Re: Good initiative mechanics?

On Mar 31, 11:32=A0am, DougL <lampert.d...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> On Mar 29, 10:00=A0am, gleichman <fox1_...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
> > On Mar 29, 7:27=A0am, Simon Smith <simon_smith_n...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
> > > If mooks need a 'ganging up mechanic' to threaten PCs, then under
most=
 rule
> > > systems PCs can get even bigger benefits from using the same
mechanic.=

>
> > The design concept of mooks is that they don't follow the same rules
> > in total as PCs and im****tant NPCs. Thus (if one is making mooks
> > mechanically different already), this ability doesn't have to care
> > over to PCs.
>
> Actually mine DO follow the same rules. But the PCs are effectively
> superheroes while the mooks are ordinary people. (Drastically
> different point totals and the mooks have a lower maximum level on
> their advantages and can't have some advantages.)
>
> The ordinary people shouldn't be able to beat the crap out of
> superheroes one on one. But in this case I don't want an entire army
> to be harmless.

Second thought. If I were having trouble with Mooks scaling rather
than finding that part about right I could use: "Combined fire you
double numbers to get a +1 to ACV up to a maximum of 13 ACV or +6 to
ACV."

This rule is inherently PC unusable since I've only got one PC with an
ACV less than 14. It also limits combined groups to being noticably
worse than the best PCs. Which I would want since range, movement, and
cover modifiers are frequently significant and I don't want a mook
army to be able to pick off PCs at longer range than the PCs can
engage effectively.

Thus 32 guys with ACV 8 could combine in a single ACV 13 attack
(actually this would be 30 guys since I'd use the current BESM fast
progression for consistency). But the PCs couldn't benefit because
they're already too good and 32 ACV 10 guys would be unable to shoot
better than a PC since they'd have to combine as at least four groups.

DougL