Rule question - Blind Fire

[General Pain]

Hi all.... I've been playing quite a bit of LAS VEGAS 2, and blind fire is a major part of the game (emptying clip without showing more than parts of your hands and arms) - so how would you determine said rule

(half STR & half skill for example)

[kcdusk]

1 in 20 chance of each "burst" hitting. So a gun with ROF of 5 gets 5 rolls of the D20 with a "1" meaning a burst hit. Then, for each burst that hits, roll a D6 and subtract 3 from the roll and thats how many bullets in the burst hit home.

With blind firing i dont think there is going to be any difference in accuracy from a civilian or a spec ops character. So this simple rule of 1 in 20 means everyone gets the same chance. It also reflects maximum fire down field and little to no real accuracy.

[Marc]

Here's my interpretation, trying not to present a too much contrived modification from the v2 or v2.2 set of rules:

Blind fire:
-Non-effective beyond the short range of the weapon.
-At short range, only roll for danger zone, accordingly to the rules and with one additional level of difficulty, adjusting the number of effective bullets that reach the target.

So, consider a character with Small Arms (Rifle):12 and Strenght: 6, performing blind fire from a corner and firing 2 burst with an M249SAW (ROF 10) at short range. He/she or the GM if the character knows nothing about the target area, must designate roughly an area 10m wide (max.) where to send the burst (the danger zone described in the set of rules). Accordingly to the rules, if we consider only the danger zone, (half the bullets that missed the target), you reduce the bullets in the area by half (10 bullets). Total recoil of 6 gives you no penalties for Strenght/Recoil. One level of difficulty higher with a ROF 10 weapon and you loss 3 more bullets. 7 bullets reach the area. Then roll for hits (Impossible, so 3 or less). Because of the danger zone, you must try to distribute the hits among all the possible targets, repeating target only if the number of hits obtained exceed the number of possible targets in the danger zone.

[leonpoi]

Here's my interpretation, trying not to present a too much contrived modification from the v2 or v2.2 set of rules:

Blind fire:
-Non-effective beyond the short range of the weapon.
-At short range, only roll for danger zone, accordingly to the rules and with one additional level of difficulty, adjusting the number of effective bullets that reach the target.

So, consider a character with Small Arms (Rifle):12 and Strenght: 6, performing blind fire from a corner and firing 2 burst with an M249SAW (ROF 10) at short range. He/she or the GM if the character knows nothing about the target area, must designate roughly an area 10m wide (max.) where to send the burst (the danger zone described in the set of rules). Accordingly to the rules, if we consider only the danger zone, (half the bullets that missed the target), you reduce the bullets in the area by half (10 bullets). Total recoil of 6 gives you no penalties for Strenght/Recoil. One level of difficulty higher with a ROF 10 weapon and you loss 3 more bullets. 7 bullets reach the area. Then roll for hits (Impossible, so 3 or less). Because of the danger zone, you must try to distribute the hits among all the possible targets, repeating target only if the number of hits obtained exceed the number of possible targets in the danger zone.

That is probably similar to how I would rule it. Shooting at a target that is obscured, say by a corn-field, is +1 difficulty according to v2.2, and surely it's going to be as hard or harder than that. I would personally discourage it and make it +2 difficulty - so in the above example 4 bullet rolls out of the original 10; but that's that my take on it.

[Marc]

That is probably similar to how I would rule it. Shooting at a target that is obscured, say by a corn-field, is +1 difficulty according to v2.2, and surely it's going to be as hard or harder than that. I would personally discourage it and make it +2 difficulty - so in the above example 4 bullet rolls out of the original 10; but that's that my take on it.

Mmmmm...I agree with you. +2 Difficulty levels seem more appropriate. Thanks for the suggestion.