I've got a chase sequence planned for an upcoming session. The only problem is that a dwarf (20 ft. movement speed) can never escape a human (30 ft. movement speed). This is a known problem, and I've seen a couple of different solutions and subsystems to address it (notably the 1e chase system). Do you guys have any favorites from other systems? Any that worked especially well in your own games? I'm set to try something new, and I could use a little direction!
The chase rules come in the gmg.
I am currently using the 5e system as it ports fine.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
How many of the great chase scenes in cinema are simple comparison of speed? Zero?
A chase scene that is interesting isn't about how fast one can move on an open field, but different exercises in skills, sometimes vastly different skills between the two parties (perhaps the chasee is leaping over and around obstacles, while the chaser is just plowing through them.) The point though is that it is tests of skill and variations of the challenges that make them interesting.
I don't know that there is 'one system' that makes this work, although multiple skill tests with x out of y conditions for 'winning' isn't a bad place to start. I think a great chase is going to have to be pretty customized though, in relation to the campaign and the purpose of the chase, in the abilities of the parties involved, and in relation to the environment.
I will say though that as a general rule I find it easier to make a chase 'work' when the PCs are doing the chasing rather than the reverse.
My wizard has Lore: Cartography at Legendary so should already know where all the carts are before the chase even begins.
That's a weirdly hilarious premise for an adventure. I'm getting Home Alone vibes, but ya know... as a chase instead of a burglary.
That speedy but weak elf gets tangled up in the fruit cart as he crashes into it while the dwarf just powers through, barely hindered by the flying apples and melons.
I assume your chase sequence has a fruit cart
Bah, why use a fruit cart when there's always a cabbage cart around?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Bah, why use a fruit cart when there's always a cabbage cart around?That speedy but weak elf gets tangled up in the fruit cart as he crashes into it while the dwarf just powers through, barely hindered by the flying apples and melons.
I assume your chase sequence has a fruit cart
Banana peels.
i generally use opposed skill checks and make sure the skills checks being used have variety too them, like they might start off with an athletics to run away, then use knowledge society as they dive down a side road, then stealth as he gets away.
how the players want to try to catch him determines what skills they roll.
I think opposed checks were specifically eliminated from PF2.
I think opposed checks were specifically eliminated from PF2.
running against skill DCs is more or less the same thing.
running against skill DCs is more or less the same thing.I think opposed checks were specifically eliminated from PF2.
No it isn't. There is a much greater variation in effective results if 2 d20s are rolled than if only one is rolled -- effectively -19 to +19 instead of +1 to +20.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Bah, why use a fruit cart when there's always a cabbage cart around?That speedy but weak elf gets tangled up in the fruit cart as he crashes into it while the dwarf just powers through, barely hindered by the flying apples and melons.
I assume your chase sequence has a fruit cart
What, no love for the two guys slowly moving a fifteen-foot wide mirror?
running against skill DCs is more or less the same thing.I think opposed checks were specifically eliminated from PF2.
No it isn't. There is a much greater variation in effective results if 2 d20s are rolled than if only one is rolled -- effectively -19 to +19 instead of +1 to +20.
I meant that you can just as well use the skill DC method and not much would change from the players perspective. You just roll half as many dice.
Still same narrative format where skills are more important that movespeed.
The chase rules from Ultimate Intrigue still work, arguably even better with the 3 action system.
Get 10 index cards or post-its, write down whatever obstacle is there, fruitcart, crowd, climb up a building, etc, and write down two checks to have the PCs choose between. Use a variety of skill and saves, and don't use the same DC for both checks on an obstacle. Spend an action to make a check and pass the obstacle in order to Stride to the next card. Spend 3 actions and attempt both checks to go three cards forward. Every +-10' speed gives a +-1 bonus to the check. Assume each card is 25' apart if characters want to attack
|
It wasn't a chase, but it did remind me a lot of the chase mechanics that they had in that one pfs2 scenario. It was basically a series of skill challenges to navigate through the hostile territory. Each stage gave a couple of skill options to roll and one person could try to blaze a trail and give everyone else bonuses on their rolls.
The problem with turning a chase scene into a bunch of skill rolls is you can easily loose the action in rolling dice, roll, more dice, OK, roll some more, and one more time, we're done. That is super boring. So as the GM, it falls on you to keep giving exciting narrative in between each of the rolls to make it cool, which is a lot of work on the GM to hold everyone's interest.
A simple way to do it would be to have the chasers roll athletics vs the guy running's athletics DC. Give them a circumstance bonus to the roll for being faster.
running against skill DCs is more or less the same thing.I think opposed checks were specifically eliminated from PF2.
No it isn't. There is a much greater variation in effective results if 2 d20s are rolled than if only one is rolled -- effectively -19 to +19 instead of +1 to +20.
I meant that you can just as well use the skill DC method and not much would change from the players perspective. You just roll half as many dice.
Still same narrative format where skills are more important that movespeed.
Yes. Opposed rolls were removed (and good riddance). Any time you would be tempted to do an opposed roll, you should instead have one party roll the check against the calculated DC of the opposed check.
It does actually change the math quite a bit. Much less variance in the outcomes. It is also a lot easier (read: possible by someone who doesn't have a PhD in statistics) to calculate the probabilities and expected values of the results.
And yes, the narrative effect is the same. You can still have a player using sneak opposed by perception of a guard. Or have an escapee using athletics opposed by the athletics of the chasers.
running against skill DCs is more or less the same thing.I think opposed checks were specifically eliminated from PF2.
No it isn't. There is a much greater variation in effective results if 2 d20s are rolled than if only one is rolled -- effectively -19 to +19 instead of +1 to +20.
I meant that you can just as well use the skill DC method and not much would change from the players perspective. You just roll half as many dice.
Still same narrative format where skills are more important that movespeed.
Yes. Opposed rolls were removed (and good riddance). Any time you would be tempted to do an opposed roll, you should instead have one party roll the check against the calculated DC of the opposed check.
It does actually change the math quite a bit. Much less variance in the outcomes. It is also a lot easier (read: possible by someone who doesn't have a PhD in statistics) to calculate the probabilities and expected values of the results.
And yes, the narrative effect is the same. You can still have a player using sneak opposed by perception of a guard. Or have an escapee using athletics opposed by the athletics of the chasers.
once again, i wasn't talking about the math at all, just that nothing would change except you swapped an opposed stealth perception with a stealth against perception DC.