| From: | Marc Renouf renouf@********.com |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Shooting through cover |
| Date: | Wed, 16 Jun 1999 11:45:32 -0400 (EDT) |
> I've not had any RL experience with this, but it seems that you should be
> able to position yourself in cover so that it doesn't impeded your
> movement too much. Laying prone by a corner gives you concealment from
> people shooting at you, but you still have amost full movement for
> shooting at other targets.
I can tell you this - laying down is the fastest way to restrict
your mobility. In order to move you either need to crawl or spend a
moment getting up. It's hard to change your direction of fire (standing
up, you just turn around, lying down it's not so easy).
Also, cover reflects more than just how much of your body is
exposed. It also reflects the amount of time your body is exposed.
Taking cover implies at least some movement. Part of the modifier for
taking cover deals with this movement. It also deals with temporarily
losing line of sight to the target while you're moving around. That split
second of reaquisition you need to make is one of the things that makes
the shot more difficult.
But essentially, you are correct. There are times when your
movement won't be restricted. But that's rarely "cover." It's usually
concealment, which is a totally different ballgame. I make a distinction
in my game between concealment and actual cover. Cover adds to people's
target numbers to hit you (as well as increasing your own to shoot back).
Concealment, on the other hand, adds to the target number people need on a
perception test to see you. Ferns and grass are a perfect example. If
you can't see your target, you can't engage him effectively. If you do
spot the target, the grass is going to do jack to stop the bullet. Once
you've sptted him, he's not in "cover" at all.
> Another home rule is that if a character is using APDS ammo, and their
> target is hiding behind a wall, who really cares that they have +6 cover?
I too use a similar house rule, but for all shots, not just APDS.
It also works by "accident," i.e. if you don't have any successes that
would hit the target including the cover modifier, you check if you have
any that hit using half the target's cover modifier (the half reflecting
the fact that if you can't see the target you don't really know how he's
positioned behind the cover, and may be shooting at the wrong place
entirely). If you do, then you hit the target, but the target gets the
benefit of the Barrier Rating of the cover as armor.
For example, Sleazy the Sam is shooting his Ares Predator at Timmy
the Target. They're in an abandoned trainyard, and Timmy the Target is
running as fast as he can in and among the stacks of discarded railroad
ties. It's long range (6), Sleazy has a smartlink (-2), it's partial
light conditions, but Sleazy has lowlight (+1), Sleazy is stationary (+0),
but his target is running (+3 - see note below), and has 75% cover (+6).
The final target number for the shot is 6-2+1+3+6 = 14. Sleazy spends his
first simple action aiming, dropping the target number to 13.
Sleazy rolls his skill of 5 and adds the maximum of 5 combat pool,
for a total of 10 dice. He gets a 1,2,3,3,4,5,5,5,10, and 11. Normally,
that would be a complete miss.
But wait! Sleazy has a 10 and an 11. The target number to hit
through cover is a 13 - target's cover/2 = 10. That's two successes!
Unfortunately, the GM rules that the heavy creosote-soaked, sun-hardened
timbers count as "structural material" and have a Barrier Rating of 12,
and the power level of the attack is only a 9. Alas, Timmy the target is
saved, as rounds that have his name on them smack harmlessly into the
railroad ties.
This rule makes players think. No longer can you jump behind the
rice-paper shoji panel and claim to be unhittable. People pay a lot more
attention to their surroundings, and positioning yourself near adequate
cover becomes important.
*NOTE from above - FASA pisses me off. Their target number
modifiers for moving targets are all out of whack. They have a stationary
target at -1 and a running target at +2. Why did they do this? Why make
a walking target the baseline? Leading even a slowly moving target
correctly isn't easy. To rectify this, I've made stationary targets +0,
walking targets +1, and running targets +3. This way, in ideal conditions
at short range with both a stationary shooter and target, the target
number to hit is a 4, just like every other base-line target number in the
freakin' game.
Marc Renouf (ShadowRN GridSec - "Bad Cop" Division)
Other ShadowRN-related addresses and links:
Mark Imbriaco <mark@*********.html.com> List Owner
Adam Jury <adamj@*********.html.com> Assistant List Administrator
DVixen <dvixen@****.com> Keeper of the FAQs
Gurth <gurth@******.nl> GridSec Enforcer Division
David Buehrer <graht@********.att.net> GridSec "Nice Guy" Division
ShadowRN FAQ <http://shadowrun.html.com/hlair/faqindex.php3>;
