Pyramid #3/57: Gunplay

[DouglasCole]

Originally Posted by evileeyore

I'm necroing this as I have a specific question regarding the article Dodge This.


In Move and Attack (Evasive) the character is given the use of Parry in defenses, which is normally denied to Move and Attack. Why was this done?

Was it just so they'd have 2 forms of defense?

Nope.

I'm of the mind to remove defenses entirely and allow the incoming attack penalty to apply to all attacks, not just ranged... as it stands anyone using this already practically foregoes attacks and defenses (the penalties are very stiff, minimum -6 to non-Ranged DX and defense skill rolls).

Not sure where you get the minimum -6 from. You may select any penalty you like from -1 to your encumbered move, and your skill use takes double that penalty, and defenses take the full penalty. It's only -6 if you choose -3 to hit you and to your own defenses.

Ultimately, I figured that the penalties to skill and defensive use substituted for the "no parries" rule already in place. This isn't specifically Move and Attack, it's a variant, so don't port the rules from one into the other.

No one will prevent disallowing defenses, but this article was about Dodging. I'll admit that if I did the numbers, I've forgotten the result, but the point of this one isn't to substitute for Dodge, it's to make the kind of motion that one tries to make by "moving evasively" to a game where Dodge is declared after a hit roll is made. I've seen objections in games I've played, and heard them here on the boards, where that sort of "telepathy" breaks suspension of disbelief.

No one objects - or rather, perhaps, I don't see nearly as much objection - when you declare Dodge after someone swings at you with a sword or stick. Easier to rationalize that you see the hit's going to miss you. But that's just not usually possible with bullets - this is the Gunplay issue, after all.

In short: this move is for ranged attacks. For hand-to-hand fighting, use the RAW. If your encumbered Move is 5, you may select a penalty to shots trying to hit you from -1 to -5. You will take -2 through -10 to your attacks, and -1 to -5 to Block and Parry. You may (in this example) move up to 2.5 yards (likely dropped to 2 due to hex use) and must move at least 1.

[evileeyore]

Originally Posted by DouglasCole

Nope.

Hmmm. Okay.

Not sure where you get the minimum -6 from.

Brain fog. It was late (like really late, almost 8 hours past when I'd normally have gone to sleep) and my mind was saying "This replaces the normal -2 to hit for Move 5... so.. ergo..".

Obviously upon rereading with no Brain Fog, Move and Evasive penalties to hit stack (with high enough Encumbered Move).

Ultimately, I figured that the penalties to skill and defensive use substituted for the "no parries" rule already in place. This isn't specifically Move and Attack, it's a variant, so don't port the rules from one into the other.

Okay. I'm converting it to a Movement Option, thus useable on 'Move' and any 'Move and' (just not Slams).

Thus the questions to see how your intentions line up with what I'm trying to import.

...this article was about Dodging. I'll admit that if I did the numbers, I've forgotten the result, but the point of this one isn't to substitute for Dodge, it's to make the kind of motion that one tries to make by "moving evasively" to a game where Dodge is declared after a hit roll is made. I've seen objections in games I've played, and heard them here on the boards, where that sort of "telepathy" breaks suspension of disbelief.

Yeah, I knew that. The Brain Fog was just interfering.

No one objects - or rather, perhaps, I don't see nearly as much objection - when you declare Dodge after someone swings at you with a sword or stick. Easier to rationalize that you see the hit's going to miss you. But that's just not usually possible with bullets - this is the Gunplay issue, after all.

In my "Harsh Reality" games I require the Players to declare Defense intentions before attack rolls are made (on a critical failure on the attack I let them "take back" the declaration, some misses are just that obvious). Same on my side of the table.

I was rereading the Gunplay article last night to see what I'm going to add to the Harsh Reality Ruleset.



Now... since I've got your attention let's rap a moment about why Ranged attacks only suffer -2 (or Bulk whichever is worse) and Melee suffers double to hit penalty? Was this to discourage 'suicidal charges' on gunners?

[DouglasCole]

Originally Posted by evileeyore

Now... since I've got your attention let's rap a moment about why Ranged attacks only suffer -2 (or Bulk whichever is worse) and Melee suffers double to hit penalty? Was this to discourage 'suicidal charges' on gunners?

-2 or Bulk in addition to the regular penalty. So if you take -3 to your foe's defenses and are shooting, you're at -6 (for the Evasive movement) plus -2 or Bulk, so if you're shooting an M16 with Bulk -4, you're at -10 when shooting and -6 for melee.

[evileeyore]

Originally Posted by DouglasCole

-2 or Bulk in addition to the regular penalty. So if you take -3 to your foe's defenses and are shooting, you're at -6 (for the Evasive movement) plus -2 or Bulk, so if you're shooting an M16 with Bulk -4, you're at -10 when shooting and -6 for melee.

Ahhhh... yes. That clears that right up.


I kept reading "still have" as meaning "unchanged" and not regarding "additional pain" as meaning add these penalties together:

"Ranged attacks still have the additional pain of suffering from -2 or the Bulk of the weapon, whichever is worse, and you lose any previously acquired Aim bonuses."