Nadaka said:
This won't work.
Say you have two equally matched forces armed with firearms faceing each other within the first increment. One side decides to shoot first because shooting first gives you the advantage right?
wrong. because shooting first means that the opposition gets to take thier AoO, so in effect the decision to shoot first allows the other guys to get the first shot. And if the opposition has the combat reflexes feat it means that everyone on your team can get shot multiple times before you get to take your shots because the combat reflexes guys can make 1 AoO for each target that provokes and each one can target the same provoker as another character.
I disagree: this argument assumes that the first army somehow all acts on a single initiative count. It also assumes that everyone essentially appeared in their spot without firing and then waiting on some trigger event to start combat. Plus it assumes the other side would get AoOs when they are flat-footed, which they would not.
That situation is not really mimicing a battlefield, but maybe something more like a mob standoff (the first image that comes to mind is the climactic three-way shootout in True Romance). Or I suppose a Napoleanic battle where the soldiers actually line up, aim, and fire at the opposing side, but even then they did so from a far greater distance than one range increment, so back to the mob standoff.
In this scenario, there would be no surprise round because the two sides are aware of each other, they are just not sure if they are going to go hostile. So when the fight starts, it should just be a straight-up initiative check. In a large group, they will not all get the same initiative, so they will not go all at once, so one by one they get their chance to shoot.
If you fire first, you're safe from AoOs, and you can even duck for cover after that. The first enemy to go will have to pick between shooting, which will provoke an AoO from only the guys that have already gone, or choose to dive for cover. If he does shoot, his enemy shoots as an AoO (maybe more than one fires) and he gets to shoot them as an AoO against them. (Yes, an AoO can provoke another AoO, but you resolve them regressively, so it does run out instead of going on infinitely.) So he fires, they fire back, he fires a second time. Next guy goes, etc. Unless I'm missing something, it should as smoothly as any normal melee combat, just spread out a few feet further apart. And yes, it could result in a flurry of shots early in the combat, but that actually sounds about right. Again, going back to the standoff scene in True Romance, there is a brief 6-second barrage of heavy gunfire back and forth, and then the few remaining combatants are behind cover and trading potshots at each other.
Nadaka said:
example lets say its 10 vs 10
side1 shoots first
1 guy on side 2 takes his AoO, the others don't
side1 uses all thier AoO on the one guy
the other 9 guys on side2 now use thier AoO without repercussion
Even if the first side did go all at once, or delay, etc. and then have 1 guy try to shoot by himself to provoke all of the AoOs at once, the enemy would not all "roll their dice" at the same time unless they were suicidal. They would instead take AoOs on him one at a time until he went down, and the remaining forces would still have AoO's left for the next guy to shoot.
I agree that Combat Reflexes would become more important. It allows you extra AoOs and you can make them flat-footed, but that doesn't mean every enemy would have it. Not every person carrying a gun would be built optimally for short-range gunfights.
Finally, the trench warfare situation still seems appropriate. Not everyone would have readied actions, but one or two on watch duty would. A few guys would have Combat Reflexes, and they would recognize that trenches which are farther apart are better able to withstand an attack (not counting barbed wire and other such obstacles.) So, when the enemy start charging, there are a few shots at the lead guys, and then in the next round, a barrage of fire cuts down almost everyone in the open. Some of those shots are normal attacks and a lot of them are AoOs. The charging guys do not get to take AoOs back, because the defenders have 3/4 cover in their trenches.
(The only way to successfully charge the opposing trench is if you have concealment from smoke grenades, can clear the obstacles out of the way with grenades, and have an artillery barrage cause most of the enemy to be stunned or dazed for the first round or two from shell shock. Even then you're bound to suffer heavy losses for only a small gain on the ground, which is historically accurate.)
Finally, getting to cover may not get you shot. This would be when you use Tumble, just as in melee, to dodge and duck as you dive for cover. A successful Tumble check and some cover close by, and you're safe from AoO's.
HeapThaumaturgist said:
Surprise becomes, perhaps, too important ... the surprise round, your side acts, shooting or moving first. Then initiative is rolled, but since your side acted first ANY ACTION the other side is likely to take provokes an AoO, so you get to shoot them all AGAIN when they try to move and then AGAIN when you take your actual action.
I agree, but I think that's a feature instead of a problem. I think in that kind of surprise round, you would be talking about a situation where two groups of armed forces got within 1 range increment of each other, everyone with their weapons ready, and then one side surprised the other one. The surprising group would definitely have a heavy advantage, and would basically be in an ambush situation on the other team, so it is reasonable that at first they would have a 2 or 3 to 1 shot ratio. For the defending team there, they somehow let a large group of armed shooters surprise them; the system would be broken if it didn't severely penalize them for that mistake.
