| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16326
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
 Posted: Mon Feb 21, 2022 2:36 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| Dr. Bidlo wrote: | | Which version do you consider the standard of the 2x combined action bonus: full dice or gradations? |
Gradations. That's what I used to generate Battery Dice numbers for my ship stats, as it allows for a greater degree of granularity as numbers increase.
| Quote: | | You do bring up a good question as to which version of the combined actions bonus to use: the modified 2nd edition rules (2x) or the 2nd Edition R&R giving a pip per person? |
I default to the x2=+1D method, for the reasons I detailed here and here. The "+1 per person" method works fine at lower levels (and in fact roughly parallels the x2 version so long as you're dealing with 10 individuals or less) but spirals wildly out of control as the numbers increase, as demonstrated in the second link above.
However, there are some circumstances where an arithmetic method is still viable, and actually ends up being simpler to use than the x2 method. In the case of calculating squad losses, it's much simpler to say "my squad has taken 2 casualties, therefore my Unit Strength Modifier has dropped by -2" than it is to take those 2 casualties, apply them to the Coordination Bonus Table and generate a new Unit Strength Modifier. You may be able to memorize the x2=+1D gradation chart, but it's always best from a GM POV to keep things as simple as possible when you're implementing a new rule.
As an aside, I'm also looking at an arithmetic progression for my Endurance Dice conversion, as there isn't really a way to do exponential increases when tracking consumption Difficulties, but I digress.
| Quote: | | I personally don't use the R&R because of the Command cap rule which prevents it from breaking but is too restrictive for my tastes. You could really use either, but I prefer consistently applying the 2x method. That is just me though. |
The 2R&E Command rules are best suited to a PC commanding a group of strangers who haven't trained together in any meaningful fashion and are essentially an ad hoc unit. Once you get outside that, they become useless very quickly. But that's consistent with the system WEG was designing; large military operations are supposed to be a backdrop to the individual actions of the player characters, not the characters themselves. Building a system that allows PCs to command capital ships or military units is entirely a fan invention, something we do because that's an aspect we want to add into our games.
| Quote: | | The other benefit is I don't have to impose a limit size to squads. Players will typically optimize the effectiveness of their squads by size. |
That, however, gets into the long-term effects of Command and training a squad to act as a group. Most militaries go with set unit sizes, and while they do train how to operate with attachments, it may not get the same level of focus as would the core squad unit. If you're envisioning, say, an eight-man line squad with a four-man fire team of medium repeating blasters reinforcing them, or a line squad with a tactical fire team with shields and riot blasters taking point on an assault stack, that's better treated as two separate units, with the fire team having a Unit Strength Modifier of +2D.
Also worth noting that most of the smaller transport vehicles / shuttles have a hard cap of 10 on the number of troops they can carry, so your maximum squad size is going to be limited by whatever sardine can you're trying to load them on to carry them into combat.
| Quote: | | Aside from the the coordination bonus specifics, how do you think the squad rules play out? Can you see any fatal flaws? I like the damage carrying over at incapacitated, but using 10 as the cut off makes the math easy when using during the game. |
I think what you have works well, apart from the reservations I expressed above about tracking casualties. Any problems are going to present themselves through repeated playtesting.
_________________
"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 |
|
 |
Dr. Bidlo
Commander
Joined: 24 Nov 2021
Posts: 440
Location: Arizona, USA
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 21, 2022 3:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Thanks for the feedback. You made a strong case for just using the +1 per squad member, as it is very easy to remember and aligns well enough with the 2x methods at the numbers I would be using. I will planet it and let you know how it goes. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Whill
Dark Lord of the Jedi (Owner/Admin)
Joined: 14 Apr 2008
Posts: 10447
Location: Columbus, Ohio, USA, Earth, The Solar System, The Milky Way Galaxy
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 21, 2022 7:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| CRMcNeill wrote: | | The 2R&E Command rules are best suited to a PC commanding a group of strangers who haven't trained together in any meaningful fashion and are essentially an ad hoc unit. Once you get outside that, they become useless very quickly. But that's consistent with the system WEG was designing; large military operations are supposed to be a backdrop to the individual actions of the player characters, not the characters themselves. |
I agree. To create the original RPG, they invented the Rebel Special Ops concept (retroactively named). Most player campaign concepts they later added, like tramps/smugglers, are also ad hoc groups not trained to work together. Tapani Noble troubleshooters, or a noble plus their adventuring party, are ad hoc groups. Even an Imperial campaign using the Imperial templates in Heroes & Rogues could be an oddball mix of different character types. All of these may have some PCs with military backgrounds but they are not likely to have been trained to work together with the new group as a whole. Some group campaign types where the PCs may have possible been trained to work together are pirates, scouts, and Rebel SpecForces, but that depends on the background so even they could be ad hoc groups. The rules in R&E are adequate for handling most of these campaign types.
| Quote: | | Building a system that allows PCs to command capital ships or military units is entirely a fan invention, something we do because that's an aspect we want to add into our games. |
That is definitely missing from RAW. I always wondered why, after introducing a capital ship battle system in the 1e Rules Companion, they backed off from that in 2e. I guess maybe because it would be more complex to work with 2e, they didn't have room in Blue Vader or R&E, and they didn't think it would be in that high of demand if sold on its own. It still seems like a missed opportunity because something like that could be a part of Pirates & Privateers/The Far Orbit Project.
_________________
*
Site Map
Forum Guidelines
Registration/Log-In Help
The Rancor Pit Library
Star Wars D6 Damage |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dr. Bidlo
Commander
Joined: 24 Nov 2021
Posts: 440
Location: Arizona, USA
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 21, 2022 10:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I really think The Far Star Project was the precursor but WEG went defunct befote ot happened. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16326
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 21, 2022 11:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Dr. Bidlo wrote: | | I really think The Far Star Project was the precursor but WEG went defunct before it happened. |
Based on its position in the WEG timeline, the Rules Companion was clearly the first attempt at it. I'm confused as to which version you're talking about; there's a Far Orbit Project, and there's the Far Star, which is the principal ship of the Darkstryder campaign, both of which feature capital ship action.
_________________
"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 |
|
|
Dr. Bidlo
Commander
Joined: 24 Nov 2021
Posts: 440
Location: Arizona, USA
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 22, 2022 12:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I meant The Far Orbit Project (sorry for mixing up my orbits!). It made a lot of progress in second edition toward detailing the roles and functions of a capital ship and they chose one that would be managable for players, as it has a small number of weapons and starfighters. It is really the next step up from a Corellian Corvette, which had become fairly commonplace among players already by that time.
I didn't mention the Rules Companion because it was for first edition and any momentum in developing capital ship rules was lost with jump to the 2nd Edition since the rules changed enough to invalidate much of what was already developed. Sure, you could adapt the rules proposed in the Rules Companion - in fact I used it as inspiration for my own current campaign, but it was not ready for use. However, the rules presented in the Rules Companion were incredibly progressive, especially considering capital ships were really intended to be used as story devices and outside the scope of player characters in first edition. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16326
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 22, 2022 7:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
IMO, having studied both in some detail, I don't think Far Orbit contributed nearly as much as the Rules Companion. There are certainly some interesting concepts in Far Orbit, but most have some internal flaw that requires a house rule modification to be truly useful. Several of my house rules have their root in trying to sift through Far Orbit's various Optional Rule side bars and finding them...wanting. And while those Optional Rules point in some interesting directions, the book itself never goes into real detail about how to run an actual capital ship vs. capital ship battle. The Rules Companion, on the other hand, did exactly that, with several of its concepts being later incorporated into 2E.
I'm still chewing over how to do formations for squads. The ideal (especially for movement in open terrain) seems to be a dispersed marching order where squad members maintain a distance of 10 meters or more between individuals. This allows the OIC to maintain command and control while also making sure that the entire unit can't be taken out by one hand grenade or artillery shell. The opposite is an assault wedge or assault stack, which are best suited to urban environments in other close quarters. If you've watched any cop or military TV shows, you've probably seen an assault stack, where the squad forms into a compact line to get the entire unit through a choke point like a doorway, from which they go into more of a wedge formation with each trooper covering a specific area.
For something like being forced to do a frontal assault down a hallway against a heavy repeating blaster, the assault stack is likely the best approach, as the troops at the front are essentially providing ablative cover for the troopers at the back. It's pretty rough on the guys in front, obviously, so that's where things like smoke grenades, tactical shields and the like come in very handy. The hardest part about adding tech like this to the SWU would be coming up with an explanation as to why the stormtroopers boarding the Tantive IV didn't make use of them and just charged straight in, taking casualties.
As an aside, we did actually see a close combat stormtrooper in action in The Force Awakens; just before he engages Finn, TR8R can be seen discarding both his blaster carbine and a hand-held shield...
_________________
"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 |
|
|
|
