Re: [FateRPG] Re: Implementing Fight advantage over Shoot when covering someone in the same zone
- You could go for Shooting always against a static defense value (Mediocre, Average, or Fair - depending on your dials and what you want to emulate). Then if someone wanted protection they'd have to go for cover, zig-zagging, getting in the shooter's face, etc. by Creating an Advantage that could then be used to increase the static defense. To paraphrase Savage Worlds: When the lead starts flying, smart heroes dive for cover.On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 9:13 AM, HMT <howardmthompson@...> wrote:
Why not make "engaged when in melee" or something like that a campaign aspect?
| Fate * http://www.faterpg.com/
| DFRPG * http://www.dresdenfilesrpg.com/
| Evil Hat * http://www.evilhat.com/| Evil Hat Fan Wiki * http://evilhat.wikidot.com/Yahoo! Groups Links<*> Your email settings:
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
Individual Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
- I've been trying tackle a similar problem in my Fate 40k conversion. One of the setting conceits is the range / melee dynamic, and in particular, bringing a gun to a knife fight can be a bad idea. The basic idea follows:
When a character attacks someone with a melee attack, this forces the defender to choose between retaliating or disengaging. Retaliating causes the attack to resolve as a contest of skills, with shifts as damage; this also consumes the defender's action. Disengaging allows the defender to roll another skill for defense, but consumes the defender's supplemental action (almost equivalent to a -1 penalty on their main action).