Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

STS limiting

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • STS limiting

    Re: https://www.pegforum.com/forum/savag...deflection-etc

    You say, "I am working for updated errata and clarified wording to possibly limit the STS's effects. Please post any thoughts on the issue in the Feedback forum. Thanks!"

    My concern here is that the clarification must make clear exactly which penalties are and are not affected by the STS. That Other Game System, back in its 3rd Edition days, did this by assigning a type (morale, dodge, etc) to literally every bonus and penalty in the game, and then declaring that like modifiers didn't stack, and listing what modifiers were affected by other effects.

    This was clear, but it was not particularly Fast or Furious. Trying to retcon such distinctions into this one are likely to have the same issue, with additional confusion. The other option is to declare specific modifiers that are affected ("Range, MAP, Unstable Platform and Cover". This... is not ideal, either, since it creates the need to memorize lists of how modifiers interact.

    So, while not particularly 'realistic', I'm disinclined to a move that gets that granular on penalty-canceling effects. If it's just a one-to-one thing (like Rock'n'Roll vs. Recoil, for instance), that's one thing--but if it's meant to be broader than that, I'd prefer just sticking with the simple approach and saying it applies to any penalty.
    Last edited by Freemage; 08-09-2020, 06:29 AM.

  • #2
    I do like the simplicity of that approach.

    if you are looking to mirror something that already exists, maybe make it work on the same stuff the Aim Edge tree works on (Range, Cover, Called Shots, etc.).

    Comment


    • #3
      Thanks for the feedback guys. I will get back to this in earnest soon. In the meantime I hope everyone keeps discussing.

      Freemage I 100% agree with you, I want to make sure it's a simple distinction as in this bonus is a gear bonus so it doesn't stack with other gear, not one of 20 categories of possible modifiers. I also don't want tons of variant category lists abounding for each type of gear.

      Café Truck ​​​​I actually discussed the Aim maneuver effects with Clint and Shane, so I like your idea. That is still a lot of effects though, and if every piece of targeting gear negates the same penalties then it makes Edges like Marksman, Sharpshooter, etc less worth taking.

      What if all ranged targeting systems simply negated 2 points of Range or Unstable Platform penalties? It would basically combine the effect of binoculars (Range) and an improved stabilizer (Unstable Platform). If it was the same across all types of targeting systems (cyberware, robots, vehicles, etc) would that help?

      Some people may wonder why not just have it negate 2 points of any penalties? Or why not just have it straight provide +2 Shooting all the time? Those approaches are simple, but the big issue I have is that I don't like easily negating Multi-Action Penalties (MAP), Uncanny Reflexes, the Dodge Edge, and effects like deflection. It doesn't feel very Rifts when these hard-earned defensive abilities are easily ignored by every two-bit skelebot or punk in a salvaged combat vehicle, or the same opponents essentially gain the effect of the Split the Seconds Edge (ignore 2 points of MAP).

      I invite everyone to comment. I am interesting in hearing and considering all points of view
      Sean Owen Roberson
      Line Manager, Rifts for Savage Worlds

      Comment


      • #4
        Maybe removing only one point of penalty, regardless of source. The majority of penalties start at -2, so it wouldn't negate them completly.

        Comment


        • #5
          What is the nature of the STS? What are it's capabilities?
          That would be the place to start to figure out what the game mechanics should entail.

          Does the STS have a telescopic range finder?
          Then it should negate Range penalties.

          Does the STS include gyrostablization?
          Then it should ignore Unstable Platform or Recoil penalties.

          Does the STS use advanced predictive algorithms to plot out a target's movement?
          Then it should negate penalties imposed by the Dodge and Combat Acrobat Edges.

          Does the STS use imaging software and/or thermographics to paint a silhouette of the target on the HUD?
          Then it should negate Cover, obscurement, and Illumination penalties.

          The only penalty I think it should not negate is the MAP. The MAP is an intrinsic representation of trying to do multiple Actions at once, and should only be removed by focused Edges or abilities. Merely jumping into a suit of power armor does not make it easier to multitask.

          _________

          It's also important to note that the game sets expectations through it's mechanics. If a common piece of tech can negate 90% of any penalty, the players (or opponents) should be encouraged to inflict as many penalties against the attacker as they could. This means seeking Cover, maintaining distance, dropping smoke grenades (or obscure spells), using decoys, etc.

          If the GM played the targets this way, it would encourage the players to invest in Edges like Rock 'n Roll, Marksman, and Steady Hands to handle those specific penalties so their STS can pick up the slack.

          In summery, what I'm saying is I would prefer a more general penalty negation (excepting only the MAP), and let individual tables figure out how they want that applied.

          Comment


          • #6
            I'm going to disagree with the MAP-negation opposition, here. The action economy in SWADE is very strict, anyway--even if you're some sort of uber-speed god with multiple ways of suppressing MAP, you cap out at three actions, plus an Innate action. I don't see any reason why a hyper-advanced targeting/control system wouldn't let you shoot and, say, issue threats (Intimidate) or control your vehicle (Driving/Piloting) a bit better than normal.

            In particular, I'd note that 'negating the MAP' on a Shooting roll does NOT negate the MAP on another skill. So if I'm using Taunt and Shooting in the same round, and my sole means of MAP-negation is the STS, then the shot does not suffer the MAP, but the Taunt still would. Ditto Spellcasting, Driving, etc. So it's not as good as having, for instance, Combat Ace, which negates both penalties outright..

            Comment


            • Deskepticon
              Deskepticon commented
              Editing a comment
              That's a compelling argument.
          Working...
          X