulates Clint Eastwood pistol duels where the faster man doesn't take a scratch if he has better aim. Weaknesses: slower characters can be dogpiled and killed in one round without having a chance to do anything. Not fun if it's a PC.
Init-order declaration, delayed resolution: Strengths: Everyone gets an action even if they take enough damage to be KO'd in one round. Weaknesses: Slow characters have a better understanding of the evolving tactical situation than fast ones, who have to basically act blindly. Allowing delayed initiative basically turns this into reverse-init order. Requires an order of operations among distinct action types or is either 1) functionally indistinguishable from immediate resolution or 2) an impossible mess (e.g. how do you adjudicate a round in which the same character is subject to both Poison and Cure Poison?).
Reverse init order declaration, immediate resolution: Strengths: None, this is fucking retarded. Weaknesses: Slow characters can kill fast characters before they have a chance to react. This pretty much is the exact opposite of the idea of "giving an advantage to speed."
Reverse init order declaration, delayed resolution: Strengths: Everyone gets an action no matter what, faster characters have a better tactical view of the battle than slower characters, who act blindly. Weaknesses: requires an order of operations.
I'm definitely leaning towards reverse init order declaration with delayed resolution, with occasional modification for things like surprise/sneak attacks where opponents are caught flatfooted.
I'm worried that I haven't fully considered the implications of the different approaches. Does anyone have any thoughts/comments/criticism to offer?
To support both of these goals at the same time, I'm trying to decide on two axes how to handle turn order:
- 1) initiative order declaration versus reverse initiative order declaration for turns and
2) delayed resolution of the effects of actions until the end of a round versus immediate resolution following declaration.
The four options then are as follows:
Init-order declaration, immediate resolution: The only choice that allows you to fell an enemy "before they have time to react." Strengths: simulates Clint Eastwood pistol duels where the faster man doesn't take a scratch if he has better aim. Weaknesses: slower characters can be dogpiled and killed in one round without having a chance to do anything. Not fun if it's a PC.
Init-order declaration, delayed resolution: Strengths: Everyone gets an action even if they take enough damage to be KO'd in one round. Weaknesses: Slow characters have a better understanding of the evolving tactical situation than fast ones, who have to basically act blindly. Allowing delayed initiative basically turns this into reverse-init order. Requires an order of operations among distinct action types or is either 1) functionally indistinguishable from immediate resolution or 2) an impossible mess (e.g. how do you adjudicate a round in which the same character is subject to both Poison and Cure Poison?).
Reverse init order declaration, immediate resolution: Strengths: None, this is fucking retarded. Weaknesses: Slow characters can kill fast characters before they have a chance to react. This pretty much is the exact opposite of the idea of "giving an advantage to speed."
Reverse init order declaration, delayed resolution: Strengths: Everyone gets an action no matter what, faster characters have a better tactical view of the battle than slower characters, who act blindly. Weaknesses: requires an order of operations.
I'm definitely leaning towards reverse init order declaration with delayed resolution, with occasional modification for things like surprise/sneak attacks where opponents are caught flatfooted.
I'm worried that I haven't fully considered the implications of the different approaches. Does anyone have any thoughts/comments/criticism to offer?