Dodging perceived threats

[Sean Waters]

I was building a charcter today with increased DCV against threats he perceives. I thought of RSR but that doesn't work well: it suggests that for PER activation, use an appropriate activation roll. And of course the sparkier the sense you use the more of a penalty it attracts...and RSR rols don't generally take modifies, and...

 

Mind you an activation roll doesn't work well either, as it doesn't differentiate between a big obvious attack and a subtle type attack.

 

I don't want to have to simply say the GM can decide on a case by case basis as the GM generally has enough to do without players foisting additional work on them: can anyone think of a way around this?

 

The best I can manage is 'requires a PER roll: (-1/2)'. Bit arbitrary.

 

The character hs 18 INT and no PER levels at present, but is going to have some sort of an 'air sensing' power - he's a flier.

[Doc Democracy]

Re: Dodging perceived threats

 

I was building a charcter today with increased DCV against threats he perceives. I thought of RSR but that doesn't work well: it suggests that for PER activation, use an appropriate activation roll. And of course the sparkier the sense you use the more of a penalty it attracts...and RSR rols don't generally take modifies, and...

 

Mind you an activation roll doesn't work well either, as it doesn't differentiate between a big obvious attack and a subtle type attack.

 

I don't want to have to simply say the GM can decide on a case by case basis as the GM generally has enough to do without players foisting additional work on them: can anyone think of a way around this?

 

The best I can manage is 'requires a PER roll: (-1/2)'. Bit arbitrary.

 

The character hs 18 INT and no PER levels at present, but is going to have some sort of an 'air sensing' power - he's a flier.

 

I always have a problem basing this on a PER roll. My favourite thing in these circumstances is to base it on tactics or danger sense. Either one of these would be appropriate to the situation and give you some credibility in 'knowing'

that a particular type of attack was in the making.

 

 

Doc

[Sean Waters]

Re: Dodging perceived threats

 

I always have a problem basing this on a PER roll. My favourite thing in these circumstances is to base it on tactics or danger sense. Either one of these would be appropriate to the situation and give you some credibility in 'knowing'

that a particular type of attack was in the making.

 

 

Doc

 

That makes a lot of sense.

[Doc Democracy]

Re: Dodging perceived threats

 

That makes a lot of sense.

 

 

I'm going to take that home and frame it somewhere my wife can see it....

[Jaxom]

Re: Dodging perceived threats

 

I thought that what you're asking was kinda the definition of DCV Skill Levels. As a GM I sure as heck ain't giving you skill levels against a threat you can't perceive. Without getting into the questiosn of what you can and cannot perceive, I would think that simple DCV-only skill levels is exactly what you'd be after. Is there some reason you think that sounds like a bad idea?

[prestidigitator]

Re: Dodging perceived threats

 

I thought that what you're asking was kinda the definition of DCV Skill Levels. As a GM I sure as heck ain't giving you skill levels against a threat you can't perceive. Without getting into the questiosn of what you can and cannot perceive' date=' I would think that simple DCV-only skill levels is exactly what you'd be after. Is there some reason you think that sounds like a bad idea?[/quote']

That's exactly what I was thinking. They aren't Persistant, and I probably wouldn't have much of a problem saying they didn't apply against attacks/attackers you are completely unaware of. (NOTE: I usually do buy a small character's DCV Levels as Persistant.) Of course, unless you have Danger Sense, Defense Maneuver, etc., any DCV bonus against unperceived attacks/attackers is going to be halved anyway, so it might be kinda built in for you....

[Duke Bushido]

Re: Dodging perceived threats

 

I'm a little befuddled here.

 

Are you implying that your GM doesn't assume that you get a PER roll to notice a danger for your character?

 

I mean---

 

Duke (as GM) [Duke knows that there are two automated net guns above the door through which the characters are passing]:

 

The natural three indicates you not only defeated the security panel without a thought, but you were able to do it with absolute style. The agents under your command are wide-eyed, and a buzz spreads through the small group of electronics experts. You're feeling confident, inspirational-- downright heroic as the door slides aside, exposing the gloom beyond. The hostages aren't here, but an aura of light from the far end suggests a hallway exiting off the side of this corridor, perhaps sixt feet down.

 

Sean: I'll pass through into the corridor first, making sure that two agents are covering me from obliques, and that the rest are a sheltered from fire as is possible.

 

Duke: you enter the corridor, and yes, there is definately a light source off to one side at the far end. Your informant was -- make a PER roll for me.

 

Sean: Seven

 

Duke: you hear the faint whir of tiny servos frantically buzzing to life _right above your head_... As you snap your attention up, you see two weapons of some kind protruding from the wall. They appear to be ranging---

 

Sean: I put my levels into (whatever Sean thinks is appropriate) and tell the agents to stay back.

 

[Duke rolls dice, targeting against Sean's new modified DCV]

 

 

--------------------------------------

 

That's the way we've always used the PER rolls.

 

Now if I understand you correctly, your current GM is more like:

 

Sean: I have two agents cover me, and the rest take cover as best they can. I enter the corridor.

 

not Duke: It appears your informant may have been right. There does seem to be a hallway off to the side up ahead, or at least a room. But there is a light shining dimly around a partially-open door about sixty feet up ahead. You here a small but violent report and are knocked to the ground by force of an attack. You are now stuck to the floor under some kind of net. It appears to be metalic. [not Duke rolls dice] You spasm violently as an electrical current surges through you like a wave of hammers. Take 4 BODY and 21 Stun.

 

Sean: I call out for the agents that were covering me

 

not Duke: You can't; you're CON-Stunned. It's going to take a minute to collect your senses.

 

Sean: I'm what, ten feet from them? Twenty at best? I _was_ using Stealth, if you recall.

 

not Duke: I know. You're only about fifteen feet from the agents. Moving silently did slow you up a bit.

 

Sean: So can they make a PER roll?

 

not Duke: Why? You got something they should read?

 

-------------------------------

 

 

Okay, a bit over the top---

 

but for my money _in__this__case__ (and I say that because I've seen some interesting uses for 'requires a per roll' that I rather liked) I have to say that 'requires a PER roll' is a bit of a redundancy, unless your doing something wiggy with PER rolls as a rule.....

[Sean Waters]

Re: Dodging perceived threats

 

I love scripted responses

 

FlyBoy (for it is he) is a reasonably high DCV character who has a sort of inherent dodge ability: he spends most of the time in the air and is constantly moving so his DCV is always reasonably high, so he has high DEX. The increased DCV is a manifestation of his flight - although he can do that pretty much subconsciously, it does require some small effort and minor movement, so he is only 'superdodgy' when he perceives a threat. Now when he is in combat, he 'turns on' the superdodgy levels, and tries to get out of the way of perceived threats. His Dex is 26 for a base CV of 9, and he has 4 DCV levels.

 

Now if a threat approaches from the front, bellowing, then no problem - he'll notice that and get full Dex based DCV and DCV levels: he'll have a DCV 13. If it approaches silently and invisibly from directly behind, that's a problem. He will be surprised, so he has half DCV. The levels on DCV are technically on, so his DCV should be halved from 13 to 7 BUT because he did not perceive the threat the limitation I am after would prevent him using them at all so his actual DCV would be halved from 9 to 5.

 

Similarly if, in combat, an attack came from an unexpected direction - not enough to amount to a surprise attack, but not quite what he was expecting he'd get full DCV but the levels would only apply if he made a PER roll.

 

This is what I am after, and why, Jaxom, I don't see DCV levels as something that is necessarily automatically subject to a PER roll.

 

Dedicated DCV levels increase your DCV, and if they are assigned they WILL protect you even from unperceived attacks, although (in common with DCV) the effect is halved. If that isn't trues then there is little point in DCV levels - you might as well have 'DEX, only for DCV -1'. That's cheaper anyway.

[Duke Bushido]

Re: Dodging perceived threats

 

I love scripted responses

 

Hey, always a pleasure; glad I could help

 

but in all honesty, my friend, there is something here that I am not seeing. You've explained it twice and provided a throrough example. I'm just having a dense moment or something. But from what I see in your posts, well I was under the impression that this is exaclty how these levels worked in the first place.

 

Maybe I need to consult my 5E; it's possbile I'm actually playing with the wrong rules.......

[Sean Waters]

Re: Dodging perceived threats

 

Hey, always a pleasure; glad I could help

 

but in all honesty, my friend, there is something here that I am not seeing. You've explained it twice and provided a throrough example. I'm just having a dense moment or something. But from what I see in your posts, well I was under the impression that this is exaclty how these levels worked in the first place.

 

Maybe I need to consult my 5E; it's possbile I'm actually playing with the wrong rules.......

 

More like I'm in obfuscatory mode......as usual

 

One more go.....DCV against an unperceived threat is halved.

 

DCV levels increase DCV.

 

SO, DCV levels against an unperceived threat are halved (assuming they are assigned to DCV at the time, i.e. you are not 'out of combat').

 

What I'm after is DCV levels that don't work at all if the attack is unperceived, even if you are in combat. Maybe that IS how DCV levels work, but that has not been my understanding of it - I've always assumed that -when assigned - DCV levls just increase DCV in the same way that 'DEX only for DCV' would.

 

I could be wrong: happens all the time

[Duke Bushido]

Re: Dodging perceived threats

 

Okay, I think I've got it.

 

For the record, what you describe is how we've always-- since way, way back when-- used additional Levels. To a man, even the munchkin among us could not really justify a means of being intentionally harder to hit by an unobserved threat. You can buy all the levels you want to simulate making yourself harder to hit than you should be, but when you're doing it, you're doing it by reaction in one way or another. Can't react if you don't know it's out there.

 

So we _are_ talking about the same thing; we're now differing in how we 'normally' handle it.

 

Gotcha.

 

A quick peek at the rules should clear this right up (heh heh heh-- I crack me up )

[Tiree]

Re: Dodging perceived threats

 

I would tack on the limitations from Combat Luck. It stops working if you are not able to perceive the threat. If I understand it correctly.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Dodging perceived threats

 

You can buy all the levels you want to simulate making yourself harder to hit than you should be, but when you're doing it, you're doing it by reaction in one way or another. Can't react if you don't know it's out there.

 

Oh I don't know. Take one standard english longbow, and a circular target some 32 inches in diameter suspended from the bough of a great oak some 100 yards away.

 

Shoot off, say, 200 clothyards.

 

So you hit 4 times? Not bad.

 

Now, have your trusty servant give the target an occasional little push with a stick and set it swinging. Shoot off another 200 arrows. Only 1 hit? Although that was, to be fair after your 130th arrow had pinned your trusty servant to the bole of the tree, and the target had all but stopped swinging...I see...

 

To my mind, one definition of DCV levels could be constant movement. That would make you harder to hit whether you knew an attack was coming or not. If you wait and watch them move out of the way, then yes - DCV levels won't help an unperceived attack, but you could say the same about DEX based DCV, and the rules would beg to differ.

 

So if there are two different ways of applying DCV levels based on your sfx, and that does have a markedly different way of actually applying them - well that seems to em that one or the other method should be subject to an advantage or limitation.

 

Mind you it is late and I could well be talking gibberish....

[Sean Waters]

Re: Dodging perceived threats

 

I would tack on the limitations from Combat Luck. It stops working if you are not able to perceive the threat. If I understand it correctly.

 

A good thought, although levels are nonpersistent in any event and the power I am conceiving of is not truly luck-based, it does give a good starting point for consideration of what the level of limitation should perhaps be, if not what it should actually say and the mechanism of application.

 

Storming.

[Jaxom]

Re: Dodging perceived threats

 

Ok, I have a better picture now of what you're after. My response was based on an opening attack (i.e. whether or not you're caught flatfooted) which would limit your ability to use Skill Levels. As I understand the example you give with FlyBoy you also want this "penalty" to occur when he is in combat and already using those Skill Levels on DCV (because of an attack from some other source, perhaps).

 

After a few minutes of thought I am not pulling up anything that would be standard out-of-the-box type options. I'm gonna have to agree with Tiree that you're gonna have to create a generic limitation that looks like the one for Combat Luck. Maybe you lower the limitation a bit because the SLs are not Persistent but if you're buying it on DCV-only skill levels anyway you might be able to get the full limitation value (since I'd assume that they'd always be used and for DCV in combat, hence persistent for all rounds when you aren't flatfooted).

[Sean Waters]

Re: Dodging perceived threats

 

I fear you may have the truth of it: a custom lim may be the way to go. A shame. it feels like something the system could do 'out of the box'. Ah well. I think a nice friendly -1/2 is probably what is called for

[prestidigitator]

Re: Dodging perceived threats

 

I say you are thinking too hard. If you aren't aware of an attack you are going to be at 1/2 DCV anyway. Just buy some DCV Levels and let the rest sort itself out in play. (Who says that as an attack comes in you aren't aware enough of it right in the nick of time to apply, "half," your ability to dodge it anyway.)

[ghost-angel]

Re: Dodging perceived threats

 

I say you are thinking too hard. If you aren't aware of an attack you are going to be at 1/2 DCV anyway. Just buy some DCV Levels and let the rest sort itself out in play. (Who says that as an attack comes in you aren't aware enough of it right in the nick of time to apply' date=' "half," your ability to dodge it anyway.)[/quote']

He's going with that ... what he wants is, while already in Combat with all DCV levels applied, an unperceived/expected attack does not count the DCV levels.

 

5DCV + 5DCVLvls = 10DCV in Combat, unaware of attack = 5DCV (1/2 of 10).

 

Sean wants 5DCV + 5DCVLlvs in Combat, unaware of attac = 3DCV (1/2 of 5, no DCVLvls apply). Which is a different monster.

 

I'm going to assume an Aware Of Attack means coming from a combatant on the field that the character is at least aware of the presense of even if not actively engaged with them. Unaware Of Attack means coming from the Invisible Sniper hidden in the niche that no one saw.

 

That about right Sean? In which case a nice -1/2 is appropriate on the DCV Levels.

[prestidigitator]

Re: Dodging perceived threats

 

He's going with that ... what he wants is, while already in Combat with all DCV levels applied, an unperceived/expected attack does not count the DCV levels.

 

5DCV + 5DCVLvls = 10DCV in Combat, unaware of attack = 5DCV (1/2 of 10).

 

Sean wants 5DCV + 5DCVLlvs in Combat, unaware of attac = 3DCV (1/2 of 5, no DCVLvls apply). Which is a different monster.

 

I'm going to assume an Aware Of Attack means coming from a combatant on the field that the character is at least aware of the presense of even if not actively engaged with them. Unaware Of Attack means coming from the Invisible Sniper hidden in the niche that no one saw.

 

That about right Sean? In which case a nice -1/2 is appropriate on the DCV Levels.

Hmm. I'd say -1/4 at most. They are halved anyway, unlike Armor vs. Combat Luck. It is along the lines of Non-Persistant. I just can't see what the fuss is unless you have a lot of these levels anyway. Just let them be would by my approach, but to each his/her own.

[Zed-F]

Re: Dodging perceived threats

 

I usually put 'Must Be Aware Of Attack' at a -1/4 lim. There are some published examples of it at that level, though I have seen it at -1/2 at other places like Surbrook's site.

[ghost-angel]

Re: Dodging perceived threats

 

Limitations are set as appropriate to the Game and GM, I pulled a generic -1/2 out of the hat. It should have some limitation to reflect that you get 0DCV Skill Levels instead of 1/2 DCV Skill Levels, even 1DCV can be a life saver.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Dodging perceived threats

 

He's going with that ... what he wants is, while already in Combat with all DCV levels applied, an unperceived/expected attack does not count the DCV levels.

 

5DCV + 5DCVLvls = 10DCV in Combat, unaware of attack = 5DCV (1/2 of 10).

 

Sean wants 5DCV + 5DCVLlvs in Combat, unaware of attac = 3DCV (1/2 of 5, no DCVLvls apply). Which is a different monster.

 

I'm going to assume an Aware Of Attack means coming from a combatant on the field that the character is at least aware of the presense of even if not actively engaged with them. Unaware Of Attack means coming from the Invisible Sniper hidden in the niche that no one saw.

 

That about right Sean? In which case a nice -1/2 is appropriate on the DCV Levels.

 

Sounds spot on, and thank you for explaining it so clearly. I was beginning to wonder what I meant

[Doc Democracy]

Re: Dodging perceived threats

 

I'm going to assume an Aware Of Attack means coming from a combatant on the field that the character is at least aware of the presense of even if not actively engaged with them. Unaware Of Attack means coming from the Invisible Sniper hidden in the niche that no one saw.

 

I would add to that an attack that is indirect or has IPE...

 

 

Doc

[ghost-angel]

Re: Dodging perceived threats

 

ah, yes those would be good to add to the list of Unaware.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Dodging perceived threats

 

I'd probably beg a PER roll for a number of indirect attacks: especially if they had (for instance) a sound component to their visibility, but IPE it definitely would not help with.