1 Attack per round? How to house rule it?

[Natasha]

RECON.

Why not just give the characters one attack per melee; it doesn't sound like you're playing you're much stock or importance into combat anyway, so who's going to ***** about one attack?

Unless it's a 12 year old punk kid vibro-knifing an unarmed and unarmoured juicer, of course.

[Dog_O_War]

After many years of playing many different systems, I've come to the conclusion that multiple attacks/actions per combat round bogs things down, so....

....I would like to work out a house rule for rifts that could accommodate this, but I dont have laods of experience with 'standard' rules - the last rifts campagin we pretty hand waved a lot of combat (or avoided it completely), any advice would be great

Cheers

Kal

By doing what your topic title suggests you completely change the dynamics of the game. You make the game a dirty commie where everyone is "equal". This is bunk. What you need is an effective initiative system that keeps track of the players for you.

No, I'm no salesman; I am offering you a completely free promotional offer here! By accepting this wonderful alternative product you will increase your game speed and overall life happiness by 10 times the current amount!*

By reading http://forums.palladium-megaverse.com/viewtopic.php?f=30&t=85651 you will find a game and life* enhancing experience awaiting your weary eyes and tired, mushy brain.

Just ask for any clarifications on the hows and whys said initiative system will make your game run smoother.

[zor_prime1]

I'm asking because I dont just want to drop everyone to 1 attack without any re-balances - it would suck for juicer players, they would loose a huge advantage.

So my question remains (and expanded), how to create 1 attack/action per round rule, but to keep the diversity of combat proficieny?

My current throughts are to translate the number of attacks into some bonuses for initative, attack and defence (strike/parry), as a faster character should be able to better fight a slower character (a feather weight fighter would run rings around a heavy weight), and its the weapons and armour of combatants that take care of damage and health, where that speed doesnt factor into it as much???
Think that is the right direction to go in?

Kal

I had similar thoughts when starting to play Palladium. I had played a few other games where the attacks were all round based and everyone got one attack per round. Which made things easy.
I liked the Palladium attack per melee system to show how fast someone could fight. But in order for me to better wrap my brain around it and keep the ease that I was familiar with, I came up with the basic "Splice Attack" rules. This was polished a bit over the years by my group of players to fit new scenarios like magic, but the basic concept stayed the same and has worked really well.

As usual, initiative is to determine the order of turns.

When combat commences, break the melee up into rounds equal to the number of attacks of the lowest participant (called the base). (3-4 being the least). So everyone gets at least one attack per round. Anyone with attacks above the base can use those attacks as quick actions or "splice attacks". Only one splice attack can be used per round unless they more than doubled the base. These can be used as desired by the player, but can't be used all at once.

Splice attacks can only be dodged by another splice attack, which makes them lethal. They can also make an maneuver that takes two attacks take only one round. There are movement penalties of offensive attacks when using a splice attack. It's the standard -3 to strike to hit or to be hit.

Characters with fewer attacks than the base only get to attack at evenly spaced rounds. I.e. two attacks are used in the beginning and middle rounds of the melee. Three attacks can be used in the beginning, middle and last round.

See the link in an above reply. I posted a URL to the complete explanation to these rules in that thread. They're not much more than what I put down here.



With this method, the characters have at least 1 attack per round as you were going to do by having 1 attack per melee. But the splice attacks come in to play to spice things up and show the speed and lethality of the characters. So the round of base attacks becomes the equalizer like you were hoping for and you don't have to convert into bonuses or anything complex. And you can still use Palladium's rules, just a minor tweak.

I really hope this helps out.

[sasha]

When combat commences, break the melee up into rounds equal to the number of attacks of the lowest participant (called the base). (3-4 being the least). So everyone gets at least one attack per round. Anyone with attacks above the base can use those attacks as quick actions or "splice attacks". Only one splice attack can be used per round unless they more than doubled the base. These can be used as desired by the player, but can't be used all at once.

Sounds about right to me.

Attacks per round doesn't necessarily reflect how good of a striker or defender you are, so distilling attacks per round into such bonuses wouldn't work for me.

Splice attacks can only be dodged by another splice attack, which makes them lethal. They can also make an maneuver that takes two attacks take only one round. There are movement penalties of offensive attacks when using a splice attack. It's the standard -3 to strike to hit or to be hit.

The devil's in the details. I would, for example, still allow automatic parry for those characters with automatic parry.

[Dog_O_War]

Rather than reduce the individual with the lowest number of attacks to one per round or segment or whatever, reduce the individual with the most attacks to one per segment and scale everyone else so they get a partial attack each segment and are allowed to attack when their number of attacks they've accumulated exceeds the number they have taken.

A simple example where characters with 5, 4, 3, 2, and 1 attack are in combat

the divisor is 5

5 attacks = attack in all segments
4 attacks = 0.8 attacks per segment
3 attacks = 0.6 attacks per segment
2 attacks = 0.4 attacks per segment
1 attack = attacks in segment one

5 segments per round

segment 1: all characters act in initiative order

segment 2: characters with 5(2.0), 4(1.6) and 3(1.2) attacks act in initiative order; characters with 2(0. and 1(0.4) attacks haven't accumulated enough points to act again.

segment 3: characters with 5(3.0), 4(2.4) and 2(1.2) attacks act in initiative order; characters with 3(1. and 1(0.6) attacks haven't accumulated enough points to act again.

segment 4: characters with 5(4.0), 4(3.2) and 3(2.4) attacks act in initiative order; characters with 2(1.6) and 1(0. attacks haven't accumulated enough points to act again.

segment 5: the character with 5(5.0) attacks acts; the other characters don't because they have already gone the allotted number of times.

Summary:
The character with 5 attacks acts in segments 1,2,3,4&5
The character with 4 attacks acts in segments 1,2,3&4
The character with 3 attacks acts in segments 1,2&4
The character with 2 attacks acts in segments 1&3
The character with 1 attack acts in segment 1

This isn't the prettiest way of getting the job done, but it distributes actions more appropriately and simplifies combat once the matrix is set up.

You've over-thought the problem. This is now more complicated and more time-consuming than just doing the regular attacks round-robin, with the extra attacks at the end. You also need multiple charts and calculations when different attack leaders come into play (such as a character with 6 or more attacks, or a grouping with a maximum number of 4 or less attacks in the combat). It also makes for called and aimed shots, as well as power-punches become overly complicated.

[zor_prime1]

Attacks per round doesn't necessarily reflect how good of a striker or defender you are, so distilling attacks per round into such bonuses wouldn't work for me.

Splice attacks can only be dodged by another splice attack, which makes them lethal. They can also make an maneuver that takes two attacks take only one round. There are movement penalties of offensive attacks when using a splice attack. It's the standard -3 to strike to hit or to be hit.

The devil's in the details. I would, for example, still allow automatic parry for those characters with automatic parry.

I agree with you. I only gave a down and dirty on the rule.
Sure having more attacks per melee doesn't make you a better fighter. It does give you an advantage in one sense. Why else have them as a factor? I mean, Dash from the Incredibles movie had many attacks per melee, but his puny punches didn't really hurt the soldier that he was fighting. This rule allows for that kind of action to commence throughout the melee, not just at the end.

We do allow for parries and auto-dodges to respond to the splice attacks. And that's up to the GM if s/he thinks it works out for them.

I tried to make this rule as simple and as close to the rules in the books without much conversion. I'm sure the other methods work as well or better. I just enjoy this one because it's simple to me and easy for me to keep track of. I do need to play RU2 rules now to see how those run with this rule.

[Dog_O_War]

Attacks per round doesn't necessarily reflect how good of a striker or defender you are, so distilling attacks per round into such bonuses wouldn't work for me.

Splice attacks can only be dodged by another splice attack, which makes them lethal. They can also make an maneuver that takes two attacks take only one round. There are movement penalties of offensive attacks when using a splice attack. It's the standard -3 to strike to hit or to be hit.

The devil's in the details. I would, for example, still allow automatic parry for those characters with automatic parry.

I agree with you. I only gave a down and dirty on the rule.
Sure having more attacks per melee doesn't make you a better fighter. It does give you an advantage in one sense. Why else have them as a factor? I mean, Dash from the Incredibles movie had many attacks per melee, but his puny punches didn't really hurt the soldier that he was fighting. This rule allows for that kind of action to commence throughout the melee, not just at the end.

We do allow for parries and auto-dodges to respond to the splice attacks. And that's up to the GM if s/he thinks it works out for them.

I tried to make this rule as simple and as close to the rules in the books without much conversion. I'm sure the other methods work as well or better. I just enjoy this one because it's simple to me and easy for me to keep track of. I do need to play RU2 rules now to see how those run with this rule.

Having more attacks per round does make you a better fighter though. If you had a +1 bonus to strike, and you had to hit 14 or better (assuming that is the average parry roll of the enemy) then you should fail 70% of the time for one hit. But given that you have 4 attacks per round (for example), the odds are in your favor for hitting at least once per round.
Compare that to a guy with +3 to strike (60% miss chance) but only 2 attacks, and he is likely to miss more often than you will in a given combat. Even at three attacks per round he only has about the same ratio of hits/misses at the guy with +1 to strike and 4 attacks per round.
Another example is the knock-out. Even if the guy with two attacks per round had +10 to strike, the guy with 4 attacks per round will achieve a knock-out blow (natural 20) in about half the time.
Also, more attacks per round means you will avoid more incoming attacks. Given even bonuses, the guy who can make 4 dodges per round versus the guy who can only make three will indicate that one has a better head (and reactions) for combat.

Personally, if you were to reduce the amount of attacks per round by anything, I'd suggest just cutting them in half rounded down, with odd numbers of attacks (like 5) offering a bonus of +1 to various combat stats.
BUT, I must flog my combat system here again; comparing times for 5 players with an average of 5 attacks per round (one with 7 and one with 4), combat goes by in roughly half the time, no one is missed (ever!), and it even offers dramatic "event-reactions", like grenade-golf. I never have to worry about simo-attacks, and initiative is exceptionally useful and offers that skills like quickdraw can be calculated on a per attack basis.

[Spinachcat]

Here's what I do.

Everyone gets a stack of bonus actions equal their their current Actions as by the normal rules. This stack is good for the whole fight. Whenever the character wants to burn an action, they can do so, but only one bonus per round. Aimed shots cost one and called shots cost one, or you can do a called shot for free with a -4 penalty. NPCs get their Actions - 2 (or -4 for mooks) for their pool.

Thus a juicer with 6 attacks would take 1 action per turn, just like everyone else. He would still have his autododge. However, he now has a pool of 6 bonus actions and each round of the fight, he can choose to spend one for an extra move or extra attack or whatever.

Also, a hero can choose to do nothing for his turn and add 1 to his Bonus Action Pool. I use poker chips or binkies so everyone keeps track of their Bonus Actions.

I enjoy this method because I like resource management toys that add more decisions for the players. Since this pool is limited and stays for the entire fight, there is a motivation to use them smartly as needed.

Sure, this method probably plays havoc with a bunch of the more fiddly rules, but I run very Quick & Dirty, cinematic first rules light sessions so I blow past them. I tend to amp up the heroes so they can tear through mooks and then mosh with the boss monsters in a very Q&D fight.

My other game speeder is to skip counting ammo. When you fumble, you get a choice - run out of ammo or friendly fire if their is a viable target. If friendly fire, you roll your attack against the nearest ally and hope not to blow them away. If you are using autofire weapon, you run out of ammo on a natural 1 or 2. For guns with long clips, I simply count each long clip as a free auto-reload.

As for mooks, I like to use them. Divide their Armor, MDC, SDC, HP by 2 and their bonus action is Actions -4. So now the 80 MDC armored Deadboy now has 40 MDC and with only 1 or 2 bonus actions, they will be doing little dodging and mostly get splattered by the heroes. I have no interest in dragging out stand-up fights between an NPC who is just game color and the player's PCs.

[bigbobsr6000]

You could use my Melee Attack Chart. Download at

http://savefile.com/files/1619632

Feedback welcome.

[Damian Magecraft]

I have looked at different variants of combat, Trying to avoid/reconcile the so called "time freeze" that can be experienced when one character has considerably more actions than any other (8 vs 3 for example).

the combat phase concept seems the best approach...(ie there are 15 seconds in a melee hence there are 15 phases to combat). The problem I experience is this method most often does not take into consideration Initiatives.

has anyone developed a method that...
1. avoids the remaining actions taking place after everyone else is out of actions.
2. takes into account the chance that the "slower" guy gets lucky and get the drop on the faster one.
and...
3. is not so complicated it requires a scientific calculator or computer program to track.

[GA]

Well I don't know if there's any simple way to solve this unless you steal from another system. It seems you will just be exchanging one set of problems for another.

However, the 15 second rule should be reduced. I might reduce it to 3 or possibly 5 seconds. I would also assign each fighting type a reaction time on how well the can perform their attacks and at what percentage of damage.

Attacks per 3 seconds:
No Training: 1 Attack or Action Damage Roll 1d100 to determine effectiveness of successful attack. (so if rolls a 65 inflicts 65% of weapon damage (round down). For 3d6 if rolls a 14 inflicts 9 points of damage.
Basic Training: 1 Attack or 2 Actions at full effectiveness
Expert Training: 2 Attacks or 2 Actions at full effectiveness
Assassin Training: 3 Attacks or 3 Actions at Full effectiveness
Juicers: 4 attacks or 4 Actions at full effectiveness.

You could also tinker with effectiveness like basic might be 1 attack at 50% +d50 effectiveness, Expert 1 Attack at 100% (150?) effectiveness or 2 attacks at 75%.

No Training: 1 Attack or Action Damage Roll 1d100 to determine effectiveness of successful attack. (so if rolls a 65 inflicts 65% of weapon damage (round down). For 3d6 if rolls a 14 inflicts 9 points of damage.
Basic Training: 1 Attack at 50%+d50 effectiveness
Expert Training: 1 Attack at 75%+d25 effectiveness
Assassin Training: 1 Attack at 100% effectiveness
Juicer Training: 2 Attacks at 150% effectiveness.

The percentages are arbitrary you can change expert to 100 and assassin to 150 for instance or just use round numbers. Expert *2 Assassin *3 Juicer *4 for damage.

You might want to use rules where if the character is allowed to focus he has reduced attacks but increased chances of making a successful strike.

No Training: 1 Attack or Action Damage Roll 1d100 to determine effectiveness of successful attack. (so if rolls a 65 inflicts 65% of weapon damage (round down). For 3d6 if rolls a 14 inflicts 9 points of damage.
Basic Training: 1 Attack at 50%+d50 effectiveness or 2 Attacks at 25%+d50% damage
Expert Training: 1 Attack at 75%+d25 effectiveness or 2 attacks at 40%+ d50% damage or 3 attacks at 10%+ d25% damage
Assassin Training: 1 Attack at 100% effectiveness or 2 attacks at 60+d25% damage or 3 attacks at 25+25% damage
Juicer Training: 2 Attacks at 150% effectiveness. (whatever)

The idea is you keep the 1 attack per round rule (as simple game mechanic) and increase damage (as a function of speed, training and focus) instead to make fights end faster.

[bigbobsr6000]

Here is a melee aid I developed it can be downloaded at:

http://www.savefile.com/files/1619632

Also, all my character sheests and such can be found at the link in sig below.

Hope this helps.

[drewkitty ~..~]

Mechinoids