Just to point out:
According to the standards that some are complaining about concerning HBs,
regular Beams also have "no roll to hit."
1-3 results in no damage, and 4-6 results in varying amounts, but they
always roll that damage die - without a single roll to hit.
Granted that HBs are assured of damage at ranges 0-6 MU as they are
currently written. At 13 MU, however, 1-2 results in no damage, and 3-6
results in varying amounts. This should sound familiar.
They ARE balanced with P-Torps as currently written (at least according
to strict statistics, though playtesting could pick up something that we
missed or wasn't factored in).
My challenge to the naysayers is: if you don't agree, or don't like it, fine.
However, provide a constructive alternative. The basic elements of any
criticism should include recommendations for change or improvement.
I am in the camp of no auto-hits unless it is an area-effect weapon.
Auto-hit is one of the reasons that the Kra'Vak Scattergun is
unbalanced in comparison to human PDS systems.
You requested constructive alternatives. I see three:
1. Change the -1 per range band to include the first range band.
This means that it is very likely to hit, but not impossible to miss.
Mass/Cost may have to be altered for play balance due to
decreased range (1 range band).
2. Roll a die and hit on 4+ (50%). If you use this option, you may
want to increase the size of the range bands or change mass/cost
for play balance.
3. Roll to hit using the P-Torp chart. Again, mass/cost or damage
may have to be altered for play balance.
-----
Brian Bell bkb@beol.net
http://members.xoom.com/rlyehable/ft/
-----
> -----Original Message-----
> 1. Change the -1 per range band to include the first range band.
This is a possibilty.
> 2. Roll a die and hit on 4+ (50%). If you use this option, you may
As I see, these two options would fundamentally change the intent of HBs as
written in the EFSB, which is why I've been avoiding it.
It's possible that those without access to the EFSB may be missing this.
My first draft of the HB rules were essentially straight out of the EFSB. I've
been trying to keep the system balanced while adhering as close as possible to
the original rules.
I don't suppose the following elegant yet simple rule would work......
"If you roll a Natural One on the D6, it misses. Die Rolls modified to a One
result in 1 pt of damage."
That way, the effect of shields can bring it down to a single point of damage
and it still gives it a chance of missing.
Heck, I wouldn't mind this "1-Misses" rule applied to KV Scatterguns.
-=Kr'rt
Quoth Sean Bayan Schoonmaker <schoon@aimnet.com>...
> Just to point out:
> On Mon, 7 Feb 2000, Sean Bayan Schoonmaker wrote:
> Just to point out:
bzzt. wrong. the roll for beams is a roll to hit. it's also a roll to damage
of course.
the issue raised is not of the lack of a roll to hit, it's the lack of the
possibility of doing no damage to unscreened targets at close range, without
having to guess placing.
> 1-3 results in no damage, and 4-6 results in varying amounts, but they
absolutely. the nay-sayers have done this.
we've criticised the automatic hit, and suggested fixes - the 'always
miss on 1' and 'round up the range band', approaches, both of which have been
rejected without much comment, it seems (the best argument i've seen is "that
would make HBs too weak, and they're balanced as they are"; a fix to that was
even proposed: the extension of the range bands to 8 mu each).
we've criticised the fact that the capacitor takes two hits before dying, and
suggested that it should only take one, with the compensation of either
reduced mass or getting to keep charging even though the capacitor is damaged
(so you can use the charge once it's fixed).
personally, i'd like to see (as i'm sure everyone is now bored of me
saying) range bands being rounded up (ie 1-6 mu is -1, 7-12 mu is -2,
etc)
and one-hit capacitors. after an analysis of the damage output with
these settings, an appropriate mass and cost can be decided on; we thus end up
with a balanced weapon which doesn't have the two features which have raised
most debate.
tom