Weapons Locker info

[d4]

Exactly. Here's your gun types: Submachine gun, Shotgun, Automatic assault rifle, Hunting rifle, Revolver, Semiautomatic handgun.

i'm in this camp, too -- i just don't see the need for listing out dozens and dozens of different models of firearms when they all end up performing identically given d20 Modern's lack of granularity in weapon stats. heck, they don't even take accuracy (other than +1 for mastercraft) or reliability into account! (i remember being told in the military that accuracy vs reliability was the key difference and trade-off between the M16 and the AK-47. d20 Modern can't handle some of the most key differences between these weapons at all...)

i was a bit disappointed with UMF because of this -- where there's literally a dozen or more pistols which only differ by clip size, hit points, and weight. is it then really necessary to list them separately?

my preference would be to have something like a single stat line for "Big Pistol" and then in the description say "These stats can be used to simulate any of these fifteen different models of handgun."

 

[Katowice]

That's pretty much the way it is in the Star Wars RPG: holdout blaster, blaster pistol, blaster rifle, repeating blaster rifle....and slugthrower.

my preference would be to have something like a single stat line for "Big Pistol" and then in the description say "These stats can be used to simulate any of these fifteen different models of handgun."

 

[Dread0395]

FWIW, Weapons Locker is Small Arms of the World Vol 1. Kieth and Richard were the writer and artist for the SMotW Project.

If you really want the crunch just go ahead and buy the Small Arms of the World books and other related source material and eliminate the middle man. All you really need is a basic, modular framework for modeling terminal ballistics is already in place within the game. Everything else is fluff.

 

[ledded]

See I told you we'd get bogged down in sword goodness on a d20 modern thread.

Yeah, but how often does a thread *not* get bogged down with something...

I can see where you're coming from (seeing as Oakshotte doesn't refer to a 'longsword' as such) and I can see where Kireg is coming from too (possibly from the same sources I've been going through - mainly historic manuals like Paradoxes of Defense where the two handed sword )

Oakshotte's not one of my favorites, though he is pretty experienced/learned; most of my points weren't necessarily through his views though he does have some good stuff. George Silver, Talhoffer, Tobler, Liechtenauer, Johannes, etc are some good historical references. Brian Price, Reinhart, Clements, Chris Amberger, etc are a few nice modern 'enthusiasts' and practical knowledge fellas too that I get around to reading and/or corresponding on stuff with. There's tons more, and we can talk about 'em off list if you guys want.

For now, can we just let the damn thing slide? Cause really while it is an interesting topic to me, and you guys, I doubt we'll ever agree on the terminology. (but that's the whole point to being a scholar of the sword innit?) And as I said before, it's possibly a debate/topic that is best discussed on a different forum than this one.
D.

Sure, we can agree to slightly disagree; it's mostly semantics that we are disagreeing on anyway and not the root of the thing.

CAn we talk about guns now?

Hey, I at least mentioned *something* about guns in RPG's in my post...

 

[buzz]

That's pretty much the way it is in the Star Wars RPG: holdout blaster, blaster pistol, blaster rifle, repeating blaster rifle....and slugthrower.

Heh. And I found it just as silly when the SW A&E Guide came out and had a big list of various blaster pistol makes and models. d20M at least has genre justification for getting all gunophillic (modern action, modern military, etc.). Differentiating between gun models in SW is just plain pointless.

 

[JPL]

Heh. And I found it just as silly when the SW A&E Guide came out and had a big list of various blaster pistol makes and models. d20M at least has genre justification for getting all gunophillic (modern action, modern military, etc.). Differentiating between gun models in SW is just plain pointless.

Mechanically, yes. But it's that whole verisimilitude issue.

Han Solo could surely tell you the make and model of that heavy blaster of his, and why he carries it vs. any other weapon. My particular vision of Star Wars is not quite so interested in the tech, but for some people, it's part of the immersion in the universe.

I agree, it makes more sense in the typical d20 Modern campaign than Star Wars, but obviously different people look at Star Wars in different ways.

 

[buzz]

IMHO, verisimilitude in SW simply doesn't demand getting too specific about tech; as a "genre," I don't think that SW really cares much. Honestly, I think it's more true to SW to specifically *not* care about technical specifics; that's what I found jarring about the A&EG.

It reminds me of one criticism I heard made about SWd20 in comparison to the old D6 version: that you have to count your ammo in SWd20. While appropriate for something like Aliens, I agreed that such detail simply isn't justified by the SW films. SW is way too pulpy to care about that, IMHO.

But here I am derailing the thread. Sorry.

 

[Katowice]

Ammo capacity is given in SWRPG, but like d20 Modern, you don't have to count it if you don't want to. It's not like WOTC is going protest.

IMHO, verisimilitude in SW simply doesn't demand getting too specific about tech; as a "genre," I don't think that SW really cares much. Honestly, I think it's more true to SW to specifically *not* care about technical specifics; that's what I found jarring about the A&EG.

It reminds me of one criticism I heard made about SWd20 in comparison to the old D6 version: that you have to count your ammo in SWd20. While appropriate for something like Aliens, I agreed that such detail simply isn't justified by the SW films. SW is way too pulpy to care about that, IMHO.

But here I am derailing the thread. Sorry.

 

[JPL]

IMHO, verisimilitude in SW simply doesn't demand getting too specific about tech; as a "genre," I don't think that SW really cares much. Honestly, I think it's more true to SW to specifically *not* care about technical specifics; that's what I found jarring about the A&EG.
.

And personally, I agree.

But some folks need more of the setting detail that's built up over the decades to feel like they're really grounded in the Star Wars universe --- whether that means attention to continuuity or knowing which of Yoda's peers on the Jedi Counsel trained your master's master or knowing who built your spaceship / droid / gun.

I feel the tone is more important than the details, but opinions vary.

 

[Krieg]

If you would, quote me some references to the use of the word longsword in actual historical classification and not just casual description.

Codex Wallerstein (1470)
Dei Liberi's Flos Duellatorum (1410)
Misc Fechtbuch's:
Talhoffer (1467)
(The) Solothurner (1423)
Egenolph (1531)
Jörg Wilhalm (1520)
Paulus Kal (1460)
Paulus Mair (1542)
Albrecht Duerer (1520)

FWIW, Weapons Locker is Small Arms of the World Vol 1. Kieth and Richard were the writer and artist for the SMotW Project.

LOL not quite what I was talking about...

Small Arms of the Wolrd