Karagin
04/28/22 06:08 PM
70.118.172.64
|
So I have a friend who wants to learn the tabletop Battletech. He has seen the miniatures I have and wants to play.
After several games, I introduce him to the tech found in TRO2750, aka Star League tech. He loves it. Then he had this question.
So you have a mech with CASE, and your mech is BEHIND said mech, that mech takes damage that enters the side torso and causes a critical hit to the ammo, when the CASE does its job of venting the blast does the mech behind it take any damage.
I told him nothing in the rules for that, but it's a good question.
Thoughts on this?
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
Cray
04/28/22 07:21 PM
71.47.208.18
|
Technically, no, the blast vented by exploding CASE magically disappears at the back of the 'Mech, leaving...
*swarming elementals on your 'Mech,
*nearby infantry,
*'Mechs on your 6, and
*kittens in a tree behind you
...unharmed.
The optional ammunition explosion rules of Tactical Operations (p. 78) explicitly only apply to CASE-less units. If you've got CASE then the explosion becomes harmless instantly.
Perfectly realistic? Hardly. Simpler? Yes.
Mike Miller, Materials Engineer
Disclaimer: Anything stated in this post is unofficial and non-canon unless directly quoted from a published book. Random internet musings of a BattleTech writer are not canon.
|
Karagin
04/28/22 09:30 PM
70.118.172.64
|
I figured, but he asked and it had me wondering as well. Though it would make for an interesting RPG side item. And one of those you had to be there stories told by Mechwarriors in bars....
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
LordRuthermore
04/29/22 06:40 AM
87.139.207.25
|
For a House Rule, you could adapt the TacOps and have CASE-equipped units deal similar damage, but only to the hex directly behind it. 'Realistically', it would make more sense to cause damage elsewhere by a focused blast than the normal spread-out ammo explosion.
|
Cray
04/29/22 09:59 AM
71.47.208.18
|
Quote:
For a House Rule, you could adapt the TacOps and have CASE-equipped units deal similar damage, but only to the hex directly behind it.
I was going to say the same thing. Rather than same hex and adjacent hexes, apply to rear arc only.
Mike Miller, Materials Engineer
Disclaimer: Anything stated in this post is unofficial and non-canon unless directly quoted from a published book. Random internet musings of a BattleTech writer are not canon.
|
Karagin
04/29/22 10:07 AM
70.118.172.64
|
A good place to start.
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
Frabby
05/05/22 04:40 AM
80.187.71.124
|
If the full force was directed rearward, physics dictate the explosion would impart a forward momentum, especially if strong enough to cause area damage. It would push the 'Mech forward one hex at the very least.
My take on it is that CASE will
a) see to it that the explosion is more of a chain reaction of individually weaker charges going off in sequence instead of one big explosion;
b) safely vents it upwards, not backwards, at least to some degree.
So no BT scale damage. But that's just my interpretation of the (lack of) rules.
|
ghostrider
05/05/22 11:39 AM
45.51.181.83
|
If you really want to make it more realistic, figure on a dice roll to see how much of the damage actually transfers to any units deemed within the blast radius.
Thus little quirks could be explained away with the dice roll.
Such as, the blast happened in a way that the explosion was more to one side or the other.
Shrapnel was spread out/concentrated like a shot gun blast.
Even risk having limbs fly off, as the explosion is only on one side of the mech. This would be more likely if a limb was where the explosion happened.
A house rule might be needed for the times where a physical attack is what set off the explosion.
|