Re: mechanics of surprise

On Fri, 23 Feb 2007 00:06:43 +0000 (UTC),
mkkuhner@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 (Mary K. Kuhner) wrote:

>In article <1172184409.795681.170680@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>,
>psychohist <psychohist@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>Surprise mechanics need not be tied to initiative.  For example, in my
>>Eastern Isles mechanics, the primary combat effect of surprise is a
>>combat bonus on the first attack (typically +4 to hit on a 2D20
>>system).  In addition, I think only the one character initiating
>>action would typically benefit from this.
>
>>In group situations, the primary benefit of surprise in my system is
>>that the group with tactical surprise would get up to a free round of
>>movement, but not combat.  That could still be a big advantage, but
>>it's not as overwhelming as a system where the entire group gets a
>>free round of combat.
>
>How do you deal with situations like the following?
>
>(1)  My forces set up just outside the cavemouth.  As soon as the foe
>steps out of the cave, we fire arrows at him.  We don't intend to move
>at all as we have good cover where we are.

[snip]

>
>In #1 I would feel quite perturbed if the unaware foe got to shoot
>one of us before we got to shoot him. 

Query: Is that "I would feel quite perturbed if the unaware foe got to
shoot before the *first* shot from our side (but it's OK if the foe
happens to be fast/lucky enough to shoot second, after our fastest guy
shoots but before the rest of us)"? Or is it "I would feel quite
perturbed if the unaware foe got to shoot before *all* of the guys on
our side got our first shots in"?

If you want the second case, then I'd say that you have contradictory
desires for surprise - you want it to be severe enough that the
slowest of your guys act before the fastest of theirs, but you also
don't want it that severe because suprise that severe produces bloody
slaughters. 

-- 
Erol K. Bayburt
ErolB1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]