Over at the S&W boards I had a crack (http://www.swordsandwizardry.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=938) at a subsystem for using guns in the game.
As I said there, "firearms are notoriously difficult to model in D&D-ish games because the mechanics of armour class don't lend themselves to easy use with such powerful weapons. No matter which way I look at it, it comes down to a choice between rebuilding the system from scratch to accommodate guns, or creating a unique subset of rules for them."
Which games, in your opinion, feature the best rules for handling firearms in combat, considering weapons, armour, accuracy and cover?
Leading Edge Games' Rhand, Aliens, Phoenix Command
Iron Crown's Spacemaster
Both selections do both hit points and potential critical hits on every hit. Both are, however, table heavy.
In general, tho, both are playable and realistic.
2300 AD... each hit has a potential maximum wound type, by location, and then one rolls for what level, capped by the location originally hit.
Traveller (specifically CT/MT/T4) directly damaging attributes was a nice abstraction with direct impact on play; In MT and T4, it actually imposes notable wound penalties by so doing...
Role/Spacemaster was my first thought for realism, but, as you say, table-heavy.
I think the Star Wars D6 is to firefights what D&D is close combat. Neither are the most realistic of simulations of course, that is not the point.
What D6 has in-built that works well for firefights is (1) multiple-action rules, (2) the "AC" is either a static number based on range/cover or an active dodge roll (3) Wounds impose penalties (kind of hard to imagine getting shot, even in a non critical area, having no immediate ill effects on your performance).
Alternity always did it for me (even though I do like the RM/SM stuff). I like how quickly the weapons scale up in lethality and conversely how armour better protects against the newer weapons. It is also very quick and easy to use.
Blue Planet has the best combat system I ever found, including firearms. Really, check it out, specially the paragraph in which the authors explain the logic behind the wound system. It's beautiful.
My favourite firearms rule is 2e Twilight 2000's "bucket of d6" rule for autofire - you basically roll a d6 for every bullet, hitting on a 6. You deduct d6s for range, cover, excessive recoil, and for suppressive fire (I think it's something like base half the dice have a chance to hit anyone passing through a suppressed zone). It works very well in play and by treating autofire as spray-n-pray it's perfect for a Vietnam type setting. It perhaps* does not model precision/close-burst autofire weapons like the police MP5 so well, but those can be modelled by rolling to hit as normal for a single-shot weapon then rolling a randomiser for how many bullets actually hit. But for squad support weapons and assault rifles it's perfect.
*Although I remember reading that even police snipers have only around a 33% hit rate, or about 2 in 6 - that's using police sniper rifles!
Quote from: aramis;310993Leading Edge Games' Phoenix Command
I very much agree with this.
The biggest problem modeling small arms is that damage and penetration are two separate things that are a pain in the butt to deal with. I actually spent a fair amount of time using GnuBallistics (http://sourceforge.net/projects/balcomp/)to model the kinetic energy of small arms and then used the results to compare to documentary evidence from WW2 weapon test videos, field fortification proofing guidelines, sites like Box'o'Truth (http://www.theboxotruth.com/) and many others to try and improve upon the Phoenix Command armor penetration results.
My conclusion was that GURPS 3rd edition armor penetration rules are less complex and match very well with real results. The BTRC supplement Guns, Guns, Guns (http://rpg.drivethrustuff.com/product_info.php?cPath=&products_id=1107&it=1&filters=0_0_0_0&manufacturers_id=30) does a good job at modeling weapon kinetic energy for a given design but their listed armor penetration values are not as good as GURPS.
As for actual tissue damage or wounding rules, that subject nearly defies analysis from a gaming standpoint because shooting real people never happens in a controlled, recorded environment and the results of things like the FBI reports on shootings have a wide spectrum of results. The actual bullet that hits you is, from my research, less important than where it strikes. Any small arms round can kill a person, go cleanly in and out without too much damage and everything in between. I don't really have a preference for damage rules therefore beyond to say that random damage dice are likely more accurate than fixed damage for a given bullet/gun combo and hit location charts are required to emulate the "lucky fatal hit".
PErsonally, I'm most fond of the Dark Heresy rules. Despite being based on a space fantasy series, they did a pretty damn good job of simulating a proper small scale firefight. Hitting is difficult, most standard tactics are supported, getting hit is pretty nasty, etc. etc. I likey much.
For larger scale mass combat, I think the best way to go is Stargrunt II's system, which abstracts everything out and focuses primarily on suppression effects, with casualties a side effect of standard warfare tactics. IT's really a brilliant game, remarkably easy to learn, but really does a great job simulating proper modern tactics.
Ours. They're not published yet, but I'm working hard to remedy that.
Combat is one-roll to resolve hit-location, accuracy and damage.
Cover and Armor function realistically.
Trauma is also realistic. Slightly more complex than hit-points, but basically on a 5 tier scale of damage that has various effects depending on the location on the body that was struck.
We've got a large assortment of modern firearms that have different stats depending on the grain and type of round loaded. The stats are Penetration, Damage, Range and Recoil. Range is accurately modeled to have scaled penalties as the target gets further away, but in most cases the effective range of a gun is limited by the sight that is being used.
The result is a very fast, very realistic system where you can customize the sights on guns, and the system is granular enough to actually see the difference between an MP5 and an UZI.
Stargrunt II is nifty, but it's not an RPG, not even close... :) At least it's free...
Quote from: aramis;311088Stargrunt II is nifty, but it's not an RPG, not even close... :) At least it's free...
I think it's abstract enough that it serves as a great drop-in mass combat system. And as you say, it's free.
The only quibble is that the treatment of the squads as mostly unified entities sort of removes some of the individuality of both character and action if all the PCs are assumed to be part of the same squad. There is support for independent characters though, which is handy.
Besides which, being as it's 1) free, and 2) the best simulation of modern combat ever made, it makes a great learning tool for RPG designers as well. :D
Quote from: Imperator;311013Blue Planet has the best combat system I ever found, including firearms. Really, check it out, specially the paragraph in which the authors explain the logic behind the wound system. It's beautiful.
Which edition?
Quote from: Strangelove;311040My conclusion was that GURPS 3rd edition armor penetration rules are less complex and match very well with real results. The BTRC supplement Guns, Guns, Guns (http://rpg.drivethrustuff.com/product_info.php?cPath=&products_id=1107&it=1&filters=0_0_0_0&manufacturers_id=30) does a good job at modeling weapon kinetic energy for a given design but their listed armor penetration values are not as good as GURPS.
I remember being very happy with GURPS rules both for determining hits and for penetration/damage. Going from 2e to 3e, they changed something in the to-hit rules; I believe they effectively abstracted the size and distance of a target into a single table, maybe motion, too. It's quite elegant...although I thought the 2e approach was good, too.
Quote from: J Arcane;311051PErsonally, I'm most fond of the Dark Heresy rules. Despite being based on a space fantasy series, they did a pretty damn good job of simulating a proper small scale firefight. Hitting is difficult, most standard tactics are supported, getting hit is pretty nasty, etc. etc. I likey much.
For larger scale mass combat, I think the best way to go is Stargrunt II's system, which abstracts everything out and focuses primarily on suppression effects, with casualties a side effect of standard warfare tactics. IT's really a brilliant game, remarkably easy to learn, but really does a great job simulating proper modern tactics.
Linky?
Quote from: Elliot Wilen;311122Which edition?
If I am not mistaken, I mean the 2nd edition, which was the one translated around here.
QuoteLinky?
http://www.groundzerogames.net/index.php?option=com_content&task=category§ionid=9&id=29&Itemid=50
As pointed out, not technically an RPG, but a good drop in mass combat system for a "each PC is a squad leader" sort of scale, and also just a damn fine simulation worth it's weight just as a primer to these sorts of tactics.
Call of Cthulhu.
If you're hit, you're either down or ok. After the fight, you may find out that ok actually is pretty badly banged up.
That reflects fairly accurately as I understand it real world results, the whole death spiral thing is a reflection of what seems realistic to gamers, not what actually happens.
Agreed, Balbinus. The death spiral is bullshit.
RPGPundit
Quote from: RPGPundit;311207Agreed, Balbinus. The death spiral is bullshit.
RPGPundit
Our take on things was to deal with only the immediate effects of trauma on combat - while *in* combat. Things like a broken bone would cause you to drop your weapon, and if an artery was pierced then the person would start to bleed to death, but other than those things the specifics of the trauma weren't covered in combat. Instead we chose to let the descriptions and details of a specific trauma be elements of how good or how bad the medicine roll to fix it was. A bad roll meant that there were lots of complications, while a good roll meant that it was a relatively clean wound.
Quote from: RPGPundit;311207Agreed, Balbinus. The death spiral is bullshit.
RPGPundit
Our take on things was to deal with only the immediate effects of trauma on combat - while *in* combat. Things like a broken bone would cause you to drop your weapon, and if an artery was pierced then the person would start to bleed to death, but other than those things the specifics of the trauma weren't covered in combat. Instead we chose to let the descriptions and details of a specific trauma be elements of how good or how bad the medicine roll to fix it was. A bad roll meant that there were lots of complications, while a good roll meant that it was a relatively clean wound.
Quote from: Imperator;311013Blue Planet has the best combat system I ever found, including firearms. Really, check it out, specially the paragraph in which the authors explain the logic behind the wound system. It's beautiful.
What makes it so good? I found it once in a library, I borrowed it and read the setting part, but I didn't read the system (something weird, because I'm more interested in systems than in settings, well, whatever). Maybe I should have.
Quote from: RPGPundit;311207Agreed, Balbinus. The death spiral is bullshit.
RPGPundit
I'm not so sure. But I admit I do like death spirals, there's nothing sweeter than striking your opponent and realizing it
hurt him.
Quote from: Claudius;311221What makes it so good? I found it once in a library, I borrowed it and read the setting part, but I didn't read the system (something weird, because I'm more interested in systems than in settings, well, whatever). Maybe I should have.
I'll try to answer tomorrow, it would be a bit lengthy.
Thank you! :) Take your time.
The best firearm rules I saw for simplicty are D20's.
For "grittiness" without being pointless, its T20 Traveller.
Though I'm now increasingly being won over to Aces & Eights.
RPGPundit