Fatigue...

[Nightshade]

Originally Posted by Atgxtg

I won't take that beit either. Being the guy who ran such, it did get missed a bit. Especially when people were bleeding to death, someone was tryting to get off a haeal, while other were trying to get off the last hit.

But, to be honest, it really didn't matter too much. Gnerally a 5% error in the hit percentages either way wasn't that big a deal.

Probably true, but at that point I'm not sure why a round-to-round tally is worth the bother.

To me, the bigger pain in the butt bookeeping wise, was magic. Everyone cast differernt spells in differernt rounds, then having to keep track of when what wore off of whom.

Well, as I recall, by RQ3 that shouldn't have been much of an issue any more; most spells had a duration long enough that if you cast them in combat, even a long combat was _very_ unlikely to last long enough for them to wear off. Even Spirit Magic typically lasted 5 minutes/25 melee rounds, after all. You might occasionally see one of those wear off. The 10 minute sorcery spells or 15 minute divine spells on the other hand, where pretty much "forever" if cast after the actual start of a battle.

I think the easiest method (other than ignore fatigue entirely), is to roll after a fight (or maybe before and after, if the group has been active) and apply a penalty then. Realistically, it is almost impossible for someone to pass out

That's mostly the tact that RQ: AIG took, and it had the best handling of this issue I've seen to date. It was theoretically possible to pass out in a fight from fatigue, but it virtually would have required that you were already almost exhausted when you got into it, or some magical process had made you so.

You could even force a roll when a hit location gets reduced to 0. People do pass out from pain.

I think that's a seperate process and a bit disconnected from fatigue issues, though.

[Atgxtg]

Originally Posted by Nightshade

Probably true, but at that point I'm not sure why a round-to-round tally is worth the bother.

I think mostly becuase it is very, very easy. I'd say easier than most other fatigue systems. Probably not that useful, but easy.
IMO, fatigue isn't as big a deal as (over)encumberance.

Originally Posted by Nightshade

Well, as I recall, by RQ3 that shouldn't have been much of an issue any more; most spells had a duration long enough that if you cast them in combat, even a long combat was _very_ unlikely to last long enough for them to wear off. Even Spirit Magic typically lasted 5 minutes/25 melee rounds, after all. You might occasionally see one of those wear off. The 10 minute sorcery spells or 15 minute divine spells on the other hand, where pretty much "forever" if cast after the actual start of a battle.

I thought that too. Problem was, with a 5 minute duration, characters could cast spells before moving into position. For instance, tossing up some bladesharp and protection before sneaking up under silence. In play, the 2 minute/ten round thing was easier for us.

Originally Posted by Nightshade

That's mostly the tact that RQ: AIG took, and it had the best handling of this issue I've seen to date. It was theoretically possible to pass out in a fight from fatigue, but it virtually would have required that you were already almost exhausted when you got into it, or some magical process had made you so.

It's a solid method. A few games use fatigue levels, and that works out okay, too. Doing something strenuous requires a test, and the more strenuous the more difficult or often the test.

I also liked the way the James Bond RPG handled it. You got so many minutes of activity, based on stats, and then you were exhausted and suppered a penalty (about 1/2) to rolls. In extreme cases (like in the outback on a hit day) exterion counted at a faster than normal rate.

Originally Posted by Nightshade

I think that's a seperate process and a bit disconnected from fatigue issues, though.

Not entirely. A wounded person should tire faster than a healthy one. So an injury penalty would seem appropriate. Likewise someone who is exhausted is more likely to pass out from an injury, and vice versa. The bit in all those army movies where one person gets injured during a hike and can't keep up is true. Even something like a broken arm will cause people to tire faster. Injury is probably at least as significant as encumbrance.

[Nightshade]

Originally Posted by Atgxtg

I think mostly becuase it is very, very easy. I'd say easier than most other fatigue systems. Probably not that useful, but easy.
IMO, fatigue isn't as big a deal as (over)encumberance.

You're correct of course; I just thought the round to round bookkeeping was more finicky than necessary, even if you did want to track fatigue. I suspect it was only done that way because it fit with the hit point and magic point models of RQ3.

I thought that too. Problem was, with a 5 minute duration, characters could cast spells before moving into position. For instance, tossing up some bladesharp and protection before sneaking up under silence. In play, the 2 minute/ten round thing was easier for us.

Why was that a problem? In those cases where you had warning, I don't see a little magical prep as being a big issue. At the lower end you still only had so many spells, and at the upper end most opponents who were worth your trouble could usually find ways to buy time to get their own spells up.

It's a solid method. A few games use fatigue levels, and that works out okay, too. Doing something strenuous requires a test, and the more strenuous the more difficult or often the test.

I probably wasn't clear but that was the RQ:AIG approach. Essentially, if you got into a situation where fatigue-significant rolls were liable to be made, you checked to see what the characters had been doing before, and made a fatigue check (or more than one if they'd been doing things like marching cross country for two days at an accellerated pace) and applied the fatigue levels then; they then made another check every ten rounds in combat. As I recall there were four or five different levels with different levels of penalty. Only thing wrong with it (and this was easily fixed) was that instead of applying as penalties to the base, they were applied as modifiers to the roll which made it quickly both impossible to get critical or special results and too easy to get fumbles. But shifting it to a modifier to skill made that go away.

I also liked the way the James Bond RPG handled it. You got so many minutes of activity, based on stats, and then you were exhausted and suppered a penalty (about 1/2) to rolls. In extreme cases (like in the outback on a hit day) exterion counted at a faster than normal rate.

I can see the benefit to that in simplicity, but I think its a little deterministic for my taste.

Not entirely. A wounded person should tire faster than a healthy one. So an

Yes, but I'm not sure the latter is really true; I'm not sure a tired person shocks out faster than a fresh one, or if so, to a significant degree.

injury penalty would seem appropriate. Likewise someone who is exhausted is more likely to pass out from an injury, and vice versa. The bit in all those

Do you actually have some evidence this is the case?

[Atgxtg]

Originally Posted by Nightshade

Why was that a problem? In those cases where you had warning, I don't see a little magical prep as being a big issue. At the lower end you still only had so many spells, and at the upper end most opponents who were worth your trouble could usually find ways to buy time to get their own spells up.

It wasn't a tactical problem, just a bookkeeping one. It worked like this. Let's say the PCs were setting up to attack a foe. The foe has guards, but isn't aware of the PCs.
-First the PCs maneuver/sneak in close enough so that their spells won't wear off before they reach the foe.
-Then they spend 2 or 3 rounds getting their magic up. GM has to note exactly which spells are cast on which round/SR to know when stuff is going to wear off.
-Now a minute or so gets used up as PCs try to coordinate for a simultaneous attack.
-The fighting breaks out. The PCs usually cut through the guard pretty quick. About 2/3rd go down in one round, with a couple of guys holding on for a round or two due to failed rolls, bad luck, etc.
-The the real fight breaks out. The rest of the NPCs are usually alerted by the fighting and stat doing their spells and other preparations ad hoc. More bookkeeping. People start popping in at odd turns and SR, and there is some maneuvering for position, delays and such.
-All this requires keeping track of spell durations, and MP expenditures. Since virtually everyone had some battle magic in RQ, it usually meant more bookkeeping than ticking off fatigue points.
-Toss in allied spirits, POW crystals and Divine Magic spells and Fatiue points were usually the last thing I was worried about. I was more cornered about when the Bladesharp, Countermagic, and Protection spells were due to wear off.

Originally Posted by Nightshade

I probably wasn't clear but that was the RQ:AIG approach. Essentially, if you got into a situation where fatigue-significant rolls were liable to be made, you checked to see what the characters had been doing before, and made a fatigue check (or more than one if they'd been doing things like marching cross country for two days at an accellerated pace) and applied the fatigue levels then; they then made another check every ten rounds in combat. As I recall there were four or five different levels with different levels of penalty. Only thing wrong with it (and this was easily fixed) was that instead of applying as penalties to the base, they were applied as modifiers to the roll which made it quickly both impossible to get critical or special results and too easy to get fumbles. But shifting it to a modifier to skill made that go away.

Sounds good, except for the application (as you pointed out).

Originally Posted by Nightshade

I can see the benefit to that in simplicity, but I think its a little deterministic for my taste.

Well, it was for a game system in which ENC is not a big issue. Fatigue in that game was more in terms of how long can you keep running, or how many hours you can travel cross country without sleep? In that game the asnwer was important to determine if you could escape the people who were chasing you.

Fatasy RPGs tened to need more fatigue and ENC rules as some players will "tank" it up, and others like to carry the kitchen sink.

Originally Posted by Nightshade

Yes, but I'm not sure the latter is really true; I'm not sure a tired person shocks out faster than a fresh one, or if so, to a significant degree.

From what I've seen working at a hospital, yeah they do. Its part of the adrenaline dump thing. When you get scared/excited/injured the adrenaline kicks in and you go into hypermode. Once it wears off, you crash. Someone who is already injured is already on the crash part of the cycle. Even worse, an injury acts as a constant distraction, so they susally don't rest back up to full stamina.
There was a variant rule for RQ3 where damage points were subtracted from FP too. While I think the implementation was a bit severe (probably need to double the FP points to make it work), the idea was fairly sound. Probably not a bad alternative to the "tick a round" method, too.

Originally Posted by Nightshade

Do you actually have some evidence this is the case?

[/quote]

Not in hand. But I think I can find some. Proving that being injured reduces stamina seems like an autokill to me. I'll dig for some evidence if you want.

[RMS]

Originally Posted by Atgxtg

It wasn't a tactical problem, just a bookkeeping one. It worked like this. Let's say the PCs were setting up to attack a foe. The foe has guards, but isn't aware of the PCs.
-First the PCs maneuver/sneak in close enough so that their spells won't wear off before they reach the foe.
-Then they spend 2 or 3 rounds getting their magic up. GM has to note exactly which spells are cast on which round/SR to know when stuff is going to wear off.
-Now a minute or so gets used up as PCs try to coordinate for a simultaneous attack.
-The fighting breaks out. The PCs usually cut through the guard pretty quick. About 2/3rd go down in one round, with a couple of guys holding on for a round or two due to failed rolls, bad luck, etc.
-The the real fight breaks out. The rest of the NPCs are usually alerted by the fighting and stat doing their spells and other preparations ad hoc. More bookkeeping. People start popping in at odd turns and SR, and there is some maneuvering for position, delays and such.
-All this requires keeping track of spell durations, and MP expenditures. Since virtually everyone had some battle magic in RQ, it usually meant more bookkeeping than ticking off fatigue points.
-Toss in allied spirits, POW crystals and Divine Magic spells and Fatiue points were usually the last thing I was worried about. I was more cornered about when the Bladesharp, Countermagic, and Protection spells were due to wear off.

Wow! I've never bothered with tracking everything like that. PCs track their own MP. NPCs have whatever MP they need to power whatever they should logical have. Magic wears off when it makes sense to wear off. I'm certianly not clicking off melee rounds to 5/10/15 minute points. For one thing, it's magic, so I assume that it's not mechanistic at all. That 5 minutes is an approximation IMO, so magic goes down whenever it seems reasonable that it's gone down.

Now, that doesn't mean that my players haven't used the short duration of magic in RQ tactically. Over the years, different groups at various times have suckered their foes into throwing up magic, only to run away or stay at missile range until the foe's magic has gone down. Then the PC's turn, power up and fight. Orlanthi equipped with Mobility can really be nasty with this type of tactic.

[Atgxtg]

Originally Posted by RMS

Wow! I've never bothered with tracking everything like that. PCs track their own MP. NPCs have whatever MP they need to power whatever they should logical have. Magic wears off when it makes sense to wear off. I'm certianly not clicking off melee rounds to 5/10/15 minute points. For one thing, it's magic, so I assume that it's not mechanistic at all. That 5 minutes is an approximation IMO, so magic goes down whenever it seems reasonable that it's gone down.

Now, that doesn't mean that my players haven't used the short duration of magic in RQ tactically. Over the years, different groups at various times have suckered their foes into throwing up magic, only to run away or stay at missile range until the foe's magic has gone down. Then the PC's turn, power up and fight. Orlanthi equipped with Mobility can really be nasty with this type of tactic.

Ideally I woundn't have to track it for the PCs either. Unfortunately, few of my RQ players ever got the "knack" for battle magic. On multiple occasions the group spoiled an attack when a couple guys stopped moving to cast battle magic. Since I could handle it and the players couldn't, I sort of had to walk them though it a bit until they got up to speed. For the most part, despite having most foes beat "on paper" the group inability to use their battle magic put them at a disadvantage. In the end, I ended up running a low-magic campaign, as only one or two players ever got good enough with battle magic to use it. One guy was even starting to get clever with it.


Plus that was 20 years ago, when a more, "by the numbers" approach was more common with RPGs in general, and my style in particular. Part of RQ strategy was trying to time things so that the other's guys fireblade was down. At one I I recall running an epic battle with 70 characters or so, round by round, Strike Rank by Strike Rank, over the course of several sessions.

Nowaday's I'd run thing differently, and use a few more shortcuts.

[RMS]

Originally Posted by Atgxtg

Ideally I woundn't have to track it for the PCs either. Unfortunately, few of my RQ players ever got the "knack" for battle magic. On multiple occasions the group spoiled an attack when a couple guys stopped moving to cast battle magic. Since I could handle it and the players couldn't, I sort of had to walk them though it a bit until they got up to speed. For the most part, despite having most foes beat "on paper" the group inability to use their battle magic put them at a disadvantage. In the end, I ended up running a low-magic campaign, as only one or two players ever got good enough with battle magic to use it. One guy was even starting to get clever with it.

You've certainly had a different experience than mine. My players generally have been very efficient and very clever with magic use. I have to guide them through things the first few sessions but they have generally run with it after that.

Plus that was 20 years ago, when a more, "by the numbers" approach was more common with RPGs in general, and my style in particular. Part of RQ strategy was trying to time things so that the other's guys fireblade was down. At one I I recall running an epic battle with 70 characters or so, round by round, Strike Rank by Strike Rank, over the course of several sessions.

The irony here is that I was just remarking to someone the other day how I thought RPG players in general are much more literal with rules now than I remember in the "old days where we'd just wing it". It might just be me though. I bought the original games, read them, and taught them to everyone and have GM'd 90% of the time, so it might just be me and my impatience with looking things up, tracking things, and all things fiddly. (To be fair, I would have gone into more detail 20 years ago too. Time constraints now make me even more impatient with minutia.)

Most of my RQ groups have been on the smaller end (2-4 players). I can't even imagine running for 70 characters. Our big battles might get into the 20-30 range with allies, followers, etc. on both sides but that's it.

[Atgxtg]

Originally Posted by RMS

You've certainly had a different experience than mine. My players generally have been very efficient and very clever with magic use. I have to guide them through things the first few sessions but they have generally run with it after that.

I wish. Most of my players have been painfully thick. To give you an idea, at one time I asked people to show up each week with their character sheet, and dice. That was all I expected. I even gave people sets of dice. Yet for months the same people would show up each week and either not have their character sheet,the latest set of dice I gave them the previous week, or both. If they couldn't accomplish that, you can imagine how well they were "in character."

Originally Posted by RMS

The irony here is that I was just remarking to someone the other day how I thought RPG players in general are much more literal with rules now than I remember in the "old days where we'd just wing it". It might just be me though. I bought the original games, read them, and taught them to everyone and have GM'd 90% of the time, so it might just be me and my impatience with looking things up, tracking things, and all things fiddly. (To be fair, I would have gone into more detail 20 years ago too. Time constraints now make me even more impatient with minutia.)

I think it is sort of a cycle. Early on, the books were thinner and the rules more sketchy, so we tended to wing it more. Then, by the mid 80s, games got very detailed oriented, and regimented. Later, rules were simplified over roleplaying and storytelling. With d20, there has been a trend towards detail for D&D. Still I think most old time GMs, especially those for non-d20 systems are probably more comfortable "winging it" as we had to do it more. Same with writing adventures, due to the relatively limited number of adventures published for most RPG. We had to do it for ourselves more, so we are less worried about following what's written in the book.

Originally Posted by RMS

Most of my RQ groups have been on the smaller end (2-4 players). I can't even imagine running for 70 characters. Our big battles might get into the 20-30 range with allies, followers, etc. on both sides but that's it.

[/quote]

Most of my groups have been small too. I fine between 3-5 to be the idea number, More than that and it hard for them all to get involved and stay focused. Less and it limits the options available to them and to the GM.

Here is my bit of irony. The big battle in question only had a couple of PCs on that particular adventure. It ended up being a couple of PC leading a small band of NPCs into a ruined castle that was in fact the lair of the enemy. The group managed to get inside, but then altered the whole enemy forces at once. So I ended up doing a LOT of the bookkeeping on that one.

Overall it was an exciting battle, as they got trapped and had to hold off two stairwells to keep from getting overwhelmed, but I wouldn't want to make a habit of it. It is one of the memorable, dramatic battles of that campaign, and a neat exercise in in running a skirmish SR by SR, but definitely a "try once" sort of thing.

Now I'd probably just do a quick roll of dice for each stairwell and if someone blows his skill roll, he get hurt, two failures and he drops. Probably get results similar to doing it out the long way, too.

[Kloster]

Originally Posted by Trifletraxor

That would be nice, but for me it would go something like this: "Have you remembered to tick your fatigue tally? Please tick the tally! Remember to tick the fatigue tally every round. TICK THAT BOX YOU MORONS!!!"

And I'd get responses like, "Yeah, yeah, [tick!]", "I keep track in my head..." and "But it doesn't matter anyway".

I want a better system. Ticking every single round takes time.

SGL.

We didn't had this problem but I understand your point.

Runequestement votre,

Kloster

[Kloster]

Originally Posted by Nightshade

I will put bets this just means in practice it gets missed fairly often.

No, it just means that most of combat didn't last a long enough duration to reach negative points, or if they do by 1 or 2, there was no roll on which that change anything.

My last character had about 5 FP free before combat start. Most fights were less than 10 MR, which means I finished at -5%. If no roll is above my skill minus 5%, there is no change.


Runequestement votre,

Kloster