Jul 10 12:04 1998

To: Froccer
To: Jerm
To: Jert

From: Dan

Subject: re:Initative and attacks

In response to Sean's e-mail

>Dan,
>
>We did not have such a system in place the last time I was there; however, we
>did have several discussions on possible alternatives and their benifits /
>drawbacks.
>
>One such system we discussed was a system that based when you attacked based
>on your initiative. The system was as follows:
>
>1) roll d20 for initiative as normal
>
>2) divide your initiative by your number of attacks, rounding up
>
>3) divide up the round into phases; the first phase will be the person with the
> highest initiative (e.g. if a person has 22 for initiative, then there will
> be 22 combat phases)
>
>4) determine the combat phase when each person can attack by taking their
> initiative roll, and subtract the number found in step 2; do this for each
> of your attacks (e.g. if a person has 22 for initiative and has 6 attacks,
> he would take his turns on 22, 18, 14, 10, 6, and 2)
>
>5) if a person has more attacks than his initiative roll, then procede as
> normal, but that person takes more attacks at the end of the round (i.e.
> a person with 6 attacks, rolling a 5 for initiative, would take his turns
> on 5, 4, 3, 2, 1, and at the end of the round)
>
>As you can probably see already, there are some benifits and drawbacks.
>
>The benifit occurs that for higher initiative totals, the number of attacks
>are evenly spread over the entire attack round (which is pretty realistic).
>
>The drawback is that a person with a low initiative total waits until the end
>of the round, but can then do pretty well any sort of funny thing that he
>thinks of to his opponent(s) at that point (e.g. empty a couple of clips into
>a guy, run up and take a guys weapon and shoot him with it, jump into a vehicle,
>turn it to a location, take careful aim, fire a couple of times, drop a whole
>bunch of grenades into the back seat, and escape with time to spare, etc ...).
>
>There are others, as well, but I would just like to overview this system at
>this time.
>
>On the whole, I think this is a better system because guys with lots of attacks
>(like juicers) also tend to have pretty high initiative totals.
>
>Froccer
>

I remember this system and I remember it favoring the juicer, maybe we
should extra penalize a person with a low initative, like they loss attacks
or something, call it an hesitant penalty. So if I am a crazy with 5
attacks and I roll the mystical 1 then I can use 2 of my 5 attacks as
dodges, if I don't then I still only get 3 attacks in the last phase.

What do you think?

Dan