Minor fixes

[ristan]

How is that more than the 19 feats a 20th level human fighter will have.
Plus the fighter doesn't have to pay for 3 feats to use armor types, and feats to use weapons beyond simple.

If what you want to say is D20M has more classes that offer bonus feats that would be correct. But I don't see how they have more than fighters in D&D.

I'm not saying this is bad thing, I think it is good that D20M classes have most of their powers defined through feats.

But I don't mean to derail the thread, so to comment on the Armor adding to the MD threshold. I don't think it will hurt anything, esp. if you want your game to focus more on chars wearing armor.

As far as the guns go, I can see why they simplified it so in the core book, but it really made Ultramodern Firearms kinda disappointing. What is the point of having a rulebook on these different gun types if they aren't mechanically different from the ones already in the game.

 

[Kae'Yoss]

How is that more than the 19 feats a 20th level human fighter will have.
Plus the fighter doesn't have to pay for 3 feats to use armor types, and feats to use weapons beyond simple.

The fighter's the only one who comes out ahead, the other classes don't get as many bonus feats as the fighter (or any at all). AND that's the only thing the fighter will have, while d20M Characters will have Talents, and those with advanced classes will have other special features.

If what you want to say is D20M has more classes that offer bonus feats that would be correct. But I don't see how they have more than fighters in D&D.

As said above: The fighter has nothing else. He's just feats.

But I don't mean to derail the thread, so to comment on the Armor adding to the MD threshold. I don't think it will hurt anything, esp. if you want your game to focus more on chars wearing armor.

But it still doesn't make sense. I like my rules with a little consistency.

As far as the guns go, I can see why they simplified it so in the core book, but it really made Ultramodern Firearms kinda disappointing. What is the point of having a rulebook on these different gun types if they aren't mechanically different from the ones already in the game.

Mechanically isn't the only thing.

The damage a gun deals is determined by the caliber it uses, why would we create guns with damage between 1d6 and 4d12 only to have a hundred different weapon kinds defined by damage. And then they'll take the 4d12 weapon...

And those weapons are different alright: They differ in mag capacity, caliber (like the 5.7mm rounds used in Five-seveN and P90), and special features (a Druganov comes with an electro-optical sight, the AI Covert has adjustable fittings and can be disassembled, the HK G11 is designed for burst fire and you only get -2 for using burst fire.....)

 

[Shadowlord]

The damage a gun deals is determined by the caliber it uses, why would we create guns with damage between 1d6 and 4d12 only to have a hundred different weapon kinds defined by damage. And then they'll take the 4d12 weapon...

Which is a very good idea, but now everyone will take the gun with the best range, damage, biggest magazine and lowest price. The intention was good, but they screwed many weapons up.

And those weapons are different alright: They differ in mag capacity, caliber (like the 5.7mm rounds used in Five-seveN and P90), and special features (a Druganov comes with an electro-optical sight, the AI Covert has adjustable fittings and can be disassembled, the HK G11 is designed for burst fire and you only get -2 for using burst fire.....)

Where did you see these?? That isn't written in the corebook, and if you're talking about UMF, they should have done it right in the corebook instead of forcing us to buy a supplement!

 

[Kae'Yoss]

Which is a very good idea, but now everyone will take the gun with the best range, damage, biggest magazine and lowest price. The intention was good, but they screwed many weapons up.

Your reasoning is flawed because there is no single weapon that's top in all those things. They have one or two, maybe three outstanding advantages, and players can choose from it: Some people simply want to have as much damage with the weapon as possible, they choose stuff like the Desert Eagle. Others want big magazines, and take a Glock17. Others want to hit as often as possible, and their Choice is a Glock 17 or 20. Then people want a very small weapon, so they take a SITES M9. People with the want of a high range go for the Beretta 92F. And then there's people who just want some weapon, but don't want to pay to much, so they choose a Ruger Service-Six.
The same goes for other types of weapons.

Where did you see these?? That isn't written in the corebook, and if you're talking about UMF, they should have done it right in the corebook instead of forcing us to buy a supplement!

At first, Wizard isn't forcing you to buy UMF. For it is a Green Ronin book, not WotC. Also, they haven't more Weapons in the core rules because they felt most people won't need more weapons, or other ammo types, or info about the weapons that has nothing to do with game mechanics.
If you want to have those things, you buy the supplement, and get over 150 pages worth of Weapons, each with its own illustration, info about the weapon, and many with special mechanics, as those mentioned above. And a couple of new feats for the use with firearms.

 

[hong]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Minor fixes

(i also agree with them only being Large, not Huge. i'm not a big guy and i could carry one fairly well. no firing from the hip, though. 2d10 damage sound right -- there's no way an M60 should do as much or more damage than a 50-cal.)

What d20M needs is a bandanna of steadying. +2 competence bonus to attacks when firing from the hip, takes up the headgear slot. Sound about right?


Hong "pair it up with the baby oil of deflection for best results" Ooi

 

[Shadowlord]

Your reasoning is flawed because there is no single weapon that's top in all those things. They have one or two, maybe three outstanding advantages, and players can choose from it:

I don't know where you're looking or what glasses you're wearing. Some weapons do have all the benefits!
Pff, I give up, there's no point in convincing someone with a fixed opinion.

 

[Kae'Yoss]

I don't know where you're looking or what glasses you're wearing.

Ones with plasitc lenses.

Some weapons do have all the benefits!
Pff, I give up, there's no point in convincing someone with a fixed opinion.

Name one.

 

[Henry]

Name one.

The Five-Seven from Ultra-modern Firearms, which was already mentioned.

2d8 damage (like a desert eagle), 40 ft range increment (the best of all handgun ranges), semi-automatic, the ability to mount a laser sight, illuminator, OR a supressor, and a 20 round box magazine. The best weapon in the whole book, IMHO, and the only one I was really worried about, stat-wise. The only thing missing is being an inherently mastercraft item!

The desert Eagle has the disadvantage of low ammo capacity; but the five-seven, for the same range and stopping power, is the best choice out of the whole pistol section of both the core rules and UMF.

 

[Kae'Yoss]

You forgot about the small size. Which is changed to medium if you use a suppressor.

But I think that all weapons can have laser sights, suppressors, and the like, by the rules.

Then, the FN Five-seveN is more expensive than other weapons (DC 20, if you want mastercraft, that will be 23).

I must admit that this weapon is one of the few that slightly troubles me. But fact is, it is a small, but powerful weapon in RL, too.
And it's in a supplement, I think there's no weapon in the core rules that has all the advantages.

I'd still use other weapons than the fn57: if I don't want to spend that much money on a weapon, if I have personal preferences (a deagle is a deagle is a deagle. I like that gun - and the Five-seveN, too - in CS), if I need a really small weapon...