Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Yair" data-source="post: 3257498" data-attributes="member: 10913">An interesting system. The concept of Reaction Time in particular is nice. While more realistic, I'm afraid it feels too math intensive and complicated to me. Flurrying movements together seems very odd to me - can I flurry three Moves to move faster?You may take any number of free actions in principle, so you don't need to flurry them (unless the DM says so). Flurrying immediate actions goes against the whole point of seperating immediate from free actions - you can't, for example, flurry two movement actions (Move being an immediate action), you need to Hustle or Run to move faster.In short - you can flurry Attack actions. Other actions can't by default be flurried, althoguh the DM is of course always free to rule otherwise. You can also combine certain actions with each other, but this has nothing to do with flurrying. You can combine any action with a single Immediate action, like combining an Attack with a Move. You can combine any action with any number of free actions, subject to DM limitation, such as combining the Attack and Move with speaking and spotting.Good.The thread magic_gathering2001 linked to above also raises good criticisms of my suggestion: that gameplay is stuck while the player decides what to do. Very well. Although this is unrealistic, so is no one acting for 6 seconds while you complete your action (in normal D&D, with the exception of AoOs). If Exalted and FF use it, it probably is for good reason too.I would suggest a rule I've seen on the Exalted example: no action takes longer than a round (6 seconds; 5 in the Exalted example). This at least limits the absurdity to a round, much like it is in D&D.Sorry, but that doesn't seem like a good way to build a system. EVERY player powergames to some extent, we don't want to design a system that breaks apart so easily. You also want to maintain D&D's balance and so on, no? That means the system should not vary so widely from being "just a different time scale". While it can enhance fluid and dynamic combat, it must do so with a mind to balance. Allowing to flurry for more than a round's-worth of actions needlessly stretches believability IMO. Flurrying too much breaks the balance of the different class options and abilities in combat, requiring a far vaster overhaul of the system than just the initiative/combat system for the game to be enjoyable. (For example, the system of hp and AC is not designed to handle many multiple attacks per round at low level.)I suggest, again, limiting the action time to 6 ticks at most.The mechanics do not relfect well fatigue or other explanations. For example, Kill'Me can still take other possibly very exerting Immediate actions, does not suffer penalties associated with being fatigued or exhausted, is not subject to effects based on these conditions, and so on. The lack of action on Kill'Me's part after his flurries is dues solely to the system's inability to cope with the situation. Instead of making up excuses, I would prefer to keep the narrative void of explanations, accepting the unrealistic nature of the game as part of the style. For this to be effective, however, overy long pauses need to be averted - hence my recommendation of a limit of one round (6 seconds).The link to the Exalted example you provided read like their Flurry does not prolong the action. The action's time is just the highest-costing action within the flurry. The cost of a flurry is the lower chances to hit and the penalty to AC. I think this is a better model to represent doing things fast (which is essentially what flurry does). It doesn't increase unrealism by creating overly long actions.Why can't Run become a mode of movement? Why should using it be complicated by the flurry mechanism? Isn't the same in-game effect of "my warrior runs towards the wizard as fast as he can, aiming to slash him before he can unleash his spell" be achieved? Why should it take 5 ticks to run a distance covered in 2 ticks of running speed? I suggest making all movement modes (Move, Hustle, Run) Immediate actions, with perhaps Withdraw as some other action (3-ticks?).I fail to see why limiting the flurry to only a single extra action without more feats would be a bad idea. It will keep the number of attacks per round more in-line with D&D's expectations. A character could take Improved Flurry and Greater Flurry to become even faster, just like Improved TWF and Greater TWF allow it extra attacks. Balance will be better maintained, action time and with unrealism will increase unduly, and the rules will be simpler and easier to follow.Two posts. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />Not following. Why couldn't you stop Total Defense to take Aim?I think adding a -1 penality to AC per extra action may go a long way towards making Flurry a more tactically interesting (i.e. balanced) option. (If you adopt my idea of making it for attacks only, this isn't necessary.)</blockquote>

Verification