Action Point System

[xenopulse]

Hi there,

I was wondering if anyone has created a good action point based system yet. I've tried searching through the posts in this forum, but haven't come across anything resembling what I have in mind.

Basically, I believe that many games give very few options to be tactical in a combat situation. Sure, there are maybe several different pre-determined options you have (e.g., disarm, power attack, etc.), but nothing in the way I would like to see. Here's a system I made up specifically for giant robot games, but they could easily be applied to any type of combat.

Characters have a set amount of Action Points (AP). These rise as the characters gain experience. In battle, AP are spent for actions as well as bonuses. Based on a D20 system, a table of AP costs could be as follows (assume 10-15 AP per character):

2 AP basic dodge (D20, against all attacks this round)
1 AP per +3 to dodge
4 AP single shot attack (D20 vs. dodge roll)
1 AP per +3 on attack
4 AP short burst from automatic gun
6 AP medium burst (gives 2 attacks)
8 AP long burst (gives 3 attacks)
2 AP reload handgun or change ammo on internal gun

Now, a character could focus on dodging and make a basic attack, or do a basic dodge and two basic attacks, or don't dodge at all and go all-out on attacks, etc. The +3 bonuses could be replaced with variables depending on the accuracy of the weapon and the mobility of the mecha (or character).

Does this seem like too much math and keeping track? Is there already a system like this one out there?

Thanks,

Christian

[anonymouse]

I know quite a few console RPGs use this system; the Fallout games, Breath of Fire V and Parasite Eve immediately spring to mind, but I'm sure there are others I'm not recalling at the moment.

I don't think it'd be too much math; maybe a bit higher learning curve. It would definitely cater to a more hardcore set of players, though.

[xenopulse]

Thanks for the response.

Yeah, it's more of a gamist system, I guess. But I felt it was almost easier than having several separate actions that get their modifiers from attributes, skills, and all that.

[jerry]

DragonQuest was the first game I saw with action points, although as I recall they may have removed them from the final version of the game. Each action took some action points, and when you ran out you had to pass until the end of the turn (round? phase? it's been a long time).

Men and Supermen uses Quality Points. Basically, the amount the player makes the roll by is the quality of the roll; these points can be traded in for a faster action, better chance to hit, better defense, etc. It also did not use rounds; each action had a specific amount of time it took to complete and that's how long it took. There were some problems with it that I'd like to revisit one of these days, but overall it worked pretty well.

Gods & Monsters (an archetype-based system) allows warriors, and only warriors, to convert attack bonuses into a "combat pool". The higher the warrior's level, the more attack bonuses can be brought into the pool per round. Any attack bonus can be brought into the pool, whether it's from greater skill, higher ground, or whatever. From the pool, combat bonuses can be traded out for greater damage, more attacks, greater defense, etc. Pools can be saved across rounds, as well, to build them higher than the player/character normally could.

Jerry

[xenopulse]

Jerry,

The Quality Points idea sounds neat, I should look into that sometime. It's a little different from my approach, which still uses rounds, but basically provides a formula for fine tuning aggressive/defensive options.

I had looked at Gods&Monsters briefly yesterday before making my initial post, when browsing the forum for other systems, though I didn't look closely enough to read about the combat pool. It's basically a D&D alternative system, right? AD&D 2nd Ed. is actually the only game I actively play these days.

- Christian

[Marco]

JAGS (http://jagsgame.dyndns.org) uses an Action Point system that is similar to what you describe.

It's freely available as are its supplements (JAGS-2, a lighter companion game, released under the FDL has a simpler take on the action point system).

-Marco

[jerry]

The Quality Points idea sounds neat, I should look into that sometime. It's a little different from my approach, which still uses rounds, but basically provides a formula for fine tuning aggressive/defensive options.

Well, the "Quality Points" idea is not tied to not having rounds. (I mentioned that because, "each action takes a certain number of action points" is similar to "each action takes a certain amount of time".) It is just the idea that better rolls provide more options to the character whose player made the roll. It isn't limited to combat, either, it's just part of the basic skill system.

The Gods & Monsters combat pool is basically the same idea--players can allocate points in strategic ways--except that instead of being mostly random the points come from both the inherent skill of the combatant and whatever maneuvering the combatant has done to increase their advantage.

Strategic points--whatever kind they are--can come from anywhere, really. They don't even have to be called points.

It's basically a D&D alternative system, right? AD&D 2nd Ed. is actually the only game I actively play these days.

Well, start playing yours! :*)

Yes, I've tried to design compatibility with AD&D 1 and 2 into Gods & Monsters.

Jerry

[xenopulse]

Well, start playing yours! :*)

None of my systems is ripe for actual playing. That's always an issue these days... having an idea, starting on it, but not really having the time to fix all the details.

I like the pool idea as well. I might try to bring my GM to implement something similar.

[Michael]

I am having/had the same problem with my system. I want combat to be fast-paced enough to be exciting, and all of my AP methods were slowing things down too much. Having to keep track of exactly how much AP was spent during a round, just to do it all over again the next round, became tedious.

At this point, I'm deciding between tackling it again or just nixing the idea of AP. If I do utilize AP, I am going to have the players working with a small AP pool (like less than 10), that way it's easier to keep track of. The only problem with smaller AP pools is that there are more limitations in how actions can be broken down. Granted this can be a good thing (maintaining simplicity), or a bad thing (sacrificing verisimilitude).

I do agree with you, though. I also have a preference for systems that allow more strategic techniques in combat.

[Autocrat]

Try doing a search for some of my posts - quite certain I made posts about my AP system, (strong links to fallout and several others!)... if not here, then it's at RPGnet's Forums!

[smokewolf]

Check out The Swing. I use Action Points for the combat system and in my opinion have made the system fairly realistic. The one thing most people say after trying it out is that it really feels like your were in that combat scene.

http://www.rpgnow.com/product_info.php?products_id=2256