Re: [SG] Discussion about weekend questions - Vehicle HW's

On Thu, 18 Jul 2002 02:14:43 -0400, Adrian Johnson
<adrian.johnson@sympatico.ca> wrote:

>Create a new type of action, specific to vehicles: the "Move and Fire"
action.

Sounds good...

>Allow vehicles to move and fire in the same action.  You could draw a
line
>of sight and measure range from any point in the vehicle's movement,
but
>the FC die of the vehicle is shifted DOWN one type.  Possibly the range
>band of the target is shifted UP one type, also.  

I would probably shift the quality die instead of the FC die _or_
increase the
range band. Since I already shift the range band up one in my Overwatch
rules,
it seems to make sense in this case to increase the range band for
moving
vehicles. Seems to be a similar rationale (something moving).

>Possibly you say that the vehicle in this
>case can't do a combat move, and is limited to the regular movement. 
Why?
>Because a combat move is to jerky? (one could argue this point away on
the
>basis of PSB, but it's another possible limitation on the action).

Chris points out that in most cases there's no reason to do a combat
move. The
average isn't really worth it. I've decided to give a combat move a die
shift
up on the range band if attacked while moving. I would do the same die
shift
up for doing a combat move while firing (which would give the range band
two
die shifts up for vehicles).

>This action also wouldn't be allowed for vehicle weapons that are NOT
>controlled with the vehicle FC, such as a pintel mounted LMG.	Why? 
They
>aren't stabilized.

Okay, I can accept that!

Allan Goodall		       agoodall@hyperbear.com
http://www.hyperbear.com

"At long last, the earthy soil of the typical, 
unimaginable mortician was revealed!" 
 - from the Random H.P. Lovecraft Story Generator: