|
Post by Probie Tim on Jul 1, 2015 17:40:46 GMT -8
When a character in Savage Worlds might actually excel at predicting where a projectile will go, they spend the advancement slot and take the Dodge Edge and if they're better even than that, Improved Dodge. That's a good point.
|
|
|
Post by lowkeyoh on Jul 2, 2015 2:25:08 GMT -8
Edges was originally I had in mind to correct the issue, but I've been thinking about this situation all day.
If I had to apply a patch to SW for variable target number for ranged attacks, I'd tie it to movement. TN to hit a target would be +(Inches Moved/3) so a stationary target would be +0, someone who moved a little would be +1 and someone who used their entire movement is at +2. I think this keeps with the math and flavor of savage worlds without pushing the TN up too high.
Essentially, a running target has the equivalent of light cover. A sprinting target has the equivalent of medium cover.
|
|
|
Post by Probie Tim on Jul 2, 2015 7:02:29 GMT -8
I think your math is wrong. TN to hit a target would be +(Inches Moved/3) so a stationary target would be +0 Wouldn't that be +DIV BY ZERO ERROR? Seriously, though, I like that solution. It might get a little mathy, though, figuring out the modifier based on inches moved. Did you consider tying it in to the running rules? So that a standard move up to pace gets a +1, running beyond that gets the +2?
|
|
D.T. Pints
Instigator
JACKERCON 2018: WITH GREAT POWER COMES GREAT RESPONSIBILITY June 22-July 1st
Posts: 2,857
Currently Playing: D&D 5e, Pathfinder, DUNGEONWORLD, Star Wars Edge of the Empire
Currently Running: DUNGEONWORLD, PATHFINDER
|
Post by D.T. Pints on Jul 2, 2015 7:59:22 GMT -8
*wanders in whistling 'wonder what their talking about'"... Be "Nerds..." Attachments:
|
|
|
Post by Probie Tim on Jul 2, 2015 8:07:20 GMT -8
So many responses going through my head right now... "Um... duh." "Pot? Meet kettle." "What part of 'RPG podcast forum' did you misunderstand?" "Nerds play Synnibarr. We're geeks." "Um... Therthei would not thay 'nerdth', that term doethn't existh in Westeroth... */comicbookguy*" Edit: and if this all wasn't nerdy enough, I posted about it at Gibbering Gamer: www.gibberinggamer.com/2015/07/hjrp-retrospective-missile-vs-melee.html
|
|
|
Post by Probie Tim on Jul 2, 2015 12:40:23 GMT -8
D'oh. Someone on my blog pointed out that melee Parry is 2 + half fighting, not 4 + half fighting as I'd incorrectly posted both here and there. And thus the missile TN I discussed originally would be 2 + half agility. Me am teh stoopid.
|
|
|
Post by jazzisblues on Jul 3, 2015 8:01:43 GMT -8
You don't dodge those fuckers, even if they do in the movies. I don't think it's so much a question of dodge, per se... it's more a question of, well, I guess that in my mind it would probably be easier to pick off Samwell Tarly with an arrow than it would Jon Snow, because Samwell inherently isn't as quick as Jon and doesn't move around as much. That said, I get what everyone's saying. I'm not opposed to a fixed TN of 4 for missile combat, I was thinking more for those people who, on the podcast's backlog, have said something like, "I really love Savage Worlds but it sucks for fantasy because of the differences in melee and missile combat." Lots of people have said that, and they were wrong. The thing is this, the rules as written end up perfectly balanced if you use them fully. That requires that the gm and the players actually do something other than wander up into base to base contact and slug it out. To use your analogy, John Snow is no harder to hit if he's standing still waiting for Stannis to walk up to him to fight. The way the rules work is that the combatants have to be active and doing things other than just rolling to hit. If the combatants approach it like d20 combat then yes it absolutely is imbalanced, but changing the rules to make it d20 isn't the fix for the problem. Instead change the players to move and do things. Just my 2 krupplenicks worth, your mileage may of course vary. JiB
|
|
|
Post by malifer on Jul 3, 2015 8:11:49 GMT -8
*wanders in whistling 'wonder what their talking about'"... Be "Nerds..." HEY! That's my catch phrase! A guy doesn't log into the forums for a couple of months and you start stealing his best lines. People will begin to think one of us is a sock puppet.
|
|
|
Post by malifer on Jul 3, 2015 8:15:58 GMT -8
My intent was to try to capture a D&D-esque...feeling,
|
|
|
Post by malifer on Jul 3, 2015 8:25:34 GMT -8
It's also totally realistic, speaking as somebody who's been shot with an arrow. You don't dodge those fuckers, even if they do in the movies. This. Kwai Chang Caine is nonsense. Seems completely natural to me that ranged combat is a thing to be feared. I don't see the sword making much of a comeback any time soon. Echoing some of what Iowkeyoh said, I think disparities are amplified often because we (PCs and NPCs) tend to forget about diving for cover or keeping other people between us and the shooty person in the back. Also this. How's things gandalftheplaidBut mostly this. it's also not at all necessary. Probie Tim I remember those old podcasts and people mention things about Savage Worlds like Magic trumps Ranged and Ranged trumps Melee. My thought was always "that seems to make sense."
|
|
|
Post by jazzisblues on Jul 3, 2015 8:28:13 GMT -8
Probably not. My intent was to try to capture a D&D-esque "flat footed" or "surprised" feeling, which is an actual ruled condition in D&D and might not translate to Savage Worlds. Given that this is a theoretical discussion, it could easily be ignored on the grounds that it doesn't translate cleanly. In which case you're left with a fixed number at the top of your character sheet equal to 4 + half Agility, right next to your Parry value. Or, alternately, it could easily be tied in to the stock Savage Worlds surprise mechanic; if you're surprised, you don't get the Agility bonus. If you're not surprised, you do. That's actually already covered in the rules as written. It's referred to as "Having the Drop" on an enemy. Please turn to page 72 in the holy writ The Drop Sometimes an attacker is able to catch a foe off-guard and gets “the drop” on him. This usually happens at a distance of only a few feet, but other situations may occur (a sniper on a nearby rooftop). Only the GM can determine when one character has obtained this kind of advantage over another. Usually it’s when the victim is in the classic hostage pose, is completely unaware of the danger, or has been caught unarmed by an armed foe. The attacker is considered on Hold and adds +4 to his attack and damage rolls should he decide to strike. What the book does not cover in detail is what constitutes having the drop? Usually, it's a result of a failed notice vs stealth check, but it's left very open for the gm to determine. Cheers, JiB
|
|
|
Post by malifer on Jul 3, 2015 8:35:36 GMT -8
Probably not. My intent was to try to capture a D&D-esque "flat footed" or "surprised" feeling, which is an actual ruled condition in D&D and might not translate to Savage Worlds. Given that this is a theoretical discussion, it could easily be ignored on the grounds that it doesn't translate cleanly. In which case you're left with a fixed number at the top of your character sheet equal to 4 + half Agility, right next to your Parry value. Or, alternately, it could easily be tied in to the stock Savage Worlds surprise mechanic; if you're surprised, you don't get the Agility bonus. If you're not surprised, you do. That's actually already covered in the rules as written. It's referred to as "Having the Drop" on an enemy. Please turn to page 72 in the holy writ The Drop Sometimes an attacker is able to catch a foe off-guard and gets “the drop” on him. This usually happens at a distance of only a few feet, but other situations may occur (a sniper on a nearby rooftop). Only the GM can determine when one character has obtained this kind of advantage over another. Usually it’s when the victim is in the classic hostage pose, is completely unaware of the danger, or has been caught unarmed by an armed foe. The attacker is considered on Hold and adds +4 to his attack and damage rolls should he decide to strike. What the book does not cover in detail is what constitutes having the drop? Usually, it's a result of a failed notice vs stealth check, but it's left very open for the gm to determine. Cheers, JiB Damnit JiB all this reminds me I want you to run an SW game on the G+. Also I want it to be at time that is good for me on the East Coast. Also while I wishing for things that wont happen I would like tonight's Traveller Character gen to go well for my PC.
|
|
|
Post by Probie Tim on Jul 3, 2015 9:08:55 GMT -8
It's also totally realistic, speaking as somebody who's been shot with an arrow. You don't dodge those fuckers, even if they do in the movies. This. Kwai Chang Caine is nonsense. So, I'm going to once again say that when I run Savage Worlds, I use the RAW. This... controversy I've stirred up here, on my blog, and on G+ was not for my benefit, it was just to spark a discussion and see what would be the best way to placate those who do believe Savage Worlds sucks for fantasy because of (amongst other things) the difference between missile and melee combat. I am not one of those people. I just think it would be nice to say something like, "You don't like Savage Worlds because of the melee/missile combat thing? I got you covered, we're going to do this house rule to fix that." instead of, "You don't like Savage Worlds because of the melee/missile combat thing? Too bad, you're wrong, the rules work perfectly as written." That said, I don't think realism is the best argument in favor of not house ruling the missile combat TN. Savage Worlds is not a realistic system; Savage Worlds is fast, furious, and fun. It's about characters doing AWESOME shit, what with bennies and wild dies and exploding results and all. GURPS is a realistic system. It seems so strange to me that realism is not discussed when a character explodes a wild die six times and gets eight raises and does something truly amazing, but thinking about adjusting the missile TN a point or two based on the target's inherent agility or speed or whatever is met with cries of "unrealistic".
|
|
|
Post by malifer on Jul 3, 2015 9:21:57 GMT -8
This. Kwai Chang Caine is nonsense. So, I'm going to once again say that when I run Savage Worlds, I use the RAW. This... controversy I've stirred up here, on my blog, and on G+ was not for my benefit, it was just to spark a discussion and see what would be the best way to placate those who do believe Savage Worlds sucks for fantasy because of (amongst other things) the difference between missile and melee combat. I am not one of those people. I just think it would be nice to say something like, "You don't like Savage Worlds because of the melee/missile combat thing? I got you covered, we're going to do this house rule to fix that." instead of, "You don't like Savage Worlds because of the melee/missile combat thing? Too bad, you're wrong, the rules work perfectly as written." That said, I don't think realism is the best argument in favor of not house ruling the missile combat TN. Savage Worlds is not a realistic system; Savage Worlds is fast, furious, and fun. It's about characters doing AWESOME shit, what with bennies and wild dies and exploding results and all. GURPS is a realistic system. It seems so strange to me that realism is not discussed when a character explodes a wild die six times and gets eight raises and does something truly amazing, but thinking about adjusting the missile TN a point or two based on the target's inherent agility or speed or whatever is met with cries of "unrealistic". It's not hard to make Savage Worlds Gritty. Realms of Cthulhu springs to mind. And everyone has to have a Realism Line. In a non-Supers game I wouldn't let someone jump over a tall building in a single bound no matter how many raises they got. My realism line is AC, but that's neither here nor there. You don't have to say "the rules are perfect shut up noob" I thought Clint Black's response on G+ was quite respectful but also mentioned great points. Referring someone back to the rules for Savage Worlds is not like dropping 5 Gurps books on them and telling them to go make a character. It's a small book.
|
|
|
Post by Probie Tim on Jul 3, 2015 9:37:02 GMT -8
And everyone has to have a Realism Line. In a non-Supers game I wouldn't let someone jump over a tall building in a single bound no matter how many raises they got. Of course. I'm just... amazed that so many people's realism line is making the TN to hit a character with a missile a point or two better because they're fast and agile or whatever, all other things being equal. That's a far cry from letting a normal dude jump over a tall building.
|
|