Size & DCV: A Big Problem

[zornwil]

Re: Size & DCV: A Big Problem

 

Except for one thing: Why would a character who just happens to be the size of a dime be easier to hit than an actual dime? Or are all innanimate objects equally easy to hit (0 DCV)?

Good point, the rules are inconsistent here as objects, according to page 382, derive DCV solely from size whereas characters may get it from size powers and their other normal abilities. It does say "Characters with Size Powers, or who are larger or smaller than normal all the time, have CV modifiers defined by those powers, their other abiltiies, and their Disadvantages." While it mentiosn "larger or smaller than normal all the time" I believe that is just a tad confusing as this thread discusses, since in fact that has no bearing unless they have a specific Disad or ability bought to reflect that specifically.

 

It mentions that PER rolls are affected by the same size modifier.

 

But pragmatically speaking, the discrepancy aside, in the game it seems clear that if you can perceive a dime-sized character (for which I would say the size WOULD come into play, though I'm not sure the rules are that specific) then that's the real driver, given the statement regarding that character being at 0 DCV automatically for being unconscious.

 

To your point, it would seem though that enforcing consistency would make sense. I would qualify this in that I think for in-combat purposes it would make sense given the haste required, but out of combat I'd count the dime and the person as 0 DCV, if it even needs to be determined, for a shot if the person shooting properly perceives either. At this point we're in opinion land solely of course.

 

I presume game balance is at stake here, mechanically, and the idea is that an unconscious dime-sized character gets too much benefit for being dime-sized if he's not set to 0 DCV.

 

I think the best thing in the end is to approach it by what feels right for the play group, in the end, not that saying that is any brilliant observation.

[Lucius]

Re: Size & DCV: A Big Problem

 

 

To your point, it would seem though that enforcing consistency would make sense. I would qualify this in that I think for in-combat purposes it would make sense given the haste required, but out of combat I'd count the dime and the person as 0 DCV, if it even needs to be determined, for a shot if the person shooting properly perceives either. At this point we're in opinion land solely of course.

 

.

 

 

I'm not sure we're quite in "opinion land" yet.

 

After all, if your statement that a dime - or similarly sized object - has 0 DCV out of combat, were to suddenly become the case in reality, well, for one thing a lot of carnivals might start losing money as hitting the bullseye (or knocking over the cans or whatever) suddenly becomes a <=11 roll for the average person (and that's assuming an unfamiliarity modifier of -3)

 

At their typical ranges I'm not sure there'd be a range penalty at all; in some cases, there may be penalties for the lousy weapons provided. But even so, I suspect they'd be giving away a lot more prizes....

 

Lucius Alexander

 

Step right up! Hit the bullseye and win a stuffed palindromedary! Hit it twice and get a ticket to the sideshow where you can see the real palindromedary! What happens if you hit it all three times? I dunno - no one ever has!

[schir1964]

Re: Size & DCV: A Big Problem

 

I think something is bit lost in the discussion.

 

There are two separate situations when concerning the ability to strike something:

 

1) HTH Combat

2) Ranged Combat

 

The Zero DCV ruling being discussed or at least what I was referring to was only for HTH Combat.

 

If the target is considered to be in the Ranged Combat situation, then all range modifiers apply and possibly size modifiers as well when trying to hit a small stationary target. Even a hex size target is still given 3 DCV in addition to range penalties.

 

- Christopher Mullins

[Dust Raven]

Re: Size & DCV: A Big Problem

 

Yes, there is definately a huge difference in making contact with a target in HTH versus Ranged combat, especially against a small target. At least out of combat. In combat, there's the timing issue. How much time are you really spending to contact that stationary target, and how much are you concentrating on the task? Out of combat, these factors don't matter. You see a dime on the floor, you bend over and pick it up. Easy. In combat, you've got to pay attention to other combatants and act/move to avoid their attacks (the primary factors of whether or not a character has full or reduced DCV). There's also the matter of if you are just touching the target, your attempting to hit it with such force you may damage it. Granted, punching a stationary target of any kind is easier than punching a moving target, but punching a small stationary target should be more difficult than punching a large stationary target.

 

At range, you do have more time to aim, but that's really all you can do. Aim. You can't slowly reach out with the item (or whatever is it) that actually contacts the target, zeroing in until you hit it. You're pretty much stuck with attacking as if you intent to damage the target, even if your intent is just to make contact.

[zornwil]

Re: Size & DCV: A Big Problem

 

I'm not sure we're quite in "opinion land" yet.

 

After all, if your statement that a dime - or similarly sized object - has 0 DCV out of combat, were to suddenly become the case in reality, well, for one thing a lot of carnivals might start losing money as hitting the bullseye (or knocking over the cans or whatever) suddenly becomes a <=11 roll for the average person (and that's assuming an unfamiliarity modifier of -3)

 

At their typical ranges I'm not sure there'd be a range penalty at all; in some cases, there may be penalties for the lousy weapons provided. But even so, I suspect they'd be giving away a lot more prizes....

 

Lucius Alexander

 

Step right up! Hit the bullseye and win a stuffed palindromedary! Hit it twice and get a ticket to the sideshow where you can see the real palindromedary! What happens if you hit it all three times? I dunno - no one ever has!

I mean it's opinion land as to how to alter and apply the rules. As soon as we stop using the rules, it's opinion-based.

 

As to whether people can hit a dime in a carnival in real-life, I submit that's meaningless criteria to an action-adventure game. I think the appropriate context for determining the desired outcome should be centered on that, and in that context whether our heroes and villains can hit the dime is, as I was indicating above, probably a non-issue if it's not split-second-timing-sensitive, but matters more if it's in combat.

[zornwil]

Re: Size & DCV: A Big Problem

 

I think something is bit lost in the discussion.

 

There are two separate situations when concerning the ability to strike something:

 

1) HTH Combat

2) Ranged Combat

 

The Zero DCV ruling being discussed or at least what I was referring to was only for HTH Combat.

 

If the target is considered to be in the Ranged Combat situation, then all range modifiers apply and possibly size modifiers as well when trying to hit a small stationary target. Even a hex size target is still given 3 DCV in addition to range penalties.

 

- Christopher Mullins

Although Lucius' point is valid in that the range at a carnival or the like is a 0 mod.

[Dust Raven]

Re: Size & DCV: A Big Problem

 

As to whether people can hit a dime in a carnival in real-life, I submit that's meaningless criteria to an action-adventure game.

It would have meaning if carnival games were in the campaign. There are several action-adventure films involving carnival games, including a few Bond films, Darkman and Remo Williams just to name a few. While the majority of the main characters to succeed in such games, it's apparent the majority of people don't (it's why the heroes are so amazing when they do succeed). It would make no sense if these games, when the player has all the time in the world to make their shot at a very short range, that the common player would miss, but almost be guarenteed a hit against a similar sized target even further away in the heat of battle.

[zornwil]

Re: Size & DCV: A Big Problem

 

It would have meaning if carnival games were in the campaign. There are several action-adventure films involving carnival games' date=' including a few Bond films, Darkman and Remo Williams just to name a few. While the majority of the main characters to succeed in such games, it's apparent the majority of people don't (it's why the heroes are so amazing when they do succeed). It would make no sense if these games, when the player has all the time in the world to make their shot at a very short range, that the common player would miss, but almost be guarenteed a hit against a similar sized target even further away in the heat of battle.[/quote']

But you're putting those actions into a different context than being regular carnival simulation. I am familiar with the Darkman example, and as you are likely aware that's a plot point to show his inner rage as he is ripped off - he was entirely capable, as our hero ought to be, of hitting the target with no problem. But it was rigged. And I think generally speaking in an action-adventure game, we need to concern ourselves with the level of simulation of "is this a time-sensitive or a challenge" versus "I'm just going to roleplay being at a carnival for the sake of it." I agree that in the former case it makes sense to make the size issue come to the fore in the CV values. I disagree that it has any merit in the latter case, and I don't really see an issue that Mr. Normal has a better chance in game life than in real life since Mr. Normal is not the subject of our game. If he were, we better fix STR, since he can sure as heck do amazing things, we better fix running and SPD since he's a pro runner automatically, virtually, and so on.

[Dust Raven]

Re: Size & DCV: A Big Problem

 

But you're putting those actions into a different context than being regular carnival simulation. I am familiar with the Darkman example' date=' and as you are likely aware that's a plot point to show his inner rage as he is ripped off - he was entirely capable, as our hero ought to be, of hitting the target with no problem. But it was rigged. And I think generally speaking in an action-adventure game, we need to concern ourselves with the level of simulation of "is this a time-sensitive or a challenge" versus "I'm just going to roleplay being at a carnival for the sake of it." I agree that in the former case it makes sense to make the size issue come to the fore in the CV values. I disagree that it has any merit in the latter case, and I don't really see an issue that Mr. Normal has a better chance in game life than in real life since Mr. Normal is not the subject of our game. If he were, we better fix STR, since he can sure as heck do amazing things, we better fix running and SPD since he's a pro runner automatically, virtually, and so on.[/quote']

Darkman was probably a bad example because it was a fixed game (no one can win), rather than just tricky.

 

My point in comparison though is verisimilitude. A skilled combatant can easily strike a target the size of a dime with an unfamiliar weapon in combat, but can't hit a target the size of a dime with a familiar weapon at a carnival. There is the possibility of just running such non-combat situations without any rolls of any kind, but that doesn't suit all campaigns or GM styles.

 

Note: Mr. Normal, in my opinion, doesn't start with (or rather, doesn't have)10s in all Primary Characteristics and 6" in Running plus a few Skills associated with his profession. The 0 Point character sheet represent the starting values for heroes, not average people.

 

Anyways, there have been a number of proposed solutions, such as simply applying the size modifier as an OCV Penalty rather than a DCV bonus (so the target really does have a 0 DCV), or buying some Power that affects any potential attacker's OCV, such as a CE, Images or Invisibility (effectively preventing the attacker from perceiving the target with a Targeting Sense, reducing his OCV when attacking). I still haven't decided what to do in my own games. So far I'm just winging it and using ad hoc rules when needed. So far, there's only been one character that's smaller than normal, and he was an NPC, so it really hasn't come up.

[Mister E]

Re: Size & DCV: A Big Problem

 

Missis E told me size isn't a big problem for her. How should I take that?

[zornwil]

Re: Size & DCV: A Big Problem

 

Darkman was probably a bad example because it was a fixed game (no one can win), rather than just tricky.

 

My point in comparison though is verisimilitude. A skilled combatant can easily strike a target the size of a dime with an unfamiliar weapon in combat, but can't hit a target the size of a dime with a familiar weapon at a carnival.

 

In heroic fiction? Wow, I never knew that, and that is something I would never find as qualifying as realistic in imy view. James Bond can't hit a dime-sized target in a carnival? I call that unrealistic. So that's the crux of our disagreement and we can only agree to disagree.

 

There is the possibility of just running such non-combat situations without any rolls of any kind, but that doesn't suit all campaigns or GM styles.

 

That's why I called it a matter of opinion.

 

Note: Mr. Normal, in my opinion, doesn't start with (or rather, doesn't have)10s in all Primary Characteristics and 6" in Running plus a few Skills associated with his profession. The 0 Point character sheet represent the starting values for heroes, not average people.

 

That doesn't change the nature of the issue. That still gives him an "unrealistic" chance of hitting the dime-sized target, and still gives him unrealistic strength and running.

 

Anyways, there have been a number of proposed solutions, such as simply applying the size modifier as an OCV Penalty rather than a DCV bonus (so the target really does have a 0 DCV), or buying some Power that affects any potential attacker's OCV, such as a CE, Images or Invisibility (effectively preventing the attacker from perceiving the target with a Targeting Sense, reducing his OCV when attacking). I still haven't decided what to do in my own games. So far I'm just winging it and using ad hoc rules when needed. So far, there's only been one character that's smaller than normal, and he was an NPC, so it really hasn't come up.

[schir1964]

Re: Size & DCV: A Big Problem

 

I'm a bit lost now. Can someone sum up what the issue is and the two opposing views?

 

- Christopher Mullins

[zornwil]

Re: Size & DCV: A Big Problem

 

I'm not sure if that's possible...

 

Right now I'm just arguing over a tangential discussion on instances in which to use object size as basis of DCV and when to just use a PER rolll and calll the object 0 DCV.

 

I think basically some believe characters' size should count in CV determination, others believe it's fine as is.