Delay symbol = lose free maneuver instead of single action recharge thoughts?

Would it balance against the red die better?

jh

Sounds nice.

Do you mean this to replace the the addition of recharge tokens AND the lowering of a hero initiative token options when you roll the hourglass? or just to replace the recharge tokens option while keeping the lowering of the hero initiative token available?

Cheers,

Yepes

I think the recharge tokens on a single action is clunky and weak, especially after a pc gets more than two special actions in their arsenal.

There is the problem that sometimes, the additional recharge tokens mean little, even though the GM can put them on any action not just one currently recharging (that gets overlooked lots).

A 'harsher' rejigging of intiaitive order might also help as in "move the top token to be after the last foe token". Assuming not end of fight, ensures at least one PC goes later in order than a foe in coming round which is more truly a "delay".

I Think it would be an addtion to the rest...

So a delay may give either..

Ini 1 Down

2 tokens to recharge

Or loss of manuver...not fun for crossbows and gunpowder...normal archers are more meh...dont need that manouvre anyway..

My 2 cent

Mex

Delay symbol = lose free maneuver instead of single action recharge thoughts?

Would it balance against the red die better?

jh

I'm all for this being an additional option for the GM, as an alternate to the Initiative and recharge penalty options. Let the GM apply any of the 3 penalties, whatever seems most potent at that moment.

Ignoring Fatigue and Exhaustion, the Green dice are nearly always better than the Red. They have a higher average success rate, and no chance of banes. Red's main strength is the possibility of multiple successes per die, but that's rarely useful in actual play because most action cards just waste any excess successes past the third one. If Green > Red in all other ways, the Delay icon needs to be more painful than the Exhaustion icon to compensate.

The ability to put recharge on a card is HUGE in the right circumstances. In the wrong circumstances? Just mess with initiative. That's why you have a choice. I'm not sure losing a maneuver is the right way to go--since that often just translates to a loss of fatigue anyways, it's not doing enough to distinguish itself from the red die penalty.

R B Bergstrom, Which stance die is better really depends on the difficulty and the action taken. If anything, reds tend to be better than greens, by default. On an easier check, the green dice often net you two successes, while the reds will net you one or three--since many cards don't have a two-success line, the green dice aren't giving you anything extra.

Emirikol, IIRC, you play with house rules that eliminate active defenses. Since one of the most powerful ways of using the recharge tokens is to put them on recharging active defense cards, you might try to come up with an alternative that's aligned to your house rules.

Agreed re alternatives, I frequently put recharges on Dodge or similar actions simply saying "you're a bit off balance from that swing" etc., of course at higher levels the wizards hates it when they go on Channel.

Always remember that cards with Zero recharge time can have their recharge modified by results such as this.

R B Bergstrom, Which stance die is better really depends on the difficulty and the action taken. If anything, reds tend to be better than greens, by default. On an easier check, the green dice often net you two successes, while the reds will net you one or three--since many cards don't have a two-success line, the green dice aren't giving you anything extra.

It's actually almost the opposite of what you're saying. Red dice do much better on high-difficulty rolls, or open-ended rolls where each redundant success adds to the effect -- but those rolls that favor the red dice don't come up very often. On low difficulty rolls, greens dependability more than trumps reds chance for extra successes that are almost always wasted.

A character with Characteristic 4, Expertise 1 and Fortune 1 making a Basic Attack against a target with Defense 2 has the following success rates:

• 3 Deep Reckless: 79% to hit, 42% triple-success, 30% double boon, 12% double bane
• Neutral: 73% to hit, 29% triple-success, 37% double boon, 3% double bane
• 3 Deep Conservative: 83% to hit, 42% triple-success, 42% double boon, 3% double bane

Green and Red are basically tied on chance of scoring the triple-success line, but Green misses less often, and has much better boon/bane results. The same patterns hold true at 1 or 2 steps of stance depth, but aren't quite as pronounced. To swing things in Red's favor you have to really pump up the difficulty.

The dice pools above are for a very typical starting character attacking a very typical NPC, but since the PCs dice pools improve at a faster rate than the NPCs defense rating does, Green dice increase in power as the campaign progresses.

I've run a lot of math on these dice (as has one of the players in my current campaign). The greens really are much better than the reds. They score more slightly successes than the red on average, and significantly more boons than red on average. The designers obfuscate that by making the red sides of the action cards look better in most cases, but once you adjust for the percentages of actual dice results, it almost always slides back into green's favor.

Here's a bunch of number-crunching articles I've written on the dice:

http://transitivegaming.blogspot.com/2013/07/the-dice-are-always-greener-on-other.html

http://transitivegaming.blogspot.com/2010/07/color-blinded.html

http://transitivegaming.blogspot.com/2010/05/stance-matters.html

http://transitivegaming.blogspot.com/2010/05/1-1-1-1-0.html

http://transitivegaming.blogspot.com/2010/05/two-by-three.html

http://transitivegaming.blogspot.com/2010/05/purple-is-new-black.html

And some articles written by one of the players in my campaign:

http://gamefest.wordpress.com/2013/06/27/reckless-or-more-damage-and-stance-in-warhammer/

http://gamefest.wordpress.com/2013/04/19/the-correlation-effect/

http://gamefest.wordpress.com/2013/07/12/house-of-cards-reckless-cleave-in-warhammer-3rd/

http://gamefest.wordpress.com/2013/07/12/house-of-cards-thunderous-blow/

http://gamefest.wordpress.com/2013/07/15/house-of-cards-mighty-swing/

http://gamefest.wordpress.com/2013/07/15/house-of-cards-melee-strike/

http://gamefest.wordpress.com/2013/07/31/house-of-cards-putting-it-together/

For his "house of cards" series he built a Monte Carlo simulation of several different melee attacks, and calculated the average damage from those rolls. 10,000 rolls a piece, IIRC. The results were quite surprising:

Troll-Feller Strike is the real eye-opener. The green side has an extra black die and is missing the two best damage boosting results lines. At a casual glance, the red side is obviously the better side of the card, but in practice green still out-performs red.

Great article. I'd love to see a comparison with double strike