I once toyed with a system that I thought showed promise (but never really had a chance to implement, as my 'regular gaming' days were behind me, I just didn't realize it yet...):<br><br>The basic premise is that EVERYONE aims - all the time. Nobody just "swings blindly" at a combat opponent, or "shoots blindly" at a target. My goal was to resolve a hit in one roll (of multiple dice, perhaps).
<br><br>So I started with single sheet of 8 1/2 x 11 paper, with an outline drawing of a standing humanoid figure on the front, side view on the back. Then two more sheets of "crouching" front/side, and prone front/side. I then used a transparent overlay and drew concentric circles, as well as 12 radiant lines. The player would place the overlay on the representative target, showing his intended point of aim. How well the player succeeded in 'beating' his skill roll, determined how closely to the center point his strike landed, with the radial deviation just a random d12 roll. (Eventually I settled on a separate asymmetric overlay for slashing/blunt weapons as well. The "circular" template would be used for missile weapons and thrusting attacks only.) Other considered tweaks were that the lighter, more nimble weapons would have a 'finer' grain of deviation, while larger, heavier, bulkier weapons would use a coarser grid.
<br><br>For missile fire, it worked better as you could use 2/3, half, quarter, even 1/8 scale outline pictures with the same grid, and rather than arbitrarily reducing the shooter's 'chance to succeed' by range, just using the smaller target sheeets made it NATURALLY harder to hit distant foes.
<br><br>Irregular cover/concealment was even simpler - you could just lay whatever represented cover over the target sheet, and depending on where the character's shot landed, either cause damage, resolve penetrating the (soft cover/concealment) barrier, or declare it a 'miss'.
<br><br>It made shooting into melee MUCH riskier - with transparent-enough paper, you could stack 4, 5, even 6 sheets and still see the outlines, and just let the arrow hit whomever it hits.<br><br>Recognizing that there were a bulk of problems unresolved (like non humanoid targets for one), I set it aside uncompleted but I always wondered how well it would have worked in practice. Probably too much sheet-switching (ala Rolemaster) and ultimately too complex but now, with computers that could resolve the apparent size of the target, and the aimpoint/landing point discrepancy instantly...
<br><br><div><span class="gmail_quote">On 5/25/06, <b class="gmail_sendername">Simon Phipp</b> <<a href="mailto:soltakss@yahoo.com">soltakss@yahoo.com</a>> wrote:</span><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<div><div>Steve Perrin:<br>> Our playtests of the previous MRQ system showed that allowing any chance to avoid armor was disastrous for > the target. Pick location, yes, do extra damage, yes, but not ignore armor.<br>
</div> <div>Yes, I'm coming to that conclusion. I think I'll have some trollkin do a mass sling/multimissile barrage against one of the PCs, I'll give them 40% to hit, 20% ignoring armour and see how the PCs like it. They'll soon agree to take that combat option out.
</div></div></blockquote></div><br>