Vehicle DCV... I had no idea

[Sean Waters]

Re: Vehicle DCV... I had no idea

 

Actually... I take the phrase to mean the rules are a set of options, not a rigid codex to never deviate from. D&CSense really means "well, if you don't like it or it interferes with your game by all means change it!"

 

In my eyes.

 

I'm quite sure you are right, and that is how it is meant. It just sets my teeth on edge, not least because I've never met two people with the same 'dramatic and common sense'. My preference is not for a rigid codex...well it is but wouldn't call it that...

[Lord Liaden]

Re: Vehicle DCV... I had no idea

 

There's an official way to handle scattering of a non-AOE attack?

 

I'm all ears. Well, I'm probably less than 1% ears, but c'mon, it's a metaphor!

 

That would be under "Missed And Random Shots," FREd p. 284/5ER p. 423.

[CorPse]

Re: Vehicle DCV... I had no idea

 

That would be under "Missed And Random Shots' date='" FREd p. 284/5ER p. 423.[/quote']

 

Aren't FRed and 5ER just two different ways of saying the same thing?

 

FREd=Fifth Revised Edition.

5ER=Fifth Edition Revised.

 

Also, I looked at the scattering rules you mentioned. (Thank you for sending that along.) But technically they'd only be useful if you missed what your were aiming at, as opposed to missing a small part of something bigger you were aiming at. (ie you hit that destroyer floating beyond the carrier.)

 

However, yes, you could use this in a pinch or if it seemed to make sense.

 

For my money, the size differential rules that g-a mentions above are probably the most appropriate for the original situation I brought up.

[Derek Hiemforth]

Re: Vehicle DCV... I had no idea

 

And for what it's worth' date=' after 30 years of playing Hero System games in all sorts of settings, I'm still waiting for a GM to giving me the "your Attack hits automatically" action.[/quote']Really? I allow that all the time as a GM.

 

(Well, not literally all the time, but frequently. Whenever it makes sense.)

[BobGreenwade]

Re: Vehicle DCV... I had no idea

 

Aren't FRed and 5ER just two different ways of saying the same thing?

 

FREd=Fifth Revised Edition.

5ER=Fifth Edition Revised.

No. FREd = Fifth Rules Edition -- the unrevised 5th Ed.

 

And I've always played that a DCV cannot be below 0 after Range Modifiers and similar factors.

[CorPse]

Re: Vehicle DCV... I had no idea

 

No. FREd = Fifth Rules Edition -- the unrevised 5th Ed.

 

And I've always played that a DCV cannot be below 0 after Range Modifiers and similar factors.

 

Aha! Aha x2.

 

As far as I'm concerned you are the end of the line on Matters Vehicular.

 

Would you mind giving an example for how Size/Range, etc., would interact for a big vehicle?

[CorPse]

Re: Vehicle DCV... I had no idea

 

Really? I allow that all the time as a GM.

 

(Well, not literally all the time, but frequently. Whenever it makes sense.)

 

Looks like I should be on a plane to San Jose!

[Lord Liaden]

Re: Vehicle DCV... I had no idea

 

No. FREd = Fifth Rules Edition -- the unrevised 5th Ed.

 

And I've always played that a DCV cannot be below 0 after Range Modifiers and similar factors.

 

FREd was sometimes considered to stand for "Fifth Rules Edition" and sometimes "Fifth Revised Edition," because it was always a fan-created retcon; but nowadays the acronym is almost always used for the first unrevised version, while 5ER (sometimes pronounced "Fiver") almost always refers to the Revised version. This is all informal fan BS of course, so it's not legally binding.

 

And I use modifiers for DCV the same as Bob does, which does make a difference when shooting at a panel truck versus an aircraft carrier at a distance. In fact, given the massive DCV penalties among the Disadvantages for some published very large objects and creatures, if DCV 0 is supposed to be the minimum there's no other way to use those penalties that would make any sense.

[BobGreenwade]

Re: Vehicle DCV... I had no idea

 

As far as I'm concerned you are the end of the line on Matters Vehicular.

 

Would you mind giving an example for how Size/Range, etc., would interact for a big vehicle?

 

Actually Steve would be "end of the line." I'm more of the Penultimate Vehicle Guy.

 

I'll see if I can post something of an example at a later time. Right now I'm a little shy of resources (time, books, etc.).

[CorPse]

Re: Vehicle DCV... I had no idea

 

Cool... I'll look forward to it.

[Maur]

Re: Vehicle DCV... I had no idea

 

I always liked the Rangespeed/Size chart from GURPS for dealing with ranged attacks. Distance/speed made the target harder to hit the farther/faster it was. Size made it easier to hit. Sum the two mods and you found the skill mod to try and hit that thing.

 

So, essentially an object that was up close but moving very fast was just as hard to hit as an object standing still, but far away. Same with a small object up close vs a large object in the distance.

 

GURPS also dealt with the issue of a called shot where the roll wasn't quite enough to hit the target called for. E.g. Eye shot was a -10 or so, miss by 1 or 2 and you just hit the head. Miss by more and your shot went wide.

[ghost-angel]

Re: Vehicle DCV... I had no idea

 

I always liked the Rangespeed/Size chart from GURPS for dealing with ranged attacks. Distance/speed made the target harder to hit the farther/faster it was. Size made it easier to hit. Sum the two mods and you found the skill mod to try and hit that thing.

 

So, essentially an object that was up close but moving very fast was just as hard to hit as an object standing still, but far away. Same with a small object up close vs a large object in the distance.

 

These are in HERO, under Dogfight Rules in the Vehicles section, coupled with Velocity Based DCV.