Steve Jackson Games - Site Navigation
Home General Info Follow Us Search Illuminator Store Forums What's New Other Games Ogre GURPS Munchkin Our Games: Home

Go Back   Steve Jackson Games Forums > Roleplaying > The Fantasy Trip

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 04-16-2021, 06:53 AM   #11
phiwum
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Default Re: Anticipating an opponent breaking cover?

That's a pretty well-considered solution. I might steal it and tell everyone I came up with it all by myself.

I'll call it Phiwum's Rule. I'll be famous!
phiwum is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-16-2021, 09:07 AM   #12
larsdangly
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Default Re: Anticipating an opponent breaking cover?

I'm not so sure that the standard rules are all that unrealistic. The furthest gap you can cross when moving from cover to cover is 40', or about 7 sprinter's strides. Given that you really need to carefully 'lead' a quickly moving target if you are going to hit them with an arrow or thrown weapon, I suspect you'd find it very challenging to do unless it were a total 'set up job', like a clay pigeon where you know exactly where, when and the path and velocity of the target.

If I were going to make a house rule for something like this I'd: 1) only do it under a lot of pressure, as I would hate to set a precedence for something really outside the core structure of the rules and potentially manipulatable for advantages in other situations, and 2) have it work sort of like an area fire thing where you can loose a missile into a small gap between cover, but with just a gambler's chance of any one missile hitting something.
larsdangly is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-16-2021, 09:47 AM   #13
phiwum
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Default Re: Anticipating an opponent breaking cover?

Well, the standard rules are unrealistic at least in the sense that movement is chunky. Take an armored guy with MA 6. If the next cover is six hexes away, you have no shot at all. If it's seven hexes away, you have a shot with no penalty.

But that sort of crude outcome really can't easily be done away with. There's a tradeoff between simplicity and realism. I tend to think that there should be some chance at a shot when moving from cover to cover in one turn, but maybe it's not important enough for others. Partly depends on how often it comes up and I'm not sure it's come up at all for me.
phiwum is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-16-2021, 10:40 AM   #14
Shostak
 
Shostak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: New England
Default Re: Anticipating an opponent breaking cover?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Plambeck View Post
A small tweak of the optional Waiting rule might be the simplest solution. Just allow the figure that started Waiting last turn to declare the moment they fire on the subsequent turn(s). Firing doesn't come then when their adjDX comes up, but the instant they say so, any time in the turn they fire. And of course any interruption spoils the plan (even Defend, although that's contrary to ITL 127) so they pay the price in wasted turns. I might take away the DX bonus for waiting too when they fire "out of turn".
It is important to remember that Waiting for an Opening is available to all combatants. Letting someone waiting pop off an attack out of adjDX order could drastically change the flow of combat, since it would allow a low-DX fighter defending while waiting one turn get in an attack before a high-DX opponent on a subsequent turn--maybe even during the movement phase.
Shostak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-16-2021, 01:00 PM   #15
larsdangly
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Default Re: Anticipating an opponent breaking cover?

And that rule applies to melee as well as missile fire (I suspect an often overlooked detail!).
larsdangly is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-16-2021, 02:57 PM   #16
phiwum
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Default Re: Anticipating an opponent breaking cover?

I presumed that Steve's amendment explicitly applies only to missile weapons, not to every instance where one says he's waiting for an opening.
phiwum is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-16-2021, 08:08 PM   #17
Steve Plambeck
 
Join Date: Jun 2019
Default Re: Anticipating an opponent breaking cover?

Quote:
Originally Posted by phiwum View Post
That's a pretty well-considered solution. I might steal it and tell everyone I came up with it all by myself.

I'll call it Phiwum's Rule. I'll be famous!
LOL! My name for it was the Picket Fence Rule, but for as long as I've carried that in my head I never wrote if down until that post.

Quote:
Originally Posted by phiwum View Post
I presumed that Steve's amendment explicitly applies only to missile weapons, not to every instance where one says he's waiting for an opening.
EXACTLY!
__________________
"I'm not arguing. I'm just explaining why I'm right."
Steve Plambeck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-16-2021, 08:31 PM   #18
Shostak
 
Shostak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: New England
Default Re: Anticipating an opponent breaking cover?

Quote:
Originally Posted by phiwum View Post
I presumed that Steve's amendment explicitly applies only to missile weapons, not to every instance where one says he's waiting for an opening.
I did, too, but it still begs the question about melee weapons. After all, what's so special about a bow that makes it somehow faster to draw and loose than one can stab with a rapier when waiting for an opening?
Shostak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-16-2021, 08:39 PM   #19
phiwum
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Default Re: Anticipating an opponent breaking cover?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shostak View Post
I did, too, but it still begs the question about melee weapons. After all, what's so special about a bow that makes it somehow faster to draw and loose than one can stab with a rapier when waiting for an opening?
Surely, what makes it special is that you're not currently involved in melee, defending and parrying and dancing about and what-not.

According to RAW, the guy who waits does get a minor advantage in speeding his action a bit, because his adjDX is one or two points higher, but I know that you're not really referring to that. I fudge the adjDX order to keep things simple in turn order anyway. If one took every DX adjustment into account, it becomes pretty tricky with a combat of eight or more participants.

Anyway, I don't think it's a huge stretch to think that there's a difference between waiting for your target to come into view and waiting for an opening in melee. Steve'sMy rule is an extra complication, no doubt, but I don't think it's onerous or too different from the spirit of RAW to consider as a house rule. From where I sit, seems like a pretty reasonable solution.

I might change my mind if I see it in use, I suppose.
phiwum is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-16-2021, 08:41 PM   #20
Steve Plambeck
 
Join Date: Jun 2019
Default Re: Anticipating an opponent breaking cover?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shostak View Post
It is important to remember that Waiting for an Opening is available to all combatants. Letting someone waiting pop off an attack out of adjDX order could drastically change the flow of combat, since it would allow a low-DX fighter defending while waiting one turn get in an attack before a high-DX opponent on a subsequent turn--maybe even during the movement phase.
As phiwum kindly pointed out, my suggestion was to narrowly apply Waiting in this modified sense to the one matter at hand, not anything else.

The obvious problem of making a regular attack on someone walking by between obstacles takes care of itself anyway. If the target is passing close enough for a regular attack, it's stepping into the attacker's front hex anyway and so stops for engagement. Fighting between two tree trunks doesn't change the turn sequence.

As to the bowman firing out of turn in my example, note that at least it's not firing early, it's firing late. A target with a higher DX still got to act first (if they chose to do anything from their point of concealment) on the turn the shooter chose to begin Waiting. When the archer does finally shoot on a later turn, it's not acting before the target's current chance to act, it's acting one, two, or more turns after the target acted on the turn the whole waiting thing began. The shooter still had an action coming -- being slow doesn't break the system.

A legit question though is, should any form of "opportunity fire" be allowed (if you're allowing it) for more than a missile weapon attack? Extending it to missile spell attacks seems logical to me. Extending it to thrown weapon attacks seems just as reasonable as missile weapon attacks, but with the DX penalties for range and the narrowness of the opportunity stacking, it's hardly ever going to result in a hit.

The pain is deciding if thrown spells should be included. I can see the argument going either way on that one. Can a wizard hold a Sleep spell all set to release waiting for a guard to pass between two columns? That's a tough one to think about.
__________________
"I'm not arguing. I'm just explaining why I'm right."
Steve Plambeck is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Fnords are Off
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:22 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.