| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Naaman
Vice Admiral
Joined: 29 Jul 2011
Posts: 3191
|
 Posted: Mon Jun 10, 2019 10:28 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| Darklighter79 wrote: | | garhkal wrote: |
Many groups i've gamed in, know of that "The dodge is effective vs all attacks of that TYPE" part of dodging That's why many players opt for multiple weapons, so some shoot the enemy with blasters, some with flamers, some toss grenades and some use other weapons.. THAT WAY the dodges (or LS parries) are not as effective against some as they are vs others..
|
This is somehow unclear. How this "type" should be understood:
1) Ranged
2) Melee
3) Unarmed
or
Ranged Archaic
Ranged Blaster
Ranged throw weapons
?
It's still confusing though. Why someone blocking attacks with LS should worry whether hit by stick, fist or claw?
To this day I have always used the rule: one dodge roll against all ranged attacks for that round as this roll replaces range difficulty.
Why they put this info on some distant pages not in the core skill description?
PS. During yesterday's re-read of REUP I have found additional info regarding reaction skills that should clarify certain issues:
Page 90 (!)
Melee parry. If someone attacks your character (either
with a brawling attack or when wielding a melee weapon)
and your character has a melee weapon (knife, vibro-ax...
even a chair or a mug will do in an emergency!), you use
melee parry to get out of the way or block the attack.
Brawling parry. If someone attacks your character
(either with a brawling attack or when wielding a melee
weapon) and your character’s unarmed, you use brawling
parry to get out of the way or block the attack.
Lightsaber. If someone attacks your character (either
with a brawling attack or when wielding a melee weapon)
and your character is wielding a lightsaber, you use the
lightsaber skill (or Dexterity attribute) to get out of the
way or block the attack.
Only Brawling Parry has extended info about getting out of the way in the core skill description.. |
I don't agree with Garhkal's interpretation (that different weapons can trigger a new reaction roll). I read the rules as having two kinds of defense: melee and ranged, and you never need to male more than one roll with each of those skills in a round. I also allow that Jedi need only to make one reaction skill at all unless they are attacked by something which the lightsaber cannot defend against such as a grenade or flame thrower or flechette rounds, etc. (Which would trigger a dodge roll). |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
garhkal
Sovereign Protector
Joined: 17 Jul 2005
Posts: 14033
Location: Reynoldsburg, Columbus, Ohio.
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 10, 2019 11:47 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Darklighter79 wrote: |
Ranged Archaic
Ranged Blaster
Ranged throw weapons
?
It's still confusing though. Why someone blocking attacks with LS should worry whether hit by stick, fist or claw? |
Dodging a firearm vs a grenade is a lot different, than someone parrying a claw vs fist though.
_________________
Confucious sayeth, don't wash cat while drunk! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Darklighter79
Captain
Joined: 27 May 2018
Posts: 529
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 10, 2019 1:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
So where's more explanatory reference for that in RAW ?
_________________
Don’t Let the Rules Get in the Way of a Good Story. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bren
Vice Admiral
Joined: 19 Aug 2010
Posts: 3868
Location: Maryland, USA
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 10, 2019 2:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Regarding the question of whether or not a character can move while making a full dodge. My recollection is that the rules allow a half move (for certain types of terrain). However, I don't think the player should really have full control of the direction and length of movement during a full dodge. I dislike the idea that a character can use a full dodge to close on an attacker. And I'm not too fond of the idea that the character can stay in their current location while doing the wacky chicken dance to avoid being hit.
For a full dodge, I prefer that that GM can (if necessary) direct movement to ensure that it is in a direction that makes sense given the situation and terrain. Usually that direction should be towards some type of cover. |
|
| 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 10, 2019 2:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Not to mention that certain attacks (a claw swipe from a Rancor, as one extreme example) would be better countered by a Dodge than by a Brawling Parry attempt...
_________________
"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 10, 2019 3:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Naaman wrote: | | That's a good point about the upper 50%. I hadn't thought of it like that. So let me amend my idea: when operating in the upper 10% of a vehicle's capability, other actions should probably be disallowed unless the pilot slows down. |
But then my second point comes into play, that we are playing in a cinematic universe, not a realistic one, and in a cinematic universe, the "heroes" are sometimes able to do things that are technically impossible. As such, I prefer an open-ended system where, through some combination of skill, luck and/or the Force, a character manages to do something at a critical moment that should be impossible.
_________________
"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 |
|
|
MrNexx
Rear Admiral
Joined: 25 Mar 2016
Posts: 2248
Location: San Antonio
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 10, 2019 4:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Really, I'd say the system already allows for this, through MAPs.
Let's say I've got a 5D Space Transports skill. If I don't do anything in the round, my total will be between 5 and 32ish (theoretically infinite, but, it's not likely to go much about 32; and I'm assuming 0D manueverability, for simplicity). I'll average around 18 or 19 (allowing for an explosion on the wild die to cancel out a low roll). But that assumes I'm not doing anything BUT piloting. If I start adding additional actions to the round, then I'm going to be a worse pilot... lower average, lower likely maximum.
With my 5D in Space Transports, I can feel pretty confident in Moderate space, at high speed, and will probably be ok in Difficult space at cruising speed. But that assumes I'm ONLY flying. If I have to start working comms, or weapons, or shields, my "likely to be ok" speed drops. If I'm All-Out, I can MAYBE do one other thing in Easy space, and likely be OK, since MAP will drop me to 4D, with an average of 15 or so. And if I've got a nimble ship (high maneuverability), then I can probably do it in rougher and rougher spaces. But the more I have to pay attention to (shields AND sensors), the less I can manage at speed without knocking off the sensor dish.
Now, Han Solo has 10D when in a YT-1300, which means he's got a 12D when in the nimble Falcon. Which means he can go all-out in Difficult space (effectively Heroic at all-out) without too much trouble, and even manage a couple other actions. Because he's Han Solo, and when you have 12D to throw around, you can do things that most would consider impossible.
_________________
"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 |
|
|
Naaman
Vice Admiral
Joined: 29 Jul 2011
Posts: 3191
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 10, 2019 5:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| CRMcNeill wrote: | | Not to mention that certain attacks (a claw swipe from a Rancor, as one extreme example) would be better countered by a Dodge than by a Brawling Parry attempt... |
Melee/brawling parry already "gets out of the way" of the rancor attack (and the rancor's claws increase the difficulty by 10 to account for the fact that you can't just "block" them without being damaged) and the rancor's strength/brawling skill already takes its size and power into account. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Naaman
Vice Admiral
Joined: 29 Jul 2011
Posts: 3191
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 10, 2019 6:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| CRMcNeill wrote: | | Naaman wrote: | | That's a good point about the upper 50%. I hadn't thought of it like that. So let me amend my idea: when operating in the upper 10% of a vehicle's capability, other actions should probably be disallowed unless the pilot slows down. |
But then my second point comes into play, that we are playing in a cinematic universe, not a realistic one, and in a cinematic universe, the "heroes" are sometimes able to do things that are technically impossible. As such, I prefer an open-ended system where, through some combination of skill, luck and/or the Force, a character manages to do something at a critical moment that should be impossible. |
Don't force points already do this? What you are describing is almost identical to how the RAW explain what the use of a force point represents.
(I did suggest earlier that a full reaction could double the reaction skill total just as if a force point were spent instead of merely adding the attack's base difficulty to the roll)
Just to be clear, is there somewhere you would draw a line? Let's say that by chance, a human attempts to lift an X-Wing or the Millenium Falcon and throw it at his opponent. His lifting skill could be 2D or 100D (doesn't really matter) but by some bizarre chance (wild die or CP dice exploding or whatever) he actually rolls high enough to do it.
What's your take on whether this should be extremely difficult or impossible? |
|
| 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 10, 2019 8:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Naaman wrote: | | Don't force points already do this? What you are describing is almost identical to how the RAW explain what the use of a force point represents. |
Except in these two incidences in the RAW where there is an absolute prohibition on other actions (Full Dodge and All-Out Movement). When performing those actions, it doesn't matter if you spend a Force Point, as the rules prevent you from taking such an action regardless of how high you roll.
| Quote: | | What's your take on whether this should be extremely difficult or impossible? |
Considering the RAW itself doesn't place an absolute prohibition on whether or not a PC can lift the Millennium Falcon (in spite of the things that it does expressly prohibit), this seems something of a Reductio Ad Absurdum. Are you implying that a single human is as likely to lift the Millennium Falcon all by themselves as they would to be able to perform a standard evasive maneuver while flying at All-Out? IMO, the Difficulty bar for one should be set much higher than the other.
_________________
"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: Mon Jun 10, 2019 11:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Darklighter79 wrote: | | So where's more explanatory reference for that in RAW ? |
I've never seen one, but even back in the UK when i played, before i even started with my Sparks group, i played under DM's who used that sort of rule.. Same as when i was stationed in Norfolk Va..
_________________
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: Tue Jun 11, 2019 9:40 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Bren wrote: | Regarding the question of whether or not a character can move while making a full dodge. My recollection is that the rules allow a half move (for certain types of terrain). However, I don't think the player should really have full control of the direction and length of movement during a full dodge. I dislike the idea that a character can use a full dodge to close on an attacker. And I'm not too fond of the idea that the character can stay in their current location while doing the wacky chicken dance to avoid being hit.
For a full dodge, I prefer that that GM can (if necessary) direct movement to ensure that it is in a direction that makes sense given the situation and terrain. Usually that direction should be towards some type of cover. |
There's something to be said for this. IIRC, the description of Dodge says something along the lines of "diving toward the nearest available cover." If the "nearest" Cover is a rock 5 meters away, but in the opposite direction from the one the player wants to go, it would make a certain amount of sense to not allow the player to pick and choose in the heat of the moment.
_________________
"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 10:25 am Post subject: |
|
|
| CRMcNeill wrote: | | Naaman wrote: | | Don't force points already do this? What you are describing is almost identical to how the RAW explain what the use of a force point represents. |
Except in these two incidences in the RAW where there is an absolute prohibition on other actions (Full Dodge and All-Out Movement). When performing those actions, it doesn't matter if you spend a Force Point, as the rules prevent you from taking such an action regardless of how high you roll.
| Quote: | | What's your take on whether this should be extremely difficult or impossible? |
Considering the RAW itself doesn't place an absolute prohibition on whether or not a PC can lift the Millennium Falcon (in spite of the things that it does expressly prohibit), this seems something of a Reductio Ad Absurdum. Are you implying that a single human is as likely to lift the Millennium Falcon all by themselves as they would to be able to perform a standard evasive maneuver while flying at All-Out? IMO, the Difficulty bar for one should be set much higher than the other. |
My question was more or less a threshold test. If the answer falls back on case-by-case discretionary call, then it would seem that your intent is simply to "free up" the rules a bit. On the other hand, if the intent is to allow for "anything's possible," then we run into the problem of characters "attempting" things that both the character and the players know is impossible, but why the heck not, right?
Essentially, I'm just wondering: where do you draw the line.
(For what its worth, I do believe that there are speeds at which maneuvering ought to be physically impossible for the reasons I mentioned in my earlier post, but that's besides the point). |
|
| 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: Tue Jun 11, 2019 1:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
It's not that I don't think that there are limits to what characters can do from a Strength standpoint, but the fact that the RAW places no hard limits on Strength / Lifting, and does place them on other things is something of a double standard. IMO, a hard limit on how much a Strength 3D character can lift through their own muscle power is more realistic than saying "your character can fly this ship at X speed, but can't possibly make any maneuvers while doing so." In the latter example, I could see a particularly skilled / lucky character being able to somehow wrangle a bit of extra performance out of a ship under extreme circumstances. Even a rule whereby a character had to spend a Force Point to be able to override the absolute prohibition would be more realistic to me than saying "I don't care how skilled the character is, they can't do that."
_________________
"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: Tue Jun 11, 2019 2:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| CRMcNeill wrote: | | It's not that I don't think that there are limits to what characters can do from a Strength standpoint, but the fact that the RAW places no hard limits on Strength / Lifting, and does place them on other things is something of a double standard. IMO, a hard limit on how much a Strength 3D character can lift through their own muscle power is more realistic than saying "your character can fly this ship at X speed, but can't possibly make any maneuvers while doing so." In the latter example, I could see a particularly skilled / lucky character being able to somehow wrangle a bit of extra performance out of a ship under extreme circumstances. Even a rule whereby a character had to spend a Force Point to be able to override the absolute prohibition would be more realistic to me than saying "I don't care how skilled the character is, they can't do that." |
If you did that, required someone to drop a FP, to have a chance to do something else in the round BESIDES going all out (or full dodging), would you still let them spend another FP in the round, to double their skill value?
If so, how does that jive with the RAW's prohibition on not being able to spend more than one FP a round?
_________________
Confucious sayeth, don't wash cat while drunk! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
