 |
Great White Games/Pinnacle Entertainment Group
Discussion Forum for PEG/GWG
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Sean-Khan
Seasoned
Joined: 19 May 2010
Posts: 490
Location: Finland, Tampere
|
 Posted: Fri Dec 10, 2010 12:36 am Post subject: |
 |
|
Some things feel very different when thinking of game mechanics vs. 'real' situation - I've been in D&D world too long so mechanics sometimes feel like the only option. I'm trying to get off that.
I'd like to extend Cryonic's point; In a situation like that you've just got to be smarter. Sneaking to move around, throwing a rock to cause distraction, digging out grenades or flask of oil, calling backup, starting to destroy evidence, trying to find something from environment to exploit ('just say yes' method or story edits with bennies) are things that could happen. And, of course, an external factor could jump in, two police officers come to check out what was the shooting about, PC's girlfriend comes in after seeing PC's car outside etc.
But if nothing happens and both parties want to take a peek at the situation, even with random peeks there's a chance that both take their peek at the same time and an agility roll tells who gets a snapshot out. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Lord Lance
Heroic
Joined: 23 Jul 2008
Posts: 1406
Location: Vicenza, Italy
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 10, 2010 3:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Zadmar wrote: |
I think I'd be tempted to rule that Boffo could still have his shot, even if he loses the Agility roll, assuming he's still alive by that point. |
It's just a game... You have to semplify the reality.
Maybe you can justify that with Boffo's finger slips away for the sweat, so he lose precious time...
However S.W. has some great (and easy) Initiative ruling. Other games has no concepts of "Standoff" or "Interrupt".
_________________
"Balance is the key, Trapping is the word." - - Lord Lance
Proud creator of the SAVAGE FREE BESTIARY |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Zadmar
Heroic
Joined: 10 Nov 2010
Posts: 1381
Location: Munich
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 10, 2010 5:05 am Post subject: |
|
|
| AlienMasters wrote: | | In strict game mechanic terms those events are processed in the order you describe them, but the exerience 'on the ground' seems like it would be more simultaneous: Bubba is moving out at the ready with his weapon in firing position, popping off rounds the instant Boffo comes into view. |
That's how I tend to view it as well, but I find it doesn't really feel that way when the person can walk 12 yards while fully exposed and then move completely behind cover at the end of it, avoiding any chance of being hit.
In a melee situation, you'd get a free attack if your opponent ran up to you, hit you, then attempted to withdraw (or two attacks if you also had First Strike). If they were mounted you could also set your weapon, getting +2 to your Agility roll for each point of reach. But as far as I'm aware there doesn't seem to be any equivalent for ranged combat.
If the Agility roll is a tie then both characters literally act simultaneously, but I'd like some way of representing them acting nearly simultaneously. Even if it was just a simple rule such as "If you fail the Agility roll to interrupt someone while on hold, and you see them act, but they move behind full cover before you get to act, they count as having near total cover against your next action: You can attack them with a -6 penalty to hit".
| Lord Lance wrote: | It's just a game... You have to semplify the reality.
Maybe you can justify that with Boffo's finger slips away for the sweat, so he lose precious time... |
Perhaps, but if Bubba has a much higher Agility he could keep doing the same thing over and over. Also, it's not just a case of Bubba sticking his gun around the corner and popping off a shot - he could walk 12 yards while fully exposed, and Boffo wouldn't even have the option of taking a shot.
| Lord Lance wrote: | | However S.W. has some great (and easy) Initiative ruling. Other games has no concepts of "Standoff" or "Interrupt". |
Definitely, it's a big improvement over previous games I've played. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Clint
Site Admin
Joined: 13 May 2003
Posts: 16176
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 10, 2010 9:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Zadmar wrote: | | AlienMasters wrote: | | In strict game mechanic terms those events are processed in the order you describe them, but the exerience 'on the ground' seems like it would be more simultaneous: Bubba is moving out at the ready with his weapon in firing position, popping off rounds the instant Boffo comes into view. |
That's how I tend to view it as well, but I find it doesn't really feel that way when the person can walk 12 yards while fully exposed and then move completely behind cover at the end of it, avoiding any chance of being hit. |
AlienMasters has it though; the book specifically states that all actions are presumed to occur almost simultaneously (even if they are resolved in order).
Also basic Pace isn't really a "walk," it's just the distance a person can move as a free action. More like a quick jog; walking would be more akin to the reduced Pace to avoid a Stealth penalty. (And to clarify, at least 2 yards would have to include the movement behind cover without Running or an Edge).
And ultimately, the whole point of the Hold and Interrupt rules is that they can't do this "avoiding any chance of being hit." And that's not even considering the Joker which automatically means they will be interrupted.
Plus, keep in mind that the character behind the wall is completely blocking his line of sight. Going on Hold to wait for him to pop out is one tactic, but so is just moving into a better position since he can't see where you are going or react to you unless he is on Hold (in which case, we're back to Standoff).
_________________
Clint Black
Savage Worlds Core Rules Brand Manager
www.peginc.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Zadmar
Heroic
Joined: 10 Nov 2010
Posts: 1381
Location: Munich
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 10, 2010 9:53 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Clint wrote: | | AlienMasters has it though; the book specifically states that all actions are presumed to occur almost simultaneously (even if they are resolved in order). |
Okay, but how does that work with cover? If Bubba jogs out from behind the wall and takes his shot almost simultaneously with Boffo pulling the trigger on his own gun, does that mean they can both roll to shoot each other - even if Bubba's action is resolved first, and he ends his turn back behind full cover again?
Up until now I've been ruling that if someone moves behind cover, they receive the cover bonus against anyone who attacks after them. But looking over the rules again, I'm no longer sure if my interpretation is correct...for example the text for heavy cover only states that the penalty applies "if only a small part of the target is visible" with an example of "peeking around the corner of a building".
If the actions are presumed to occur almost simultaneously, does that mean peeking around the corner of a building to fire your gun would allow your opponent a chance to shoot back (with the -4 penalty for heavy cover), even if you win the opposed Agility roll and move completely behind the building after shooting, before they get to act? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Clint
Site Admin
Joined: 13 May 2003
Posts: 16176
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 10, 2010 11:23 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Zadmar wrote: | | Clint wrote: | | AlienMasters has it though; the book specifically states that all actions are presumed to occur almost simultaneously (even if they are resolved in order). |
Okay, but how does that work with cover? If Bubba jogs out from behind the wall and takes his shot almost simultaneously with Boffo pulling the trigger on his own gun, does that mean they can both roll to shoot each other - even if Bubba's action is resolved first, and he ends his turn back behind full cover again? |
Sorry, to clarify, all of a character's actions are presumed to take place almost simultaneously, not every action in a round. Actions are still resolved in initiative order.
Going back to AlienMasters post, the point being that the guy behind cover is moving while going through the entire process of firing his weapon (not just the one point where he actually pulls the trigger), and the character on Hold is trying to react fast enough to catch him in that "almost simultaneous" point where he is out of cover, but hasn't fired.
If he makes his Agility roll, he succeeds, but if he reacts too slow, he missed his opportunity (and of course, if they tie, their actions occur at the exact same time).
If that delineation is too broad in that situation for anyone, it's very simple to adjust it. Just alter the results of the roll...
On a tie, the actions still occur completely simultaneously.
If one side gets a raise, then they resolve all of their actions before the other character.
If one side just gets a success, then they get to resolve only one action first (not counting previously resolved actions if the character interrupted), and then the other character may resolve one action of their own (if they are still able) before the successful character completes the rest of their actions.
_________________
Clint Black
Savage Worlds Core Rules Brand Manager
www.peginc.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
fanchergw
Heroic
Joined: 13 May 2003
Posts: 1474
Location: Seattle area
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 10, 2010 11:37 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Clint wrote: | | Zadmar wrote: | | AlienMasters wrote: | | In strict game mechanic terms those events are processed in the order you describe them, but the exerience 'on the ground' seems like it would be more simultaneous: Bubba is moving out at the ready with his weapon in firing position, popping off rounds the instant Boffo comes into view. |
That's how I tend to view it as well, but I find it doesn't really feel that way when the person can walk 12 yards while fully exposed and then move completely behind cover at the end of it, avoiding any chance of being hit. |
AlienMasters has it though; the book specifically states that all actions are presumed to occur almost simultaneously (even if they are resolved in order).
Also basic Pace isn't really a "walk," it's just the distance a person can move as a free action. More like a quick jog; walking would be more akin to the reduced Pace to avoid a Stealth penalty. (And to clarify, at least 2 yards would have to include the movement behind cover without Running or an Edge).
And ultimately, the whole point of the Hold and Interrupt rules is that they can't do this "avoiding any chance of being hit." And that's not even considering the Joker which automatically means they will be interrupted.
Plus, keep in mind that the character behind the wall is completely blocking his line of sight. Going on Hold to wait for him to pop out is one tactic, but so is just moving into a better position since he can't see where you are going or react to you unless he is on Hold (in which case, we're back to Standoff). |
As much as I love SW, this is one of the few parts of the rules that really sticks in my craw. It just doesn't make any sense to me, which results in having to make up some bizarre, illogical rationalization at the table to explain what happens per the rules. ("You've been waiting for the guy to pop out. He does, but just then a bead of sweat drips into your eye making it impossible for you to shoot back as he stops, fires at you, then jogs over and dives behind a different section of wall." I cannot imagine any player at any table being happy with this.)
It's important to keep in mind that neither combatant can see through the wall. That means that it takes just as long for the guy coming out from behind to wall to locate and target his opponent as it does for the opponent to react and target him. I can't see any reason for the guy popping out to have roughly a 50% (assuming roughly equal Agilities) chance of getting a free pass.
Gordon |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
AlienMasters
Novice
Joined: 17 Mar 2009
Posts: 42
Location: Austin, TX
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 10, 2010 11:47 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Zadmar wrote: | | If Bubba jogs out from behind the wall and takes his shot almost simultaneously with Boffo pulling the trigger on his own gun, does that mean they can both roll to shoot each other - even if Bubba's action is resolved first, and he ends his turn back behind full cover again? |
My understanding is that whoever wins the agility roll gets to shoot and complete their turn including their entire movement before the other person shoots. Changing the way this works is the GMs prerogative. You could easily make a Setting Rule to encourage use of Hold, like "Kill Zone: Characters on Hold that try to interrupt an enemies movement with a Shooting attack and lose the roll can reroll contested agility rolls to interrupt for every subsequent 1" of enemy movement, as long as the enemy is in their field of fire."
| Zadmar wrote: | | Up until now I've been ruling that if someone moves behind cover, they receive the cover bonus against anyone who attacks after them. |
Right on. When the lead starts flying, Initiative and Cover are your friends! 
| Zadmar wrote: | | If the actions are presumed to occur almost simultaneously, does that mean peeking around the corner of a building to fire your gun would allow your opponent a chance to shoot back (with the -4 penalty for heavy cover), even if you win the opposed Agility roll and move completely behind the building after shooting, before they get to act? |
Nope, don't think so. You winning the opposed roll means they don't get to shoot at you until after you finish your entire action. If they are going to flush you out they need to get more weapons Holding on your building (for more chances to beat your agility rolls), flank around(or over or under), bring to bear a weapon that can go through the building, use AE weapons (grenades are fun!), etc. Again, easily houseruled to achieve a different flavor if that's what a GM wants, though I find it works well as long as I make sure my NPCs are as crafty as my players. 
_________________
We have to believe in free will. We have no choice. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Old One Eye
Novice
Joined: 10 Dec 2010
Posts: 24
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 10, 2010 11:48 am Post subject: |
|
|
| The guy popping up out of cover, taking a shot, and ducking back behind cover is not going to have much time to see where his target is located, bring his weapon to bear, and take a shot. If this was a common experience at the table, I would be tempted to give him a penalty to the attack roll. -1, -2 or something. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kreider204
Heroic
Joined: 19 Jun 2009
Posts: 1712
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 10, 2010 11:50 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Old One Eye wrote: | | The guy popping up out of cover, taking a shot, and ducking back behind cover is not going to have much time to see where his target is located, bring his weapon to bear, and take a shot. If this was a common experience at the table, I would be tempted to give him a penalty to the attack roll. -1, -2 or something. |
That's my feeling too, and I've asked about it, but strictly speaking that's not how the rules work. It seems to me a reasonable house rule, though, so as long as you let your players know about it ahead of time, I think it would work well.
_________________
"It only takes an extra second to be courteous."
- Constable Benton Fraser |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Old One Eye
Novice
Joined: 10 Dec 2010
Posts: 24
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 10, 2010 12:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| kreider204 wrote: | | Old One Eye wrote: | | The guy popping up out of cover, taking a shot, and ducking back behind cover is not going to have much time to see where his target is located, bring his weapon to bear, and take a shot. If this was a common experience at the table, I would be tempted to give him a penalty to the attack roll. -1, -2 or something. |
That's my feeling too, and I've asked about it, but strictly speaking that's not how the rules work. It seems to me a reasonable house rule, though, so as long as you let your players know about it ahead of time, I think it would work well. |
For me, it would depend on whether the players were exploiting it or not. If it was just an ad hoc thing that a person did on the spur of the moment, I wouldn't worry about it and play things straight up. If the players were constantly exploiting this as a loophole, then I think a penalty would be appropriate. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Clint
Site Admin
Joined: 13 May 2003
Posts: 16176
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 10, 2010 12:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Old One Eye wrote: | | The guy popping up out of cover, taking a shot, and ducking back behind cover is not going to have much time to see where his target is located, bring his weapon to bear, and take a shot. |
This is a perfect example. All of these things are part of the "action" of firing a weapon. The Shooting action is not simply pulling the trigger; it's the character doing all of these things.
_________________
Clint Black
Savage Worlds Core Rules Brand Manager
www.peginc.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ValhallaGH
Legendary
Joined: 25 Apr 2010
Posts: 4475
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 10, 2010 12:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Old One Eye wrote: | | For me, it would depend on whether the players were exploiting it or not. If it was just an ad hoc thing that a person did on the spur of the moment, I wouldn't worry about it and play things straight up. If the players were constantly exploiting this as a loophole, then I think a penalty would be appropriate. |
I think giving my opposition grenades would be appropriate.
Or supporting fire to call in, such as mortars or artillery.
If I was feeling evil then I'd come up with a reason why the players wouldn't be able to loot the grenades. Something like the Hell On Earth Black Hats, with their user-identification chips (a.k.a. Head-banger chips) and a self-destruct built into most of their equipment, is some frustrating fun, but there are other options and methods that can work just as well.
Don't be afraid, as the GM, to change the dynamic of a combat. Guns aren't the only weapon options, and using other weapons can be as or more fun than furious gunplay. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
thwill
Seasoned
Joined: 12 Aug 2009
Posts: 123
Location: Manchester, England
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 10, 2010 12:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
This question also makes me wonder what the maximum amount of cover a character who is exposing themselves (no innuendo intended) from behind a piece of cover (low wall, or corner of a wall, not a made for purpose firing slit) can claim?
Assuming they aren't firing blindly then they have to expose their head, one or two arms, some shoulder and maybe a bit of torso if they're leaning around a corner. So is that -2 or -4 cover?
Tom |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Clint
Site Admin
Joined: 13 May 2003
Posts: 16176
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 10, 2010 12:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| fanchergw wrote: | | As much as I love SW, this is one of the few parts of the rules that really sticks in my craw. It just doesn't make any sense to me, which results in having to make up some bizarre, illogical rationalization at the table to explain what happens per the rules. ("You've been waiting for the guy to pop out. He does, but just then a bead of sweat drips into your eye making it impossible for you to shoot back as he stops, fires at you, then jogs over and dives behind a different section of wall." I cannot imagine any player at any table being happy with this.) |
"You've been waiting..." 
That doesn't sound like interrupting; that sounds like an ambush. We aren't talking hours or even minutes here, but the space of mere seconds between the character choosing to wait for someone else to react and then hoping to react fast enough to catch them.
While the game is fast, I understand it does still take longer in real time to get to that action (not even considering if others act before), but while the player may have been waiting, the character is trying to react in the spur of the moment in the heat of combat. That distinction has to be recognized.
Now, if the character stays on Hold into the next round (or longer), I could see giving a Situational Modifier to the roll for the extended time, but in the same round, I don't see it.
Again though, I did provide an option above for a finer breakdown of the actions that provides more of an edge to the character interrupting.
_________________
Clint Black
Savage Worlds Core Rules Brand Manager
www.peginc.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
77IM
Heroic
Joined: 23 Jun 2009
Posts: 1591
Location: Austin, TX
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 10, 2010 12:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
My feeling is, artifacts of game mechanics can defy common sense a bit, as long as players can try to do anything that makes sense. When the players think up something reasonable and the game mechanics say, "Nope, you can't even attempt that," that does bother me (and should be overridden by the GM).
Shooting the guy when he pops out makes sense, and the game lets you try, although you might fail by losing the Agility roll. If the target then gets to run around a little bit, that's a weird artifact of the turn system, but it hasn't prevented any character from trying to do anything.
-- 77IM
PS. A great house-rule that may help with this particular situation is Candi's Action Surge rule.
_________________
Stuff I made: Arcane Abilities · Talent Edge · Savage Fading Suns · Savage Wuxia! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
77IM
Heroic
Joined: 23 Jun 2009
Posts: 1591
Location: Austin, TX
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 10, 2010 12:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I like Clint's mention of circumstance modifiers. Remember that as GM if a particular situation warrants it you can always give a modifier. So maybe "pop out, shoot, pop back" seems reasonable and grants no modifier. But if "pop out, shoot, saunter around the field for a while, then pop back" seems like a stretch, give that guy a -2 penalty on his Agility check to avoid being interrupted. (So he can still try to scurry about really fast, and his opponent can still try to shoot him first, but neither is guaranteed.)
-- 77IM
_________________
Stuff I made: Arcane Abilities · Talent Edge · Savage Fading Suns · Savage Wuxia! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kreider204
Heroic
Joined: 19 Jun 2009
Posts: 1712
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 10, 2010 1:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I guess I just don't like treating "pop-up" / "pop-down" as part of movement. First of all, you don't have to move anywhere - it could be done with 0% of your Pace. Second, it seems more like a maneuver. I mean, readying a weapon is a full action, but popping up and back down isn't? If you treated it as a maneuver rather than movement, it could count as a full action, thereby incurring a MAP penalty when done with shooting.
_________________
"It only takes an extra second to be courteous."
- Constable Benton Fraser |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
thwill
Seasoned
Joined: 12 Aug 2009
Posts: 123
Location: Manchester, England
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 10, 2010 1:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I have to agree that applying a -2 to a "pop-up" attack (whether they then "pop-down" or not) seems like it might be a good idea. Whether this is the -2 for MAP, or a -2 for "not being entirely certain where my target is", doesn't really matter.
A general rule of "-2 Shooting/Fighting/Throwing when a character attacks a target that they could not see at the beginning of the combat round" would seem like a good way of phrasing it.
Perhaps even apply to indirect fire weapons (like grenades) when you are just lobbing them into an area you think the target is in. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
newForumNewName
Heroic
Joined: 22 Oct 2010
Posts: 1781
Location: Broomfield, CO
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 10, 2010 1:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| kreider204 wrote: | | I guess I just don't like treating "pop-up" / "pop-down" as part of movement. First of all, you don't have to move anywhere - it could be done with 0% of your Pace. Second, it seems more like a maneuver. I mean, readying a weapon is a full action, but popping up and back down isn't? If you treated it as a maneuver rather than movement, it could count as a full action, thereby incurring a MAP penalty when done with shooting. |
Depends what you mean by "pop-up" since getting up from prone burns 2" of your movement...
_________________
"I had a whole bunch of advice for you but got ninja'd by newForumNewName. I'd just do what he says." -- 77IM
"While nFNN could be less of a jerk about how he says what he says, what he says is essentially correct." -- ValhallaGH |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
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
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
