1KM1KT Free RPG Community

Okay,

I just discovered we were doing this wrong or at least we think we are, why does the lower initiative not only get to select targets 1st but also shoot 1st and do damage 1st.

I can see having them select targets 1st, but why are they shooting and causing damage 1st? or did I misunderstand pg 24 of 4th edition book.

Juan who has the ability to get at max 32 Init, doesn't like the Fred who max Init of 17 will shoot at him 1st, no matter what he does. Rob u really don't want borderline Psychopathic/Sociopathic Brick Shit House at 7'5" and 37.5 stones mad at u, and want to get into close combat with u.

The key thing to remember is that in a turn, everything happens at the same time. If you get killed at the start of the turn and your initiative is very high, you still get to shoot at the end of it.

Lower initiative means you're not very good. Your Battle and Shift are low and you've rolled low. You have to decide what you're going to do - and do it - before you've seen what everyone else is going to do. Higher initiative goes last because they can see what everyone else has done and then do the best thing. Having the initiative means you can make best use of the turn.

In practise, either taking things in turn or everything happening at the same time works just fine. For the former, you need to switch the initiative round so highest goes first. The reason we were doing actions simultaneously was that Icar isn't about getting the first kill or doing the most damage, its about creating the most extraordinary scenes each turn. That's how it's written at the moment.

Example
3 characters, driver, medic and combat monster fleeing in a Grav car. The combat monster and medic are shooting out the back of the Grav car. As there is no dog fighting going on, it's just normal firefighting. The bad guys are two - one driving and one leaning out of the window shooting.

1. Everyone rolls initiative. Driver gets highest, then Combat Monster, then the bad guys and finally Medic.
2. Medic, with lowest initiative has to decide what he's going to do (and do it) first. He decides to shoot at the pursuers. He shoots, hits and kills the bad guy with the gun.
3. The bad guy with the gun is about to die, he knows that because his initiative is higher so he shoots a grenade rather than his normal rifle. He was saving the grenade for a special occasion. The grenade hits the car, killing the Combat monster.
4. The combat monster still gets to fire and as he knows he's going to die, fires off a grenade back.
5. The driver PC then heads off to hospital.

Thoughts and conclusions of a sort
I can see that writing it down like this makes it sound really very complicated and I'm not sure how we managed all these years. With the simplification in the system that I've been doing, I think it's probably better to work initiative in the same way as every other game. I'm not convinced that doing it backwards and having everything happening at once is really adding a lot to combat. It might actually slow it down. When I come to run my next Icar campaign in the new year (I'm play testing the Star Fleet setting), I'll switch it around as there will be plenty of combat to test it on.

Thanks for bringing this up, Doc! Sometimes it takes someone to point something out as unwise.

I generally like the simultaneous round/high initiative last part of the combat system. It allows people who have low initiative not to get completely hosed (unlike a certain 2nd edition of a game...). That said, my group and I are/were avid battletech players, which uses the same approach.

Thanks Rob, in part i guessed I missed it was all simultaneous.

My only issue is it should be somewhat "easier" for a higher Init person to dodge a lower Init Firearms attack. After all I can see them aiming at me, I should be able to dodge.

My thoughts, gee make it more complex.
Add in the the follow

All players/NPC
State Targets and rounds, move to next person, after everyone has declared target & round, go back and to hit and damage. All player to change target or weapon choice with -20 penalty.

Then yes, U can get the change in planned actions but it makes hitting harder

another wrinkel (oh joy....), only those who have the skill may change targets. fire control for unfamilar weapons being iffy at best.

Sorry, randolph, I don't understand quite what you mean. Would you post up an example for my tired baby-destroyed brain? Thanks!

oakiedoakie. EXAMPLE....
the Scav Team has beeen interupted in their work by a pirate band (they caused the wreck came back and found the scavies all over their prize....) while Security is laying down fire, Colony Tech Fred grabs up an Arms 5 from the rack
in the security office and rattels off a burst at the Boagies. his intv is lower than Security but higher than the Boagies.
as his targets go down he tries to change to another. my point is that wheare he has no skill with the Arma 5
changeing targets should be harder than the proposed -20 because basicly he's just pointing in the targets general direction and holding down the trigger.

Okay..

Adding in my idea and Randolph my GM
Add in the the follow step

All players/NPC
State Targets and rounds, move to next person, after everyone has declared target & round, go back and to hit and damage. Allow player/NPC to change target or weapon choice with -20 penalty culmitaive. Anyone without skill with weapon, takes double the penalties,

anyone with Gun Fu skill of 55 or better with a handgun, doesn't take penalty for changing target or for changing handgun from skill.

Then yes, U can get the change in planned actions but it makes hitting harder

[edit - just realised all the numbers I've included aer version 4 equipment index - which I haven't actually realed yet! ]

@randolph - Thank you for the example, I get it. I've added: -20% modifier for each additional target you want to shoot at. Shoot at 3 targets, you're looking at -60%. Of course, that's difficult even if you have the skill! I like to think that the rules should enable you to do mad things but the chance of success might not be too high. In your example, poor old Fred would have no chance of shooting two, which you would expect, given he's just grabbed a gun and is holding on for dear life!

I won't add any 'I have skill at X or Y' caveats because I fear of making it more confusing for people picking it up afresh. Please do have house rules to suit the taste of your table.

Please do feel free to apply your own common sense (which is clearly ample) at the table. I am happy to put in this good general solutions but I urge you to keep using your common sense as arbiter. If it's not in the rules, it only means that I've not figured out a good mechanic for it - not that it can't be done!

@Doc - That works neatly for most firefights but I've not had a neat firefight for about ten years. While two PCs are firing their weapons, a hacker PC will be trying to evacuate all the air from the wreck, another will be in close combat trying to smash the EV visor of the plot hook I hoped they wouldn't kill and finally the tech will have sneaked onto the pirate vessel, killed the skeleton crew and would be turning its weapons on the wreck. Everyone will be taking modifiers for whatever they're doing and I don't want to make too hard for them.

Please do use it at your table!