Topic: IYO Does Multip. attacks make Arms even vs Spell Casters

[intothatdarkness]

I simply created a multiple attack skill, ranging from 2 to 4 attacks every other round. There were Profession-based caps (with only a handful being able to use MuA 4...MuA 2 was the most common and even spellcasters could learn it). It's a basic skill, but it can only be used every other round. There were also negative mods for each additional attack (-10 for the second attack, -20 for the third, and -30 for the fourth). The other balancer was that if a character used MuA, she had to use the LOWER of the two bonuses (weapon skill or MuA) as her OB modifier. We found it to work really well for a skill-based balancing device, and led to some very interesting fights at higher level.

MuA attacks could also be used as parries.

This was all done for RM2.

[Marc R]

I found that "feel" wise it was more of an issue with missile fire, and even more so in spacemaster.

Like, the logic of melee being "A multitude of movements that result in one roll." is golden canon, but it gets a little iffy with missile fire where one arrow fired means one less arrow left in the quiver, and very iffy with guns and other such "self reloading" missile weapons.

Like, you could step out a door, then shoot 4-5 people in 10 seconds, they might not be the best aimed shots, but they're not "spray and pray" fire. . .

But the way the logic works, it's not so easy to make 5 attacks with a pistol on 5 different people in one round, without taking extraordinary measures like haste. (If a normal real person can do it in the real world, then it shouldn't require adrenal speed or haste)

We made tweaks here and there to the whole way self reloading weapons work, as far back as when we were playing RM with "Fire phase A" and "Fire Phase B" to allow it to be possible to take more than 2 shots a round, though we imposed penalties so anyone short of a really good gunman attempting 5 shots in a round would be unlikely to get very solid hits.

[markc]

I found that "feel" wise it was more of an issue with missile fire, and even more so in spacemaster.

Like, the logic of melee being "A multitude of movements that result in one roll." is golden canon, but it gets a little iffy with missile fire where one arrow fired means one less arrow left in the quiver, and very iffy with guns and other such "self reloading" missile weapons.

Like, you could step out a door, then shoot 4-5 people in 10 seconds, they might not be the best aimed shots, but they're not "spray and pray" fire. . .

But the way the logic works, it's not so easy to make 5 attacks with a pistol on 5 different people in one round, without taking extraordinary measures like haste. (If a normal real person can do it in the real world, then it shouldn't require adrenal speed or haste)

We made tweaks here and there to the whole way self reloading weapons work, as far back as when we were playing RM with "Fire phase A" and "Fire Phase B" to allow it to be possible to take more than 2 shots a round, though we imposed penalties so anyone short of a really good gunman attempting 5 shots in a round would be unlikely to get very solid hits.

 IMHO this is where a second by second combat resolution works the best.
MDC

[Marc R]

Agreed, and shrinking the % activity needed to fire a bit. . .like pulling it down from 30-60 to 20-60 allows for 5 shot firing at a -40 penalty.

OTOH for SM:P that runs into issues with 5 shots fall into what phase? (Or are split over the three phases how?)

[markc]

Agreed, and shrinking the % activity needed to fire a bit. . .like pulling it down from 30-60 to 20-60 allows for 5 shot firing at a -40 penalty.

OTOH for SM:P that runs into issues with 5 shots fall into what phase? (Or are split over the three phases how?)

 Or you can make a Combat Art to deal with it.
  One set of standard rules and then Combat Art rules to modify the standard rule set.
MDC

[Marc R]

One of my problems with the various fixes in this vein we've tried over the years is the inconsistency.

Like a monk rule for unarmed, which throws things out of whack since all actions use one set of rules, and unarmed another.

The "real speed shooting" had guns going fast per above, but everything else going per normal.

It creates skews in the weighting of the system. . .like the very goal of this thread was asking if multiple attacks balance casters and arms better.

In my experience what happens is you end up creating other islands of excellence, without actually achieving balance.

i.e. casters are overpowered to arms, so you add in the monk multi attack rule, now casters and monks are overpowered to everyone else, so you add in a "faster shooting" rule, now casters, monks and shooters are overpowered.

I've never actually managed to hit a really good sweet spot where the tampering didn't just re-shuffle the imbalance around to another spot.

[markc]

Marc R;
 I agree that balance is a big and not so big problem as IMHO some "professions" and skill choices should be out of balance with others. The big question is that are there other factors that can offset those advantages in the game.
 I have been reading the main Rifts RPG book and one of the first things that stuck in my head was some thing like this ... " occupational character classes and racial charter classes are not balanced vs. one another in all ways. Some are stronger than others but have limitations as well." I think that is good as long as things do not get too out of control.
MDC
P.S. (Looking for the sweet spot in RM RPG's)

[Marc R]

I agree, and that's especially true with spells vs nons, but when a player complains about the house rules in play ala:

"He can shoot 5 people a round, and he can punch 5 people a round, why can't I stab 5 people a round?"

And there's not really a good answer to that I've ever come up with.

[yammahoper]

Marc R;
 I agree that balance is a big and not so big problem as IMHO some "professions" and skill choices should be out of balance with others. The big question is that are there other factors that can offset those advantages in the game.
 I have been reading the main Rifts RPG book and one of the first things that stuck in my head was some thing like this ... " occupational character classes and racial charter classes are not balanced vs. one another in all ways. Some are stronger than others but have limitations as well." I think that is good as long as things do not get too out of control.
MDC
P.S. (Looking for the sweet spot in RM RPG's)

The RIFTS rule that always sticks with me: you can't dodge a salvo of more than five missiles.

BTW, fav RIFTS PC: Holy Terror from WormWood.

[intothatdarkness]

I agree, and that's especially true with spells vs nons, but when a player complains about the house rules in play ala:

"He can shoot 5 people a round, and he can punch 5 people a round, why can't I stab 5 people a round?"

And there's not really a good answer to that I've ever come up with.

That's why I did MuA as a skill. For firearms, I did some approximate rates of fire (usually two per round for semi-autos and revolvers, with things sliding up for full auto) and used those limits with some penalties for firing in consecutive rounds to balance the constant fire faction. We also tweaked some spellcasting stuff in the area of instantaneous spells in various parts of the RM2 combat round. Having MuA as a skill gives it some player-controlled limits and capabilities, while restricting it to every other round (one for "prep" of a sort and the next for "casting") kept it from getting out of control.

[Ynglaur]

Depending on the campaign type, the firebolt-slinging magicians aren't really that powerful.  Try dealing with a foe with a spell-stored-trigger-on-being-attacked Matter Disruption caster, or a caster who through the judicious use of Wards breaks up a party, or who uses mental spells to make friends appear as foes, etc. etc.   

[yammahoper]

Depending on the campaign type, the firebolt-slinging magicians aren't really that powerful.  Try dealing with a foe with a spell-stored-trigger-on-being-attacked Matter Disruption caster, or a caster who through the judicious use of Wards breaks up a party, or who uses mental spells to make friends appear as foes, etc. etc.

yep.  i always like the look on a players face when some spell combo sends him full Rambo into the party.  i also like the look of dread on everyone elses face, hahahahaha.

[kevinmccollum]

Funny. In core rm2, casters took quite a bit of time to become more powerful than melee. They only had 3 pp per level (IF you had a 100 stat in their prime stat), took time to get decent lists and required three rounds to cast a spell. Along comes RMSS, hands out PP like candy, and the casting system pretty much allows casters to fire off spells much quicker and at higher level. Now we have to do something to boost the melee types. where does the escalation end?

[yammahoper]

Funny. In core rm2, casters took quite a bit of time to become more powerful than melee. They only had 3 pp per level (IF you had a 100 stat in their prime stat), took time to get decent lists and required three rounds to cast a spell. Along comes RMSS, hands out PP like candy, and the casting system pretty much allows casters to fire off spells much quicker and at higher level. Now we have to do something to boost the melee types. where does the escalation end?

Your perception of RMSS is amiss.  It still takes two rounds prep in RMSS then cast on the third round.  ESF is now standard rule via SCSM, though any GM could just ignore the rule, which would only mean an increase in pp, which makes the spell user much more useful outside of combat, which has obvious advantages for players and GM's over the older way.  Spell users do not fire off spells quicker unless they take considerable risk.   

[kevinmccollum]

Your perception of RMSS is amiss.  It still takes two rounds prep in RMSS then cast on the third round.  ESF is now standard rule via SCSM, though any GM could just ignore the rule, which would only mean an increase in pp, which makes the spell user much more useful outside of combat, which has obvious advantages for players and GM's over the older way.  Spell users do not fire off spells quicker unless they take considerable risk.

BS. With very little assistance, a first level mage can fire off a first level spell with zero prep rounds with a half decent roll. with an average roll, they fail. somewhat above average, the spell goes off the following round. That is without any "talents" that help them. And from other posts, many of the people here let characters pick their talents. Must I do the math for you or can you figure out my point on your own?

[Ecthelion]

I don't think it solves the problem in the long run.

IMO there is no problem. If Arms users have an advantage at lower levels and are at a disadvantage at higher levels, then on average (over low, mid and high levels) they are on par. And it is also in tune with many fantasy novels, where older (i.e. high level) mages are among the most powerful persons in a world and novice mages are weaklings. What I think must be ensured is that the game does not get boring for Arms users at higher levels.

[MariusH]

I agree with yammahoper, kevin. It's considerable risk trying to fire off spells with too little preparation. Particularly in combat, the risk is too high (often you're under -20 for "melee environment", plus the fact that getting a spell failure, particularly with elemental attack spells, in combat, can be very dangerous). And out of combat, it is usually pointless, since time is less important. Is the possibility of firing shock bolts every round rather than every third round really worth a very high chance of spell-failing yourself unconscious?

As for PPs - sure, you can cast more spells outside combat. Again, IN combat, you may have trouble, since having used more than 25% of your PPs dictates you have to roll an SCSM. Again with the penalty for "melee environment", plus you don't have the time for 9 rounds of preparation (which helps a lot out of combat) this becomes risky - but possible in extreme need.

[yammahoper]

Your perception of RMSS is amiss.  It still takes two rounds prep in RMSS then cast on the third round.  ESF is now standard rule via SCSM, though any GM could just ignore the rule, which would only mean an increase in pp, which makes the spell user much more useful outside of combat, which has obvious advantages for players and GM's over the older way.  Spell users do not fire off spells quicker unless they take considerable risk.

BS. With very little assistance, a first level mage can fire off a first level spell with zero prep rounds with a half decent roll. with an average roll, they fail. somewhat above average, the spell goes off the following round. That is without any "talents" that help them. And from other posts, many of the people here let characters pick their talents. Must I do the math for you or can you figure out my point on your own?

Lets accept your arguement; a flip of a coin is not considerable risk?

Addressing the "spell goes of next round": that does mean the spell caster spends a round at 100% activity doing nothing and basically defensless, adding to the risk. 

I guess your definition of risk vary from my own..  So be it.  Just note I am not spouting BS.  Nor do i appreciate your bad internet mojo.  You come across as intense (which is appreciated) and rude ( not appreciated and which seems suprisingly immature considering the otherwise intelligence behind your typical post). 

Your anti RMSS is well known.  Your opinion is your own.  Yet the difference between RM2 and RMSS is far less than you state, in fact,  with careful choosing in RM2, I could gain a talent providing a big bonus to ESF rolls, enabling casting of spells three levels higher with little to no risk.  Even more powerful than the SCSM rules.

Even so, what is the required roll using esf to cast a spell, without prep, one level higher?  Isn't it around 20?  Hmm, please correct me if I'm wrong.  It has been years since I operated from the RM2 rule set...though I did so since 82-83 to 96-97.  I am definitely a fan of the system (and kept a single copy of it for prosterity...well, six arms LLaw, can never have to many of those), even the old ESF rules, though I find the newer SCSM rules superior.

No BS here, just tasty apples and oranges.

[markc]

Please respect the Rules of Conduct for ICE's Forums.
Thanks
Mark D Carlson

[Cory Magel]

IMO there is no problem. If Arms users have an advantage at lower levels and are at a disadvantage at higher levels, then on average (over low, mid and high levels) they are on par.

That would be a horrible way to design a system, even intentionally, and would largely result in unhappy players, which will result in the failure of a system commercially.

You don't knowingly create a biased system and you make efforts to fix an unintentionally biased system when it comes to team effort processes UNLESS you want friction (not the good kind) among the team members.