| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
ZzaphodD
Rear Admiral
Joined: 28 Nov 2009
Posts: 2426
|
 Posted: Mon Aug 30, 2010 4:25 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| Ankhanu wrote: | I might be thinking in the box... but it makes sense 
Initiative has NO bearing on what you choose to do with your reaction speed, it's purely mental. |
Thats your interpretation.
_________________
My Biggest Beard Retard award goes to: The Admiral of course.. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
garhkal
Sovereign Protector
Joined: 17 Jul 2005
Posts: 14292
Location: Reynoldsburg, Columbus, Ohio.
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 30, 2010 5:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Esoomian wrote: | | jmanski wrote: | | Only to dodge, and not to hit? |
Sure, if the target is unaware and just standing there then it wouldn't make any difference if you're shooting them with a rifle or a pistol. It's when they're trying to avoid being hit that it's an issue at that range. |
yup. If i am dodging cause your weapon is restricted, i can see a bonus to my dodge. OR a penalty to your to hit.. either way it is adds to the same thing.
| Quote: | | As I said, I understand what your after, but think its a clumsy way of doing it. To begin with the dodging target should have as much difficulty dodging in the cramped space as the firer tracking him, hence it should even out. |
That is true. you should have a harder time to dodge when there is less space or cover available to dodge into..
_________________
Confucious sayeth, don't wash cat while drunk! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ankhanu
Vice Admiral
Joined: 13 Oct 2006
Posts: 3089
Location: Nova Scotia, Canada
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 30, 2010 9:26 am Post subject: |
|
|
| ZzaphodD wrote: | | Ankhanu wrote: | I might be thinking in the box... but it makes sense
Initiative has NO bearing on what you choose to do with your reaction speed, it's purely mental. |
Thats your interpretation. |
Sure, that's my interpretation (and I'm right ) ... but it's more widely applicable to the situation. For example, why would a player be penalized initiative for *holding* a long gun in tightish quarters if they're not USING the gun.
By penalizing initiative, if the PC decided to not shoot that round, they're being penalized because they can't aim the weapon effectively... that just doesn't make sense. They could be penalized for holding a rifle when what they're doing is, say, hitting a button to open a door with their left hand. How does this make sense? The penalty should apply to the action of trying to use the gun, not to everything they might consider doing. Or they could choose to dodge instead of shoot... that dodge might simply involve falling backwards... the gun would not inhibit that. It also wouldn't likely inhibit kicking your opponent... See what I'm getting at?
The speed of your wits (ability to rapidly assess and react) is perceptive and mental, it's not dependent upon what you hold in your hand.
_________________
Hotaru no Hishou; a messageboard about games, friends and nothing at all.
Donate to Ankhanu Press |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
vong
Jedi
Joined: 30 Aug 2006
Posts: 6699
Location: Ottawa, Canada
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 30, 2010 11:10 am Post subject: |
|
|
ZzaphodD: Instead of modifying the initiative, why not just make the wielder spend an action to aim (increasing his MAPs).
This would basically do what both of you are saying, give a - to shooting, and discourage use. but it shouldn't lower initiative, just take longer to aim (hence more actions).
_________________
The Vong have Arrived
PM me if you want user created content uploaded to my site: http://databank.yvong.com/index.php |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ZzaphodD
Rear Admiral
Joined: 28 Nov 2009
Posts: 2426
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 31, 2010 4:36 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Ankhanu wrote: | | ZzaphodD wrote: | | Ankhanu wrote: | I might be thinking in the box... but it makes sense
Initiative has NO bearing on what you choose to do with your reaction speed, it's purely mental. |
Thats your interpretation. |
Sure, that's my interpretation (and I'm right ) ... but it's more widely applicable to the situation. For example, why would a player be penalized initiative for *holding* a long gun in tightish quarters if they're not USING the gun. |
Of course the penalty is tied to the gun, if your stabbing with a knife it does not apply.
_________________
My Biggest Beard Retard award goes to: The Admiral of course.. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ankhanu
Vice Admiral
Joined: 13 Oct 2006
Posts: 3089
Location: Nova Scotia, Canada
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 31, 2010 4:39 am Post subject: |
|
|
The point is, an initiative penalty is applied before actions are declared... therefore applies whether or not the action that would incur the penalty is declared; that or never applies because you can't know if it will influence init or not.
A MAP for aiming in tight quarters makes some sense, Vong, it's a little like an attack modifier, but also represents the action sequence slowing. Not bad.
_________________
Hotaru no Hishou; a messageboard about games, friends and nothing at all.
Donate to Ankhanu Press |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ZzaphodD
Rear Admiral
Joined: 28 Nov 2009
Posts: 2426
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 31, 2010 4:41 am Post subject: |
|
|
| vong wrote: | ZzaphodD: Instead of modifying the initiative, why not just make the wielder spend an action to aim (increasing his MAPs).
This would basically do what both of you are saying, give a - to shooting, and discourage use. but it shouldn't lower initiative, just take longer to aim (hence more actions). |
I have been playing with that idea (is that an english phrase? Its directly translated from Swedish  ), but has not playtested it yet.
_________________
My Biggest Beard Retard award goes to: The Admiral of course.. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bren
Vice Admiral
Joined: 19 Aug 2010
Posts: 3868
Location: Maryland, USA
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 31, 2010 6:07 am Post subject: |
|
|
Vong:
| Quote: | | Quote: | | ZzaphodD: Instead of modifying the initiative, why not just make the wielder spend an action to aim (increasing his MAPs). |
This would basically do what both of you are saying, give a - to shooting, and discourage use. but it shouldn't lower initiative, just take longer to aim (hence more actions). |
That seems like a reasonable fix to me.
ZzaphodD:
| Quote: | | I have been playing with that idea (is that an english phrase? Its directly translated from Swedish ), but has not playtested it yet. |
Yes that is an American-English phrase. I haven't noticed yet if it is an English-English phrase. Out of curiousity are you Swedish ZzaphodD? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
garhkal
Sovereign Protector
Joined: 17 Jul 2005
Posts: 14292
Location: Reynoldsburg, Columbus, Ohio.
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 31, 2010 6:40 am Post subject: |
|
|
I could agree to a MAP for 'aiming' though without any 'aiming bonus'..
_________________
Confucious sayeth, don't wash cat while drunk! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ZzaphodD
Rear Admiral
Joined: 28 Nov 2009
Posts: 2426
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 31, 2010 7:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Bren wrote: | Vong:
| Quote: | | Quote: | | ZzaphodD: Instead of modifying the initiative, why not just make the wielder spend an action to aim (increasing his MAPs). |
This would basically do what both of you are saying, give a - to shooting, and discourage use. but it shouldn't lower initiative, just take longer to aim (hence more actions). |
That seems like a reasonable fix to me.
ZzaphodD:
| Quote: | | I have been playing with that idea (is that an english phrase? Its directly translated from Swedish ), but has not playtested it yet. |
Yes that is an American-English phrase. I haven't noticed yet if it is an English-English phrase. Out of curiousity are you Swedish ZzaphodD? |
Yes, guilty as charged..
_________________
My Biggest Beard Retard award goes to: The Admiral of course.. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ZzaphodD
Rear Admiral
Joined: 28 Nov 2009
Posts: 2426
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 31, 2010 7:38 am Post subject: |
|
|
| garhkal wrote: | | I could agree to a MAP for 'aiming' though without any 'aiming bonus'.. |
Hmm, just realised I wouldnt make it a MAP penalty (ie penalty that applies to skill use), but instead an 'penalty action' that represent that maneuvering a bulky weapon is more time consuming and clumsy. That is, it would be a 'free action' (ie no MAP) but you would none the less need to perform it which would slow you down.
_________________
My Biggest Beard Retard award goes to: The Admiral of course.. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bren
Vice Admiral
Joined: 19 Aug 2010
Posts: 3868
Location: Maryland, USA
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 31, 2010 9:39 am Post subject: |
|
|
ZzaphodD
| Quote: | | Hmm, just realised I wouldnt make it a MAP penalty (ie penalty that applies to skill use), but instead an 'penalty action' that represent that maneuvering a bulky weapon is more time consuming and clumsy. That is, it would be a 'free action' (ie no MAP) but you would none the less need to perform it which would slow you down. |
So what is the game impact to being slowed and how does it play out in the various permutations mentioned, for example: shoot the gun, dodge an opponent, do something else like kick or stab with off hand, etc. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ZzaphodD
Rear Admiral
Joined: 28 Nov 2009
Posts: 2426
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 31, 2010 3:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Bren wrote: | ZzaphodD
| Quote: | | Hmm, just realised I wouldnt make it a MAP penalty (ie penalty that applies to skill use), but instead an 'penalty action' that represent that maneuvering a bulky weapon is more time consuming and clumsy. That is, it would be a 'free action' (ie no MAP) but you would none the less need to perform it which would slow you down. |
So what is the game impact to being slowed and how does it play out in the various permutations mentioned, for example: shoot the gun, dodge an opponent, do something else like kick or stab with off hand, etc. |
If the opponent is not directly in front of you, instead coming from an angle where you have to maneuver your gun to fire, you have to take an 'action' to direct your weapon. With 'action' I mean that its a 'free action' which does not result in a MAP but you must perform it before firing.
This only make sense if you are playing each round action by action or something similar. Then being 'delayed' one action can mean that your enemy gets to fire first. If each player do all his actions on his initiative then this makes no sense of course. Then we are back at a initiative penalty instead (which represent the same thing).
If I would go with a penalty to hit (not bonus to dodge) Id make it rather small, perhaps -1d or so. Even though its not that much of a penalty I think it would represent that slight loss in edge from having a clumsy weapon. So, either -1d to initiative or to the 'to hit' roll.
_________________
My Biggest Beard Retard award goes to: The Admiral of course.. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ankhanu
Vice Admiral
Joined: 13 Oct 2006
Posts: 3089
Location: Nova Scotia, Canada
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 31, 2010 4:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
That's not a bad idea, ZzaphodD, but, like you said, depends on how you actually run combat; action by action or character by character. I use action by action when running PbP games, but not always in table top. Something to consider anyway.
_________________
Hotaru no Hishou; a messageboard about games, friends and nothing at all.
Donate to Ankhanu Press |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ZzaphodD
Rear Admiral
Joined: 28 Nov 2009
Posts: 2426
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 31, 2010 4:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Ankhanu wrote: | | That's not a bad idea, ZzaphodD, but, like you said, depends on how you actually run combat; action by action or character by character. I use action by action when running PbP games, but not always in table top. Something to consider anyway. |
Yeah, we have always played action by action even in fantasy games such as WFRP, AD&D and the like.. but as pointed out if you go character by character then a 'to hit' penalty is the best way to go..
_________________
My Biggest Beard Retard award goes to: The Admiral of course.. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
