Initiative Tool Request- Refocus

[Amaril]

PC 1 has a +1 initiative bonus- he lucked out and rolled high for the initiative roll. Under 3.0 rules, PC 1 can only delay until initiative count 7.

How so? -10 - 1 = -11.

A character can only voluntarily lower its initiative to -10 minus its initiative bonus. When the initiative count reaches -10 minus a delaying character's initiative bonus, that character must act or forfeit any action that round.

[mrobviousjosh]

PC 1 has a +1 initiative bonus- he lucked out and rolled high for the initiative roll. Under 3.0 rules, PC 1 can only delay until initiative count 7.

How so? -10 - 1 = -11.

A character can only voluntarily lower its initiative to -10 minus its initiative bonus. When the initiative count reaches -10 minus a delaying character's initiative bonus, that character must act or forfeit any action that round.

I take it Lidda wasn't forced to the 5 then?

EVEN IF I AM WRONG ABOUT THAT, -11 does not allow the character, as per my example, to ready against a spell cast from BG 3 (because his action wouldn't be until the following turn- after your delay was forced); therefore, under that system, in that situation, refocus would be needed in order to achieve that effect.

[Jector]

*sits down with soda*

Continue.

/slurp

[Amaril]

EVEN IF I AM WRONG ABOUT THAT, -11 does not allow the character, as per my example, to ready against a spell cast from BG 3 (because his action wouldn't be until the following turn- after your delay was forced); therefore, under that system, in that situation, refocus would be needed in order to achieve that effect.

What prevents PC1 from readying the action on his turn, forced or otherwise?

[mrobviousjosh]

EVEN IF I AM WRONG ABOUT THAT, -11 does not allow the character, as per my example, to ready against a spell cast from BG 3 (because his action wouldn't be until the following turn- after your delay was forced); therefore, under that system, in that situation, refocus would be needed in order to achieve that effect.

What prevents PC1 from readying the action on his turn, forced or otherwise?

If he readies the action, but the present condition doesn't occur by the end of the round, he loses that readied action IIRC. Because BG 3, the spellcaster, has a higher initiative, the only way that PC 1 could ready against said spell being cast, would be to get a higher initiative himself.

[Amaril]

If he readies the action, but the present condition doesn't occur by the end of the round, he loses that readied action IIRC.

You recall incorrectly.

[mrobviousjosh]

If he readies the action, but the present condition doesn't occur by the end of the round, he loses that readied action IIRC.

You recall incorrectly.

First, you could have specified BUT, since you haven't, I'll quote the SRD directly: "If the character takes the readied action into a subsequent round, and the conditions are met before the character's normal initiative, the character's initiative rises to that new point in the order of battle, the character may take the readied action, and whether that action is taken or not, the character does not get a regular action that round."

Having said that, if the readied trigger never comes, but you continue to hold it, you do NOTHING. So, your suggestion then, is to ready and "hope for the best." You end up wasting an entire round, if not more, if the readied trigger doesn't occur that round, or the next, or the next.

FOR THE RECORD THOUGH, previously I'd mentioned other d20 games like the SWRPG. It specifically says in the SWRPG RCR, "The longest a character can delay before taking an action is until everyone else has acted in the round. At that point, the delaying character must act or else forfeit any action that round."

Also, while readying would work under the SWRPG RCR for taking your action at a higher initiative, if it doesn't come (or as per my example can't possibly come until the following round) refocus prevents you from losing 2 actions (the round you readied in and the new one). Why? Because your target could die, the condition doesn't happen, etc. Readying locks in your action from the previous round. YET, if you had refocused, you could have done whatever you wanted (this is even more the case when you consider that 3.0 only allowed you to ready partial actions and the SWRPG RCR preserves an attack action- not a movement action).

BUT, EVEN IF YOU ARE CORRECT, THIS THREAD SHOULD BE LOCKED DOWN.

I will say, yet again (for the third time no less), "since the delay function in initiative tool can handle 85-95% of currently played d20 combat which no longer uses refocus, you're also right that refocus probably doesn't need to be added to initiative tool."

I don't even why you feel the need to argue mechanics when, as I've already conceited MULTIPLE times, while the option could be included, especially given the rewrite for 3.5, most games won't need refocus. Seriously man, I get it, I've said I get it, and now you're just trying to argue who knows 3.0 better because nothing productive is coming from this discussion anymore.

[carpens]

BUT, EVEN IF YOU ARE CORRECT, THIS THREAD SHOULD BE LOCKED DOWN.

I will say, yet again (for the third time no less), "since the delay function in initiative tool can handle 85-95% of currently played d20 combat which no longer uses refocus, you're also right that refocus probably doesn't need to be added to initiative tool."

I don't even why you feel the need to argue mechanics when, as I've already conceited MULTIPLE times, while the option could be included, especially given the rewrite for 3.5, most games won't need refocus. Seriously man, I get it, I've said I get it, and now you're just trying to argue who knows 3.0 better because nothing productive is coming from this discussion anymore.

If you believe the thread is over, the logical thing to do would be to stop posting in it.

[Amaril]

Calm down there. You're taking this far too personally and you're not paying attention to the point behind the argument let alone the path of logic involved with it.

You seem to be confusing readying for delaying in your arguments above. Earlier in the thread you were arguing the difference between refocus and delaying. Then you were arguing that delay doesn't allow you to gain initiative to position yourself first in the next round so that you can ready an action against BG 3 who has a higher initiative. I was merely stating that the ready action handles that need. Then you began to argue about how readying an action doesn't guarantee an action, but that just argues against your own point about needing higher initiative to ready against a spell cast by BG 3, which doesn't really contribute to your own argument about the need for refocus so I'm not sure where you're going with this.

Additionally, Star Wars RPG is not an open system, and thus developers cannot legally program logic against its game mechanics.

Now to your argument above.

...I'll quote the SRD directly: "If the character takes the readied action into a subsequent round, and the conditions are met before the character's normal initiative, the character's initiative rises to that new point in the order of battle, the character may take the readied action, and whether that action is taken or not, the character does not get a regular action that round."

Having said that, if the readied trigger never comes, but you continue to hold it, you do NOTHING. So, your suggestion then, is to ready and "hope for the best." You end up wasting an entire round, if not more, if the readied trigger doesn't occur that round, or the next, or the next.

See my point above regarding ready vs. delay vs. refocus in this discussion. You're jumping all over the place and aren't sticking to the points. Specifically, you were arguing for being able to ready against a caster. You can't argue against the ready action after arguing for it.

FOR THE RECORD THOUGH, previously I'd mentioned other d20 games like the SWRPG. It specifically says in the SWRPG RCR, "The longest a character can delay before taking an action is until everyone else has acted in the round. At that point, the delaying character must act or else forfeit any action that round."

Tell me, what's the difference between taking an action at the end of one round vs. taking an action at the beginning of the next besides the label of Round N vs. Round N+1?

Also, while readying would work under the SWRPG RCR for taking your action at a higher initiative, if it doesn't come (or as per my example can't possibly come until the following round) refocus prevents you from losing 2 actions (the round you readied in and the new one). Why? Because your target could die, the condition doesn't happen, etc. Readying locks in your action from the previous round. YET, if you had refocused, you could have done whatever you wanted (this is even more the case when you consider that 3.0 only allowed you to ready partial actions and the SWRPG RCR preserves an attack action- not a movement action).

Again, that's what delay is for. PC 1 could delay until the end of the existing round, essentially acting before the BG 3 in the next round. If PC 1 wanted to ready against a spell BG 3 casts in the next round, PC 1 can do so this round and that ready state carries over. If PC 1 simply wanted to take any other action before BG 3 acts, going last in the current round is no different than going first in the next round, as mentioned above.

BUT, EVEN IF YOU ARE CORRECT, THIS THREAD SHOULD BE LOCKED DOWN.

I hardly think so. It's a civil conversation about rules implementation, and no one has made any inflammatory statements against the other.

I will say, yet again (for the third time no less), "since the delay function in initiative tool can handle 85-95% of currently played d20 combat which no longer uses refocus, you're also right that refocus probably doesn't need to be added to initiative tool."

I don't even why you feel the need to argue mechanics when, as I've already conceited MULTIPLE times, while the option could be included, especially given the rewrite for 3.5, most games won't need refocus. Seriously man, I get it, I've said I get it, and now you're just trying to argue who knows 3.0 better because nothing productive is coming from this discussion anymore.

And I will say yet again, the 3.0 refocus option is obsolete even in 3.0, thus there is no real need for any development to support it. The software can handle 3.0 mechanics for ready and delay as is. Even if SWRPG did allow for unlicensed third-party developtment of supporting software, the point still stands that SWRPG doesn't differ enough to warrant development support, IMHO.

Now, these are just my opinions. I'm not a decision maker in terms of what does or does not get developed for InitiativeTool. If you don't care to engage in the conversation regarding the differences between 3.0 and 3.5 combat actions for delay and ready and support for those differences in InitiativeTool, then why are you even participating in the discussion? More importantly, why should I be prevented from having a civil discussion about such a topic just because your opinion is different than mine? (These are rhetorical questions. I'm not really looking for answers.)

To summarize my points: 3.0 refocus contributes nothing to 3.0 rules that delay and ready didn't already handle. The only thing it did was place someone at the top of initiative for the subsequent rounds, which made players feel better but served not functional purpose. Rounds are just circles. Going last in one circle is no different than going first in the next as you're still going before everyone else's next turn. If you want to ready an action in one round against another's action in the next round, 3.0 rules allow you to do so.

Regarding SWRPG, I don't own those books, and given that your understanding of 3.0 rules seems to be a bit inaccurate, I don't know how accurate your interpretation of the rules are. If you are correct, then I personally would house rule that one can ready into subsequent rounds or delay into subsequent rounds. Using refocus vs delaying into a subsequent round bears no difference at all in terms of actual play.

Finally, in regards to using InitiativeTool for those systems: If someone wants to refocus, just set them to delay and trigger an alarm at 20+ Init modifier, or manually change their initiative. I'm sure there might be one or two other options as well. It's really not that hard to accommodate using the software as is.

[mrobviousjosh]

Calm down there. You're taking this far too personally and you're not paying attention to the point behind the argument let alone the path of logic involved with it.

Sorry to take things so personal but you really do seem to be ignoring my concession of the tool request (which was the point of this thread). That's a bit frustrating, whether or not you understand 3.0 rules better than I do (which, given how long it's been since I've played much d20, it's probably a fair assumption that you do know these rules better than me atm).

Additionally, Star Wars RPG is not an open system, and thus developers cannot legally program logic against its game mechanics.

Because the Star Wars RPG was developed using the d20 mechanics, I brought it into this discussion. You are right about it not being an open system BUT developers CAN legally program logic against the game mechanics when they appear elsewhere (e.g. 3.0 D&D, d20 Modern, other d20 games).

BUT, EVEN IF YOU ARE CORRECT, THIS THREAD SHOULD BE LOCKED DOWN.

I hardly think so. It's a civil conversation about rules implementation, and no one has made any inflammatory statements against the other.

Actually it should be locked down because the topic of this thread is dramatically shifting away from its original intent (in the appropriate forum) and is headed into a "Misc." type thread topic. If this weren't a tool request, the first post someone would have likely made was, "this thread should go here (insert x link)." We are both in agreement that a new refocus option doesn't need to be implemented and, thus, nothing new in support or against the original thread request is being made (which is the reason I've stopped the line by line debate w/ you).

I will say, yet again (for the third time no less), "since the delay function in initiative tool can handle 85-95% of currently played d20 combat which no longer uses refocus, you're also right that refocus probably doesn't need to be added to initiative tool."

I don't even why you feel the need to argue mechanics when, as I've already conceited MULTIPLE times, while the option could be included, especially given the rewrite for 3.5, most games won't need refocus. Seriously man, I get it, I've said I get it, and now you're just trying to argue who knows 3.0 better because nothing productive is coming from this discussion anymore.

And I will say yet again, the 3.0 refocus option is obsolete even in 3.0, thus there is no real need for any development to support it. The software can handle 3.0 mechanics for ready and delay as is. Even if SWRPG did allow for unlicensed third-party developtment of supporting software, the point still stands that SWRPG doesn't differ enough to warrant development support, IMHO.

Now, these are just my opinions. I'm not a decision maker in terms of what does or does not get developed for InitiativeTool. If you don't care to engage in the conversation regarding the differences between 3.0 and 3.5 combat actions for delay and ready and support for those differences in InitiativeTool, then why are you even participating in the discussion? More importantly, why should I be prevented from having a civil discussion about such a topic just because your opinion is different than mine? (These are rhetorical questions. I'm not really looking for answers.)

WOW, just wow. You acknowledge the fact that I've conceited, multiple times, that this new option doesn't need to be implemented, YET STILL continue arguing that refocus isn't need- but specifically that it shouldn't have been written in the first place? Seriously, go critique the game on the D&D boards- that's why they're there. Whether or not the option is
"good" or not, is unimportant to this thread- NEW TOOL REQUESTS. If it's in the game, it's fair to request the option. I honestly don't understand why you can't accept the "win" or whatever. I've conceded that this option really isn't needed and the discussion should have ended there. As for my going off topic, it's no wonder I'm confused when you started arguing the reasons for refocus in the rules (and the lack of need for it), when all we were talking about is whether or not the initiative tool should have an option for it (not the viability of the refocus action which is more of a game mechanic discussion).

To summarize my points: 3.0 refocus contributes nothing to 3.0 rules that delay and ready didn't already handle.

So you don't like the fact it's a combat action? Big deal. Some players think combat expertise is stupid. Does that mean that programs like DM Genie should ignore it? Refocus is no different. If it's in the rules, an argument can be made that when using a program to track initiative, even if options are "pointless," if they're written in the rules, consideration should be given as to whether or not you can put them in the program's functions.

Regarding SWRPG, I don't own those books, and given that your understanding of 3.0 rules seems to be a bit inaccurate, I don't know how accurate your interpretation of the rules are. If you are correct, then I personally would house rule that one can ready into subsequent rounds or delay into subsequent rounds. Using refocus vs delaying into a subsequent round bears no difference at all in terms of actual play.

So I'm a bit rusty. Sorry, since I've been in law school I haven't had much time to game and when I do play D&D, 3.5 dominates. I bet I don't know anything about 2nd ed. D&D either, despite how much I played in junior high and high school. As for the rules, there are differences and some games (another WOTC example is d20 Call of Cthulhu), never get the updates and revision that D&D gets, making those games, per canon, less effective than the latest version of D&D. As for me, I could houserule the refocus/readying/delay/etc. actions BUT I'm not always the guy running and some of the DMs I've played with refuse to houserule anything (so there's less to keep up with).

Finally, in regards to using InitiativeTool for those systems: If someone wants to refocus, just set them to delay and trigger an alarm at 20+ Init modifier, or manually change their initiative. I'm sure there might be one or two other options as well. It's really not that hard to accommodate using the software as is.

That's what I've been doing but it takes more time than clicking on "delay" or other actions. A special function would save time. I do have to say this though, of all your arguments, this is BY FAR the best one you've made regarding this subject because it talked about the tool and how to accommodate this special initiative option (i.e. you weren't arguing how ineffectual the refocus option was in general).

Hopefully, we can end this pointless discussion but if you feel the overwhelming need to get in the last word, feel free to do so.

[Jector]

If you believe the thread is over, the logical thing to do would be to stop posting in it.

Shush, you. Best drama this board has. I'll thank you to keep logic out of it.

(which is the reason I've stopped the line by line debate w/ you).

Ha! Excellent.



/slurp

where'd i put that popcorn?

[dorpond]

(which is the reason I've stopped the line by line debate w/ you).

Ha! Excellent.



/slurp

where'd i put that popcorn?

Sit down! I can't see!

*Throws popcorn at the lion headed looking freak boy slurping his cola like a dying man in the sahara*

[mrobviousjosh]

(which is the reason I've stopped the line by line debate w/ you).

Ha! Excellent.



/slurp

where'd i put that popcorn?

Sit down! I can't see!

*Throws popcorn at the lion headed looking freak boy slurping his cola like a dying man in the sahara*

And I didn't think this thread would ever make me smile, let alone laugh a little. If you guys want to join this circus, feel free.

[Amaril]

I'm not going to bother with the majority of your line-by-line post, but I am going to attempt to clarify my point one last time in hopes that you can see that I'm not trying to be offensive or antagonistic. Wait, does this automatically mean I'm trying to get the last word?

In any case, my whole reason for engaging in this entire conversation was simply to clarify that refocus is not as important as you had initially presented it to be. Each of your posts were some sort of defense for the refocus option, and I was merely trying to communicate how those situations can be handled without refocus, which is why refocus was removed in 3.5. I honestly don't know why you found my replies to be offensive.

Additionally, I don't recall any sort of forums rule that game mechanics cannot be discussed in a request thread. Heck, most of the threads in these forums run off-topic in some form or another and no one else seems to get terribly upset over it.

Finally, I'm sorry to have upset you as much as you seem to be. I honestly didn't see why it had to escalate to this point. I'm especially confused by how you were arguing about 3.0 refocus, delay and ready actions, later admit you didn't know them that well, and then become angry with me because I was providing solutions to the absence of a refocus option that still fit within the scope of using 3.0 rules. In my defense, it seems that you were more interested in arguing minutiae rather than grasping the big picture of how you can use InitiativeTool without the refocus option in a 3.0 game.

I don't know what else to say. Sorry, I think? I'm not sure what you're expecting at this point.

By the way, I really don't care about having any sort of last word, and your closing statement was nothing more than an antagonistic trap. If I defend myself, I'm trying to get the last word and I'm a bad person for it. If I don't reply and clarify my intent, than the conversation was all for naught and truly pointless. It was an unfair setup as neither case is beneficial to either of us or this conversation.

[AidyBaby]

Aw, come on guys keep it up. It's never been so lively since Mr Josh arrived...

Oh, and stop talking in the back and pass me some popcorn.