Hey friends,

I have a situation that comes up every once in a while in my campaigns where a player uses two maneuvers (by suffering strain) in order to move through range bands and still end up just outside (or a long way outside) where they want to be. So they inevitably ask me if they could make some sort of check to get just a bit further.

In the book the athletics skill can be tested to "run long distances". Is that just used in narrative play or can I have them make the check in order to cover the same amount of ground as a maneuver. And I've thought about this and could make it fairly balanced.

For example, a character could make an average athletics check as their action after making just one maneuver (likely for movement) and if they succeed they get the distance of a maneuver without suffering the strain. If they fail they could suffer the strain anyway and have the embarrassment of losing their action. But that is the less likely scenario. Knowing my players, they will want to suffer two strain to take two movement maneuvers and then want to get a bit further. In theory I could let them make an athletics check (hard since it is like trying to make a third maneuver thus three dice) and if they succeed they get the distance. If they fail they get another lump of strain based on the threats, terrain, etc. If ever a dispair comes up I'd have them trip and take on the prone status, but I'd have to spend a destiny point to make that possible. The difficulty of the check would reflect the number of movement maneuvers they try to make since athletics is a measure of stamina so using a manuever to ready a weapon or pick something up wouldn't drain stamina and thus not increase the difficulty. In simple terms, the difficulty would be equal to the number of movement they are trying to make. A second move would be average and a third would be hard and that would be the limit.

What do you guys think? Is this a house rule that we could implement fairly and still keep things balanced? Any thoughts on changes or alternatives or just open objections? I want to hear your thoughts (but be nice still, the internet is a scary place to share ideas).

Thanks

I would be wary of adding multiple rolls per turn. They already get an Action (for which they roll) and Maneuvers are things that don't need Actions (so don't need a roll). It's worth noting if they downgrade their Action to a Maneuver they wouldn't need to spend the Strain (though they can still only do 2 Maneuvers per turn). It's also worth noting that their Action could be an Athletics/Coordination check to cover extra ground (kind of house-rule-ish, but not unreasonable). But this means they can't be shooting while they're jumping around like parkour bunnies.

It does beg the question, where are they trying to get that can't be handled with the current mechanics? If this happens "inevitably", I'd say change how you GM it rather than make a house rule, because this is honestly the first I've heard of a table having this situation. If the PCs are chasing someone or being chased (and aren't spending their Action on other things) then you can forego the normal movement rules and run a Chase. The rules for this are in the starship combat section, but are easily applied to any movement situation. The PCs roll their Athletics against a difficulty set by terrain (or whatever obstacle you have), and if they get more successes than the NPCs they shift range bands (closer or further depending on who is chasing who). You can use this to emulate all kinds of chases, and you don't have to stick with Athletics, though that is the default. For example, a chase through a crowded market could conceivably use Coordination (to leap over fruit stands), Charm (to find a sympathetic helper), Stealth (to hide in the crowd), Coercion (to make everyone get out of the way) or whatever you think would make the situation more interesting. You can also let one PC roll for the team for that check, which gives everybody in the party something to do.

This is actually how I usually try to run a combat. I might have a couple rounds of shooting, but either the PCs are clearly overwhelmed and need to flee, or the enemy is trying to escape. Then we'll break into a couple rounds of chasing (which also potentially gives the PCs space to recover from wounds/strain) before maybe coming into contact again for more combat. It makes the whole experience a lot more dynamic.

But maybe none of that is relevant to your situation. An example of your setup might be helpful.

Thanks for the advice.

The reason this happens is because of the mix of PC styles. I have a few players who only fight at engaged range while others fight from long. I try to balance it so we get indoor and outdoor situations so these two styles get a chance to shine but whenever I open things up there is at least one melee player who wants to cover more than two maneuvers of ground. It isn't a big deal that they may have to wait another round to keep going and it is fine that my snipers feel threatened in tight spaces once in a while. I'll give the chase rules a closer look and see if I can use that to cause more dynamic encounters. I didn't think about it because you don't usually think the word "chase" when neither side is fleeing.

Thanks again

11 hours ago, OtakuEngine said:

Hey friends,

I have a situation that comes up every once in a while in my campaigns where a player uses two maneuvers (by suffering strain) in order to move through range bands and still end up just outside (or a long way outside) where they want to be. So they inevitably ask me if they could make some sort of check to get just a bit further.

In effect, by spending Strain and the second Maneuver, that is what they are doing - that's why there's a Strain cost. I would likely allow the player to dedicate their action to a Resilience, Dedication, or Athletics check on the same turn to push it just that little extra bit that they want. The problem here is that we are hard-capped at 2 Maneuvers so even if one were to convert one's Action to a Maneuver, it would still hit the cap so I would be reluctant to allow traversal of another Range Band. But maybe, just maybe, plot willing..... That's what Destiny Points are for, after all!

I would relegate that the Destiny Point System that's really there just for moments like that. It lets them pick their moments where they really need the extra edge, but also puts them in the plight of having to decided if it's better to use the point now or save it for later. Once they've used them up, the GM gets to use them to have some fun, after all!

It sounds like ultimately the balance is working though since you're trying to divide up the moments where the engaged specialists shine and still give the snipers places to work. There's a blade-wielding death robot in my group that is always melee, so they have it set up so there's just a strategy to using him: let him go first in the tight corridors, and when its out in the open, he plays defense to keep the snipers safe from the one or two guys who break through.

Just as an aside, there are a couple other ways to improve your mobility, without resorting to unusual checks. Jetpacks come to mind right away - nothing like getting a vehicle speed for personal encounters. Force leap for any force sensitives is nice, too. The explorer signature ability allows someone to take three maneuvers a turn, without giving up their action or taking strain (once they've got the right upgrades).

If it's really "just a little farther" I would go with three options:

- allow it, if they downgrade their action to a movement (I consider downgrading the action somehow more valuable than adding strain for an additional maneuver)

- allow it, if they flip a destiny point

- allow it, but they get one or two complication dice (jump into cover, recover from that long jump and then shoot)

either way, it should come with "bonus" strain