Diving for Cover

By Smokes, in Dark Heresy Rules Questions

Quick question that came up in our game last night, and we were a little unsure of the proper way to proceed.

PC is standing near (2m) a wall and 4 slavers get the drop on him. They begin to fire (3 shot guns and 1 rifle) and for his first reaction, he decided to dive for cover (-10 agility test to negate shot and be declared in cover). So the PC succeeds, negating the first shot against him. He is now behind a metal wall, but what about the other 3 shooters? Technically, all of the bad guys are firing at the same time, so do their shots get resolved before the PC is considered in cover, or is the PC now safe for making 1 dodge roll?

Thanks

I would suggest that the pc is in cover from all the attacks, as he is reacting to all their fire upon him. Combat is deadly in Dark heresy, so i think it is fair to give him this chance. His attackers can still fire at him through the cover.

I would say Yes, all shots get resolved before he is finished moving to cover.

His official rulesy reaction was a dodge (to dive for cover) in response to the guns which is something you can only do to one attack barring Step Aside. Allowing all attacks to be dodged in such a fashion would be a hit against the functionality and worth of Step Aside if all you have to do to doge 200 hundred shots is dive for cover. It would work if he was already in cover, but as you pointed out, they got the drop on him, they started shooting before he moved, and I assume all of them did. Therefore they all were pulling the trigger before he was in or reached cover. He dodged one as he flew to the cover, but not the others as they were all blazing away at him at once (although he could still "dodge" them as he sails through the air if they miss their BS check to hit him). However, I would throw him a bone and actually give the other shots a -20 for trying to hit a moving target. But that's the key, they'd be shooting while he's moving, not waiting for him to finish moving or waiting for their body to finish his shot (the one that caused the movement, so, technically, all their shots caused the movement) before they each took their shot in a nice and orderly fashion.

Edit: anouther option if he needs a bone in tis situation would be to allow him to negate one shot for a successful agl test +1 per DoS as if he were dodging autofire, only it's a salvo from several gunmen instead of a stream from one. Those he dosen't negate hit him before he hit's cover. Actualy, I rather like that...

Edit #2: However, i would rule that doing such will cost him half an action when his turn comes around, just swo Step Asside dosn't have all the wind taken from it and to represent the extra effort he put forth in that dive for cover as opposed to just ducking and scuttling about. A fair trade for negating multiple shots I would think.

I am the GM for the game Smokes was referencing. The reason it was really an issue was that the PC had delayed and was out in the open. When all his opponents(the 4 shooters) began to fire, the PC made agility tests vs. all the shooters to act 1st and failed each one, letting the slavers get their shots off first.

He dodged the 1st roll with a -10 Dive For Cover option and thought that he now had cover from all the shooters. I argued that they were all firing simultaneously, but I was rolling them one at a time and not 4 sets of dice at once, so there was no '1st shooter'(they were acting on the same initiative). The RAW states you dive for cover and negate an attack against you. Not 4 attacks. Said player also has Step Aside so I told him he could get a dodge against another attack but not all 4. We have 8 people in our group(1 GM and 7 players) and it was pretty much split down the middle. In the end I allowed him to have cover on body, head, and 1 arm and leg.

I still think that it only works against 1 attack, not all 4, but I didnt want my game to grind to a halt over rules arguments.

Why have a rules argument? You're the GM. What you say goes.

Smokes said:

Technically, all of the bad guys are firing at the same time

No they don't.

Bad guys roll for initiative just like everyone else, and even if you're using identical stats for their agility they would still have to roll dice to see which one acts before the other because there is no such thing as two people shooting EXACTLY (down to the millisecond) at the same time.

Granted they are shooting within a relatively small timefram (a combat round is roughly 4 seconds long), but they still don't shoot at the same time, and this if one of the PC's respond to the first shooter by diving for cover and succeeds, he would have the benefit of cover against the rest of the shooters.

Jlid said:

I am the GM for the game Smokes was referencing. The reason it was really an issue was that the PC had delayed and was out in the open. When all his opponents(the 4 shooters) began to fire, the PC made agility tests vs. all the shooters to act 1st and failed each one, letting the slavers get their shots off first.

He dodged the 1st roll with a -10 Dive For Cover option and thought that he now had cover from all the shooters. I argued that they were all firing simultaneously, but I was rolling them one at a time and not 4 sets of dice at once, so there was no '1st shooter'(they were acting on the same initiative). The RAW states you dive for cover and negate an attack against you. Not 4 attacks. Said player also has Step Aside so I told him he could get a dodge against another attack but not all 4. We have 8 people in our group(1 GM and 7 players) and it was pretty much split down the middle. In the end I allowed him to have cover on body, head, and 1 arm and leg.

I still think that it only works against 1 attack, not all 4, but I didnt want my game to grind to a halt over rules arguments.

Granted it is never good to let the game get bogged down because of rules arguments, but your player would be right in this issue. No shooter can fire EXACTLY at the same time as another according to the rules. So your gunmen would be wrong in being able to fire with such coordination and not take their target's reaction into account.

Varnias Tybalt said:

Jlid said:

I am the GM for the game Smokes was referencing. The reason it was really an issue was that the PC had delayed and was out in the open. When all his opponents(the 4 shooters) began to fire, the PC made agility tests vs. all the shooters to act 1st and failed each one, letting the slavers get their shots off first.

He dodged the 1st roll with a -10 Dive For Cover option and thought that he now had cover from all the shooters. I argued that they were all firing simultaneously, but I was rolling them one at a time and not 4 sets of dice at once, so there was no '1st shooter'(they were acting on the same initiative). The RAW states you dive for cover and negate an attack against you. Not 4 attacks. Said player also has Step Aside so I told him he could get a dodge against another attack but not all 4. We have 8 people in our group(1 GM and 7 players) and it was pretty much split down the middle. In the end I allowed him to have cover on body, head, and 1 arm and leg.

I still think that it only works against 1 attack, not all 4, but I didnt want my game to grind to a halt over rules arguments.

Granted it is never good to let the game get bogged down because of rules arguments, but your player would be right in this issue. No shooter can fire EXACTLY at the same time as another according to the rules. So your gunmen would be wrong in being able to fire with such coordination and not take their target's reaction into account.

It doesn't seem like the player was. An agl test was made against each foe to see if he could act first. he failed each one. He reacted against the first shot rolled, but, as they wouldn't be waiting for him to finish his leap through the air (it takes a ell of a lot less time to move your finger then it takes for someone to move their whole body from a standstill to 2m away) it can be safely assumed that he wouldn't be in the cover he was diving for before the shooters pulled all their triggers. With his fast thinking, he started moving before all the shooters could react 9negating one shot) but to assume he could have flung his body 2m away before any other shooter could finish squeezing their triggers is rather silly.

You do like the order the dice are rolled in don't you ;-p

Graver said:

It doesn't seem like the player was. An agl test was made against each foe to see if he could act first. he failed each one. He reacted against the first shot rolled, but, as they wouldn't be waiting for him to finish his leap through the air (it takes a ell of a lot less time to move your finger then it takes for someone to move their whole body from a standstill to 2m away) it can be safely assumed that he wouldn't be in the cover he was diving for before the shooters pulled all their triggers. With his fast thinking, he started moving before all the shooters could react 9negating one shot) but to assume he could have flung his body 2m away before any other shooter could finish squeezing their triggers is rather silly.

You do like the order the dice are rolled in don't you ;-p

Well If you're gonna put it like that then we could simply say that IF the said gunmen fired at the same target at the same time then all of them would have aimed at the same spot/general direction before squeezing the trigger. Meaning of course that if the PC managed to dodge the "first" gunman, he would autmatically leap out of the way of the shots fired by the other gunmen as well.

So you can either choose between the PC having the benefit of cover for the subsequent shots or having all the shots miss. Which one do you prefer? lengua.gif

Varnias Tybalt said:

Graver said:

It doesn't seem like the player was. An agl test was made against each foe to see if he could act first. he failed each one. He reacted against the first shot rolled, but, as they wouldn't be waiting for him to finish his leap through the air (it takes a ell of a lot less time to move your finger then it takes for someone to move their whole body from a standstill to 2m away) it can be safely assumed that he wouldn't be in the cover he was diving for before the shooters pulled all their triggers. With his fast thinking, he started moving before all the shooters could react 9negating one shot) but to assume he could have flung his body 2m away before any other shooter could finish squeezing their triggers is rather silly.

You do like the order the dice are rolled in don't you ;-p

Well If you're gonna put it like that then we could simply say that IF the said gunmen fired at the same target at the same time then all of them would have aimed at the same spot/general direction before squeezing the trigger. Meaning of course that if the PC managed to dodge the "first" gunman, he would autmatically leap out of the way of the shots fired by the other gunmen as well.

So you can either choose between the PC having the benefit of cover for the subsequent shots or having all the shots miss. Which one do you prefer? lengua.gif

Neither.

I'd prefer a -20 for having to hit a moving target.

Your move :-p

Interesting issue. I think the problem lies with the "Dive for cover" thingy - is it described in the rules anywhere? Because I can't find it in the description for Dodge.

its in the Inquisitor's Handbook. They have a few different uses for skills towards the back.

Most interesting.

Well, in that case, I'd consider the character to be in cover for the rest of the shots. There are no simultaneous actions in Dark Heresy. Of course, depending on the degree of cover, I'd also let him spend some time in the next round to get into a position from where he can shoot back.

Cifer said:

Most interesting.

Well, in that case, I'd consider the character to be in cover for the rest of the shots. There are no simultaneous actions in Dark Heresy. Of course, depending on the degree of cover, I'd also let him spend some time in the next round to get into a position from where he can shoot back.

This is how I reason as well. But like you say if someone hurls themselves into cover it is quite a desperate action and even if they succeed or not I'd deem them to be in a prone position next time it is their turn.

That's my move Graver. Since Dark Heresy doesn't cover shooting characters conveninetly hanging in mid air. happy.gif

I would also say, the character is lucky, for the moment, because he would need to spend a half action to get up again and counter attack.
But I would rule he is save for the other 3 attacks, unless the throw a grenade into his cover (6)

Santiago said:

I would also say, the character is lucky, for the moment, because he would need to spend a half action to get up again and counter attack.
But I would rule he is save for the other 3 attacks, unless the throw a grenade into his cover (6)

Or, Emperor forbids, the gunmen have brought a flamer... Or the cover isn't really that durable and the shots will hurt him anyway... Or the gunmen were fairly close so they could easily charge in for the kill and have an easy time striking the prone target.

The way I see it, the gunmen are at no disadvantage here. Because they wouldn't be able to shoot all at the same time anyway, so once they see the PC jumping into cover they could easily change tactics and break out grenades or flamers, or simply charge in for the kill against a prone target.

I'd prefer a -20 for having to hit a moving target.
Your move :-p
That would be for a Running target, requiring the use of the Run Full Action. This is not doable with the Half Action reserved by Delay, and so this is not an option.

Ok I seem to like the ruling of the PC gets into cover with his reaction, is now prone, and the NPCs that did not fire yet still get their full actions, so they could move around the cover, draw and throw grenades, etc.

There are 7 players and 15 bad guys. And Varnias is telling me that each bad guy goes on a separate Initiative. Do your sessions last for like 10 hours or something? We have about 5 hours to play, so my nameless, faceless bad guys all go on one initiative so we can actually get through combat in our allotted time. In the end I have decided that the player would get cover from the one shooter he dodged, and possibly a second with Step Aside, but thats it. The rest of them get to shoot him normally before he gets behind cover. Remember, he DID fail his Agility test vs. all 4, however unlikely that is, so they have the upper hand.

And to answer someone elses question, while yes I am the GM, all the players are close friends and we have been playing together for almost 8 years now, so I try not to rule with an iron fist when more than one player has a disagreement with the rules. Diplomacy usually works best. Or the rules forum =)

Jlid said:

Do your sessions last for like 10 hours or something?

Nope. Of course it get's tricky once battles involve like 25-30 plus combatants, and sometimes when I want to make things go a little faster I tend to roll a few initiative rolls for the bad guys (like three or four) and then simply group them together in different "initiative groups". But even when I do that, I don't let them all shoot their weapons exactly at the same time and being able to hit something jumping in mid air like that. Usually such instances doesn't occur, but when it does I take that initiative group separately and work out some sort of "order" in which they act in relation to the PC's reaction.

Varnias Tybalt said:

Cifer said:

Most interesting.

Well, in that case, I'd consider the character to be in cover for the rest of the shots. There are no simultaneous actions in Dark Heresy. Of course, depending on the degree of cover, I'd also let him spend some time in the next round to get into a position from where he can shoot back.

This is how I reason as well. But like you say if someone hurls themselves into cover it is quite a desperate action and even if they succeed or not I'd deem them to be in a prone position next time it is their turn.

That's my move Graver. Since Dark Heresy doesn't cover shooting characters conveninetly hanging in mid air. happy.gif

Actually, it dose cover shooting characters conveniently hanging in midair -DH pg 216 under the topic heading "Hovering" ;-p Though, in my answer to the problem, the character wouldn't be hovering or hanging in the air by the hand of the Emperor or some other miracle but actually moving trough the air fixing to land behind cover as the shooters barrels track his movement and pump lead out in his direction whether sailing through the air or sprinting across the ground. That's why I would throw the character a bone and give the shots a -20 for hitting a moving target and losing half an action (for moving). The prone idea is good as well though.

While i agree, there are no simultaneous actions in DH, things that happen in one combat round do all pretty much happen at the same time. No one politely waits around for everyone else to finish up what they were doing before they act. Initiative order is just a convenient way for us to run the shear chaos that would be a lot of folks trying to kill one another and not die in the process . So, while one guy is jumping, the other guys could be pulling their triggers in and around his general area or anticipating and tracking his movement with their guns and pulling the trigger a half second after they saw his legs curling for the leap. Hell, he could also jump into the path of a shot that might have missed him if he hadn't moved. While we resolve each characters actions on their turn or reactions when rolled, it could be safely assumed that all the actions, from a in-game reality standpoint, are pretty much all happening at roughly the same time. After all, no one's going to be hanging around doing absolutely nothing waiting for one character to finish doing what ever it was he started half a second ago. Not all things that a combat action encompasses are, time wise, created equal and some things will take longer to finish then others even though they are, for sanities sake, resolved on the characters turn but narratively are overlapping with what everyone else in the combat is doing.

Anything else would be THIS ;-)

Graver said:

Actually, it dose cover shooting characters conveniently hanging in midair -DH pg 216 under the topic heading "Hovering" ;-p Though, in my answer to the problem, the character wouldn't be hovering or hanging in the air by the hand of the Emperor or some other miracle but actually moving trough the air fixing to land behind cover as the shooters barrels track his movement and pump lead out in his direction whether sailing through the air or sprinting across the ground. That's why I would throw the character a bone and give the shots a -20 for hitting a moving target and losing half an action (for moving). The prone idea is good as well though.

For argument's sake, and not because im obstinate to "prove you wrong" or anything like that, I'd have to inform you that Dark Heresy doesn't really give penalties to characters shooting at moving targets. You recieve penalties depending on how big/small the target is or how far away it is, but the page describing combat circumstances doesn' have any penalties at all for moving targets.

That being said, there is a paricular talent called "Hard Target" that incurs a -20 penalty to everyone trying to shoot at said target if the target is running or charging.

Of course, if you're the GM you're gonna houserule it any way you like, regardless of what I say. I just think it might be relevant to tell you that by applying these penalties you speak of your houseruling is messing with the game mechanics a little too much for comfort.

Not that it's a bad thing, I have myself replaced entire sections of rules that I don't like for my own, but as a rule of thumb I try to work out a way where the changing of one rule doesn't influence the entire game system too much, becuase if you do that and don't think ahead, chances are many situations will ultimately bottle down to arbitrary decisions, and if that happens, what's the point of using a set of rules anyway?

Graver said:

While i agree, there are no simultaneous actions in DH, things that happen in one combat round do all pretty much happen at the same time. No one politely waits around for everyone else to finish up what they were doing before they act. Initiative order is just a convenient way for us to run the shear chaos that would be a lot of folks trying to kill one another and not die in the process . So, while one guy is jumping, the other guys could be pulling their triggers in and around his general area or anticipating and tracking his movement with their guns and pulling the trigger a half second after they saw his legs curling for the leap. Hell, he could also jump into the path of a shot that might have missed him if he hadn't moved. While we resolve each characters actions on their turn or reactions when rolled, it could be safely assumed that all the actions, from a in-game reality standpoint, are pretty much all happening at roughly the same time. After all, no one's going to be hanging around doing absolutely nothing waiting for one character to finish doing what ever it was he started half a second ago. Not all things that a combat action encompasses are, time wise, created equal and some things will take longer to finish then others even though they are, for sanities sake, resolved on the characters turn but narratively are overlapping with what everyone else in the combat is doing.

Anything else would be THIS ;-)

Well it depends on how you interprate the system. I tend to look at it in such a way that initiative rolls don't really symbolize whose "going first" and the others are "waiting around" to let the characters with higher initiative to comlete their entire action. A combat turn takes roughly four seconds according to the rules, and a lot of things will happen roughly at the same time during those four seconds. But the effectiveness of these "simultaneous" actions will largely depend on how well timed they are.

So I'd like to see it as the initiative is basically a score of how fast reaction time all the combatants have at the time and how fast they act according to their reaction time. BUT this is only the "basic" reaction time and not really the one used during the game's version of "reactions". Naturally a successful reaction will trump any combatants initiative based action, because the very success of a dodge or other type of reaction implies that the reactionary was able to act faster than the character with the highest initiative that round.

In this particular scenario it would mean that while the guy trying to throw himself into cover didn't think fast enough on his feet to get the drop on the gunmen, he was in fact reacting faster than the fastest gunman did by succeeding to register the gunman's action and adapt accordingly. This of course means that he's acting WAY faster than the slower gunmen and would have all the split seconds he need to land behind cover before the "slower" gunmen are even able to pull their triggers.

This interpratation of mine is based on the notion that while a character is dodging shots, he isn't really waiting for the shot to be fired, he's actually adapting faster than the attacker is acting. If I went with your interpretation, then it would mean that characters have near Matrix-esque abilities where they actually "dodge bullets", and personally I don't like that in an RPG.

So quite simply, in my interpretation, reactions are always faster than actions, regardless of the initiative. Which in this case most definetly mean that jumping behind cover would happen way faster than anyone could hope to shoot, so a -20 penalty wouldn't really cut it. If they wanted a hope of hitting then a -60 penalty without counting range bonuses (because shooting a jumping target on short range is way harder than shooting the same target at long range because you need to adjust your aim a lot more on short range than long range) would be the most appropriate.

So in your game, while you might blame it all on the "chaos of battle", if we slowed it all down to bullet time, your characters would be like Neo or Agent Smith straight out of the matrix. In my game, that doesn't happen (unless daemons, psykers or eldar are involved of course), because my interpretation says that a successful reaction is ALWAYS faster than an action. That's the boon you get from actually being able to pull off a succesful dodge.

And in my opinion, this view is balanced, because dodge tests rarely ever get any sort of bonus (they mostly recieve penalties due to different circumstances), while attacks (ranged or melee) often recieve bonuses due to a variety of circumstances.

Anyway, I'll stress the fact once again that im not out to prove you wrong or anything, because all GM's should adjust the rules and their interpretations of the rules to the way they like. This is just to keep the debate flowing. happy.gif

Varnias Tybalt said:

For argument's sake, and not because im obstinate to "prove you wrong" or anything like that, I'd have to inform you that Dark Heresy doesn't really give penalties to characters shooting at moving targets. You recieve penalties depending on how big/small the target is or how far away it is, but the page describing combat circumstances doesn' have any penalties at all for moving targets.

That being said, there is a paricular talent called "Hard Target" that incurs a -20 penalty to everyone trying to shoot at said target if the target is running or charging.

Of course, if you're the GM you're gonna houserule it any way you like, regardless of what I say. I just think it might be relevant to tell you that by applying these penalties you speak of your houseruling is messing with the game mechanics a little too much for comfort.

Not that it's a bad thing, I have myself replaced entire sections of rules that I don't like for my own, but as a rule of thumb I try to work out a way where the changing of one rule doesn't influence the entire game system too much, becuase if you do that and don't think ahead, chances are many situations will ultimately bottle down to arbitrary decisions, and if that happens, what's the point of using a set of rules anyway?

You're right, it doesn't specifically state what the penalty for hitting a moving target is. But it dose say on pg 198 under "Combat Circumstances" that: "The fallowing circumstances are some of the most common ones encountered in combat" and "...for situations not covered here, use these as a guide." So, just because a penalty isn't explicitly listed doesn't mean the penalty doesn't exist. The rules state that for situations not illustrated, the GM should come up with their own arbitrary number using the listed examples as a guide. Doing such is part of the RAW. If that table on 198 included every penalty for every action possible, that's all the book would be, a table of combat penalties.

Since hitting a running target is a -20 (not just if they have hard target, that more then likely is supposed to add a further -20 to the full action run) and since it seemed about as difficult as hitting someone with your off hand, shooting someone in the head, or shooting a target in fog, I went with -20. I could see where it could also be a -10 feasibly, but, in such arbitrary decisions as difficulty (which is all over the game all the time), I usually err on the players side. If this was an NPC diving for cover, I probably would have called for a -10. In the end, though, difficulty modifiers are all terribly arbitrary. There's no way around that one except to have a massive tome of all situations ever with a corresponding number, but that would be just a touch cumbersome and silly, but not in the good way.

As to the use of rules if all things are merely arbitrary decisions: as illustrated above, you use rules as a jumping off point and mold for those arbitrary decisions that must be made, of course. There is no rule system (that can be used by any sane individual not steeped in the lores of math and gifted with the brain of an idiot-savant) that doesn't require a bit of arbitrary decision making from the GM. It's just part of the game.

Varnias Tybalt said:

Well it depends on how you interprate the system. I tend to look at it in such a way that initiative rolls don't really symbolize whose "going first" and the others are "waiting around" to let the characters with higher initiative to comlete their entire action. A combat turn takes roughly four seconds according to the rules, and a lot of things will happen roughly at the same time during those four seconds. But the effectiveness of these "simultaneous" actions will largely depend on how well timed they are.

So I'd like to see it as the initiative is basically a score of how fast reaction time all the combatants have at the time and how fast they act according to their reaction time. BUT this is only the "basic" reaction time and not really the one used during the game's version of "reactions". Naturally a successful reaction will trump any combatants initiative based action, because the very success of a dodge or other type of reaction implies that the reactionary was able to act faster than the character with the highest initiative that round.

In this particular scenario it would mean that while the guy trying to throw himself into cover didn't think fast enough on his feet to get the on the gunmen, he was in fact reacting faster than the fastest gunman did by succeeding to register the gunman's action and adapt accordingly. This of course means that he's acting WAY faster than the slower gunmen and would have all the split seconds he need to land behind cover before the "slower" gunmen are even able to pull their triggers.

This interpratation of mine is based on the notion that while a character is dodging shots, he isn't really waiting for the shot to be fired, he's actually adapting faster than the attacker is acting. If I went with your interpretation, then it would mean that characters have near Matrix-esque abilities where they actually "dodge bullets", and personally I don't like that in an RPG.

So quite simply, in my interpretation, reactions are always faster than actions, regardless of the initiative. Which in this case most definetly mean that jumping behind cover would happen way faster than anyone could hope to shoot, so a -20 penalty wouldn't really cut it. If they wanted a hope of hitting then a -60 penalty without counting range bonuses (because shooting a jumping target on short range is way harder than shooting the same target at long range because you need to adjust your aim a lot more on short range than long range) would be the most appropriate.

So in your game, while you might blame it all on the "chaos of battle", if we slowed it all down to bullet time, your characters would be like Neo or Agent Smith straight out of the matrix. In my game, that doesn't happen (unless daemons, psykers or eldar are involved of course), because my interpretation says that a successful reaction is ALWAYS faster than an action. That's the boon you get from actually being able to pull off a succesful dodge.

And in my opinion, this view is balanced, because dodge tests rarely ever get any sort of bonus (they mostly recieve penalties due to different circumstances), while attacks (ranged or melee) often recieve bonuses due to a variety of circumstances.

Anyway, I'll stress the fact once again that im not out to prove you wrong or anything, because all GM's should adjust the rules and their interpretations of the rules to the way they like. This is just to keep the debate flowing. happy.gif

That perspective makes a hell of a lot of sense (and wasn't the argument I was expecting, **** you!) and that's how I view initiative and what-not as well. However, in the above situation, the direction i was coming from is a touch different from yours.

I'm with you all the way up until (and somewhat through) the reaction trumps all other actions part. On the one hand, I completely agree with that assessment of the relationship of reactions and actions. However, and one crucial point, is the speed of a reaction. In my mind, a reaction (or any action for that matter) that trumps all other actions would have to be one that is started and completed in an instant, with the snap of the fingers as it were. A parry or dodge can be a snap movement and thus would count as it could be little more then a slight move to the right or left. Diving behind something 2m away (a full on half action move for the somewhat clumsy, and practically a half action for most folks) would take a bit more effort and time to complete and, as such, wouldn't be a snap movement or reaction. While the movement could be started in a snap (first shot dodged), it couldn't be fully completed in a snap.

Second, I considered the validity of Dodge (last chance defense against a single attack) and the validity of step aside (a second last ditch defense against a single attack). Allowing one check to negate all attacks seems to fly in the face of Step Aside, cheapening it's importance so, on a game balance perspective, allowing one diving for cover to dodge one attacker but not all is more balanced then allowing them to doge all no matter what. -it keeps the talents and skills in the same balance as before. That combined with the fact that, when dodging autofire, one might dodge some of it, but not all of it and that's just from one shooter, not multiple shooters with multiple lines of fire, led me to conclude that the other shooters would indeed have a chance of hitting the character before he or she reached the cover they were jumping for. The fact that the character started the jump before the other shooters were able to squeeze the triggers would be covered in the negative they suffer and a -20 is a lot. Chances are, with a -20, they'd end up missing and, as such, the character would have effectivly dodged all the shots, but such shouldn't be guaranteed just because they were able to avoid one shot from the salvo.

Anyone at all being able to react (just because someone acted against them) and get to safety before anyone else is able to shoot them, even though the attackers got the on the target and had their guns out and ready to pull the triggers, seems a bit matrixy if you ask me. After all, those would have to be some mighty quick reflexes and some damned fast movement to move 6 ft before someone who technically responded quicker then the target could move their trigger finger half an inch. It sounds to me like your interpretation has a lot more to do with the matrix then mine and I might hazard a guess that combat in your game might be a bit closer to the matrix then in mine. I mean, being able to move a 160lbs of flesh 6ft before someone could move 1/50th of that 1/2 an inch... ;-p

Edit: and don't worry, I'm just debating as well (that and I can't be proven wrong because I'm right, all the time, forever, infinity+1 even ;-p ). It helps one work through ideas and get a better grip on topics or situations that they might not have really tought about (or find a perspective not found before)... or just get a better handle on combat in this case (tough you had to bring te matrix into it, didn't you?!).

i would fall on the side of the player for this one. in this instance but a ruling needs to be made. why bog down the game and debate rules lawyerish instances? do the tried and true method...roll a random d10 or let the player have his way and keep the game going. there will be ANY number of times to mincemeat them later. this is how i do it. its much simpler than entering a debate and having to then draw straws or whatever is fancied. go random or go player.

that said, ruleswise Dive for Cover state 'an' attack. meaning one attack with a -10 difficulty test. this same problem has come up in my game and this is what I did. (if you're interested or care):

the player announces a Dive for Cover. this will include all the attacks at a cumulative -10. so in your situation, this will be a -40. a successful dodge negates the 1st attack. hence 3 more guns + the -10 diffficulty. if it succeeds that player was one lucky bastard. if not, it continues as thus. each degree of failure means that many damage dice rolled, the highest being used + a cumulative +1 for damage and any weapon quality is used. the 3 guns do damage (3 degrees of failure). there are 3d10s rolled. pick the highest of the 3. and add +3 damage so in your particular scenario. lets say a 9 is rolled on one of the d10s. a shotgun does 1d10+4 dmg. Dive for Cover player takes 9+4+3 points of damage along with the Scatter trait being in effect causing an additional 1d10+4 if at point blank range.

this allows there to be some compromise giving the player a chance to evade the storm of shots and doesn't require multiple rolls for each opponent, moving gameplay along.

i consider gameswise to be the key moreso than rules to be important. the player has his chance for bravado. as stated by Varnias, you the GM as the 4 gunmen are in a tactically advantageous position to be able to eliminate the Acolyte behind cover. its not something I'd fuss about. ultimately the GM has the upperhand in all situations if you are so inclined, to do your characters in at any point and time. I like the idea of giving players a lil bit of chance in the game and debate the merits of the rules later.

as seen by the debates on a number of forums, it comes to my mind that most Game Designers have never been in combat nor fired a shot in anger. these rules are abstractions of combat. most ppl playing have never seen nor experienced combat, much of it comes from what is believed or percieved to be the case, secondary stories, documentaries, literature etc.

ultimately, it comes down to what the GM adjudicates to be so in his or her world.

what i will add is this. as per reaction times and trigger pulling. much of combat is not as mechanical as many of you make it out to be. there is experience, training, luck, balls and psychology. psychology and expectations in combat, i've found to be interesting factors. 4 gunmen burst in gun raised. Acolyte looks at them. they look at him. all the factors listed above come into play. its not a matter of whos trigger finger is faster so much as who reacts 1st. bullets will fly.but who gets hits? luck, skill, training, natural ability, experience and psychology will come into play. i've seen men dive for cover. i have dived for cover. it is the expectation of violence. while the human finger can pull a trigger pretty quickly. a person can also react pretty quickly to the sudden threat of violence. at least for the person accustomed to violence. the avg person will stand there unsure of what to do next.

it stands to reason that 4 men with shotguns. standing close together. will have their muzzles trained on the one man in front of them. he is a fixed point of interest and focus. the avg gunman will experience tunnel vision. this is a very difficult condition to overcome and takes alot of training...this is one of the reasons why there are the 'Houses of Horrors', 'Kill Houses' and Assaulters Buildings that Special Operations personnel train in....if a target moves rapidly (for the avg gunmen), they will not be able to track it fast enough. lets say they are much better trained..a simple psychological factor can hinder their abilities...overconfidence. even special operations soldiers miss and quite a bit. combat is fluid and random. just because you have a goal ur enemy has one too. and can slip your sight picture very very quickly responding not necessarily to u, but to some other real or percived threat.

theres a saying. real combat accuracy is half of your best day at the range.

Graver said:

Anyone at all being able to react (just because someone acted against them) and get to safety before anyone else is able to shoot them, even though the attackers got the on the target and had their guns out and ready to pull the triggers, seems a bit matrixy if you ask me. After all, those would have to be some mighty quick reflexes and some damned fast movement to move 6 ft before someone who technically responded quicker then the target could move their trigger finger half an inch. It sounds to me like your interpretation has a lot more to do with the matrix then mine and I might hazard a guess that combat in your game might be a bit closer to the matrix then in mine. I mean, being able to move a 160lbs of flesh 6ft before someone could move 1/50th of that 1/2 an inch... ;-p

Just to put things in perspective here:

While I might be a pretty skinny and lightweight guy, im not particularly strong or anything like that. And I can without a doubt, throw myself, roughly my body length (185 cm i.e just a few centimeters short of 2 metres) in any direction from a standing start. And if I do that I'll have jumped and landed in well under a second.

Of course, im not a heroic acolyte of the grim darkness of the 41st millenium, and while I might land nearly 2 metres away my legs would probably be sticking out a bit behind that mark (because im no gymnast and haven't really complete mastery over rolling), someone who did would probably be able to throw themselves that length and roll their body sufficiently to make sure their legs are covered by the barrier they tried to throw themselves behind.

Now we've already established that both of us agree that a reaction always takes precedence over actions. So if I (myself as a character) rolled a successful dodge test with a -10 because im gonna throw myself behind cover, we're both in agreement that if im successful on that roll I'll be able to jump before the fastest gunman is able to aim and fire. And considering that even my unfit self can easily throw myself the length of my own body in any direction and land in under a second, and this happens way before the first gunman is even able to get his shot off, how on earth (...or whichever planet they are on at that moment) would the other gunmen ever have a hope of being able to fire their guns at me when I can jump and land in under a second?

To prove my point, locate a large soft mat and break out the measuring tape, mark the area you'll jump from and jump as hard as you can onto the mat (aim for distance and not height, think "Max Payne" style jumping), then mark the general area where your torso landed (it is the most probable place on your body to get hit by a firearm after all).

Of course, you might be way more unfit than I am (there's always that risk), but I think you'll be surprised as to how far you can actually throw yourself and how fast it'll go.

No apply the results of that real world experiment to "heroic acolytes" who are probably a lot more used to rolling, dodging and throwing themselves behind cover, and im sure you'll find that it isn't that unreasonable to throw oneself 2 metres in any direction from a standing start. And if you're still of the same opinion as I am about reactions always being faster than actions, you'll probably see my point.