10-24-2020, 03:36 PM | #11 | |
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Boston area
|
Re: Swinging from the sidelines
Quote:
I'm thinking of adjusting as follows: First, roll to hit your target, with the usual +4 DX. If you miss, randomly select another target in the hex and roll to hit or to miss, but without the +4 DX modifier. In this case, the odds of hitting an ally in a one-on-one fight becomes 5% for DX 10 and about 2% for DX 11 or better. So, in sum, I see the following options:
When swinging into a one-on-one fight, the approximate odds of hitting an ally are as follows (first number is for DX10, second DX11):
I think it's obvious that a 1% chance to hit the wrong target is too low for realism's sake. I also think a 5% chance is too low, but I'm not positive about that. For game play's sake, I rather like the most dramatic choice (Adj). The folks on the sideline have to worry about whether they will strike an ally. A sufficiently high DX fighter can still reliably hit the opponent without putting his buddy in danger. I've only listed DX 10 and DX 11 above, but at DX 12, the odds of hitting an ally fall to 6.8%. But I must say I'm surprised that so many here think that RAW is about right. RAW makes jumping into HTH when facing multiple foes positively suicidal, contrary to the suggestion in the text. When you do that, you go from a situation where multiple foes are attacking at adjDX to a situation where the same foes are attacking at adjDX + 4 with no fear of collateral damage to the ally. At best, if the lone figure has a high DX or happens to be adjacent to the side or rear hex of an enemy, he might have bought himself one turn when others are out of position to attack him. So, anyway, I'm still thinking, but I'm strongly leaning against RAW obviously. I think considerations of collateral damage are both realistic and good for game play. |
|
10-24-2020, 04:26 PM | #12 | |
Join Date: May 2015
|
Re: Swinging from the sidelines
Quote:
Wait. Your math is wrong. The roll to hit the ally is a roll to-hit at the same DX +4. So the chance to hit the wrong person is not the chance to miss raised to the power of the number of figures in the hex. It's the chance to miss raised to the power of the number of ENEMY figures, and then multiplied by inverse, i.e. the chance to HIT, the ally. So if there's one foe in HTH with your ally and your to-hit is 90%, the chance to hit your friend is 9%. If there are two foes in HTH with your ally, then the chance to hit your ally is 0.9%. The system could stand to be tweaked for the multi-figure case. An easy way that makes sense to me would be: If the first foe is missed, randomly determine ONE other figure in the hex, and roll to hit that figure. On a miss, it's a miss. Crit failures only take effect on the first to-hit roll. (Edit: I posted that before reading your final suggestion. Which, it turns out, is almost the same as my suggestion! I actually like your version better, leaving out the +4. I'd be tempted to reduce or leave out the +4 to hit the intended target, too... or to make it an option whether to take the +4/+0 as you suggest, or to try +0 but get to roll to MISS an unintended target +4. So you can choose between a great chance to hack someone, probably who you want, or doing it carefully, reducing the chance to hit the wrong person.) Last edited by Skarg; 10-26-2020 at 02:31 PM. |
|
10-24-2020, 07:02 PM | #13 | |
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Boston area
|
Re: Swinging from the sidelines
Quote:
Let's stick with two figures in the hex, the baddie and the ally. I roll to hit the baddie, with a 0.9 chance of hitting. If I miss, then I roll to miss the ally, with a 0.9 chance of missing. Thus, I hit the ally only if I fail both rolls and hence have 0.1 * 0.1 = 0.01 probability of hitting the ally. If I'm reading you correctly, you're saying I need to miss the first roll and "succeed" on the second roll, so have 0.1 * 0.9 = 0.09 probability of hitting the ally. But that's not how I read roll to miss. ITL 117 directs us to ITL 116 which directs us to ITL 115 which describes a successful adjDX roll indicates missing an ally, not hitting one. Am I |
|
10-24-2020, 07:10 PM | #14 |
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: Idaho Falls
|
Re: Swinging from the sidelines
I think in melee attacks directed into HtH
Roll to hit your target - if miss Roll to hit the next available target until you hit someone or miss everyone In Shooting (Ranged) attack into HtH Roll to hit your target - if miss Roll to MISS the next target That is the way I am remembering it, but I should just look it up, after all its on this computer, duh |
10-24-2020, 07:54 PM | #15 |
Join Date: Sep 2018
Location: North Texas
|
Re: Swinging from the sidelines
I would prefer to adapt my house-rules that make use of the existing concealment/coverage rules. My approach requires the GM to adjudicate how much of the target figure is visible and target-able, but there is never a 'roll to miss'... attacks into melee (or HTH) are resolved by a single roll.
For example, let's say an archer normally would have an adjDX of 12 to hit an orc opponent two megahexes away, but that figure is engaged in HTH with one of the archer's compatriots. Based on this, the GM decides that at least half of the target figure will be effectively blocked by her mage buddy who is rolling around soon to be killed by the stronger orc foe. This applies an additional -4 DX to the roll. So if the archer manages to roll 8 or less, she hits the orc as intended, but if she rolls a 9, 10, 11 or 12 guess who gets an arrow in the back... the wizard, that's who. Oops.
__________________
“No matter how subtle the wizard, a knife between the shoulder blades will seriously cramp his style.” -Vladimir Taltos |
10-24-2020, 07:58 PM | #16 | |||
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Boston area
|
Re: Swinging from the sidelines
Relevant passages:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Hence, a DX 10 character (with the +4 bonus) has to fail both rolls to hit the ally, and since he fails only about 10% of the time, that's a 1% chance to hit the ally per RAW. |
|||
10-24-2020, 08:06 PM | #17 | |
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Boston area
|
Re: Swinging from the sidelines
Quote:
Of course, realistically, it's not quite like that. Perhaps you missed precisely because you aimed to the outside to avoid the wizard. Thus, you would've hit but for the wizard, yet you didn't hit the wizard. In any case, adapting this to striking into HTH, we'd either have to make up the percentage blocked as a constant or make it different based on whether the ally or the baddie is "on top". But this doesn't take into account that a miss of the guy on top still might hit the guy on bottom, even if he's not providing any cover at all for the guy on top. That said, there's always been something flaky about rolling to miss in this game, I'm afraid. For missiles, I might think about your method. Still has some issues regarding striking non-targets behind the target, I think, but I'd rather not digress at present. |
|
10-24-2020, 08:43 PM | #18 | |
Join Date: May 2015
|
Re: Swinging from the sidelines
Quote:
I'll never forgetting thinking I could get away with striking into HTH with a long-time comrade, and killing her. My adjDX was over 15. Only one foe in the hex, though. In any case, I still like your suggested revision. |
|
10-24-2020, 09:16 PM | #19 | |||
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Boston area
|
Re: Swinging from the sidelines
Quote:
Quote:
Here are the three alterations that have to do with the +4 Bonus. In every case, I randomize the order of rolls after the first to hit roll. Adj: No +4 DX bonus when striking into a hex with HTH[*] ModAdj: A +4 DX bonus to hit the (first) enemy, no bonus for further rolls, whether to hit or to miss. SkargAdj: Either a +4 DX bonus to hit or a +4 DX bonus to miss. In a one-on-one fight, I reckon that ModAdj and SkargAdj end up giving the same odds to hit an ally, so probably SkargAdj is more complicated than necessary. Adding to the to hit is always preferable. (If there are more than two combatants, perhaps it would matter, but that's a less common situation.) I'm leaning towards Adj, which is the most dramatic change. I'll probably try ModAdj for a while and see if it's sufficient. It might have the odd effect of making HTH harder for the players, since a GM will take a chance to hit an ally (not his character, after all!) and a player not. None of this changes anything if you're facing dragonets or nuisance critters, because in those cases there's no real facing concerns. Perhaps an over-literal reading of RAW gives you a +4 DX bonus to miss your spider covered ally if his back is to you, but that seems just silly. If swinging at a dragonet attacking an adjacent ally, both of whom are facing away, I'd give a +4 to hit the dragonet and no adjustment to miss the ally. These considerations actually give some small support for ModAdj, since the results are the same: A plus to hit, no plus to miss. The situations are different enough that I'm not sure I'd weight that support much. A "real" rear hex gets a bonus for inability to see the swing coming. A prone figure gets a bonus for inability to react quickly. In sum, the proposed house rule is either of the following: Quote:
Last edited by phiwum; 10-24-2020 at 09:22 PM. |
|||
10-24-2020, 11:30 PM | #20 |
Join Date: Sep 2018
Location: North Texas
|
Re: Swinging from the sidelines
TBH, I have never agreed with the +4 DX to hit a 'prone' figure... not as a universal rule, anyway.
Yes, it is easier for a standing figure to hit someone who has been knocked prone directly in front of them, and yes, it is easier to hit someone that you are locked in HTH with because you are already in physical contact with each other, but I would not grant the bonus to an archer firing from more than 10' away because in that situation, the prone figure is actually a smaller target. I would also not grant it to a standing figure attacking someone engaged in HTH with another character because they are effectively making a 'called shot' to try and hit one specific target who is rolling around on the ground, partially obscured by his opponent who you presumably don't want to hit.
__________________
“No matter how subtle the wizard, a knife between the shoulder blades will seriously cramp his style.” -Vladimir Taltos |
Tags |
hth |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|