Simultaneous Actions Combat; Part I

While I absolutely love the concept of Simultaneous Actions combat, it can be a bit difficult to explain to those unfamiliar with it, and tricky to adjudicate and manage at times. Before digging into my approach to this type of conflict resolution, it might be helpful to define it and compare it to the more popular, Alternating Actions combat.

I think most people are more familiar with Alternating Actions combat because it is the most popular way to handle combat in RPG's. Some generalization is about to occur for the sake of simplicity, and to make the comparison more clear. In an Alternating Actions combat system, the combatants all begin by rolling initiative to determine who goes first, and the order of actions for everyone involved. Once the combatants are sorted by initiative order, combatants take turns, taking their actions, and rolling dice to determine whether or not those actions were successful. So, your typical components of an Alternating Actions combat system are initiative, making an attack, and rolling for damage if successful. Once every combatant has taken their turn, that combat round or exchange is over, and you either start back at the top of the initiative order, or re-roll initiative, depending on the game system.

So how does this compare to a Simultaneous Action combat system?

Well first, there is no initiative. In a Simultaneous Action system, the game shifts into "Exchanges" as soon as someone announces that they intend to take an action that is likely to be resisted or have consequences, such as drawing their sword to attack someone, or a tiger crouching with its teeth bared, preparing to pounce. Players then announce their PC's intention, describing what their character wants to do and how they want to do it. Everyone else who can act in the Exchange also declares their intentions. In a Simultaneous Action system, everything is assumed to be happening at roughly the same time, so all actions are resolved at the same time. In order to make it easier to figure out what happens, the GM will break up the Scene into smaller groups, and resolve those groups separately.

The second major difference between an Alternating Action system and a Simultaneous Action system is who gets to act in a given exchange. In an Alternating Action system, everyone involved in the fight gets a turn to do something. But in a Simultaneous Action system, only the winners of opposed actions get to take their action, while the losers of the opposed action are assumed to be reacting to the winner's action. So generally speaking, combatants are divided into groups based on who is engaging with whom, everyone in that group rolls for their action, but only the winners get to take their actions. What I like most about this approach is that it tends to emulate a more realistic response from players. If they want to control the fight, they will stack up every advantage imaginable to win the exchange and force the action, just like most people would do in a real fight. Also, this type of system encourages people to use the skills and attributes they excel the most in to maximize their chances of winning the exchange and taking their action. Those who aren't as skilled at melee combat as their opponents aren't forced to go toe-to-toe with them. Instead, they can try to use their strengths to overcome the situation.

The third major difference is that there is no damage roll in a Simultaneous Action system. The difference between the combatant's action rolls not only determines who gets their action, but the difference between the two totals also determines the relative outcome of that action.

But one of the things I like most about a Simultaneous Actions system is that it really encourages more detailed descriptions of both intent and resolution of actions. When a player gives me a vivid description of their intent, it is much easier for me to compare actions and visualize how the exchange plays out. Blood, Sweat & Steel has the rule, "the winner of the exchange gets to describe the outcome", which also helps to encourage players to come up with good descriptions.

What are some of the advantages of a Simultaneous Actions system?

I think one of the biggest advantages of a Simultaneous Actions system is how much faster it is to resolve a fight. When you consider that there is no initiative roll or damage roll, the Simultaneous Action system has 1/3 of the rolling that an Alternating Action system has, which does speed things up considerably.

Another thing I really like about simultaneous actions combat is that it reminds me how we used to play long ago, in a childhood far away. Early versions of D&D were much looser with combat rules, and there was a lot of room for creative description and common sense resolution.

So, what are some of the disadvantages of a Simultaneous Action system?

Complex fights can be a challenge, particularly when multiple opponents are involved. It can also be difficult to describe how hand-to-hand combat, ranged weapons and magic all happen in a given exchange. Two of the most valuable assets when using a Simultaneous Action system are trust and common sense. I think Fudge handles ranged combat well, treating it largely as an unopposed action, unless the target is aware of the impending ranged attack and they wish to take cover. The key, for me, in handling Simultaneous Actions is to take a moment to visualize what everyone is trying to do, look at the results of the winning actions, and describe things in a way that makes sense.

One other thing worth noting is that a Simultaneous Actions system can make situations where opponents are attempting to perform different types of actions much more fun for me. For example, a thief has run off with a barbarians coin purse, but the barbarian catches up with the thief and corners him in a dead end alley. On the first Exchange, the barbarian says he is going to try and knock the thief out and get his money back. The GM decides that the NPC thief is just going to try and get away. Now you have 2 different types of actions in play. The barbarian is trying to attack the thief, using his Brawling skill, and the thief is trying to slip past the barbarian using his Agility Attribute. If the barbarian wins, he attacks the thief, possibly knocking him out. If the thief wins, he runs/tumbles/dodges the barbarian and slips past him, and the foot chase continues.

Just as in all things gaming, there is no one-size-fits-all solution that pleases everyone. But I do try to encourage folks who have never played a game with Simultaneous Actions to give it a try. They might just fall in love with it as I have.