[Rq-rules] Re: Mongoose SRD

[Styopa]

Actually, I use something similar in my game and it works really well.
I have 3 SR ratings: Reach, Quickness, Reaction
Reach: SIZ/10 (round 5's down).
Quickness: DEX/6 (round 3's down).
Reaction: 8 minus (average of Int & Dex, divided by 6)
And 2 values for each weapon, reflecting length & speed

Init is d20 + Reach + weapon length.  Highest goes first (yes, this tends to
mean that people with weapons tend to react quicker; personally, I like
this)

People with quick weapons generally want to close, which then means both
combatants substitute quickness for reach, and weapon speed for length.
(Essentially, attackers can declare a 'closing' action, giving the defender
an automatic 1 category improvement on their attack roll (misses become
hits, etc.); defenders can declare 'fending' which REDUCES the category of
their hit by 1, and keeps the fighting at 'reach' as long as they can step
back one hex.  More to it, but that's the simple version.)

Want to change an action from what you declared?  Declare your new action,
and subtract (reaction + 1d6) from your current init.  That's your new
init.  If it's <0, you don't act this round.  I use rolling rounds, so you
can change your action for free for the next round, or continue and act
immediately on 20+(your negative init number).
I've even toyed with using different initiative dice (d20's out in the open,
and going lower as the space is more constricted, d12 in a tavern, for
example, d8 in a tight little cave where there's very little moving about).
The players seemed to like it.  Init became more important than luck, so (in
the couple of times we've done it) seen more 'closing' in tight little
fights.
And yes, this also means that spells tend to go off near the ends of rounds,
which both fits mine and my players' expectations.

I have a whiteboard behind me when I DM, so it's an easy matter to keep
track of:
statement of intent order (reverse by INT)
inits for everyone (I don't usually put up the enemy's however)

YMMV of course.


On 10/16/06, Bruce Mason <mason.bruce at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I wasn't involved in playtesting but looking at the proposed rules,
> I'm not surprised they dropped them because they fall apart the minute
> you think about them. If a character has 3 different strike rank
> modifiers then what happens if he uses a magic action for his first
> action  and then a combat one for the next one. What about delays or
> changes of mind? At the very least you have to remember what the d10
> roll was so that you can recalculate each time. That and consider
> having to write three numbers where one can do. There is a niche of
> roleplayer who looks that level of detail in the rules but it is only
> a small minority.
> _______________________________________________
> RQ-Rules mailing list
> RQ-Rules at crashbox.com
> http://crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.thinbits.net/pipermail/rq-rules/attachments/20061016/0411d753/attachment.html