Just curious of most of you GMs... (regarding dodge limits)

[Lt Gargoyle]

personally i try to stay clear of this. both as a player and gm. it can cause issues quickly.

[Kagashi]

Personally, I stay clear of this as well.

It certainly makes sense to house rule *something* because the rules as written are pretty much incomplete. Palladium rules say each character takes turns until one runs out of attacks and the other can just unload. The system works *okay* until you run into a player who has a significant amount of attacks over the opponent. So if a character with 4 attacks is fighting a character with 8 attacks, the character with 4 attacks suddenly stops reacting 7.5 seconds into every 15 second period. Heck, the entire megaverse stops reacting to what they were doing every 7.5 seconds as long as their is a character that exists with 8 attacks. That does not sound very realistic.

Example: Bob = 4 attacks, Mark = 8 attacks. Bob will win initiative in all my examples.

Turn order would be:
Bob
Mark
Bob
Mark
Bob
Mark
Bob
Mark
Mark
Mark
Mark
Mark

One approach to fixing this is what you propose, allowing a character to borrow attacks from the next round. but then if you think about it, it really takes away from the entire purpose of having more attacks than the next guy. Plus, you have to regulate it somehow. You cannot just let him use up his whole next round of attacks. Perhaps only one can be "borrowed" each round. Perhaps the following round, he has to pay 2 to make up for the one borrowed attack, or the following round is fought at -1 to strike, parry, dodge for every attack borrowed the round prior. Something. The Character with the lesser number of attacks is SUPPOSED to be at a disadvantage. So using the above example, Bob could use one of his four attacks of his NEXT melee round to counter the FIVE unopposed attacks Mark gets to level at him, but I would throw in a penalty for the second melee round for Bob of -1 s/p/d...AND he only has 3 attacks vs Marks EIGHT in round 2.

Another approach is a bit more complicated. When I ran this system, I used a chart to help me visualize. But I broke down each player in combat by the number of attacks in a 15 second period. Each attack would take up longer or shorter periods of time within each melee round. So going back to the 4 vs 8 attacks, the guy with 8 attacks would get to react to the outcome of the combat twice for every time the guy with 4 attacks would get to react.

Bob
Mark
Mark
Bob
Mark
Mark
Bob
Mark
Mark
Bob
Mark
Mark

This approach is more realistic, but can become quite cumbersome with more characters in the combat or numbers of attacks that do not divide evenly like the example above. But there would be no need for borrowing attacks as Bob now spreads his attacks evenly in the 15 second period.

Personally, lately, I have been leading to abandoning the number of attacks all together for a third approach. I propose every character, regardless of H2H training, OCC, RCC, or whatever, gets 5 APM. Period. Then take the number of attacks Palladium says the character should have and apply a +1 to s/p/d (or all combat rolls...doesnt matter as long as everybody in the megaverse is doing it) for every attack that character should have.

(EDIT: Perhaps a bonus to Init would be more warranted. Bonuses to strike would mean under the current Palladium rules, nobody would ever miss a shot/strike).

This way, each attack is a nice even 3 seconds of combat game time and there is no need to borrow attacks for less experienced people. There are no charts to have to maintain, simplifying the issue for the GM. And more experienced characters will still have an advantage over less experienced characters.

Bob
Mark
Bob
Mark
Bob
Mark
Bob
Mark
Bob
Mark

I think this would ALSO resolve the misconceptions I see people having about the concept of simultaneous attack.

[glitterboy2098]

IMO, the ability to 'bank' attacks doesn't make much sense.. not only in terms of in setting time but also in terms of book keeping.

i generally ignore it. though now that i think of it, it might be worth trying out something like "you can continue to dodge for free, but at a -4 penalty" or something like that. give them the option, but make it less attractive an option (thus letting autododge remain a valued option)

[Damian Magecraft]

the "banking" thing works (sort of) but only if you keep in mind that it puts Bob completely on the defensive. (burning next melees actions means no attack options for Bob).
but it does seem off some how...
I get where the concept is coming from but as a combat mechanic it is aesthetically displeasing.

[MilkManX]

Personally, I stay clear of this as well.

It certainly makes sense to house rule *something* because the rules as written are pretty much incomplete. Palladium rules say each character takes turns until one runs out of attacks and the other can just unload. The system works *okay* until you run into a player who has a significant amount of attacks over the opponent. So if a character with 4 attacks is fighting a character with 8 attacks, the character with 4 attacks suddenly stops reacting 7.5 seconds into every 15 second period. Heck, the entire megaverse stops reacting to what they were doing every 7.5 seconds as long as their is a character that exists with 8 attacks. That does not sound very realistic.

Example: Bob = 4 attacks, Mark = 8 attacks. Bob will win initiative in all my examples.

Turn order would be:
Bob
Mark
Bob
Mark
Bob
Mark
Bob
Mark
Mark
Mark
Mark
Mark

One approach to fixing this is what you propose, allowing a character to borrow attacks from the next round. but then if you think about it, it really takes away from the entire purpose of having more attacks than the next guy. Plus, you have to regulate it somehow. You cannot just let him use up his whole next round of attacks. Perhaps only one can be "borrowed" each round. Perhaps the following round, he has to pay 2 to make up for the one borrowed attack, or the following round is fought at -1 to strike, parry, dodge for every attack borrowed the round prior. Something. The Character with the lesser number of attacks is SUPPOSED to be at a disadvantage. So using the above example, Bob could use one of his four attacks of his NEXT melee round to counter the FIVE unopposed attacks Mark gets to level at him, but I would throw in a penalty for the second melee round for Bob of -1 s/p/d...AND he only has 3 attacks vs Marks EIGHT in round 2.

Another approach is a bit more complicated. When I ran this system, I used a chart to help me visualize. But I broke down each player in combat by the number of attacks in a 15 second period. Each attack would take up longer or shorter periods of time within each melee round. So going back to the 4 vs 8 attacks, the guy with 8 attacks would get to react to the outcome of the combat twice for every time the guy with 4 attacks would get to react.

Bob
Mark
Mark
Bob
Mark
Mark
Bob
Mark
Mark
Bob
Mark
Mark

This approach is more realistic, but can become quite cumbersome with more characters in the combat or numbers of attacks that do not divide evenly like the example above. But there would be no need for borrowing attacks as Bob now spreads his attacks evenly in the 15 second period.

Personally, lately, I have been leading to abandoning the number of attacks all together for a third approach. I propose every character, regardless of H2H training, OCC, RCC, or whatever, gets 5 APM. Period. Then take the number of attacks Palladium says the character should have and apply a +1 to s/p/d (or all combat rolls...doesnt matter as long as everybody in the megaverse is doing it) for every attack that character should have.

(EDIT: Perhaps a bonus to Init would be more warranted. Bonuses to strike would mean under the current Palladium rules, nobody would ever miss a shot/strike).

This way, each attack is a nice even 3 seconds of combat game time and there is no need to borrow attacks for less experienced people. There are no charts to have to maintain, simplifying the issue for the GM. And more experienced characters will still have an advantage over less experienced characters.

Bob
Mark
Bob
Mark
Bob
Mark
Bob
Mark
Bob
Mark

I think this would ALSO resolve the misconceptions I see people having about the concept of simultaneous attack.

Oh man that is a great idea. I have been thinking of how to make the combat less cumbersome/time consuming. I might even trim it down to 4 actions and have the PC's get their extra attacks as an init/stat bonus. Thanks!

[Alrik Vas]

Never let them borrow attacks to dodge. It's a weak idea and only encourages players to act foolishly. They'd be better served by planning a little more, having some decent SOP in place and acting accordingly when **** hits the fan. that way they take cover and concentrate fire rather than just dodge-dodge-dodge like whoa.

[flatline]

I ditch attacks per melee entirely. Everyone gets one action per round, each round is 1 second long, and some actions take multiple rounds to complete.

Also, instead of rolling to dodge, if you choose to dodge, the difficulty of all attacks made against you that round is increased.

--flatline

[Alrik Vas]

I ditch attacks per melee entirely. Everyone gets one action per round, each round is 1 second long, and some actions take multiple rounds to complete.

Also, instead of rolling to dodge, if you choose to dodge, the difficulty of all attacks made against you that round is increased.

--flatline

I keep seeing you post this, and i doubt you would play it that way if it didn't work for you (so i won't ask "how's that work for you?" )...but uh...how's that work? Like, specifically. You can PM me if you don't want to muck-up this thread.

[Lt Gargoyle]

the banking attacks is a no go in my games. I like the mor skilled fighters having the extra. I have seen this over the years of martial arts training. so it made sence to me. but i cannot stop time and borrow skill from the future. so i dont allow that.

[Kagashi]

IMO, the ability to 'bank' attacks doesn't make much sense.. not only in terms of in setting time but also in terms of book keeping.

i generally ignore it. though now that i think of it, it might be worth trying out something like "you can continue to dodge for free, but at a -4 penalty" or something like that. give them the option, but make it less attractive an option (thus letting autododge remain a valued option)

Interesting. Perhaps everybody gets the ability to autododge, just at -4, unless you have bonuses that say otherwise. Of course, the player can always opt to do a traditional dodge and take advantage of all the regular bonuses. I like this.

[ShadowLogan]

Just curious if most of you GMs allow for the ruling that if the opponent wants to continue dodging when they run out of "attacks", they can "bank" them by using attacks from the following round. That is not something that was allowed in 1st edition if memory serves. The one question I have as a result, do you LIMIT that to only the attacks of that following round and ONLY that following round's worth, or do you continue to allow them basically unlimited dodges (as long as it keeps eating up "attacks" for the future). Yes, naive question. Please excuse it. : )

We don't "bank". If you dodge, that is you next action for the melee round (15sec) period. If you need to dodge another attack, you're out of luck. (Though Evasive Action Piloting Maneuver could be interpreted to show that if you dodge one attack other attacks on you are very difficult while that Dodge is happening IMHO)

Under 1E flying mecha had an advantage in the form of the Tilt-Dodge piloting maneuver, as it was half-way between a regular dodge and an auto-leap dodge because it left one at penalty to strike (cumulative) w/o sacrificing an attack action. 2E really doesn't have the special piloting maneuvers listed like it did in 1E/M2 IIRC, but there is no reason they wouldn't still be in play (may have to get them from another PB line like N&SS or HU).

[MilkManX]

I ditch attacks per melee entirely. Everyone gets one action per round, each round is 1 second long, and some actions take multiple rounds to complete.

Also, instead of rolling to dodge, if you choose to dodge, the difficulty of all attacks made against you that round is increased.

--flatline

See I was also looking at something like this. Very much like classic D&D.

Interesting to hear all the variations you guys have.

[slade the sniper]

I go with something similar to what Kagashi and flatline do. I break the melee into 3 second bits and divide the APM by 5 to get how many actions they get in that 3 seconds. I use whole numbers so 1 to 9 APM in 15 seconds gives them 1 action, 10 to 14 APM gives them 2 actions, 15 to 19 APM they get 3, etc. It really cuts down on the time combat takes and it has had the effect of players really shying away from making multi-APM characters so they focus more on skills for role playing than combat.

-STS

[Tiree]

I also do something similar to Kagashi. Based on situation though:

Play by Post, I break it up to 3 5 Second Phases. Everyone's attacks are spread evenly across all 3 phases.
Table top Play: I break it up to 5, 3 Second Phases. Everyone's attacks are spread evenly across all 5 phases (making sure that everyone has an attack in phase 1.

Both work well, I do a shorter amount of Phases in Play by Post, mainly to make the writing a bit easier as a GM.

[Damian Magecraft]

I also do something similar to Kagashi. Based on situation though:

Play by Post, I break it up to 3 5 Second Phases. Everyone's attacks are spread evenly across all 3 phases.
Table top Play: I break it up to 5, 3 Second Phases. Everyone's attacks are spread evenly across all 5 phases (making sure that everyone has an attack in phase 1.

Both work well, I do a shorter amount of Phases in Play by Post, mainly to make the writing a bit easier as a GM.

the 5 phase works but I have found Players prefer the 3 phase at the table (has to do with the illusion of advancement I think...)
YMMV however.

[Tiree]

My group likes the 5 phases better, as it is a bit more granular than the 3 phase. It also let's them figure out their attacks when they do two action things (ie aimed shot, power punch).

[Damian Magecraft]

My group likes the 5 phases better, as it is a bit more granular than the 3 phase. It also let's them figure out their attacks when they do two action things (ie aimed shot, power punch).

Like I said YMMV...
I have tested both methods (with three different variations for each all characters tested at levels 1, 3, 5, 10, and 15) and the votes (100 testers polled) were overwhelmingly for a 3 phase front loaded melee. Predominant reason given was they felt their characters showed advancement more with the 3 phase than the 5 (yeah I know its complete hogwash its the same progression either way but one "looks" like it advances faster).

[devillin]

My groups always divided our attacks over three phases. You can use up all of your actions in the phase, or you could hold one for a dodge or roll during that phase. That dodge lasted until your next action. If you used up all of your actions in attacks, you didn't get a dodge (unless you have autododge [which always has a lower bonus than a regular dodge]) and were hit. If you banked an action and didn't end up using it for a dodge or roll, you lost it.

One thing we did do a little differently was that if you banked 2 actions (for a possible dodge and then a roll) and your first dodge roll was a really low number, you had the option of using your last remaining action to roll another dodge number against your next incoming attack. Of course, if the dice are rolling against you, even an 8 is better than a 5.

[Alrik Vas]

I run the melee round like normal, but i don't allow dodge banking, like i said before, because it breaks the game when given liberal interpretation.

I just keep a sheet of paper with the initiative order written down on it. Everytime someone takes an action (including a dodge, entangle or roll with impact) they get a tally mark, when they've met their max attacks for the round they're out of luck...er...actions. Makes it easy to keep track of what's going on. Also i allow characters to move their SPD attribute in feet as part of an action (but they take the normal -3 to actions for moving if they do so), or double if all they do is move. When i do it like that, it's much more like D&D or Dark Heresy type combat rounds, just the people with more attacks get free rounds at the end. When things get nuts i might upgrade to staggering them.

[jaymz]

Um, has everyone forgotten the 2nd ed of Robotech have quite a few mecha that have auto-dodge and that you add your PP bonus to auto-dodge rolls?


Personally I allow anyone with combat training a basic auto-dodge (no bonus except PP if any). This is NOT the same as the Juicer's "uncanny near supernatural ability to dodge for free" but just dodge without costing an attack. In most cases the person shooting at you has higher bonuses and will likely still hit you but it at least gives you chance over having to take the hit and this allows anyone to at least try to dodge even if out of attacks. I mean it's only fair to give some form of free dodge since anyone with combat training gets to parry for free. Granted the parrying gets full bonuses but dodging is a little more involved than parrying I would think and in most cases involves a lot more active movement to do.

Mind you I also modify the whole "cannot dodge 4 or more missile rule" as well

[flatline]

Mind you I also modify the whole "cannot dodge 4 or more missile rule" as well

Good call. That rule has always been at the top of my list of canon rules to totally ignore because they're completely stupid.

--flatline

[jaymz]

Well i don't just "ignore it" but i do modify. It just harder and harder to dodge the more missiles thrown at you.

[glitterboy2098]

Um, has everyone forgotten the 2nd ed of Robotech have quite a few mecha that have auto-dodge and that you add your PP bonus to auto-dodge rolls?

if you define "quite a few" as 27% of all mecha published...

total mecha count..

Code: Select all

      Mecha   Autododge
UEEF:      11   4 (VR-038, VR-042, VR-052, VF-057)
ASC:      14   3 (Logan [F-mode], Ajax [F-mode], Manticore [space only], 
UEDF:      6   1 (VF-1 [F-mode])
IMU's:      4   2 (VRM-32 Typhoon, VFH-RAU "fury")
Invid:      8   0
Masters:   9   1 (Bioroid Invid Fighter)
Zentreadi:   7   6 (Regult, Light arty pod, Heavy arty pod, Gluag, MPA, FPA)
haydonites:   2   0
Gura Invid:   5   0
Regent:      1   1 (Cougar)

note: Alpha models, Beta models, VF-1 models, and Cyclone submodels not counted seperately, Bioroid upgrades treated as seperate models due to massive changes to their designs and stats.

that's 67 mecha total, and 18 of which have auto dodge. of those 18, 4 receive autododge only in specific circumstances. and 7 of them have minimal armor and thus the autotdodge provides their main defense against attack.
the rest are cyclones.

[jaymz]

And yet too me that is quite a few (ignoring the fact I think the messed it up altogether anyway) and it IS there for "some" if you prefer. And those are the ones likely to be used in most campaigns anyway so it IS a viable option within the rules.

[Kagashi]

True. In first edition, auto dodge was extremely rare. Three cyclones, one Masters bioroid, and two Invid units (which ironically lost their AD bonuses in 2nd Edition). Everything else did not have auto dodge. Jaymz's point a valid one. Id certainly classify 27% as "quite a few" compared to the old game.