Jedi combat
Chriz
Mercury
Brend
Elmer
Stuiter
Open in chat • 10 posts (analysis)
• Page 1 of 1
Jedi combat
Chriz » Fri Jun 29, 2012 9:18 pm
In my opinion the combat system was still unclear and we started out the wrong way in Basic Training II.
It looks like we started this combat in the wrong order. At least we should have stated 2 combat styles to make it clear what is happening.
We now did our attacks first and defend with the same style in the next round. But the defence is still part of round 1 and should be with the newly declared style.
We can still collapse round 0 and round 1 but we need to declare two combat styles each round.
First you declare the combat style from round 0 that you use to attack with in Round 1. In round 1 you choose the style to defend with against the attacks on you. The style that you chose to defend with in Round 1 will automatically be used for your attacks in round 2.
It is important that we separate the attacking combat style and the defending combat style since the attacking combat style is the one you used to defend with the previous round. Although I think we should write down the attacking combat style as well for convenience.
An examples of the way I think we should probably write it:
Ariana starts the combat offensively with the Ataru style and will use this in the first round to attack. Because it is the first round she still has a -2 penalty on attacks. Ariana switches her combat style to Shii-Cho to defend against the incoming attacks.
((OOC: Round 1:
Attack with Ataru: 5/6/6
Defence with Shii-Cho: 6/8/7))
The next round Ariana attacks with the Shii-Cho style she defended with in the previous round and switches to Ataru, lowering her defences but opening up the possibility to land a killing blow the next round.
((OOC: Round 2:
Attack with Shii-Cho: 6/7/6
Defence with Ataru: 5/6/6))
What do you guys think about it?
It looks like we started this combat in the wrong order. At least we should have stated 2 combat styles to make it clear what is happening.
We now did our attacks first and defend with the same style in the next round. But the defence is still part of round 1 and should be with the newly declared style.
We can still collapse round 0 and round 1 but we need to declare two combat styles each round.
First you declare the combat style from round 0 that you use to attack with in Round 1. In round 1 you choose the style to defend with against the attacks on you. The style that you chose to defend with in Round 1 will automatically be used for your attacks in round 2.
It is important that we separate the attacking combat style and the defending combat style since the attacking combat style is the one you used to defend with the previous round. Although I think we should write down the attacking combat style as well for convenience.
An examples of the way I think we should probably write it:
Ariana starts the combat offensively with the Ataru style and will use this in the first round to attack. Because it is the first round she still has a -2 penalty on attacks. Ariana switches her combat style to Shii-Cho to defend against the incoming attacks.
((OOC: Round 1:
Attack with Ataru: 5/6/6
Defence with Shii-Cho: 6/8/7))
The next round Ariana attacks with the Shii-Cho style she defended with in the previous round and switches to Ataru, lowering her defences but opening up the possibility to land a killing blow the next round.
((OOC: Round 2:
Attack with Shii-Cho: 6/7/6
Defence with Ataru: 5/6/6))
What do you guys think about it?
Player of the Praetorian Empire
Mercury » Fri Jun 29, 2012 10:50 pm
-
Mercury - Storyteller
This might help clarify some things, yes! Remember, parry is defence-attack.
A little drawing might be necessary to help clarify. I made a simple one which we should probably update to a better one:
A little drawing might be necessary to help clarify. I made a simple one which we should probably update to a better one:
Brend » Fri Jun 29, 2012 11:25 pm
Chriz wrote:It looks like we started this combat in the wrong order. At least we should have stated 2 combat styles to make it clear what is happening. We now did our attacks first and defend with the same style in the next round. But the defence is still part of round 1 and should be with the newly declared style.
That was distinctly NOT what I was going to do. The assumption was that you do not defend in the first round (i.e. the firstmost round of combat, in which hostilities are intiated, does not include previous attacks, so no defence is required...)
My idea was that we start out with people declaring attacks, and then defend with the style they choose NEXT round. (So the style switched to in round 2 allows you to take into account the attack of round 1.) This allows them to pick a style based on the incoming attacks, properly describe their defenses, and launch an attack with their newly picked style!
There is more: We did NOT do the double style thingy in Basic Training I. Next to that, I find declaring a double style a bit confusing -- you don't get to choose two styles!
@Mercury: what round is the actual start of hostilities? (I.e. is the Round 0 the virtual pre-round used to ensure everyone has a style, or is there no such round?) Maybe you can add a very simple example combat flow as you envision it? The image is not informative enough to clear up the issue...
Last edited by Brend on Fri Jun 29, 2012 11:28 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Elmer » Fri Jun 29, 2012 11:26 pm
If I am correctly, the way the system works now, the players should post their move first, and then the storyteller. so it will be
combat:
start:
round 0
((OOC: 1 players declares first style
2 storyteller declares first style
3 nothing happens so far))
round 1
((OOC: 1 players declares second style, meaning their defence for this round and the attack for the next round
2 storyteller declares second style, and result of round 1))
round 2
((OOC: 1 players declare third style
2 storyteller declares third style and result of round 2))
round 3
((OOC: players win))
combat:
start:
round 0
((OOC: 1 players declares first style
2 storyteller declares first style
3 nothing happens so far))
round 1
((OOC: 1 players declares second style, meaning their defence for this round and the attack for the next round
2 storyteller declares second style, and result of round 1))
round 2
((OOC: 1 players declare third style
2 storyteller declares third style and result of round 2))
round 3
((OOC: players win))
Brend » Sat Jun 30, 2012 1:08 am
Ok. I have spent some extra thought on this. I think I know what the global idea was that Mercury was thinking of when writing the rules.
There are two distinct things going on here: Rounds (the time units used to define combat) and posts (the units used by players to describe the actions of their characters).
I think what Mercury and I both intended with respect to the rounds (and, Mercury, please do correct me if I got it wrong) was the following:
Round 0 "The initiation of combat":
All involved entities declare their first style (Let's call it A). This will be the style they use to attack with in Round 1. (Since their is no previous attack, it will not be used for defence.)
Round 1 "First round of combat":
All characters describe their attack with the style selected in the previous round (thus: A), and select their style used for defense in this round (let's name it B). and describe their defence.
Round 2 "Second round of combat":
All characters describe their attack with the style selected in the previous round (thus: B), and select their style used for defense in this round (let's name it C). and describe their defence.
I think that most confusion stems from the fact that this leaves it unclear what goes in which post.
I think I have a clear idea of this now, but to make sure I don't add to the confusion, I will keep it to myself until we have an actual explanation by Mercury.
There are two distinct things going on here: Rounds (the time units used to define combat) and posts (the units used by players to describe the actions of their characters).
I think what Mercury and I both intended with respect to the rounds (and, Mercury, please do correct me if I got it wrong) was the following:
Round 0 "The initiation of combat":
All involved entities declare their first style (Let's call it A). This will be the style they use to attack with in Round 1. (Since their is no previous attack, it will not be used for defence.)
Round 1 "First round of combat":
All characters describe their attack with the style selected in the previous round (thus: A), and select their style used for defense in this round (let's name it B). and describe their defence.
Round 2 "Second round of combat":
All characters describe their attack with the style selected in the previous round (thus: B), and select their style used for defense in this round (let's name it C). and describe their defence.
I think that most confusion stems from the fact that this leaves it unclear what goes in which post.
I think I have a clear idea of this now, but to make sure I don't add to the confusion, I will keep it to myself until we have an actual explanation by Mercury.
Stuiter » Sat Jun 30, 2012 6:54 am
The biggest problem is the round 0.
It is the getting ready for battle round by chosing a style.
In the basic training 2 we did get ready for combat but did not chose a style.
The flow of the combat was different and combat suddenly started with attacking.
The thing is that the storyteller has to tell that they are going to fight one post earlier.
So that player can post in their getting ready for combat action their chosen style.
And then next post do their attacks.
Dual styling is indeed trickier but it can give you combo bonuses.
It is the getting ready for battle round by chosing a style.
In the basic training 2 we did get ready for combat but did not chose a style.
The flow of the combat was different and combat suddenly started with attacking.
The thing is that the storyteller has to tell that they are going to fight one post earlier.
So that player can post in their getting ready for combat action their chosen style.
And then next post do their attacks.
Dual styling is indeed trickier but it can give you combo bonuses.
Brend » Sat Jun 30, 2012 3:52 pm
Stuiter wrote:Dual styling is indeed trickier but it can give you combo bonuses.
There is no 'dual styling'. Dual wielding two sabers already gives different offence/defence bonuses.
----
After some discussion between Elmer, mvdenk and myself we came to the conclusion that the notation proposed by Chriz is probably the best one. It makes the offence style explicit, though it was already known as it was used as the defensive style in the previous round.
We also think it best to not mention the Round 0 explicitly, but use the Round 1 post to declare the initial attack style, along with the style switch. An example of this can be seen in the original post of the thread.
Does anyone have questions or comments on the notation proposed by Chriz? If not, let us all use that.
Brend » Sat Jun 30, 2012 6:27 pm
Ok. I did even more thinking on this, as I am still a bit unsure about how combat should be done with regard to what is posted when.
As I understand it now, the flow is as follows (each line prefixed with P1, P2 or ST is a single post):
This would mean that the very first post of any player in a combat situation will only contain their readying move, and the selection of a combat style that will be used for their initial attack.
As you can see I came back from my position that we shouldn't mention round 0. We need it.
However, things became confusing in Basic Training I because there was only a single style available, so there was no switching involved.
In the Red Troop thread, a thing that confused me is the fact that Mercury has collapsed round 0 and round 1 into a single post, and did not ask for a defensive style. I now (finally) understand why: because the enemies are surprised, they don't select a style in round 0, and as such they do not get an attack in round 1. Because of this, the players effectively have a free attack before the enemies react, and combat starts as normal.
I hope I got it right this time.
@Mercury: I think it's a good idea to not collapse rounds until the involved players have a good grip on how combat really works. (Though I do like the surprise mechanic, I think it best if this is made explicit the next time...)
As I understand it now, the flow is as follows (each line prefixed with P1, P2 or ST is a single post):
ST: Posts that combat is joined. Announces round 0.
-- round 0 --
P1: Selects combat style for attack in round 1
ST: characters select their styles for attack in round 1
P2: Selects combat style for attack in round 1
ST: Announces the start of round 1.
-- round 1 --
P1: Attacks with style selected in round 0, and defends with newly selected style
P2: Attacks with style selected in round 0, and defends with newly selected style
ST: Characters attack with styles selected in round 0, and select new styles for defence
ST: Posts results of attacks (could be combined in one post with previous ST post), and announces round 2
-- round 2 --
P1: Attacks with style selected in round 1, and defends with newly selected style
P2: Attacks with style selected in round 1, and defends with newly selected style
ST: Characters attack with styles selected in round 1, and select new styles for defence
ST: Posts results of attacks (could be combined in one post with previous ST post), and announces round N+1
-- round N+1 --
etc.
This would mean that the very first post of any player in a combat situation will only contain their readying move, and the selection of a combat style that will be used for their initial attack.
As you can see I came back from my position that we shouldn't mention round 0. We need it.
However, things became confusing in Basic Training I because there was only a single style available, so there was no switching involved.
In the Red Troop thread, a thing that confused me is the fact that Mercury has collapsed round 0 and round 1 into a single post, and did not ask for a defensive style. I now (finally) understand why: because the enemies are surprised, they don't select a style in round 0, and as such they do not get an attack in round 1. Because of this, the players effectively have a free attack before the enemies react, and combat starts as normal.
I hope I got it right this time.
@Mercury: I think it's a good idea to not collapse rounds until the involved players have a good grip on how combat really works. (Though I do like the surprise mechanic, I think it best if this is made explicit the next time...)
Mercury » Sat Jun 30, 2012 6:36 pm
-
Mercury - Storyteller
Yay, the problem has been resolved! Your explanation is just right Brend.
Elmer » Sat Jun 30, 2012 7:07 pm
jeey, finally. Now we can combat appropriately, and I knew I did understand the system :P
10 posts (analysis)
• Page 1 of 1