View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
Dromdarr_Alark Commander
Joined: 07 Apr 2013 Posts: 426 Location: Boston, MA
|
Posted: Mon Jun 17, 2013 10:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Has anyone created speed modifiers?
I would volunteer, but I'm somewhat at a loss a to where to begin. _________________ "I still wouldn't have a roll for it - but that's just how I roll." |
|
Back to top |
|
|
garhkal Sovereign Protector
Joined: 17 Jul 2005 Posts: 14088 Location: Reynoldsburg, Columbus, Ohio.
|
Posted: Tue Jun 18, 2013 1:24 am Post subject: |
|
|
jmanski wrote: | I thought I saw, somewhere, a blurb about a fast moving character being +1d harder to hit. I can't find it anywhere, but I KNOW I saw it.
I think a speed modifier would be the thing to do here. |
You might be mixing up the +2d bonus troopers with MFAS in their helmets get when shooting at fast moving targets (more than 10/round) _________________ Confucious sayeth, don't wash cat while drunk! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
ZzaphodD Rear Admiral
Joined: 28 Nov 2009 Posts: 2426
|
Posted: Sun Jun 23, 2013 6:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
jmanski wrote: | I thought I saw, somewhere, a blurb about a fast moving character being +1d harder to hit. I can't find it anywhere, but I KNOW I saw it.
I think a speed modifier would be the thing to do here. |
Its been up before, regarding why its so darn easy to hit an x-wing at full atmospheric speed with a blaster rifle... _________________ My Biggest Beard Retard award goes to: The Admiral of course.. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
jmanski Arbiter-General (Moderator)
Joined: 06 Mar 2005 Posts: 2065 Location: Kansas
|
Posted: Sun Jun 23, 2013 9:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
garhkal wrote: | jmanski wrote: | I thought I saw, somewhere, a blurb about a fast moving character being +1d harder to hit. I can't find it anywhere, but I KNOW I saw it.
I think a speed modifier would be the thing to do here. |
You might be mixing up the +2d bonus troopers with MFAS in their helmets get when shooting at fast moving targets (more than 10/round) |
Could be, I am getting older... But I'm just sure I read something about a moving character being +1d harder to hit due to speed. Could have been a house rule, too, for what its worth. _________________ Blasted rules. Why can't they just be perfect? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
DougRed4 Rear Admiral
Joined: 18 Jan 2013 Posts: 2260 Location: Seattle, WA
|
Posted: Sat Jul 06, 2013 3:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
A lot of games do have a hindrance both to shooter and/or to the target if they're moving.
Adding in the rule for jetpacks (using basically Tupteq's modifiers posted above, which my group seems to be okay with) makes me now consider whether it might make sense to implement:
-1D if the shooter is moving significantly (more than 10 meters per round)
-1D if the target is moving significantly (more than 10 meters per round) _________________ Currently Running: Villains & Vigilantes (a 32-year-old campaign with multiple groups) and D6 Star Wars; mostly on hiatus are Adventures in Middle-earth and Delta Green |
|
Back to top |
|
|
jmanski Arbiter-General (Moderator)
Joined: 06 Mar 2005 Posts: 2065 Location: Kansas
|
Posted: Sat Jul 06, 2013 2:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
How about adding the target's movement penalty to the shooter's difficulty (IE 2 moves = 1 MAP or 1d difficulty)? _________________ Blasted rules. Why can't they just be perfect? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Leon The Lion Commander
Joined: 29 Oct 2009 Posts: 309 Location: Somewhere in Poland
|
Posted: Sat Jul 06, 2013 3:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
jmanski wrote: | How about adding the target's movement penalty to the shooter's difficulty (IE 2 moves = 1 MAP or 1d difficulty)? |
That would mean a man running flat out and a starfighter flying overhead at full burn would generate the same to hit penalty due to movement, despite the vast speed difference. _________________ Plagiarize! Let no one else's work evade your eyes,
Remember why the good Lord made your eyes! So don't shade your eyes,
But plagiarize, plagiarize, plagiarize... Only be sure to call it, please, "research".
- Tom Lehrer |
|
Back to top |
|
|
jmanski Arbiter-General (Moderator)
Joined: 06 Mar 2005 Posts: 2065 Location: Kansas
|
Posted: Sat Jul 06, 2013 9:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Then you'd have to factor in scale to that _________________ Blasted rules. Why can't they just be perfect? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Leon The Lion Commander
Joined: 29 Oct 2009 Posts: 309 Location: Somewhere in Poland
|
Posted: Sun Jul 07, 2013 2:41 am Post subject: |
|
|
jmanski wrote: | Then you'd have to factor in scale to that |
?
Of course you'd figure in scale, as per RAW. Which will make the starfighter easier to hit than the man, because of it's higher scale, despite it going over 30x as fast. Which is the very problem with this situation, so we're back to square one.
Or do you mean devise a way to figure in scale of the distance traveled, which would be a negative modifier?
Personally, I'm tempted to adapt something along the lines of the Speed/Distance/Size table from GURPS. _________________ Plagiarize! Let no one else's work evade your eyes,
Remember why the good Lord made your eyes! So don't shade your eyes,
But plagiarize, plagiarize, plagiarize... Only be sure to call it, please, "research".
- Tom Lehrer |
|
Back to top |
|
|
garhkal Sovereign Protector
Joined: 17 Jul 2005 Posts: 14088 Location: Reynoldsburg, Columbus, Ohio.
|
Posted: Sun Jul 07, 2013 3:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Well watching many war movies, the size of fighters in relation to people and the speed they move is usually a null addition (their speed negates teh bonus of their size), if not a negative cause we rarely see lots of hits from ground weapons to fighters. _________________ Confucious sayeth, don't wash cat while drunk! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Naaman Vice Admiral
Joined: 29 Jul 2011 Posts: 3191
|
Posted: Sun Jul 07, 2013 5:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
We are still talking about jet packs, right?
When shooting at a moving target, there are a couple different ways to approach this.
You can "lead" the target, moving the weapon with the target and following through with that movement as you pull the trigger. This method is often used in skeet shooting.
Or, if you can predict a future location of the target (it's moving in a straight line across your field of fire, for example), you can just "camp" the cross hairs on a spot you know (or suspect) the target will soon be, and time the shot so that it gets there at the same time.
In real world applications, a bullet leaves the muzzle of a rifle at around 3,000 feet per second. Pistols are generally sub-sonic, in the 600-1200 feet per second range... so the "timing" of the shot is not that difficult to calculate, unless you're dealing with vast distances that would render the target beyond the reach of the naked eye. So, at typical skirmish distances, unless you want a very specific target (the brain stem or the right knee or some such), just placing the sights on the target will result in a hit.
At jet pack speeds, I would tend to allow some variance, though. Since jet packs are really fast, I might allow the jet packer to claim a full dodge, since at the speeds I'm thinking of, he wouldn't be able to do anything else anyway.
As for the stormies getting a bonus on attack rolls to hit moving targets, it would seem to me that this bonus is intended to offset some preexisting penalty (or, bonus received by the target) for speed. Where a description of such a penalty (or bonus) might be is unknown to me... |
|
Back to top |
|
|
jmanski Arbiter-General (Moderator)
Joined: 06 Mar 2005 Posts: 2065 Location: Kansas
|
Posted: Sun Jul 07, 2013 7:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Leon The Lion wrote: | jmanski wrote: | Then you'd have to factor in scale to that |
?
Of course you'd figure in scale, as per RAW. Which will make the starfighter easier to hit than the man, because of it's higher scale, despite it going over 30x as fast. Which is the very problem with this situation, so we're back to square one.
Or do you mean devise a way to figure in scale of the distance traveled, which would be a negative modifier?
Personally, I'm tempted to adapt something along the lines of the Speed/Distance/Size table from GURPS. |
I mean add the scale modifier to the speed difference. So an X-wing travelling overhead (pilot uses two moves) being shot at by a character, the character gets an additional 4d (iirc) penalty to hit the X-wing based on the speed. _________________ Blasted rules. Why can't they just be perfect? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
DougRed4 Rear Admiral
Joined: 18 Jan 2013 Posts: 2260 Location: Seattle, WA
|
Posted: Mon Jul 08, 2013 4:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
My group liked this, and we were ready to move forward with the list as proposed. Then we were going to add some penalties for the jet pack wearing character when they were shooting.
But then one of my players pointed out that such a character would already be getting a MAP, so such a penalty would be pretty severe.
Then when I was typing this out, and incorporaing our own new penalty for moving characters (both as a target and as a shooter), I realized that such a rule also doubles up the penalty from the chart.
So instead here are both rules, working in tandem:
Movement during Combat
When combatants are moving, the following penalties apply:
Shooter is moving more than 10 meters per round: -1D
Target is moving more than 10 meters per round: -1D
In addition, if the target is moving exceptionally fast (often via a jet pack or rocket pack), the following numbers are added to the difficulty:
Target is moving 40-79 meters per round: +3
Target is moving 80-159 meters per round: +6
Target is moving 160 meters or more per round: +9 _________________ Currently Running: Villains & Vigilantes (a 32-year-old campaign with multiple groups) and D6 Star Wars; mostly on hiatus are Adventures in Middle-earth and Delta Green |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|