Back to Crafty Games Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
September 02, 2014, 09:39:57 PM
Home Help Search Login Register
News: Welcome to the Crafty Games Forums!

Note to New Members: To combat spam, we have instituted new rules: you must post 5 replies to existing threads before you can create new threads.

+  Crafty Games Forum
|-+  Products
| |-+  Spycraft Third Edition
| | |-+  Sletch pontificates on gun combat in SC3
« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 18 Go Down Print
Author Topic: Sletch pontificates on gun combat in SC3  (Read 10800 times)
TheTSKoala
Control
******
Posts: 2414



View Profile
« Reply #15 on: March 28, 2012, 02:18:07 PM »

And here I had an entire holster to target idea in my head.. but Crafty_Alex nails down the 6 seconds for firing pretty well.  You want a mind bender?  Try to figure out how Quick Draw works.. lol.  (Unless you carry with 1 in the pipe, Quick draw takes ALOT of training from holster.)  And even then.. you hover around the 3 second mark.

One of my players DID use Autofire.. ..not ALL the time.. but enough.  If he needed attention.. or just really wanted to make a point.. Aim and Brace were used by the two combat guys sufficiently.  Especially if one was going for something a little intense.  (Distance shooting.. 1 shot window.. etc.)
Logged
Sletchman
Control
******
Posts: 4108


Gentleman Scholar.


View Profile WWW
« Reply #16 on: March 28, 2012, 02:41:14 PM »

The ambush was the number one tactic though. They hated a standup fight.

Absolutely - in one of the rare chances I got to be a player, I played a character whose motto was "Never engage in a fight you haven't already won".  After him, my group have gained a real respect for Ambushes (most combats ended during the suprise rounds).

(Unless you carry with 1 in the pipe, Quick draw takes ALOT of training from holster.)  And even then.. you hover around the 3 second mark.

Absolutely.  You watch a guy like Jerry Miculek do his thing and it's just mind boggling.  Quick Draw really sits right in the territory of just crazy levels of skill and reflexes (it probably should have a Dex requirement really).  Unless you're really expecting to use your weapon soon carrying with a round chambered is just irresponsible in my mind (though I understand it's necessary in certain professions).
Logged
tfwfh
Operative
****
Posts: 443



View Profile
« Reply #17 on: March 28, 2012, 02:59:01 PM »

Honest question to the general forum: Am I in the minority of Spycraft GMs in that my players consider those alternate options (Autofire, Strafe, Covering Fire) "pretty useless"?  Or have more players come to the same conclusion as mine?
My players also never use anything other than Burst.  However, that may be as much because they can't be bothered to glance over the rules as anything else.

Without tipping my hand with the exact mechanic, I will say I'm taking a very careful look at all these fire combat options to try to bring bigger reward to the more costly ones and make others which have a number of drawbacks more attractive.
Is it gonna be like the "follow up burst" idea I mentioned?  Because the more I think about that, the more I like it. Cheesy
Logged

Who's the more foolish, the fool or tfwfh?
Crafty_Alex
Crafty Staff
Control
*****
Posts: 3244


Damned if I do, damned if I don't.


View Profile WWW
« Reply #18 on: March 28, 2012, 05:17:40 PM »

Is it gonna be like the "follow up burst" idea I mentioned?  Because the more I think about that, the more I like it. Cheesy

Without tipping my hand with the exact mechanic, I will say I'm taking a very careful look at all these fire combat options to try to bring bigger reward to the more costly ones and make others which have a number of drawbacks more attractive.

 Wink
Logged

MilitiaJim
Control
******
Posts: 4306



View Profile WWW
« Reply #19 on: March 29, 2012, 08:02:04 AM »

Unless you're really expecting to use your weapon soon carrying with a round chambered is just irresponsible in my mind (though I understand it's necessary in certain professions).
YMMV.  I think not having a chambered round is setting yourself up for failure.  I always carried with a chambered round, and will when I live in a free area again.  It did take a while for me to practice lowering the hammer on a loaded chamber, no mishaps in practice but it is a bit nerve wracking the first few times.
Logged

"Quemadmodum gladius neminem occidit, occidentis telum est."  ("A sword is never a killer, it's a tool  in the killer's hands.")
- Lucius Annaeus Seneca "the younger" ca. (4 BC - 65 AD)
Krensky
Control
******
Posts: 6997


WWTWD?


View Profile
« Reply #20 on: March 29, 2012, 09:23:08 AM »

With the caveat that not all guns are safe with a chambered round (heck, a lot of very old revolvers aren't safe to carry fully loaded), if you're carrying a gun for self defense having it ready to use makes a lot of sense.

Of course, I also think that carrying a firearm gives you a greater duty to avoid violent confrontations, regardless of what the law says about your obligation or lack of to retreat.
Logged

We can lick gravity, but sometimes the paperwork is overwhelming. - Werner von Braun
Right now you have no idea how lucky you are that I am not a sociopath. - A sign seen above my desk.
There's no upside in screwing with things you can't explain. - Captain Roy Montgomery
Sletchman
Control
******
Posts: 4108


Gentleman Scholar.


View Profile WWW
« Reply #21 on: March 29, 2012, 09:41:14 AM »

Krensky pretty much nailed my thoughts, in both parts.  I've also heard of modern firearms having accidental discharges when there's one in the chamber.  It may not be a common occurance, but when it comes to potentially being shot (especially by your own weapon) I'd personally err on the side of caution (with about any safety issue, really).  Of course I've been fairly priviledged in terms of where I've grown up and lived as an adult, so my views are almost certainly skewed by that factor.

Law enforcement / military deployment is a different suitation though.
Logged
MilitiaJim
Control
******
Posts: 4306



View Profile WWW
« Reply #22 on: March 29, 2012, 09:46:23 AM »

Of course, I also think that carrying a firearm gives you a greater duty to avoid violent confrontations, regardless of what the law says about your obligation or lack of to retreat.
Indeed, power and responsibility apply to more than just the Spider Man.
Logged

"Quemadmodum gladius neminem occidit, occidentis telum est."  ("A sword is never a killer, it's a tool  in the killer's hands.")
- Lucius Annaeus Seneca "the younger" ca. (4 BC - 65 AD)
TheTSKoala
Control
******
Posts: 2414



View Profile
« Reply #23 on: March 29, 2012, 02:02:13 PM »

Of course, I also think that carrying a firearm gives you a greater duty to avoid violent confrontations, regardless of what the law says about your obligation or lack of to retreat.
Indeed, power and responsibility apply to more than just the Spider Man.

Yep.  Which is why I married my wife.  I needed a conscience.  lol.

With the caveat that not all guns are safe with a chambered round (heck, a lot of very old revolvers aren't safe to carry fully loaded), if you're carrying a gun for self defense having it ready to use makes a lot of sense.

Heat discharge!  Thankfully that's a situation I normally don't have to worry about.  Though, MilitiaJim probably does.  Heavy Guns and all.  As for carrying unloaded.  I'm of two minds.  One.  Yes it takes longer for me to have a side arm ready, however, I get the luxury of not walking around wearing a target on my head.  (Opposed to uniformed Police Officers or BDU'd military units.)  Two.  Should the environment change to where it's logical to carry hot, I can.  I just choose not to by default.  Namely for safety.
Logged
Tegyrius
Fantasy Craft Playtester
Agent
******
Posts: 234


Somebody Else's Problem


View Profile WWW
« Reply #24 on: March 30, 2012, 05:15:39 PM »

YMMV.  I think not having a chambered round is setting yourself up for failure.  I always carried with a chambered round, and will when I live in a free area again.  It did take a while for me to practice lowering the hammer on a loaded chamber, no mishaps in practice but it is a bit nerve wracking the first few times.

I think Koala and I had this discussion in an off-topic shotgun thread a while ago, but I have to throw a +1 in Jim's direction here.  Condition Three carry gets more press than it deserves because of Israelifondlers.  I have always assumed that if any PC in any game I'm running is carrying a holstered (modern) sidearm, that weapon has a round chambered unless otherwise stated.

Krensky pretty much nailed my thoughts, in both parts.  I've also heard of modern firearms having accidental discharges when there's one in the chamber.  It may not be a common occurance, but when it comes to potentially being shot (especially by your own weapon) I'd personally err on the side of caution (with about any safety issue, really).

I think it's important to differentiate between negligent discharge (where someone screws the proverbial poodle) and accidental discharge (which involves mechanical failure).  I have no statistics to back this up but I believe the former are much more common.  Hardware failures leading to unintended bangs are pretty rare in well-built modern weapons because the biggest sales environment is so lawsuit-averse. 

(I'm still undecided as to whether shooting yourself in the leg with a Blackhawk SERPA is accident [because the design sucks and failed] or negligence (because you chose to wear a holster that sucks and fails].)

- C.
« Last Edit: March 30, 2012, 05:19:47 PM by Tegyrius » Logged

Clayton A. Oliver Writer of Fortune

And in this moment/I will not run, it is my place to stand
We few shall carry hope/Within our bloodied hands

- The Cruxshadows, Winter Born
Tegyrius
Fantasy Craft Playtester
Agent
******
Posts: 234


Somebody Else's Problem


View Profile WWW
« Reply #25 on: March 30, 2012, 06:11:45 PM »

Getting back to the original question, I'll confess that I've never really been happy with SC's implementation of "cover fire" and "suppressive fire" as mechanically distinct actions.  Bullets don't form a magic shield of deflection or concealment.  I think the intent of both is to make it harder for the target to do something - whether that is to tie his shoes, to move across beaten ground, or to attack an opponent.  

Accordingly, I'd like to see suppressive fire implemented as a single area-effect action that:

  • lasts until the shooter's next initiative count, unless interrupted;
  • consumes a relatively large amount of ammunition;
  • provides a free attack on anyone in the affected area when it's declared;
  • provides a free attack on anyone moving into the affected area;
  • applies penalties to all actions taken within the affected area (which can be mitigated by feats);
  • has heightened effects for weapons better-suited to suppression (thereby finally making machine guns worth using)

But that's just me.

- C.
Logged

Clayton A. Oliver Writer of Fortune

And in this moment/I will not run, it is my place to stand
We few shall carry hope/Within our bloodied hands

- The Cruxshadows, Winter Born
tfwfh
Operative
****
Posts: 443



View Profile
« Reply #26 on: March 30, 2012, 07:06:53 PM »

  • lasts until the shooter's next initiative count, unless interrupted;
  • provides a free attack on anyone in the affected area when it's declared;
  • has heightened effects for weapons better-suited to suppression (thereby finally making machine guns worth using)
Some thoughts.  First is that if this action covers more than the tiniest area, that makes it by far the best attack in the game.  It's better than grenades, even, because there would be no damage drop off.  Also, if this is to represent an entire round's worth of shooting, getting to make all your attacks at the beginning seems ... I dunnno, unfair?  At least inappropriate.  I'm ok with the action working that way, but I would instead move the attacks to the beginning of the character's next turn.  Something along the lines of "... at the beginning of the character's next turn, he may make a final attack against any opponent that is still in the targeted area."

Second, I have in the past considered a "Volume of Fire" weapon quality, or some such.  The idea is that it would allow guns with very large ammo capacities and high rates of fire to cover fire (or suppressive, whichever targets an area) a larger than normal area.  My thinking was 5 bullets per square, like it is currently.  So a typical assault rifle or LMG with a 50 or 100 round drum/belt could gain VOF(3), indicating a 3x3 area.  Larger weapons, like HMGs could get VOF(5), and things like vulcan cannons and the like with 1000 round capacity could have VOF(7) or higher.
Logged

Who's the more foolish, the fool or tfwfh?
Tegyrius
Fantasy Craft Playtester
Agent
******
Posts: 234


Somebody Else's Problem


View Profile WWW
« Reply #27 on: March 30, 2012, 08:12:46 PM »

Some thoughts.  First is that if this action covers more than the tiniest area, that makes it by far the best attack in the game.  It's better than grenades, even, because there would be no damage drop off.  Also, if this is to represent an entire round's worth of shooting, getting to make all your attacks at the beginning seems ... I dunnno, unfair?  At least inappropriate.

More inappropriate than a strafe attack?  Bear in mind that when I say "consumes a relatively large amount of ammunition," I'm thinking of something on the order of 20-30 rounds - or more for guns with a high cyclic rate.  This represents saturation of an area for six seconds of ongoing bursts.  Lower-capacity weapons should be at a  disadvantage for this action.

Also, I wouldn't be averse to opposing each free attack with a Will save.  Yes, Will, not Reflex.  I think Will is more important for not panicking while under machine gun fire - or for judging the precise instant to move through a beaten area.

- C.
Logged

Clayton A. Oliver Writer of Fortune

And in this moment/I will not run, it is my place to stand
We few shall carry hope/Within our bloodied hands

- The Cruxshadows, Winter Born
tfwfh
Operative
****
Posts: 443



View Profile
« Reply #28 on: March 30, 2012, 09:24:52 PM »

Considering that you also want to get free attacks against people who enter the area after your turn has ended, yes I think it is more inappropriate than a strafe.  This isn't a full action's worth of shooting, it's a full round.  It's ongoing area control and you have to consider that the majority of what you're doing happens after what you would normally think of as being your turn or action.

EDIT:
Also, point of interest: Saves vs attacks is a universally terrible idea.  For one thing, nothing takes longer to resolve than opposed rolls, and combat should be organized so that it is as fast as possible.  Because even very fast combat still takes a long time.  And second, save bonuses don't progress at the same rate as attack bonuses.
« Last Edit: March 30, 2012, 09:36:10 PM by tfwfh » Logged

Who's the more foolish, the fool or tfwfh?
Sletchman
Control
******
Posts: 4108


Gentleman Scholar.


View Profile WWW
« Reply #29 on: March 30, 2012, 10:21:55 PM »

I largely agree with Tegyrius's points.  I wouldn't make it a direct save vs attack - it'd be unpassable, which makes it pointless.  Just inflict the condition in that case.  I'd call it like 20-30 rounds per 5ft square for proper supression.  You want to supress large swathes of turf you gotta use some serious hardware - or have a team do it.

I'm fine with free attacks against anyone who enters the area supressed - just make it anyone.  Your friend is stupid enough to enter the area you're spraying with fire?  Too bad for them.  Same with people leaving cover - they're stupid enough to pop into the open and it's really more of an assisted suicide.  I wouldn't grant free attacks against people already in the area - as you start opening up without aimed shots they scrabble for cover and such.
Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 18 Go Up Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.13 | SMF © 2006-2011, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!