Striker Combat - Armor, Penetration and Damage

[atpollard]

Note that in kile's system skill increases the roll so the results are shifted upwards.

It's a novel system but is stretching a single roll of 2d6 to its limit.

I have toyed with hit location systems in the past, but over the years I have moved towards reducing the number of rolls during combat to a minimum.

I agree.
Both this and his Treatment rules are great for a rare case when hyper-detail matters.

As a general rule, I prefer a system where you don't need to look anything up. I currently use Striker's 4-8-12 progression where a damage of 4+ = light wound, 8+ = serious wound and 12+ = critical/dead precisely because I can remember it with no tables to look up.

 

[Piper]

Note that in kile's system skill increases the roll so the results are shifted upwards.

Noted but it doesn't actually alter the effect. The sample character applying the entire +4DM to damage will achieve a higher chance of center of mass hits but will never hit the offside arm or leg.

Seems like an unusual target aspect.

 

[mike wightman]

No worse than always hitting the left leg...

 

[kilemall]

I agree.
Both this and his Treatment rules are great for a rare case when hyper-detail matters.

As a general rule, I prefer a system where you don't need to look anything up. I currently use Striker's 4-8-12 progression where a damage of 4+ = light wound, 8+ = serious wound and 12+ = critical/dead precisely because I can remember it with no tables to look up.

I have no problem giving NDP (non dramatis personae) the Striker you dead/you ain't dead but out/you hurt but fighting treatment, detail is for players and their nemesis.

 

[kilemall]

Note that in kile's system skill increases the roll so the results are shifted upwards.

It's a novel system but is stretching a single roll of 2d6 to its limit.

I have toyed with hit location systems in the past, but over the years I have moved towards reducing the number of rolls during combat to a minimum.

That's another beauty to this, I'm not adding a roll, just making the one I will roll in Striker anyway more meaningful.

AND gives me variable cover for when a target is peeking around a corner and I have to decide if the shot had to gouge through starship hallway or hit an exposed bit.

AND give me a chance to let player mix and match armor.

AND, gritty damage that makes it personal (rather then 3D Dex you down, more like 'the rifle shot hit your abdomen, you passed out from the hydrostatic shock and won't be moving, medic checks and fortunately looks like you have no internal organ damage, looks like a clean entry and exit so less chance of infection later but he's having to treat for trauma right now, here comes the roll`).

Pretty good payoff for just the same old roll.

 

[kilemall]

Noted but it doesn't actually alter the effect. The sample character applying the entire +4DM to damage will achieve a higher chance of center of mass hits but will never hit the offside arm or leg.

Seems like an unusual target aspect.

Not really, less likely to hit the smaller presented body parts, about as elegant as I can make it reusing the same roll and sniper guy wants to max out his damage anyway. The roll presupposes a concentration on hitting smaller areas then just 'anywhere on the target's body' and so a chance to miss entirely.

Conversely, I would allow a NEGATIVE DM if a security/intel/LE type wants to specifically wound a person for non-lethal capture. In that case winging someone would be MORE likely.

 

[kilemall]

Sounds a bit like the target profile for a duelist stance: edge on to the shooter, arm protecting the chest.

Not everyone's first choice, I'm thinking.

While I am thinking both melee weapons and gunfire with that whole facing business, I had an image in mind more like this-

Conventiional equipped guys flattened out against the wall or behind one, right arms facing the oncoming battle dress shooter, kneeling guy has left leg facing, so they would be hit on their right arm/leg except for kneeling guy, and in all cases that would constitute quite a bit of their exposed parts.

Meantime, the battle dress target soldier has his left side exposed more even as he is obviously right-handed, so that would be the more likely area to hit. Quite reasonable I think.

So no, you don't have to be in an engarde/honor duel at 10 paces pose to get that percentage of probability to hit going. A target directly perpendicular to their shooter is going to be the exception rather then the rule.

 

[Hyphen]

All I can do is point you at my own Striker/MT mash-up. I did a lot of thinking and designing in this space a few years ago.

The difference will be that I'm using the MT rules, where armour becomes a damage soak (e.g. Pen < AV ==> half damage, and so on).

==> Tavonni Repair Bays
==> House Rules
==> Weapons Tables

and also under House Rules:

==> Unified Range Table

Dunnno if it'll help or hinder, but at least it covers almost every weapon except tank-sized projectile weapons and wet navy weaponry. (I found some inconsistencies in the Wet Navy rules from Challenge, and never went back to "correct" them.)

 

[whartung]

Meantime, the battle dress target soldier has his left side exposed more even as he is obviously right-handed, so that would be the more likely area to hit. Quite reasonable I think.

Not as if I'm any kind of expert, but I watch TV from time to time.

On one show, long ago, the host was hanging out with a SWAT team or some other group of "Operators" clearing rooms.

And the curious takeaway was specifically this case.

He mentioned that they're trained to provide a full frontal profile to the aggressor. Specifically because they want Center of mass to be the "best target", because CoM is the part with the armor on it, not the arms and legs and hands. So, they stand perpendicular to the target, rather than obliquely as you would intuitively think.

 

[kilemall]

Not as if I'm any kind of expert, but I watch TV from time to time.

On one show, long ago, the host was hanging out with a SWAT team or some other group of "Operators" clearing rooms.

And the curious takeaway was specifically this case.

He mentioned that they're trained to provide a full frontal profile to the aggressor. Specifically because they want Center of mass to be the "best target", because CoM is the part with the armor on it, not the arms and legs and hands. So, they stand perpendicular to the target, rather than obliquely as you would intuitively think.

Hmm, seems odd, the way armor works I'd think you'd get more protection from an oblique hit that skips off and doesn't transmit all it's energy.

If an operator's preference is to leave the arms unarmored for encumbrance reasons, I could see that policy especially if the vest has a side weak point.

<Shrug> not terribly worried about it, it's the amateur that will be hitting the extremities, the pros will be more likely hitting where it hurts.

 

[kilemall]

All I can do is point you at my own Striker/MT mash-up. I did a lot of thinking and designing in this space a few years ago.

The difference will be that I'm using the MT rules, where armour becomes a damage soak (e.g. Pen < AV ==> half damage, and so on).

==> Tavonni Repair Bays
==> House Rules
==> Weapons Tables

and also under House Rules:

==> Unified Range Table

Dunnno if it'll help or hinder, but at least it covers almost every weapon except tank-sized projectile weapons and wet navy weaponry. (I found some inconsistencies in the Wet Navy rules from Challenge, and never went back to "correct" them.)

Er, there are no links to this, where does all this live?

 

[Hyphen]

Er, there are no links to this, where does all this live?

Start from my web page (link in .sig) and go from there.

 

[whartung]

Hmm, seems odd, the way armor works I'd think you'd get more protection from an oblique hit that skips off and doesn't transmit all it's energy.

If an operator's preference is to leave the arms unarmored for encumbrance reasons, I could see that policy especially if the vest has a side weak point.

Modern body armor is weak on the side. Trauma plates, for example, only cover the upper chest.

<Shrug> not terribly worried about it, it's the amateur that will be hitting the extremities, the pros will be more likely hitting where it hurts.

I think the premise is despite "aimed fire", most gunshots are more random than not, so presenting the larger, armored, target will more likely be hit all else being equal.

 

[kilemall]

Read the reference to the Archaic Missile Weapons article in JTAS, vaguely remember seeing that back then and not feeling a need to buy the original, got ahold of it last night.

Largely good with it and like the bonus of various matchlock and flintlock weapons, appreciate that the big minie balls and the like do serious damage and not that serious a problem with the penetration since I have the plate/mesh to simulate knight and conquistador armor.

But I do have a problem with the range and accuracy of muskets. I would think they would get a low effective range value and more of their range would be in the long/very long probability due to inaccuracy, which made the large volley formations necessary.

Am I off on that?

I also am dropping penetration of all the melee weapons down by -4, which means some of the Pen 0 weapons get negative values. Won't affect hit locations but does mean getting beaned by a cudgel on your head will just knock you out. An effort to keep it all on one table rather then operating that second melee table.

Now just get resolution sequence and shields both low and high tech right, and I'll be feeling good.

Next stop would be being able to do the Maker number in Striker.

 

[Leitz]

Mass formation shooting was in part driven by "that's what they did". There's a morale boost with mass formations as well as the chance to replace a fallen combatant quickly. Of course, mass formations also make great targets.

Many, if not most of the early military grade firearms didn't have sights. The shooter was just aiming for a large target and the bullet to bore fit was often a bit loose so powder buildup didn't preclude firing.

A muzzle loader that is made for sport shooting can be a fairly accurate firearm out to several hundred yards. Fairly accurate being "hit a person sized target" or so.

 

[kilemall]

Mass formation shooting was in part driven by "that's what they did". There's a morale boost with mass formations as well as the chance to replace a fallen combatant quickly. Of course, mass formations also make great targets.

Many, if not most of the early military grade firearms didn't have sights. The shooter was just aiming for a large target and the bullet to bore fit was often a bit loose so powder buildup didn't preclude firing.

A muzzle loader that is made for sport shooting can be a fairly accurate firearm out to several hundred yards. Fairly accurate being "hit a person sized target" or so.

Printed it out to fit my Striker book 3 and found I had been taking the rifle values for musket, everything is reasonable.

 

[Leitz]

Printed it out to fit my Striker book 3 and found I had been taking the rifle values for musket, everything is reasonable.

One of the things I've been mentally playing with but haven't done a lot of research on is fixed ranges. So "Short" is 0-50 meters, "Effective" is something like 50 to 100 meters, and so on. Weapons are given Penetration values for those ranges and they have maximum ranges. For example, the average autopistol in firefight usage isnt' meant to hit something past 50 meters. An SMG might have a bonus to hit at short range but can't hit at effective. Or at least loses it's bonus. Most CPR based autofire weapons bounce too much to be accurate enough to aim, you're just trying to counter the bounce and pray for a hit.

 

[kilemall]

One of the things I've been mentally playing with but haven't done a lot of research on is fixed ranges. So "Short" is 0-50 meters, "Effective" is something like 50 to 100 meters, and so on. Weapons are given Penetration values for those ranges and they have maximum ranges. For example, the average autopistol in firefight usage isnt' meant to hit something past 50 meters. An SMG might have a bonus to hit at short range but can't hit at effective. Or at least loses it's bonus. Most CPR based autofire weapons bounce too much to be accurate enough to aim, you're just trying to counter the bounce and pray for a hit.

At that point, might as well use CT or MgT combat, both have fixed range bands and MgT characterizes a weapon as common types such as pistol, shotgun, rifle etc. with task difficulties pegged to crossindexing range and weapon type.

The differing ranges in Striker, particularly effective range increases as tech increases, is a BIG selling point for me.

 

[atpollard]

Being a fan of the 6-8-A concept, I was impressed by the way FF&S for TNE calculated range and penetration for some specific 'standard' and then used simple doubling of the range.

For Striker-like combat, I would like to just list the range and penetration for a To Hit of 8+ and make half that range 6+ to hit and double that range 10+ to hit and quadruple that range as 12+ to hit.

The goal for me (always) is something so simple that I can remember it without needing to look up anything on a table.

 

[Hyphen]

The differing ranges in Striker, particularly effective range increases as tech increases, is a BIG selling point for me.

Agreed. My tables also include this decoupling between a weapon's capability (based on range) and the Difficulty Ranges for character to-hit rolls. Although others find this too finicky and prefer more straight-forward approaches (such as TNE's doubling increases. To my mind it provides another way of differentiating between weapons.

As always, YMMV. ;-)