Tactical Combat

[CRMcNeill]

As for the null bolt, I just wrote it up on the fly and never had a chance to play test it.
_________________
"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

[Naaman]

Well, with the system I've set up, a weapon like an E-Web would only deal 8D+6 damage (slower rate of fire than the smaller weapons). Average roll would be 28. If all 6 rounds hit, it would average 34 damage, which isn't unheard of for a single it from an E-Web, anyway.

Any "more" damage would have to come as a result of a separate action, thereby requiring a separate damage roll.

[Naaman]

Added some clarification to automatic weapons fire in the earlier posts to explain how area targeting works. Also, been playing around with different shooting positions/stances.

FIRING POSITIONS

Standing
This is the normal firing position. The character rolls blaster and dodge as per the normal rules.

Kneeling
Kneeling provides a more stable base to fire from, as well as presenting a smaller target to the enemy at the expense of mobility. The character gains a +2 bonus on attack rolls with a blaster, but suffers a -2D penalty do dodge rolls. When shooting at a kneeling character who does not attempt to dodge, increase the difficulty by +5.

Prone
Firing from the prone position is the most stable, but also the least mobile. A prone character gains a +4 bonus on attack rolls with a blaster, but cannot use the dodge skill at all. When shooting at a prone character, increase the difficulty to hit by +10.

Walking
Firing on the move is highly unstable and results in inaccurate shot placement, but mobility is optimized. If firing while moving at half speed or less, the character gains a +2 bonus to his dodge roll, but suffers a -2D penalty on his attack rolls with a blaster; alternatively, he can suppress while moving his full speed. Note that firing on the move is most often used in order to take ground or to advance from cover to cover.

PISTOL SHOOTING
In the real world, pistol shooting is primarily done with two hands. But in Star Wars, one-handed shooting is the norm. Even still, one-handed shooting is perfectly acceptable in real life, and has certain benefits. Nevertheless, shooting with two hands is the generally preferred method, and here are some house rules to cover that for players who want their character to be "tactically proficient."

Two-Handed Combat Grip
A character with at least 4D in blaster may use a two-handed combat grip when firing his pistol. Doing so allows him to re-roll his lowest die each time he fires.

One-Handed Grip
If shooting from behind cover, the shooter may choose to use only one hand in order to keep the majority of his body protected by his cover. If he does so, increase the cover bonus by +2. Note, the character can still use a two-handed grip (and benefit from the re-roll) while retaining the normal cover bonus.

Pistols in Close Quarters Battle
When a character armed with a pistol finds himself within arm's reach of an enemy, sometimes a grapple will ensue, often for control of the weapon. A skilled fighter will be able to retain his weapon and even shoot his opponent with it during the grapple.

When a firefight closes to within arm's reach, both characters roll brawling (neither rolls brawling parry: CQB requires a highly aggressive mentality). A character with the (A) CQB skill may add his dice in that skill to his brawling roll in this circumstance.

If the player with the pistol wins by at least 5, he may immediately roll damage with his blaster pistol, instead of his normal brawling damage.

If the enemy wins by at least 5, he may roll his brawling damage against the pistol-carrier.

If the enemy wins by at least 10, he may roll brawling damage against the pistol-carrier, or he can take control of the pistol, but cannot use it until his next turn.

If neither side wins by a margin of 5, then the struggle is a stalemate until the next player's turn, when opposed brawling checks are rolled again.

Note that the enemy can choose to use the brawling skill normally, but in this case, the pistol-carrier is free to engage with his pistol without being forced to win a brawling contest.

[Naaman]

ENGAGING MULTIPLE TARGETS

By forgoing the option to dodge for one round, a character may choose to engage one additional target per D he has in Dexterity.

The character suffers MAPs as normal, but all attacks are resolved "simultaneously" (they all occur during the same "phase" of the round on the character's action).

Note that, ig the character has already used a reaction skill, then this option is not available. Furthermore, the character may not use a reaction skill for tje duration of the turn, as he is focused on engaging and eliminating as many opponents as possible (in hopes that he will not need to dodge).

[CRMcNeill]

I've been chewing on your idea of adding reaction bonuses to smaller weapons like pistols and carbines, and I think I have a useful compromise. The sourcebook for Han Solo and the Corporate Sector includes the Quick-Draw rules, which allow a character to use their Blaster or Firearms skill as a dice pool split between the Initiative and To Hit rolls. The initiative roll is drawn solely from the dice pool, and does not stack with Perception (the character must choose either Perception or the Quick-Draw dice pool, not both at once).

My thought is to apply the Reaction bonuses to initiative you suggested to the Quick Draw method only, so that something like a Hold-Out Blaster would receive a +2D bonus to the dice pool when using the Quick Draw rules, or the character could roll Initiative normally (without the bonus). Something like a Blaster Carbine would be able to function as either a Sidearm (Quick Draw capable) or a Shoulder Arm (normal initiative only) depending on whether or not the shoulder stock was extended or folded away.
_________________
"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

[Naaman]

Hmmm...

Okay, Ill have to look at the RAW for quick draw to understand, but I do like the idea of smaller weapons being easier to quick draw.

I tend also to think that the RAW confuses (or lumps together) the idea of a carbine and an SMG (think MP5). A carbine is basically a shorter version of a rifle while an SMG is like a bigger version of a pistol, or perhaps a "sub-compact" version of a rifle.

For some reason, I am averse to dice pools as I feel like they are more of a "balancing" mechanism and less of an attempt to express a concept (I really dont like using mechanics to impose "balance" because the style/setting/content of the campaign or adventure will lend itself--or not--to certain skils, items or equipment being more or less useful).

Of course, Im not dismissing the notion off the bat. I think that there is value in the idea even if at worst it inspires another idea. At best, I might become a covert to the dice pool method.

[CRMcNeill]

In this case, its actually pretty straight-forward. For example, a character with 9D in Blaster chooses to split off 5D for the initiative roll, leaving just 4D for the To Hit roll. It represents the balancing act between drawing + aiming vs. shooting accurately.

Personally, I wouldn't mind having a +2D to -2D window for all personal weapons that is applied to initiative in general, so that Hold-Outs would have a +2D to initiative (that would help offset their small size), while Light or Medium Repeaters would be on the -2D end of the spectrum, with their bulky, cumbersome nature representing the difficulty of bringing the weapon to bear quickly.[/list]
_________________
"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

[Naaman]

The only problem with weapon-based initiative bonuses is that actions which dont use the weapon will be artificially sped up as well. And of course, the "smallest" hadiest weapon is a brawling attack.... and since everyone has hands, keeping one hand free makes a great way for minmaxers and power gamers to claim an initiative bonus all the time.

This also becomes an issue with quick draw, I think: tell me what Im missing. A person can gain abonus to initiative whichallows them to act sooner for all of their actions that round, even if only one of them uses the blaster.

In amy case, I suppose that my house rule is somewhat "harsher" in that the penalty on the attack roll is double the bonuse gaind on initiative. But in some ways, its less harsh because you dont uave to take a 4D or 5D penalty just to out do your own standard initiative....

And of course the power level of the campaign makes a difference, too. I usually feel like the campaign is just getting good when skills reach 7D-8D. The highest skill I've ever achieved with a character was 13D+2 in brawling. Another chharacter had 9D plus in all Force skills anf lightsaber... needless to say, she was unstoppable and became a player controlled NPC Jedi master in a future campaign (I know that sounds like an oxymoron... but it works with mature players).

In a game like that, Quick draw would work great against mooks, but you wouldnt really need it. In a more moderately powered campaign, I wonder whether a character would have enough dice to gain an initiative boost and still hit the target?

I knowit sounds like Im being a party pooper, but Im not trying to, promise!

[Naaman]

I guess in order for me to feel like the dice pool was a worthwhile trade off, the quick draw would have to provide some knd of bonus to the basic initiative roll so that characters who are equally matched could have a truely deadly quick draw duel. Now, if we introduce character points/force points into the equasion, we beg the question: why not just use them to boost initiative rather than blaster/quick draw?

Maybe by using the dice pool method, we could allow the character to take the penalty on his attak roll and add some bonus to his perception/initiative?

If using a smaller weapon, the bonus gained is greater in relation to the penalty assessed and vice versa.

[CRMcNeill]

I'm not really seeing a problem with weapon based initiatives. I would think a character wielding a Hold-Out Blaster would be more agile and able to react better than a character wielding a Medium Repeating Blaster, and as such, an initiative modifier would represent that. I'd limit it by saying that you only get the bonus if you are using just that weapon to attack that round, or I'd apply a MAP for additional attacks.

As far as the Quick Draw rules (page 122 in Han Solo & The Corporate Sector), a character doing a speed Draw can't do anything else, including Dodge. Personally, I tend to let that rule slide.
_________________
"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

[Naaman]

I can understand prohibiting dodges because youre trying to shoot first at the risk of drawing slower than the opponent and getting hit instead. Dodging, in my oinion, should be allowed, but it must be done instead of shooting (character changed hs mind at the last second or whatever).

Encumbrence is a decent explanation for hampered initiative, though, I see it comimg into question in scenarios where the character's gear is irrelevant.

[Naaman]

[CRMcNeill]

So, I haven't been able to let this one go...

Naaman, I know you don't want to have initiative bonuses, so how about just penalties?

Here's what I'm thinking:

-The initiative penalty would run the gamut between 0D and -2D.

-Pistols and other, similarly sized weapons would have a 0D penalty, and would roll Initiative normally.

-Shoulder arms (rifles and other similarly sized weapons) would have a -1D penalty to Initiative.

-Heavy weapons (medium repeaters, grenade launchers, rocket launchers, etc.) would have a -2D penalty.

-Gunners operating a weapon with an initiative penalty can negate the penalty by waiting 1 round to fire, in essence using the Preparing rule to counteract the penalty.

-Carbines (the SBAR blaster used by stormtroopers) would straddle the line between 0D and -1D, using the folding stock to convert between rifle and pistol modes. It might be appropriate to not entirely do away with the penalty, due to the carbine's size, so that rather than dropping from -1D to 0D, the carbine's penalty drops to, for example, -1 to Initiative, rather than -0

-This would just be the basic version, with the three steps being -0D, -1D and -2D. If you wanted to get into more detail, you could use dice+pips to represent incremental improvements. This would fit better with a system wherein weapons can be fitted with equipment that makes them more responsive.

This is what I think of while driving 80,000 pounds of metal down our nation's interstate at 60+ mph. Enjoy...
_________________
"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

[Naaman]

Hmmm....

Even thd idea for an initiative bonus has merit. It just depends on the style of the campaign IMO.

Now this idea is more compatible with what I'm trying to do in this PARTICULAR thread. Though, off the cuff (or is it "cusp"?), I feel like the rang e would definitely need to be based on pips rather than whole dice, though, I think that -2D is appropriate for the most awkward of weapons.

If I were to use something like this, though, Id probably also convert the dex penalty imposed by armor over to an initiative penalty.

I would also want to create a way for the character (not just the equipment) to off set the penalty... specialization in the particular weapon is the firs thing that pops to mind....

[CRMcNeill]