Welcome! These forums will be deactivated by the end of this year. The conversation continues in a new morph over on Discord! Please join us there for a more active conversation and the occasional opportunity to ask developers questions directly! Go to the PS+ Discord Server.

Reactions to 3rd Printing: Initiative

77 posts / 0 new
Last post
Mon, 2011-06-13 08:10
Albertorius Albertorius's picture
Re: Reactions to 3rd Printing: Initiative
crizh wrote:
By using a system where the more skilled guy has a higher average MoS? Imagine the guy with 90 is Andy Murray and the 99 is Roger Federer. We simulate a Wimbledon final with an opposed test for each game. We total modifiers for superior equipment, stress, injury and/or distraction and each ends up with a +10. Over the fifty odd games in a Grand Slam final using my system Federer wins five or six more games than Murray and wins 99% of the matches. Using the current system Murray wins HALF the matches. Murray might be number 4 in the world but he is 2 or 3% behind the number 1 in terms of skill. He'll obliterate most opposition but until he improves that last little bit he will NEVER win a major tournament.
Well, if the problem is diferentiating really high effective skills of up to 100 so that higher skills/end values matter more, how about adding the upscale (or a fraction of it, like half or whatever) to the actual dice roll, up to a maximum of 98? For example: I have skill 90 with a +20 circunstance, and some guy has 80 with a +20 circunstance, so final values are 110 and 100. Let's say that I get to add to my actual roll half the quantity above 100 of my effective skill (rounding down). That way, I'll have a +5 bonus on average over the other guy. Just messin' around, mind you ^_^
Top
Mon, 2011-06-13 12:28
crizh crizh's picture
Re: Reactions to 3rd Printing: Initiative
Gee4orce wrote:
or allows you to confidently attempt advanced moves
What? Like 'Upgrading Status'? This is precisely my point, you cannot confidently predict your minimum MoS under the current system. Well other than it is going to be at least one.
—
Trust the Computer. The Computer is your friend.
Top
Mon, 2011-06-13 12:41
crizh crizh's picture
Re: Reactions to 3rd Printing: Initiative
Gee4orce wrote:
the real world stats for the two players are the Murray has actually won 50.6% of the games, 50% of the sets, and 61% of the matches.
Blushes. Poor research on my part. You understand the point clearly enough. Replace Federer with whoever is currently the number 1 seed and my point stands. The stat's you quote do make interesting reading however. A 0.6% swing in number of games won results in an 11% swing in overall victories. This demonstrates how important it is to be able to differentiate even the smallest skill differences between competitors at the higher levels of skill. To have a system that simply ceases to make any differentiation at all beyond a certain level of competence is at best irritating and at worst completely destroys the game. Imagine you spend months playing through Star Wars as Luke. You finally reach the point where you are battling Vader on Death Star II. Two of the best Lightsaber fencers in the whole galaxy face to face at last and the GM says; 'OK guys, flip a coin. Heads Luke wins, tails Vader does.' A bit anti-climactic for my taste. While luck and tactics should play their part, all things being equal, superior skill should always triumph in the end.
—
Trust the Computer. The Computer is your friend.
Top
Mon, 2011-06-13 13:54
bblonski bblonski's picture
Re: Reactions to 3rd Printing: Initiative
crizh wrote:
'OK guys, flip a coin. Heads Luke wins, tails Vader does.'
You wouldn't leave the showdown between Luke and Vader to a single roll. Let's be honest, if it was really that important, you'd draw it out as a whole scene in the adventure. That's why we have lots of complicated rules for combat. Saying that you would resolve a battle with a single coin flip is completely ignoring a whole chapter of the rules. You would probably simulate a tennis tournament similar to combat as well, with each volley a set of rolls. If my character was a world champion tennis player and the tournament was important to the story, then I'd be awfully disappointing with it ending in a single roll even if the roll appropriately adjusted for my advanced skill level. What if I just happen to roll bad? Do I lose the tournament just because I rolled low (with the errata rules) and my opponent happened to roll high? Or does that just put me at a temporary disadvantage (say -20 for being off balance. A penalty I can negate with my skill above 100). A single roll has way too much variability to assign the result of an entire conflict. Yes, it's still a problem, but it's not as big of a problem as you make it out to be since the conflict is unlikely to end in one roll. Hopefully at some point in the conflict the characters are actually challenged and can come up with strategies that can affect the outcome instead of leaving it completely up to chance. I just realized something. The original rules largely ignored skills over 100 as well. You would have a larger MoS if you won, but it would still be a coin toss since you still had to beat your opponent's roll and there is no way to roll above 100. So it's broken either way. I guess that's an argument for fixed TNs.
Top
Mon, 2011-06-13 15:41
Yerameyahu Yerameyahu's picture
Re: Reactions to 3rd Printing: Initiative
Given that Luke is a whiny half-trained child, Vader would have won if you're silly enough to let skill ratings determine the outcome of high drama. ;) crizh, I think the Upgrading Status issue is muddied by the fact that you're screwed anyway. All the active defender has to do is succeed (MoS 0 ) and you're barred from Hidden Status (and Covert)… no matter what you roll. It's totally out of your hands. :( Right? I agree that the GM should allow the 'Aim High' style of modifier for Intrusion tests, exactly as it's allowed for Security/Admin access.
Top
Mon, 2011-06-13 17:28
crizh crizh's picture
Re: Reactions to 3rd Printing: Initiative
bblonski wrote:
You wouldn't leave the showdown between Luke and Vader to a single roll.
My point is that if both parties have a modified skill that has edged over 100 it does not matter how many rolls you make it boils down to a coin toss. The probability of one guy defeating the other, all other things being equal, is exactly 50/50. If Luke's modified skill is 100 and Vader's is 159 Luke still wins half the time.
—
Trust the Computer. The Computer is your friend.
Top
Mon, 2011-06-13 19:39
The Demon Code The Demon Code's picture
Re: Reactions to 3rd Printing: Initiative
crizh wrote:
We simulate a Wimbledon final with an opposed test for each game. We total modifiers for superior equipment, stress, injury and/or distraction and each ends up with a +10.
You seem fixated with giving everyone a +10 modifier, even in situations where it makes no sense (or else tennis equipment is really, really good and tennis is really all about who has the best equipment). As you are obviously eyeballing the numbers instead of trying to go for any sort of realism, perhaps you should simply switch to a standard -10 modifier? Then all your problems with the current TN system would go away and you would be happy like me :D.
Top
Mon, 2011-06-13 19:44
Yerameyahu Yerameyahu's picture
Re: Reactions to 3rd Printing: Initiative
crizh: Yup. (None of this is about Initiative, still. Hehe.) And I don't think anyone disagrees that that's a particular artifact of the mechanic. Some people disagree that it's a problem. Also, in that example, Vader could make use of Called Shots more reliably, use Full Defense less (Parrying), wield a two-handed weapon in one hand, etc. If you're setting up an example that doesn't take advantage of any of that, big surprise that it doesn't work out.
Top
Mon, 2011-06-13 19:45
The Demon Code The Demon Code's picture
Re: Reactions to 3rd Printing: Initiative
crizh wrote:
bblonski wrote:
You wouldn't leave the showdown between Luke and Vader to a single roll.
My point is that if both parties have a modified skill that has edged over 100 it does not matter how many rolls you make it boils down to a coin toss. The probability of one guy defeating the other, all other things being equal, is exactly 50/50. If Luke's modified skill is 100 and Vader's is 159 Luke still wins half the time.
:)
Mark Twain wrote:
The best swordsman in the world doesn’t need to fear the second best swordsman in the world; no, the person for him to be afraid of is some ignorant antagonist who has never had a sword in his hand before; he doesn’t do the thing he ought to do, and so the expert isn’t prepared for him; he does the thing he ought not to do; and it often catches the expert out and ends him on the spot.
Top
Tue, 2011-06-14 03:41
The Demon Code The Demon Code's picture
Re: Reactions to 3rd Printing: Initiative
Yerameyahu wrote:
crizh: Yup. (None of this is about Initiative, still. Hehe.) And I don't think anyone disagrees that that's a particular artifact of the mechanic. Some people disagree that it's a problem. Also, in that example, Vader could make use of Called Shots more reliably, use Full Defense less (Parrying), wield a two-handed weapon in one hand, etc. If you're setting up an example that doesn't take advantage of any of that, big surprise that it doesn't work out.
This may be your point but, if you watch TESB, you will note that Vader: a) does use his two handed weapon in one hand, and b) makes use of a called shot to disarm Luke :). And, as a side note, Luke totally won in ROTJ by blowing all his moxie while Vader was out (having foolishly wasted it on psi and persuade tests):
Spoiler: Highlight to view
Luke got angry and charged Vader (-10, +1d10 dmg) but Vader had a delayed action to receive the charge (+20). Luke however spent a point of moxie on his defensive Bladed Weapon (Lightsaber) roll to score a crit. Vader didn't have the moxie to counter and didn't roll a crit, so he got knocked down (giving Luke the superior position). Luke then used the superior position (+20) and made a called shot (-10) at Vader's wrist (very small -30, this may be a house rule). He succeeded and also spent a second point of moxie on this roll to crit. Vader didn't roll a crit on his defensive Bladed Weapon (Lightsaber) roll and didn't have any moxie left, so he took damage. Luke then rolled enough damage to take Vader's hand off, ending the fight.
Also, in regards to the new initiative system. Most people only roll initiative once, however if you roll it every round, the new system is much faster, so I like it. Edited: Because once again I hit save instead of preview. Edited Again: To add Luke vs. Vader thoughts.
Top
Mon, 2011-06-13 20:14
bblonski bblonski's picture
Re: Reactions to 3rd Printing: Initiative
crizh wrote:
If Luke's modified skill is 100 and Vader's is 159 Luke still wins half the time.
Well, no. You're ignoring things like initiative, durability, wounds, the fray skill, etc. First round Luke get's lucky hit and Vader takes a wound. He now has a -10 for his wound, putting him at 149. Next round Vader gets a swing in. Since Luke isn't nearly as armored or has as much durability he takes two wounds and loses a hand. He now has a -20 penalty putting him at 80 vs 149. You have a legitimate point, but you're applying the rules in ways to make the problem look bigger than it is. Chances are that the character with the higher skill will still come out in the end. Plus, smart characters will use tactics to improve their chances. For example, you could turn out the lights so everyone has a -30 blind attack penalty.
Top
Mon, 2011-06-13 20:15
Yerameyahu Yerameyahu's picture
Re: Reactions to 3rd Printing: Initiative
See, I don't see why it's faster, let alone 'much'. d100 versus d10? Adding 60 instead of 6?
Top
Mon, 2011-06-13 20:46
The Demon Code The Demon Code's picture
Re: Reactions to 3rd Printing: Initiative
Yerameyahu wrote:
See, I don't see why it's faster, let alone 'much'. d100 versus d10? Adding 60 instead of 6?
Honestly? Poor math skills :). It just seems easier for most people to add the smaller numbers. And people had to correct others when they got the math wrong, and then the first person had to stop and recalculate to see if the person correcting them was right. Also, not everyone ended up with nice round numbers in the old system so you had things like 48+78. Also, you had to sort out the crits. Of course if you are only rolling initiative once a combat, then the added overhead doesn't matter that much. But if you are rolling it every round, and you have 5 or 6 rounds, the new system saves a lot of time.
Top
Mon, 2011-06-13 21:17
Yerameyahu Yerameyahu's picture
Re: Reactions to 3rd Printing: Initiative
Ha! Well okay then. Maybe use a calculator…
Top
Tue, 2011-06-14 02:32
bblonski bblonski's picture
Re: Reactions to 3rd Printing: Initiative
Has anyone had much experience with the new initiative rules? I haven't had a chance to see how they work in play. Are ties common?
Top
Tue, 2011-06-14 03:34
The Demon Code The Demon Code's picture
Re: Reactions to 3rd Printing: Initiative
bblonski wrote:
Has anyone had much experience with the new initiative rules? I haven't had a chance to see how they work in play. Are ties common?
Ties seem to happen fairly often. They are easy to resolve though, simply resolve the actions in any order, ignoring the results of the previous action or actions when resolving any subsequent simultaneous actions (except for moxie expenditures). Example: Vash and Revy are about to fight. They tie on initiative. Revy is going to fast draw her twin heavy rail pistols and run to point blank range while unloading four +1d10 damage burst into Vash. He is luck and only takes 2 wounds from the attacks. Vash is going to fast draw his Heavy pistol and take a called shot to disable Revy without killing her while also running for cover. Since they tied, Vash doesn't get the point blank bonus and doesn't take the wounds penalties this action. Just like Revy's turn didn't happen. See, Easy :).
Top
Tue, 2011-06-14 04:19
Gee4orce Gee4orce's picture
Re: Reactions to 3rd Printing: Initiative
But with Luke v. Vader in TESB, they battle in semi-darkness, on a narrow windy gantry, and vader is deploying psychological and Force attacks on Luke. So even if Luke had Lightsaber:100 (and I very much doubt that), and Vader had 160 (maybe in his prime, but not as a cripple) - the mitigating circumstances mean that Luke's affectively rolling against skill ~ 60% and Vader is still toting 98% (the max). I'm happy with the rules as written - If you're not then, hell, they are CC licensed so download the Hack Pack and publish a version with your alternate system…
Top
Tue, 2011-06-14 09:51
Yerameyahu Yerameyahu's picture
Re: Reactions to 3rd Printing: Initiative
See, to me, dealing with ties in that sort of 'Many Worlds' way isn't easy. It's not insurmountable, but it's a messy concept. I'd just as soon have the finer-grained score prevent the tie altogether, instead of dividing reality into multiple forks. :) -- I'm going to go ahead and make the new thread to discuss the core mechanic, because it's clear that people still want to talk about that, me included. :) (http://www.eclipsephase.com/reactions-3rd-printing-blackjack-and-core-te...)
Top
Tue, 2011-06-14 09:51
CodeBreaker CodeBreaker's picture
Re: Reactions to 3rd Printing: Initiative
Yerameyahu wrote:
See, to me, dealing with ties in that sort of 'Many Worlds' way isn't easy. It's not insurmountable, but it's a messy concept. I'd just as soon have the finer-grained score prevent the tie altogether, instead of dividing reality into multiple forks. :)
Agreed. I never liked simultaneous actions. We always just had ties roll another d100 until someone came out ahead. They went first, and then the loser went next. Simultaneous actions suck. (Note, this is only really helpful when you use the simplified initiative optional rule. Otherwise it just becomes a mess of rolling when people start taking wounds.)
—
-
Top
Tue, 2011-06-14 10:54
crizh crizh's picture
Re: Reactions to 3rd Printing: Initiative
crizh wrote:
While LUCK and TACTICS should play their part, ALL THINGS BEING EQUAL, superior skill should always triumph in the end.
The Demon Code et al wrote:
You seem fixated with giving everyone a +10 modifier, even in situations where it makes no sense As you are obviously eyeballing the numbers instead of trying to go for any sort of realism (And several other similar posts)
You're either not paying careful attention, stupid or deliberately attempting to reframe the debate in such a way as to draw attention away from my actual point. I won't engage with you in that manner so you can stop trying. I won't sugar coat any replies to that sort of rhetoric. Discuss the issue at hand or shut up.
—
Trust the Computer. The Computer is your friend.
Top
Tue, 2011-06-14 11:37
The Demon Code The Demon Code's picture
Re: Reactions to 3rd Printing: Initiative
Replied to crizh here: http://www.eclipsephase.com/reactions-3rd-printing-blackjack-and-core-te... Seems like I'm one of the few that can stand simultaneous actions :(. Still I can see why people don't like them, though I don't get the point of rolling a tie-breaker. You already rolled once, wouldn't it be better to use a relatively static number like INIT, REF, or even the current MOX? That way you don't have to roll again.
Top
Tue, 2011-06-14 11:53
CodeBreaker CodeBreaker's picture
Re: Reactions to 3rd Printing: Initiative
The Demon Code wrote:
Replied to crizh here: http://www.eclipsephase.com/reactions-3rd-printing-blackjack-and-core-te... Seems like I'm one of the few that can stand simultaneous actions :(. Still I can see why people don't like them, though I don't get the point of rolling a tie-breaker. You already rolled once, wouldn't it be better to use a relatively static number like INIT, REF, or even the current MOX? That way you don't have to roll again.
The trouble is when those numbers are also equal. REF tends to be ~15, MOX tends to be ~2. INIT might work I guess. I have found that rolling it out leads to the lowest amount of conflict.
—
-
Top
Tue, 2011-06-14 12:50
bblonski bblonski's picture
Re: Reactions to 3rd Printing: Initiative
I'll have to wait and see how my group feels about simultaneous actions. I'm considering doubling init scores and adding 2d10 to give more of a range. Although, this leads to more math... I can see why the went with initiative system they did in the first printing. I never really had an issue with it, even if it did seem kinda out of place.
Top
Tue, 2011-06-14 15:38
Yerameyahu Yerameyahu's picture
Re: Reactions to 3rd Printing: Initiative
Yeah, I think if you're concerned about granularity and ties, you should just use the old d100. :)
Top
Tue, 2011-06-14 15:50
The Demon Code The Demon Code's picture
Re: Reactions to 3rd Printing: Initiative
CodeBreaker wrote:
The trouble is when those numbers are also equal. REF tends to be ~15, MOX tends to be ~2. INIT might work I guess. I have found that rolling it out leads to the lowest amount of conflict.
Ahh... That makes perfect sense :) .
Top
Tue, 2011-06-14 18:46
det det's picture
Re: Reactions to 3rd Printing: Initiative
with ties I'd use the highest Initiative. Seems fair. If there is a tie and the same I score, besides the odds that are very slim, I think I'd just make another roll between the two. Moreso, fixed "I+roll" for bunch of generic NPCs should speed things up a bit.
Top

Pages