SLA House Rules

[Dog Pants]

As those who have been playing my SLA campaign for a while will probably know, the rules are a bit of a nightmare. Some are unclear, some are contradictory, some just aren't there. The SLA community at large accepts that every GM will play with the rules and come up with a working system adapted to their needs, and I'm no exception. Unlike many GMs though, I don't want to dictate the terms of my game to my players, I want you guys to have some input too. That way we're all happy with them, and people aren't going to get any nasty surprises when I use a rule that isn't in the books.

So, the rules are here. They're split into categories, some of which are bigger than others. The only ones I'm not using in their entirety are the combat rules, because deviating from the book could screw you guys over if you didn't know I was doing it. Have a look at the ones that concern you and give me any suggestions. I'm particularly interested in Ebb stuff - Roman and Joose probably already have more experience of it than me, as I've never played an Ebb race.

[Joose]

I've already read most of this, and I've not seen anything that makes me recoil in horror.

Does this mean we are using the penetration* rules from now on?

Only thing I can add for the Ebon stuff is what we were discussing earlier: The rules for Ebb abilities in combat could use some clarifying/simplifying. I liked your suggestion of direct combat stuff not being delayed till the next turn. Pointing at something and then shooting at them in a bit struck me as odd.

*no, not that kind of penetration

[Roman Totale]

Thing we discussed about ranged Ebb attacks in the BPN thread seemed fair. If you use a Flintlock for Blast, you have to aim but you get the reduced flux bonus. If you don't use you don't have to aim but it does cost more flux.

[deject]

I think the tax on item transfer registrations is a tad high, but other than that I think the rules are fine.

I do want to clarify your custom penetration rules though.

Say I'm wearing armor with a PV of 8 and I get hit by a 10mm STD round (8 DMG, 5 PEN), I would not take any wounds and just one point of damage and the 2 points of AD? If the same armor was hit by a CAF round or something pitiful like that I'd take no damage at all?

[Dog Pants]

From the 10mm the PEN is less than the PV of the armour, but more than half (which would be 4), so the damage would get through but you would halve it. THinking about it that could go one of two ways; treat as normal SLA rules, so 5 damage gets through and is halved to 2 or 3. Or half of the full damage gets through without being affected by PEN, resulting in 4. I've not thought it through properly, which is why it isn't in play yet. But the CAF would do no damage at all as its PEN was under half your PV.

The tax on item transfers is deliberately high to prevent people selling on their old kit to each other and getting stuff cheap.

[Dog Pants]

I've got the PEN rules completely wrong there. I was quoting from memory, but missed completely. The new rules with 10mm would work like this:

Wearing PV5, the round's penetration (5) is equal to the armour's PV and so it penetrates. The character takes the full 8 points of damage and takes a wound.

Wearing PV8, the 10mm round would not penetrate. The damage (8) is reduced by the full PV of the armour, reducing it to 0. A point of bruising damage is still caused though.

Wearing PV10, the 10mm round would not penetrate. The damage is reduced by the PV of the armour, reducing it to 0. Since the PEN is half the PV of the armour there is no bruising damage.

[Roman Totale]

Ooh ta, that's cleared up PEN for me no end - always used to struggle getting it previously.

I'm off to compare my PV against all known calibres...

[Dog Pants]

That's not how the book does it, but this way AP actually has a use; previously PEN was just like DAM that didn't carry through, so rounds with high damage got through armour anyway.

[deject]

That's not how the book does it, but this way AP actually has a use; previously PEN was just like DAM that didn't carry through, so rounds with high damage got through armour anyway.

Yeah that's one of the reasons I went with the Mutilator over the Gash Fist, the DMG + PEN is the same value but it has more DMG, which was more useful.

[HereComesPete]

Pfffffffft Gash Fist.

[Dog Pants]

Added:

===Friends and Enemies===
Clarifying the friend advantage and enemy disadvantage. Both work the same way, with the person either liking you or hating you depending which way the advantage/disadvantage goes. The specific advantage/disadvantage (major/minor) simply dictates the strength of emotion. A major friend will go out of their way to help the character, even to the point of risking their career or even life. Likewise a major enemy will want the character dead. Minor friends and enemies won't be nearly so passionate; friends will want favours in return, and enemies will be content to make a character's life difficult. The rank will dictate the influence and power of the friend or enemy;

*1 - Monarch, Civilian
*2 - Shiver, Office worker, Gang member
*3 - Low SCL Op, Receptionist, Cameraman
*4 - Shiver Sgt, Talent Scout, Reporter, minor gang leader
*5 - Cloak Division Op, Financier, Anchor
*6 - Shiver Cpt, Corporate researcher, News editor, 'Big 3' gang lieutenant
*7 - Famous Contract Killer, Corporate senior manager, Channel head
*8 - Necanthrope, Executive, Internal Affairs agent, 'Big 3' gang leader
*9 - Subsidiary CEO
*10 - SLA Department head

[Dog Pants]

Penetration rules: Apply across the board to bullets and melee, leave as is, or scrap it completely? Since you guys are the ones playing I'm happy for you to decide. Discuss here to avoid cluttering up the BPN thread.

[Grimmie]

I like dying less, and more intense firefights with baddies.
I think the PEN rules are good as-is.

[Joose]

Yeah, im not sure what would be best, to be honest.

At the moment, there's this odd situation where stabbing people is better than shooting, just *generally*, with equally specced weapons. Whilst I accept the point about kevlar and knives, this would still happen with Dogeybone armour, and that's supposed to be like a walking tank.

Trouble is, I think the revised armour rules may be making armour a bit *too* good (I know im going to regret saying that, as a guy in big stompy armour), so I think expanding the rules to both would just make everyone damn hard to kill, both players and npc's alike. Which could just end up frustrating.

I think the best option might be to have the same rules for both, but make the armour *slightly* less effective. Don't have a clue how to actually do that, mind.

[Grimmie]

Rules as they are at the moment does mean that melee characters may actually get a look in, instead of us gunbunnies always shooting off faces before you reach them.

[deject]

I think we should keep penetration as is, or possibly tie PV to the ID at a location. Armor loses effectiveness in a damaged area quite fast, so reducing the PV of damaged areas would be good.

[Joose]

Rules as they are at the moment does mean that melee characters may actually get a look in, instead of us gunbunnies always shooting off faces before you reach them.

Aye, thats true. It was always a bit frustrating playing gerald, when things were generally deaded from bullets before he got to them, unless we were sneaking up on stuff.

Thinking about it, maybe the fact that these altered PV rules have slowed combat down a little *in general* is a good thing. It makes it a bit more back and forth, which makes it a bit more exciting. Combat before was always a bit BLAM, EVERYTHING IS DEAD! So on those grounds, maybe we should keep the PV rules as they are, and expand it to cover melee as well as bullets.

[Dog Pants]

Rules as they are at the moment does mean that melee characters may actually get a look in, instead of us gunbunnies always shooting off faces before you reach them.

This was why I was happy to leave the difference between bullet and melee penetration, but despite my wriggling Joose does have a point when a kitchen knife does more damage to an armoured target than a 10mm round. I used to just add a few points of damage to melee weapons to make them more useful (+2 for unpowered, +4 for powered), but I ditched that rule when I started this campaign. There are advantages to melee weapons that aren't as obvious as those of firearms. You don't have to aim or bring to bear, which means you can hit on every phase you act. You also have far fewer modifiers, making it easier to hit and easier to cause extra damage. You also get your damage bonus from strength. On top of that, those looking for media attention know that the public loves a melee fighter - someone who drills an enemy from 500m away with a rifle isn't nearly as cinematic as someone who slices the bad guy up with a vibro-sabre.

I think we should keep penetration as is, or possibly tie PV to the ID at a location. Armor loses effectiveness in a damaged area quite fast, so reducing the PV of damaged areas would be good.

That's an idea worth looking into I think. With fights lasting longer due to the new PEN rules there's a fair chance armour might deteriorate a reasonable amount in a BPN. It might be a bit of a nightmare to book-keep though, but certainly worth thinking about. Anyone else any thoughts on it?

Thinking about it, maybe the fact that these altered PV rules have slowed combat down a little *in general* is a good thing. It makes it a bit more back and forth, which makes it a bit more exciting. Combat before was always a bit BLAM, EVERYTHING IS DEAD! So on those grounds, maybe we should keep the PV rules as they are, and expand it to cover melee as well as bullets.

This is true, and SLA does suffer a lot from the fastest combat ever. The only problem is that nine times out of ten the Ops will be better armoured and better armed than the bad guys. This will often result in the new PEN rules only really benefitting the players, which is a bad thing because a) there's not as much risk and so not as much excitement, and b) a false sense of security can lead to untimely character deaths, made worse by the fact players convonce themselves they're indestructible.

[Dog Pants]

That long combat brought up a few things. The bullet penetration rules really do prolong combat, and actually makes armour ID a factor - will your armour die before you do? This also means far more expensive repair bills. It also makes ammo a very tactical consideration, which I like. AP is suddently useful against armoured targets, and not so much against unarmoured. HESH is suddenly pretty useless against armoured targets.

Applying it to melee weapons would make them all less effective against almost all armoured targets. Most melee weapons don't have a penetration over 4, and most armour's PV is greater than that. On top of that, the melee damage being done by Eraser at the moment is pretty much as good as it's ever going to get, so if a chainaxe is hardly effective against someone in Blocker at SCL10, it's going to be utterly useless against more heavily armoured targets on higher SCL BPNs.

Spazzing back over the thread, I've an idea for Deject's idea of PV deteriorating as ID does. To keep things simple, how about after ID reaches 0 any furhter damage will reduce the PV by that amount. It'll still take the armour down quickly in most cases, but it's not so cut and dry and it's easy to book-keep. I wouldn't apply that to Deathsuits though - once they hit 0 hits they're dead and are as protective as a piece of gammon.

I'm fairly happy with the way the auto/support rules worked - I've adjusted them slightly since they were last used. The medical rules seemed to work nicely too (thanks Punkchuck for taking a kicking and testing those out).

In conjunction with the combat guide I put on the wiki, I hope combat will be a lot clearer next BPN. I'd like to finalise the rules with you people though. Please do have a read and a think and post your opinions here, because I only plan on implimenting rules changes between BPNs, so you'll be stuck with them over the next one.

Finally, I'm going to take a look at melee weapons and a few other stuff. Customisation in order to allow superior melee weapons, and second and third tier Science Friction devices for Ebons with a certain ability rank, including Ebb-enhanced melee weapons, are in the pipeline.

[deject]

I think leaving melee weapons alone is good.

As for deteriorating armor, I was thinking something like a stepwise function, where once half the ID in a location is gone, then the PV at that location drops a proportional amount, say half or three quarters, rounded up? Then once the ID reaches 0, the armor is useless at that location.

As for combat, I have to apologize for continuously posting out of turn. I'm just impatient and I'll try to control it.