Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
archon007

My house rule space combat/chase rules

Recommended Posts

Lets face it the written rules are not that great or fun (numerous topics on space combat issues), so I wanted to bring a little more clarity and fun for the pilot and players. There what I came up with.

First I mixed chase rules into the standard space/vehicle combat. In reality (I know it's a game) most of the time one person or another is trying to gain range, keep range, or close range and as the rules are written it is very rubberbandy:

CLARIFICATION: the standard "fly" maneuver is no longer used, like the chase rules, before each round 1 check is made for movement, the pilot then can act normally but can't not use a maneuver for movement. Page 241 "characters take turns as normal, however, they can not use their turn to take maneuvers that would move their position..."

Ship one moves from short to close and fires, ship 2 fires then moves from close to short. I don't like it so here's the chase rule part.

If there are only 2 vehicles the PC makes an opposed skill check (outside of the combat round like chase rules) adding either setback or boost dice determined by the speed difference. I.e. the PCs vehicle is traveling at speed of 3 vs 2, the PC would add 1 boost dice. The winner of the check determines if they stay at same range, or increase/decrease range band by 1.

If there are 3 or more vehicles all pilots involved make a competitive simple pilot check (outside of the combat round like chase rules), adding either setback or boost dice determined by the difference of speed. This is a little harder than just 2 vehicles the easiest way is either pick the middle speed of all vehicles or pick the speed that most vehicles have.

NOTE: difference in speed is calculated by current speed you are traveling not ship's max speed.

Example: 4 vehicles in combat, V1 speed of 2, V2 & V3 speed of 3, V4 sipped of 4. Base speed used would be speed 3. V1 would add 1 setback die (-1 speed) and V4 would add 1 boost die (+1 speed). The winner would determine the outcome of range to them in regards to the other 3 vehicles, 2nd place would determine out come between him and 3rd & 4th place, and 3rd place would determine the outcome between him and 4th place.

This might seem confusing at first, but it plays out pretty simply and allows the pilot to get to roll and show off their skill, makes the range bands not rubberbandy, & keeps the abstract flow especially in space combat where you can simulate 3d movement (like being surround by 4 ships on each side at close range and by beating them all increasing range to all 4 to medium by flying down)

Full example: Player is in a YT-1300 speed 3 fighting 4 TIE fighters speed 5. Combat opens with the TIE fighters at long range trying to close the gap and the player trying to out run them, and all ships are currently traveling at max speed.

Round 1: All pilots roll simple competitive skill check player adds 2 setback dice (base speed 5 vs player ship speed of 3).

T1, T2, & T3 beat the Players skill check and close to medium range. However, the Player beat T4's check and pushes T4 to extreme range.

Narrative: your scanners pick up 4 TIE fighters on your six, you immediately try to put distance between you and fighters while your co-pilot frantically punches away at the terminal trying to calculate your hyperspace jump. You make a sharp turn trying to shake the pursuit unfortunately the TIE fighters speed is making that difficult as 3 of the 4 fighters close range on you. However, you seem to have put some distance between you and one of the fighters.

Now, the pilot and rest of the crews would act in intiative order normally until everyone has acted and before round 2 starts another chase type competitive check would take place.

The obvious downside is more rolls especially for the GM if controlling several enemy vehicles. However, I feel it adds more flavor and scenamatics than the current rules.

Side note: I like using the setback/boost dice based on difference of speed because it means a faster vehicle does have a better chance of closing the gap but can't go from extreme to close in one round (not very cinematic) like the rules are currently written chase rules on pg241. "Closes the distance by an additional number of range bands equal to the difference in relative speeds"

Thoughts?

Edited by archon007

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As you yourself point out, there's quite a lot more of rolling dice.

 

First off I think the adding of boost or setback die based on relative speed is a double up of starship handling sort of. The Tie's in your example already have quite a lot of boost dice from handling, I think those would suffice, the YT-1300 also has a setback die due to handling. Why add more due to speed? I see the logic, but you get way to large dice pool in my opinion, and you get more pools to roll this way. Cumbersome 3 or 4 at least :ph34r:

 

Second, it's no secret that I'm a fan of the existing system, simply because its elegant, simple and open. I do see your point on the chase rule and closing distances based on difference of speed, a simpler solution would be that the faster ship can close two range bands instead of one, if they won the check. Although a squadron of TIEs chasing an Action VI... I wouldn't think it odd that the TIEs could close from extreme to short in one sequence. If both parties were going all out.

 

The existing space combat system is fun and great in my opinion, because it's based on the dice mechanic. I know I've had issues with the dice sometimes and it sort of inverts part of the roleplaying process. Giving into that is sometimes hard, but its so rewarding when a player tells me what he wants to do, then rolls and tells me what really happens. So instead of tactically and strategically going about business before any check has been made (which is not really how things happen, space combat would be confusing and fast), make the check and then turn it into tactics and golden strategical nuggets for the future :ph34r: it not what we're used to, but it is a more cinematic, narrative and rewarding way of playing. It's also harder, I know some of my players really find it challenging. And so do I sometimes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with the substitution of handling instead of a speed differential. Speed should be used to determine how much distance you can close or gain on a winning roll.

Effectively, this house rule breaks starship combat up into a movement phase and then an ordered action phase. I like it. It actually lets the GM keep a cinematic feel for the discription of abstract movements, while retaining a concrete system of rules for the more gamer centric PCs.

Also, more piloting = more fun for your dedicated pilot, who right now is relegated to a handful of maneuvers that are usually pre decided by the entire party.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I see the point on the handling and speed. The reason I added speed the way I suggested is i didn't like the fact a TIE fighter could close 3 rang bands in one roll. Winning (1 band) and speed 5 vs 3 (2 more bands), but I wanted to still give a benifiet to a faster ship.

As far as big dice pools, the competitive skill checks are simple difficulty checks, so 0 purple dice so the number of dice taking an additional 2 setback dice from speed is no bigger than a normal difficulty standard check (2 purple).

Part of the purpose was to give the dedicated pilot more options than "fly" & "gaining advantage" or "fly" & "evasive maneuvers" which is basically the standard 2 options the dedicated pilot does.

@jegergryte, not sure what you find elegant about the current space combat rules? To me they are by far the least elegant part of the game and just clunky. In personal combat it makes a little more sense and flows better with the " I move, attack, you move, attack" turn, but vehicle combat (to me doesn't) especially since you are moving such a vast distance.

The ship A's turn I move from medium to short range and fire. Then, ship B's turn we return fire and then move to medium range combat isn't elegant or smooth. Any space combat scene in Star Wars the movement and firing of weapons is fluid, the Millennium falcon doesn't sit still for the TIE fighters to get in range then get fired upon the move out of range. I do understand its pen & paper and not a video game, so it is harder to represent that kind of action.

The goal of my house rule is to create a closure, more fluid vehicle movement system and also free up the player pilot to be able to do more and feel more useful. Also, allow fighters to move with there targets, fly through obstacles, and fire which is a constant in the movies and not even double in RAW.

You mention it's fun based on the dice mechanic, but in "combat rounds" there is no dice mechanic for movement as written. The Fly maneuver just happens with no skill check required, so a little confused on what you mean.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe I'm missing something, but I'm not sure how it prevents the rubber-banding.  If you have 4 TIEs and they win the piloting/chase check, they can start at close range, shoot, then move off to short.  Then the YT has to move to close and shoot...

... or are you eliminating the Fly maneuver entirely?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe I'm missing something, but I'm not sure how it prevents the rubber-banding.  If you have 4 TIEs and they win the piloting/chase check, they can start at close range, shoot, then move off to short.  Then the YT has to move to close and shoot...

... or are you eliminating the Fly maneuver entirely?

Yes like the chase rules, before each round 1 check is made for movement, the pilot then can act normally but can't not use a maneuver for movement. Page 241 "characters take turns as normal, however, they can not use their turn to take maneuvers that would move their position..."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As far as big dice pools, the competitive skill checks are simple difficulty checks, so 0 purple dice so the number of dice taking an additional 2 setback dice from speed is no bigger than a normal difficulty standard check (2 purple).

Simple checks? I guess in open space with no hazards that could make sense, but it should really be based on speed and terrain no? Otherwise it really is a pointless check...  or use the gain the advantage table for difficulties at the very least.

 

1) @jegergryte, not sure what you find elegant about the current space combat rules? To me they are by far the least elegant part of the game and just clunky. In personal combat it makes a little more sense and flows better with the " I move, attack, you move, attack" turn, but vehicle combat (to me doesn't) especially since you are moving such a vast distance.

2) The ship A's turn I move from medium to short range and fire. Then, ship B's turn we return fire and then move to medium range combat isn't elegant or smooth. Any space combat scene in Star Wars the movement and firing of weapons is fluid, the Millennium falcon doesn't sit still for the TIE fighters to get in range then get fired upon the move out of range. I do understand its pen & paper and not a video game, so it is harder to represent that kind of action.

3) The goal of my house rule is to create a closure, more fluid vehicle movement system and also free up the player pilot to be able to do more and feel more useful. Also, allow fighters to move with there targets, fly through obstacles, and fire which is a constant in the movies and not even double in RAW.

4) You mention it's fun based on the dice mechanic, but in "combat rounds" there is no dice mechanic for movement as written. The Fly maneuver just happens with no skill check required, so a little confused on what you mean.

1) The rules are elegant because they are simple, fluid, open-ended, not rigid, restrictive and time consuming. I fail to see what is clunky about it, particularly by making it more clunky, more rolls and add complexity and details that are, when it comes down to it, completely unnecessary. This system is all about being freed by restricting rules and open up for creativity and story telling... there is nothing clunky in that, challenging perhaps, but not clunky.

 

2) First off, you don't have to spend a manoeuvre to fly every round, that would be a notion carried over from RCR or SE I think. There is movement going on by evasive flying, by gaining the advantage, by moving within a range band, there is no need to change range bands or spend manoeuvres on that. Not at all. You can spend your manoeuvres doing other stuff, its not like the ship stops if you don't... I mean you can spend a manoeuvre on accelerate and then take the gain the advantage action... you're not standing still, you're definitely moving relative to your target, in space, but perhaps you're not moving astronomically closer to the sun or moon or planet or whatever is nearby... astronomically speaking.

 

3) It is less fluid because there will be too many rolls, it will break down combat even more into checks upon checks. While I'm all for making the Pilot more useful I do not think this is a good solution, and if you've had a look at the pilot specialisation, there are good deal of stuff that the pilot can do with checks and stuff if the pilot only invests XP in this. As it should be. What you seem to want is already there in the system, your changes makes it slower and less narrative, less cinematic, and more time consuming.

 

4) You fail to recognise that the ship is considered to be moving all the time, no matter what the pilot spends his manoeuvre or action on. The vehicle moves, there is no need to make a roll for that, why would there? The pilot can of course go full throttle for increased speed for a few rounds, then fly evasive while the opponent tries to gain the advantage, he is moving, but perhaps not closer or further away astronomically to the star destroyer blockading the planet, but its still movement in three dimensional space. If the pilot wants to escape or race someone, use the chase mechanic, difficulty based on speed/silhouette add in some terrain and you have good pilot check for movement, but such movement take the attention of the pilot, that might bar him/her/it from doing any other action. Of course, I'd let a pilot perform a pilot check if using the normal fly manoeuvre when going through a trench, if their action had already been spent doing something else. The system is fluid, open and in no need of the changes you suggest. Not in my opinion at least.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As far as big dice pools, the competitive skill checks are simple difficulty checks, so 0 purple dice so the number of dice taking an additional 2 setback dice from speed is no bigger than a normal difficulty standard check (2 purple).

Simple checks? I guess in open space with no hazards that could make sense, but it should really be based on speed and terrain no? Otherwise it really is a pointless check... or use the gain the advantage table for difficulties at the very least.
I thought it was obvious we were talking about the base of the rolls, sorry I didn't clarify that. You said big dice pools (because of adding dice for difference in speed) I was referencing they wouldn't be any bigger, meaning the number of dice because standard checks have base difficulty dice and simple checks do not.

1) not sure how adding a pilot roll makes less story telling since that pilot roll which is not normally ever rolled helps tell a story with the result of the dice.

2) per RAW there is no movement happening, except in same band movement, unless you take the "fly/drive" maneuver. Also, per RAW, the "Evasive Maneuvers" maneuver does not require a roll so there is no advantage to be had. Based on your comment maybe you are requiring rolls which RAW does not normally require.

Now, yes I can see you coming back and saying well debris in space, asteroids, etc require rolls but not all space combat has that.

3) while it adds a few additional rolls I'm not sure it's less fluid and it seems it might not add any rolls for you since it seems from your comment you require additional rules the RAW does not.

4) you are correct, vehicles are always moving. I think the major difference is you believe they are always moving within the same range band while I do not. As mention most races, dogfights, etc there is almost always someone trying to gain distance (increase range band) or close the gap (decrease range band). Almost never do both pilots of vehicles engaged try to keep the same range.

I'm glad you enjoy the RAW on vehicle combat, though it does seem by your comments you are adding additional rolls not required. I am not happy with them and based on several other threads about issues other players and GMs are sharing I posted this to maybe help others. So, lets agree to disagree and move along as friends.

Edited by archon007

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not just a comment on this particular post, but just an overall impression after reading a variety of posts... I find the desire to Frankenstein this game to turn it into some sort of quasi-tactical thing pretty disheartening. If the game isn't doing it for you as presented, then there is probably a SW game out there somewhere that does. This is meant to be fast, cinematic, ABSTRACT... not a tactical combat experience of square counting, tactical positioning, and constant die rolling. Just my two cents. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
As mention most races, dogfights, etc there is almost always someone trying to gain distance (increase range band) or close the gap (decrease range band). Almost never do both pilots of vehicles engaged try to keep the same range.

 

In Ep IV, before the rebels begin their attack run, all the dogfights involve one side or another trying to gain the advantage. It appears that the defender is trying to fly away from the attacker, but that's the nature of a dogfight. As the defender you're trying not to get hit while simultaneously trying to turn the tables, and as the attacker you do not want to let this happen.

 

It's possible that I am misinterpreting you on this matter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not just a comment on this particular post, but just an overall impression after reading a variety of posts... I find the desire to Frankenstein this game to turn it into some sort of quasi-tactical thing pretty disheartening. If the game isn't doing it for you as presented, then there is probably a SW game out there somewhere that does. This is meant to be fast, cinematic, ABSTRACT... not a tactical combat experience of square counting, tactical positioning, and constant die rolling. Just my two cents.

I'm not changing the abstract style of the game at all. I'm trying to make space combat more interesting and interactive for the pilot.

There are a lot of things this game does great, just because one or a few areas don't meet what a player likes doesn't mean they should play something else. In fact, it's better for you that we do tweak and house rule the game. Why? Because I'm still buying the product and you can just ignore these posts and go n your merry RAW way while myself and others support the company so they continue to make more books.

Should all the people making additional equipment, new races, converting d20 or d6 weg adventures not play this either they should just play those games?

What I find disheartening is people saying you should play the game as it is written and if you don't you're doing it wrong, or should play something else. The core rule, golden rule if you will, in pen and paper games is the rules are a guideline and the GM and players should adjust them accordingly to make it fun to them. I'm not trying to say my house rule is right or the best way, I'm just sharing something so people who might be having issues with space combat might find something else or get them thinking as well.

Edited by archon007

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like the idea of using chase mechanics for every dogfight, because:

  1. every dogfight is essentially a series of micro-chases
  2. it gives pilots of Speed-3 ships something to roll on when they're fighting in open space and not just narrate their maneuvers.

As to the specifics of archon007's house rules, my only thoughts steer it a little closer toward Chase RAW. Here's how I'd see the 1 YT, 4 Tie scenario playing out:

  1. All pilots make their simple pilot checks, including modifiers for ship handling.
    1. Tie A: Rolls 4 success
    2. Tie B: Rolls 3
    3. YT Pilot: Rolls 2
    4. Tie C: Rolls 2
    5. Tie D: Rolls 1
  2. In initiative order, each pilot (narratively) chooses 1 adversary with a lower roll whom he wishes to change distance on.
    1. YT Pilot: "I execute a feint that totally fakes out Tie D and sends him speeding down the wrong course. He's now at Extreme Range."
    2. GM: "Ties A and B see right through your maneuver, and before you know it, they're right there in close range. Tie C was almost fooled by the move, but he recovered and maintained distance at Long range."
  3. Now, with the YT, Tie A, and Tie B all at close range, normal play continues.
  4. In the following round, maybe the YT out-rolls Ties B and C. He opts to force B out into Short range, C stays at long, A stays at close, and D finally manages to close from Extreme into Short.

I think it cleans up the narrative to handle all the range banding at once and then let the gunners open fire on their targets of opportunity, rather than update the ranges every time someone performs a move.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My PCs recently added a short range Heavy Laser Cannon to thier arsenal. Sadly, the first thought that crossed my mind was - in a fight where the enemy has only close range weapons, and isn't capable of speed 5, my players will be able to stay at short range indeffinately and remove any challenge at all. This is because the rules for "moving" through space are static and rigid. In fact the "piloting" of the ship doesn't even require a "piloting" check

Now, it's easy to say "your pcs are bad people for gaming the movement system and they should be punnished with the GM hammer of righteousness" except that, they are playing by the rules. They aren't even bending them. They move, the enemy moves. The enemy can never close to close range if the pc use two fly maneuvers. They sit back and pew pew at short range and that's it. They win.

This house rule add varriance into an other wise static, predictable, and thus easily broken movement system (one which, mechanically, treats speed 2 ships the same as speed 4 ... dont get me started). It brings story telling back to space flight. Suddenly its not about clunkily rubberbanding around absract range bands in 3D space, with a roll of the dice you are back telling a story about high speed ships whizzing about, doing barrel rolls, juking back and forth trying to open a gap or close on an enemy.

Edited by Ionman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As mention most races, dogfights, etc there is almost always someone trying to gain distance (increase range band) or close the gap (decrease range band). Almost never do both pilots of vehicles engaged try to keep the same range.

 

In Ep IV, before the rebels begin their attack run, all the dogfights involve one side or another trying to gain the advantage. It appears that the defender is trying to fly away from the attacker, but that's the nature of a dogfight. As the defender you're trying not to get hit while simultaneously trying to turn the tables, and as the attacker you do not want to let this happen.

 

It's possible that I am misinterpreting you on this matter.

That was kind of my point, the defender was trying to fly away from the attackers (increase band range). Which is why I started this tread and looking at the house rule of adding a similar mechanic as the Chase rules (page 241) to the standard space combat rules written.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You misunderstood his post. He said it looked like the defender was trying to get away when in reality, as it looks to him, it was a dog fight with each side using the Gain the Advantage maneuver. What looks like flying away is a failed Gain the Advantage

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This house rule add varriance into an other wise static, predictable, and thus easily broken movement system (one which, mechanically, treats speed 2 ships the same as speed 4 ... dont get me started). It brings story telling back to space flight. Suddenly its not about clunkily rubberbanding around absract range bands in 3D space, with a roll of the dice you are back telling a story about high speed ships whizzing about, doing barrel rolls, juking back and forth trying to open a gap or close on an enemy.

Thanks that is goal and I felt the same way as your post which is why I started thinking out of the RAW to make a slight change.

@Spjork, that would work too.

Here is another house rule (not mine): http://triumphdespair.wordpress.com/category/house-rules-2/

Gain The Advantage (CSR)

Pilot Only Maneuver

Requirement: Speed 1+

Target one starship or vehicle in Close range and make an opposed Piloting check against the starship or vehicle’s pilot.

Upgrade the check for each point of Speed your starship or vehicle is travelling faster than the target, and downgrade the check for each point of Speed your starship or vehicle is travelling slower than the target. Add Boost or Setback die as normally determined by the starship or vehicle’s Handling rating.

On a successful check, combat checks from your starship or vehicle against the target are upgraded and you may choose the defense zone targeted.

Edited by archon007

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Maybe I'm missing something, but I'm not sure how it prevents the rubber-banding.  If you have 4 TIEs and they win the piloting/chase check, they can start at close range, shoot, then move off to short.  Then the YT has to move to close and shoot...

... or are you eliminating the Fly maneuver entirely?

Yes like the chase rules, before each round 1 check is made for movement, the pilot then can act normally but can't not use a maneuver for movement. Page 241 "characters take turns as normal, however, they can not use their turn to take maneuvers that would move their position..."

 

Okay, I think I'm sold, essentially you're house-ruling that every space combat is a chase.  No problem.

 

I detest the "Fly" maneuver, especially that you can take it more than once.  Regardless of appeals to non-rigidity, freedom, abstractness, etc, "Fly" has a completely invalid conceptual basis.  It's not "abstract", it's just wrong, and has no basis in either the films or real world physics.

 

Consider:  if Han wanted to avoid some TIEs, he'd just Fly twice every turn until they had to spend Strain to keep up, and since TIEs are minions, they'd explode or the pilot would die before they could do much damage.

 

Making all space combat a chase is a much better conceptual starting point.  I hope I get a chance to try this out soon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes like Okay, I think I'm sold, essentially you're house-ruling that every space combat is a chase.  No problem.

 

I detest the "Fly" maneuver, especially that you can take it more than once.  Regardless of appeals to non-rigidity, freedom, abstractness, etc, "Fly" has a completely invalid conceptual basis.  It's not "abstract", it's just wrong, and has no basis in either the films or real world physics.

 

Consider:  if Han wanted to avoid some TIEs, he'd just Fly twice every turn until they had to spend Strain to keep up, and since TIEs are minions, they'd explode or the pilot would die before they could do much damage.

 

Making all space combat a chase is a much better conceptual starting point.  I hope I get a chance to try this out soon.

yes at the root of it that is what I'm doing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, I don't think anyone is that upset that you're using the chase idea, it might be the rest of the stuff that is added.  Personally, if both sides are attempting to dogfight, then I'll just use the normal rules (though I have changed GtA so it's useable at any speed so pilots can still do something), but as soon as one side is trying to "get away" from the other (whether it's to flee or in the case where they have longer range weapons and want to "kite" the other side around) then it becomes a chase.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

1) I thought it was obvious we were talking about the base of the rolls, sorry I didn't clarify that. You said big dice pools (because of adding dice for difference in speed) I was referencing they wouldn't be any bigger, meaning the number of dice because standard checks have base difficulty dice and simple checks do not.

2) not sure how adding a pilot roll makes less story telling since that pilot roll which is not normally ever rolled helps tell a story with the result of the dice.

3) per RAW there is no movement happening, except in same band movement, unless you take the "fly/drive" maneuver. Also, per RAW, the "Evasive Maneuvers" maneuver does not require a roll so there is no advantage to be had. Based on your comment maybe you are requiring rolls which RAW does not normally require.

3b) Now, yes I can see you coming back and saying well debris in space, asteroids, etc require rolls but not all space combat has that.

4) while it adds a few additional rolls I'm not sure it's less fluid and it seems it might not add any rolls for you since it seems from your comment you require additional rules the RAW does not.

5) you are correct, vehicles are always moving. I think the major difference is you believe they are always moving within the same range band while I do not. As mention most races, dogfights, etc there is almost always someone trying to gain distance (increase range band) or close the gap (decrease range band). Almost never do both pilots of vehicles engaged try to keep the same range.

6) I'm glad you enjoy the RAW on vehicle combat, though it does seem by your comments you are adding additional rolls not required. I am not happy with them and based on several other threads about issues other players and GMs are sharing I posted this to maybe help others. So, lets agree to disagree and move along as friends.

1) Well, first there should be a difficulty based on the higher of current speed and silhouettex0.5 (upgrade to challenge dice the lower value) +/- handling. At least that's how I read the rules about movement that require a check. See page 240. This is also referenced in the chase mechanic side bar, on page 241. These rules should also apply your check for increasing/decreasing range thingy. At least I think so.

 

2) It doesn't necessary make less storytelling no, but can also bog down play a lot more than less rolling would do.

 

3) Listening to the Order 66 podcast, one of the episode with Sam Stewart contradicts your interpretation of RAW. Of course there is movement, you cannot evade anything when stationary, and having any speed above 0 means you're not stationary, you are moving, except closer not closer or further away from anyone. You're either accelerating, decelerating, evading or staying on target - even punching it if starting at 0. These move you of course. Gain the Advantage does obviously also move you around in the area of space you are. Per RAW, per the designer's own words. There seems to be a lack of suspension of disbelief at the basis of you house rule, that sounds perhaps harsh... but that is what I get from this, and the older more tactical space combat rules for RCR and SE...

 

3b) Arguably a group of minion TIEs (or two) in the same area of space, swarming you, could be considered terrain easily, but of course, as you say, this is not always the case, but I'd say if fighting in atmosphere, even high up on the edge of space, like 50 to 90 kilometres up there (earth-like atmosphere and planet) would or could count as terrain due to the gravitational pull and stuff.

 

4) That's an odd interpretation of my comment. I add no unnecessary rolls, although I do sometime combine combat with the chase mechanic if appropriate. The way I interpret your idea it means a lot more rolling, particularly for the GM. That bogs down play unnecessarily.

 

5) Consider this, the range bands are vast; most player controlled ships, and most enemy ships, will have short ranged weapons (close range, up to short, few beyond that except perhaps enemy ships) it makes no sense to travel hundreds, if not thousands, of kilometres just to go back or wait for them to catch up so you can use your weapons in a dogfight. Unless you're trying to escape of course, at which point RAW provides us with what we need. If the goal is a dogfight, then Gain the Advantage, Evasive Manoeuvres and a plethora of nice Pilot specialisation talents are there for you fun and games. Gain the Advantage is a way to try and keep the enemy .. not in range, but at your mercy, and evasive manoeuvres is movement set to avoid being hit, but also being able to shoot back...

 

6) Odd that you interpret my comments that way, but hey, stuff like that happens. I do not add anything beyond sometimes requiring the pilot to participate in a chase check... and sometimes I call for a check if there is debris or terrain; like when having a dogfight close to a space station with towers and stuff. Yeah I figure that you, and many others are not happy with them. That I have registered, but the grievances I have heard thus far are odd to me, because it's all there, in the rules, in the talent tree and within the creativity of playing the game. I will stop harassing you now :ph34r: hope no harm has been done. Good luck in your endeavour.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I read the space rules twice, but they are for me very unclear when it comes to move in combat. Since it is a narrative system I do not understand why the rules are still so detailed like for SW D6 in this matter. Moves, distances.....no, I bought this game for different kind of play. The dice system begs for simple-fast-action oriented combat. Maneuvers, detailed ranges? When I miss them, I will return to D6. Meanwhile let's roll these nice dice and try to narrate the results.

Most of the space combat will be between PC's starship vs one or more fighters. Make it fast and simple. If the PCs want to escape, they can do it only if their ship is faster. Otherwise they have to jump to hyperspace or the enemy will always catch them. Simple mathematics, no miracles. Invest in ship, tweak the engine or otherwise be caught by swarm of TIE Fighters. The rule from D6 about power transfer can also be adapted here.

However, if the PCs want to fight, let's roll. All PC's roll initiative, opponent's roll as a group unless there is some boss which rolls in such case separately. Before every round PC pilot makes a check against the group and/or the boss. Add a setback die for each roll above one - fighting a flight of TIEs is one, a flight of TIEs and boss is another, two or three flights of TIEs...its even harder. If he succeeds, than the gunner(s) get(s) a bonus to hit. Otherwise the opponent(s) get(s) it. Then they act according to initiative, other PCs may attempt sensors check to help gunner, jam communication or whatever. When it comes to pilot again, if he wants to do something more, he suffers a setback die due to fact that he is doing piloting and attempting to do something else (angle shields or shot). The GM may rule that in case of dangerous environment like flying through the asteroid field or death star, the pilot cannot do anything else.

What about mass combat, what about capital ships that have many weapons with different ranges? What about it? Do it like in Star Wars movies, make a movie. Han is blowing shield, Luke is fighting the Emperor, Lando is piloting Falcon into death star and one rebel-hero-pilot destroys generator shield of the SSD. Only heroes matter, the battle is just the background, all is decided with our heroes! So forget about ranges, maneuvers and roll those beautiful dice and tell the story about the galaxy far, far away... :D .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How would this system adjust to other types of vehicles, such as guys on foot vs. guys with jet packs or speeder bikes?

Planetary vehicles would operate the same way as this house rule. Vehicles, including jet packs, vs. people on foot really isn't a chase because all of personal range bands (engaged to extreme) fit in close vehicle range band so their speed is huge compared to running speed. I was focusing on space combat when I wrote this out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I get the feeling many would have problems playing "Amber Diceless RPG" based on Roger Zelazny's Amber Chronicles by Phage Press (old RPG - absolutely loved it.)

Played it long, long, long time ago. People and games adjust with time it doesn't make one better than the other, it's just different. Just like making a house rule some people will like it and use it or modify it and some won't. What I don't understand is why people who don't like a suggested house rule feel the necessity to bash the rule and/or person. Not talking about this thread, just see a lot of it on the forums in general.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...