Combat Rules

[Badbru]

That's a slipery slope there. Dictating what the players may or may not attempt. I can see why you want to do it but I've had both sides of the coin there. Some players will push the envelope of what the GM will allow just to find the boundaries, whilst others will be adamant that that's what their character will do because that's what they want him to do. The latter can end in tears and/or you can loose players to railroading.

[Mohoender]

Marc

I see your idea of a Panic roll as a very good one but one to use with care. For exemple, with player having previous combat experience you should use it mostly when they are hesitating. With civilian characters or green military characters (no or little military experience) you can use it more often. Nevertheless, if one player has a good aproach to the situation you must not use it (IMO, of course).

Originally Posted by Badbru

The latter can end in tears and/or you can loose players to railroading.

Not always a bad thing. You can debate the GM decisions but his decision always has to prevail or you end up in chaos. Anyway, an unfair GM will quickly find himself with no players at all.

[Tegyrius]

I think there's a difference between arbitrarily taking away a player's control of his PC and doing so as a known consequence for risky actions. Morale and panic rules should have teeth for PCs as well as NPCs - if you apply them only to NPCs, then you inflict a fundamental tactical imbalance on the opposition.

- C.

[Raellus]

I don't use the v1.0 rules but I kind of like the idea of a Coolness Under Fire attribute. IIRC, it dealt somewhat with the likelihood of hesitation and panic.

If a player is a good RPer and willing to roll with what whatever the dice come up, hesitation and panic can add a lot of realism/grittiness to the game. If the player is not willing or able to RP anything other than his/her PC's best qualities, then use of hesitation/panic going to lead to arguing, hurt feelings, GM railroading, resignations, etc.

A little trick for the reluctant to hesitate/panic player is to just call it being "pinned down" instead. It's a little bit more of an objective term but it can generate the same results. If the player still insists upon movement or risky action during that turn, plug 'em!

[Marc]

Well, my intention is not to dictate or railroad the actions of my players, though I recognize that some of your opinions makes me think about this unpleasant consequence. I will pay attention to it in my next game. The feedback from the players about the “Self-Control� skill (we’ve baptized it this last Sunday) seems positive, but the first playtesting must be done next week. I agree totally with Tegyrius and will only add that, in my opinion, such a parameter (panic, morale...) is needed in this kind of RPG game, where combat and and a certain search for “realism� are strongly tied. I think that most tactics (in one way or another) deals with fear, the way to cause it to the enemy and the way to avoid it on your side. (Althought I know that an RPG combat only use to end with the total extermination of one of the sides )

Mmmm... Let me sell my idea . For the moment, we are planning to use a new skill with an initial value of (Intelligence + Initiative) to substitute the 1d6 panic and bailout rolls used in the v2.2 set of rules. Talking in a more official way, for those familiar with the v2 (or2.2) rules, we will have a new asset, under the Intelligence characteristic, and with a number of initial skill points equal to the characters initiative, for free. The GM will assign difficulty levels as normal depending of the risk taken by the characters. So, thinking about what Mo said, this is the way the GM will evaluate the aproach of the player to the situation. And the skill is directly related to Initiative wich, in this set of rules, is a direct consecuence of the combat experience of the character. A player who is looking for a cold and imperturbable character in combat can choose to raise this skill.

So, the doctor of my group, Raquel (Int: 10, Ini 2), will have an initial Self-Control Skill of 12. The skill would be automatically rose by rising the initiative or by spending skill points as normal, no instructor needed. (3 in the case of Raquel, to gain a 13 in the Self-Control Skill). Anyway se will continue acting at its current intiative (2).

The direct consequences:
• We can use adjust the difficulty of the check as with any other skill.
• More Initiative or Intelligence implies more Self-Control.
• The new skill would be raised with skill points (by decision of the player) or automatically through the improvement of the initiative (taking part and surviving to combat).
• Initiative works as always when talking about the order of the actions and the number of combat actions available.
• About NPC's, their Self-Control level will be (Int+Ini):

Novice: 7
Trained: 8 (an intermediate level we use, novice with instruction and without experience)
Experienced: 9
Veteran: 11
Elite: 13+