Bad scoring

[IVhorseman]

but I'm not sure of the best way to stack their bonuses.

what about just all of them roll skill, and you only choose the highest skill roll? since there's more people helping, you're doing a better job, and you've got a higher chance of rolling higher, ESPECIALLY with crit successes.

[feuer_faust]

In the game AT-43, there are special anti-vehicular weapons. These weapons are considered to lock onto targets easily, and thus only require a single, low roll to hit (like 3+). The downside is that while they are high strength and damage, they are not usable against non-vehicles at all.

Could be an option for Brikwars.

Target-Lock: (+Size Rating AP) This weapon can only be fired at vehicles, mechs, and buildings. Due to a complex array of targeting systems, this weapon has a use equal to its size rating. The cost is increased by the wapon's size rating.

[IVhorseman]

they are not usable against non-vehicles at all.

this is definitely the kind of thinking i want to discourage amongst brikwarriors. labeling things as "vehicles" as opposed to creations places stuff into categories and groupings, without any fluid way of transferring between different mediums. sure, an armored car or a tank would be considered a vehicle no problem. but what about a dinosaur? that's not a vehicle perse, but it's certainly large enough to hit easily. and where does that leave giant robots?

the point is, i think it's incredibly un-brikwarsy to label certain vehicles as "this is a tank-class vehicle, so it has THESE modifiers...", because it gets more into semantics than it does into play-time. this is what i really liked about the 2005 rules: all ranged weapons are basically treated the same way. you've got a very few number of variations to these, but enough to differentiate different types of guns in aspects where it'd be extremely obvious (Artillery gun vs. rifle), as opposed to a smaller, hardly noticeable on brik terms change (AK-47 vs. AK-74).

[pesgores]

they are not usable against non-vehicles at all.

this is definitely the kind of thinking i want to discourage amongst brikwarriors. labeling things as "vehicles" as opposed to creations places stuff into categories and groupings, without any fluid way of transferring between different mediums. sure, an armored car or a tank would be considered a vehicle no problem. but what about a dinosaur? that's not a vehicle perse, but it's certainly large enough to hit easily. and where does that leave giant robots?

the point is, i think it's incredibly un-brikwarsy to label certain vehicles as "this is a tank-class vehicle, so it has THESE modifiers...", because it gets more into semantics than it does into play-time. this is what i really liked about the 2005 rules: all ranged weapons are basically treated the same way. you've got a very few number of variations to these, but enough to differentiate different types of guns in aspects where it'd be extremely obvious (Artillery gun vs. rifle), as opposed to a smaller, hardly noticeable on brik terms change (AK-47 vs. AK-74).

Agreed.

[Tiny Tank Rannon]

He's right, because it's not as fair if someone has an army of dinosaurs and trogdor, while you have an army of mechs and the thrid guy has an army of infantry and tanks with anti vehicle target lock. All that will happen will be the dinosaurs eat the infantry, your mechs stomp the infantry, the tanks accidently crush the infantry then only attack the mechs.

or something like that.

also the whole "what's a vehicle" thing, is my Dreadnought with no pilot a vehicle or what.

And Cyborgs, that's really screwing with target lock.

[feuer_faust]

Well, you could simply say that the target-lock works on creations of size 2 and larger.

[Gorchek]

Or you could try something like this:

AP Gun
Cost: Size x 4cp
Range: Size x 6"
Use: Size + 3
Damage: Size or target's armor rating +1 in d6

So, shooting your big size 4 AP Gun at a car with an armor rating of 3 will do 4d6 damage.  But if you use it on a normal minifig it will just do 1d6 damage, the supersonic ap bullets just pass through the flesh too easily to cause much damage. (Inspired from Gunnm.)

[Bennanteno]

How about this for multiple man weapons operating;

Roll for skill for both gunners and subtract the weapon's size from the total.
The result is the total skill roll.

[Rody]

that would make bigger weapons easier to use as small weapons.. not really correct is it.
I like horseman's sugestion, nice and simple

[Rayhawk]

It does seem like a good opening course of action.  I'm thinking of four possibilities.

1: The Bonus Dice Advantage:  A number of minifigs can work together to fire a weapon, up to the weapon's Size.  When firing the weapon, all the minifigs roll their Skill, and only the highest roll is used.  However, if any of the minifigs roll a Critical Success, ALL bonus dice are added to the final roll.

2: The Synergy Advantage:  Minifigs can work together up to a weapon's Size, as before, all rolling their Skill when firing.  The player may choose to use the highest Skill roll.  However if any minifigs roll exactly the same number, their rolls may be combined and the sum of those rolls used instead.  Summing takes place before bonus dice are rolled.

3. The Die Size Advantage:  Minifigs can work together up to a weapon's Size.  Start with the minifig with the highest Skill.  Each extra minifig adds one die size to the Skill Roll, maxing out at a full 1d20.

4. The Specialty Advantage: Assisting with firing a weapon requires skills that regular minifigs don't possess.  A minifig with the Gunner advantage can add his skill to the roll of another minifig firing a large weapon.

[Foggy]

Each has a valid point.

1: Simple and quick. My approval.

2: Can anyone say "Yahtzee"?

3: This could lead to quarrels over what comes next.

4: Meh. Extra rules on infantry.

[IVhorseman]

i mostly agree with foggy, although i think a gunner ability could potentially be used in conjunction with rulesets one or two. i also favor one, but using EVERY minifig's skill in the event of bonus dice seems a bit too all-or-nothing to me (which is an awesome code to live by, but not very practical for firing large weapons at small targets).

[Almighty Benny]

i mostly agree with benny

The only thing I've done so far in this forum is admit to having dated a lunch lady. Who knows, I could have even been lying about that!

Unless Foggy was wearing an Almighty Benny suit, in which case it's a perfectly logical mistake. I'm with Foggy too though, I like rule number 1 the best.

wait a minute... IVHorsemen agrees with me (or Foggy), we agree with rule number 1, IVHorsemen INVENTED rule number 1... then that's cheating!

[IVhorseman]

read again, ben. stop making up quotes!

also, i did not invent rule number one! i suggested something similar, and rayhawk made a bastardization of it.

[Atomsk]

I definetly think there should be a 'gunner' specialty.  Mostly because it looks ridiculous to have a truck rolling around with a guy at the wheel, and nobody manning the huge turret behind him.

Depending on the size of the gun, I'm thinking have the gunner's skill be anywhere from 1d10 to 2d6.  It's pretty important that the gunner be worth not only dedicating a minifig to a stationary/mounted weapon, but also the extra cost his skill rating will doubtless incure.