macd21 said:
Loswaith said:
By alowing the change forward and backwards takes away the unknown of a rushed situation, In 3rd ed its likely all characters will know what all other characters are going to do and can act acordingly. Which unless you are talking about well trained troops or groups just isn't the way it would work and even in well trained groups they dont always work like a well oiled machiene.
To be fair though, that's pretty much the case with most RPGs. Usually the players will give each other advice, tell each other to do/not to do certain things. "Don't charge the goblins yet, I want to fireball them and don't want to hit you." "Ok, I'll delay until after your action...." The v3 system at least has the potential to put some pressure on the players through added stress.
It is usualy the case the difference is though that the faster character needs to delay their action to suit the warning (I'd assume something like the wizard saying/shouting 'wait', and since they have worked togeather for a while the other character knows the wizard is likely doing some area spell) given by the wizard, its a reactive occurance (the character makes some concious decision) to the situation. The downside is in doing that it may mean the enemies (some or all) get actions due to the slower reactions of the wizard. (for me iniative is about how fast an individual character can react compared to others in the situation).
The character doesnt have to wait or may not have heard the warning, which has occured in many games I have been in. Hell in one game the dwarf (the fastest in the group) allways charged in even to the detriment of the two characters with rifles, that typically were ready (and wanted) to take shots.
Personaly I'd likely use the mechanic to alieviate some of the stop-start action in the game by limiting the characters based on the kind of action they do, those that need to move to attack would be acting later than those just needing to attack as an example.