TAKE COVER!

[Spoon]

I'm in bit of a hurry so maybe I'll elaborate in more detail later, but the basic idea is: what if you could dive for cover from missile attacks? This could only affect shots from more than one room away maybe, and depend on the location for the efficiency of the cover (though this would involve flagging a lot of rooms...). Some places would be devoid of cover, making them perfect for ambushing and raiding. I guess it would work with a similar delay as the hide command. Also, maybe there would be a large delay for leaving cover (so the archer could fill you full of arrows if you moved?)

Anyway, I'm going to leave this now for discussion, it's only a vague idea so far as you can see.

[Aaron Goulet]

I've always considered using something like this in a modern post-apocolyptic game, only where you could use objects as cover.  All objects in this (purely conceptual) game had a durability value and a "penetration" value (bullets would pass through plywood easier than through a brick wall.  Why duck behind a piece of plywood, you ask?  Your opponent still has limited visibility.

[Gunnerblaster]

Skill_Dodge

This skill, when toggled, makes the character attempt to be on alert for incoming projectile attacks, increasing your chances of evading.

Syntax:
   dodge [on|off|status]

Notes:
   If a person's skill at archery/throwing is greater than your character's skill at
   Dodging, you may not be able to avoid their attacks.

   Your character must be standing in order to dodge the best. Sitting or
   resting will have negative impacts on your ability to dodge.

Or something similar to this. Make it branchable from some a skill that would make some sense for it to branch from (IE: Scan, Watch, Shield Use)

[Synthesis]

Work on your shield use.

EP a good shield.

[brytta.leofa]

Or hide.

[jhunter]

or run away.

[Akoto]

I don't necessarily dislike the idea, but my inner cheater sees a problem with the proposed plan:

Archer pelts you with arrows so as to get you behind cover. Then, while you are in heavy delay leaving cover, he runs in and beats the crap outta ya. Bada-boom, a new pair of boots hits the market.

[Dar]

And the problem with that is ... what? Somebody chased you in a bad position by arrows, then moved in and capitalized on it. Dont like it ? Dont take cover.

[FantasyWriter]

Yeah.. the "problem" seems pretty IC to me.

[Akoto]

Hey, I didn't say I disliked the idea. I was just pointing out the tactic, which would be problematic if it were constantly exploited. It's rather like paralyzing someone at no risk to the archer. This creates a situation where the player either doesn't take cover and gets pelted, or takes cover and suffers a lengthy beating, even if he waits out the archer's supply of arrows (the latter is assuming they have some other weapon skill).

I like the idea, but as for a delay, I'd rather suggest that it were short. It doesn't take all that long to jump out from behind a rock. This way, the "bad position" you enter when you choose to take cover results in taking a few hits, but it's not entirely pointless. Otherwise, why bother surviving the arrows when you're just going to stand there and be bludgeoned to death after the fact?

[valeria]

I like the idea, but I'd be opposed to a large delay for leaving from cover.  My not so vast 'real world' experience in the realm of paintball tells me that it takes a little longer to find cover, or to find good cover, than it does to jump out from behind it and run like hell.  Maybe a small drop to offense/defense would be in order, though, at least in the immediate aftermath of leaving cover.  Since usually in the act of taking cover, you cut yourself off from information about where your opponent is, etc.

[Spoon]

Cool, that's why I said maybe. I was wondering whether the delay might get abused by people doing western style shootouts.

>cover

>shoot figure north

>cover

Or would that not be a bad thing?

As for using a shield, running and hiding, this is an idea, not a whinge about getting shot all the time. I'm aware that you can use a shield to block arrows, though this option is only available to more then competent PCs with the right skills. Any PC should be able to take action from distant fire in the right location. Running and hiding, these would be the places you would run and hide in. That's why I had the idea about delay- something to keep the person being shot at pinned down maybe?

I was thinking keeping it limited to beyond one location away so that people could close in or use throwing weapons with no penalty (reflecting the ability to maneuver around the cover). Maybe add a direction like the watch so archers can work around it for a shot or two at least? Maybe just tag the whole thing onto watch so you're taking cover from incoming fire from the direction you specify.

[Potaje]

why not parry, and one doesn't need a shield to block arrows, I have seen a skilled pc knock arrows from the air using a weapon. perhaps it was the duel wield.

[Spoon]

I want to discuss an idea, not find a solution to a problem I don't have. I m fully aware of the fact there are ways of deflecting arrows!

[Gunnerblaster]

Cool, that's why I said maybe. I was wondering whether the delay might get abused by people doing western style shootouts.

>cover Hide

>shoot figure north

>cover Hide

The code is fine as it is. Merchants and pickpockets shouldn't have any idea how to dodge arrows. Assassins might have a better chance if their being shot at in their own "territory", which would be stupid in the first place. Warriors have their own way of protecting against it - If their mastered enough and Rangers develop the method to avoiding over time.

[X-D]

I agree with anybody that thinks it is fine as it is.

But I'm not against the idea of cover, but only in this format.

1-5 second delay to finding cover.

Once you are in cover (assuming the room has any) You no longer see what is happening around you unless you "look out".

Taking cover means keeping your head down and all other body parts as small of targets as possible, You cannot scan, watch or see people coming and going from the room.

If you do "look out" There should be a 50% chance of breaking cover.

Now...I know that sounds horrible, what use is it?

Well, I also think that a person who has taken cover should be very easy to guard. So, that merchant with the byn escorting him can duck behind a rock and let the byn work without having to worry much about him.

I'd even allow a small chance of escaping notice. Not hide, but simply a 20-35% change that a look on the room will not show the covered PC up...course, if it does show it should show "So and so is cowering behind a rock"

[jmordetsky]

I wonder if this could be handled by having varying degrees of "hide". Like, I can sneak even if I don't have the skill - it is akin to moving slowly.

It would be interesting if I could also "hide" and though not hidden like a ranger or a thief, perhaps I get some measure of protection from missles.

[FantasyWriter]

I wonder if this could be handled by having varying degrees of "hide". Like, I can sneak even if I don't have the skill - it is akin to moving slowly.

It would be interesting if I could also "hide" and though not hidden like a ranger or a thief, perhaps I get some measure of protection from missles.

I would like to be able to hide from someone without scan without hide.

[musashi]

I agree with anybody that thinks it is fine as it is.

But I'm not against the idea of cover, but only in this format.

1-5 second delay to finding cover.

Once you are in cover (assuming the room has any) You no longer see what is happening around you unless you "look out".

Taking cover means keeping your head down and all other body parts as small of targets as possible, You cannot scan, watch or see people coming and going from the room.

If you do "look out" There should be a 50% chance of breaking cover.

Now...I know that sounds horrible, what use is it?

Well, I also think that a person who has taken cover should be very easy to guard. So, that merchant with the byn escorting him can duck behind a rock and let the byn work without having to worry much about him.

I'd even allow a small chance of escaping notice. Not hide, but simply a 20-35% change that a look on the room will not show the covered PC up...course, if it does show it should show "So and so is cowering behind a rock"

So shove the merchant in a tent? Seems IC'ly possible already to me.

[X-D]

What, and risk a 1500 coin item for a 300 coin contract? Blah, shove him behind a rock.

But like I said, I think code is fine the way it is.

[musashi]

What, and risk a 1500 coin item for a 300 coin contract? Blah, shove him behind a rock.

But like I said, I think code is fine the way it is.

lulz

You have a point. I just remember a merchant PC trying to sell a PC of mine a tent once, and one of the selling points was: Inside it, filthy neckers can't shoot you from a quarter mile away.

[Voular]

Have you tried shooting a bow at anything in real life? You need particularly good line of sight, trajectory and shit. If we're going this route - then I would say that there should be an easy way to take cover. And the easiest is simply to move to an adjescent square. If this is not possible - then you're obviously fucked. Which is where the discussion might spawn from? In any case, archery is a douchey way to fight. So anyway to help minimize it's usefullness in PKing is welcomed by me.

[Ender]

Cool, that's why I said maybe. I was wondering whether the delay might get abused by people doing western style shootouts.

>cover Hide

>shoot figure north

>cover Hide

The code is fine as it is. Merchants and pickpockets shouldn't have any idea how to dodge arrows.

I think the idea of hiding behind a rock for protection is a pretty basic concept even a half-giant could understand.

I agree with XD in that if a cover command was implemented it should have a delay and work kind of like forage but should only be focused in one direction.

>cover w

you begin scrambling for cover from the west!

You cannot find any cover here!

or

You manage to find partial cover.

or

you find cover

Each with its own detriments and bonuses, and it should be as a command only one direction at a time.  The only things that should be -full- cover from all directions should be separate rooms all together or enterable places.

[Rotten]

I say make guarding cumulative for each PC guarding, particularly the part where you can intercept projectiles aimed at the fellow you're guarding.

Done.

[Yam]

I say make guarding cumulative for each PC guarding, particularly the part where you can intercept projectiles aimed at the fellow you're guarding.

Done.

Doesn't it already work like this?

If one person fails a guard, the next person guarding has a chance to guard.

[Gagula]

To the best of my knowledge, yes.