View Single Post
Old 12-03-2020, 04:02 AM   #9
Join Date: Aug 2018
Default Re: Own SM and ranged

Yeah, it's a bit sloppy when I say "range". What I mean is the compounded estimate of primarily angular size, and I think that what's bothering me is attacker size. Or, more specifically, projectile size.

Also, what's a "hit"? Does it mean the a collision of the projectile and the target with the two centers of mass perfectly aligned? Does it mean anything but a "clean miss"? Probably something in between for the vast majority if cases. This has huge implications for size of projectile. If you require just grazing the target, having a bigger projectile is an advantage, whereas requiring not a single part of the projectile to be outside the "silhouette" of the target, it's actually a disadvantage (since you have to hit further from the perceived "edge" of the target to account for the increased projectile size).
  1. Imagine not two combatants but two objects. They are both SM6, say, 20 yards apart (range penalty -6), so they would be at 0 to "launch themselves" at one another. If one is swapped for a 100 times smaller object (SM-6), the other object would now be at -12 to hit whereas the new object would still be at 0. If they were both SM-6, they would both be at -12.

    If I launch either single pebbles (SM-6) or boulders (SM6) at a target with my giant catapult (it's special purpose to handle both -- dont ask), it seems counterintuitive to me to have the projectile size be irrelevant -- at least not for a sufficiently small target. Using a hexagonal tactical battle map and placing the projectile where it lands, if the target is one hex (or in the case of a pebble, a fraction of a hex) and the projectile is the same size, there's not a lot of spaces you could place to get a hit (varying somewhat, of course, on how clean hit you require for it to count), so you'd have to be more precise which implies a bigger penalty for projectile size. If you instead imagine an SM6 projectile, you can place it in quite a lot of actual hexes and still cover the entire (fraction of a) hex, which I would consider a hit.

    Melee seems to have the same phenomenon, as well. I'd use a SM-6 flyswatter and occasionally be able to hit a pesky SM-12 insect in spite of having no training beyond a little everyday experience (ie the penalty is -6, not -12). Wouldn't it make sense, then, to have the modifier for the attack in regards to the target SM in fact be the larger of the target SM and the projectile/meleee weapon SM. Of course, this is likely irrelevant in most cases, since most combatants are much larger than the incoming attacks, but great for roleplaying as a lepidopterist!

  2. Another thing I came to think about is regarding the "no bonus when closer point set to own SM"; shouldn't it be based on the target SM instead? For instance, I'm waving around my hand as though aiming a gun, and I imagine that if I'm SM0 and firing at an SM0 door, I likely wont get a benefit from being closer than 2 yards. However, if I'm firing at an SM-6 painting hanging on the door, being closer probably would help (up to, say, a tenth of that distance). If I'm firing at the SM6 wall the door is part of, it might not help being closer than 20 yards. Wouldn't this hold during stress/combat as well? Of course, at small enough range, the reach of the arm and the weapon or equivalent start becoming relevant.

I saw the melee errata says to take the SM difference, but maximum bonus +4; perhaps something similar would be sensible for ranged? Would something like that be relevant in either of the two cases above, or are these phenomena already covered/irrelevant?

Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth View Post
However, being big or small realistically (but often not fictionally) is likely to impact the shooter's performance. A small character has smaller eyes, which makes it harder to have good long-range vision. Which should probably influence shooting though that connection is a bit lacking in basic rules unless you apply Bad Sight or Telescopic Vision. Also, a small character most likely handles a smaller weapon, which likely has less ballistic accuracy (due to a shorter barrel) and less length for sighting arrangements.
So, is accuracy (the ranged weapon stat), something that should vary with size, then? Something along the lines of damage for weapons of different SMs (in fact, even the exact same rules, perahaps)?

Originally Posted by Varyon View Post
instead of simply getting a discount on ST at higher SM's, SM determines base ST, and each [+10] is +10%. Base ST would either follow SSR on its own (10, 15, 20, 30, etc)
I like the idea of this, but it might be better to let it be [1] per 1% ST (since it will no longer match to even multiples of 10). Any feedback from how it actually plays out?
FeiLin is offline   Reply With Quote