Actions versus Spotlight (SPD Discussion)

[zornwil]

Re: Actions versus Spotlight - revisiting the SPD Concept from a more fundamental lev

 

I do agree with your analysis of this matter. Although, as someone who tends toward the simulationist perspective, I don't care that much. If the reality of the game dictates that some characters get more time than others, then IMO so be it.

 

Yet I am quite aware that my attitude on these matters differs from that of the majority of gamers.

 

And I'll add that this issue is not really just limited to SPD, I once had a hyper-active Rifts character with Sonic Speed Flight who only needed to sleep 3 hours per day, and it would make sense (from a game reality stand point) that this character would be out running around while the rest of the group was sleeping. Of course, this situation did not make some of the others in the group happy.

 

In any case, I do have a suggestion for mechanics which might help deal with this problem.

 

 

 

I like the DC Heroes RPG method for dealing with high speed characters.

 

Everybody gets one action per 4 second turn. However, and here is the catch, some people can do more with their one action than others.

 

In one action, John Normal can cross the room and punch somebody.

 

In one action, the Flash can cross the whole country and subdue an angry mob of 1,000 people (In the DC game, there are manuvers similar to Hero's sweep manuver, but they work on an exponential basis so thousands or millions of targets can be attacked) .

 

But the Flash would still be making one attack (almost like making an Area Effect attack), rather than having 1,000 separate attacks.

 

Fast DC characters can still do more than slow ones, but they still have to describe these actions in more simple terms.

That's a good idea/approach.

[zornwil]

Re: Actions versus Spotlight - revisiting the SPD Concept from a more fundamental lev

 

Another notion that enforces that it's a group effect, that we are basically elbowing each taking up time, that occurred to me on the way home, is to declare the SPD "total". One could allow all the PCs to be simply at a given SPD (explained following) without paying points, without making SPD a derived char. Assuming we're designing characters in advance before a campaign, to start, at DESIGN time (not run time), in order for PCs to have a higher or lower SPD, it has to come from the pool. So say the group of 5 has a total SPD of 22 (which is an average SPD of 4.5 per player). So player A wants to play the Flash and wants to have a good bit higher SPD than everyone else. So he wants to go from SPD 4 to SPD 7 (let's say). That means player B could give up 3 SPD or, more likely, players B, C, and D all give up one SPD each. (Of course, given such, the SPD total has to be designed with that in mind, so if you want effective minimum SPDs to be such as 4 and maximum SPDs at 8, put the standard at 24 for 4 players or such - put it at 22 if you want 8 SPDs to be that much rarer, or 26 if you want to edge up closer to a max).

 

Increasing SPD requires all players to contribute XP (let's say still 10 points per 1 SPD, still, at least 2 per player/PC if the group has 5 people, at least 1 if more), so there has to be buy-in into the notion that someone is going to go up.

 

Adding a new player means the new player gets the average value, rounded, but since he's joining late in the game we'll let him tweak at design time by the normal value (10 pts per SPD) up or down to the min or max the other PCs have. If he wants above the max, same buy-in process as above.

[zornwil]

Re: Actions versus Spotlight - revisiting the SPD Concept from a more fundamental lev

 

Not at all. It mandates that your character gets to act at certain points. It doesn't say anything about who has to be listened to. I frequently talk' date=' both in and out of character, during other people's Phases. I have no problems with a game that mandates which [u']character[/u] acts when, and in fact it seems that some level of that is pretty much required. What I have no interest in is a game that tells me when players get to talk.

 

 

 

That isn't what it sounds like to me. Or possibly you and I view the SPD chart as madating different things. Or possibly I'm misunderstanding you.

It's a misunderstanding but I have no tools at my avail to get it across.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Actions versus Spotlight (SPD Discussion)

 

I would agree that a high SPD can be used by an immature player in an effort to hog the spotlight. However, I concur with Archermoo's point that, if you game with mature people, they will not turn high SPD into an excuse to hog the spotlight.

 

I would further suggest that, if you play a different game where all PC's have an equal number of actions, the spotlight hog will seek and find other ways to hog the spotlight.

[Chris Goodwin]

Re: Actions versus Spotlight (SPD Discussion)

 

Wilson, remember the separation between DEX/SPD (in-game) and spotlight (metagame). The thing that sucks about DEX and SPD is that a guy with a higher SPD gets more spotlight time during combat; when the SPD 4 brick who built his character the way he saw it, working with SPD 5/6 EPs and mentalists and SPD 7 martial artists doesn't get as much play time, the others can legitimately say "But we bought higher SPDs." And the brick player doesn't really have a comeback, except to start thinking about that higher SPD concept.

 

Which is why that unremembered poster on RPG.net wrote "SPD = fun".

[archermoo]

Re: Actions versus Spotlight (SPD Discussion)

 

Are there really that many people out there that consider "spotlight time" to be what gaming is about? I guess I really am just a freak...

[Maur]

Re: Actions versus Spotlight (SPD Discussion)

 

The only spotlight time I've ever seen in any of the games I've been in was when the GM tailored various adventures to highlight that specific character. Such as the group of players heading back to one of the player's hometown.

[zornwil]

Re: Actions versus Spotlight (SPD Discussion)

 

Spotlight time simply refers to the same as camera time, which is the same as exposition of one's character.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Actions versus Spotlight - revisiting the SPD Concept from a more fundamental lev

 

Well, that's not strictly correct. Higher SPD characters don't have more opportunities to relate what their characters are doing in combat. Their characters simply do more things in combat. Lower SPD characters can describe what they're doing between Phases, or what they're preparing to do.

 

Here's an (admittedly contrived) example:

 

Brick Dude (SPD 2) and Karate Dude (SPD 4) are fighting thugs.

Segment 3:

Karate Dude: I karate chop Thug1, he seems to be the most dangerous one. "Ayaaaaaaa!" [rolls to hit, damage, etc.]

Brick Dude: Ok, you're taking care of Thug1, I'll head on over to Thug2, he's close to me and looking at me funny. "Thug2, prepare to be smashed!" [note no actual character movement takes place here]

Segment 6:

Karate Dude: Ok, Brick Dude's on Thug2, so I'll jump over them and Flying Tackle Thug3. "Fwoosh... BLAM!" [rolls to hit, etc.]

Brick Dude: Half move to Thug2 and head butt! "SLAM! Take THAT!" [roll to hit, etc.]

Segment 9:

Karate Dude: I'll Grab Thug3, hold 'im ready for ya, Brick Dude! "Not too fun being pinned, is it, Thug3?" [roll, etc..]

Brick Dude: Hah! Thug2's down for the count... I look around and see Karate Dude holding Thug3, looks like the poor thug's not gonna last much... "Prepare to get pulped, Thug!" [no actual actions take place]

Segment 12:

Karate Dude: I squeeze Thug3 for damage. "Hrrrmph!" [roll, etc]

Brick Dude: I run over to Karate Dude and Thug3 and punch the thug in the face. "You're prettier now, Thug. Also, unconscious." [roll, etc]

 

Ok, so it was lame and cheesy and stupid... but both PLAYERS were equally active, even though one CHARACTER was twice as active as the other. I left the thugs' actions out intentionally, since both players could/would react equally to their actions (not characters, of course).

 

 

Segment 3: Karate Dude: I smack thug 1

Brick Dude: I'm getting ready to smack thug 2

 

Segment 6: Karate Dude: I head over and smack thug 2

Brick Dude: **Sigh** OK, I head towards Brick 3, but I can't quite get to him this phase

 

Segment 9: Karate Dude: I head over and smack thug 3

Brick Dude: **Grrr** I head over to 'congratulate' Karate Dude

 

Segment 12: Karate Dude: I pose for photographs

Brick Dude: I smack Karate Dude

 

 

I think zornwil has a valid point: there really is more opportunity for high speed characters to take the spotlight. Of course most decent groups are composed of friends who are not there to hog the spotlight, so it is not too much of a problem. However, if the main interaction with the game in combat is when you are taking actions and - because the GM needs to know what you are doing and has to apply the information to the game environment, the player taking a phase is going to get more GM time. That's not the same as game time, of course, but is a factor, especially with new groups who, perhaps, don't know each other so well.

 

Personally my fix would be this: I LIKE the speed system, but for new groups it might be sensible to ensure that all their characters have the same speed, or very close (all characters, for instance, might be speed 4 or 5). I think this COULD be a real problem, but SHOULD only need to be worried about for certain groups at certain times int heir development.

 

Of course if you have a group that has been together forever and there is still a SPD 12 spotlight hog, just make sure you serve him extra coffee, so he talks faster