Activity % and the 10 second round

[Archlyte]

So is the Activity % supposed to be the percentage of 10 Seconds of time? If this is true why is the Activity cost to load a bow 80% when it actually takes about 4 seconds (40%)? I also tried it with a bow shouldered and even that is about 7 seconds on the average. If a character is firing repeated shots it would definitely be more like 40% to reload. I believe the cost to fire is 30% which makes sense because aiming and firing is typically a 3 second action IRL. But 8 seconds to load seems too long.

I know I can overrule but I don't like to do so if I don't have to. Am I misunderstanding the Activity% to Time relationship as modeled in the rules? Any thoughts?

[Andraax]

If this is true why is the Activity cost to load a bow 80% when it actually takes about 4 seconds (40%)? I also tried it with a bow shouldered and even that is about 7 seconds on the average. If a character is firing repeated shots it would definitely be more like 40% to reload. I believe the cost to fire is 30% which makes sense because aiming and firing is typically a 3 second action IRL. But 8 seconds to load seems too long.

Were you trying this while someone was shooting arrows at you and someone else was trying to beat you with a flail?

[Archlyte]

No, but I'm not an Elf Warrior who has fought Orcs for 250 years either. Obviously it's not supposed to be a question of pure accuracy, but it becomes difficult to describe the pause when a competent archer fires at range against a target and readies another arrow. Thank you for chiming in, I did laugh when I realized my mistake.

Anyone know if 100% activity is supposed to be 10 Seconds, or is it parsed out between combatants and abstract?

[Archlyte]

I took to the ICE forums but would still like to hear how people describe and conceptualize the combat round and what happens in it.

[Dakadin]

I usually try to keep it abstract since when I look at the percentages they don't always make sense to me when I break it down into seconds. So I usually just go with what they say and only use seconds when something comes up that isn't on the list.

Feel free to change them to suit your game. Just be aware that reducing the reload time on bows will make them much more powerful. Long bows are already one of the deadliest weapons in Rolemaster so I would be very careful with giving them that much extra time to fire.

[Andraax]

No, but I'm not an Elf Warrior who has fought Orcs for 250 years either.

You'd think that with 250 years of training, you'd have taken "Subconscious Preparation" which halves your reload percentages (ie, long bow becomes 35%)...

[Ardem]

The reason for the percentages is not the actual time it takes, but it takes into account the thinking time, the actual wait for the best opportunity and then the load and fire.

So Bill wish to hit a bird, it decides to hit the bird, takes a 1sec, he watches the bird for another 1-2 secs to roughly estimate it distance and travel direction speed etc. He then goes through the actual action of loading and firing the bow. He holds the loaded bow a few seconds to steady his aim and then fires.

A lot of this is abstracted in the game into a load and fire result.

It more understandable in hit and parry combat, the actual hit takes a second, but it the waiting for the right opportunity to take the hit in those seconds that are abstracted. If you even watched a proper medieval match after the inital flurry there is a lot of waiting for opportunities.

This is my reasoning around the times.

On Bow combat I have a player that plays and elf with a composite bow. She is by far the most powerful attacker. She has a bow of speed, so her delay is in the reload as the fire is a 0 action. This has made her close to OP. I wish I never gave it to her. <smile>

[Archlyte]

You'd think that with 250 years of training, you'd have taken "Subconscious Preparation" which halves your reload percentages (ie, long bow becomes 35%)...

I'm new to Rolemaster so I haven't learned to Min/Max yet

[Archlyte]

The reason for the percentages is not the actual time it takes, but it takes into account the thinking time, the actual wait for the best opportunity and then the load and fire.

So Bill wish to hit a bird, it decides to hit the bird, takes a 1sec, he watches the bird for another 1-2 secs to roughly estimate it distance and travel direction speed etc. He then goes through the actual action of loading and firing the bow. He holds the loaded bow a few seconds to steady his aim and then fires.

A lot of this is abstracted in the game into a load and fire result.

It more understandable in hit and parry combat, the actual hit takes a second, but it the waiting for the right opportunity to take the hit in those seconds that are abstracted. If you even watched a proper medieval match after the inital flurry there is a lot of waiting for opportunities.

This is my reasoning around the times.

On Bow combat I have a player that plays and elf with a composite bow. She is by far the most powerful attacker. She has a bow of speed, so her delay is in the reload as the fire is a 0 action. This has made her close to OP. I wish I never gave it to her. <smile>


Thanks for this reply, I see what you mean. I'm disappointed though because I was hoping for once to have something that was more quantified where combat is concerned.

[Ardem]

You cannot account for combat unless you add these mental and obscure parameters in otherwise it becomes unrealistic and combat. It be like two robots hitting each other.

[JohnD]

Man if Rolemaster isn't the most detailed system I probably need to rethink my hobby.

[Trenloe]

I'm disappointed though because I was hoping for once to have something that was more quantified where combat is concerned.
Hey, if you don't like it house rule it for your own games. But, as has been mentioned above, you'll probably end up with there being unbalance in the game if you significantly reduce the action percentage for using a bow.

But, as you've just said you're new to Rolemaster I'd recommend holding off messing with game balance that has been developed over decades of play until you've actually played a few sessions - then you can change what you have issues with based off in-game experience, rather than just looking at the numbers.

[Dakadin]

Thanks for this reply, I see what you mean. I'm disappointed though because I was hoping for once to have something that was more quantified where combat is concerned.

There are quite a few optional rules for Rolemaster where initiative and activity percentages are concerned if you can get a hold of some of the older Rolemaster Companions.

Ardem, does give an example from his game which is really close to what you are talking about. In his example using the 70% reload times for the composite bow are really close at 90% for firing a long bow with 40% reload times (40+50).

Trenloe's advice is the best though. At first run it using some of the rules that have been play tested until you get a better feel for the system. It is always easier to make a change that benefits the PCs than it is to do one that takes something away. I doubt your archers will complain if they can reload in half the time but your melee and spell casters might. ;)

[Ardem]

One another note becareful about adding more detail combat rules, I was using the new rule system in RMU. This is in test phase it add a lot more combat rules, the reason I went back to FRP was because combat just took too long and the player and I (as GM) was getting frustrated as it was just delaying not enhancing the game.

I love detail, love love love. However not everyone will have the same knowledge or indepth learning of the ruleset, so you are forever looking thing up for other players. I wish I could play with rule gods, that knew every rule without me needing to know it or look it up <smile>

Remember the main goal is fun for all, if you achieve that, that all you need. Good luck in what ever way you go.

[Tiqon]

I have played RM for MANY years, like som many others here. And I have never used the % thing. I have tried a lot of different initiative system in RM though, but now in FG I just let each player take their turn according to their initiative rolled in the CT. I play with grown people who accept that I decide what they can do and what they can't. They trust in me (SUCKERS!) to make it fair, cinematic and most of all, fun.

[Archlyte]

One another note becareful about adding more detail combat rules, I was using the new rule system in RMU. This is in test phase it add a lot more combat rules, the reason I went back to FRP was because combat just took too long and the player and I (as GM) was getting frustrated as it was just delaying not enhancing the game.

I love detail, love love love. However not everyone will have the same knowledge or indepth learning of the ruleset, so you are forever looking thing up for other players. I wish I could play with rule gods, that knew every rule without me needing to know it or look it up <smile>

Remember the main goal is fun for all, if you achieve that, that all you need. Good luck in what ever way you go.

Hey Thanks Ardem. I will try to never forget the end goal. I am trying to find a Fantasy system that meets my need for flexibility, and non linear damage which RMC has.

[Archlyte]

I have played RM for MANY years, like som many others here. And I have never used the % thing. I have tried a lot of different initiative system in RM though, but now in FG I just let each player take their turn according to their initiative rolled in the CT. I play with grown people who accept that I decide what they can do and what they can't. They trust in me (SUCKERS!) to make it fair, cinematic and most of all, fun.

Sage Advice Tiqon. I will use your method for quick mook fights

[Archlyte]

Hey, if you don't like it house rule it for your own games. But, as has been mentioned above, you'll probably end up with there being unbalance in the game if you significantly reduce the action percentage for using a bow.

But, as you've just said you're new to Rolemaster I'd recommend holding off messing with game balance that has been developed over decades of play until you've actually played a few sessions - then you can change what you have issues with based off in-game experience, rather than just looking at the numbers.


Wait, don't you only get one attack per round regardless of speed? I was sure that is what it says in the book. So is the danger reducing it to the point of an arrow every round versus every two rounds? Am I wrong about the 1 attack per round thing?

[Andraax]

Wait, don't you only get one attack per round regardless of speed? I was sure that is what it says in the book. So is the danger reducing it to the point of an arrow every round versus every two rounds? Am I wrong about the 1 attack per round thing?

You can only cast one spell per round, regardless of percentages. You can make multiple attacks if you're able (attacks are normally 60%, but some advantages / spells / etc will allow more than 100% activity).

[Dakadin]

Hey Thanks Ardem. I will try to never forget the end goal. I am trying to find a Fantasy system that meets my need for flexibility, and non linear damage which RMC has.

Rolemaster is the only system that I've played that really makes me respect combat and the damage you can take. The first game I played in with FG was after many years of not playing and I forgot how you really need to think about the tactics. I volunteered to be the guinea pig by sitting alone at a campfire while 4 or 5 orcs came at me. The rest of the party was waiting to ambush them but they were going to be using ranged attacks. A round or two before they got to me I realized my mistake and by then it was too late. I went as defensive as I could and still came away with a broken hip. I was much smarter after that by doing my best to limit the opponents options and waiting for the best opportunity. No other system makes me worry about fighting like Rolemaster. I like that fact. :D

[Archlyte]

Rolemaster is the only system that I've played that really makes me respect combat and the damage you can take. The first game I played in with FG was after many years of not playing and I forgot how you really need to think about the tactics. I volunteered to be the guinea pig by sitting alone at a campfire while 4 or 5 orcs came at me. The rest of the party was waiting to ambush them but they were going to be using ranged attacks. A round or two before they got to me I realized my mistake and by then it was too late. I went as defensive as I could and still came away with a broken hip. I was much smarter after that by doing my best to limit the opponents options and waiting for the best opportunity. No other system makes me worry about fighting like Rolemaster. I like that fact. :D

Yeah that is awesome :)

[Ardem]

If you after a system with non linear damage check out my Extinction Event ruleset (shameless plug) It is free and you can find it in the wiki.

Down side it is geared for a modern setting, but hey never know it might be your cup of tea.

[damned]

Read it and weep peoples!
https://www.geeknative.com/50913/got-archery-wrong/

[Ardem]

At first I could not tell if he was serious or not, it seemed the video was a mockumentry, however the more I watched I realised it wasn't and he boy has skill. I main issue is most archers were not skilled but boys plucked from farms and used in the back lines. Atleast in the European theatre. It gos to show why the Europeans used tower shields int he middle east.

[Tiqon]

What can I say... he's a Dane ;). We are awesome. Good old Lars.

[damned]

the point of this is that he is a specialist and has trained at this for many years and obviously has some talent for it too...
the vast majority of archers are part time at best and would not have anything remotely resembling this skill.

this guy is like the film version of Legolas.

[JohnD]

this guy is like the film version of Legolas.
I didn't see him walking on snow or boarding down stairs on the back of a shield. Maybe that's the next video.

[Andraax]

Well, it's obvious he took "Subconscious Preparation". :-)

[Dakadin]

Yeah that was an incredible display of archery. After getting over my amazement, I couldn't help but think does he even have a job?!? :confused: It just seemed like it would take too many hours in the day to get to that level of expertise.

[JohnD]

Yeah that was an incredible display of archery. After getting over my amazement, I couldn't help but think does he even have a job?!? :confused: It just seemed like it would take too many hours in the day to get to that level of expertise.

Not to worry; some adventuring party will hire him on for a half share.

[Tiqon]

One of the key points, not mentioned in this film, but in others with Lars (I ofc knew of him beforehand...;)), is that he does not aim with one eye closed, he has both open and does not use breathing techniques and such, he just relies on his experience and intuition. That's why he can shoot that fast and do it while moving too.

But I agree with Damned and Ardem about the training. Beside the longbow archers from England (and that was just to draw the bow back) I don't think many of the archers in a medieval army was trained much. Also, when you stand 300 archers shooting at 500 others its not so much about hitting a small target but just getting some arrows over there ;). We tend to look at different kind of combat, army battles, sieges and personal combat and mix it. Not to mention different time periods and cultures. And hey when it all comes down to the nitty gritty, rpg is all about having fun ;).

[Dakadin]

Not to worry; some adventuring party will hire him on for a half share.

Ha! I would give him at least a full share and probably would be tempted to give him a share and a half. With the Rolemaster combat tables, I would just have to mop up the left overs. ;)

[Archlyte]

If you after a system with non linear damage check out my Extinction Event ruleset (shameless plug) It is free and you can find it in the wiki.

Down side it is geared for a modern setting, but hey never know it might be your cup of tea.

I will check it out :)

[JohnD]

Ha! I would give him at least a full share and probably would be tempted to give him a share and a half. With the Rolemaster combat tables, I would just have to mop up the left overs. ;)

Yeah, there's a lot of truth in that.

[Archlyte]

While I agree with what you are saying, I feel that most systems operate on constant assumptions as the biggest component of the abstraction. The assumption is that every fight will result in a 1 v 1 setup during the "Turn" (or whatever you call the characters time to act) with opponents making measured openings to test defenses, etc. The Ten second round proposed in the rules could be a time when you do nothing as you wait for your break, or you could literally be raining blows on someone who was a slow slug or distracted. The combat rounds are too big in my opinion, especially considering how many things you could do or not do in those seconds.

It is my curse that I have to feel like descriptions and mechanics are married well, so if something strikes me as a long period of time in which only one attack is made it will get under my skin. Especially since every combat system is described in its rulebook as being a series of feints, binds, parries, and other stuff, but in my experience the only thing anyone actually verbalizes is the blow that hits or misses.

<Player Rolls>"Ok you hit the Bandit in the left arm with your sword."

So you get a round that is supposed to be full of stuff but it comes across in description as a weird chunk of time where nothing but one action really occurred for each actor. Maybe they moved and attacked/cast, but not much else. If they reloaded a heavy crossbow you could go out for coffee in the time it takes them to finish.

Add to this a typical Linear Initiative System and you have a recipe for robot combat, at least in the description, because each character will stand in a queue for their one significant action which their brain will be telling them is very little action at all.

[Dakadin]

I would definitely recommend looking at some of the other initiative options in the Rolemaster Companions. There was one in RMC 4 (I think) that I used to use about 10 years ago that I really liked with very little adjustment. I haven't looked it up so this is from memory but everyone basically declared their action and they took a specific amount of time which you added to the current initiative. Once that was done you could declare another action which added which at some point would wrap back around to 0 (It might have counted down too. I don't quite remember :confused: and don't have time to look it up). Then the GM just announced the current initiative to see if anyone had an action completing. I think I counted by 10s and worked out the specifics if there were multiples. Movement was the difficult part since you had to break it up into smaller chunks but it wasn't too bad most of the time since you could usually figure out where they would be at any point in time. I think stats and/or skills helped modify the times for certain activities. The nice thing is if you thought something was to fast or slow you would just adjust the base value for it and start using that instead.

[Archlyte]

Yeah I think this is an issue of my taste more than anything. I have grown dissatisfied with standard initiative over time, but I realize that it's not a problem for a great many PnP gamers so I have to be diligent in avoiding sounding like an ***.

On the constructive side: do you know if there is a way to have a default (AT:null DB:0) that will allow for untargeted rolls using the Ruleset?

[Dakadin]

You are doing fine. :) I am a firm believer in using what works for you. I've tried to make it easier to handle things when they are different from what the ruleset can currently handle but it isn't possible to handle every possibility. Hopefully you can find a way to play RM the way you like to and still take advantage of some of the things that makes using FG much smoother than playing without it.

It shouldn't be hard to create an extension that does that. Hopefully it would be in one spot in the code but I wouldn't be surprised if it is in a few different places. I will take a look at the code and let you know.

[Dakadin]

Archlyte, it wasn't too bad to create so I threw it together. I haven't tested it much but the only thing I noticed that was odd was the attack stack on the combat tracker wasn't clearing the resolved attacks so you would have to manually do it.

Also it does modify a file that handles the customdata for most rolls so it might not work with other extensions.

[Archlyte]

Archlyte, it wasn't too bad to create so I threw it together. I haven't tested it much but the only thing I noticed that was odd was the attack stack on the combat tracker wasn't clearing the resolved attacks so you would have to manually do it.

Also it does modify a file that handles the customdata for most rolls so it might not work with other extensions.

Holy Crap! thank you Dakadin :) I'm speechless. This is awesome