Supporting character weapon damage seems irrelevant

Supporting characters who are not directly controlled by a Player Character do not seem to have the ability to leverage the type / damage of the weapon that they bring to combat. For example, if a have a Security supporting character who is equipped with a type 3 phaser use their allowed Assist action in combat, the increased potential damage of the type 3 is not taken into account - only the task roll results are considered in support of the acting Player Character. Am I missing something in the rules ?

The rules are a bit unclear.
As i understand it you can be in direct control of a supporting character or your main character, but not both. If you have a scene were both are present, there are some restrictions.
An example scene is your are playing the ships counselor, but the current scene your ship is in a space battle.
You introduce a supporting character, a junior helmsman.
Now you have 2 characters available, and you have to assume control of one of them, and you choose the helmsman.
Now there are restrictions on what the uncontrolled character can per pg 133-134 CRB

Yes, those restrictions are what makes the weapon type ( other than melee it ranged type )of a non-Player controlled supporting character meaningless.

But you can as a player choose to control the supporting character.
Letā€™s say your party is planning a direct assault on the caves where the federation hostages are. So your counsellor has security 1, and control 8, and is basically pacifist.
So you roll up a supporting character for the assault, ensign jake, security officer.
Now you are controlling him fully in that scene and he can take all the actions a main character can, except avoid an injury.

You could also use the direct action, to force them to do an action.

Only if youā€™re the senior officer in the scene, or have a talent or role ability to allow using it.

Right, however I am talking about non-controlled supporting characters.

A ranged attack is base difficulty 2 and non-controlled supporting characters are prevented from attempting a task with a difficulty above 0 and they may only assist in combat as part of a Player Characterā€™s turn. Thus, the dilemma.

Create two traits for themā€¦

  • Target Designated: ___
  • Permission to fire

You now have a D0 task for them to shoot with.

In the fiction, this looks more like:

ā€œSecurity, stand ready to repel boardersā€
ā€œFire when readyā€¦ā€

At the tableā€¦ (not a literal from my table, but similar has happened).

Ed: Iā€™m telling the goons, ā€œStand ready to repel boardersā€ā€¦ Security & presence, creating a trait for the team.

GM: Okā€¦ they beam inā€¦
Joe: 6 momentum for extra dice, as I have been steeling my nervesā€¦ I scream, ā€œFIRE AT WILL!ā€ - creating a trait. Command and Presence. Ouch! 2 complicationsā€¦ but I made it.
GM: The team is not aiming carefully, take a hit from a phaserā€¦
Joe: That means theyā€™re firing! (Starts picking up dice again)ā€¦

3 Likes

Well - I think that solves the issue right there and is already in the rules ( positive traits ).
Excellent and thank you.

1 Like

Even with uncontrolled supporting characters, I think you could use the direct task.

Only if the difficulty of the task for the non-controlled, supporting character is 0, then all they can do is assist.

Created a Personal Trait: Starfleet Combat Training 2. Most ship security personnel will have this trait. This trait will lower the difficulty of a security-related task, including combat, by 2 to a minimum of 0.

Iā€™d say thatā€™s a bit too broad, @CoolRockSkii

And a bit too permanent. Ship talent, maybe?

Or, for tactical, just break out the tactical minis rules from the Operations Division SB.

Treat non-controlled Supporting Characters as Traits, like ā€žSecurity Teamā€œ. This way they contribute to the scene, they passively support the Player Characters and you have less dice to roll.

Example uses are of course to reduce difficulty of a player attack by 1 or even prevent enemies from entering an area by creating cover fire.

I find Traits much more elegant then letting non-controlled characters roll for tasks themselves.

There are times where the story is better served by dropping into tactical minis game modeā€¦ and in those times, theyā€™re definitely not equivalent in value.

I generally prefer to use them as help dice, so at least their abilities matter; traits donā€™t.

Of course, if one wants to have a hybrid approachā€¦ itā€™s simple enough to treat each additional goon as adding Spread +1ā€¦ but instead of doing half damage, do the goonā€™s damage. Thatā€™s a trait adding an effect - not exactly within the rules, but definitely within the spirit of them.

And, of course, when you DO want to go to minis modeā€¦ Operations Division Sourcebook has you covered.

1 Like

Not really. Trained Security personnel wouldnā€™t freeze up and not know how to engage a target just because the standard difficulty of a ranged attack is 2. Also - whatā€™s the point of equipping dedicated security personnel ( crew support : non PC controlled characters ) with type 3 phasers as snipers or overwatch for an away team if those same security personnel canā€™t employ the advantages of the type - 3 ( rifle ). Iā€™m not into micro simulation of combat using miniatures either. The rules as written state that a given trait ( which can decrease the difficulty) can STACK. Starfleet Combat training (2) trait is not too broad and it enables proper use of a security team. My group wants to have the crew support be a part of the shipā€™s character ( with names and ranks and story involvement ) and just having the entire team abstractly represented as a trait is not the desired outcome.

The fact that they canā€™t perform Tasks with Difficulty above 0 does not mean that they freeze up or donā€™t know what to do. Of course they engage the enemy, but that is handled by assisting another character and not by rolling themselves. And I find it a good thing that they usually canā€™t perform their own attacks, that would make uncontrolled characters too strong, it would take focus away from the main characters and it would just unnecessarily prolong combat. But thatā€™s just my personal opinion.

Having a sniper deployed somewhere certainly counts as an Advantage.
Usually it does not matter if uncontrolled characters have Type 1, 2 or 3 phasers. The GM can take this into account when allowing assists (type 3 phasers can maybe assist when attacking at long range, type 1 maybe cannot) or when using the uncontrolled characters as Advantage (phaser rifles are far more impressive and dangerous than type 1s, thus they should be more efficient in cover fire).

1 Like

All good points here and thank you for the extra ideas. For now, I will use the positive traits ( in the rules categorized as a ā€˜personalā€™ trait ) which represent advanced security and tactical training for security crew personnel which will stack at a value of 2, thus reducing the difficulty to 0 so that the supporting characters can execute the task directly as per my earlier post. Credit to
@aramis for this suggestion.

Wanted to add that my PCs cover a wide spectrum of Divisions ( science, conn, medical, and engineering in addition to command and security ) and areas of expertise and that Iā€™m planning on adding, in some specific cases, more traits applicable to the primary purpose of non PC-controlled ( the shipā€™s Crew Support compliment ) supporting characters from those Divisions.