View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
garhkal Sovereign Protector
Joined: 17 Jul 2005 Posts: 14215 Location: Reynoldsburg, Columbus, Ohio.
|
Posted: Thu Jan 09, 2014 5:00 pm Post subject: Banking the shot. Bouncing your blaster bolts off of stuff? |
|
|
Has anyone made HRs to allow people to bank shots of interposing objects, so they can hit targets elsewhere? Such as say han in that corridor on the Death star shoots one trooper before he rounds the corner, hitting him, then banks one off the side wall to hit a 2nd trooper just as he turned it? _________________ Confucious sayeth, don't wash cat while drunk! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
DougRed4 Rear Admiral
Joined: 18 Jan 2013 Posts: 2286 Location: Seattle, WA
|
Posted: Thu Jan 09, 2014 5:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Haven't made any house rules, but I figure I'd just make up a ruling on the spot, if it seemed feasible. I could see such a tactic working occasionally, if the surface is appropriate to do so. _________________ Currently Running: Villains & Vigilantes (a 32-year-old campaign with multiple groups) and D6 Star Wars; mostly on hiatus are Adventures in Middle-earth and Delta Green |
|
Back to top |
|
|
TyCaine Captain
Joined: 16 Oct 2009 Posts: 515 Location: Florida, US
|
Posted: Thu Jan 09, 2014 5:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Like DougRed4 I haven't noted any actual ruling, but off the top of my head perhaps something like this:
Per surface (how appropriate the surface is, is up to the GM) to ricochet the shot off: +1 Difficulty Level & -1D Damage
This accounts for the additional difficulty to hit the original target with a planned ricochet, and for the damage reduction that I could see from the blaster bolt expending energy against the additional surface.
The bolt can only be bounced off as many surfaces as it has D in Damage to a minimum of 1D damage (since you loose one D per surface).
Shooter must know or have an idea the target is there...
We could get into a more in-depth look at energy and expenditure, and such, but SWD6 is supposed to be quick and dirty, so this is a relatively simple HR to account for the action, without over-complicating it.
Thoughts?
T.C. _________________ "For every person with a spark of genius, there are a hundred with ignition trouble." |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Leon The Lion Commander
Joined: 29 Oct 2009 Posts: 309 Location: Somewhere in Poland
|
Posted: Thu Jan 09, 2014 6:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Looks just about perfect to me.
I agree, there is no real need to complicate it further, though the GM could perhaps lower or rise the damage loss depending on the suitability of the surface bounced from.
Could be useful for hitting targets in 1/2 and better partial cover, as the net to-hit penalty is lower. Provided, of course, that a suitable, in both composition and placement, surface is available. _________________ Plagiarize! Let no one else's work evade your eyes,
Remember why the good Lord made your eyes! So don't shade your eyes,
But plagiarize, plagiarize, plagiarize... Only be sure to call it, please, "research".
- Tom Lehrer |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Tinman Lieutenant Commander
Joined: 26 Dec 2013 Posts: 110
|
Posted: Thu Jan 09, 2014 8:24 pm Post subject: Re: Banking the shot. Bouncing your blaster bolts off of st |
|
|
garhkal wrote: | Has anyone made HRs to allow people to bank shots of interposing objects, so they can hit targets elsewhere? Such as say han in that corridor on the Death star shoots one trooper before he rounds the corner, hitting him, then banks one off the side wall to hit a 2nd trooper just as he turned it? |
Blaster bolts don't seem to ricochet off most surfaces (whatever materials garbage mashers are made of being one obvious exception.) For the most part they just seem to scorch and occasionally set fire to whatever they hit. Old fashioned projectile weapons and bowcaster quarrels might be subject to this though. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Corise Lucerne Lieutenant
Joined: 02 Jan 2014 Posts: 78 Location: USA
|
Posted: Fri Jan 10, 2014 7:49 am Post subject: |
|
|
TyCaine wrote: | We could get into a more in-depth look at energy and expenditure, and such, but SWD6 is supposed to be quick and dirty, so this is a relatively simple HR to account for the action, without over-complicating it.
Thoughts?
T.C. |
That looks pretty solid to me too.
Depending on the situation, I might add a modifier if the target is behind some sort of cover or concealment as well. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Leon The Lion Commander
Joined: 29 Oct 2009 Posts: 309 Location: Somewhere in Poland
|
Posted: Fri Jan 10, 2014 8:04 am Post subject: |
|
|
Corise Lucerne wrote: | Depending on the situation, I might add a modifier if the target is behind some sort of cover or concealment as well. |
I'd only do that if the target was in full cover. Otherwise the maneuver becomes useless against targets in partial cover, if it's easier to just shoot the target directly with the cover to-hit penalty. It's already very situational, depending as it does on the presence of a suitable surface to bounce the shot from, and you're trading in some damage besides. I don't think it needs to be further penalized. _________________ Plagiarize! Let no one else's work evade your eyes,
Remember why the good Lord made your eyes! So don't shade your eyes,
But plagiarize, plagiarize, plagiarize... Only be sure to call it, please, "research".
- Tom Lehrer |
|
Back to top |
|
|
lurker Commander
Joined: 24 Oct 2012 Posts: 423 Location: Oklahoma
|
Posted: Fri Jan 10, 2014 10:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
Well, I don't know about 'blaster bolts' but I do know real life bullets can be 'bounced' under cars (doing good damage to a surprised target's ankles and knees if they are kneeled down taking cover) and 'tumble' down a brick/clay etc wall at just about 1 1/2 - 2 feet from the wall (that is one of the reasons why guys are taught to stay about an arm's length from the wall). Now I'm not saying this is easy. I had to get training to do it correctly and spend days at the range perfecting it so it was muscle memory and not something I had to think about …
If we use that precedence then it would be possible. However, and like Tinman pointed out, in the movies they tend to make big smoking holes in walls. Except for the trash compactor and I think that was explained as it being 'magnetically sealed' or something like that. So, you as the GM could easily say blasters don’t bounce and leave it at that.
Now, to find the 'middle of the road' answer and to keep it in the simple fast rules of the game. I'd say make it a +1d - 2d difficulty to hit. Call it the slag, spall and splash from the blaster hitting the wall and then hitting the target, or say the bolt itself hit the target (which ever you as the GM feel most comfortable with in your narrative). Then drop the damage by 1d (it is surprising how much energy bullets still have when bounced, so I wouldn't drop the damage as much as increase the 'to hit'. Then get on with the game and have fun!
LTL, good point on partial vs full cover. It is always easier to hit what you can see than try and bounce the shot. So you should default to cover / concealment rules before this (and then bouncing the shot should be harder than the cover rules) _________________ "And so I am become a knight of the Kingdom of Dreams and Shadows!" - Mark Twain
Forgive all spelling errors. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
atgxtg Rear Admiral
Joined: 22 Mar 2009 Posts: 2460
|
Posted: Fri Jan 10, 2014 1:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
As has been mentioned, blaster bolts generally don't bounce off objects. Shields and Lightsabers appear to be the exceptions. And yes, the trash compactor was "magnetically sealed" so we can assume sort of of magnetic field would work (and that blaster gas is probably ferrous).
I'd suspect that banking a shot is probably a lot more difficult that +1 level per surface. Maybe something like +1 level per surface per range band. it's much, much easier to get the right angle to hit someone 3m away than it is to get the right angle to hit someone 300m away.
After a certain point the complexity would probably require a Jedi to pull it off. Come to think of it, the shooter is trying to redirect a blaster bolt in a controlled fashion. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
DougRed4 Rear Admiral
Joined: 18 Jan 2013 Posts: 2286 Location: Seattle, WA
|
Posted: Fri Jan 10, 2014 2:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
atgxtg wrote: | As has been mentioned, blaster bolts generally don't bounce off objects. Shields and Lightsabers appear to be the exceptions. And yes, the trash compactor was "magnetically sealed" so we can assume sort of of magnetic field would work (and that blaster gas is probably ferrous). |
Of course they probably did this in A New Hope for purely dramatic/entertainment purposes. Why exactly do they expect someone to be using a blaster in the trash compactor for? (or is it 'magnetically sealed' for some other reason, like repelling certain metals in the trash?)
In any event, I'd suppose magnetically sealing things must be an expensive process. Otherwise one could expect every PC starship to have its hull magnetically sealed. Player "Well I'll just ignore their blaster fire, as my hull is now manetically sealed!" _________________ Currently Running: Villains & Vigilantes (a 32-year-old campaign with multiple groups) and D6 Star Wars; mostly on hiatus are Adventures in Middle-earth and Delta Green |
|
Back to top |
|
|
atgxtg Rear Admiral
Joined: 22 Mar 2009 Posts: 2460
|
Posted: Fri Jan 10, 2014 2:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
DougRed4 wrote: |
Of course they probably did this in A New Hope for purely dramatic/entertainment purposes. Why exactly do they expect someone to be using a blaster in the trash compactor for? (or is it 'magnetically sealed' for some other reason, like repelling certain metals in the trash?) |
I suspect that the magnetic sealing was to keep the door secured so that the trash didn't pop the door out when compacted and/or so nobody in the hallway could accidentally walk into the trash compactor when it was running and get squished. I think the bit about repelling blaster bolts was just a side effect, not the intended effect.
Also, if I recall correctly only the door was magnetically sealed, yet the blaster bolts also bounced off the walls. So I guess trash compactors must be made out of some really tough and dense material that can reflect a blaster bolt.
And Luke didn't try to cut his way out with his lightsaber, either.
DougRed4 wrote: |
In any event, I'd suppose magnetically sealing things must be an expensive process. Otherwise one could expect every PC starship to have its hull magnetically sealed. Player "Well I'll just ignore their blaster fire, as my hull is now manetically sealed!" |
LOL! If only the Empire had magnetically sealed the exhaust ports on the Death Star instead of the trash compactors!
It probably just doesn't scale up. What works fine against hand blasters probably isn't effective against a turbolaser. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Tinman Lieutenant Commander
Joined: 26 Dec 2013 Posts: 110
|
Posted: Fri Jan 10, 2014 3:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
DougRed4 wrote: | Player "Well I'll just ignore their blaster fire, as my hull is now manetically sealed!" |
Thank you for this, I'm still laughing. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Ral_Brelt Lieutenant Commander
Joined: 05 May 2013 Posts: 221
|
Posted: Fri Jan 10, 2014 6:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I doubt Luke even had his saber at that point as it was still unwieldy to him and he was trying to sneak around as a Stormtrooper at the time.
'TK-615, what's that on your belt?'
'Uhm...a flashlight Sir?'
I'd say the mag seal was to:
A- keep the door closed
B- help contain any hazardous materials being crushed
And I'd imagine the compactor is heavily armored as well in case of explosion of say, surplus tabana canisters from weapons systems. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
garhkal Sovereign Protector
Joined: 17 Jul 2005 Posts: 14215 Location: Reynoldsburg, Columbus, Ohio.
|
Posted: Sat Jan 11, 2014 3:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
THat is a good point. Often people do chuck out batteries or the like which still has a charge on, but not sufficient to do the job. _________________ Confucious sayeth, don't wash cat while drunk! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
lurker Commander
Joined: 24 Oct 2012 Posts: 423 Location: Oklahoma
|
Posted: Sat Jan 11, 2014 5:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
garhkal wrote: | THat is a good point. Often people do chuck out batteries or the like which still has a charge on, but not sufficient to do the job. |
Rgr that, & I never thought of that
From experience, there are military batteries that HAVE to be vented and the charge completely depleted or bad things happen ... Like getting the old 'dead' batteries wet when a camel pack bladder busts, in a ruck, and it all of a sudden it gets HOT and smells (luckily it didn't self ignite . A whole team had to jump out of the 2 1/2 before it stopped and we had to throw the ruck out off the road until it cooled off. That was an interesting safety report I had to fill out in the AAR ...
With that, it does justify then 'magnetic' sealing the garbage disposal as much as possible against explosions (and smell too!) _________________ "And so I am become a knight of the Kingdom of Dreams and Shadows!" - Mark Twain
Forgive all spelling errors. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|