Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Enchanted Trinkets Complete--a hardcover book containing over 500 magic items for your D&D games!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="barsoomcore" data-source="post: 2045844" data-attributes="member: 812">Whew! Some analysis! Let me try and address your concerns...Well, that's not ALWAYS going to be true. I guess I could have put lots more caveats and examples and stuff in the book, but to my thinking the real value was in the pure rules as much as possible.You could absolutely rule that all pursuers must make a Jump maneuver to follow the prey over the ditch or lose a range category. But you could also say that the drivers further back can adjust their direction to find a crossing point, or can flank the prey until an easier crossing presents itself and thus don't have to make any Jump attempts.Again, the rules aren't very good for representing a chase as a line being traversed across a map. In fact, they were specifically designed so that you DIDN'T have to map out the chase territory.It means exactly what it says. Ranges between pursuers are disregarded -- only the ranges between each pursuer and the prey is considered.I tend towards an extremely terse style in rules presentation (whereas in more conversational writing I'm downright verbose), so apologies for not providing more meat.When a vehicle is out-of-control, the person who just failed the Crash check is no longer the driver of the vehicle (hence, it's out-of-control). This would ordinarily mean that the vehicle is in no danger of ever encountering an obstacle, since there isn't anyone on whose turn an obstacle check is made.In this case, obstacle checks continue to be made on the turn of the person who, until the vehicle went out-of-control, was the driver. The previous driver. This state exists until somebody gets control of the vehicle, at which point they become the driver and obstacle checks are then made on their turn.Well, it's a fine distinction. But technically if you're choosing Head 'Em Off, you're electing to drop out of the chase.Yeah, those errors were identified by Berandor in the other thread and will be addressed in the upcoming revision.At least one full round must have elapsed between the previous point in the example and this one (since we ended the previous one on Davis' turn and started the current one also on his turn), so there's no reason to assume the ranges have remained the same.A range-based penalty seems like a good idea to me. I'll see if we can get that into the revision.Pace only cancels out the penalties due to Speed Category.<img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />Yeah, probably. Somebody ambitious could go do the research, I guess. I'll be watching action movies.<img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f600.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":D" title="Big grin    :D"  data-smilie="8"data-shortname=":D" />The cover details for vehicles are listed in the Modern SRD. I probably should have included that information in these tables, but it's all online and easy to look up.<a href="http://www.systemreferencedocuments.org/modern/roarerbull/EquipmentVehicles.php" target="_blank">http://www.systemreferencedocuments.org/modern/roarerbull/EquipmentVehicles.php</a>I welcome questions. This is how things get better. I really appreciate you putting all this thought and consideration into these rules of mine, and I hope you get a lot of fun and excitement from running chases with them.If I've said anything that seems flippant or inconsiderate, it wasn't meant. I'm a pretty sarcastic and offhand sort of poster, but I'm honestly very grateful for all your thoughts and notions. Post more if you got 'em!</blockquote>

Verification