The Gaming Den

Lokathor wrote:So all the info is kinda spread around the topic, and possibly outside of the topic.

Could you post an actual play example of how it would all come together?

Sure. First of all, we have 4 players:

• We have Ahu, who is a Berserker from the Shark Tribe.
• We have Kokor Heckus, the Fire Wizard.
• We have Darcy, the bow using Scout.
• We have Helen the Druid from the Banemires.
  
  They fight crime.

They all have abilities that interact with the system in different ways. But first, let's define a couple of basic terms:

• Maneuvers
• An Assault is a maneuver that moves you into the target zone or feature and then performs an action (generally an attack). The default generic Assault is to "Advance" which merely moves you and does nothing else.
• A Withdraw is a maneuver the performs an action and then moves you to the target zone or feature. The default generic Withdraw is to "Fall Back" which just moves you and does nothing else. It is different from Advance because it triggers Crossfire attacks from the people in the target zone and not from the people in the zone you are leaving.
• An Attack is an action attacks someone or something in the zone you are in. There is a "basic attack" that uses whatever weaponry you happen to have and performs an attack.
• A Fire is an action that attacks into the target zone and does not move the character. A "basic fire" action can only be used if the character has a sufficiently long ranged weapon on hand.
• A Circle is an action that you can take that allows you to Mark a zone until your next turn.
• A Focus is an action you take that allows you to choose your WoF result next turn.
• A Poke is an action that activates a feature.
  
  Terms
• AoE (number): An area effect can be targeted at a zone or feature. If the size number of the AoE is at least the size of the zone or feature, it affects everything in the zone or feature. If it it smaller, it affects one target and any target that is "linked" to it.
• Claimed: A zone or feature is "claimed" if a character assaults it and no one else is there to dispute them doing so. Other abilities may claim an uncontested zone or feature or contest a claimed zone or feature.
• Contested: A zone or feature is contested if an enemy is in it or has claimed it. A zone or feature that has been claimed by your side is uncontested.
• Crossfire: Similar in concept to an attack of opportunity, it is an attack you get because an opponent's guard is down. At base, you get a Crossfire attack if someone Assaults out or Withdraws in to the zone you are in.
• Feature (number): a feature is some thing, whether it be a fox hole or a cliff, or a stream or a chandelier. Some give some tangible benefit for claiming (such as a defense bonus for being "in" a fox hole or a tree), others don't. Features have a size. Some features are "unique" in that there is only one such feature to interact with in a zone, while others are "generic" in that for example there are likely no meaningful limits on how many different trees you could climb into in a heavily wooded area.
• Line: Each turn you roll a die to determine where your line of fire goes. You then have Line on that zone. If that zone is uncontested, you have an open line and can choose to target any available zone.
• Linked: A creature is linked to another creature or object if they are considered to be in extremely close proximity for some reason. Generally speaking, a character is linked to a horse they are riding or a kitten they are carrying, for example. Some attacks or events may link characters involuntarily - such as grabs from Octopuses or Monks.
• Mark (number): A Mark is going to be on a specific zone. You may choose to target that zone instead of whatever zone you rolled up.
• Zone (number) - (number): a zone is an abstract region of the battlefield. It has a designation for determining whether people have line on it each turn, and it also has a size number for determining what can fit in or fill the zone.

Now, the setup: The PCs are walking through the woods and they meet a war party of an Ogre and a bunch of goblins. Let's say: six. The goblins are mooks, the Orge is a mighty warrior. Fight!

The battlefield is setup. It looks like this:

Zone	features	Occupants	Claimed?
1 - 10	Trees (2, Generic) Stream (6)	Ahu Darcy Helen Kokor Heckus	Blue
2 - 19
3 - 13	Trees (2, Generic)
4 - 10	Trees (2, Generic)
5 - 16	Trees (2, Generic)	Goblin A Goblin B Goblin C	Red
6 - 13	Trees (2, Generic) Hill (4)	Ogre Goblin D Goblin E Goblin F	Red

So now we roll initiative, and perhaps unsurprisingly, Darcy wins. Darcy rolls a 2 on his line and a 4 on his WoF count, which means that he has an open line. Being a Scout, he uses a Trailblaze maneuver. It gives all his allies a Mark on his current zone for the next round, and then Withdraws him to his target area. He chooses to go to zone 3, claiming it. The next to go is Goblins A, B, and C. They lack special maneuvers because they are mooks, so they are inclined to advance. One of them rolls up a line on 2 and the other a line on 3, and the other on 6. 3 is contested for the red team, so Goblin B advances to 3, 2 and 6 are uncontested, so Goblin A and Goblin C have an open line. Goblin A advances to Zone 1, Goblin C to Zone 4. The battlefield now looks like this:

Zone	features	Occupants	Claimed?
1 - 10	Trees (2, Generic) Stream (6)	Ahu Helen Kokor Heckus Goblin A	Contested
2 - 19
3 - 13	Trees (2, Generic)	Darcy Goblin B	Contested
4 - 10	Trees (2, Generic)	Goblin C	Red
5 - 16	Trees (2, Generic)		Red
6 - 13	Trees (2, Generic) Hill (4)	Ogre Goblin D Goblin E Goblin F	Red

Now it's Helen's turn and things are kind of cramped. She rolls a 3 on her WoF, and 5 on her line and there is really nothing useful she can do there, she could withdraw out of 1 and into 5 to claim it, but the goblins could claim it back, and then she'd just have set herself up for a crossfire without accomplishing much. But fortunately, she has a Mark on Zone 1, which she uses to dump an Entangle on Goblin A. As a result of that, Goblin A is not currently contesting Zone 1, making it Claimed by the Blue Team again. No it's Ahu's turn, and she gets a 6 on her WoF and a 3 on her Line. While she could go into zone 3 and assault zone 3, she has Frenzied Assault queued up. So what she does instead is exercise her Mark on Zone 1 to have an open line and chooses to assault Zone 6 with Frenzied Assault. This would have drawn a crossfire from Goblin A, but Goblin A is entangled at the moment. Goblins D, E, and F are all attacked, as is the Ogre. And the battlefield now looks like this:

Zone	features	Occupants	Claimed?
1 - 10	Trees (2, Generic) Stream (6)	Helen Kokor Heckus Goblin A (Entangled)	Blue
2 - 19
3 - 13	Trees (2, Generic)	Darcy Goblin B	Contested
4 - 10	Trees (2, Generic)	Goblin C	Red
5 - 16	Trees (2, Generic)		Red
6 - 13	Trees (2, Generic) Hill (4)	Ahu Ogre Goblin D Goblin E Goblin F	Contested

Now, Goblin D, E, and F roll their line dice, and get a 5, a 6, and 1. Goblin D has an open line, because they own zone 5, but the other two do not. And neither one particularly wants to advance or fall back into 1 because either way would involve getting crossfired (either by Ahu or by Kokor Heckus and Helen). So Goblin D falls back into Zone 2, and Goblins E and F attack Ahu (Goblin F can use a basic attack on Ahu even though it has line on 1, because you can always basic attack in your own zone). Then Kokor Heckus goes and rolls line on 6. He rolls his WoF and has the option of Firebolt (which is single target) and Fireblast (which is AoE 16). Not wanting to blast Ahu, he chooses to Firebolt Goblin E, taking it out of action. Finally, the Ogre goes, and also rolls a line on 6, so it attacks Ahu as really the only action it can take. The turn ends, and the battlefield looks like this:

Zone	features	Occupants	Claimed?
1 - 10	Trees (2, Generic) Stream (6)	Helen Kokor Heckus Goblin A (Entangled)	Blue
2 - 19		Goblin D	Red
3 - 13	Trees (2, Generic)	Darcy Goblin B	Contested
4 - 10	Trees (2, Generic)	Goblin C	Red
5 - 16	Trees (2, Generic)		Red
6 - 13	Trees (2, Generic) Hill (4)	Ahu Ogre Goblin F	Contested

A new turn dawns, and Darcy rolls up his Line...

-Username17

I was having some trouble getting the flow of this, but then it occurred to me that this system is *extremely* similar in concept to the Command & Colors engine (Memoir '44 and the ilk), and suddenly the turn progression really flows for me.

The difference is, instead of having center and flanks and drawing command cards, you're rolling both for your abilities that particular round *and* your line of sight in that round as well.

This is actually a step or two up from an entry-level wargame engine. It's fascinating that it works at the squad-based, tactical level as well as the strategic level. It gives an idea that combat is a messy, chaotic affair, where one can't necessarily plot and plan out every move in advance.

If one were so inclined, one could probably replace WoF or the line of sight rolls with straight decks of cards.

At any rate, it makes a lot of sense now. It'd make an interesting fantasy combat system.

Questions:

1) Why didn't Goblins A and C initially both move into Zone 1?

2) Why doesn't Helen have the option to assault into Zone 5?

3) Why can't Helen use Entangle on a target in her own zone without having a Mark in play?

4) How does having a Mark in Zone 1 allow Ahu to target Zone 6?

5) Why does Goblin D move to Zone 2 instead of staying in Zone 6 to focus-fire on Ahu?

6) Why is Goblin D considered to be "falling back" to Zone 2 instead of Assaulting it?

7) If Kokor Hexus used Fireblast, what additional Zones would be affected by his AoE attack outside of Zone 6?

Ganbare Gincun wrote:4) How does having a Mark in Zone 1 allow Ahu to target Zone 6?

The way I was reading it; it was because zone 1 was no longer contested. Though an enemy was in zone 1, it was entangled by Helen. So the mark let him replace his targeting result with one into an uncontested zone, and so he could target wherever he wanted.

Ganbare Gincun wrote:1) Why didn't Goblins A and C initially both move into Zone 1?

To claim zone 4 for the Red team.

Ganbare Gincun wrote:2) Why doesn't Helen have the option to assault into Zone 5?

She has, but Withdrawing is better since Assault earns her a knife in the back from Goblin A.

My initial guess was that Withdraw does not allow you to claim zones, but later Goblin D does claim Zone 2 by Withdrawing from 6. So, I guess, it's because making a Marked zone uncontested is awesome for obvious reasons.

2.1) Does Withdraw into zones claim them the way Assault does?

Ganbare Gincun wrote:3) Why can't Helen use Entangle on a target in her own zone without having a Mark in play?

Dunno. Perhaps Entangle requires a Line.

Ganbare Gincun wrote:4) How does having a Mark in Zone 1 allow Ahu to target Zone 6?

Akula wrote:The way I was reading it; it was because zone 1 was no longer contested. Though an enemy was in zone 1, it was entangled by Helen. So the mark let him replace his targeting result with one into an uncontested zone, and so he could target wherever he wanted.

That's the way I'm reading it too, except Ahu is a lady. Getting a Line into an uncontested zone lets you choose any zone (cool). A Mark lets you get a Line into the Marked zone instead of what came up (cool). Having an uncontested zone marked = Awesome.

Ganbare Gincun wrote:5) Why does Goblin D move to Zone 2 instead of staying in Zone 6 to focus-fire on Ahu?

To claim it for Team Red. Claiming zones is awesome.

Ganbare Gincun wrote:6) Why is Goblin D considered to be "falling back" to Zone 2 instead of Assaulting it?

Because Assault earns him an axe in the back from Ahu. Withdraw earns him a stab in the face from whoever is in Zone 2, but since it's empty, profit.

Ganbare Gincun wrote:7) If Kokor Hexus used Fireblast, what additional Zones would be affected by his AoE attack outside of Zone 6?

I think none. Zone 6 is size 13 and Fireblast is Size 16. Size 16 allows to burn Zone 1, 3, 4, 5, 6 or one target and whatever is linked to it in Zone 2.

8) Since there's a Mark on Zone 1 and Goblin A is still entangled, can Kokor Heckus use it to get an Open Line and fry up targets in other locations? Or has Ahu "exhausted" it? Because as I'm seeing it, a better choice would be to fry Darcy's Goblin so Darcy could Trailblaze an uncontested zone (which is holyfuckawesome).

9) When are people attacking each other in this example? Does Goblin A stab anyone on arriving at 1? Why doesn't Goblin D stab Ahu before Withdrawing to 2 (the text states "fall back" which is just a move)?

Notation Quip: "Zone (#) - (Size)" should probably not use a dash because until halfway down the post i was confused and though that it was showing ranges. I'd put size in another column, or have "Zone 1 (10)" for example, with the size in parenthesis.

I'm not sure I like "mark" effects generating open lines. It seems to me to be just too easy to mark a "safe" zone and get all the mobility you need. I would think that marks should only ever let you target the actually marked region.

OK so as a quick summary.

Your system requires TWO additional rolls, per player, per turn BEFORE they can understand their tactical position and make decisions and further rolls to resolve their actions in a relatively normal manner.

That is INSANE for both player choice AND complexity and resolution times.

Your list of terms, and your list of maneuvers are actually basically a long list of "fiddly exceptional mechanics" tacked on to the system to make things like zone control matter. They are EXACTLY the same in nature to the ones you criticized, in some cases almost outright actually exactly the same as those "too fiddly" mechanics from the big fat squares threads themselves.

This system is no less complex or more elegant than even the fairly shoddy sample system of big fat squares seen years ago on this board. It in fact involves SIGNIFICANT costs in complexity and is fiddly as all hell.

So really at this point the only thing I see that explains Frank and Murtak's apparent affection for this and yet simultaneous hate on for big fat squares is that Frank is always (often stupidly) biased to his own creations and Murtak is somehow surgically attached face first to Frank's ass.

Other than the thing about each zone having a size and that not being well explained, it sounds really fun though.

the amount of dice I have to roll for thisi is obnoxious.

I want 1 die, at most, to roll for movement per turn. And I would prefer no dice, really...

You throw 2d6 at the start of every turn. A red one and a black one. Or a blue one and a green one. Or an orange one and a brown one. It doesn't matter really. One is your "Line" result, and the other is your WoF result. Now you know what you can do, and you take your turn. It's the same as leaning forward and looking over the battle grid and seeing who you can charge at and crap when you're using miniatures. You could even represent who is in what zone with miniatures just standing on a piece of paper split into 6 sections. I do not get what is hard about that.

But ditto on the "marking an open zone gives you open line all the time", that seems way too easy.

Also, Frank, your gameplay example doesn't talk about what the advantage of controlling more zones would be, or if there would be more zones in some situations (such as 8 or 10, or maybe only 4). Please comment on these issues.

It occurs to me it is also worth noting those two additional rolls (and no I don't think rolling both dice at once and then separating the numbers after the fact is a significant complexity short cut) also then in turn become references to two separate look up tables.

And of those look up tables one is changing from combat to combat and it's meaning (as in what targets are in the different table results) changes from turn to turn. Thus meaning the mental administration and tracking of what a line result of a 4 is by each individual player is going to be time consuming and confusing.

And the other, the WoF table is itself actually a rather complex mechanic, though the exact details of that particular mess escape me since I stopped watching the topics regarding it when it became clear how incredibly stupid and counter productive to player choice and game balance the whole idea was.

The complexity cost here is not a good thing. And considering what we are trading that complexity for (replacing player options and actual attempts at balancing options with mere dice rolls) it is REALLY not a good thing.

PL wrote: the WoF table is itself actually a rather complex mechanic, though the exact details of that particular mess escape me since I stopped watching the topics regarding it

This is why I'm not listening to your objections on this subject. You aren't really trying to understand what is going on, and then complaining that you don't. Rolling a die is easier than counting squares or durations, measuring distance, marking off charges, or anything else I have ever seen that the WoF system or the Line system actually replaces. Repeatedly stating that dong something instead of nothing is "more complicated" is not an apples to apples comparison. Rolling a WoF die is less complicated than tracking cool down times or keeping track of daily charges. That is the actual comparison.

Lokathor wrote:You throw 2d6 at the start of every turn.

Actually, it's probably better for everyone if you throw one die at the beginning of your turn to see where your line is, and one die at the end of your turn to see what your WoF result is going to be next turn. So that you can plan and shit.

Lokathor wrote:Also, Frank, your gameplay example doesn't talk about what the advantage of controlling more zones would be, or if there would be more zones in some situations (such as 8 or 10, or maybe only 4). Please comment on these issues.

Conrolling more zones gives you more open lines and gives your opponent less open lines. As for there being more or less locations, that is entirely possible, yes. In such situations you would have a line roll modifier for being in different locations.

For Valor wrote:the amount of dice I have to roll for thisi is obnoxious.

I want 1 die, at most, to roll for movement per turn. And I would prefer no dice, really...

Each player only rolls one die for movement. There are a total of 2 dice you roll, but one of them is in lieu of keeping track of cool down times.

Starmaker wrote:8) Since there's a Mark on Zone 1 and Goblin A is still entangled, can Kokor Heckus use it to get an Open Line and fry up targets in other locations? Or has Ahu "exhausted" it? Because as I'm seeing it, a better choice would be to fry Darcy's Goblin so Darcy could Trailblaze an uncontested zone (which is holyfuckawesome).

None of these abilities are wholly set in stone, and I am genuinely unsure whether Trailblazer's Mark would expire after being used a number of times or at the beginning of Darcy's next turn, or what. But in any case, one of the points of the WoF system is that Darcy probably won't be able to Trailblazer next turn. And indeed, by rolling the WoF number at the end of Darcy's turn, he will probably know that. So presumably Darcy is going to have access to some other Scout abilities like "Cut and Run" (Attack then Withdraw) and doesn't even want Kokor Heckus to fry that Goblin.

Starmaker wrote:9) When are people attacking each other in this example? Does Goblin A stab anyone on arriving at 1? Why doesn't Goblin D stab Ahu before Withdrawing to 2 (the text states "fall back" which is just a move)?

The Goblins are just low-end Mooks and they don't have special abilities. So when they assault or withdraw into new zones, they have to advance or fall back. And that means that they don't get attacks in. In order to attack the PCs, they need to take the Attack or Fire actions. Their primary purpose in life is to make life tactically difficult for the PCs and tactically easy for the BBEG Ogre by claiming territory. So the first order of business for the PCs is to clear the goblins out so that they can lock the Ogre down and keep it from repeatedly assaulting individual PCs until they drop.

-Username17

Actually, it's probably better for everyone if you throw one die at the beginning of your turn to see where your line is, and one die at the end of your turn to see what your WoF result is going to be next turn. So that you can plan and shit.

How does that work with player knowledge though? Is it somehow obvious to everyone (in character) what actions someone will be able to take in future, or is everyone else supposed to pretend they didn't see the result?

Ice9 wrote:

Actually, it's probably better for everyone if you throw one die at the beginning of your turn to see where your line is, and one die at the end of your turn to see what your WoF result is going to be next turn. So that you can plan and shit.

How does that work with player knowledge though? Is it somehow obvious to everyone (in character) what actions someone will be able to take in future, or is everyone else supposed to pretend they didn't see the result?

It doesn't strike me as at all weird that player characters would be able to see that their friend was getting ready to shoot a giant lightning bolt or that a dragon was about to breathe fire.

Those numbers should be public knowledge, it makes tactical choices deeper.

-Username17

Is the difference between Advance and Withdraw purely which zone triggers AoO?

That's the difference between the Advance and Fall Back basic maneuvers, which is because they are basic. The actual special maneuvers will of course have various different effects, but those effects will generally assume you are Assaulting into a contested zone from your claimed zone and Withdrawing the other way around.

FrankTrollman wrote:Those numbers should be public knowledge, it makes tactical choices deeper.

Yah, like, you know, to the limited degree there are any tactical choices left not being made by 1d6 rolls... I mean now I know that Johny rolled an Assault for next turn and will attack... well... something random we won't know until next turn... I TOTALLY will be making "deeper tactical choices" ABOUT ROLLING A FUCKING WITHDRAW TARGETING THE BULLSHIT STRAY GOBLIN IN THE FAR CORNER OF NO ONE CARES LAND.

And no, the choice is not between this counter productive complexity and no complexity.

It is between this counter productive complexity and similar or less, hell screw it, MORE complexity expended on something that ISN'T taking away player choices.

The complexity rant was YOUR baby, well, your's and Murtaks, you specifically state that the grand improvement of your system was... LESS COMPLEXITY. Remember all your comments about "fiddly little additions".

Oh but suddenly now it's been pointed out how fucking complex your "solution" is you are all "well of course adding a rule to do something is adding complexity!" No duh sherlock, I've been telling you and your pet Murtak that all along, you two were the dumb suckers telling us all that writing an exception rule for grappling or attacks of opportunity was somehow messy, complex, and magically unique to my specific proposals.

So eat it Frank, your solution is MORE complex AND spends all that complexity just to create a bystander game where the players have their major tactical decisions dictate to them by d6s.

FrankTrollman wrote:But in any case, one of the points of the WoF system is that Darcy probably won't be able to Trailblazer next turn.

sorry, I had a derp moment.

Also: PL, read the example of you want to whine without looking dumb. You don't roll up Assaults and Withdraws for the next turn. And yes, this system has less bookkeeping and more tactical complexity than 3e.

PhoneLobster wrote:

FrankTrollman wrote:Those numbers should be public knowledge, it makes tactical choices deeper.

Yah, like, you know, to the limited degree there are any tactical choices left not being made by 1d6 rolls... I mean now I know that Johny rolled an Assault for next turn and will attack... well... something random we won't know until next turn... I TOTALLY will be making "deeper tactical choices" ABOUT ROLLING A FUCKING WITHDRAW TARGETING THE BULLSHIT STRAY GOBLIN IN THE FAR CORNER OF NO ONE CARES LAND.

And no, the choice is not between this counter productive complexity and no complexity.

It is between this counter productive complexity and similar or less, hell screw it, MORE complexity expended on something that ISN'T taking away player choices.

The complexity rant was YOUR baby, well, your's and Murtaks, you specifically state that the grand improvement of your system was... LESS COMPLEXITY. Remember all your comments about "fiddly little additions".

Oh but suddenly now it's been pointed out how fucking complex your "solution" is you are all "well of course adding a rule to do something is adding complexity!" No duh sherlock, I've been telling you and your pet Murtak that all along, you two were the dumb suckers telling us all that writing an exception rule for grappling or attacks of opportunity was somehow messy, complex, and magically unique to my specific proposals.

So eat it Frank, your solution is MORE complex AND spends all that complexity just to create a bystander game where the players have their major tactical decisions dictate to them by d6s.

You need to fucking tone down your trolling in actual gaming threads. People tolerate that shit in political threads because you occasionally have something useful to say in IMHO, but this bullshit does not fly.

FrankTrollman wrote:As for there being more or less locations, that is entirely possible, yes. In such situations you would have a line roll modifier for being in different locations.

You wouldn't just roll a bigger or smaller die for your line roll?

Starmaker wrote:Also: PL, read the example of you want to whine without looking dumb. You don't roll up Assaults and Withdraws for the next turn.

...

Frank wrote:Actually, it's probably better for everyone if you throw one die at the beginning of your turn to see where your line is, and one die at the end of your turn to see what your WoF result is going to be next turn. So that you can plan and shit.

... really all I can go on is what is ACTUALLY said, WTF are you going on?

I'm going to pretend that PL's confusion is genuine long enough to underline a point that perhaps needs to be restated:

Basic maneuvers such as Circle, Advance, Fall Back, and Attack are not part of your WoF setup. If you want to do one of the basics, you just do it. Advanced maneuvers, the ones that come up based on your wheel result, are better than basic maneuvers. But you don't have upgraded versions of all the basic maneuvers available every turn, and the upgrades you do have won't always be relevant to the situation.

"Cut and Run" is better than Fall Back. It is better because you attack a target in your zone and then Withdraw exactly like you would had you used Fall Back. But it won't always be available for use, and you won't always want to use it. If there aren't any enemies in the zone with you, the benefits are meaningless, and if your line is on a zone the enemy is occupying, Withdrawing into it is a world of pain. So when Cut and Run is available, it still won't always be a thing you want to use. But if it is available and you would like to use Fall Back anyway, Cut and Run is in all ways superior. And even when Cut and Run is not available, Fall Back always is.

-Username17

So to reiterate your "deep tactical choice" in the roll a withdraw for the zone no one cares about scenario, is to make THAT tactically inferior randomized decision, OR use some OTHER tactically inferior decision because you aren't actually allowed to decide to use the ACTUAL optimal ability on your ability list unless you ALSO get the 1 in 6 chance of rolling it for WoF AND then you need to roll for the right targeting.

So yeah, I really am NOT making deep tactical decisions, and knowing someone elses WoF result from the end of their current turn does NOT inform me of much, especially since I AM still waiting for their line roll at the beginning of their NEXT turn before I have a firm idea of what they are doing and where they are doing it.

The WoF roll result is much less a result that informs tactical decisions and is much more a result which makes them for you it certainly gives us diversity (in a rather dictatorial manner), but it does NOT provide real informed tactical choice, and contrary to Frank's and Murtak's claims it does not provide elegance or efficiency either.