So I have this crazy idea. How would you run a classic "cup and ball" style chase scene in an rpg? By cup and ball, I'm talking about the old street performers trick with one ball and three cups. I'm sure most of you are familiar with the scene in Raiders of the Lost Ark, as Indy chases after a gang of thugs handing off Marion in a woven basket.  The macguffin in this case would be a small artifact, easily concealable. We're also talking about a larger group involved in the chase. The players, plus four different groups of bad guys. I've got a chase mechanic, but how do I keep a running game of bait, switch, and swipe going that doesn't feel contrived?

Tom

I've had a chance to mull things over a bit.  Still needs some tightening, so any suggestions/advice would be helpful.

Rather than the sort of cup and ball/slight of hand, I'm starting to see this play out a bit more like a traditional chase with a slightly different objective: to be the last one holding on to the macguffin.

So the chase begins with Bad Guy A in possession of the macguffin.  All sides give chase through the twisting, narrow city streets at night.  Characters have a couple of different options during the chase.  They can distract (or mislead) the bad guys in pursuit, defend the character with the item, or pursue the character with the item.  When engaging the character with the item, they can do a normal attack, grapple (or trip), or attempt to strip the item away.  Some characters may attempt to cut off the character with the item using their Streetwise skill to get ahead of it and ambush the target.

Meanwhile, the different NPC groups are angling to capture the item and make off with it as well.  So they can do each of these actions as well.  At times, you might end up with multiple opponents in a single round all angling to grab the item and make off with it.  This will probably come down to a simple opposed roll with the highest result being in possession of the item (especially when it comes to NPC v NPC–no need to make it more complicated than that).

So...thoughts?  Am I on the right track here?  Making things too complicated?  Any way to make this more dynamic?

Tom

How would you determine when someone could try to steal the item? Are you going to be tracking distance? Or is everybody going to just be able to mob the item holder all the time until they take it?

Quote from: mAcular Chaotic;890528How would you determine when someone could try to steal the item? Are you going to be tracking distance? Or is everybody going to just be able to mob the item holder all the time until they take it?

The chase rules already handle distance abstractly with markers. If there are 0 markers between you and the target, they are in melee range. If the target reached 6 markers between it and you, it escapes. Ranged weapons are possible up to 1 or 2 markers distance.

As for who can steal the item, that's a very good question. I'm inclined to only let one person (from each group in range) attempt to strip the item from the possessor.  The other characters can lend aid and grant a bonus. All sides roll off and the one with the highest roll has the item. This seems to make sense, though I'm wondering what skill the item possessor should roll to hold onto the item.

Tom

Quote from: Blusponge;890499So...thoughts?  Am I on the right track here?  Making things too complicated?

I think that you're on the right track, but I also think that things are too complicated.  Your first idea would have required a very contrived situation for things to be even slightly believable.  This one is better, but I think that by introducing so many variables, in practice it will either become a mess, or collapse into something a lot simpler like a big brawl.

My personal opinion is that, if you want it to be interesting, keep it fairly restrained.  For instance, imagine that you have four NPCs carrying something heavy at a quick trot, the party trying to grab that thing, and another group of four trying to grab the thing.  The original group of NPCs is trying to get it around the block to a waiting cart; if they succeed, they will get away.  Two people can carry the thing slowly, four quickly.

In this case, the original group carrying the item will act according to the PCs.  If the party stops to defeat their competition, the bearers will try to get to the cart as fast as possible.  If the party keeps pursuing in part, the bearers will leave two behind to try to slow them down.  Meanwhile, the four competitors will attack the PCs.  However, if they see the original bearers getting away, they may propose a temporary truce.

That's a simpler situation, but there's still quite a bit going on.  You have three separate groups, including the PCs, and each of them has decisions to make in competition with the other two.  Throw in the randomness of the dice, and there's a lot that can happen without adding more factions and a long chase through dark alleys with tripping and grappling.

That's just my opinion, obviously.  Still, I've found that you really don't have to get too complicated.  The players will come up with all sorts of unpredictable plans (good and otherwise), and that will make things plenty interesting.  Especially once you start chucking dice.  Better to give them three tactical elements that are guaranteed to be dynamic and important than ten, some of which may turn out to be boring, unimportant or hard to juggle.

I think it's potentially a good idea for a fun and interesting situation, but it can be tricky to pull off depending on the situation and the rules system.

I would try to model things fairly realistically, because that's the way I almost always approach making rules to represent situations. So I would be trying to make rules with considerations such as:

* The distance between the people watching, and what they are doing (standing still and just watching the McGuffin, or being distracted by running or fighting or watching other things, like other chasers) is a big factor in determining whether someone manages to keep track of where the thing is. Distracting attention (and/or blocking line of sight) is what makes most magic tricks work, in reality.

* Taking an object from someone else carrying it isn't made artificially easy for the sake of trying to force the situation to be more like Tag. However there are some realistic ways to achieve something like it, as holding the McGuffin might make it hard to fight, or it might be possible for people to do something like yell "Look - he's stolen an artifact from the temple!" and have the crowd try to capture the person holding it, leaving a chance to take it yourself ... but then you have to slip away from the without them noticing you're trying to steal it too...

* If there are "cups" like baskets in a market that all look alike, in order to keep track of which one it's in, someone probably needs to keep an eye directly on the one, and minimize things blocking sight to it, and their movement and so on. I'd have at least some guidelines for that.

I've run various situations that remind me of this. Running GURPS, there are some rules and mechanics that are fairly close to what's needed, for perception, sleight of hand, and wrestling and grabbing things from other people. But also it helps if the game world situation provides strong disincentives to doing other things, like killing the competition and then just picking the thing up. This can be public crowds, law enforcement, or having the competition actually be semi-allies that you're not allowed to kill, and/or having the object be fragile, or other reasons why overt or excessive violence isn't a good option.

For instance, maybe there are a few groups/individuals trying to get the thing, with different skills, but they all want to avoid public discovery (and/or discovery by law enforcement or royal guards or allies who won't understand, or something), and they are just a few steps behind a wave of investigators, so they have to stay ahead of that pursuit while also competing to hold the thing, and that can bring them through a variety of locations and situations, and eventually to some form of escape (safe location or way to escape and lose pursuit and/or detection).

Thanks guys,

Skrag, I'm using a slight variant on the chase rules from 7th Sea.  It's pretty simple.  There are five "spaces" of distance: near, close, distant, far, and very far.  All those engaged in the chase make an opposed roll (say, Athletics v Athletics). If the pursuer rolls higher, he closes the distance gap 1 space for every 2 successes.  If the pursued rolls higher, he increases the distance gap by 1 space for every 2 successes.  If there is not change in the distance between the two parties, something unusual happens (roll d10 on the chart).  That's pretty much it.  It's pretty fast and easy, though I'm hoping to push it a bit to make it a bit more dramatic than just "roll the dice", repeat.

In my head, I have a running chase much like something out of the more recent Bond movies.  (Right.  Don't we all.) With bad guys coming from different directions and the pursuit going from the street, to the rooftops, back down and into the sewers.  It's the East End, so very slummy with narrow alleys, pitched roofs, open sewer grates, and all manner of atmosphere.

Having thought about it, I'm only going to track the football (the relic) and the players' position(s).  Maybe the one villain.  Each round, there will be a chance that one of the different factions will step in and interfere with the PCs and/or the pursued.  Of course the more I do that, the more dice rolling intrudes, which slows down the whole process, which becomes counter productive.  Maybe I'll let players swap penalties to their followup roll for damage.  I dunno.  

I think if I can scrap together some time before game night, I'm going to play through a solo chance just to better wrap my brain around what I'm trying to do.

Tom

Step 1 to running a great chase scene in RPGs. If the game your playing has chase rules, find those pages in the rulebook, tear them out, crumple them up, throw them in a waste basket, then toss a lit match on top of it.

You don't need to abstract things into oblivion. All it does is cloud the process. What you need to do is think.

If the pursued is faster than the pursuers, why wouldn't they just automatically get away?

If the pursuer is faster than the pursued, why wouldn't they just automatically catch who they're after?

If both are the same speed, why wouldn't this just be a perpetual stalemate to be decided by "endurance" or some such?

When you answer these questions, you're starting to get the ideas that will go into a good RPG chase scenario. Fuck Bond. Those writers are a bunch of pussies. They have the convenience of being able to script everyone's actions, and it'd still be as boring as shit if it weren't for the director and post-production refining it further. No matter how hard you try to shoehorn the Bond model for tabletop play, the best result you can hope for is, "Well, I guess it's better than nothing."

What are some other things you'd like to see in a chase? How do you make it happen among thinking adversaries?

What the hell does it mean to "cut 'em off at the pass?" Are you telling me the pursued are arbitrarily taking a longer route when a shorter one is available? No. The good chases allow some parties to take a shortcut because their modes of transport, while perhaps of inferior speed in the general case, are able to navigate some shortcut that the otherwise superior modes of transport cannot manage.

What else? How the hell does the pursuer know where the pursued is going with enough certainty that taking a "short cut" even makes sense? It only works if the pursuers can somehow surmise where the pursued are heading. If they have some idea of the motives of the pursued, what objectives they might find important during the chase, then short cuts make sense. This applies to conveniently-placed Bond extras joining the chase from all sorts of directions as well.

I would never abstract time, distance, or velocity. It's simply a matter that all the other variables, obstacles, mode of transport, knowledge of the area, understanding the other party's motives, and so on trump this from being a simple physiques equation.

Wow, Luna. Tell me how you really feel.

On this one, we are just going to have to agree to disagree. The chase is a stable of the swashbuckling genre, and I've run just enough of them to know they can be fun. I just haven't run them with this system before, so it's fiddle and test time.

My chase rules amount to a 1 page cheat sheet, so ripping them out wouldn't be too heartbreaking. Having run them now, I've made some adjustments. What's missing is good flavor–things that make it more than just a series of competitive rolls. Here it's a battle between the abstract (the pursuer encounters a "low barrier") and the absolute ("a stack of barrels and crates lies in your path"). That's what I'm continuing to deal with. It's a fun exercise.

BTW, the chase scene the other night lasted all of about five rounds, with plenty for the players to do. And yes, "cut them off at the pass" did come up! When dealing with characters with different knowledge of the location (the East End of London), it isn't unreasonable that one character might be able to do such a thing.

Right now, I keep coming back to my super simple quick chase table:
D10 event
1-2 pursuer hazard
2-4 pursuer opportunity
5-6 nothing
7-8 pursued opportunity
9-0 pursued hazard

That seems quick and abstract enough to work from.

Anyway, I'm rambling now. I'll have something more on this by the time the week is out.

Tom

Quote from: Blusponge;892446Wow, Luna. Tell me how you really feel.

On this one, we are just going to have to agree to disagree. The chase is a stable of the swashbuckling genre, and I've run just enough of them to know they can be fun.

Where's the disagreement? I have nothing against playing out a chase scene. They are fun when done well. I just don't think chase rules in RPGs are the best way to get great chase scenes. As you say....

QuoteWhat's missing is good flavor–things that make it more than just a series of competitive rolls.

So how do you get there? By going back and answering my questions. How does this chase scene even make sense? Why wouldn't it be resolved with a simple motion equation?

Oh, and opposed rolls? Ew. I think they promote bad habits in gaming. Especially in a chase, the characters involved can't directly affect one another. That's kind of what makes it a chase. Rather, everything should be treated as player vs environment. The pursued may take action to alter the environment (which may or may not require a check) to create an obstacle that the pursuers must deal with (perhaps also requiring a check).

"Create obstacle" should not be a valid choice. The pursued has to do something specific according to the scenery. That means you, as GM, do have to set the scene. You may even want to bring in that red-headed step child of the RPG world, "wandering monsters" to add a random complication to also shake things up. You should have a custom table tailored to the scenery. Bonus points if the chase goes through multiple distinct areas that present their own hazards and risks.

In short, you do your job as GM, ditch all the fancy rules and stick just to the core mechanic, and you'll have something that's versatile while avoiding the generic. Generic is really the enemy here. Even a table like this....

QuoteRight now, I keep coming back to my super simple quick chase table:
D10 event
1-2 pursuer hazard
2-4 pursuer opportunity
5-6 nothing
7-8 pursued opportunity
9-0 pursued hazard

... can be bad. How do you interpret the table? How do you interpret hazard vs opportunity? What if the players take a hazard presented and turn it into an opportunity? I'm sure you wouldn't begrudge them that, but then your table really isn't true to life, is it? If hazard vs opportunity is going to be subjective anyway, why bother with such table entries? Go with something specific, like "Fruit stand" or "Two guys carrying a large pane of glass across a busy street." Let it be seen whether these are hazards or opportunities.

If you'd like, use your table as a meta table when constructing the real table you're going to use in play. Think up four specific things that you anticipate would be a hazard for the pursuers. Then four that you anticipate could be an opportunity. Four things that don't have any obvious or immediate effect on the chase but highlight the setting. Four things that could provide an opportunity for the pursued. Four things that could be a hazard for the pursued. Now go down the list of 20 items, writing the numbers 1, 2, 3, etc. This is your "wandering monster" table to use periodically during the chase. None of the entries should automatically be helpful or a hindrance to any party. They should just be presented matter-of-factly and be left to the characters to react accordingly.

Quote from: Lunamancer;892455Where's the disagreement? I have nothing against playing out a chase scene. They are fun when done well. I just don't think chase rules in RPGs are the best way to get great chase scenes.

I actually think the 7th Sea chase rules were light enough to deliver a pretty good chase, which is why I tried to stick close to those when I started working on my chase rules.  It's actually when I play with ideas to break out of that model that I feel I get into to trouble.  Whether that's good or bad remains to be seen.

QuoteOh, and opposed rolls? Ew. I think they promote bad habits in gaming. Especially in a chase, the characters involved can't directly affect one another. That's kind of what makes it a chase. Rather, everything should be treated as player vs environment. The pursued may take action to alter the environment (which may or may not require a check) to create an obstacle that the pursuers must deal with (perhaps also requiring a check).

Exactly.  This is what the old James Bond RPG did back in the 80s.  Each round, the players would "bid" the difficulty higher before the final roll off.  Night's Black Agents does something similar.  Witch Hunter (the 1st edition, away) allowed the Pursued (who rolls first) to sacrifice successes to create a die penalty for the Pursuers.  I played with adding a back and forth wager between the two sides, but my test player didn't think it would add enough to the dynamic vs. the time drag of players deciding the odds.  I still like the idea, though, and may revisit it at some point.

Quote"Create obstacle" should not be a valid choice. The pursued has to do something specific according to the scenery. That means you, as GM, do have to set the scene. You may even want to bring in that red-headed step child of the RPG world, "wandering monsters" to add a random complication to also shake things up. You should have a custom table tailored to the scenery. Bonus points if the chase goes through multiple distinct areas that present their own hazards and risks.

That's exactly what I'm doing.  My dilemma is there are several fun choices, but none of them really play well together:
1) Both sides roll.  If neither position changes, something interesting happens (roll d10 on table).  1-4 affect the pursuer, 7-0 affect the pursued.
2) Both sides wager and then roll off.  Describe the results as suit the scene.
3) One side (the pursuer) can wager successes (or dice), creating a penalty for the pursuing players (reflects the pursued using the environment–creating or exploiting obstacles–to make things more difficult for the pursuers).
4) If the players roll more 1s than successes (this is a dice pool game), a complication occurs.  Roll on the table.

The more I roll these things around in my head, only the first gives me a consistently (and surprising) dynamic environment.  The rest either require too many subtables (and subsequent rolls that eat up time and slow down the chase).  Once you start adding the other options on top of the first, the less sense the first option makes.

QuoteIn short, you do your job as GM, ditch all the fancy rules and stick just to the core mechanic, and you'll have something that's versatile while avoiding the generic. Generic is really the enemy here.

Yeah, generic is the enemy.  Which is, in part, why I started this thread.

QuoteEven a table like this....
... can be bad. How do you interpret the table? How do you interpret hazard vs opportunity? What if the players take a hazard presented and turn it into an opportunity? I'm sure you wouldn't begrudge them that, but then your table really isn't true to life, is it? If hazard vs opportunity is going to be subjective anyway, why bother with such table entries? Go with something specific, like "Fruit stand" or "Two guys carrying a large pane of glass across a busy street." Let it be seen whether these are hazards or opportunities.

Actually, it's not really that bad.  It just boils things down to its most simplistic level and gives the GM maximum flexibility when setting the scene.  But I do agree, having an actual table of events makes me feel more comfortable and protects the players against me having a bad night.

QuoteIf you'd like, use your table as a meta table when constructing the real table you're going to use in play. Think up four specific things that you anticipate would be a hazard for the pursuers. Then four that you anticipate could be an opportunity. Four things that don't have any obvious or immediate effect on the chase but highlight the setting. Four things that could provide an opportunity for the pursued. Four things that could be a hazard for the pursued. Now go down the list of 20 items, writing the numbers 1, 2, 3, etc. This is your "wandering monster" table to use periodically during the chase. None of the entries should automatically be helpful or a hindrance to any party. They should just be presented matter-of-factly and be left to the characters to react accordingly.

Which I could totally do.  Right now, here are the options I'm looking at:
Roll d10 to determine target of event (pursuer or pursued); Roll d10 on events table.
Roll 2d10 and take the results as they stand (2-10 affect the pursuer, 11-20 affect the pursued).
Now which of these yields the most satisfactory results.
And do you still allow for the other details.

Now here is an idea that might work well with blending options 1 and 3 above.  If the event affects the pursued, they can sacrifice successes beyond the TN to add a die penalty to the (nearest) pursuer.  I kinda like that.  It allows the pursued to exploit the environment as you described, without making the event redundant.  Hmmm...

Tom

Quote from: Blusponge;892446What's missing is good flavor–things that make it more than just a series of competitive rolls. Here it's a battle between the abstract (the pursuer encounters a "low barrier") and the absolute ("a stack of barrels and crates lies in your path"). That's what I'm continuing to deal with. It's a fun exercise.

It sounds like what you are looking for is a mechanism to add additional detail to flesh out the abstract results other than the two standard methods.

• Standard Method 1: create an extremely detailed map (typically prepared ahead of time). Downsides: Requires preparation ahead of time. Requires a high ratio of planning to play time.
  

• Standard Method 2: use in the moment improvisation to specify the obstacles. Downsides: Sometimes inspiration doesn't strike. Prone to repetition and cliche
  

One mechanism is to add additional tables that create more detail or to create a nested table. Let me illustrate what I mean.

Additional tables would give ideas for specific things for the generic obstacle. For an abstract result like "the pursuer encounters a "low barrier" you would have a small table that lists sample low barriers.

1 - stack of boxes or barrels
2 - passed out drunk
3 - pig or half a dozen chickens
4 - vegetable cart
5 - vendor's table
6 - fence or low hedge

The GM can supplement these results with location specific spur of the moment improvisation. The downside to this is you may need to do a lot of table lookups.

Another option is to nest the detailed tables into a larger table. Taking your simple D10 table:

QuoteD10 event
1-2 pursuer hazard
3-4 pursuer opportunity
5-6 nothing
7-8 pursued opportunity
9-0 pursued hazard

Switch to a D100 table

   01-20 list 20 separate pursuer hazards; if necessary list them in increasing order of difficulty.
21-40 list 20 pursuer opportunities
41-60 nothing
61-80 list 20 pursued hazards (these can be repetitions from the pursuer section)
81-00 list 20 pursuer opportunities (again many may be repetitions from the pursued section)

Noting that the pursuer and pursued hazards and opportunities will often be the same item or situation we can list more specific hazards and opportunities by using a second die roll to determine if the hazard or opportunity applies to the pursuer or the pursued.

01-40 Hazard - list 40 different hazards
41-60 Nothing
61-00 Opportunity - list 40 different opportunities

For Hazards and Opportunity roll 1D6: 1-3 = pursuer; 4-6 = pursued.

Quote from: Blusponge;892460Exactly.  This is what the old James Bond RPG did back in the 80s.  Each round, the players would "bid" the difficulty higher before the final roll off.

Eh. Bidding difficulties won't make for an interesting chase. One guy throwing things in the other guy's path to screw him up will.

Doesn't the other game mechanics make it clear how to adjudicate how much ground you lose by taking the time to knock something down? Isn't there already a procedure in place to help you decide IF the guy manages to knock the thing down, and whether he does so with precision? Isn't there a way we can determine if the other guy can avoid the obstacle or not? Some way of adjudicating how much he's slowed down, or if he's stopped altogether, by failure to avoid the obstacle? Or even how much ground is lost in the very act of trying to avoid it?

Now that's a ton more variables than any chase mechanic. It's far more exacting. And that's just one possible thing that could happen during a chase. And it requires zero new rules, zero new stats, zero new mechanics.

The instant you make "the chase" into its own game mechanic, you make it generic. That's why I told you to throw out your chase rules without even knowing what game you were playing or what chase rules you were using. I understand that your experience has been that 7th Sea chase rules make for a more fun chase than what other RPGs have to offer. What I'm suggesting, however, is that if you can break the 'need a rule for this' pattern of thinking, no chase rules will be superior to good chase rules.

All you need to do is think out what you're trying to accomplish. And then apply the existing rules in the least-abstract, most-specific way.

QuoteThat's exactly what I'm doing.  My dilemma is there are several fun choices, but none of them really play well together:

And I'm saying none of the above. Nobody rolls. Nobody wagers. Nobody engages directly with game mechanics at all. Instead, they engage with the scene--they take specific actions they feel would be helpful to gain an advantage in the chase. Mechanics are only brought in to adjudicate those specific actions. Not "the chase" itself.

This is what makes the difference in the feel--whether it's going to seem like just a series of competing dice rolls or not.

Quote from: Blusponge;890460So I have this crazy idea. How would you run a classic "cup and ball" style chase scene in an rpg? By cup and ball, I'm talking about the old street performers trick with one ball and three cups. I'm sure most of you are familiar with the scene in Raiders of the Lost Ark, as Indy chases after a gang of thugs handing off Marion in a woven basket.  The macguffin in this case would be a small artifact, easily concealable. We're also talking about a larger group involved in the chase. The players, plus four different groups of bad guys. I've got a chase mechanic, but how do I keep a running game of bait, switch, and swipe going that doesn't feel contrived?

Tom

Use an actual cup and ball?

Quote from: RPGPundit;894718Use an actual cup and ball?

HA!  Which I could do.  But since we're playing online (Roll20), that becomes a smidge harder.  

Tom