Mh/issue 672/frag grenades#948
Conversation
modified: Combat Rules/2_Shooting.txt
frag grenade discription. modified: 06_Explosives.txt
| legs, and arms (if armor is pierced or not present): (3*45 damage)+2xBleed | ||
| within a 2.5m radius.Only legs and torso (2*45 damage)+1xBleed within a 5m | ||
| radius. At least one hit must damage health to cause Bleed. | ||
| radius. At least one hit must damage health to cause Bleed. Recall that multiple |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I like the changes here that make the damage more obvious. I think that there is still some ambiguity in the 'at least one hit causes bleed', does the player choose which wounds have the bleed tokens attached? Are the 2 tokens attached to one wound or are they one token per wound, but only 2? It would make them a little more powerful, but it would make more sense to me to have a bleed token for each shrapnel wound, just for simplicity's sake.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I suggest phrasing like: the frag grenade applies 3 wounds, and if any damage health then the target gets 2 bleed tokens.
| damage per hit, automatically hits armor. Targets take full damage to the torso, | ||
| legs, and arms (if armor is pierced or not present): (3*50 damage)+2xBleed | ||
| within a 3m radius. Only legs and torso (2*50 damage)+1xBleed within a 6m radius. | ||
| At least one hit must damage health to cause Bleed. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Same ambiguity as above.
|
I hadn't seen that ambiguity, and now that you've called it out, I'm not sure how it should work. If a rule has that level of confusion, it's unplayable and you should feel free to block the PR by requesting changes. :) |
|
I also noticed while sketching out item cards that the effect prose on the ECSC Smoke Grenade is a bit wordy, especially when it comes to whether or not someone can be seen well. It says something like everyone is in 80% stealth and needs to roll an 81% to hit. I feel like this can be condensed to "a DC of 80 is required to hit or see anyone in or through the cloud. |
|
I've created a new issue for smoke grenades. |
rosebrallier
left a comment
rosebrallier
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We may want to streamline the "damage within such and such radius" description into a table. If we don't, I made a suggestion for the prose.
| Each Target within the blast radius takes three shrapnel hits. 45 ballistic | ||
| damage per hit, automatically hits armor. Targets take full damage to the torso, | ||
| legs, and arms (if armor is pierced or not present): (3*45 damage)+2xBleed | ||
| within a 2.5m radius.Only legs and torso (2*45 damage)+1xBleed within a 5m |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Another thing for this frag: I'd lead with "If all three shrapnel hits pierce the target's armor and the target is within 2.5m of the explosion, the target takes wounds to the torso, arms, and legs for a total of:.... Within a 5m radius of the explosion, targets take two shrapnel hits. If both hits pierce the target;s armor, they take wounds to the legs and torso for a total of:.... If only one shrapnel hit pierces the target's armor, they take a single wound to their torso for a total of:.... Targets do not suffer any Bleed effect unless at least one hit deals damage to their health.
|
Maybe it would be beneficial to codify that DoT tokens are separate from and not tied to Wounds in the combat rules - taking damage section. |
modified: Items/06_Explosives.txt
|
We'll simplify the health system soon, so let's not work too hard on codifying new rules that are too complex already. |
4 participants
Should address minor grammar and Issue #672