Musing on Movement: Is Velocity "Persistent"

[CorPse]

Here's a thing that, even though I've been playing for a long time, I don't think I've ever really understood...

 

It's easiest to talk about this with an example.

 

Let's say I have a speed of 4. In Phase 3, I run 9". Am I considered to have a velocity of 9" (even though my figure is stationary) until Phase 6? Or does my velocity just disappear at the end of the Phase?

 

If I am considered to be moving at 0" after my Phase 3, then where did my momentum go if I never decelerated? Also, do I have to accelerate again if I, say, want to do a Move Through against someone that pops up in an adjacent hex on my next Phase? (And in that case, I'd only be able to accelerate up to 5" and not do my full damage...)

 

On the other hand, if I am still "moving," does that make me vulnerable to a Martial Throw? (ie Someone can run across my path and hurl me to the ground with my velocity as nice damage bonus.)

 

Neither of these arguments really makes sense to me. (Or they both do.) Depends on the time of day.

 

In any case, it seems odd to me that if you've been running you can somehow lose your velocity between Phases... but in every game I've ever played, it's just assumed that in your next Phase you can do whatever you want without declaring that you were decelerating in your previous Phase.

 

In fact since acceleration/deceleration is a 0 Phase Action, I don't guess you'd be able decelerate after a Full Move, or Attack Action, because your turn would be over.

 

I must be missing something simple.

 

I must be.

[Lord Liaden]

Re: Musing on Movement: Is Velocity "Persistent"

 

I always figure that, when you're moving in Combat, your (for example) 9" of Running takes you from the point where you started, to the point where you want to go stop. Acceleration and deceleration are all part of that Move. At the end of your Phase you've reached your destination and stopped, so that you're ready for your next Action. Noncombat Movement is generally continuous, Phase after Phase, which IMO is one reason why it's twice as fast - you don't need to increase or decrease velocity while you travel.

 

On that last part, keep in mind that while accelerating and decelerating are essentially "0 Phase Actions" (i.e. take no time), they do require sufficient space to get up to full speed. Again, IMO it's assumed that that space is necessary to accelerate and decelerate.

[Vestnik]

Re: Musing on Movement: Is Velocity "Persistent"

 

I think it depends on the situation.

 

1. Gopher Guy sees some agents. I does a half-move, spins, and fires an exploding gopher at them. Logically, Gopher Guy is now stopped.

 

2. Coward Lad is retreating, as usual, from the same bunch of agents. He's running full tilt, but ducking and weaving (not an NCM) to avoid getting hit by their bullets. Coward Lad is still moving at the end of his phase.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Musing on Movement: Is Velocity "Persistent"

 

You are not missing something simple, no...

 

Velocity is always a bit of a puzzle because phased moves are not necessarily regular. I think Lord Laiden has the most sensible approach, and the one we tend to adopt, assuming you start and end your phase stationary. That doesn't always make sense and (probably - my maths isn't really up to it) means you can't actually move a full move in a single phase, as some of it is spent accelerating ro decelerating and so your mean velocity is lower. We concern ourselves with that not at all.

 

Generally speaking you are better off not moving (unless you are using velocity based DCV - probably not), and it makes the book keeping so much easier.

 

It also fits in with the idea that combat moves tend to involve lots of stops and starts and turns, helping to explain why NCM is so much faster.

 

I'd let someone declare that they were ending the phase 'still moving' if they wanted though - and they might if they intended to got to NCM next phase - to save some acceleration time.

[Wayside]

Re: Musing on Movement: Is Velocity "Persistent"

 

Acceleration, Deceleration, and Velocity have been a pretty constant bother for me.

 

1. In the book it notes that you can only accelerate up to your combat movement per phase. And that it may take several turns to reach your NCM velocity if it's very high. So does this mean that all characters can only do a full combat move on their first phase, reaching their combat velocity, and then speed up to their noncombat velocity on their second phase (assuming a 2x multiplier).

 

2. In the book it list adding or removing velocity is a zero phase action doable once per phase. I've pretty much taken that as a complete falsity. Taken literally it would seem to me that you could only either accelerate 5" or decelerate 5" each phase. In most cases it seems it's intended to just be ignored.

 

3. At the end of your phase, since the game goes through the trouble of including acceleration and deceleration, it makes sense to me that you would still have a velocity until your next phase, assuming you ended your last one with a velocity. Ie, if you run at someone on segment 3 using your full move, with the intent of performing a move through on segment 6, your velocity should carry over.

 

4. What if you get hit and take knockback? Suddenly your velocity is completely negated? Shouldn't your velocity factor in to counteract the knockback if you are moving forward at x velocity? It's illogical that someone running forward at a velocity of 100"/phase who takes 1" of knockback is instantly knocked back 1" and loses all his velocity.

[Tonio]

Re: Musing on Movement: Is Velocity "Persistent"

 

Acceleration, Deceleration, and Velocity have been a pretty constant bother for me.

 

1. In the book it notes that you can only accelerate up to your combat movement per phase. And that it may take several turns to reach your NCM velocity if it's very high. So does this mean that all characters can only do a full combat move on their first phase, reaching their combat velocity, and then speed up to their noncombat velocity on their second phase (assuming a 2x multiplier).

 

Yeah, think so.

 

2. In the book it list adding or removing velocity is a zero phase action doable once per phase. I've pretty much taken that as a complete falsity. Taken literally it would seem to me that you could only either accelerate 5" or decelerate 5" each phase. In most cases it seems it's intended to just be ignored.

 

3. At the end of your phase, since the game goes through the trouble of including acceleration and deceleration, it makes sense to me that you would still have a velocity until your next phase, assuming you ended your last one with a velocity. Ie, if you run at someone on segment 3 using your full move, with the intent of performing a move through on segment 6, your velocity should carry over.

 

Well, take these two together, and it can work. You do a full move this Phase. This means you accelerate to your full combat move as a 0-phase action at the beginning of your phase, then take your full move. You're now moving with a velocity equal to your full combat move. Next phase, you decelerate back to 0" as a 0-phase action at the beginning of your phase, then take whatever actions you were going to take this phase. Unless you were moving this phase, in which case you wouldn't decelerate back to 0", but rather accelerate to up to 2 x full combat move (if you're going for non-combat movement), decelerate to half-combat speed (or less) if you're doing a half-move, or decelerate less than that (including not at all) if you're doing a full move.

 

Basically, your velocity gets changed only at the beginning of each Phase.

 

4. What if you get hit and take knockback? Suddenly your velocity is completely negated? Shouldn't your velocity factor in to counteract the knockback if you are moving forward at x velocity? It's illogical that someone running forward at a velocity of 100"/phase who takes 1" of knockback is instantly knocked back 1" and loses all his velocity.

 

Hm, would make sense, I guess. At least if you're going for realism. The current system works for a more cinematic feel (that way you can Haymaker Mr. Speedy and hope to knock him out of his path), I think.

[CorPse]

Re: Musing on Movement: Is Velocity "Persistent"

 

Next phase' date=' you decelerate back to 0" as a 0-phase action at the beginning of your phase, then take whatever actions you were going to take this phase.[/quote']

 

That makes a certain kind of sense... and that's what ends up happening in most games that I've been in... but the book takes some pains to point out that you can only dump 5" of velocity for every 1" of space you travel. So, strictly speaking, if you were slowing down at the beginning of your next phase, you'd have to travel a game inch or two, even if you were just Running, before you could stop.

 

Weird, weird, weird.

 

I guess it's usually assumed that when people move they accelerate up to their combat velocity and then decelerate at the end of their move. (But it seems like the movement rules state that you can only accelerate or decelerate in any given phase--but maybe I'm reading it wrong.)

 

I guess I don't have a problem with letting people decelerate "for free" in most circumstances... but if you've just pulled a Move Through or Move By, or are zipping around Non-combat... then you've got to keep going or justify ditching the velocity in your next Phase.

 

How do other folks end up handling these issues?

[GreyGuardian]

Re: Musing on Movement: Is Velocity "Persistent"

 

Unless it is going to matter a character moving at combat speed can be presumed to accelerate and decelerate so they end their phase at 0 velocity.

 

1st the situation should provide some sort of dramatic tension and then it's probably one of these sitations when velocity matters:

• Accelerating so you can go to non-combat movement next phase and whenever moving at non-combat velocity.
  
• Move through, Move by, being thrown
  
• movement modes with a turn mode when used in a small space - this includes flying characters that dive towards the ground and need to have room to pull out of the dive.
  
• most vehicle movement
  

[Thia Halmades]

Re: Musing on Movement: Is Velocity "Persistent"

 

Unless we're talking about calculations for damage you'll DEAL with movement powers, or damage dealt TO YOU, does it matter? If someone meets you at the end of your 9" move, I would rule they could "redirect you" and deal an extra 2 DCs. For the most part, I would submit it ain't all that relevant. However, if you were to move 9", and on your NEXT Phase do a Move-Through, then the previous 9" wouldn't count; we're only talking about current speed, yeah?

 

So AFAIC, you'll "stop" and "start" as necessary.

[Killer Shrike]

Re: Musing on Movement: Is Velocity "Persistent"

 

Clip...

 

Im not going to parse all that text, but basically you have to accelerate and decelerate; velocity is not lost between Phases.

 

However, there is a specific clause in the Movement rules that says a character can opt to accel and decel within a single Phase to make a combat move if they so choose and at the GM's discretion.

 

I don't have my book available, but I do recall that it's in the first paragraph under "Accelerating and Decelerating" in 5ER if you want to go look it up.