Base X combat or "how to keep everyone moving along quickly"

[Leonardo T Dragon]

I'm re-posting this from another forum that I use for my own monthly Rifts game but this is a modification to the combat system that evolved out of discussions between my old Rifts GM and my old Rifts group. (Warshield73 here on the forums - I know he used it at the open house in 2010 in the game he ran.) We tweak it slightly in the fact that he uses it on a base 5 and for my current campaign we work on base 4 approach.

See below and then post your thoughts:

The Base X combat system…

You’ve seen this mentioned before but here’s how I’ve played combat in Palladium for many years.

“An army moves as fast as its slowest man.”

Not everyone has the same number of attacks and yet all of their actions occur within the span of a melee round. (15 seconds, according to Palladium.) Traditionally I’ve heard of games being played where everyone takes their first action, then everyone takes their second action, etc and people essentially drop out as they run out of actions. To me, this doesn’t make sense as some people peak at 5 actions while others may only have 4 or as many as 7!

Combat will be determined thus:
1) Everyone rolls initiative as normal. This determines the order in which each character takes action.
2) Each player declares the TOTAL number of attacks/combat actions their character has. The lowest number of attacks determines how many rounds will be in that melee.
3) Characters who have more actions than rounds will have extra actions. These may be used during their turn at any point in the combat sequence other than on the first. (Note: Only one extra attack/action may be used per round.)
4) Once the base number of rounds is over initiative is re-rolled and the sequence starts again.

Confused? Here’s an example:

At a game, there are four players and one GM.
- Ralphie is playing a merc and has 5 attacks. His initiative roll is a 13.
- Bob is playing a hatching dragon and has 4 attacks. Initiative rolled is 7.
- Larry is playing a gunslinger and has 6 attacks with his pistol. Initiative is 19.
- Darryl is playing a psi-stalker and has 5 attacks. Initiative rolled is 15.
- The GM rolls for a brodkill that has 5 attacks. It gets a 16 initiative.

According to the scenario above, combat will occur on a base 4 system. Ralphie and Darryl each have one extra action. Larry has two extra actions. These extra actions may be used in the second or third round of combat but not in the first or last. Had Bob had five attacks, the base would have been 5. If Bob had 6 attacks the base still would have been 5 as Darryl only has five attacks.

To break this down further, here is the initiative and number of attacks/actions that each character will most likely use during the first melee.

Round 1:
Larry- 1 action (Draws a pistol)
Brodkill – 1 action (Charges party)
Darryl – 1 action (Draws a pistol)
Ralphie – 1 action (Grabs his E-Rifle)
Bob – 1 action (Breathes fire)

Round 2
Larry – 2 actions (Fires twice)
Brodkill – 1 action (Tries to melee Daryll)
Darryl – 2 actions (Dodges attack, takes a shot)
Ralphie – 1 action (Ducks behind cover)
Bob – 1 action (Melee attacks Brodkill)

Round 3
Larry – 2 actions (Fires twice)
Brodkill – 2 actions (Attacks Bob twice)
Darryl – 1 action (fires once)
Ralphie – 2 actions (Fires once, Yells to Darry l to run to APC)
Bob – 1 action (Dodges attack)

Round 4
Larry- 1 action (Fires once)
Brodkill – 1 action (Attacks Bob)
Darryl – 1 action (runs to APC)
Ralphie – 1 action (Fires once)
Bob – 1 action (Attacks Brodkill)

At this point initiative is re-rolled and a new round begins.

The idea behind this is that everyone begins and ends the melee at the same time. Everyone acts on the first round and at least once on each subsequent round thereafter. With the base X system the characters with more attacks simply move a bit faster than others but everyone moves together. Remember, characters can use attacks/combat actions to do more than just attack.

Thoughts?

[Severus Snape]

I get the concept - a single action per melee round. My major question on this, however, is:

Say it's a Base 5, with 4 characters. So you've got 5 "rounds" of combat before the next initiative is rolled. What happens in the event one of the characters who does not have "extra actions" wants to use an attack or tactic that takes 2 or more actions to perform?

As an example, let's say that in our Base 5 example Doug has no extra actions. Meaning, he gets to act one each "round" and only once each "round". Let's say he's involved in combat, and he wants to pull off the use of something that requires 2 actions be spent:

• If he wants to do this, does he lose his action in the next "round"?
• When does the effect go off - immediately, or during the next round?

You can see what I'm getting at. How do you account for attacks that take multiple actions to perform if they are being done by someone who has no extra attacks.

And this leads to this question: Those with extra attacks obviously get to use attacks that cost more than 1 action in any "round" provided they have the extra actions. But isn't that a little...off? I mean, they aren't losing attacks on the back end of the scenario, so they are, in essence, being rewarded for wanting to pull off stuff that is harder to do than normal.

As an example, say in our Base 5 scenario Lisa wants to shoot someone with a burst that costs 2 actions. She can perform this action at any time between the second and fourth rounds. She isn't losing any actions on the back end for doing this - she is still able to perform just as many actions as everyone else, but ends all at the same time. And why can't she use the extra actions in round 1 or round 5?

I guess I'm a little too confused on why you would implement a system that seems...I don't know...imbalance isn't the right word, but I can't think of another word to describe it.

[Leonardo T Dragon]

As far as carrying actions over to the next round, I've let it go as long as it is only 1 action carrying over. If someone in the last round of a melee decides "I want to use an aimed called shot" (which takes 3 actions) it's been GM's discretion. I've had a GM that kept allowing characters to "borrow actions" from the next round-- to the point where people should have had whole rounds where nothing happens.

As far as things taking multiple actions-- the action doesn't happen until the last required action. In other words, an aimed called shot takes three actions to set up. The character doesn't take the shot in the first action and then sit on their hands in the second and third. Instead, the first two are used to set up the shot-- proper positioning, sighting in on the target, etc. When the their third action comes up, they take the shot and get the bonuses accorded to them by burning up three actions.

Same goes for a power punch. You use two actions to burn it off and it goes off on the second. The first action is the wind-up and the second is the increased follow-through.

The reason this was developed was the fact that it kept everyone involved throughout the entire melee. Otherwise, the guy with four attacks has nothing to do while the Juicer or Altara Warrior Woman with 7 or 8 keeps attacking. This way, everyone has an action at the beginning and end of the round-- some characters just move more quickly than others which is why they have more attacks in the first place.

Does that make sense? I've either played in or ran multiple groups that have used this and I've yet to find someone who finds it truly cumbersome.

[Warwolf]

I had the same issue, but fixed it by spreading the attacks across fifteen "slots," one for each second of the melee. Unfortunately, Wayne doesn't like to publish tables or it probably would have been in a Rifter already.

[Leonardo T Dragon]

the downside is if the the disparity between the lowest number and the highest are too far. so lets say if you have

A 4apms
B 8apms
C 5apms
D 5apms
with the OPs rules PC B has to do 2 actions on the 1st action. now add player E
E 2apms (yes this possible)


i think this only works in games where the PCs APMs are really close together. otherwise i have no complaints and might actually use it.

Actually the person with 2apm would go once every other round-- which would be reflective of their untrained nature in combat. I think that this is more of an exception than a rule but one that would be addressed. The idea of this is to keep everyone involved at a realistic pace reflective of their character's abilities.

In the example of my monthly group we have the following characters:
Rogue Scholar - 4 APM
Altara Warrior Woman - 8 APM
Juicer - 7APM
Cyber Knight - 6 APM

So, using the spirit of the rules above, we're on base 4. The scholar goes once each round, the Juicer has 3 extras, the Cyber-Knight has 2 extras, and, to keep things flowing smoothly, the Blind Warrior Woman goes 2x each time. Is that fair? Actually I think it is as the Altara is built almost purely for combat. The scholar isn't as highly trained and just moves slower. Consider the alternative with this group.

Melee starts--
Round 1:
Altara Warrior Woman
Juicer
Cyber-Knight
Scholar

Round 2:
Altara Warrior Woman
Juicer
Cyber-Knight
Scholar

Round 3:
Altara Warrior Woman
Juicer
Cyber-Knight
Scholar

Round 4:
Altara Warrior Woman
Juicer
Cyber-Knight
Scholar

Round 5:
Altara Warrior Woman
Juicer
Cyber-Knight

Round 6:
Altara Warrior Woman
Juicer
Cyber-Knight

Round 7:
Altara Warrior Woman
Juicer

Round 8:
Altara Warrior Woman

Performing combat in that fashion means that my scholar is essentially sitting out for HALF of the melee with nothing to do at all. In a RIFTS combat setting, foes could be obliterated before she could do anything. Using Base X means that characters with fewer attacks start out the melee and then have time to go get a pizza while the rest of the group wipes out the forces. It spreads the actions out in a more reasonable and realistic manner over the span of the melee which is a whopping 15 seconds of "real time." Sure, they move more slowly but I think it keeps the players more engaged vs. having to sit on their hands for as much as 20 minutes while the rest of the group finishes out a single melee of combat.

It's just an optional way of running combat that my old GM and I have been using for some time now. It works and it keeps the players a bit more engaged in my experience. Your mileage may vary.