Underpowered Guns in d20 Modern (rant, long)

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

Also, how do you feel about my argument that the linear hp progression conceals a geometric basis. I'm of the opinion that d20 sneaks geometric mechanics into decidedly linear-looking progressions with aggravating frequency, but whenever I bring it up (re: fighters, level gain, etc.), nobody pays attention to the point. I like to think it's my intimidating logical prowess, but I somehow doubt that's it.

You didn`t ask me, but I think you are right. I am not sure if it´s every 2 or maybe every 4 levels the effective power doubles, but the basic idea is definitely true, if I think about it.
Speaking of thinking about it:
Whenever you level, multiple of your statistics increase. If you double your number of hp, you would consider that doubling your character`s power. But whenever you double a characters hp, you usually have to double his total HD, which means you will also add new feats, skillpoints, abd increase saving throws and base attack bonus, and possibly add new spells.
That`s probably also the reason why items costs (and assumed wealth by level) go up geometrically...

And if you have meteor swarm in your campaign, then obviously, it should be taken into account when used against a tank. If you're playing a more realistic game, then probably not. But, in order to support all that game-wise, you'd have to have location armor and a corresponding location hit system, and degradation of systems, etc. etc. Lots of dice and tables, if that's your poison (and I love Battletech, but not for role-playing).

Kelleris already explained it in the post above, but I want to say the same (maybe just different):
HP are abstract. That doesn´t only apply for creatures. It applies for vehicles and objects. If a tank has 50 hp and a hardness of 20, this isn`t meant to say he will be destroyed just because you empty several clips of ammunition into him, just targeting the main front of the tank. You attempted to hit "vital" areas - targeting the points of the tanks you can affect AND that are required for the tank to be more than just a big chung of metal.
That´s the reason why you don`t need target locations, and they in fact fail to work with the hp system. HP are abstract. Whenever you hit someone (or something= and deal hp damage, you somehow affect him, increasing the chance that you will take him out of the fight. If it´s because you exhaust him, or slowly damage or destroy parts of it that are vital for the basic function is something that is not exactly modelled - it´s something you have to think up, decide on the spot - what ever makes sense in the situation.

The HP system certainly isn`t perfect, and maybe not even the best one available - especially with its extreme abstraction. But it works, it can create enjoyable games - unless you can`t overlook its weaknesses, which is certainly a problem for many people.
But there are some things where the D20 combat system really is good: It gives you a lot of options in combat. You can use tactics - often "realistic" ones, and I think that is also important for many players.

 

[S'mon]

S'mon, why the difficulty accepting "it's only a scratch/graze/near-miss"? Do you have similar trouble accepting it when it's a six-foot-six behemoth with a greatsword swinging at a guy with a lot of hit points?

You completely misunderstand me - I can accept a hit that reduces hp being explained as "it's only a scratch" but NOT as "it totally missed, yet you lose hp anyway". If it missed, it missed - ie the to-hit roll was not a hit. If it hit, it did damage, whether a scratch, critical wound, or instant kill.

 

[S'mon]

I don't really use a geometric-power-increase assumption for my modern d20 games - a 12th level warrior isn't worth 2 10th levellers, he's worth maybe 2 6th-levellers or a couple dozen 1st level, depending on circumstance. I don't much like "a 10th level character is tougher than an MBT", either.

I've been using input here to update my Cyperpunk d20 rules - I found a handy version online (d20cyberpunk.rtf) that was very similar to my old AD&D version, using that as base. My system is intended so the 12th level Russian Solo can take on the US M1A2 MBT, not by breaking it apart with his bare hands but by using _tactics_ - that DR 1200 is for attacks vs the M1A2's sloped frontal armour of course, you can get it down to DR 150 if you sneak around the back... easy meat for a HEAT RPG round. d20Modern seems almost viscerally hostile to this approach, making it unusable except for modern-Hollywood-action 'Mission Impossible' or 'True Lies' stuff and totally unsuitable for 'war story' or even Gibson-esque Cyberpunk (ok, for Matrix-type Cyberpunk it's fine...) *sigh*

 

[S'mon]

Fireballs - I'd equate these to an HE mortar round in their effects - great vs people & unarmoured vehicles. The best D&D spells for attacking vehicles are the landscape-shaping ones like Rock to Mud...

 

[Krieg]

Fireballs - I'd equate these to an HE mortar round in their effects - great vs people & unarmoured vehicles.

Personally I would say they are much closer in effect to thermobaric weapons, which are very similar to older FAEs (Fuel Air Explosives).

High explosve mortar ammunition relies on shrapnel for casualty or destructive effects. I don't see a Fireball as being mechanically similar.

 

[takyris]

You completely misunderstand me - I can accept a hit that reduces hp being explained as "it's only a scratch" but NOT as "it totally missed, yet you lose hp anyway". If it missed, it missed - ie the to-hit roll was not a hit. If it hit, it did damage, whether a scratch, critical wound, or instant kill.

Ah. That clarifies some of it. Thanks.

So, to make sure I understand you:

You have no problem with an enormous greatsword deliving a tiny minor cut to somebody, but you do have a problem with the notion that the greatsword did not make physical contact but drove the person back, caused him to lose footing, forced him to dive to one side in such a manner that he's off-balance and more vulnerable to future attacks, and so forth? (Not an attack -- want to make sure I'm getting this.)

I guess my reasons for liking a combination of both ideas (minor scratches and complete misses) are as follows:

- My own experiences: As a martial artist, I am fully behind the notion that there are some strikes that I block but, in so doing, set myself up for the really big followup strike by my opponent. In d20 terms, I think of those strikes as costing me some hit points, and the big followup strike costs more -- because not every big followup strike is a critical, and doesn't do a ton of damage. Thus, even in a gunfight between two folks with cover, I'm fine with the first three shots representing "near misses", as the shooter gets closer and closer and slowly makes note of the timing of when his opponent peeks out to shoot. Then that last shot, the one which finally takes the guy down is a real hit. In d20 terms, I can work with "the first three shots, while damaging, were just fatigue and shock and scariness, and the last one really results in a gunshot wound, even though the numbers say '30 down to 22, 22 down to 12, 12 down to 8, 8 down to -1'...."

- Weirndess of multiple wounds: While I love Die Hard, I don't want every campaign to involve a hero who starts with 80 hit points, ends with 7, and is a bleeding wreck. Sometimes I want 7/80 to look "winded, tired, slower than he usually is, but with no more than a few small scrapes from his duel with Duke Ranciar".

- Possible realism with guns?: I don't know squat about gunfights, but from the squat I know, I don't think that most gunfights involve even people we'd consider "high-level" getting grazed dozens of times during a fight. Most heroic war stories I've heard involve people getting nearly shot a bunch of times, maybe hit once really bad, or something along those lines. I'm sure exceptions exist, though.

EDIT: Uh, failed to complete my last sentence for some reason... dur.

 

[Kelleris]

*whew*

I was afraid that someone would take offense to something overly-blunt I said. Although that doesn't seem to be the case, apologies if you did.

Thanks for the comment, Mustrum, I was beginning to wonder if I was the only person here who thought that way. I do have to 'fess up on one point, though, which you made me remember - doubled power from +2 levels doesn't necessarily mean that each individual factor (feats, class abilities, saves) is doubled in importance, although I think that's indicated in the case of hp.

I don't really use a geometric-power-increase assumption for my modern d20 games - a 12th level warrior isn't worth 2 10th levellers...

Aside from the examples I quoted, my main reason for arguing this is that it's the assumption that the experience point award system uses: 2 Cr 10 creatures is an EL 12 encounter, 4 is EL 14, 8 is EL 16, and so forth until the numbers break down at large mobs of creatures. It may not be true, but it is the impression the game designers seem to have been laboring under.

I have to say, though, that it doesn't work quite as well in D20 Modern, although I think they use the same system, because high-level Modern characters are not usually as radically better-equipped than their low-level counterparts as they are in D&D.

Fireballs - I'd equate these to an HE mortar round in their effects - great vs people & unarmoured vehicles. The best D&D spells for attacking vehicles are the landscape-shaping ones like Rock to Mud...

I was just citing equivalencies in terms of raw damage. If you were actually planning on blowing up a vehicle, the RPG is better, because it ignores some of the thing's hardness.

And the best D&D spell for attacking vehicles is disintegrate. That 10' cube pretty much puts whatever you point it at out of commission. I'd feel a little dirty doing it, though.

takyris - I like your explanation of what hp means. Wish I could add something to it, but that's pretty much exactly what I do. Well, except that I enjoy occasionally rendering my PCs into bloody wrecks.

 

[takyris]

takyris - I like your explanation of what hp means. Wish I could add something to it, but that's pretty much exactly what I do. Well, except that I enjoy occasionally rendering my PCs into bloody wrecks.

Oh, definitely, yes. I have one player who categorically refuses to use the "barely missed" methodology. He plays Tough heroes, and they come out of a lot of fights looking like Bruce Willis at the end of, well, almost any Bruce Willis movie.

 

[S'mon]

Personally I would say they are much closer in effect to thermobaric weapons, which are very similar to older FAEs (Fuel Air Explosives).

High explosve mortar ammunition relies on shrapnel for casualty or destructive effects. I don't see a Fireball as being mechanically similar.

I meant in effect, not in mechanics. Sure, mechanically a fireball is like a small FAE/FAX attack.

 

[S'mon]

Ah. That clarifies some of it. Thanks.

So, to make sure I understand you:

You have no problem with an enormous greatsword deliving a tiny minor cut to somebody, but you do have a problem with the notion that the greatsword did not make physical contact but drove the person back, caused him to lose footing, forced him to dive to one side in such a manner that he's off-balance and more vulnerable to future attacks, and so forth? (Not an attack -- want to make sure I'm getting this.)

Eh, yes, I have a problem with the idea that "causing him to lose footing" is reflected in a loss of hit points requiring days to heal! The D&D hit point mechanic was designed to reflect _damage_, not near misses. Essentially, it reflects damage proportionate to total hp, so 25/50 looks much the same as 3/6, and 3/50 looks much worse than 3/6.

Trying to twist a damage mechanic to reflect something it was never intended to reflect just doesn't work well IMO. The D&D/d20 ruleset does a fair job of representing Bruce Willis in Die Hard, or other tough heroes who can take a hit & keep fighting (which is not uncommon in real life - though IRL people have a tendency to drop dead later on once adrenalin fades & they realise how badly wounded they are, which doesn't happen in D&D). It does a terrible job of reflecting genres where high-level heroes are never hit (and killed by a single bullet if they are hit). Different genres need different rules.