nails
New Member
Posts: 34
|
Post by nails on Sept 27, 2015 8:26:39 GMT
Another question. To hit something say the size of a child has a penalty is it -1?
Only ask as say the PCs Were to enter a school and out of a classroom come a horde of infected children! I sense panic and a possible moral role at some point as it may be the first time they have come across and infected child.
|
|
|
Post by Oliver R Shead on Sept 29, 2015 8:37:12 GMT
Yeah that would be pretty brutal. Though bear in mind, this isn't the Walking Dead, so these children Infected would be unlikely to still be in the school, and in large numbers. Five years on (if that's when you're setting it), most of them would have died and moved on, looking for food. However, they could still be living there, surviving there I don't give any penalties to hit something of a child's size, unless they're at a distance. Even then, unless they're really small, or obscured by cover, they'd be basically as easy to hit as anyone else (despite my usual rules for targeting different Size things... it just doesn't seem to make sense in this case unless they're obscured!). Killing kids though... nasty... that would certainly require Morality checks!
|
|
|
Post by Garage on Sept 29, 2015 8:46:45 GMT
A short burst fires from three to ten rounds for light firearms, or ten to thirty for a belt-fed machinegun. A short burst gives +1 Die to Strike, at the level of the appropriate Skill. The attack also suffers a penalty of -2 to Strike.
the +1 Die to strike..... what does it add too? Dex+Ranged: Firearms is the standard attack rolls....
|
|
nails
New Member
Posts: 34
|
Post by nails on Sept 30, 2015 21:00:20 GMT
Ok got a question to do with defence and multiple actions.
Player A has declared that he is going to attack and infected.
Initiative order is as follows player A then infected
Player A attacks infected 1 (does the infected receive a penalty to defence as it intends on attacking, if so what penalty)
Then
Infected 1 attacks player A (I presume because the infected had to defend it was forced to take multiple actions, so because this would be player A's second action is there a penalty in his defensive roll?) Infected
|
|
nails
New Member
Posts: 34
|
Post by nails on Sept 30, 2015 21:43:28 GMT
Sorry another question.
We struggled with the new combat rules while play testing and ended up getting really confused. Our combat ended up going with the following rules
1. Attack: attribute + skill rolls 2. Defence: attribute + skill rolls If successful then 3. Damage: attribute + weapon stat rolls/ unless a mechanical firearm which already describes the damage rolls e.g. 9mm pistol = +4/+4 4. Work out HR difference and apply 5. Absorb: constitution + armour stat rolls
This is what I worked out and went with and seemed to work for us. I did absorption like this because the armour's effectiveness is measured in the HR difference vs the weapons HR. Rolling constitution shows how well you can take a hit/how hardy someone is and rolling armour's stat shows where on the armour you were hit (whether on the thickest part (high roll) or weakest part (low roll)).
For example:
Dave has a dagger (+4 damage, HR 2) He attacks an bob who is wearing a leather coat (+3 absorb, HR 1) Attack: (+5 dex/+4 melee) rolls 15/11 = 6 successes Defence: (+5 dex/+4 dodge) rolls 12/9 = 2 successes 6-2=4 successes. Damage: (+4 str/+4 dagger with carryover = +6/+6) rolls 13/13 = 6 damage HR: dagger(2) vs jacket (1) = HR 1 for attacker =absorbed rolls result is halved) Absorb: (+5 con/ +3 jacket) rolls 14/8 = 4 successes, halved = 2 successes 6 damage - 2 absorb = 4 total damage
Bob got badly injured.
Does this a) make sense and b) sound feasible?
|
|
|
Post by Oliver R Shead on Oct 1, 2015 4:09:55 GMT
The +1 die is at the level of Ranged: Firearms, when you're shooting handguns. If you had a repeating crossbow (whatever that is), you would roll using Ranged: Simple. So for a burst from a handgun you'd roll Dex/Firearms/Firearms with -2 successes. And btw, Garage you asked how many bullets should it actually be? I'd say 3. It's a short burst. I like to keep it loose, but three is basically what people would fire for this sort of burst. Okay so this all comes down to Declaring your actions. If Player A elects to do a single action and only shoot the Infected, he'd better hope he kills it. If he just wounds it and it doesn't fall over, get staggered or whatever, then it is going to attack him and he won't be able to Dodge, because he didn't do a multi action. However, if the Infected doesn't want to get shot, it would have to abort its action to a Dodge, losing its attack that round and only getting to Dodge (again, unless it elected to Dodge AND attack that round, getting a penalty on both actions). Player A could elect to do a multi-action, Shoot, then Dodge. In this case he would suffer a penalty of -2 to the shooting roll, then -3 to the Dodging roll. Same with Infected 1, if it elected to Dodge then Claw, it would get -2, then -3. Very close nails! I will need to work on a way to make this clearer in the book. The Con check is only made if you're getting attacked by something which has an HR of 0 or 1. In this case of getting stabbed, it's HR 2, so they don't get a Con Absorb. You'll notice in the stat of the leather jacket it Absorbs at +3/+3 - so you roll 2 dice at that level. (However, I quite like your modification of it. I think I'll give that some thought). So in your example above Bob would have only gotten an 11/8 = 1 success, so he ends up taking 5 damage and is brutally injured. The other thing was carryover - our rule is (at present - bear in mind it could change) that carryover is your total successes to strike -1. Because if you got 1 success to Strike, that doesn't give you carryover. It's just the barest of successes. You roll damage with no modifier. If you got 2 successes to Strike you get +1/+0. 3 successes = +1/+1 4 successes = +2/+1 Does that make sense? Again, it could be changed to make it simpler
|
|
nails
New Member
Posts: 34
|
Post by nails on Oct 1, 2015 7:24:55 GMT
Cheers Oliver certainly clears a bit up for me.
We had fun play testing last night though. It even got to a point that Gary got scared of Kim's cat!!! Hahahaha
|
|
|
Post by Garage on Oct 1, 2015 7:42:59 GMT
The thing was like a ninja!!! It crept under the table and sat on the chair next to me....
I was taping my hand in excitement and bam!! It struck!!
I think I needed clean underwear afterwards!!!
|
|
|
Post by Oliver R Shead on Oct 1, 2015 11:08:46 GMT
Hahaha! That sounds awesome Cats... are ninjas... it's true!
|
|
nails
New Member
Posts: 34
|
Post by nails on Oct 5, 2015 23:19:33 GMT
Question about the infected.
I know they are intelligent enough to use simple items etc. so I take it they are sensitive to light, sound and most smell.
Can they smell non infected people much like the walkers on the walking dead can smell a living person?
|
|
|
Post by Garage on Oct 6, 2015 5:10:44 GMT
Why do I get worried when you ask questions......
|
|
|
Post by Oliver R Shead on Oct 7, 2015 13:41:17 GMT
Hi nails, they can absolutely! They have heightened perceptions of such things, as the animal is much more alert, and their very survival depends on them being able to "sniff out" prey... so they can smell blood, sweat, strong smells much more sharply than most people, who are almost deaf to smells. Which also brings up some interesting points about those who are immune, or those who have been infected but have survived, and so might smell a bit like an Infected! This would be an Advantage in the final book (a backer idea, and a cool one).
|
|
nails
New Member
Posts: 34
|
Post by nails on Oct 9, 2015 0:01:03 GMT
So would they then be able to 'track' fresh blood for example. Does the exposure of a fresh wound make them more detectable? Also are they smart enough to follow foot prints etc when tracking their quarry?
|
|
|
Post by rupethebear on Oct 9, 2015 5:42:49 GMT
Forgive me if I've missed this somewhere as I tend to just skim things... Is there a Critical Fail rule? Ignore me, I've just found the bungle rule.
|
|
|
Post by Oliver R Shead on Oct 9, 2015 22:08:14 GMT
Haha, no problem @rupe!
|
|