Jump to content

tetrasodium

Members
  • Content Count

    24
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

2 Neutral

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. pg131 Biological venom: "Venomous creatures include snakes, scorpions, frogs, and of course strange alien beasts. Most can be classified as a neurotoxin, but regardless of the poison type they all deal poison damage. Upon exposure the character must succeed at a DC 13 constitution save or suffer 1d8 poison damage. Every hour afterwards the afflicted character must pass another save or suffer an additional 1d8 poison damage. The poison is cured after 8 hours or when the afflicted passes a save." It's good that it has some teeth in a way that makes it actually be a little scary, but it should take more than 8 hours of running for your life evading a kull warrior kill team for 8 hours to be rid of things like this. If this was changed from 8 hours to "end of long rest where modern or better treatment can be given" or similar it shifts the problem from yet another survival but with the slow & gradual accumulation of slightly more than a couple staff weapon blasts worth of damage to a snag that needs to be managed while trying to fin/hide/disguise a shelter from those same kull so alice can treat bob because nobody knows how long the poison from that p4x-37542342 critter lasts for. pg121 Forced march: "travel for 8 hours in the day. They can push on beyond that limit, at the risk of exhaustion. For each additional hour of travel beyond 8 hours, the characters cover the distance shown in the Hour column for their pace, and each character must make a Constitution saving throw at the end of the hour. The DC is 10 + 1 for each hour past 8 hours. On a failed saving throw, a character suffers one level of exhaustion (see page @@). " This should include a footnote that high gravity worlds & poor atmospheric compositions like low o2/low pressure/etc can reduce that 8 hour time frame. pg104 foraging:"When in a [SUITABLE] natural environment you can feed a number of people up to your proficiency modifier with a single Hard (DC 20) survival check and 1d4 hours of work." I'm being a bit pedantic here but including it for completeness. Yea dc20 is nothing to sneeze at, but adding a word like suitable might not be a bad idea since the Chernobyl exclusion zone & noctis labyrinthus are both "natural environments." Pg108 archaeologist:"As an action you can cause a target emotional and mental distress by using cultural taboos against them. If the target fails a Wisdom save (DC 8+ Intelligence modifier + Proficiency Bonus) you may spend a number of Eureka points. The target is stunned for a number of rounds equal to the Eureka points spent. A target that passes its save is immune to this ability for 24 hours (and possibly very upset)." As written this affects a replicator, AI, Grizzly Bear, slime mold, carnivorous plant, or even godzilla sized dinosaur. Pretty sure most of those should not be subject to it.
  2. Don't be ridiculous, this is a game & There are multiple stargate tv series where a main character uses an alien/nontauri weapon despite joinnig the secret military agency. Not to mention... To take things one step further, even if we assume your words as the one true & only way to "play" the game, the design space is lacking for a GM to create new equipment that represents small & lateral improvements other than +1/+2/+3/etc, "more of a value that's already nearly always enough to nearly always be irrelevant", and "less of a value that's already low enough to nearly always be irrelevant" thereby getting hamstrung by the same problem you seem to be trying to dismiss as not relevant to the way it should be played.
  3. Right now weapons have: Name: Self Explanatory Tech Level: Usually 2-3 with a few exceptions, but mechanically there is very little impact beyond what amounts to "You can pick this weapon" & "You can't get more ammo for this" Damage: A simple die size or dice pool like 1d6, 1d8, 1d10, 2d6, 3d4, etc. Bigger is almost always better Type: What type of damage it does, fire pierce force etc. We don't have many monsters to compare to, but at least in standard d&d 5e shifted these from once relevant things affected by DR/x Resist/x & vulnerable/x to near irrelevant fluff on par with the color of a weapon. Range: In the case of practically every weapon this is currently scaled to "enough in nearly all circumstances" making it a value that does not significantly impact weapon choice. A longarm that deals +1 or extra damage but is limited by losing half two thirds or even three quarters of its range is objectively better as an example. Capacity: This has some value when a weapon has a notable reload time, but when you have 50 shots or even 15 or 5 shots to a 1-2 action reload it's not something t be particularly concerned about when choosing a weapon based largely on the die size. Going back to that longarm, if it has a capacity of 25 or even 1000 vrs 50 with it's still a no brain choice to grab the +1 900m range one Reload: most weapons have this as - 1 or 2 aside from super heavy duty stuff like grenade launchers flame throwers etc. If that +1 rifle had a 2 or even 3 round reload time it's not a significant concern to factor in simply because a player can just reload between fights where the action cost is nullified. All combined this leaves no room to differentiate a hypothetical larger weapon list that even the current ruleset displays as more than just hypothetical on page 63 "The standard issue longarm of the Phoenix Site is the P90, which is a Longarm with the automatic and reflex sight upgrades." vrs "The standard issue “sniper rifle” of the Phoenix Site, the SR9TC is a longarm with a reduced capacity but improved accuracy and stopping power. The SR9TC is a longarm with the high calibre and scope upgrade.". Yes they have different upgrades attached to them, but there are only so many ways you can combine them in balanced sensible ways. Both of those weapons have a short range of "more than enough" making the scope on the second niche at best. One is automatic 1d10 damage & one is merely semiautomatic 1d12 damage while both have an ammo capacity & range of "enough" & capacity/reload of "this is fine". It doesn't really matter if a third weapon is belt fed extended capacity or so on. The need for more mechanical values allowing subjective choice based on merits represented within the weapon statblocks themselves is critical because players can only be expected to read through so much homebrew stuff from a gm. It's one thing to read through a list of weapons made by the gm that have varying values for things that already exist, it's something entirely different to give them that same list with a couple pages of writeup on new values that were added that might conflict elsewhere in the system & need a constant series of one off "lets handle it like this" Even if all or nearly all weapons have the same values, simply having additional designspace within weapons where the gm can adjust things allows for it to e done by the GM with the much lower bar of working within the existing framework rather than creating a whole new one in need of balance & compatibility complications. Below are some possible areas where those subjective values could exist accuracy dropoff/gain: every N meters you suffer or benefit from -/+Y points. For whatever reason a given gun (such as a pistol) might have a -1 penalty to hit for every 1 meters (-1/1)while something else like the hk sr9tc on page 63 might only take -1 every 10 or 50 feet for -1/10 or -1/50. Meanwhile a Serrakin self guided Macguffin gun might work better the greater the distance & gain +1/5 or something minimum value on a damage die: Maybe the p95 shoots Naquadah enhanced rounds that are especially damaging that deal 1d8 damage with a minimum of a 4 on that d8 Knockback: How often did we see someone get hit by a staff weapon or have a staff weapon simply hit the ground near them & send them flying? Knockback could just be a simple value in meters where a medium sized target is knocked back that far when it's hit by that weapon. Maybe the value doubles or halves as sizes go down & up away from medium. What the weapon gets a critical hit or critical fail on other than 20 & 1. Maybe the Kull repeater is a 1d6 automatic plasma weapon that deals 1d6 instead of the Ma'Tok 3d6 but is extra scary because it gets a crit on a 19-20 & deals while an ashen blaster is 1d4 automatic & gets a crit on a 17-20. If the weapon affects the user's proficiency die or not & how (ie bump/shrink the die or set a minimum value on the die). The Ma'tok staff weapon only shoots once every other round due to the recharge1, but maybe it bumps the user's proficiency die by one step, allows the user to reroll anything less than 2 on the proficiency die or even sets the floor on the die to 50% the proficiency die so a d6 d8 d10 proficiency die user can't roll less than 3 4 & 5 respectively making the elite among the elites quite scary while still providing a nice benefit of a 2-4 proficiency die for cannon fodder. How much or what level of armor or damage reduction/resistance it ignores.. Armor piercing is pretty self explanatory to the point where tv & movies frequently use it as a big thing
  4. I'm not sure but armor should probably include speed penalties or something & none of the weapons seem to explicitly say they ever need two hands. Right now it seems like you could snipe from nearly 2km away while decked out like the bomb squad in tactical armor tactical helmet & carrying a Blast shield. Likewise with the same bomb squad loadout & a ma'tok jaffa staff weapon at closer range
  5. a penalty of 1-2 per 1-2 meters would go a long way towards acknowledging that stabbing someone in the kidney from arm's reach is dramatically easier than doing it with a ranged weapon from a football field or twenty yes. I think that any solution that includes words to the extent of "just don't use a battlemap & restrict yourself to theater of the mind" is a shortsighted & self inflicted wound. A system like fate core that relies on nebulous "zones" where ranged weapons can shoot 1-2 zones away works fine with theater of the mind, but 5e & the stargate 5e derivative has all of the ranges in concrete distances that do not always translate very well to the more nebulous & wishy-washy free form narrativist style that goes with "It's not designed for grid combat" type solutions
  6. No not the physics of projectiles effects of windspeed & other such such nonsense.... the reality that applies to us as tabletop gamers. Chessex seems to make such a large percentage of battlemaps that "chessex mat" is the vinyl grid map equivalent of postit note & qtip. Chessex mats come in two sizes. The Battlemat: 26” x 23½” (66cm x 60cm) The Megamat: 34½” x 48” (88cm x 122cm) From all appearances, the rules are written with the assumption that 1m=1 square, but 1 square=2m does not significantly change things First we have "common weapons" that might have been listed as archaic weapons in the d20 days Both a bow & a sling can shoot from one edge of the battlemat to the other edge without a penalty. & the megamat is not doing significantly better If you are willing to accept disadvantage then they can reach across several mats end to end for a truly excessive range given to the most primitive of ranged weapons. The Jaffa weapons are significantly better with the staff weapon needing to take disadvantage to hit the last 3-6 squares from the far edge of the map & the zat only able to reach about halfway. The tauri weapons are flatly obscene with a pistol able to reach everything on the megamat from anywhere. The grenade launcher has a close range of 3 megamats long end to long end while the longarm tops that with four megamats. Things go sideways from there with the longarm's disadvantage 1800 range that needs a mat taking up a sizable chunk of a football field (either version of football!). Clearly the ranges are unworkable with battlemaps Lets say that a game is using digital maps to bypass themeatspace limitations of not having multilple chessex mats or a football field sized room. I don't think roll20 can feed a map 1800 squares across but could be wrong. Since I use arkenforge and a tvbox that I know for a fact can handle that many squares & more we don'y need to wonder if my guess on roll20 is right or not. Even the 24 square range of 120' eldritch blast & the 20/30 range of heavy xbow/longbow is a chore that massively raises the overhead pf gm'ing as soon as PC's realize they can attack from max range on two sides & kite any outdoor enemies who have near zero chance of reaching either half of the party. The ranges are probably pulled from wikipedia or something & that's fine, but the point of a rpg is to be fun not simulate how far a bullet could theoretically punch through a paper target & current ranges are so generous they may as well just list "the entire map" or something. The navy pistol qualification test is more concerned with practical use of a pistol & uses the following ranges. Depending on if you use 1m or 2m squares that works out to3-5 squares for short range with a pistol using the first two ranges & 1m squares or 2-5 squares for the 7 & 15yard ranges. The marine corp rifle qualification uses targets with significantly longer ranges if you look at table1, but that allows the shooter to fire from sitting & prone position not moving 20m in 6 seconds while firing at a target 200-300 yards away. 5e does not model that in any meaningful way & the very real negative impact on gameplay is already out so it shouldn't be assumed the default range. Table2 however is much closer to being reasonable for a long range by at least limiting it to a single battlemat For long range attacks like carter here where she's standing motionless & effectively performing a full round action you can both model reality and improve the gameplay experience within the boundaries of tabletop gaming by making it a full round action to nip kiting in the bud & still allow a long range strike without making it the equivalent of rods from god or drone warfare.
  7. You are acting like the rules we have are completely unmodified 5e, have you not looked at the attributes & how moxie actually works, the classes & leveling, hp scaling, or the role & mechanics of of races & origins compared to stock 5e's races & backgrounds? Yes they use 5e as a base, but there are plenty of changes to it in order to make it fit the game they are buildingrather than the old d20 style that would frequently direct you to the phb
  8. why bother having more than one type of save when you can get rid of all those fiddly features & just have single saving throw? @shadowmyre i Having tactical & subjective choices to make in things like armor & weapons is not about "realism".
  9. You are suggesting seven ac boxes... That's pretty extreme given there are only 6 attributes, how would it even look on a sheet? Here's a simple 30 second crappy artist example of what putting armor name plus BAC/EAC/TAC on the current sheet might look like
  10. I dunno what it intended But your right that the wording is definately clunky & invites confusion worse than 5e's action surge "and a possible bonus action"
  11. Look closer at some of the classes. Soldier: at first you can use an action to activate a tactics feat for a number of rounds equal to your cha mod. at second you can activate two. At third you deal max da,age with your weapons & choose one you crit on 19-20. Scout can activate traps at first but the rules seem missing in addition to being able to heal with firstaid at first, a medic deals an extra d6 of damage for organ targeting at second engineer at fifth can activate a machine to explode for 6d6 damage. Is it a bad thing that a team comprised of diplomats engineers & scoutswill have a tough time with combat while walking all over social technical & survival type challenges?... not really & it's probably not a bad thing.
  12. You misunderstand. The problem with your example is not that it references a non-game item; the problem is that it is incomplete & doesn't give enough information in isolation about how it would work or what the dr levels would look like to not need a lot of balancing concerns. I just hope to hell they don't include 5e type resistances
  13. I don't see ordnance disposal armor anywhere in the book so guessing it's something you made up, so there's no point debating the mechanics of an undefined item, but your right about kevlar not being especially useful against a knife & that is why I didn't list melee weapons hitting with attacks against EAC or BAC ;). You wouldn't be misinterpreting my examples "for your reasons' sake" would you? The fact of the matter is though that we are both talking about changes to the system. Your suggestion of armor as DR is how shadowrun handles it & combat is very different with opposed rolls. Your example also encourages the odd feel of sgc teams converting tio jaffa armor & ditching tau'ri armor while jaffa do the inverse. By comparison having some armors having a point or three different AC against some types of attacks doesn't cause the same shift because those armors are still goor or even better against other types of attacks.
×
×
  • Create New...