One Eye vs Adaptation Time in Tactical Shooting

[Plane]

Tactical Shooting 18 mentions keeping an eye closed (reduce light sensitivity) then swapping eyes when it gets dark to avoid the -2 penalty...

But I'm not sure I understand the incentive since there's a -3 to ranged attacks with 1 eye.

Would it be that the -2 only applies to Sense Rolls (Vision Rolls) but not to actual attacks? That seems kinda strange.

Also based on this logic couldn't you keep BOTH eyes shut so they both adapt to total darkness, then open them as soon as you enter the reduced-lighting area?

It also seems like "sleeping with one eye open" could be used to mitigate the "adapt to better lighting" problem of waking up (when your eyes were closed for HOURS)

Normally:

"two minutes per -1 of darkness penalty to adapt, apply another -2 to Vision until then"

Alt:

"quarter of this time to adapt to better lighting conditions – remove -1 of darkness penalties every 30 seconds"

I think how 1st works is for example:

a) zero to -1, you're -2 for 120 seconds
b) zero to -2, you're -2 for 240 seconds (maybe only -1 after 120?)

I think how 2nd works:

c) -1 to zero: you're -2 for 30 seconds
d) -2 to zero: you're -2 for 60 seconds (maybe only -1 after 30?)

Not 100% sure I'm understanding this right because the "quarter" (dark to bright) situation is worded differently from the "full" (bright to dark) situation.

If you slept with one eye open (is that a perk if you can choose, a quirk if you must always?) then in theory you could use the "intentional one eye" trick to have your "kept open" eye adapted to surrounding lighting penalties while the "kept closed" eye would be adapted to darkness?

I'm wondering if there are any traits that would remove or lessen these adaptation times. Like if you have Nightvision (the leveled perk, or 0 pt feature if you see worse in bright light) or Darkvision, how might it affect these new rules?

[Anthony]

The problem is that the One Eye disadvantage is just wrong. Realistically, the loss of depth perception mostly matters at short ranges, because visual parallax doesn't play a big role at long ranges to start with.

[Plane]

Originally Posted by Anthony

The problem is that the One Eye disadvantage is just wrong. Realistically, the loss of depth perception mostly matters at short ranges, because visual parallax doesn't play a big role at long ranges to start with.

so do you suggest flipping the -1 melee / -3 range to -3 melee / -1 range?

[Anthony]

Originally Posted by Plane

so do you suggest flipping the -1 melee / -3 range to -3 melee / -1 range?

I'd be tempted to get rid of the DX penalties totally (if you want to be clumsy because you have one eye, just buy down your DX) and One Eye becomes Tunnel Vision (One Side Only).

[ravenfish]

Note that One-Eyed explicitly says that the penalty to ranged attacks does not apply when you aim first, so if you don't plan on needing to make "snap shots", the closing of alternate eyes can be useful even under the rules as written.


That said, I agree that the substantial DX penalties One Eye gives are probably questionable in the first place (stereoscopic vision is only one of multiple methods our brains use to judge range- hence the severe discomfort some feel when watching 3D movies as the different methods report conflicting results), and like the suggestion about Tunnel Vision. I would note that No Peripheral Vision has the same -15 point cost as One Eye, and so would use it as a guide when determining how much to restrict arc of vision.

[lugaid]

Yeah, I think I like No Peripheral Vision (One Side Only -50%) [-7] (not Tunnel Vision, though, based on a quick test of my field of vision when I close one eye). Cyclopes wouldn't have a penalty, I think, and their one eye would be just an appearance thing.

[Anthony]

Originally Posted by lugaid

Yeah, I think I like No Peripheral Vision (One Side Only -50%) [-7] (not Tunnel Vision, though, based on a quick test of my field of vision when I close one eye). Cyclopes wouldn't have a penalty, I think, and their one eye would be just an appearance thing.

My test of closing one eye is that my vision cuts off at around 30 degrees, which is consistent with Tunnel Vision. A cyclops would probably have generic No Peripheral Vision.

[lugaid]

Originally Posted by Anthony

My test of closing one eye is that my vision cuts off at around 30 degrees, which is consistent with Tunnel Vision.

Huh. I suppose that it's possible that I might have an unusually wide field of vision, though I don't think that I do.

[Ulzgoroth]

Originally Posted by Anthony

My test of closing one eye is that my vision cuts off at around 30 degrees, which is consistent with Tunnel Vision. A cyclops would probably have generic No Peripheral Vision.

I'm inclined to agree with this measurement, though my angle measures aren't very precise.

Originally Posted by lugaid

Huh. I suppose that it's possible that I might have an unusually wide field of vision, though I don't think that I do.

There's no way your right eye can see 90 degrees to the left of your head, unless you've got no nose...

[lugaid]

Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth

There's no way your right eye can see 90 degrees to the left of your head, unless you've got no nose...

I agree! Good thing that isn't what I said, then, right? <gentle smile> I pointed out that it seems to be about the angle of No Peripheral Vision on the off side, not the angle of normal vision, and Tunnel Vision seems to be far too restrictive given what I'm seeing.