Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: How to fix Chase Combat
Dumpshock Forums > Discussion > Shadowrun
Pages: 1, 2
The Monk
This is the handout for the house rules for Chase Combat that I will give to my players, comments?
Vehicle Chase Combat

These optional rules are used when all characters are piloting vehicles or drones and are operating them beyond the Walk and Run speeds. Chase combat simulates high-speed chases, street racing, and mounted combat. These rules modify the existing rules on page 161, SR4.

Vehicle Tests
The attribute and skill used for the vehicle test depend on how the vehicle is being piloted.
Manuel pilots roll Reaction+Pilot Skill. With AR assist, +1 dice.
Rigger pilots roll Response+Pilot Skill. With Control Rig, +2 dice (+4 hot sim) and -1 Threshold.
Matrix pilots roll Command+Autosoft. Full VR, +1 dice (+3 hot sim) and -1 Threshold.
Auto pilots roll Polit+Autosoft.

Normally added to the above test is the Handling Attribute. These rules introduce two other attributes used similarly to Handling: Speed and Acceleration.
Speed is calculated by dividing the Vehicle or Drone’s Speed Attribute by 50 rounding down.
Acceleration is calculated by dividing the Run Acceleration Attribute by 15 rounding down.
When the Vehicle Chase Combat takes place in Tight and Restricted terrain use the Handling Attribute to modify the Vehicle Tests as normal. In Light terrain use the Acceleration Attribute. In Open terrain use the Speed Attribute.

Opposed Vehicle Test
At the beginning of each Chase Combat Turn, each driver makes a Vehicle Test. The winner chooses the Engagement Range and Terrain Type, if the GM determines that there is more than one choice available (you can’t choose to move the Chase into a Tight alley if there are none to turn into). The Engagement Range has been changed to Short Range, Medium Range, and Long Range for consistency.

Chase Stunts
Along with the four Chase Stunts on page 161 SR4, the driver may choose this additional Stunt:
Speed Up (Any Range): The driver attempts to use his skill or the speed of his vehicle to gain an advantage. To do this the driver must succeed in an Opposed Vehicle Test (any or all opposing vehicle may roll). If the driver wins, he may increase the speed in which the Chase Combat is operating in by up to his Running Acceleration Attribute times the net hits gained from this test. This increased speed (along with all appropriate modifiers) begins on the next Chase Turn and ends when the Terrain Type changes.

Maximum Speed
For every 20 meters of Speed above the Maximum Speed of the Terrain type and the Vehicle Speed Attribute of the vehicle driven, modify the Vehicle Test by -1.

Terrain Table

Terrain Type Short Range Medium Range Long Range Maximum Speed Threshold Modifier
Open 0-200 201-400 401+ 200 +1
Example: highways, flat grassy plains, open seas, gently flowing rivers
Light 0-100 101-250 251+ 100 +2
Example: main street thoroughfares, rolling hills, dock areas
Restricted 0-50 51-150 151+ 70 +3
Example: side streets, light woods, rocky mountain slopes, light traffic areas, gentle rapids, shallow water zones
Tight 0-25 26-75 76+ 40 +4
Example: back alleys, heavy woods, very steep slopes, high traffic streets, mud, swamp

Cain
QUOTE
I can see where you don't believe in killing players for using powerful abilities, but might doesn't make right. I can think of more than a few examples where someone who uses a bit more power than they should have to do something silly met their ends because of it.

I know what you mean, but come on! A Threshold 30 test? That's the same thing as: "Rocks fall, everyone dies". Movement works like, well, magic; you can assume that you get some measure of safety from it. Apply penalties? Sure, but not impossible ones.
QUOTE
I don't mean to point blame or start fights. Accept this as an apology. I came to this thread to find out what you thought was wrong with chase combat, and so far, everything I've read more or less seemed like the GM just got flustered and didn't account for any in game reason your team was now again in close engagement range. I personally have never had a problem with chase combat.

Actually, once the Movement power got involved, the GM simply handwaved the escape. The driver was making some very difficult rolls to stay alive, though. But the issue is that even with a huge speed advantage, the other guys could manage to stay in close range. By the Rules As Written, we would need to keep running at top speed for at least 4 minutes before we could get away. The RAW doesn't account for speed.

Oh and don't worry about the apology, it's not a big deal.
QUOTE
So here's my suggestion. Chase combat works basically as designed... Winner declares range and you go from there, but that's the *final* range of the chase round, which lasts a minute. Yes, that means you have to figure out/abstract what happens in that minute. If you need to do tactical combat in there, you can. As ranges increase, take that into account for making some weapons non-viable for hurting your target. As ranges decrease, options will increase, including the option of leaping onto the opposing vehicle.

I like what you're trying to do, but I think it still has the problems with closing ranges way too quickly, and not accounting for speed differences. Someone suggested not allowing you to change more than one range category per turn; would that work with what you're doing?

I also don't like the different time frame. That's why I favor folding some of the Chase stuff into normal combat. I think the one minute rounds are just too long, and complicate the actions of normal characters.
Jhaiisiin
I don't see why not. Limiting a single change in range wouldn't be too difficult. Or even limiting it not on speed, but on acceleration differences. As someone mentioned, unless you're on open road, top speeds are just not going to matter.
Blade
@Jhaiisiin: I like your vision, it's quite close to mine (explained earlier in that thread).

Anyway, I don't see the point of arguing any further with most people here since we clearly have a different way to play a game. I know I like to consider the facts and then apply the rules in a way that fit the fact, while some seem to prefer to apply the rules and get the final facts directly out of them. Each to his own, I guess.
Ryu
So Cain, what is your proposed set of rules?
Cain
QUOTE (Ryu @ Sep 10 2008, 01:17 AM) *
So Cain, what is your proposed set of rules?

I don't have one yet. That's why I started this thread. nyahnyah.gif
Mr. Unpronounceable
QUOTE (Jhaiisiin @ Sep 10 2008, 07:24 AM) *
Oh, in regards to the movement power, I understand it to be, well, magic, and it helps protect the target while moving it from one point to another. Maybe it creates a millimeter of space beneath your feet and the pavement so that you run normally, but cover 5x the distance due to the power. Your body isn't doing any more work, and thus no more stress is incurred. The same protection extends to accelleration and decelleration. The power slows stuff down or speeds it up as needed without negatively impacting the power.

However, if something unexpectedly gets in the way... like say a Wall, then you suffer damage based on crashing into it at the speed you were travelling at. So a spiffy human running along at 150m/turn gets to take damage if he goes from 150 to 0 due to an obstruction.

That's why clever mages use spirits with the guard power too.
Cain
QUOTE (Ryu @ Sep 10 2008, 01:17 AM) *
So Cain, what is your proposed set of rules?

OK, I've come up with an idea. It's a little crazy, but I think it might work.

You know that one thing I like about Chase Combat is the fact that distances are abstracted. You don't have to set exact positions. The problem with deleting Chase Combat and folding the better parts into normal combat is that distances in normal combat are more precise.

Then it hit me. Why should I take out the part I like? Instead of making vehicle combat more exact, why not just completely abstract ranges in normal combat?

Most of the time, GM's tend to abstract distances anyway. You never hear: "He's exactly 8.3 meters away from you"; you hear: "Yeah, he's within medium range of your pistol." So, I think turning things into ranges, instead of exact distances, will work just fine.

So, we have four distance ranges: Close, Medium, Long, and Extreme. To prevent the Picard Maneuver, under normal circumstances, you cannot move more than one range category per action. You can make an appropriate roll, with a Threshold of at least 2+ and modified by terrain, to close two range categories as a simple action. Trolls get +2 to movement rolls, because they're really big; other movement modifiers become a flat die bonus. For example, Movement becomes bonus dice equal to Force.

Instead of an opposed vehicle test to determine position, you can choose to make an opposed test as a complex action. Your vehicle will then have a +2 Superior Position modifier against the vehicles you defeated. For non-vehicles, different rolls as appropriate; for example, Sprinting is good, but Climbing could work as well.

Well, that's some of the basics. What do you all think?
Wesley Street
Hmm, no I don't think that's crazy. That's pretty close to what I've been using for the few Chase Combat encounters I've run. I abstract (I think "round" is a more appropriate term) the distances and apply appropriate modifiers. I wonder if this what the developers intended when the rules were originally written but they never quite fleshed that part out.

Sometimes using Hot Wheels cars on a battlemap helps.

Side note: When I'm bored I like to put together imaginary proposals for Shadowrun projects: one was called In The Field and the idea was to do a mash-up of Fields of Fire, Rigger 3, Corporate Security and the Lone Star Sourcebook. One section would outline Law Enforcement and Special Forces-style driving tactics with more fleshed out vehicle combat rules as well as optional advanced rules on braking, ramming, spin-outs, etc.
Ryu
QUOTE (Cain @ Sep 13 2008, 01:37 AM) *
OK, I've come up with an idea. It's a little crazy, but I think it might work.

You know that one thing I like about Chase Combat is the fact that distances are abstracted. You don't have to set exact positions. The problem with deleting Chase Combat and folding the better parts into normal combat is that distances in normal combat are more precise.

Then it hit me. Why should I take out the part I like? Instead of making vehicle combat more exact, why not just completely abstract ranges in normal combat?

Most of the time, GM's tend to abstract distances anyway. You never hear: "He's exactly 8.3 meters away from you"; you hear: "Yeah, he's within medium range of your pistol." So, I think turning things into ranges, instead of exact distances, will work just fine.

So, we have four distance ranges: Close, Medium, Long, and Extreme. To prevent the Picard Maneuver, under normal circumstances, you cannot move more than one range category per action. You can make an appropriate roll, with a Threshold of at least 2+ and modified by terrain, to close two range categories as a simple action. Trolls get +2 to movement rolls, because they're really big; other movement modifiers become a flat die bonus. For example, Movement becomes bonus dice equal to Force.

Instead of an opposed vehicle test to determine position, you can choose to make an opposed test as a complex action. Your vehicle will then have a +2 Superior Position modifier against the vehicles you defeated. For non-vehicles, different rolls as appropriate; for example, Sprinting is good, but Climbing could work as well.

Well, that's some of the basics. What do you all think?


It could work with my bunch. You would need a different kind of range modifier table (mod per range category).
Cain
QUOTE (Ryu @ Sep 13 2008, 03:18 PM) *
It could work with my bunch. You would need a different kind of range modifier table (mod per range category).

What would you suggest?
Ryu
Something along the lines of "Pistols: -1/0/-3/--", "Assault Rifle: -3/0/-2/-4" etc.
TheGothfather
QUOTE (Cain @ Sep 12 2008, 07:37 PM) *
OK, I've come up with an idea. It's a little crazy, but I think it might work.

You know that one thing I like about Chase Combat is the fact that distances are abstracted. You don't have to set exact positions. The problem with deleting Chase Combat and folding the better parts into normal combat is that distances in normal combat are more precise.

Then it hit me. Why should I take out the part I like? Instead of making vehicle combat more exact, why not just completely abstract ranges in normal combat?

Most of the time, GM's tend to abstract distances anyway. You never hear: "He's exactly 8.3 meters away from you"; you hear: "Yeah, he's within medium range of your pistol." So, I think turning things into ranges, instead of exact distances, will work just fine.

So, we have four distance ranges: Close, Medium, Long, and Extreme. To prevent the Picard Maneuver, under normal circumstances, you cannot move more than one range category per action. You can make an appropriate roll, with a Threshold of at least 2+ and modified by terrain, to close two range categories as a simple action. Trolls get +2 to movement rolls, because they're really big; other movement modifiers become a flat die bonus. For example, Movement becomes bonus dice equal to Force.

Instead of an opposed vehicle test to determine position, you can choose to make an opposed test as a complex action. Your vehicle will then have a +2 Superior Position modifier against the vehicles you defeated. For non-vehicles, different rolls as appropriate; for example, Sprinting is good, but Climbing could work as well.

Well, that's some of the basics. What do you all think?
You've almost re-invented Burning Wheel's combat system. May as well go all the way with it. Have everybody roll opposed positioning tests (initiative would probably work fine for it), let the person with the highest number of hits determine his range against everyone else, then the next highest against the ones below him. The person with the least gets screwed (guess he should have positioned better).

QUOTE (Ryu)
Something along the lines of "Pistols: -1/0/-3/--", "Assault Rifle: -3/0/-2/-4" etc.
Why use dice modifiers? Why not use thresholds instead, and give bonus dice to the initial positioning roll based on the ranges of the weapon (which can also be abstracted)? At short range you have a threshold of 1, medium 2, long 3, extreme 4. At point blank you should be hand to hand, or maybe getting a shot off with an open test.
Ryu
So you would have variable thresholds on top of a weapon range modifier table. As you can work the thresholds into the range table, that is a bit superfluous. Ie: Threshold 2nd category +1 is equivalent to "all range modifiers for the 2nd category -3".
Cain
QUOTE
Why use dice modifiers? Why not use thresholds instead, and give bonus dice to the initial positioning roll based on the ranges of the weapon (which can also be abstracted)? At short range you have a threshold of 1, medium 2, long 3, extreme 4. At point blank you should be hand to hand, or maybe getting a shot off with an open test.

Because there are no thresholds in combat. Just about every test is opposed. Since in an opposed test, your threshold is what the other guy rolled. By adding and subtracting successes (which is what Threshold modifiers do) things become unbalanced very quickly.

Also: I don't have Burning Wheel. I've heard a lot about it. Could you provide more detail? How do you handle people with complicated distances from each other?
TheGothfather
QUOTE (Ryu @ Sep 15 2008, 03:45 PM) *
So you would have variable thresholds on top of a weapon range modifier table. As you can work the thresholds into the range table, that is a bit superfluous. Ie: Threshold 2nd category +1 is equivalent to "all range modifiers for the 2nd category -3".
No. I'd dump weapon range modifiers in favor of variable thresholds. I dislike the idea of subtracting dice from a pool. It's a houserule, but I always apply penalties as a threshold modifier, and bonuses as a dice pool modifier. Saves on the bookkeeping as a GM. And I'm a very lazy GM

QUOTE (Cain)
I don't have Burning Wheel. I've heard a lot about it. Could you provide more detail? How do you handle people with complicated distances from each other?
There's a lot to explain, but I'll try to be a little brief. BW's mechanics are all about explicit intents. If there's someone blocking a door, it's not enough to say, "I punch the guard." You have to be explicit - "I want to get to the door. I punch the guard." The roll determines whether or not you make it to the door, rather than whether or not you successfully punch the guard. I only explain that because it's a fundamental BW concept that I've used in my own SR game.

BW also takes a layered approach to combat. You can go at multiple levels of detail, depending on how important a particular battle is. For example, if you're hacking down unimportant mooks, you just make an opposed weapon skill roll. The winner gets their intent, like in the example above.

Ranged combat get's a lot more abstract. It's all about positioning, finding cover, and getting a chance to attack. It's a little difficult to explain quickly, so bear with me. First, there's no initiative. You script three moves in advance and reveal them one by one. With ranged combat, you're scripting positioning maneuvers, so you can Close the distance, Maintain your position, Withdraw to a greater range, or Let Them Come and just stand your ground. Whoever wins their positioning test gets their intent. Let's say I want to Close, and my opponent wants to Withdraw. We make an opposed roll. I get 3 hits, he gets 2. He stays where he's at, and I Close in on him. Successes from that roll are used to "buy" cover and attacks. So with my 3 hits, I could spend one to attack, and the other 2 as either defense dice or aiming dice. Probably more detail than you needed, and it looks complicated, but it goes really fast in play. Actual ranges don't really matter. The system gives you bonus positioning dice for having weapons with longer ranges, that is, a bow might give you a +2 due to having a better range than someone with throwing knives, but the meat of combat is about getting the better firing position, so how far you actually are from your target isn't as much of an issue.

Close combat builds another layer by having you script out actual moves - Block, Strike, Push, feint, etc. - three moves in advance. Yeah, that does mean that two people can kill eachother at the exact same time. Which is awesome, as far as I'm concerned.

QUOTE (Cain)
Because there are no thresholds in combat. Just about every test is opposed. Since in an opposed test, your threshold is what the other guy rolled. By adding and subtracting successes (which is what Threshold modifiers do) things become unbalanced very quickly.
I'm going to start a new thread for this. Not because you're wrong, but because this conversation essentially inspired me to create an unholy scripted combat system for SR4.
noonesshowmonkey
I am going to openly admit that I got to page 2 and just stopped reading.

I think that those who gave situations wherein chase rules are applicable are dead on to how the rules are intended to be used.

When the situation actually produces a chase as a viable method of storytelling, as opposed to trying to chase a car with a bike (lullz, btw), then the rules work just fine. I have had very little trouble with them and they are similar in style to the chase rules in Alternity which I love with all my heart.
In any case, the problem seems to be pretty plain to me.

You went mach 4+ and wondered what happened. What if the gangers got a good roll? By RAW, they box you in and are still in close range? By logic your car would rip itself apart and the occupants would be most uncomfortable. Literally the car would disintegrate, fly into the air and rip itself apart. Maybe I am just missing what exactly a Force 10 spirit can do? Maybe I would rule that a F10 Movement power would have to dedicate, oh, 75% of its force points to exceed the base speed of a land vehicle by more than 2 or 3 times before the vehicle is utterly destroyed? Who knows. I would have stopped that shit right then and there... Then again, as you said, GM fiat pisses you off.
Cain
QUOTE
BW also takes a layered approach to combat. You can go at multiple levels of detail, depending on how important a particular battle is. For example, if you're hacking down unimportant mooks, you just make an opposed weapon skill roll. The winner gets their intent, like in the example above.

OK, I see where you're going with this. Start that new thread, maybe I can get the answers I need there. Meanwhile, I'll keep working on my ideas here.

QUOTE
When the situation actually produces a chase as a viable method of storytelling, as opposed to trying to chase a car with a bike (lullz, btw), then the rules work just fine. I have had very little trouble with them and they are similar in style to the chase rules in Alternity which I love with all my heart.

I've explained repeatedly that it does not. You can teleport from long range to short range, bringing all your buddies with you. Speed doesn't matter, and skill only matters a little bit. It also breaks completely when you try running normal combat. I have one solution: fold it into normal combat, then abstract all ranges in normal combat.

QUOTE
You went mach 4+ and wondered what happened. What if the gangers got a good roll? By RAW, they box you in and are still in close range? By logic your car would rip itself apart and the occupants would be most uncomfortable. Literally the car would disintegrate, fly into the air and rip itself apart. Maybe I am just missing what exactly a Force 10 spirit can do? Maybe I would rule that a F10 Movement power would have to dedicate, oh, 75% of its force points to exceed the base speed of a land vehicle by more than 2 or 3 times before the vehicle is utterly destroyed? Who knows. I would have stopped that shit right then and there... Then again, as you said, GM fiat pisses you off.

Yeah, that's exactly the sort of GM fiat that really gets my goat. I cannot stand the "Rocks fall, you die" method of GMing. But for the record, why are you using logic. Hate to put it this way, but it's literally *magic*. Especially if you've got a spirit using the Guard power on you, you shouldn't have to worry much, even on a failed roll.

The GM in the actual scenario simply handwaved our escape, saying that there was no way in hell they could keep up with us. The hypothetical situation is what would have happened if he'd followed the rules. Of course, waiting in ambush to get a player just because he summoned a powerful spirit is just as bad as slavish rule obedience. Fiat isn't necessarily any better, as you can see.

What about house rules? They're fine, as long as they're agreed upon in advance. Would you tell the player, before the character risked life and limb summoning and binding a Force 10 spirit, that use of certain powers would kill him outright? Or does the GM just make BS up on the spot, because he can't cope with a clever player?
noonesshowmonkey
I don't really think that of a clever player as one who uses dice and numbers alone to get out of a situation. You may consider calling a Force 10 spirit in as "creative". Personally, the game world that I run games in, a Force 10 spirit is a Big Daddy of some part of the world. There aren't very many of these guys out there, their summer home is the Grand Canyon and they winter in the Arctic Circle (as a nature spirit or whatever). In any case, a F10 spirit, to me, resents being used by mortals to do silly tasks like make a car go impossibly fast... So when asked to do so he does just that - the car goes Mach 4 and its occupants are turned to goo as their bodies try to smoosh their way out the ass-end of a car that is leaving them behind... moments before the car rips itself apart.

As far as "Logic" goes, the game may have magic but it also has Physics. Magic can influence physics and tool around with a lot of the basic principles but the basic principles, as far as I know them, stay the same. SR4 is a game where man and magic meet machine - it is a logic and science meets the fantastic. There is compromise here and I think that the spirit letting the occupants get goo'ed is perfectly acceptable unless the players are very "clever" (an apt usage, here) in their wording of how they want the spirit to serve them. I'm sorry, but my game worlds live and breath and a F10 spirit has a name, an agenda and hates the puny mortals telling him what to do. If you don't like textured game worlds, continuity or (semi)believability, then I guess we can agree to disagree. My players, after polling, all literally laughed out loud at the example that you brought up. Continuity would be reinforced (since the players agreed that it was absurd) and everything was just fine in our instance of the world.

Seriously. Mach 4 in a car? It'd be a big streak for a few seconds turning into a fireball as the vehicle went all Space Shuttle Columbia. The cahse rules are just fine if you aren't abusing easily abused rules. Jusgement and logic have a place, believe it or not. The GM is a Game Master, an arbiter of rules, a cooperative storyteller... Its their job to do that sort of thing from time to time. A bad player abuses F10 to go mach 4 and a bad GM says "you are hit by a boulder and die". Maybe your situation had some nuance to it but I can assure you that I am not the only one who sees the use of the Movement power as one of the hardest core abuses and misuses of core game mechanics. I slap the shit out of players who abuse the game - the game abuses them back.

Heck, I might even just ask them to make a crash test for going too damned fast... They'd fail and take 40 physical from a failed crash test at 3,000m/turn... The spirit could even assist the crash test... The threshold would be enormous.

Regardless: the ruless. Rules are suggestions and guidelines. If you want a mechanic driven game, go play D20 or DnD4. These are mechanic driven games which are designed to work and be internally consistent in a way that Shadowrun is not, has never been and likely will never be. For any measure of consistency the GM must exercise fiat in some, and perhaps many, cases.
Cain
QUOTE
Personally, the game world that I run games in, a Force 10 spirit is a Big Daddy of some part of the world. There aren't very many of these guys out there, their summer home is the Grand Canyon and they winter in the Arctic Circle (as a nature spirit or whatever). In any case, a F10 spirit, to me, resents being used by mortals to do silly tasks like make a car go impossibly fast... So when asked to do so he does just that - the car goes Mach 4 and its occupants are turned to goo as their bodies try to smoosh their way out the ass-end of a car that is leaving them behind... moments before the car rips itself apart.

In a world with immortal elves, great dragons, and Buttercup, a single force 10 spirit is not a big player. I understand that high-average power levels can cause issues in inexperienced GMs. Anyway, a force 10 spirit that has been treated well is less likely to cause problems than a force 3 spirit that's been abused.

But on another note, you seemed to say you'd pull a house rule out of your gluteus, without warning the players. I take it then that you wouldn't tell the player, before he summoned the spirit and used the power, that you intended to disregard the rules and kill him? Just because you didn't like the result?

QUOTE
As far as "Logic" goes, the game may have magic but it also has Physics. Magic can influence physics and tool around with a lot of the basic principles but the basic principles, as far as I know them, stay the same. SR4 is a game where man and magic meet machine - it is a logic and science meets the fantastic. There is compromise here and I think that the spirit letting the occupants get goo'ed is perfectly acceptable unless the players are very "clever" (an apt usage, here) in their wording of how they want the spirit to serve them. I'm sorry, but my game worlds live and breath and a F10 spirit has a name, an agenda and hates the puny mortals telling him what to do. If you don't like textured game worlds, continuity or (semi)believability, then I guess we can agree to disagree.

Magic has physics all its own. Among these, is the Movement power, which can accelerate things to insane speeds for limited bursts. Should the car be more difficult to maneuver? Of course. We had to make some difficult rolls to keep from crashing. That's fine, but making up numbers because you want to kill the PC isn't.

QUOTE
The cahse rules are just fine if you aren't abusing easily abused rules. Jusgement and logic have a place, believe it or not. The GM is a Game Master, an arbiter of rules, a cooperative storyteller... Its their job to do that sort of thing from time to time. A bad player abuses F10 to go mach 4 and a bad GM says "you are hit by a boulder and die". Maybe your situation had some nuance to it but I can assure you that I am not the only one who sees the use of the Movement power as one of the hardest core abuses and misuses of core game mechanics. I slap the shit out of players who abuse the game - the game abuses them back.

The chase rules, as has been amply demonstrated, don't even work for chases. Even the GM's who like the rules, admit that they have flaws.

And as far as it goes: I prefer to anticipate rules problems, and politely discuss them with my players, stopping them before they can become an issue. I never understood why some GM's seem to get off on slapping down players. Could you explain that?
QUOTE
Heck, I might even just ask them to make a crash test for going too damned fast... They'd fail and take 40 physical from a failed crash test at 3,000m/turn... The spirit could even assist the crash test...

See what I mean about making up numbers, just because you don't like them? According to the Crash damage rules, they wouldn't take more than 30. Which is still a lot, admittedly, but I'd also give them the two rolls they're legally entitled to, as well. Part of the reason rules exist is to prevent the GM from arbitrarily forcing his will onto the game.
QUOTE
Regardless: the ruless. Rules are suggestions and guidelines. If you want a mechanic driven game, go play D20 or DnD4. These are mechanic driven games which are designed to work and be internally consistent in a way that Shadowrun is not, has never been and likely will never be. For any measure of consistency the GM must exercise fiat in some, and perhaps many, cases.

rotfl.gif rotfl.gif rotfl.gif

Gods, that was *funny*

You obviously haven't played many "narrative-driven" games, have you? Wushu, Dogs in the Vineyard, Capes... any of this sounding familiar? No? Didn't think so.

Sorry, but if you're going to compare games, Shadowrun is at least as crunchy as d20, and slightly more so than D&D 4.0. In fact, it's up there with Hero and GURPS. Not familiar with those either?

But you did hit on one point. For such a crunchy game, SR4 really does rely on "GM discretion" a whole heck of a lot. That would be acceptable in a more narrative-driven game; but Shadowrun is-- and always has been, even back to when I started in 1989-- a crunchy, mechanics-driven game.
The Monk
The thing about chase combat that I don't like is that it doesn't give you the feeling of speed, like you are driving way too fast and are on the edge of loosing control. It works, but really the GM has to fill in for the spots that the rules do not go. I mean, at long range can the guy with the heavy pistol shoot? If he can, then can the guy with the assault rifle shoot and not have the long range modifiers.

As far as the force 10 spirit and the example above, I would have described it like this:

The ghostly form manifests besides you, "By ancient law I have come to serve you wizard, what is your bidding?"
"Get us out of here fast!"
Just as the bad guys bear down on your car, you feel it lurch forward pushing you deep into the seat. The metroplex becomes an unrecognizable blur as you move faster and faster. Suddenly you come to a stop. For a second you are disoriented, and then green fields and snowy mountains come into focus. "You are safe here wizard, my pact with you is complete."
When you step out of the car you see that the paint has bubbled in places from the heat of your "escape," and most of the plastic had melted away. Crap, you think, it's going to take some nuyen to get that repaired, not to mention you're probably in the Shidhe somewhere...


noonesshowmonkey
Clearly we disagree. Also, I doubt this is the time or the place to debate the length or girth of our respective e-peens, our gaming experience etc. Whatever games you play and the way that you play them is up to you.

As a matter of fact I have dealt with this scenario in the past, asked for a crash test relative to the rules and assigned damage relative to the rules... Except that the players did it to some NPCs that were main villains... And it caused a big ole smear, killed a car full of people and put a serious kink in the narrative as far as what I had planned... but such is the way of gaming. If you care to level personal attacks, do it on your own time. I will leave you to it.

And just as a note, I was indeed saying that DnD is super crunch just as SR is super crunch. In fact more so. The entire point was a comparison between mechanic drivin games (SR or DnD) and narrative driven ones (Wushu, WoD et all). Closer reading might yield better results in the future.
Cain
QUOTE (noonesshowmonkey @ Sep 15 2008, 09:57 PM) *
Clearly we disagree.

Clearly we do. I stand by the decision that a force 10 spirit that is well-treated is less likely to cause trouble than a force 3 spirit that's mistreated. I also stand by the concept that you don't pull surprise rulings, especially fatal ones, on clever players mid-game. Which ones do you stand by?

QUOTE
As a matter of fact I have dealt with this scenario in the past, asked for a crash test relative to the rules and assigned damage relative to the rules... Except that the players did it to some NPCs that were main villains... And it caused a big ole smear, killed a car full of people and put a serious kink in the narrative as far as what I had planned... but such is the way of gaming. If you care to level personal attacks, do it on your own time. I will leave you to it.

I like how The Monk handled things. It was basically a very dramatic way of handwaving the escape; as much as I dislike handwaving in this style of game, sometimes it fits perfectly. I think he did a beautiful job of handling it.

QUOTE
And just as a note, I was indeed saying that DnD is super crunch just as SR is super crunch. In fact more so. The entire point was a comparison between mechanic drivin games (SR or DnD) and narrative driven ones (Wushu, WoD et all). Closer reading might yield better results in the future.

That's true, because Wushu and WoD have almost nothing in common. Closer reading of their mechanics would have revealed that they run on totally different principles. In fact, only one small section of one White Wolf game looks anything like Wushu, and it's not even a WoD game-- it's Exalted's stunting rules. So, remember for now: "Closer reading might yield better results in the future."

QUOTE
The thing about chase combat that I don't like is that it doesn't give you the feeling of speed, like you are driving way too fast and are on the edge of loosing control. It works, but really the GM has to fill in for the spots that the rules do not go. I mean, at long range can the guy with the heavy pistol shoot? If he can, then can the guy with the assault rifle shoot and not have the long range modifiers.

You're right; Chase combat also doesn't give you nearly the depth of tactical options that normal combat does. I'm hoping that by abstracting ranges, I can allow vehicles to have more options by putting it all into normal combat.
noonesshowmonkey
Simple point of fact is that the chase rules, like most rules in SR4, suffer from a need to be tweaked from time to time to keep things from getting way, way out of hand. The rules as is provide a framework that can be improvized with if you and the players are willing. Personally, I see little important about an air tight rules set for such a specific event. I'd prefer stronger rules to govern things that happen with far more regularity - unless you are playing a rigger game, maybe.

In any case, Cain, you know essentially nothing about the way that I run games just as I know essentially nothing about the way that you run/play games. I really don't appreciate you acting a fool and running yer mouth. Pretty weak sauce. In any case, F10 spirits might be common in your games, obviously they are not in mine. Physics might bend to the will of the game mechanics or even the players, but not with the group that I game with (who enjoy what it is we do, in fact!). To me using a F10 spirit to do something in the rules that is so absurd like making a car go mach 4, or another forum favorite that I found, making a shipping container move like a rocket ship with a whole SR team living out of it, is something that breaks the verisimilitude of the game. When shit like that starts going down it becomes a situation of 'because I can', at least in my experience. There is a serious disconnect between street level games and the jet-setting, comic book / anime fueled insanity that some people play. It is all a matter of taste and while I clearly do not like your particular flavor, I was at no point saying that you don't play games, are inexperienced etc.

The whole problem from where I am seeing it revolves around how much players want a mechanic driven game or if they can stand to have things happen that adhere to reason, creativity and continuity in place of what the rules dictate. Sounds a lot like Wushu, no? Well, maybe not the reason part... In any case, don't be a douche. nyahnyah.gif
Cain
QUOTE
Simple point of fact is that the chase rules, like most rules in SR4, suffer from a need to be tweaked from time to time to keep things from getting way, way out of hand. The rules as is provide a framework that can be improvized with if you and the players are willing.

The rules as is need an overhaul, for the reasons I described. I do think abstracting ranges in normal combat is a good idea; even Toturi (probably) doesn't give exact distances down to the last centimeter. If you do that, you'd be the first one I've met.

But anyways, the point of the Mach 4.6 car is this: by the rules, it takes a minimum of four minutes to get away. That's 3 rounds maintaining Long Range, then one round to Break Away. And if we ever fail to win the opposed test, the other guy can pull a Picard Maneuver, and instantly bring himself and all of his buddies right alongside our car. That's just ludicrous. When there's such a huge speed differential, all you can do is scrap the current rules, and handwave an escape.

QUOTE
In any case, Cain, you know essentially nothing about the way that I run games just as I know essentially nothing about the way that you run/play games.

All I know is what you've told me. You said you'd deliberately "slap down" players trying similar stunts in your game. I personally don't believe in "slapping down" players in game at all. I'll handle problem players out of game. Clever stunts that break the fourth wall or suspension of disbelief will get warnings ("Are you really sure you want to do that?") followed by fair but hair-raising consequences. Generally speaking, you're saying that you prefer to use punitive measures on your players, rather than good communication and a mutual desire for fun.

Now, that's just the impression that I get. You're free to correct me, if I got anything wrong; like you said, I don't know how you actually game. I just repeat what you said.
QUOTE
In any case, F10 spirits might be common in your games, obviously they are not in mine. Physics might bend to the will of the game mechanics or even the players, but not with the group that I game with (who enjoy what it is we do, in fact!). To me using a F10 spirit to do something in the rules that is so absurd like making a car go mach 4, or another forum favorite that I found, making a shipping container move like a rocket ship with a whole SR team living out of it, is something that breaks the verisimilitude of the game. When shit like that starts going down it becomes a situation of 'because I can', at least in my experience. There is a serious disconnect between street level games and the jet-setting, comic book / anime fueled insanity that some people play.

Yes, there is. I prefer a "cinematic" and "pulpy" feel to my game. If you actually look at it, the time of the greatest Shadowrun-type action was the early 20th century! But even that takes a back seat to one important principle: is everyone having fun? If everyone gets a huge laugh and gives high-fives all around when someone pulls off a stunt like that, why rain on their parade? It was *fun*, and that's all that matters in my games. What about yours? What I'm getting from your post is that you prefer verisimilitude over having fun. Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the point of games to have fun?
QUOTE
The whole problem from where I am seeing it revolves around how much players want a mechanic driven game or if they can stand to have things happen that adhere to reason, creativity and continuity in place of what the rules dictate. Sounds a lot like Wushu, no?

Not really, no. Wushu bends the laws of reality in favor of cinematics all the time. It's almost purely narrative-driven, to the point where the better the narrative is, the better you will do. It definitely rewards creativity over reason and continuity.
The Monk
QUOTE (Cain @ Sep 16 2008, 01:37 AM) *
You're right; Chase combat also doesn't give you nearly the depth of tactical options that normal combat does. I'm hoping that by abstracting ranges, I can allow vehicles to have more options by putting it all into normal combat.


It's an interesting idea, and I'd be curious of your results when you actually playtest it. Unfortunately for my group, we've used actual meters to describe how far opponents are. Personally I think that it is too abstract. The actual weapon ranges are so different. A heavy pistol, for example can shoot up to 60 meters max, an assault rifle's short range is up to 50 meters.

Like I said previously, chase combat is fine, except for the fact that it doesn't give you the feeling of driving too fast. The Picard Maneuver is a problem but it is somewhat fixed if you house rule that you can only change one step in the range. It works out too that short (medium) range actually becomes used. The few chase combat's that I have run seem to only happen in close range or long range.
kigmatzomat
This is similar to something posted earlier. Parallel evolution I guess.

Chase combat house rule.

The core notion is that a) the mechanic is focused on someone fleeing, b) it shouldn't involve too much math, c) it should deal better with corner cases, and d) you should be able to go tactical if you want without having to go tactical if you don't.

All normal terrain modifiers affect the drivers. The "speed modifier" only affects the pursuers to avoid weird math collisions.


Opposed Extended Test.
Defender (escapee) needs to acquire a number of net successes to escape. Simply keep track of each vehicle's total successes and compare each round. Any time the defender reaches the Escape threshold against a pursuer, that pursuer has lost track of the Chasee. (See "multiple pursuers" for complications like "follow the leader".)

Time frame: Personally, I think this works fine for regular combat turns but switching to the "chase turn" for the Exposed condition wouldn't be unreasonable outside of "close" range.



Escape conditions. These conditions are relative to each pursuer. A speed boat in a canal may be pursued by a car on a nearby road, another boat, a submarine, and an aircraft. Each of which may have different conditions that would justify escape.
Note that the escape condition may change due to weather, moving from interstate to surface roads, changing altitudes in aerial combat, submerging, etc.

Ideal escape condition
Lots escape routes with short line of sight. Could be downtown at 2pm, an old growth forest, sensor-occluding bad weather, mana storms, aircraft in (urban) canyons, etc.

Typical escape condition
Moderate lines of sight, limited escape routes. Most roads, rough seas, cloudy skies, etc.

Exposed escape condition
Very long line of sight with limited escape options. Freeways beyond sprawls, deserts, clear skies, open ocean or trains (what, like they can turn when they want?!?)


Ranges classes:
There are four ranges. Close is always 0-50meters. A pursuer must be at close range to ram or do other such stunts. Moderate is normally the maximum range that passengers can shoot at other vehicles due to trees, other vehicles, etc. Long is usually the greatest range that vehicle mounted weapons can be used on each other, and at the "escape" range you've got only fleeting glimpses of the target.

When a pursuer shows up it should be given a range and an appropriate success modifier.

A suggested "real world" range is given for each of the classes. You'll note that they match up between conditions and successes so that a change in condition doesn't change the absolute distance even if it changes the range class.


close med long escape
ideal 1 2 3 4 Threshold
0-50m -100m -200m -300m
typical 2 4 6 8 Threshold
0-50m -300m -500m -750m
exposed 3 6 9 12 Threshold
0-50m -500m -1000m 2000m+

So under typical conditions, if the chasee has 6 total successes and the pursuer has 4 total successes, the pursuer is at (6-4=2) close range.

If this is the first round of chase and the pursuer starts at moderate range (-4), the pursuer would have 0 total successes so chasee would have a net of 6 successes (6-0), pushing the pursuer back to long range.


Relative Speed modifier
For all typical and ideal conditions and close range under exposed conditions, compare the pursuer's acceleration (run) to that of the chasee. Pursuers get +1 for every 5 they exceed the chasee, -1 for every 5 they are below the chasee.
.
Under most Exposed conditions at ranges beyond close, Speed is usually more important because the vehicles can run flat out. Pursuers get +1 for every 10 their Max Speed exceeds the chasee, -1 for every 10 they are below the chasee.

Corner cases
Multiple Pursuers:
A pursuer that has lost their target vehicle can choose to follow an ally. The ally does NOT make a separate Chase test, meaning they cannot make it easier for the pursuer without losing the target. Note the pursuer should recalculate the relative speed modifier for his new "target."

Air vs ground pursuit
Determine the defender's escape threshold based on the pursuer's range of vision. Eg an escape car flees at 2pm downtown Topeka. The chasee needs 4 successes vs ground pursuit but 12 vs aircraft (few tall buildings in Topeka). If the chasee enters the heavily wooded city park the escape threshold is 8 vs ground pursuit (less traffic, fewer turnoffs) and 4 vs aircraft due to the tree canopy.
Cain
Okay, so here's what I've got so far. It still only works for two groups, but I think it's better:

  • There are five ranges: Melee, Close, Medium, Long, and Extreme.
  • Pistols cannot fire at Extreme range. All guns have the usual range penalties, negated by Vision Magnification.
  • There are no range penalties for Melee range. Instead, you can only accomplish certain things in this range, such as melee combat (duh), jumping from one vehicle to another, or ramming.
  • At the start of each turn, you make a "positioning test", using whatever skill happens to be appropriate. Usually, Pilot skills will be used for vehicles. You gain modifiers in the form of extra dice for things that increase your speed, like cyberskates.
    • The Movement power grants bonus dice equal to the spirit's force.
    • Trolls get a +2 modifier to this test, Dwarves get -1.
    • An "extreme speed" bonus may also be applied.
    • Penalties for terrain may be applied as well.

  • Winning the test gives you a +2 Superior Position dice pool modifier, or allows you to move up to two range categories, or move another group one range category.
  • You can Cut Off a vehicle or opponent who is in Close range, by making an opposed check. You can Break Away from an opponent by moving him to Extreme range and then making a successful opposed check.

That's the basic idea. This way, you can use vehicles right alongside normal humans. This also means you can use the chase rules while on foot. So, you can have someone knock over a trash can, in an attempt to give his chasers a terrain penalty.

What do you all think? I'm trying to make it so that we can have more than two groups, but I don't know how these rules would work if you added a third party to the mix.
Ryu
  • There are five ranges: Melee, Close, Medium, Long, and Extreme.
  • Pistols cannot fire at Extreme range. All guns have the usual range penalties, negated by Vision Magnification.

KISS - but not much differentiation between weapons. I still think you should do a mod table smile.gif


  • There are no range penalties for Melee range. Instead, you can only accomplish certain things in this range, such as melee combat (duh), jumping from one vehicle to another, or ramming.

Even-more-reckless-driving-range, I see cool.gif

  • At the start of each turn, you make a "positioning test", using whatever skill happens to be appropriate. Usually, Pilot skills will be used for vehicles. You gain modifiers in the form of extra dice for things that increase your speed, like cyberskates. [list]
  • The Movement power grants bonus dice equal to the spirit's force.
  • Trolls get a +2 modifier to this test, Dwarves get -1.
  • An "extreme speed" bonus may also be applied.
  • Penalties for terrain may be applied as well.

Appropiate skill for metahumans would be Running? Second, did you come around on the GM forbidding inappropiate chases? Some of my chars can bring a dozen running dice, mods might become inconsequential at that point.


  • Winning the test gives you a +2 Superior Position dice pool modifier, or allows you to move up to two range categories, or move another group one range category.

You are certainly waiting for this comment, old chum, but while you are at it, remove the ability to move other parties. Compare the fleeing parties hits to the hits of all pursuers, permit distance changes based on the difference. Multiple fleeing parties are the ugly, that´s where moving to a "driven distance" system would shine. Abstract distances can only work if one side of the conflict is useable as a reference.

  • You can Cut Off a vehicle or opponent who is in Close range, by making an opposed check. You can Break Away from an opponent by moving him to Extreme range and then making a successful opposed check.

That´s fine. Maybe cutting someone off changes everyone elses range categories? Those behind come closer, those in front move farther away, "melee" vehicles roll a crash test?
Cain
QUOTE
Appropiate skill for metahumans would be Running? Second, did you come around on the GM forbidding inappropiate chases? Some of my chars can bring a dozen running dice, mods might become inconsequential at that point.

Usually running, but other skills might apply as well. As much as I hate relying on GM fiat, it isn't so bad once you abstract things-- abstract rulings for a "realistic" game are serious bad news, but abstract rulings for an abstract system is OK. I'd like a rule, though, that would define inappropriate chases. Probably a speed/altitude differential, or something.

QUOTE
You are certainly waiting for this comment, old chum, but while you are at it, remove the ability to move other parties. Compare the fleeing parties hits to the hits of all pursuers, permit distance changes based on the difference. Multiple fleeing parties are the ugly, that´s where moving to a "driven distance" system would shine. Abstract distances can only work if one side of the conflict is useable as a reference.

You make a good point. I think I'll go with that.
QUOTE
That´s fine. Maybe cutting someone off changes everyone elses range categories? Those behind come closer, those in front move farther away, "melee" vehicles roll a crash test?

I was thinking a penalty to the opposed test. That way, everyone has a good chance of closing in, but not a certainty.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Dumpshock Forums © 2001-2012