Forums of the Megaverse®

I'm reading about the range of energy weapons and spells and psionics powers.

Fellow GM's and players.

Do you just ignore range in battles?

It only seems like a factor when planning a battle like when the players are trying to ambush or defend a location. A strategist will think through their targets abilities to defend themselves or what they will attack you with. If they are smart they will choose where the battle will take place. Well planned, they might attack by surprise (6th sense?) from multiple angles leaving their target without cover, and / or outside the range of their targets range of attack.

In almost all cases, the CS (or such) have better range when it comes to energy rifles compared with the range of spells and psionic powers.

However, that only applies when they can know to attack and can "see" their target or at least know where to shoot. Which only goes when they have unobstructed views like in long flat open spaces.

I don't know the landscape of Rifts Earth. I could just say it is what I say it is and that would be one way of handling it but in universe is the land just a reflection of the US states today. Like Nebraska is really flat.

While Greece is NOT flat. Lots of trees and hills that offer cover from sight if not from damage by energy weapon fire.

The real problem for attacker or defender is can they "see" their target(s). If they can't they are firing blind. That could be good if one can trick CS grunts ior bandits into spending all their E-clips.

Any surprise attacks can be detected with Sixth Sense. Which if I were a CS captain I'd assign a Dog Boy or CS miltary personal with it to every camp, mission and patrol off base. Same if I was the commander of a merc company or platoon of spell casters. Just like any base or camp I'd set up I'd cut down everything within 300 feet just so I could see them coming.

It comes down to 3 situations:

1. Going from A to B: so Adventurers are making a delivery or are attacking one.

2. Heroes are attacking or defending a location

3. They are out patrolling or exploring or hunting and they hear, smell, sense (Dog Boy, etc), or see the "other."

Depending on the one's awareness they may not know whether or not they are "Friendly" or "Hostile"

I read that book, "Extreme Ownership" by the retired Navy Seal Jocko and he mentioned that "Blue on Blue as he called it happens more often than you think. Guys shooting allies or members of their own company because they didn't know who they were just that they saw someone (silhouette or whatever) with a rifle who wasn't "supposed" to be "there" but they got lost or were wondering or wanted to check something out or answering the "call of nature."
So they unexpected unidentified person did not immediately id themselves (because - surprise, panic, etc), hands up and drop to their knees. Instead they ran or assumed an aggressive fighting position readying their rifle and got shot at or shot first or they both shot at the other. At least, when it comes to #3

Gee, after I wrote all of that I feel like dropping all range limits and just making it eyes and ears.

darthauthor wrote:Do you just ignore range in battles?

In my games, range matters very little but I keep the following in mind...

* All members of a modern unit should have transponders that limit Blue on Blue with the location of friendly forces displayed on the HUD or capable of being pinged. Otherwise, they rely on less reliable ways of identification.

* If a cyborg, BA/PA, or robot vehicle has a combat computer installed, the first hit might be analyzed to indicate the direction/elevation of attack. However, range is still usually determined by sight. Without this, it can be very difficult for a shooter to be located at range, especially if they remember to turn off the "Pew Pew" sound effects button on their weapon and move after each shot.

* Always take elevation into consideration when trying to judge whether range matters in a given scenario. Angles matter when dealing with energy weapons.

* If the shooter isn't located, but the direction is known or guessed, defenders are relegated to wild shots. Blind shots are only if obstructed by thick smoke, pea soup fog, darkness, blindness, etc. As a GM, I deem any random shots in the wrong direction an automatic miss (which happens more often than you'd think, especially if targets are surprised/panicked)… it just makes common sense.

* In urban areas, effective range is limited to line of sight or fancy tricks by sharpshooters since the average joe isn't usually aiming for an opponent three blocks over. Unaugmented urban combat rarely exceeds 300ft. Range may come into play with regard to collateral damage. Likely shorter range weapons are preferred by combatants.

* In rural or wilderness settings, range is limited by the terrain and any obstructions, like trees. Collateral damage is less of a concern, unless near a village or regularly used area (i.e. a well-travelled road). Longer range weapons would likely be the norm.

* Telescopic sight or optics that take advantage of range can be a game-changer in open spaces (particularly since may psi or magic sense abilities don't extend as far as the range of energy weapons), but impacts the shooter's ability to monitor beyond their restricted field of view, so flanking can be effective against a lone shooter. A spotter or operating in a team of shooters improves overall team defense when attacking a target at range.

* Range matters when determining how quickly a person can close the distance between them and their target/attacker. If focused on moving fast without firing to limit wasted ammo (blind or wild shots), the range is important to know as it might give a PC pause if they realize that they will be peppered into swiss cheese by a sniper before they get to the end of the street. Skilled armorers and weaponsmiths might be able to tell what they are facing by the type of energy discharge and thereby gauge likely range by weapon type.

Cutting down trees out to 300ft is meaningless as shooters will just be 310ft away. You'd have to cut everything down out to a mile in case they have a mini missile launcher or rail gun. This makes even less sense if you are a mobile unit making camp in a new location every day. It's better to throw up barriers, lay out sensors, deploy automated defense systems, and have aerial surveillance of the surrounding area across multiple spectra (IR, UV, TW-powered Sensing spells, etc.).

When it comes to psionics, magic, or natural abilities, range can be significantly shorter and less effective in open fields or flat plains. This means combat using these powers will likely lead to combatants being in closer proximity, making range a non-issue. Even the use of Sixth Sense can be limited in a combat setting due to range (in the case of a surprise attack, the attacker or a targeted friend or family member must be within 90ft) and it doesn't even mean a surprise attack is imminent. It could mean a heart attack, brain aneurism, or other immediately deadly health issue. It could also mean someone will trip on a log and break their neck. It could mean someone will inadvertently discharge their weapon killing their comrade. It could mean the Sarge is about to choke on the apple he just picked off the tree. Perhaps the very triggering of the Sixth Sense is what causes the event that kills the psychic or their loved one. As a player, I hate paradoxes.

Thanks for the information Grazzik,

When it comes to:

Cutting down trees out to 300ft is meaningless as shooters will just be 310ft away. You'd have to cut everything down out to a mile in case they have a mini missile launcher or rail gun. This makes even less sense if you are a mobile unit making camp in a new location every day. It's better to throw up barriers, lay out sensors, deploy automated defense systems, and have aerial surveillance of the surrounding area across multiple spectra (IR, UV, TW-powered Sensing spells, etc.).

I meant, IF I was CS and had Lore: Magic and studied the CS tactical reports on spell casters and their limitations. 300 feet seem more than enough distance to stay out of the range of spell casters.

I figured as a GM, enemy camps should be intelligently located. Likewise, bandit attacks on supply runs should choose their ambush location where they have the most cover while the transport has the least and is least likely to be see its attackers or get away.

That leaves team A and team B "encountering" each other in terrain of boulders, six feet plus high wilderness vegitation, mounds, etc. as being obstacles to line of sight and shot. Feels like a quickdraw situation with the first draw going to the best range sense of hearing or psychic senses (SCORE one for the crazy, bionic amplified hearing, and Dog Boys).

darthauthor wrote:I meant, IF I was CS and had Lore: Magic and studied the CS tactical reports on spell casters and their limitations. 300 feet seem more than enough distance to stay out of the range of spell casters.

Right, gotcha . Though I'd still say for mobile units or temporary camps, it's a lot of effort.

darthauthor wrote:That leaves team A and team B "encountering" each other in terrain of boulders, six feet plus high wilderness vegitation, mounds, etc. as being obstacles to line of sight and shot. Feels like a quickdraw situation with the first draw going to the best range sense of hearing or psychic senses (SCORE one for the crazy, bionic amplified hearing, and Dog Boys).

I let the scenario dictate how to play out an ambush. Sometimes, I simply do a opposing roll between ambush skills (camouflage, blending, military tactics, etc.) and ambush detection skills. A more complicated approach is to roll to see if the ambushers fail to prepare the ambush well. If they fail, THEN the targets roll to detect the flaw. Either way, range / terrain / elevation may factor in as a bonus. Quickdraws are reserved for when both teams are truly surprised (which might happen in your scenario above), but usually one team notices the other first for one reason or another, sets up a rapid ambush, and if they roll well then I grant the ambushers a shot or two before initiating combat as normal. Maybe even do a HF or ME roll for the targets to see how they react. I might even do a ME roll for the ambushers if contact is extreme short range and they need to keep from an overabundance of enthusiasm.

I would also add to Grazzik's post that the lines of sight is why, in urban situations, your snipers are going to be situated as high as possible, with as unobstructed a view as possible. so that they have fewer LOS restrictions to deal with. Of course...that also means that the enemy can guess where the snipers will locate themselves (& especially someone with the sniper skill should be able to take all of the factors into consideration for where sniper perches will be located: range, LOS, ease of escape, alternate shooting locations, etc.).

1st.

Do I have a fair assessment of encounters before firing off spells or shots?

1. Attack or defending a position.

2. Two take position in the boxing ring, martial arts dojo, fensing/pistol dual .

3. Attack or defense of a moving position. Like an attack/hyjack of a person or party scouting/exploring/making delivery/on way to attack or defend.

#3 is a typical Jame Bond 007 movie or Fast and Furious film or road warrior or the A-Team or Avengers Infinity War or Spider-Man or John Wick 1-3. They all have chase scenes and fights that move between scenes. Why? Because the writers and directors, after enough Rocky movies and Dragon Ball Z tournments, that contained fights got kind of boring.

Fictions can fail in so many ways but the worst is to be BORING! Taking turns rolling to take turns, to strike, parry, damage without any flair, being over with too quickly, or chance of high speed flamboyant get aways is boring.

Excitment is its own reward and the reason we turn to fantasy.