Weapons Locker info

[Corinth]

None of the above necessitates what's in the A&EG. Mechanically, d20 doesn't care about anything you've mentioned above... which is fine (foolish roll/roleplayer comments aside). Players/GMs who add this kind of detail to their games should be commended, and if the A&EG adds to this kind of enjoyment, then more power to them. I still don't find it particularly necessary, though.

That's not necessarily true. AEG's Modern Arms Guide goes into loving and useful detail about the qualities that differentiate one model from another. The book does this by adding a few additional traits--Accuracy, Recoil--and putting traits to some models (e.g. Takedown: Target must make Fortitude save vs. DC equal to damage taken or be knocked prone.) not all of which are positive (e.g. Awkward: Target suffers a one-time -2 penalty to Initiative.). The benefit is that these real-world traits get on the character sheet and thus see use where it matters--during actual play--because if it isn't on the sheet, then it doesn't matter.

This is why I prefer the MAG for my modern gaming; my Spycraft games go so much better with it than without it (as would any Stargate SG-1 game that I run).

 

[Kesh]

So, can anyone tell me what the guns on the cover are supposed to be? They look cool (esp. the longarm on the bottom), but I know nothing about them.

Okay, top to bottom:

1: Looks like an M-16 Carbine w/ an M80 grenade launcher under the barrel. I'd say it's a Carbine, and not a standard model, due to the plastic shoulder stock, and the barrel is the same length as the grenade launcher attachment.

2: On the left is some form of .45 pistol. Not an original Colt 1911, but one of the more modern copycats, I'd say. On the right is what appears to be a modified Winchester 1300 combat shotgun, but I can't say for sure. I've been unable to find an exact match for that design... possibly also a modified Mossberg 590.

3: Your standard AK-47.

4: This looks to be some form of .50 machine gun, but I can't find a match in the stuff I have handy.

 

[C. Baize]

No. I've been thanked many times for writing a line of books that puts the average GM on the same level with the local gun nut, and provides an ever-thickening book to beat them into submission with. Those GMs haven't been particularly interested in guns and are now quite happy to have all that fluff and flavor.

Of course, I've seen several times in this thread that we've said your books are good... but we don't necessarily need THAT much of a gun's history / technical specifications.

Seriously.... If I want to know that at about 4,000 rounds through the barrel, the firing pin starts to get a little sloppy.... I'll buy a gun digest.

Oh... and insulting a bunch of potential customers....
*shakes head*

Bad idea.... Really.

I'm quite a lot less likely to purchase future products of yours based on the attitude I see displayed here. You've been insulting from your first post on this thread, and it hasn't lightened up, any. From insulting someone else's product, to insulting peoples' intelligence, to insulting the way people game.
I'm honestly boggled by how you can expect to sell people on your product by telling people they don't know what they want, and that they game incorrectly.

It's like standing on a corner with your self help book, saying, "Hey! You! You're too stupid to know what you want! And you're living your life, incorrectly! But *I* know what you REALLY want, and it's in this book! Buy it, you jerk!"

Well.... good luck with sales.

 

[d4]

You know, it's the rollplayers who only care about what numbers they can take a bite out of and crunch. It's the roleplayers who enjoy all the fluff and flavor that fuels imagination.

you're not listening to what i'm saying. (or reading what i'm writing, whatever.)

i like the fluff and flavor, and i like it being there in the SW A&EG. however, i said the weapon stats themselves weren't different enough to justify being listed separately IMO. it's a waste of space.

having five pages that have a paragraph about each of thirty different kinds of blasters, describing their manufacturers, histories, idiosyncracies, famous users, etc. -- and then having a single stat block at the end, to be used for all of them, would be fine by me. i like reading the flavor, but since the system isn't granular enough to catch subtle differences between the models, one stat block can suffice for all of them.

what the A&EG did was use up twice as much space in order to list a stat block for each individual model -- with game mechanical differences so slight that i'm left wondering why they bothered.

it's a waste of space that could've been used for other things. (and IMO there were many things that should've had more detail in that book that didn't receive it; here is where i think they could've found the space for the other stuff i wanted.)

 

[blindrage]

I picked said book tonight and so far I m happy with the book. Not as good as the Green Ronin book but man it's nice to have a little blurb about the said weapon and pic. Good for GM and players. Now if you have the Green Ronin book and do not want to buy another one, well no worries. You have better of the two IMHO.

 

[Krieg]

Okay, top to bottom:

1: Looks like an M-16 Carbine w/ an M80 grenade launcher under the barrel. I'd say it's a Carbine, and not a standard model, due to the plastic shoulder stock, and the barrel is the same length as the grenade launcher attachment.

More specifally the M4A1 with an M203 40mm grenade launcher.

4: This looks to be some form of .50 machine gun, but I can't find a match in the stuff I have handy.

It looks like an M60E3, which was the "light" version of the M60 used by the Marine Corps prior to their adoption of the M240G (ie the FN-MAG to the rest of the world).

The M60E3 7.62mm is a lightweight, gas operated, air cooled, disintegrating metallic link-belt fed, man portable, general purpose machine gun. (Wow hard to believe I still remember all that verbatim from SOI! )

 

[d4]

It looks like an M60E3, which was the "light" version of the M60 used by the Marine Corps prior to their adoption of the M240G (ie the FN-MAG to the rest of the world).

the Marine Corps doesn't use the M249 SAW? or is M240G the Marine Corps nomenclature for the same thing?

 

[Vocenoctum]

the Marine Corps doesn't use the M249 SAW? or is M240G the Marine Corps nomenclature for the same thing?

249=5.56, M60=7.62, not sure if both are still in general use, but I believe so.

 

[Krieg]

the Marine Corps doesn't use the M249 SAW? or is M240G the Marine Corps nomenclature for the same thing?

The Marine Corps uses both.

The M249 squad automatic weapon is issued at the fireteam level. That means that there is one SAW gunner per four man fire team (3 per squad & 9 per platoon).

All of the crew served/heavier weapons (Mortars, M-2s, Mk-19s, SMAWs, AT-4s, TOWs, Dragons/Javelins, M240G2 etc) are organic to the weapons platoon.

There is one weapons platoon (and 3 rifle platoons) in each rifle company.

The weapons platoon is broken down into three sections (Mortars, Machine Gun & Anti-Tank). The Machine Gun section typically has at least 6 M240's.

249=5.56, M60=7.62, not sure if both are still in general use, but I believe so.

The M240G has replaced the M60, otherwise you are correct.

 

[Mythtify]

I looked throught this book today. I won't be purchasing it. I am a big fan of d20 Modern. I have the other books that Wizards has done for the system. This book is not up to there usual standards.

First of all, it is all black and white.

Secondly, I did not see any master tables. You would think that they would at least put a master table in each chapter.

The art work isn't very good either.

Overall, it just is not what I have come to expect from the d20M line.