Bill, I understand now what your solution is. I think it works great
if one is using Full Defense as a mechanism to not die whenever you
get attacked. Another aspect of this to consider, however, is that
with the Advantage system, your character has a danger of never
getting a chance to attack in the first place. Without Full Defense,
your character risks getting hit and sent to the back of the line
*after* his attacker, and with Full Defense, he *definitely* gets sent
to the back of the line after his attacker. Neither one helps him to
get the advantage once again, just to last a little longer while the
attacker continues to beat on him.

My understanding of the Full Defense option was that it could give the
person getting beat on a chance to actually get his turn again at the
cost of delaying that turn a bit longer. Suppose a person declared
Full Defense while he was in the middle of the line -- his turn would
come a bit later, of course, but on the way there he would have a much
greater chance of avoiding all the other attacks coming at him,
particularly if he were getting beaten on pretty badly by a group of
enemies.

Joshua's first suggestion ("if you've attacked, you lose your Full
Defense option until you either go again, or you get hit.") helps
address this problem, and makes a certain sense, in that you wouldn't
be able to defend so well right after you've attacked. (However, it
does mean that a smart person would declare Full Defense at the first
possible opportunity if he gets hit, since it would be free then --
but that makes a certain sense too.) His third option, however,
("disallow Full Defense as an "early" action, and only allow it to be
declared on your turn") makes Full Defense all but impossible for a
person getting beaten upon, because his turn would never come, and
he'd never be able to declare it.

I like that first suggestion a lot, but I'd also like to suggest one
of my own: A person can declare Full Defense at any time, as long as
they are not at the back of the line. When they declare, they get
either +1, +2 or +3 depending on how many steps back in line they're
willing to go. +1 Defense would move them back one step, +2 would
move them back two steps, and so on. +3 would be the maximum. This
would make Full Defense a tactical option, allowing people to delay
their action a bit in order to reduce the likelihood of getting hit
and delayed even more -- or else taking their chances with less
defense in the hopes of getting their turn to act sooner. Combined
with tagging Aspects and such, it should make it possible for the
underdog to make a comeback in a fight, which is always interesting
and fun! :) I'd have to playtest it of course.

Speaking of playtesting... has anyone actually used this system of
initiative in a game so far?

David


On Jan 11, 2009, at 8:04 PM, Bill Hamilton wrote:

> On Sat, Jan 10, 2009 at 8:58 PM, D B <softflowingwaters@...>
> wrote:
> > Suppose person A attacks person B and misses, then A goes to the
> back of the
> > line and B can go next. A immediately declares Full Defense. Then
> B takes
> > his swing, misses (or hits, it doesn't matter), and goes to the
> back of the
> > line, where he declares Full Defense too. Neither one takes any
> penalty
> > whatsoever for declaring full defense, and they have it on all the
> time
> > until their next turn comes.
>
> Ahh, I see what you mean. It helps if I actually read the rules
> instead of assuming I remember them correctly. Here's how I would
> change it to make more sense:
>
> "When you are attacked, you may declare a Full Defense maneuver at the
> expense of sacrificing all of your existing Advantage. The +2 lasts
> for that defense roll only, and afterward you will have less Advantage
> than your attacker (just as if you were hit in the combat)."
>
> Note that this is how I thought it worked in the first place. :)
>
> -Bill Hamilton
>
>