Topic: instant and init idea

[pastaav]

Indeed, further items casting as instant spells will also lead to the funny situation that it is better to hire a staff of firebolt user than an actual magician that can cast the spell naturally.

And if all you are looking for are firebolts on demand, it is the better option. Now, if you want more than just firebolts, get the spellcaster, they are likely to be able to do more than just toss firebolts. (They can also cast Fireballs!!!  )

Not terribly convinced. I think there is certain balance in that the potent magican spells need to fired from the second row since the spell user can not combine the attack with a parry. The front line fighter that does parry/attack and has a shield with charged magic that he can use at the same time is IMHO a pretty big game changer.

As for the matter of being limited to firebolts...you can make charged items that has more than one spells in it. With a staff sized item you get 100 charges so the user of the charged shield might in practice have enough charges to support a number of different spells.

[RandalThor]

Not terribly convinced. I think there is certain balance in that the potent magican spells need to fired from the second row since the spell user can not combine the attack with a parry. The front line fighter that does parry/attack and has a shield with charged magic that he can use at the same time is IMHO a pretty big game changer.

So you throw in a few extra orcs. NBD. This game is deadly. Getting killed is easy. (Easier than RL, I believe.) Let the characters have some cool stuff. You are the GM, you have ALL THE COOL STUFF. Maybe they should be allowed to have some, eventually.

As for the matter of being limited to firebolts...you can make charged items that has more than one spells in it. With a staff sized item you get 100 charges so the user of the charged shield might in practice have enough charges to support a number of different spells.

First, that was just working off the original example you used. Second, if the characters have gotten powerful and capable enough to craft an item that can toss out 100 spells of different types - you let them. They have earned it. They have slogged through all the beasts, traps, story arcs, environmental hazards, puzzles, etc... to get to where they are. Its not like you just randomly rolled it in some treasure they got at 2nd level, right?

[arakish]

I think that the other big thing is what happens when you add in Psi from SM:P and all Psi skills are instants. Does that give Psi a leg up on spells or spells a leg up since all Psi after actions are refractory recovery actions?
MDC

IIRC, don't all Psi actions have at least one round of recovery (or whatever it is called) after usage ceases?  I'll check the books when I get home.

Psi powers do have the advantage that they are activated instantly and can be sustained for many rounds (until user runs out of PP).  The only disadvantage is what if the Psi user needs to switch to a different Psi power?  The previous power will have to be dropped/ceased.

However, as mentioned, even if a Psi were used for only one round, isn't there a minimum of one recovery round before another Psi can be used?

Spell users can cast one spell, then cast a different spell the next round, and so on.  There is no pause for recovery between spells.

rmfr

[jdale]

Im sure you would feel differently about landing if you were falling.  After all, 100% activity can be used up in a second.  OTOH, it doesnt bother me at all if some spells make lousy items.

Hmm, that's not how I interpret it. A round is 10 seconds, therefore 100% activity is 10 seconds (except under the effects of speed etc). It doesn't matter how complex your actions are in 1 second, you should have 9 seconds to do something else, even if it is just movement or looking around.

For game balance I can see the alternative explanation being that the spell effect happens at the beginning and it just takes the rest of your 75% activity (7.5 seconds) to complete it after you land. This doesn't make a lot of logical sense though. Suppose you get interrupted and compelled to stop. What are the consequences? Does your landing retroactively cease to have happened? Suppose an antimagic area is activated after you land on it. Seconds after you land suddenly your leg breaks?

Adrenal Landing does work in this backwards way, reverse of other Adrenal skills, but at least that's explicit in the skill description.

I think it's much easier to just say that instant spells are instant spells regardless of whether they are in items or not. Keep the normal limit of 1 spell per round, it doesn't really cause any problems, it doesn't change the relative power level of any of the spells, it doesn't require any special consideration.

[yammahoper]

A mage cast a 75% action spell and moves 25% of his base rate at a jog. Does he get his base DB against all attacks?  Of course he does, even though no activity is alotted.

There are many assumptions in a ten second round.  10% activity always equaling 1 second in counter intuitive to RM mechanics.  If that were so, all attacks would be resolved simultaeously with no need for initiative, every ten seconds.

100% activity can be performed in the first second of the round.  The rest of the round involves all the assumptions of movement for base DB, recovery, follow through, orienting, etc.

[Marc R]

AFAIK only movement is 10/10% in RMSS, you can indeed act 100% for anything but movement in snap.

Except if you act 100% in snap, you can't act in normal or deliberate. . you're idled until next round. (unless hasted or something).

[jdale]

The attack roll is an abstraction that represents the best opening during 10 seconds of melee. Initiative, when you are already in melee, is not necessarily acting first (since you melee the whole time) but finding an opening you can take advantage of before your opponent can do the same. Attacking in the snap phase does not mean you sit idle for the rest of the round, it just means instead of waiting for a better opening, you put your focus into the first opening you could get, in hopes of getting in a good hit before the other guy. A risk that may or may not pay off. And which may cost you a better opening later in the round, while you are recovering your footing.

There is certainly some room for actions to overlap each other (defense, offense, movement are all entangled) but there's a big difference between saying that and saying that you can do something so complex in 1 second (75% action) that you'll only be able to walk as far in 7.5 seconds as someone else can in 2.5 seconds....

[Cory Magel]

In RMSS percentage activity does not directly translate into actual elapsed time to perform an action, it is more a representation of the amount of focus and haste you are placing on that action.  The round is intentionally abstracted to avoid trying to pin down exactly what is happening during every moment of the round.  The problem that I see a lot of people have with how things work in rounds is because they are over-thinking them.

In RMSS you can move 20% in Snap, 60% in Normal, and 80% in Deliberate.  This is ONLY for movement purposes and the only reason for that is to avoid the "move 100 feet and hit someone" before they can try to react.

Yammahoper is dead on when he says that you don't suddenly take 100% activity on your initiative then are standing around the rest of the round.  Let's take attacks... you aren't standing still whacking each other over the head with your one swing each round like the three stooges.  You are moving, dodging, weaving, feinting, etc, etc.  The attack is a representation of your overall effort.

[Marc R]

True, and if you do something other than attack for 100% you do still get your quickness DB.

T'wasn't implying you were a statue, just that you can't declare anything I can think of in Normal or Deliberate if you expend all action in Snap.

Yamma's original point was that you can 75% use an item in any phase. . .I agree, if you have the activity left. Which you should in Snap, but you might not later in the round.

If anything the "item casts instants as 75%" strikes me as more an issue in latter phases, not snap. Like if we're fighting, in snap we move together, in normal you attack me, I attack you back, and in my crit you are knocked backward . . .off a cliff.

You must have expended more than 25% moving and attacking me, so now you don't have the 75% left to make the landing bracelet save you in deliberate.

You're may get caught unable to use an item that would save you in normal or deliberate, but you should be fine to do it in snap.

[pastaav]

You must have expended more than 25% moving and attacking me, so now you don't have the 75% left to make the landing bracelet save you in deliberate.

You're may get caught unable to use an item that would save you in normal or deliberate, but you should be fine to do it in snap.

That ties back into the round structure itself. To keep things sensible for the bookkeeping we divide things into rounds, but there need to be some balance to it.

If you are pushed off the cliff at 9 seconds and have less than 75% action left I would without hesitation rule that you can use your magic item and that the reminder of the action must be spent the next round.

In the same spirit I think that you can rule that a character with a ready weapon and limited activity left still should be able to make a parry in some situations. The normal would of course be that you assume the attack happens earlier in the round when the character was not actively defending, but movement rules or canceled actions can create situations when it is obvious the attacker will not get there to attack before the end of the round. In these cases it IMHO reasonable that defender does not get an melee attack since he lacks the needed activity to spare, but that he should be able to defend himself even though the round division prevent him from doing melee. I would also demand the character uses the same amount of parry for the next round prevent that he does a full parry when he don't get an attack.

[Marc R]

I might similarly fudge things at the table, but it's fudging, like if in the example above instead of falling off the cliff, another person attacks me in deliberate, can I trigger my bracelet of Bladeturn with my 0% activity left in Deliberate?

You can argue that I fell off the cliff this round and land next, but the next person attacking in the round is definitely acting in deliberate. . .and most GMs wouldn't allow you to borrow from next round to trigger the bracelet this round.

There are some situations where you may act yourself into a corner of being unable to use an item this round, and simply have to wait for next round, it's not a terrible thing, but it is possible to get jammed up that way.

[providence13]

I can think of a few ways to handle the 'falling off a cliff with 0-1%Act and wanting to activate a Landing item'.

You could impose a changing action (-40 for us) penalty to Sit Combat roll, or just make the DR extreme. If it's made, then the device is activated.

You could use the MM table. This is a good table and could be used in place of most (all ?) the RM tables, IMHO.
Achieving a roll that allows "you still have 1/2 a round to act" is possible. My players are pretty good at squeezing their %Act for all it's worth.
Many of the Static Maneuver tables yield similar results. So it is possible in the RAW to get more than 100%Act in a round, or perform another action as if you had more %Act by making an awesome roll.

Another system I've used is "dice me for it". For us, it's an elegant solution to the problem. You don't establish a precedent for future RAW wrecks and it is totally unbiased; except giving them a slight chance in heck. This HR might be seen as a Joss/Fate/Deus Ex point, but it's not guaranteed.  

On a similar note: I have used the 'all actions are multi-round actions rule and it can work.

[yammahoper]

True, and if you do something other than attack for 100% you do still get your quickness DB.

T'wasn't implying you were a statue, just that you can't declare anything I can think of in Normal or Deliberate if you expend all action in Snap.

Yamma's original point was that you can 75% use an item in any phase. . .I agree, if you have the activity left. Which you should in Snap, but you might not later in the round.

If anything the "item casts instants as 75%" strikes me as more an issue in latter phases, not snap. Like if we're fighting, in snap we move together, in normal you attack me, I attack you back, and in my crit you are knocked backward . . .off a cliff.

You must have expended more than 25% moving and attacking me, so now you don't have the 75% left to make the landing bracelet save you in deliberate.

You're may get caught unable to use an item that would save you in normal or deliberate, but you should be fine to do it in snap.

This happens all the time with normal instant spells.  At least at our table.  Player cast sheild spell then attacks, THEN has arror shot at him; he can't cast a deflections spell because he is out of activity.  Sucks to be him, BT BAD THINGS HAPPEN.

I truely feel this has more to do with a growing inability to accept any form of limitation or having to suffer them.  There are no save points in a table top rpg.

Of course, if you want spells from items to be 10% for instants, do so.  It is your game table.  But the rule, as is, makes perfectly fine sense and is by no means a game changer.

Now, Pastaav seems to have the right aproach over all.  This is a game that requires a referee to play, the GM.  He makes decisions and interprets application of the rule set.  Allowing use of the item, even if the player only has 50% activity left, yet carrying over the remaining activity requirement to the next round...brilliant.  I'd also have no problem if he had declared the spell would be 33% les effective.  Every action in life has a repercussion (with apologies to Newton).  The game should reflect this.

[Marc R]

I agree, much like if you're disarmed with no activity left, you can't draw a new weapon. . .and you can get stuck the same way with an instant item, just less often with the smaller activity needed.

[Cory Magel]

The items casting issue was always a troublesome one and our ruling on it came down to the fun factor really.

My outlook (and many of our group) is that many of them, as cast by a player (not an item) are reactionary in intent.  Like when you attack a highly trained Martial Artist their reaction will be different than your average person... they will likely defend themselves in a much more effective manner due to their training.  So, to some degree, we apply this logic to instants.  Someone fires an arrow at you, and you see it happen, you can 'react' with deflections.  Same would go for Landing and the like.  Other instants you do in preparation for something, like an attack or haste, etc, so they are not much of a concern.  Then you'll run into the exceptions (there are ALWAYS exceptions) like Absolution.

However, this logic doesn't carry over very well to items.  Because you have an item that can cast deflections doesn't suddenly train you to the point that you could activate it as a natural reaction.  This is where making an item take 75% makes sense.  But is it actually necessary for balance reasons?  Depends on the GM/Gamer.  Like I always say when it comes to game design... Fun. Balance. Realism. In that order.  If it's not fun, why play.  If it's not balanced people will become frustrated.  So if one of those things is put in jeopardy by insisting on 'realism' then you're creating a bad rule.

We've also ruled in some situations you pay for an action after taking it and may have to cancel your current action to do it... but, again, this logic doesn't apply very well to items.

So we just decided when it came to items the rule is however the spell was built into the item is how the spell comes out of the item.  This effectively lets the GM determine how they want it to work in that particular case/item.  It also lets you do things like say "This is a belt of landing. When you, as a player, experience or think you are experiencing an unexpected fall that will cause you harm, it is triggered.".  The player is able to count on it when they need to, but they do not have control over it.  The drawback is there are times when a character might THINK they need it and trigger it, possibly using up that 'charge' (for the round, day, whatever).

[yammahoper]

If an item has intelligence, it can cast the spell.  this is the only way in my game (other than use of an arcane list from RMCI) to cast two spells in one round.

I played with the one normal/one instant spell for years.   Hell, I played with four instant on one round for a while using an optional init rule set (also from RMCI).  It's all about what ya want in order to have fun.

[Marc R]

I think there's a specific exception in the rules on that. Items cast using the user's aura like the broadcast antenna, meaning the user is the one who eats the spell failure if it fails. Intelligent items can choose to cast (hostile ones may even cast on the user) but still use the user's aura, the user is still liable for the spell failure if one happens.

In all those cases, the user is casting, so per rules the cast applies to the 1/round limit. I don't know if it's explicitly stated one way or the other if it counts as a declared action or activity %. As GM if the user casts I'd count it that way, but if the intelligent item chooses to cast I'd not count it as the user's action for the round/phase or charge them activity % for it.

An item that casts on it's own, not using the user, and thus subject itself to spell failure, then it's crossed over from being an item to being a construct creature. . .in which case it declares it's own actions, uses it's own activity percentage, and can cast once a round, which does not count toward the limit of the person wearing/carrying it. Sort of like if the cleric is carrying the mage, and the mage casts, the cleric hasn't cast for this round and can also cast.

[arakish]

I think that the other big thing is what happens when you add in Psi from SM:P and all Psi skills are instants. Does that give Psi a leg up on spells or spells a leg up since all Psi after actions are refractory recovery actions?
MDC

IIRC, don't all Psi actions have at least one round of recovery (or whatever it is called) after usage ceases?  I'll check the books when I get home.

Psi powers do have the advantage that they are activated instantly and can be sustained for many rounds (until user runs out of PP).  The only disadvantage is what if the Psi user needs to switch to a different Psi power?  The previous power will have to be dropped/ceased.

However, as mentioned, even if a Psi were used for only one round, isn't there a minimum of one recovery round before another Psi can be used?

Spell users can cast one spell, then cast a different spell the next round, and so on.  There is no pause for recovery between spells.

rmfr

First, sorry for the mistakes.

I was partially correct in the above post.  In some instances, a Psi user can switch powers from one round to the next, provided the difference of the user's level and magnitude is >= 6 (Lvl - Mag >= 6).  In such a case, the Psi user can switch powers round to round.  In the case of (Lvl - Mag <= 5), then the Psi user will suffer a penalty, and may even have to wait several rounds before switching to another power.

Thus, it would depend on the power's magnitude and the psi user's level that would dictate on how quickly a psi user could switch powers.

I was also incorrect about spell users.  I forgot about spell classes.  Thus, it may be one, two, or three rounds between casting spells.

Essentially, there are advantages and disadvantages between psi users and spell users.

I am using a totally different method for power users (spell/psi users) on my world of Onaviu.  First they have to call up the power (which can take as long as six rounds), but once it is called, they can cast one spell/psi/power per round until they either release the power or run out of power points.  Of course, I am still in the process of rewriting this method...

rmfr