Forum

Having read a number of comments about the combat rules, I wasn’t 100% with some of the choices, especially the numbers of actions.
Well, they say that the “proof of the pudding is in the eating”, so I have had a few trial runs through the combat to see how it runs at the table rather that just reading the quick-start rules, and I must admit to being surprised! I’ve run through a couple of 1-2-1 fights and some multiple opponents combats as well and, to my preferences, the system seems to work extremely well.
I found that due to the single action economy I felt I was having to make tactical decisions each round, but not getting bogged down in complex or special rules. Changing the initiative every turn made for some interesting decisions and circumstances that felt like what I decided made a difference. I think the biggest thing I took away from these test fights is that neither “low” or “high” initiative is “better” but they lead to different choices and decision points. I think the main benefit of drawing a low (early) card is there is more potential options to “wait” which was especially useful when faced with multiple foes.
One think that I noticed was it felt that different characters felt like they were fighting differently, with choices around parry/dodge/attack based on the character, skills, order in initiative, opponents rolls and so on. Using shields was interesting as I found myself more willing to consider parrying with something more substantial.
And it was fast! Even when I ran one of the longer combats that lasted several rounds it only took a few minutes and, for me, I never really felt “analysis paralysis” around choices which seemed to flow from the combat and initiative system.
What I found overall was that fights felt “fun”, that choices weren’t static and felt dramatic in play. I know that this system may not be for everyone, but it suites my GM/play preferences pretty spot on (which I wasn’t expecting from just reading the rules).

I agree, I've done some testing also, and the wait mechanic in particular is absolutely genius, so I'm honestly surprised that it's considered an optional rule.
I would absolutely "promote" it to official rule (same as the "pushing the roll" one).

So, I agree with all that you've said here, although I don't quite get how waiting works in relation to whether you draw low vs high each round. Perhaps you could explain a bit?
Also though, Monsters always hit? Is that right? If that just Monsters that don't wield weapons, sorta similar to FL, or...? Please explain here, because that could spell TPK real quickly unless I'm mistaken.
Thnx a lot! It's great so far though, with a few typos of course, as expected naturally, and a paragraph disjointed that I found.

The real genius I’ve found with waiting is that you swap your card on your turn with someone (PC or NPC) who is later in the round. This not only gives you time to react to a successful hit (if you want to use your action that way) but can also force the NPC to take their action when you decide….so you can swap cards, they take their action (probably attack) and if they succeed you choose to parry/avoid/take the hit, but if they fail you know they can’t respond to your attack. In a group this can be really useful to force a monster or NPC to act rather than allowing it to react
(I would assume more discussion if swapping with another player)
Also, monsters autohitting is for the “big bads”, foes like goblins and bandits fight same as heroes. This makes monsters more unique in a way, I think. Also, the attacks are from a table d6 or choose, and can’t be the same one for a following attack. Not all these are physical attacks and many in the examples only target one character, meaning less TPK and more variety in the big monster fights.

So, I agree with all that you've said here, although I don't quite get how waiting works in relation to whether you draw low vs high each round. Perhaps you could explain a bit?
Also though, Monsters always hit? Is that right? If that just Monsters that don't wield weapons, sorta similar to FL, or...? Please explain here, because that could spell TPK real quickly unless I'm mistaken.
Thnx a lot! It's great so far though, with a few typos of course, as expected naturally, and a paragraph disjointed that I found.

When it's you turn, you can decide to "wait": this means swapping your initiative card with another higher one (so someone who should act later) from an ally or foe (they can't refuse).
To make a simple example, let's assume that the thief should go first, but doing so means that they won't be able to use their backstabbing ability.
So they swap with the warrior, who engage the monster in melee, getting the monster attention.
Then, if the knight should go next, he could decide to wait also, guaranteeing that, if the monster attacks the warrior, he can use protector + parry.
As a group, having the ability to shape the turn order (which changes every round) is a massive encouragement to play tactically.

Yes, the "main" monsters always hits, and they have a table (just like in Forbidden Lands) to determine the attack that they do every turn (never the same one two times in a row).
Other humanoids follow the same rules of the player characters instead.

As Banquo said, on paper it may look kinda strange, but if you try it you'll find that, against all odds, the combat seems very well balanced, fast, and fun (at least in the quickstart).

Just got done with my second mock combat. All five pregens vs. five goblins (Grub's stats). After closing, with ranged capable folks gettting a few hits in, two goblins were dead. The remaining 3 were close enough to move and attack the Wolfkin, 2 hits and one miss, and he dropped to 0 HP in that one turn of the goblins. The duck moved up to protect the wolf, and the thief and the elf finished off one of the goblins, with the wizard downing the other two. Combat took 4 rounds. Very quick. The dying and rallying rules are interested, though after that fight I realized that the Wolfkin is better suited to range and second rank despite his speed.

Over all I love it and am looking forward to what other possibilities other professions and talents bring. Will likely put together a small dungeon crawl to run the party through this weekend, observing time rules, using traps, and the like.

So, I agree with all that you've said here, although I don't quite get how waiting works in relation to whether you draw low vs high each round. Perhaps you could explain a bit?
Also though, Monsters always hit? Is that right? If that just Monsters that don't wield weapons, sorta similar to FL, or...? Please explain here, because that could spell TPK real quickly unless I'm mistaken.
Thnx a lot! It's great so far though, with a few typos of course, as expected naturally, and a paragraph disjointed that I found.

When it's you turn, you can decide to "wait": this means swapping your initiative card with another higher one (so someone who should act later) from an ally or foe (they can't refuse).
To make a simple example, let's assume that the thief should go first, but doing so means that they won't be able to use their backstabbing ability.
So they swap with the warrior, who engage the monster in melee, getting the monster attention.
Then, if the knight should go next, he could decide to wait also, guaranteeing that, if the monster attacks the warrior, he can use protector + parry.
As a group, having the ability to shape the turn order (which changes every round) is a massive encouragement to play tactically.

Yes, the "main" monsters always hits, and they have a table (just like in Forbidden Lands) to determine the attack that they do every turn (never the same one two times in a row).
Other humanoids follow the same rules of the player characters instead.

As Banquo said, on paper it may look kinda strange, but if you try it you'll find that, against all odds, the combat seems very well balanced, fast, and fun (at least in the quickstart).

Thank you very much! This is great!! I guess I'll just have to wait for the alpha and then try it and see. I do know that in FL, Monsters don't auto hit, but yes, their attacks do work otherwise the same. Nice and quite interesting. I'll likely look at some YouTube folks running a sim of this if possible to help me kinda work it out I guess...Lol

The real genius I’ve found with waiting is that you swap your card on your turn with someone (PC or NPC) who is later in the round. This not only gives you time to react to a successful hit (if you want to use your action that way) but can also force the NPC to take their action when you decide….so you can swap cards, they take their action (probably attack) and if they succeed you choose to parry/avoid/take the hit, but if they fail you know they can’t respond to your attack. In a group this can be really useful to force a monster or NPC to act rather than allowing it to react
(I would assume more discussion if swapping with another player)
Also, monsters autohitting is for the “big bads”, foes like goblins and bandits fight same as heroes. This makes monsters more unique in a way, I think. Also, the attacks are from a table d6 or choose, and can’t be the same one for a following attack. Not all these are physical attacks and many in the examples only target one character, meaning less TPK and more variety in the big monster fights.

I also like how you've broken this down as well... the idea of "big bads" and how that works here makes sense with a game that says rolls are only when it really counts. The tactics you mention here will be very unique and alternate a good amount of times in each combat so as to make it not repetitive rotation as in some systems... for a while at least anyway... and the deadly factor always being present will greatly inform fantastic play! Thnx!

I was going to start a thread on initiative but then found this thread.
So it seems like the advantage to going early in the round is that you get to deliver damage quickly and maybe take out the bad guys before they can attack. The advantage to going late in the round is that you can use your action to parry, or to attack if the bad guys missed.
Does that oversimplify things? I'm worried that my players will all try to move to later actions so that they have the parry option, and that nobody will want to go early.

I was going to start a thread on initiative but then found this thread.
So it seems like the advantage to going early in the round is that you get to deliver damage quickly and maybe take out the bad guys before they can attack. The advantage to going late in the round is that you can use your action to parry, or to attack if the bad guys missed.
Does that oversimplify things? I'm worried that my players will all try to move to later actions so that they have the parry option, and that nobody will want to go early.

I think weaker characters who are in danger of being insta-killed (maybe already low on HP) may want to do exactly that. But a tougher character with reasonable armor probably won't want to surrender initiative so easily. Better to put the enemy down and never take a hit then have a chance of avoiding a hit which may bypass all your defenses entirely.