BRP Vehicle rule

[carnifex]

Hi there!

I has worked out a BRP vehicule building rule. It was largely inspired (copied) after the Hero and Fuzion system. I writed it in french for the TOC web site and i has included numerous vehicule from the roaring 20

(cars, planes, tanks, etc, etc). The only thing i was insatisfied in this rule is the fact my player will be able to put out of commission a Ford model A with a burst of a thompson. The G-men of this era have to use a Browning monitor (automatic rifle caliber 30-06) or a shotgun caliber 10 with slug to have a reasonnable chance of doing-it.

I want to know if other player have also worked on a brp vehicule and what was the strong and feeble pount of their rule.

:thumb:

[Atgxtg]

I'd like to see your rules. THey might be just the thing we've been looking for.

BTW,

What did you use for AP/Hull Quality for your vehicles? Rasing that migth solve the problem, although BRP does have .45s doing way to much damage in reation to 30-06s and other big guns.

[Nightshade]

BTW,

What did you use for AP/Hull Quality for your vehicles? Rasing that migth solve the problem, although BRP does have .45s doing way to much damage in reation to 30-06s and other big guns.

The problem is that you don't have a lot of spread to work with, and lack of hit locations acerbates the issue. If you make the handguns too weak, they can't kill people; if you make the rifles too strong, they kill too reliably.

[Atgxtg]

The problem is that you don't have a lot of spread to work with, and lack of hit locations acerbates the issue. If you make the handguns too weak, they can't kill people; if you make the rifles too strong, they kill too reliably.

One reason why I liked a bleeding rules, major wounds, critical's hits & impales.

The thing I don't like about the CoC chart is that there is too much spread between the handguns, and not that much between the high powered pistols, rifles and heavy weapons.

For instance the difference between a .30-06 and a +45 ACP is actually much more significant that the difference between the .45ACP and a .32ACP, but in the game the difference is about the same.

Go back to 1st edtion CoC damages with the .45 down to the D8 level and it solves most of the problems.

Another idea would be to say the firearms can't impale vehicles and other objects. That would make AP much more useful.

Or maybe change the impale effect to double damage that gets past the target's AP. That would make a lot of sense. If a round can't penetrate a certain level of ballistic vest it shouldn't do so 20% of the time due to an impale.

[Nightshade]

One reason why I liked a bleeding rules, major wounds, critical's hits & impales.

Those help, but they still only give you so much range to work with.

The thing I don't like about the CoC chart is that there is too much spread between the handguns, and not that much between the high powered pistols, rifles and heavy weapons.

For instance the difference between a .30-06 and a +45 ACP is actually much more significant that the difference between the .45ACP and a .32ACP, but in the game the difference is about the same.

That's probably an issue of them deciding what you'd see in play more often.

Go back to 1st edtion CoC damages with the .45 down to the D8 level and it solves most of the problems.

Another idea would be to say the firearms can't impale vehicles and other objects. That would make AP much more useful.

Most likely it should work that way anyway.

Or maybe change the impale effect to double damage that gets past the target's AP. That would make a lot of sense. If a round can't penetrate a certain level of ballistic vest it shouldn't do so 20% of the time due to an impale.

Not sure I agree; impaling is in some respects a reflection of an attack that hits dead on rather than slightly at an angle, and those _do_ tend to penetrate better.

[Atgxtg]

Not sure I agree; impaling is in some respects a reflection of an attack that hits dead on rather than slightly at an angle, and those _do_ tend to penetrate better.

It has to do with ballistics. Certain Class rated vests will stop certain slugs. With BRP, since the impale effect is double damage, then it results in a shot being able to penetrate twice the AP protection. This means than a 45 bullet that impales (2d10+4) penetrates better than a 30.06 (2d6+4). That's messed up. Likewise a .32 caliber bullet that implales has the penetrating power of a M16!

Since the spread is so large, the problem gets more pronounced with vehicles.

If the benefit is to represent the attacks ability to damage a person, then ballistic armor should come off first.

As a side note, this would be one way to distinguish between archaic armors and modern ones. That way a 5 point ballistic vest could stop a bullet better than might stop a bullet better than a 7 point shirt of maille.

[Nightshade]

It has to do with ballistics. Certain Class rated vests will stop certain slugs. With BRP, since the impale effect is double damage, then it results in a shot being able to penetrate twice the AP protection. This means than a 45 bullet that impales (2d10+4) penetrates better than a 30.06 (2d6+4). That's messed up. Likewise a .32 caliber bullet that implales has the penetrating power of a M16!

If you're not literal minded about it, that just means the impaling shot will transfer some energy in, not that it literally penetrates. Given some of that almost always happens (which is why bruising and cracked ribs frequently result at close ranges) I don't see that as a big problem.

As a side note, this would be one way to distinguish between archaic armors and modern ones. That way a 5 point ballistic vest could stop a bullet better than might stop a bullet better than a 7 point shirt of maille.

Well, often its the opposite; ballistic armor (especially without plates) should be really _poor_ at stopping most non-ballistic attacks.

Really, part of the problem is that damage values to living things aren't quite the same as to inanimate objects, and "structured" objects (those with working bits) are somewhere inbetween.

[Atgxtg]

If you're not literal minded about it, that just means the impaling shot will transfer some energy in, not that it literally penetrates. Given some of that almost always happens (which is why bruising and cracked ribs frequently result at close ranges) I don't see that as a big problem.

THe problem is that it is trannsfering too much energy. The major advantage of ballasitc armor is that it spread out the enrgy over a wider area, resulting in much less serious injury. If the armor doesn"t get penetrated, the victim isn't going to die. Sure, there will be some brusing, and in exterme cases a cracked rib or two, but as long as the armor isn't penetrated, not much is getting through, perhaps a D4.

Well, often its the opposite; ballistic armor (especially without plates) should be really _poor_ at stopping most non-ballistic attacks.

True. I was thinking in terms of firearms. The reverse could hold true for other types of attack.

Really, part of the problem is that damage values to living things aren't quite the same as to inanimate objects, and "structured" objects (those with working bits) are somewhere inbetween.

Yup. Addtionally, "damage value" has two other problems.

First, it reflect both penetrating power and disruption of tissue. So something that can punch through armor also does a lot of structural damage (something that isn't always true).

Secondly, is that with the way hit point work, damage is handle by attrition, where more realistically it is more a factor of just what part/organ was fdamaged rather than a running total.

For instance, you can shoot right through most cars with a 30-06 and the only effect the damage will have is against the vehicles resale value, waterproofing, and wind resistance. Start shooting through the engine block and one or two hits will cause any vehicle to eventually stop working.

That's hard to reflect with BRP. Maybe a Luck roll could be one option. If the driver makes the Luck roll, then damage is only cosmetic? TO reflect the effect of overkill, we could alter the LUCK roll by how much damage the attack inflicts. So something that does more damage that the vehicles HP in one attack might roll against POWx3% or just half the LUCK roll.

[Nightshade]

THe problem is that it is trannsfering too much energy. The major advantage of ballasitc armor is that it spread out the enrgy over a wider area, resulting in much less serious injury. If the armor doesn"t get penetrated, the victim isn't going to die. Sure, there will be some brusing, and in exterme cases a cracked rib or two, but as long as the armor isn't penetrated, not much is getting through, perhaps a D4.

I think the degree of damage from a broken rib is probably greater than a D4 represents. If you've got a vest that _genuinely_ will stop the top output of a non-impaling handgun, the impaling one isn't liable to get much through either.

Example: Let's say you've got ballistic armor that stop 9 points, the max damage for a D8+1 handgun. If the weapon impales, it does 2d8+2--but it also gets a much flatter output because of the two die curve. Sure, under occasional results you can get as much as 18 points, but that's one in 64 results for something that only occurs one in 5 hits. Given the necessary coarseness of damage, that doesn't seem unreasonable to me (and I'd be very suprised if it doesn't mirror occasional top end results under those circumstances). The _average_ result will be about two points of damage, which easily lands in the "heavy bruising" category to me.

Yup. Addtionally, "damage value" has two other problems.

First, it reflect both penetrating power and disruption of tissue. So something that can punch through armor also does a lot of structural damage (something that isn't always true).

Yup. An interesting tact was taken if a fairly obscure old game called Space Quest was to have a die roll representing penetration and a damage multiplier you used on the penetrating points to get damage. It allowed you to easily distinguish between high penetration/low damage weapons and the inverse. Its downside was it did require multiplication in every damage result, and it only worked with a system that used a fairly large numerical value for damage tracking.

Secondly, is that with the way hit point work, damage is handle by attrition, where more realistically it is more a factor of just what part/organ was fdamaged rather than a running total.

Yeah, hit point models (other than to some degree covering blood loss) aren't a great model for injury; they're just simple.

For instance, you can shoot right through most cars with a 30-06 and the only effect the damage will have is against the vehicles resale value, waterproofing, and wind resistance. Start shooting through the engine block and one or two hits will cause any vehicle to eventually stop working.

Of course part of that is that a large amount of most vehicle space is, in the end, little more than a box to hold things.

That's hard to reflect with BRP. Maybe a Luck roll could be one option. If the driver makes the Luck roll, then damage is only cosmetic? TO reflect the effect of overkill, we could alter the LUCK roll by how much damage the attack inflicts. So something that does more damage that the vehicles HP in one attack might roll against POWx3% or just half the LUCK roll.

Well, being me, I'd be prone to just going back to hit location, but I realize that's not a direction most people want to go to.

[Atgxtg]

I think the degree of damage from a broken rib is probably greater than a D4 represents. If you've got a vest that _genuinely_ will stop the top output of a non-impaling handgun, the impaling one isn't liable to get much through either.

Example: Let's say you've got ballistic armor that stop 9 points, the max damage for a D8+1 handgun. If the weapon impales, it does 2d8+2--but it also gets a much flatter output because of the two die curve. Sure, under occasional results you can get as much as 18 points, but that's one in 64 results for something that only occurs one in 5 hits. Given the necessary coarseness of damage, that doesn't seem unreasonable to me (and I'd be very suprised if it doesn't mirror occasional top end results under those circumstances). The _average_ result will be about two points of damage, which easily lands in the "heavy bruising" category to me.

The problem is that with the impale rules the chances of doing 4, 5, 6 or 9 points through that armor are much higher than in real life.

Also, with CoC's new damage table, weapons like the ,.45ACP become penetrators, when in fact they are among the least effective against body armor.

Yup. An interesting tact was taken if a fairly obscure old game called Space Quest was to have a die roll representing penetration and a damage multiplier you used on the penetrating points to get damage. It allowed you to easily distinguish between high penetration/low damage weapons and the inverse. Its downside was it did require multiplication in every damage result, and it only worked with a system that used a fairly large numerical value for damage tracking.

Interesting, but not vialbe for BRP. What could work would be something like giving weapons a PEN rating that is used to bypass armor. Heavy hitting weapon could get a condtinal damage mod that only applies to damage that get's through the armor, and only up to the amount that gets through.

FOr excample, a 9mm Parabelleuum could be 1D8, PEN +2, while a .45 could be 1D8, DAM +4. Against an unarmored person the .45 would get to add up to 4 [points extra damage (for damage rolls of 4 or greater), but against an armored foe the 9mm might be more effective.

Of course part of that is that a large amount of most vehicle space is, in the end, little more than a box to hold things.

Yup. Probably 85% of most vehicles is filled up with air.

Well, being me, I'd be prone to just going back to hit location, but I realize that's not a direction most people want to go to.

That wirks for me. Is there a hit location table for vehicles in BRP? If not, CORPS has a nice one worth swiping (it's d10, but double the ranges and voila, it works for BRP), and handles things in a manner that is compatible with BRP. You can hit the engine, controls, passengers, wheels, or even empty space.

[Nightshade]

The problem is that with the impale rules the chances of doing 4, 5, 6 or 9 points through that armor are much higher than in real life.

I have two responses to that:

1. We don't really know the likelyhood of that occuring in real life, because what damage points really mean in practice is vague.

2. My own opinion is that almost any game system simple to use is going to, in some circumstances, either understate or overstate damage.

Also, with CoC's new damage table, weapons like the ,.45ACP become penetrators, when in fact they are among the least effective against body armor.

Well, that's an issue with those specific numbers, which I'll not defend, having not even seen them.

Interesting, but not vialbe for BRP. What could work would be something like giving weapons a PEN rating that is used to bypass armor. Heavy hitting weapon could get a condtinal damage mod that only applies to damage that get's through the armor, and only up to the amount that gets through.

You can do a limited form of it, making AP weapons higher base value but divided in half after armor, and things like fragmenting ammo the inverse.

Yup. Probably 85% of most vehicles is filled up with air.

The only exceptions might be things like fighter aircraft which are rather tight for space.

That wirks for me. Is there a hit location table for vehicles in BRP? If not, CORPS has a nice one worth swiping (it's d10, but double the ranges and voila, it works for BRP), and handles things in a manner that is compatible with BRP. You can hit the engine, controls, passengers, wheels, or even empty space.

That'd be my own preference; then you can assign them damage points per location and base effects on the preportion of that. It'd be a bit of generic work, but it ought to produce at least a tolerable result.

[Atgxtg]

I have two responses to that:

1. We don't really know the likelyhood of that occuring in real life, because what damage points really mean in practice is vague.

2. My own opinion is that almost any game system simple to use is going to, in some circumstances, either understate or overstate damage.

1) Oh come on, by that reasoning we can't come to any sort of conclusions or, indeed, any use for damage points. What damage points really mean isn't vague. It is a measure of how much punishment something (or someone) can take before ceasing to function and or dying.

By your argument, how can we assign damage rating to weapons, or AP to armor? Really.

The whole point of 'damage" ratings is that they reflect a relative ability of weapons to inflict injury.

The problem with the impale rule is that it doubles not only the ability of a weapon to inflict a more serious injury, but to bypass defenses as well. In the real world, a certain thickness of materal will stop a bullet. WIth the impale rule, 1 in 5 hits will have about twice the penetrating power in terms of damage points.

In game terms that means that pistol fire can penetrate APCs, as the damage scale is compresssed enough that the doubling for impale is greater than the difference by round.

For instance, an implaling .45 round at 2d10+4,about the same as an elephant gun! (3D6+4).

What we do know in real life is that certain armors will protect against certain rounds (barring defects, hitting a uncovered area, and the other uncontrolled factors that help account for cortical hits). A .32 is not going to get through a Class II vest. Nor will emptying the clip into a foe wearing such a vest inflict enough blunt trauma to kill them. With the implae rules, you got a good chance of killing the guy.

That's why armor first makes sense.

2. Perhaps. But by how much? The 5th edition CoC firearm values are poor numbers. Chasoium has used different values in the past, and they did a better job.

Well, that's an issue with those specific numbers, which I'll not defend, having not even seen them.

Well, you've been defending them so far. Those numbers are the cause of most of the problems too. They compress the damage scale greatly in favor of the .45ACP. Different damages and many of the problems go away.

Toss hit locations into the equation and many more problems disappear, too. With hit locations a single shot from any way has a chance to incapacitate a foe.

You can do a limited form of it, making AP weapons higher base value but divided in half after armor, and things like fragmenting ammo the inverse.

Yup. Several RPGs do that. With BRP I thing a straight halving/doubling mechanic might be too severe (most games with halving/doubling don't have a fixed HP system). But something along those lines would help.

The only exceptions might be things like fighter aircraft which are rather tight for space.

And, lots of fuel....:eek:

That'd be my own preference; then you can assign them damage points per location and base effects on the proportion of that. It'd be a bit of generic work, but it ought to produce at least a tolerable result.

Probably mine too. Like I wrote earlier, CORPS has hit locations for vehicles and a damage system that can be equated toBRP fairly easily. Use Timelords/CORPS based damage rating would fix a lot of the CoC problems, too, or at least reduce them.

[Nightshade]

1) Oh come on, by that reasoning we can't come to any sort of conclusions or, indeed, any use for damage points. What damage points really mean isn't vague. It is a measure of how much punishment something (or someone) can take before ceasing to function and or dying.

By your argument, how can we assign damage rating to weapons, or AP to armor? Really.

Honestly, I do think such things are by their nature somewhat arbitrary. Certainly, fiddling over fine details strikes me as normally operating past the limits of knowledge in most cases. People can't even consistently agree what firearms are "better"; how are you going to argue whether the distinction if important enough to represent in a game system?

The whole point of 'damage" ratings is that they reflect a relative ability of weapons to inflict injury.

Yes, but what do those differences _mean_ in the game system? How important is the precision? How distinct are they really in real life? I think all these are less clearcut than I suspect you do.

The problem with the impale rule is that it doubles not only the ability of a weapon to inflict a more serious injury, but to bypass defenses as well. In the real world, a certain thickness of materal will stop a bullet. WIth the impale rule, 1 in 5 hits will have about twice the penetrating power in terms of damage points.

But armor _doesn't_ just represent thickness of material. If that was the only criteria, most armor would be overstated or understated. Just like weapon damages its factoring in a lot of issues about how armor works (consider the fact the system makes no real distinction between flexible and inflexible armor, or have any way to deal with armor with true dead space in it); with rigid armors, things like sloping matter, too; a slightly arched plate is more likely to cause something to slide off in part than one that is flat, and much more than one with concave spots. This is more important with vehicular armors than personal ones, but its relevant with all armor by its nature. So how well a round that has focal point hits can be incredibly important for penetration with real armors.

Arguably, armor expected to be proofed against real bullets should be set slightly _higher_ than their expected maximum prior to impale, but I still think you're understimating the real harm kinetic transfer, even spread out, can do.

For instance, an implaling .45 round at 2d10+4,about the same as an elephant gun! (3D6+4).

And I'll argue thats intrinsic in the limits of simulation present. I'd also argue its because the .45 is overstated, in part because it was written up to be used in a system that doesn't deal with hit locations, and thus understates the effect of smaller damages.

2. Perhaps. But by how much? The 5th edition CoC firearm values are poor numbers. Chasoium has used different values in the past, and they did a better job.

Well, as I said above, I don't think there's going to be an easy fix in a game that that uses a fixed pool of hit points as large as the basic hit point model in BRP.

Well, you've been defending them so far. Those numbers are the cause of

No, I'm defending the cause of the problem, and arguing sub points. Not the same thing. I'm not defending the specific numbers because I don't even know them; the last edition of CoC I own was probably 1st, and the most recent numbers for firearms I have for BRP accessible are the ones in the standalone Superworld.

Yup. Several RPGs do that. With BRP I thing a straight halving/doubling mechanic might be too severe (most games with halving/doubling don't have a fixed HP system). But something along those lines would help.

Well, as I said (and you seem to at least somewhat agree) you're only going to fix so much of this without subdividing hit points in some way, whether its by hit location or use of degree of wounds. Without that, you're either going to end up with overly lethal handguns, underlethal rifles, or possibly both (and if you don't use care when setting up the subdivision, you may end up with _everything_ overlethal).

[/

quote]

And, lots of fuel....:eek:

[carnifex]

I have dowloaded it (the Rule) in the file of the yahoo basic roleplayig group.

Carnifex.

[Trifletraxor]

I have dowloaded it (the Rule) in the file of the yahoo basic roleplayig group.

Carnifex.

Nice!

Can we have them added to the wiki too?

SGL.

[Trifletraxor]

I have dowloaded it (the Rule) in the file of the yahoo basic roleplayig group.

Carnifex.

Added to the wiki with carnifex' approval.

SGL.

[Atgxtg]

Here are some suggestions for the wiki.

-I didn't see a move rate for spaceships other that FTL. What is the cost for sublight speeds?

How about 1 pt per .05c?

-Maybe we could then reduce the cost for FTL travel to 10+4 per additional FTL.

-As written, faster aircraft bet a bonus to dogfighting. This is just wrong. Generally speaking faster craft are at a disadvantage, since dogfighting depends on the ability to turn, and that increases in proportion to the square of velocity. In other words, all things being equal a plane moving twice as past will take four times as long to turn.

Also with a +10 per 10% an 100mph difference will throw the fight.

-How about the speed difference applies as a bonus to chase/flee actions, but we let vehicles buy an new ability :Maneuverability.

-Each Point of Maneuverability costs the same as the vehicles Base Kinetic Dice/BRP cost.

-No vehicle can have a higher maneuverability that it's total hit points (otherwise the stress would rip the vehicle apart).

Due to contact with the ground or water, ground and sea vehciles have a fairly low maneuverability limit:

Ground vehicles:20-BRP cost.

Ships are limited to 18-BRP

Submaraines are limited to 15-BRP

Locomotives (your kidding right?)

-For dogfighting, compare you maneuverability to you current speed (in MPH)

If Maneuverability is higher than Speed you get a +10% bonus.

If Maneuverability is 1.5 times Speed you get a +15% bonus.

If Maneuverability is 2x Speed you get a +20% bonus.

etc.

to a max. of 5x Speed= +50%

If Speed is higher you get the corresponding penalty.

-Even numbered Vehicles.

All the values for Base Kinetic Damage/BP Cost are odd. How about allowing people to upgrade or downgrade a vehicle by 1 step, spending or saving s point. That way not all cars will have the same Hit Points.

-200 mph tanks?

As written it doesn;t matter how big or massive your vehicle is when you buy speed dice. So it is just as easy to get a tank up to 200 mph as a airplane.

-How about we change it to 1 point gives you 30MPH, divide by the vehicles Base Kinetic Dice? That way it is a lot easier to get a Ferrari up to 180mph than an M1A1 Abrams?

-Armored Vehciles

How about a vehicle can be armored.. Each BRP point spent on armoring a vehicle adds 2 to its KA. We could limit this to a maximum KA of 10 the BRP cost. So that way tanks could actually be immune to anything short of tanks rounds.

[carnifex]

Hi there!

Good suggestion, perhaps these rule was too generic. Dogfighting is perhap a bad description. In the inter-war the Italien was very impress by the maniability of their biplan and put resource in their developpement. But the less agile monoplan of the allied force has more speed and wiped-out the italian air-force. The German pilot like dogfihting but the messhersmith 262 wa not good in this type of fight and they have to use his superior speed to destroy allied plane.

Another names than dogfigthing has to be use for this rules. I am open to sugestion. The intermediary speed for spacecraft was a good one. I was thinking to create equippement cards for vehicule but you are right the rule has not ready yet.

carnifex

[Atgxtg]

Hi there!

Good suggestion, perhaps these rule was too generic. Dogfighting is perhap a bad description. In the inter-war the Italien was very impress by the maniability of their biplan and put resource in their developpement. But the less agile monoplan of the allied force has more speed and wiped-out the italian air-force. The German pilot like dogfihting but the messhersmith 262 wa not good in this type of fight and they have to use his superior speed to destroy allied plane.

Another names than dogfigthing has to be use for this rules. I am open to sugestion. The intermediary speed for spacecraft was a good one. I was thinking to create equippement cards for vehicule but you are right the rule has not ready yet.

carnifex

Just a semi related bunch of tweaks and ideas. It is easy to modify somethuning once there is a framework.

Aircraft:

Okay this is a pretty complex topic that we atre trying to bolit down into game terms but here goes.

The Itialitan Aircraft really weren't very maneuverable. While they could out turn a monoplane, that was because the biplane was moving so slow. The biplanes were alos made out of wood and canvas, making then fragile, unable to put much wing loading on the plane. If both planes were moving at similar speeds, the monoplane would outturn the biplane, as the biplane could actually rip it's wings off in a tight turn. Also, thing like pilot quality and the armanents used, not to mention morale played a huge part.

Liekwise the ME-262, although novel as one of the first jets was not a good fighter plane. Pilots would complain that it moved to fast that they hard a hard time getting and statying in gun range, and were limited to conducting straffing runs. And the ME262 didn't fare as well as planes like the Fw-190, that were more maneuverable.

Today, a subsonic but maneuverable plane like the Harrier can outfight a MIG-25 "Foxbat" IF the MIG lets the Harrier get in close. TW, I based the maneuverability on the g's a vehicle can pull (Maneuverability=g'sx10), so a real world turn rate would be: Maneuverability/(10xVelocity squared).

I figured that most of the Speed advantage would apply with the COC chase rules in allowing the faster plane the ability to control the range band. For instance the early monoplane, the 262 and the Foxbat would all having increasing ability to control the distance and terms of engagement.

Still, I could see where a faster moving target would be harder to hit. How about we apply a penalty to hit a fast moving vehicle, say:

Apply a -10% modifier to attacks at a vehicle that has a higher Speed.

Apply an additional -10% per 25MPH difference.

So a ME262 with a 100mph speed advantage against most allied fighter would be -50% to hit.

I think dogfighting is a good term, but perhaps we could put in a fly-by attack for fast aircraft, allwing them to interupt thier movement to fire. THat way they could move in close, fire, and move out of range in one turn.

What we could all dwould be a dodgfight chart, and have that affect what wort of weapons can be fired. Basically compare the degree of success to see what arc the enemy is in. Something like:

Same success Level (Sucess vs Success, Special vs. Special, Cirtiical vs. Critical): Fly by, both can fire forward facing weapons

Faliure vs. Failure: Tail Weapons Only

Fumble vs. Fumble: No weapons fire

1 degreee of Difference (Special vs. Success, etc.): Better roll can attack with forward weapons (or other arc if desired), lower quality roll restricted to side weapons or tail, loser's chose).

2 degrees difference (critical vs. Success, etc.): Better roll can attack with forward weapons (or other arc if desired), lower quality roll restricted to side weapons or tail (winner's choice) weapons .

[Atgxtg]

Hey, I just thought or an idea.

I'm going to try and do this using the power rules from Worlds of Wonder/ Superworld. It gives us a few more options and a point cost for everything, and would be more compataible with the finished BRP.

We could just use a 10-1 or whatever ratio for the final cost.