Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: Thanatos <sthanatos@*********.COM>
Subject: Reaction Contests and Initiative
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1999 13:26:24 -0500
Ok, me and one of my groups got into a fierce discussion on Reaction
contests and initiative during our last game. Here's the arguement:

Two characters both get inits of 17, and one has a reaction of 7 and one a
reaction of 5.

The character with the lower reaction declares his action first, and then
the character with the higher gets to go.

Now, these two were arguing with me, that the reason for this little
declaration statement is so that the person with the higher reaction can
tell what the person with the lower reaction is going to do, and thus react
to it before the guy can pull it off. (Which I rebuttled with the fact that
magic requires no physical action, and so the quicker reaction person would
never notice something like that, but they said it didnt matter.)

My stance is that the person with the higher reaction is responding only a
fraction of a second before the guy with the lower, and thus the
declaration of action by the lower reaction character is so that he is
locked into his action, no matter what the quicker guy does.

I need hard proof, from the books, where I can prove them incorrect. Can
anyone help?

Thanatos
<http://home.earthlink.net/~ryokley>;
The Shadowrun Character Assistant v1.0
Message no. 2
From: David Buehrer <dbuehrer@******.CARL.ORG>
Subject: Re: Reaction Contests and Initiative
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1999 12:09:46 -0700
For the mere cost of a Thaum, Thanatos wrote:
/
/ The character with the lower reaction declares his action first, and then
/ the character with the higher gets to go.
/
/ Now, these two were arguing with me, that the reason for this little
/ declaration statement is so that the person with the higher reaction can
/ tell what the person with the lower reaction is going to do, and thus react
/ to it before the guy can pull it off. (Which I rebuttled with the fact that
/ magic requires no physical action, and so the quicker reaction person would
/ never notice something like that, but they said it didnt matter.)
/
/ My stance is that the person with the higher reaction is responding only a
/ fraction of a second before the guy with the lower, and thus the
/ declaration of action by the lower reaction character is so that he is
/ locked into his action, no matter what the quicker guy does.
/
/ I need hard proof, from the books, where I can prove them incorrect. Can
/ anyone help?

I can tell you right now that you won't find hard proof :)

How about my take on it, based on years of experience?

Perception requires a declaration. As a GM I assume that if the
character is facing in the general direction of a significant event
(the bad guy tosses a grenade at you, he points his gun at you, the car
explodes, the guy runs from crate to the car, etc) then they will
notice what's going on unless they're really distracted (if they spent
a simple action previously to declare that they were specifically
focusing their attention on something else in the area, if they spent
several free actions to change cyberware settings, etc). If they are
focusing their attention (declaring that they are using free actions to
keep an eye on the bad guy) then I let them know what is going on
unless there are exceptional circumstances (it's dark and foggy, the
bad guy is being sneaky, etc), in which case I require a perception
roll if and only if the PC has spent a simple action for perception.

If a PC is only using free actions to keep track of his environment
they only get to see the obvious coming. They find out about subtle
events as they occur.

PCs cannot predict the future. The GM shouldn't let the players know
what's going to happen, only what is happening.

Do not tell the players that bad guy #1 is going to shoot PC #4. Tell
the players that bad guy #1 is raising his weapon and it looks like
he's focusing his attention on PC #4. Only you (the GM) knows what the
intentions of bad guy #1 are. Only when an event actually occurs (bad
guy #1 fires at PC #4) should the players know exactly what is going
on.

So, if a PC and an NPC are acting simultaneously then the one with the
higher reaction will only have an idea of what the other is planning,
and only if he is looking in the right direction and paying attention
to what is going on around him. But he won't know exactly what the
other is going to do until after the fact. PCs are not omniscient.

-David B.
--
"Earn what you have been given."
--
email: dbuehrer@******.carl.org
http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/1068/homepage.htm
Message no. 3
From: "D. Ghost" <dghost@****.COM>
Subject: Re: Reaction Contests and Initiative
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1999 14:32:18 -0600
On Mon, 4 Jan 1999 13:26:24 -0500 Thanatos <sthanatos@*********.COM>
writes:
<SNIP>
>Two characters both get inits of 17, and one has a reaction of 7 and one
a
>reaction of 5.
>
>The character with the lower reaction declares his action first, and
then
>the character with the higher gets to go.
>
>Now, these two were arguing with me, that the reason for this little
>declaration statement is so that the person with the higher reaction can
>tell what the person with the lower reaction is going to do, and thus
react
>to it before the guy can pull it off. (Which I rebuttled with the fact
that
>magic requires no physical action, and so the quicker reaction person
would
>never notice something like that, but they said it didnt matter.)
<SNIP>
>I need hard proof, from the books, where I can prove them incorrect. Can
>anyone help?

SR1:
Couldn't find anything, you might want to check Grimmy1. I seem to
remember something about the obvious appearance of spells (something
about a Neon Corkscrew?) but not really of the appearance of spellcasting
(ie, "What's that guy flailing his arms about for?").

SR2:
See page 132 of the BBB for Noticing Spellcasting. This is a Perception
Test and thus requires a Simple Action. Therefore, when you "declare
your action", you should say "nothing obvious" or something similar.

SR3:
See Page 162 of the BBB for Noticing Magic. It's very similar to above
but noticing some spells is easier while noticing others is harder.

In Summary: If the opponent doesn't spend a Simple Action, s/he can't
notice the spell casting. The GM, may determine that a given
spellcasting is obvious (maybe if the modified target number to spot the
spell is 0 or less.)

--
D. Ghost
(aka Pixel, Tantrum, RuPixel)
"Coffee without caffeine is like sex without the spanking." -- Cupid
"A magician is always 'touching' himself" --Page 123, Grimoire (2nd
Edition)

___________________________________________________________________
You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail.
Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com/getjuno.html
or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]
Message no. 4
From: Mongoose <m0ng005e@*********.COM>
Subject: Re: Reaction Contests and Initiative
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1999 17:01:04 -0600
:Ok, me and one of my groups got into a fierce discussion on Reaction
:contests and initiative during our last game. Here's the arguement:
:
:Two characters both get inits of 17, and one has a reaction of 7 and one
a
:reaction of 5.
:
:The character with the lower reaction declares his action first, and then
:the character with the higher gets to go.

In both SR2 and sr3, you declare, then reslove, then the next
character declares and resolves...

:Now, these two were arguing with me, that the reason for this little
:declaration statement is so that the person with the higher reaction can
:tell what the person with the lower reaction is going to do, and thus
react
:to it before the guy can pull it off. (Which I rebuttled with the fact
that
:magic requires no physical action, and so the quicker reaction person
would
:never notice something like that, but they said it didnt matter.)
:

Since thats not the BTB procedure, there's no need for rebutal (unless
your have some house rule). If the person who is faster wants to see what
the guy does, he should hold his action (costing a free action)- you can't
react to what somebody does before they try to act! As for spells, there
is a procedure for figuring the TN needed to notice spellcasting, so yes,
its (somwhat) surruptiious, and the person shouldn't be tipped that you
are casting a spell if they don't notice it. Doesn't meean they won't cap
you on basic principle...

:My stance is that the person with the higher reaction is responding only
a
:fraction of a second before the guy with the lower, and thus the
:declaration of action by the lower reaction character is so that he is
:locked into his action, no matter what the quicker guy does.

Nope, BTB, slower people don't get "locked in" at all- they can fully
respond to actions by faster people. I tend to hold actions a LOT, and
the SR3 system penalizes fast people less for doing so.

:I need hard proof, from the books, where I can prove them incorrect. Can
:anyone help?


Sure, p 78 sr2, and p. 104 sr3. Its as simple as A,B,C. (and D, for
SR2).

Mongoose
Message no. 5
From: Mike Bobroff <Airwasp@***.COM>
Subject: Re: Reaction Contests and Initiative
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1999 07:57:06 EST
In a message dated 1/4/1999 1:21:54 PM US Eastern Standard Time,
sthanatos@*********.COM writes:

> My stance is that the person with the higher reaction is responding only a
> fraction of a second before the guy with the lower, and thus the
> declaration of action by the lower reaction character is so that he is
> locked into his action, no matter what the quicker guy does.
>
> I need hard proof, from the books, where I can prove them incorrect. Can
> anyone help?

You want something simple, tell both the players to deal with it.

We use some of the combat system here, and it has been a long time since two
or more players on the same intiative have to argue about something this
nitpicky. What we just do is toss out the declaring the actions phase, and
combine this for when the person actually goes on their action phase. Sure,
it is kind of unfair to the people with a slightly higher Reaction but it does
streamline the process some.

Frag, next time your players start arguing about who goes first, give them a
couple of seconds of arguing, and then presume they are having their pc's
shouting at each other, delaying their actions, and then have the opposition
take a pot-shot at them while they are arguing about who goes first. Worked
for me a long time ago, now I no longer have the problem.

-Herc

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about Reaction Contests and Initiative, you may also be interested in:

Disclaimer

These messages were posted a long time ago on a mailing list far, far away. The copyright to their contents probably lies with the original authors of the individual messages, but since they were published in an electronic forum that anyone could subscribe to, and the logs were available to subscribers and most likely non-subscribers as well, it's felt that re-publishing them here is a kind of public service.

Thwap!