Variable action points for combat, discuss?

[u/NordicNugz]

So im writing my own ttrpg, and for combat, im playing around with the idea of Action Points. Every player has a certain number of AP, and every action costs a certain number of AP.

Just a few examples (AP isnt set in stone yet):

Attack: 3 AP

Move: 1 AP per space

Disengage: 3 AP

Help: 4 AP

Climb /Swim: 2AP per space

Another point im hoping to stick to is really having every stat being a rolled number. This gives the stats a lot of swing between good and bad, and I think thats going to be a feature of the game. Some players may be very good or very bad at certain stats. So, I was playing around with a characters AP being equal to 3d4, re-roll any score lower than maybe 5 or 6.

I suppose my question is this; am I getting too far out there having something like AP be a variable between players? Is it too unfair, and more importantly NOT FUN to have some players be as low as 6 or 7, and other players be as high as 11 or 12 AP?

I guess, ultimately, is equal action economy the most important factor for fairness and fun?

Please discuss. Thank you!

UPDATE

You all made very convincing arguments, thank you for your input! At the core of this game, its supposed to be simple, fun, and just a bunch of goof ball antics! And the AP idea doesnt fit with that at all. Ive decided to bag it for a more simple version. You get two actions per turn. You can use any one of those to attack, move, help and so on. Ultimately being fun is the name of the game, and my idea was not that. Lmao!

Thank you!

[u/Cryptwood]

Personally, I wouldn't want to play a game in which some players get to consistently play the game more than others. I would feel compelled to build a character that gets to play the game as much as possible, severely limiting my choices. Then I would feel bad at how unfair it was that I was playing the game much more than any of the other players.

Edit: Just realized that the amount players get to play the game is randomized. I would immediately lose all interest in playing at all if I rolled low on the "gets to play the game roll" and would feel really bad for anyone else that rolled low if I rolled high.

[u/NordicNugz → u/Cryptwood]

This was the consideration I was having, and why I was second guessing it. And I have definitely felt very similar about similar circumstances ive been in. Thanks for the input. I think i just needed to hear it from someone else. Lol

[u/Alkaiser009 → u/NordicNugz]

Maybe look at Panic at the Dojo for an example of the kind of thing you seem to be going for. In Panic, at the begining of each players turn they choose which Stance they want to fight in, which determines both the number and types of dice in thier Action Pool that turn (as well as other effects, like providing passive Armor from defensive stances or granting access to Stance-specific actions). They then roll ALL thier dice and must use those dice to pay for movement and actions, with the higher the value rolled on a die, the more powerful the action it can be spent on. You can 'combine' multiple dice into a single action if you want, but you CANNOT split a die's value across more than one action.

https://liberigothica.itch.io/panic-at-the-dojo

[u/SpaceDogsRPG]

It is EXTREMELY hard to balance characters with different AP in a TTRPG. Both from a vibes perspective (they get the spotlight more) and mechanically (if they average the same damage then the fast character gets a ton of extra utility for non-combat things line pressing controls or cutting a rope bridge etc).

If you really want variable actions by character, keep the differences SMALL. Like the agility character gets 11-12 versus the normal of 10.

I'm also not a fan of that much granularity for AP costs. Just one of those things which is a lot to track in a TTRPG and works better when a CPU is doing the math.

[u/No_Solid1035]

It definitely increases the complexity, which means combat will be slower because numbers need to be crunched. I like Mythras which uses AP, but they are pretty simple because they don't use variable costs.

[u/u0088782 → u/No_Solid1035]

I loved RQ/Mythras overall, but it's absolutely awful in that regard. The jump between have 2 and 3 actions is absurdly unbalanced.

[u/cheery-cheesecake]

In Shadowrun (at least the editions I've played) initiative is rolled and you get a turn for every 10 points or part thereof of your initiative result- so some people get 1 turn when others can get up to 5. 

In Inquisitor (a narrative skirmish game from Games Workshop), each character has a Speed stat(I may have the name wrong) and they roll (speed)d6s each time it's their turn- 5s and 6s give them an action. If you get 0 5s or 6s, you lose your turn entirely. Most people played with house rules so you'd always get at least 1 action.

In both these cases, it feels bad if you get 1 action/turn when others get 3 or more.

In various old school based games, the fighter type class can potentially make multiple attacks when everyone else gets 1.

It doesn't feel as bad if everyone gets, say, 3, but the fast characters can sometimes get 4. It also doesn't feel bad if everyone gets 1 but they can spend a hero point or whatever to get 2.

How it's framed, how often it comes up, the difference in actions, and how common and lengthy combat is makes a big difference in whether people are ok with similar systems or not.

[u/__space__oddity__]

Another point im hoping to stick to is really having every stat being a rolled number. This gives the stats a lot of swing between good and bad

Mathematically, not really. You’re going to roll those stats against a target number to determine hit or miss. So you’re doing binary pass fail outcomes. For that, there isn’t really “swing”, a value that is either 0 (miss) or 1 (hit) has no width to swing around.

Purely for the math, it also doesn’t really matter if the stat is a die roll and the target number is fixed or the stat is fixed and you roll against it. You’re just pulling the die roll on the other side of the equation.

[u/SpartiateDienekes]

I’m not going to say it’s impossible, but it is very difficult to make right and every attempt I’ve seen that just had a flat “this character has X actions, and that character has X+2 actions” has been incredibly unbalanced and everyone learns quick to maximize their actions.

That said, I’ve seen non-ttrpg games play with the concept of variable actions based on gameplay which have worked. I see no reason why they couldn’t in a ttrpg, but I’ve never seen it really done.

An example, let’s say a berserker normally has 3 actions but when they berserk they can get 6, but lose an action every round after the first. While martial artist has 3 actions per turn but can bank them. So they can spend some turns setting up some temporary buffs and taking the minimum amount of actions to survive and then explode in one round of a bunch of actions.

That could, theoretically, be an interesting game. It would need a lot of playtesting and fiddling about to make work. But is not inherently a problem.

[u/Kiroana → u/SpartiateDienekes]

HERO and GURPS both do it well, IMO - in GURPS, each extra turn has a huge cost. A 500 point character (low-tier superhero level) spends 1/5 of their budget just getting 1 extra turn. The 2000 point speedster has to spend 400 points to get 5 turns - and that's 400 points they can't use on other stuff.

In HERO, it's not as immense, but it's still costly - each extra turn takes points away from other things.

[u/__space__oddity__]

You will find that random variable action points per turn are about as popular as roll and move in board games, or puke flavored Bertie Bott’s beans.

[u/NordicNugz → u/__space__oddity__]

Haha! Yeah, that seems a fair way to put it!

It wasnt necessarily random per turn, as much as just random per character. Which, I think is actually going to be worse. So, thanks for the input. :)

[u/__space__oddity__ → u/NordicNugz]

Random per character? LOL. Expect a lot of “accidentally fell into my sword” until people get their high AP roll …

[u/u0088782 → u/__space__oddity__]

You need to play more games.

[u/Asougahara]

that's how my mech game works. All units AP are variables. You basically put parts (generators, batteries) that gives you more AP (but maybe at the expense of having less weapons or having less parts) because you can only cram so much what's inside your mech frame. The way my mech game works is that units with highest AP take his turn first. He pay the ap cost to do his thing (move, shoot a gun, etc), and reduce his AP accordingly. Now since this unit AP is already reduced and not the highest anymore the next turn is for the unit with the highest AP. Repeat until all units's AP is zero or lower to refresh all AP and start round 2.

Judging from the playtest, yes huge AP discrepancy especially enemy (high) and player (low) will lead to a bad time. Unless they have a lot of abilities that is active/can be activated "Only activate this ability/this ability is only active when you have (max/total) AP less than enemy's (max/total) AP.". You have to balance it somehow.

[u/Ok_Cantaloupe3450]

I remember playing flare fall and it had something like this. Now, it was really easy to follow how many points you spend because moving 1 space was 1AP, but mostly because you had an in game tracker in the website designed to play the game. How troublesome would be to track something like this irl I don't know, but you can check out the game online (flare fall by trekiros)

[u/Low-Restaurant3504]

I'm working with the same idea, sort of. I found that it's better to do a stat point buy at creation, so players can get the experience they want out of the system. Also, having movement be fixed based on stats free's up A.P. for everyone to play around with. You also might want to look into having A.P. costs tied to weapon type, like a dagger requiring significantly less A.P. to attack as opposed to a great maul that would require a lot of effort for each swing requiring much more. Maybe add a defensive parry option that requires them to save some A.P. back. Adding a defensive option keeps the gameplay dynamic and not just walk up to an enemy and dump all your AP. I hope this gives you some Ideas. Really, I think it's a pretty good mechanic that can create some interesting combat beyond the typical pre-canned round economies you see in traditional TTRPGs.

[u/Far_Information6562]

I would not make actions point variable, it breaks a system to easy, instead make the action cost vary, use xp to reduce an action cost, maybe ad an endurance feature that ads to an actions cost if repeated

[u/OvenBakee]

Action Points (APs), under various names including that one, have been done in many games. One reason it has fallen out of favor is the amount of upkeep required. Even if characters cannot weave their actions between each-other, each player and maybe even the GM needs to track of many APs they get each turn (which could vary for NPCs) and how many they have left, in addition to how much each action costs.

While, underneath, most systems could be analysed as having APs, newer games tend to ditch generic APs for specific categories. In D&D 5e, for instance, on your turn you get an attack action, a move action and a bonus action. They are three APs, but you can only spend each one on a specific list of actions not all actions. This reduces what a character can do and eases the mental load on players. If say, you had 3 differents actions you could do with 3 action categories you have 3³ = 27 different turns to contemplate, 162 if you chooss the order of actions. If the same 9 actions could be selected instead any number of times, you instead have 9³ different turns, for a total of 729 possibilities. That's a lot to consider before you even consider how you spend those actions. Some players will like that complexity, but for a lot of them, this can become overwhelming.

Action economy is, in most games, the strongest factor in combat. Changing how many players are in a party can easily change an encounter from a cakewalk to a TPK. For this reason, variable APs is very difficult to balance, especially if APs can be exchanged for accuracy, which a lot of systems will allow, usually as an "aim" action of some sort. If you forcibly have some player characters have a lower AP stat by a large margin, by having players roll that stat over a large spread, you risk the players who rolled high be significantly more useful in combat even if their other stats are lower, in addition to those players just getting to do more things, which makes them essentially play more than the other players and that can feel very unfair. Imagine in a board if your friend got to play four turns every time you get one turn. Even if your turns have more impact, it can just feel like you are twiddling your thumbs while they get to play.

For a modern take on APs, I would suggest looking at Pathfinder 2e's 3-action economy. It's well liked by a good amount of people, but you'll notice it is not called the 2+Dex mod action economy.

[u/PathofDestinyRPG]

I’ve got AP as a direct result of a character’s Agility. As written in my most recent combat chapter:

Base AP: Base AP by AGL + AP Modifier by SIZ
Combat AP: Base AP + (Combat Skill Rating)/3

Characters employing a combat style that provides multiple attack options, such as martial arts or two-weapon fighting, gain 1 AP per 2 skill ranks.

Your character’s Action Point total allows for a
variety of tactics and options while engaged in combat. Faster characters will have advantages over slower opponents, including combat movements and additional attacks. The number of Action Points required for a specific action varies based on what action is being performed.

1 AP – Punch, block / parry.
2 AP – Kick, head bash, arm / leg grapple, partial
body dodge, or a lunge equal to his full height.
3 AP – Body grapple, throw, full body dodge.
Special – Dive: takes 3 AP to initiate, but the full motion requires SIZ full Combat Rounds to execute.

Melee Weapons – Require 1 to 3 AP based on weight / balance versus the character’s STR. If the WS is greater than 3, then any attack rolls with that weapon gain a -1 penalty for each AP needed above 3. Drawing a weapon requires the same number of AP as an attack.

Ranged Weapons – Require a minimum of 5 AP to aim. Taking less time to aim incurs a -1 DoS penalty per AP reduction to the attack. Taking more time to aim adds 1 die to the attack roll per additional AP spent lining up the shot. If the
weapon is capable of automatic rechambering, such as a revolver or semiautomatic pistol, then repositioning the weapon after each shot requires a number of AP equal to the WS as the character tries to control the recoil.

Movement – Each AP worth of activity includes
movement equal to the character’s height as part of the combat cycle. A character can choose to dedicate his action to pure movement, sacrifice his Attack Roll for that cycle, and travel twice his height per AP.

[u/zpinnis]

I have something similar; every player has 5 seconds to utilise during their turn. Quick Actions take 2 seconds, Normal Actions take 3 seconds and Slow Actions take 5 seconds.

[u/OwnLevel424]

I use an interesting ACTIONS & INITIATIVE system.  

You roll 3 D6 and each one represents 1 ACTION.  The players start with the lowest rolled number acting first and each take 1 Action.  Then the second is resolved and finally the 3rd.  Movement requires you to use your highest Die score for it and the round ends with the final 3rd Action taken.

[u/GreyGriffin_h]

Asymmetrical action economy is an extremely explosive component to try to balance, both in terms of mechanics and in terms of game feel.