CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16281
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
 Posted: Wed Oct 16, 2024 4:42 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| jtanzer wrote: | | CRMcNeill, from what I can see garhkal didn't put any words in your mouth. To me, it looks like you got angry at garhkal for posing an entirely reasonable concern |
There’s a lot of history you may not be aware of. garhkal and I have been butting heads over stuff like this for over a decade, and it usually boils down to differences in priorities. I’m a simulationist who believes the rules should mimic on-screen action (as well as other media, to a lesser extent) as much as practicable, with game balance being a lesser concern to be sorted out in either the tweaking of the individual rule or as part of other, off-setting rules; garhkal is a RAW + Sparks purist who, while he is willing to include house rules to an extent, views most/all changes primarily through the lens of how it will affect the RAW and game balance first and foremost. In particular, he reacts negatively to suggested house rules that shift the balance in favor of the players. One common tack he takes in those circumstances is to posit a worst-case scenario and imply it’s the ultimate intent of the proposed house rule’s author, even when they haven’t said anything of the sort. In this case… | garhkal wrote: | | everyone else could line up behind them, gaining the Same almost not-hitable status, WHILE leaning out behind the jedi, and shooting back with impunity? |
While characters firing around Cover (or through, as the case may be) is certainly a factor to be considered, having a Jedi parrying blaster bolts covering a character hardly allows them to retaliate with impunity. They still have to either expose themselves by firing around the Jedi’s protection, at which point they’re subject to the Partial Cover rules. Theoretically, they could fire through the Jedi’s Protection, but that would increase the Difficulty load on the Jedi since he now has to not only precognitively block enemy attacks but also deliberately not block the shots of his allies. And all these penalties stack up fast, especially when smart enemies resort to attacks that the saber have a harder time blocking (auto-blasters, arc blasters, etc) or can’t counter at all (flamethrowers, grenades, etc).
So, no, not with impunity, and I never said otherwise. That’s garhkal’s Straw Man, and it’s not the first one he’s built over the years.
| Quote: | | Personally, I would avoid this problem entirely by not allowing it. |
And yet, the problem (or the potential for it, at least) exists. Blaster bolts aimed at a character behind a Jedi don’t curve around the Jedi or phase through him to rematerialize to strike with full power. A Jedi blocking blaster bolts provides at least some Cover. The question being asked here is “how much?”
| Quote: | | However, if I were to allow it at my table, I would have the lightsaber character make a Parry reaction as if they were the target of the attack. On a fail, the original target makes their reaction as normal. |
My two issues here is that 1) it creates a unique rule set specifically for these circumstances, when it’s far easier on GMs to tie it into a single overarching rule (particularly one that already exists in the RAW, like Cover), and 2) there’s nowhere near enough time for human reflexes to react to a missed parry on a blaster bolt at such close range (targeted characters will likely be a few meters behind the Jedi, at most). That, however, is best dealt with under the larger Aegis of my Dodge as an Advanced Skill house rule.
| Quote: | | Shooting back would mean the target gains a bonus to the DC. |
Raises an interesting question. I don’t think I’ve ever considered penalizing characters for shooting around Cover, but it’s certainly worth taking into account. I did end up making smaller weapons allow their wielders to take more advantage of Partial Cover…
_________________
"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
|
|
jtanzer
Lieutenant
Joined: 01 Mar 2023
Posts: 97
|
| Posted: Wed Oct 16, 2024 10:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| CRMcNeill wrote: | | I’m a simulationist who believes the rules should mimic on-screen action (as well as other media, to a lesser extent) as much as practicable, with game balance being a lesser concern to be sorted out in either the tweaking of the individual rule or as part of other, off-setting rules |
Ah. That explains a few things. I'm not really a fan of this approach as it tends to lead to rules bloat and conflicting rules that ultimately do nothing but cancel each other out. I much prefer the "roll'n'go" playstyle, rather than having to spend game time bogged down in looking up and interpreting conflicting rules.
| CRMcNeill wrote: | | And yet, the problem (or the potential for it, at least) exists. Blaster bolts aimed at a character behind a Jedi don’t curve around the Jedi or phase through him to rematerialize to strike with full power. A Jedi blocking blaster bolts provides at least some Cover. The question being asked here is “how much?” |
My assumption here was that the characters behind the Jedi weren't perfectly in line, but rather slightly off to one side or existing in a sort of 'cloud' (similar to an atomic electron cloud) where they can be seen and shot at. Hence why I decided to have the Jedi make the Parry check.
| CRMcNeill wrote: | | My two issues here is that 1) it creates a unique rule set specifically for these circumstances, when it’s far easier on GMs to tie it into a single overarching rule (particularly one that already exists in the RAW, like Cover), and 2) there’s nowhere near enough time for human reflexes to react to a missed parry on a blaster bolt at such close range (targeted characters will likely be a few meters behind the Jedi, at most). |
Firstly, we're talking about the Jedi being proactive about providing cover, not being the cover. Additionally, have the Jedi make a Parry check puts an upper limit on much it can be used, thus making less abusable. Secondly, Jedi are often noted as having enhanced reflexes (plus possibly some precognition) when it comes to deflecting blaster shots. Thirdly, PCs are already able to Dodge blaster shots fairly reliably at close range anyways so I don't really see how it makes a difference.
| CRMcNeill wrote: | | jtanzer wrote: |
Shooting back would mean the target gains a bonus to the DC. |
Raises an interesting question. I don’t think I’ve ever considered penalizing characters for shooting around Cover, but it’s certainly worth taking into account. I did end up making smaller weapons allow their wielders to take more advantage of Partial Cover… |
This was more intended to model the difficulty of firing through the defense provided by the Jedi. I didn't have a good idea of how it would work, so I tossed it out there. The best I could come up with was something along the lines of the Jedi making his Parry check after declaring his action and the result getting applied both ways. As for you response, I believe RAW states that characters can fire out of Cover with no penalty.
_________________
The best villians are the ones the PCs create. |
|
