On initial read I thought that with "steady pace of combat" Aramis was referring to its frequency/incidence rate. RPG characters tend to get in a LOT of fights, and this necessitates the odds of dying in one being relatively low if we're going to have ongoing character continuity.
Although now I could see an argument for it being about the pace of action in any given fight. In my own LARP and fencing experience, I do remember it being much more a mix of different paces- slower paced tentative feints and feeling each other out and pot-shotting punctuated by furious bursts of action where combatants are striking as fast as possible, trying to finish off an opponent, or overwhelm/push past them as part of a tactical maneuver*. And the latter are quickly tiring which enforces breaks/lulls again. Which is a significant contrast to a standard RPG combat round where each combatant tends to do the same amount of things each time they get to act.
Systems like Champions and Car Wars and Shadowrun having the faster combatants acting on more distributed segments each round is definitely a thing, but that's still a steady pace for them, as long as they maintain speed. As opposed to lulls and bursts for each combatant.
*(I often see this in realistic portrayals of modern combat too, for example WW2 stuff like Band of Brothers or SPR).
I was intending the pace of combat, not frequency.
Frequency is a good bit high, tho', too.
I feel like you have more to say about this.
Champions had an interesting mechanic for this. Each character had a speed stat, which determined how often you got to act. It was a bit clunky to consult the chart and confirm who got to act on each segment, but it meant that you didn’t cycle through everyone quite so predictably.
Champions suffers from steady pace of combat, too; it's phases chart by speed is NOT a solution to the even pacing of combat.
A more realistic approach, keep Speed... but roll (speed)d12 and go on the phases rolled. Tracking nightmare, but simple and far more realistic. In case of doubles, first unrolled slot after. So 3/3/6/7 goes on 3/4/6/7, and 3/3/4/4 goes on 3/4/5/6. ignore the chart.
If you really want to prevent simultinaity, use a french (bridge/poker) deck, dealing (speed) cards.
Either way, redo each round.
@thomas - LTE was a huge hassle for minimal gains in realism and story.
I've only had one game that had a decent lack of consistency... Prime Directive 1st ed. Due to the Action/Initiative rolls, one can wind up unable to act or only a small amount of action, but still be reasonably middle of the initiative count. Each die, after open-ending, is checked vs a tricode (base unarmored is 4/6/8), each die on 4-5 being 1 initiative, 6-7 being 2, 8-15 being 3, 16+ being 4 (optional rule); best die sets the level of action 4-5 being minimal, 6=7 moderate, 8-15 complete.
One fun case, the Security CPO had an A/I roll of 8d, and due to armor & encumbrance was 4/7/10... and rolled 8x 3's... one of a very few extreme rolls. Was a rough round... couldn't do anything but go prone... Following round, he had an initiative of 20 and Extreme level of action, whereupon he brought up the scatter phaser and dropped half the klingons.
Note that the open ending is 6 = 5+reroll; we counted the 6's, rolled a second batch, and it is recursive. The guy playing the CPO above once rolled a 56. That's 11 6's in a row, followed by a 1. His phaser pool was 10d. Only initiative uses every die, the rest just use the best.
PD1 isn't a fast system to resolve, but a roll sort mat helps immensely. And replicates nicely the "Riker &/or Redshirt stands there 2 seconds looking dumb before he dives for cover" effect.
