Has anyone fixed range bands?

ddaley said:

It's simple in theory. But, when you have two or more groups engaged in combat and people begin moving around, it quickly becomes difficult to figure out who is at what range to whom. It is sad that they put so much work into the system, and then dropped the ball on combat ranges. We will either need to change the system ourselves or find another system to play. Starfinder is promising. Looks like the new Star Trek game will have the same broken range band system.

Click to expand...

I disagree entirely, having DM'd this for years. I can doodle on a piece of paper an area in 30s. I point from one spot to another and say short, point to a hall and say end to end is medium, unless it's really long, then it's a long hall. Anything beyond that is out of scope of combat unless a sniper is setting up. After that, most players can guestimate their own ranges, and if I feel they are outside the fudge region, correct the difficulty accordingly.

As an example, A single conference room end to end is usually short range. Two of them side by side on thier longest sides is likely medium range. Outside that, long range. From the further tank of a land/air speeder fueling station to the convenience store, short to edge of medium. Across the street, definitely medium, down the block, long. Room inside the Falcon, likely engaged. One end of the falcon to the middle, short. From one end of the falcon to the other, medium. One end of a hangar holding 2 such yt-1300s to the other, long range.

It becomes easy enough to diagram in the dirt with a couple rocks.

PC: "I'm hiding behind the shipment crates along the wall and I fire at the ramp"
Me: "Front or back of the ship?"
PC: "Front"
Me: "Medium Range"

PC: "I stand up from the dinner table and fire at Darth Vader standing in the doorway"
Me: "Short Range, and Vader eats your blaster bolt for breakfast and spits out the grizzle"

I've never played the FFG Star Wars game, but I have used Range Bands in games before. Initially, I had the same problem as that described in the OP. But, I realized that the problem was due to what I was used to and not the game mechanics.

Range Bands are quick-n-easy way to figure range. They should be perfect for a swashbuckling Star Wars game. You're (the OP) probably used to, as I was, exact range distances. Get that out of your head. You don't need exact range. All you really need is a difficulty or a target number to use in your combat attack throw. So, just ball-park it. You'll find, when you get used to it, that it's actually liberating to not be tied down to actual meter by meter range.

Oh, you're fighting hand-to-hand or in melee with hand weapons? That's Close Range Band.

Oh, you're firing blaster pistols? That's Short Range Bands.

Oh, you're firing a blaster rifle? That's a Medium Range Band.

If you are firiing a blaster pistol at a stormtrooper at Short Range, and the trooper is firing back, then logic tells you that you're both firing at a Short Range Band.

Indoors? Short Range.

Outside? Use Medium Range.

Got a sniper or units touching down from a skyhopper in the distance? Put them at Long Range.



I don't know the Range Bands in FFG's Star Wars game, but I'm sure the concepts I use above (probably not the actual bands) are probably what is intended by FFG"s game.

Water Bob said:

I don't know the Range Bands in FFG's Star Wars game, but I'm sure the concepts I use above (probably not the actual bands) are probably what is intended by FFG"s game.

Click to expand...

Not only intended, but pretty close to the same. In that respect it's close to the WEG d6 Star Wars game too. Range there was simply a factor in having the GM set a difficulty number for players to roll. The shorter the range the easier the difficulty number should be. So, without specific ranges set in meters range either determined difficulty, or the difficulty that the DM wanted to assign dictated whether opponents ought to be closer or further away from each other.

Again, it's an intended feature, not a design oversight. Probably better to roll with it than try to "fix" it. Simply assigning fixed, precise ranges in meters won't REALLY change things. It just means the GM and players both spend more time dealing with rules crunch than creating the free-wheeling cinematic action that both those systems are meant to encourage.

For example, the characters join Han Solo and board his ship the Millennium Falcon at docking bay 94 in Mos Eisley. Suddenly stormtroopers show up in the docking bay. "Stop that ship! Blast 'em!" The GM doesn't need to have drawn out the docking bay in detail. Neither GM nor the players need to count squares or take measurements:

"Solo is near the bottom of the boarding ramp. The docking bay is pretty big since the Falcon isn't exactly small, so it's medium range for all y'all. There's potential cover for some of the troopers but they're not really taking up proper fighting positions."

"We've got a ton of destiny points so I'll flip a destiny marker and I'll fire away indiscriminately. In fact, I'll shoot the walls above them too... The destiny point would mean they panic or at least fall back long enough so that I can get on board, or at least get better cover."

"Chewie will also get the ship started ASAP."

<Dice are rolled. Solo gets good results with advantage spent to add setback to one of the stormtroopers next check. The stormtroopers all miss and some have threat results as well which the DM spends as suffering strain and one allows solo to perform a free maneuver - which he sensibly uses to run up the ramp and inside the ship.>

That's fast, smooth and cinematic gameplay (or at least it should SEEM that way...). Using specific ranges for weapons would be possible but would tend to mire the events in the "mud" of a fixed-position firefight encounter and detract from the flow:

<Everyone measures/counts squares.>

"Okay, these two troopers are actually long range for your Heavy Blaster Pistol which would be three difficulty dice, the others are medium range - two difficulty dice. You're actually short range for these three shooting at you so only one difficulty die for them, medium range for the rest at two dice, except this guy who has a big-arsed heavy blast rifle which is also short range/1 die for him."

If the GM WANTED a firefight around the ship he could arrange that in a dozen different ways, such as announcing that the stormtroopers arrive BEFORE anyone gets on board. But the idea of the situation is simply to get the action moving - get the players into space for a short chase, NOT stand and fight it out in the docking bay. Throw out a range band that makes sense, add a few modifiers such as for Han's unexpected tactics and the troopers not actually expecting spirited resistance, and you have a quick couple rounds of action that jump immediately into the chase:

"You're out ahead of the imperial cruiser but there's two more that come in from a better angle. The closest one will start firing at long range."

"I'll angle the deflectors to the rear, obviously, while Han does the course plotting."

"Okay, they move from extreme to long and the ship starts rocking from the incoming fire. A lot of the shots seem to be 'across the bow" so to speak. They seem to want you to give up. The ship shakes more as some closer shots are deflected."

"Give up? Not freakin' likely."

"What about the other PC's? What are you guys doing?"

"We go up to the cockpit but leave the droids in the main cabin area. We'll give Han and Chewie some snide "helpful suggestions"."

"Okay Chewie can have a boost die to his piloting as you kibbitz, which he will certainly need as they stop shooting across the bow."

"Oh crap. Uh... How about I do Evasive Maneuvers this round?"

"Okay, they close the range to Medium."

"Jeez Bill. Maybe Luke SHOULD be the one piloting like I suggested earlier."

Of course, this is a very simplified example. In FFG's system there are a hell of a lot of ways to skin cats. There are gobs of ways to modify dice rolls, add more dice, and a wide selection of HOW to apply the dice results. Far more than this even begins to suggest, so the system IS NOT lacking for crunch. But details of determining range just doesn't need to be one of them. Not even SLIGHTLY. It just gets in the way of the action rather than adding anything of value to it.

Man in the Funny Hat said:

Not only intended, but pretty close to the same. In that respect it's close to the WEG d6 Star Wars game too. Range there was simply a factor in having the GM set a difficulty number for players to roll.

Click to expand...

That's actually incorrect, Funny Hat. The weapons in D6 Star Wars are given ranges. For example, Short Range for a blaster pistol is 3-10 meters. Short Range for a DL-44 (Han Solo's Heavy Blaster pistol) is 3-7 meters. Short Range for a stormtrooper blaster rifle is 3-30 meters.

The Range Band system typically is an easy-sand-over-the-details-and-get-on-with-it system. That's not true in D6 Star Wars. You pretty much have to count meters. If stormtroopers and Rebels are 15 meters apart, where the troopers are using standard issue rifles and the Rebels have standard blaster pistols, then the troopers are at Medium Range for the Rebels where as the troopers are firing at Short Range to hit the Rebels. That's a big difference in target number, 10+ or 15+.

Short Range for a....

Hold-Out Blaster is 3-4 meters
Sporting Blaster like Leia's weapon in A New Hope is 3-10 meters


If the Range Band system were used, then these weapons would both fire at the same Short Range band (but modifiers might apply).





The Difference is: In D6 Star Wars, you have different ranges, counted in meters, for different weapons, to account for Point-Blank, Short, Medium, and Long Range.

In a Range Band system, the Point Blank is the same distance for all weapons and movement. The same goes for Short, Medium, and Long Range.



The D6 system is probably the kind of range system that the OP is used to--like that used in D&D.

Classic Traveller is a game that uses Range Bands (optionally, in some cases).





Again, Range Bands are simple because, if your characters are running around the corridors of the Death Star, and combat breaks out, he can declare all blaster combat at Short Range (except for a massive room, like one of the hangars, where he might use Short and Medium Range).

When you know that all combat will be at Short Range, combat flows. It's easy. There's no counting range squares, meter per meter, for particular weapons.

What you lose with Range Bands is the gritty detail. Some people like to know exactly where Short Range ends and Medium Range begins for their particular weapon (though that's kinda arbitrary, if you think about it...it's X to hit to a certain distance, then, magically, it's X+Y to hit a target that crosses a certain line.)



Both systems can be quite fun.

To the OP: Embrace Range Bands. Don't run from them. They can make your game easier, faster, and maybe more fun.







EDIT: THE DIFFERENCE IN RANGE AND RANGE BANDS

A Hold-Out Blaster (picture a Star Wars derringer) has this range in D6: Short: 3-4, Medium: 5-8, Long: 9-12

A Sporting Blaster (like Leia's in A New Hope) has this range in D6: Short: 3-10, Medium: 11-30, Long: 31-120

So...you've got to count. If a target is at 10 meters, it's a Short Range (10+) blaster task to hit the target with the Sporting Blaser, but it's a Long Range (20+) task to hit with the hold out.






Now, look at a Range Band game--Classic Traveller.

One Distance Scale is Used for All Weapons and Movement (The game also allows for grid movement/range with 1.5 meters squares--the Ref can choose either or both for his game)

A Range Band in this game is approximately 25 meters.

Short Range is 1-5 meters (within one Range Band)

Medium Range is 6-50 meters (with one to two complete Range Bands)

Long Range is 51-250 meters (three to 10 Range Bands)

Very Long Range is 251-500 meters (11-20 Range Bands).




FIGURING RANGE

This makes it easy to figure range for any type of situation.

If you fight in melee or hand-to-hand (called Brawling in Classic Traveller), that takes place at Close Range (which is less than 1 meter).

If you are in tight confines, like inside a space ship or a house, then use Short Range (1-5 meters) for combat.

If you are outside, in a normal firefight, distances are typically longer, so use Medium Range (6-50 meters) for the entire combat--unless someone gets real close.

Anything longer than Medium Range is typically not used in combat, unless you are a sniper or firing at vehicles down the road--those are cases for Long Range.



THIS IS HOW EASY IT IS.

You're outside, approaching a house where you suspect enemies. Use Medium Range.

The Players make it to the door, bust it in, then go inside. Now,the battlefield is smaller. Use Short Range.



Body Pistol (like a derringer or small handgun) is +1 to hit at Short Range and -6 to hit at Medium Range.

A standard AutoPistol (a standard automatic pistol) is +2 to hit at Short Range and -4 to hit at Medium Range.


So, you get the same effect as you do with the D6 Star Wars system above--the short range weapon is very inferior to a standard side-arm at longer ranges--but you don't have to count range with the Range Band system.


Ref: "You're outside, all targets are at Medium Range. Boom. Let's go."

Ref: "You're on a spacecraft. Tighter confines than when you were on the planet outside. All target are at Short Range. Boom. Let's go."

Ref: "A stormtroopers bursts from around the corner. No weapon drawn. He tries to backhand you with his armored wrist! All melee is at Close range. Boom. Let's go."

Man in the Funny Hat said:

Not only intended, but pretty close to the same. In that respect it's close to the WEG d6 Star Wars game too. Range there was simply a factor in having the GM set a difficulty number for players to roll.

Click to expand...

With all that I said above, I should point out what Funny Hat is probably talking about. D6 Star Wars, especially First Edition, is not about weapon ranges and counting squares. It's about frantic, swashbuckling Star Wars movie action.

In several places in the core rulebook, it does state that the GM should just pick a target number and go. Keep the action moving.

So, if a GM wanted to disregard the various ranges assigned to weapons and run combat more like a Range Band game (we're inside--all targets at Short Range), then do it.

Whatever fits your group.

Water Bob said:

With all that I said above, I should point out what Funny Hat is probably talking about. D6 Star Wars, especially First Edition, is not about weapon ranges and counting squares. It's about frantic, swashbuckling Star Wars movie action.

In several places in the core rulebook, it does state that the GM should just pick a target number and go. Keep the action moving.

So, if a GM wanted to disregard the various ranges assigned to weapons and run combat more like a Range Band game (we're inside--all targets at Short Range), then do it.

Whatever fits your group.

Click to expand...

Yeah, I was aware that d6 uses specific ranges for weapons (I was actually riffling through my 2E book for the info but didn't see it instantly and didn't want to bother too much as NOT using it was the point) - but as noted the GM is encouraged to NOT focus on that kind of detail, but just pick the difficulty he thinks is reasonable and roll with it. It's a little easier to include detailed range calculation in d6 because there's not all that much modification being done to the hit rolls. So, in especially critical situations is when the players or GM will want to once again pay attention to those details. In FFG there's ten ways from Sunday to add dice, upgrade/downgrade dice, and utilize or modify the results of the roll. Range calculations in that system just bog things down in detail that doesn't need to be there even in critical situations. There's so much other influence going on to a given hit roll - especially in critical situations when everyone pulls out the stops to influence the dice - that setting the basic difficulty (determining range) should still be, NEEDS to be, fast and simple.

But, as you say - whatever fits your group. If you want specific range distances for weapons in FFG they CAN be added in and the system will handle it fine - in fact I think you could borrow all that data from any other SW game and just plug it in. I just don't know that anyone has done so (or would want to).

It's not so easy to just plug in the data, but given that WEG didn't really do separate ranges by weapon as much as it simply concealed separate categories by transforming them to numbers....

For space combat, I used
Cl 1 MU
Sh 2-4 MU
Medium 5-9 MU
Long 10-16 MU
Extreme 17-25 MU

A maneuver moves you (current speed) MU, and allows a facing change.

For ground
personal bands in 5m units as above...
but maneuvers are 10m

Ground vehicles, 50m units, 50*speed per maneuver.

jimmifett said:

I disagree entirely, having DM'd this for years. I can doodle on a piece of paper an area in 30s. I point from one spot to another and say short, point to a hall and say end to end is medium, unless it's really long, then it's a long hall. Anything beyond that is out of scope of combat unless a sniper is setting up. After that, most players can guestimate their own ranges, and if I feel they are outside the fudge region, correct the difficulty accordingly.

Click to expand...

That's the exact same procedure as playing on a grid, except you didn't stop to measure distances. The GM pictures the scene in their head (and describes it to everyone), and that picture allows them to declare whether any given range is short or medium or whatever. But with abstract range bands, you're much more likely to make mistakes.

Imagine you have a bunch of stormtroopers surrounding a rebel, so you just decide that they're all short range to each other. And then you have another rebel across the street, so you say that one is at medium range to or from anyone in the cluster. But if you don't stop to think about the actual distances involved, you might not realize that two stormtroopers on the opposite ends of that group were actually further from each other than some of them are from the rebel across the street, which can suddenly matter if another rebels pops up on one edge of that group.

By going with actual numbers rather than your gut feeling, you can ensure that everything remains consistent. And it's not like it requires more work to say that the distance is ten meters than to say it's at medium range; the picture is already in the GM's head, after all, so you can already see what the actual distance is. Unless you're really bad and inconsistent with your distance estimates, I mean.

It's really just a matter of priorities, on whether you care more about speed of play or integrity of the process. Of course, if you are good at math and visualizing distances anyway, then you're not actually saving much time, and those inconsistencies will be much more apparent. If you aren't good at those things, then the time cost is higher. and you probably won't notice the inconsistencies. Or I guess some people may not actually care about the integrity of the process, so those people might also see it as a bad tradeoff, even if it's not saving them much time.

Actually the abstract range system has another virtue in that it drastically simplifies movement. Without that, every race should have a listed speed, and droids would need to have a list of specified chassis with different movement speeds and modes. It opens a huge can of worms. I'm not saying there is no value in that can, but it's a lot of work for relatively little reward, and I say that as someone who leans towards simulationist play.

As it is, I don't see why you can use maps and minis with the existing system. Make up a few bits of string or circular templates to measure short and medium range and go. Base contact is engaged and long and extreme ranges are probably off the map if you don't have a dedicated basement diorama.