Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="swrushing" data-source="post: 1220856" data-attributes="member: 14140"></blockquote>Well, a couple of things.In the show, the stated ROF for the P90 SMG the teams use is 900 rounds per minute, or for those d20ers, 90 rounds per round.In the show, and in my game, the P90 has a 50 round clip, not a 150 round clip. i don't have any 150 round clip SMgG in the game. Neither do they.So, in my game using my system, the max ROF is well within the ROF of the guns in the show and AFAIK IRL although i confess i have not gone back to the FN site to look it up.Finally, book not in front of me so i am working from memory, but I don't recall there being any limit to how many bursts you could fire in the stargate book in a single round except of course the run out of ammo one. So, "my system" did not change that at all. In their game you can fire a number of three-round bursts equal to 1/3rd the ammo... thus emptying the mag. In my game, you can keep pouring it on until you are out of ammo. Both empty the clip. ooohhhh aaahhhh...  If it bothers you that my system allows you to empty some theoretical 150 round mag in 6 seconds, then you should also be writing AEG to complain about theirs, i reckon, cuz that was not a change of mine.yes indeed. Fortunately for me, this is not one of them. This one can be done right without compromise. More over, the word compromise means giving up something for gaining something else. For my view, nothing would be gained by the old bullet counting method. Its not how it is shown in the show, its not significantly simpler and faster, its less realistic in that it puts radically different decisions than is involved to the player... where is the compromise? This sounds more like just a sacrifice, a sacrifice i do not need to make.Why does this need to be sacrificed? What is gained? What benefit is gained by allowing a batch of SMG bullets to cumulatively add up to penetrate the force fields?I would be willing to entertain the notion of this being a necessary sacrifice or even a compromise, but before I can do that you need to show me the gains i can expect or the reasons it has to be sacrificed. Actually, i do not recall any episode where the hose down fire was at all seeming like the pre-count-bullet method. Actually, I do not recall any episode when the autofire seemed to hint that the bullets would cumulatively add up and get thru the force fields, that 10 bullets would be treated cumulatively for penetration.Actually, the fact that it does not match the show is but one issue. The fact that it puts radically different decisions to the player than that the character/shooter would have is another. Anyway, heroes dieing is a STORY element, not a mechanical element IMO. Whether you do autofire hosing down by precounting bullets and hoping or by watching what the shots do and stopping when you get the result you wanted is not story but mechanics. Their mechanic is unrealistic AND it fails to match the show.Again, some people may think that people firing hose down autofire do indeed preselect the specific amount of bullets they will fire and then count bullet by bullet stopping at that preselected point. I am not one of them.Thats why i see it as a flaw.If you like it, thats cool, but please drop the universal "gotta compromise"... though if you want to speak to why for this mechanic we should compromise, please go right ahead.Tell me what i would gain if i chose to make your preferred sacrifice or compromise? Why is pre-bullet-counting better? Why is cumulative penetration better? Show me the money! Then i can consider your notion of this as a necessary compromise.Right and my autofire is closer to the feel of the show.This seems to be at cross purposes to your above. First we have to sacrifice autofire for unspecified compromises but now whats important is that we capture the feel and flavor of the show?Did you miss that my review was POSITIVE. I endorsed this book. I said it was worth the price? Let me repeat it...Overall, the book was good. The pros outweigh the cons. The cons are easily fixed with house rules.If you admit the existence of pros and cons, admit the perceptions will vary from game to game, then i cannot get why you would object to people house ruling away their specific cons or also recognizing the dlaws there are if they don't fix them.[/QUOTE]

Verification