|
1 <?xml version="1.0"?> |
|
2 <!DOCTYPE section PUBLIC "-//OASIS//DTD DocBook XML V4//EN" |
|
3 "/usr/share/sgml/docbook/dtd/xml/4.2/docbookx.dtd" |
|
4 [ |
|
5 <!ENTITY % struct-dtd SYSTEM "struct.dtd"> |
|
6 %struct-dtd; |
|
7 ]> |
|
8 <section id="sactgroup" revision="$Revision: 1841 $ $Name$" |
|
9 vendor="1.19" xmlns:xi="http://www.w3.org/2003/XInclude"> |
|
10 |
|
11 <title id="stactgroup">Group Actions</title></title> |
|
12 |
|
13 <para>It's often interesting to see the characters cooperate |
|
14 together for a particularly difficult task, or to put at the head |
|
15 of a troup of kobolds and see how they can make them <emphasis |
|
16 role="ironic">efficient</emphasis>. The problem meet most often |
|
17 here is that the rules that they know can only be used to rule for |
|
18 one character at once, asking for rolling dice for each character |
|
19 and each action, which is quite long. Arpeggii uses some |
|
20 shortcuts to manage those kinds of ruling, with only one roll, and |
|
21 obtains similar results as if each character have roll for |
|
22 themself. You can them <link linkend="scombinaisons">compute the |
|
23 total power of a group</link>, <link linkend="sjetgroupe">count |
|
24 the number of success</link> in a group with only one roll, and |
|
25 even <link linkend="sjetdist">determine the degrees of |
|
26 success</link> of each individual character of the group.</para> |
|
27 |
|
28 <section id="scombinaisons"> |
|
29 <title id="stcombinaisons">Values Combination</title> |
|
30 |
|
31 <para>Some actions can be sometime impossible for one individual |
|
32 and required the cooperation of the group to be succeed. |
|
33 However, attach a young puppy to a group of 10 horses will not |
|
34 help a lot to the task. To find the strength of the group, you |
|
35 can <emphasis>combine</emphasis> the characters' Attributes. |
|
36 The simple method is to convert all of them in Measures, add |
|
37 them and convert it back in Value. This way can became long and |
|
38 tedious however when they are many characters.</para> |
|
39 |
|
40 <para>Another way is possible but required a bit of practice from |
|
41 the GM to be efficient, and can be long if the group is too much |
|
42 heterogenous. However, as soon as the group is composed of |
|
43 individual with identical attributes, the calculation became |
|
44 very quick and make it very clear when someone will not add |
|
45 something interesting to the total strenght of the group.</para> |
|
46 |
|
47 <procedure id="pcombinaison"> |
|
48 <title id="ptcombinaison">Calculation of Values Combination</title> |
|
49 <step id="pscombind"> |
|
50 <para>Take each individual with the same Value and form a |
|
51 group. The Value of those group will be equal to the common |
|
52 Value of each individual, plus the Value corresponding to |
|
53 the number of individuals in the group (e.g. +5 is you have |
|
54 3 individuals, or +0 if you only have one).</para> |
|
55 </step> |
|
56 <step id="pscombgrpident"> |
|
57 <para>Take all groups with the same Value and combine them |
|
58 again but this time by adding the Value of the number of |
|
59 groups instead of the number of individuals. For example, |
|
60 if you have 3 groups with +2 each, whatever the number of |
|
61 individuals in those groups, the new group will have a Value |
|
62 of +2 + 5 (the Value of 3), which is +7.</para> |
|
63 </step> |
|
64 <step id="pscombgrpdiff"> |
|
65 <para>Take the two groups with the least Value.</para> |
|
66 <substeps> |
|
67 <step id="pscomb1a3"> |
|
68 <para>If the difference between both is 3 points or less, |
|
69 combine them in a new group with give them the Value of |
|
70 the strongest one +2.</para> |
|
71 </step> |
|
72 <step id="pscomb4a6"> |
|
73 <para>If the difference is between 4 and 6 included, |
|
74 combine them and give the Value of the strongest +1.</para> |
|
75 </step> |
|
76 <step> |
|
77 <para>If the difference is greater than 6 points, discard |
|
78 the weakest group and keep the stronger. The weakest |
|
79 group will be ignored in the total but if a new |
|
80 individual is add at later time, you'll be able to check |
|
81 if he can be add to discard groups first to form a |
|
82 strongest group.</para> |
|
83 </step> |
|
84 </substeps> |
|
85 </step> |
|
86 <step id="scombfinal"> |
|
87 <para>Redo the last two steps until you have only one group |
|
88 left, except for the discard groups. The combined Value of |
|
89 all individuals will be the Value of this final |
|
90 group.</para> |
|
91 </step> |
|
92 </procedure> |
|
93 |
|
94 <para>It should be note that's not always possible (or realistic |
|
95 if you prefer) to combine Value this way, and the Game Master |
|
96 can always impose some penalities and even restrictions to the |
|
97 numbers of characters which can participate and for their |
|
98 know-how, including asking for a leadership roll to the chief of |
|
99 the group. It's the GM responsability to create the right |
|
100 suspension of disbelief and keep the players interest.</para> |
|
101 |
|
102 <example id="xcombinaison"> |
|
103 <title id="xtcombinaison">Group Value Combination</title> |
|
104 |
|
105 <para>A group is composed of 6 characters with a score in Body |
|
106 of -10, -5, -5, +3, +4 and +5. Since they are already |
|
107 ordered, we can began to group them:</para> |
|
108 |
|
109 <orderedlist> |
|
110 <listitem> |
|
111 <para>First, we group the identical Values: We have two |
|
112 individuals with -5. We can so group them by adding to |
|
113 them the Value of 2, which is +3. The new group value |
|
114 will be -5 + 3 = -2.</para> |
|
115 </listitem> |
|
116 <listitem> |
|
117 <para>The two weakest groups can are now -10 and -2. The |
|
118 difference is 8 points, so the -10 group (a single |
|
119 individual) can be ignored.</para> |
|
120 </listitem> |
|
121 <listitem> |
|
122 <para>We now compare the -2 and +3 group. The difference is |
|
123 5 points and so we combine both groups and give them the |
|
124 value of the stronger (+3) augment of one point, for a |
|
125 total of +4.</para> |
|
126 </listitem> |
|
127 <listitem> |
|
128 <para>In the remaining groups, we now have a new identical |
|
129 pair, which is two +4 groups. Again, we can combine them |
|
130 in a new group by adding +3 to the common Value, for a |
|
131 total of +7. The group is now composed of 3 subgroups, |
|
132 one ignored (-10), a +5 and a +7 group.</para> |
|
133 </listitem> |
|
134 <listitem> |
|
135 <para>We compare again the two weakest, +5 and +7 (the -10 |
|
136 is still ignored). The difference is only 2 points. The |
|
137 groups can so be combined in a new group with the highest |
|
138 Value (+7) augment of 2 points, for a final group with a |
|
139 <emphasis>combined</emphasis> Body Attribute of +9. |
|
140 </listitem> |
|
141 </orderedlist> |
|
142 |
|
143 <para>Remark that if the group at -10 was compared with the -5 |
|
144 group first, you will got a group with -4, which combined with |
|
145 the other group at -5, will also give you a group with -2. |
|
146 So, it doesn't make any difference at the end and since the |
|
147 combination of identical groups is the only one which can be |
|
148 done on multiple groups at the same time, she is favored most |
|
149 of the time.</para> |
|
150 </example> |
|
151 </section> |
|
152 |
|
153 <section id="sjetgroupe"> |
|
154 <title id="stjetgroupe">Rolling dice for a group</title> |
|
155 |
|
156 <para>In a game, the players are often confronted to group of NPC |
|
157 sometime numerous and often hostile. In a combat or a pursuit, |
|
158 it will be tedious for the GM to roll dice individually for each |
|
159 members of the group. When the group is sufficiently <anchor |
|
160 id="refjgrpcond"/>homogeneous (no more then 5 points of |
|
161 difference in their Competency Level for this particular action) |
|
162 et that the roll is a <link linkend="sactsimple">simple |
|
163 action</link>, a quick alternative can be used instead. First, |
|
164 the Game Master make a normal roll for the whole group. Then, |
|
165 she takes the Value of the total number of members in this |
|
166 group. To this value, she subtracts either the degrees of |
|
167 success if this one is positive or the degrees of failure |
|
168 elsewhere, and then subtracts 3 more points to the result. The |
|
169 result will always be at most the Value of the group minus 3. |
|
170 This Value can then be converted in a Measure and round up to |
|
171 the lower whole number. If the roll was positive, this Measure |
|
172 represent the number of individuals that |
|
173 <emphasis>failed</emphasis> their roll. Elsewhere, it represent |
|
174 the number of individual that succeed their roll.</para> |
|
175 |
|
176 <example id="xreussitegroupe"> |
|
177 <title>Simple Group Roll</title> |
|
178 |
|
179 <para>A group of 25 guards try to catch the characters in a |
|
180 mountain road. The characters decide to destroy a little |
|
181 bridge to slow them down. The guards decide to jump over the |
|
182 small gap. The difficulty is -5 under Ag+Pw, where the guards |
|
183 have a total of +3 each. The Game Master roll the dice and |
|
184 get +4, which is a +2 degrees of success. The group of 25 |
|
185 guards correspond to a Value of +14. If you subtract the |
|
186 degrees of success and 3, you get +9. The <xref |
|
187 linkend="tmesures"/> indicate that it's equivalent to a |
|
188 Measure of 8. So, 8 guards have fail their roll into a |
|
189 dramatic end. If the roll have give a failure at -3, the |
|
190 final value will then be (+14 - 3 - 3 =) +8, and so only 6 |
|
191 guards will have <emphasis>succeed</emphasis> to jump over the |
|
192 gap. It will have take a degrees of success of +12 for every |
|
193 guards to pass the gap.</para> |
|
194 </example> |
|
195 |
|
196 <para>When you roll the dice for a group, it is good advice to |
|
197 only make <link |
|
198 linkend="sjetdifference"><emphasis>closed</emphasis> difference |
|
199 roll (±d10)</link>. The great range of open rolls create must |
|
200 of the time incredible catastrophe or miraculous prowess, |
|
201 instead of normal result.</para> |
|
202 </section> |
|
203 |
|
204 <section id="sjetdist"> |
|
205 <title id="stjetdist">Group Degrees of Success</title> |
|
206 |
|
207 <para>The precedent method is very exact if you apply the |
|
208 theoretical probability curve on which is based the Harmonies, |
|
209 but which are only an approximation of the real dice dispersion. |
|
210 A similar method permit not only to be nearer than the real |
|
211 value, but also to calculate the level of success of each |
|
212 individual or, to be exact, to know the number of individual for |
|
213 each level of success. It is, however, much more longer and |
|
214 complex. It will be to the Game Master to choose which of both |
|
215 it will used, but must stay consistent for their players.</para> |
|
216 |
|
217 <para>The method need the <link linkend="refjgrpcond">same |
|
218 conditions</link> then the preceding method (homogeneous group) |
|
219 and at least hundreds of individual if we want to detail each |
|
220 level of success (the precision will be lesser elsewhere). The |
|
221 Game Master begin again with a roll for the whole group. She |
|
222 then convert the number of individuals in Value and subtracts |
|
223 the number of points indicate in <xref linkend="tjetdist"/>, in |
|
224 function of the difference between the degrees of success of the |
|
225 roll and the one we are interested in. The first row of the |
|
226 table represent the difference between the degrees of success of |
|
227 the roll and the one we want to know, the second row show the |
|
228 value to subtract to obtain the Value of the number of |
|
229 individuals having exactly this number of degrees of success, |
|
230 and the last one give the value to subtract to obtain the number |
|
231 of individual that have <emphasis>at least</emphasis> this |
|
232 difference in number of degrees of success. The result can then |
|
233 be converted into a Measure and you got the number of |
|
234 individuals having this number of degrees of success plus or |
|
235 minus the difference. For columns with fraction (like -2.5), |
|
236 you must take the average of the two adjacent values. For |
|
237 example, at -2.5, you must take the average of the Measure of -2 |
|
238 and -3.</para> |
|
239 |
|
240 <table frame="all" id="tjetdist"> |
|
241 <title id="ttjetdist">Groups Degrees of Success</title> |
|
242 |
|
243 <tgroup cols="11" align="center"> |
|
244 <colspec colnum="1" colwidth="1.5in" align="right"/> |
|
245 <colspec colnum="2" colwidth="0.5in"/> |
|
246 <colspec colnum="3" colwidth="0.5in"/> |
|
247 <colspec colnum="4" colwidth="0.5in"/> |
|
248 <colspec colnum="5" colwidth="0.5in"/> |
|
249 <colspec colnum="6" colwidth="0.5in"/> |
|
250 <colspec colnum="7" colwidth="0.5in"/> |
|
251 <colspec colnum="8" colwidth="0.5in"/> |
|
252 <colspec colnum="9" colwidth="0.5in"/> |
|
253 <colspec colnum="10" colwidth="0.5in"/> |
|
254 <colspec colnum="11" colwidth="0.5in"/> |
|
255 <tbody> |
|
256 <row> |
|
257 <entry>difference</entry> |
|
258 <entry>0</entry> |
|
259 <entry>1</entry> |
|
260 <entry>2</entry> |
|
261 <entry>3</entry> |
|
262 <entry>4</entry> |
|
263 <entry>5</entry> |
|
264 <entry>6</entry> |
|
265 <entry>7</entry> |
|
266 <entry>8</entry> |
|
267 <entry>9</entry> |
|
268 </row> |
|
269 <row> |
|
270 <entry>exactly this difference</entry> |
|
271 <entry>-10</entry> |
|
272 <entry>-10.5</entry> |
|
273 <entry>-11</entry> |
|
274 <entry>-11.5</entry> |
|
275 <entry>-12</entry> |
|
276 <entry>-13</entry> |
|
277 <entry>-14</entry> |
|
278 <entry>-15</entry> |
|
279 <entry>-17</entry> |
|
280 <entry>-20</entry> |
|
281 </row> |
|
282 <row> |
|
283 <entry>this difference or more</entry> |
|
284 <entry>-2.5</entry> |
|
285 <entry>-3.5</entry> |
|
286 <entry>-4.5</entry> |
|
287 <entry>-5.5</entry> |
|
288 <entry>-7</entry> |
|
289 <entry>-8</entry> |
|
290 <entry>-10</entry> |
|
291 <entry>-12</entry> |
|
292 <entry>-15</entry> |
|
293 <entry>-20</entry> |
|
294 </row> |
|
295 </tbody> |
|
296 </tgroup> |
|
297 </table> |
|
298 |
|
299 <example id="xjetdist"> |
|
300 <title>Group Degrees of Success</title> |
|
301 |
|
302 <para>We have a group of 300 soldiers (Value of +25) who get a |
|
303 +2 success margin. With +25 - 10 = +15, so 30 soldiers that |
|
304 got exactly this success margin (+2). For the number of |
|
305 soldiers who got +1 or +3 (1 point of difference), we must |
|
306 take the Measure of -10 (which we already have: 30) and -11 |
|
307 (which is the same as the column 2, which we still don't |
|
308 know). So, for a difference of 2 points, we have +25 - 11 = |
|
309 +14, or 25 individuals with 0 degrees of success, and another |
|
310 25 with +4 degrees of success. We can now take the sum of 30 |
|
311 and 25, which is 55, that we can split in two: there will be |
|
312 28 soldiers with +1 degree of success, and 27 with +3 degrees |
|
313 of success.</para> |
|
314 </example> |
|
315 |
|
316 <para>The last row ask for more explanations. If you're looking |
|
317 for the number of individuals with +3 or more degrees of |
|
318 success, and that you roll a +2, it's easy. You just have to |
|
319 convert for a difference of +1 or more. But if you were looking |
|
320 for those with 0 or more, you're in trouble! You can take only |
|
321 those with 2 points of difference or more, because you will only |
|
322 get those with +4 or more! What's you really looking for is |
|
323 those with +0 (2 points of difference exactly), +1 (1 points of |
|
324 difference exactly) and +2 and more (0 or more points of |
|
325 difference). But a shorter way will be to looking for the |
|
326 opposite. Find all of them that get -1 or less (3 points of |
|
327 difference and more) and subtract them from the total of |
|
328 individual in the group to find those who get +0 and |
|
329 more.</para> |
|
330 |
|
331 <example id="xjetdist2"> |
|
332 <title>Group Degrees of Success 2</title> |
|
333 |
|
334 <para>With the same group as before, we are looking for the |
|
335 number of those that got +0 and more degrees of success. This |
|
336 represent a difference of 2 points which include the result of |
|
337 the roll. We can then find those who got less than zero |
|
338 degrees of success (a difference of 3 points or more) and |
|
339 subtract it to the Measure of the group. The column 3 got us |
|
340 with -5.5, which mean that we must take the average of -5 and |
|
341 -6. +25 - 6 = +19, or 80 individuals. +25 - 5 = +20, or 100 |
|
342 individuals. The average is (100+80)/2 = 90 soldiers who has |
|
343 less than zero degree of success. On the initial group of 300 |
|
344 soldiers, that's mean that (300-90) = 210 soldiers have got +0 |
|
345 or more. Using the method view in the preceding section, we |
|
346 would get 100 individuals that have failed (+25 -2 -3 = +20), |
|
347 so 200 individual that have succeed.</para> |
|
348 |
|
349 </example> |
|
350 |
|
351 <note userlevel="adv"> |
|
352 <title>Choosing between the two methods</title> |
|
353 |
|
354 <para>The maximum error is 6% or less on the total of |
|
355 individuals for the first method, and less than 1% for the |
|
356 second method. You have to choose between a more precise but |
|
357 longer roll, or a quickest but less exact one. At the same |
|
358 time, You can choose to only take the lowest Value instead of |
|
359 calculating the average when you got an .5 factor to subtract. |
|
360 Again, this is just a compromise on speed and |
|
361 exactitude.</para> |
|
362 |
|
363 </note> |
|
364 |
|
365 </section> |
|
366 </section> |
|
367 <!-- Keep this comment at the end of the file |
|
368 Local variables: |
|
369 mode: xml |
|
370 sgml-omittag:nil |
|
371 sgml-shorttag:t |
|
372 sgml-namecase-general:t |
|
373 sgml-general-insert-case:lower |
|
374 sgml-minimize-attributes:nil |
|
375 sgml-always-quote-attributes:t |
|
376 sgml-indent-step:2 |
|
377 sgml-indent-data:t |
|
378 sgml-exposed-tags:nil |
|
379 sgml-local-catalogs:nil |
|
380 sgml-local-ecat-files:nil |
|
381 sgml-default-dtd-file:"section.ced" |
|
382 End: |
|
383 --> |