How do actions / reactions work?

[ironmessiah]

Hey, folks. I've started running this game for some friends and have found a bit of confusion in the explanation of actions. On page 41 of the GM's guide it says, "You can try to do more than one Action in a Round, but that’s harder than it sounds." No problem, so you can talk, then run, and then pick a lock, and then shoot. I also understand that each action past the first gets a -2.

First question: Is this correct? It seems like you can do a hell of a lot and don't need to be very committed to a single course of action. As it is written, you can talk and, if it goes poorly, run away in the same round for a mere -2.

Now putting aside my question, my major confusion comes from page 42 where it says, "You only get one action in a Round, whether it’s running, talking, doing or fighting, but that doesn't mean that you won’t be targeted by more than one Conflict." So, wait a minute... so I CAN'T do more than one action in a round? Which is it?

My final question is regarding reactions. Are reactions treated as actions? It seems they suffer a -2 for each successive action performed before it. Can I perform more than one of these?

[Escher]

Jun 19, 2013 5:23:56 GMT ironmessiah said:

Hey, folks. I've started running this game for some friends and have found a bit of confusion in the explanation of actions. On page 41 of the GM's guide it says, "You can try to do more than one Action in a Round, but that’s harder than it sounds." No problem, so you can talk, then run, and then pick a lock, and then shoot. I also understand that each action past the first gets a -2.

First question: Is this correct? It seems like you can do a hell of a lot and don't need to be very committed to a single course of action. As it is written, you can talk and, if it goes poorly, run away in the same round for a mere -2.

Now putting aside my question, my major confusion comes from page 42 where it says, "You only get one action in a Round, whether it’s running, talking, doing or fighting, but that doesn't mean that you won’t be targeted by more than one Conflict." So, wait a minute... so I CAN'T do more than one action in a round? Which is it?

My final question is regarding reactions. Are reactions treated as actions? It seems they suffer a -2 for each successive action performed before it. Can I perform more than one of these?

You are using the 10th Doctor edition of the GM's guide. You need to get the 11th Doc edition.

You can take more than one action in a sequence. You can choose to do more actions, but at a -2 penalty for each. You can indeed do a lot and this is in accord with the feel of action in the show. If you need to go all-out, then you can.


According to the 11th Doctor Edition:



TAKING MORE THAN ONE ACTION IN A ROUND (11th Doctor Edition, p.47)

You only get one action in a Round, whether it’s running, talking, doing or fighting, but that doesn’t mean that you won’t be targeted by more than one Conflict. Resisting is technically a Reaction, but you can’t do more than one thing at a time without things getting difficult. You get your action as normal, but every other different action you take in the sequence, such as shooting or shouting, receives a -2 penalty. This penalty is cumulative as well, so each additional action after that gets another -2 on top!

For example, River is running away from a host of Sontaran Troopers, and she’s hoping to hack into the ship’s computer with her scan-pad to close the door behind her. Her first action is going to be running to the door as her ‘Move’ action. She then starts hacking into the computer as a ‘Doing’ action. As she’s already acted this sequence this action receives a -2 penalty. If she wants to do anything else (like dodging Sontaran fire) it’ll be at a -4 penalty.

You can voluntarily do more than one thing in a sequence, but again, every action after the first is at a cumulative -2 to the roll!



MAKING MORE THAN ONE REACTION IN A ROUND (11th Doctor Edition, p.48)

You can make more than one Reaction roll in a Round, but in many cases you don’t actually need to. Once you’re leaping around and dodging, you’re harder to hit for everyone who’s shooting at you – you don’t need to try to dodge every single shot. If you have to react to anything in a Round, roll as normal (with any necessary penalties for when you make the roll). That reaction roll counts for every attempt against you in that Round.

Let’s say the Doctor is being shot at by three Silurians while he’s trying to adjust the settings on his Sonic Screwdriver to knock out their guns.
The ‘Doing’ comes first, so setting the Sonic is rolled as normal.
Then comes the fighting. The Doctor’s Sonic isn’t going to be ready to use until next Round so the three Silurians open fire. He’s going to dodge, jumping for cover. The Doctor’s already acted this time (adjusting the Sonic) so his dodging is at -2. He only needs to roll once, and that result sets the target for all three of the Silurians trying to hit him.

If the Silurian’s leader was trying to command him to surrender earlier in the Round, ‘Talkers’ come first, so he would resist that before trying to adjust the Sonic. His resistance against being talked into surrendering would be normal (and would count against any other attempts to talk him out of what he’s doing). Setting the Sonic would be next in the Round, with a -2 penalty.

Then the dodge against the three shots would be at -4.

Using the same roll for multiple resistances only works with reactions, not with actions

[Stormcrow]

Jun 19, 2013 9:49:25 GMT Escher said:

You are using the 10th Doctor edition of the GM's guide. You need to get the 11th Doc edition.

No, you don't!

It's just some badly worded text. You are not limited by the number or type of actions you can perform, but each gets cumulatively harder, and they must be performed in the usual talkers/runners/doers/fighters order. Reactions count against the number of actions taken in a round, but you only roll each kind of reaction once in that round (only one Awa+Coo roll to dodge multiple shots; only one Ing+Res roll to resist multiple attempts to control your mind, etc.).

Also, if you're continuing an action from the previous round, it should be considered to happen prior to the talkers/runners/doers/fighters sequence. For instance, if I'm running for several rounds, and I decide to try to convince someone over my wrist-communicator to send reinforcements even while I'm running, the running happens first, since it is ongoing, and my Res+Con roll gets a -2 penalty. If, after I have this conversation, an enemy tries to shoot me during the fighters phase, my reaction of Awa+Coo to dodge is at -4. If another enemy tries to shoot me next, they roll against the same Awa+Coo-4 result I already determined. And so on.

[Escher]

Jun 19, 2013 14:04:09 GMT Stormcrow said:

Jun 19, 2013 9:49:25 GMT Escher said:

You are using the 10th Doctor edition of the GM's guide. You need to get the 11th Doc edition.

No, you don't!

I know he doesn't, but it's nice.

ironmessiah, quick question: do you have the UNIT Sourcebook and Time Traveller's Companion yet?

[Rassilon]

I've put a quick example of play featuring this here:

dwaitas.proboards.com/thread/2380/multiple-actions-penalties

[ironmessiah]

Escher, I have the TTC, but not the UNIT book. Why do you ask?

[ironmessiah]

Rassilon, that post was extremely helpful! Very well written!

[jeffrywith1e]

I agree. Very nicely done, Rassilon.

[chickenpaddy]

Very helpful. I've been running DWAITAS games for a while, and this makes me realize how I can do things differently.

[Escher]

Jun 19, 2013 21:07:43 GMT ironmessiah said:

Escher, I have the TTC, but not the UNIT book. Why do you ask?

I bought the UNIT pdf from rpg.drivethrustuff.com then bought the hardcopy & pdf bundle from Cubicle 7’s store so I have an extra pdf code if you want it.

If anyone also wants a pdf code for the Time Traveller’s Companion they are welcome to it.

[chickenpaddy]

If you wouldn't mind, Escher, I would love to have the PDF code for the TTC.

[Escher]

Jun 20, 2013 16:15:11 GMT chickenpaddy said:

If you wouldn't mind, Escher, I would love to have the PDF code for the TTC.

PM sent.

[chickenpaddy]

Thank you!

[ironmessiah]

Quick follow up question: I've briefly looked through the U.N.I.T. sourcebook and was wondering if players are generally permitted to take multiples of the same action in the same round (suffering the cumulative -2 modifier of course). For example, could you fire four times in one round? I ask because the section of the sourcebook that talks about automatic weapons says you can. I'm sure this is because it is a new rule for these weapons, but I just want to be sure.

[Stormcrow]

I don't have the sourcebook, so I can't refer to its rules, but I would say that if the game master thinks your weapon could fire multiple times in quick succession, then yes, you should be able to shoot multiple times in a round with the penalty. Also don't forget the I Knew You Were Going To Do That rule.

[Escher]

Jun 21, 2013 17:37:21 GMT ironmessiah said:

Quick follow up question: I've briefly looked through the U.N.I.T. sourcebook and was wondering if players are generally permitted to take multiples of the same action in the same round (suffering the cumulative -2 modifier of course). For example, could you fire four times in one round? I ask because the section of the sourcebook that talks about automatic weapons says you can. I'm sure this is because it is a new rule for these weapons, but I just want to be sure.

You cannot make multiple actions in the same part of the extended action such as several actions in the 'Talkers' part, then several move actions in the 'Movers' part, etc.

You can fire multiple shots in a round (with recoil penalties for each shot after the first). Check the Assault Rifle (p.91) also for burst fire and full-auto.

Check out the 'Five Rounds, Rapid' Trait on p.60. This allows you to fire earlier during 'Movers' or 'Doers'.

I highly recommend you download the errata for the UNIT book Mister Harry has collected here:
dwaitas.proboards.com/thread/2377/dwaitas-supplements-errata-sheets

 …and also this unofficial updated firearms chart here:
dwaitas.proboards.com/thread/2032/question-firearms


There is an unofficial updated Third Doctor writeup here, which is written by the author of the Time Travellers Companion: dwaitas.proboards.com/thread/2154/updating-3rd-doctor-ttc

[ironmessiah]

I'm reading it and finding that the UNIT Sourcebook is amazing! Thanks again, Escher!

[ironmessiah]

Here is a new question: So my players frequently use their talk action to try and tell the enemy to listen to what they have to say. This puts me in a position (assuming they don't fail or get a "yes, but") wherin my foes are not able to do much. Am I doing this correctly? Can they do that? Or at least tell the enemy not to attack? Played this way I find a persuasion-build doctor will never really be in danger unless he gets an awful roll.

[Stormcrow]

Your players have the right idea. In Doctor Who, quick thinking should trump firepower every time.

But be sure to give persuasion attempts the appropriate weight. If there are a lot of things going on, with a bunch of characters, make the entire scene an extended conflict. As such, characters will have to reduce the Resolve of opponents to zero to get them to agree to something, even if it's "don't kill us," and the talkers will usually go first.

Notice that if the scene isn't an extended conflict, and the shoot-or-talk event is being handled as a simple conflict, initiative and damage do not apply. Either one side wins or the other does. This would be much more appropriate if, say, a character opened a door and suddenly found a bunch of enemies ready to shoot him, and there was nothing else going on in the scene.

So, yes, in general your players should be able to stop the bad guys doing their thing by talking them out of it, provided they're persuasive enough.

[ironmessiah]

I see. Thank you for that answer. The issue I am having is that pretty much every encounter starts out with a player announcing, "I tell them not to <action>." Each round someone does this, so (as long as they succeed) every round my bad guys are hamstrung. It makes each session extremely anti-climactic because we seem to be in an eternal conversation unless (as I did in the last session) I simply narrate them into an action scene where they're already running or being fired at. Any thoughts on this?

[Stormcrow]

First of all, if all they say is "I tell them not to," that's not very persuasive. If a Dalek wants to exterminate you, and you try to talk it out of it just by saying, "Don't shoot," the game master should give that a high difficulty, like Nearly Impossible (30). But if they say, "Don't shoot; I'm holding a powerful explosive that will blow us all to kingdom come if you detonate it with your blasters," the Daleks might not want to take the risk, and the difficulty drops to, say, Tricky (15), at least until they determine that you're bluffing.

Second, remember the rule of I Knew You Were Going To Do That. That's the one where every time you do the same thing you did before, the opponents get a cumulative +1 bonus to their actions. If the players try to stop their opponents by repeating their "don't shoot" arguments ad infinitum, sooner or later the difficulty is going to get too high. Be sure to remind players that their opponents are getting this bonus; it'll make them want to try something different.

Third, every time they use an action to try to talk their opponents out of attacking, they're making it harder to do anything else. If you try to talk to your opponent, you're going to have -2 or higher penalties to any moving, doing, or fighting you try in the same round. 

Fourth, remember that the opponents have story points, too! If your players convince their opponents not to attack, but you think the enemies really should attack anyway, have them spend story points to bring the players' result down to a Failure. Do the players want to spend precious story points reversing their enemies' expenditures?

Finally, try to gauge how much talking your players like, compared with action and puzzles. Maybe they really get more satisfaction out of convincing their opponents rather than running away from them or fighting back; some people do.

[ironmessiah]

Speaking to your first point, isn't it supposed to be an opposed test?

[Stormcrow]

You're right. Give the opponents a bonus to their reactions, instead. I'd say if the referee thinks it's an argument that might actually make the opponents pause and consider, it's a normal roll. Less persuasive arguments give bonuses to the opponents' reactions; very persuasive arguments give bonuses to the players' action.

[ironmessiah]

Okay, thanks.

[Escher]

Okay, I use this for my group. This is a quick-and-dirty method that works well during play and lets you (the GM) decide on a suitable level of difficulty fast. These are rough guidelines and you may want to re-grade them in severity for your style of game, but they work well for us.

Set a difficulty based on the nature of the thing they are asking of your target and what ‘feels right’ to you.

Looking at the difficulty examples on the 11th Doc GM’s book and using the examples given we can appropriately grade persuasion attempts in degrees of difficulty. Official examples in italics.

Shift difficulties up or down for target's relationship to you (friend, lover, rival, enemy etc.) bribes, how good the argument is, good roleplaying, environmental aspects etc; Your targets can also spend their Story Points to resist.

Alternatively, you could also take the standard rules and add a complication modifier (*) to your opponents reaction to bump up the difficulty based on the nature of the desired result.



Very Easy [6] Ask a close friend to make you a cup of coffee while they are already making one for themselves. (-6)

Easy [9] A polite, neutral request to a stranger with no consequences involved. Politely ask a neutral stranger the correct time while walking in the street, in a pleasant area of town at midday. (-3)

Normal [12] A request to a stranger with a little effort and no consequences involved. Request something of an official or professional if that request is reasonable and has no consequences or benefits to them. (+0)

Tricky [15] A request to a stranger with some effort and consequences involved. Bluff your way past security in a non-secure establishment. (+3)

Hard [18] A request to a stranger with great effort and serious consequences involved. Bluff your way into a meeting of scientific experts. (+6)

Difficult [21] A request to a stranger with very great effort and severe consequences involved. Bluff/charm/persuade your way past security in a secure establishment. Try to calm down an angry crowd in the middle of a disturbance. (+9)

Very Difficult [24] A request to a stranger with extreme effort and very severe consequences involved. Charm your way into the White House. (+12)

Improbable [27] A request to a stranger with effort beyond reason and catastrophic consequences involved. Convince a bomb not to go off, create peace between Silurians and Humans, convince hostile enemies not to destroy you when there is no good reason they shouldn’t. (+15)

Nearly Impossible [30] A request to a stranger with unimaginable effort and consequences involved. Convince your partner that those three lingerie models dressed in Ewok costumes, massaging yoghurt onto your bare chest while in bed is not what it seems… (+18)

[Stormcrow]

Very nice! I like the bonuses and penalties listed for conflicts being based around 12.