|
Post by xhaosdaemon on Apr 25, 2014 21:23:49 GMT -8
So I have a question about the regular (buckshot) shotgun shells. It says it has a spread of 1m at 5m, a 2m spread at 10m, and a 3m spread after that. That is clear enough as is the idea that targets in that spread are attacked by the shot.
My question is, when a number of targets are in the spread of a shotgun blast is the attack resolved with a single d100 roll applied vs. all targets or is there a separate attack roll against each target in the spread? Actually, come to think of it, the same question applies to those in the area of a grenade/explosive blast; one attack roll or one roll vs. each target in the area?
|
|
|
Post by providence13 on Apr 26, 2014 6:35:18 GMT -8
Hey xhaosdaemon.
I was wondering the same thing myself about covering fire, bursts and sprays from auto weapons. Under proximity mines (ME pg 196).. "As with all explosives, the blast must strike each target in the radius." So that sounds like you have to roll for each target in the radius. Which is what I do for PC's. With larger groups of opponents, I usually make a roll for each group.
That's not entirely accurate, though. The "basic combat rule" is to minus the defenders DV from attackers SV and then roll. You don't apply a mod to the roll. Apply the mod then roll. Each defender could have a different DV and that would change what the roll needs to be. Combat is a private thing. But I often roll groups just to save time.
In my opinion, the SV from buckshot should increase with range (a wider net of shot makes you easier to hit) but the damage should be reduced (less pellets per area and less energy per pellet).
|
|
|
Post by SavageGM on Apr 26, 2014 7:08:39 GMT -8
I would personally roll one d100 attack vs. all targets in both the cases of shotguns and explosives. Mainly due to the fact that both the Pump Shotgun and the Assault Shotgun both have +20 SV, which is quite high. If you have 3 targets in the spread rolling 3 attack rolls, each with +20, there is a very high chance that someone will always be hit. I personally like the one roll (shell) to "cost" more (the one roll plus $$$ for the shell) to the player when he decides to shoot his shotgun, as well as to take into account possible innocent bystanders in the spread zone.
Players could have an issue when it comes to the damage more than the amount of targets in regards to shotguns. I would tell my players that when firing a shotgun you are shooting at the location more so than the target.
I'm sure that more realistic or detailed rules could be implemented if thats the type of game you are after. You could split damage rolled evenly vs. all targets that are hit or roll attacks separately vs each target and then split the damage rolled evenly vs. all those that were hit.
I like my first way as it plays faster, less numbers and makes the shotgun a deadly but chaotic force to be reckoned with, which I think, it is.
Hope this helps and hope you are enjoying the game!
|
|
|
Post by providence13 on Apr 26, 2014 7:30:32 GMT -8
Savagegm, do you have a thought on bursts/sprays with auto weapons? I'm thinking SV will be higher (you're going to hit something!) but less bullets will hit; probably.
In my opinion, targets would have to be in the same "cone of fire". Perhaps there should be a SV penalty for each target after the first.. Maybe -10 per + target. This reflects a bit of bottom of pg 198. This all sounds familiar. Let me dig through some posts.
|
|
|
Post by providence13 on Apr 26, 2014 7:42:09 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by SavageGM on Apr 26, 2014 7:58:22 GMT -8
Providence13 I think that a -10 SV after the first bullet would be a good house rule. I wouldn't make it cumlative though as bursts or sprays sometimes tend to become a bit stable as misses and hits with the first bullet(s) are recognized by the shooter (a trained shooter that is) and compensated for. All of this just my take on the game surrounded by the framework of rules that hopefully make the game fun. If the negatives get too high the uniqueness and killing ability of the relic becomes lessened as well as the players start to question if they should use it considering the high costs of bullets. Players won't take those other shots as they become less and less likely to hit.
Great link btw, good info in there! I will give it a good read through.
|
|
|
Post by xhaosdaemon on Apr 26, 2014 8:10:42 GMT -8
Perhaps with burst fire making it so the 1st shot in the burst has the SV bonus from the weapon but the additional shots do not, reflecting the barrel rise inherent in firing more than one round rapidly. Since the SV bonus from auto-fire and semi-auto weapons isn't huge dropping it for successive rounds in a burst wouldn't be massively penalizing. Obviously that wouldn't apply to pulse rifles since they fire a bolt of energy.
|
|
|
Post by providence13 on Apr 26, 2014 8:27:40 GMT -8
Good discussion. Thanks. I have decent experience with RPG's, but no Real Life field experience with auto weapons. I can tell you how other games handle it. Mutant Epoch has great streamlined rules and I want to respect that while adhering to a bit of reality. Barrel rise is a great point, especially if you're spraying the same target. Maybe not so much with 3-5 rounds but if the weapon has a higher ROF, it might matter more. Again, I don't know. Future weapons could have that problem solved and we don't have to worry about it. High SV bonus for auto weapons represents that you're more likely to hit, but also represents higher penetration, in my humble opinion. For me, the high DV for exoskeleton Shell armor, for instance, doesn't just mean you miss. You could hit, but the attack doesn't penetrate/bounces off. The same could be said for explosives.
|
|
|
Post by xhaosdaemon on Apr 26, 2014 8:35:55 GMT -8
Well, I can say in any shooter I have ever played that tries to model reality at all, there is definite muzzle rise even on a 3 round burst. You can generally correct by applying downward pull when firing but you have to be careful or you will overcompensate. So I figure dropping the weapon-supplied SV is reasonable. Another option is to keep the weapon SV but drop any Accuracy bonus from the character but that could over-penalize really accurate characters.
As far as explosives go, I am a bit of a meanie. Unless a target is close to the edges of the explosion or has easily available cover of some sort I disallow the DV bonus from high Agility and/or Dodge. Only the DV from the actual armor itself applies.
|
|
|
Post by providence13 on Apr 26, 2014 8:50:14 GMT -8
As far as explosives go, I am a bit of a meanie. Unless a target is close to the edges of the explosion or has easily available cover of some sort I disallow the DV bonus from high Agility and/or Dodge. Only the DV from the actual armor itself applies. The "area damage rule isn't affected by AGI" does make sense and I've used it for other games. I do allow an AGI HC "diving for cover" to give -30 DV and armor bonuses. Most of the time, that's all your actions for the round. The Missile Combat penalty of -40 for "Target zigzagging, somersaulting.. 1/4 MV" is generous in my opinion and should still require an AGI HC.
|
|
|
Post by xhaosdaemon on Apr 26, 2014 8:57:26 GMT -8
On the flipside of my explosives rules I have rules for attacks like fire, acid sprays, and such. Armor does not provide any protection against those attacks unless it specifies that it does. Acid finds its way between cracks in the armor if not burning right through it and fire will easily cook you inside a suit of armor.
I have something similar in place for forcefields. Because the forcefield is around the outside of a character, to strike it only requires a successful hit against the Agility and Dodge bonuses. The armor is underneath the forcefield so its protection doesn't apply to the target until the forcefield is dropped. It is a bit more calculation, but reflects the relative ease of striking a target vs. penetrating its armor. (The old D&D touch attacks conundrum)
|
|
|
Post by providence13 on Apr 26, 2014 9:10:49 GMT -8
I understand where you're coming from on attacking force fields. It could also be said that this rule negates the inherent game bonus of force fields.
Wait a minute.. Force fields in ME don't reduce DV, right? The only one that gives a DV bonus is Aura Of Protection. AoP also has some serious restrictions on use. No attacks and you can only walk.
|
|
|
Post by xhaosdaemon on Apr 26, 2014 9:14:29 GMT -8
Right, forcefields are a damage soak. I actually came up with the rule because in one game a PC had a 30 point forcefield AND a DV of -40. Without the change negating the armor component of DV because the forcefield is over the armor it was impossible to knock it down AND hit the PC. Being able to soak any damage at all is like having bonus hit points every round so even with my rule forcefields are still handy.
|
|
|
Post by providence13 on Apr 26, 2014 9:41:41 GMT -8
WOW! That's one tough FF.
Still, for my PC's, the first (or second) attack would completely wipe out that protection and the other attacks that round would do full damage. -40 is a lot, but not when you stack Dodge, Vests, armor, AGI, etc. If the attack only missed by a few points, sometimes I still degrade the armor. It can only absorb so much before being useless. My HR.
|
|