(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.
