Quote from: Sacrosanct;727928I'm a gun nut of sorts, so having rules for that is important to me.  In my game, I did something very similar in that you simply choose an option for a series of table, and the final weapon is represented not only by whatever name you want to give it, but a military-esque designation.

For example, a RC-S2 is a rifle(R), cartridge (C), Semi-auto (S), medium caliber (2) weapon.  Each table (letter designation) assigns attributes such as range, base damage, etc.

That sounds cool. You are probably a more organized person than I am, and that table does sound handy.

Quote from: Bill;728226That sounds cool. You are probably a more organized person than I am, and that table does sound handy.

turns out I actually had screen shots on my photobucket.  In addition to the below, I had a similar chart for ammunition types.  I fully admit that this is more detail and steps that many people would like.




So if I wanted to replicate a modern M4, I could have something like:  RC-H2-R,CP,SO

Quote from: Sacrosanct;728239turns out I actually had screen shots on my photobucket.  In addition to the below, I had a similar chart for ammunition types.  I fully admit that this is more detail and steps that many people would like.


So if I wanted to replicate a modern M4, I could have something like:  RC-H2-R,CP,SO

Ah, RA-A4-A,B,LC,FG,SL

12.7mm Close Quarters Assault Weapon, Full Auto, x4 Core, 62.5/375/750/1250 $5250, 12 pounds.  A bit heavy to lug around, but Jesse Ventura would've made it happen.  And the bayonet adds to the fun.

"Best" system for gun combat is one where half the group aren't bored to tears while the other half get their gun on.

I like Unisystem and Hollowpoint.

Quote from: Panzerkraken;728431Ah, RA-A4-A,B,LC,FG,SL

12.7mm Close Quarters Assault Weapon, Full Auto, x4 Core, 62.5/375/750/1250 $5250, 12 pounds.  A bit heavy to lug around, but Jesse Ventura would've made it happen.  And the bayonet adds to the fun.

haha, didn't say it was perfect

And you wouldn't know this of course, but under the descriptions of each category, the difference between rifle and heavy is that rifles are clearly described as being a rifle, as opposed to something like an M60 platform or gattling gun.  So your weapon would be something like a full auto version of a .50 cal sniper rifle.  Also, if I had the ammo chart handy, you'd find out that you wouldn't be able to carry many AM rounds with you to make a full auto practicle because it would be too heavy

Jesse Ventura's gun would be something like HC-A3-X (I think he used 7.62 rounds instead of anti-material with that).

I think that if "cool gun combat rules" were the only consideration, my favorite would be Aces & Eights.

RPGPundit

Quote from: J Arcane;724462Hit points are fine so long as you also have some kind of possibility of instant serious or even fatal injury from a strike regardless of HP.

Sorry to necro this thread, but I was having a conversation with a friend about D20 Modern's problems and I remembered this part of the conversation.

In D20 Modern, if memory serves, most of the guns had both a low chance of critical hits (natural 20) and a low damage multiplier even if you did hit (x2). People complained that guns were too weak and cost too many feats to use properly.

So I wondered, is improving gun combat in D20 Modern simply be a matter of increasing the critical threat range (19-20 or even 18-20 for some) AND the multiplier (x3 or x4)?

Quote from: Shipyard Locked;724060Long story short, d20 modern gun combat is riddled with apparently unanticipated problems that make it both unrealistic and broken.

First, a quick blast from the past.

Quote from: Shipyard Locked;724280

Quote from: Black Vulmea;724253Have you actually played d20 Modern, or are you just repeating shit you read on the intrewebs?

No, I have not played it and I'm just repeating what I've heard.

Perhaps the first thing you need to do is stop listening to fourteen year-olds and assuming they're experts. Play the game and develop your own fucking opinions.

Quote from: Shipyard Locked;748094In D20 Modern, if memory serves, most of the guns had both a low chance of critical hits (natural 20) and a low damage multiplier even if you did hit (x2).

That completely overlooks the fact that the massive damage threshold is equal to your CON score. Pistols generally do 2d6 damage, so a single pistol shot isn't going to force a DC 15 Fort save too often, but most longarms do 2d8, 2d10, or 2d12, meaning that each time your character takes a hit from a rifle or a shotgun, you've got a good chance of forcing a save which, if failed, drops the character immediately to -1 hit points.

d20 Modern is quite good at what it does. If you actually try playing it, instead of quoting random gobshites on the intrewebs, you might discover that. Or you might decide you don't like it after all, in which case you'd at least be able to articulate why in your own words.

And by the way, since we're talking about d20 Modern.

Quote from: J Arcane;724290Morale rules are definitely an important start.

"Cool unde Fire": 'In this case, we want a rule that determines whether a hero can stay cool under fire. Why? Well, the truth is that in a critical situation, people usually react without thinking. Those who have received specific training related to the situation often follow that training, acting more or less on automatic. Doing so provides a sort of mental refuge when events occur that are beyond the human capacity to comprehend. People without training generally freeze and do nothing. Sometimes, though, the roles reverse -- people with no training take charge, while people who know what to do cry, scream, tremble, and generally fail to act in a constructive manner. We can describe people capable of acting constructively in a crisis as "cool under fire."'

Quote from: smiorgan;728469"Best" system for gun combat is one where half the group aren't bored to tears while the other half get their gun on.

Fuck yes.

Quote from: Black Vulmea;748129That completely overlooks the fact that the massive damage threshold is equal to your CON score. Pistols generally do 2d6 damage, so a single pistol shot isn't going to force a DC 15 Fort save too often, but most longarms do 2d8, 2d10, or 2d12, meaning that each time your character takes a hit from a rifle or a shotgun, you've got a good chance of forcing a save which, if failed, drops the character immediately to -1 hit points.

Wow, this made me realize that in the many conversations I've had with people who were disatisfied with this aspect of D20 Modern, the massive damage rules were never mentioned. It must be a candidate for "frequently forgotten rules" lists.

I still wonder if it wouldn't have been easier and less subsystem-y to just use more devastating crit ranges...

Quote from: Shipyard Locked;748171I still wonder if it wouldn't have been easier and less subsystem-y to just use more devastating crit ranges...

Or just use GURPS

The worst thing about d20 Modern is the unarmed combat damage rules. This was fixed fairly well in Star Wars Saga Edition.

Quote from: Shipyard Locked;748171Wow, this made me realize that in the many conversations I've had with people who were disatisfied with this aspect of D20 Modern, the massive damage rules were never mentioned.

I'd hoped that you'd stop parroting others' opinions after the last time this came up, but clearly that hasn't happened.

Of course, if we ever reach a point where gamers stop putting their abject ignorance about games on display, gaming forums are likely to become ghost towns.

Quote from: Black Vulmea;748129*snip cause its long and it's too early for me to do multiquotes*.

Since you called me by name, I figure I should respond.

1) I'm aware of the massive damage rule. I love the massive damage rule. In fact, I loved it so much that I stole it for Arcana Rising. It was one of the better ideas they had in the game. Real problem is though, is that weapon damages were too low to reliably hit that target: with two exceptions, they're all two dice, and effectively competing with anywhere from 3d6 to 4d6H to whatever point-build the group used to determine CON scores.

2) That's a fairly good house rule, but a bit overdesigned (but then what could I expect from WotC). It's at least addressing the issue, instead of the book's method of pretty much ignoring it completely.

Quote from: Black Vulmea;748240I'd hoped that you'd stop parroting others' opinions after the last time this came up, but clearly that hasn't happened.

Of course, if we ever reach a point where gamers stop putting their abject ignorance about games on display, gaming forums are likely to become ghost towns.

Well, life is short, and while personally testing every accepted notion is a good policy if you are a professional scientist, I feel it is a questionable use of limited hobby time in gaming. Yes, sometimes I am led astray by the opinions of others, but sometimes I am saved a lot of trouble.

For instance, people once told me 7th Sea sucked as a system, but I loved the setting enough to run it for 21 sessions. It sucked and was a painful experience overall, but we soldiered on because there were things about it we enjoyed and we hoped we would eventually figure out how to make it work for us. After the campaign collapsed, I invested a massive amount of time in modifying the system to make it my own, and it is what I am currently running (12th session). It still sucks, but in previously unrevealed ways. In this case I think I really should have taken the extensively documented opinions against the game seriously.

Quote from: Sacrosanct;724274Sorry, totally debunked.

Thank you for that, very informative.

Quote from: jeff37923;724293I think that this would be better stated as, "People want an acceptable  suspension of disbelief that does not seem implausible."

...and is enjoyable to play.

(Noting that what is "enjoyable" varies from person to person.)