Register Register

Author Topic: MechWarrior: Destiny  (Read 26127 times)

victor_shaw

  • Warrant Officer
  • *
  • Posts: 608
Re: MechWarrior: Destiny
« Reply #510 on: 22 September 2019, 21:17:49 »
EDIT: I never said BattleTech was dead either. Far from it. But you can't deny that the player base has shrunk significantly over the decades. And it's probably going to continue shrinking unless something changes. 11,000 people sounds like a lot. But how many people are playing Warhammer? X-Wing? Other tabletop miniature games? I ask this honestly because even I don't actually know the numbers, but I'm willing to bet it's a lot more.

Warhammer (GW) is struggling massively right now, as there steal their wallet and run them dry business model is falling them.
I've even hear talk of FFG thinking about buying out the company.
FFG mini games have all but died in my local area, as again they depend to much on having the newest minis.
Battletech and Alpha strike are still going strong here, and it not just the old guard as the other day I saw a couple of old-timers playing with a couple of 20 somethings and having a blast. If it has died in you area try to bring it back, but if you go in with the you want to play this out of date 35 year old game, I don't think it will work.
So I'm not seeing the point you are trying to making.

Daryk

  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 10671
  • The Double Deuce II/II-σ
Re: MechWarrior: Destiny
« Reply #511 on: 22 September 2019, 21:19:24 »
I'm not sure that model is failing Games Workshop... they were written up in the Economist as an example of a company doing well in the UK not too long ago...

SteelShrike

  • Recruit
  • *
  • Posts: 14
Re: MechWarrior: Destiny
« Reply #512 on: 22 September 2019, 21:25:38 »
Warhammer (GW) is struggling massively right now, as there steal their wallet and run them dry business model is falling them.
I've even hear talk of FFG thinking about buying out the company.
FFG mini games have all but died in my local area, as again they depend to much on having the newest minis.
Battletech and Alpha strike are still going strong here, and it not just the old guard as the other day I saw a couple of old-timers playing with a couple of 20 somethings and having a blast. If it has died in you area try to bring it back, but if you go in with the you want to play this out of date 35 year old game, I don't think it will work.
So I'm not seeing the point you are trying to making.

The point I'm making is that two examples don't make a statistical trend. Is it thriving where you live? That's awesome. I hope you continue to enjoy it. Is it dead here? Absolutely. And that's a shame. Meanwhile, FFG and X-Wing is constantly being played everywhere I look. The thing is I don't want to bring it back because I don't want to run Total Warfare. It's not my cup of tea. Nor is it apparently the cup of tea for the majority of people where I live, otherwise it'd still be going. People in my area should be able to experience BattleTech in a way that makes sense for them. The market will decide which one is more successful. It doesn't make one better than the other. It doesn't have to mean one is "obsolete". It's just different.

Mendou

  • Sergeant
  • *
  • Posts: 178
Re: MechWarrior: Destiny
« Reply #513 on: 22 September 2019, 21:27:17 »
I recommend you look at those mech-scale rules again.  There's no "Out of Range", which means units with Long range weapons are inescapable.  If they're fast too, they win, since they can keep the range open.
If you look closely, there's no "Out of Range" at strict personal scale, either. There is, however, an assumption that people realize that there are distances beyond "Long Range".

Scotty

  • Alpha Strike Guru by appointment to the FWLM
  • Catalyst Demo Team
  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 10231
Re: MechWarrior: Destiny
« Reply #514 on: 22 September 2019, 21:29:31 »
Warhammer (GW) is struggling massively right now, as there steal their wallet and run them dry business model is falling them.

Games Workshop made over 74 million pounds in profit last year on the back of almost 230 million pounds (not dollars) in total revenue (link is a pdf available as a source on wikipedia).  They're not struggling at all.
Catalyst Demo Agent #679

Kansas City players, or people who are just passing through the area, come join us at the Geekery just off Shawnee Mission Parkway for BattleTech!  Current days are Tuesdays in the afternoon and evening.  I can't make every single week, but odds are pretty good that somebody will be there.

Mendou

  • Sergeant
  • *
  • Posts: 178
Re: MechWarrior: Destiny
« Reply #515 on: 22 September 2019, 21:33:04 »
Also I feel it fair to point out that a spreadsheet isn't strictly necessary for AToW.  It really depends on how organized you are as an individual.

Especially if you use point buy instead of module.
I've yet to use a spreadsheet for any of my numerous unused AToW characters, and all have been built with life path modules. Admittedly, my method involves a lot of copying and pasting to show my work, and totaling spent/unspent XP by hand at every step. . . . (An example is attached.)

Xan

  • Recruit
  • *
  • Posts: 4
Re: MechWarrior: Destiny
« Reply #516 on: 22 September 2019, 21:38:04 »
So I have just done a quick reading of the rules, and will be doing a more through read through latter but here are my first impressions.  These are thoughts from someone with little RPG experience (some Star Wars D20, ~10 years ago).

The narrative passing system is interesting to me.  It kinda reminds me what my friends and I used to do as we were eating fast food after a night at the bars, and creating ridiculous scenarios that just kept building off each other.  "What if on the way home this happens"  "And then this happened", "then you did this!"  These scenarios were always hilarious (to us, in an altered state), but usually devolved pretty quickly into some NSFW craziness.  I think I like the idea of the passing narrative system, however I'm a little worried it might take a special group to keep a game going for a months on end.

I like relative lack of GM work here, compared to say the Star Wars D20, as if I were to try and get a local game going I know i would have to GM it, and this system seems for friendly to a new GM.  I have two folks who do DnD I might be able to talk into trying this.  One is big into BT, and one I don't believe has played it.  (I'll fix that at some point).

I like the lack of crunch, as I think it could lead to online games being playable.  I lurk over on the FFG forums for the Star Wars game, and it seems to run pretty well as a PbP.  And this seems even less rule intensive than that system (I do not currently own any of the FFG books).  I have seen attempts at the Star Wars D20 system online, and it requires maps and a whole lot of stuff, that just doesn't work as well online without some major up front time investment.

Just some first thoughts.

*Edit*  Also I really like the art that is in this.
« Last Edit: 22 September 2019, 21:58:30 by Xan »

victor_shaw

  • Warrant Officer
  • *
  • Posts: 608
Re: MechWarrior: Destiny
« Reply #517 on: 22 September 2019, 21:40:09 »
The point I'm making is that two examples don't make a statistical trend. Is it thriving where you live? That's awesome. I hope you continue to enjoy it. Is it dead here? Absolutely. And that's a shame. Meanwhile, FFG and X-Wing is constantly being played everywhere I look. The thing is I don't want to bring it back because I don't want to run Total Warfare. It's not my cup of tea. Nor is it apparently the cup of tea for the majority of people where I live, otherwise it'd still be going. People in my area should be able to experience BattleTech in a way that makes sense for them. The market will decide which one is more successful. It doesn't make one better than the other. It doesn't have to mean one is "obsolete". It's just different.

But if Battletech is dead in your area, no one is experiencing it, so why would how they want to experience BattleTech matter.
I sorry to put it this way but CGL changing how battletech worked, is not going to change that or automatically revitalize the community in your area, but it could kill it in other areas. It takes work to build a gaming community and people passionate about the game. I know I've done it with friend in my area with L5R 4th. It does not just happen because a new version comes out.

Daryk

  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 10671
  • The Double Deuce II/II-σ
Re: MechWarrior: Destiny
« Reply #518 on: 22 September 2019, 21:42:16 »
If you look closely, there's no "Out of Range" at strict personal scale, either. There is, however, an assumption that people realize that there are distances beyond "Long Range".
Page 55 has a diagram with explicit "Out of Range" for Personal Scale, but not 'mech.

victor_shaw

  • Warrant Officer
  • *
  • Posts: 608
Re: MechWarrior: Destiny
« Reply #519 on: 22 September 2019, 21:44:44 »
Games Workshop made over 74 million pounds in profit last year on the back of almost 230 million pounds (not dollars) in total revenue (link is a pdf available as a source on wikipedia).  They're not struggling at all.

Ok have not played warhammer for about 20 year now and was just going by what I was told from people that do.

Mendou

  • Sergeant
  • *
  • Posts: 178
Re: MechWarrior: Destiny
« Reply #520 on: 22 September 2019, 21:51:45 »
Count me as one of the people who likes Destiny's simpler character creation. I had a lot of fun with a MechWarrior 3rd campaign a number of years ago, and enjoy building AToW characters for fun (though I've not had the opportunity to play any of them--my gaming group is now too busy with other things like families, jobs, and mortgages), but I'm more than happy to have a simpler way to build characters. My biggest problem with the system so far, to be honest, is trying to come up with enough Cues. . . .

And I've played BattleTech since around 1990 (I was a bit young and a bit distant from any gaming stores when the ads for "BattleDroids" were published in the comics I read in 1984), so I'm quite familiar with the pre-Clan era and basically every company which published BattleTech rules over the past thirty years. In my opinion, the setting can work with the Destiny ruleset as easily as it did with any other BattleTech/MechWarrior RPG iteration. The rules and level of crunch aren't nearly so important as capturing the feel of the setting, which has moved from dystopian to space opera at varying levels in the past 35 years. As long as the text and narrative structure can capture the feel of the Inner Sphere, Destiny should work well for roleplaying there.

Mendou

  • Sergeant
  • *
  • Posts: 178
Re: MechWarrior: Destiny
« Reply #521 on: 22 September 2019, 21:58:14 »
Page 55 has a diagram with explicit "Out of Range" for Personal Scale, but not 'mech.
Only because that's as far as the diagram needs to go to include the full length of Long Range for 'Mech Scale as compared to Personal Scale. It corresponds exactly to the optional "Using Miniatures" box on the same page (page 65, rather than 55). There are two squares for each range listed in the box--the writers didn't feel it was necessary to point out that beyond seven squares was out of range, just like they didn't include an "Out of Range" line in the personal combat table on page 36, nor for that matter to include an "out of range" line in any iteration of ranges in any BattleTech product in the last 35 years.

SteelShrike

  • Recruit
  • *
  • Posts: 14
Re: MechWarrior: Destiny
« Reply #522 on: 22 September 2019, 22:04:12 »
But if Battletech is dead in your area, no one is experiencing it, so why would how they want to experience BattleTech matter.
I sorry to put it this way but CGL changing how battletech worked, is not going to change that or automatically revitalize the community in your area, but it could kill it in other areas. It takes work to build a gaming community and people passionate about the game. I know I've done it with friend in my area with L5R 4th. It does not just happen because a new version comes out.

Because I have people who WANT to experience BattleTech. Just not in its current form. And I'm eager to introduce them to it, but it also needs to be in a way that's fun for all of us.

If you're afraid your group is going to disolve just because a new form of the game emerges, I don't know what to tell you. If they're as passionate about it as you are, I don't feel like you have anything to worry about. You'll continue to keep playing the game you love for years to come. But those of us who want a change should be allowed to have it as well.

pixelgeek

  • Sergeant
  • *
  • Posts: 182
    • My blog
Re: MechWarrior: Destiny
« Reply #523 on: 22 September 2019, 22:13:57 »
Ok have not played warhammer for about 20 year now and was just going by what I was told from people that do.

Also FFG isn’t its own company anymore and is owned by Asmodee

victor_shaw

  • Warrant Officer
  • *
  • Posts: 608
Re: MechWarrior: Destiny
« Reply #524 on: 22 September 2019, 22:35:00 »
Because I have people who WANT to experience BattleTech. Just not in its current form. And I'm eager to introduce them to it, but it also needs to be in a way that's fun for all of us.

If you're afraid your group is going to disolve just because a new form of the game emerges, I don't know what to tell you. If they're as passionate about it as you are, I don't feel like you have anything to worry about. You'll continue to keep playing the game you love for years to come. But those of us who want a change should be allowed to have it as well.

First, You know that is not what I meant at all.
"but it could kill it in other areas" was not about me and my friends not playing any more it was about it being killed in the area for CGL.
And how do CGL decide which people to support, are the people in you area that are supporting them now more important that the one in my area that are?
Do they go outside the current community to all the shops and ask why people are not play the current version and what they want changed to support it or support the current community that just invested 2.5 million into the current game.
I'm not saying that you are totally wrong here, but how many people in your community can you guaranty will start buying Battletech products if they change it for them?
But lets say CGL needs 8,000 people buying most of their new products to stay in business, they have 11,000 and decide to overhaul the system for non-current players that claim they will play if they change the game, half of those like the new system and start buy it numbering around 1,000, but half the current players don't like the new system decide to stop buying new battletech and just play the old system they already have. So that leaves 5,500 old players and 1,000 new players for a total of 6,500 player. CGL just changed themselves out of business. (numbers just for demonstration and have no true meaning)
The points are,
1. Battletech popularity has been up and down may times over it 35 year and its still here with the same old system.
2. Change does not always guarantee success.
3. People claiming that they would play this if they change that is sometimes just talk.
4. It's not wise to change things when you on an upwards swing in business, but don't wait till you hit the bottom either.
« Last Edit: 22 September 2019, 22:42:10 by victor_shaw »

ActionButler

  • Global Moderator
  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 3335
Re: MechWarrior: Destiny
« Reply #525 on: 22 September 2019, 22:35:57 »
How do we feel about the equipment list?

I’m kind of scratching my head over the fact that there are so many different variations of melee weapons, but a relatively small collection of firearms.  Do we really need rules for a scimitar?  Especially if we don’t have a stat line for an assault rifle?

I’d also like to see the non-weapon equipment list given a little more depth.
Experimental Technical Readout: The School
http://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php?topic=56420.0

victor_shaw

  • Warrant Officer
  • *
  • Posts: 608
Re: MechWarrior: Destiny
« Reply #526 on: 22 September 2019, 22:40:39 »
Also FFG isn’t its own company anymore and is owned by Asmodee

I know that but don't see why it's important as even under Asmodee FFG bought the L5R IP off AEG not Asmodee.
Normally, in these umbrella type setups the parent company leaves the sub-companies to run themselves.

SteelShrike

  • Recruit
  • *
  • Posts: 14
Re: MechWarrior: Destiny
« Reply #527 on: 22 September 2019, 22:45:06 »
First, You know that is not what I meant at all.
"but it could kill it in other areas" was not about me and my friends not playing any more it was about it being killed in the area for CGL.
And how do CGL decide which people to support, are the people in you area that are supporting them now more important that the one in my area that are?
Do they go outside the current community to all the shops and ask why people are not play the current version and what they want changed to support it or support the current community that just invested 2.5 million into the current game.
I'm not saying that you are totally wrong here, but how many people in your community can you guaranty will start buying Battletech products if they change it for them?
But lets say CGL needs 8,000 people buying most of their new products to stay in business, they have 11,000 and decide to overhaul the system for non-current players that claim they will play if they change the game, half of those like the new system and start buy it numbering around 1,000, but half the current players don't like the new system decide to stop buying new battletech and just play the old system they already have. So that leaves 5,500 old players and 1,000 new players for a total of 6,500 player. CGL just changed themselves out of business. (numbers just for demonstration and have not true meaning)
The points are,
1. Battletech popularity has been up and down may times over it 35 year and its still here with the same old system.
2. Change does not always guarantee success.
3. People claiming that they would play this if they change that is sometimes just talk.
4. It's not wise to change things when you on an upwards swing in business, but don't wait till you hit the bottom either.

That all comes down to speculating about information we don't really have access to. I'd like to think CGL is smart enough about running a business that they know what they're getting into. If they didn't feel like there was a market for it, they wouldn't be doing it.

As for how CGL decides who to support? Whichever way the market takes them. It's as simple as that.

Also, they don't have to go around to shops to ask people why they're not playing. They can look at market trends and all the feedback on various forums and reddits all over the internet. The information for them is there to make smart decisions.

victor_shaw

  • Warrant Officer
  • *
  • Posts: 608
Re: MechWarrior: Destiny
« Reply #528 on: 22 September 2019, 23:01:33 »
That all comes down to speculating about information we don't really have access to. I'd like to think CGL is smart enough about running a business that they know what they're getting into. If they didn't feel like there was a market for it, they wouldn't be doing it.

As for how CGL decides who to support? Whichever way the market takes them. It's as simple as that.

Also, they don't have to go around to shops to ask people why they're not playing. They can look at market trends and all the feedback on various forums and reddits all over the internet. The information for them is there to make smart decisions.

And as you say we don't have the data so maybe they have looked into it and found that the current system gives them the best bang for the buck. As we don't have the market data on hand, neither you or I is qualified to make the decision that the need to change or stay the same. For all we know the current game is doing fine.
I do know that CGL stated during the AMA 2 that A game of armored combat is on it 4th-5th reprinting at this time and that the current system seems to be selling well, not sure if this is sustainable or if they are making the money they need to keep going off it, but it would indicate that the current system still has a strong market from the outside looking in.
« Last Edit: 22 September 2019, 23:03:40 by victor_shaw »

SteelShrike

  • Recruit
  • *
  • Posts: 14
Re: MechWarrior: Destiny
« Reply #529 on: 22 September 2019, 23:26:18 »
And as you say we don't have the data so maybe they have looked into it and found that the current system gives them the best bang for the buck. As we don't have the market data on hand, neither you or I is qualified to make the decision that the need to change or stay the same. For all we know the current game is doing fine.
I do know that CGL stated during the AMA 2 that A game of armored combat is on it 4th-5th reprinting at this time that the current system seems to be selling well, not sure if this is sustainable or if they are making the money they need to keep going off it, but it would indicate that the current system sill has a strong market from the outside.

For sure. I think it's selling well enough to sustain itself. But sustaining itself and being successful enough to really grow the game are two very different things. Eventually they'll hit peak saturation with the core box set, and then it's going to depend on how well miniatures sell. And that's where games like X-Wing end up thriving. I think TW's continued success will boil down to how willing people are to buy frequent miniature packs over continuing to use the same collection they've been using over the last 30 years.

I think it's important to reiterate that the game literally hasn't changed in 13 years, and likely isn't in the near future with the new Total Warfare reprints. They've put out some cool Historicals and have expanded the lore over the years, but the game itself? Pretty much nothing has come out to really impact Total Warfare itself. In my opinion, that means if CGL wanted to shift resources to something new, literally nothing changes. They can continue to reprint the current set of rules for those who want to play it, and Total Warfare goes into legacy support. There's very little they'd have to do to keep it going in its current state.

Even with the new Clan Invasion set, the most exciting thing about it is arguably the new miniature sculpts. Those could be backwards and forwards compatible to a new system if they wanted it to be. Otherwise, it's still the same game we've always been playing, just repackaged. And with Print on Demand, Total Warfare doesn't need to completely go away if they wanted to do something new. And if whatever new thing they try ends up failing, they at least still have Total Warfare to fall back on.

I think ultimately though, we're just just going to have to wait and see. All this boils down to it's worth giving a shot and seeing where it goes, and if it fails, it's likely not the end of the world either.
« Last Edit: 22 September 2019, 23:27:51 by SteelShrike »

Lyran Wolf

  • Come the Millenial!
  • Catalyst Demo Team
  • Corporal
  • *
  • Posts: 89
Re: MechWarrior: Destiny
« Reply #530 on: 22 September 2019, 23:32:23 »
So I am still doing an in depth read of the rules but here are my thoughts so far.

Character creation - hits some nostalgia and familiarity buttons while being relatively simple.  Very easy to tweak and customize.  I tried my hand at putting together a MAD-9S for a Jihad character and it worked fine.  Even tried a Savage Wolf A, what I went with for ATMs would need some play testing but the framework was easy to get it going.

Actual use - I doubt I will actually play the game, but I will use it to create TW and AS characters.  I am already eyeing the mech combat rules as a means to provide some game feel to some fan-fiction without breaking out full on TW.  Add that battletech flavor of randomness every once in a while and otherwise make sure things stay reasonable.

Hybrid potential - As others have mentioned the mech combat rules have me thinking of ways to hang it on AS and get something halfway between TW and AS.


I had some words weighing in on the success of the kickstarter, core community, and reluctance to change.  Rather than derail a MWD thread I will try and distill, we can discuss in another thread if people find it interesting.
I think the success of the kickstarter may have more to do with models, read, sweet, sweet 'mechs than rulesets.  In fact taking the GW example, their business model is really, well... models.  I think there is room for frank discussions on what a profitable business model for battletech might look like, what will grab the most newcomers.
CDT Agent #1000

SteelShrike

  • Recruit
  • *
  • Posts: 14
Re: MechWarrior: Destiny
« Reply #531 on: 22 September 2019, 23:44:35 »
Hybrid potential - As others have mentioned the mech combat rules have me thinking of ways to hang it on AS and get something halfway between TW and AS.

That was my first thought as well seeing the Mech Combat rules. I think it'd be really easy to use Alpha Strike movement and ranges and combine them with the MWD damage and combat system. I'm kinda eager to try this actually and have gotten at least one person on board to experiment with it with me in the near future. Alpha Strike I kinda felt lost a little too much by getting rid of hit locations and individual weapons. This would make the perfect blend.

Also, the BattleTech/Alpha Strike character sheets are fantastic. I'm really torn between whether or not I'd use them over the Destiny sheets if I were to run a campaign, just because it'd be so much easier to integrate if I did run a hybrid MWD/Alpha Strike campaign.

Fear Factory

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 3577
  • Designing the Enemy
Re: MechWarrior: Destiny
« Reply #532 on: 23 September 2019, 00:26:47 »
I like the idea of abstract combat, but I also like the idea of using this system with a hex map without using Total Warfare. Might be worth giving it a shot using Destiny conversion, but sticking with Alpha Strike movement and range. Or just using Destiny on a hex map. No idea what would work better.

dsteelegm

  • Recruit
  • *
  • Posts: 4
Re: MechWarrior: Destiny
« Reply #533 on: 23 September 2019, 01:09:10 »
Running Destiny tomorrow night with one of my regular groups. Never run a game that has this shared narrative. I couldn't tell from reading the rules how much of the mission briefing is intended to be shared with players. Do they get the whole brief and then we get to explore how they move through the scenes? Or are cues and scenes for game masters only?

Ursus Maior

  • Master Sergeant
  • *
  • Posts: 352
  • Just here for a little mayhem.
Re: MechWarrior: Destiny
« Reply #534 on: 23 September 2019, 02:19:49 »
Games Workshop made over 74 million pounds in profit last year on the back of almost 230 million pounds (not dollars) in total revenue (link is a pdf available as a source on wikipedia).  They're not struggling at all.
Thanks for pulling this out of the web, before I had to. No, GW is not struggling, not by a long shot. What they realized, however, was that their old business model was failing and they turned their ship around and revamped most of their product line. They even broke with former company rules like 1) the universes are stagnant or 2) small systems get no support after release.

Today, they're throwing board games into the market to support their miniature wargames and reanimate older, smaller games to mutually support Warhammer 40k and Warhammer Fantasy. I haven't touched GW products in a long time, but that revival was some awesome management turnaround. Of course, it's easier to do that with their cash and it's not a blueprint for a much smaller company like CGL, but you still have to nod at GW for succeeding so much. 8)
liber et infractus

Ursus Maior

  • Master Sergeant
  • *
  • Posts: 352
  • Just here for a little mayhem.
Re: MechWarrior: Destiny
« Reply #535 on: 23 September 2019, 02:29:17 »
How do we feel about the equipment list?

I’m kind of scratching my head over the fact that there are so many different variations of melee weapons, but a relatively small collection of firearms.  Do we really need rules for a scimitar?  Especially if we don’t have a stat line for an assault rifle?

I’d also like to see the non-weapon equipment list given a little more depth.
Yeah, that strikes me as odd, too. I also found it slightly troubling that each of the four Life Modules supposedly adds something to the character, but on p. 152 none of the Factions seem to contribute to the characters. Now, I would be fine with just one point in Protocol (maybe add specialties per Faction here?), but I think that some cultural differences could be made for the 3025 era as well as for later eras.
liber et infractus

Ursus Maior

  • Master Sergeant
  • *
  • Posts: 352
  • Just here for a little mayhem.
Re: MechWarrior: Destiny
« Reply #536 on: 23 September 2019, 02:46:41 »
As for how CGL decides who to support? Whichever way the market takes them. It's as simple as that.
This, exactly this. Even, if they decide to kill new products for TW, AS and AtoW and make MWD the new RPG and its miniature rules their new flagship wargame, I would be okay with that. First of all, I would have to be, it's not my decision. And second of all, I want a fully supported and functional BTU wargame. And after 35 years, I can play the heck out of BatteTech using the current line of books. As long as they are available as PDF or (better) POD, this can last until 3025 and back.

There will be some change, it's inevitable, and better it's well managed and wanted change (by CGL) than an implosion and another shattering of the IP.

CGL: You got the cash now, go make it count.
liber et infractus

SCC

  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 7619
Re: MechWarrior: Destiny
« Reply #537 on: 23 September 2019, 02:47:40 »
Detective Work: Investigation
Fixing: Technician
Intrusion: Depends on your approach, could be any one of several skills
Medicine: MedTech
Social Engineering: Depends on your approach, can include Acting, Intimidation, Protocol, Disguise, Negotiation
Technology: Technician
Transportation: Piloting

The skill descriptions pretty much cover almost everything, the only thing I see missing is something that's explicitly related to picking locks. Electronic locks are covered by Computers, mechanical locks are another thing.
First of all I was pulling those terms from a list of skill catagories that every party should be able to cover, and in some cases each character should cover. Next, Fixing in this case means working with or being a fixer or fence. Intrusion looks to be up to 8 skills, several of which every party member should have. Transportation also covers driving a civilian vehicle, which isn't covered by the skills as they stand, so if your players get into a car case, they're going to crash in short order.

Daryk

  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 10671
  • The Double Deuce II/II-σ
Re: MechWarrior: Destiny
« Reply #538 on: 23 September 2019, 05:04:09 »
Only because that's as far as the diagram needs to go to include the full length of Long Range for 'Mech Scale as compared to Personal Scale. It corresponds exactly to the optional "Using Miniatures" box on the same page (page 65, rather than 55). There are two squares for each range listed in the box--the writers didn't feel it was necessary to point out that beyond seven squares was out of range, just like they didn't include an "Out of Range" line in the personal combat table on page 36, nor for that matter to include an "out of range" line in any iteration of ranges in any BattleTech product in the last 35 years.
Sorry for the typo, page 65 is the correct page number for the diagram.  I believe page 65 overrides page 36's lack of "out of range" (or rather, page 38's, where is says 2+ is "Far").  For 'mech scale, the problem is on page 42 where they list the movement costs of moving between ranges, but provide no way to move out of range.  Four movement points would be reasonable.

Maelwys

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 4488
Re: MechWarrior: Destiny
« Reply #539 on: 23 September 2019, 08:02:29 »
Does anyone else find it incredibly bizarre that Perception is Int+Wil, unless you have the Perception skill, in which case its Int+Perception?


 

Register