Underpowered Guns in d20 Modern (rant, long)

[Aaron2]

In the show, we see this guy as aged, stick thin, shuffling geek guy and in the RPG write up, given the levels he needed to get to be "top science guy" skill ranks/points, he ended up with over-adequate combat stats and hit points so he could take out the moderately experienced and in his prime marine Kowalski (6th level soldier) in hand to hand without breaking a sweat.

Oi. That's not helping my case. What level was this guy? What were his Dex and Con? With a Con of 8, he should end up with about 1-2 hit points per level. This kinda reminds me of Buffy where, in the later episodes, Cordelia was going toe-to-toe with vampires. D20 Modern makes matters worse by removing the Skill Focus feat. Having a Skill Emphasis feat that stacks with itself add +3 every three level; an easy way to halve the level required for any desired skill!

I think there is a general trend to over leveling and over stating NPCs. There is no reason that the "best whatever" in any given universe -has- to be 20th level. Forex: Conan, in Hour of the Dragon, is nowhere near 20th level. Its just silly and it exacerbates any problems with d20's abstractions (or any game for that matter)


Aaron

 

[Dismas]

What are their occupations. Sounds stupid I know, but I am just doing some maths and the feat count, without know the occupations, seems out, that is if I add in preq feats then I end up with too many for the character.

Another option would be to use the Injury system from Unearthed Arcana (originally from Mutants and Masterminds). Instead of taking damage you make a Fort Save DC based on damage dealt. If you fail by 1-10 you suffer a -1 on future checks, more than 10 and you become disabled etc.

 

[swrushing]

[/QUOTE]

Oi. That's not helping my case. What level was this guy? What were his Dex and Con? With a Con of 8, he should end up with about 1-2 hit points per level.

let me point out that the stargate system is d20 but its own sort of animal and not exactly like d20 modern, though similar.

It actually is one which has feats/abilities that raise the skill level caps (feat by 3, ability by 10) so you can sometimes avoid this. however, it also has all its classes at either d8, d10 or d12 hit die, si the scientist has d8s for hit points at each level.

As i recall, the scientist guy was around 15th level, divided between mostly scientist and a few explorer (for the surviving on his own on alien world.)
His con was not below 10, i think 12.

Having a Skill Emphasis feat that stacks with itself add +3 every three level; an easy way to halve the level required for any desired skill!

Unfortunately, feats also being linked to levels still makes level the key ingredient.

 

[Vigilance]

In my Modern Dispatch article on armor as DR I say that you should treat modern firearms as a ranged touch attack against archaic armor.

That means the knight would be severely disadvantaged.

Chuck

 

[Krieg]

Well, I for one don't consider it a laughing matter.

I was doing my best to stay restrained.

Placing a wounded sailor who was very close to death on a poncho & carrying him to the medavac was not a laughing matter. Nor was seeing the horrified face of the Marine who was responsible through his own negligence.

One even had a Destroyer Escort named after him.

No, they've got no time for glory in the Infantry.
No, they've got no use for praises loudly sung,
But in every soldier's heart in all the Infantry
Shines the name, shines the name of Rodger Young.

May I ask which ship?

.../snip/...The solution i found was to (among other things) get rid of the "will trade hit points for events" by making it likely that one result from getting shot was, due to shock, not getting to complete your actions. Imagine if the result of that first barrage was not only to eat some hit points off the knight but to also cost him an action, so he is stuck out in the open NOT CLOSING.../snip/...

While your solution is probably not something I would ever use personally, it is a very cool way of handling the problem.

 

[jasper]

Technically, it's illegal to fire at troops by the Geneva convention..but that's beside the point). Really Ragboy What Convention? Give year article and number because I never been able to find it the Genvea convention. In fact the old cartoon manual I read on the 50 gave you the lead distance on paratroopers depending on the size of your thumb. I think that hairy chestnut is told by sergants to us green troopers so we will fire on the enemy and not think about it. Of course in Army I was told there was no ice in Germany and you could not get ice cold beer.

Now t20 has dr and reduce archaic armour. Ac/3 round up. Dr I don't remember since I have the screen. A hit takes hitpts off and x con pts off. damage reduction takes place before the hits on con.

Set up a fifty with only 20 yards of clear field of Fire. Sound like a normal Snafu army drill to me. Of course I got mad when they chained down the fifty on the firing range. We were limited up to 1500 meter targets. Very limited firing ranges in some places in West Germany. But at least on 50 team I got to ride in front of duce and a half.

Remember sometimes the game plays like arnold vs Predator. Not the ibm computer guy (What is a blade?) vs german arty in band of brothers.

 

[Aaron2]

Technically, it's illegal to fire at troops by the Geneva convention..but that's beside the point). Really Ragboy What Convention? Give year article and number because I never been able to find it the Genvea convention.

My understanding is that it supposedly violates the "The Hague Convention (IV) respecting the Laws and Customs of War on Land of 1907; Article 23 (e)" against weapons that cause "superfluous injury." ...

Here is that article. Note that the original document is French.
"Art. 23. In addition to the prohibitions provided by special Conventions, it is especially forbidden
(a) To employ poison or poisoned weapons;
(b) To kill or wound treacherously individuals belonging to the hostile nation or army;
(c) To kill or wound an enemy who, having laid down his arms, or having no longer means of defence, has surrendered at discretion;
(d) To declare that no quarter will be given;
(e) To employ arms, projectiles, or material calculated to cause unnecessary suffering;
(f) To make improper use of a flag of truce, of the national flag or of the military insignia and uniform of the enemy, as well as the distinctive badges of the Geneva Convention;
(g) To destroy or seize the enemy's property, unless such destruction or seizure be imperatively demanded by the necessities of war;
(h) To declare abolished, suspended, or inadmissible in a court of law the rights and actions of the nationals of the hostile party. A belligerent is likewise forbidden to compel the nationals of the hostile party to take part in the operations of war directed against their own country, even if they were in the belligerent's service before the commencement of the war. "

Of course, doing anything but wave at the bad guy can easily be construed as violating this nonsense.

The Geneva convetions thing has been given new momentum with John Kerry's oft quoted 1971 remark, "I used 50-caliber machine guns which we were granted and ordered to use, which were our only weapon against people. ... All of this is contrary to the laws of warfare. All of this is contrary to the Geneva Conventions ..."


Aaron

 

[MoogleEmpMog]

Ask yourself one question:

Would a character be significantly more able to survive being hit with a 6' blade of finely forged steel, wielded by a 6'6" master swordsman (orc fighter 13, Str 22), than he would be a single machine gun bullet fired by an equivalently trained elite soldier (human strong 3/soldier 10)?

Modern weapons are devastating. So, in the right hands, are 'archaic' weapons. Place a swordsman and a gunner at point blank range and the swordsman is likely to win. Give them the best armors of their respective eras - full plate and a forced entry unit - and the swordsman really should be even more likely to win, since full plate would offer some protection against small arms fire, while a sword or worse yet mace would maul someone relying on modern anti-ballistic armor.

If you make archaic armor less effective against modern weapons, modern armor should also be made less effective (or not effective at all) against archaic weapons.

Damage-wise, by the way:

Sword minimum: 15
Sword average: 21
Sword maximum: 26

Machine gun minimum: 6
Machine gun average: 17
Machine gun maximum: 28
Machine gun (burst) minimum: 8
Machine gun (burst) average: 30
Machine gun (burst) maximum: 52

With 8 points of full plate DR (using armor as DR), the machine gun's burst averages 22 points of damage and can do up to 44. The average is enough to cause a massive damage save in anything less than a 20th-level, max-Con human. Do you really need to increase its lethality past that point? If so, doesn't the greatsword's much lowerlethality also need just as much buffing?

 

[Tetsubo]

I was doing my best to stay restrained.

Placing a wounded sailor who was very close to death on a poncho & carrying him to the medavac was not a laughing matter. Nor was seeing the horrified face of the Marine who was responsible through his own negligence.



No, they've got no time for glory in the Infantry.
No, they've got no use for praises loudly sung,
But in every soldier's heart in all the Infantry
Shines the name, shines the name of Rodger Young.

May I ask which ship?


While your solution is probably not something I would ever use personally, it is a very cool way of handling the problem.

USS Frankovich. Last I knew it was mothballed in Maryland. It was named after my paternal Grandmother's brother. She had the champagne bottle that she christened it with. The bottle was in a metal mesh. I always found that fascinating as a child. Her brother was a pilot in the Pacific theater during WWII. While on a recon flight his flight group was attacked by the Japanese. His wing gun jammed. He put the plane on autopilot and attempted to "kick" the gun into action. He was shot while doing this. It was a brave attempt even if a bit fool-hardy. I know he was sorely missed by my Grandmother.

No one else in my direct family was lost in military action. Though my Father had both feet crush when a 500 pound bomb fell out of its housing and landed on his boots. A painful way to learn not to remove the bomb carriage before checking if the bomb is locked in place.

Sorry for the thread hijack.

 

[blaskowicz]

Ask yourself one question:

Would a character be significantly more able to survive being hit with a 6' blade of finely forged steel, wielded by a 6'6" master swordsman (orc fighter 13, Str 22), than he would be a single machine gun bullet fired by an equivalently trained elite soldier (human strong 3/soldier 10)?

With 8 points of full plate DR (using armor as DR), the machine gun's burst averages 22 points of damage and can do up to 44. The average is enough to cause a massive damage save in anything less than a 20th-level, max-Con human. Do you really need to increase its lethality past that point? If so, doesn't the greatsword's much lowerlethality also need just as much buffing?

As I already said, the damage is adequate, the numbers needed to hit are not. The knight in the example could have been at double or triple that distance and he would still stand a good chance of making it to the gunner unscathed. As many posters agreed (some of which experienced soldiers), full plate armor will not help "deflect" .50 caliber rounds, at least not to such degree.
And, to my understanding, you cannot fire single shots with the M2HB (in d20 modern rules), since it only has the "automatic" rate of fire.
I am not against the cinematic approach of the DnD hit point mechanic, mind you. But, as it stands, I will have my players clad in full plate armor and wielding halberds and greatswords against aliens.