Results 1 to 13 of 13

Thread: fixed

  1. #1

    Critical hit table fixed

    fixed the errors
    Attached Images Attached Images
    Last edited by vecna35; 05-25-2004 at 08:24 PM.

  2. #2
    When I first saw this I didn't understand the point... phaser and disruptor weapons are so powerful that you're either stunned or dispersed parrticles after one hit.

    Then I realized that WAS the point. Not having every fight end with the first sucessful hit adds some drama to the game, and having the different effects adds to the story-telling aspect.

    Target on the mover!

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Salinas, Calif., USA (a Chiefs fan in an unholy land)
    Posts
    3,379
    Hmm...I'm not sure what you're looking to accomplish with this, tanksoldier's guess notwithstanding.

    One reason that Trek sidearms are so dangerous is to drive home the point that they should be the last thing you think about using. Trek isn't Space Master. Resorting to phasers is generally considered a failure...even Kirk usually exhausted most of his options before attempting to simply kill someone.

    And when a phaser set to kill was fired, the target was usually just dead. Critical hit tables are simply superfluous.
    Davy Jones

    "Frightened? My dear, you are looking at a man who has laughed in the face of death, sneered at doom, and chuckled at catastrophe! I was petrified."
    -- The Wizard of Oz

  4. #4
    Actually not so sea tyger. let me explain

    If we go by the rules the phaser setting 9 onwards simply implies that the target is vaporized. No rolling required.
    I have seen every trek episode and when we do see people shooting and hitting each other ...they do not vaporize. Furthermore some people actually survive (ie Nog), now I am sure every badguy would walk around with setting 16 making all good guys disappear but this is not canon according to the show. I found a section in the novel Vendetta (which is NOT considered offical but a really nice read) that explains why people are not always being vaporized...basically because there is a delay/recharge before you can fire again. If you want to have a continues fire fight then a much lower/faster recharge rate is needed....but in this case you might kill the target but not necessarily vaporize him.
    Looking at the rules we see that would be setting 4 - 7. You could use setting 8 which does 10d6+36 with a result of vaporized but what if your opponent survives such a role...perhaps only parts of him disappeared. In any case for my game I have added recharge values to simulate a more trek canon feel. Yes you could vaporize your tatics officer like kruge did in Star trek 3 but just don't expect him to immediatly fire again. I am sure when Captain Sisko was defending the transmitter and shooting all the Jem Hadar he would rather vaporize them all rather than having to bury them.
    The critical charts are for people who want to use them....if you don't like don't use. It won't make the game more realistic but it will reward a really good shot/good roll with some minor description. I believe LibraII done by IKI here on the boards has a critical hit system of his own based of the players option books from 2nd edition. I just figured I would provide my own : )

    PS if you would like to know what recharge rates I use in my game let me know.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Location
    Baltimore, MD
    Posts
    1,331
    I use a more abstract system than this. Basically, if the damage is severe enough and I decide a lingering injury serves the needs of the story, I assign one (don't tell my players). I feel this is reasonable since I also assign critical hits to the opponent characters.

    Critical hits are useful for improving the simulation of reality: people don't use deadly force without consequence. However, ask yourself: how many players want to play maimed characters? Because if you let the players use this system, you have to let their opponents do so, too. And while it's true that Federation medicine can fix almost anything on this chart that isn't immediately lethal, it's still the case that the character is forever injured. Whether or not a player can handle that depends on the player, and should be (IMO) a story element, not something determined by chance.

    As far as the effects of being hit: the system already covers this with general penalties to actions -- which in some ways is more realistic. If you take a shot to the hand in this system, your hand is injured and less useful -- but your other hand, and your feet, are okay. This isn't quite realistic, because the body reacts to gross trauma by going into shock (unless treated); shock is a systemic response that limits the ability to perform *any* function (it has certain benefits, too, such as conservation of blood flow to vital organs).

    But this table is useful as a reference point, because some of the descriptions are classic!

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Salinas, Calif., USA (a Chiefs fan in an unholy land)
    Posts
    3,379
    Originally posted by vecna35

    I have seen every trek episode and when we do see people shooting and hitting each other ...they do not vaporize.
    This statement right here tells me you haven't seen every Trek episode.

    Fesarius is right; lingering injuries should be a roleplaying aspect that is mutually decided between the player and the narrator, not by dice.
    Davy Jones

    "Frightened? My dear, you are looking at a man who has laughed in the face of death, sneered at doom, and chuckled at catastrophe! I was petrified."
    -- The Wizard of Oz

  7. #7
    Originally posted by Sea Tyger
    This statement right here tells me you haven't seen every Trek episode.

    Fesarius is right; lingering injuries should be a roleplaying aspect that is mutually decided between the player and the narrator, not by dice.
    Okay there were some episodes were they did decide to change the phaser setting from kill to vaporize but never have they vaporized someone then immediately fired again with a lesser setting, if so tell me the episode. However my point Still remains true that in a fire fight people are not all vanishing.

    As for Fesarius, this area falls under the narrator and how he wants to use the rules. Your way is just another style of play but some games, the players might want to have this type of complexity. In my game all injuries can be treated once in sick bay with 95% recovery where it does not come back to haunt the PC. Even if it did they have told me they welcome such a roleplaying experience.
    So its really about what your roleplaying group wants.

    Many systems have critical hits with results dictated by dice rolls but as a Narrator you can either use them or just make it a result of your own choosing, its your world.
    Last edited by vecna35; 05-27-2004 at 09:57 AM.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Salinas, Calif., USA (a Chiefs fan in an unholy land)
    Posts
    3,379
    Originally posted by vecna35
    Many systems have critical hits with results dictated by dice rolls but as a Narrator you can either use them or just make it a result of your own choosing, its your world.
    Sure, there are systems that use critical hits, but it's still not keeping with the Trek genre. As I've said before, Trek isn't about massive gunfights (massive brawls? maybe ), and I feel that a critical hit table (especially one as extensive as yours) has no real place in a Star Trek setting.
    Davy Jones

    "Frightened? My dear, you are looking at a man who has laughed in the face of death, sneered at doom, and chuckled at catastrophe! I was petrified."
    -- The Wizard of Oz

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Newcastle, England
    Posts
    3,462
    Just to play devils advocate here....

    Startrek should be an adventure which focuses on the storytellign aspect of it rather than just rules I agree.. but the point about a critical hits table is if nothing else it gives the GM ideas if he decides to effect a player character with such a wound - and moreso it's not about just letting your fate be at the hands of the dice it's about giving youa chance of surviving something you shouldn't have!

    Seatyger, I find your statement curious (not that i am saying wrong!) because while working with the players helps to ensure they get as much out of the game and help you shape a good game - there SHOULD be penalties - without risks or danger there is no fear. The point is it would happen to both sides, and it is cinematic. Quite often we see characters NOT fall when they are hit on high beams - point in case all unshielded borg almost never disintergrate - they just fall over - that is when their shielding is NOT protecting them (and the team desperatelly rifles throug their settings to maximum) - nog is a good example - in the game rules a Dominion weapon should automatically kill and vapourise someone - it didn't - hence there is a tradeoff with story flow and 'game mechanics'.

    Personally I like the idea of wounds which cannot be treated. Allot of them can be cured miraculously, but allot cannot: Geordies eyes cannot be regrown; Picards heart is metal not flesh; Nog has a peg leg... etc... these are things for which the medical science of the era had a 'cure' for but that cure comes with a cost. Geordie could see better than anyone on the ship yet he could not 'see' like us - and how many times did people use that visor to do nasty things to him! Picards life was put in danger because he had a mechanical heart - something that would not have normally wounded someone hurt him in an unpredictable way.

    If given a choice between retiring their favourite character or bringing him back (maybe from beyond dead!) but with a life affecting wound (with a corresponding technological cure) helps to make the point about risk. Bottom line is they are likelly to be more careful unless they want to repeat the same mistakes!

    At the end of the day it's about choice. A similar thing happened in a non startrek game i played. Player death shouldn't be about 'a roll on the dice' but you take away the risk if you simply say *do-over*. Sure if they walk blindly into a bad situation and paint a bulseye on their chest, then it's their own conscionable fault but if they die for pointless reasons, such as an unlucky dice roll, then I think it's only fair to give them a choice. That choice needs to have consequences of course, nothing should be free or all you are doing is again removing risk.
    Ta Muchly

  10. #10
    Originally posted by Sea Tyger
    Sure, there are systems that use critical hits, but it's still not keeping with the Trek genre. As I've said before, Trek isn't about massive gunfights (massive brawls? maybe ), and I feel that a critical hit table (especially one as extensive as yours) has no real place in a Star Trek setting.
    Like I said before some people like the idea some people don't want critical hit tables. Actually IKI also developed an interesting table as well as some one else whos name I can't recall, developed a new called shot table even though the game has one (sort of)

    A hit to Nogs leg giving him a peg leg in the end was where I was going with this table. Something of a DS9 gritty flavor so the bashier character has some flavor text to consult. However it would not be the flavor of TNG game or maybe even voyager. Use a table or don't use one, its how you percieve your trek campaign to be.

  11. #11
    Originally posted by tanksoldier
    When I first saw this I didn't understand the point... phaser and disruptor weapons are so powerful that you're either stunned or dispersed parrticles after one hit.

    Then I realized that WAS the point. Not having every fight end with the first sucessful hit adds some drama to the game, and having the different effects adds to the story-telling aspect.
    Bingo!

    I only let my players fire heavy thermal, any other setting has a recharge rate of 1 or more rounds. IE firing light disrupt has a 1 round delay where you have to wait. Medium disrupt is even more of a recharge delay. Thus enter the critical hit charts.

    Since my last point I have noticed some errors.

    1.The penalty where it says you can't dodge should also state you can't parry either.

    2. The penalty of which you can't attack SHOULD ALSO INCLUDE YOU CAN'T PERFORM A MOVE ACTION.

    3. All TN penalties listed on the sheet is toward the staminia check ONLY. (we don't need any more penalties as they are reflected in the wound level.)

    some other member invented a table that expanded the injury table and since that time I have used it with great success.
    Last edited by vecna35; 07-29-2004 at 12:23 PM.

  12. #12

    here

    here are the wounds
    Attached Images Attached Images
    Last edited by vecna35; 07-29-2004 at 11:15 PM.

  13. #13
    I also have a medical rules to fix the criticals if anyone cares.

    If enough interest exist I will then post it from my SOM2 book I created.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •