Username:    Password:      Remember me       
Great White Games/Pinnacle Entertainment Group Forum Index Great White Games/Pinnacle Entertainment Group
Discussion Forum for PEG/GWG
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Good genre rule to downpower guns?
Goto page Previous  1, 2
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Great White Games/Pinnacle Entertainment Group Forum Index -> SW General Chat & Game Stories
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
StormKnight
Novice


Joined: 09 Jan 2008
Posts: 48

PostPosted: Wed Apr 18, 2012 12:53 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ok, I got curious on odds here. The chance of of 2d8 taking down a toughness 5 is 56.25%, so the odds of all 3 shots taking down a foe are about 18%. Not so hot. So about a 5% chance of this happening - a bit better than Clint calculated, but still a lot more of an unlikely event than I thought. (Technically a bit better than that since you could get a raise on the attack roll, but I'm up too late to calculate that right now).
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Zadmar
Heroic


Joined: 10 Nov 2010
Posts: 1381
Location: Munich

PostPosted: Wed Apr 18, 2012 6:26 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

StormKnight wrote:
A lot of this seems to hinge on the cover, and I'm just not seeing it. I kept glancing around on my way to work today thinking "so, what sort of cover is around here", and most places I'm seeing there's usually cover easily reachable, but there's lots of places to be where nobody could reasonably advance on you while staying in cover.

The bad guys can run 7-12". That's 14-24 yards - on your way to work, try looking for a spot which has no cover within that distance.

If the shooter really has that much clear space then it's probably due to planning, and obviously they're going to have an advantage. But the bad guys still have options. They could move behind cover and drop prone, then start using Taunt, Intimidate or Tricks - on a raise, the shooter would be Shaken, and the remaining bad guys could make a run for it. Or if they're indoors, perhaps they could switch off the lights to give the shooter some visibility penalties. They might even have cover they can move with them, such as crates or trash cans (or better yet, innocent hostages!).

For a modern martial arts setting I'd watch a few movies and see how the fight scenes are set up. You'll notice that Jackie Chan, Jet Li, etc, generally interact a lot with their environment when they fight, and when they do go up against firearms it's usually pistols and such (and in very close quarters). You're not going to see them make a frontal charge across 25+ yards of open terrain to attack someone who's already aiming at them with an assault rifle - they're far more likely to dive for cover or run away as soon as the shooter points the gun in their direction, then use stealth to try and sneak up behind them.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
tigerguy786
Seasoned


Joined: 26 Nov 2011
Posts: 434

PostPosted: Wed Apr 18, 2012 10:12 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

StormKnight wrote:
Needing a 4+ on a d6 is a 50/50 chance. You get 4 dice and pick the best three. That means you've got 16 possible combinations of hit/miss:


Unless your character has "Rock and Roll!" the TN they need is not 4 but 6 which significantly different odds. Shooting a weapon on full auto incurs a -2 penalty to the shots making it a lot harder.
_________________
TIGER, tiger, burning bright
In the forests of the night,
What immortal hand or eye
Could frame thy fearful symmetry?

Clint wrote:
Common sense always trumps anything pretending to be an "overarching" rule.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Clint
Site Admin


Joined: 13 May 2003
Posts: 16176

PostPosted: Wed Apr 18, 2012 10:16 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

StormKnight wrote:
Five of those combos give 3 or 4 hits, with 4 being the same as 3. 5/16 = .31.


You're right! I actually forgot to apply the Wild Die in all the cases. Still as you noted in the latter post, much less common than expected, about 1 in 20 instead of 1 in 30.

StormKnight wrote:
In your melee example, you are giving the fighter an extra fighting die, and if said fighter takes out two foes (unlikely), she's now at -2 parry and ganged up on - the counterattack is going to hurt badly! If she misses, its even worse.


I'm not "giving" him an extra Fighting die; the character has it available by virtue of the rules. Not using it is similar to the shooter with the assault rifle firing one handed at -4. The character has two hands, why not use them both. The Edges make that use better, but it doesn't mean it isn't viable without them.

And if the character takes out 2 foes of 3 to 5, then they have reduced the Gang Up bonus by +2 meaning they have cancelled out the -2 to Parry from Wild Attack. The point though is that the odds are pretty close to taking out three foes over two rounds for the shooter.

If we look at the downsides of the manuevers chosen, then the shooter Aiming cannot move or do anything for one round, so they are giving their foes at least one round (possibly two depending on initiative the next round) to run and get into melee with them. Figuring a typical Pace 6 character with a d6 running die, that's an average of 9" in one round or 19" in two rounds, which is pretty close to covering the full distance of Short range for a rifle.

Also, even if these foes are melee fighters, don't forget that Tests of Will are effectively "ranged attacks" they could use. Yeah, they might be at -2 for running, but the shooter has to resist against a separate roll for each foe (three in the original example).

Any one of them gets a raise, and the shooter is Shaken, which is going to negate the aim unless the character immediately buys it off with a benny and if not, they probably bought at least an extra round to move in closer. Even a success is going to provide a +2 to the next roll, making a raise more likely.

Even if they didn't have any skill for a Test of Will (which is purely a GM decision anyway), they could have done nearly the same thing with a Trick.

Point is, both maneuvers have potential downsides, but they don't mean anything if foes don't capitalize on them given the opportunity. It's easier to see how to take advantage of a -2 Parry, but there are also ways to do so with a "free round" from Aim too.
_________________
Clint Black
Savage Worlds Core Rules Brand Manager

www.peginc.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
StormKnight
Novice


Joined: 09 Jan 2008
Posts: 48

PostPosted: Thu Apr 19, 2012 9:31 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

You know, I'm really surprised at the kickback I'm getting on this. I'm not saying there's anything wrong with the system. Guns being deadly and range being a big advantage is realistic and quite appropriate for many genres. I'd think an awful lot of Deadlands characters would be pretty annoyed if they could't hit with their six shooters! 

While there's been a lot of discussion on the single example I gave, that was really just a random illustrative comment. Guns have longer range, higher damage and lower base to hit numbers than melee weapons. That's all there was to it. From some of the comments on here, you'd get the idea that having long range is no advantage at all.

Not being able to close on someone with a gun is quite realistic. In real warfare, if you want to get in close, you better have suppressive fire or the numbers to take casualties on the way there. Or you have a big tactical or terrain advantage Smile

That said, Zadmars comment about movement rates illuminates something. We aren't using minis or a board. So we aren't thinking in terms of "goon 1 starts its turn in cover here, then sprints 9 inches to get into melee without getting shot, despite those 9 inches being out in the open". We're thinking "there's a good chunk of open space here, so they won't be in cover crossing that space". We're picturing the action real-time rather than turn based, which leads to a different perspective.

By the way, saying the genre was 'martial arts' may be a little inaccurate. I don't mean so much Jet Li, Jackie Chan as...err...I don't know a good example. Maybe think Big Trouble in Little China? (I haven't seen that in ages, so that comparison could be way off Smile )Or, if you know it, think of the Shadowfist CCG or the Feng Shui RPG, which this game is based on. The general points being that fighting unarmed is a valid option even against armed foes, and armament is more of a style detail than anything else.

Also I was corrected by my player last night. She didn't take down three with one volley. She took down 2 and shook the leader. The third one went down next round.

The leader, a big nasty brute, did take the 'portable cover' approach after he recovered - he tore the door off a car to use as a shield.

At any rate, for me it's now kind of a moot point with this game. The focus has just sort of shifted to being more gun and firefight oriented, and we're having a great time, so no stress.

Though I am a bit curious as to why the "use mind for ranged defense" is considered a great idea while "add +1 to many ranged defenses" is considered a bad idea when the results are very similar and the flat +1 is less of a change in most cases.

Clint:oops! I wasn't referring to the extra attack, but the extra die size. Step? What do you call it? Your fighter had a d8 fighting while I was looking at a d6.

Regarding 'tricks' and such stuff: this is purely a personal preference, but that sort of thing is for PCs and major NPCs, and not normally something extras do. Especially not when the extras are savage beasts/zombies/simple minded demons and such. Smile
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Dracones
Seasoned


Joined: 26 Aug 2011
Posts: 146
Location: Fort Pierce, Fl

PostPosted: Thu Apr 19, 2012 10:07 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

StormKnight wrote:

Though I am a bit curious as to why the "use mind for ranged defense" is considered a great idea while "add +1 to many ranged defenses" is considered a bad idea when the results are very similar and the flat +1 is less of a change in most cases.


The +1 universal gripe is because prior to throwing in new rules, you want to exhaust your options with the existing rules. If you nerf guns by tossing mods at them it makes them that much more ineffective when people start throwing in tactics as they learn the rules.

I mean you had a rifle attack 3 people with TN 4 with 2d8 damage.

I can do the same thing with melee combat. Give me 3 targets standing right next to each other, toss in a +2 mod for me like you did with the rifle(let's say they're unarmed) and I can sweep all 3 with a katana with a wild attack. Give me a d6 fighting and d8 str.

Attack TN is 5(average parry), -2 sweep, +2 unarmed, +2 wild attack = I need a 3 or higher. Damage is d6+d8+4 with 2 AP on an attack that ignores ballistic armor.

That's easier to hit with and does more damage than the autofire of your player. I'm rolling 2 dice instead of 4 so it's easier to bennie a success and I'll never hit innocent bystanders.

Guns just don't need a nerf IMO.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ValhallaGH
Legendary


Joined: 25 Apr 2010
Posts: 4475

PostPosted: Thu Apr 19, 2012 3:08 pm    Post subject: Re: Good genre rule to downpower guns? Reply with quote

StormKnight wrote:
Anyone have good genre rules for that sort of settings? I'd still like guns to be handy, just not drastically deadlier than close combat.

Setting edges for my Tekken-style world martial arts tournament campaigns.
Quote:
Iron Body
Requirements: Novice, Martial Artist, Vigor d6+
Extensive body-hardening techniques have left your fighter resistant to pain, and he’s learned to channel his chi to resist damage. His skin counts as physical Armor 2 in all locations, and has the Kevlar special rules (see Selected Gear Notes). Among other things, this makes him almost bulletproof.
Adamantine Body
Requirements: Veteran, Iron Body, Spirit d8+, Vigor d10+
This technique is named after a mythical, indestructible metal and makes the fighter nearly as unstoppable. The most impressive defensive techniques have been learned by this fighter. Her skin increases to Armor 4, and has the same special rules as the Kevlar Vest w/inserts.


It's a setting conceit that martial arts are fundamentally superior to firearms, but require much more skill. These edges help to do that.
_________________
"Got a problem? I've got the solution: Rocket Launcher."
"Not against a Servitor."
"... We're all gonna die."
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Zadmar
Heroic


Joined: 10 Nov 2010
Posts: 1381
Location: Munich

PostPosted: Thu Apr 19, 2012 8:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

StormKnight wrote:
While there's been a lot of discussion on the single example I gave, that was really just a random illustrative comment. Guns have longer range, higher damage and lower base to hit numbers than melee weapons. That's all there was to it. From some of the comments on here, you'd get the idea that having long range is no advantage at all.

It's definitely an advantage, particularly with the more powerful firearms, but the rules do also provide options for the melee fighter.

StormKnight wrote:
Not being able to close on someone with a gun is quite realistic.

It is, but SW goes for more of a pulp approach in this respect, and makes it quite easy to close with them as long as there's cover.

StormKnight wrote:
That said, Zadmars comment about movement rates illuminates something. We aren't using minis or a board. So we aren't thinking in terms of "goon 1 starts its turn in cover here, then sprints 9 inches to get into melee without getting shot, despite those 9 inches being out in the open". We're thinking "there's a good chunk of open space here, so they won't be in cover crossing that space". We're picturing the action real-time rather than turn based, which leads to a different perspective.

Ok, but it's important to understand that you're drastically reducing the value of cover, and that's one of the main weaknesses of ranged weapons. Normally the shooter would have to be on hold and win an opposed Agility roll to shoot their target as they ran between two areas of cover.

Even if you're not explicitly using rounds, you could still ask the player to make an opposed Agility roll to see if they can target the enemy in the brief moment they're out of cover - if they fail, the cover penalty would apply normally. You could also rule that the enemy was crouching while they moved, which would give the -1 penalty you proposed.

StormKnight wrote:
Regarding 'tricks' and such stuff: this is purely a personal preference, but that sort of thing is for PCs and major NPCs, and not normally something extras do. Especially not when the extras are savage beasts/zombies/simple minded demons and such.

Animals are often fast and/or stealthy, zombies and demons tend to be tough (and may cause fear), etc. But generally speaking there are always going to be losses if you make a direct frontal attack without any tactics or cover against someone armed with a long-range fully automatic weapon. That's why zombie apocalypse games usually involve large hordes of zombies.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
StormKnight
Novice


Joined: 09 Jan 2008
Posts: 48

PostPosted: Fri Apr 20, 2012 7:51 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Dracones wrote:
The +1 universal gripe is because prior to throwing in new rules, you want to exhaust your options with the existing rules. If you nerf guns by tossing mods at them it makes them that much more ineffective when people start throwing in tactics as they learn the rules.

And the Evasion defense is also throwing in a new rule and is as much or more of a nerf to guns in most cases. So why is that one better?

Quote:
I can do the same thing with melee combat. Give me 3 targets standing right next to each other, toss in a +2 mod for me like you did with the rifle(let's say they're unarmed) and I can sweep all 3 with a katana with a wild attack. Give me a d6 fighting and d8 str.

Attack TN is 5(average parry), -2 sweep, +2 unarmed, +2 wild attack = I need a 3 or higher. Damage is d6+d8+4 with 2 AP on an attack that ignores ballistic armor.

That's easier to hit with and does more damage than the autofire of your player. I'm rolling 2 dice instead of 4 so it's easier to bennie a success and I'll never hit innocent bystanders.

Guns just don't need a nerf IMO.

Sweep is an edge (and also takes fighting d8, but we'll ignore that). Having a d8 body is an extra advance worth of stat points. Sweep DOES hit friendly targets. Though they have to be in the sweep area so its a much lower risk. The katana costs about twice as much as the assault rifle and simply isn't going to "found around" in the primarily modern day setting I'm playing in. How likely are you to get three unarmed foes in a little clump (as compared to how likely you are to get three foes in a 24" area). That +2 mod wasn't "out of nowhere", it was a result of getting an advantage out of having longer range. So saying that a character with better stats and a better weapon in a more fairly unlikely situation can do better really isn't saying much. If the character had d8 shooting and a gun edge, we never would blinked at the resulting carnage.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Clint
Site Admin


Joined: 13 May 2003
Posts: 16176

PostPosted: Fri Apr 20, 2012 10:15 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

StormKnight wrote:
Dracones wrote:
The +1 universal gripe is because prior to throwing in new rules, you want to exhaust your options with the existing rules. If you nerf guns by tossing mods at them it makes them that much more ineffective when people start throwing in tactics as they learn the rules.

And the Evasion defense is also throwing in a new rule and is as much or more of a nerf to guns in most cases. So why is that one better?


When did anyone say it was? Seriously, I checked through the thread, and I didn't see that.

Different options were presented including Evasion, using Parry, and other things besides just the -1 for not wearing Armor which you mentioned.

After that though, it kind of became a discussion of why that was occuring in the game, primarily because most others weren't having the issue and I think the desire was to figure out why it was happening to better help with the issue.

It's kind of come out in snippets, but now, it's obvious characters aren't using cover and some tactical maneuvers are relegated just to Wild Cards. Clearly, the first directly makes ranged combat more dangerous and the second does so indirectly too.

It's fine to play that way, but it's not inherent to the system, so there was a disconnect to overcome there, which may have been taken as a barrier to changing the rules, but I think we've reached the point where it's understood that they've already been "changed," so it's a matter of accepting and adapting to that.

In which case, I think the -1 to hit with ranged attacks would likely work for the game. You might even just remove Light Cover and say the -1 reflects it's use. It'd be easier to judge Medium and heavier cover in mapless combat anyway, so it would take a strain off the game.
_________________
Clint Black
Savage Worlds Core Rules Brand Manager

www.peginc.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
StormKnight
Novice


Joined: 09 Jan 2008
Posts: 48

PostPosted: Tue Apr 24, 2012 12:00 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
When did anyone say it was?

The first three posts when everyone said what a great rule Evasion was, and then the rest of the posts where people said ranged attacks didn't need any penalties? Razz

Quote:
It's fine to play that way, but it's not inherent to the system, ...

I think saying that the amount of cover in the environment "isn't inherent to the system" is a bit of a stretch, but oh well Smile

Since some of the characters has gone more firearm focused, its a moot point now. I'm just tossing dodge on some of the critters a little more often.

I am adding one edge to fill in a gap, though I'm still struggling with a good name for it.

Kung-Fu Fighter: Your unarmed attacks count as a D6 damage weapon. You can use a Defend or Full Defense action against ranged attacks as well as melee attacks.

Of course, trying to balance out challenges levels is rendered continually difficult by dice and cards that seem to have a soft spot for the PCs anyway. Last session had two of our heroes ambushed and fleeing from a group of hopping vampires over a burnt battlefield. Yay, first use of the chase rules from Deluxe! My poor bloodsuckers...I drew three chase cards for them first turn and could only manage a 4. A few turns later, a joker and a fantastic roll had one PC finding an unexploded missile and turning it a trap, as the other PC shot it and sent the vampires bounding back to hell in huge fireball. Not at all how it was expected to go, but very cool anyway Smile
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
77IM
Heroic


Joined: 23 Jun 2009
Posts: 1591
Location: Austin, TX

PostPosted: Tue May 15, 2012 11:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Yeah, I think instead of downgrading guns, you need to upgrade melee attacks. Upgrading movement would help too. Both are appropriate to a kung-fu genre game.

* For melee attacks, I'd give everyone more damage. Maybe cut the Called Shot penalties in half for melee attacks! Also allow Called Shots to cause effects like a knockdown or push. This gives skilled melee fighters more options. I'd give everybody Martial Artist too. This may sound powerful, but compared to an M16 on 3RB (+2 attack, 2d8+2 damage) it's really not.

* For movement, some sort of wire-fu is appropriate. As a simple version, increase base movement rate and make jumping, running up walls, etc. simply count as "difficult terrain." You can also play with the idea of making a moving character harder to shoot. (In the core, things moving faster than 10" can qualify for a penalty to hit them.)

-- 77IM
_________________
Stuff I made: Arcane Abilities · Talent Edge · Savage Fading Suns · Savage Wuxia!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
sablemage
Seasoned


Joined: 26 Feb 2008
Posts: 247
Location: Directly above the centre of the Earth

PostPosted: Wed May 16, 2012 12:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

My experience has been that numbers and tactics count. If the NPCs work together, use suppressive fire, flanking, pick their terrain to get The Drop and so on, they can give the PCs a run for their money.

In melee, a combination of gang-up bonuses and wild attacks works well. None of this martial arts etiquette one on one duel business.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
77IM
Heroic


Joined: 23 Jun 2009
Posts: 1591
Location: Austin, TX

PostPosted: Wed May 16, 2012 9:47 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Here's a rule I thunk up for a modern kung-fu setting to balance unarmed combat. (And yes, this just an edge from Clint's Modern Martial Arts, turned into a setting rule. I think all good ideas can ultimately be traced back to Clint.)
  • No Unarmed Defender rule.
  • Unarmed attacks deal Str+Fighting damage. You get full Fighting die even if it exceeds Strength.
  • You can also deal Str+Fighting damage with melee weapons if that would be higher than the regular weapon damage.

    This means that the only reasons to use melee weapons is a) because you have low fighting or b) because the weapon gives you some special trait like reach or Parry +1. To prevent everyone from using rapiers all the time, I'd create a variety of weapons with minor bonuses using Zadmar's Savage Armory.


The net effect is that Fighting attacks deal a lot more damage, comparable (and often better) than ranged weapons. Melee weapons would still be useful, but not required, since they're only a minor bonus.

-- 77IM
_________________
Stuff I made: Arcane Abilities · Talent Edge · Savage Fading Suns · Savage Wuxia!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ValhallaGH
Legendary


Joined: 25 Apr 2010
Posts: 4475

PostPosted: Thu May 17, 2012 10:30 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

77IM wrote:
To prevent everyone from using rapiers all the time, I'd create a variety of weapons with minor bonuses using Zadmar's Savage Armory.

Or point out the awesomeness that is the Spear. +1 Parry and +1 Reach and you can throw it with a real range increment.
_________________
"Got a problem? I've got the solution: Rocket Launcher."
"Not against a Servitor."
"... We're all gonna die."
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Great White Games/Pinnacle Entertainment Group Forum Index -> SW General Chat & Game Stories All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2
Page 2 of 2

 
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