Re: [WW] A few rules questions

[gathomas4@juno.com]

> > 2) The notion of 'aimed fire' is mentioned in several
> > places (at the end of the desc. of automatic fire on
> > p. 88, under the description for telescopic sights on
> > p. 89, and under the description of improved far shot
> > on p.118), but I can't find any description of the
> > term in the Weird War II book or the PHB.
> 
> Shane already ruled this on the list: If you take a full-round 
> action
> to shoot (no movement other than a 5 foot step), you are doing an
> "aimed fire attack.".
> So basically you forfeit your movement for aiming (which makes 
> sense).

Again, i guess i'm being thick here, as with Shane's response this
doesn't address the issue of what the benefits of making an aimed shot
are (other than avoiding the penalty for firing a weapon with a scope
without making an aimed shot.)  Why would a player character with an
automatic weapon perform an aimed fire attack?  

Is it the same as with armor (p109), that assuming the character has only
one shot left (since this example uses an automatic weapon) and the
character spends a full round doing nothing but track his target, and
maybe take a 5' step, he then can attack the next round with a +2 bonus?

That would mean a trained sniper is only capable of one aimed fire attack
every other round regardless of his level of experience. And unless you
have a scope attached to your weapon, it's just not worth aiming at all.
Most PCs will perform a full attack action over a "one shot at a +2 bonus
every other round" attack action.

Call me obstinate and a general pain in the neck, but i think this issue
needs to be more fully dealt with in whatever official errata eventually
comes out.


Happy Gaming,

screenmonkey




________________________________________________________________
GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO!
Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less!
Join Juno today!  For your FREE software, visit:
http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj.