Questions and feedback on a 2.0 game run at IndieCon

  • 5 Replies
Questions and feedback on a 2.0 game run at IndieCon
« on: November 26, 2012, 10:25:17 AM »

Here are a few questions and comments raised during a game of TR 2.0 I ran at IndieCon 2012 in the UK recently, based on Kelly's Heroes.

Does it cost the Sniper 1 gear to fire? This seems harsh considering the very few rounds involved. Perhaps precision rifles should get some ‘single shot’ tag that means it doesn’t cost any gear to fire.

Should a sniper shot cause suppression/pinning? Perhaps not in WW2 but perhaps in a modern setting where large calibre weapons can be used (with AP rounds).

I couldn’t understand the explanation of the harm sustained by the crew of an armoured vehicle that’s been penetrated.

Does a 10+ still do +3 penetration on an Anti Vehicle roll? The enemy will never get this, which probably works ok when the enemy has better tanks (eg WW2) but might not work so well in a modern setting where the enemy vehicles are probably inferior.

Can the enemy use autofire, spray etc? as per their weapon tags? I would say yes and not record any gear usage, but the rules intent might be different.

Does the Impose Your Will move only apply to PCs? If applied to NPCs, does it only need to be used where there’s a question of chain of command or where the order given is fairly suicidal? Could it be used to interrogate prisoners?

Is Attack no longer a move or an integral part of other moves? It doesn’t mention 10+ and 7-9 results. Does every attack result in like-for-like damage?

The volume of fire table doesn’t label the I, D, C rows, which confused some players.

I like that the ‘I’ row has more shock results than wounds, but perhaps then Direct should have one less shock and a ‘miss’ result on a 1.

The players didn’t do much roleplaying out of the battle area, but that might have been down to my rattling through several battles to finish in time (the scenario was based on Kelly’s Heroes, so the battles were the minefield/patrol ambush, the river crossing, and the town).

A fully worked out example of a small scale battle would be great to see how things are meant to work – perhaps two teams assaulting an MG position.

Re: Questions and feedback on a 2.0 game run at IndieCon
« Reply #1 on: November 26, 2012, 12:32:32 PM »
I'll try my hand at some of these.

1. The sniper rifle doesn't use gear every time it fires, no.  (Weapons with the "ordinance" tag do.)  You do use up gear if you Assault or provide Covering Fire, however, since these assume you're doing quite a bit of shooting.

2. Yes, the enemy can use autofire and spray, etc.  Some weapons are defined by their tags, like the flamethrower.  I wouldn't bother recording enemy gear either, instead just handling it approximately.  

3. Attack is how you resolve weapon fire, and it's an integral part of Assault and Covering Fire.  You can also use it directly, which makes sense if you're not trying to gain a tactical advantage, claim ground (both of which suggest Assault), and you're not wasting ammo to suppress the enemy (suggesting Covering fire).

Attack doesn't need to be reciprocal, it's entirely up to the GM, based on what's been established.  If you're trading fire with enemies in the next building, that might be a mutual Attack.  If, however, you're shooting at an unsuspecting target, or a target that's concentrating on something else, then it could be entirely one-sided.

4. We used Impose Your Will to interrogate a prisoner, for sure.  Also, it's perfect for giving orders to reluctant NPC allied troops.

Re: Questions and feedback on a 2.0 game run at IndieCon
« Reply #2 on: November 27, 2012, 04:32:05 AM »
Great, good answers, thanks!

Re: Questions and feedback on a 2.0 game run at IndieCon
« Reply #3 on: November 27, 2012, 05:07:15 PM »
Thanks for the questions and feedback, Badgers!

Re: Questions and feedback on a 2.0 game run at IndieCon
« Reply #4 on: November 28, 2012, 02:46:16 PM »
Hi, one of the players in Badgers' game at IndieCon

Is that right for for the Sniper, the Assault move does not mention anything about ordinance tags, is that the move to use?

Which might lead to answer 3, so if you're firing but not wanting tactical advantage, claiming ground or suppression, you don't roll you just give damage?

I agree a fully worked out example would be good for understanding the finer details.

Re: Questions and feedback on a 2.0 game run at IndieCon
« Reply #5 on: November 28, 2012, 04:12:17 PM »
The sniper has a "one shot, one kill" move that's normally the right move for trying to snipe individual targets.

Weapons with the 'ordnance' tag use gear every time you attack with them, regardless of what move is used - even if no move is used and you just shoot it at a tree, presumably.  None of the sniper's weapons have this tag, so they only use Gear when you're using one of the more sustained combat moves: Assault or Covering Fire.

The choice of move seems to have a lot of latitude. When I played with John, I was playing a special forces Operator.  I was infiltrating a building, and came across a surprised enemy with an AK-47 - John let me shoot and kill him without even rolling damage.

As a special forces operator, he figured I was trained for this precise thing, my gun was at the ready, my target was surprised and had no cover, so John just declared my target down.

Moments later, I was engaged in a firefight with a guy who was up some stairs.  Here, the outcome was much less certain - the target was responding to the sound of my weapon, had his weapon at the ready, and there was some distance between us to make misses far more likely.  John declared that this was an Attack: we were both just trying to kill one another; both of us just went straight to rolling damage (3D6 Direct, I think).

If, on the other hand, there had been some way for me to get up to the second level, I had thrown a smoke grenade, there was some more interesting tactical element to the gunfight, or I was perhaps trying to drive him back, John might have ruled it was an Assault.  I'd have rolled 2D6 to see how the combat went on top of us rolling damage, and spend Gear.

If, instead, I had been firing steady bursts to prevent the enemy on the second level from drawing a clear bead on me (or my companions), it would have been Covering Fire, potentially allowing a teammate to flank him while he's hiding from my hail of fire.