About your turn order rules on p.113.
Most rpg systems have "initiative rolls" but you just say "PC go first, now negotiate among players."
I like your ideas in "very general" terms."
HOWEVER, I feel that you should give somewhere some very general suggestion on how to establish Initiative without negotiations.
I mean: everybody is adult at the game table, but this negotiation thing, even considering the GM threatening to give more "doom" (p.114 on indecision), sometimes can give problems or ruin the fun with certain people....
Especially when, for example, two players want exactly the same thing and one need an abstract way to do it (maybe something to do with Agility?).
The second paragraph's first sentence is awkward.
"focuses on recovery and foremost..."
This likely is suppose to read 'first and foremost' but it leaves the intent a little unclear.
'When taking the Recover Action, the chracter may re-roll any soak (Armor) cover dice until the start of the next turn.'
Shamrock said Jun 25, 2016 06:00:57
Perhaps I missed it, but how do pets work? I have a player who is making a character with a guard dog. Is the dog an NPC, or does the player control it's movements/attacks? If the player, does the command action count? Technically, it's just talking so i don't see how it would help or hinder their own actions, but in some games it does for balance reasons? I see the parts on mounts and "actions", but nothing that suggests how to handle the "slasher" of my group.
Thanks for any insight,
p.121 "Dual Wielding".
So, if I well understood, Dual wielding give you a 1pt discount for spending momentum for a second attack....but no hindrace or malus at all!!
It is that possible?
Most games let Dual Wielding give you further attack/bonus but coupled with a penalty.
But you seem to give only the good part of dual wielding!
If this is true all characters will go "dual wielding"!!
By the way, most real practitioners say that dual wielding is difficult, so I feel that you should put some kind of penalty.
I agree with DerekHand. This is still fantasy. Also, dual wielding in this game also means weapon and shield, and stabbing with dagger then throwing it. My players love it.
I also don't put a lot of faith or weight in the opinion of "real practitioners" on the internet.
Page 119, Actions and Attacks: "Any character can only perform a single Movement action during each Round." Since a character can only do normal Movement actions on their own Turn during the Round, did you word this such that if you have not yet done a Movement this Round, there could be Reaction actions or some other future optional rules that include a Movement action outside of your own Turn? If this was not intended, I think it would be more clear to say, "Any character can perform only a single Movement action each Round and only during that character's Turn." to further restrict it so people do not try to figure out ways to do Movement actions during other characters' turns elsewhere in the Round.
Page 122, someone already caught the "first and foremost" problem, so skip to Treatment: "The Difficulty of the test is equal to the number of Harms of that type the ally is suffering from, or Average (D1)." One question is, when can the "or Average (D1)" come into play? Then I would clarify when that "or" can apply, because, as written, a player could ignore the (D3) for 3 Harms and instead do the Average (D1) check to heal those Harms, which certainly was not your intent. Something like, "whichever is higher" may be the right end to that sentence, if the "or" portion is required then explain when that (D1) can be used instead.
Page 124, Momentum Spends table: I recommend changing the font on the capital letter 'i' so it has the same top and bottom lines for Second Wind "1 I,R" because the straight line capital 'i' does not look like an 'i', and it doesn't match the "I" mentioned in the text lower on the page under Action Scene Momentum Spends, which is unnecessarily confusing.
Page 126, first sentence: "Non-player characters are typically less able to withstand Harm, and take fewer Harms to incapacitate than does a player character." sounds a lot better as "less able to withstand Harm and take fewer Harms to incapacitate compared to a player character."
Regarding LucaCherstich's two comments, with the group that I play with, we negotiated "initiative" turns amiably in Mutant Chronicles, quickly planning out an order based on if we needed to heal people early in the round or wanted healers to hang back until late in the round, or to get the armored guys in front of the squishier people, etc. With other groups that are competing with one another, you could just roll initiative like most other games. Nothing in the rules precludes the GM from making that call.
And I agree that when I read Dual Wielding on page 121, I kept waiting for the other shoe to drop, and it actually sounds more advantageous than in most tabletop games. But, you have to spend 3 Momentum to pull off Swift Action AND then Dual Wield with that second Standard Action you get, so 3 Momentum means you won't be Dual Wielding every time you attack, and you have to use 3 Momentum from the first attack just to do a second attack. Most of the time you're going to use that Momentum to do more damage or some other effect on that first attack. There's no guarantee that the second attack will even hit. So, the Dual Wield rules may not provide an immediate disadvantage, but it also will not come up all the time to unbalance your game. I would give it a chance and try it out before recommending to remove it.
@Mike Weber - I think it's only 1 Momentum total. The 1 Momentum you pay to dual wield is the cost of the Swift Action.
So it seems like there is no down side, but there is.
1) You have to spend that Momentum on your second attack, and thus not on rerolling damage, etc.
2) There is an inherent disadvantage in Swift Action, which is the +1 difficulty.
3) Because of the 1 Momentum cost from the first attack, and the +1 difficulty from the second attack, you are lessening the potential for that first attack.
In our group, the spear fighter is just as effective as the sword and dagger fighter. The Sword and Dagger gets two attacks and damage (if they can afford the second attack, and if they hit), but the spear fighter can spend all their Momentum on that one action.
Finally, if the spear fighter wants to attack a second time, they only need to spend 1 more Momentum than the dual wielder.