| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16281
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
 Posted: Tue Jun 02, 2020 12:36 am Post subject: Range as Cover |
 |
|
I've often considered reverting back to the simpler core 1E rules, but there were certain aspects I wanted to retain so long as I could find a simpler way to express them. The biggest of these is Range for Weapons and Sensors; I've been mulling this over some time, trying to find a way to still incorporate this feature without using the actual range numbers.
And then, when thinking over some of the ramifications of this topic, it hit me: Treat Range as Cover. As in, the further away something gets, apply an increasing dice penalty equivalent to the Concealment bonuses in 2R&E:Point Blank = +0D
Short Range = +1D
Medium Range = +2D
Long Range = +4D This could, in turn, be modified by Scale Modifier dice (which would entail incorporating the 2R&E Scale System or my modified version into 1E, but that's not hugely problematic). It would also allow Sensors to be reduced down to a single D value, ala the ship stats in the Instant Adventure Game. Under 1E, weapon systems only have 2 stats (Damage and Fire Control), but adding a third D value for range wouldn't require all that much modification. Alternately, as with Sensors, greater/lesser ranges could simply be a function of Scale differences.
This pretty much just occurred to me tonight, and I haven't really had time to consider the ramifications, but I think there's something to it...
This would be part of a larger 1R&E concept that adds in a few of my other house rules, such as converting the Consumables rating to Endurance dice, which I find to be more appropriate to the simpler story-telling model of 1E.
Thoughts?
_________________
"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 |
|
 |
Raven Redstar
Rear Admiral
Joined: 10 Mar 2009
Posts: 2648
Location: Salem, OR
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 02, 2020 11:06 am Post subject: |
|
|
It could work, but without range numbers how does one fairly decide how far away they are? You could go with a couple of static ranges for character scale, and then have a set of static ranges for vehicle combat?
_________________
RR
________________________________________________________________ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16281
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 02, 2020 12:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Raven Redstar wrote: | | It could work, but without range numbers how does one fairly decide how far away they are? You could go with a couple of static ranges for character scale, and then have a set of static ranges for vehicle combat? |
There's a couple possibilities. In the past, I've proposed Scale-based range brackets; the larger in scale a weapon is, the further it can reach. To match this, weapons could be given Range modifiers; pistols might have a -1D or -2D that keeps them from firing out to what would be Long Range for Character-Scale, but translating into a bonus at Point Blank Range, as they are effectively "smaller Scale in Range."
The other would be four tiers of terrain ranges, based on the Speed Factors from Mini Six (see the Vehicle Movement section on page 8). To paraphrase, there are four Speed Factors: Primitive / Walking (+0D), Ground Vehicle (+2D), Air Vehicle (+5D), and Spaceship (+10D). So, Primitive / Walking would be the equivalent to Character-Scale weapons, with the usual Range Brackets, and Speeder-Scale Combat would be shifted two steps up from that (Point Blank Range for a Speeder would be Medium Range for a Speeder, and so on and so forth).
I haven't hammered out the details yet, so it could be either one, or even a combination of both.
_________________
"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 |
|
|
Raven Redstar
Rear Admiral
Joined: 10 Mar 2009
Posts: 2648
Location: Salem, OR
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 03, 2020 10:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
Naaman cooked up these numbers for standard combat range:
Point Blank/Short/Medium/Long/Extreme
| Quote: | | <10m/11-50/51-150/151-500/501m+ |
I'm thinking that maybe you multiply by 10 for "ground vehicle" ranges and then you can roughly divide by 10 for space units.
Which would give you:
<100m/110-500m/501m-1.5km/1.51km-5km/5.01km+
<1/2-5/6-15/16-50/51+
_________________
RR
________________________________________________________________ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Argentsaber
Lieutenant Commander
Joined: 07 Oct 2017
Posts: 127
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 03, 2020 12:08 pm Post subject: Re: Range as Cover |
|
|
| CRMcNeill wrote: | | (which would entail incorporating the 2R&E Scale System or my modified version into 1E, but that's not hugely problematic). |
Definitely possible, but hardly necessary. The die cap system would produce the same effect (probably slightly stronger in some cases)
_________________
"The universe is driven by the complex interaction between three ingredients: matter, energy, and enlightened self-interest."
G'Kar, Survivors (Babylon 5) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16281
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 03, 2020 4:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Raven Redstar wrote: | Naaman cooked up these numbers for standard combat range:
Point Blank/Short/Medium/Long/Extreme |
I remember that discussion. I'm actually thinking more extreme than that, of removing numerical ranges as much as possible in favor of more cinematic descriptions of range (see Estimating Ranges on pg. 89 of 2R&E).
_________________
"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: 16281
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 03, 2020 4:11 pm Post subject: Re: Range as Cover |
|
|
| Argentsaber wrote: | | The die cap system would produce the same effect (probably slightly stronger in some cases) |
After having put so much work into my Scale System, even to the point of having it published in one of the Adventurer's Journals, I'm disinclined to throw it out. In addition, I'm envisioning a simplified system that uses as few disparate rules as possible, with an emphasis on Difficulties + Modifiers and Skill Dice + Bonus/Penalty Dice. Adding in a dice cap system as well would be an unneeded complication when I have a perfectly good scale rule that uses Dice Modifiers.
_________________
"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: 16281
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Whill
Dark Lord of the Jedi (Owner/Admin)
Joined: 14 Apr 2008
Posts: 10402
Location: Columbus, Ohio, USA, Earth, The Solar System, The Milky Way Galaxy
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 03, 2020 7:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Thanks for posting this. When I saw this thread I thought of my attempt to come up with static weapons ranges for my game. This linked to the thread where I talked about it, or at least one place that I mentioned it if I had mentioned it sooner. It just worked out that the range/difficulty relationship still worked out to be very different from RAW, which is one of the foundations of the EU and therefore the Canon Universe.
But that was three years ago. After the completion of the DT, I am in more of the "canon be damned" mind frame than I was back then. Naaman's and your comments in support of this idea speak to me a bit more now. Maybe I'll dig up my spreadsheet again and take a look at possibly revisiting this concept.
Didn't IAG do this?
_________________
*
Site Map
Forum Guidelines
Registration/Log-In Help
The Rancor Pit Library
Star Wars D6 Damage |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16281
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 03, 2020 7:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I actually did a brief thumb-through of the IAG Narrator's Book last night, and I don't recall any mention of range at all. I may have just missed it. IMO, IAG has some interesting ideas, but it's a little too simplistic for my tastes. The idea of having a simple D rating for Sensors and other systems is appealing, though. If I can ever get a Static Range rule that I like, I may do a 1E+ version, updating the 1E stats to include things like Endurance Dice and swapping out the gun numbers from the Capital Ships for Battery Dice per Fire Arc values.
But that's for the future...
_________________
"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 |
|
|
Whill
Dark Lord of the Jedi (Owner/Admin)
Joined: 14 Apr 2008
Posts: 10402
Location: Columbus, Ohio, USA, Earth, The Solar System, The Milky Way Galaxy
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Odea Ionstrike
Cadet
Joined: 09 May 2019
Posts: 17
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 03, 2020 11:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| The only mention of range rules in IAG is in the Player’s Guide on page 18 where there’s a list of four ranges and the associated difficulty numbers. I don’t mind the simplicity given the goal of the product but I might have liked some guidance on cover modifiers nearby that text since even the adventure encounters themselves involve use of cover. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16281
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 04, 2020 12:20 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Odea Ionstrike wrote: | | The only mention of range rules in IAG is in the Player’s Guide on page 18 where there’s a list of four ranges and the associated difficulty numbers. I don’t mind the simplicity given the goal of the product but I might have liked some guidance on cover modifiers nearby that text since even the adventure encounters themselves involve use of cover. |
The more obvious problem is that some weapons are going to be more effective at certain ranges than others. For example, a blaster rifle will be effective at Medium and Long Ranges, while a blaster pistol will be of little to no use unless the target gets closer. As such, there needs to be some sort of modifier assigned to the weapons to represent this.
_________________
"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 |
|
|
Odea Ionstrike
Cadet
Joined: 09 May 2019
Posts: 17
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 04, 2020 12:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Yep, in total agreement - just wanted to leave a pointer to where IAG defined range as a system. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Chaosmeister
Sub-Lieutenant
Joined: 24 Jul 2018
Posts: 57
Location: www.chaosmeistergames.com
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 05, 2020 5:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I may be not understanding everything you guys talk about but I liked this representation in Rules Essentials for ranges
And the Weapons as reference
_________________
Teamwork is essential, it gives them someone else to shoot at! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
