When you can’t see your target you take either a -30 or a 50% chance of missing no matter what you roll. That means that it you have a 59% or lower of hitting your target unmodified, you are better off taking the 50% miss chance... seems weird that the “worse” penalty is sometimes the better option.

Welcome!

*These forums will be deactivated by the end of this year*. The conversation continues in a new morph over on Discord! Please join us there for a more active conversation and the occasional opportunity to ask developers questions directly! Go to the PS+ Discord Server.# Math problem in 2e blind fire...

Tue, 2018-10-23 10:35

#1
Math problem in 2e blind fire...

Fri, 2018-11-02 15:42

#2
Yeah, that does seem odd. It

Yeah, that does seem odd. It has echoes of Shadowrun's 'sometimes it's better to blindfold yourself before battle' issues. Probably easier to turn the 50% to a flat -50 penalty, or apply that -30 /in addition to/ the 50%.

Fri, 2018-11-02 19:31

#3
Yep. Pretty much...

Yep. Pretty much...

Tue, 2018-11-27 22:06

#4
The interactions with Fray

The interactions with Fray make this a little more significant. Against a Fray of 80 (halved to 40), if your skill roll is 66, you have a 57.47% chance of hitting. With a -30 penalty, you have a 28.65% chance of hitting. So even with a skill roll of 66, the 50% miss chance is better than the -30.
I'm a fan of stacking the penalties. You could have the GM determine which to apply, but since the math is a bit tricky, and the GM has enough on his plate, I'd rather just say you get both penalties (-30 and 50% miss chance).
Edit: Fixed my math