What’s your implementation favorite action economy/round structure in a game? I can see the appeal of something like PF2e, but the 3-action thing ends up with some wonky design space (magic) and some cumbersome memorization to do for which actions cost what. On the other hand, something like GURPS has definite appeal as well. Sell me your favorite!
I'm perfectly fine with 1 round = 1 action + defenses with exceptions for multiple rapid attacks or skill-based skips like fast drawing, as gurps does it.
You'd think it'd 'make the game drag,' because people can't do as much in a turn, but it tends to make it go faster. The same amount of actual 'actions' is occuring, even if the number of 'turns' is higher, and the individual turns are shorter which keeps all the players more engaged because they don't have to wait for billy then timmy to decide what to do with several interreliant decisions.
The more choices you have in your turn the longer it takes to resolve the turn because you have to consider all the options available. Each additional action you have in a turn expands the choice matrix by another dimension which just means way more combinations to think through. A single action and, potentially, a move is the best approach from where I'm sitting.
Ad&d is need but the segment system is needlessly complex. Removing that and sticking with 10 minute turns and 1 minute rounds works pretty smoothly. As for action economy, only high level fighters can attack more than once via class features but any class weilding a significantly faster weapon (Speed Factor) can attack twice or even three times before their opponent. Moving and attacking on the same round is only possible via a charge which I think is a necessary limitation.
I'm really enjoying the OSR system my buddy hacked up to support zone-based combat. Alternating initiative, PCs start first, characters each get one action per round and everything's an action (attack, move, use a skill, etc.) The initiative works due to the GM only giving us around 10-15 seconds to decide who is going, then he'll just call out whoever seems most ready, and the arenas are structured to make this workable and fun -- we have to plan fast.
Also, a friend and I have been working on our own game involving dice pools that refresh at the top of the round, and all actions you take in a round typically cost some number of dice. There are various reactions, you get a level-dependent number of activations in a round based on your level, and the turn order is structured based on wuxing cycles that some character techniques can interact with as well. Similar to the previous example, you only get one action per activation to help keep turns quick, and we're using zone-based movement as well since fiddling around with grid movement count is tedious.
In general I like simple systems that help keep turns flowing. I'd rather have fast-paced action than carefully crafted turns where you try to best optimize your three actions.
D&D 4E's. I also liked Shadowrun's initiative passes a lot, balance issues be damned.
Broadly, each round
1. Declaration of intent from all players
2. Roll initiative once for each group
3. The GM resolves the action for the whole round and asks for rolls where needed
4. Repeat
Add detail to any phase if needed.
Sounds like you’d like Spellbound Kingdoms, which has a similar system, but more codified:
Each round of combat begins with all the participants choosing a spot on what is essentially an action flow-chart, and then in future turns either staying on the same spot, or moving to an adjacent spot. Then all the choices are simultaneously revealed and adjusted by the GM.
Semi-moronic idea, but have an action for each body part.
Left hand action, right hand action, feet action, and mouth action.
If you're holding a weapon in your right hand, you can swing it while holding the enemy in place with your left hand, hold up a shield with your left hand, swing with both hands for more damage, have a weapon in both hands, or use a potion or whatever in your left hand.
You can use your feet action to move, or use it to kick or jump or use a weapon held between your toes.
Mouth action to speak or to bite or cast spells or kiss a spellcaster to stop them from casting a spell.
Might be kinda weird, but it's intuitive.
>kiss a spellcaster to stop them from casting a spell
my homie what
No, no, he's got a point.
Joking aside, I do wonder if a "movement action" and "hands action" system could work well. Every turn you get to move and manipulate independently, with more complex actions maybe taking up both, or having one extra "free" action per turn for faster, easier moves.
I've actually been toying with the idea of a system where you get something like 3 actions per round, but you can only attack with each limb once (plus a slam or headbutt, all legs count as one 'limb'). So you can really go all-out spamming attacks, but you can't just use your best one over and over, instead having to mix it up with shoves, kicks, off-hand strikes, and so on. Gives you a reason to carry a second weapon without just making it give you extra attacks for free, since you're sacrificing mobility, etc. to use it.
Here for birdfish feelings.
But segmented combat rounds that are 10-15 seconds each and entail phases like a wargame, initiative is rolled once or when battlefield momentum obviously changes, each party decides actions, then the actions play out in that order as arbitrated by the dm are best.
I personally really enjoy the Vtm / storyteller system.
After Initiative is rolled the last one in the Initiative has to declare Actions first then the second to last and so on so a high ini actually helps you deciding what to do while still acting first. While low ini has difficulty reacting. Additional actions (from stuff like celerity) have to be declared before rolling Initiative. First all normal actions are done in Initiative. Then all the extra actions are done in Initiative order in a second go around.
That helps to prevent someone with good ini just fricking you up with 6 actions before you can act but still imparts the same tactical advantages of high ini. I think it's quite well done.
To elaborate a bit you get one action, movement and free actions like talking. You can declare either attack or defense actions. And while you can change a declared attack to a defense action with a willpower check you cant change a declared defense action. You can also split your dice pool to get multiple but weaker actions without any special abilities which also has to be declared before initative is rolled. Initiative gets rolled new every round of combat
>Actions = level (low)
>no explicitly defined actions
Perfection
I prefer the wargame approach, where you handle everything in phases. So you have the movement phase, the ranged phase, the melee phase, the magic phase, etc.
Action economy is really straightforward then, since you either do something during that phase or you don't. Rounds also go really fast because you just run down a list.
This seems like it might be wonky with individual characters rather than units like in a wargame. Does each character get to act during each phase? If I have a bow and a sword, can I shoot in the ranged phase and stab in the melee phase?
The process is a bit simpler than that
>Declare your action at the start of the turn
>Resolve everything in order
There's a bit of ruling necessary for things like drinking a potion, but I'd personally say that just uses your movement during the movement phase.
It also allows for fun things like interrupting spellcasting.
>If I have a bow and a sword, can I shoot in the ranged phase and stab in the melee phase?
Depends on the rules. Old-school D&D often says you can only do one of those phases a turn, but plenty of wargames let you shoot and then fight in melee (e.g. javelin throws or horse archers getting charged), sometimes at a penalty and sometimes not.
>What’s your implementation favorite action economy/round structure in a game?
I enjoy Shadow of the Demon Lord's Fast and Slow turn economy for making combat like 10x as fast as any edition of D&D simply because you completely cut out the management of initiative.
Besides that probably abstract systems like Cortex where you describe what you want to do on your turn and then build a dice pool to reflect that. I really dislike shit like PF2E where walking across the entire room costs exactly as many actions as PUTTING BOTH HANDS ON A SWORD, or using your fricking thumb to change barrels on a multi-barrel gun, since it's just so stupid and arbitrary and completely takes me out of the fiction. The wannabe legolas in the party can reach behind his back, grab an arrow, draw it out, bring it up to his bow, nock it, aim, draw his longbow to full length, and then release making an attack against th enemy all for the cost of ONE action, but using your thumb to flick to the next barrel on a pepperbox costs an entire action and you still need to spend another action to actually shoot? Frick off homosexual we're playing something else.
Unless a game is going full on autism simulationist and micromanaging individual seconds like GURPS does I generally prefer for actions to be somewhat handwaved, tracking exactly what's in your hands at all times is usually just a roundabout way of punishing mundane PCs since monsters and fantastical characters (spellcasters, capeshit psychics, whatever) aren't bound by realism in the same way
I also love SOTDL’s fast and slow turns. What do you think of Weird Wizard changing it to get rid of enemy fast turns? It seems like it might give players too much of an advantage but I haven’t been able to play the SOTWW play test so maybe I’m wrong.