| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16406
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
 Posted: Sat Mar 22, 2014 2:15 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
I can sort of see your point, but the more I think about it, I would think that would be expressed more along the lines of a person who has a high Starfighter Piloting skill and a low Starship Gunnery skill. Yes, Starship Gunnery is a separate skill, because there are a lot of techniques involved that wouldn't come into play with piloting (such as calculating lead and such), but there would still be a degree of skill overlap above and beyond just having a good Mech attribute. In general, a person who is a skilled and experienced pilot will be better equipped to put his gunnery specific skills to good use. That, in turn, would express itself as some form of dice bonus derived from good piloting and applied to accurate gunnery. I'm not sure what form it should take, but I am convinced it is appropriate.
_________________
"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
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Leon The Lion
Commander
Joined: 29 Oct 2009
Posts: 309
Location: Somewhere in Poland
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 22, 2014 2:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
This, then, is the point where we agree to disagree, and I leave the discussion, having nothing more constructive to contribute, but with no hard feelings (on both sides, I hope?). I wish you luck in hammering out the house rule to your satisfaction.
_________________
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 |
|
|
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16406
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 22, 2014 2:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Leon The Lion wrote: | | Change dodging enemy fire into "dodging" terrain obstacles in my post, if you like. It doesn't chage my point any, I don't think. |
I think it does. The piloting roll versus the terrain difficulty is more a measurement of how well the character navigated through a challenging course, not how well he dodged around obstacles. Doing so smoothly would create a more stable firing platform than it would if he navigated the section just barely managing to not screw up. That, in turn, would translate into a bonus to Fire Control.
| Quote: | | What do you do in a situation when the pilot does not need to make any piloting roll, like moving at half speed through very easy to moderate terrain, or just standing still? Should going fast enough to need piloting rolls actually improve your aim? Or do you add a roll where one is not needed, just to see what effect it has on gunnery? |
Actually, I would say that maneuvering for a shot would require a Piloting roll, even if one is not called for by the terrain difficulty. The pilot is, in fact, performing a more difficult task than would be called for simply by flying through the terrain in question.
| Quote: | | A piloting roll that was only passed by a low margin should actually cause a penalty first, and only as the margin of success rises should the penalty go down, finally reaching zero, and then transform into an increasing bonus. |
I might actually be okay with that, if I liked the way the numbers work out. I use Knowledge skill rolls to boost appropriate skill use under other attributes, and this wouldn't be too far from the same.
_________________
"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
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
garhkal
Sovereign Protector
Joined: 17 Jul 2005
Posts: 14359
Location: Reynoldsburg, Columbus, Ohio.
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 22, 2014 3:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Leon The Lion wrote: |
I can agree that piloting should effect gunnery. But I can't agree that the effect, if one exists, should only ever be automatically positive. |
Agreed. If anything, your maneuver you are attempting to do, should give you a base TN for your piloting (MANEUVER) roll (not the dodge part), and if successful add to your gunners shots. BUT if it fails should give penalties to their chance to hit.
_________________
Confucious sayeth, don't wash cat while drunk! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16406
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 22, 2014 6:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| garhkal wrote: | | Leon The Lion wrote: |
I can agree that piloting should effect gunnery. But I can't agree that the effect, if one exists, should only ever be automatically positive. |
Agreed. If anything, your maneuver you are attempting to do, should give you a base TN for your piloting (MANEUVER) roll (not the dodge part), and if successful add to your gunners shots. BUT if it fails should give penalties to their chance to hit. |
Just to clarify, I'm primarily concerned with fixed forward weaponry on a small one or two man fighter. I have no problem with Starship Gunnery being a separate skill for someone who is a separate gunner in a turret not receiving a bonus from Starship Piloting. In the case of the pilot manning fixed forward weaponry, since he is, in essence, flying the turret to aim it, his ability to fly the thing should have a positive or negative effect on his ability to hit accurately.
_________________
"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
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
DougRed4
Rear Admiral
Joined: 18 Jan 2013
Posts: 2295
Location: Seattle, WA
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 23, 2014 3:29 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Leon The Lion wrote: | | DougRed4 wrote: | | (and by the way, Leo the Lion is a really cool Villains & Vigilantes villain in our supers campaign, created by the creators of the game!) |
Ah, yes, him. He's the black sheep of the family. We don't usually mention him, and he's not invited to family functions. |
LOL! I almost literally laughed out loud at this! I went ahead and copied and pasted this exchange on two V&V forums, for the enjoyment of others! 
_________________
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 |
|
|
DougRed4
Rear Admiral
Joined: 18 Jan 2013
Posts: 2295
Location: Seattle, WA
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 23, 2014 3:35 am Post subject: |
|
|
| crmcneill wrote: | | Why does the Piloting roll automatically mean he was dodging? In the films, there isn't a lot of evasive maneuvering unless there is actually a fighter on their tail. However, proper angling of a fixed forward weapon is just as dependent on the pilot's skill at lining up the shot as it is on him pulling the trigger at the right time. Why wouldn't a high roll on Piloting not have a positive effect on weapon accuracy? |
Hitting a moving opponent (in real life) is extremely difficult, and far harder than just shooting at a stationary target (like at the shooting range). So it requires far more than just lining up a shot and pulling the trigger. It often requires leading the target (like a quarterback does when throwing the football to a wide receiver who is sprinting down the sideline); you have to guess where the target will be, based on their speed, but also take into account the way you're moving yourself, plus factoring in the variables of everything else between you and your target. To me this is why it does make sense to impose a MAP in this case.
Your comment about how there isn't a lot of evasive maneuvering in the films reminds me of the first Family Guy SW film, where they show the Falcon drifting down the screen and the Imperials say something to the effect of "He's drifting lazily to the left. He really does know a few maneuvers!"
_________________
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 |
|
|
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16406
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 23, 2014 7:39 am Post subject: |
|
|
I completely agree, and I do not doubt in the slightest that lining up a shot is very difficult. If a character is both navigating a difficult section of terrain and trying to line up a shot, then yes, a MAP is appropriate. However, my point still remains (IMO), in that a character whose piloting skill allows him to rise above the difficulty (by making a successful piloting roll even against a high difficulty) should get some sort of bump for using the exact same controls to also line up the shot. Naturally, the higher difficulty will make the bonus smaller than it would be if he were flying along out in the open, but that doesn't eliminate the appropriateness of the bonus in general.
_________________
"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
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
garhkal
Sovereign Protector
Joined: 17 Jul 2005
Posts: 14359
Location: Reynoldsburg, Columbus, Ohio.
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 23, 2014 2:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
So what sort of bonus you looking at? Something like a +1/+2 for each grouping of 5 over the target diff the pilot gets on his maneuver roll over the terrain diff?
_________________
Confucious sayeth, don't wash cat while drunk! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16406
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 23, 2014 3:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| garhkal wrote: | | So what sort of bonus you looking at? Something like a +1/+2 for each grouping of 5 over the target diff the pilot gets on his maneuver roll over the terrain diff? |
I think +1 per 5 over would be a good starting place. Considering the pilot will already be dealing with a MAP for two actions at once, this would be more of a MAP offset for the overlapped nature of the skills. A pilot would have to beat the difficulty by quite a bit to have the bonus do anything more.
There is also the question of opposed piloting rolls. If the shooter is on the tail of another, fleeing ship, attempting to shoot it down, then his piloting roll would not just need to beat the terrain, but also beat the opposing pilot's roll to navigate the terrain. Haven't figured that one out quite yet either...
_________________
"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
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
atgxtg
Rear Admiral
Joined: 22 Mar 2009
Posts: 2460
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 23, 2014 3:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Just a thought, but what if instead of a bonus based on the difference vs. the difficulty, the pilot could use some of his piloting skill dice as gunnery dice. That would reduce his piloting skill (he is focusing on the shot), and still provide a gunnery bonus (the extra dice), but would use easier math. It would also make the bonus more skill based than luck based. So that way the PCs don't get fired if the GM gets the hot hand with the wild die when rolling for a mook.
We could limit how many dice the pilot could transfer. Maybe 1/3rd of his skill? Or 1/5th? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16406
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 23, 2014 3:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
That's not a bad idea, really, and there is precedent for using skills as dice pools (the Quickdraw Rule in Han Solo & The Corporate Sector, for one). Splitting dice off from Piloting would be a consistent representation of a pilot splitting his attention between flying the ship and shooting his target.
_________________
"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
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
atgxtg
Rear Admiral
Joined: 22 Mar 2009
Posts: 2460
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 23, 2014 3:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Well the +1 for 5 thing got me thinking of the damage bonus in SpecForces, and that got me thinking of the other option for damage bonus of sacrificing dice. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16406
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 23, 2014 3:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| atgxtg wrote: | | Well the +1 for 5 thing got me thinking of the damage bonus in SpecForces, and that got me thinking of the other option for damage bonus of sacrificing dice. |
That was the other example of dice pools that I remembered. So what would be appropriate limitations to place on this rule? Should it be just for fixed-forward weaponry, or can it be applied to any weaponry under the pilot's direct control?
_________________
"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
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
atgxtg
Rear Admiral
Joined: 22 Mar 2009
Posts: 2460
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 24, 2014 9:26 am Post subject: |
|
|
| crmcneill wrote: | | atgxtg wrote: | | Well the +1 for 5 thing got me thinking of the damage bonus in SpecForces, and that got me thinking of the other option for damage bonus of sacrificing dice. |
That was the other example of dice pools that I remembered. So what would be appropriate limitations to place on this rule? Should it be just for fixed-forward weaponry, or can it be applied to any weaponry under the pilot's direct control? |
ooh, good question.
I suppose it could apply to any weapon, pissobly even ones controlled by others- if the pilot is trying to keep a nice level gun platform. But I would think it would certainly be easier to guns he controlled as especially for forward weaponry (fixed or otherwise), since he is mostly aiming with the nose of the ship.
How about something like:
Forward: 1D for 1D
Pilot Controlled: 1D per 2D
Gunners: 1D per 4D |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
