Full Version: Small Unit Tactics
| QUOTE (mfb) |
| that's the main purpose of the skill, after all. |
Why? If everyone has the SUT skill, nobody needs to communicate at all to get the bonuses. In fact, it is easier, quicker and more effective to use SUT that way if everyone has the same skill (and level of implantation).
Of course there should still be communication. Obviously yours won't be an effective team without some. But that doesn't necessarily have to be the realm of Small Unit Tactics. Communication should, IMO, be stuff worthwhile for the players to mention, Small Unit Tactics I consider to be the stuff that isn't.
| QUOTE (mfb) |
| in a situation where the enemy is well-prepared, it should be harder to formulate a plan that gives you an advantage over them. |
We're talking about a completely different thing, it seems. I never said SUT should allow you to get an advantage over your enemies in every situation. However, it absolutely should get you an advantage over a person who has no SUT skill at all.
Think of it like this: 2 guys, Tactical and Rambo, with identical stats except one has SUT at 6 and the other has none. They are in combat alone, without help from anyone. Regardless of how challenging the situation is, I would always expect Tactical to do significantly better.
Now these two guys both have to storm a (different) room with 4 enemies armed with automatic weapons inside. If the TN on the SUT test was based on apparent "Challenge Rating" of the situation, Tactical would fare just as badly as Rambo. With a TN at 6 or higher, the chances of scoring the 2 successes necessary to gain even 1 CP/Init bonus are very slim. In this case, Tactical would not do significantly better. Both will get slaughtered just as fast.
If, however, the TN for the SUT skill roll (analyzing and taking advantage of the situation) is static at 4, Tactical can get a slight advantage over Rambo. He might get 3 meters further into the room, or he might even be able to drop one of the bad guys. He'll still get slaughtered, but he will do better than Rambo.
the purpose of everyone having the SUT skill would be so that, when the team leader handsigns "red one", everyone knows that they're doing a four-corner room-clearing sweep with flashbangs before entry (or whatever). i guess the advantage would be that, if everyone has it, the communication modifiers should be lessened.
varying the TN according to the current situation would easily work if you simply used the same TN range as is currently employed for communication modifiers. if you did something like "+1 per bad guy, and their cover mod applies to your TN" then, yeah, it'd be pretty useless.
varying the TN according to the current situation would easily work if you simply used the same TN range as is currently employed for communication modifiers. if you did something like "+1 per bad guy, and their cover mod applies to your TN" then, yeah, it'd be pretty useless.
SUT TN 6 or higher = Hardly any point rolling SUT. Even at 5, you're looking at an average of 1 more CP in combat at the cost of 30 Karma (SUT 6). If the TN for using SUT on yourself is anything higher than 4, you shouldn't bother getting the skill at all before you have at least RacModLimits in QUI, INT and WILL.
eh, i've never seen the primary use of SUT as being for use on yourself, anyway. granted, the way the rules are written, that's the best use.
As far as I'm concerned, it can stay the best use. Which is why, in my games, it's the primary use. As I've been saying all along.
How would you suggest the rules be changed for those people who want SUT to be useless for one person, useful for several? Changing the base TNs to be scaled by situation only makes it useless in all challenging situations, regardless of team structure.
How would you suggest the rules be changed for those people who want SUT to be useless for one person, useful for several? Changing the base TNs to be scaled by situation only makes it useless in all challenging situations, regardless of team structure.
not sure. maybe something like -1 TN for every guy on your team with an SUT skill equal to at least half the current base TN, or something? or even just a flat -1 TN for every guy with SUT of 4+.
or, hey, how about this. when you roll SUT, so do the bad guys; make it a success contest. if the bad guys (or you) don't have SUT, they have to default. make this roll during the first round; its effects last until the situation changes (more bad guys enter from another direction, someone kills the lights, etcetera). that eliminates the three-second tactical briefs, as well.
or, hey, how about this. when you roll SUT, so do the bad guys; make it a success contest. if the bad guys (or you) don't have SUT, they have to default. make this roll during the first round; its effects last until the situation changes (more bad guys enter from another direction, someone kills the lights, etcetera). that eliminates the three-second tactical briefs, as well.
| QUOTE (mfb) |
| when you roll SUT, so do the bad guys; make it a success contest. |
That's a great idea. You should hone the rules a bit (who rolls and how many dice, the exact TNs, etc), but it looks like it might work.
indeed. i'll work on them... crap, sometime. books are packed away and bobbing merrily on the surface of the Pacific while i move.
Small unit tactics is a broken rule. A good team of players working together should be able to devise their own small unit tactics and reap the benefit without resorting to more rules.
| QUOTE (Grinzwilly @ Jul 6 2004, 08:34 PM) |
| Small unit tactics is a broken rule. A good team of players working together should be able to devise their own small unit tactics and reap the benefit without resorting to more rules. |
Eh. Either you know how to leap frog, or you don't.
Either you move your models in proper room-clearing fashion or you don't.
I don't agree with the mechanical benefits offered by the skill, but I have since pulled down the CC and reviewed them.
So while I still think it silly as all hell, it's not so broken that it unbalances the game in any appreciable direction.
And for a relatively nominal investment of a dedicated chipjack and CED, one security commander at an installation could make the most from a bunch of under-enhanced grunts.
-Siege
One suggestion -- in the Silhouette system, the Tactics skill is rolled once at the beginning of a combat "scene"; it then gives a number of command points that can be used by the leader of each side to give team members a one-time benefit (like a bonus to a single Dodge test, or getting an extra action). In that way, Tactics is relevant, but it isn't really overpowering -- it lets you exploit a good opportunity or save your ass if you get caught in a jam, but doesn't really do much other than that. Might be interesting to try and work out something like that with Shadowrun, if you want to make Small Unit Tactics a relevant skill (I haven't seen the rules in Cannon Companion though, so I admit I may be making a useless comment here).
Shouldn't small unit tactics be what the player makes their character do instead of some bonus that magically appears and affects their numbers?
If people want small unit tactics they should go read army manuals and apply the tactics to their SR game.
If people want small unit tactics they should go read army manuals and apply the tactics to their SR game.
Granted.
But I will point out that the mechanical benefit conferred by this skill in no way addresses the concepts of room clearing, advancing under cover, leap-frogging, interlocking fields of fire, etc.
By applying it to personal skills, it is assuming to offer a bonus by shooting or fighting in a "tactical" situation. Which I would argue is a function of the skill itself, not a secondary skill, but that's neither here nor there.
A character could have a 12 in SUT and still deploy his people stupidly. Although they would somehow receive a bonus to initative or combat pool.
So with all that in mind, the skill can stand because it's not a game-breaking bit of cheese.
Although I will also point out that the same argument could be applied to any skill in SR - want to shoot a gun? Go to the range. Want to learn how to program a computer? Take classes. Etc.
-Siege
But I will point out that the mechanical benefit conferred by this skill in no way addresses the concepts of room clearing, advancing under cover, leap-frogging, interlocking fields of fire, etc.
By applying it to personal skills, it is assuming to offer a bonus by shooting or fighting in a "tactical" situation. Which I would argue is a function of the skill itself, not a secondary skill, but that's neither here nor there.
A character could have a 12 in SUT and still deploy his people stupidly. Although they would somehow receive a bonus to initative or combat pool.
So with all that in mind, the skill can stand because it's not a game-breaking bit of cheese.
Although I will also point out that the same argument could be applied to any skill in SR - want to shoot a gun? Go to the range. Want to learn how to program a computer? Take classes. Etc.
-Siege
Not having CC, I was just wondering if there were any specializations for SUT. Specifically, I was discussing this with someone else that SUT can be pretty vague, and there can be a SUT specialization in Protection/Bodyguarding just as easily as, say, Assault/Tactical specialization.
Especially since something like SUT/Bodyguarding (which was actually borne from a desire to obviate the need to bother making Bodyguarding an active skill from a knowledge skill as was done with SUT) could also add in a complimentary skill (perhaps if they have a MA with the Toss technique) or some other skill (Athletics, perhaps).
Especially since something like SUT/Bodyguarding (which was actually borne from a desire to obviate the need to bother making Bodyguarding an active skill from a knowledge skill as was done with SUT) could also add in a complimentary skill (perhaps if they have a MA with the Toss technique) or some other skill (Athletics, perhaps).
Listed specializations are: Matrix Tactics, Vehicle Tactics and BattleTac Systems.
As for the others, it really depends on how your GM interprets the skill and it's use.
-Siege
As for the others, it really depends on how your GM interprets the skill and it's use.
-Siege
| QUOTE (Wounded Ronin) |
| If people want small unit tactics they should go read army manuals and apply the tactics to their SR game. |
And if people want to hack computers, they should get advanced computer science degrees and read 2600 every. freaking. day.
That's a ridiculous argument to make -- the whole point of a roleplaying game is to be someone other than yourself. Limiting your characters' skills to those that the player himself possesses is insane -- can any of you guys negotiate a shadowrun contract? track down and acquire highly illegal weaponry?
If I was actually as good at small unit tactics as a team of crack shadowrunners, I'd be in a friggin' LAPD SWAT helicopter with a headset, not a dimly-lit basement with a bucket of dee-sixes.
-Albert
| QUOTE (Siege) |
| Listed specializations are: Matrix Tactics, Vehicle Tactics and BattleTac Systems. As for the others, it really depends on how your GM interprets the skill and it's use. -Siege |
So, in other words, nothing immediately useful. I came up with those two on the fly, but ... Ah, to hell with it.
| QUOTE (Grinzwilly) |
| Small unit tactics is a broken rule. A good team of players working together should be able to devise their own small unit tactics and reap the benefit without resorting to more rules. |
There's alot of confusion here between "Role-playing" and "live-action". I wanna have fun by playing an officer in a small team of tactical troops, for a few hours a week. I don't wanna join the marines and get shot at for real.
Since SUT (Active) can be used for personal benefit, a generous GM might allow you to apply Bodyguard (Knowledge) as a comp bonus.
And SUT/Personal Protection is certainly a valid specialization in my humble opinion - SWAT SUT varies greatly from Secret Service SUT and so on.
-Siege
And SUT/Personal Protection is certainly a valid specialization in my humble opinion - SWAT SUT varies greatly from Secret Service SUT and so on.
-Siege
| QUOTE (SporkPimp @ Jul 7 2004, 02:01 AM) |
| And if people want to hack computers, they should get advanced computer science degrees and read 2600 every. freaking. day. That's a ridiculous argument to make... |
...partly because 2600 is so damn worthless at providing anything but culture news and the latest tricks to get free salad bar fixin's at Wendys.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.