Shooting Around Cover and 2-handed rifles

[Plane]

I was checking out the box on page 28 of Tactical Shooting and this is easy to understand in regard to how it would work with one-handed pistols, but how would you apply this concept to holding a rifle?

With rifles even moreso than stuff like swords there seems to be a big gap between the hand which is holding the trigger and the one ahead stabilizing the barrel.

Should it count like "Shooting Right-Handed" (in a "If you have to fire around the left-hand side" situation) where cover counts as a step less since you'd need to expose both limbs unless you wielded the rifle one-handed?

Also wondering aside from "how many limbs need to reach around the cover" how this works with eyesight: in theory you could just aim using your left eye (keeping your right eye behind cover) but then you would have less depth perception. So would you just let the character specify whether they take B145's No Depth Perception penalties (ie B147 One Eye) as if one eye were closed/crippled, in exchange for keeping the unused eye behind complete cover and be unattackable?

The -3 on ranged attacks doesn't apply if you Aim though so it seems like if you did this there would be no incentive to expose your right eye when you have the time to prep a second for a snipe.

[Ulzgoroth]

Originally Posted by Plane

I was checking out the box on page 28 of Tactical Shooting and this is easy to understand in regard to how it would work with one-handed pistols, but how would you apply this concept to holding a rifle?

With rifles even moreso than stuff like swords there seems to be a big gap between the hand which is holding the trigger and the one ahead stabilizing the barrel.

Should it count like "Shooting Right-Handed" (in a "If you have to fire around the left-hand side" situation) where cover counts as a step less since you'd need to expose both limbs unless you wielded the rifle one-handed?

Also wondering aside from "how many limbs need to reach around the cover" how this works with eyesight: in theory you could just aim using your left eye (keeping your right eye behind cover) but then you would have less depth perception. So would you just let the character specify whether they take B145's No Depth Perception penalties (ie B147 One Eye) as if one eye were closed/crippled, in exchange for keeping the unused eye behind complete cover and be unattackable?

The -3 on ranged attacks doesn't apply if you Aim though so it seems like if you did this there would be no incentive to expose your right eye when you have the time to prep a second for a snipe.

This is covered in the Basic Set on p407, and referenced by the page in Tactical Shooting.

[Plane]

Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth

This is covered in the Basic Set on p407, and referenced by the page in Tactical Shooting.

I had overlooked that... it only mentions arms/hands and half-torso / half-vitals but I figure that's in addition to the places listed for 1hand weapons (skull/eyes/face/neck)

That's sort of hard to accept though... if I were lying on my side I could definitely peak just the top of my head (skull+eyes) to see something while keeping my nose/mouth/neck behind the cover.

Or as previously, if I were poking around the right side of cover, I might in theory expose my right ear / right eye while keeping my left eye/ear behind the cover at the cost of losing depth perception.

[Pursuivant]

Originally Posted by Plane

With rifles even moreso than stuff like swords there seems to be a big gap between the hand which is holding the trigger and the one ahead stabilizing the barrel.

Not really. In many cases you can tuck your leading arm in relatively close to your body, far more than you could with your arm at full extension while making a swung sword attack.

Originally Posted by Plane

Should it count like "Shooting Right-Handed" (in a "If you have to fire around the left-hand side" situation) where cover counts as a step less since you'd need to expose both limbs unless you wielded the rifle one-handed?

Note the word "normally" in the text on p. 407. The GM can and should adjust exact body parts exposed depending on the exact situation, particularly if it benefits the shooter.

Examples:

Shooting over a wall or parapet: Only Head, Arms, Hands, Upper Chest (Torso 9) and Vitals exposed.

Shooting around the corner of a building or the end of a high wall: The entire left or right-hand side of your body might be exposed. Roll hit location normally then roll 1d. On 1-3 the attack hits cover.

Shooting from behind a car or similar vehicle: Head, Arms, Hands, Upper Chest (Torso 9), Vitals and Feet exposed (feet and lower legs are vulnerable to bullets skipping off the pavement).

Shooting prone over a parapet or prepared shooting position: Head and Arms exposed.

The GM might also allow skill rolls (e.g., vs. Guns, Soldier, or Tactics) to expose slightly less of your body.

The GM might allow you to take penalties to Acc and/or Rcl to shoot from an awkward stance which maximizes use of cover.

Perks might allow you to switch from a left to right-handed shooting stance (or vice-versa) as a Free Action or ignore penalties for shooting from awkward positions which maximize cover use.

Originally Posted by Plane

in theory you could just aim using your left eye (keeping your right eye behind cover) but then you would have less depth perception. So would you just let the character specify whether they take B145's No Depth Perception penalties (ie B147 One Eye) as if one eye were closed/crippled, in exchange for keeping the unused eye behind complete cover and be unattackable?

The ability to keep one eye hidden while making an attack over cover assumes a superhuman level of knowledge as to where attacks are coming from.

It also doesn't really make any difference using the combat rules, since the Hit Location tables don't specifically break out left eye/right eye.

Also consider that a trained combat shooter is going to fire "instinctively" using cues like target size, surrounding terrain, and tactical situation to estimate distance on the fly. The penalty for One Eye/No Depth Perception comes from overall lack of depth perception or sensory input, not just temporary lack of depth perception as you take a shot with one eye obscured.

OTOH, temporary penalties for One Eye might apply even for Aimed shots at long range if you lack other methods of accurately estimating distance.

Sniper teams work around the need to maximize cover vs. accurately estimating range by working in pairs - the spotter exposes their head and hands to detect and range targets. The sniper exposes their head, arms, upper chest, and vitals to take the shot, using the spotter's information for range, azimuth, etc.

[Rupert]

Originally Posted by Pursuivant

OTOH, temporary penalties for One Eye might apply even for Aimed shots at long range if you lack other methods of accurately estimating distance.

At long range you aren't using depth perception to estimate range, so one vs two eyes won't matter. You're using other cues, such as how much detail you can discern on the target and nearby objects.

[The Colonel]

A lot will depend on your rifle - some modern rifles will stick brass in your face if you fire them off handed. Some idiot will always suggest that "you will just have to learn to fire it right handed" (sadly, this idiot will probably have a lot of stripes on his arm).

[Tuk the Weekah]

Originally Posted by Plane

I
Also wondering aside from "how many limbs need to reach around the cover" how this works with eyesight: in theory you could just aim using your left eye (keeping your right eye behind cover) but then you would have less depth perception. So would you just let the character specify whether they take B145's No Depth Perception penalties (ie B147 One Eye) as if one eye were closed/crippled, in exchange for keeping the unused eye behind complete cover and be unattackable?

The -3 on ranged attacks doesn't apply if you Aim though so it seems like if you did this there would be no incentive to expose your right eye when you have the time to prep a second for a snipe.

For what it's worth, we only use binocular vision for depth perception up to about 6 feet or so. After that, we pretty much rely on colour shifts, etc. And even within the 6 feet, if the missing eye is your dominant eye, there will be issues, but if the dominant eye is the remaining eye there will be far fewer problems.