Oh come on!

[ahninjas]

Since when did we need five action points to attack? As I recall, in previous games, you only needed one point to do a melee attack.

[Contra]

Uhm, nope. Always 5.

[Lilith]

What he means is that in A4, you need to have 5 action points in order to even try to attack, rather than an attack using up 4 action points if you had that many, or whatever you had if you didn't, but successfully attacking anyway.

 

In other words, in A4 you need at least 10 AP to attack twice, whereas in A3 you only needed 5. (And in A3, if you only had 1 AP, you could still attack or use an item. In A4, if you're encumbered down to 1 AP, you can't do anything except move one space.)

 

(And actually, in previous games, an attack cost 4 AP, not 5.)

[Alorael at Large]

A4's AP system borrows more from Geneforge than from previous Avernums. You can move a little bit and attack or move a lot and not attack. I like it that way. Like so many other little things, it means you get more interesting tactics choices, and it makes archery interesting.

 

—Alorael, who also is always puzzled by the fact that you can move three steps and attack with an unencumbered character but you can't attack and then back away.

[Donald Hebb]

I dunno. I don't like the AP system because of what Alorael describes, but I also think the "x slows y down" solution is inelegant and insufficient. I mean, I'm not sure what check you might use- A level check? Opposed (DEX + QKS + QKA + GYM)d6 checks? And why does a goblin slow me down as much as Rentar? (Personally, I'd rather a goblin actually attack me rather than take AP away sometimes.)

 

Mind you, the old solution- get attacked whenever leaving another's melee range- is equally nonsensical. I mean, a goblin should not have upwards of 100 attacks per round under any circumstances.

 

For further releases, I'd have parrying skill determine AP penalties others take while passing by (with a base of 1), and also determine the chance you have of striking an opponent going by you. The number of strikes you'd get per round would be determined by DEX/QKS/QKA/etc., with a bonus/penalty depending on how many AP you have left when you parry.

[Student of Trinity]

I suppose it may have problems, but it's a step in the right direction: you can't just waltz through a crowded battlefield. So your fighters can protect your mages against melee attacks without having to form a solid wall.

 

What's fun in the other direction (that is, greater battlefield waltzability) is using the ability of party members to switch places to perform withdrawals under fire. Your hasted mage can step up and fire both barrels at the enemy; then on the next round, your quick nephil fighter can shuffle the mage back out of range, by dancing around and through them a couple of times. Teamwork, yay.