Main Menu

News:

If you are having problems registering, please e-mail theconclaveforum at gmail.com

Depth Perception

Started by Molotov, August 20, 2009, 10:59:29 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Molotov

I looked through the Inquisitor rulebook but couldn't find the answer to this question... (feel free to point out where it is if I've missed it; it would be nice to show my players.)

If a character is missing an eye, what modifiers would you impose on them with regards to depth perception? I figure that it matters primarily for Shooting, Close Combat and Awareness.

Would you define a difference between someone recently blinded and someone who has trained to overcome their disability?
INQ28 Thread | INQ28 Blog
INQ28, done properly, is at least the equal of its big brother - and Mol is one of the expert proponents of "done properly".
- precinctomega

Kaled

Well, the alien generator article includes the following rule which you could point your players at;

Cyclopean: The alien only has a single eye, destroying its depth perception. The alien
doubles any penalties to hit due to range modifiers (bonuses for range modifiers are unaffected).


If a character has only recently lost an eye you could apply additional modifiers on top of that.
I like to remember things my own way... Not necessarily the way they happened.

Inquisitor - Blood Bowl - Malifaux - Fairy Meat

Molotov

Awesome... thanks, Kaled!
INQ28 Thread | INQ28 Blog
INQ28, done properly, is at least the equal of its big brother - and Mol is one of the expert proponents of "done properly".
- precinctomega

MarcoSkoll

I don't really like Cyclopean as a rule.

If you're dealing with people (particularly at shooting ranges), apparent size is far more useful for estimating distance than binocular vision, which only really comes into play at shorter distances (where the range is too short to matter for shooting!).

So, the disadvantages would really hit you in close combat. Not being able to work out how far away your opponent is, where his sword is relative to you... lots of missed swings, and failed parries.
I'd recommend a doubling of any penalties for weapon reach differences as a possible starting point.

Awareness? I don't really think so. The effects of loss of binocular vision stop you making out close distances - they don't stop you seeing what's there.

QuoteWould you define a difference between someone recently blinded and someone who has trained to overcome their disability?
The two are different. You can learn your way around some of this by becoming more aware of eye focus.
The question is, is it different enough to demand a change in the rules? Maybe. Your choice.

Anything that had evolved with only one eye (like in the case of the Aliens article) would presumably not suffer too much trouble. They'd presumably get by pretty well with only the one.
S.Sgt Silva Birgen: "Good evening, we're here from the Adeptus Defenestratus."
Captain L. Rollin: "Nonsense. Never heard of it."
Birgen: "Pick a window. I'll demonstrate".

GW's =I= articles

Adlan

I don't know if you read http://www.schlockmercenary.com/index.html but it had a very good explanation for a one eyed beings depth perception, being that his eye changed it's focus rapidly, allowing him to judge distance that way.

DapperAnarchist

Drat, someone got to the Uniocs before me... In terms of depth perception, where would people stand on a three eyed being losing one eye? Would it have effects on range, or perhaps only on visual awareness tests?

Would a one-eyed character have a smaller field of vision, for shooting and the like? I supposed that depends on how long they have had only one eye. In analogy, my sister is deaf in one ear, completely, ever since she was very very young. It doesn't affect her very much - as she turns her head in small movements to hear both sides with one ear.
Questions are a burden to others, answers a burden to oneself.

The Keltani Subsector  My P&M Thread - Most recent, INQ28!

Myriad

The field of vision would be smaller, but I don't see it making a large difference - maybe -10 to awareness on the blind side.  Depending on how recently the character lost an eye, I'd simply adjust the weaponskill / ballistic skill as you see fit, which has the virtue of simplicity.

I believe two eyes suffice for depth perception, and that a third gives no particular benefit.  However it might be assumed that a mind used to three eyes would be to some degree disorientated when relying on two.
I had better point out, that some of the clubs I represent are of a military bent.

You know what you are?  A plywood shark!

Ynek

Quote from: MarcoSkoll on August 20, 2009, 11:19:26 PM
I don't really like Cyclopean as a rule.
[....]
I'd recommend a doubling of any penalties for weapon reach differences as a possible starting point.
I would agree with you that the cyclopean rules are quite bad, and a while ago the folks at my gaming club came up with a simple rule for characters who are missing one of their eyes.

A character who has lost an eye cannot benefit from positive reach modifiers in combat.

So, if the one-eyed character were armed with a rune staff (reach 4) and their enemy were armed with a knife (reach 1), the one-eyed character would recieve no benefits.

Now that I look at it, I think that your suggestion probably works better from a game mechanics point of view.

Quote from: Myriad on August 21, 2009, 02:25:00 PM
The field of vision would be smaller, but I don't see it making a large difference - maybe -10 to awareness on the blind side.  Depending on how recently the character lost an eye, I'd simply adjust the weaponskill / ballistic skill as you see fit, which has the virtue of simplicity.
I don't think that losing an eye would have too much of an effect on awareness. I mean, it's not like it's reducing the quality of your vision by very much, so it wouldn't make spotting the enemy any more difficult. You might have to turn your head a little bit, but I don't think that really warrants a -10 modifier, in all fairness.

Quote from: Myriad on August 21, 2009, 02:25:00 PM
I believe two eyes suffice for depth perception, and that a third gives no particular benefit.  However it might be assumed that a mind used to three eyes would be to some degree disorientated when relying on two.
Ah, now I'm afraid I'm going to have to put my geneticist hat on...
In layman's terms, there is a region of genetic code referred to as Ad/Hox genes which tell the body where a particular component is supposed to go during embryonic development. Through manipulation of these genes, it is possible to create a centipede with two heads (by telling both ends that they should develop heads) or creating a centipede with legs where their antennae should be.

Now to get to the point. If you had a mutant with three eyes, the odds are that this particular mutation would be in the ad/hox region of their genetic code. This would mean that although they have three eyes, their vision would still be perfectly human, and therefore, they would receive no benefits for having that third eye, other than having a 'spare' to use in the likelihood that one eye is lost.

Having a "spare" is actually a surprisingly common tactic in evolutionary terms. Male snakes, for instance, have two sets of genitals, since they often lose their wedding tackle if the female decides to bolt and flee during mating (if, say, a predator suddenly interrupts them). So unless a three-eyed alien has some total dependence upon their third eye, it would most likely just be a spare, in accordance with what we know about life on earth. Therefore, other than hurting a bit, I don't think that a three-eyed alien would be too badly affected by losing one of its eyes.
"Somehow, Inquisitor, when you say 'with all due respect,' I don't think that you mean any respect at all."

"I disagree, governor. I think I am giving you all of the respect that you are due..."

precinctomega

For my part, I tend to say "don't bother".  After all, a lot of aiming is done with one eye.  That doesn't seem to affect accuracy all that much.

R.

MarcoSkoll

Quote from: precinctomega on August 24, 2009, 02:26:17 PMAfter all, a lot of aiming is done with one eye.
Part of my point. Many people close one eye when shooting anyway.

Some people (myself included) do have both open though. One to sight, the other performing a more passive role by keeping track of a wider area (as magnification scopes do have very narrow fields of view) - although it is something of a black art interpreting the wildly different image from each eye.

However, in my case, I've got the dilemma of being right handed, but left eyed, so when I do try and shoot like that, I naturally see out of the eye NOT looking down the scope. Fortunately, enough practise can overcome that.
It's still a disappointment though, because it is something of a damper on my potential (except with pistols, where using an opposite hand and eye is entirely feasible).
S.Sgt Silva Birgen: "Good evening, we're here from the Adeptus Defenestratus."
Captain L. Rollin: "Nonsense. Never heard of it."
Birgen: "Pick a window. I'll demonstrate".

GW's =I= articles