RPC has moved! These pages have been kept for historical purposes

Verad · **04-21-2015, 08:06 PM**

A little while ago we had a thread about how to be better at combat roleplay, especially in freeform. There was a lot of good and useful advice in that thread. One thing that struck me, however, was the general assumption that combat is conducted one-on-one in duels with a single opponent - the advice was generally framed in terms of "your opponent" rather than "your opponents," etc.

While we have a number of venues for one-on-one combat roleplay, it occurred to me that works well in the one-on-one might not work as well in the many and chaotic situations in which a fight breaks out between groups, rather than individuals. Sometimes these are planned, but sometimes these are the byproduct of spontaneous RP proceeding as it often does. Somebody finds themselves involved in a fight with someone else, and their friends happen to be nearby. Two groups with reason to dislike each other encounter each other in the street and things get heated. In the event that these scenarios occur with an equal number of parties on both sides, then there's no problem - people split off into duels and that takes care of that.

But there are any number of situations where this gets complicated. One group outnumbers the other, or it's only one man against several; the environment is structured in such a way that only a few people can fight at a time, like a narrow street; some characters may not be trained in the kind of one-on-one combat that would allow for easy pairing, like conjurers; and, of course, it's possible for people to contribute back and forth to each other's attacks.Â

In short, how we address freeform combat RP as individual duels doesn't often address the much-more chaotic version of mass combat RP and how that can be structured in an entertaining manner. And, knowing how often we see mass combat in the game iteslf through things like the MSQ, it seems like a subject worth at least a little consideration.

I have the following questions:

1. How do you address posting order and initiative in freeform mass combat? Who goes first, and how often can they attack?

2. In situations where one group is outnumbered, does the other group allow them to have an edge in terms of how often they can attack and defend themselves for fairness' sake, or does the larger group press the weight of numbers?

3. How do you handle disparities in character strength? The Powerlevel thread shows that some characters consider themselves strong enough to take on much larger groups. Do you take these disparities into account when trying to resolve a mass combat?

4. Do you assign individuals to specific targets to the best of your ability, or do you prefer a more chaotic melee in which it's possible for everyone to strike everyone else?

5. Friendly fire: It happens, and it's unfortunate, but how do you involve accidental strikes on someone friendly when there are very few accidents in freeform?

6. Do you feel some of the difficulties in addressing the above have a cooling effect on this kind of combat RP? If so, how can they be corrected?

Anstarra · **04-21-2015, 08:27 PM**

Freeform combat makes baby Nald'thal cry.

That said, well! Most important is that everyone post QUICKLY. One-liners if they can, slightly more if they HAVE to react to someone else. Otherwise six guys fighting for three rounds can take two hours. Minimum.

Let's seee...

1. Seems to me whoever initiates hostilities goes first. And should not act again until everyone else has.

2. The larger group will have the advantage. You're outnumbered, sucks to be you!

3. Disparities in strength should be worked out between PCs in a quick (if possible) OOC manner BEFORE the fight, before it turns into drama. If everyone's okay with one guy being equal to any other 2, then it's fine! If not, then assume All PCs Are Created Equal (which I hate and is why I don't freeform combat, but there it is).

4. A neat and clean way IS to pick and choose combat groups. If A and B square off, leaving C and D to fight it out, it means they can work much quicker. If it's a mass melee, it's gonna slow down and everyone needs to go before anyone else does.

5. Friendly fire is an interesting (and sometimes hilarious) quirk in mass combat. I see it coming about as part of someone's creative defensive emote, more than anything.

6. Well, as you know, I heartily approve of dice-based RP combat. It requires more forethought, having sheets and stuff, but if you're going freeform (unless you're working with people you know) there are gonna be stumbling blocks. Perhaps the best way to do things is to take a quick OOC time-out before combat begins and exchange some words with everyone, determining things like general combat aptitude and the seriousness of the fight, and its consequences.

Just my two gil~

Iex · **04-21-2015, 08:59 PM**

A lot of my post deals with NPCs vs PCs because my experience rarely involves PC characters going after each other outside of 1v1 or maybe 1v2 2v3ness.

1. Ideally if you have a large group of people, you would OOCly establish a posting order only to deviate from it when OOCly agreed (aka someone being attacked and player b dives to take the hit instead of player a)

The posting order generally is based on the situation. If it is an ambush... the ambushers etc. Generally, it is a good idea for the "GM" if against NPCS to get the first go just to set things up.

2. In larger groups vs smaller groups, I tend to have the larger groups not go any more than the smaller groups but have them do MORE STUFF on their turn so to speak. This is mostly so the PCs get to post often as well. As a GM you tend to need to post a lot, and sometimes it is best to dial down the detail a touch to get more things happening, and have more things happen per post so you aren't posting 3-4 times per PC post.

That may be difficult to do if the PCs are fighting in separate areas or against their own personal foe.

In Player vs Player, it is only fair everyone gets a posting turn unless otherwise discussed OOCly.

3. "Powerlevel" has a couple different ways to approach depending on the foes. When GMing Pathfinder or something, if the creature itself doesn't have an attack 'style' I will apply a personality to it.

Vulture: Goes after the weak (meaning low power level/injured people will get focused on and likely need help.)

Prideful: Goes after the strong as sense of pride of beating the big guy and not wanting to be seen as weak.

Guardian: Generally, goes after whoever is attacking one of its allies. This often will go after the leader as well.

Coward: Cheap shot guy, so once again may go after weak person.

Tactician: This one is more reading the battlefield and going after what seems the smartest at the time. (I avoid this one except for bosses and such because I don't want to "compete" against my players as the GM.)

(there are more I use but that is a sample.)

In general RP... this question flows quickly into 4.

4. If I am the one assigning the bad guys to fight certain people, I go for the way I think the players will enjoy the most. It may be being led by me, but it needs to have something for everyone, or at least something folks will enjoy. However, after I have 'assigned' in my own head who is going for who if the players change how I expected them to behave I roll with it... This could mean chaotic or more 1v1ish. A lot of times with mass combat if you are RPing the "fodder" I don't.... really treat the fodder with much concern. I let them be fodder and fall quickly... save for a few stronger ones.

5. Friendly fire... really is up to the people doing it. Sometimes a bad guy will sacrifice some lesser to get a good hit on a foe. As for player characters a lot of RP I have seen ends up with the line. "With friends like these who needs enemies."

6. Mass combat need patience from all parties. When you have fights with more than 3-4 people time between posting can get quite long. (The record I had was 1 hour... I cried) The "GM" often has to forgo detail and let the players have the fun with that until the combat thins out of the strong remaining.Â Often a solution is to have folks split off so they can continue their fights without having to wait for player B to post. (the 1v"1").

One RP I did I split the party into individuals at had their own enemies. It meant I was doing three times as many posts and my posts weren't as detailed as they could be, but it allowed the RP to keep a good pace and allowed each player to have as detailed posts as the wanted for their character. Then when they were brought together again, the combat style turned to 'fodder' where the 'scene' was set and then the players could include their kills in their posts so no one was waiting the GM between posts. Finally, it returned to a more organized posting order with the GM when the enemies were reduced to the strong and it needed a stronger guided hand.

Mass combat is very tricky due to the fact everyone has different styles of writing, different pace settings, and limited amount of patience. The other problem is we have fights that last an hour that in real time are 30 seconds if the detail is too great. In most films we see the protagonists in a mass battle and most everything aroundÂ them is too chaotic to follow and people die left and right with little more than a stab, but then whenÂ they encounter a large strong foe the details of the fight get fleshed out and rest of the battlefield becomes a backdrop.

If weÂ have all PC characters at once... you have too many "protagonists" for a cohesive and well paced battle if they are all together. Everyone wants lots of details... and the devil likes those.

Honestly... a "MASS BATTLE" between PC charactersÂ seems nigh impossible without splitting it into smaller chunks isolated from each other without running into mental limitations of players.

EDIT: As I find poor word choice this post may change.

Hammersmith · **04-21-2015, 09:02 PM**

Multi fights are slogs. Â I prefer 1 on 1 BECAUSE of the potential for 2-hour-turn orders if you get a large group going.

If you're going to group fight, form a party, talk, get an order, and an idea just how bad/good this is going to go.

Because otherwise you will be there. All. Night. Long.

Not saying don't have fun with it. Â But like said above, concise posting will make sure you aren't grandpa by the time it's all done. Â We all know that one guy that takes 10 minutes to post one thing. Don't be that guy in this kind of situation. Â Pre-cache your typing where you can, edit on your post, post fast.

With that said: Group fights in RL arn't like the movies. Â You're going to get fucked up more often than not.

On the other hand this is FF with the rule of cool and often Cinema logic for fight-flows.

Which brings us back to: COMMUNICATE AS A GROUP, GET AN IDEA OF WHERE THIS IS GOING. WORK TO BRING IT THERE AS A GROUP TO BE SUPER AWESOME.

Even a slight outline will give people a direction to rampage towards.

Even if that's just turning two of your opponents into Guard Chucks, yo.

Aaron · **04-21-2015, 09:05 PM**

I know this isn't the answer Verad was probably seeking but I think it's relevant.Â

If you're character happens to be surrounded by a larger group, do what any sensible person would do and try /not/ to fight. If you can do something that can allow an escape. Please take it and run. (Catch the bastard by themself one v one or come back later with yo posse )

Your character isn't a war machine. They have a sense of self preservation. One person trying to purposely take on three other PC solo is begging for trouble OOC if the people are random or a severe IC beat down and embarrassment.

Id suggest avoiding situations like this like you would do IRL. If you can't? Â I refer to the above post.

Melkire · **04-21-2015, 09:06 PM**

I recently had the good fortune and wonderful experience of participating in large-scale in-game freeform RP combat that has gone on to inform the "What You Are in the Dark" thread (a big thank you to Roen and to fellow participants), so I'll do my best to answer these questions as they pertain to that experience. Every other RP combat scene on this scale that I've participated in has generally been governed by dice.

In all cases, large-scale RP combat took hours to complete.

(04-21-2015, 08:06 PM)Verad Wrote: 1. How do you address posting order and initiative in freeform mass combat? Who goes first, and how often can they attack?

Posting speed / timestamps usually determine what happens first and in what order. There's some level of unspoken mutual agreement that taking action, whether offensively or defensively, implicitly means you're going to await at least one other person's reaction and interaction to and with your action before taking action again. How many "steps" or "levels" or "number of actions" there are to your single emote generally matters less than being brief and concise (as opposed to verbose para rp). For this reason, we experienced a lot of "one defensive action, one movement, and one offensive action" emotes. It was really comparable in many ways to how Tactics games like FFTA work.

(04-21-2015, 08:06 PM)Verad Wrote: 2. In situations where one group is outnumbered, does the other group allow them to have an edge in terms of how often they can attack and defend themselves for fairness' sake, or does the larger group press the weight of numbers?

This really depends. In our case, numbers were skewed to favor one side, but that side also had a few unnamed "redshirt" "mook" NPC players that were played out as dispensable. As a result, those larger numbers dropped as a few combatants were culled, which led to more even footing.

No handicaps were given, save perhaps the element of surprise and the resulting shock value. Larger group would have pressed the weight of numbers had they the chance, but terrain and speed didnt allow for it.

(04-21-2015, 08:06 PM)Verad Wrote: 3. How do you handle disparities in character strength? The Powerlevel thread shows that some characters consider themselves strong enough to take on much larger groups. Do you take these disparities into account when trying to resolve a mass combat?

This one's tricky. I think going in there was, again, an unspoken mutual agreement regarding where on the low fantasy vs high fantasy scale this scene was to take place, and so we knew the range in which to play in. Not too mundane, but not too over the top, either.

The usual one on one guidelines of intending damage, dealing damage, taking damage, and selling damage still applied. Intent-to-hit was a big thing, with occasional Effect-of-hit thrown in by an attacker who REALLY wanted something to pan out a certain way (shooting someone at point blank range, say). In either case, it was again understood that it was up to the recipient of damage to determine what degree of damage they found acceptable for their character to take.

(04-21-2015, 08:06 PM)Verad Wrote: 4. Do you assign individuals to specific targets to the best of your ability, or do you prefer a more chaotic melee in which it's possible for everyone to strike everyone else?

One advantage of freeform combat RP in an MMO setting is that you have avatars you can position relative to other players. Think tabletop, or arranging action figures. If your character was capable of spotting a foe, and then reaching them somehow, be it by movement or ranged weapon, then the foe was considered fair game.

Of course, in the chat spam, many such strikes were completely missed by their intended recipients, in which case folks shrugged it off and moved on as if said blow missed. I can think of at least one axe swing and one sword swing that got lost in the chat spam.

All this said, our characters more or less picked their targets and struck out at those they could when they could.

(04-21-2015, 08:06 PM)Verad Wrote: 5. Friendly fire: It happens, and it's unfortunate, but how do you involve accidental strikes on someone friendly when there are very few accidents in freeform?

We had at least one flaming arrow strike its friendly. That was played off for laughs. We also had one serious case of someone inadvertently stumbling and tripping over someone else which resulted in unanticipated damage (which the tripped-over player chose out of the blue to take based on RP'd actions and relative positioning). Accidents in freeform are more a case of someone choosing, for the sake of flavor, to take damage that no one intentionally dealt.

(04-21-2015, 08:06 PM)Verad Wrote: 6. Do you feel some of the difficulties in addressing the above have a cooling effect on this kind of combat RP? If so, how can they be corrected?

There was a lot of trust involved, and a lot of unspoken concessions made by all sides. The nature of the scene required that it be played hard and fast, which led to said concessions. That can be a turn-off for those who might not be willing to see their characters downplayed or trumped up to degrees they might not be comfortable with.

Verad · **04-21-2015, 09:13 PM**

(04-21-2015, 09:05 PM)Aaron Wrote: I know this isn't the answer Verad was probably seeking but I think it's relevant.Â

If you're character happens to be surrounded by a larger group, do what any sensible person would do and try /not/ to fight. If you can do something that can allow an escape. Please take it and run. (Catch the bastard by themself one v one or come back later with yo posse )

Any time somebody gives me the opportunity to repost the following from Unknown Armies'Â section on combat is relevant:

Quote:Somewhere out there is someone who had loving parents, watched clouds on a summerâ€™s day, fell in love, lost a friend, is kind to small animals, and knows how to say â€˜pleaseâ€™ and 'thank you,â€™ and yet somehow the two of you are going to end up in a dirty little room with one knife between you and you are going to have to kill that human being.

Itâ€™s a terrible thing. Not just because heâ€™s come to the same realization and wants to survive just as much a you do, meaning heâ€™s going to try and puncture your internal organs to set off a cascading trauma effect that ends with you voiding your bowels, dying alone and removed from everything youâ€™ve ever loved. No, itâ€™s a terrible thing because somewhere along the way you could have made a different choice. You could have avoided that knife, that room, and maybe even found some kind of common ground between the two of you. Or at least, you might have divvied up some turf and left each other alone. That would have been a lot smarter, wouldnâ€™t it? EvenÂ dogsÂ are smart enough to do that. Now youâ€™re staring into the eyes of a fellow human and in a couple minutes one of you is going to be vomiting blood to the rhythm of a fading heartbeat. The survivor is going to remember this night for the rest of his or her life.

Six Ways to Stop A Fight
So before you make a grab for that knife, you should maybe think about a few things. This moment is frozen in time. You can still make a better choice.

Surrender. Is your pride really worth a human life? Drop your weapon, put up your hands, and tell them youâ€™re ready to cut a deal. Sidestep the current agenda. Offer them something unrelated to your dispute, and negotiate to find a solution.

Disarm. Knife on the table? Throw it out the window. Opponent with a gun? Dodge until heâ€™s out of bullets. Deescalate the confrontation to fists, if possible. You can settle your differences with some brawling and still walk away, plus neither one of you has to face a murder charge or a criminal investigation.

Rechannel. So you have a conflict. Settle it a smarter way. Arm wrestle, play cards, have a scavenger hunt, a drinking contest, anything that lets you establish a winner and a loser. Smart gamblers bet nothing they arenâ€™t willing to lose. Why put your life on the line?

Pass the Buck. Is there somebody more powerful than either one of you who is going to be angry that you two are coming to blows? Pretend youâ€™re all in the mafia and you canâ€™t just kill each other without kicking your dispute upstairs first. Let that symbolic superior make a decision. You both gain clout for not spilling blood.

Call the Cops. If youâ€™ve got a grievance against somebody, let the police do your dirty work. File charges. Get a restraining order. Sue him in civil court for wrongful harm. You can beat him down without throwing a punch.

Run Away. The hell with it. Who needs this kind of heat? Blow town, get a job someplace else, build a new power base. Is the world really too small for the both of you? Itâ€™s a big planet out there.

Oh Well

Still determined? Backed into a corner with no way out? Have to fight for the greater good? Up against someone too stupid to know this is a bad idea? Or maybe just itching for some action? So be it. The rest of this chapter contains rules for simulating the murder of human beings. Have fun.

There's probably a much lengthier discussion to be had about when it is and isn't appropriate to have such an attitude towards combat, but that can be another thread.

Verad · **04-21-2015, 10:24 PM**

To return to the topic, I note there's a general theme of mass combat being a DMed situation primarily involving NPCs against PCs, with Osric's experience working as an exception to the rule, the NPCs being from <NPCs>. Â Are there any instances where two FCs have had this kind of conflict?

C'kayah Polaali · **04-21-2015, 10:26 PM**

(04-21-2015, 08:06 PM)Verad Wrote: 1. How do you address posting order and initiative in freeform mass combat? Who goes first, and how often can they attack?

I've GMed freeform mass combat a few times before, as well as roll-based combat, and I always end up doing the same thing: Before combat, I'll post an order of initiative. Usually it's simply alphabetical, but sometimes the order will take into account surprise or an initiative roll. We then go down the list and each person posts their action. I like following the "You post your action, the person you're acting against posts the response" standard.

(04-21-2015, 08:06 PM)Verad Wrote: 2. In situations where one group is outnumbered, does the other group allow them to have an edge in terms of how often they can attack and defend themselves for fairness' sake, or does the larger group press the weight of numbers?

I pretty much always allow someone to attempt to defend no matter how many people are attacking them - an N-vs-1 fight is already plenty slewed towards the side with N people, so allowing the 1 to defend against each of the N attacks doesn't harm things unduly.

(04-21-2015, 08:06 PM)Verad Wrote: 3. How do you handle disparities in character strength? The Powerlevel thread shows that some characters consider themselves strong enough to take on much larger groups. Do you take these disparities into account when trying to resolve a mass combat?

I tend to not take these into account. With freeform combat, the receiver of an action dictates what that action does, so it's up to them to decide if they're going to be splattered by a God-tier character's attack, or if they'll somehow rise to the occasion and channel the rage of Halone and block that attack.

(04-21-2015, 08:06 PM)Verad Wrote: 4. Do you assign individuals to specific targets to the best of your ability, or do you prefer a more chaotic melee in which it's possible for everyone to strike everyone else?

I let people choose their targets. For the most part, I'm good with people being able to move and engage different targets at will, but if someone's a good distance away I'll take that into account.

(04-21-2015, 08:06 PM)Verad Wrote: 5. Friendly fire: It happens, and it's unfortunate, but how do you involve accidental strikes on someone friendly when there are very few accidents in freeform?

Again, with freeform, it's up to the players.

(04-21-2015, 08:06 PM)Verad Wrote: 6. Do you feel some of the difficulties in addressing the above have a cooling effect on this kind of combat RP? If so, how can they be corrected?

Not terribly. Keep in mind this all pertains to freeform combat. The main thing about freeform combat is that everyone involved must trust one another. If it's clear that this trust isn't there (or if someone abuses the freeform system enough that people start complaining), then I'll recommend we go to a simple roll-based system. I'm personally not a huge fan of those, but it's better than having combat devolve into angry arguments.

Roen · **04-22-2015, 02:14 AM**

Being that most of the combat scenarios I have been involved in have all been freeform, I will add my two cents.

Quote:1. How do you address posting order and initiative in freeform mass combat? Who goes first, and how often can they attack?

The most recent scene, it was as Osric said. Who ever typed first in their action, went first. Then they would wait until the person they were facing typed back. We all typed in our action in that "round" and would wait until most contributed with their post before entering our next post. I say most because you and the person you are facing off can exchange off a few things at a different speed than the rest depending on context (dialogue for example). This is usually the norm for me, but sometimes we would actually designate a specific order and wait for that person to post before moving on. The latter was necessary if a particular player or two were slower in typing just to make it fair.

Quote:2. In situations where one group is outnumbered, does the other group allow them to have an edge in terms of how often they can attack and defend themselves for fairness' sake, or does the larger group press the weight of numbers?

I always assume that one person can defend against multiple. Or they can't, depending on their skills. It is freeform though so it is left up to the player. Realistically if you are outnumbered, you are at a disadvantage, and I have yet to see those I've played with not take this into account.

Quote:3. How do you handle disparities in character strength? The Powerlevel thread shows that some characters consider themselves strong enough to take on much larger groups. Do you take these disparities into account when trying to resolve a mass combat?

When it is NPC vs PCs, and I am DMing the NPCs, as a DM I decide how skilled the NPCs are. Some are more formidable than others to be sure. I haven't had problems with overpowered characters, most of the scenes I am involved in are not very overpowered (but not too mundane either, as Osric described).

Player character that faces off with each other, they must MUST have some trust in each other entering the scene. Allowing themselves to inflict but ALSO take damage, adjusting for the situations, the armor, the defense, the strategy, the environment, it all affects the fight! I think every scene I've done freeform combat with, ALL the players knew it was for a story, not "I wanna see who is more powerful." I never do combat scenes for the latter anyways.

Quote:4. Do you assign individuals to specific targets to the best of your ability, or do you prefer a more chaotic melee in which it's possible for everyone to strike everyone else?

It is whatever the character would do. RP has to be fluid. But! A group can come in with a preformed plan. For example, in the last scene, two people were supposed to sneak through the defense to go rescue someone. They weren't supposed to stay in the fight. Due to the dynamics of what happened, only one person got through but it worked out fine for the story.

Quote:5. Friendly fire: It happens, and it's unfortunate, but how do you involve accidental strikes on someone friendly when there are very few accidents in freeform?

I let the players decide. Although if I was DMing NPCs sometimes I will engineer friendly fire if the circumstances seems appropriate. (careless or haphazard firing... OR an explosive in the wrong place combined with a clumsy civilian NPC!)

Quote:6. Do you feel some of the difficulties in addressing the above have a cooling effect on this kind of combat RP? If so, how can they be corrected?

Definitely, when it comes to combat RP amongst people who don't know each other or there is no established trust. Then I would use dice. But for all of the combat scenes I've been in for any story I was involved in in depth, I trusted the players to carry it out freeform.

My suggestion for freeform combat that involved multiple players? That they quickly set OOC parameters on what is off limits (death, amputation and such) or they already loosely set a predetermined result.

Flashhelix · **04-23-2015, 03:49 PM**

My personal doctrine for any differences in powerlevels is, if you're roleplaying a character that is supposed to be a fighter who would be capable enough to hold their own, or, in your opinion, would be more capable than their opponent, then the way to make it so that you're not a chore to RP with is just to assume they're the same strength as their opponent. One can easily roleplay their character being weaker or a less skilled fighter than another, but when you start to get into who's stronger than who things get messy.

Paradox · **04-26-2015, 07:10 PM**

1. How do you address posting order and initiative in freeform mass combat? Who goes first, and how often can they attack?

Generally in mass combat situations, either we agree on a post order, or do a round robin based on who replies first and keep that post order. Common sense dictates everyone should get a post chance, then resolve it as best they can. Communication is key in this kind of situation generally.

2. In situations where one group is outnumbered, does the other group allow them to have an edge in terms of how often they can attack and defend themselves for fairness' sake, or does the larger group press the weight of numbers?

In the fights I've been in, the larger group generally presses numbers. However, larger numbers can be as much a disadvantage as an advantage. Especially depending on what the numbers consist of. There's really no 'go to' answer for this kind of situation, but myself and my peers generally go with it as is. The only time any exceptions are made is if a story absolutely needs an advantage given to move on.

3. How do you handle disparities in character strength? The Powerlevel thread shows that some characters consider themselves strong enough to take on much larger groups. Do you take these disparities into account when trying to resolve a mass combat?

I always take people's power into account. It's actually rather important. If we take that thread as our example, if two power level type 3s are against one type 2, there's a very good chance if the 3s are cagey and know their stuff, that the 2 can very likely lose. Hell, even a type 5 can defeat a type 2 if they get the drop on them. Nothing says a power level 2 can't be holding off a couple 3's, then a 5 gets the drop on him from behind or from below with a lucky strike to the kneecaps or the back of the head. No barrier is foolproof after all, and every defense, magical or mundane, will break. It comes down to smart fighting, not power.

4. Do you assign individuals to specific targets to the best of your ability, or do you prefer a more chaotic melee in which it's possible for everyone to strike everyone else?

I like the 'pro wrestling approach'. That is, generally people stick to their chosen targets, but if someone's about to tap out or be pinned, be a bro and go help if your own target is currently incapacitated or distracted. It's what you'd do in a real fight if you had the ability. Protect your bros, because the longer they're up, the more chance they have of supporting you if you get in a crossface.

5. Friendly fire: It happens, and it's unfortunate, but how do you involve accidental strikes on someone friendly when there are very few accidents in freeform?

It depends on the situation. If you're firing a bow into a melee, especially a large one, realistically you have a chance to hit your buddy. If you're casting wide area spells, expect to nuke some friends. Hell, even single target spells have a mildly explosive backwash when it comes to fire especially; and be careful your Egi doesn't accidentally swipe a friend in that long slash of flaming claws or wisp of cutting air. Err on the side of realism to a point.

6. Do you feel some of the difficulties in addressing the above have a cooling effect on this kind of combat RP? If so, how can they be corrected?

It's genuinely hard to say. In the end, communicating is important. If someone things something doesn't make sense, address that. A good thing to do is invite everyone involved into a party or raid if possible, or a temporary linkshell so discussion can happen during the fight itself. If it's not your turn to respond, raise your questions then, so the fight's pace isn't slowed but you can still make your disputes known. And try to remain calm and not be butthurt; everyone's style and method differs, so having a common ground is good too. And it's important that everyone is having fun and not worried too much about who comes out on top over everything else. Flowing is key to a lot of things. Just my two gil.

***Maril*** · **04-26-2015, 08:15 PM**

1.Â How do you address posting order and initiative in freeform mass combat? Who goes first, and how often can they attack?

- The first hostile action starts it off, if that persons emote is going to effect more than one person, they would let the two people respond and counter before continuing. It makes for slow rounds, and in most of the events I have seen people tend to lock down 1vs1 even in mass fights as some sort of unspoken agreement. If someone was to fall which frees up a person, then they can jump onto someone else and the same thing happens where people adjust to let the third person emote. As to how often, generally speaking you do one attack per emote, but you can sometimes squeeze in two by stating what your character would follow up with should something go through - I did this a lot when I roleplayed as a mage in a past game, as I consider it good costum to emote for the act of charging up your spell/saying the spell out loud which counts as something your opponent can interrupt and cause the spell to fail. If a spell is very strong or complex, I would usually spend an entire turn on it (this usually has the side-effect of your character being completely open to bad stuff happening).

2.Â In situations where one group is outnumbered, does the other group allow them to have an edge in terms of how often they can attack and defend themselves for fairness' sake, or does the larger group press the weight of numbers?

- Not as for what I have seen. I think something that is a bit characteristic for freeform fights is that they're not really fair, and there's no emphasis on making them fair. If you are outnumbered, you have a disadvantage unless your characters strong side is dealing with more than one person. Remembering that people can end up leaving their characters open to dirty tricks and simple basic moves, as well as remembering your sorroundings can help turn the tide in a disadvantageous battle.Â

3.Â How do you handle disparities in character strength? The Powerlevel thread shows that some characters consider themselves strong enough to take on much larger groups. Do you take these disparities into account when trying to resolve a mass combat?

- Both yes and no. For planned events, I tend to allow my NPC's (I usually have them played by people) to ramp up their power if I can see the fight as being extremely out of balance to the end where they would not stay alive for long. Fights sometimes happen where you can't plan this out, and explanations of how powerful things are comes down to emotes and good ooc communication. OOC communication is very vital in these situations.Â

My Nailah was in a fight a couple of days ago, she's not at all strong or experienced and literally got caught in the middle of it with no other choice. So you could say she was much weaker than the rest, and that was reflected in her emotes - more uncertainty, slowness and bad judgementcalls. When her aether was as spent as she felt she could let it, she resorted to throwing rocksÂ Pebbles at the assiliants which were notably clad in plate, she figured that she might as well try to distract them. Which in the end caused her to be distracted, she was snuck up on and stabbed in the leg and left the fight as the only "good-sided" person being carried off half-concious. Meanwhile I did keep people informed on any elaborations to questions I got about her attacks etc.Â

4.Â Do you assign individuals to specific targets to the best of your ability, or do you prefer a more chaotic melee in which it's possible for everyone to strike everyone else?

- I have never experienced anyone getting assigned outside of training fights. I vastly prefer chaos, and absolutely should people be able to strike everyone.Â

5.Â Friendly fire: It happens, and it's unfortunate, but how do you involve accidental strikes on someone friendly when there are very few accidents in freeform?
- Sometimes you can end up having it happen because you send something out just before someone else does, which puts them in the way of whatever you were doing. How that is handled is by the person I for example were trying to hit states that this person got in the way, and the person would then have to react to it - usually they get hit (there may be other ways of resolving this) I remember one notable encounter in a past game of mine where friendly fire caused an allies upper back to get covered by one big nasty burn wound.Â

6.Â Do you feel some of the difficulties in addressing the above have a cooling effect on this kind of combat RP? If so, how can they be corrected?Â

- I think that the difficulties in it makes freeform combat difficult to learn how to master, I know I was frustrated with my characters losing because I simply did not fully understand the extend of the freedom in the system back when I was a rookie. I'd make mistakes that I didn't think my characters would make, and there's just not really any way of getting around that I feel.Â
Some of them, especially with power and strength and that, can lead to a lot of ooc drama which is the #1 reason I hear people list when they do not use freeform, simply that it is too dramatic.Â
I make it a point to ensure that people in my own FC knows how to use the system, because we run all of our combat events with it - I find that by spending some time to ensure everyone knows and are confident with it, we do not have any drama related to fights using this system at all. However this is hard to achieve when you're thinking of an entire community.Â

*puts two gil in a hat* Also, disclaimer, I write from my experiences so take it as suggestions as to how things are done and not the one true way.Â

Mercurias · **04-26-2015, 09:25 PM**

1.Â I personally set this based loosely along making sure everyone has a 'turn' before people have another, barring things like plot-necessaryÂ actions or someone who is OP because plot.Â

2.Â It depends on the story andÂ comparativeÂ strengths of the characters. You have to straddle the fine line between letting people of varying combat abilities act in the same space according to character while not placing someone in a position they do not consent to in combat.

3.Â In my general experience, there is a very strong connection between super powerful characters and players who hate to lose IC. I'm certainly not saying this is always the case (I can name four exceptions off the top of my head), but often high-powered characters need special care to not steal too much spotlight when lower-power characters want to participate too.

4.Â Again, this is dependant on the situation, but largely I'm alright with everyone being able to attack everyone else.

5.Â Normally both players have to discuss and consent to the action. All players are ultimately in control of their characters. This includes being hurt.

6.Â I personally feel that different groups have varying opinions on the matter, and interact very differently. As a general rule, the Night Blades have their PC villains on a higher tier of ability than the vast majority of the members of the FC, even able to handle fights on par with the 'Incredibly Skilled' sorts. We do this because everyone likes to dogpile villains and killing the big bad and his minions in the first encounter is sort of an asspain. At the same time, our villains DO get hurt. The other night, the FC's combat group outright killed off one villain (RIP Ryad) and maimed the crap out of two others, requiring the current Number Two baddies to have to spend a significant period of time getting used to replacement magitek limbs.

In my experience, Combat RP comes in two flavors.Â

Flavor 1 involves rolls and rules, like at the Grindstone. Sometimes you add in modifiers if you're feeling froggy.Â

Flavor 2 is Cinematic combat, where you're trying to tell a story and the RP is a function of that. A lot of the time, it's best to have a general goal to reach over the course of the fight. Personally, I like talking to the other party and saying "So who do we want to win this?". Oftentimes, you'll see a draw, or you can even have someone interrupt it before things get so bad.

In both flavors, I always follow the rule that a character can only be injured if he or she consents.

Largely, I tend to dislike a lot of combat RP in slice of life for the same reason people frown on it in the real world: If you get into a fist fight over every little thing, then you're probably kind of a dick and people won't want to be around you.

Combat RP - Skirmishes, Melees, and General Kerfuffles

RPC has moved! These pages have been kept for historical purposes