PDA

View Full Version : Flexible Action System



Derpaligtr
2018-06-11, 09:34 PM
I'm out.

Don't want to deal with this site anymore :smallsigh:

Knaight
2018-06-11, 10:35 PM
This looks like a pretty standard action point system - usually paired with either characters getting a variable amount of action points on their turn as a stat or tied directly into initiative, where spending action points moves you down the initiative chain by that much, until you get pushed into second and the new first person acts.

The almost metamagic like action extensions are a bit more novel, and look pretty cool, though there are a few points of weirdness in the specific numbers.

For tabletop games, there are some major downsides. The initiative-chain approach in particular can get incredibly finnicky, any method that involves defensive actions can still get finnicky quickly (the way you handle dodge makes this a non-issue in this particular case, but reactions and how they're handled have the potential to be interesting), and this can lead to particular combinations not working well. Groups of weak enemies and detailed action point tracking in particular have the potential to be messy.

There's also the matter of how this often ends up with lots of attacks per combatant per turn, which ends up with an excessive amount of die rolling. This can be avoided (e.g. by having enough points for about one medium action per turn, getting to store excess points for next turn, and thus getting to balance action points as a resource without throwing around tons of dice), but it's an easy trap to fall into. Similarly it's easy for a speed stat or similar to end up freakishly useful compared to all other stats.

Goaty14
2018-06-11, 11:42 PM
I can't quite see it, but how much MP is allotted to a player each turn?

Derpaligtr
2018-06-12, 09:32 AM
This looks like a pretty standard action point system - usually paired with either characters getting a variable amount of action points on their turn as a stat or tied directly into initiative, where spending action points moves you down the initiative chain by that much, until you get pushed into second and the new first person acts.

The almost metamagic like action extensions are a bit more novel, and look pretty cool, though there are a few points of weirdness in the specific numbers.

For tabletop games, there are some major downsides. The initiative-chain approach in particular can get incredibly finnicky, any method that involves defensive actions can still get finnicky quickly (the way you handle dodge makes this a non-issue in this particular case, but reactions and how they're handled have the potential to be interesting), and this can lead to particular combinations not working well. Groups of weak enemies and detailed action point tracking in particular have the potential to be messy.

There's also the matter of how this often ends up with lots of attacks per combatant per turn, which ends up with an excessive amount of die rolling. This can be avoided (e.g. by having enough points for about one medium action per turn, getting to store excess points for next turn, and thus getting to balance action points as a resource without throwing around tons of dice), but it's an easy trap to fall into. Similarly it's easy for a speed stat or similar to end up freakishly useful compared to all other stats.


Oh, initiative would definitely work like 5e. Your initiative order wouldn't actually change, you just wait to act and if your turn comes up again then you didn't act the last round.

Specific numbers aren't here yet. The numbers are just fillers.

I wouldn't want monsters to run off the same system as characters. Monsters and PCs have different expectations and goals for a game. Monsters should be set up as an encounter and not some sort of individual creature. A goblin can have stats and abilities, but it isn't like each goblin from an encounter would be a separate "thing". I already do this with D&D and it works quite well. The DM wouldn't be using this system, they would have monsters set up in advance that may use one or two tricks, but they wouldn't have the full compliment of options.

So Goblin-A may be able to dash or disengage each round while also attacking, but Goblin-B would only be able to attack and alter the rules in order to do so silently with MP.


At the end of the day, no one would really get more than 2 attacks (or spells) plus maybe an Opportunity Attack in between turns. Which is pretty much what happens in D&D a lot of the time.

Thanks for your input :)


I can't quite see it, but how much MP is allotted to a player each turn?

Totally haven't got that far.

Also, don't take the numbers literally. They are place holders.

I'm thinking of keeping numbers relatively low, how much MP you get and how much abilities cost, just for simplicity.