Newbish n00b questions, MkII

Rules questions, suggestions, and discussion

Moderators: Pwnerade, IVhorseman

User avatar
stubby
tl;dr: the rule of fudge is the entire rulebook
Posts: 5178
Joined: Sat Dec 29, 2007 8:31 pm

Re: Newbish n00b questions, MkII

Post by stubby » Wed Aug 31, 2016 4:57 pm

Voin wrote:
stubby wrote: Nope. Only one unit can Operate a vehicle in a turn. But what they could do is provide specialist assistance, the same way a medik or a gunner does, adding one die size to the stunt inches roll.
I thought Gunners add a +1/gunner, up to inches of weapon size (which makes sense, since even a d12 Skill die would not be enough for truly titanic weapons).
Oh yeah. Originally they worked the same, but Gunners got changed because d12s weren't big enough. I'm so conflicted about it though, I can never quite decide whether I should change it back just so that truly titanic weapons always miss ridiculously.

Really, what I ought to do is have it increase to d12s and then add +1s after that. I want to eliminate +1s and -1s as much as possible, wherever I can.
Natalya wrote:Wtf is going on in this thread?

User avatar
stubby
tl;dr: the rule of fudge is the entire rulebook
Posts: 5178
Joined: Sat Dec 29, 2007 8:31 pm

Re: Newbish n00b questions, MkII

Post by stubby » Thu Sep 01, 2016 11:45 am

Voin wrote:Or look at it from the other end of the scale - our aircraft carriers are the mightiest damn thing to ever sail the seas - how come it's not the only type of ship we make from now on?
It would be overkill, you would have disproportionately low support for it, it would likely slow down what could be a fast & agile strike force, & those resources could be better spent on equipping your dudes.
Voin wrote:
stubby wrote: Really, what I ought to do is have it increase to d12s and then add +1s after that. I want to eliminate +1s and -1s as much as possible, wherever I can.
So... why not just do that for Gunners, Mediks, & Pilots? Hell, I should probably house-rule it in my games, & then (if I can remember), get back to you on how playtesting it went.
Well, thinking about it further - for mediks, +1s lead to automatic successes except on crit-fails, and I never want that. d12s are probably a good upper limit for them.

For Stunt Driving it'd probably be okay balance-wise, although kind of weird fluff-wise. Having a copilot in your fighter jet doesn't lead to crazier stunts, it mostly just lets you do more things at the same time. For something like the starship Enterprise you can get a whole bunch of guys juicing the system at once, but that's not because a bunch of hotshot pilots are all taking the wheel at the same time, it's because engineers are putting SN pseudoscience dice into the ship's engine. I'd allow it if players had a good reason for it to fit in the fiction, but I'd probably also top it off at a d12 just because the +1s on top of the d12 are an extra level of complexity that I'd have to explain in the rules, and they don't add anything interesting or necessary the way they do for Gunners up against giant Use ratings.
Voin wrote:
chapter 3 wrote:Wearing Body Armor prevents a minifig from swimming, jumping, or flying.
So... how are we supposed to stat up Mandalorian armor or anything else that's got an armored flying character?
If you make the jetpack part of the armor, you've got a Size 1" Flying Vehicle with Armor 1d10, subject to the maneuvering limits of vehicles (which are appropriate in this case, I think) and stunt driving inches, if applicable. As opposed to a winged angel or something who has no maneuvering limits but can't wear armor.
Natalya wrote:Wtf is going on in this thread?

User avatar
stubby
tl;dr: the rule of fudge is the entire rulebook
Posts: 5178
Joined: Sat Dec 29, 2007 8:31 pm

Re: Newbish n00b questions, MkII

Post by stubby » Thu Sep 01, 2016 2:18 pm

Mainly I just don't want them as standard units. If you want to field one of those guys, they're going to need some SuperNatural power to make their flying work. And whenever they're not using their SD for flying, they just turn into extra buffs on the ground, exactly like you'd expect for guys like this.

Of course, as with anything else, if you have a specific setting or fiction in mind that violates the rules, ignore the rules. "No armored flight" is just for game balance for general-purpose games, it's not set in stone.

Oh I forgot the other thing to do with Boba Fett. Armor prevents regular Flight movement, but not Thrust movement, which is probably closer to how Boba Fett's jetpack works. It doesn't seem to be especially nimble or precise.
Natalya wrote:Wtf is going on in this thread?

User avatar
stubby
tl;dr: the rule of fudge is the entire rulebook
Posts: 5178
Joined: Sat Dec 29, 2007 8:31 pm

Re: Newbish n00b questions, MkII

Post by stubby » Wed Sep 07, 2016 9:44 am

Voin wrote:Is there any difference (besides the obvious rotation flexibility) b/w turreted & fixed-forward-firing weapons? I sorta semi-recall (maybe? Or maybe I just imaged it) that in an earlier edition, hinged mounts were... structurally weaker or something than fixed ones, but I could me mistaken, or that could have gotten removed in an update.
7.1: Structure wrote:Any exposed hinges, turrets, pivots, or other moving attachment points are considered weak points on a Structure. Except in special cases agreed on by the players, weak points, Non-Structural Elements, and interior walls have a Structure Level one level below that of the Structure they're mounted on, to a minimum Structure Level of ½ and Armor Rating of 1d6 (unless the main Structure is already at Structure Level zero, in which case they're also zero).
8.2: Basic Weapons: Ranged Weapons wrote:Players can mount a Creation's weapons onto any type of turret, hinge, or arm to cover a wider firing arc. This has no extra cost, but remember that any hinges, joints, or other moving attachment points are weak points armored at one Structure Level lower than the rest of the Creation (to a minimum Structure Level of ½) (7.1: Structure).
Natalya wrote:Wtf is going on in this thread?

User avatar
*CRAZYHORSE*
Mega Blok
Posts: 1348
Joined: Fri Feb 29, 2008 6:10 pm
Location: Procrasturbating.

Re: Newbish n00b questions, MkII

Post by *CRAZYHORSE* » Wed Sep 07, 2016 10:43 am

Having a command vehicle antenna/dish work as a a spawner does seem to make sense. For immersion sake I would probably say the units either parachuted in or if the command vehicle is on the edge of the playing field the reinforcements could just walk onto the map.
The added value of a command vehicle is of course that it is a mobile spawner and thus can be used to call in elite reserve troops closer to the enemy.

It would be quite cool to have a battle where both players have one command vehicle as a spawner, a high amount of cannon fodder and a couple of more elite units. Find and destroy the opponents command vehicle while keeping yours safe.
stubby wrote:You were inb4beluga.

User avatar
stubby
tl;dr: the rule of fudge is the entire rulebook
Posts: 5178
Joined: Sat Dec 29, 2007 8:31 pm

Re: Newbish n00b questions, MkII

Post by stubby » Wed Sep 07, 2016 11:38 am

Voin wrote:Just thought I'd re-visit this now w/ the updated Spawner rules - the big anttenae/satellite dishes on command vehicles can be statted as Spawners to call in reinforcements.
That's a good idea, and it might be better as a new Command specialty that can be given to all kinds of units - ground commanders, command vehicles, forward command bases, etc. I'd switch it up a little bit though - Spawners are designed to spit out cannon fodder continuously, while I think of calling in reinforcements as a less frequent but much larger event. Off the top of my head, something like this:
  • Commit Forces / Call In Reinforcements:
    Once per game, the Command unit can call in reserve forces from any sides of the map under his team's control. These forces are purchased in advance and held in reserve so that enemies won't know the direction of their approach.

    The longer the Command unit waits to call in the reserves, the larger they get: he can add a free +1U" or +5CP worth of extra forces to these reserves for every turn that he's finished since First Blood was awarded.

    Parachuting units and drop pods can be delivered as if fired from a appropriately-sized Launchers just off a controlled edge of the map. The player doesn't have to pay for these virtual Launchers, but he or she does have to make the Attack Rolls on a d6 to see how badly the units miss their intended landing sites.

    If all of a player's Command units are killed or destroyed, there is no way to call in the reserves and they spend the rest of the battle partying offstage.
Natalya wrote:Wtf is going on in this thread?

User avatar
dilanski
Now with added tractor fetish
Now with added tractor fetish
Posts: 1909
Joined: Sun Jan 18, 2009 6:41 am
Location: United Kingdom of Great Britain & FUCK THE DUP
Contact:

Re: Newbish n00b questions, MkII

Post by dilanski » Wed Sep 07, 2016 12:45 pm

stubby wrote:
  • Commit Forces / Call In Reinforcements:
    Once per game, the Command unit can call in reserve forces from any sides of the map under his team's control. These forces are purchased in advance and held in reserve so that enemies won't know the direction of their approach.

    The longer the Command unit waits to call in the reserves, the larger they get: he can add a free +1U" or +5CP worth of extra forces to these reserves for every turn that he's finished since First Blood was awarded.

    Parachuting units and drop pods can be delivered as if fired from a appropriately-sized Launchers just off a controlled edge of the map. The player doesn't have to pay for these virtual Launchers, but he or she does have to make the Attack Rolls on a d6 to see how badly the units miss their intended landing sites.

    If all of a player's Command units are killed or destroyed, there is no way to call in the reserves and they spend the rest of the battle partying offstage.
I'm digging this. Although it seems a little unusable in some situations. How do I determine if a side of the board is under my control? Or even more importantly in brikwars, what if there is no board? Also I could end up paradropping my entire force in on the first turn, there'd need to be some points cost, or more severe negative to doing this. Perhaps charge for parachutes/retro-rockets?
Almond Status: ACTIVATED

User avatar
stubby
tl;dr: the rule of fudge is the entire rulebook
Posts: 5178
Joined: Sat Dec 29, 2007 8:31 pm

Re: Newbish n00b questions, MkII

Post by stubby » Wed Sep 07, 2016 3:22 pm

dilanski wrote:I'm digging this. Although it seems a little unusable in some situations. How do I determine if a side of the board is under my control? Or even more importantly in brikwars, what if there is no board?
Agreed beforehand. If you can't agree on which side is whose before the battle, don't bring reinforcements.
dilanski wrote:Also I could end up paradropping my entire force in on the first turn, there'd need to be some points cost, or more severe negative to doing this. Perhaps charge for parachutes/retro-rockets?
Well yeah. Like I said, every unit lands as if fired from a launcher; I figured the potential damage was implied.

Historically, parachutes are 1CP and have no effect other than preventing falling damage. They must be represented by an element.
Voin wrote:See, what I'm confused about is that weapons are Non-Structural Elements too.
Turrets and hinges used to be two SLs below standard, but yeah, now they're exactly the same as the guns. The only real difference now is that it's real easy to knock a gun off a vehicle by hitting an exposed turret piece with a single successful hit of Component Damage.
Natalya wrote:Wtf is going on in this thread?

User avatar
dilanski
Now with added tractor fetish
Now with added tractor fetish
Posts: 1909
Joined: Sun Jan 18, 2009 6:41 am
Location: United Kingdom of Great Britain & FUCK THE DUP
Contact:

Re: Newbish n00b questions, MkII

Post by dilanski » Wed Sep 07, 2016 3:41 pm

stubby wrote:Agreed beforehand. If you can't agree on which side is whose before the battle, don't bring reinforcements.
Oh, I thought it was implying that control of a particular side of the board could change during the battle.
Almond Status: ACTIVATED

User avatar
stubby
tl;dr: the rule of fudge is the entire rulebook
Posts: 5178
Joined: Sat Dec 29, 2007 8:31 pm

Re: Newbish n00b questions, MkII

Post by stubby » Wed Sep 07, 2016 5:35 pm

It was, but then I realized I didn't want to make rules for that.
Natalya wrote:Wtf is going on in this thread?

User avatar
stubby
tl;dr: the rule of fudge is the entire rulebook
Posts: 5178
Joined: Sat Dec 29, 2007 8:31 pm

Re: Newbish n00b questions, MkII

Post by stubby » Fri Sep 09, 2016 10:31 am

Voin wrote:
stubby wrote:Historically, parachutes are 1CP and have no effect other than preventing falling damage. They must be represented by an element.
As per your advice, I changed my parachutes into cancelling Momentum damage (so they can also be used for dragsters or w/e). But I think the same rules can be applied to retro-thrusters (which would cause drift by pushing, rather than pulling).
Oh yeah, that is a better version. Even better than canceling Mom damage would just be canceling your own Moms entirely; you could still be damaged by other objects slamming into you, but you wouldn't have to worry about any momentum of your own.
Voin wrote:6. If there's a shield/heavy shield sitting on a vehicle (as w/ many castle carts, or viking ships or w/e), does that count as "armor plating" for purposes of that section being armored & move penalty?
If it's just sitting on the vehicle, and not a part of the vehicle, then I'd say no. It still grants shielding if enemy attacks happen to hit the shield elements specifically, but opponents don't have to make a special point of targeting non-shielded parts of the vehicle like they would for integrated armor plating.

But like anything else, players can make exceptions if they think it makes sense to do so.

Voin wrote:7. So I'm not sure if I'm reading the momentum/collision rules right (especially after the recent changes), so correct me if I'm wrong, but... if a vehicle (or w/e) has spikes (or w/e "Charging Weapon) installed on it, that automatically does damage first...
Spiked Crashes wrote:As in any Charging Weapon Attack, the player can spend MOMs to add dice to the spikes' Damage, up to the Weapon Size of the spikes. Depending on how much Momentum the Vehicle has, spending MOMs before the Collision occurs might save it from taking Crash Damage, or it may allow the Vehicle to convert more of its MOMs into Damage than it would have been able to from Crashing alone.
How does this work, exactly? Is it that the MOMs are used up on the spikes, or does it have to completely destroy it's target & thus have nothing to bodily crash into?
I definitely need to go back in and re-write that bit more clearly. Moms spent on the spikes are used up. Whatever Moms are left over are used for the Collision. So if you have a SL:3 armored camaro with a 1" spiked bumper crash into a nursery school with its full 3 Moms, the first Mom will be part of the spikes attack and the remaining 2 Moms will be used in the collision.
Spiked Crashes wrote:8. How would one do a sideswipe maneuver? Is it basically a vehicular shove?
Yep. I haven't figured out a better way to handle this yet, so for now it's just shoves.
Voin wrote:Yeah, but how often are the turntable pieces that make turrets function actually exposed on tanks & such? More often than not, they're buried beneath the armor of the cupola & not visible from the outside.
In real life, or in Lego form? Exposed turntables are pretty common for more casual builders.
Voin wrote:If I were aiming to take out a creation's gun, I'd likely go for the barrel, which turreted or not, is typically only 1 piece thick, & thus only a single good shot of Component Damage (at 1 less than the structure's size). So w/a 4" gun on an AR 3d10 tank/tank destroyer, I'd only need to exceed a 2d10 AR to disarm it's main cannon (& get a nice +2 Size bonus to targeting in the process).
If you're taking the Size bonus for shooting at all 4" of the barrel, then the defending player gets to choose where in those 4" you hit it. Most likely you're only succeeding in turning that 4" gun into a 3" gun. A lot depends on how it's constructed.

(Officially, though, when you're doing Component Damage you're firing at a specific element. Unless the single element is 4" by itself, you're not getting that bonus.)

But the fun part about blasting it off at the turret is that the gun itself is still intact. You can run up and steal it.
Natalya wrote:Wtf is going on in this thread?

User avatar
stubby
tl;dr: the rule of fudge is the entire rulebook
Posts: 5178
Joined: Sat Dec 29, 2007 8:31 pm

Re: Newbish n00b questions, MkII

Post by stubby » Sat Sep 10, 2016 2:27 pm

I figured we'd already answered that one and had moved on to associated trivia. A gun with a turret is differentiated by the fact that it has a turret. Otherwise no difference.
Natalya wrote:Wtf is going on in this thread?

User avatar
Gungnir
Jaw-Jaw
Posts: 996
Joined: Wed Jul 14, 2010 3:01 am

Re: Newbish n00b questions, MkII

Post by Gungnir » Sun Sep 11, 2016 2:46 am

I think the kind of engine would dictate how big a bang that would make. A gasoline-powered car or a mobile artillery that runs on diesel wouldn't blow up as much as a nuclear submarine or a space ship with an antimatter reactor.
BrikThulhu eats 1d6 minifigs each turn.

User avatar
stubby
tl;dr: the rule of fudge is the entire rulebook
Posts: 5178
Joined: Sat Dec 29, 2007 8:31 pm

Re: Newbish n00b questions, MkII

Post by stubby » Sun Sep 11, 2016 3:35 pm

BW2001 had rules for self-destructing a power source:
When the Self-Destruct device goes off, a mechanical Power Source such as a sail, waterwheel, or wind-
mill will simply collapse, doing at best (Power x 1d6) damage to any thing that happens to get caught in the
machinery or smashed by falling parts. Combustible Power Sources on the other hand, from steam engines to
nuclear fission pods to antimatter reactors, detonate and do (Power x 1d10) explosion damage.
That's a little extreme for BW2010, since power is handled differently than it was in BW2001. To keep it very, very general, I might just hook it to Structure Level. If you can blow up a power source, it does as many dice of damage (either mechanical d6es or explosive d10s) as the Structure Level of the vehicle or building it was designed to power.
Natalya wrote:Wtf is going on in this thread?

User avatar
stubby
tl;dr: the rule of fudge is the entire rulebook
Posts: 5178
Joined: Sat Dec 29, 2007 8:31 pm

Re: Newbish n00b questions, MkII

Post by stubby » Sun Sep 11, 2016 5:00 pm

Voin wrote:B/c while 1d10 may be fine for a car blowing up, a 4d10 (8" radius) explosion may be smaller than a SHIP, which is both underwhelming, & antithetical to the genre tropes.
8" radius is 16" diameter. I've seen SHIPs that are bigger than 16" in one dimension, but only rarely in a second or third, and never in a brikwars game.

It's totally tropethetical to have the engines blow up the rear half of a SHIP completely while sending the bridge section flying through space mostly unharmed.
Natalya wrote:Wtf is going on in this thread?

Post Reply