How do you visualize combat?

[nexus]

Re: How do you visualize combat?

 

 

Although, it's not as if Storyteller or Cyberpunk 2020 didn't have people who were able to superheroically dodge bullets either. The Cyberpunk combat rules are pretty realistic and gritty, and yet Solos get a bonus to their defense that makes them hard to shoot.

.

 

Nitpick: Cyberpunk 2013 did but Cyberpunk 2020 doesn't. The rules used for Cyberpunk v3 allow Defense rolls against gunfire, IIRC.

 

Storyteller varies but generally you couldn't "Dodge" bullets unless you had certain powers but you could do the equivalent of a Hero System "Dive for Cover".

[Rockhoof]

Re: How do you visualize combat?

 

IMO this is a failure of imagination. Any attack is a co-operative act between attaccker and defender. DCV is an abstraction of all the things a defender can do to avoid giving the attacker what he wants.

[薔薇語]

Re: How do you visualize combat?

 

IMO this is a failure of imagination. Any attack is a co-operative act between attaccker and defender. DCV is an abstraction of all the things a defender can do to avoid giving the attacker what he wants.

 

On this line of thought, DCV doesn't have to be strickly dodging the attack. It could be that the character just wasn't hit in any truly vital spot. Such examples are a luck based character with high DCV but with the special effect of "not in the face!" or at least not in a vital spot, but he takes the hit and looks like he might be injured just not to badly.

 

Also there isn't anything saying that V has to have a high DCV, it could be that he simply has Damage reduction with the general special affect as described above.

 

La Rose.

[Hyper-Man]

Re: How do you visualize combat?

 

Also,

 

The drama of the character could easily give a bonus to a PRE attack that then slowed down the cops in the scene in question.

[Utech]

Re: How do you visualize combat?

 

Regarding DCV = dodging bullets: Only if you insist that all to-hit rolls produce a clean hit or a clean miss.

 

In this case, it's entirely reasonable to say that V had all of his levels in DCV and that he used a Martial Dodge when he was shot at. "Miss" results indicated shots that struck the metal plate and either failed to penetrate or were deflected. "Hit" results indicated shots that pierced the metal plate or struck an unarmored location.

[Katherine]

Re: How do you visualize combat?

 

I think Katherine's problem isn't the mechanics behind the scene but with DCV specifically that some people in her group are arguing that it's unrealistic for a person to have the ability to "evade" things like bullets. The example scene, for example, in Hero depending on how you wrote him up, V could have theoretically "dodged" those shots, at least some of them. (IOW: His DCV caused them to miss for whatever reason/sfx).

 

Judging from the games they usually play, gunfire often can't be evaded by normal beings. Options are limited to cover, falling prone or other "realistic" counter measures and that's causing some hang ups with some of her group.

 

 

Yes, that's what I meant. They just don't like the idea of Defensive Combat Value for anything but hand to hand combat.

[Hyper-Man]

Re: How do you visualize combat?

 

Yes' date=' that's what I meant. They just don't like the idea of Defensive Combat Value for anything but hand to hand combat.[/quote']

 

One possible solution would be to house-rule or require (heroic vs. super-heroic) that guns/bullets be built with a Limited version Invisible Power Effects vs. Sight. Now their DCV's vs. those attacks are going to be severely penalized.

[Guest steamteck]

Re: How do you visualize combat?

 

DCV vs. gunfire is perfectly cinematic. Look how rarely Arnold Schwarzenegger or Indiana Jones etc gets shot at and actually hit.

[archermoo]

Re: How do you visualize combat?

 

One possible solution would be to house-rule or require (heroic vs. super-heroic) that guns/bullets be built with a Limited version Invisible Power Effects vs. Sight. Now their DCV's vs. those attacks are going to be severely penalized.

 

Only if you house rule DCV modifiers for IPE. The RAW don't include any.

[Hyper-Man]

Re: How do you visualize combat?

 

Only if you house rule DCV modifiers for IPE. The RAW don't include any.

 

Not directly.

 

The rule I was thinking of in that post was:

 

422 ■ Combat And Adventuring

 

Inability To Sense An Opponent

 

A character who cannot perceive his opponent(s) or target(s) with a Targeting Sense (because he’s been attacked with a Flash, is in a Darkness fi eld, is otherwise “blinded,” or his opponent is Invisible) suffers the following penalties:

—In HTH Combat, the character is at ½ OCV and ½ DCV. This applies both to when he makes attacks in HTH Combat, and is attacked in HTH Combat.

 

—In Ranged Combat, the character is at 0

OCV and ½ DCV. Th is applies both to when he makes attacks in Ranged Combat, and is attacked in Ranged Combat.

 

If a character can make a PER Roll with a Nontargeting Sense (a Half Phase Action) to perceive a particular target, then against that target only he is at -1 DCV, ½ OCV when attacked or attacking in HTH Combat, and full DCV, ½ OCV when attacked from or attacking at Range. Against all other targets he is aff ected by the standard “lack of Targeting Sense” modifiers described above.

 

The inability to sense an opponent is not that different than the inability to sense a particular attack. The effect should be similar.

[archermoo]

Re: How do you visualize combat?

 

Not directly.

 

The rule I was thinking of in that post was:

 

422 ■ Combat And Adventuring

 

 

 

The inability to sense an opponent is not that different than the inability to sense a particular attack. The effect should be similar.

 

They are in fact very different. One makes you invisible. One makes it harder for people to tell where an attack came from. Possibly attacking with an Attack that has IPE could get you the Surprised combat modifier under the right circumstances. But the description of Surprised notes that if the person being attacked has reason to believe that they will be sniped at/attacked in a sneaky fashion, the Surprised modifier doesn't apply.

 

I'm pretty sure that someone pointing a gun at you will give you reason to believe that you will be being shot at, and so you won't be at any DCV penalty.

 

If the intent of IPE was that you were to be treated as if you were invisible for purposes of combat modifiers, I'm pretty sure the rules would actually say that.

[nexus]

Re: How do you visualize combat?

 

It seems to be more of a game philosophy and "realism" issue than a rules problem, honestly. I'm not sure what advice to give that might resolve it.

[BNakagawa]

Re: How do you visualize combat?

 

Do you take the dice rolls literally (every attack roll represents one attack' date=' all results are exactly what the say, location rolls, knockback, etc) or do you feel the rolls represent an abstraction of what's going on? A missed attack might be an attack that didn't do any damage or even the attacker failing to see an opening and make an attack at all, low end "knockback" can be someone staggered and stumbling back, momentarily stunned by the force of the blow, things like that.[/quote']

 

I prefer not to get too creative with descriptors. A miss might be a wide miss or a near miss, but it's always a miss.

 

If you describe a miss as an attack that just pinged off the target's defenses, then you encourage them to push their attacks or haymaker, when they really ought to be spreading their dice.

 

As for not finding an opening, the dice were rolled, the end or the charge is spent and the attack goes somewhere. It might hit something other than the intended target, it might not, but it always goes somewhere. Describing it otherwise might mislead people about how many bullets or arrows they have left or whether or not that guy that's just standing there has a held action or not.

 

Don't confuse the players.

[archermoo]

Re: How do you visualize combat?

 

 

Don't confuse the players.

 

Yup. When I do the more fanciful descriptions of what happens, it is always with the intent of providing more flavour, not confusing people. Which is why I make sure that they get both the flavour text AND the mechanical description of what happened.

 

"You hit a DCV 7? That misses. Brickman stands there and takes the bullet to the chest. However you weren't able to get a clean shot, so it just bounces off harmlessly."

 

Fanciful descriptions should enhance the player's ability to see what their character can see, not hide the game mechanics from the players to take advantage of them. If you miss, you miss, and you know you miss. Unless the bad guy has some sort of power to make you think you hit.

[nexus]

Re: How do you visualize combat?

 

Don't confuse the players.

 

When I add flavor to a description I try to base it around the mechanics and also give the mechanical result in addition. For example, I'd only use "couldn't find an opening" for an attack which wouldn't result in a charge/arrow, whatever being lost such a sword swing or throwing a punch.

[Captain Obvious]

Re: How do you visualize combat?

 

DCV vs. gunfire is perfectly cinematic. Look how rarely Arnold Schwarzenegger or Indiana Jones etc gets shot at and actually hit.

 

Only a few percent of bullets fired in combat ever hit what they were aimed at anyway. As far as realism goes, DCV isn't defensive enough.

[archermoo]

Re: How do you visualize combat?

 

Only a few percent of bullets fired in combat ever hit what they were aimed at anyway. As far as realism goes' date=' DCV isn't defensive enough.[/quote']

 

Yeah, I've seen footage of a firefight taking place at just over arms reach, with three people firing more than 50 rounds between them (2 guys trying to rob a motel I think). None of them managed to hit anyone.

[Zeropoint]

Re: How do you visualize combat?

 

Only a few percent of bullets fired in combat ever hit what they were aimed at anyway. As far as realism goes, DCV isn't defensive enough.

 

Yeah, I've seen footage of a firefight taking place at just over arms reach, with three people firing more than 50 rounds between them (2 guys trying to rob a motel I think). None of them managed to hit anyone.

 

I'd say that stuff like this reflects more on a lack of OCV on the part of the shooters than on any DCV in the targets. One of the reasons that guns are an "equalizer" is that while you can take cover, the skill of the defender has MUCH less influence on whether they get hit or not than it does in melee combat.

 

 

On the actual thread topic: I STRONGLY dislike hits that aren't really hits and misses that aren't really misses. If I'm GMing, a successful attack roll indicates an attack that connects, and an unsuccessful attack roll indicates an attack that didn't touch the target. Grazes and attacks that don't penetrate the targets defenses are represented by . . . low damage rolls. It's possible that some attacks might do minor damage or cosmetic damage if they miss by one. The old "bullet holes in your clothes" thing, you know?

 

If I'm just a player, I still picture my attack results that way, and it bugs me if the GM does otherwise.

[nexus]

Re: How do you visualize combat?

 

I'd say that stuff like this reflects more on a lack of OCV on the part of the shooters than on any DCV in the targets. One of the reasons that guns are an "equalizer" is that while you can take cover, the skill of the defender has MUCH less influence on whether they get hit or not than it does in melee combat.

 

I think it's a mix in real life. I'm not going to make a call on how much since I've never fired a weapon at another human being and I hope I never have to. though I can see why some people wouldn't like DCV even in cinema since it mostly like looks the attacker misses without any defensive measures taken in by the target.

[Utech]

Re: How do you visualize combat?

 

I STRONGLY dislike hits that aren't really hits and misses that aren't really misses.

If I'm just a player, I still picture my attack results that way, and it bugs me if the GM does otherwise.

 

I think you're really limiting yourself and your GM here. But to each his own.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: How do you visualize combat?

 

I'd say that stuff like this reflects more on a lack of OCV on the part of the shooters than on any DCV in the targets. One of the reasons that guns are an "equalizer" is that while you can take cover' date=' the skill of the defender has MUCH less influence on whether they get hit or not than it does in melee combat.[/quote']

 

I'd say it indicates "realistic" base OCV and DCV are not equal or, alternatively, that 11- is not the "realistic" chance to hit someone whose DCV equals your OCV.

 

From a playability perspective, however, who wants to average only one hit every couple of turns or so?

[Zeropoint]

Re: How do you visualize combat?

 

I'd say it indicates "realistic" base OCV and DCV are not equal or, alternatively, that 11- is not the "realistic" chance to hit someone whose DCV equals your OCV.

 

From a playability perspective, however, who wants to average only one hit every couple of turns or so?

Reply With Quote

 

The more I think about this, the less clear it gets, AND the more obvious it becomes that my own lack of combat experience of any kind leaves me with nothing to work with. I've never been shot at, and never fired a shot at a human being. I don't remember anyone actually trying to hit me other than two occasions, both as a kid.

[Maur]

Re: How do you visualize combat?

 

I think it's a mix in real life. I'm not going to make a call on how much since I've never fired a weapon at another human being and I hope I never have to. though I can see why some people wouldn't like DCV even in cinema since it mostly like looks the attacker misses without any defensive measures taken in by the target.

But that is exactly what DCV is a measure of. If the person is truly not taking any attempts to defend himself, then he is considered out of combat and 1/2 DCV and 1/2 Hit location penalties and I think 0 DCV vs something he can't perceive (e.g. a sniper in the bush 500 yards off and camouflaged). When one is running in combat (at combat speed) they aren't really moving in straight and easy lines, but ducking and zigging which is why they can do double that movement rate when not in combat because then they truly are moving in straight lines.

[nexus]

Re: How do you visualize combat?

 

But that is exactly what DCV is a measure of. If the person is truly not taking any attempts to defend himself' date=' then he is considered out of combat and 1/2 DCV and 1/2 Hit location penalties and I think 0 DCV vs something he can't perceive (e.g. a sniper in the bush 500 yards off and camouflaged). When one is running in combat (at combat speed) they aren't really moving in straight and easy lines, but ducking and zigging which is why they can do double that movement rate when not in combat because then they truly are moving in straight lines.[/quote']

 

I know what DCV can represent. I said I can understand why some might not think Hero's DCV is "cinematic" not that I feel that way. You usually see characters in movies running yes, but they don't seem to be "evading" the gunfire directed at them except in more fanciful movies. It looks more like their opponents can't shoot straight.

 

Some of it is sfx but I can understand where the impression can come from and I've never been (and hope to never be) in a gunfight so I'm not going to make any comments about "realism" either way. I've heard that movies portray guns as too accurate/instantly lethal much of the time and they're shown as not powerful enough from others so again I'm not making a comment.

 

Katherine's problem seems to be overcoming the perception about DCV being unrealistic by a couple of guys in her group. I'm not sure what to tell her about that except to try and explain that DCV doesn't necessarily only mean actively sidestepping or blocking the attack but making yourself harder to hit. IIRC, even Phoenix Command and GURPS allow characters with certain skills to make themselves harder to hit with gunfire, even if only slightly and both are considered fairly realistic combat systems

[Sean Waters]

Re: How do you visualize combat?

 

I think this is a good thread to bring this up. Our group has been using Hero System/Champions for a little while now and overall we like it. We came to it from Storyteller, Cyberpunk 2020 and similar games. But there are two people that are having a big issue with one part of the system: Defensive Combat Value. They don't feel it's realistic or even fits most cinematic battles especially when guns come into play. I'm not sure how to explain or defend it really.

 

For instance, they complain that this scene

 

 

From V for Vendetta couldn't happen in Hero since if V was as agile as he seemed he'd just dodge all the bullets.

 

Hmm. This is Hero. He did dodge most of the bullets. It is just that he chose to portray his dodge as standing still and having the impact, or most of it, taken by his armour. So, although it appeared he was hit by 100+ bullets, in fact only a couple actually got him - not enough to kill him instantly or put him down.

 

Personally I'm not very keen on that explanation, but then I also find that many people are more than happy to overestimate how effective bullets are.

 

Of course you could equally well argue that the scene from V for Vendetta is unrealistic because of the ridiculously high apparent OCV evidenced by all those knife kills. One thing you find a lot is that heroes in movies usually only take damage when it dramatically appropriate, and the same cannot aways be said of RPGs.