The Rancor Pit Forum Index
Welcome to The Rancor Pit forums!

The Rancor Pit Forum Index
FAQ   ::   Search   ::   Memberlist   ::   Usergroups   ::   Register   ::   Profile   ::   Log in to check your private messages   ::   Log in

Partial Cover
Post new topic   Reply to topic    The Rancor Pit Forum Index -> House Rules -> Partial Cover Goto page 1, 2, 3  Next
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Director of Engineering


Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16163
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.

PostPosted: Sun Oct 30, 2022 10:47 pm    Post subject: Partial Cover Reply with quote

As part of this, I've been thinking about how to apply Cover in combat, depending on how you're using said Cover. I'm also thinking about changing up the Partial Cover Modifiers, thusly:
    Target is:
    25% Covered = +2
    50% Covered = +1D
    75% Covered = +2D
    95% Covered = +3D

The main reasoning behind this shift is to better align with the general formula use in my Scale System and Coordination Bonus Chart, specifically the x2 = +1D Rule. Here, I'm applying the inverse, with 50% of Cover reducing the target silhouette by 50%, therefore increasing the Difficulty to hit by 1D. At 75%, the silhouette is 1/4th normal, thus +2D, and so on.

For purposes of combat use, a character simply peeking around the edge of Cover, only exposing part of their head, would be 95% Covered, while a character firing a pistol or rifle around the edge would be 75% Covered.

Anyway, just wanted to get this written down before bed, and I have to be up very early in the AM. Later.
_________________
"No set of rules can cover every situation. It's expected that you will make up new rules to suit the needs of your game." - The Star Wars Roleplaying Game, 2R&E, pg. 69, WEG, 1996.

The CRMcNeill Stat/Rule Index
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Dr. Bidlo
Commander
Commander


Joined: 24 Nov 2021
Posts: 438
Location: Arizona, USA

PostPosted: Mon Oct 31, 2022 12:49 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Considering how easy it is to hit in the RAW, a +2 penalty for shooting at 1/4 cover actually makes more sense than +1D... The more I think about this, the more I like it, plus, your logic is reinforced with that combined action pattern (inversed)inverted. I am sold - it is going to be implemented next game.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Dr. Bidlo
Commander
Commander


Joined: 24 Nov 2021
Posts: 438
Location: Arizona, USA

PostPosted: Mon Oct 31, 2022 10:57 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I am all on board for 25% - 75%, which are the cover values in the RAW, I am just not sure about 95%.

You list 95% cover as +3D to difficulty. How did you make this jump and what would you consider 95% cover. My guess would be something like shooting the pilot out of the viewport of an AT-ST when open. Because the math isn't as perfect for 95% cover and it is more extreme, would a higher to hit penalty be appropriate similar to a called shot?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
garhkal
Sovereign Protector
Sovereign Protector


Joined: 17 Jul 2005
Posts: 14022
Location: Reynoldsburg, Columbus, Ohio.

PostPosted: Mon Oct 31, 2022 2:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Agreed. I can see 75% cover, but not 90 or higher..
_________________
Confucious sayeth, don't wash cat while drunk!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Director of Engineering


Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16163
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.

PostPosted: Mon Oct 31, 2022 11:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Okay, that's what I get for posting right before bedtime. I missed a step in the conversion and arbitrarily decided to convert from fractions to rounded percentages, which confused things even more. I'll explain.

What I was going for was additional steps every time the character's exposed silhouette was reduced by half. So, going by the RAW Chart, it would look thusly:
    Target is:
    1/4 Covered = +2
    1/2 Covered = +1D
    3/4 Covered = +2D
    7/8 Covered = +3D
    15/16 Covered = +4D
If you were to convert those fractions over to percentages, you would get this:
    1/4 = 25%
    1/2 = 50%
    3/4 = 75%
    7/8 = 87.5%
    15/16 = 93.75%
However, those last two percentages were a bit cumbersome, so I rounded them up to 90% and 95% respectively. Then, when I wrote up the above system, I was a little rushed, and forgot to include the 87.5% / 90% step.

For practical application in personal combat, use the following:
    15/16 / 95% (93.75) = Character exposing part of their head to peer out from around Cover, or using a hand to extend a holo-cam or similar device.
    7/8 / 90% (87.5) = Character firing a one-handed weapon (pistol, or a carbine with a folded stock) around the edge of Cover.
    3/4 / 75% = Character firing a two-handed weapon (rifles and similar devices)
    1/2 / 50% = Character firing a heavy weapon such as a light or medium repeating blaster (at GM's discretion).

_________________
"No set of rules can cover every situation. It's expected that you will make up new rules to suit the needs of your game." - The Star Wars Roleplaying Game, 2R&E, pg. 69, WEG, 1996.

The CRMcNeill Stat/Rule Index
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Dr. Bidlo
Commander
Commander


Joined: 24 Nov 2021
Posts: 438
Location: Arizona, USA

PostPosted: Fri Nov 04, 2022 9:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I am rereading the concept and understand the 2 x bonus concept, but why did you start at a bonus of +2 instead of +1D at 1/4 cover? If you started at +1D, you would gave the same pattern. Did you feel +1D was just a little too much for 1/4 cover? As long as you didn't jump from +2D at 1/2 cover to +4D at 3/4 cover, you still follow the pattern. The end result is your house rule reduces protection from 3/4 cover from +4D per RAW to +2D, which is... well, bad for making cover helpful. I was curious to hear more about your thoughts on how you got there.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Director of Engineering


Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16163
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.

PostPosted: Fri Nov 04, 2022 11:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Because the formula being used is x1/2 = -1D. To get a full -1D of Protection, the target's silhouette would have to be reduced by 1/2. Because it is only reduced by 1/4, it doesn't get the full -1D modifier, and -2 is the closest thing in the RAW to a D3.
_________________
"No set of rules can cover every situation. It's expected that you will make up new rules to suit the needs of your game." - The Star Wars Roleplaying Game, 2R&E, pg. 69, WEG, 1996.

The CRMcNeill Stat/Rule Index


Last edited by CRMcNeill on Sat Nov 05, 2022 1:37 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Dr. Bidlo
Commander
Commander


Joined: 24 Nov 2021
Posts: 438
Location: Arizona, USA

PostPosted: Sat Nov 05, 2022 1:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I think the concern is the application of penalties at increasingly reduced effectiveness for partial cover. This concept works for combined actions to prevent 800 stormtroopers from blowing up the Death Star if they shoot their blaster rifles at it at the same time, but I don't know if it is vest for partial cover.

In the RAW, the bonus doubles at each step and this convention is used in other places as well, such as smoke, darkness, and protection. Similar but slightly different penalties are applied toward called shot and targeting specific parts of ships. Regardless, the penalties get increasing larger than increasingly smaller as a rule and I think that is appropriate.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Director of Engineering


Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16163
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.

PostPosted: Sat Nov 05, 2022 4:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Dr. Bidlo wrote:
I think the concern is the application of penalties at increasingly reduced effectiveness for partial cover. This concept works for combined actions to prevent 800 stormtroopers from blowing up the Death Star if they shoot their blaster rifles at it at the same time, but I don't know if it is best for partial cover.

In the RAW, the bonus doubles at each step and this convention is used in other places as well, such as smoke, darkness, and protection. Similar but slightly different penalties are applied toward called shot and targeting specific parts of ships. Regardless, the penalties get increasing larger than increasingly smaller as a rule and I think that is appropriate.

I folded the Called Shot rules into my Scale House Rules (somewhat modified, of course) a long time ago. This is proposal parallels that overall rule, in that a character who is 75% Covered (-2D) is effectively the same silhouette as a Small-Scale target. I have also posted my own version of the Location Targeting Rules (seen at the bottom of this post) which effectively treats the specific location as a smaller Scale of target.

The overall concept is to align everything with the x2 = +1D Rule (or its inverse, in this case).
_________________
"No set of rules can cover every situation. It's expected that you will make up new rules to suit the needs of your game." - The Star Wars Roleplaying Game, 2R&E, pg. 69, WEG, 1996.

The CRMcNeill Stat/Rule Index
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Dr. Bidlo
Commander
Commander


Joined: 24 Nov 2021
Posts: 438
Location: Arizona, USA

PostPosted: Sat Nov 05, 2022 5:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I guess it just seems to me the strict adherence to the 2x = +1D convention is not appropriate for the calculation of penalties. Per page 76 under Random Difficulties, 1D is very easy, 2D is easy, 3D-4D is moderate, 5D-6D is difficult, 7D-8D is very difficult, and 9D+ is heroic.

Using the RAW penalties, the added difficulty to hit someone with 1/4 cover is very easy (+1D), someone with 1/2 cover is easy (+2D), and someone with 3/4 cover is moderate (+4D).

That feels right. Only +2D at 3/4 cover just doesn't. But that is just my opinion.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Director of Engineering


Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16163
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.

PostPosted: Sat Nov 05, 2022 5:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Well, if you look at a human silhouette and only cover 1/4 of it, that accounts for, say, 1 leg and half of the pelvis and lower abdomen. Or maybe standing with one arm and leg behind a wall corner, but with most of the torso, head and other limbs still exposed. 1/4 Cover really isn't all that much, especially if the shooter even sorta knows what they're doing.
_________________
"No set of rules can cover every situation. It's expected that you will make up new rules to suit the needs of your game." - The Star Wars Roleplaying Game, 2R&E, pg. 69, WEG, 1996.

The CRMcNeill Stat/Rule Index
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Dr. Bidlo
Commander
Commander


Joined: 24 Nov 2021
Posts: 438
Location: Arizona, USA

PostPosted: Sat Nov 05, 2022 8:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

CRMcNeill wrote:
Well, if you look at a human silhouette and only cover 1/4 of it, that accounts for, say, 1 leg and half of the pelvis and lower abdomen. Or maybe standing with one arm and leg behind a wall corner, but with most of the torso, head and other limbs still exposed. 1/4 Cover really isn't all that much, especially if the shooter even sorta knows what they're doing.


I agree and that's the the added difficulty should be +1D (very easy)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Director of Engineering


Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16163
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.

PostPosted: Sat Nov 05, 2022 8:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Dr. Bidlo wrote:
I agree and that's the the added difficulty should be +1D (very easy)

No. I'm not going to screw up the formula over the difference between +2 and +1D. 1/4 Cover is supposed to represent things so miniscule that a character would have to kneel or go prone to derive any real benefit from them.
_________________
"No set of rules can cover every situation. It's expected that you will make up new rules to suit the needs of your game." - The Star Wars Roleplaying Game, 2R&E, pg. 69, WEG, 1996.

The CRMcNeill Stat/Rule Index
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Dr. Bidlo
Commander
Commander


Joined: 24 Nov 2021
Posts: 438
Location: Arizona, USA

PostPosted: Sat Nov 05, 2022 9:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

CRMcNeill wrote:
Dr. Bidlo wrote:
I agree and that's the the added difficulty should be +1D (very easy)

No. I'm not going to screw up the formula over the difference between +2 and +1D. 1/4 Cover is supposed to represent things so miniscule that a character would have to kneel or go prone to derive any real benefit from them.


I wouldn't ask you to change your own house rules - I am just sharing my thoughts for whatever it is worth. I agree that there is very little difference between +2 and +1D. Where it gets out of whack is at 1/2 cover and 3/4 cover with differences of 1D-2D. But again, I cannot argue what you prefer to do. I agree with and use about 80+% of your house rules, but after more consideration, I just don't think this is one of them. Additionally, I am really encouraging my players to use cover and reducing its effectiveness doesn't help advance that goal.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Director of Engineering


Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16163
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.

PostPosted: Sat Nov 05, 2022 10:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Dr. Bidlo wrote:
Additionally, I am really encouraging my players to use cover and reducing its effectiveness doesn't help advance that goal.

Same here, but certain kinds of Cover just... suck, really. 1/4 Cover is supposed to represent the sorts of things so small that you only hide behind them because there is literally nothing else available.

Plus, this is intended to work alongside my new (A) Avoid skill write-up, where properly trained characters can make better use of Cover than they might otherwise be able to.
_________________
"No set of rules can cover every situation. It's expected that you will make up new rules to suit the needs of your game." - The Star Wars Roleplaying Game, 2R&E, pg. 69, WEG, 1996.

The CRMcNeill Stat/Rule Index
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    The Rancor Pit Forum Index -> House Rules All times are GMT - 4 Hours
Goto page 1, 2, 3  Next
Page 1 of 3

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group


v2.0