View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
ZzaphodD Rear Admiral
Joined: 28 Nov 2009 Posts: 2426
|
Posted: Wed Jan 05, 2011 7:07 pm Post subject: Differing between heavy firepower and rapid fire. |
|
|
When redoing my 40K Terminator conversion to SW I came across a problem I have encountered before.
How does one differ between a weapon with a powerful attack and a weapon with a high rate of fire.
The same problem exists with the RAW repeating blasters. How do you differ between an E-web and a portable Laser Cannon damage wise?
The question touches on the autofire rules discussed on this board.
My autofire system adds a number of Autofire Dice to either damage or the Skill roll. A light repeating blaster then does 5D in damage with 1D Autofire Die. An Autofire dice can also be used to cover an area of 3m with a singe action. When using area fire the Autofire Dice is not used either to hit or for damage. If hit, anyone suffers the weapons basic damage.
This is a simple system made for fast play. However it suffers from the same problem as the RAW repeating blasters. If you have a weak blaster with a high rate of fire it shouldnt be able to damage heavily armoured targets to the same degree as a singer powerful blaster bolt. The other way around, a fast firing lighter weapon could possibly damage a (non living) target more than a single powerful attack.
I can find no easy way of adressing this without rolling a massive amount of to-hit dice and damage dice for each hit. The armour values (if they exist) are very low, so its hard to use them as a 'barrier'. All known weapons will shoot through a Bounty Hunter armor anyway. _________________ My Biggest Beard Retard award goes to: The Admiral of course.. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
ZzaphodD Rear Admiral
Joined: 28 Nov 2009 Posts: 2426
|
Posted: Wed Jan 05, 2011 7:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Weird! I have looked for a simple solution for this for a while, with no luck. Perhaps writing this topic made something click, because an idea suddenly came to my mind.
When handling autofire weapons like in my rule above one rolls the autofire dice in a separate colour from the basice damage dice.
The result of the basic damage dice are them compared to the damage resistance roll.
If the damage dice result is 6 lower or more than the resistance roll, the Autofire Dice may not be added. The force of the attacking weapon is to weak to penetrate the armour. If the result is 5 lower or more, add the result of the Autofire dice to the damage. Even though a single bolt might not have damaged the target seriusly enough to warrant a wound/light damage, the barrage of shots added up to one.
Example: A Stormtrooper Assault Trooper fires his Assault Blaster (gatling blaster). Damgae is 5D, but with a 3D autofire bonus. The target is a Rebel Military speeder with a Body of 6D*. He rolls 5D in damage with a result of 16. The Speeder commander rolls his Body and comes up with a 23. The Stormtrooper dont get to add his 3D as the blaster bolts are to weak to penetrate the armour sufficiently (or the angle of attack was ineffective, etc). If he would have rolled 18 for damage he would then add 3D autofire damage for a total of 29. Even though each bolt were not powerful enough to damage the target more than superficially, the amount of superficial damages added up to a light damage.
* For this example the speeder is character scale.
This might seem more complicated than it is. Just roll damage as usual with two different colours. Give the GM the result of the basic damage die first. Either you fail to penetrate enough or the GM tells you to add the Autofire dice to the total. _________________ My Biggest Beard Retard award goes to: The Admiral of course.. |
|
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 Jan 05, 2011 7:53 pm Post subject: Re: Differing between heavy firepower and rapid fire. |
|
|
ZzaphodD wrote: | My autofire system adds a number of Autofire Dice to either damage or the Skill roll. A light repeating blaster then does 5D in damage with 1D Autofire Die. An Autofire dice can also be used to cover an area of 3m with a singe action. When using area fire the Autofire Dice is not used either to hit or for damage. If hit, anyone suffers the weapons basic damage. |
Very nice. I like it. You can also use the suppression fire rules from Rules of Engagement, where area fire adds penalties to the accuracy of enemies in the area fire zone.
ZzaphodD wrote: | This is a simple system made for fast play. However it suffers from the same problem as the RAW repeating blasters. If you have a weak blaster with a high rate of fire it shouldnt be able to damage heavily armoured targets to the same degree as a singer powerful blaster bolt. The other way around, a fast firing lighter weapon could possibly damage a (non living) target more than a single powerful attackknown weapons will shoot through a Bounty Hunter armor anyway. |
Well, if you're referring to a character taking on a tank with a repeating blaster, something like that happened in the official material. I'm pretty sure it was part of the Katarn Commandos description in the Dark Force Rising Sourcebook, where the Katarn's extracted two captured Rebel agents from a Floating Fortress. In this battle, the Floating Fortress was critically damaged by a Heavy Weapons Specialist with a Medium Repeating Blaster Rifle.
As for rules, the best fit (IMO), would be the Optional Rule: Ship Location Targeting in the Far Orbit Project. To summarize this rule, you may target specific locations on a target, in exchange for higher difficulty. You can only use this rule on targets that are the same scale as you or larger. All the rules for difficulty and damage refer to starship systems, but it wouldn't be too difficult to modify it for character scale use. Alternately, you could use the rules from RoE about accurate fire automatically affecting damage (two different variants; one that you got to add the difference between your dice rolls to your damage on a successful attack, and another less powerful version where you got to add 1 to damage for every 5 point by which you succeeded).
I'm also considering a rule called sustained fire, whereby a weapon that generates a relatively continuous attack, like lightsabers, autoblaster and plasma torches, gains a damage bonus for every round of sustained attack against a single target. Each round, the damage roll gets to a little bonus that cumulatively builds and builds until it overwhelms the target. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
garhkal Sovereign Protector
Joined: 17 Jul 2005 Posts: 14168 Location: Reynoldsburg, Columbus, Ohio.
|
Posted: Thu Jan 06, 2011 4:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
So like, this round i hit i do 5d+1 (weapons listed damage). Next round i add +1 making it 5d+2. next round i add 1 round+1= +2 making it 6d. Next round i add 1+1+2, making 1d+1. for 6+2. Next round i add 1+1+2+3=2d+1, making it 7d+2. Next round it is 1+1+2+3+4 for 3d+2 bonus giving me a total damage of 9d. _________________ Confucious sayeth, don't wash cat while drunk! |
|
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 Jan 06, 2011 10:40 am Post subject: |
|
|
garhkal wrote: | So like, this round i hit i do 5d+1 (weapons listed damage). Next round i add +1 making it 5d+2. next round i add 1 round+1= +2 making it 6d. Next round i add 1+1+2, making 1d+1. for 6+2. Next round i add 1+1+2+3=2d+1, making it 7d+2. Next round it is 1+1+2+3+4 for 3d+2 bonus giving me a total damage of 9d. |
Exactly. I think there would need to be a cap for most weapons, but something like a lightsaber or plasma torch would eventually cut through anything if you stayed at it long enough |
|
Back to top |
|
|
atgxtg Rear Admiral
Joined: 22 Mar 2009 Posts: 2460
|
Posted: Thu Jan 06, 2011 5:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
crmcneill wrote: | garhkal wrote: | So like, this round i hit i do 5d+1 (weapons listed damage). Next round i add +1 making it 5d+2. next round i add 1 round+1= +2 making it 6d. Next round i add 1+1+2, making 1d+1. for 6+2. Next round i add 1+1+2+3=2d+1, making it 7d+2. Next round it is 1+1+2+3+4 for 3d+2 bonus giving me a total damage of 9d. |
Exactly. I think there would need to be a cap for most weapons, but something like a lightsaber or plasma torch would eventually cut through anything if you stayed at it long enough |
In cases when attacking an object at the same spot over time (thrusting a lightsaber through a blast door) you might want to roll the damage dice once, and just increase the damage total 1 pip each round. Tat way you get a "burn through" effect. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
atgxtg Rear Admiral
Joined: 22 Mar 2009 Posts: 2460
|
Posted: Thu Jan 06, 2011 5:48 pm Post subject: Re: Differing between heavy firepower and rapid fire. |
|
|
Quote: | How does one differ between a weapon with a powerful attack and a weapon with a high rate of fire. |
After considering the problem I think it is important to realize that we only need to differentiate between the two when the target has some sort of armor or inheritent toughness that would protect it from the high rate of fire weapon. A good example of this is firing a Uzi at a Bradely APC. The 9mm bullets shouldn7t penetrate, no matter how many are being fired.
I think the solution is to give the targets (i.e. vehicles) some sort of ARMOR rating, and this rating could be taken off the damage dice rolled, rather than adding to soak rolls. That way anything with more armor than the weapon:s base damage (before high ROF bonuses) would be immune to the lighter weapon.
To keep it simple, you could start off using a vehicles Scale modfier as the armor rating and subtract it from damage dice rolled rather than adding to the vehicle Body/STR rolls to soak damage. Or maybe use half it's Body dice? Or half Body and Scale dice.
The nice thing about this is that is quickly makes AT-ATs immune to blaster pistols. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Random Numbers Commander
Joined: 12 Jan 2010 Posts: 454 Location: Gladsheim
|
Posted: Thu Jan 06, 2011 5:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
or let weapons with extreme rate of fire hit several times per success. Then you don't have any problems with writing armor rules.
Example:
'normal' auto blaster ala mp5 gets 4d +1d autofire dice.
gatling version of the same gets 4d +1d autofire dice and every hit counts as two hits. _________________ Random is who random does... |
|
Back to top |
|
|
ZzaphodD Rear Admiral
Joined: 28 Nov 2009 Posts: 2426
|
Posted: Thu Jan 06, 2011 7:01 pm Post subject: Re: Differing between heavy firepower and rapid fire. |
|
|
atgxtg wrote: | Quote: | How does one differ between a weapon with a powerful attack and a weapon with a high rate of fire. |
After considering the problem I think it is important to realize that we only need to differentiate between the two when the target has some sort of armor or inheritent toughness that would protect it from the high rate of fire weapon. A good example of this is firing a Uzi at a Bradely APC. The 9mm bullets shouldn7t penetrate, no matter how many are being fired.
I think the solution is to give the targets (i.e. vehicles) some sort of ARMOR rating, and this rating could be taken off the damage dice rolled, rather than adding to soak rolls. That way anything with more armor than the weapon:s base damage (before high ROF bonuses) would be immune to the lighter weapon.
To keep it simple, you could start off using a vehicles Scale modfier as the armor rating and subtract it from damage dice rolled rather than adding to the vehicle Body/STR rolls to soak damage. Or maybe use half it's Body dice? Or half Body and Scale dice.
The nice thing about this is that is quickly makes AT-ATs immune to blaster pistols. |
Yeah, the armour issue has been discussed here before.
I had the same idea for characters too before. The idea came from the fact that wearing bounty hunter armour did little for 'weak' (standard human) persons. The idea was the same as yours above. If a weapon did not meet a certain number of D:s in damage the attack would not penetrate armour and no resistance roll was neccesary. The idea never got realized as I couldnt come up with a way to interpret existing stats into this rule. I didnt want to redo all armours. _________________ My Biggest Beard Retard award goes to: The Admiral of course.. |
|
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 Jan 06, 2011 8:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Random Numbers wrote: | or let weapons with extreme rate of fire hit several times per success. Then you don't have any problems with writing armor rules.
Example:
'normal' auto blaster ala mp5 gets 4d +1d autofire dice.
gatling version of the same gets 4d +1d autofire dice and every hit counts as two hits. |
I would suggest combining the auto fire rules with the optional rules in RoE, whereby the higher you roll to hit, you receive a bonus to damage. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Random Numbers Commander
Joined: 12 Jan 2010 Posts: 454 Location: Gladsheim
|
Posted: Thu Jan 06, 2011 8:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Random Numbers wrote: | or let weapons with extreme rate of fire hit several times per success. Then you don't have any problems with writing armor rules.
Example:
'normal' auto blaster ala mp5 gets 4d +1d autofire dice.
gatling version of the same gets 4d +1d autofire dice and every hit counts as two hits. |
Or the autofire dice could be applied to skill only and never to damage. _________________ Random is who random does... |
|
Back to top |
|
|
garhkal Sovereign Protector
Joined: 17 Jul 2005 Posts: 14168 Location: Reynoldsburg, Columbus, Ohio.
|
Posted: Thu Jan 06, 2011 9:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I could see that if you were using one of the rules of engagement additional damage ways... so the higher you hit by the more damage you did. _________________ Confucious sayeth, don't wash cat while drunk! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
ZzaphodD Rear Admiral
Joined: 28 Nov 2009 Posts: 2426
|
Posted: Fri Jan 07, 2011 3:47 am Post subject: |
|
|
We already have a damage bonus depending on how high over the required target number you roll. This is not specifically for autofire though.
But one thing I have been thinking of is to give autofire a steeper 'damage bonus' than normal weapon, representing hitting with several shots. This would be combined with putting all the autofire dice on the skill roll.
However, I digress, this is a separate issue from the firepower/rate of fire issue.
I would really want to avoid rolling several 'hits' when doing autofire. My aim here is to keep it simple. In 'reality' one would have to work out how many shots hit the target (not that easy) and then do every hit separately. This would be a dice rolling nightmare for a game. _________________ My Biggest Beard Retard award goes to: The Admiral of course.. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
garhkal Sovereign Protector
Joined: 17 Jul 2005 Posts: 14168 Location: Reynoldsburg, Columbus, Ohio.
|
Posted: Fri Jan 07, 2011 6:04 am Post subject: |
|
|
Why not a chart.
To hit over dodge.. 0-4 = 1 hit
To hit over dodge.. 5-8 = 2hits
To hit..9-12 = 3 hits
and so on, inc one hit each 4 over the target adds one more hit. _________________ Confucious sayeth, don't wash cat while drunk! |
|
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: Fri Jan 07, 2011 11:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
ZzaphodD wrote: | We already have a damage bonus depending on how high over the required target number you roll. This is not specifically for autofire though.
But one thing I have been thinking of is to give autofire a steeper 'damage bonus' than normal weapon, representing hitting with several shots. This would be combined with putting all the autofire dice on the skill roll.
However, I digress, this is a separate issue from the firepower/rate of fire issue.
I would really want to avoid rolling several 'hits' when doing autofire. My aim here is to keep it simple. In 'reality' one would have to work out how many shots hit the target (not that easy) and then do every hit separately. This would be a dice rolling nightmare for a game. |
Well, if you used both sets of rules, the autoblaster would be combining bonuses from two different rules.
Based on your rules, say your gunner was shooting at a heavy repulsortank with an E-Web. By the current rules, E-Web's have a Damage of 8D. I would suggest a reduction to 6D, with 2D reallocated to autofire.
Now, by the current scale rules, there is a 2D gap between the E-Web and the repulsortank (with a 4D+2 hull and 0D maneuverability). That grants a +2D bonus to the E-Web gunner to hit right off the bat. Say he adds his autofire bonus to damage instead of FC, he's still rolling his skill +2D to hit the tank, with a base damage of 8D vs. 6D+2, not counting whatever damage bonus he gets from his To Hit roll. Averaging potential dice rolls, you're looking at 28 to Damage against a 23 Hull Strength roll, before you add in the accuracy bonus. 5 point disparity = Lightly Damaged. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|