The Rancor Pit Forum Index
Welcome to The Rancor Pit forums!

The Rancor Pit Forum Index
FAQ   ::   Search   ::   Memberlist   ::   Usergroups   ::   Register   ::   Profile   ::   Log in to check your private messages   ::   Log in

Shields as Cover
Post new topic   Reply to topic    The Rancor Pit Forum Index -> House Rules -> Shields as Cover Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Director of Engineering


Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16163
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.

PostPosted: Tue Dec 21, 2021 2:43 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Dr. Bidlo wrote:
I got a change to read the rules for cover and protection in 2ER&E and then read your rules for using Shields as Cover and I love the idea! However, I cannot quite understand Stabilizing option above. I think it may just be that I am tired. All the rest it finally clicking and I like it so much more than the standard increase to the hull. I will let you know how it goes.

The premise of this rule is that it treats Shields like movable Cover that can be positioned around the ship as needed on a round-by-round basis. Stabilizing the Shields effectively sacrifices that ability to quickly move the shields to another fire arc in order to gain additional protection.

It's just something I came up with to explain Gold Five's "stabilize your rear deflectors" line from ANH. He predicted they were about to get attacked from behind, and would be unable to evade in the trench, so he told his wingmates to put the strongest possible shields in the rear arc. Not that it did much good, but it was the best they could do under the circumstances.

Quote:
Quick question though - when a shot penetrates the shields, does it temporarily reduce the shields for that turn only or does it actually damage them, reducing the shield dice? This part an an not sure of...

That's tied to the Shields Drained result on my Starship Damage Chart. I played around with Shield Recharge rules, but it was just a lot of extra work for no real pay-off in game play.

The way I envision the system working is, Shield Projectors are constantly generating shield energy, so the Shields will constantly be replenishing their own strength. The only ways to bring the Shield down are:
    1) Inflict a Shields Drained result, which reduces the Shields to 0D for the remainder of the round.
    2) Hit them with Ion weapons, with Ionization being retconned to have a persistent disruptive effect against Shields in much the same way that a ship's electronics can be ionized (using the same rules for Ionization, with the penalty applied to the Shield Dice).
    3) Inflict enough damage to overload / damage the Shield Generators themselves.
One other idea I'm playing with for larger ships is Static Discharge Systems that a skilled shield operator can use to dissipate ionization faster than it normally would on a good Shields roll, but that one's not fully fleshed out yet.

Also worth noting that I gave my ship stats the option of Shield Control Dice (see the House Rule section at the bottom of each stat) as a measure of how well their onboard systems assist the shield operator in controlling and fine-tuning the shields.
_________________
"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
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Director of Engineering


Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16163
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.

PostPosted: Tue Dec 21, 2021 11:52 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

W/r/t Angling vs. Stabilizing, Angling requires constant input from the shield operator, predicting the angle of an incoming attack and altering the shield settings in reaction. Stabilizing, on the other hand, is basically bracing a shield in place. It has a superior base bonus, but that bonus can be surpassed by a good Shields roll from the shield operator. Because of crew limitations, starfighters tend to use Stabilizing more often than Angling, as Shield skill rolls are yet another MAP that a single pilot has to deal with (although astromechs can somewhat mitigate this). Capital ships, with dedicated shield operation teams have a bit more flexibility, and can make use of either option as befits the current situation.
_________________
"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
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Dr. Bidlo
Commander
Commander


Joined: 24 Nov 2021
Posts: 438
Location: Arizona, USA

PostPosted: Tue Dec 21, 2021 12:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

After reading a few times, the angling and stabilizing riles are sinking in. I will create a quick table for angling bonuses so I don't have to do the math, simple as it may be.

CRMcNeill wrote:
The way I envision the system working is, Shield Projectors are constantly generating shield energy, so the Shields will constantly be replenishing their own strength. The only ways to bring the Shield down are:
1) Inflict a Shields Drained result, which reduces the Shields to 0D for the remainder of the round.
2) Hit them with Ion weapons, with Ionization being retconned to have a persistent disruptive effect against Shields in much the same way that a ship's electronics can be ionized (using the same rules for Ionization, with the penalty applied to the Shield Dice).
3) Inflict enough damage to overload / damage the Shield Generators themselves.[/list]One other idea I'm playing with for larger ships is Static Discharge Systems that a skilled shield operator can use to dissipate ionization faster than it normally would on a good Shields roll, but that one's not fully fleshed out yet.


I do need verification, if you would, to make sure I am absolutely clear:

The only ways to bring down shields would be:
1) Inflict a "Shield Drained" result per your house rules using Shields as Cover.
2) Reduce shields per your house rules for ion cannons.
3) Get a Shields Blown/Controls ionized damage result (0-3 damage > Hull roll) per the RAW.
4) Get a lightly damaged or heavily damaged result that reduces Shield by -1D or -2D respectively per the RAW.

Also, in reading your house rules for Shields as Cover, I thought you initially proposed the Shields Drained result for damage>Shields roll 0-3, but changed it for the final version which states no effective damage at 0-3 (which I agree with).
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Director of Engineering


Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16163
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.

PostPosted: Tue Dec 21, 2021 1:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Dr. Bidlo wrote:
After reading a few times, the angling and stabilizing riles are sinking in. I will create a quick table for angling bonuses so I don't have to do the math, simple as it may be.

That's fine. I use the 3->3->3 sequence quite a bit across my various House Rules, so writing up a chart for quick reference will come in handy if you're using a lot of my stuff.

Quote:
I do need verification, if you would, to make sure I am absolutely clear:

The only ways to bring down shields would be:
1) Inflict a "Shield Drained" result per your house rules using Shields as Cover.
2) Reduce shields per your house rules for ion cannons.
3) Get a Shields Blown/Controls ionized damage result (0-3 damage > Hull roll) per the RAW.
4) Get a lightly damaged or heavily damaged result that reduces Shield by -1D or -2D respectively per the RAW.

Correct. Also worth noting that I do allow Ionization to inflict permanent damage (as in, requires repair to function again) if the Ionization level gets high enough. The specifics are found here, as part of the Damage Chart.

Quote:
Also, in reading your house rules for Shields as Cover, I thought you initially proposed the Shields Drained result for damage>Shields roll 0-3, but changed it for the final version which states no effective damage at 0-3 (which I agree with).

I did, and it's been a while since I changed it, so I can't recall the exact reasoning. One positive result is that it uses the same rule for Protection as found in the RAW, so the GM only has to remember one rule, not two.

EDIT: Also, I edited #2 on the Shields as Cover post to clarify that a Shields Drained result applies to a successful Damage roll against the ship, not the Shield.
_________________
"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
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Dr. Bidlo
Commander
Commander


Joined: 24 Nov 2021
Posts: 438
Location: Arizona, USA

PostPosted: Tue Dec 21, 2021 1:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thanks for the clarification. I do really like how the final damage chart for Shields aligns with the RAW. I am also going to review your ionization house rules. The RAW is lacking so much that I tend to try to avoid ion weapons as much as possible, but this might help me bring them to the game. I know the X-wing video game influences in your house rules and I think it is appropriate that sufficiently high ion damage should cause actual damage, much like an EMP weapon would.

Thanks again. I am excited to try these rules out in 'the field'.


Last edited by Dr. Bidlo on Tue Jan 04, 2022 12:22 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Director of Engineering


Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16163
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.

PostPosted: Tue Dec 21, 2021 3:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Dr. Bidlo wrote:
I know the X-wing video game influences in your house rules and I think it is appropriate that sufficiently high ion damage should cause actual damage, much like an EMP weapon would.

The more I dug into it, there's not a lot of difference between EMP and ionization. My (possibly overly simplistic) understanding of an orbital EMP attack is that it starts as ions released by a nuclear explosion that converts to EMP upon contact with the atmosphere. I don't want to dig too far into the real-world science, as it may render suspension of disbelief impossible, but it seems that ionization is mainly the "Stun" version of EMP, essentially the same effect dialed down so that it only has a temporary effect.

Quote:
Thanks again. I am excited to try these rules out in 'the field'.

Glad to be of service, and looking forward to seeing how well this works at the gaming table.
_________________
"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
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Dr. Bidlo
Commander
Commander


Joined: 24 Nov 2021
Posts: 438
Location: Arizona, USA

PostPosted: Thu Dec 23, 2021 4:59 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

One more clarification: the RAW says that if the roll to hit exceeds both the base difficulty and the cover modifier, a direct hit is scored against the target and the cover provides no benefit. For your rules for Shields as Cover, do you always use the cover or only when the roll to hit does not exceed the difficulty AND shields roll combined per the RAW?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Director of Engineering


Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16163
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.

PostPosted: Thu Dec 23, 2021 5:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

That rule only applies to partial cover. For the purposes of this rule, a shield counts as 100% Cover against all attacks from that arc, and as such, any attacks must overcome the shield in order to take effect.
_________________
"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
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Dr. Bidlo
Commander
Commander


Joined: 24 Nov 2021
Posts: 438
Location: Arizona, USA

PostPosted: Thu Dec 23, 2021 5:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

CRMcNeill wrote:
That rule only applies to partial cover. For the purposes of this rule, a shield counts as 100% Cover against all attacks from that arc, and as such, any attacks must overcome the shield in order to take effect.


That makes senses AND is easier, so it's a double plus. Thanks.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Director of Engineering


Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16163
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.

PostPosted: Thu Dec 23, 2021 6:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

No prob. The one problem that wasn’t resolved when this rule was tried in gameplay is what happens to ionization if it overloads the shields. For example, what happens if a ship has 3D Shields in an arc, but that Shield takes 4D Ionization. The Shields are now at 0D, but where does the extra 1D of Ionization go? I never came up with a solid conclusion, but my tentative solution is to apply 1/2 of the overage (rounded down) against the target ship. For example, in the above example, the 1D of overage would round down to 0, so no effect. If, however, the Shields had suffered 2D of overage, it would round down to 1D, which is then applied to the ship’s current ionization total.
_________________
"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
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Director of Engineering


Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16163
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.

PostPosted: Thu Dec 23, 2021 8:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The other option would be to keep the two separate, with any Shield overage counting as the number of rounds it takes before the shields can be effective again. So, using the same example, if 3D of Shields took 4D of Ionization, the Shield would be reduced to 0D (-1D) effectiveness for the remainder of the round. At the beginning of the next round, 1D of Ionization rolls off the Shields, but they still can’t be used because the they still have an effective value of 0D.
_________________
"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
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Dr. Bidlo
Commander
Commander


Joined: 24 Nov 2021
Posts: 438
Location: Arizona, USA

PostPosted: Thu Dec 23, 2021 9:47 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

CRMcNeill wrote:
The other option would be to keep the two separate, with any Shield overage counting as the number of rounds it takes before the shields can be effective again. So, using the same example, if 3D of Shields took 4D of Ionization, the Shield would be reduced to 0D (-1D) effectiveness for the remainder of the round. At the beginning of the next round, 1D of Ionization rolls off the Shields, but they still can’t be used because the they still have an effective value of 0D.


I would play that with 4D Ionization damage, the first 3D knocks down the 3D of Shields to 0D in the arc fired upon, leaving 1D Ionization damage, which is applied to the ship itself, giving one Controls Ionized result with its -1D effects.

I do like the idea of the Shields recharging at 1D per round. I have a ship template that makes tracking this very easy and it really isn't too hard to keep track of even without.

I think this is how I will apply these rules for my next game. I now how to come up with a reason an opponent who try to ionized my Imperial officers and a good ship with Ion Cannons as their adversary...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Director of Engineering


Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16163
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.

PostPosted: Fri Dec 24, 2021 1:10 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'm don't think applying the full overage to the Shield is appropriate, since at the very least, the ion blast that hit the shield will be badly disrupted by the impact even if the shield is taken down.

The way I picture it, ion blasts don't have the cohesion of laser or turbolaser blasts, and are much more likely to fracture on impact with whatever they hit
_________________
"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
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Dr. Bidlo
Commander
Commander


Joined: 24 Nov 2021
Posts: 438
Location: Arizona, USA

PostPosted: Fri Dec 24, 2021 1:54 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

CRMcNeill wrote:
I'm don't think applying the full overage to the Shield is appropriate, since at the very least, the ion blast that hit the shield will be badly disrupted by the impact even if the shield is taken down.

The way I picture it, ion blasts don't have the cohesion of laser or turbolaser blasts, and are much more likely to fracture on impact with whatever they hit


I am not sure I understand your response. The overage beyond the damage that would fully drain the shields would be applied to the ship's controls, not the shields. My application of the remaining ion damage to the ship's controls after draining the shields seems like it would be closest to the RAW akin to multiple shields blown/controls ionized results.

What else would you propose to do with the remaining 1D ionization?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Director of Engineering


Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16163
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.

PostPosted: Fri Dec 24, 2021 1:59 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Dr. Bidlo wrote:
The overage beyond the damage that would fully drain the shields would be applied to the ship's controls, not the shields. My application of the remaining ion damage to the ship's controls after draining the shields seems like it would be closest to the RAW akin to multiple shields blown/controls ionized results.


Part of my explanation for why ion cannon have a disruptive effect on shields is that, rather than penetrating into a target and affecting its internal components, the beam comes apart on impact, spreading ion particles throughout the target. The same thing happens when it hits a shield, with the ions being dispersed laterally (or at least tangentially) to the original course of the beam (deduced from the name "deflector screen"). The concentration of ionization in the shield as the result of the beam coming apart within the shield perimeter is what causes the shield to come down.

However, another aspect of Shields as Cover is that deflector screens are projected out some distance from the ship itself, and that particle/navigation shields form an additional layer beneath them (likely coterminous with the ship's hull). So, while the overage was more than enough to bring down the shield, it is now an unfocused, non-cohesive cloud of ions scattered in close proximity to the ship's navigation screens. It's no longer a cohesive beam that can deliver a focused impact that penetrates through to have the full effect on the ship underneath.

Quote:
What else would you propose to do with the remaining 1D ionization?

I'd probably just go with the second option I described above, and then factor any overage into Part 2 in the Shields as Cover rule. Basically treating the shield as a separate object that provides cover, and that any ionization the target suffers is the result of blow-through damage from the shield being reduced/taken down.

Somewhere around here, I have a concept for Conversion Shields that allow a ship to absorb damage and divert it to ship systems as temporary auxiliary power, but that's getting a little off coourse.

Quote:
I do like the idea of the Shields recharging at 1D per round. I have a ship template that makes tracking this very easy and it really isn't too hard to keep track of even without.

Just to clarify (and I apologize if I'm just nit-picking here), the Shields aren't recharging; rather, they're gradually dispersing ionization effects so that they can return to normal operation. It just looks like recharging.
_________________
"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
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    The Rancor Pit Forum Index -> House Rules All times are GMT - 4 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Page 3 of 5

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group


v2.0