Yep, that's pretty much impulse movement you have going there.  I like such systems, and hope you have far more success than I did (players with a wargame backgroung might help)!  I'm right there with you on liking the feel of such systems.

By re-scaling and expressing moves in terms of "hexes per segment," you get rid of a lot of knarly calculating or "move 3 the first segment, 2 the second, 3 the third"-type rules.  Very nice.  I think the movement portion of your system will be very clean.

I wouldn't worry too much about fixing the exact time each segment represents, btw.  It's hard for me to explain well, but that's where my system hit conceptual pitfalls...I started implementing actions that took more than one segment, then half-actions, then...it got ridiculous because I mentally chained myself to the time concept, and was forcing my mechanics to work within that.

I use a hex-map and whatever minis or counters are at hand -- typically minis.

Each combat round is 3-5 seconds, or a frame in a comic book. Each hex is 2 meters across.

Everyone rolls initiative (on a d12) and adds their modifier. Players act in that order, with some options for delaying a move, or holding your action and preempting opponents.

Movement rules are similar to Hero System in that each character has a base movement score (say 6 hexes). He can move this many hexes in a round, or half that and attack. Other actions fall into the categories of full actions, half actions, or free actions. The attack action is special because it ends your turn; you cannot attack and then move away.

Units do not exert a zone of control per se, but once you attack someone, you have engaged them. An engaged opponent can move one hex, but must remain adjacent to you. If he tries to disengage, you get a free attack (and he gets a -2 to his defense as a penalty).

You can freely disengage if you have some means of movement that takes you out of reach of your attacker. So you could jump off the side of a boat, or fly away. Characters with acrobatics can make a skill test to tumble out of an engagement. The other way to disengage without penalty is to have an ally move adjacent to your attacker. If you have help, you can disengage with no attack.

The system has rules for flanking, multiple attackers on a single opponent, the effect of weapon length, high ground, obstructions, and so on. It sounds fairly complicated, but I think it hangs together fairly well in play and is quick enough.

Quote from: KenHRYep, that's pretty much impulse movement you have going there.  I like such systems, and hope you have far more success than I did (players with a wargame backgroung might help)!  I'm right there with you on liking the feel of such systems.

By re-scaling and expressing moves in terms of "hexes per segment," you get rid of a lot of knarly calculating or "move 3 the first segment, 2 the second, 3 the third"-type rules.  Very nice.  I think the movement portion of your system will be very clean.

I wouldn't worry too much about fixing the exact time each segment represents, btw.  It's hard for me to explain well, but that's where my system hit conceptual pitfalls...I started implementing actions that took more than one segment, then half-actions, then...it got ridiculous because I mentally chained myself to the time concept, and was forcing my mechanics to work within that.

Oh hey, that's a very good tip!  

I will de-emphasize the time element.  Thanks!!

Chris's post touched on something pertaining to map and minis gaming: how do you handle facing?

My last few homebrews have used a fluid facing mechanic that works as follows (it works better in practice than it sounds in writing):

1. Your figure may change facing as many times as you like during your move/segment.

2. When moving, a figure rear facing matches the side from which it entered its new hex/square for purposes of interception (i.e. if someone decides to attack the moving guy in the middle of his move)

3. After an attack against your figure is resolved, you can change its facing toward the direction from which the attack came if you wish.

"Zones of control" only extend to the hexes/squares the figure is currently facing.

Flanking and rear attacks got a bonus, as per usual.

Nothing earth-shattering, but I like facing rules.  By making such rules less rigid than some I've seen, though (by allowing for on-the-fly adjustments to meet new threats), it captures more of that fluidity you're looking for with your merge-movement system.

Oh, and with regard to the time element: its worth considering for working out movement rates and such, but don't be chained to the concept, both for the pitfalls you can hit in design, and for the quibbling that inevitably happens in actual play ("What do you mean I can't do this in 2 seconds...let me show you!").  Recently I've gone with the indeterminate time round, where the only definition is that a round represents a slice of time that would allow your character to do what they just did.  I assume all combats take about 10 minutes of time, unless it "felt" longer in play (i.e. GM fiat!).

Quote from: cmagounI use a hex-map and whatever minis or counters are at hand -- typically minis.

Each combat round is 3-5 seconds, or a frame in a comic book. Each hex is 2 meters across.

Everyone rolls initiative (on a d12) and adds their modifier. Players act in that order, with some options for delaying a move, or holding your action and preempting opponents.

Movement rules are similar to Hero System in that each character has a base movement score (say 6 hexes). He can move this many hexes in a round, or half that and attack. Other actions fall into the categories of full actions, half actions, or free actions. The attack action is special because it ends your turn; you cannot attack and then move away.

Units do not exert a zone of control per se, but once you attack someone, you have engaged them. An engaged opponent can move one hex, but must remain adjacent to you. If he tries to disengage, you get a free attack (and he gets a -2 to his defense as a penalty).

You can freely disengage if you have some means of movement that takes you out of reach of your attacker. So you could jump off the side of a boat, or fly away. Characters with acrobatics can make a skill test to tumble out of an engagement. The other way to disengage without penalty is to have an ally move adjacent to your attacker. If you have help, you can disengage with no attack.

The system has rules for flanking, multiple attackers on a single opponent, the effect of weapon length, high ground, obstructions, and so on. It sounds fairly complicated, but I think it hangs together fairly well in play and is quick enough.

Cool.  There are several things I like about this.  The disengagement without penalty if the attacker has multiple opponents is good.   The Move Half And Attack rule is something I'm doing too except my rule is that you can attack as long as you haven't used up all of your movement points (Merge-Movement method).   I also have terrain as a factor in terms of movement as well.  For High Ground vs. Low Ground I'm allowing for an Attack Level / Armor Class bonus, rather than apply that to movement, though now that I think about it ... Up hill movement should have a minus, and down hill should have a plus.   Good good.   Thanks!  

Quote from: KenHRChris's post touched on something pertaining to map and minis gaming: how do you handle facing?

I use a reasonably fluid facing system as well: A character can face any direction he likes during his move. When someone approaches him, he can change his facing IF the opponent starts his move anywhere in front of him. If the opponent starts his move from behind (the rear 180), the character must maintain his current facing and can be flanked.

I gotta check out Runebearer; I like what you've described in this thread!

So...ummm...where can I find it?

Quote from: KenHRI gotta check out Runebearer; I like what you've described in this thread!

So...ummm...where can I find it?

Well, much to my misery, I was informed that my link is broken. So... I either need to find some place to host the latest copy, or I need an email address to which I can send the files.

I'll send you a PM so as not to derail VB's thread here (which is great, btw).

Quote from: KenHRChris's post touched on something pertaining to map and minis gaming: how do you handle facing?

My last few homebrews have used a fluid facing mechanic that works as follows (it works better in practice than it sounds in writing):

1. Your figure may change facing as many times as you like during your move/segment.

2. When moving, a figure rear facing matches the side from which it entered its new hex/square for purposes of interception (i.e. if someone decides to attack the moving guy in the middle of his move)

3. After an attack against your figure is resolved, you can change its facing toward the direction from which the attack came if you wish.

"Zones of control" only extend to the hexes/squares the figure is currently facing.

Flanking and rear attacks got a bonus, as per usual.

Nothing earth-shattering, but I like facing rules.  By making such rules less rigid than some I've seen, though (by allowing for on-the-fly adjustments to meet new threats), it captures more of that fluidity you're looking for with your merge-movement system.

Oh, and with regard to the time element: its worth considering for working out movement rates and such, but don't be chained to the concept, both for the pitfalls you can hit in design, and for the quibbling that inevitably happens in actual play ("What do you mean I can't do this in 2 seconds...let me show you!").  Recently I've gone with the indeterminate time round, where the only definition is that a round represents a slice of time that would allow your character to do what they just did.  I assume all combats take about 10 minutes of time, unless it "felt" longer in play (i.e. GM fiat!).

Good points about facing.  The way I do it now is that you have a facing direction that is a dot located at the forward position of the counter.  This shows which direction you're facing (you can see the dots in the gif file on my website if you look carefully).   To change direction where you are not moving forward (ie - to pivot) costs 1 movement to spin around (or per hex direction shift, but I think I prefer 180 degree pivot = 1 Movement point).  You can also shift direction while moving forward without a cost unless you want to reverse direction, which also costs one movement point.

As for time, yup yup.  I'm totally with you on that.  

Thanks!

Edit:  http://www.elthos.com/2008/Elthos_MergeMove_Example.htm  (in case you breezed over it)

I saw the example...nice animation!

My rationale for allowing free facing changes had to do with the chaotic nature of melee.  A combatant could conceivably be face every direction at some point in the span of even a six second round.  So the free change allows for that, and it keeps players from feeling hamstrung by the number of movement points their character has (that's a perceptual thing, but damn if it didn't have an impact on my group!).

You still get some tactical nuance this way, too, especially in very close quarters or when a figure is surrounded: turn to face a new threat, exposing your flank to the old threat, or finish what you've already started?

By the way, do you have a system document online anywhere?  I'm always interested in seeing how others handle issues like this.

Quote from: KenHRI saw the example...nice animation!

My rationale for allowing free facing changes had to do with the chaotic nature of melee.  A combatant could conceivably be face every direction at some point in the span of even a six second round.  So the free change allows for that, and it keeps players from feeling hamstrung by the number of movement points their character has (that's a perceptual thing, but damn if it didn't have an impact on my group!).

You still get some tactical nuance this way, too, especially in very close quarters or when a figure is surrounded: turn to face a new threat, exposing your flank to the old threat, or finish what you've already started?

By the way, do you have a system document online anywhere?  I'm always interested in seeing how others handle issues like this.

Hmmm... actually that sounds pretty damn reasonable.   Give Pivoting away as a freebee anyway.   It's nicer and I suspect the players will like it better anyway.   Good call.

As for documentation online... not yet.  I have a rules book which I'm finalizing but I'm trying to playtest like a madman before I release the rules into the wild.   I'll post some notice or other on theRPGSite when I put the book out there.

Unless of course you'd be interested and willing to look the book over in some sort of official capacity and provide feedback as part of my review process... in which case I'd be up for that!   Fo Shizzle!     If not, no problem.   I know everyone is really busy with their own stuff (just like me at the moment).  hehe.

Ah, I appreciate the offer, and despite really wanting to offer help, I'm swamped between the band, work and gaming.  It'd be one of those best intentions, but no delivery situations, and I don't want to opt in and not be able to carry my weight.

I'd be happy to proofread when you've gotten a final draft down the road and some time may have opened up on my end, though.  Despite my awful grammar (and word choice, and punctuation, and proclivity for long and rambling parenthetical asides) on message boards, I am pretty decent in that area.

It was buried a bit more than I thought:

Drawing rooms on hex paper

This is a biggie:

Non-Euclidian Geometry in 4e?

But, it has a metric tonne of good info hidden among the arguments.

Quote from: StormBringerIt was buried a bit more than I thought:

Drawing rooms on hex paper

This is a biggie:

Non-Euclidian Geometry in 4e?

But, it has a metric tonne of good info hidden among the arguments.

Yah.  Sweet!  Thank you for the links.  I'm slogging through the second one now.   Interesting stuff, definitely.   The first one was kinda helpful too, and might just turn out the way I decide to go after all.  I can live with Hex Maps for Dungeons I think.  The only issue I've ever had is the half grids along the walls.  But really, how many times has it ever actually turned out to be a game-problem?  Um... never?   Heh.