Totally abusive Innate Attack

Rupert Boleyn wrote:
> tussock wrote:

>> Everyone knows accuracy only lets you cancel range penalties, not
>> help with hitting difficult targets.
>
> That's not the case. Acc adds to your hit chance when you aim.

No one /uses/ that rule though, do they? Popping eyeballs with sniper
rifles at 5 feet is extremely silly.


>> As if range ever matters.
>
> The 1/2D range of an Innate Attack starts at only 10 yards. I think 500
> yards is probably more than one will usually need, but less than 100
> yards is asking for it.

Admittedly, my GURPS campaigns have normally found themselves focused
on hard cover and stealth so much that range over 20 or so is simply a
waste. If you /do/ get caught in the open at long range, you're dead.

Not so much with low-tech games, but there's little ranged power to
be had there for either side.


Perhaps the odd case where players have cover and the enemy doesn't;
but it's not particularly fun, even if you do get to show off your
machinegun.

--
tussock

Zzzzzzzzzz... uh, wha? What the hell? I was sleeping, bugger off.
 >> Stay informed about: Totally abusive Innate Attack 

On Sun, 03 Feb 2008 14:44:47 +1300, tussock wrote:

> Rupert Boleyn wrote:
>> tussock wrote:
>>> Rupert Boleyn wrote:
>
>>>> That's not the case. Acc adds to your hit chance when you aim.
>>>
>>> No one /uses/ that rule though, do they? Popping eyeballs with
>>> sniper rifles at 5 feet is extremely silly.
>>
>> I've never actually met anyone who doesn't, aiming at something 10
>> yards away not making it easier to hit than a snap shot at two yards
>> being extremely silly, and all.
>
> To quote the bit you snipped ...
>
>>>>> Everyone knows accuracy only lets you cancel range penalties,
>>>>> not
>>>>> help with hitting difficult targets.
>
> So yea, what you said. Just no +9 to hit with sniper rifles at *2
> yards*, weapon accuracy shouldn't do that.

But that's the thing - if Acc only counters range penalties aiming at
something 10 yards away can never be easier than shooting unaimed at
something two yards away, and that's not right.

--
Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn.RemoveThis@paradise.net.nz>
 >> Stay informed about: Totally abusive Innate Attack 

tussock <scrub DeleteThis @clear.net.nz> writes:

> Rupert Boleyn wrote:
> > tussock wrote:
>
> >> Everyone knows accuracy only lets you cancel range penalties,
> >> not help with hitting difficult targets.
> >
> > That's not the case. Acc adds to your hit chance when you aim.
>
> No one /uses/ that rule though, do they? Popping eyeballs with
> sniper rifles at 5 feet is extremely silly.

The rule works fine. If the person can set up their weapon so close,
and aim undisturbed for 3+ seconds at the target, why shouldn't they
get the full bonuses provided by the Accuracy rules?

The only thing "extremely silly" in such a situation is that
presumably the rifle wielder would *not* get such an opportunity: the
target would have plenty of time to disturb the aim of the shooter.
That's not a failing of the Accuracy rules.

--
\ "If you get invited to your first orgy, don't just show up |
`\ nude. That's a common mistake. You have to let nudity |
_o__) 'happen.'" —Jack Handey |
Ben Finney
 >> Stay informed about: Totally abusive Innate Attack 

Rupert Boleyn wrote:
> tussock wrote:
>> Rupert Boleyn wrote:

>>> That's not the case. Acc adds to your hit chance when you aim.
>>
>> No one /uses/ that rule though, do they? Popping eyeballs with
>> sniper rifles at 5 feet is extremely silly.
>
> I've never actually met anyone who doesn't, aiming at something 10 yards
> away not making it easier to hit than a snap shot at two yards being
> extremely silly, and all.

To quote the bit you snipped ...

>>>> Everyone knows accuracy only lets you cancel range penalties, not
>>>> help with hitting difficult targets.

So yea, what you said. Just no +9 to hit with sniper rifles at *2
yards*, weapon accuracy shouldn't do that.

--
tussock

Zzzzzzzzzz... uh, wha? What the hell? I was sleeping, bugger off.
 >> Stay informed about: Totally abusive Innate Attack 

Ben Finney wrote:
> tussock <scrub.RemoveThis@clear.net.nz> writes:
>
>> Rupert Boleyn wrote:
>>> tussock wrote:
>>>> Everyone knows accuracy only lets you cancel range penalties,
>>>> not help with hitting difficult targets.
>>> That's not the case. Acc adds to your hit chance when you aim.
>> No one /uses/ that rule though, do they? Popping eyeballs with
>> sniper rifles at 5 feet is extremely silly.
>
> The rule works fine. If the person can set up their weapon so close,
> and aim undisturbed for 3+ seconds at the target, why shouldn't they
> get the full bonuses provided by the Accuracy rules?
>
> The only thing "extremely silly" in such a situation is that
> presumably the rifle wielder would *not* get such an opportunity: the
> target would have plenty of time to disturb the aim of the shooter.
> That's not a failing of the Accuracy rules.
>

I'm having a little difficulty following this discussion. What does the
following not cover?

As GM, to hit a target, I determine the skill with the weapon, apply
aiming bonuses if any, subtract/add distance-motion factor, subtract
lighting/stance/cover penalties, and then roll. For a high power sniper
rifle sighted to be "on target" at 500 yds, there are severe
penalties for attempting a shot at less than 100 yds. Attempting a
"snapshot" is the equivalent of pointing the rifle one-handed and
closing your eyes!

For bursts, the recoil of the weapon itself will cause the 2nd &
following bullets to be "off target" from the aim point, significantly
if the firing platform is not 100% stable. Thus, if the weapon is
sighted for 100 yds, a target at longer range is going to only get the
first bullet of a burst, if that. A target at closer range may get the
first 2-3 rounds, but it is highly likely the 4th & following is off
target -cumulative recoil. (This is why most training is for short
bursts, unless- the object is to provide "suppressive fire" which simply
means your not aiming at anyone in particular, just trying to "keep
their heads down" while other troops are advancing.)

Accuracy bonuses are due to the weight of the weapon making it difficult
to jar readily when mounted on a stable, solid rest and with time to
take careful aiming. If there is 1- no stable solid rest, or 2- no
aiming, the bonus simply does not apply.
(I speak from having many years experience shooting rifles!)

Regards,
Roger
 >> Stay informed about: Totally abusive Innate Attack 

Rupert Boleyn wrote:
> tussock wrote:

>> To quote the bit you snipped ...
>>
>>>>>> Everyone knows accuracy only lets you cancel range penalties,
>>>>>> not help with hitting difficult targets.
>>
>> So yea, what you said. Just no +9 to hit with sniper rifles at *2
>> yards*, weapon accuracy shouldn't do that.
>
> But that's the thing - if Acc only counters range penalties aiming at
> something 10 yards away can never be easier than shooting unaimed at
> something two yards away, and that's not right.

I can see what you mean, I'm just not sure the line you're drawing is
one that fits the rules anyway. The game assumes 'stand and shoot' is
enough aiming to remove any bulk penalty, so you're really comparing a
better than one second aim at 10 yards against part-second aim at 2 yards.

Five seconds in all will help at the longer range, shooting from the
hip as you move will hurt at the shorter range, so the longer /can/ be a
lot easier, by perhaps +8 for a fairly large weapon.

--
tussock

Zzzzzzzzzz... uh, wha? What the hell? I was sleeping, bugger off.
 >> Stay informed about: Totally abusive Innate Attack