[Star Wars] SECR Preview #5 is up

[Ranger REG]

Source: http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=starwars/article/SagaPreview5

More combat, including the change in Aid Another, Aiming, Natural 20 being automatic critical hit, All-New Autofire, Stun and Ion Damage, and more.

Next Preview -- droids, droids, droids.

 

[nerfherder]

Here's a summary:

• Aid Another - can now be used for ranged combat as well as melee, and can be used to provide "covering fire" which reduces the target's attacks by -2.
• Aiming - spend 2 swift actions to ignore cover bonuses, and trigger feats Careful Shot (+ to hit) and Deadeye (+ damage).
• Criticals - every 20 is a confirmed critical and does double damage. Some talents and feats can augment this in different ways.
• Movement - rules and feats tweaked to encourage movement. For instance, Shot on the Run and Spring Attack combined into one feat - Running Attack.
• Autofire - use 10 shots to suppress a 2 square by 2 square area. Roll to hit at -5 and compare to Reflex defense. Hits take full damage and misses take half (Scout's Evasion talent will reduce this to none). There are special abilities and feats that reduce this penalty or give new uses to rules. For example, Burst Fire feat allows you to target a single individual - attack at -5, but add 2 dice if hit (not an area attack, so no half damage if you miss). Shame Burst Fire doesn't seem to model reality, but hey-ho!
• Stun & Ion damage - exceeding the Threshold results in 2 steps down the condition track, but then only half damage is done to hit points. Neat. Stun is vs biological targets and ion vs droids, vehicles, and cybernetically enhanced creatures...
• Shields - rated like DR. When DR exceeded, shield rating drops by 5. Vehicles and droids with shields can spend actions to regenerate shields.

 

[Ranger REG]

Shame Burst Fire doesn't seem to model reality, but hey-ho!

What reality would that be?

 

[nerfherder]

What reality would that be?

Firing a short burst (as real-world soldiers are trained to do) at someone increases the likelihood of hitting and the chance of hitting with more than one round. The Burst feat reduces your chance to hit. And before anyone says it, yes I know that SWSE isn't trying to model reality, it's trying to model the Star Wars films. I'm just mentally noting adjustments I'll have to make when I steal ideas for my modern game

 

[ValhallaGH]

Firing a short burst (as real-world soldiers are trained to do) at someone increases the likelihood of hitting and the chance of hitting with more than one round.

My own military experience disagrees with your assertion. But go ahead and play your games however you want.

 

[Plane Sailing]

Also the alliance preview http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=starwars/article/AEPreview4

Moff Tarkin as a 7th Noble and a wookie soldier 3

 

[nerfherder]

My own military experience disagrees with your assertion. But go ahead and play your games however you want.

Fair enough. I'm going off the military experiences from this thread on CM where I asked specifically how automatic fire worked: http://www.circvsmaximvs.com/showthread.php?t=23078

For example:

Does firing a burst at a target make you less likely to hit, but do more damage if you do hit (like a lot of game systems rule)?

The point of firing short controlled bursts is to increase your hit probability.

What did you find the effect of a short burst to be? (assuming we're not talking about suppressive fire, which seems to be covered already by the autofire rules)

 

[Shadowbit]

Also the alliance preview http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=starwars/article/AEPreview4

Moff Tarkin as a 7th Noble and a wookie soldier 3

I had to do a double-take on this as I asked myself the question "Where did Tarkin pick up levels as a Wookiee soldier?"

 

[Reaper Steve]

Liking it more and more...and I hope it's the shape of things to come (ie 4e, but that's another topic).

My only disappointment with this preview is suppresion fire. Seems like every game wants rules for suppression, and they all have some terrible flaws.

As far as I can tell, suppresive fire doesn't give the attacker a chance to hit. So why would the target have a penalty to attack if he is targeted by an attack that can't hit him? (Facetious question.) But then when being shot at by an attack that actually does have a chance to hit, the target doesn't suffer a penalty to his next attack.

My point is...the target doesn't know if it's suppresion or aimed fire, all he knows is bullets/slugs/lasers are flying by in near proximity and he may want to keep his head down.

There is no reason for separate suppression attacks...it should happen as a result of a near hit or a hit. Just pulling something out my butt...I would say that if an attack roll missed the target by 5 or less, then the target is suppressed and suffers the -2 penalty on his next attack. A target that was actually hit would suffer a bigger penlty. I would also tie it to cover...a target behind cover (that was just shot at) would need to make a Will check to break cover on his action.

But again, rules are not for realism, they are for playability and fun. There is no precedent for melee hits giving a penalty to a subsequent attack because it would make the game less fun, so whay apply one to ranged attacks?. I do think that SWSE is shaping up to be the most fun version of d20 so far, with an emphasis on ease and speed of play. Having to make Will checks or suffer attack penalties after every attack against you would be cumbersome and counter to those goals. So I'm cool with it!

 

[JohnSnow]

But again, rules are not for realism, they are for playability and fun. There is no precedent for melee hits giving a penalty to a subsequent attack because it would make the game less fun, so why apply one to ranged attacks?

Ah. Because there is a precedent for giving a defense bonus to your friend in melee with the "aid another" action. Since you can't realistically give your friend a defense bonus to being shot at, you "cover him" meaning that a smart opponent stays out of direct fire and therefore takes a -2 to his attacks.

It's a ranged/melee balancing mechanism. You can aid someone in melee (thus giving them a bonus to defense), but shouting "duck" shouldn't realistically help someone dodge a fast moving blaster bolt.

However, taking an action to shoot at the stormtrooper trying to hit your buddy can throw his aim off, thus achieving the exact same mechanical effect (inflicting a -2 to attacks is the same as giving the target a +2 to his defense).

Since it's reasonably well fudged, I don't mind if it's not strictly "realistic." And it is "fair."