[PnP] noob questions part II

[Scott Adams]

At 09:24 PM 9/17/07, you wrote:
>1) Regarding tactical combat, do any of you folks have house rules for
>combatants who wish to flee?
>
>The way I read the rules, it sounds like if two combatants begin the
>movement portion of the phase adjacent to each other, and either
>wishes to fight, both must fight (and end the movement part of the
>phase).
>
>The obvious fix is to allow either combatant to flee, allowing the
>other to take a free attack AND allow that attacker to move as well.
>So, a slower combatant cannot flee from a faster one, but a faster
>combatant can flee from a slower one, he just may have to endure one
>or more free attacks in the process.
>
>Does that sound like what any of you folks are doing?

Pretty much here.  If 3 run toward you and they end their move in melee range to you but you've not run then simply you can run away.  But if you moved and then they move you endure their attacks.  I've never seen use to tweaking those rules other than adding more morale situations.


>2) Weapon damage. I really like the idea that most weapons do similar
>damage (I never understood in D&D why a dagger would do 1d4 and a
>great sword would do 1d12 - seems like either would kill with a well
>placed hit). However I think there should be SOME varience in damage
>beyond the WSB. Maybe 1d8 for light weapons vs 1d10 for heavy/two hand
>weapons. Have any of you used similar house rules?

No.  And plan not to.  Just complicates things.  The balance to the weapons is WSB, magic effects, and the big Strength bonus that can balance it down or up.  If you add in some other random factor then just adds more math and time.  Aside from some obvious exceptions like Poisoned weapons or such.


>3) The Communicate spell. As written, the target of a Communicate
>spell cannot attack or cast spells while he is still affected by it. I
>choose to read that as the target cannot attack or cast spells while
>actively communicating (rather than just affected by it), otherwise
>the spells seems to be overpowered for a base MP1 spell. Am I reading
>that right?
IT rarely comes up.  To me most situations with Communicate
are for languages so the whole issue of attack rarely comes in.
But either way works duration or while communicating.  Up to
the Ref :)



>4) Switching weapons: the rules make it clear that if a melee
>combatant moves adjacent to an archer, and the archer has already
>fired, that the melee combatant can attack without fear of
>counterattack. That's fine, but what about the archer switching
>weapons even if no melee combatant moves adjacent to him? Does it cost
>any movement to switch weapons? It sounds like weapon switching is
>free so long as the character only makes either a missile attack or a
>melee attack, but not both. I just want to make sure I'm doing that
>right. Also, if this is the case, can I assume a character can only
>switch weapons once per phase? Finally, what part of the phase does
>the switch happen? (I assume during the movement portion).
Yes during movement phase.  I take it on a case by case basis.  No one simple set of rules can define it.  I mean it only takes one smooth action to put a bow on your shoulder and with the other hand draw a sword on your opposite hip.  2 seconds max.  I take it as realistic view of my own experience in SCA days or playing around.  Unless your one hnaded or one handed should only take 1-2 seconds.  Course now then do you allow an attack.  That's the question.  Again depends on the situation.
For example a person putting an arrow up, bow on shoulder and then bending down to get a magical dagger in his hidden boot hole by pushing a spring would end his move and likely not get a attack as that's probably 4 seconds.  :)  

I run a system (well used to not in awhile) called Timeship.  Time travel game basically.  No one probably heard of it.  But the interesting thing about it is you ran YOU.  So you didn't design a character but you ran you.  So if you were a programmer in real life that was your skill set.  If a doctor you could heal.  If you were a trash man you had high trash collection skills :).  But the nice thing about the system was it was if you can do it then your character can do it.  If you can jump a 8 foot hole then you can.  But you better show me :)  Thatt's how pnp and most fantasy games tend to be.  If you can draw weapons fast then so be it.
So I take a more realistic view of mechanics than anything.  
I see Pauls idea on this and I've used a system like it.  In one system they use Action Points and that's how they resolve that.

The main thing about pnp is you can take it overally cojmplicated and use formulae out the ying yang or make it simple for players and the
GM.  The bottom line is have fun.  :)