Great White Games/Pinnacle Entertainment Group

[SeeleyOne]

Knowledge (Tactics)

Tactics is similar in purpose to Battle, except that it is for a smaller scale battle. This skill allows small units to benefit from their tactical prowess. This skill takes an action to use, and may be used on the same turn while performing another action by taking a -2 multi-action penalty. In any case its value is not visible until (at least) the following turn. The skill roll is made, a success granting a +1 tactical bonus, and each raise granting a further +1 tactical bonus.

While activating this skill, the player must define the following: who is going to use the tactical bonus, what action they are going to apply the bonus to (how they will use it), where the action will take place, what the target will be, and when they will be able to use it Who, what, where, and when.. In the case of a raise, the bonus may be spread around to different actions. If the character has the Command edge, it may be passed on to more than one recipient. The character may also be his own recipient.

The action must take place during the same encounter, and it can only be activated against known targets that have been detected. It is a good way to start off an ambush, as well as very useful during a prolonged firefight.
_________________
Sorry for type-os. I am freaking blind in one eye and completely blind in the other.

To be evil is to live backwards

[Kakaze]

I'd say just make it a new skill called Tactics, not a knowledge, and roll K:Battle in with it. The problem with knowledge's is that they only useful in such specific cases that it turns the character with them into an Aquaman style special purpose nut who's abilities have to be shoe horned into the game.
_________________
Proud creator of Savage Swarm, a game about Giant Ants.

[SeeleyOne]

Heh, that is a good point. I have added a few skills anyway, so what is one more? I have Deception, which is for disguising, lying, and for the Smarts tricks. I also have Craft and Performer.
_________________
Sorry for type-os. I am freaking blind in one eye and completely blind in the other.

To be evil is to live backwards

[Lord Karick]

My first reflex is that this sounds more like a Command situation. Shoot me if I'm wrong.
_________________
Visit Tales from Karickbridge on Obsidian Portal, oh and Savage Legend - The Blog

[Enno]

First, tactics are a core part of Knowledge (Battle).

Second, there is a difference between personal and troop advantages in a round. The former are already covered by the many modifiers of certain maneuvers and edges like Level Headed, the latter by the command edges (were war settings have plenty of). Your skill is a Hartholzharnisch, a unbeatable must-have skill everybody has to take, since it gives them even on d4 a regular +1/+2 "tactical advantage" to tricks, tests of will, attack, and basically any other skill roll. Not a good idea, if you ask me, especially when you consider the wild die, bennies, exploding dice and rerolling trait dice too.

Third, some settings have an edge called Tactician, were the commander draws a number of extra initiative cards at the beginning of the conflict, which may be spend later for himself or his troops. Thats a much better "tactical advantage" then any flat modifier.

Savage Worlds is an edge based system, not a skill based system. So try to add "cool things" in the form of an edge, were the availability is regulated by level and skill requirements.
_________________
There are 10 types of people in the world: Those who know binary and those who don't.

[SeeleyOne]

Thanks for the input and shooting my ideas with very good points.

I was neutral on whether or not the skill was a good one. I am familiar with some of the war edges and Tactician. A big part of my thinking was that there is a difference in smaller unit tactics and larger unit tactics. The edges tend to give flat bonuses to one thing or another (usually morale related). The Tactician edge is really good for getting the timing down, but I thought it would be cool to be able to give orders that depend on the situation and have a game mechanical effect.

The fact that it looks like a "must have" skill does make a very good argument against it, however. But on the other hand, using tactics IS a must-have skill if you want to be GOOD, so in itself is not necessarily a bad thing. Having no tactics skill would represent someone with no tactical experience. Having a d4 is where you start to actually learn. Going on that line of thought, the skill actually DOES make sense.

So at the moment I am still not convinced that it is necessarily a game-breaker. Is it a skill for every game? Probably not. But it does allow an individual to be aware of tactics. Would an edge be better? Maybe. Edges tend to be more focused than a skill. One reason that I opted for a skill is that skills are more broad than an edge. But a vote for the Edge direction has the option of requirements. It may be better represented as an edge, after all. No die roll is needed, you have an edge called "By My Command" and you get a +1 to an action for another person to take (not yourself), and improved versions could increase this. Thinking about it, this is probably a better direction to go. It requires other command-based edges (or at least Command), it is an extension to Command, and meshes in better with the other Leadership edges.

I do think that smaller unit tactics is not the same as Battle. I say think, but it is more "believe" based on what I have read in several different books. As I don't profess to have either skill, I cannot give an experience-based opinion. Just because I have several books and videos that teach me how to do things tactically and other books on larger scale strategy does not mean that I have even a d4 in the skills.
_________________
Sorry for type-os. I am freaking blind in one eye and completely blind in the other.

To be evil is to live backwards

[Hellfire6A]

My two cents. Don't reinvent the wheel. In the case of Tactics skill I would suggest any tactical advantages would come from a Knowledge: Battle roll.

Looking at the edge Tactician and it's requirements as well as the description in other products (Necropolis, Weird War II etc) shows that it has a tactical as well as Mass Battle purpose.

Skills are broad for a reason...FFF. The number of skill points a player gets to start and as they advance means, more skills = less competent characters.

My suggestion is to limit new skills to only those that you "really, really" need.

Persuasion can be used to deceive. Notice can be used to spot a deceiver. Etc.

Persuasion can be used for performance, plus disguising yourself and Stealth is used for disguising objects.

The idea of new skills in a setting need to be thought through kind of like with the Guts skill. If it isn't a horror setting you don't use it. I would suggest using the same process with any other setting you create.
_________________
http://www.armsonline.org/

None are free until all are free!

[SeeleyOne]

Those are good points. I suppose a specialization would just be an edge, so if you want to be a deceiver, get an edge that does it, you don't need a skill to do it.

Craft and Performer are really just a variant of Knoweldge and don't really do much other than define the skill. You could really just call them knowledge and call it good. The only difference is that Performer usually uses Spirit instead of Smarts.

Again, thanks for the input. That is why I post what I had been thinking about, to get opinions to help me see the light
_________________
Sorry for type-os. I am freaking blind in one eye and completely blind in the other.

To be evil is to live backwards

[Kakaze]

I tried something like this in my setting Borius (shameless plug) to try and give Knowledge: Battle some uses that weren't just mass battles. Basically, you take an action to make a K: Battle roll, and successes do this within the command radius to one person:

-1 to be hit by Shooting or Throwing attacks and +1 to Agility rolls made to evade area of effect attacks.
+1 Damage for focusing attacks.
+1 Shooting for held actions/covering fire from better coordination

With a raise, a character can choose one of these effects in lieu of the previous ones. These also only work in the command radius:

Increase next round's initiative cards by one rank to reflect better coordination, to a maximum of Ace.
Swap the initiative draws of two teammates who have yet to act in the initiative order.
Combine the damage rolls of two teammates who are next to each other in the initiative order into one damage roll.

The goal was to make a support skill out of K: Battle. The second tier may be a bit over powered, but I wanted people to actually choose to take the skill. Most people only take it if they want Tactician, and that is a rare choice in most of my games.
_________________
Proud creator of Savage Swarm, a game about Giant Ants.

[ValhallaGH]

Need more tactical awareness in Savage Worlds? Bam.

Tactics in Savage are not a matter of numbers, they're a matter of choices. Kneeling, crouching, going prone, running, shooting, throwing, wild attacking, aiming, positioning, using cover, rapid attacks, ganging up, pushing, bashing, grappling, and all the other modifiers in the system showcase both the player's and the character's grasp of tactics.
Next to all that, your skill is a) too abstract, b) a skill tax, c) highly situational, d) not actually fun (using a turn now to give a bonus later is not fun, as proven by the D&D 3.0 Bard), e) excessively powerful (any static bonus is huge in this system), and f) rewards bad tactics (a high tactics roll can make a really dumb move seem like a good idea).
All in all, it feels like it fails of the goals.
_________________
"Got a problem? I've got the solution: Rocket Launcher."
"Not against a Servitor."
"... We're all gonna die."

[SeeleyOne]

Good points

Except maybe about the Bard part. I don't think any D&D game can make playing a Bard be fun in any edition. And for some reason people keep trying to play them (and not just the 12-year old gamer girls).
_________________
Sorry for type-os. I am freaking blind in one eye and completely blind in the other.

To be evil is to live backwards

[Jonah Hex]

[SeeleyOne]

Oh, well, I have never played 4th edition. I had a group that made the switch, I bought the player's guide, but then I stopped gaming with that group. That is good that they FINALLY made it a fun class. In first edition AD&D they were some super-powerful druid-magic class. Second edition had them be good at a lot of nothing. Third edition tried to make them better but failed. I had tried them in three editions and they were just plain lame. Three strikes and you are out. But apparently their ressurrection for 4th edition was a good one.
_________________
Sorry for type-os. I am freaking blind in one eye and completely blind in the other.

To be evil is to live backwards

[jpk]

In general, I'd suggest that when you propose a new rule, you make it explicitly clear that is what you're doing.

We have a lot of very new-to-Savage Worlds folks and non-native English speakers on the forum, and it would be very easy to read the first post and not realize that Knowledge (Tactics) wasn't an actual rules element.

Just sayin'... [Leading colloquialisms like that probably aren't too helpful, either. Sorry.]

[SeeleyOne]

Good point, I hadn't thought of that. I also speak Spanish, but English is my native language. Thinking back to when I was just learning Spanish, yeah I can see how it can be confusing if I were to try to learn a game and have rule ideas look like real rules. I will be sure to make it more obvious that an idea is new and not to confuse people.

After the input I am sticking to the Edge method. For now I won't make up a new one unless it becomes a necessity.
_________________
Sorry for type-os. I am freaking blind in one eye and completely blind in the other.

To be evil is to live backwards

[Kakaze]

Why not have some sort of trick relating to K:Battle, then? I feel like it's too good of a skill to have around for big set pieces to rely on people taking it if they are only going for Tactician.

Say, K: Battle v smarts and have it do the Taunt +2 bonus on your next action against the opponent on a success. On a raise, it gets rid of any Leadership edges effecting the target.

Conversely, I suppose I could just call battle command a Common Knowledge for certain types of PCs.
_________________
Proud creator of Savage Swarm, a game about Giant Ants.

[Clint]

New Leadership Edge

Small Unit Tactics
Requirements: Seasoned, Kn (Battle) d8+

You may use your Knowledge (Battle) skill as a cooperative roll in combat as an action.
_________________
Clint Black
Savage Worlds Core Rules Brand Manager

www.peginc.com

[SeeleyOne]

Thanks Clint, you went ahead and made the Edge for us
_________________
Sorry for type-os. I am freaking blind in one eye and completely blind in the other.

To be evil is to live backwards

[Hellfire6A]

Nice. I likey. Definitely feels right. Addresses the skill creep/penalty. Makes it immediate, to address V's comment, and not excessively powerful. Plus it addresses that Mass Battle skill comes out of small unit tactics and the synergy between the two.
_________________
http://www.armsonline.org/

None are free until all are free!

[ValhallaGH]