T Bone wrote:
On May 10, 2007, at 7:05 PM, Pauli Hakala wrote:
Re large weapons vs small foes:
Against bugs, use a flyswatter instead of trying to pin them
with a needle or trying to catch them with chopsticks. Their small
size benefits can be canceled out by simply using a larger weapon
attack surface.. This could work by simply capping the dodge
modifier of a very small creature at the size modifier of
the attacking weapon. As the rationale goes; the larger
the flyswatter, the easier it is to hit a fly.
Right, I've worked that effect into my house rules since way back, as a
simple "use the higher of target or weapon size" as the target's SM for
TH purposes.
But that's separate from your implementation, SM as a Dodge mod. I
suppose SM as a Dodge mod works too, though to get technical about it,
Dodge should become a factor of how far you have to move (based on
larger of SM or weapon size), vs how far you *can* move in a "defense
instant" (whatever length of time that represents). If the base Dodge
stat ((DX+HT)/4) can be said to represent that latter item, then I guess
Dodge = base Dodge - (larger of SM or weapon size) should be reasonable
- though if you're using tactical maps, it also implies that a large
creature, moving a distance that represents his own size, should move
the appropriate number of hexes when Dodging (not just staying in-hex or
moving one hex).
I haven't played SM as a Dodge mod in GURPS, but have used similar
concepts in some non-GURPS geekery, and have no problem with the concept.
Also, if the target cannot move at least half as much as the incoming
weapons shortest dimension is and cannot move into cover either, no
dodge roll should be possible.
In fact, most player characters did not end up spending more than
2 or 4 points in the Evasion skill.
I can't help but think that in large-scale playtesting, it would prove
extremely popular (8 points for +1 Dodge), and get labeled "too cheap".
But if the cost isn't proving a problem in *your* game, then of course,
the old adage applies: if it's not broke, don't fix it!
We did use the Evasion/2 dodge in a medieval fantasy game too
- Actually, with all of the encumbrance penalties from the armor
and weapons, blocks and parries were still in most cases more
effective defenses than dodge, and this made dodge prettymuch
a last resort, something one only attempts when nothing else
works.
I see no problems with using the Evasion skill with FEND. It works
just like Battlesuit and Driving:Mecha skills do. (Default 'untrained'
dodging still uses the usual HT+DX base.)
Hmm, using FEND and full Evasion skill, to make a Dodge? Now that's
getting down to an incredibly cheap 4 points per +1 Dodge... I myself
wouldn't price Dodge bonuses that cheap – but as above, if it works fine
in your games, all is well!
Even with FEND dodge scores this high, it is still quite easy
to hit with something like hypersonic armorpiercing infra-red
homing projectiles fired from neurolinked gauss weapons, since
the 'Fast Attack' option can change any leftover aiming
bonuses into a big dodge penalty.. And if using a cyberslaved
weapon harness (like the smartguns from the movie 'Aliens'),
a targeting computer can be added to the weapon, giving
a considerable TH bonus which can also be used to further
erode targets FEND defenses. (Note: In Space Vikings setting,
IRH bypasses the targets Deflector Screen TH penalty)
In effect, with the FEND rules in place, the Evasion skill
only makes it easy to dodge unskilled 'spray and pray' kind
of attacks. A professional combatant with an advanced weapon
system can inflict quite massive dodge penalties at typical
urban combat distances..
-Pauli
--
"Accompanied only by the full moon, howling of
the nightwolf, and the path under my bare feet,
the elvenpath.."
-Nightwish, Angels Fall First: Elvenpath
_______________________________________________
GurpsNet-L mailing list <[email protected]>
http://mail.sjgames.com/mailman/listinfo/gurpsnet-l
