Official ICE Forums
Systems & Settings => Rolemaster => Topic started by: pantsorama on March 25, 2022, 01:13:36 PM
-
You have initiative next round
What does this mean?
I have combed through the RMC books, and looked some in RMFRP but found nothing. Have yet to really search RMSS. But that line appears all through the critical tables. Any idea on how to handle it?
-
Your action will come before the foe's action next round.
It's a little unclear how that actually works with regard to everyone else involved in the combat. Since it says "you" it's implied that your initiative should be moved up to just before the foe, but it might be more sensible to move your foe's initiative down to just after yours.
-
Your action will come before the foe's action next round.
It's a little unclear how that actually works with regard to everyone else involved in the combat. Since it says "you" it's implied that your initiative should be moved up to just before the foe, but it might be more sensible to move your foe's initiative down to just after yours.
It's a bit of a mystery, honestly.
I think your interpretation is more sensible. However, it does not say anything about the relative initiatives beyond yours and your opponent's. Say you're A, you have a friend B and your opponent is C. The result of the crit is that you (A) have initiative over C. It says nothing of your relative initiative vs B, nor of the relative initiative of B vs C. Presumably, those are unchanged.
If, in the next initiative roll, A rolls lower than both B and C, and C rolls higher than B, then you have a problem : according to the crit, A should go before C. According to the rolls, A should go after B. According to the rolls, B should go after C. This is not possible.
The way the crit result is stated implies that this is a duel (the PC and their opponent). It breaks down when there are more than two fighters because the crit results is expressed in relative terms.
Either the idea is that A feels inspired and "has the initiative" (over everyone else) and it should be stated explicitly.
Or the idea is that C has been shaken by the crit and has "lost the initiative" (vs everyone else) and it should also be stated explicitly.
The closest to your interpretation is the second expression (C's next initiative is lowered to the bottom of the initiative list). However, the wording seems to imply that the first interpretation is the correct one.
I would still lower C's init to the bottom of the list, though :)
-
Note that the line comes from the first/second edition of Rolemaster, which had a somewhat different turn sequence than RMSS/FRP. So to really understand the intent, you have to look at how the RM2 round worked.
Remember that the RM2 round was divided into phases by action type. Spells always went before missile. Missile always went before movement. Movement always went before melee.
Within phases, though, there was an important difference. All spells were resolved simultaneously in the spell results phase, and the same was true for missiles and movement. However, melee results were resolved sequentially, with the combatant with the highest initiative fully resolving the effects of his/her attack before the next combatant did. Thus, in melee, unlike with missile or spells, a combatant could kill an opposing melee attacker at the beginning of the melee results phase and thus entirely prevent that attacker from getting off their attack.
Initiative was clearly defined (Arms Law, red band edition, p. 6) as the factor that determines the order of actions, i.e. the combatant with the highest initiative goes first. It really seemed to matter only in melee combat though.
-
IMO, have the foe you sustained the critical on roll their initiative for the next round and you go before them.
-
100% what Cory said.
Changing the foe’s Init ends up working out for everyone else, when it shouldn’t, so the “rule” is meant to move only the offending PC’s Init.
In RM, going first is king.
Winning is let’s you decide on disengaging from a deadly enemy and having it attack someone else (since you’re no longer there) or getting the first strike in hoping to Stun-lock an enemy!
-
Have everyone roll their initiatives (if you do that separately for every round), but if the player awarded with initiative priority rolls lower than the opponent, they automatically move up the initiative list to act before the opponent.
-
Have everyone roll their initiatives (if you do that separately for every round), but if the player awarded with initiative priority rolls lower than the opponent, they automatically move up the initiative list to act before the opponent.
That's a reasonable way to do it.
-
Your action will come before the foe's action next round.
It's a little unclear how that actually works with regard to everyone else involved in the combat. Since it says "you" it's implied that your initiative should be moved up to just before the foe, but it might be more sensible to move your foe's initiative down to just after yours.
Talked about this today, I think the latter method is more appropriate as it does not say you go faster, only that you will go before them.
-
What if said opponent also rolls a critical (against you) that say that he has the initiative next round? :p
-
The two combatants will attack simultaneously. You could choose to put them at either the higher or lower initiative.
-
Interesting.
So some edge cases:
If you are fighting multiple opponents, and you critical and get initiative next round, is the gain initiative effect against all opponents you are currently in melee with? While it is implied that you get initiative over the opponent you are fighting, it does not say that.
If the opponent you criticaled dies, is the effect gone?
Those questions lead me to think maybe just giving the character that made the crit a +10 to initiative next round may be the way to go.
-
Thus the question about whether you get boosted to just before their initiative, or they get bumped to just after. Either could be feasible; the former suggests your attack against them put you in an optimal place for next round, while the latter suggests they are a little off balance.
If a combatant is dead, I treat them as being last in initiative order (mainly to keep them from cluttering the list of active combatants). So you're going to have a higher initiative than they are automatically.
-
If a combatant is dead, I treat them as being last in initiative order (mainly to keep them from cluttering the list of active combatants). So you're going to have a higher initiative than they are automatically.
:( ;D