Combining Fire

[Naaman]

This came up in the other thread about difficulty of parrying blasters.

Here's an idea to make combined fire better represent what it does in real life.

Well, I'd suggest the following in that case:

Combined actions in combat can be performed as long as the participants' tactics skill is high enough (actual skill level requirement determined by complexity of maneuver).

Anyone who does not meet the tactics requirement can still shoot, but they don't contribute to the combined action (their action is separate) unless another character wants to take a MAP to command them into the group.

The character with the highest skill (or, the character with the best line of sight... GM's call) rolls the primary attack roll. Each participant contributes a bonus. The bonus is equal to +1 for each D the character has in tactics (this represents the character's ability maximize the situational value of his firepower). For example, shooter 1 has 5D in blaster, and shooter 2 has 4D in tactics. Shooter 1 rolls 5D and adds a +4 bonus on his attack roll.

And when combining fire to increase damage:

Each character participating must be "in the loop" with regard to the objective (apply brute force firepower to overcome an otherwise impenetrable target). Any characters who have not received instructions or who just don't know exactly why/what they are shooting do not contribute to the combined effect.

A command roll is made as per the normal rules (alternatively, the number of personnel included could be difficulty-based, rather than skill level based).

Each shooter must make a successful attack roll on the "weak spot" of the target. Once all hits have been calculated, roll damage. For each successful attack roll, increase the damage by 1D. Each 1D of bonus damage is reduced by 1 pip for each scale level the target is larger than the shooters.

In any case, only a single damage roll is made.

Note that if shooting at a character who chooses to dodge, the shooters have two options: either combine fire to increase the attack roll (making it harder to dodge) or, if they want to combine damage, they must all wait until the lowest initiative in their group to fire (which may give the target an opportunity to escape or attack first or whatever). A third option would be to just each shoot as individuals using the normal rules.

[garhkal]

Since storm troopers all don't have the tactics skill, just a base 2d know, would that mean they couldn't combine fire, as they are not tactically savvy enough?
_________________
Confucious sayeth, don't wash cat while drunk!

[Naaman]

In my opinion, using the WEG stats for stuff is kinda iffy.

There is a lot of skills that military type personnel should have but don't.

Since this is a house rule, it would require the GM to reason what a storm trooper's tactics skill should be.

I say there are two ways to look at this.

1) Does the GM consider storm troopers to be cannon fodder? If so, let them have 2D+1 tactics and be done with it.... or, just disallow combining fire (since they are basically disposable meat sacks anyway... doesn't really matter how tactical they are... they're just a speed bump for the PCs, ultimately).

2) Does the GM consider stomries to be "elite" and more skilled than regular Imperial army soldiers? If so, they need a completely new stat block (IMO), such that a squad of stormies is approximately equivalent in capability to a group of about 4 starting PCs, and could collectively play the role of an adventure's BBEG (for the first two or three adventures, anyway).

One of the ways we always played was to allow stormies to combine fire absent a commander since they are "elite."

[Dredwulf60]

I think it would come down to what you feel the game philosophy behind the combined fire is.

Is it a tactical maneuver to gain a definite advantage in a combat situation?

or

Is it a simplification meant to allow the GM to let a bunch of rank and file mooks all conduct their fire with a single attack roll, acknowledging that with more shooting the chances of at least one of the shots connecting...as a simple matter of odds is better?

[Naaman]

I'm thinking that it's the latter because of the rules given for it:

By RAW, it requires a command roll, which means that someone has to be "smart enough" to make combined fire work. Take out the commander, and you take away the GM's ability to combine fire.

[garhkal]

But its not just npcs who use it. I often see pcs combining fire. And not every PC has tactics..
_________________
Confucious sayeth, don't wash cat while drunk!

[Naaman]

Thats why its a house rule. In my opinion, combining fire is the PURPOSE (or, one of the purposes) of "tactics."

The idea of tactics is to maximize the effectiveness of the resources (human and otherwise) at your disposal.

Groups who want to combine fire would need to understand how to make use of timing, angles, movements and other variables in order to create a situational advantage.

By this house rule, combining fire means you must have tactics (instead of command... the PCs would just put the CPs they spent on command into tactics).

Command would still be useful, but for non-combat tasks.

[Mamatried]

Would not the officer/Squadleader's tactics skill be the one used to allow the unit the combined fire action?

Now while the basic trooper does have a flat 2d to tactics, it ould not be unreasonable that squad leaders do have at least a pip or two in tactics as well as in command.

Also as of the current canon, sergeant is a "commisioned" rank, and to me indicate a level of tactics and command training.

officers do have this.

now a group of 4 or 1000 troopers with no leaders or officers then sure I would not allow them a combined fire, but with a squad leader I would use the sqaud leader tactics skill and apply this to the unit for combined fire

[Bren]

[Mamatried]

[Dredwulf60]

[Mamatried]

[Naaman]

[Naaman]

Following up, there are standardized ways in which to respond to various situations.

Such as:

React to near ambush
React to far ambush
Set an ambush
Break contact
Assault the objective

And so on.

A character who needs to rely on his squad leader every single time he encounters the enemy is only a liability, not an asset.

The functions listed above are basic infantry doctrines. Being eligible to perform them should require any participant to have 3D in tactics (must have the skill, regardless of what the knowledge attribute is). But an infantryman would have 4D in tactics (or, more appropriately, 4D in a specialization of tactics such as land warfare, infantry tactics or something similar).

Unless you feel that trained soldiers are just cannon fodder, which, in some armies, they are.

[garhkal]