Co-Operative Actions Mark 2

[Telarus_KSC]

[Mataxes]

Okay... but I didn't see where the PCs fit into the given example -- was the PC supposed to be the Captain? One of the crew?

[Banjo666]

[Banjo666]

[thezombiekat]

Breaking cooperation into a few categories of task could get us effective rules, I worry that there will be too many task types. And there will still be a lot of GM judgment in which type is permitted and how many people may assist.

First cooperation to reduce time taken.
This is easy, divide the construction time by the number of effective assistants. The GM may reduce the value of assistants without a minimum skill level (when building a stone wall str required is 10, anybody below counts as half an assistant) or say that they will not be useful at all (a warrior is of no assistance enchanting the doors of thrall). The total number of assistants is limited to those that may effectively work in the available space (again GM has final call).

Cooperation to create improved effect.
One character is declared the task leader, a number of assistance appropriate to the task type roll against a difficulty number and grant the leader +1 step for every success level they achieve. The GM sets the difficulty to assist and it may or may not have any relation to the primary difficulty.

Cooperation to provide the minimum number of hands.
This is a more general form of what the airship sailing rules tried to do (and did in far too complicated a manner).
The rules in the book require far too many rolls, it gets in the way when you have to role for every member of the crew.
Banjo666’s rules mean that just by piling on an additional 20 crew a barley competent captain could pull amazing acrobatic mauvers, hell a galion already has that many crew. Also the ship combat rules don’t have you assigning each crew member to a position (sailing, gins, boarding) so your not needing to reduse the number of effective crew.

Here is my idea.
The GM determines the normal number of people to use for the task (the normal watch size for a ship, normally 1/2 the total crew size)) with that many people the task may be attempted with nether bonus or penalty the following modifiers apply based on team (crew) size

Less than 10% imposable
Less than 25% -5
Less than 50% -3
Less than 75% -2
Less than 100% -1
More than 150% +1
More than 200% +2
More than 250% +3
More than 300% +4
More than 400% +5
Each additional +200% +1 step until the GM decides there isn’t space for that many people to work



It is worth noting that a task could benefit from more than one type of assistance. When building a ship for example the master shipwright could be assisted by 3 shipwrights (cooperating for improved effect) and 100 labourers (cooperating to reduce time taken)

The assistant may not even be rolling the same skill or the same difficulty. This example could be a party of adventurers
The captain of an airship is a sky raider using air sailing to performing a tricky mauver in heavy fog could be assisted by his crew at the ores (Cooperation to provide the minimum number of hands, possibly with a bonus for extras), as well as his first mate the troubadour calling a cadence (Cooperation to create improved effect, using a leadership talent, difficulty based on crew social defence) and a scout spotting in the bow (Cooperation to create improved effect, using perception with a difficulty based on the thickness of the fog.)



Ps. I note that my set of rules that covers almost every possibility did come to over a page, and calls for a lot of GM calls, just as I predicted in the other thread.

Ops, one more category.

cooperation to lift or move a heavy object.
Add the lifting capacities of all assistants together and compare to weight of object to be lifted. Reduce by 10-20 % if all assistants are not of similar height.

[Banjo666]

Interesting stuff but in all honestly, probably a bit more complicated than I hope to achieve

OK let's do a quick rethink....

What are we looking for co-operative actions to cover ? I think it is really only one. That is to reduce the time the task will take and/or make the task easier.

So breaking down a door or lifting/moving a heavy weight or building a house or building airship or digging a fire break can be done by one character given enough time but are much easier if you have assistance.
Sailing a ship really does not have a time requirement, or best stated as taking "x" time per roll where "x" is a arbitary unit of time depending on circumstances. Having more or at least enough crew is what makes things easier.

So here is my take on it.

The player asks the GM if someone can help him with the task at hand.

Step 1: The GM decides if the task at hand would benefit from "many hands make light work" and this really should be pretty obvious.

Step 2: The GM decides what attribute, talent or skill is most appropriate to the task (players can always make suggestions)and the maximum number of PCs/NPCs that can assist.

Step 3: The PCs decide who is most suitable to lead the effort, obviously the PC with the "best" talent etc., and who will assist this "primary" character.

Step 4: The GM sets a TN based on the difficulty of the task and decides if a success on the Primary character's roll will reduce the time and/or difficulty of the task.

Step 5: Apply the result, which is dependent on the aim of the task.

Now I will be first to admit that this is very similar to what is written in the rules now about determining difficulty numbers by the GM but it just adds a bit more clarification and, hopefully, a few examples. Also it adds actual mention of co-operative actions to a future addition of the rules.

Now the big question for me is how we can achieve this in a balanced, relatively simple, system. And this is what this thread is all about

My idea at the moment is two different methods depending upon the number of assistants involved.

For 4 or less assistants, each assistant rolls against the difficulty number and each success level they achieve adds +1 to the Primary character's roll. With a pathetic result subtracting 1 from the roll.

With more than 4 assistants just add a set number to the Primary character's roll. This could be +1 per assistant or +1 per 5 or 10 assistants, depending on the task at hand.

When reducing time the GM could set a base time and a minimum time for completion. The base time can be reduced by co-operation but no matter how many assistants you rope in to help the time can not be reduced below the minimum time.

These are just some starting ideas

[Telarus_KSC]

I see an interesting thread running through this discussion. Let's see if examining it helps.

1) We only really want to roll a test if there's a Conflict and an Obstacle. If the 13th Circle Weaponsmith has all the time in the world to design the ultimate-'whatever', you can be pretty sure he's doing a great job. But if there are Horrors cracking the Air Dome, and half of his Forge's assistants are dead or mad... that's the interesting point. That's where we want a tense moment at the table.

2) We want to involve as many Players as possible. Most of the time, when a player says 'collaborate' they mean with another person playing the game. Looking at thezombiekat's scenario of an airship being piloted through turbulent fog, we see he find spots for the other Named Characters (PC-level of narrative importance, they could be players.. we don't know). And the activities presented are creative, and tense in themselves. Good spots for rolling dice (because success wins bonuses, and a Pathetic Result allows the GM to introduce complications). We also see that there is a Leader is most of these situations, even if other important actions are delegated to the Scout or Troubadour.

3) Help from secondary characters. We may have all of the airsailor crew's Names and a word or two about them written somewhere, but when we're invested in the tense night-time maneuver in fog, we just want a measure of coordinated action. I think a key idea here is that a team who all has the same skill can be considered "competent" enough that we don't even need to roll for everyday activities. If there are enough competent people around, it gets done. (This is also the line of thought that led me to my mass combat system.. I'll see about getting that thread started today.. after work and coffee).

4) We want to limit the number of rolls (our issue with the airsailor example). The Key Character should be making a final roll, with bonuses, or complications from the others involved. Named Characters might contribute +1 bonus per Result Level achieved on their own delegated task. Mass coordinated action might contribute +1 per character involved... but I'm not sure I like that. How about the "crew" make 1 roll, and contribute as if a Named Character (+1 per Result Level)? This assumes that the "team" or "Crew" is always competent at what they do, and we're only really rolling for them to see the if there are any out of the ordinary performances. Then, if we have more than enough people there (say, twice as many), roll twice, and take the better roll! (Your stakes are only up to a +4 bonus to the key character, so this seems fair.)

[Slimcreeper]

I'm not the rules monkey I once was, but I will throw this in there.

When attempting something that the character could just try over and over again until he succeeds, but time is a factor, I use this method: Roll, if you make it you make it. If you miss, subtract the roll result from the DN. The difference is the number of units of time necessary to accomplish it. Example: if the time frame is 1) measured in rounds, 2) the DN is 15, 3) and the roll result was 10, then the character would take 5 rounds to get it done.

If the character is really unhappy with the result (the fair maiden will bleed out before he completes the bandage), he can roll again one time, but it requires blood magic to push the ability. The second roll follows the same rules as the first one, but it will never make the task take longer.

The relevant part is the bit about how long it takes if you miss a roll. Could be useful.

[Banjo666]

IMHO we must have a divide between a group conducting a series of individual actions that may lead to a final result, which we have the rules for already, and those actions which are truely benefit from a group working on the same project at the same time, using, basically, the same attributes, talents or skills. Restricting ourselves to this limited aim, should make our task easier.

For example, a "group" breaking down a door, whether by brute force or using a battering ram is a co-operative task. A chef cooking a meal, with assistants chopping up the vegies and meat etc., although it does involve some co-ordination, from the chef, is really a series of individual tasks leading to a final result.

As Telarus has pointed out we only want to roll when it is important to the plot, otherwise a competent group can be expected to complete the task, whatever it is, in the time allowed without any rolls.

An Airship crew is called a "crew" because they are a group of people working together.