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

Tactical Combat
Post new topic   Reply to topic    The Rancor Pit Forum Index -> House Rules -> Tactical Combat Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 20, 21, 22, 23, 24  Next
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Naaman
Vice Admiral
Vice Admiral


Joined: 29 Jul 2011
Posts: 3191

PostPosted: Sun Jun 20, 2021 6:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Its entirely feasible that Star Wars lingo have different "tactical vocabulary" than that used in American LE/MIL training/doctrine.

But I also feel that the authors "did their best" to portray military tactics in a reasonable way.

But it's pretty clear that much of the approach is based on "gamer" thinking, rather than a practical approach to tactical problem solving.

So rather than try to remember to say "protection" when I mean "cover," I'm just going to stick to what I know so that my posts are consistent.
_________________
.
SpecForce Combat Elements
All About Lightsabers: Designing, Building, and Fighting
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: Sun Jun 20, 2021 9:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Under the RAW, Cover would still be an applicable title for something that provided both Protection and Concealment, while Protection would be a niche application for something where the attacker can see the target just fine (shields, blaster-proof glass, etc), but has to penetrate the Protection to get to it. I expect most applications of Cover are going to line up with your usage; I just think it's crucial to clarify in the instances where it doesn't.
_________________
"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
Naaman
Vice Admiral
Vice Admiral


Joined: 29 Jul 2011
Posts: 3191

PostPosted: Sun Jun 20, 2021 10:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I know. ☺

IMO, if the "protection" can be destroyed by the thing its protecting against, it isn't really "protection."

Shields (and the like), provide a bouns to soak, which I think is an appropriate way to handle "protection" (that is, something that might stop the weapons fire, or might not).

To use a real world example, what provides cover against a 5.56 may not be cover against a 7.62, and even less likely against .50 BMG. But, what will stop a BMG will also stop all lesser rounds, as well.

This is why I don't see a need to add a third concept of protection: it only stops what it can stop. If the shooter can see through it, and the weapon is powerful enough, it's not protection at all.

On the other hand, if the protection can take enough energy out of the attack to reduce its terminal effect, we are effectively talking about armor at that point (even if its only ablative in its application).

This is why I prefer to handle "protection" more like armor.
_________________
.
SpecForce Combat Elements
All About Lightsabers: Designing, Building, and Fighting
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 Jun 21, 2021 12:16 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I think you’re overthinking this. Armor is worn, Protection is not. The idea is that, in order to provide Protection, the object has its own separate Damage Soak, and the Damage Reduction bonuses provided for partially penetrated Protection apply bonuses in the same way armor does. There isn’t really a need to reinvent the wheel here.
_________________
"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
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 Jun 21, 2021 9:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

CRMcNeill wrote:
The most complicated part would be figuring out whether or not, on a failed roll, the shooter missed entirely, or if they hit the Cover, and thus have to roll damage against the Cover to see if the shot punched through.

The answer to this was in the RAW the whole time:
    Sturdy objects may provide protection. If the attacker rolled well enough to beat the basic difficulty, but not well enough to beat the added cover modifier, that means that the shot hit whatever the character was hiding behind. Roll the attack's damage against the protection's body strength.
Since the character isn't dodging, just compare the attacker's Skill roll against the combined Base Difficulty + Cover Modifier. Then, if the attack is more than the Base Difficulty, but by less than the amount rolled on the Cover Modifier dice, the attack hits the Cover instead of the character.
_________________
"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
Whill
Dark Lord of the Jedi (Owner/Admin)


Joined: 14 Apr 2008
Posts: 10286
Location: Columbus, Ohio, USA, Earth, The Solar System, The Milky Way Galaxy

PostPosted: Mon Jun 21, 2021 10:37 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Yes.

Naaman wrote:
IMO, if the "protection" can be destroyed by the thing its protecting against, it isn't really "protection."

Protection isn't a binary yes-or-no thing, in Star Wars or in real life. In the game, protection can possibly be destroyed (providing no protection), but it also can provide full protection (no damage) and everything in between (damage reduction to various degrees). It varies according to the dice rolls, and protection has rating levels so stronger protection protects more and weaker protection protects less. In the heat of battle, a soldier (or what you consider less often, a two-fisted space opera scoundrel), may have to make do with whatever protection is available.

Some protection is sometimes better than no protection, but in my experience firefights rarely involve both sides shooting at each other from behind cover/protection until one side is eliminated. Usually one side eventually advances on the other or retreats, so protection rarely ever has time to be destroyed. My point is, using protection is often a temporary occurrence in combat, and if the protection is so weak than it can more easily be quickly destroyed then trained soldiers and most other characters would not depend on that.
_________________
*
Site Map
Forum Guidelines
Registration/Log-In Help
The Rancor Pit Library
Star Wars D6 Damage
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
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 Jun 21, 2021 11:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

It's possible for Cover / Protection to be damaged, and thus reduced in effectiveness, which adds dramatic tension to the battle. If the characters making use of the Cover know they have a limited amount of time before the Cover stops being viable protection, they have to think fast to come up with an alternate plan.
_________________
"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
garhkal
Sovereign Protector
Sovereign Protector


Joined: 17 Jul 2005
Posts: 14021
Location: Reynoldsburg, Columbus, Ohio.

PostPosted: Tue Jun 22, 2021 1:27 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Naaman wrote:
I know. ☺

IMO, if the "protection" can be destroyed by the thing its protecting against, it isn't really "protection."

Shields (and the like), provide a bouns to soak, which I think is an appropriate way to handle "protection" (that is, something that might stop the weapons fire, or might not).

To use a real world example, what provides cover against a 5.56 may not be cover against a 7.62, and even less likely against .50 BMG. But, what will stop a BMG will also stop all lesser rounds, as well.

This is why I don't see a need to add a third concept of protection: it only stops what it can stop. If the shooter can see through it, and the weapon is powerful enough, it's not protection at all.

On the other hand, if the protection can take enough energy out of the attack to reduce its terminal effect, we are effectively talking about armor at that point (even if its only ablative in its application).

This is why I prefer to handle "protection" more like armor.


By that logic, Armor isn't protection, as it can and does (BTB) get destroyed (if you kill the target wearing the armor, the armor is also seen as being destroyed).

CRMcNeill wrote:
It's possible for Cover / Protection to be damaged, and thus reduced in effectiveness, which adds dramatic tension to the battle. If the characters making use of the Cover know they have a limited amount of time before the Cover stops being viable protection, they have to think fast to come up with an alternate plan.


AND those shooting the cover, to ween it down, should at some point realize, that shooting the cover, while others shoot to "keep his head down" is better than all shooting the cover.
_________________
Confucious sayeth, don't wash cat while drunk!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Naaman
Vice Admiral
Vice Admiral


Joined: 29 Jul 2011
Posts: 3191

PostPosted: Tue Jun 22, 2021 3:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Check out some youtube vids of various steel targets being shot by calibers that it is not rated for.

Pistol rated steel targets will (not might, but will) be penetrated the first time a rifle round hits it. And even rifle rated steel is incremental: if its rated for 5.56mm, then a 7.62 will penetrate it on the first shot. This is steel we're talking about. Not wood, or drywall or something flimsy. Even a softer metal like iron would be immediately defeated by a rifle shot (which makes sense if it's penetrating a hardened alloy like steel).

In reality, "cover" by definition is impervious to your enemies' weapons. If your enemies' weapons can (that is, "could" or "might") penetrate it, it's not cover.

You may have cover against the stormies with rifles, but not the EWHB their buddies just finished setting up.

Not that blasters work like bullets, but if anyone wants to understand the nuances of "cover" versus (the concept of) "protection," check out some of Paul Harrell's videos on youtube.
_________________
.
SpecForce Combat Elements
All About Lightsabers: Designing, Building, and Fighting
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: Tue Jun 22, 2021 3:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

CRMcNeill wrote:
It's possible for Cover / Protection to be damaged, and thus reduced in effectiveness, which adds dramatic tension to the battle. If the characters making use of the Cover know they have a limited amount of time before the Cover stops being viable protection, they have to think fast to come up with an alternate plan.

I double checked, and there actually isn't anything specific about Cover being reduced in effectiveness by Damage. There are, however, mentions of both Armor and Weapons being reduced in effectiveness by Damage, so having something similar happen to inanimate cover that takes damage seems appropriate.

Maybe a combination of the two, along the lines of:
    Protection Damage Level = Protection Body Strength Reduced By
    Lightly Damaged = -1
    Heavily Damaged = -1D
    Severely Damaged = -2D
    Destroyed = Reduced to 0D

_________________
"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 Tue Jun 22, 2021 3:39 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
garhkal
Sovereign Protector
Sovereign Protector


Joined: 17 Jul 2005
Posts: 14021
Location: Reynoldsburg, Columbus, Ohio.

PostPosted: Tue Jun 22, 2021 3:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Cover SHOULD be wittled down like armor.
_________________
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: Tue Jun 22, 2021 5:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Naaman wrote:
In reality, "cover" by definition is impervious to your enemies' weapons. If your enemies' weapons can (that is, "could" or "might") penetrate it, it's not cover.

But representing that would require not only rewriting the Cover rules, but the entire Damage mechanic of the game itself. The whole system is built around the possibility, no matter how miniscule, that small can overcome large if it rolls high enough. The existing mechanic represents this relatively well; a flimsy wooden door with a Body of 2D is unlikely to provide much protection at all against a 5D Blaster Rifle, but the roll would still need to be made.
_________________
"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
MrNexx
Rear Admiral
Rear Admiral


Joined: 25 Mar 2016
Posts: 2248
Location: San Antonio

PostPosted: Tue Jun 22, 2021 6:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

To an extent, the argument about "cover" becomes something of an inverse ludic fallacy... while the Ludic Fallacy assumes the rules of the "game" apply the real world, this assumes that the rules of the real world apply to the game.

"Cover" may have a definition in the real world, but that definition doesn't necessarily apply in the game. The definition that applies in game is the game definition, which is "cover is something that provides some resistance (i.e. an increase to difficulties to attack) to direct fire, and some damage resistance if the cover is struck where the character would be."
_________________
"I've Seen Your Daily Routine. You Are Not Busy!"
“We're going to win this war, not by fighting what we hate, but saving what we love.”
http://rpgcrank.blogspot.com/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Whill
Dark Lord of the Jedi (Owner/Admin)


Joined: 14 Apr 2008
Posts: 10286
Location: Columbus, Ohio, USA, Earth, The Solar System, The Milky Way Galaxy

PostPosted: Tue Jun 22, 2021 10:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

MrNexx wrote:
To an extent, the argument about "cover" becomes something of an inverse ludic fallacy... while the Ludic Fallacy assumes the rules of the "game" apply the real world, this assumes that the rules of the real world apply to the game.

"Cover" may have a definition in the real world, but that definition doesn't necessarily apply in the game. The definition that applies in game is the game definition, which is "cover is something that provides some resistance (i.e. an increase to difficulties to attack) to direct fire, and some damage resistance if the cover is struck where the character would be."

No, in the game, cover is something which obstructs the shooter's view of the target, such as smoke or darkness. Mechanically, it adds to the shooter's difficulty to hit. Protection is the game term referring to something that may block a shot from providing full or any damage to the target. Part of Naaman's issue is that they do not use the terms exactly the same way in his military.

https://rancorpit.com/jotw/damage.html
_________________
*
Site Map
Forum Guidelines
Registration/Log-In Help
The Rancor Pit Library
Star Wars D6 Damage
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
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: Tue Jun 22, 2021 10:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Whill wrote:
No, in the game, cover is something which obstructs the shooter's view of the target, such as smoke or darkness.

You mean Concealment. Cover is an umbrella term for Protection and Concealment.

Quote:
Part of Naaman's issue is that they do not use the terms exactly the same way in his military.

It may have been more accurate for Nexx to have used Protection instead of Cover, given the context, but he has a fair point. Naaman's most recent post argues that the nature of Protection in the real world is pretty much all-or-nothing; a bullet either penetrates or it doesn't. This is at odds with the way the game works, where there's much more variability in potential results. Nexx just pointed out that the game is not the real world, and vice versa.
_________________
"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 Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 20, 21, 22, 23, 24  Next
Page 21 of 24

 
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