Battle Dress questions

[archhealer]

Again with the design system questions... sheesh! What's wrong with my brain? I can' get enough of this stuff.

Ok, I'm builing an entire catalogue of Battle Dress for an alternate setting (Wherein the Imperium is almost powerless, save their control of certain aspects of interstellar banking, against teh massive megacorporations who rule anything else) and I've come up with a few questions.

First: I'm trying to find a way to add a 'shield' option to certain battle-dress designs. At first I was coming up empty, but then I got "On the Ground" TAS supplement which introduces ram plates.

What'ya think? A removeable ram plate as a shield option? I like it, my only question is in the combat mechanics of what it does. Obviously it would allow the wearer to 'ram' other battl-dressed troops (or not dressed, if you wanna be really mean) and vehicles, but what about the AC bonus? Ram plates normally don't add one, but shields do, and a Ram Plate is normaly mounted ona MUCH larger vehicle than 200 to 400vls, the sizes of most battle-dress in my game. They take as much space as two points of armor, and cost as much, so I'm thinking it wouldn't be unreasonable to allow them to grant a +1 to AC. Probably not to AR though, as that's from the same source as the bonus SI for ramming....

 

[archhealer]

Oh, one other question here. For melee combat involving battle-dress (Such as on-ship when large firearms are frequently a bad idea) Do you use the character's STR and DEX scores for attack, or the suits? Obviously you'd use the suits STR for melee damage, but I'm thinking maybe the suits dex acts as a limiter, but not abonus, to attacking. Like if the suit has DEX12 arms, and the character has DEX17, he only fights as if at DEX12, cause he can't make the suit go faster or quicker.

Normally, Melee weapons would have almost no effect against battle-dress, but if the wielder was ALSO wearing battle-dress, that can change things, especially if you give the suit STR18+arms, it starts being able to overcome the -5 DMG for the armor just via the stat bonus to damage. Of course, you'd need special weapons to avoid them simply shattering, but still.

Also, I'm thinking it might be easier to use battle-dress (And sometimes other legged drivetrains) as if they had a movement speed like a character, rather than acceleration/max speed etc. It's easier to keep track of in combat, and a legged drivetrain wouldn't have the same kind of movement mechanics as a rolling or flying one, as the legs by their very nature limit how much 'inertia' type movement the vehicle would be able to take advantage of, and make it easier to stop the vehicle on a dime or quickly change direction. What'ya all think?

 

[veltyen]

IMTU "Lancelot" suits have a sword and sheild. I used the sheild stats scaled directly with the size of the battledress. 100VL = a person therefore 300 VL battledress needs a sheild 3* cost and mass. The sheild needs to be built into the suit (VL=kgs).

I interpret the Dex mod the same way you do. Lower dex is still a disadvantage.

Melee weapons can do a good job against BD. Remember that some melee weapons get to an 18 critical range, with improved critical (15+ threat range) a cutlass is going to critical BD pretty regularily. Critical hits roll on the vehicle damage tables... which can get unpleasant very quickly. More importantly they ignore armor, meaning that 3d8 + Str crit is doing (d8-3 + str) damage directly to the chasis.

One rule mod for battledress that you may wish to consider. Drop the AC bonus for AR. Otherwise high TL BD is impossible (well, close to impossible) to hit.

Base + Agility + Sheild + AR + Chameleon really adds up, getting to around 35+ at the top end.

 

[BetterThanLife]

Now, I don't count armor when criting a vehicle, however I still scale the damage. So firing a pistol at a tank and causing a critical hit is still going to be reduced 5 dice before applying damage. The same with melee weapons. If hightech Battledress is armored better than a typical TL8 Main Battle Tank (And it is.) what good would a sword do to it? (Ask the Polish Cavalry who charged Tl5-6 tanks with lances in 1939.) I think that it is still too much damage but a Crit is a crit.

As for Battledress with shields? What is the point. High Tech Battledress still basically needs major shipboard weapons to kill it. (Or autofire from a highpowered Rapid Fire Fusion Gun or gattling Laser.)

 

[BetterThanLife]

Originally posted by Archhealer:
Oh, one other question here. For melee combat involving battle-dress (Such as on-ship when large firearms are frequently a bad idea) Do you use the character's STR and DEX scores for attack, or the suits? Obviously you'd use the suits STR for melee damage, but I'm thinking maybe the suits dex acts as a limiter, but not abonus, to attacking. Like if the suit has DEX12 arms, and the character has DEX17, he only fights as if at DEX12, cause he can't make the suit go faster or quicker.

Normally, Melee weapons would have almost no effect against battle-dress, but if the wielder was ALSO wearing battle-dress, that can change things, especially if you give the suit STR18+arms, it starts being able to overcome the -5 DMG for the armor just via the stat bonus to damage. Of course, you'd need special weapons to avoid them simply shattering, but still.

Also, I'm thinking it might be easier to use battle-dress (And sometimes other legged drivetrains) as if they had a movement speed like a character, rather than acceleration/max speed etc. It's easier to keep track of in combat, and a legged drivetrain wouldn't have the same kind of movement mechanics as a rolling or flying one, as the legs by their very nature limit how much 'inertia' type movement the vehicle would be able to take advantage of, and make it easier to stop the vehicle on a dime or quickly change direction. What'ya all think?

OK Here is how I read it, and apply it. User Strength and Dex have no effect when wearing Battledress. Agility is applied to AC. Battledress Strength is applied to damage and Battledress Dex is applied to hit. (It has to have some game effect or why bother having it at all.)

Further if the weapon is integrated then targeting computers, not suit dex, apply, except probably melee combat (It has never come up and until now I hadn't thought of that. If the weapon is carried then the standard BAB +Suit dex applies. I would recommend that the bonus is the occupant or the suit, whichever is LOWER! (And yes Penalties are lower than any bonus.)

Now do remember that IMTU Battledress is a CAT-5 piece of equipment. Marine Battledress is unobtainable to anyone that isn't an Active Duty Marine and while it isn't technically as bad as using Nukes, the Imperial Marines go after missing suits with a vengence. And Combat Armor/Combat Environment Suits are Cat-4. I find that Armor unbalances the game faster than weapons. (And is easier to fix.) If nobody is wearing armor then everyone is less prone to lethal weapons.

 

[archhealer]

A quick note about Battle Dress IMTU:

I have a very largely powerless central government, which is battered about by massive corporations who are allowed to do pretty much whateve they want; which includes both selling and using battledress TO whomever they wish.

Now, on that note, I have a large catalogue of battle-dress based vehicles which are not, when you come right down to it, battle dress. Some are for cargo handling (Just massively strong powersuits, basically) or other heavy labor, others are simply a vehicle to carry lots of armor, but the users still apply their own attack bonuses to weapons as these suits don't even supply a vacc rating, jsut lots of armored plating, etc. I have over eighty designs so far, but many of them are unfinished while i work out kinks in the mechanics of it.
Thus, the CAT-5 licensing ceases to be an issue, since it's perfectly feasible for a civilian to own several suits of the cargo variety, which still provide ample protection in a fight. Of course, unarmed, these vehicles are best for just hruling large objects at targets, or battering them with their arms

My players call these "Kong" suits. It makes me giggle.

 

[archhealer]

Integrated Weapons on BD:

Ok, theres' another question. Obviously, if you have a suit computer installed, it can assist with weapons fire, but if there isn't, and it's wielding personal arms such as ACRs and such, wouldn't the player use their attack bonus? And where do you draw the line on an integrated weapon? Several suits I've designed have a built-in HUD hookup in the visor, which I'd think would use the standard attack rolls, but if you're using a targetting or select program with gunnery assist, that'd obviously be a gunnery roll.

I have several suits wich have small mortars installed on a fixed mount to the back, holding only a couple of rounds (Field combat suits), but wield ACRs. I've been allowing the character attack rolls with the ACR, but gunnery with the Mortars.

Anybody have any twists on that?

 

[veltyen]

I draw the line at inbuilt vs carried weaponry.

Everything inbuilt uses gunnery. Small arms that are carried use BAB (or for robots the "small arms" skill). Larger (vehicle scale weapons) that are carried still use Gunnery. This does mean that in some cases you use Gunnery in combination with WP/Marksman.

The engineering recovery suits IMTU are called lobsters, due to one arm being High Dex/Moderate Strength and the other being Moderate Dex/Extreme Strength. Due to a slight logical break in the Strength tables it is quite easy to build battledress that can pick up starships in one hand. This means you can pick up a vehicle with the strong arm and then use the dextrous arm to repair it.

 

[tjoneslo]

Originally posted by veltyen:
The engineering recovery suits IMTU are called lobsters, due to one arm being High Dex/Moderate Strength and the other being Moderate Dex/Extreme Strength. Due to a slight logical break in the Strength tables it is quite easy to build battledress that can pick up starships in one hand. This means you can pick up a vehicle with the strong arm and then use the dextrous arm to repair it.

I'd love to see this suit. My concern with a suit like this is the rest of the suit capable of supporting the mass of the vehicle/starship. I'd hate to see some novice engineer, feeling overly strong, ripping their own arm off. And did you put duck feet on the suit, as the mass of a starship, or other larger vehicle, may well drive a person into the ground like a nail, particularly if they are standing on soft ground.

 

[BetterThanLife]

Originally posted by veltyen:
I draw the line at inbuilt vs carried weaponry.

Everything inbuilt uses gunnery. Small arms that are carried use BAB (or for robots the "small arms" skill). Larger (vehicle scale weapons) that are carried still use Gunnery. This does mean that in some cases you use Gunnery in combination with WP/Marksman.

But it doesn't. Carriage Mounted VFR Gauss Gun firing at an air/raft uses BAB and Weapon Prof Heavy Weapons. Now put the Gauss Rifle on a pintle mount on a tank, fire it at the same air/raft, still BAB. Mount it coaxial with the main gun on the tank, still Gunnery. Now mount it in a turret on a Kimu class assault boat or in any other starship turret and it is gunnery. (Hunter and I had this discussion.) Because it is classified as a machinegun it only goes to gunnery of it is a starship weapon. Artillery and Starship weapons use gunnery, autocannons use either gunnery or BAB firer's choice (unless it is mounted in a Starship Turret). Virtually everything else uses BAB. Now there are two problems with using gunnery, even if you want to make it, inbuilt weapons are gunnery and handheld weapons are BAB. First, no matter what level you are you only get one attack. Second, you can take PMOS Gunnery and Take 10 on every shot. Ooops in some cases that means no chance for a miss, in one particular case it means instant death, no saving throw, no survivors, for a 700,000 ton or less Starship. Separating BAB and Gunnery is a mistake. Either go with skills, the way pilot does and change the skill points available to your Marines, Mercs and Barbarians (lots of work and playbalance goes out the window without serious playtesting.), or do away with Gunnery and have your Naval Gunners take the Marshall Feat. (Simpler, easier to balance, and keeps someone who is a combat whimp from becoming a supersoldier simply because they put on a suit.)

 

[veltyen]

Mount it coaxial with the main gun on the tank, still Gunnery.

typo I assume?

It is interesting that autocannons have an exception. Effectively they are just scaled up assault rifles.

Either go with skills, the way pilot does and change the skill points available to your Marines, Mercs and Barbarians (lots of work and playbalance goes out the window without serious playtesting.)

I've considered that. I'm not terribly worried by the concept of balance, so that aspect doesn't worry me.

 

[archhealer]

Ok, so autocannons use BAB? Even the big ones, like in the weapons chart in Against Gravity? I use that weapons chart preferentially, as it gives more flexibility (It seems a bit odd to me to have only three types of artillery, once you have the tech). These autocannons can be immensley devestating either way, though ammo does get pricey with a RoF of as much as 70, but still... That's pretty hairy from the wrong end.

Now, as you say, if somebody took CMOS Gunnery, and could take 10 on attacks, that'd just be nasty. But still, these are definately vehicle-scale, large, heavy weapons, so.... Mrr?

While we're on it, another question: Fixed mount weapons. Piloting? Gunnery? Can the driver/Pilot fire the weapon and use a move-equivelant drive action in the same round? That's got me a little baffled.

 

[Chuck Anumia]

Originally posted by Archhealer:
Again with the design system questions... sheesh! What's wrong with my brain? I can' get enough of this stuff.

Ahhh...
A Gearhead in the making me thinks?

 

[veltyen]

While we're on it, another question: Fixed mount weapons. Piloting? Gunnery? Can the driver/Pilot fire the weapon and use a move-equivelant drive action in the same round? That's got me a little baffled.

There has been several threads about multiple actions in vehicle/spaceship combat. It is possibly worth looking them up (try fighter combat or something similar in the search).