Sletch pontificates on gun combat in SC3

[TheTSKoala]

For military service, I can see SMGs dying.  For civil service, I could see PDWs surviving.  Each shot you fire, you own.  Discharging 30 rounds of 5.56 into a residential might make the city council very nervous.. lol.  Plus the argument of the arms race in a social society. If the police have 5.56mm, the next evolution would be the bad guys to try to get 7.62 or bigger.

[Crafty_Pat]

The long arms / short arms breakdown fails the layman bar in that most folks uniformed about firearms wouldn't be able to confidently tell from the title what's included in the proficiency / category (something that's vital in an RPG).

Jim's alternative breakdown is interesting, and might work for laymen, but I'm also reasonably certain it would produce too few proficiencies / categories to support the system. Will consider.

As proficiency categories or as weapon roles/classifications?  My current design leaning is a very small number of small arms skills ("proficiencies," in d20 terms) but a larger number of classes of weapons. 

For the sake of sanity, and because we've learned this lesson the hard way, any version of proficiencies and related gear categories must be 100% aligned (which is to say, if there's a "Pistols" weapon proficiency, then there must also be a "Pistols" weapon category, and said proficiency must always and only ever interact with that one weapon category). There can be (clear) subcategories, of course, but for the sake of clarity and utility those need to be fairly limited in number.

[MilitiaJim]

The long arms / short arms breakdown fails the layman bar in that most folks uniformed about firearms wouldn't be able to confidently tell from the title what's included in the proficiency / category (something that's vital in an RPG).

Y'all solved this nicely on the gear tables, breaking out light and heavy SMGs so nicely.  I recall it being a bit fuzzy on the machine guns, but this is easily solved with clearly labeled gear tables.

Jim's alternative breakdown is interesting, and might work for laymen, but I'm also reasonably certain it would produce too few proficiencies / categories to support the system. Will consider.

It does break it down a bit farther than I was happy with, but it does leave lots of room for all manner of tricks and fortes.  Fortes could be used to break down the overarching proficiencies:  A soldier could be proficient with Direct Fire weapons, with Fortes in pistols (including light SMGs) and rifles (including heavy SMGs and shotguns).
___________________________________

For military service, I can see SMGs dying.  For civil service, I could see PDWs surviving.  Each shot you fire, you own.  Discharging 30 rounds of 5.56 into a residential might make the city council very nervous.. lol.  Plus the argument of the arms race in a social society. If the police have 5.56mm, the next evolution would be the bad guys to try to get 7.62 or bigger.

The biggest difference I see between PDW and SMG is how folk talk about them.

Cops running around with assault rifles should make council folks nervous, and I think the 5.56mm is a horrid round for police work.  (I think a Thompson, UMP-45, Saiga 12, Remington 800/Winchester 1200 series is much better suited.)  Very rarely is a rifle the right tool for police work, and for those time, keep semi-auto rifle in the trunk of the patrol car. 

FWIW, I don't think cops should have anything that the locals need a license to own.  If outgunning the populace is required to enforce the law, the law is vile feces and needs to change.

[Sletchman]

With the MP5K vs. Glock 18.. I would guess that this was a game balance / design decision instead of real life comparable.  (Don't have my Books on my.. so feel free to interject.)  But I would guess the Rate of Fire / Fire Select options of the MP5K created a need to 'tone it down' when compared to Pistols.

The Glock 18 is select fire too - which was pretty much at the crux of my confusion.

As for Tegyrius' point.  I agree.  SMGs are going to be overtaken by either Compact Rifles or PDWs.  The only thing currently dragging PDWs down is the fact that manufacturers are trying to re-invent the bullet, creating various special use, weapon system specific rounds.  (FN and HK specifically...)

Totally, and I knew that.  It's really easy to find information on what is deployed and with whom (and therefore extrapolate usage and popularity trends), but finding raw performance statistics (and trying to reverse engineer the Crafty formula) is a far more difficult proposition (especially with weapons on the chart that don't seem to conform to any standard I can figure out).

The long arms / short arms breakdown fails the layman bar in that most folks uniformed about firearms wouldn't be able to confidently tell from the title what's included in the proficiency / category (something that's vital in an RPG).

Is that because of the names (Long and Short) or because of the categories themselves?

All the laypersons I know thought 2.0 had too many categories (and I heard that complaint far more often post-Practice Makes Perfect) and would have prefered just Rifle and Pistol for "main weapons" (Rifles, Shotguns, all SMGs, all handguns, all SAWs), with additional proficiencies for what they called "heavy weapons" (GPMG's, Launchers, vehicle weapons, emplacements, etc) and melee weapons.  I'm guessing those terms came from video games where you can have a main weapon and a heavy weapon when you deploy or something (I don't enjoy games like CS, Battlefield, or CoD - so I'm just totally guessing).

While I also like Jim's alternate, I think it would cause more confusion for laymen (particularly the labels) then it would avoid.  I can also see issues with balance if the game has a total of 4 proficiencies (vs the existing 7) - you would need a lot of tricks to spend the rest on.

Like Jim said, no matter what you pick as the breakdown properly labeled gear charts save a thousand headaches.  FC is great in this regard as people go "Edged is this list, and my Sword feats cover this section of that" - and it's really simple for anyone who picks it up.

[Crafty_Pat]

The long arms / short arms breakdown fails the layman bar in that most folks uniformed about firearms wouldn't be able to confidently tell from the title what's included in the proficiency / category (something that's vital in an RPG).

Is that because of the names (Long and Short) or because of the categories themselves?

All the laypersons I know thought 2.0 had too many categories (and I heard that complaint far more often post-Practice Makes Perfect) and would have prefered just Rifle and Pistol for "main weapons" (Rifles, Shotguns, all SMGs, all handguns, all SAWs), with additional proficiencies for what they called "heavy weapons" (GPMG's, Launchers, vehicle weapons, emplacements, etc) and melee weapons.  I'm guessing those terms came from video games where you can have a main weapon and a heavy weapon when you deploy or something (I don't enjoy games like CS, Battlefield, or CoD - so I'm just totally guessing).

The issues always arise when you consider what your garden variety non-gun enthusiast (read: never held a gun and knows nothing more than what he or she sees in the movies) reader. To these folks "long arms" and "short arms" mean nothing. Well, they mean something, probably, but not what you or I might expect them to. There are a lot of folks who couldn't confidently place SMGs in either category, for example. Do melee weapons get folded into all this? It is based on the length of the barrel, the whole weapon, or something else? You see where I'm going.

"Pistol" makes sense to everyone, especially when there's a "Pistol" weapon category. Folding things into categories that aren't immediately obvious runs you into a similar but entirely separate pit trap, which is why SMGs tend to get splintered out.

While I also like Jim's alternate, I think it would cause more confusion for laymen (particularly the labels) then it would avoid.  I can also see issues with balance if the game has a total of 4 proficiencies (vs the existing 7) - you would need a lot of tricks to spend the rest on.

Let's assume for the sake of argument that this isn't an issue and strictly look at proficiencies and categories on their own.

Like Jim said, no matter what you pick as the breakdown properly labeled gear charts save a thousand headaches.  FC is great in this regard as people go "Edged is this list, and my Sword feats cover this section of that" - and it's really simple for anyone who picks it up.

Precisely my point to Clayton earlier.

[Sletchman]

The long arms / short arms breakdown fails the layman bar in that most folks uniformed about firearms wouldn't be able to confidently tell from the title what's included in the proficiency / category (something that's vital in an RPG).

Is that because of the names (Long and Short) or because of the categories themselves?

The issues always arise when you consider what your garden variety non-gun enthusiast (read: never held a gun and knows nothing more than what he or she sees in the movies) reader. To these folks "long arms" and "short arms" mean nothing. Well, they mean something, probably, but not what you or I might expect them to. There are a lot of folks who couldn't confidently place SMGs in either category, for example. Do melee weapons get folded into all this? It is based on the length of the barrel, the whole weapon, or something else? You see where I'm going.

"Pistol" makes sense to everyone, especially when there's a "Pistol" weapon category. Folding things into categories that aren't immediately obvious runs you into a similar but entirely separate pit trap, which is why SMGs tend to get splintered out.

True, but after house ruling categories down to Rifle, Handgun, Tactical/Heavy, Vehicle Mounted, Unarmed, Edged, Blunt, and Hurled I can't recall having a player ask what proficiencies cover what weapons (except "Why is bow in hurled?" - a problem solved by FC's Bow category and that's existed since FCs release).  That's mostly with random guys at Uni who have never played a tabletop game or held a gun.

It probably helped that I customised the gear lists for them to help them gear up, but that's something you'd do with a new game anyway.


EDIT: Addendum: I was asked once if a "to the nub" style sawn off shotgun with a pistol grip would become Handgun instead of Rifle.  I ruled "Yes", but it's very easy to write that directly into the upgrade itself.

[Agent 333]

Maybe someone who's more familiar with guns can enlighten me: Does an M-16 and an MP5 with an attached stock behave that differently to require different proficiencies?

Mind you, I've only ever fired 3 guns in my life: A .22 rifle, a 9mm pistol, and a .38 revolver. The pistol and the revolver were quite similar. The rifle was completely different. (Also, I'm much better with a rifle). I'm also quite proficient with a bow, but can't throw knives for crap.

Usage style is the barrier, not length of the barrel or type of grip.

[TheTSKoala]

With the MP5K vs. Glock 18.. I would guess that this was a game balance / design decision instead of real life comparable.  (Don't have my Books on my.. so feel free to interject.)  But I would guess the Rate of Fire / Fire Select options of the MP5K created a need to 'tone it down' when compared to Pistols.

The Glock 18 is select fire too - which was pretty much at the crux of my confusion.

And that's what I get for not double checking my typing.  You are completely right.  The 18 is almost a bloody machine pistol.  (I totally had the 17 in my head when I typed...)  I was going to say stability and grouping, but the 18 actually spits faster than the MP5.  Soooo... umm.. maybe the Crafty bunch just hate germans?  

Maybe someone who's more familiar with guns can enlighten me: Does an M-16 and an MP5 with an attached stock behave that differently to require different proficiencies?

Behave differently?  *waffle hand*  No.  I mean.. the recoil is differently.. as is the weight.. but it's not like Shotgun vs. Vulcan.  Learn their proper applications?  Yes.  Effective Range.  CQC handling.  Field Stirpping?  (That one is a bit of a reach.)  Etc.

[MilitiaJim]

Maybe someone who's more familiar with guns can enlighten me: Does an M-16 and an MP5 with an attached stock behave that differently to require different proficiencies?

Behave differently?  *waffle hand*  No.  I mean.. the recoil is differently.. as is the weight.. but it's not like Shotgun vs. Vulcan.  Learn their proper applications?  Yes.  Effective Range.  CQC handling.  Field Stirpping?  (That one is a bit of a reach.)  Etc.

CQC and maintenance don't really enter into the picture.  (And we aren't even getting into wielding an M-16 like it's a pistol, which you can do.  That would knock about 75% off the range increment, but you can still hit a car at 100m one handing an M-16.)

[TheTSKoala]

Maybe someone who's more familiar with guns can enlighten me: Does an M-16 and an MP5 with an attached stock behave that differently to require different proficiencies?

Behave differently?  *waffle hand*  No.  I mean.. the recoil is differently.. as is the weight.. but it's not like Shotgun vs. Vulcan.  Learn their proper applications?  Yes.  Effective Range.  CQC handling.  Field Stirpping?  (That one is a bit of a reach.)  Etc.

CQC and maintenance don't really enter into the picture.  (And we aren't even getting into wielding an M-16 like it's a pistol, which you can do.  That would knock about 75% off the range increment, but you can still hit a car at 100m one handing an M-16.)

^ Right.  That's my waffle hand.  Maybe replace proficiencies with "cool stuff you learn to do"?  I dunno...

[Crafty_Pat]

True, but after house ruling categories down to Rifle, Handgun, Tactical/Heavy, Vehicle Mounted, Unarmed, Edged, Blunt, and Hurled I can't recall having a player ask what proficiencies cover what weapons (except "Why is bow in hurled?" - a problem solved by FC's Bow category and that's existed since FCs release).  That's mostly with random guys at Uni who have never played a tabletop game or held a gun.

...and in this scheme, SMGs go where?

It probably helped that I customised the gear lists for them to help them gear up, but that's something you'd do with a new game anyway.

While developing the tutoring cycle is critical to any game, the goal is usually to get the game to speak for itself as much as possible. I'm not refuting your point - it's entirely valid - just clarifying what a forward-thinking design house has to consider.

EDIT: Addendum: I was asked once if a "to the nub" style sawn off shotgun with a pistol grip would become Handgun instead of Rifle.  I ruled "Yes", but it's very easy to write that directly into the upgrade itself.

In our experience, exceptions are at the very core of game complexity. Thus the conundrum in situations like this.

[MilitiaJim]

...  Maybe replace proficiencies with "cool stuff you learn to do"?  I dunno...

Broad proficiencies, narrower fortes, and lots of tricks?

Direct Fire proficiency opens up Pistol, Rifle, Tactical, and Vehicle Fortes?

True, but after house ruling categories down to Rifle, Handgun, Tactical/Heavy, Vehicle Mounted, Unarmed, Edged, Blunt, and Hurled I can't recall having a player ask what proficiencies cover what weapons (except "Why is bow in hurled?" - a problem solved by FC's Bow category and that's existed since FCs release).  That's mostly with random guys at Uni who have never played a tabletop game or held a gun.

...and in this scheme, SMGs go where?

Light SMGs go in Pistols, heavy SMGs and shotguns go in Rifles.

The only one that is at all squirrely is bows going in Hurled, and while not necessarily intuitive, it does make sense.

[Sletchman]

True, but after house ruling categories down to Rifle, Handgun, Tactical/Heavy, Vehicle Mounted, Unarmed, Edged, Blunt, and Hurled I can't recall having a player ask what proficiencies cover what weapons (except "Why is bow in hurled?" - a problem solved by FC's Bow category and that's existed since FCs release).  That's mostly with random guys at Uni who have never played a tabletop game or held a gun.

...and in this scheme, SMGs go where?

2-Handed = Rifle // 1-Handed = Handgun.

The reason why that particular question never came up is below.

It probably helped that I customised the gear lists for them to help them gear up, but that's something you'd do with a new game anyway.

While developing the tutoring cycle is critical to any game, the goal is usually to get the game to speak for itself as much as possible. I'm not refuting your point - it's entirely valid - just clarifying what a forward-thinking design house has to consider.

To be clear, the only way in which I changed the gear lists was seperate it into a page for the rifle proficiency, a sepeate page for the Handgun proficiency, another page for the Tactical proficiency.  In practice it wasn't any different to how FC's gear charts are now.  That was also done pre-second printing of 2.0 (so the gear charts were a bit of a mess anyway).  So you could tell at a glance that "Yup, that MP5/40 is a 'Rifle' and the MP7 is a 'Handgun'".

Also (again to be clear) - by "what you'd do with a new game", I meant FC/3rd vs 2.0 (as opposed to a new game I'm introducing them to).  The advantages of FCs gear list render many questions moot automatically - you know straight up that a Katana is a 'Sword', and a Naginata is a 'Polearm' (and to use either you need 'Edged').  In 3.0 terms you'd automatically know that a 12 ga shotgun is a [BLANK] (in my case - 'Rifle') at a glance.

EDIT: Addendum: I was asked once if a "to the nub" style sawn off shotgun with a pistol grip would become Handgun instead of Rifle.  I ruled "Yes", but it's very easy to write that directly into the upgrade itself.

In our experience, exceptions are at the very core of game complexity. Thus the conundrum in situations like this.

Absolutely.  For the RAW there would be nothing wrong with ruling that a Shotgun is always [X] Proficiency, no matter what is done to it.  The non-gun-literate players wouldn't care, and the gun bunnies would probably say "well, it's reasonable to make it this" - a quick, small and easy house rule (and lets be honest, many of them are probably making many small house rules - adding qualities to firearms that they believe should possess them and so on).

[tfwfh]

2-Handed = Rifle // 1-Handed = Handgun.

I would have said guns with a shoulder stock are rifles, and without are handguns.  Normally, it's the same thing, but it places certain small SMGs like the MP5K or TMP into different categories.  I would also say that adding a stock to a gun that normally doesn't have one makes it use the rifle proficiency, and removing or not using the stock of a gun that has one makes it a handgun.  For clarity's sake I would include that bit of rules in the respective upgrades for adding, removing, and collapsible stocks.

[Crafty_Pat]

To be clear, the only way in which I changed the gear lists was seperate it into a page for the rifle proficiency, a sepeate page for the Handgun proficiency, another page for the Tactical proficiency.  In practice it wasn't any different to how FC's gear charts are now.  That was also done pre-second printing of 2.0 (so the gear charts were a bit of a mess anyway).  So you could tell at a glance that "Yup, that MP5/40 is a 'Rifle' and the MP7 is a 'Handgun'".

Also (again to be clear) - by "what you'd do with a new game", I meant FC/3rd vs 2.0 (as opposed to a new game I'm introducing them to).  The advantages of FCs gear list render many questions moot automatically - you know straight up that a Katana is a 'Sword', and a Naginata is a 'Polearm' (and to use either you need 'Edged').  In 3.0 terms you'd automatically know that a 12 ga shotgun is a [BLANK] (in my case - 'Rifle') at a glance.

That's true until you have more than a page of any particular category (and by a category, I'm talking "Rifles," not "Heavy SMGs"). At that point the intuitiveness starts to slide, unfortunately, which makes splitting SMGs and other weapon types between categories more and more difficult.

2-Handed = Rifle // 1-Handed = Handgun.

I would have said guns with a shoulder stock are rifles, and without are handguns.  Normally, it's the same thing, but it places certain small SMGs like the MP5K or TMP into different categories.  I would also say that adding a stock to a gun that normally doesn't have one makes it use the rifle proficiency, and removing or not using the stock of a gun that has one makes it a handgun.  For clarity's sake I would include that bit of rules in the respective upgrades for adding, removing, and collapsible stocks.

Oy. We've tried this kind of thing before and it almost always goes poorly. Folks tend to reject the idea that you need more than one skill / proficiency / whatever to use a weapon, especially when the difference is perceived as fairly trivial (e.g. adding a quick upgrade, changing a weapon profile, etc.).