[Torg] Torg Initiative & Torg Combat Options

[Sam Frazier II]

>>>I have been taking a closer look at how action order - and more importantly action resolution order - can occur.  I would like to describe several different situations, say how "common sense" would resolve it IMO, but then solicit opinions on how these situations "ought" to be resolved, either by "the book" or by the gut instinct of you all.<<<
Ok...I'll tell you how I'd rule in my existing game. I don't refer to the rule book much anymore unless it is for a spell, miracle, etc and of course for the reality special items...storms, shards, etc...
So let's get started.
>>>At the end of the last round, Andy has his gun out, finger on the trigger, pointing at Brad.  Brad's gun is in his holster.  Brad gets first initiative, but Andy wants to shoot Brad if Brad makes a move.  Who gets to pull a trigger first?
	* My Answer:  If Andy is one trigger pull from shooting Brad, and Brad hasn't even yet pulled his gun from his holster, then Andy should in general (all things being equal) be able to fire first, or at least get an initiative bonus of some kind.
	* The Book Answer (I think):  If you are using card initiative, the Brad is going first either because he and Andy are on different sides (hero/villain) and Brad's side is going first, or because Brad and Andy are on the same side and Brad has a higher Dex.  Either way, Brad can shoot Andy first.  Or, if you are using the optional initiative system where you roll for initiative, Brad is going first because he rolled better - and he still gets to shoot first.
	* Your answer?
<<<
Andy does. If Andy is a PC and he himself hesitates to roll the die...asks questions about his shot, etc....Brad gets goes while Andy (the PC) figures whatever out in his brain). This is part of the Role-Playing I require by my players. But lets look at what you have. Sometimes they fail, sometimes they succeed. Some PCs are better than others.

>>>
	1. Same situation as above, but Andy wins initiative.  Andy says he will not fire unless Brad goes for his gun, holding his action.  Brad goes for his gun.

	* My Answer:  I don't think Torg has the ability to hold actions, but I would allow it.  Given that Andy is already prepared to fire, Andy's shot would interrupt Brad's pulling his gun.
	* The Book Answer:  What is the Book's Answer?
	* Your Answer?
<<<

If TORG doesn't have the Hold actions, I've been playing TORG, SZ, and MB all wrong. Hell half of the time at least one of my players is going, "I'll wait."  
As long as the die hasn't rolled on an action (PC or NPC) the PC who has held their action can go.
>>>
	1. Brad has his gun out, but not pointing at a hostage.  Andy has a teleport mental power.  Andy tells the GM that if Brad points his gun at the hostage, Andy will immediately teleport the hostage out.  The round commences, with Brad winning initiative.  Brad says he is shooting the hostage - can Brad shoot the hostage before Andy can teleport him?

	* My Answer:  If Andy only has to think to teleport the hostage, then as soon as Brad begins to raise his arm, Andy should be able to teleport the hostage, before can complete raising his arm and firing.
	* The Book Answer: same as above - Brad, having won the initiative, resolves his action first.
	* Your answer?
<<<
I'd need to know more about the teleport mental power honestly. I'm assuming from your verbage that the previous round Andy mentioned this "Immediately teleport the hostage" thing. So depending on the mental power will depend if Brad can get off a clean shot, have a minus to hit (and how big the minus is), or if the hostage is teleported out of there.

If the power acts like a Focused spell or has a casting time of whose effects go off 3 or less? and the effects occur instantly then Brad gets no shot. The Hostage is teleported based on Andy's roll.
If the power acts like a Focused spell or has a casting time of whose effects go off 3 or less? whose effects go off during the round with the full effect occuring half-way or by the end of the round, then Brad will get a minus to his shot. 
Otherwise Andy should look for a Haste Card prior to the GM rolling the die because Brad gets a clean shot. 

>>>
	1. The same situation as #3, but Andy wins initiative, and says he is holding his action, but will teleport the hostage if Brad raises his arm.

	* My Answer:  Andy's mental action of teleport still beats Brad's action of raising his arm and firing.
	* The Book Answer: ???
	* Your Answer?
<<<

First off, the action was "if Brad raises his arm" so your answer is flawed. If Andy is just teleporting the hostage, your answer makes sense. But if Andy is waiting for Brad to "move" then Andy is holding his action....see the above answer.
>>>
	1. Brad has a gun pressed to the hostage's head, finger on the trigger.  Brad wants to kill the hostage if Andy tries to save him.  Andy tries to teleport the hostage to safety.  What happens?

	* My Answer:  If the only sign of the teleport is it's effect - that is the appearance or disappearance of something or someone - then Brad is effectively only willing to shoot the hostage after the hostage is already gone.  

	* The Book Answer:  possibly that announcing one's action reveals it, giving parties a chance to use that information if they win initiative, before the action resolves?  Though that does not seem fair.
	* Your Answer?
<<<
This completly depends on the teleport power and what is necessary to pull it off. I'd say unless it was a "thought-poof" teleport, Brad gets a free shot, no minus's for called shot as the gun is already pressed where he wants to shoot and is ready to fire. Actually even if it was a "thought-poof" Andy would have to make a test of wills against Brad. Of course it would depend on what kind of villian Brad is...if he is a henchmen then there would be no roll as Brad is fairly mindless. If Brad is a lieutenant or a major villian, well then....that would require a roll IMHO. If Brad is perceiving what Andy is going to do, it is a game of flinch...ergo Test of Wills. Here is a case I hope Andy has the "thought-poof" and a high test of wills skills or perhaps he should call in a negotiator.
Hope Andy isn't in Orrorsh, he could be lining up for a Malevolent (Orrorshian Corruption) add. After all a Hero needs to know when to "take the shot" and when to "back off and wait til later" 
>>>
Thanks guys - your responses are greatly helpful.  For what it's worth, we *are* using rolled initiative in our game.
<<<
Do you use the cards for the approved actions (so PCs can get cards) and for the bonus/penalty for the actions the Hero or Villians take in the round? Or do you do something else that is equivalent?

>>>
Now as to Torg combat options - is it only me, or aren't a lot of them, um, not particularly worth it?  Vital Blow: -8AV +4 EV springs to mind, as does the fact that I think you can Blindside any opponent simply by winning initiative - since movement can happen just before you attack.  Disarm I think works off the Vital Blow rules.  The rules covering single shot/burst/semi-auto/full auto use of weapons seem a little overly complex while the way ammunition is actually tracked seems simplifies in a way that also makes it more complex.  The lack of rules that cover the above 5 initiative situations well (IMO) is unfortunate.  With a system that in general shines on so many levels - the value/measure system, task resolution system, NCIs, simple yet skill based chargen, the cosm system with World Laws and Axioms and it's omni-genre usages - this game is a shining star in many ways.
<<<
*smile* it is nice. But the rules for cover are fairly simple. Are you covered? Partially?  what is the toughness of where you are seeking cover? Subtract it off. 
Disarm doesn't work off of the Vital Blow rules...or that isn't quite how I run it. Though most of my players don't disarm...except for the MA who has the MA Maneuver. 
Every system has rules on combat options....like 'em or not, you can always not use them. The game works just as well. My NPC's don't use the combat options if a PC doesn't use them. I, as a GM, try to keep a even playing field. But if a PC uses them all the time, then the NPC will use them to their full advantage. Now as a GM I may from time to time use a combat option so the PCs can see and learn what one of them are and how they work. E.G my group doesn't do alot of "all out attacks" and they run into some....er...Vikings. The big bad Viking Lord will  use "all out attacks" against a PC in single combat, but not against more than one. He didn't get to be the Viking Lord by being dumb. The PCs will see that the Viking Lord hits alot more for more damage, but at the same time is easier to hit. 
Gun combat is complex because guns are complex. Don't like it? Alter it, simply it, make it work for you and your group. Steal from other systems. BUT and I want to emphsize this, both sides of the screen use the same rules. And if the PC uses the rules, the GM should use the same rules against them. It'll help see how balanced your rules are. If the PCs complain, then...perhaps the rule should be polished off. 
I don't recommend re-working the existing combat rules. We did that a few times, and it never ended well.

>>>
Am I the only one to feel somewhat let down by the combat system?
<<<
Not realy, as you don't have to use the combat options. But they do enhance the existing combat for the more detailed players. You can also, as we did in SZ, come up with options you feel are needed but not provided. 
>>>
Thanks
<<<
You're welcome. I am always happy to speak. 
If you're not on it, I suggest seeking answers and advice on the forums at www.westendgames.com
SDF II


      
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.justintimeadventures.com/pipermail/torg/attachments/20080615/753ed794/attachment.html>