Extra Attacks in GURPS vs. DFRPG (and Scouts)

[Anthony]

Originally Posted by Gnome

Yeah, in some ways it seems even harder! That's a good house rule, I might have to adopt that. Then again it greatly reduces the utility of Heroic Archer, so maybe I would have to discount that or something.

Easy way to test: "I'm removing this effect from HA. If you want, you can replace it with a different 20 point trait." If people choose that option, it might be overpriced now. If they keep HA, it indicates that HA is still good enough.

[Ulzgoroth]

Originally Posted by Plane

Except for that "I'm holding two arrows and firing them with a single pull of the bowstring" approach which is weird because you'd think that would divide the force of the elasticity between both arrows having them do less damage.

Maybe less than you are thinking - the arrow isn't the only thing that the bow's spring forces are accelerating. It depends on the bow and the arrows, but in some circumstances more arrow weight doesn't change a lot.

Originally Posted by Plane

I guess that means even in close range you might be better off throwing the knife at someone 1 yard away rather than stabbing them with it.

That's possible even if you're not doing a Move and Attack depending on your Thrown Weapon (Knife) vs. Melee Weapon (Knife) skill levels.

[VariousRen]

Originally Posted by Plane

Except for that "I'm holding two arrows and firing them with a single pull of the bowstring" approach which is weird because you'd think that would divide the force of the elasticity between both arrows having them do less damage.

Low Tech pg.78 has details for a panjagan, which was a Persian device that attached 5 arrows together to be launched at once from a normal bow. It resulted in -2 damage per arrow, so you could assume that launching two arrows would result in a smaller penalty than that.

On the topic of panjagan's they can contribute to making Extra Attack + DWA even sillier for DF scouts. I've run a game that included a ~400 point scout. A common turn was a DWA to launch two panjagan's (10 arrows), then an extra attack for another volley (10 more arrows). If a wizard was on hand they normally had great haste active, which meant they could do it all again (20 more arrows). Hawk flight (from the wizard) + Heroic archer also meant they had move 40, so they could fly point blank, fire, and retreat to 20 yards away every turn. Anything with eyes or vitals received 4lb of arrows hurled at them, and even creatures without such vulnerabilities could be destroyed unless they were armoured heavily enough to ignore the damage. The only limiting factor would be ammo, but a cornucopia quiver of prepared arrows costs $50,000, so for $100,000 the scout has infinite ammo.

[MakDemonik]

Originally Posted by VariousRen

On the topic of panjagan's they can contribute to making Extra Attack + DWA even sillier for DF scouts. I've run a game that included a ~400 point scout. A common turn was a DWA to launch two panjagan's (10 arrows), then an extra attack for another volley (10 more arrows). If a wizard was on hand they normally had great haste active, which meant they could do it all again (20 more arrows). Hawk flight (from the wizard) + Heroic archer also meant they had move 40, so they could fly point blank, fire, and retreat to 20 yards away every turn. Anything with eyes or vitals received 4lb of arrows hurled at them, and even creatures without such vulnerabilities could be destroyed unless they were armoured heavily enough to ignore the damage. The only limiting factor would be ammo, but a cornucopia quiver of prepared arrows costs $50,000, so for $100,000 the scout has infinite ammo.

While amazing to read about that action... This seems like it would be fun once. After that it would be like watching megazord assembling in full for the 200th episode. Except now there is a 2% chance every second the assembly would critically in a fabulous manner. (which would certainly be an interesting subversion)

[Anthony]

It is generally hard to make it so both melee and ranged fighters are reliably useful. Heroic archer is an attempt to make low-tech ranged weapons useful in close quarters fights (if you don't permit heroic archer, an archer gets mauled except in fights that are over before the melee fighter can reach the ranged fighter), but then has the reverse problem that there are fights (long ranges, physical barriers preventing closing) where melee weapons are useless and the ranged combatant is just superior.

[Plane]

Originally Posted by MakDemonik

like watching megazord assembling in full for the 200th episode. Except now there is a 2% chance every second the assembly would critically in a fabulous manner. (which would certainly be an interesting subversion)

I would watch it faithfully 200x for a 10% total chance of that happening tbh

No idea how I tolerated not skipping past that w/ a PVR when watching live TV in past.

It's like I tolerated the sword animations for Laharl until I learned later remakes allowed you to turn off animations for speedier grinding

[MakDemonik]

Originally Posted by Anthony

It is generally hard to make it so both melee and ranged fighters are reliably useful. Heroic archer is an attempt to make low-tech ranged weapons useful in close quarters fights (if you don't permit heroic archer, an archer gets mauled except in fights that are over before the melee fighter can reach the ranged fighter), but then has the reverse problem that there are fights (long ranges, physical barriers preventing closing) where melee weapons are useless and the ranged combatant is just superior.

Well I guess in those scenarios it just lies in the GM's hands to vary combat environments and enemies so that sometimes ranged fighters have the upper hand and sometimes its better to be melee. I guess its somewhat similar to retreating. Most people who find constant retreating a problem just dont change up the terrain (or enemy attack types) to make it not always the best option.

[Rupert]

Originally Posted by Gnome

Yeah, in some ways it seems even harder! That's a good house rule, I might have to adopt that. Then again it greatly reduces the utility of Heroic Archer, so maybe I would have to discount that or something.

Bear in mind that without Heroic Archer (or Gunslinger for guns) these ranged attacks can't use the weapon's Acc, and that plus taking Bulk as a penalty is a large to huge penalty. It's just that many PCs have high missile weapon skills, ranges in RPG fights tend to be short, and the GMs and players who find these things problematic often allow things like Gunslinger. Perhaps they don't initially realise just how impactful some of these advantages, etc. are.

For what it's worth, and can sort of see why there shouldn't be a skill cap on Move and Attack with a gun. You can allow for your movement to a fair degree, with practice, so high skill should result in a better hit chance than 9-.

[corwyn]

Originally Posted by Anthony

Easy way to test: "I'm removing this effect from HA. If you want, you can replace it with a different 20 point trait." If people choose that option, it might be overpriced now. If they keep HA, it indicates that HA is still good enough.

Then you're just holding the player hostage because HA is the only way for the Scout to not take 2 turns - not moving at that - to attack.

[johndallman]

Originally Posted by Gnome

Ok, that sounds more like target acquisition to me, I hadn't thought of it that way.

That's how I think of it: training target recognition and acquisition, taking the thought process of "that's a head, target the eye" out of the loop and making the steps between seeing a head and pointing the bow at the eye reflexive.

You could, of course, require a Will roll to shoot a target in any other location.