How is modern?

[d4]

i'm an Army veteran who spent much of my time in service with an infantry unit and was trained as an armorer (weapon maintenance), so i'd like to think i've got a pretty good grasp of automatic and burst fire.

the d20 Modern rules look fine to me.

automatic fire isn't really meant to hit anything. i like the way d20 Modern does it, where autofire is basically suppressive fire -- you're attacking an area, and anyone in the area has a chance to get hit. that's the way soldiers are trained to use autofire. now, if you want to focus on one particular target, it's actually not that easy. most autofire weapons have a lot of recoil, and i know from experience that trying to keep the weapon tightly aimed at a particular target on full auto can range from quite difficult to almost impossible, depending on how much "kick" the weapon has.

as far as burst fire goes, i think that works fine too, and i don't mind the Wis 13 prereq (with one caveat). trying to keep a full auto weapon focused on one target and only squeeze off a couple of rounds so that it won't buck that much isn't an easy task. as you mentioned, the 3-round burst setting on the M16A2 was specifically added to keep soldiers from wasting too much ammo, because most of them couldn't time the burst right and ended up shooting too many rounds, which decreases accuracy considerably.

now a weapon that actually has a 3- or 5-round burst setting shouldn't require the Wisdom prereq to use on that setting, but trying to use a full auto weapon as if it had a shorter burst setting should.

 

[Khur]

i'm an Army veteran who spent much of my time in service with an infantry unit and was trained as an armorer (weapon maintenance), so i'd like to think i've got a pretty good grasp of automatic and burst fire. *snip*

Cool! Thanks for saying something about that! Your post provides very valuable insight.

I've said all along that the rules are fine, especially for simplicity, just not that satisfying. I mentioned suppression fire as well. I'm not a soldier, so I can honestly say I don't know on a personal level. However, I can say some veterans and current military personnel seem to agree with me, and based on their influence still don't buy the Wisdom 13 requirement for the Burst Fire feat at the very least—the cost of having to have a feat is enough of a restriction in itself if you want to stick to d20 Modern rules. I also cling to the logic that if you shoot Autofire into a square totally occupied by a very large, multi-square creature, at the very least that creature should take more damage.

Anyway, once again, I'm not trying to tell anyone how to run his or her game. I'm just interested in others' POV—especially those in a position to know, like you. I'm also not interested in rehashing something that bores everyone, because it has been done 1000 times. I just never had the opportunity to read the old discussions.

Thanks again!

 

[Spatzimaus]

My group liked d20Modern so much that when we started making up a d20 homebrew fantasy ruleset, we used Modern as the baseline instead of D&D, adding in our own rules for magic (well before Urban Arcana came out) and removing all of the technology.

The six basic classes are balanced, flexible, and a much more elegant system than D&D's archaic classes. While every character has one or two obvious classes to pick, the abilities are spread enough that any path is still possible. The "occupation" (background) rules allow players some customization of class skills without leaving it too open-ended.

On the other hand, the Wealth, Reputation, Action Point, and vehicle rules are better done without IMO. The PrCs are a bit too specific to certain archtypes, sort of like D&D's "hybrid" base classes (Ranger, Bard, Paladin, Monk...). And, of course, in d20Modern core rules everyone is a Human.

But, overall, it's still a really good system.

 

[Bran Blackbyrd]

Zip ties are a brilliant solution, and one I had considered. ... Zip ties don't provide a gag, either.

They're right under handcuffs in the core rulebook.
Anyway, my characters usually carry a stun gun too...

Just as asides, WotC wouldn't have had to change anything to use the Wound Point system. It was already developed for Star Wars.

I know, I bought it for our SW GM. Just because the system already existed doesn't mean they wouldn't have had to change a lot of the rules for D20M. Or in other words, they would have had to do certain things differently and, apparently, they did not want to.

Secondly, if there are a lot of threads complaining about these issues, that is at least some evidence that there are problems with the system.

People always complain. This is a forum with a lot of different people and there will always be a portion of us that don't like something. That doesn't always mean the game designers goofed, it means tastes differ and they can't all be catered to.

Whether these are problems in perception is really irrelevant.

That strikes me as awfully convenient. The next time I disagree with someone I can tell them that if I erroneously perceive them to be wrong, they must be.

If the burst rules seem spot on to you, why? Do you have some relevant experience in real world burst fire? If so, the information you have to share is very valuable. If not, your assessment is just speculation....
Now if you want to simulate the A-Team, all the gunplay rules are fine. If you want more realistic action, you may have a hard time with Modern. While this is fine for the veteran GM, who can modify the rules and do so well, the novice is left without any tools to adjust the danger level.

That's your polite way of saying put up or shut up, right? I guess you need real world firearms experience to support the current system, but none to decry it. I think d4 covered this territory very well so I'll stand with his statements on the matter.
...
I've seen this same subtle attack in forums for games like Infiltration.
"X is fine as long as you like unrealistic garbage, but if you liked realism then you'd want to change it. You do like realism, right?"
As I said, I think the rules do a pretty good job representing burst and autofire's accuracy. What isn't realistic is thinking you can pick up one of these weapons without any training and actually hit something while blazing away like a madman.
I never really watched the A-Team, but from what I've read online it was like going to a Stormtrooper firing range... If you're pulling a Neo and firing a minigun into a space the size of an office you'll hit something, maybe not who you're aiming at, but something. Somebody's going to have to make a save and if they're highly experienced, they might just escape unharmed.
If you're standing fifteen feet from a bus that's sitting still and the GM wants to rule that there's no way to miss with your m2hb, then they can tell you to just go ahead and roll for damage, that doesn't take a veteran GM.

More realism available at your local recruiter's office.

 

[Khur]

They're right under handcuffs in the core rulebook. Anyway, my characters usually carry a stun gun too...

I know where zip ties are in the book. Like I said, I had considered it. This still doesn't justify an "instant cuffing" on a dazed character. That's what the original discussion was about. Zip ties do little to change that except making it easier and reasonable to subdue a dazed character in a few rounds. Now a stun gun ... a great tool for the problem of nonlethal subdual...except against an elephant.

People always complain. *snip* That doesn't always mean the game designers goofed, it means tastes differ and they can't all be catered to.

[Khur's stuff on problem with perception being irrelevant]

That strikes me as awfully convenient. The next time I disagree with someone I can tell them that if I erroneously perceive them to be wrong, they must be.

If a lot of players complain about the same thing, then it's at least possible that the designers did goof.

As for the perception, you didn't understand me. The fact of the matter is, that whether something perceives something as hokey, stupid, acceptable, or spot on is always a personal judgment. That doesn't mean that a person is wrong just because it has to do with his or her feelings. It can mean that the feeling really has to do with some other problem a person has, if the person can't back up a feeling with reasonable and logical discourse.

It's not about right and wrong--few arguments are that black and white. Most are semantic ... exactly like this portion of this one.

That's your polite way of saying put up or shut up, right? I guess you need real world firearms experience to support the current system, but none to decry it. I think d4 covered this territory very well so I'll stand with his statements on the matter. I've seen this same subtle attack in forums for games like Infiltration.

I never said you need real-world experience to support anything. You said that above, but I didn't. I did suggest that if you have such information it would be edifying that you share it. That's why I thanked d4 for his input. One can say whatever one likes, but someone who has real-world experience has a more relevant argument when it comes to how acceptable a particular rule is for recreating a "realistic" simulation, simply because he or she knows what it's like in the real world. Everyone who doesn't have such information, or some other relevant research into the subject, is just speculating as I said before. This is merely a fact, not a personal jibe at anyone.

My experience is limited to weapons I've fired (revolvers, 9mm and .45 cal auto pistols, rifles, shotguns, and a musket). I did talk to military personnel, and another person who also talked to military personnel, about the rules before forming an opinion. They disagreed with the rules in d20 Modern. If you have more information, then your opinion is better informed then mine, if you have less information, then your opinion is less informed.

Notice, I did not say that anyone's opinion invalid, whether it's speculation, less informed, or more informed. One has every right to believe whatever one chooses. One has every right to play the game as one sees fit. The only way you can tell your choices on running a game are poor ones is if the persons playing are not having fun. I haven't said anything that disputes these points, in fact just the opposite.

Speaking of military personnel, and informed opinions, d4 did cover the ground very well. It's great to hear a military person speak on the subject. d4's statement doesn't have anything to do with whether or not you have any experience or relevant information to add. If you do, I'd appreciate reading it. If you don't have time or the inclination, that's fine. Even a one-line post stating your military rank (present or past) would be enough for me to count your assessment as more informed than mine (but not necessarily those of other military personnel).

I'm here to educate myself on how others see the rules and why they feel that way. The why is more important to me, and if someone doesn't bother to express why, I'll ask. Opinion with relevant backup information is simply more valuable than mere belief statements with no accompanying reasoning. I'll also express my strong opinions (and the why of them) until someone shows me a better way. I'm not here to influence anyone's opinion but my own. If I do influence someone, hopefully that influence sways playing the game toward a higher "fun quotient".

The rules in d20 Modern are fine. They work. That doesn't mean they're suitable for the type of game I want to run. That also doesn't mean they were the best possible solution to the problem. (Nor does it mean they're the worst.)

I never attacked you, subtly or otherwise. If I meant to attack you, you wouldn't have to label it subtle. I just wanted any relevant information you had so I could personally form a more educated opinion on the subject we are discussing. I never said that if you didn't provide that information you have no right to an opinion. You're the one who suggested my words meant that.

I did say that without backup reasoning, your point of view is speculation. If that fact is insulting, I apologize. My being sorry for hurting your feelings doesn't make that fact less true, however.

 

[Von Ether]

I know, I bought it for our SW GM. Just because the system already existed doesn't mean they wouldn't have had to change a lot of the rules for D20M. Or in other words, they would have had to do certain things differently and, apparently, they did not want to.

Ohhh. The irony of that statement ....

The d20 Modern designers WANTED to make such changes. Orignially, d20 Modern was going to be 1st ed. d20 Star Wars with the serial numbers filed off. They were going to use VP, Armor was going to be focused on DR, no AC, etc. Early mentions of d20 Modern in Polyhedron say as much. The reason why it didn't happen?

Feedback from the fans. The market segment WotC was aiming for made it clear they wanted d20 Modern to hew much closer to D&D than d20 SW. Seeing that there is a 2 to 1 ratio of Fantasy/SF settings in the core book and that the only setting that got its own book was basicly "D&D Modern" it is pretty clear who that audience was.

So quite a few basic rules in d20 Modern aren't there because they designers thought they were "right" (by nature, designers are always pushing the envelope -- not neccessarly in the right directions), but to appease fans (who can often over look any "flaws" in a rule book that supports $200 of suppliment material they bought and have used for years.)

Personly, I think all of the concepts are valid, it just depends on what I am aiming at for a particular game.

But gaming is such a subjective thing and there is no wrong/right answer. It is interesting how one person can see a certain game rule to be a feature -- or a bug -- depending how the game fits in their comfort level.

 

[Khur]

Thanks for this additional insight, Von Ether. As someone who liked Shadow Chasers, I knew this stuff, but I felt like adding it would just irritate Bran. That was neither my intent nor my desire. They had Star Wars long before Modern, so the form Modern takes is a large change already.

Gaming is a subjective thing. I just like to tinker for a certain "feel". I can say my players enjoy themselves.

 

[d4]

However, I can say some veterans and current military personnel seem to agree with me, and based on their influence still don't buy the Wisdom 13 requirement for the Burst Fire feat at the very least...

i may not have stressed it strongly enough in my last post, but IMO, if the weapon already has a "built-in" burst fire (3- to 5-rounds) setting, i don't think you should need the Wis 13 prereq (and maybe not even the feat at all -- it might be better to see it as a property of the weapon). however, trying to fire a fully automatic weapon that doesn't have such a setting (like, say, an M60) in that mode, should require the feat, and i'm OK with the Wisdom prereq in that instance.

"X is fine as long as you like unrealistic garbage, but if you liked realism then you'd want to change it. You do like realism, right?"

now despite everything i've just said, i've got to laugh at sentiment like this. do i want realism in my roleplaying games? heck no! i game to get away from reality. i want my games to run more like action movies than real life.

i think the d20 Modern rules are a good compromise between gritty, lethal "real reality" and high-action cinematic "movie reality." and for the most part, i think they hew closer to the latter than the former, much to my pleasure.

 

[DMauricio]

now despite everything i've just said, i've got to laugh at sentiment like this. do i want realism in my roleplaying games? heck no! i game to get away from reality. i want my games to run more like action movies than real life.

i think the d20 Modern rules are a good compromise between gritty, lethal "real reality" and high-action cinematic "movie reality." and for the most part, i think they hew closer to the latter than the former, much to my pleasure.

I think that last statement sums up modern completely for me and my group.
Though we tend to stick closer to the gritty, its still a very movie-esque feel.



D.

 

[Von Ether]

I think that last statement sums up modern completely for me and my group.
Though we tend to stick closer to the gritty, its still a very movie-esque feel.

*Sticks face in a empty tin can*

I don't call it vengence ... I call it Punishment!
*echos in tin can*

Punishment! Punishment!