Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

I think most people thinking about vehicles are thinking about Chase scenes.

 Easy E wrote:
I think most people thinking about vehicles are thinking about Chase scenes.

Yeah. So was I. I didn't even think about blending in while driving.

How much is your game supposed to be James Bond versus Top Secret versus Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy?

 Easy E wrote:
How much is your game supposed to be James Bond versus Top Secret versus Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy?

I'll give you the basic layout of the starter campaign, and it should give you the gist if what I'm going for.

It's June 1987 and US President Ronald Reagan is due to speak at the Brandenburg Gate in 36 hours.

The problem, a 1 kiloton SADM (loving referred to as a backpack nuke) is missing from the NATO arsenal.

The men escorting the weapon have disappeared. Last known location, the Marquis Hotel, West Berlin.

Your team has been activated to recover the munition at all costs. The Americans must not become aware of this debacle.

The first mission has them investigate the hotel where the thieves were last seen. They have military ID photos and names, which may or not be accurate.

They also don't have any authority to go kicking down doors or carrying weapons.

The mission will take them to the Wall and perhaps have to disarm a nuclear weapon next to the Victory Colum as President Reagan gives the "Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall!" speech.

Hmmmm, so a bit of Hollywood wrapped up in a mostly grounded setting. Do I have the right?


Also, on the topic of actions/initiative I was looking at a few games for my own edification and ran across an idea that might be useful for you (or might not).

Players would pick their actions, but the action choice would also determine their order in initiative. I.e. those who chose to talk would go before those who chose to take cover would always go before those who chose to attack.

Actions were broken down into broad categories like Defend, Observe, Advance, Negotiate, and Attack.

Defend could have:
1. Take cover
2. Blend In
3. Evade

Observe:
1. Hold an action
2. Search
3. Document

Advance:
1. Move Rapidly
2. Seize a key location
3. Intercept

Negotiate
1. Make friends
2. Make demands
3. Talk to comrades

Attack:
1. Swing a fist
2. Stabbyy-stab
3. Draw a weapon
4. Shoot a gun
5. Prime an explosive

So, choosing a Negotiate option would always go first, Observe second, Defend third, Advance fourth, and Attack Last. All players and foes choose and then take actions in their slot, players before NPCs.

This would require you to re-work your action economy but could be an interesting change and maintain some simultaneous action aspects. It also moves you further away from D&D style action/free action/bonus action stuff.

Hmmm... I did have an Action Slot idea I bounced around for a while, where the more actions you selected at the start of your turn the less dice you rolled. Essentially the Law of Diminishing Returns.

You selected
1 action slot +2d6
2 action slots +/- 0
3 action slots -1d6
4 action slots -2d6

Kinda like the old West End Star Wars, but you decided before you did anything and all penalties applied to all Skill tests until the start of your next turn including attempts to dodge attacks when it wasn't your turn.

With all the plusses and minuses, this that and the other, my players complained loudly that it was too difficult to keep track of things. (With Tension modifiers and Advantage/Disadvantage).

So I scrapped the idea... until I can work out the kinks.

¤¤¤

I do like the idea of actions dictating initiative.

I tossed around the idea of giving the Vanguard a special ability called "Synchronize Watches," which would allow him to select the initiative order for his team for the mission.

Carrying Stuff!



* No more weight or “Concealment Capacity.”

* Each character has four concealment slots: **Belt, Torso (coat), Bag, Ankle**.

* Slots take Small / Medium / Large items (Bag holds the most). Overfill = item becomes **Visible**.

* Draw times: **Belt = instant (quick draw), Torso = 1 action, Bag = 1 action if open / 2 if closed, Ankle = 2 actions.**

* Resolution: opposed rolls —
**Detection** (searcher) vs **Stealth** (holder). Ties favor the searcher.


* Determine the item and slot. Then resolve an opposed roll:

**Detection** (NPC/guard) vs **Stealth** (player). Ties favor the searcher.

* **When the holder gets Advantage** on Stealth: item is noticeably hard to find (Small item in Torso/Ankle, or Bag closed with small item, or a well-described disguise).

* **When the searcher gets Advantage** (or the holder suffers Disadvantage): slot is overloaded, item is Visible, or conditions are actively high-surveillance (or Bag open and being inspected).

* **Neutral**: most Medium items in Torso or a Small item in Belt — no Advantage/Disadvantage; roll normally.

* **Environment & Disguise:** reward good disguise/roleplay with Advantage for the holder; high-surveillance environments or thorough searches give the searcher Advantage. Keep these rare and simple — one Advantage or one Disadvantage, not both.

I like it. Simple and easy and avoids characters carrying a ton of stuff without making it obvious they are carrying a ton of stuff.

 Easy E wrote:
I like it. Simple and easy and avoids characters carrying a ton of stuff without making it obvious they are carrying a ton of stuff.

I've been sitting at the game like some sort of Anthropologist, taking notes on what I notice the players struggling with or outright ignoring.

And carrying capacity was an annoyance that bogged down the game. As was my previous concealment method which in retrospect was copied inspired by Shadowrun 5e.

Thanks for the feedback.

I'm currently reworking sizes for equipment. Thankfully, the playtest equipment list is small.

Why grabbing thins from torso 1 action? I mean holster on torso or scabbard on chest is very easy and natural to grap gun/knife/grenade from

I guess I could add holster to the equipment. Reduces the action required to Free Action/Reaction.

I would honestly try to move away from D&D style action, reaction, free action etc. Instead, focus on simply "what do you do?" that is your action idea.

 Easy E wrote:
I would honestly try to move away from D&D style action, reaction, free action etc. Instead, focus on simply "what do you do?" that is your action idea.

I guess I'm stuck in that mode. Initially it allowed me to create an easy framework to build everything else around.

It was non-threatening and I thought that it would allow players to easily understand terminology and be more likely to learn the system.

☆☆☆

As it stands now. Reactions are simply skill tests you make when it is not your turn.

I need a system in place where the players can be tricked into making bad decisions.

I'll give you an example if something I want... but am having a lot of trouble implementing without a Reaction system/"action."

The operatives are moving through a darkened forest when they hear a stick crack behind them.

I need a way for the players to be able to turn to face the sound immediately, as the whole sound is a diversion set up by the enemy and any player who fell for it, is now facing away from the ensuing ambush.


But... how often will this occur? Probably rarely. But it seemed like a cool idea.

(I have a bunch of ideas like this, like a bomb defusing mini-game.)

Avoid mini-games like the plague.

 Easy E wrote:
Avoid mini-games like the plague.

Really? I thought it would break up the typical dice roll for success gameplay.

People don't like them?

To be honest people who like mini games still plays D&D 3.5. I like more streamlined play for example. When you don't break game flow for some micromanagement. Also about this test on sounds. They can simply declare they turned or not. You need just fraction of a second to turns head, you don't need test for that. Or there can be nerves/cool test but without dice roll, GM decide who turned depends on stats/character. I have trauma after close explosion. I always turns to clicking sound. Even if I don't want. You can build something like this into character profile.