| 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: Sun Jun 09, 2019 6:33 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
And my point is that there is a middle ground between the two that makes a Dodge more difficult simply by dint of there being more fire to be avoided, even if it isn't well coordinated, especially at close range. Not a lot of one, but still present.
What's the old saying; quantity has a quality all its own?
_________________
"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 |
|
 |
Darklighter79
Captain
Joined: 27 May 2018
Posts: 529
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 10, 2019 9:38 am Post subject: |
|
|
| CRMcNeill wrote: |
But this topic is about parrying blaster bolts with a lightsaber, not blocking them with a shield. Enfys Nest hardly moves her arms at all while she's charging, so all she's doing is hiding behind her shields. I'd go with the Cover and Protection rules, treating the shields as 1/4 Cover, which Beckett then has to try to shoot around to get to her.
|
Option 1 then: v. easy +1D
In d6 Fantasy I have just found alternative to RAW rule: shield gives armor bonus if positioned between defender and attacked that stacks with STR and armor worn.
OK back on topic.
| Naaman wrote: | | This is why I believe that the lightsber defense concept INCLUDES dodging the fire that the lightsaber is not available to parry (that is, the skill is just not high enough to deflect it ALL--and thus grant an opportunity to redirect it, but the precognition still allows for a sense of how to avoid being hit). |
It does. Check https://rancorpit.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=190231#190231
| CRMcNeill wrote: | 1) A Jedi with Lightsaber Combat 'up' can parry all the blaster fire from a single fire arc at Easy Difficulty.
rs at all. |
Here's the small problem with Coleman Trebor (only 2 shots deflected)
and Zett Jukassa (many shots, 2+ rounds)
With dice bucket available for LSC, it's hard to believe that Trebor lost it. I tested some options with sense skill only as some of you already did. It seems optimal and cinematic:
Trebor could have lost it as MAP "killed" him:
1) Enhanced Attribute
2) Jump Skill
3) LSC (for melee combat only. He was trying to get Dooku after all)
4) Sense for deflection (two arcs, Dooku is not to be underestimated).
so -5D to his Sense roll
Zett Jukassa: 1st round surprise attack an killing all clones in his vicinity. Then 2nd round: deflect only from one arc but number of shots in a round finally overcame him (there were app. six or seven shots deflected)
I think Jedi should declare at the beginning how many arcs are to be protected so proper penalty could be applied
_________________
Don’t Let the Rules Get in the Way of a Good Story. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Naaman
Vice Admiral
Joined: 29 Jul 2011
Posts: 3191
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 10, 2019 10:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
| CRMcNeill wrote: | And my point is that there is a middle ground between the two that makes a Dodge more difficult simply by dint of there being more fire to be avoided, even if it isn't well coordinated, especially at close range. Not a lot of one, but still present.
What's the old saying; quantity has a quality all its own? |
But it really doesn't UNLESS it is deliberately coordinated. |
|
| 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: Mon Jun 10, 2019 2:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Naaman wrote: | | But it really doesn't UNLESS it is deliberately coordinated. |
And now it sounds like you're arguing in a circle.
| Naaman wrote: | | What I'm saying effectively amounts to all shooters with the same goal are automatically able to combine fire but if they don't, then their numbers do not provide a situational advantage other than perhaps physically blocking enemy routes of travel. |
"Physically blocking enemy routes of travel" includes the increased likelihood that someone dodging out of the way of one blaster bolt could potentially run straight into another one. The dice vs. difficulty system is supposed to represent random probability, and the premise that I'm working with is that, as per your above quote, a group of shooters does automatically combine their fire by simple dint of all of them shooting at the same target, but not to the same degree of effectiveness of a properly Commanded and Coordinated unit working together to maximize their effectiveness against a target.
_________________
"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 |
|
|
Naaman
Vice Admiral
Joined: 29 Jul 2011
Posts: 3191
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 10, 2019 6:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
What I meant with regard to blocking routes of travel was that a charachter has fewer option to make tactical move to gain a superior fighting position, not that its harder to avoid being shot in the first place by goons who are too uncoordinated to dominate a battle space (or by mutual enemies who don't care whether they hit each other or would otherwise not care to "coordinate" with each other).
Remember: blasters/bullets don't discriminate. To dominate a battle space the shooters MUST also account for their allies' positions, which significantly limits their options as well.
Without coordinating, shooters are incredibly likely to hit each other unless they all just happen to be shooting in the same general direction (like the same 90-degree arc), which then means that a single piece of cover (for example) can protect against most or all of the firepower. And, that a single directional dodge will avoid all the shots, since they are all aimed at the same physical point in space. The shorter the range, the LESS any angular miscalculations matter, and the MORE likely it is to hit your buddy who isn't paying attention to what you're doing (since you guys didn't coordinate), nor are you worried about what he is doing, etc.
Bottom line for me as to how I feel a rule like this should go if it is going to "suspend my disbelief":
Either a bonus to hit with exactly one damage roll at base damage for the group or a bonus to a single damage roll based on the number if individual shooters who successfully hit the target. Or, individual shooters and individual damage rolls with no bonuses.
If you want bonuses for uncoordinated fire, you must also include a risk to your allies that is roughly proportionate with the bonus gained (that is, there should be about an equal trade-off between how big the bonus is and how big the risk is; that's my opinion on this one). |
|
| 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: Mon Jun 10, 2019 7:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Naaman wrote: | | Either a bonus to hit with exactly one damage roll at base damage for the group or a bonus to a single damage roll based on the number if individual shooters who successfully hit the target. |
Which is exactly what would happen if one were to apply a reduced Coordination bonus (say, half the Coordination bonus the group would get if they were successfully coordinated) and the bonus were added to either the Damage or the Gunnery of the best shooter.
| Quote: | | If you want bonuses for uncoordinated fire, you must also include a risk to your allies that is roughly proportionate with the bonus gained (that is, there should be about an equal trade-off between how big the bonus is and how big the risk is; that's my opinion on this one). |
At this point, we're discussing regular PC vs. NPC battles, most of which happen to occur with the fire coming from a single fire arc, and at the relatively short ranges found in alleys, starships corridors and cantinas. Do the circumstances you're describing (shooters shooting at their targets with allies on the other side of the other side of the targets and thus in danger of being hit by their fire) happen often in your games?
_________________
"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 |
|
|
Naaman
Vice Admiral
Joined: 29 Jul 2011
Posts: 3191
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 11, 2019 8:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
| CRMcNeill wrote: |
Which is exactly what would happen if one were to apply a reduced Coordination bonus (say, half the Coordination bonus the group would get if they were successfully coordinated) and the bonus were added to either the Damage or the Gunnery of the best shooter.
|
It's a little different the way I'm proposing: the damage bonus must be derived from individual shooters each making the difficulty roll (with no bonus on their attacks), rather than a bunch of lame shooters getting to artificially boost the damage of the one shooter most capable of making the shot.
With regard to the coordinating to hit, there's no problem there. My disagreement is with giving each shooter his own attack roll and a bonus based on the presence of allies and their relative location to the target while disregarding their relative locations to each other.
How often do scenarios come up involving shooters at short range on opposote sides? I don't know, but this thread is about "surrounding " a Jedi for the purpose of overwhelming him with difficult angles of attack... so that's what I'm on about. |
|
| 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: Tue Jun 11, 2019 8:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Naaman wrote: | | With regard to the coordinating to hit, there's no problem there. My disagreement is with giving each shooter his own attack roll and a bonus based on the presence of allies and their relative location to the target while disregarding their relative locations to each other. |
Ah, that's where the disconnect is. The bonus isn't applied to ALL the shooters; it's treated just like Coordination, with the bonus applied only to one shooter (either the one with the highest skill level, or just one of them at random if they all have the same skill level). It converts the multiple rolls into a single roll with a 50% coordination bonus.
_________________
"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 |
|
|
Naaman
Vice Admiral
Joined: 29 Jul 2011
Posts: 3191
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 11, 2019 10:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
Haha!
Funny how people talk past each other sometimes. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Darklighter79
Captain
Joined: 27 May 2018
Posts: 529
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 07, 2020 9:17 am Post subject: |
|
|
Taking it to the next level
So here we have a combo o LS + absorb/dissipate (with deflect option) as seen in TESB and R1 and...curving the blaster trajectory at 0:35 (to see it better, set 0.25 speed) possibly with telekinesis.
Any new rules for that or regular MAP would be good?
_________________
Don’t Let the Rules Get in the Way of a Good Story. |
|
| 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: Mon Mar 09, 2020 11:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Redirecting energy in that fashion predated the ST, starting with Yoda in AotC. Absorb/Dissipate Energy just needs to be updated to match, although redirecting in that fashion would more likely need to be a C/S/A power with Absorb/Dissipate as a prerequisite.
_________________
"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 |
|
|
Darklighter79
Captain
Joined: 27 May 2018
Posts: 529
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 10, 2020 4:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
The thing that Yoda was using against Palpi and Dooku (and Anakin and Obi against each other) was Rebuke - a technique used against other Force attacks for deflection (yes, one power for absorb another for deflection  ).
But for the purpose of "deflect" with hand, Absorb/ Dissipate could be updated just as LS power for redirecting shots (In order not to multiply unnecessary powers)?
PS. So in order to make this muiltiMAP worthwhile, the multiarc LS deflect should really have a higher DC at is was proposed in house rules (in addition to the number of shots blocked).
_________________
Don’t Let the Rules Get in the Way of a Good Story. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Naaman
Vice Admiral
Joined: 29 Jul 2011
Posts: 3191
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 14, 2020 4:58 am Post subject: |
|
|
I've never heard of "rebuke" as a force power. Source?
Other systems treat the force lightning deflection exactly like blaster deflection (that is, it treats force lightning exactly like any other energy-based ranged attack).
Obi-Wan vs. Anakin seems pretty obvious: both using aTK/Force strike at the same time and cancelling each other out (eventually overloading with mutual use of force points or whatever).
_________________
.
SpecForce Combat Elements
All About Lightsabers: Designing, Building, and Fighting |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Darklighter79
Captain
Joined: 27 May 2018
Posts: 529
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 14, 2020 5:35 am Post subject: |
|
|
Sure, source is:
Star Wars Saga Edition page.100
| Quote: | You harmlessly absorb or deflect one Force Power used against you, perhaps even turning it against its creator.
Time: Reaction
Make a Use the Force check. If your result equals or exceeds the check result of the Force Power directed at you, you harmlessly redirect it and suffer no ill effects. If your result exceeds the check result of the Force Power directed at you by 5 or more, you may choose to turn the Force Power against its creator, who suffers the effect based on the creator’s original Use the Force check.
Special: If you successfully reflect a Force Power back at it's originator, the originator may attempt to Rebuke the Force Power as well, expending a use of the Rebuke Force Power and using your Use the Force check as it's target DC. If they reflect it back again, both you and the originator are affected by the Force Power. You can spend a Force Point as a Reaction to suffer no effects from a Force Power that has been Rebuked twice- once by you and once by the Force Power's originator.
|
IMHO, d20 went to far by unnecessary multiplying similar force powers. We have additionally:
1) Energy Resistance
2) Negate Energy
_________________
Don’t Let the Rules Get in the Way of a Good Story. |
|
| 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: Sat Mar 14, 2020 12:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Agreed. My thought on reading your initial post was that "Rebuke" sounded like somebody from Saga Edition just copy-pasted straight from a D&D Cleric Spell list. While I would like to see more Light vs. Dark powers, this is just silly. IMO, the only need for different powers would be if the particulars of a Force power require the addition of another skill, such as an ability tied to a Control based power needing a Sense and/or Alter component.
In this case, I see room for two, or potentially three, powers:Absorb Energy - An expansion of Absorb/Dissipate, where the Force user may either dissipate the absorbed energy or convert it into temporary Force energy (probably equivalent to a +1D for every X amount of points of damage absorbed)
Redirect Energy - With Absorb Energy as a prerequisite, but allowing for redirection of energy attacks ala Yoda in the prequels.
Alter Energy - Not quite sure of the parameters on this one (or whether I want to include it at all), but hypothetically it would cover things like Kylo Ren's "freeze blaster bolt" trick.
_________________
"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 |
|
|
|
