mixed time-based & fixed-sequence TB idea (indirectly AP-based)

[lewis_cb]

Hi everyone,

I know this is perhaps too late, but maybe for next game this could be a good strategy to allow both modes to co-exist. I had an idea inspired by reading other interesting suggestions about TB tweaks to make DEX valuable.

 

Rationale:
- On the one hand, I can imagine a pure time-based system could be too chaotic in the sense of sequence of turns being very different and unpredictable each round.
- On the other hand, I think devs consider a set order more desirable, so that it is more tactical and tracktable.
- However, I think both could be merged by imposing to the dynamic time-based system a turn resolution every X secs based on DEX/RES and not time * (so it's usually the same character order every round).

* Note it would be more realistic to resolve character order based on whoever is available earlier but this would lead us again to pure time-based system, so no.

 

The idea:
- allocate every round a "budget" of 6s to every character (turns are sequential within the round as usual),
- every round resolve character order based on RES/DEX and not time (i.e. char1 acts sooner than char2 if char1 RES/DEX is higher, even if char2 recovers from his last action before char1; see next point),
- every turn give some flexibility and aim for at least one action but also open the possibility of several actions:
a) let the character borrow maximum 25% = 1'5s from next turn (and/or save max 25% = 1'5s for next turn) 
b) let the character execute an action as long as the attack phase (hit*) is within whatever remains of the turn's 6s budget even if its recovery phase falls inside next turn and "borrows" part of it. That next turn would start with less initial budget (i.e. less than 6s)
- buffs, debuffs and statuses in general cannot only start/end at the beginning of the turn as usual but also somewhere in the middle (see next point). This way, interruptions/dazes/etc could mean losing only part of a turn (e.g. some secs) and not all (avoiding making them too binary, either too strong or too weak),
- let characters postpone (but never advance!) their turn within the round. Also let them waste time within the turn, so that e.g. a blind status wears off and the attack(s) have a better chance.

* For reference, MaxQuest's great explanation and time diagrams of RTwP combat: https://forums.obsidian.net/topic/98679-mechanics-attack-speed-recovery-time-reload-time/ I believe the RTwP engine could still be a great underlying system behind a turn-based appearance together with this DEX/RES-based sequence resolution.

 

The HMI:
- To make it more accessible, even if time is kept internally as the underlying measure of actions (e.g. 4'2s per attack and not 3 APs), the HMI could show a bar of e.g. 6 diamonds (APs, i.e. 1/second).
- X additional diamonds can be shown on each side of the bar if seconds were saved in the previous round or are going to be borrowed from the next round.
- If an action does not take an exact nº of diamonds but also a fraction of a diamond, this is displayed as that diamond having that fraction greyed-out and the rest still green (available). I.e. diamonds cannot only be either fully green or grey but also partially used/available.
- This way, after some familiarisation and usage of tentative actions, a player can more or less mentally calculate or visualise combinations of actions in terms of diamonds (APs) and not sums of seconds (tedious).

 

The advantages:
- Inherit RtWP mechanics and fine-tuning which is already polished (with minor changes).
- Make DEX and more diversity appear again, e.g. fast weapons would oftentimes attack twice in a row and similarly slow weapons would sometimes have empty turns where all time happened to be recovery time (i.e. borrowed). High dex casters would be tricky, but casting time could be made bigger and recovery smaller to enforce being exposed to interruptions 1 turn.
- Movement could use a separate budget or the same one,  by converting it to consumed time with some stride-to-time proportionality.

 

What do you think? I can try to paint some time diagrams explaining the idea if it is not clear. I hope it doesn't sound very bad.

Edited May 2, 2019 by lewis_cb
Better explanation