I'm kind of wondering if I'm going nuts here... I thought I remembered a brief set of rules for resolving a combat quickly when a fight is basically over and you're running out of time at the end of a session. Something involving each PC making a single roll and taking damage and strain based on the result of the roll. But then I can't find these rules in the core books.

Am I remembering wrong, or thinking of some other game? (I can't imagine which one... I haven't been playing anything else lately.)

GM section. One roll combat resolution.

EoE p.323

If it's in the mop-up stage then you don't really even need to make a roll out of it: just declare that it happens and move on to the aftermath.

When the outcome is obvious only crazy people stay to be killed. Don't forget to have people run away.

4 hours ago, Daeglan said:

When the outcome is obvious only crazy people stay to be killed. Don't forget to have people run away.

It's amazing how many GMs have their bad guys stay and fight to the bitter, bloody end, when truthfully many of them would indeed say "screw it, I'm outta here!" or at the very least make a tactical withdrawal to regroup and fight another day.

About the only time bad guys might well stay to be killed is if the PCs are attacking them on their home turf, and even that can vary for the rank and file goons. Iron Man 3 had a great example with one of the goons at Killians' compound pretty much giving up and walking out after Tony had trounced his buddies, saying that he didn't even like these guys as he left the scene.

1 hour ago, Donovan Morningfire said:

It's amazing how many GMs have their bad guys stay and fight to the bitter, bloody end, when truthfully many of them would indeed say "screw it, I'm outta here!" or at the very least make a tactical withdrawal to regroup and fight another day.

It's even more amazing to me how many players have their PCs stay and fight to the bitter, bloody end, when truthfully many of them would indeed say "screw it, I'm outta here!" or at the very least make a tactical withdrawal to regroup and fight another day.

Too many players too often assume that they cannot lose. I let the dice fall where they may and sometimes those players are proven very wrong.

12 hours ago, 2P51 said:

GM section. One roll combat resolution.

EoE p.323

Thanks!!!

Did they leave that out of the other core books?

Your Welcome. It's not in AoR, I didn't look in F&D.

4 hours ago, Donovan Morningfire said:

About the only time bad guys might well stay to be killed is if the PCs are attacking them on their home turf, and even that can vary for the rank and file goons. Iron Man 3 had a great example with one of the goons at Killians' compound pretty much giving up and walking out after Tony had trounced his buddies, saying that he didn't even like these guys as he left the scene.

Or the enemies could be Imperial stormtroopers, or droids...

An interesting side-note, these optional rules on EotE p.323 are one of the very few places where "degrees of Failure" are a thing.

I adapted the one roll idea to mass combat as well. So there is the face guy leading the battle, and the rest of the PCs roll a dice pool like a one combat roll check where they are rolling against a Difficulty I set based on the average enemy pool or whatever. They roll every round though not just once. Their positive results I let them use to help the Leader/Face guy like they're acting as NCOs leading troops or squadrons or whatever, the bad results I inflict on them in the form of Strain/Wounds/Crits/Busted Gear, etc. I end up not having to roll at all and the only math I do is crossing off minions or whatever, the adjust the mass combat check.

When we playtested the mass combat rules in Friends Like These, my guys really didn't like how they could be completely divested from influencing mass combat events but would be subject to results. My idea to address that.

1 hour ago, awayputurwpn said:

An interesting side-note, these optional rules on EotE p.323 are one of the very few places where "degrees of Failure" are a thing.

Fear checks also have a degree of failure fwiw, allowing strain damage, dependant on failure and available advantage.

10 minutes ago, syrath said:

Fear checks also have a degree of failure fwiw, allowing strain damage, dependant on failure and available advantage.

Yeah that's an interesting one. I thought it was a typo in EotE that got corrected in AoR, but then it came back in FaD.

I would still think that it's likely a typo in EotE and FaD. Spend 1 Threat to cause your PC to take strain equal to the number of Failures? What happens if you have no uncancelled Failures? I run it the way it's printed in the AoR rulebook, because the other way makes little sense.

The only other example of degrees of Failure, of which I'm aware, is found in the follow-on adventure for the Age of Rebellion Beginner Game, Operation: Shadowpoint .

The one thing I don't like about these one-roll combat rules as written is that they make it impossible to both take wounds and achieve your objective (since you only take wounds if you roll uncanceled failures). But of course in a real round of combat PCs normally take wounds even when they win.

My first thought is to instead inflict a wound for every failure rolled, even the ones canceled by successes.

Nah. It is certainly possible to avoid taking damage in combat if you're good or lucky enough, particularly if you have the right talents.

5 minutes ago, Tramp Graphics said:

Nah. It is certainly possible to avoid taking damage in combat if you're good or lucky enough, particularly if you have the right talents.

Possible... Highly unlikely against typical opponents, though. It's also possible to avoid damage with my suggested modification to the rules, of course.

11 minutes ago, DaverWattra said:

The one thing I don't like about these one-roll combat rules as written is that they make it impossible to both take wounds and achieve your objective (since you only take wounds if you roll uncanceled failures). But of course in a real round of combat PCs normally take wounds even when they win.

Wounds and Strain are narrative abstractions, anyway, though. They are game-mechanical resources with no definite narrative consequences.

2 hours ago, awayputurwpn said:

Yeah that's an interesting one. I thought it was a typo in EotE that got corrected in AoR, but then it came back in FaD.

I would still think that it's likely a typo in EotE and FaD. Spend 1 Threat to cause your PC to take strain equal to the number of Failures? What happens if you have no uncancelled Failures? I run it the way it's printed in the AoR rulebook, because the other way makes little sense.

The only other example of degrees of Failure, of which I'm aware, is found in the follow-on adventure for the Age of Rebellion Beginner Game, Operation: Shadowpoint .

I actually like that rule (but then im a warden with fearsome) I like the idea that if you are terrifying enough you can cause fainting and heart attacks.

3 minutes ago, awayputurwpn said:

Wounds and Strain are narrative abstractions, anyway, though. They are game-mechanical resources with no definite narrative consequences.

Yeah, no question. But I would ideally like the one-roll system to give results that aren't terribly different from what would've happened if the combat had been played out at length with the regular rules.

5 minutes ago, DaverWattra said:

Possible... Highly unlikely against typical opponents, though. It's also possible to avoid damage with my suggested modification to the rules, of course.

Also consider that a Despair means a Critical Injury. So it is most definitely possible to be "damaged" while succeeding

1 minute ago, DaverWattra said:

Yeah, no question. But I would ideally like the one-roll system to give results that aren't terribly different from what would've happened if the combat had been played out at length with the regular rules.

I guess you'd need to shore up a good sense of what a "forgone conclusion" is Then set up the likelihood of the heroes coming out of the battle unscathed, and translate that into your Difficulty.

7 minutes ago, DaverWattra said:

Possible... Highly unlikely against typical opponents, though. It's also possible to avoid damage with my suggested modification to the rules, of course.

Not all that unlikely with enough ranks in talents like Reflect, Parry, and Dodge.

2 minutes ago, Tramp Graphics said:

Not all that unlikely with enough ranks in talents like Reflect, Parry, and Dodge.

And now we see the dice probabilities coming full-circle: the dice favor Success with Threat!

With Reflect and Parry, sure. I might allow a character with Reflect and Parry to take strain instead of wounds.

To get enough ranks of Dodge that one could reliably take zero damage from an attacker like a typical-sized minion group of 3 or 4, on the other hand... that would require 1,000 XP spent on talent trees, probably.

18 minutes ago, DaverWattra said:

To get enough ranks of Dodge that one could reliably take zero damage from an attacker like a typical-sized minion group of 3 or 4, on the other hand... that would require 1,000 XP spent on talent trees, probably.

That reliability (or lack thereof) should be reflected in the Difficulty of the player's check, no?