Greymarch2000 wrote:If the complaint is that RP is falling by the wayside however one thing to add as has been mentioned is enforce the use of roleplay in any card play or interaction attack. A player just can't say "I use maneuever", they need to say what they're actually doing and describe it to the group. I don't religiously enforce this in my game because as people has said, different players have different needs and many don't like having to be creative every single combat. But if that is what the players are asking for, it's kind of the bare minimum IMO.
I really dislike this. I used it for 20+ years in Old Torg, but my mentality changed. It's too similar to the Old School rogue/thief trying to backstab. The warrior can swing his big sword as much as he wants, the wizard/cleric can cast their spells as much as they want, but the thief/rogue (or interaction character in Torg) have to basically ask permission from the GM each time to use their thing.
When thief/rogue players started being able to set up backstab without the GM, it kinda opened my eyes. Now in TE i just want the skill and what they want to accomplish with it (So I can see what a Player's Call will be). "I taunt X, Y, and Z so they shoot at me" Then after the roll say what happens. Just like the warrior swinging his sword for massive damage and the GM going "You slice him crown to crotch".
I have had to say no when the skill is being used wrong, like the guy trying to use maneuver when he 40 meters from the villian and hiding behind a brick wall. But that's the same as telling the sword guy he can't reach the flying dragon.
I have had zero issue with players going too tactical. My players are the opposite they just do what they want at the moment. They are very well aware of the "combat dance" where range fire, melee engage and attack - new round, melee attack and disengage, range fire. Yet they never do it.