| | You are not authorized to post a reply. |
| | Author | Messages | |
Sean-Khan
Commander
2731 Posts
    
 | | 06/06/2006 4:58 AM |
| This is something I've met recently, and I'm very fascinated about it. Tick -based action system means that instead of everyone rolling for initiative and doing actions at their initiative number, game advances tick by tick. You start at a Tick defined by your initiative, do some action and that action defines how many Ticks it takes before you act again.
I've been trying to develop my own game system (slow, and losing will is always near [:(] ) but one thing I've decided is that I will not use normal initiative system, but the Tick system. Or, if I can't get my system made, the next game I start to GM is using Tick -system instead of normal initiative system.
First game where I saw this was Feng Shui. This game still uses rounds, so Ticks in FS can be thought of action points. Exalted 2nd edition doesn't use turns; It's recommended that some kind of counters are used to tell how many clicks until a character can act.
I've also thought of if this could be incorporated into D&D. Maybe it's difficult, and might need some special rules for large amounts of opponents.
Have you got experiences with this method? Do you know other games that use this? I've got a feeling that this might be the next Thing in RPGS... Who knows if DnD4E has it? Maybe the system is too specialized for that, but I wouldn't say it's impossible.
For reference, you can see Exalted 2nd ed system explained here:
http://forum.rpg.net/showthread.php?t=252712 | |
Vindicated AtG Called shot: 2nd Huge Red Dragon
My collected trade reference links
Star Wars tactical combat -project
My modelling/terrain pages
Suomen miniatyyrikeräilijät / Miniature collectors of Finland | |
|
IanB
Commander
3112 Posts
| | 06/06/2006 5:48 AM |
| We played a first edition D&D game for many years that went by segments instead of rounds, with weapon speeds, spell casting times, etc.
One thing to take note of is it requires a lot more constant attention by every player, and also has a tendency to make even the simplest combats take quite a long time.
If you're looking for 'realism' though, I think it is probably a good choice. | |
Anson on WotC boards | |
|
Sean-Khan
Commander
2731 Posts
| | 06/06/2006 6:53 AM |
| How is that it takes lots of time? I got an impression that it would be pretty fast. I guess it pretty much depends on how it's executed and the system surrounding it.
In the examples I've read, actions didn't take too many ticks. When a player does an action (attack for example) that takes 3 clicks, he takes 3 tokens (I'm thinking glass beads) in front of him. When GM says 'Tick', each player & character takes one of his counters away. When there's no counters in front of him, it's his turn.
I'm pretty much sold on it and am trying to find an optimal system using it or that can adapt it [:)] I'm surely interested in both Feng Shui and Exalted, but both have features that don't fit well into game type I'm thinking of. | |
Vindicated AtG Called shot: 2nd Huge Red Dragon
My collected trade reference links
Star Wars tactical combat -project
My modelling/terrain pages
Suomen miniatyyrikeräilijät / Miniature collectors of Finland | |
| 
Zenako
Commander
3472 Posts
| | 06/06/2006 8:53 AM |
| I had a system in my old home brew campaign that used a funky round with breakdown into parts system. Everything was x/per round, swings, spells, movement, whatever. Depending on your level and weapon used, you got a certain number of attack actions per round. At the top of the list was spells with a total of 10 actions per round. The round was laid out on a piece of graph paper with seperate rows for example action rate. For someone with only one action they were on the first row, 10 actions, put them on the bottom row. Each row consisted of n+1 segments, that were centered on the row. So the first row was blank for the 1st quarter, then had an open action spot filling the middle 1/2 and was again blank the final quarter. The 4th row would have the first 10% blank, then four even 20% segments and a final blank 10%. Each character ended up on a row for actions, as did the monsters.
When a round began, the DM would move left to right and as each action block was encountered, characters or monsters in that block could act. Doing things like swing (once), do part of a spell, move, etc. Once done, the action slider would move farther right until the next action block was encountered. (If I can find the old stuff I might take a picture of the chart and link a picture later).
Characters got melee attacks at the following rate: square root of level round down plus one. PLus one if fighting with two weapons. Spells worked like this. On the ten action line, a spell caster would use one action to Summon the Spell Energy, a second action to Aim the energy, and third to Fire the Energy. IF the spell was self only the aiming was not required, but any spell where the target point was not personal required aiming, or if fired off it would go in random direction. Then the caster had "Cool down" of one action per spell level just cast. So a wiazrd could pop off mulitple low level spells in a round, but only do single high level spells, and some of those might drag into the next round.
In melee, weapon also had a maximum number of swings per round that they could be used, so something like a greatsword might only have 2 swings a round, while a dagger or rapier might have maximum of something like 6 swings a round. That meant that the optimal weapon of choice was a moving target as characters looked to trade off weapon speed and number of attacks versus shear amounts of damage from the heavier, but slower weapons. Armor also absorbed damage in that campaign so swing a rapier for a base d6 at someone wearing plate armor that aborbed 6 or 7 points per hit (unless you got a critical or no-absorb hit which was an unconfirmed critical) you would be useless, while some swing a 3d6 great sword would have an excellent chance of getting past the damage reduction of the armor.
If you change the action rate, you need to also consider how the interplay of the other aspects of an excounter might shift as well and what that will mean for gaming. The Enigma gaming system was used not only by myself but a handful of other players and later DMs that moved all over the country. | |
Built the addition for this addiction, now on to the "gaming table" project....
http://www.maxminis.com/hw_list.asp?user=Zenako last updated 29 May 2006
Set Status: in a nutshell = all of all
In Process trades 0), (Sig last updated 05/29/06) 300 plus Completed Trades -
If I seem scarce at times...blame DDO - Sarlona | |
| Thoth, Gatherer of Knowledge
MerricB
Underboss
2353 Posts
Australia
| | 06/06/2006 9:07 AM |
| Rearranging initiative = bad.
The more players you have (and I have 6), the worse it gets. Even harder when you have multiple opponents.
The purpose of initiative is to break ties, and the tick system creates ties all the time.
Cheers! | |
Merric Blackman
| |
|
Zenako
Commander
3472 Posts
| | 06/06/2006 11:01 AM |
| | In the system I had, if two characters were on the same "blow table" as we called it, and were both about to act, the one with the higher dexterity acted first (no option to wait or delay, that just complicates things and drags out battles even more IMO). If they had the same dex, then the higher level acted first, and if that was tied just rolled a die. Generally the actions were independant of each other so it seldom mattered who went first or second. Remember that a melee action was only one swing, (out of how ever many the character would get that round) unlike the possible half dozen swings a 3.5 Char can get with an attack sequence. This did have the benefit of making combat more incremental. For example getting hit 5 times by your opponent for 10 points spread out during the round, instread of taking 50 points all at once. You had a chance to change tactics or grab a potion or something. Made combat much more detailed in its flow. It also meant that someone using a great sword could only parry two attacks a round, while someone using a scimitar could try and block 4 or 5 attacks a round. (Think Errol Flynn vs Ivanhoe). | |
Built the addition for this addiction, now on to the "gaming table" project....
http://www.maxminis.com/hw_list.asp?user=Zenako last updated 29 May 2006
Set Status: in a nutshell = all of all
In Process trades0), (Sig last updated 05/29/06) 300 plus Completed Trades -
If I seem scarce at times...blame DDO - Sarlona | |
|
FeranEldritchKnight
Sergeant
385 Posts
Kansas City, MO USA
| | 06/06/2006 11:23 AM |
| | I tried suggesting something similar to this back in the Skills & Powers days, but my friend got too confused by the idea. I based my idea off the skills and powers rules using phases based on weapon speed. At this point, I would have to look back at the rules to figure it out again, but it boiled down to being too confusing. Hell, he had problems with weapon speed and movement speed as factors, let alone ticks rather than rounds. | |
Completed trades: Gausse, Mazra, Pagansexy, Galerians, Lord_Raven, Drakkengi, Temujinn x2, Random Sasquatch, elf_ranger, Azuretide, Hung4treason, Griffrat (face2face), Nasamonkey
Carpe Forum! | |
|
Zenako
Commander
3472 Posts
| | 06/06/2006 11:55 AM |
| I was leaching from Runequest, C&S, T&T, and Theives Guild systems to develop the entire system. This was back in the 80's. We were all engineering/science students in school with a huge bias in favor of elegant mathmatical systems so working out the mechanics was not an issue, although I could see how it could be for many players. It also required the DM to be on top of things and have good control of the situation.
I must say the huge quanta of effects that occur now can make higher level battles much more all or nothing. Initiative becomes a matter of life or death in many battles. I go first, I KILL my opponent before they can act or swing, while if they go first I am likely to die. This is with characters with close to 200 HPs when pumped. With Haste, Frenzy and BAB attacks, my Samurai can make 6 attacks doing d10+22+D6 with a 30% chance of criticals and only a small chance of missing with most swings. 200HP demon might die without ever getting a swing. (If I/we get a drop on them so they are flatfooted I can also add in a one time Iajustsu Attack damage as well for another 5d6 on average.)
The current game has an interesting lethality curve. Very deadly at low levels when characters have few enough hit points that even a single critical hit can KILL them outright, then a slow decline in the mid levels with another ramping up of deadliness as high levels (16+) are reached. | |
Built the addition for this addiction, now on to the "gaming table" project....
http://www.maxminis.com/hw_list.asp?user=Zenako last updated 29 May 2006
Set Status: in a nutshell = all of all
In Process trades0), (Sig last updated 05/29/06) 300 plus Completed Trades -
If I seem scarce at times...blame DDO - Sarlona | |
|
jgsugden
Commander
4320 Posts
Walnut Creek, CA
| | 06/06/2006 2:15 PM |
| I used segmented/tick based combat between 1985 and 1999, much of that time in a group with Ianb (who commented above on the system).
Things to note:
- It can be very realiastic when implemented correctly, but it takes a lot of effort to get there. Until you work out the tweaks, it can be very unrealistic.
- It is a time killer. A simple combat that takes 4 minutes in 3.5 D&D can take 90 minutes in a tick system.
- This system gives very high reward sfor intelligent strategic thinking, and punishes people for not thinking ahead. Be sure that your players will all have fun in the new system.
- Make sure you have a play location where everyone can reach all the figures at all times, as they'll be constantly moving and readjusting.
- Use smaller encounters in your combats. Large number of wimpy creatures can take a long time to move. When you have to use large numbers of creatures, don't be too exact with their movement. Instead, move them in groups and don't worry if somebody moves 5' too far or 5' too short. The time saved will be worth your weight in gold...
I left the tick/segmented system behind because 3.5 worked smoother. However, I think the ideal answer is actually something living between the two systems.
The advantage of the tick based system is that you break down everything into very fine units of time. Breaking things down in this matter makes everything seem to happen in a smooth and even flow.
The advantage of the round based system is that you reduce the number of times a creature must act, and thus reduce the time it akes for a combat. Instead of moving a figure 1 space at 6 different times, you can move 6 spaces at 1 time.
My personal opinion is that the efficiency of the round system exceeds the value of the realism of the tick system, but I think out rounds are too long. 6 seconds of time is just too much to be grouped into one activation. Instead, I'd rather see us reduce rounds to 3 seconds.
What would this mean? - Shorter movement of creaturs on their turns.
- More activites that would require more than 1 rd to complete (like full turn casting spells in the current system)
- Easier implementation of simultaneous activites such as racing.
A full discussion of this topic would take 50 pages, so I'll leave it at this brief introduction to the idea. | |
Champion of Meepo _*_ Myztek on the Wizards Boards. _*_ (2206 DDM on 03/06/06)
Please note: The use of the  indicates an attempt at humor ... often a bad attempt.
BAD EBAY SELLERS LIST (CLICK HERE): AVOID AT ALL COSTS
| |
|
Sean-Khan
Commander
2731 Posts
| | 06/06/2006 3:02 PM |
| Actually, when thinking of larger combats, Feng Shui has excellent method for it. When a minor character is hit and the attack value beats his roll by 1-4, effect is only cosmetic. If the attack roll is 5+, the character is eliminated. In the beginning, Kobolds are worthy adversaries to the adventurers, while they later are only hindrance that Heroes are well capable of cleaning away.
When it comes to actions of hordes, some cheating should be done. While some take extra Tick of idleness, others might act quicker than they should. In the end, it evens out. This supports storytelling more than strict counting of actions, and if players can't be too sure what's happening, they don't count their actions too strictly but act more on feeling. Heroic Surge -like abilities might also allow a character to act before he actually should be able to.
Attack rolls adding to the damage would actually work better in this kind of system, as it works in FS and Exalted. Base damage could be a static value, which drops away one roll.
What comes to simultaneous actions, I don't know if it's that bad. An initiative roll could may be made. On the other hand, situation where two combatants thrust their swords into each other's chest and look into each other's eyes stunned has certain emotion in it [:p] I haven't yet come to decision how this would be best handled.
I think that optimal relation in steps between Ticks should be found so everything wouldn't happen immediately but Ticks wouldn't be too far from each other. There could be few default speed for actions, but characters could act faster by taking penalties to their rolls. | |
Vindicated AtG Called shot: 2nd Huge Red Dragon
My collected trade reference links
Star Wars tactical combat -project
My modelling/terrain pages
Suomen miniatyyrikeräilijät / Miniature collectors of Finland | |
|
Lachlarlan_the_Mad
Sergeant
470 Posts
| | 06/06/2006 3:02 PM |
| I'd play a Tick based action game.
Just make sure Sewer Urchin, American Maid, and Die Fledermaus are in it.
SPOOOOOON! | |
Champion of the Mimic; Knight of the Caryatid Column
Called Shots: Unhallowed - Tomb Mote
Vindicated Called Shots: Blood Wars - Solar
Aberrations 60/60, Deathknell 60/60, Angelfire 60/60, Underdark 60/60, Wardrums 60/60, WotDQ 60/60 | |
|
reezel
Sergeant
555 Posts
| | 06/06/2006 3:11 PM |
| quote:
Originally posted by Lachlarlan_the_Mad
I'd play a Tick based action game.
Just make sure Sewer Urchin, American Maid, and Die Fledermaus are in it.
SPOOOOOON!
What, no love for Arthur? | |
Champion of the Beholder and Beholderkin
The absence of evidence is not the evidence of absence. | |
|
Lachlarlan_the_Mad
Sergeant
470 Posts
| | 06/06/2006 3:30 PM |
| quote:
Originally posted by reezel
quote:
Originally posted by Lachlarlan_the_Mad
I'd play a Tick based action game.
Just make sure Sewer Urchin, American Maid, and Die Fledermaus are in it.
SPOOOOOON!
What, no love for Arthur?
Okay, he can go in too. | |
Champion of the Mimic; Knight of the Caryatid Column
Called Shots: Unhallowed - Tomb Mote
Vindicated Called Shots: Blood Wars - Solar
Aberrations 60/60, Deathknell 60/60, Angelfire 60/60, Underdark 60/60, Wardrums 60/60, WotDQ 60/60 | |
|
Most Edumacated
zenthrus
Warlord
5132 Posts
SLC, UT
| | 06/06/2006 8:08 PM |
| quote:
Originally posted by Lachlarlan_the_Mad
I'd play a Tick based action game.
Just make sure Sewer Urchin, American Maid, and Die Fledermaus are in it.
SPOOOOOON!
Sign me up! Must have the Mad Bomber as well [D]
I like the round/initiative system. While it isn't the most realistic system around, it's definitely the most streamlined battle mechanic I've seen. Few other RPGs allow for the rather brief combats that D&D 3.x allows.
I game with an Economics grad student, two Math majors, an Engineering major, etc. They all have a very difficult time adding their static modifier to the d20 roll (8 + 3 is....what gets added in again?). Keeping combat quick and simple is good. Anything to complicate that is bad.
If I want more "real-time" or realistic combat, I can always go LARP [:D]
| |
Knight Warlord a.k.a. Commander (#32) in only 6 months. Where's my pie?
Champion of Dwarven Thunderlashers
Knight of the Large Dire Chicken
Have/Want List
Trade References | |
|
Mrfurious
Warrior
344 Posts
| | 06/07/2006 11:30 AM |
| quote:
Originally posted by zenthrus
quote:
Originally posted by Lachlarlan_the_Mad
I'd play a Tick based action game.
Just make sure Sewer Urchin, American Maid, and Die Fledermaus are in it.
SPOOOOOON!
Sign me up! Must have the Mad Bomber as well [D]
You mean the evil midnight bomber what bombs at midnight. Boom baby boom. So this guy says to me I don't like the cut of your jib. And I says its the only jib I got, baby. Boom. | |
Sanity is a one trick pony, my friend, . . .but when you're good and crazy the sky is the limit.
http://www.maxminis.com/hwlist.asp?user=mrfurious
braman@che.utexas.edu | |
|
jgsugden
Commander
4320 Posts
Walnut Creek, CA
| | 06/07/2006 1:11 PM |
| Sean-Khan: I was thoroughly entrenched in the belief that tick/segmented systems were best when 3.0 was on the horizen. I'd been using them for over a decade (4 different versions). Accordignly, I'd consider myself somewhat of an authority on the subject.
Let's look at a 6 second period under 3.5 rules, and then a 6 second period under a tick based system. We'll use a typical 4th level encounter: 4 PCs versus 8 orcs.
In the round system, you have 12 activations. During that round of combat, each creature will activate, move and attack/cast a spell/etc... Time will be taken before each 'activation' to consider a plan of attack. All in all, this type of round typically involves:
12 movements
12 periods of thinking
12 die rolling events (attacks, spells, etc...)
The time devoted to die rolling events is not really chnaged by a move to a tick based system. However, the other two components take huge hits in the efficiency department.
In the tick based system, we'll see a huge increase in the number of times creatures move. If we assume that the creatures move ~ 20' during the round (on average), we're looking at 35 - 50 different movements. Each movement is much shorter than the round based movement, but there is some thinking invovled in each movement, and there is time lost between each movement as you wait for the prior creature to move their 5' of movement. All in all, the time involved in moveing creatures is drastically increased.
Thinking time is also increased. These systems typically involve concepts like 'casting time' for spells, or 'swinging time' for weapons. You declare what you intend to do, and then finish the action at a later time. This delay in effect often requires a lot ofthinking time on the part of PCs. Let's use a simple example and look at a sleep spell. Let's say that the DM has decided that it will take 7 ticks for a sleep spell to go off after the caster begins casting. Let's also say that the orcs move 5' every other tick. So, by the time the spell goes off, the orcs may have moved 15'. The player deciding to cast sleep has to consider multiple possibilities of where the orcs might end up before deciding to cast his spell.
Further, the thinking time of DMs is drastically increased because the creatures that he controls become much more difficult to manage. In a typical round based system, the DM moves a bunch of monsters at the same time. This allows the DM to think and manage the monsters as one group. It becomes nearly impossible for this to occur in a tick based system. Imagine that the orcs in our example charge towards the PCs and attack. The distasnce to the various PCs will be different. Accordingly, each attack will be released at a different time. As each orc will need to spend some time before they can attack again, the DM will need to track each orc separately to determine when they can attack again. Ibnstead of tracking one group, the DM is tracking 8. This is a nuisance... but it can be a devastating problem if you use 30 kobolds instead fo 8 orcs.
An encounter that might take 5 minutes in a round based system can take an hour in a tick system. Seriously.
There are many advantages to a tick system in terms of realism and power of the rules. However, they are time killers. | |
Champion of Meepo _*_ Myztek on the Wizards Boards. _*_ (2206 DDM on 03/06/06)
Please note: The use of the indicates an attempt at humor ... often a bad attempt.
BAD EBAY SELLERS LIST (CLICK HERE): AVOID AT ALL COSTS
| |
|
Zenako
Commander
3472 Posts
| | 06/07/2006 1:48 PM |
| I would offer that while the other system may well take longer, in my experience it is not that much longer once players adapt to it. In battle each move or swing is not as much an all or nothing event like with 3.0 and init. As for spells, that is why I choose to use a recharge formula rather than a charge up formula. The time to cast ANY spell was pretty much the same, however the time it took before you could cast another spell did vary. A wizard would be vulnerable for a period of time right after he cast a spell.
With each action being simpler the decision trees that bog down the thought process of many players would be shorted and they could perhaps resolve things quicker than they do now.
Bottom line is the decision on play flow or play flavor and where the interests of the group lie. 3.0+ involves plenty of abstractions but the rules are the same for both sides. The biggest one being the VERY high significance of Initiative in being able to win conflicts. Catch your foe flatfooted and they probably never recover... | |
Built the addition for this addiction, now on to the "gaming table" project....
http://www.maxminis.com/hw_list.asp?user=Zenako last updated 29 May 2006
Set Status: in a nutshell = all of all
In Process trades0), (Sig last updated 05/29/06) 300 plus Completed Trades -
If I seem scarce at times...blame DDO - Sarlona | |
| The Great
Choco Monster
Ghendar
Warlord
13069 Posts
Mud Lick, Kentucky
| | 06/07/2006 2:36 PM |
| quote:
Originally posted by Mrfurious
quote:
Originally posted by zenthrus
quote:
Originally posted by Lachlarlan_the_Mad
I'd play a Tick based action game.
Just make sure Sewer Urchin, American Maid, and Die Fledermaus are in it.
SPOOOOOON!
Sign me up! Must have the Mad Bomber as well [D]
You mean the evil midnight bomber what bombs at midnight. Boom baby boom. So this guy says to me I don't like the cut of your jib. And I says its the only jib I got, baby. Boom.
LOL! When I first saw this thread, I thought it was some kind of Tick based game system. Surprised it took so long for people to derail it. | |
WotC - making me wish more and more every day for a return to the TSR days. :(
I fought the snark and the snark won. I'm baaaaaaaaaaack!
Some of my favorite Maxminis quotes
I actually love to be swallowed. - Posted By gss_000 on 09/04/2007 2:32 PM
Could somebody explain Snatch to me? I understand the basics, but not how to enter/use it. - Posted by orcmonk220
G's the man. - Posted By greyhaze on 11/11/2008 8:58 AM
I dont mind butting heads every once in a while. It makes thing interesting. Thats why I'd be heartbroken if Ghendar ever left - Posted By Count Dooku on 04/03/2006 11:58 AM
| |
|
jgsugden
Commander
4320 Posts
Walnut Creek, CA
| | 06/07/2006 2:43 PM |
| quote:
Originally posted by Zenako
...Bottom line is the decision on play flow or play flavor and where the interests of the group lie. 3.0+ involves plenty of abstractions but the rules are the same for both sides... Catch your foe flatfooted and they probably never recover...
That is not true in my experience, but I guess it will depend upon the DM style of play. More importantly, I also found this to be very true in tick/segmented systems as well when the concept of surprise was factored into the game. | |
Champion of Meepo _*_ Myztek on the Wizards Boards. _*_ (2206 DDM on 03/06/06)
Please note: The use of the indicates an attempt at humor ... often a bad attempt.
BAD EBAY SELLERS LIST (CLICK HERE): AVOID AT ALL COSTS
| |
|
Zenako
Commander
3472 Posts
| | 06/07/2006 3:39 PM |
| quote:
Originally posted by jgsugden
quote:
Originally posted by Zenako
...Bottom line is the decision on play flow or play flavor and where the interests of the group lie. 3.0+ involves plenty of abstractions but the rules are the same for both sides... Catch your foe flatfooted and they probably never recover...
That is not true in my experience, but I guess it will depend upon the DM style of play. More importantly, I also found this to be very true in tick/segmented systems as well when the concept of surprise was factored into the game.
The bulk of my experience at this point derives from what is now a fairly high level 16+ level campaign. Battles seldom last more than 3 rounds (if that) and we have a double sized party playing so the number of foes is generally scaled as well. In a just concluded session we had once circumstance where a wall came down between us and 5 quardians behind the wall. On their side a close to 400HP Chimera dropped from the combined bow shots of two characters in a round who both had decent INIT rolls (plus adds). ON the other end of the line, the monster Ettin pounded our 16th level Weapon Master into a pulp with one weapon while SEVERELY injuring another character with his other weapon. (now this is in an OA setting where offense dominates defense in general). Had the Weapon Master gone first, he might have dropped the Ettin. Combat is extremely short and leathal, so going first might be your only chance. If the battles between opponents lasted a number of rounds then the significance of going first would be lessened. By the end of the first round of contact there had probably been over 1000 points of damage dealt (Combat and various fire breaths from the monsters) to the battle field. | |
Built the addition for this addiction, now on to the "gaming table" project....
http://www.maxminis.com/hw_list.asp?user=Zenako last updated 29 May 2006
Set Status: in a nutshell = all of all
In Process trades0), (Sig last updated 05/29/06) 300 plus Completed Trades -
If I seem scarce at times...blame DDO - Sarlona | |
|
| | You are not authorized to post a reply. |
|
| |
ActiveForums 3.7 | You must be signed in to participate in the
games. |