Why does Grim Tales have the most customized CharGen?

[Morgenstern]

That's something I always found weird (in other games, too)... that firing a burst overall lessens your chance to hit, but increases damage, if you do.

Shouldn't it make hitting easier, if more bullets are fired (even with recoil), with the chance to deal extra damage being pretty slim (i.e. hitting with multiple bullets)?

I always thought, that's the whole point of burst/auto fire, to make it more likely to hit with at least one bullet.

Burst (Trick — +2 Shots — Burst Mode)
1 Half Action • Error Range +1
A character making a Standard Attack with a firearm may instead target 1 opponent with a short burst of ammunition.
With a hit, the target is struck by 1 shot. If the attack result exceeds the target’s Defense by 5 or more, 2 shots hit. If the attack result exceeds the target’s Defense by 10 or more, all 3 shots hit. Damage is applied as standard for each shot that hits.
With a critical hit, the damage from the first hit only is applied directly to the target’s wounds (if the second and third shots hit, damage is applied for each as a standard hit).


That's a combat action, BTW. No feat required. 2.0 feats generally make you better at stuff, not pass/fail to do it at all .

 

[Denaes]

I believe you would be referring to Burst Fire and Dead Aim, both of which are special combat tactics that the majority of soldiers are incapable of performing. Only highly specialized units can do these sorts of things, which require a great deal of perception and control (elements of the Wisdom score). This has been addressed in Bullet Points before; check it out on the Wizards website or wait for me to find the URL for that particular article.

Great realism... but if you're going for realisim, you really need to overhaul the feat system with a LOT of extra pre-reqs in different areas.

But I'm not looking to make a tactical combat replica. I'm looking for a game where players are heros. They're capable of attempting common sense things (like shooting a gun) without training, though with penalties.

My brash fast hero specializing in gun-fu was unable to be very gun-fuey at all. And he wasn't even able to attempt these things for some inane reason (either the GM didn't read the rules to find out the untrained penalties or the book doesn't allow it) and my gun-fu guy was a naughty word character who couldn't do anything remotely cinematic with guns. He just ended up being a Fast Hero who could shoot guns.

I'm not sure about burst fire needing special training. I could do it at 12. I couldn't innately squeeze off pulses of 3 or 5 shots, but I could pull down the trigger and squeeze off a short burst to hit a target or multiple targets on an outdoor firing range... thinking back on that, I'm wondering exactly how illegal that was. I had parental permission and supervision of a squad of Navy personel. But still... I was 12 firing shotguns, revolvers, semi-automatic and fully automatic weapons

I'm not saying an army of 12yr olds could show up the police or military, I'm just saying that it can be done untrained, just not as well and luck does play a part of it.

 

[Denaes]

Burst (Trick — +2 Shots — Burst Mode)
1 Half Action • Error Range +1
A character making a Standard Attack with a firearm may instead target 1 opponent with a short burst of ammunition.
With a hit, the target is struck by 1 shot. If the attack result exceeds the target’s Defense by 5 or more, 2 shots hit. If the attack result exceeds the target’s Defense by 10 or more, all 3 shots hit. Damage is applied as standard for each shot that hits.
With a critical hit, the damage from the first hit only is applied directly to the target’s wounds (if the second and third shots hit, damage is applied for each as a standard hit).

This is why I'm running my first Spycraft 2.0 game this Friday

That's a combat action, BTW. No feat required. 2.0 feats generally make you better at stuff, not pass/fail to do it at all .

Thats my opinion on feats in a game of heroic characters. Feats shouldn't let you do most things (yeah, there are specialized exceptions), but they should give bonuses to do those things.

Spycraft 2.0 is the bees knees. It also seems to have a much, much, MUCH better non-lethal combat than d20 Modern

 

[takyris]

Great realism... but if you're going for realisim, you really need to overhaul the feat system with a LOT of extra pre-reqs in different areas.

I'd like to see you support this statement. Especially given that you declared below that you thought one of the feats already in use in the game has pre-reqs that you disagree with, based on your experiences as a twelve-year-old.

But I'm not looking to make a tactical combat replica. I'm looking for a game where players are heros. They're capable of attempting common sense things (like shooting a gun) without training, though with penalties.

Perhaps you missed the part where anybody can fire a gun, albeit at a -4 if they aren't proficient with it?

And I don't think anybody is going to accuse d20 Modern of being a tactical combat replica. To be honest, I've sort of lost track of what your complaint is. I'm getting one-part "It's unrealistic" and one-part "It's not cinematic enough for me", and when I hear that from a player, what that usually means is "The game isn't unrealistically over the top in the areas that I want it to be unrealistically over the top in." Which, coincidentally, are usually the areas that your character would have.

For example:

My brash fast hero specializing in gun-fu was unable to be very gun-fuey at all. And he wasn't even able to attempt these things for some inane reason (either the GM didn't read the rules to find out the untrained penalties or the book doesn't allow it) and my gun-fu guy was a naughty word character who couldn't do anything remotely cinematic with guns. He just ended up being a Fast Hero who could shoot guns.

I'm going to need a bit more information to be able to answer any of what you just said. Based on what you've posted, I'm going to go out on a limb and guess that a) your character wasn't high enough level to do the sweet stuff you wanted, b) you tried to minmax your character without a clear enough understanding of the rules and ended up not qualifying for feats you wanted, and/or c) you and the GM didn't have a clear enough understanding of the rules.

I've played heroes who don't have Double Tap but fire two bullets as an attack. The way it works is that I say "My guy fires two bullets because that's how he's heard he's supposed to do it," and then I roll a normal attack for normal damage. I don't do anything special except remove an extra bullet from my clip, because I've chosen to play a character without Double Tap -- which, in d20 Modern, means somebody who isn't a good enough shot to rapidly fire a second shot that has any real chance of hitting. He's firing a bit wildly and not being the most efficient gunman of all time, because I haven't bought the feats that let you do that.

I mean, would you complain in a D&D game that your DM didn't let you make a Whirlwind Attack without having the feat in question? I mean, if you stand in the middle of a circle of combat dummies and swing a club around, you can easily hit all of them just by spinning, right? So why shouldn't everyone be able to do Whirlwind Attack?

The answer most people agree on is that swinging a stick at combat dummies is a bit different from swinging at a pack of bad guys surrounding you and trying to hit back, and the ability to do something casually in a practice environment doesn't mean you can actually do it in the heat of combat. Much like, say, somebody could fire off a pair of shots at an unmoving target on a practice range and hit the target both times, but might not be able to do so against a real-live target who was running toward him screaming and shooting a gun of his own while our would-be gunman dives to the ground, rolls, scrambles for cover, and then tries to make that double-tap shot that looked so easy on the shooting range.

At first level, you don't get to do Whirlwind Attack, and you don't get to do Shot on the Run. Sorry. You actually have to buy those abilities, regardless of the fact that you think that guns are so easy that they shouldn't require any feats to use or do tricks with.

I'm not saying an army of 12yr olds could show up the police or military, I'm just saying that it can be done untrained, just not as well and luck does play a part of it.

Right. And if you didn't hit the target a whole lot more than you would have if you'd just been trying to pepper the general area with bullets, then what you did, by the rules, was make a single attack that would hit for normal damage. It's not about whether your character can physically do it. It's whether your character can physically do it well enough to gain some kind of bonus over doing it the normal way.

Hope Spycraft works out for you. It seems to be unrealistic in the ways you want it to be.

 

[HeapThaumaturgist]

Just to note, since this topic was originally about Grim Tales:

GT does autofire like SpyCraft does, and removed the Burst Fire and Advanced Firearms Proficiency feats.

*shrug*

Which are six to one, half dozen to the other, to me. My group likes the double-tap feat, and one guy goes for it often in Modern games.

GT's rules (since I haven't looked at Spycraft 2) generally go:

Wide Burst: Fire off a burst at somebody, get a plus to hit.
Tight Burst: Fire off a burst, take a negative to hit, do more damage (but not double-dice or anything)
Strafe: Fire multiple bursts into adjacent squares, with a larger and larger penalty to hit, with the possiblity of hitting everybody in those squares.

There's another one for like "fill em full a lead", but I've never used it, as it's a little too 80's cop show for any of the games I run.

--fje

 

[Staffan]

That's something I always found weird (in other games, too)... that firing a burst overall lessens your chance to hit, but increases damage, if you do.

Shouldn't it make hitting easier, if more bullets are fired (even with recoil), with the chance to deal extra damage being pretty slim (i.e. hitting with multiple bullets)?

Alternity to the rescue!

In Alternity, burst fire gives you -1 difficulty to hit (which is a good thing in Alternity, because you want to roll low). That mainly makes it easier to hit in the first place, but it also makes it easier to get a Good or Amazing success, thereby doing more damage.

 

[Denaes]

I'd like to see you support this statement. Especially given that you declared below that you thought one of the feats already in use in the game has pre-reqs that you disagree with, based on your experiences as a twelve-year-old.

I won't support that statement other to say that I'm sure people who specialize in X feat in real life will have different takes on what it's like in the "real world". I could do so with the computer skills/feats. Heck, even some feats arn't realistic at all and make no pretense to be so.

I also never made any such statement about pre-reqs in my 12 yr old anecdote. I made a statement saying that I did it untrained. Maybe not well, but I got a few lucky shots in. Meaning that it can be attempted without specialized training. That happens to also coincide with how I like feats. Brain surgery would need specialized training. running while shooting would just be really hard unless you're specially trained. You could attempt it, though.

Perhaps you missed the part where anybody can fire a gun, albeit at a -4 if they aren't proficient with it?

No I didn't miss that part.

There are many ways to shoot a gun and all can be attempted without training. Sure they may be harder, but you can try them. shooting from a car window, running and shooting, firing bursts, sprays (multiple targets), pulling the trigger quickly on semi-automatic weapons, etc.

Now what I did say was that my GM ruled that since there was a feat for them, we couldn't attempt them without the feat. I also said I wasn't sure if that was the GMs own ruling or the rules of the game.

And I don't think anybody is going to accuse d20 Modern of being a tactical combat replica. To be honest, I've sort of lost track of what your complaint is. I'm getting one-part "It's unrealistic" and one-part "It's not cinematic enough for me", and when I hear that from a player, what that usually means is "The game isn't unrealistically over the top in the areas that I want it to be unrealistically over the top in." Which, coincidentally, are usually the areas that your character would have.

I never said it was. I don't think it should be.

What I did say was that it makes for a more cinematic game to loose most of the pre-reqs on feats and someone was going over the realism and balance factors. I think most of the balance factors are artificial because at level 1 or level 3 or level 5, fighting with two weapons will still be just as powerful. More so at the later levels because you'll have higher bonuses to hit with each gun.

For example:



I'm going to need a bit more information to be able to answer any of what you just said. Based on what you've posted, I'm going to go out on a limb and guess that a) your character wasn't high enough level to do the sweet stuff you wanted, b) you tried to minmax your character without a clear enough understanding of the rules and ended up not qualifying for feats you wanted, and/or c) you and the GM didn't have a clear enough understanding of the rules.

The problem was that I wasn't minmaxing or metagaming. I rolled up a character and tried to take the feats I would need. Then realized that because I was dexterous and charasmatic and smart, I didn't have enough willpower to take those feats.

That was a seperate complaint about many feats requiring above average abilityscore bonuses in a game where you're encouraged to make for your ability score weaknesses by taking levels in the ability score class and through feats. Only those pre-reqs exasperated the situation and made it so you couldn't take the feats to be good in those areas unless you were already good. Therefore you couldn't round out your character properly and you have to metagame to plan out your stats to get the feats for the kinda character you want.

I mean, would you complain in a D&D game that your DM didn't let you make a Whirlwind Attack without having the feat in question? I mean, if you stand in the middle of a circle of combat dummies and swing a club around, you can easily hit all of them just by spinning, right? So why shouldn't everyone be able to do Whirlwind Attack?

Why not? If a player wants to attempt it, I would allow it. Make someone spend some action dice to even attempt it (yes, I'm really digging spycraft 2.0), then take hefty penalties. If they have feats that might assist, penalties might be reduced. I'd also take a look at the pre-reqs for it in True20 and that would factor in a bit more. It may not even be as effective.

I'm more of a cinematic GM than a rules lawyery GM. If something can be conceivably done without training in that particular campaign, then I'm cool with it.

Brain surgery? No. Making armor or taking apart weapons without training? Nope. A Wizard doing some sort of "Wirlwind Attack"? I don't think it's likely. A Warrior? Much more likely.

At first level, you don't get to do Whirlwind Attack, and you don't get to do Shot on the Run. Sorry. You actually have to buy those abilities, regardless of the fact that you think that guns are so easy that they shouldn't require any feats to use or do tricks with.

Some people would have you buy a feat to do anything special. Some people would let you do it, but with penalities (or not as good). I'm of the later philosophy. Thats why I'm talking about not liking the way d20 Modern does the feats. Thats the whole point. I don't agree with it.

Hope Spycraft works out for you. It seems to be unrealistic in the ways you want it to be.

It is, it's modeled after action movies, about players being cinematic heroes to some degree - depending on which campaign qualities are chosen and what sort of game you're going for.

 

[Hammerhead]

Burst Fire obviously requires some training. I wouldn't expect any yahoo who picks up an automatic weapon to be able to squeeze off several rounds of shots in an accurate manner. However, I think we can agree that using Burst Fire isn't nearly as impressive as, say, a Whirldwind Attack that attacks everyone within reach in an accurate and effective manner.

I would compare the complexity of using a burst fire with an automatic weapon to be about equivalent to executing a proper lunge with a rapier: while not something just anyone can do, it is expected knowledge if you have the proficiency with the weapon. Furthermore, from a design perspective, it seems foolish to require feats for advanced combat maneuvers...it would be like needing Improved Disarm to simply disarm someone in D&D.

From an ENWorld perspective, however, it seems foolish to discuss the merits of d20 Modern's feat and firearm system in a thread about Grim Tales.

 

[Khorod]

D20 in general is not designed for a cinematic GM. Its designed for a rules lawyer.

However, its perfectly easy to be a cinematic GM. Where some feats seem like they should be universal for your campaign, staple them as freebies attached to basic proficiency with the weapon- or just give them to all characters automatically. There's nothing wrong with that.

There's nothing wrong with ignoring the very existence of feats none of your players or NPCs have, and just using the mechanics to help your rulings of how combat unfolds.

And attribute requirements always engender disagreement. This is the way of adding to the tradeoffs of a high Strength vs. a high Wisdom. And so forth. It also has to do with the basic flavor the rules are trying to impart. Your character lacked the Wisdom for burst fire? Point at your Intelligence, Dexterity, & Character Background and try to cut a deal with the GM. A cinematic GM (in my experience) will generally say "Sure, that's fine."

Remember also, this particular example is talking about guns. Modern has to walk a fine line- they are trying to balance the power of guns against the power of unarmed combat and the talky-powers of the Charismatic hero. That mix means that guns need to be controlled a little, and that's done by confining a lot of seemingly basic functionality to the realm of feats and special requirements. It prevents a first level character from grabbing an automatic weapon and gunning down fourth level characters in a single round.

Another point to remember, as one of your problems seems to be 1st-3rd power levels... Modern is a much shallower combat power curve than D&D. In a sense, a Good BAB is actually the Rogue's bab. The Fighter BAB is the over-the-top crazy specialist BAB. In D&D, I normally like to run games of 6th level characters. For combat purposes, I run Modern games at 8th or 9th level.

For flexibility, Shadowrun is also a good system for wacky action. Its got a great factor for cinematic GMs, in that the standard response to any player request for doing something is "roll the dice, you'll need many successes." Not only that, but its power levels are closer to Gun-Fu. No Modern character less than 5th level can come close to daring to claim "Gun-Fu" as something within reach.

 

[John Q. Mayhem]

My brash fast hero specializing in gun-fu was unable to be very gun-fuey at all. And he wasn't even able to attempt these things for some inane reason (either the GM didn't read the rules to find out the untrained penalties or the book doesn't allow it) and my gun-fu guy was a character who couldn't do anything remotely cinematic with guns. He just ended up being a Fast Hero who could shoot guns.

Mmmm, you should check out Gun-Fu: Balletic Ballistics.