Action and Combat - Open Discussion

134 posts / 0 new
Last post
RobBoyle RobBoyle's picture
Action and Combat - Open Discussion

This thread is for open discussion of the Action and Combat chapter, which will be posted up with the new playtest pack later tonight.

As always, we're looking for:
* Typos, bad grammar, and other mistakes
* Broken rules
* Confusing text
* General feedback on what you think!

We'll be posting some specific playtest questions soon.

This chapter is loooong, so have at it!

Rob Boyle :: Posthuman Studios

UnitOmega UnitOmega's picture
Initial pass - very good.

Initial pass - very good.

While not averse to bean counting, I like the simplified reload and range mechanics.

Like addition of aggressive Melee attacks. Also like grappling - now with explicit options.

Already liking some of the weapon additions. It sounds like Spur replaces "cyberclaws" which I like, helps prevent confusion and aid visualization.

Love the clarification of pairs of weapons in multiple melee - that was a personal bug in my side before.

Social Manipulation is a great section, kudos to that. It covers a lot of ground while still not being too overly complicated.

Removed the talk of cold damage from Vacuum - that took you a while but good job.

Downtime is pretty good, and training skills is much improved. I like the direction the 60+ rule takes.

Acute stress seems to have a typo, it's talking about wounds and attacks rather than Traumas and some probably more broadly applicable word than "attack".

Types of stress seems to be the new hotness, I like how it plays in EP and works with hardening, a little better now that it's explicit.

All-in-all a positive read, will try and play with the rules soon and get some more "in action" feedback.

H-Rep: An EP Homebrew Blog
http://ephrep.blogspot.com/

Trappedinwikipedia Trappedinwikipedia's picture
First pass:

First pass:

The shock baton appears to have the wrong average damage. My guess is it had a 2d6 damage profile in a previous version.

There don't seem to be any rules for using more than one weapon except for the +10 on defense, is the rule from 1e about gaining extra damage gone or accidentally omitted? Nevermind it's there just not where I expected. Clarity could potentially be improved by moving where it is.

There appears to be no damage bonus based on SOM, which I'm guessing is intentional but I want to make sure that I'm not missing something. EDIT: Size matters though, which is mostly good enough for me. I just want Reapers to be able to rip people up I guess.

Choking in a grapple seems very strong, but without playing it out I can't be sure. I'm guessing Respirocytes would make it take a really long time though.

Ranged Weapons:

Do the helper ALIs provide a bonus to hit? The wording makes it kind of sound like they do, but an automatic +20 on those checks seems pretty awesome if true.

I like how ranged weapons don't automatically get more attacks than melee any more

The rules for suppressing fire confuse me. Is the height of the cone limited to 20 meters as well or can you make, say, a narrower cone with say a height of 40 meters and a diameter of 20 meters?

Does guided fire from seekers always take a round to arrive or would it potentially just be until the seeker fires? It feels a little weird that it would especially at shorter ranges to me.

The beam weapon changes feel good. They really have some muscle now and really dominate in vacuum conditions I think. Laser blindness is very strong in situations where one side isn't ready for them, and is awesome from a realism standpoint. I like how the laser pulser's less lethal mode is just shock instead of being it's own weird (and mostly useless) thing.

It seems weird that the Laser Pulser has a FA fire rate but the battle laser doesn't.

Is it intentional that the roast setting on the microwave agonizer is single shot but the less lethal mode is not?

The Thrown Weapons header should probably be closer to seekers and grenades, instead of being with emplaced weapons and kinetic weapons.

Kinetic Weapons:

Not sure why I would ever want to use a submachine gun over an assault rifle, unless there are bulk rules I missed for really close quarters or something. I think it needs a little more to differentiate it from other weapons. Giving rifles No Point Blank might be good.

It appears that railguns can now use smart ammo, which is cool, but potentially unintentional.

Accushot ammo should be restricted, as standard ammo is, and it looks like accushot ammo has range: Line Of Sight thanks to ignoring all penalties. Seems like it needs an upper bound of some type to me.

I like how shredders aren't anti-vehicle weapons anymore, that was kind of weird.

Seeker Weapons:

I wish there was a reusable full sized seeker launcher.

Automatic Accushot for seekers is great, combined with their ability to be fired from outside line of sight you can take some *really* long shots with them RAW. I think this is neat, but needs an upper bound in terms of KM. Like 20 or 30 or something, just to make crew-served intercontinental missiles a little harder to access haha

Scatter should scale with range somehow or short range grenade use will become silly. Like throwing around explosive superballs kind of silly. That said, prudent use of various trigger can prevent unfortunate accidents, so it's just kind of silly rather than really dangerous.

Jumping on and throwing back grenades don't seem like they will be used often still, mostly thanks to how common airburst and impact triggers probably will be.

Conditions and stuff:

I don't like how stun grenades and the laser pulser are considered shock so they don't work on synthmorphs. That doesn't feel right to me.

Social Combat moves don't appear to use an action, which is cool, but will probably slow things down thanks to everyone wanting to trade insults and threats while shooting. I guess it's balanced by not being able to communicate with allies and use them at the same time, though that's implicit? Also seems potentially narrative weird.

I think there should be more restrictions for using multiple ranged weapons at the same time, like a max limit or something, say 3 or 4.

I'm going to bed now, but as a final note "suffering moderate torture" kind of cracks me up.

EDIT: Gravity Transition zones should go. Simulated rotational gravity does not work that way, someone pushed from the center axis will simply drift down (helplessly potentially) until they strike a building or the ground, which is moving *sideways* and likely hundred of km/h relative to them.

ubik2 ubik2's picture
Actions and Combat
  • pg 22 and 23 The table lists Reactive as +3/+3 while the description text lists it as +5/+5
  • pg 22 Was Hyperdense Exoskeleton intended to be 10/12 armor or +10/+12 armor? The former seems to better reflect EP1, and would avoid stacking this with any heavy armor build. Of course GM fiat can deal with this as layered armor as well.
  • pg 25 Jamming specifies that the drone's Vigor pool is used instead of the operator's. The Wirehead infomorph (Making Characters: pg 24) has a Vigor pool. This can still be useful if they use the Ongoing use of the Vigor pool to boost skills before jamming, since the bonus applies for 24 hours, but I'm not sure if this was the intent.
  • pg 30 Under Improve Aptitudes, the increased cost for skills over 60 seems to have stuck around in this section. It's significantly worse, since boosting the associated skill by 1 from the aptitude requires the expenditure of 1 RP (which would buy 5 skill points instead of 1 now). This section also refers to a skill cap of 99 (rather than the 98 in the Making Characters pamphlet).
  • pg 31 The Lose a Negative Ego Trait section is duplicated
  • pg 32 Paranoia grants a +20 bonus to WIL Checks against Persuade, but Making Characters pg 15 says Persuade is opposed by SAV. The subsequent Provoke penalty does appropriately apply to WIL checks.

In the Remote Operations section (pg 25) Jamming indicates that you should use the normal skills, but other sections have indicated that vehicle-mounted weapons use Interface (would drones use Guns?).
I'm also assuming that if I were jamming/sleeved in a Car, I would use Pilot: Groundcraft instead of Athletics, but I'm really not sure.
It looks like the Direct Remote Control mode has gone away, which addresses many of the issues that used to exist here.

SquireNed SquireNed's picture
I know that some people like

I know that some people like the new reload system, but it's not really any better than tracking ammo, and I will have one player who insists they get to fire 50 SA shots and 25 BF shots.

Smart ammo for railguns seems like an accident, though this could be wrong.

Do polyguns need to be reloaded after changing form? If so, needs to be stated. Otherwise I will have a player try to load their polygun with a magazine for each weapon type (which, honestly, is kinda cool), then give it the ol' college try by dumping those magazines as fast as possible and just morphing his weapon between forms.

Rez looks much improved, which should help with the "CP is the best thing ever and you'll never see it again" I felt was an issue with 1e.

Creator of Street Rats, a CC-BY cyberpunk roleplaying game.

CordialUltimate2 CordialUltimate2's picture
I second the suggestion about

I second the suggestion about the correcting the transitional gravity zones. If you float off the axis you will move on trajectory close to straight line (for the outside frame of reference).
IF there is atmosphere, you will experience aerodynamic drag which will curve your trajectory somewhat.
To be perfectly honest it is pretty complicated exercise in motion mechanics. Heavy aerodynamic objects will float close to a straight lines and be in danger of meeting rotating deck of habitat.
Lighter objects with more drag will get some "rotational" momentum which will give them "percieved" gravity in the rotational frame of reference.

If I ever get bored too much I will present you the results of calculations including drag coefficients and mases of objects. Don't be waiting for them though.

Suggestion:
Please make a ruling for coaxial coupled weapons. My players or myself will probably at some point want to use multiple morph mounted guns. Reaper in the official art seems to have 4 coupled guns.
Now it is pretty hard to figure out what to do with them. Do you attack once and roll damage 4 times? Do you add +Xd10 per superior Sucess? Or make 4 separate attacks WITH or WITHOUT off-hand modifier?

Exurgents wanna eat your ass and you are low on ammo? Register to mobile gear catalogue at eldrich.host.mesh! ORDER NOW! FOR FREE PLASMA MINIMISSILE PACK! *explosive delivery options included

Snarls-at-Fleas Snarls-at-Fleas's picture
Reload

Cannot see the purpose of this change - it's easier to just count ammo. If we go abstract may I suggest the following:

1)Each weapon has an abstract ammo rating. Ex. Ammo 4 for medium pistol and Ammo 10 for assault rifle.
2)We assume that a character has enough ammo for a fight if they try to conserve ammo (i.e. single shot or semi-auto only) and just reload after the fight ends.
3)They may choose to shoot a burst. This spends 1 Ammo and either adds +10/+1d10 DV to attack or allows to attack two targets withing 1 meter of each other.
4)They may go full auto. This spends 3 Ammo and either adds +30/+2d10 DV to attack or allows to attack three targets withing 1 meter of each other.
5)They may lay suppressing fire. This spends 6 Ammo and /insert supp fire desription/
6)If your Ammo reaches 0 you cannot shoot this weapon until you spend a complex action to reload.

This way we don't forget to count ammo, but it gets much easier. To convert from EP1 just give 1 Ammo for each 3 shots the weapon normally has.

What do you think?

Urthdigger Urthdigger's picture
For the layering armor

For the layering armor section, does bio ware count as a layer? Just curious if I should put on some armor clothing over my bioweave, or if I have an excuse to keep running around naked.

Also, for morphs with multiple limbs, I'm assuming one can make an unarmed attack for every pair?

CordialUltimate2 CordialUltimate2's picture
All bioware armour is

All bioware armour is stackable except for the carapace. The same as in first edition.

AFAIK every additional pair adds d6 to damage. Up to 3d6. The same goes for claws and weighed gloves.

Exurgents wanna eat your ass and you are low on ammo? Register to mobile gear catalogue at eldrich.host.mesh! ORDER NOW! FOR FREE PLASMA MINIMISSILE PACK! *explosive delivery options included

Urthdigger Urthdigger's picture
Yeah, I went back for a

Yeah, I went back for a second read and found the bits I was missing. Probably shouldn't be proofreading when I should be getting sleep.

Though, now I have a concern in the opposite direction. Say I have enough layers to go over 11 AV, for instance bioweave, second skin, and armor clothing with an armor coat draped over it all. Concealability is just on a per item basis about whether it looks obviously like armor right? So that kind of get up can still hide that I'm prepared for stuff to go down?

eaton eaton's picture
Quote:Cannot see the purpose

Quote:
Cannot see the purpose of this change - it's easier to just count ammo. If we go abstract may I suggest the following:

Generally bullish on these changes, but I agree with the objections RE ammo. I don't think this improves things much, since "how much ammo do you have" was a pretty easy to understand/intuitive thing for most players.
RobBoyle RobBoyle's picture
Trappedinwikipedia wrote

Trappedinwikipedia wrote:
First pass:
There appears to be no damage bonus based on SOM, which I'm guessing is intentional but I want to make sure that I'm not missing something.

Correct, this was cut.

Trappedinwikipedia wrote:

Do the helper ALIs provide a bonus to hit? The wording makes it kind of sound like they do, but an automatic +20 on those checks seems pretty awesome if true.

No, there is no bonus.

Trappedinwikipedia wrote:

Is it intentional that the roast setting on the microwave agonizer is single shot but the less lethal mode is not?

Yes.

Trappedinwikipedia wrote:

It appears that railguns can now use smart ammo, which is cool, but potentially unintentional.

No, they cannot.

Rob Boyle :: Posthuman Studios

Grim G Grim G's picture
My $2 (Canadian)

Polyguns: YESS! FLEX GUNS FOR MY FLEXBRO! Though some of the technicals are muddy. For example: I always treated automatic rifles and LMGs the same in 1st Ed as they deal the same damage, and often times is the same ammunition IRL. Also, is there a rule stopping me from having an automatic Sniper? Or a single shot MG?... Or an SMG with 2 barrels? Oh, and can they turn into shredders? Can they be railguns and chem arms?

Magazines: I don't like it. As I was reading it today I found the rules to be a bit confusing. It also doesn't stop bean counting when you think about it; You have to keep track of mag capacity instead of bullets, and you still have to keep track of a partially depleted mag when you load in a fresh one.

Wording: It took me a while to realize that Spurs were really Cyberclaws. Personally I found it's description sort of hollow too, since it doesn't depict them as badass wolverine claws.

Overload Grenades: I almost had a stroke when trying to look for my favorite screaming grenade. Just a criticism on the wording again; these things are iconic (to me at least). On top of that, I noticed that they don't have a strobe effect, which is unfortunate because I lived the idea of them being pocket sized raves.

Axes and Swords: I'm assuming this was a mistake, because there was a clear power balance between these weapons before. Now there is no point in taking a sword as it does less damage, can't pierce armor, and is restricted. And why can't a sword pierce armor? I was under the impression that Monofilament meant really sharp.

Disorders: Can we have a table for these? I think that will help the process of choosing one faster.

Microgravity Range: While I like the new range system, I find the microgravity range to be too vague to actually be used. How far is "line of sight" exactly? I can see whole galaxies light years away. Also, just 'cause you can see a spec in the distance doesn't mean it's easy to hit; being even a single degree off can effect a target 6 km away. There needs to be a solid range cap for 0G.

Armor penetration: I don't see this as being any more simple than before. Instead of subtracting armor, we're dividing it now.

Seekers: I'd like to see a scatter table for seekers as they don't just disappear if they miss. I'd also like to see a damage value for seekers that don't explode (they are scramjet bullets if you remove the payload).

That's all I got for now.

Vae Dei Vae Dei's picture
Re Trappedinwikipedia's

Re Trappedinwikipedia's comment on stun grenades: they do still apply both Knockdown and Blinding. I'm pretty OK with this. There is a question of "what do you use for riot control when the rioters are cases", but I think the answer is just "freezers".

Re CordialUltimate's comment on coaxial/morph-mounted weapons: Except for "coaxial on different axes", I don't see why they wouldn't just use the Extra Ranged Weapons rule, same as everything else?

1) I almost want a specific clarification that the Attacker Behind Cover ranged modifier doesn't stack with Indirect Fire, but that might be overly finicky. Some clarification about how Indirect Fire interacts with defender's cover would be good, though.

2) Changing it to a penalty for not using a smartlink/laser sight is good.

3) I like the range changes and removal of penetration. The old rules were better in theory, but tended to slow things down.

4) No real opinion on "Reload", but I do have a suspicion it's going to play out exactly like counting ammo.

5) The order of the weapons categories is a bit odd. I would expect weapons systems either at the beginning or the end, for example. Probably Beam/Spray/Kinetic/Seeker should be next to each other, with Thrown and Systems either at the beginning or end. (Possibly do Thrown right after Seeker, since grenades?)

6) The particle beam bolter description still references having greater "penetration" than the laser pulser. Same with the shard pistol and assault rifle. Possibly this is fine and it just sticks out to me because I'm used to 1e descriptions. For some reason, pistols and sniper rifles mentioning both stopping power and penetration doesn't bother me.

7) Surprised that Shard Pistols and Shredders aren't restricted - I tend to place them in the same vein as a laser pulser or light pistol. Even more surprised about torches.

8) Shouldn't the Vortex Ring Gun use Kinetic armour, since it's blunt force?

9) RAW, there's no reason to use an SMG right now - an assault rifle or battle rifle is always strictly superior. Mostly I bring this up in the context of "why would I ever switch my polyrifle to SMG mode"?

10) Guessing Accushot ammo is supposed to be restricted.

11) Is having three different near-identical machine guns really worth the space?

12) Minor thing, but can we get clarification of how big minigrenades are? I've always wondered.

13) ...what does the missile do to the disposable launcher to increase it's range that micro/minimissiles don't do to other seekers?

14) Is there any reason not to list the -1d10 DV for armour-piercing ammo in the ammo tables? There's a damage column there already, and having to remember that it's -1d10 for ammo, but not weapons, is somewhat irritating. And I'm honestly not sure whether railguns do less damage than non-railguns or not, though I'm guessing (and hoping) the latter.

15) Will anyone ever actually wear the Armour Coat? It seems like, if someone wants a cool coat, they'll just call it part of their Armour Clothing and wear a light Armour Vest underneath it. Or just have regular cool clothing and have a vest underneath.

16) "Only one mod may be applied at a time." Thank you. Thank you so much. ...could I ask for a clarification that only the mod on the outermost layer applies? Or something similar, so that we don't get immunogenic second skin + shock proof armour clothing + impact vest + refractive shield...

17) I'd be OK with changing Shock Proof to +30. Specialized stuff is allowed to be good at what it does, and I don't see Shock Proof being a must-have that would crowd out other options. Plus it feels more consistent with other modifiers.

18) I like the downtime section, though just in case it hasn't already been called out "Lose a Negative Ego Trait" is in there twice.

19) Types of stress, and in general the entire mental health section - excellent! Only quibble is, hardening can be treated by psychotherapy, but when does the "5 times without a disorder to be hardened" reset? Can it be treated as well, or is time enough to reverse that slow climb?

20) OK, one other quibble. I thought we were getting rid of 1d10/2 for d6s, but there's a bunch of them in the Stressful Experiences table!

Have to take a look at the Environmental Factors section some time later.

Grim G Grim G's picture
Vae Dei wrote:

Vae Dei wrote:

7) Surprised that Shard Pistols and Shredders aren't restricted - I tend to place them in the same vein as a laser pulser or light pistol. Even more surprised about torches.
I'm actually surprised to see shredders aren't armor piercing, I mean, wasn't that the reason shotguns became obsolete? And a do have to agree about the Torch. Pretty sure flamethrowers are inhumane.

Vae Dei wrote:
8) Shouldn't the Vortex Ring Gun use Kinetic armour, since it's blunt force?
Good question. Would a shockwave count as kinetic energy?

Vae Dei wrote:
9) RAW, there's no reason to use an SMG right now - an assault rifle or battle rifle is always strictly superior. Mostly I bring this up in the context of "why would I ever switch my polyrifle to SMG mode"?
For me SMGs were more easily concealable and less restricted, making them perfect for urban combat. But now that there is a concealable trait, it seems like anything smaller than a rifle is useless if it doesn't have that trait.

Vae Dei wrote:
11) Is having three different near-identical machine guns really worth the space?
Agreed 100%. Just by looking at them, MMGs and LMGs are just shitty HMGs. Literally no advantages.

Vae Dei wrote:
12) Minor thing, but can we get clarification of how big minigrenades are? I've always wondered.
Again, 100% agreed. The size variations of seekers and grenades are confusing as hell. But since micro missiles and minigrenades have the same yeld, I would imagine they are the size of a d20 as best.

Vae Dei wrote:
13) ...what does the missile do to the disposable launcher to increase it's range that micro/minimissiles don't do to other seekers?
It seems like logic to me. Minimissiles travel twice the range of micros, and standard missiles travel twice the range of minis.

Also, there's one thing I forgot to mention before. Exotic throwing weapons? REALLY? You remove exotic melee and range weapons but now throwing a knife is it's own skill? REALLY?

Leetsepeak Leetsepeak's picture
I think Torches might not be

I think Torches might not be restricted because they can be industrial tools?

I like this section a lot.

LatwPIAT LatwPIAT's picture
Mental Health

Mental Health
I, too, have a copy of the Delta Green RPG. And the Delta Green RPG is a well-made product tooled specifically for running the kind of cosmic horror Eclipse Phase occasionally wants to be, so cribbing its mental health system wholesale isn't too bad of an idea.

But.

It's not a perfect system, and suffers somewhat from trying to unify the Stress Gauges in NEMESIS with the traditional CoC Sanity points. One place where this becomes very apparent are the rules for Adapting to Violence/Helplessness, where accumulating small stresses not only makes a character adapted to handling that kind of stress, but any other stress in its category - meaning that seeing enough corpses can make you immune to torture, and prison terms, bankruptcy, and being fired can immunize you to watching your loved ones be tortured to death. This comes from DGRPG abandoning the 10-point scales of NEMESIS, which made hardening only work against stresses of equal or lesser intensity.

And this is a problem that carries over to EP2E it seems, because being drugged a lot and experiencing enough spacesuit malfunctions can apparently make you immune to the stress of being tortured.

Which is a bit weird!

(Also I don't think DID really belongs on the list of disorders. It's a pretty controversial disorder in the first place, and fundamentally in a gaming and even fictional context it has problems with how it's presented as fundamentally something kinda cool, without any attention paid to the claimed real-world drawbacks, which include amnesia - a symptom EP2E doesn't mention at all. I think you'd emphasize the horror angle better by replacing it with, for example, psychogenic amnesia.)

@-rep +2
C-rep +1

Urthdigger Urthdigger's picture
Except you need to receive a

Except you need to receive a TRAUMA to work towards hardening, which for a base 15 WIL character means 6 points or more from a single source. So, "small stresses" won't build up to immunity. For instance, seeing a corpse or committing violence in self defense will NEVER grant more than 5 stress. For a character with 18 or more WIL, most stresses won't lead to traumas, at least if I'm reading this right.

On the topic of healing, I was curious about first aid (and this is actually something that's concerned me since 1st ed). It states that you can't perform first aid on an injury that's been treated with medichines or the like. Do we assume that medichines work on all wounds kinda equally, in which case all first aid is invalid after an hour without getting hurt? Does it triage and treat the worst injuries first? On top of that, any guidelines on how to track the number of injuries would be appreciated. I can see each Wound counting as their own injury, but for damage sources that don't incur wounds do we treat each round they took damage as an injury? The whole encounter as one? Take total damage that did not lead to wounds and divide by 10 (which admittedly avoids the possibility of healing more damage than the injury did)?

Finally, just to clarify, nanobandages do indeed stack with healing vats correct (I seem to recall it being a little different in 1st ed)? So if someone was on the brink of death, ideally one would use first aid on all the injuries they can, slap three nanobandages on the worst of what remains and then toss them in a healing vat to do injuriesd10 over an hour or so, then 6d10 for the first hour, followed by 3d10 per hour for the rest of the day.

I will say, as someone who actually bothered to take the skills in the past, I'm kinda glad that applying first aid allows for quick removal of wounds whereas gear-based methods like medichines need to heal any and all damage before taking additional time to repair the wounds.

SquireNed SquireNed's picture
I like that there is now a

I like that there is now a weapon quality table, but armor piercing giving negative DV is sort of pointless. Just have the weapons or ammunition be adjusted. Otherwise it gets confusing because there are too many use cases.

Creator of Street Rats, a CC-BY cyberpunk roleplaying game.

Trappedinwikipedia Trappedinwikipedia's picture
The weapons are already

The weapons are already adjusted, so far it only applies to AP ammo, which means it should probably be a part of AP ammo, not a part of the weapon trait unless there's more ammo/not weapons which give AP in the pipeline.

The new grenades are nuts I have to say, they basically all gained a d10 of damage across the board and most have even larger blast radii! There's a couple of funny parts of the table though, like the cost of TMP grenades looks like it's in the wrong column, but that's really minor, and High-Explosive grenades appear to be duplicated- once as an option for TMP, and once alone, and there seems to be no need to get HE instead of TMP, or even an entry for HE grenades in the description list.

I second the machine guns being kind of weird. They're all pretty similar, but basically just get better as they get larger. Giving some of them No Point Blank or even No Short Range (perhaps a lessened version which just represents the difficulty of quickly traversing the weapon rather than the blanket ban seekers get).

I also think giving the rifles No Point Blank is a pretty good way to give them SMG more of a role.

It strikes me as a little odd that of ranged weapons, only beam weapons have a Ware section, and they are the only ones which can be bonded to a shell without a weapon mount. I'm not sure if that section just didn't make it in for other weapons or if it's because they're all recoiless, and if it's the latter a few spray weapons should be similar.

I really like how taking two wounds at once no longer prompts two tests.

LatwPIAT LatwPIAT's picture
Urthdigger wrote:Except you

Urthdigger wrote:
Except you need to receive a TRAUMA to work towards hardening, which for a base 15 WIL character means 6 points or more from a single source. So, "small stresses" won't build up to immunity. For instance, seeing a corpse or committing violence in self defense will NEVER grant more than 5 stress.

Happens readily to WIL 10 characters with TT 4, though.

@-rep +2
C-rep +1

Grim G Grim G's picture
It seems like most people

It seems like most people agree that the reload rule is a side grade at best and a downgrade at worst.

Another thing I don't like is the conseal rule. It only applies to certain weapons when there should be a spectrum of modifiers.

TheGrue TheGrue's picture
I approve, 100%, of the

I approve, 100%, of the change to the way smartlinks are handled. This was a change I'd made in my own "1.5" rules hack.

Now, as for armor...let me float an idea. Just like in 1E, every piece of armor here has very close to the same E and K armor value, and the ones with a large difference have less E than K. This is mathematically the same (or close enough) as all energy weapons having a small bonus to damage - but the latter is cleaner in terms of rule bloat. I'd ask you to consider either;

(1) Give energy weapons a small boost to their listed damage values (or no boost) and drop E and K armor in favor of just Armor; have armor mods like 1E's Refractive Glazing provide "+3 bonus armor vs Energy" (the same way Fireproofing gives +8 bonus armor vs fire)

(2) Further differentiate between E and K armor; make players choose which they're going to focus on, instead of having armor values so close together across the board

I see you also did the same thing as 1E with Fireproofing and Refractive Glazing. They're both the same cost, one gives 3 bonus energy armor, the other gives 2 bonus energy armor and 8 bonus armor against fire. It's...hard to make an argument that Fireproofing isn't just better than Glazing. I'd say either increase Glazing's bonus(by a lot), or take out Fireproofing's bonus and make it just +10 vs fire.

GRAVITY TRANSITIONS

Quote:
If you are cast adrift in the microgravity zone at the axis of a
rotating space habitat, you will slowly drift outward until you
begin to encounter simulated gravity, at which point you will fall.
How long this takes varies on the size of the habitat.

Again, guys - I'm sorry, but this is not how rotating reference frames work. See this gif for reference. Also, you've all seen Babylon 5 right? Remember this scene? That is what falling from the center of a rotating reference frame looks.

There is no gravity transition zone in a rotating space habitat, because there is no gravity in a rotating space habitat (centrifugal force is a fictitious force, and is felt only by an observer "standing" on the inside of the circle). If you are cast adrift at the axis - unless you have some means of keeping station - you will gradually drift according to your initial momentum, at roughly the same speed, until you are accelerated to the speed of the rim slowly by air resistance or rapidly as you hit structures on the inner surface of the habitat (from your frame of reference this will appear to be a sudden acceleration - followed by death - but from the perspective of observers on the inside surface you will appear to be spiralling slowly outward from habitat's central axis).

Oh yeah, how do airbursts interact with the attack sequence? Say there's a hostile target fifty meters away from me. I fire a seeker not at it, but at a point one meter to its left, and program the seeker to detonate after travelling 50.03 meters (my muse ran Pythagoras and outputted that as a sufficiently accurate value for the line between me and the indicated point). I fire, and roll a success on my Guns test.

Does my target get a Fray roll to dodge, even though the seeker isn't going to impact him?

Suppose he does; what happens? Does he roll Fray to leap out of the radius of the explosion? If so, does he then return to his original position, or stay at his new position outside the radius? How far can he move in this manner, and does he get to move again on his next turn?

Thermonuclear Banana Split - A not-really-weekly Eclipse Phase campaign journal.

TheGrue TheGrue's picture
One other thing: There's some

One other thing: There's some oddness with the rules for armor-piercing ammo. AP kinetic ammo just gains the Armor Piercing quality, ie -1d10 damage, half armor; RAP kinetic ammo gains Armor Piercing and +1d6 damage; so is that +1d6 -1d10 or what? Seems clunky. Same with HEAP explosives; 3d10+12, but do you apply the -1d10 from Armor Piercing or what?

Are shardguns and shredders armor-piercing or aren't they? The description says they are, but the stats say they aren't. Also I'm not sure I've ever understood how flechettes can be "very traumatic to flesh", and yet be less effective versus unarmoured targets than hardened ones.

I don't think the damage penalty from Armor Piercing necessary; either you're using it instead of regular ammo (which should be cheaper - see below), or you're paying a utility cost by using it instead of ammo that increases damage, or you're using a weapon that has it built in and the damage is already adjusted anyway.

EDIT: I thought regular ammo was cheaper than AP, so the first version of this post referred to it as though it were. Really though, it ought to be. I mean if we aren't playing Gear: The Shoppening, you're buying a gun but aren't buying speciality ammo, and you have enough ammo at all times to reload as often as you need to...why not make regular ammo free with the gun?

Thermonuclear Banana Split - A not-really-weekly Eclipse Phase campaign journal.

Trappedinwikipedia Trappedinwikipedia's picture
The shredder description says

The shredder description says they struggle with armor and they don't have AP, this is a change from 1e.

UnitOmega UnitOmega's picture
Trappedinwikipedia wrote:The

Trappedinwikipedia wrote:
The shredder description says they struggle with armor and they don't have AP, this is a change from 1e.

Which is something I heard people complain about frequently about flechettes and diamondoid structures. Now if only we can fix Gravity Transition Zones, people will laugh less at EP.

For RAP - I assume you reduce the base damage by a d10, but you add back in a d6 effectively you only lose like half your damage potential. Presumably this is why the AP trait says adding it removes a d10, because then you'd have to write something stupid for RAP like -1d10 +1d6

H-Rep: An EP Homebrew Blog
http://ephrep.blogspot.com/

TheGrue TheGrue's picture
The shredder description says

The shredder description says nothing of the kind.

Quote:
Shredder: A heavier version of the shard pistol, the shredder fires
a larger cloud of lethal flechettes, enough to shred a portion of the
target into a fine mist.

The Shard Gun says this (emphasis mine):

Quote:
Shard Pistol: This weapon fires a stream of of diamondoid shards
at high velocities with each shot. A blast of these micro-flechettes is
very traumatic to flesh, but their armor-piercing capabilities are offset
by their low mass
. Shard pistols are ideal for close-quarters habitats,
as the shards tend to shatter rather than ricochet. Shard ammunition
is sometimes coated with drugs or toxins for extra efficiency.

Thermonuclear Banana Split - A not-really-weekly Eclipse Phase campaign journal.

Grim G Grim G's picture
TheGrue wrote:The shredder

TheGrue wrote:
The shredder description says nothing of the kind.

Quote:
Shredder: A heavier version of the shard pistol, the shredder fires
a larger cloud of lethal flechettes, enough to shred a portion of the
target into a fine mist.

The Shard Gun says this (emphasis mine):

Quote:
Shard Pistol: This weapon fires a stream of of diamondoid shards
at high velocities with each shot. A blast of these micro-flechettes is
very traumatic to flesh, but their armor-piercing capabilities are offset
by their low mass
. Shard pistols are ideal for close-quarters habitats,
as the shards tend to shatter rather than ricochet. Shard ammunition
is sometimes coated with drugs or toxins for extra efficiency.

Yep, hard to see how nanoscopic diamond shards traveling at muzzle velocity wouldn't immediately go through everything. Though considering their "low mass". I'd say a -1d10 is fair enough.

UnitOmega UnitOmega's picture
They're not nanoscopic, and

They're not nanoscopic, and my understanding is that their ballistic properties aren't great.

Due to low mass, they will not necessarily impart the force to a target to do a lot of damage to armor - especially considering how common carbon weave and fullerenes is supposed to be in EP's armor tech. But vs your soft, squishy body they can just slap through everything and cause lots of small damage to tissues, cause blood loss, etc.

It's basically the principle of biter ammo. Hard, solid shot punches through armor designed to spread out and deflect force. Softer shot expands and drags through target to cause more harm.

H-Rep: An EP Homebrew Blog
http://ephrep.blogspot.com/

Grim G Grim G's picture
UnitOmega wrote:They're not

UnitOmega wrote:
They're not nanoscopic, and my understanding is that their ballistic properties aren't great.

Due to low mass, they will not necessarily impart the force to a target to do a lot of damage to armor - especially considering how common carbon weave and fullerenes is supposed to be in EP's armor tech. But vs your soft, squishy body they can just slap through everything and cause lots of small damage to tissues, cause blood loss, etc.

It's basically the principle of biter ammo. Hard, solid shot punches through armor designed to spread out and deflect force. Softer shot expands and drags through target to cause more harm.


Ok fine, "Microscopic". But that said low mass doesn't necessarily lead to worse armor penetration, otherwise rapiers wouldn't have a reputation for doing that. Also notice how you said "Damage to armor". The point isn't to damage armor, it's to go through it with the least resistance.

The way you're describing them is the complete opposite of 1st ed; good at getting through armor but poor kinetic energy distribution.

TheGrue TheGrue's picture
But rapiers aren't good at

But rapiers aren't good at penetrating armor. A rapier was a gentleman's dueling sword. You may be thinking of an estoc, which was basically a metal-hafted spear.

Thermonuclear Banana Split - A not-really-weekly Eclipse Phase campaign journal.

UnitOmega UnitOmega's picture
Grim G wrote:

Grim G wrote:

The way you're describing them is the complete opposite of 1st ed; good at getting through armor but poor kinetic energy distribution.

As evidenced by the removal of discussion of acute Cold Damage from Vacuum and many remarks on Gravity Transition zones, it's entirely possible for the game developers to be wrong in describing something.

Also, Grue is right about rapiers. They "penetrate" armor by bypassing it. You use a light, thin blade to stick somebody where the armor gaps are. To penetrate armor you need a combination of mass and velocity. And then optimally you have a shape suited to these. The micro-flechettes might not necessarily deliver the mass and speed universally to all armors - as noted a carbon fullerene is strong at that scale or smaller, but no matter the scale with your body if you poke many tiny holes in it you will have a bad day. They're hard and light, so they probably go fast and maintain speed through soft targets and if they have a high enough base damage can probably push through low-end armors but don't necessarily have an over-all armor defeating effect.

Since they do +1d10 at close this probably works out. You get smacked with a bundle of these things in a tight pattern up close, it pass through armor and into your body in a spot and does a lot of concentrated damage. You get too far away, individual flechettes don't have the right mass and speed to penetrate cleanly.

H-Rep: An EP Homebrew Blog
http://ephrep.blogspot.com/

Grim G Grim G's picture
My official thoughts on armor pen

So now that I've taken time to fully go through it, I've come to the conclusion that I don't like armor penetration.

The idea of cutting armor in half is something I can get behind, though I have to wonder if the scaling effect of dividing armor may change combat dynamics in any negative way.

My main problem with it though is the -1d10 damage. Assuming this effect applies to railguns, then it's completely unacceptable (Railguns are known to set the projectiles on FIRE when they hit something!). I see it also applies to sniper rifles, which is funny because the description says:

Quote:
Sniper rifles are optimized for range, accuracy, penetration, and stopping power.

The idea of reducing damage is something I'm not completely opposed to a damage penalty, but if you're going to have it, make it part of special ammo types rather than a weapon.

UnitOmega UnitOmega's picture
I mean, Sniper Rifle stopping

I mean, Sniper Rifle stopping power is pretty good. It does 2d10+10 after the reduction.

Quote:
Weapons (not ammo) listed as
armor-piercing already incorporate the DV modifier.

This also actually fits with many principles of armor penetration if you want to hit a hardened target you have to sacrifice overall damage to that target because your shot will often bleed less energy into the target.

And I think Railguns do the same? This I will say could use some clarification. It says the DV stays "as above", but with x2 Reload rate, x1.5 range and AP added. It lists the quality directly, and it's inherent to the railgun weapon, so I would assume this means they are an overall improvement over using AP ammo in your firearm, but now you have the battery limitation and cannot use speciality ammo.

H-Rep: An EP Homebrew Blog
http://ephrep.blogspot.com/

Grim G Grim G's picture
TheGrue wrote:But rapiers

TheGrue wrote:
But rapiers aren't good at penetrating armor. A rapier was a gentleman's dueling sword. You may be thinking of an estoc, which was basically a metal-hafted spear.

Unless estocs were top heavy and meant to be swung around like an axe, my point still stands that mass isn't the only key factor in penetrating.
UnitOmega wrote:

Also, Grue is right about rapiers. They "penetrate" armor by bypassing it. You use a light, thin blade to stick somebody where the armor gaps are. To penetrate armor you need a combination of mass and velocity. And then optimally you have a shape suited to these. The micro-flechettes might not necessarily deliver the mass and speed universally to all armors - as noted a carbon fullerene is strong at that scale or smaller, but no matter the scale with your body if you poke many tiny holes in it you will have a bad day. They're hard and light, so they probably go fast and maintain speed through soft targets and if they have a high enough base damage can probably push through low-end armors but don't necessarily have an over-all armor defeating effect.

Since they do +1d10 at close this probably works out. You get smacked with a bundle of these things in a tight pattern up close, it pass through armor and into your body in a spot and does a lot of concentrated damage. You get too far away, individual flechettes don't have the right mass and speed to penetrate cleanly.


I could make an argument that a cone of glass would get between armor, but then again this would also count for other spray weapons. Likewise the +1d10 you mentioned is also for all sprayers, so it's nothing special.

UnitOmega wrote:
The micro-flechettes might not necessarily deliver the mass and speed universally to all armors
If we're talking about realism then I'd like to point out that nothing is "universally" good at armor penetrating, that was kind of the point of AP values in 1st ed. 2nd ed wants to round all weapons' AP potential, so I vote that shredders get rounded up. Otherwise they are no different then standard shotgun buckshot.
Grim G Grim G's picture
UnitOmega wrote:I mean,

UnitOmega wrote:
I mean, Sniper Rifle stopping power is pretty good. It does 2d10+10 after the reduction.
Why would it be After the damage reduction? Who's to say that you don't roll a d10 after rolling damage?

UnitOmega wrote:
And I think Railguns do the same? This I will say could use some clarification.
In real life? I don't know. But I do know that a slug started combusting when it hit a concrete wall.

UnitOmega wrote:
It says the DV stays "as above", but with x2 Reload rate, x1.5 range and AP added. It lists the quality directly, and it's inherent to the railgun weapon, so I would assume this means they are an overall improvement over using AP ammo in your firearm, but now you have the battery limitation and cannot use speciality ammo.
I guess technically this could be intentional. x2 reload would mean twice the capacity, which would mean smaller bullets that deals less damage. It would also mean that the weapon's lack of damage can be picked up by higher firing rates. I suppose this would mean that you're going to piss away more ammo though (I prefer to keep track of it), and that may ultimately be the problem. You can only carry so many mags at a time (standard US soldier carries 9 + 1 in the rifle). Then again assuming that Railslugs are made of steel (a combination of 2 fairly common resources), you could probably fab them easily if you have the equipment and skill.

All and all I guess I could accept railguns 2.0, but I'm going to miss the aesthetics of the big ass gun of unrelenting force powered by lighting.

UnitOmega UnitOmega's picture
I mean that the -1d10 damage

I mean that the -1d10 damage is already accounted for. You don't roll a d10 and subtract, you reduce the DV by a d10, and ONLY if you add AP with ammo. The DV for a weapon which intrinsically has the quality (which the Sniper Rifle does) does not deviate, it's already accounted for - this is why I quoted that section.

So theoretically a Sniper Rifle does 3d10+10 DV, but that is reduced to it's written number of 2d10+10. So it has AP and still managed to out-pace other firearms. I mean by Railguns doing the same I think they don't reduce their DV because they say to treat damage "as above" yet with the Armor-Piercing quality. This would again mean that effectively they do +1d10 DV but this is pre adjusted for you. This is why I say it could use clarification - it's a little ambiguously parsed right now.

H-Rep: An EP Homebrew Blog
http://ephrep.blogspot.com/

Grim G Grim G's picture
UnitOmega wrote:I mean that

UnitOmega wrote:
I mean that the -1d10 damage is already accounted for. You don't roll a d10 and subtract, you reduce the DV by a d10, and ONLY if you add AP with ammo. The DV for a weapon which intrinsically has the quality (which the Sniper Rifle does) does not deviate, it's already accounted for - this is why I quoted that section.

So theoretically a Sniper Rifle does 3d10+10 DV, but that is reduced to it's written number of 2d10+10. So it has AP and still managed to out-pace other firearms. I mean by Railguns doing the same I think they don't reduce their DV because they say to treat damage "as above" yet with the Armor-Piercing quality. This would again mean that effectively they do +1d10 DV but this is pre adjusted for you. This is why I say it could use clarification - it's a little ambiguously parsed right now.


Yeah, I just saw the section about it, was a little confusing at first. In that case I suppose AP is fair.
ubik2 ubik2's picture
Armor Piercing

For a decent model of penetration, the square root of the diameter is important as well (e.g. a projectile of the same mass with 4x the diameter will only have half the penetration).

I'll use this as the simple model:
(mass/diameter)^0.5 * velocity^1.5

If the shard pistol fires a needle with the same length as an M-16 bullet, but 1/10th the diameter, at Mach 7, the overall penetration is similar to the M-16 bullet. In atmosphere, this will falloff quickly. I'm assuming some sort of smart shards too, in atmosphere, to replicate the stabilizing effect of a rifled bullet.

For our railgun with twice the muzzle velocity of our firearm, and a 4mm projectile with the same length, but smaller diameter to have the same momentum, we end up with around 6 times the penetration. This also gets you 2x the reload, since your bullets are half as massive. This is the area where you want to have the Armor Piercing trait, to indicate that armor is significantly less effective. The vast majority of that energy does not go into a soft target, as most of it is wasted on overpenetration, so the amount of damage that actually applies to an unarmored target is essentially the same as the firearm version (I'm just asserting this part, rather than basing it on a model of overpenetration).

Regarding the rapier/estoc conversation, the penetration of the estoc in a thrust is not normally sufficient to get through plate. That's modeled by combining it with a called shot to a vulnerable area, which gets you armor piercing. It's possible you would use both versions of armor piercing there (one from the weapon, and one from the called shot) to completely eliminate the role of armor (this is very unrealistic if you're using it with EP2 combat armor). A pick style weapon will penetrate plate armor, and does not need the called shot to do so, but that's a result of the additional velocity you have available for the swinging motion (perhaps modeled as a higher DV). The piston spear would make this velocity available in a thrusting weapon.

I do like the fact that the Armor Piercing trait represents a trade-off for the piercing. Related to that, I would imagine that while most autonomist habitats are fine with shard pistols / shredders / firearms, they might have a hard time with railguns or armor piercing ammunition. These projectiles are likely to keep going all the way out to space, and someone has to patch those holes.

I would prefer it if the books removed the -1d10 portion from the Armor Piercing trait description, and added it to the appropriate ammunition instead. It makes it clearer when you're picking out ammunition that you've made a trade-off, and eliminates some rules confusion. For the RAP, I'd suggest a simple -2 modifier (since this is the average result of a +1d6 together with -1d10).

Finally, despite my use of equations, I don't think EP2 should turn into GURPS.

Grim G Grim G's picture
ubik2 wrote:For a decent

ubik2 wrote:
For a decent model of penetration, the square root of the diameter is important as well (e.g. a projectile of the same mass with 4x the diameter will only have half the penetration).

I'll use this as the simple model:
(mass/diameter)^0.5 * velocity^1.5

If the shard pistol fires a needle with the same length as an M-16 bullet, but 1/10th the diameter, at Mach 7, the overall penetration is similar to the M-16 bullet. In atmosphere, this will falloff quickly. I'm assuming some sort of smart shards too, in atmosphere, to replicate the stabilizing effect of a rifled bullet.

For our railgun with twice the muzzle velocity of our firearm, and a 4mm projectile with the same length, but smaller diameter to have the same momentum, we end up with around 6 times the penetration. This also gets you 2x the reload, since your bullets are half as massive. This is the area where you want to have the Armor Piercing trait, to indicate that armor is significantly less effective. The vast majority of that energy does not go into a soft target, as most of it is wasted on overpenetration, so the amount of damage that actually applies to an unarmored target is essentially the same as the firearm version (I'm just asserting this part, rather than basing it on a model of overpenetration).

Regarding the rapier/estoc conversation, the penetration of the estoc in a thrust is not normally sufficient to get through plate. That's modeled by combining it with a called shot to a vulnerable area, which gets you armor piercing. It's possible you would use both versions of armor piercing there (one from the weapon, and one from the called shot) to completely eliminate the role of armor (this is very unrealistic if you're using it with EP2 combat armor). A pick style weapon will penetrate plate armor, and does not need the called shot to do so, but that's a result of the additional velocity you have available for the swinging motion (perhaps modeled as a higher DV). The piston spear would make this velocity available in a thrusting weapon.

I do like the fact that the Armor Piercing trait represents a trade-off for the piercing. Related to that, I would imagine that while most autonomist habitats are fine with shard pistols / shredders / firearms, they might have a hard time with railguns or armor piercing ammunition. These projectiles are likely to keep going all the way out to space, and someone has to patch those holes.

I would prefer it if the books removed the -1d10 portion from the Armor Piercing trait description, and added it to the appropriate ammunition instead. It makes it clearer when you're picking out ammunition that you've made a trade-off, and eliminates some rules confusion. For the RAP, I'd suggest a simple -2 modifier (since this is the average result of a +1d6 together with -1d10).

Finally, despite my use of equations, I don't think EP2 should turn into GURPS.


*rubs eyes*
Could you please put that in a TL;DR? I've had too much quadratics to deal with today to deal with math.
ubik2 ubik2's picture
TL;DR

Railguns really should penetrate dramatically better, while a shard pistol or shredder has pretty similar armor penetration to a traditional bullet.

I also echoed the request to put the -1d10 on the relevant ammunition listings, rather than on the Armor Piercing trait in the books.

TheGrue TheGrue's picture
I'd agree that putting the

I'd agree that putting the -1d10 on the ammunition listing is better organizationally. I still think that it's not needed per my reasoning above, but this is an acceptable alternative.

Oh one thing; is the halving of armor from crits and AP weapons additive, or multiplicitive? ie, if I crit with a sniper rifle, do I ignore all armor or 75%?

I guess that raises another question, is there any reason to put AP ammo in a kinetic gun that has inherent AP?

Thermonuclear Banana Split - A not-really-weekly Eclipse Phase campaign journal.

ubik2 ubik2's picture
Double AP

TheGrue wrote:
Oh one thing; is the halving of armor from crits and AP weapons additive, or multiplicitive? ie, if I crit with a sniper rifle, do I ignore all armor or 75%?

From page 2, in the "Step 7: Apply Armor" section, "A critical armor-piercing attack will reduce the AV to 0".

I didn't assume that meant that you could use Armor-Piercing ammunition with a sniper rifle (already Armor-Piercing) to reduce the AV to 0, but I can understand interpreting it that way.
I did assume that you could combine the Called Shot: Bypass Armor with Armor-Piercing to get the AV 0.
If you can double up on Armor-Piercing, it makes the Sniper Railgun worthwhile, but I don't know that it really makes sense from a simulation standpoint.

ubik2 ubik2's picture
Armor stacking and synths

The rules on Layering Armor (pg 21) make it pretty difficult for a morph like the Steel Morph to keep up with biomorphs on armor. In a Direct Action type situation, I would normally expect everyone to be sleeved into Reapers, together with the Synthmorph Armor (Heavy Combat) for a total of 28/24. Meanwhile, our Fury with Scale Armor and a Battlesuit Exoskeleton has 31/32 armor. I've left off the cheesier things, like adding Second Skin and Armor Clothing to these, since hopefully the GM's discretion would kick in there.

It's possible the SOM limit in the layering section is intended to apply to characters with only a single layer of armor as well, in which case, this armor stacking isn't a real problem. For example, a 15 SOM would probably result in an Armored Vest (light) and Second Skin for 6/13 armor. The average flat would just wear the Armored Vest for 4/10. Even the extreme soldiers (SOM 30) would be limited to Battlesuit Exoskeleton and Dermal Armor for 29/30. In this case, the Reaper can close the gap with an Impact armor coating to get to 28/27 which is probably close enough. If we go cheesy (adding Second Skin), we can get the Reaper to 30/30. In any case, the SOM probably serves as a good guideline for a GM on when to consider the multiple armor items problematic.

Shock attacks are extremely effective against biomorphs (since even on a success, you still take -30 for 3 turns), so this might equalize the battlefield enough that the Reapers dominate even if the biomorphs have 8 more armor.

If the SOM limit isn't intended to be used this way, it would be nice to have an option for a synth to remove their frame level armor so they have access to things like the Battlesuit Exoskeleton (perhaps even making the scale/carapace armor option available in that case).

Complexity values are missing for a number of these entries, though I assume that's a known issue. It would also be nice to be more explicit about which armor sets include a helmet. I assume Combat Armor does (which makes the standard Body Armor with a Helmet (Full) more protective vs. Kinetic attacks).

Urthdigger Urthdigger's picture
ubik2 wrote:The rules on

ubik2 wrote:
The rules on Layering Armor (pg 21) make it pretty difficult for a morph like the Steel Morph to keep up with biomorphs on armor. In a Direct Action type situation, I would normally expect everyone to be sleeved into Reapers, together with the Synthmorph Armor (Heavy Combat) for a total of 28/24. Meanwhile, our Fury with Scale Armor and a Battlesuit Exoskeleton has 31/32 armor. I've left off the cheesier things, like adding Second Skin and Armor Clothing to these, since hopefully the GM's discretion would kick in there.

Well, first off a fury already comes with bioweave armor, and I'm not entirely sure you can have multiple forms of bioware armor? Secondly, the reaper also comes with more durability, more vigor, 4 weapon mounts (on top of it's two usable limbs), and ability to ignore one wound. Lastly, the main issue seems to be the frankly MASSIVE armor provided by the battlesuit exoskeleton, which doesn't even have a description listed. I wouldn't be surprised to see it give a native action penalty or other such drawback. Heck, we don't see a complexity offered, the cost to acquire one may outweigh the cheaper cost of the fury.

Edit: Also, the reaper doesn't necessarily need to be the best in every way. Using the examples you gave, the fury can get 3/8 more armor points, sure. Compared to all the other bonuses a reaper naturally gets. But, if armor is truly your biggest priority, maybe you would prefer to go with a fury.

o11o1 o11o1's picture
A quick post before bed.

Haven't read the thread yet, just recording my thoughts as I go through the booklet. Apologies if there are repeats of previous comments in here.

If attacking with multiple weapons in melee collapses down into single attacks, why does attacking with multiple ranged weapons not do the same thing? it seems like "extra volumn of fire" should have much the same upshot, at least for game mechanics.

The point is to avoid the guy with an octomorph and six machine pistols from having to roll 6+6 times for attack and damage. Just let him apply a bonus to the attack roll and damage roll for extra weapons. It's faster and nearly as faithful to what's being simulated.

Looking at the Social Modifers table, I see much the same issues as the original general function modifers had. Just we switch that to "Very hard, hard, slightly hard", I would say Social table should move to "Very Unfriendly, Unfriendly, slightly Unfriendly", and then likewise with "Cooperative". Meanwhile, The request modifers seem fine.

So, during the Surprise Round, neither side can use Vigor for extractions? Interesting. Somewhat mutes the deadliness of an Ambush, but it seems reasonable to make fights not end in the opening round.

Armor Piercing having a build in damage reduction seems odd and would tend to mean that a lot of the time you don't actually deal any more damage. If we must, have it be a flat -2 rather than a full roll -1d10. Then it's a small, predictable penalty and using a big AP round on a soft target is less scary than hollow points, but still pretty dang good.

I like the clarification that the TacNet ALI needs to have an Ecto or better to ride in. Means the group has to designate who's the babysitter for the TacNet (Probably whoever has Radio Boosters, meaning probably me.) Do the Tacknet skills have the ALI's Aptitudes (or lack therof) already factored in?

In the Micrgravity Section, the note on Escape Velocity has been mistakenly labled "Termnal Velocity", which is actually the max speed you can fall through an atmosphere (Potentially also interesting)

The section on Dangerous Atmospheres mention oxygen, but not CO2 poisoning, which actually tends to become a problem faster.

Hmmm, the Timeframes for Rep mention you can get a Major item "once per campaign" but then in Downtime Actions you appear to be able to do it once a week with a strong enough Rep net. Is this intended to represent you having an entire week to pay back the relevant favors to account for such things? May also be a good time to remind people of the difference between single use BPs and Multi-use BPs.

Playtest wrote:
IMPROVE APTITUDES
Raise aptitudes at the cost of 1 RP per aptitude point. Aptitudes may
not be raised above 30.
Raising the value of an aptitude also raises the value of all linked
skills by an equivalent amount. If this raises any linked skills over
60, an additional 1 RP must be spent per linked skill over 60 (with
the exception of the character’s native language skill and skills
capped at 99).

I would rather say that the linked skills generate a refund of the affected skill points, if the player prefers that to going over the 60 line. Easier to track, just spend the skill points at the same time the refund happens. Also, Languages don't have a skill ranking anymore, you either have it or you don't. Furthermore, the cap is at 98, not 99.

The 'Learn a Language' section should call out the Hyper Linguist trait as probably good grounds to learn the language quickly. Otherwise, both this and Lose a Negative Ego Trait may want to call out some amount of time more specfic than "monthes" as a baseline. Perhaps a range like "two to six months". Can you do other kinds of downtime for that, or is it eight weeks of always doing training that only pays out at the end?

A slight smell of ions....

o11o1 o11o1's picture
So I lied about going to bed.

Playtest wrote:
Regeneration: Transhumans with biomods will regrow severed parts over time. An ear or finger will take a week, an arm or leg a full month. Healing vats greatly accelerate this process to somewhere between 4 hours (ear/finger) and 2 days (full limb), and can even restore a full body from just a head (1 month).

Woah! That last one, while hella cool, conflicts with elsewhere stated fabrication rules where a from scratch Biomorph takes a full six months to put together. Whereas here, it seems to only take a month once you have the brain together?

Is this intended to imply that in EP, it takes 5 months to grow a transhuman brain in a vat? Or is this an unconsidered numbering for the regeneration time?

Re:Mental Stress

Bravo! I like the layout of this new system. Still need to read through in detail, but it strikes me as pretty usable and fair to how mental stress and illness works. Having exactly four classes of stress also cleans up related traits.

That said, on the Stressful Experiences table, I would taboo any occurrence of "halving" on these charts. Just to reduce having to use division for anything. Plain d6s and the occasional d6-1 seems ideal. There also seem to be weird "divided by one" markings in various places I think I'll ignore.

Insanity Rating should probably call out "Being restored from a pre-breakdown backup" as being the resolution for such severe breaks.

Regarding being restored from backup in general, I don't recall the Rez section talking about how it interacts with backups. I've had sessions where the whole team managed to wipe but still "won" the mission. Usually involving copious amounts of explosives. Should we still get Rez for that? Not get any rez? is it justifiable to risk the mission in order to ego cast out and claim rez?

Oh, if it's not there already "Relieve Stress" might be a good downtime activity to list.

Does the stress entry for "Encountering non-sapient alien life" intend to include things like exoplanet trees and whatnot, or is it mainly meant to apply to rabid moon-dogs and such? And are you intended to re-take that stress when re-encountering the same life again later? since it's called 'The Unknown' I would expect that is not the intent, but it's a matter very vulnerable to arguments of pedantry. Likewise, does "witnessing async sleights" apply to slights you yourself are casting?

Regarding Hardening: does anything stop me from, instead of treating it the normal way, just spending 5 rez (or cp) and buying back the lost SAV or WIL the hard way? By that measure, the Upshot of being Hardened is a 3 CP positive trait. Which... I suppose works out about right. I know a player who'll want to take Hardened to Violence and then various... murderhobo-style mental disorders. They like to play... messy, characters.

Platest wrote:
Stress is trickier to heal than physical damage. There are no nano-treatments or quick fix options (other than killing yourself and reverting to a non-stressed backup). The options for recuperating are simply natural healing over time or psychotherapy/
psychosurgery.

Oh yes, because that sounds like a stress-free solution! >.>

A slight smell of ions....

Kojak Kojak's picture
Couple of things I noticed:

Couple of things I noticed:

- Sniper rifles are listed as Fixed. I assume this is in error.
- Shredders are no longer two-handed? Being able to double-fist shredders seems kinda nuts.

Also, I agree with those calling for the SMG to get some distinguishing characteristic that makes it worthwhile.

"I wonder if in some weird Freudian way, Kojak was sucking on his own head."
- Steve Webster on Kojak's lollipop

ubik2 ubik2's picture
Kojak wrote:- Sniper rifles

Kojak wrote:
- Sniper rifles are listed as Fixed. I assume this is in error.

Page 19 has the description for Fixed, which mostly means the sniper rifle should be fired from the prone position.
Vae Dei Vae Dei's picture
Finally remembered what's been bothering me

Is there any scenario when halving armour from a crit is better than doubling your damage? As far as I can tell it's always equal worse.

TheGrue TheGrue's picture
No, you're right;

No, you're right; mathematically, there is no value of armor or damage for which it is more beneficial to halve armor than double damage. In fact, halving the target's armor, unless I'm mistaken, will always result in exactly half of what you'd get by doubling damage.

eg, given a target with 10 armor,

6 base damage does 2 damage doubled, or 1 vs half armor
9 base damage does 8 damage doubled, or 4 vs half armor,
17 base damage does 24 damage doubled, or 12 vs half armor,
50 base damage does 90 damage doubled, or 45 vs half armor,
etc

There is no reason ever to do it instead of doubling damage.

Thermonuclear Banana Split - A not-really-weekly Eclipse Phase campaign journal.

Pages