Combat Space

[GMMichael]

I'm trying to fit a combat system into my RPG, and I'm leaning toward a FF1-style space: both sides of the battle stay on their own side, and if they run away, the battle's over.

What's your favorite combat space system?

If you could make your own, what would it look like?

 

[Water Bob]

Deleted.

 

[Asmor]

Water Bob, I don't think he meant combat in space.

Lately I've been disinterested in map-based combat. Not because of any problems with the combat, but because I just find it a big hassle to set up the map and keep table space dedicated to it.

I'm working on an RPG, and combat in it eschews some D&D staples. There's no initiative; all the PCs go, then all the enemies. There's no map.

The difficult thing is figuring out how to handle ranged combat and magic. Without actual physical space to move around in, it's difficult to make ranged combat attractive without overshadowing melee. I have ideas, but so far nothing I'm really happy with.

 

[Water Bob]

Water Bob, I don't think he meant combat in space.

OOoops! LOL!! I think you're right! Damn, and I wrote all that out, too.

I've had Star Wars on the brain lately, not D&D.

Lately I've been disinterested in map-based combat. Not because of any problems with the combat, but because I just find it a big hassle to set up the map and keep table space dedicated to it.

Me too. I used to insist on precise distances and map based movement, but in my old age, I think just describing the scene, imagining the action, with generalized ranges is quite appealing.

There's no initiative; all the PCs go, then all the enemies. There's no map.

I'd like to hear those ideas. I started a thread about this very thing. If you want to post your idea, I'd be interested in reading it.

The difficult thing is figuring out how to handle ranged combat and magic. Without actual physical space to move around in, it's difficult to make ranged combat attractive without overshadowing melee. I have ideas, but so far nothing I'm really happy with.

I'd be interested in when damage is applied to combatants. Without initiative, that could get dicey with the players unless you're doing it at the end of the round, in a damage phase, after everybody has had a chance to act (which, I think would be quite confusing in a D&D based game).

 

[Asmor]

I'd be interested in when damage is applied to combatants. Without initiative, that could get dicey with the players unless you're doing it at the end of the round, in a damage phase, after everybody has had a chance to act (which, I think would be quite confusing in a D&D based game).

Damage is applied immediately, and yeah, people can be taken out before they've even had a turn. Generally speaking, I let the narrative dictate which side should get to go first. There aren't a whole lot of instances where one side doesn't have at least a minor tactical advantage.

The system still has a lot of kinks in it, though. I will say that the OP has actually inspired me to look towards video games for a solution to the 'tactical' issues... Specifically, Etrian Odyssey's arrangement of your heroes into two lines. Here's what I came up with in the shower.

Each side can align itself into combat groups; a combat group consisting of a front and back line. Those in the back line are Protected as long as there are at least as many people in the front line. You can only align yourself into groups on your side's turn, so if the front line of a group gets taken out during the enemy's turn, that leaves those in the back temporarily vulnerable.

Protected people can't be attacked in melee. If you try to cast a spell or make a ranged attack while not Protected, you'll take some kind of penalty.

AoE attacks will deal damage to everyone in a group, giving an incentive to split up if you suspect your enemies might be using fireballs and such.

 

[Water Bob]

Damage is applied immediately, and yeah, people can be taken out before they've even had a turn. Generally speaking, I let the narrative dictate which side should get to go first..

The problem I see with this is in the nature of the way rpgs are played.

Player: I move down the cave. I've got my sword out and my shield readied. I'm poised for anything.

GM: OK, deeper and deeper, down into the earth you go. You've got to duck roots and narrow spaces, move around rocks upon uneven ground. This is definitely a natural tunnel with lots of turns, zig-zags, and elevation increases/decreases. Most parts are wide enough for you to swing your sword, but there are areas where you've got so sqeeze through.

You are now several minutes into the tunnel, and it's getting quite dark.

Player: I'll stop, fasten my shield to my back, then light a torch, and move on ahead.

GM: OK, that done, you sqeeze through a narrow rock opening into a larger cavern. You can hear water in the distance, but the pool must be beyond the light your torch brings you.

Player: I'll move towards the water, torch held so that I can see best, sword ready to swing.

GM: Before you, there's movment. A shape is moving towards you. It's moving at a pretty good clip. It's short, whatever it is...wait! A giant spider just came into view at the edge of sight directly in front of you--it's charging!

See, the players are reactionary to what the GM says. With the GM typically "moving first", you might end up doing more damage to the PCs than the other way around. Since there's usually many more NPCs than PCs, this might be a problem with your system--the PCs having to endur all that before they typically get to move.

 

[Tonguez]

I use distance as a modifier to BAB = Distance/10

So combatants start with 60 Foot of distance or Bab+6, they can either move to close distance or attack from range. Terrain and stunts can modify things too

 

[GMMichael]

Tonguez, that sounds like what d20 does: the farther from the enemies you are, the more your attack bonus suffers.

Asmor, check this out:
http://finalfantasyzero.wikidot.com/
It's using two rows of combatants, and I'm pretty sure you take half damage from melee weapons in the back row, but full damage from ranged weapons.

Final Fantasy One, if I recall, didn't have rows. You had a line of four heroes, and your odds of getting attacked got worse as you were further back in the marching order. FF2(japan 4) was actually better, like the FF0 system. Since I'm trying to make a simple RPG, I want something much simpler than d20's miniatures/grid rules. FF2 could be that system.

But I've been watching Table Top, and the Dragon Age episode goes "old school" and doesn't use a map, either. It's just: describe what you want, GM adjudicates. Which is pretty loosey-goosey, but that's how it WAS done and how many games still do it. So I'm looking for options and experiences.

Which includes Star Wars if you want, WaterBob...

 

[GMMichael]

How about this:
- Each battle has two sides.
- Each side has two rows.
- If one side isn't paying attention, it needs to check for surprise. If it is surprised, the other side acts first.
- Each side then checks initiative - which is just an ability score contest by the most ready character on each side. Winner's side goes first.
- Characters choose what their normal starting rank is: front or back.
- Characters in the front rank take full damage from enemies in the opposing front rank.
- Characters in the back rank take half damage from reach-based weapons in the opposing front rank.
- Missile weapons and magic deal full damage from any rank.
- Reach range weapons cannot attack from a rear rank to a rear rank.

And... what did I miss?

 

[Nytmare]

I haven't played it yet, but The One Ring has an interesting combat system. At the start of each round, each player chooses a "stance" for their character between, forward, open, defensive, and rearward. Your stance dictates your initiative, your attack, and your defense bonus.

If you're fighting in a forward, open, or defensive stance, you're in the thick of the battle, and (depending on your stance) you can attempt to either intimidate your foes, or rally, or protect your companions.

If you're fighting in a rearward stance, you're hanging back and either fighting with a ranged weapon, or getting ready to retreat. To fight in a rearward stance, you need to have at least two people fighting forward, open, or defensively, and your party needs to NOT be outnumbered two to one.