| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16178
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
 Posted: Tue Dec 18, 2012 11:04 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| Esoomian wrote: | | That makes sense if the target doesn't breathe or is in completely sealed (environmentally sealed) armour then it counts as a droid or inorganic for purposes of resisting fire damage and gets that +1D to resist the fire damage. That +1D then in turn lowers the likelyhood of panic. |
Exactly.
| Quote: | | Not quite sure I understand blast radius negating cover is it just you target behind the cover and hit them with the blast radius? |
I'm not quite sure yet. Its just that, of the two, I feel that the blast radius makes a more realistic fit to a weapon ignoring or reducing the effectiveness of cover.
| Quote: | | I'd just use the armour bonus but you have to do enough damage to actually 'wound' the armour otherwise you haven't done enough to get it off. |
It's as good a marker as any. My only issue is that an armor's Strength is likely not directly proportional to the complexity of its latching system. Otherwise, Boba Fett would have a hell of a time getting out of his +4D physical armor when its one fire.
_________________
"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 |
|
 |
Esoomian
High Admiral
Joined: 29 Oct 2003
Posts: 6207
Location: Auckland, New Zealand
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 18, 2012 11:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| crmcneill wrote: | | It's as good a marker as any. My only issue is that an armor's Strength is likely not directly proportional to the complexity of its latching system. Otherwise, Boba Fett would have a hell of a time getting out of his +4D physical armor when its one fire. |
Well the strength check is for breaking your way out of the armour. As Bobba Fett's armour is unique I'd have no problem saying he could simply unlatch it in a round by using his armour repair skill against a set difficulty. If he wanted to break his way out though then roll strength vs. 4D and see how you go.
_________________
Don't waste money on expensive binoculars.
Simply stand closer to the object you wish to view. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16178
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 19, 2012 12:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Esoomian wrote: | | Well the strength check is for breaking your way out of the armour. As Bobba Fett's armour is unique I'd have no problem saying he could simply unlatch it in a round by using his armour repair skill against a set difficulty. If he wanted to break his way out though then roll strength vs. 4D and see how you go. |
I'd almost rather have it tied to the Willpower roll. Maybe on a success, you maintain the wherewithal to toggle the latches and remove the armor, but on a minor (i.e. non-panicked) failure, you have to physically tear the armor off and break the latches.
_________________
"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 |
|
|
Esoomian
High Admiral
Joined: 29 Oct 2003
Posts: 6207
Location: Auckland, New Zealand
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 19, 2012 8:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
That seems like it would penalize someone with a high armour repair skill. The task they're doing is an armour repair task the fire is a situational modifier.
It's like making headbutting someone a willpower test rather than a brawling test because you know it's going to hurt and you have to psyche yourself up for it.
_________________
Don't waste money on expensive binoculars.
Simply stand closer to the object you wish to view. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16178
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 19, 2012 9:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Esoomian wrote: | That seems like it would penalize someone with a high armour repair skill. The task they're doing is an armour repair task the fire is a situational modifier.
It's like making headbutting someone a willpower test rather than a brawling test because you know it's going to hurt and you have to psyche yourself up for it. |
I don't see it that way. Anyone trained to wear armor has to know the basics of how to put it on and take it off. Removing it under fire wouldn't require any special training beyond that; just the presence of mind to remember the procedure instead of panicking and just trying to tear the armor off.
_________________
"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 |
|
|
Esoomian
High Admiral
Joined: 29 Oct 2003
Posts: 6207
Location: Auckland, New Zealand
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 19, 2012 10:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
That assumes the armour can be removed quickly, that may not be possible in normal situations hence the need for an armour repair roll (or something similar) to remove it in the least possible time. Which catches can be bent, which steps can be skipped. Like taking off your shirt while undoing the least possible amount of buttons.
Knowing how to drive a car generally means you know how to open a car door or start a car but it doesn't mean you can do so without keys. If you want to do that you need a different skill or perhaps more a better example is if you were locked in a car sinking in a lake you wouldn't use drive or willpower to get out of the car you could use strength to break a window or ground vehicle repair to undo something that will let you get out.
_________________
Don't waste money on expensive binoculars.
Simply stand closer to the object you wish to view. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16178
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 20, 2012 12:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
Sorry, but I can't agree with that one. The vast majority of armor in the SWU (IMO) is secured with little more than latches and simple fastenings, and any character who wears armor on a regular basis knows how to put his armor on and take it off. Armor Repair is for taking damaged armor, diagnosing problems and fixing them, not taking it off as fast as possible. If I had to come up with a rule for this, I would consider putting armor on and taking it off to be a non-roll action, with the time required based on the complexity of the armor. Taking it on or off faster than the normal time required would be a Dexterity check, not a Technical one.
_________________
"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 |
|
|
Fallon Kell
Commodore
Joined: 07 Mar 2011
Posts: 1846
Location: Tacoma, WA
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 20, 2012 3:52 am Post subject: |
|
|
| crmcneill wrote: | | ...I would consider putting armor on and taking it off to be a non-roll action, with the time required based on the complexity of the armor. Taking it on or off faster than the normal time required would be a Dexterity check, not a Technical one. |
I agree 100% for exactly the reasons listed.
_________________
Or that excessively long "Noooooooooo" was the Whining Side of the Force leaving him. - Dustflier
Complete Starship Construction System |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Esoomian
High Admiral
Joined: 29 Oct 2003
Posts: 6207
Location: Auckland, New Zealand
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 20, 2012 4:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Dexterity check is fine in my mind but just not willpower. The fire is a situational modifier like a wound level rather than the be all and end all of performing a task while on fire.
A Columi in armour for instance should not be able to succeed automatically because it has 7D in Willpower.
_________________
Don't waste money on expensive binoculars.
Simply stand closer to the object you wish to view. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16178
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 20, 2012 4:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Esoomian wrote: | Dexterity check is fine in my mind but just not willpower. The fire is a situational modifier like a wound level rather than the be all and end all of performing a task while on fire.
A Columi in armour for instance should not be able to succeed automatically because it has 7D in Willpower. |
Willpower is already an aspect of fire damage as I have presented it. Recall the following from the flamethrower stats:
| Quote: | -Effects of Fire on Living Beings: A character who is Aflame or worse must roll Willpower against the Difficulty value in parenthesis at the end of each entry in the above list.
Success = The character can ignore the fire and act normally (subject to standard damage penalties) while still aflame.
Failure by 10 or less = The character can take no action other than attempting to put out the flames.
Failure by more than 10 = The character is panicked and makes a minimum High Speed move in a random direction. He is unable to attempt to fight the flames, but his comrades may attempt to tackle him and extinguish the flames themselves. |
What I am proposing is that what kind of roll the character can make to remove his armor is dependent on how well he rolled his Willpower roll to maintain control of himself even though he is on fire.
Damage Level (decided by Strength level) = Willpower Difficulty = Degree of self-control characters retain while on fire = What kind of action a character can take to put themselves out.
Using the difficulty chart above for Willpower success as applied to action to remove armor would look something like this:
Success = Character may make a normal Dex check to remove his armor.
Failure by 10 or less = Character may still remove armor, but must make a Strength check, as he is too panicked to attempt to remove armor normally.
Failure by more than 10 = Character has lost all control and may not attempt to remove his armor at all, subject to the rules described above for panicked characters.
In the case of your example, a Columi with 7D Willpower would also have 1D Strength (plus 1D armor), so he would take more damage than a Wookiee wearing similar armor, and would need to roll higher Willpower (as the Willpower Difficulty would be increased by the higher damage level).
_________________
"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 |
|
|
Esoomian
High Admiral
Joined: 29 Oct 2003
Posts: 6207
Location: Auckland, New Zealand
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 20, 2012 4:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I'm talking about this post here:
| crmcneill wrote: | | Esoomian wrote: | | Well the strength check is for breaking your way out of the armour. As Bobba Fett's armour is unique I'd have no problem saying he could simply unlatch it in a round by using his armour repair skill against a set difficulty. If he wanted to break his way out though then roll strength vs. 4D and see how you go. |
I'd almost rather have it tied to the Willpower roll. Maybe on a success, you maintain the wherewithal to toggle the latches and remove the armor, but on a minor (i.e. non-panicked) failure, you have to physically tear the armor off and break the latches. |
I inferred that you'd rule removing armour was dependent on a willpower test alone, if that is not the case then it works for me.
[Edit] Perhaps rather than panic completely removing a character's ability to act panic should simply apply Multi Action Penalties. So if you fail the willpower roll by five or less it's one MAP 5-10 is 2 MAPs 10-15 it's 3 MAPs etc... That way skills that a character has drilled into their brain to the degree that they are all but instinctive can still be performed while panicing but skills that a character isn't good at are completely repressed by the panic.
So If a character is set on fire and misses his difficulty by 10 he can still act but with a -2D penalty (on top of any wound penalties). This means if he is an expert at hand to hand he might be able to keep fighting but he probably won't have the presence of mind to remove his armour.[/edit]
_________________
Don't waste money on expensive binoculars.
Simply stand closer to the object you wish to view. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16178
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 20, 2012 5:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
What? And pass on the chance to use my Psychological Effect rules for the first time?
_________________
"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 |
|
|
Esoomian
High Admiral
Joined: 29 Oct 2003
Posts: 6207
Location: Auckland, New Zealand
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 20, 2012 5:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Perhaps you can change the way panic works in your psychological effects rules. Panic (fear) is fine when you're controlling a number of squads but when you're playing just one character it can be a bit much.
In fact even in the later editions of Warhammer they changed fear to allow people to act as they wanted but they would only hit on sixes to show the effects panic would have.
_________________
Don't waste money on expensive binoculars.
Simply stand closer to the object you wish to view. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16178
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 20, 2012 6:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
This already getting pretty complicated...
_________________
"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: 16178
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 20, 2012 8:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Why not just allow characters to spend CP as soak on the Willpower roll if they feel the need?
_________________
"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 |
|
|
|
