Forums of the Megaverse®

A rules question came up tonight in our Online Robotech campaign.

Is the rule "Simultaneous attack" only for hand to hand combat, or can it be used in ranged combat.

I'll asked some follow up questions based on the answers I get.

Nothing rules it out from being used in ranged combat.

The answer is a solid "maybe" with a side order of "it depends"
The rules are not exactly firm either way.
I have seen GMs rule both ways with pretty solid backing, in fact I have seen GMs rule differently in the same game!

In general, as I see it.
IF you know the attack is coming, and IF you would normally get a defense against that attack, then you may forgo taking your defense to launch an instantaneous attack to take advantage of the split second opening in defense that your opponent leaves in their own defenses when they attack.
You will both be hit, but you are calculating that either you can take it, or that the trade off is worth it.

I would allow a Simultaneous attack against, for instance, someone engaged in a mecha dog fight taking a shot with a cannon...
...they need to line up the shot for a couple seconds and I can take advantage of that to shoot them in turn.
I would not allow it against a missile attack. That is just something that I need to get a lock on and once I get the tone I push the button...
...it doesn't really set up an 'opening' to exploit.
Nor would I allow it against a really long range attack. Something from a mile or twenty away and the necessary split second timing is going to be impossible.

All my opinion there of course. I think the biggest thing about Simultaneous attack is not "is it the most effective possible attack" but "does this make the most narrative sense/is it the most fun option" If it enhances the game go for it! If it takes away from the game then the GM should just say "nope, sorry."

eliakon wrote:The answer is a solid "maybe" with a side order of "it depends"
The rules are not exactly firm either way.
I have seen GMs rule both ways with pretty solid backing, in fact I have seen GMs rule differently in the same game!

In general, as I see it.
IF you know the attack is coming, and IF you would normally get a defense against that attack, then you may forgo taking your defense to launch an instantaneous attack to take advantage of the split second opening in defense that your opponent leaves in their own defenses when they attack.
You will both be hit, but you are calculating that either you can take it, or that the trade off is worth it.

I would allow a Simultaneous attack against, for instance, someone engaged in a mecha dog fight taking a shot with a cannon...
...they need to line up the shot for a couple seconds and I can take advantage of that to shoot them in turn.
I would not allow it against a missile attack. That is just something that I need to get a lock on and once I get the tone I push the button...
...it doesn't really set up an 'opening' to exploit.
Nor would I allow it against a really long range attack. Something from a mile or twenty away and the necessary split second timing is going to be impossible.

All my opinion there of course. I think the biggest thing about Simultaneous attack is not "is it the most effective possible attack" but "does this make the most narrative sense/is it the most fun option" If it enhances the game go for it! If it takes away from the game then the GM should just say "nope, sorry."

Agrees with eli.

Here's how I feel it can be abused. In a battle with 4 Cyclones vs two Invid shock troopers. The four Cyclones all have initiative before the Invid due to the die rolls. The first cyclone fires at the Invid. The Invid takes damage and simultaneously fires back. It has now jumped out of initiative order, and the cyclone no longer has an auto dodge.


Seems like cheating to me.

DocTom wrote:Here's how I feel it can be abused. In a battle with 4 Cyclones vs two Invid shock troopers. The four Cyclones all have initiative before the Invid due to the die rolls. The first cyclone fires at the Invid. The Invid takes damage and simultaneously fires back. It has now jumped out of initiative order, and the cyclone no longer has an auto dodge.


Seems like cheating to me.

that is an example where I would tend to agree that use of the simultaneous attack "rule" would count as "cheating", unless the shock trooper was a player character. for the simple reason that shock troopers are supposed to be generic npc bad guys that frankly aren't that bright.

I would also rule that if the attack is BEFORE your first initiative action pass you can't simultaneously attack.

I might just be nitpicking but that's my thought.

I like your opinion.

guardiandashi wrote:

DocTom wrote:Here's how I feel it can be abused. In a battle with 4 Cyclones vs two Invid shock troopers. The four Cyclones all have initiative before the Invid due to the die rolls. The first cyclone fires at the Invid. The Invid takes damage and simultaneously fires back. It has now jumped out of initiative order, and the cyclone no longer has an auto dodge.


Seems like cheating to me.

that is an example where I would tend to agree that use of the simultaneous attack "rule" would count as "cheating", unless the shock trooper was a player character. for the simple reason that shock troopers are supposed to be generic npc bad guys that frankly aren't that bright.

I would also rule that if the attack is BEFORE your first initiative action pass you can't simultaneously attack.

I might just be nitpicking but that's my thought.

I agree with the first part, not the second.

The first part is logical.
Simultaneous attack comes under 'advanced tactics' and most NPCs are not going to use advanced tactics
I mean, sure I could have all my random NPCs be masters of warfare who know every trick in the book...
...but its utterly out of character.

The second part though doesn't make sense.
If you can't use simultaneous attack "out of order" then you will never get to do it.
Ever.
Because it is ONLY used in response to an attack.
And other people only attack when it is their Initiative, and thus by definition not yours.
If I can only use it on my own turn... then what? I attack my self then counter my own attack?

eliakon wrote:

guardiandashi wrote:

DocTom wrote:Here's how I feel it can be abused. In a battle with 4 Cyclones vs two Invid shock troopers. The four Cyclones all have initiative before the Invid due to the die rolls. The first cyclone fires at the Invid. The Invid takes damage and simultaneously fires back. It has now jumped out of initiative order, and the cyclone no longer has an auto dodge.


Seems like cheating to me.

that is an example where I would tend to agree that use of the simultaneous attack "rule" would count as "cheating", unless the shock trooper was a player character. for the simple reason that shock troopers are supposed to be generic npc bad guys that frankly aren't that bright.

I would also rule that if the attack is BEFORE your first initiative action pass you can't simultaneously attack.

I might just be nitpicking but that's my thought.

I agree with the first part, not the second.

The first part is logical.
Simultaneous attack comes under 'advanced tactics' and most NPCs are not going to use advanced tactics
I mean, sure I could have all my random NPCs be masters of warfare who know every trick in the book...
...but its utterly out of character.

The second part though doesn't make sense.
If you can't use simultaneous attack "out of order" then you will never get to do it.
Ever.
Because it is ONLY used in response to an attack.
And other people only attack when it is their Initiative, and thus by definition not yours.
If I can only use it on my own turn... then what? I attack my self then counter my own attack?

that's not what I said.

read more carefully, I said before your FIRST action of the combat you cannot simultaneous attack. Not that you don't simultaneous attack on your turn.

look at it this way 1st pass of actions
p1 attacks on 15
p2 attacks on 14
p3 attacks on 12
p4 attacks on 9
ST1 attacks on 6
ST2 attacks on 4

second pass of actions
p1 attacks on 15 attack #2 ST1 simultaneous attacks
p2 attacks on 14
p3 attacks on 12
p4 attacks on 9
ST1 attacks on 6
ST2 attacks on 4

I would be ok with that, but NOT ok with the ST making the advanced action of simultaneous attack on its FIRST action especially when it should be reacting "slower" because its not real bright I can't find the second edition stats atm but under 1st edition:
a stage 1 invid pilot (scout and armored scout (subhuman) IQ3, ma 3 me 10 note incapable of independent thought
a stage 2 invid pilot (trooper /shock trooper) subhuman Iq 5 MA 5 me 10 note incapable of independent thought
stage 3 is capable of independent thought, IQ 8 MA 5 ME 10

I think you should be able to use a simultaneous attack anytime that you are in one on one hand to hand combat and you are about to take damage. I don't think that it should be allowed in ranged combat. I think that the original attacker should also be allowed to respond to the attack with a party or Dodge as normal.

For my, personal games, I have instituted a custom house rule for Simultaneous attacks that allows for the option of...essentially a "simultaneous defense' which can add an element of risk to the equation.
I am currently working up a 'feint' mechanic to add in so that people can try to feint and draw others into triggering the sub-optimal simo-options...
...but that is still just in the drafting stages.