| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Dr. Bidlo
Commander
Joined: 24 Nov 2021
Posts: 439
Location: Arizona, USA
|
 Posted: Sat Nov 05, 2022 10:23 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| When I first said I would use your rules, I liked the +2 for 1/4 cover and I hadn't compared the other values to the RAW. The other thing is I have not been keeping up with the (A) dodge house rule discussion because 1) I have not had any problems with dodges using the RAW and 2) I was a little intimidated by the potential complexity of it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16176
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 06, 2022 1:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Dr. Bidlo wrote: | | 1) I have not had any problems with dodges using the RAW |
There's nothing technically wrong with Dodge in the RAW; my issue is mainly cinematic, in that Dodge in combat on the tabletop is noticeably different from what we see on screen (as in, on screen, when a blaster fight happens, generally everyone dives for the nearest bit of Cover and continues the fight from there until circumstances require them to break cover and move). As things stand, the current mechanic favors putting dice into Dodge, then shimmying around out in the open to avoid getting hit. In order to bring things more in line with the films, Dodge needs to be nerfed such that taking Cover and fighting from there is the preferable option.
| Quote: | | 2) I was a little intimidated by the potential complexity of it. |
Feel free to ask if you have any questions. At the moment, it breaks down to three changes:- Dodge (or (A) Avoid, as it currently stands) is now an Advanced Skill that can be used in one of two ways...
- Added to the Base Difficulty to Hit of anyone shooting at the character, if the character is making a Move Action.
- Or added to any Modifier provided by Cover. This gives you the same general effect as Dodge (avoiding being hit), but applies it a way more consistent with the films.
_________________
"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 Thu Dec 14, 2023 12:01 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dr. Bidlo
Commander
Joined: 24 Nov 2021
Posts: 439
Location: Arizona, USA
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 06, 2022 1:12 pm Post subject: Re: Partial Cover |
|
|
| CRMcNeill wrote: | 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 |
While trying to apply the x2 = +1D method to my own house rules for angle of turns based on scale, I found myself applying the +1D bonus based on a set value instead of doubling the previous value. So I went back to this example to see how you dud it and I see you did the same thing - added +1D at set intervals rather than the true 2x = +1D method. If you did apply it faithfully, it is hard to figure out where to start, so the first step is set arbitrarily at 25% cover equals +2, which is fine. Then, the next step would be 50% cover at +1D. Then there would be no other steps because the next doubling is 100% cover with +2D, which makes no sense.
If we go inverse, we would have to halve the value each time and work backwards from an imaginary number value to get to 50% in the first place, then to 25%. The 2X =+1D system just doesn't seem to work for penalties based an percentiles - it will only ever work for whole numbers.
For example, for the sake of the math, we start at 100% cover equals +3D, then half of that is 50% which equals +2D, followed by 25% which equals +1D. If you wanted, you could then go down to 1/8 cover equals +2, but that is too little cover to even register...
I now see why set intervals must be applied to percentiles. However, in my case with reduced turn angles, I am dealing with whole numbers, but the bonus is in set intervals for degrees, not bonus die, so the 2×=+1D system won't work for my case either. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dr. Bidlo
Commander
Joined: 24 Nov 2021
Posts: 439
Location: Arizona, USA
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 06, 2022 1:18 pm Post subject: Re: Partial Cover |
|
|
As a follow-up to my last post, I think I found the way to reverse the system to follow the pattern for intervals (the example being my house rules for turn angles being dictated by a ship's maneuverability), but it turns into 2 x D = +[interval] or rather for our purposes + [interval] = 2 X D (or part therof)
Applied to the maneuverability rules fir a Capital Ship (+12D), the turn angle interval is +2 degrees per turn. So, 0 to +2 manueverability = 2 degrees per turn, 1D to 1D+2 maneuverability = 4 degrees, 2D to 3D+2 maneuverability = 6 degrees per turn, 4D to 7D+2 maneuverability (effectively 4D+) = 8 degrees per turn. I will post these full rules separately, though I used intervals at the full die breaks for my current version.
Applied to cover, it looks like this:
No Cover = no cover difficulty increase
1/4 Cover = +1D to +1D+2 cover difficulty increase
1/2 Cover = +2D to +3D+2 cover difficulty increase
3/4 Cover = +4D to +8D cover difficulty increase
The GM would have a range based on whatever they think is appropriate. Of course, I started at +1D to +1D+2, but you could start at +0 to +2 if you prefer, which would look like:
No Cover = no cover difficulty increase
1/4 Cover = +0 to +2 cover difficulty increase
1/2 Cover = +1D to +1D+2 cover difficulty increase
3/4 Cover = +2D to +3D+2 cover difficulty increase
Assuming this is the system to use, I would prefer the former option because it keeps cover useful and gives the GM a range of dice values based on circumstances at the GM's discretion. It also caps out at +8D, which is the highest to hit difficulty increase that shows up in the rules for targeting specific weapons and locations on a Capital ship, so it could be applied as a house rules for other circumstances to hold true to the inverse of the 2x = +1D convention. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16176
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 06, 2022 5:13 pm Post subject: Re: Partial Cover |
|
|
| Dr. Bidlo wrote: | | So I went back to this example to see how you did it and I see you did the same thing - added +1D at set intervals rather than the true 2x = +1D method. |
This is incorrect. 0% Cover = -0D, and is the starting point for Partial Cover. Every time the silhouette of the targeted character is reduced by 1/2 of the previous value, the penalty increases by 1D. 100% Exposed = -0D. 1/2 of 100% is 50% (-1D), 1/2 of 50% is 25% (-2D), 1/2 of 25% is 12.5% (-3D), 1/2 of 12.5% is 6.25% (-4D), and so on. The only set interval is a function of the preceding values.
| Quote: | | If you did apply it faithfully, it is hard to figure out where to start, so the first step is set arbitrarily at 25% cover equals +2, which is fine. Then, the next step would be 50% cover at +1D. Then there would be no other steps because the next doubling is 100% cover with +2D, which makes no sense. |
It starts at 0% Cover = +0D. At that point, the character is fully exposed, and thus the Base Difficulty to Hit is equal to whatever the listed Difficulty is for the weapon at the given range.
Think of it in terms of Scale. Every time the silhouette of the target is reduced by 50%, it becomes 1D more difficult to hit
| Quote: | | For example, for the sake of the math, we start at 100% cover equals +3D, then half of that is 50% which equals +2D, followed by 25% which equals +1D. |
The problem with that is, at 100% Cover, there is nothing to hit, as 0% of the target is exposed. I didn't bother to include the RAW in my Partial Cover proposal because it was technically outside of the scope of the topic, but here is what it says:Fully Covered: If Cover provides Protection, attacker cannot hit target directly; attacker must eliminate cover first. The x2=+1D / x1/2=-1D requires that at least some portion of the target, no matter how small, be exposed enough to hit. If it is 100% Covered, this rule does not apply, and the attacked must attack the Cover itself.
The x2=+1D / x1/2=-1D Rule works so long as the volume / area of the object or shape in question is greater than 0. If 0% of the target is visible and vulnerable to attack, then it doesn't apply.
| Quote: | | However, in my case with reduced turn angles, I am dealing with whole numbers, but the bonus is in set intervals for degrees, not bonus die, so the 2×=+1D system won't work for my case either. |
I have no interest in turn angles in degrees, outside of what is applicable to a four-fire-arc system or a conversion to a six-arc system for use with a hex map. It's important to think about exactly how this will impact gameplay, and whether that level of complexity is worth the drag it will create at the table during combat.
_________________
"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 Thu Jun 22, 2023 9:50 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dr. Bidlo
Commander
Joined: 24 Nov 2021
Posts: 439
Location: Arizona, USA
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 06, 2022 6:54 pm Post subject: Re: Partial Cover |
|
|
Sorry, there were too many quotes within quotes for me to figure out... so, you convinced me for a moment just now, but then I realized something. If you applied the 2 x =1D method, there would be no value for 1/4 cover because you are always reducing the starting value by half. I will attempt to explain.
It you start with 1/4 cover as your first arbitrary point, the progression would be 1/4 cover, 3/8 cover, 7/16 cover, 15/32 cover... you would never reach 1/2 cover.
If you start at the whole, the first step is 1/2 cover, then 3/4 cover, then 7/8 cover and so on, but there is no way to get 1/4 cover.
What you have proposed still looks like 1/4 interval progression to me.
As for the angle rules, the point wasn't to sell you on that but to attempt to apply the 2 x = 1D formula when starting with a D value and working inversely to a real number, as I found it did not make sense to convert dice values to dice values to dice bonus values when I attempted it.
As for the granularity of the angle rules applied to movement, yet would bog down most games, but the games I run are often very tactical and my players really like that, so it works for them. I imagine they are in the very small minority, though.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16176
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 06, 2022 7:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
No. 1/4 Cover would be a half step between 0D and 1D, with 1D equaling an average result of 3.5 (per the 2D=7 Bell Curve). If one were, for example, to do a similar spread with D3's in place of D6's, you'd get a distribution of roughly:Result on 2D3 = Odds
2 = 1/9
3 = 2/9
4 = 3/9
5 = 2/9
6 = 1/9 The most likely result on a 2D3 is a 4. Divide by 2 (to get the likely result on a 1D3) and you get 2, so +2.
1/4 Cover is not the arbitrary starting point; it's a half step incorporated solely because 1/4 Cover was included in the RAW, and mathematically, 1/4 Cover would provide 1/2 the Protection of 1/2 Cover. Thus a +2 modifier.
_________________
"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 |
|
|
Dr. Bidlo
Commander
Joined: 24 Nov 2021
Posts: 439
Location: Arizona, USA
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 06, 2022 8:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| CRMcNeill wrote: | No. 1/4 Cover would be a half step between 0D and 1D, with 1D equaling an average result of 3.5 (per the 2D=7 Bell Curve). If one were, for example, to do a similar spread with D3's in place of D6's, you'd get a distribution of roughly:Result on 2D3 = Odds
2 = 1/9
3 = 2/9
4 = 3/9
5 = 2/9
6 = 1/9 The most likely result on a 2D3 is a 4. Divide by 2 (to get the likely result on a 1D3) and you get 2, so +2.
1/4 Cover is not the arbitrary starting point; it's a half step incorporated solely because 1/4 Cover was included in the RAW, and mathematically, 1/4 Cover would provide 1/2 the Protection of 1/2 Cover. Thus a +2 modifier. |
I see your logic, but a bell curve is not a consistent application of the 2 x = 1D progression. There should be steady and unchanging increases/decreases of 50% - there should be no inflection point were the progression flips - in this case at 50% cover. I have no other evidence concerning the math aside from my previous post.
Regardless, it is another way to figure difficulty increases due to cover and I will continue to watch your house rule threads for similar applications and other new great ideas. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16176
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 11, 2022 2:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Also, to clarify, the distinction between 3/4 and 7/8's Cover ties into my Blaster Weapon re-write. Essentially, a one-handed weapon like a pistol or blaster carbine exposes less of the firer when shooting around Cover, which makes them 1D harder to hit than they would be if firing a larger, two-handed weapon
_________________
"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 |
|
|
garhkal
Sovereign Protector
Joined: 17 Jul 2005
Posts: 14033
Location: Reynoldsburg, Columbus, Ohio.
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 11, 2022 3:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Though if they are that covered, how much of their OWN head is outside the cover, for THEM TO shoot back??
_________________
Confucious sayeth, don't wash cat while drunk! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16176
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 11, 2022 4:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| garhkal wrote: | | Though if they are that covered, how much of their OWN head is outside the cover, for THEM TO shoot back?? |
...
Less than it would if they were firing a larger weapon.
_________________
"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 |
|
|
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16176
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 24, 2023 1:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
Coming back around to this, I realized I never fully codified it for inclusion in my House Rule posting, so here it is.
Partial Cover
Characters often find themselves taking Cover behind objects that may not fully hide them. Alternately, they may have to partially expose themselves for a variety of reasons, such as shooting from behind Cover, or peering around Cover to get a look at the situation. When this occurs, add a Cover Modifier to the Difficulty of the Attacker, based on how much of the Target is covered.Target is:
1/4 Covered = +2
1/2 Covered = +1D
3/4 Covered = +2D
7/8 Covered = +3D
15/16 Covered = +4D
Fully Covered = If Cover provides Protection, the Attacker cannot hit Target directly; Attacker must eliminate Cover first. For practical application in personal combat, use the following:15/16 Cover = 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 Cover = Character firing a one-handed weapon (pistol, or a carbine with a folded stock) around the edge of Cover.
3/4 Cover = Character firing a two-handed weapon (rifles and similar devices)
1/2 Cover = Character firing a heavy weapon such as a light or medium repeating blaster (at GM's discretion).
1/4 Cover = Character hiding behind a thin pole or tree that hardly provides any Cover at all.
_________________
"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 |
|
|
Whill
Dark Lord of the Jedi (Owner/Admin)
Joined: 14 Apr 2008
Posts: 10297
Location: Columbus, Ohio, USA, Earth, The Solar System, The Milky Way Galaxy
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 24, 2023 7:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I like this idea. It adds a little more nuance to RAW with no additional crunch.
Just to confirm, the weapon guidelines are not when attacking characters using those weapons out in the open (It is not the weapons themselves providing cover). The weapon guidelines are for attacking a target character who is behind something that would serve as full cover but the target character wants to come out just enough to use the weapons, such as from around a corner or up from under a window. Using some weapons require a character to expose more of themselves than others in that situation. Right?
_________________
*
Site Map
Forum Guidelines
Registration/Log-In Help
The Rancor Pit Library
Star Wars D6 Damage |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16176
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 24, 2023 9:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Correct. It also ties in with the One-Handed/Two-Handed entry. Characters firing a two-handed weapon can attempt to fire it one-handed, but at the penalty to Blaster listed in the stat line.
_________________
"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 |
|
|
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16176
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 26, 2023 11:52 am Post subject: |
|
|
Also, this would tie in with my Dodge Advanced Skill concept, where the character’s training allows them to make better use of available Cover when looking/firing around it. This incentivizes characters to look for and make use of Cover in a blaster fight, which is what we see in the films.
_________________
"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 |
|
|
|
