What is a skill rank really worth?

[pantsorama]

I just want to quote the above to draw attention to it (since there is no "like" option on the forum). Target shooting is very different from combat. I've done a fair bit of archery and I can hit my target pretty well after I have had a couple of practice rounds each spring. However, I doubt I could hit a moving target very well.

I think you can still use the same resolution. Just take into account the state of the target : immobile, does not defend in any way, unaware of attack. So 0 DB, and all of the above bonuses apply : Flank, Rear, Surprise, and I would throw in Stunned at least as well. In old RMSS that translates into a +75 modifier. The only negative modifier you get is range (and reload if you're shooting as fast as you can). I's fairly difficult to miss in those conditions, except at long ranges - and it's a 100 modifier difference with combat situation against a target that has a shield ready (even if they are not actually defending).

Of course, where it breaks down is that there is no reason why AT1 would be harder to hit than ATx (10 or 20) on a target dummy. But that's a problem with the Armour system in general (the armour ratings assign a DB penalty for wearing armour *and* the combat table makes it easier to hit someone in heavier armour - harder to wound, but easier to hit. You get the impression that the encumbrance penalty for armour is applied twice).

Eh.  For target shooting, just treat the shot as a static maneuver based on their bow skill.

[MisterK]

Eh.  For target shooting, just treat the shot as a static maneuver based on their bow skill.

Of course. But then, you could use the standard static manoeuvre table for all combat actions as well.
Now there's a thought...

[pantsorama]

Eh.  For target shooting, just treat the shot as a static maneuver based on their bow skill.

Of course. But then, you could use the standard static manoeuvre table for all combat actions as well.
Now there's a thought...

I guess what I am pointing out is that if it doesn't have armor treat it like you would any other skill.  The combat tables are there for combat.

[MisterK]

Eh.  For target shooting, just treat the shot as a static maneuver based on their bow skill.

Of course. But then, you could use the standard static manoeuvre table for all combat actions as well.
Now there's a thought...

I guess what I am pointing out is that if it doesn't have armor treat it like you would any other skill.  The combat tables are there for combat.

The thing is, it *can* have armour. There are actually very interesting videos on Youtube about people building medieval weapons and trying them out on armoured dummies (with various armours to see the weapon penetration and effects). I don't think there is a significant difference between, say, an immobile sentry and an immobile dummy target armoured the same way - reactive avoidance is defined by defensive bonus and situational bonuses. If we can't use the same resolution for similar situations, then there is an issue.

[jdale]

Of course. But then, you could use the standard static manoeuvre table for all combat actions as well.
Now there's a thought...

Some discussion of that thought: https://ironcrown.co.uk/ICEforums/index.php?topic=20198.0


Of course I think the difference here is not really about armor at all, it's about a completely static target in a calm environment. Worlds apart from a dynamic target moving in an environment where the archer also has to be thinking about their own safety.

[MisterK]

Of course I think the difference here is not really about armor at all, it's about a completely static target in a calm environment. Worlds apart from a dynamic target moving in an environment where the archer also has to be thinking about their own safety.

I agree that the environment is different, but I believe it would be reflected in some modifiers. After all, taking the example I presented before, if you're shooting from a hidden position onto an unsuspecting, static sentry, you are not in any danger (at least until you've shot) and the sentry is not moving. Does that mean that, in this case, you would use the static manoeuver table to see if the sentry is hit ? How would you resolve the wound then ?
And if you use the combat table in that case, why not use it for the dummy as well ?

Since the RAW make it difficult to use the static manoeuver table for all combat actions, I would tend to think that the reverse (using the combat table for dummy target shooting) would be more appropriate. Of course, modifiers would be appropriate (at least the same as those for a static, unsuspecting sentry).