| | You are not authorized to post a reply. |
| | Author | Messages | |
Wayne
Underboss
1371 Posts
    
 | | 01/24/2006 4:36 AM |
| I was working through Battlestar Galactica 2.0 DVDs earlier tonight, and during one fight scene it struck me how 95 percent of shots fired aren't intended to hit anything, even with a lucky shot. They're just intended to force opponents to duck and cover ... to not even risk a peek out.
Are there any rules systems that support this type of (presumably) realistic firefight?
My favorites for suppressive fire heretofore have been Shadowrun and Cyberpunk, both of which effectively have anyone exposed to suppressive fire make a "saving throw" to avoid getting hit. Although the theory is good, both systems are weak in practice because even if a target gets hit, one hit isn't likely to kill or badly injure. Since players know this, fire intended to suppress ... doesn't.
There are good game-design reasons in most systems why a single shot doesn't kill or maim, so changing that (or finding a system that doesn't care how disposable characters are) isn't really appealing to me. Instead, I'd rather come up with another solution.
Since the problem is that players use metagame knowledge ("a single shot from suppressive fire isn't going to take my character out") to create the unrealistic siutation of ignoring suppressive fire, it occurs to me that maybe the solution is to at least partially remove the ability to metagame ... make it a saving throw not to avoid damage, but rather to expose yourself to immediate damage.
Cyberpunk even has a stat that would be great for this: Cool. In d20 games, you could make it a Will save or BAB save, whichever is higher.
Any thoughts, or pointers to systems I should check out before I reinvent the wheel? | |
Jeff "Wayne Laredo" Wilder | Email | Have/Want List | Trade Policies | Are You an Ethical Trader?
| |
|
Sean-Khan
Commander
2731 Posts
| |
Wayne
Underboss
1371 Posts
| | 01/24/2006 5:59 AM |
| quote:
Originally posted by Sean-Khan
Anyway, target of suppressive fire should be able to choose whether to dodge or try to avoid fire & proceed. First choise would take his action but is easy, second would give moderately high chance of being hit (and really difficult dodge rolls could avoid hits).
That's basically the way currently extant systems work. As I said, it's a problem, because the consequences for being unrealistically brave (or foolish) aren't severe enough. And making the consequences severe enough to provoke realistic "duck and cover" tactics would have the catastrophic side effect of making all combat too deadly for dramatic gaming. | |
Jeff "Wayne Laredo" Wilder | Email | Have/Want List | Trade Policies | Are You an Ethical Trader?
| |
| The Great
Choco Monster
Ghendar
Warlord
13069 Posts
Mud Lick, Kentucky
| | 01/24/2006 8:44 AM |
| Wayne, do a google search for "d20 suppressive fire rules"
I came up with several hits but I can't look at any of them here at work. It appears the rules do exist. Can't vouch for the quality of them however and they appear to be firearms related. | |
WotC - making me wish more and more every day for a return to the TSR days. :(
I fought the snark and the snark won. I'm baaaaaaaaaaack!
Some of my favorite Maxminis quotes
I actually love to be swallowed. - Posted By gss_000 on 09/04/2007 2:32 PM
Could somebody explain Snatch to me? I understand the basics, but not how to enter/use it. - Posted by orcmonk220
G's the man. - Posted By greyhaze on 11/11/2008 8:58 AM
I dont mind butting heads every once in a while. It makes thing interesting. Thats why I'd be heartbroken if Ghendar ever left - Posted By Count Dooku on 04/03/2006 11:58 AM
| |
| 
Wrackspawn
ChristopherGroves
Warlord
6093 Posts
| | 01/24/2006 8:45 AM |
| AAM has some rules for it. Typically in the more ... wargame-type games you can find good rules.
40k / epic / warhammer have several different ways ... one they call overwatch, one where you can pin units, etc. They all work moderately well, but not as you'd expect.
Perhaps the best way to convey it in D&D is a group of guys w/ ready actions, alternating which one actually shoots while the others hold their readied action. You going to poke your head around the corner knowing full well that those ready actions go first? | |
Triangle DDM Skirmish Group | My Email | 45-ish trades and counting | Stuff for Trade
* * * Show your brother some love and click here * * * | |
|
Wayne
Underboss
1371 Posts
| | 01/24/2006 9:27 AM |
| quote:
Originally posted by ChristopherGroves
Perhaps the best way to convey it in D&D is a group of guys w/ ready actions, alternating which one actually shoots while the others hold their readied action. You going to poke your head around the corner knowing full well that those ready actions go first?
This is the perfect example of what I mean by "lack of severe consequences."
Who cares if they go first? One arrow, magic missile, whatever isn't going to kill a 5th-level character.And the players know that, so they have their characters behave with ridiculous "bravery." Well ... not "ridiculous." But bravery that makes it impossible to emulate the kinds of ranged combat you see in movies and read about in books.
Some people will argue, "Well, the PCs are heroes. They shouldn't be subject to the same limitations." Or, "Since a single arrow can't kill the PCs, they are behaving realistically."
To the first argument, I point at action movies (or shows like BG). We all know that Apollo isn't going to be taken out by a stray bullet if he breaks cover and does something stupid and heroic. But Apollo doesn't know that, and so he reserves those occasions for when he's truly desperate.
To the second argument, I say again that making suppressive fire potentially deadly enough to cause realistic behavior will break the combat rules in every other situation. In most situations in an RPG, you don't want combat to be quick, messy, and fatal. It's just bad game design.
So there's a Catch-22: suppressive fire isn't dangerous enough to suppress anybody, and making it dangerous enough to suppress anybody makes all other combat too dangerous. It seems to me that the way out of the Catch-22 doesn't lie with the combat rules, but rather with the metagaming going on behind the combat rules. Thus requiring some kind of "cool under fire" saving throw to break cover and expose oneself to danger. | |
Jeff "Wayne Laredo" Wilder | Email | Have/Want List | Trade Policies | Are You an Ethical Trader?
| |
|
Wrackspawn
ChristopherGroves
Warlord
6093 Posts
| |
Wayne
Underboss
1371 Posts
| | 01/24/2006 9:59 AM |
| quote:
Originally posted by ChristopherGroves
Use the VP / HP mechanism instead of straight HP? Poke your head out and they shoot ... YOUR HEAD. Auto-crits? Something serious ...
Yeah, that's another approach that might work.
Downside to it is that when Apollo does break cover, he gets blown away, which also doesn't fit cinematic precedent very well ...
I think it would be the way to go for those who want realistic behavior (as opposed to cinematic behavior that only fakes realistic behavior). | |
Jeff "Wayne Laredo" Wilder | Email | Have/Want List | Trade Policies | Are You an Ethical Trader?
| |
| The Mighty
jai
Commander
3235 Posts
| | 01/24/2006 10:11 AM |
| quote:
Originally posted by ChristopherGroves
Use the VP / HP mechanism instead of straight HP? Poke your head out and they shoot ... YOUR HEAD. Auto-crits? Something serious ...
i was thinking the same thing [:)] | | | |
|
notserious
Sneak
117 Posts
| | 01/24/2006 12:08 PM |
| I find that the problem with this sort of problem in rpg's (and wargaming) is that it is possible to come up with realistic rules, it is possible to come up with cinematic rules (that allow for a cool movie feel to your scenes) and it is possible to come up with smooth rules that make combat roll along relatively quickly. Much like Merric's law of miniatures, it is exceedingly difficult to achieve all three.
If you've got a group that can stand a little extra rolling, I think you could combine the above rules for a decent approximation. For it to be suppressing fire it really has to rain ammo one guy plinking an arrow a round just doesn't compare to MAC-10 emptying a clip per round - so let's say you need at least 6 missiles per 5ft square being suppressed. (you might want to adopt a REF save or autocritical when somebody voluntarily walks into an awaiting action of a single missile firer). When faced with suppressing fire, a PC must succeed at WIL save with a DC equal to the max damage of a single hit of the suppressing fire. (if you are worried you low WIL-save fighter will now be pinned down, create a feat that allows him to use FOR or BAB or something - personally I like forcing characters to use non-prime stats at important times - specialization is for ants). If a PC makes that save he/she can then move through the fire zone - He/She automatically takes one hit roll damage as normal (remember hp are a symbolic representation of combat - they don't correlate directly to being struck by ammo (think of Bruce Willis' feet in Die Hard). the PC must also make a REF save (save 10+the number of missiles being fired in the area) or take an additional d4 critical hits. | |
| |
|
Malin Lug
Sergeant
742 Posts
| | 01/24/2006 12:27 PM |
| A couple of things:
This is the weakness of most roleplaying games. It doesn't matter how tough you are, if someone hits you in the head with a sword, you are probably going to die, but there is no possible way for a single sword strike to kill a higher level character (well maybe a giant swinging a sword with power attack and criting a wizard.) There are sudden death rules but those really are weak. The current system for D&D does not allow for quick death, it is not what players want. Therefore, players are not affraid to take a hit. It was mentioned before, if you want a more realistic game, move to vitality points. It allows the chance that anyone can be taken down in just a single hit. Other games have tried and to some extent have succeeded, but it is a matter of taste, do you want to play a really leathal game where you might have to roll up a new character or do you want to play a FANTASY game.
Suppresive fire isn't going to work so well if the person being fired on has full body armor on. They might be willing to trade a hit and trust to their armor to protect them. While this may not be true in modern day military and police actions, it could certainly be true with full plate mail. Suppresive fire really didn't become effective untill the invention of automatic weapons. Before that, it was always hit or miss.
| |
"Are you not entertained?" 
Champion of the Common Bar Wench
| |
|
jgsugden
Commander
4320 Posts
Walnut Creek, CA
| | 01/24/2006 1:47 PM |
| IMHO: western, modern and sci-fi games don't work unless PCs have a fear of instant death. That is why I prefer GURPS to d20 for these settings. If one lucky shot can kill your PC, you fear getting shot at ... if it can only give you a little boo-boo, it isn't worth fearing.
Accordingly, I have the idiot rule in my game - if you do something unrealisticly life threatening (poking your head out into suppressive fire seems like a good example), there is always at least a chance of instant death. If I can work it into the game mechanics, I will. If not, I just wing it.
GM: "The alley you just ran into is a dead end. There is an overturned car leaning against the side wall towards the end of the alley, but otherwise the alley is empty."
PC: "I duck behind the car."
GM: "As you move behind the car, the Banyon Boys round the corner and begin shooting ... (rolling dice) ... but miss you. You get behind the car. You have complete cover where you are, but you can see no exits. The Banyon Boys are launching a fairly continuous stream of bullets in your direction to keep you pinned and prevent you from peaking out to see what they are doing."
PC: "I poke my head out anyways."
GM: "If you do that, you think there is about a 10% chance that you'll take a bullet in the head ... with a 50% chance of that being a critical hit, and a 50% chance of that being instant death."
PC: "Ouch ... scratch that. Then I ... oh! Are the mirrors in the car still there?..." | |
Champion of Meepo _*_ Myztek on the Wizards Boards. _*_ (2206 DDM on 03/06/06)
Please note: The use of the  indicates an attempt at humor ... often a bad attempt.
BAD EBAY SELLERS LIST (CLICK HERE): AVOID AT ALL COSTS
| |
| Knight of Argenis
Corim Danex
Warlord
6842 Posts
West Valley City, Utah
| | 01/24/2006 3:11 PM |
| quote:
Originally posted by Wayne
In d20 games, you could make it a Will save or BAB save, whichever is higher.
Wouldn't it make more sense to be a reflex save? | |
"Look to God and live." Alma 37:47
Vindicated Champ of Hippogriff (Arcadian Hippogriff) and Uncommon Horse | |
|
Wayne
Underboss
1371 Posts
| |
jgsugden
Commander
4320 Posts
Walnut Creek, CA
| | 01/24/2006 3:59 PM |
| quote:
Originally posted by Wayne
quote:
Originally posted by Corim Danex
Wouldn't it make more sense to be a reflex save?
Nope. Reread.
I was having trouble following the concept you were trying to get across as well ... are you suggesting a will save to 'steel your nerves' so that you can be brave enough to stick your head out in the suppressive fire? | |
Champion of Meepo _*_ Myztek on the Wizards Boards. _*_ (2206 DDM on 03/06/06)
Please note: The use of the indicates an attempt at humor ... often a bad attempt.
BAD EBAY SELLERS LIST (CLICK HERE): AVOID AT ALL COSTS
| |
|
Wrackspawn
ChristopherGroves
Warlord
6093 Posts
| | 
Lead Moderator
LCS
Underboss
1928 Posts
| | 01/25/2006 3:13 AM |
|
Isn't the whole point of having a situation like this going to be to force the players to have their characters take some risk in order to get out of it?
The suppressive fire doesn't need to be instantly fatal to create that risk and give the players a reason to be creative in finding ways to avoid it. If the situation isn't dangerous enough to create sufficient risk without adding mechanics to make it more lethal, expecting the players to be able to recognize that danger is unrealistic.
It's also easy to underestimate the effect that losing even a relatively small number of hit points has in an extended battle or in a series of encounters. They can be replenished at the cost of spells or gold if given the opportunity, but are still essentially a finite resource until the group is able to rest or able to acquire more items. If the players waste hit points by taking too many risks, it is going to catch up with them and force them to be more careful later.
Putting together an encounter where suppressive fire is going to be useful or a reasonable threat requires a combination of factors (available cover, sufficient combined rate of fire, etc...). In a fantasy environment, rate of fire is relatively low, so suppressive fire would normally require a significant advantage in terms of numbers to be an effective tactic.
Assuming the proper conditions for effective suppressive fire exist in a particular encounter, I think the basic concepts could be taken from existing D&D combat rules. The most important thing would be to find a way to reduce the amount of dice rolling required to a reasonable amount. I don't think using a saving throw to avoid damage is the best solution, since it takes armor out of the equation. I have a few ideas for the mechanics of the attacks/damage, and I'll try to get them typed up and posted later if I have time.
Regarding the idea to use Will saves or a similar mechanic when "under fire":
I don't think it's a good idea to implement any system that effectively says "unless you roll the dice and get a good result, you're not allowed to try."
If you end up deciding to do something like this, I would suggest using a status effect like shaken as the result of the failed save. That way, even on a failed save it is still the player's choice how to act, and their hesitation is just implemented as a penalty to most actions.
I would probably put the DC to avoid being shaken when facing a significant amount of suppressive fire at 10 + average PC level. A character would need to make the save when they first expose themselves to the suppressive fire, and the result should probably last the rest of that particular encounter (maybe giving those who failed a second chance to save later to remove the shaken effect, if the group was able to neutralize the suppressive fire in some way during the encounter).
Making the effect restrictive (even with a corresponding decrease in the DC) and/or requiring rolls more frequently is going to get pretty frustrating for the players who have poor modifiers or bad luck.
| | | |
| Knight of Argenis
Corim Danex
Warlord
6842 Posts
West Valley City, Utah
| | 01/25/2006 3:41 AM |
| quote:
Originally posted by Wayne
quote:
Originally posted by Corim Danex
Wouldn't it make more sense to be a reflex save?
Nope. Reread.
While getting up the courage to take risk of suppressive fire is an act of will, willpower does nearly nothing to aid in avoiding damage. This is why a will save doesn't make much sense. Neither does a BAB. Nobody is attacking the fire coming their way. They are trying to dodge it.
It might make more sense to tie in a will save with getting up courage to do the action--if the fail saves, the character stays put. This is more like a morale issue. But all the courage in the world isn't going to help when the sharp arrow actually hits in a vulnerable spot. However, reflexes can help to turn the body in a way to protect that vulnerable spot or avoid being hit entirely.
Since Wisdom is connected with perception issues (spot, listen) it might make some sense to have a wisdom (not a will) save have some effect on the situation. | |
"Look to God and live." Alma 37:47
Vindicated Champ of Hippogriff (Arcadian Hippogriff) and Uncommon Horse | |
|
Sean-Khan
Commander
2731 Posts
| | 01/25/2006 5:02 AM |
| In my reply I was thinking of Galactica... Sure dodging suppressive fire is heroic, but with really fast reactions (superhuman?) it should be possible to some extent, when thinking of those clearly visible ammuntions of Galactica.
In more normal situations (non-visible bullets), experience and speed should reduce the chance to be hit, and hitting itself should depend little on shooter's skill but more on luck.
I've been developing a game system for some time, and one thing that has always existed in my thoughts is 'Combat experience', which adds to melee, reactions(initiative) and ability to act in life -threatening situations. It would also reduce chance of being hit by suppressive fire. | |
Vindicated AtG Called shot: 2nd Huge Red Dragon
My collected trade reference links
Star Wars tactical combat -project
My modelling/terrain pages
Suomen miniatyyrikeräilijät / Miniature collectors of Finland | |
|
Lead Moderator
LCS
Underboss
1928 Posts
| | 01/25/2006 5:16 AM |
| quote:
Originally posted by Corim Danex
It might make more sense to tie in a will save with getting up courage to do the action--if the fail saves, the character stays put. This is more like a morale issue.
That's what Wayne is talking about.
| | | |
| Knight of Argenis
Corim Danex
Warlord
6842 Posts
West Valley City, Utah
| | 01/25/2006 9:42 AM |
| quote:
Originally posted by LCS
quote:
Originally posted by Corim Danex
It might make more sense to tie in a will save with getting up courage to do the action--if the fail saves, the character stays put. This is more like a morale issue.
That's what Wayne is talking about.
So it wouldn't be connected to getting hit at all. There would have to be some other determination to see if they get hit.
EDIT: Is this for D&D or for other RPG's with faster firing? | |
"Look to God and live." Alma 37:47
Vindicated Champ of Hippogriff (Arcadian Hippogriff) and Uncommon Horse | |
|
Wayne
Underboss
1371 Posts
| | 01/25/2006 10:11 AM |
| quote:
Originally posted by Corim Danex
So it wouldn't be connected to getting hit at all. There would have to be some other determination to see if they get hit.
Right. Currently, I don't think any rules set does a very good job with the actual "suppression" part of suppressive fire. There are good game design reasons, as I discussed above, why this is the case, but I think there's a way to do it.
LCS -- I'm not really sure why a "Cool Under Fire" check of some sort would be bad. D20 has dozens of effects that restrict what characters can do, including game mechanical fear effects for many other situations. What I'd be proposing wouldn't keep the characters from trying ... it just might take a little while before they work up the nerve to risk the hail of missile fire.
I think the best mechanic for this might be a level check, modified by Wisdom bonus. (And possibly with a cumulative +1 to the check, for every round in which the PC makes a try at breaking cover.) After all, every adventurer has an equal bravery potential, at least.
I like the suggestion someone else made to set the DC based on potential damage. Max damage is too high, though. Three light crossbows readied would put the DC at 24, just for example. I'll have to give it some thought. Maybe average base damage ... so three light crossbows would have a DC of 13. Stick six orcs with readied longbows, though, and suddenly the DC is 27. Might take a bit of courage-screwing to get to that sticking place.
You could even do something like if you miss the check by 5 or less, you can break cover, but you're shaken, as LCS suggested.
One problem that just occurred to me is that you can't make it too onerous to break cover ... otherwise the clear -- and unsatisfying -- solution becomes to never take cover. Hmmm. Don't immediately see a way around that.
(BTW, LCS, don't worry, I won't be implementing any of this in my game, as I'm studiously avoiding HRB (House Rules Bloat), since I have a tendency toward the syndrome. It's just something I've been kicking around in my head for a while. I've never really liked that you can't emulate cinematic firefights in any RPG system I've tried. (Another issue, for example, is that accuracy in RPGs is way too high. In cinematic firefights (and even RL firefights) twenty rounds are expended to get a hit.)) | |
Jeff "Wayne Laredo" Wilder | Email | Have/Want List | Trade Policies | Are You an Ethical Trader?
| |
|
Wayne
Underboss
1371 Posts
| | 01/25/2006 10:13 AM |
| quote:
Originally posted by Corim Danex
EDIT: Is this for D&D or for other RPG's with faster firing?
Preferably I'd like a system adaptable to all games. I currently only play D&D, but I'm also a big fan of games like Shadowrun and Cyberpunk.
(BTW, for any CP fans out there ... at long long long last, third edition has been released. Dunno how it is yet.) | |
Jeff "Wayne Laredo" Wilder | Email | Have/Want List | Trade Policies | Are You an Ethical Trader?
| |
| Knight of Argenis
Corim Danex
Warlord
6842 Posts
West Valley City, Utah
| | 01/25/2006 12:25 PM |
| quote:
Originally posted by Wayne
I like the suggestion someone else made to set the DC based on potential damage. Max damage is too high, though. Three light crossbows readied would put the DC at 24, just for example. I'll have to give it some thought. Maybe average base damage ... so three light crossbows would have a DC of 13. Stick six orcs with readied longbows, though, and suddenly the DC is 27. Might take a bit of courage-screwing to get to that sticking place.
Now the question becomes, is the DC based upon readied ranged attacks that the guy coming out of cover is aware of, or all of the readied ranged attacks? In theory, it should only be those he is aware of, since it wouldn't take courage to face something you don't realize you need to be concerned about.
I do think that doing some sort of willpower save in order to do a heroic deed is an intriguing thought. | |
"Look to God and live." Alma 37:47
Vindicated Champ of Hippogriff (Arcadian Hippogriff) and Uncommon Horse | |
|
Malin Lug
Sergeant
742 Posts
| | 01/25/2006 1:06 PM |
| quote:
Originally posted by Corim Danex
quote:
Originally posted by Wayne
I like the suggestion someone else made to set the DC based on potential damage. Max damage is too high, though. Three light crossbows readied would put the DC at 24, just for example. I'll have to give it some thought. Maybe average base damage ... so three light crossbows would have a DC of 13. Stick six orcs with readied longbows, though, and suddenly the DC is 27. Might take a bit of courage-screwing to get to that sticking place.
Now the question becomes, is the DC based upon readied ranged attacks that the guy coming out of cover is aware of, or all of the readied ranged attacks? In theory, it should only be those he is aware of, since it wouldn't take courage to face something you don't realize you need to be concerned about.
I do think that doing some sort of willpower save in order to do a heroic deed is an intriguing thought.
Or you could have them make a wisdom check and only if they fail do they get to jump out. That would mean that the box of rocks fighter with the low wisdom is more likely to jump out than the cool headed cleric. | |
"Are you not entertained?"
Champion of the Common Bar Wench
| |
|
smithmeg
Sergeant
508 Posts
| | 01/27/2006 1:55 AM |
| Maybe, if you want your suppressive fire to actually suppress, you could rule that anyone who breaks cover and gets hit (maybe with a AC modifier if they are trying to avoid it), stops where they are, and can't take any further actions till their next turn (so they'll take a lot more hits). With maybe a rule for an ally to move them back into cover if needed.
Just a thought, and it leaves the decision (with all it's consequences) in the hands of the player, rather than it being decided by a dice roll. | | | |
|
Bert the Troll
Commander
3964 Posts
Adelaide
| | 01/31/2006 6:08 AM |
| I`m very lazy. I tend to treat suppressive fire as an area effect and a successful save still takes half of xx amount of damage.
| |
"Mutton yesterday, mutton today, and blimey, if it don't look like mutton again tomorrer." Bert the Troll - The Hobbit
Semi-Secret sig business: "In the age of the internet attaching a famous name to your personal opinion to give more weight to it is a very valid strategy." - Benjamin Franklin
Champion of Epic Lolth, Orcus, & Demogorgon and bring us Asmodeus! | |
|
| | You are not authorized to post a reply. |
|
| |
ActiveForums 3.7 | You must be signed in to participate in the
games. |