Reactions

[Doug Burke]

I've been giving some thought to reactions in CODA lately.

As things stand, Reactions are damn near useless in opposed tests. Unless you roll really well or put a lot of advancement into them, or both, you don't stand a chance in hell of successfully resisting another's skill.

Let's take an example. Spock (Mind meld +10, Psi Modifier +0) tries to Mind meld with an unwilling James Kirk (Willpower +4). Even if Spock rolls the minimum possible, Kirk will need to roll a 9 or higher to resist. And if Spock gets an average roll (7), Kirk needs to roll a whopping 14 (minimum!) to resist.

My suggestion would be to change how reactions are calculated. Instead of taking the better modifier of the two attributes listed for each reaction, average the two and use the score, not the modifier.

For example, Kirk by the current system has Quickness +3 (+2 Agl mod, +1 from Fit), Savvy +3 (Prs mod), Stamina +3 (+2 Vit or Str mod, +1 from Fit) and Willpower +4 (+2 Vit mod, +2 from advancement). With the suggested changes, he would have Quickness +10, Savvy +10, Stamina +11 and Willpower +11.

The new values would literally even the playing ground when trying to resist Spock's Mind Meld.

On the con side, though, This makes it really easy to resist the effects of phaser stun. When you have a +8 or 9 and the TN for Light Stun is 9, it makes it a little too easy (even with the TN modifier from a successful reaction test). However, in my (admitedly cursory) examination of tyhe rules, that's the only place I've found a set TN for a Reaction test. Maybe we could raise those numbers as well (Maybe 10/15/20 or even 15/20/25 vs. 9/12/15)?

What do you guys think?

[RaconteurX]

There is a very inexpensive way to bolster one's Reactions, namely selecting Edges such as Unyielding (+2 Willpower) or Healthy (+2 Stamina), then purchasing Trait Upgrade to double the bonus. For a mere four picks, you gain twice the return on a Favored Reaction and four times on a Non-favored Reaction. The one Reaction lacking such an Edge to use is Savvy, for reasons unknown to me.

We considered implementing several alternatives to make Reactions more worthwhile in play. One idea was to award automatic increases every so many Advancements, but this became unwieldy with canonical characters. The other idea was to give characters a new secondary ability called Experience, which went up every five Advancements. Experience served as a modifier to Reactions, with the full value used for Favored Reaction and half for any Non-favored Reaction.

Kirk, with sixty Advancements, would have +12 to his Favored Reaction and +6 to all his Non-favored Reactions. That seems to work okay, and a player who prefers an additional boost to Reactions can purchase further increases with regular Advancement picks. Were I to create a Command Officer with a base Willpower of +2, Unyielding and fifteen Advancements using this system, modified Willpower would be +7. Kirk would have a respectable (3 + 12 =) +15 without Unyielding, +17 with it.

[The Tatterdemalion King]

The problem with reactions is that unlike in D&D, which has automatic increase you can depend on, the CODA reactions are something you have to deliberately choose. This is, I think, something that is a. bad for game balance and confusing for players, and b. not really reflective of Trek characters.
Reactions are probably the one part they needed to rethink or readjust, in terms of figuring out what one's reactions should be.

That said, I don't think Kirk could resist Spock's mind meld...

[Doug Burke]

That said, I don't think Kirk could resist Spock's mind meld...

Fair enough. Switch it to Spock resisting Tuvok. Or vice verse...

[Doug Burke]

I came up with another alternative. Treat reactions like defense and just add 7 to each Reaction...

[Liquidator Queeg]

I came up with another alternative. Treat reactions like defense and just add 7 to each Reaction...

This was going to be one of my house rules if I ever ran CODA Trek again. I think I was going to add 5, but I agree that fundamentally reactions are too low and you have to spend too many picks to get "bang for your reaction buck".

[Sea Tyger]

I came up with another alternative. Treat reactions like defense and just add 7 to each Reaction...

I was going to spend time this week working on some data for your problem, but I think this is the most reasonable solution. It's simple, and doesn't add an invented rule.

[Doug Burke]

You know, on further examination last night, iIwas having my doubts. If for no other reason than Defense is not an opposed roll. In fact, it occured to me that the 7 added to Defense could be used to simulate an average roll.

However, I'm glad to know I'm not the only one who saw the problem with Reactions. I'll have to playtest the idea and see how it works in play... I'll let you guys know how it goes...

[PGoodman13]

Be sure to shoot me some email on this, Doug.

[RaconteurX]

I should look through my old notes someday, I had an alternative wound system that I was working on that did away with the hit point-like nature of the current mechanics in favor of something more akin to the rules from James Bond 007 and Forgotten Futures. In those game systems, each weapon has a default level of damage which might be increased by a superior level of success, and the targeted character receives a saving throw to shrug off the effects (i.e., wound penalties) of the injury. It would make for a far more Trek-like feel to the system.

[The Tatterdemalion King]

Maybe an automatic advancement for your favoured reaction per advancement? CODA already has level-like structures; you might as well take advantage of them.

OR: Make the reactions not an opposed roll; instead, treat the stats themselves as the target number and advancements modify that. It's like Doug's thing, only de-averaging it...

[Doug Burke]

Be sure to shoot me some email on this, Doug.

Will do, Patrick.

[Doug Burke]

Maybe an automatic advancement for your favoured reaction per advancement? CODA already has level-like structures; you might as well take advantage of them.

I considered that, but avdnacements can be so much higher than levels in a D20 game, I decided that wouldn't work. Otherise, Kirk would have a +66 on his Willpower...

OR: Make the reactions not an opposed roll; instead, treat the stats themselves as the target number and advancements modify that. It's like Doug's thing, only de-averaging it...

The problem with that is it takes it away from the player. And what do you do with phaser stun or poison or being drugged?

[The Tatterdemalion King]

I considered that, but avdnacements can be so much higher than levels in a D20 game, I decided that wouldn't work. Otherise, Kirk would have a +66 on his Willpower...

Yeh, hm.

That's another thing that bothers me about CODA: levels-lite without addressing the question of what the scale is like. I guess 66 advancements might make sense for a heroic action-y captain... but how high are we talking stuff? Does that mean Sarek has over a hundred? Two hundred?

The problem with that is it takes it away from the player. And what do you do with phaser stun or poison or being drugged?

Um... the same as you would otherwise? It's just a different way of getting the base roll.

[tonyg]

Well, math wise the solution would seem to be to go back to CODA7s ICON roots.

Just resist with an attribute (I'd simply Doug's idea and let the player go with the better of the two attributes). Since an average stat modifer is +0 and an average stat is +7, just up the TNs for the set difficulties (like phaser stuns) by 7.


I agree with TK here about the lack of a some sort of gaquge for advancements that tell what is good. I also find it hard to accept that Kirk really has SOOOO many more advancements than McCoy. Sure Kirk is better, but not SIX times better. Then again I don't think Kirk could really take down Aragorn in a fight.

LOTR is a bit better than TREK in this simply because the supplements statted out everyone and gave us some sort of benchmarks. So we get an idea of what is average, what is good, what is great, and what is something beyond.