|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Well I saw the rules for firearms expanded with the weapons in Rasputin Must Die.
So I was wondering how would you go about making rules for something like a Thompson 1919 SMG?
yes WW1 is over so it technically wouldnt be part of that era, but I was working on doing a WW2 type cross over a bit.
So looking for rules for SMG's going full auto and some later with burst fire features for other weapons.
Are there any threads that address this or any ideas?
I have the Enforcer Module from Anachronistic Adventures and it wants to use the CMB and CMD for alot of it, but it seems odd that someone strength (CMD) would factor in whether I would be able to hit you with a SMG burst at 25 feet?
I am sure someone could make a reason but I am just wanting some ideas from the community.
thanks
I don't believe Thompsons have/had a burst-fire feature. If you didn't know what to expect I'd imagine you'd be close to spraying the ceiling pretty quickly with one, so the Str thing does make sense.
The Thompson was designed as a 'trench broom' for WW I, but the prototype only came out in 1918 so it missed seeing combat. Production only started in 1919, and then it was released to the civilian market (you used to be able to buy them in the Sears catalog).
While there is some case for a strength involvement, I'd say knowing what you are doing is far more important. This isn't a BAR or anything with heavy recoil. It is a heavy weapon firing a pistol cartridge, so the recoil isn't really that much (they also have integrated compensators which help). The real trick to it is having the sense to fire controlled bursts. If you keep it to 3-5 rounds at a time, it is really quite controllable (I rent one every year when I visit Las Vegas).
Now I would consider strength relevant in that someone with under average strength would likely have trouble, but Joe average male probably isn't going to have much trouble with it after some basic instruction.
Now if this were a BAR or something firing rifle cartridges full auto, then we get into strength. Those really do require a lot more effort to keep on target. Heck, there's a reason the M14 and FAL were basically useless on full auto.
|
|
yup, the Thompson did not have a burst fire mode, which is why I said "burst fire for other weapons". It also did appear after WW1 in 1919 as I annotated.
Yes Strength for holding the weapon steady, an offensive technique.
But in the Enforcer Module from Anachronistic Adventures it has you use your CMB vs the targets CMD, (Combat Maneuver Bonus vs. Combat Maneuver Defense) The Combat Maneuver Defense adds the Targets Strength.... what I was inquiring about is how does the TARGET's Strength, not the SHOOTER's Strength affect whether or not the shooter can dodge a bullet? Essentially, Dexterity I can understand, the ability to dodge... but Strength, the Ability to Bend Bars and Lift Gates affect how well someone 30 feet away can hit you with a burst of automatic weapons fire.
What I am asking for is ultimately is there a system that works well for having such weapons in the Pathfinder Universe (Burst Fire) other than the Enforcer Module, which is good, I just dont like the idea of Strength on the defenders part determining if you can hit them, on the Attackers part, yes Strength I can see for helping to control a burst of fire on target at about 50 meters on out easily.
Was not trying to sound mean or as a jerk, but most of the comments I got were pretty much details about the weapon I stated in the beginning.
Just looking for some suggestions on rules mechanics for implementing them, thanks
If your idea is to use Pathfinder rules to cover modern situations and modern firearms, I think it will likely come up short. From what I've see of the rules in Reign of Winter, they look quite bad. I would look into other systems (perhaps d20 Modern, or Spycraft 1.0) to see if they have something which meets your needs.
I do agree that CMB vs CMD does seem a bit odd, though I can see some logic in CMD since it does mean that you get a defensive value without the armor (on the assumption that armor is invalid against bullets). However as you say strength doesn't make any sense in there. I'd probably just use touch AC instead.
In the system I use for my Pulp campaign, we treat full auto fire as an AOE, where the target makes a reflex save where the DC is based on the number of rounds fired and the skill of the shooter.
Here's the relevant feat which describes the process fairly well.
Machine Gunner
You are skilled at using automatic weapons.
Prerequisites: Weapon Group Proficiency (Rifles), base attack bonus +1 or higher.
Benefit: You may use autofiring capability of weapons in the Rifle Weapon Group more effectively. You may effectively fire up to 20 shots per round when autofiring or strafing. The DCs of your autofire attacks are also 5 + ½ BAB + the number of shots fired into the 5-foot square. Also, the number of hits resulting from a failed save is determined by each 4 points by which the save was failed.
Normal: You may only fire 10 shots per round in autofire mode and the DC for the Reflex save the number of rounds fired into the 5-foot square. The number of hits is equal to how many increments of 5 by which the save was missed.
|
|
That definitely works for full auto fire and suppressive fire
I do like the concept of hits based on degree of failed save
I saw something similar for using burst fire where as the shooter fired his weapon, rolled the to hit, and using a burst fire weapon that fired 3 round bursts a shot, for every 5 that the shooter beat the targets AC by meant that another burst hit the target.
So looking at the modern rules for that, a SMG or Assault Rifle that fired a 3 round burst (3 bullets) each bullet doing 2d8 damage, and you could technically add your specialization and other bonus damage to the first round (like the gunslingers Gun Training)of the 3 round burst.
so that if you hit with all three bursts it would be 2d8+5, 2d8, and 2d8
That would definitely have me looking for more armors and items that give damage reduction then.
Opinions on that?
I'm actually writing a game set in the interwar period right now. I believe the original thompsons had no select-fire on them, but the military models did. I could absolutely be wrong on that, as I have to do more research.
I've simply stated them as a 2d8 damage (I have the colt M1911 do 1d8; it's also chambered for the .45 ACP) automatic weapon with a range of 60 feet. Accepts 20 and 30 round magazines as well as 50 and 100 round drums.
d20 Modern has rules for burst fire, but they assume some other change to the ruleset (mainly new feats).
There are no rules for strength affecting firearm use in published pathfinder weapons, including machine guns and the double hackbutt, so I didn't go that route. If you start changing things like that, you are going to have to rewrite the whole firearms system.
In the system I posted you only get a total number of hits decided by the degree of missing the save. Otherwise things would just get far too lethal. Mind you, that's probably more realistic (nobody ever stood in front of a MG42 and died of old age), but since it is a game limiting the lethality without making autofire trivial requires you to strike a balance.
So in my system, say you take a 10th level soldier with the machingunner feat, and he volleys 10 rounds at a target from his Thompson. This makes the DC of the save a 20. The target makes a save of 15. That means they get tagged twice (once for failing the save, and another for getting under 16). For a Thompson that's 2d12 damage (.45 ACP is a d12). Now it should be noted that in my system there's no magical save boosting equipment (or almost none) and thus saves aren't great. Now you might feel you need to up or lower that lethality of course. But if someone says it isn't lethal enough, let's look at Joe Average.
That will have 10 or 11 wounds (no vitality, they are average). Their save might be +2 if they are lucky. Average roll is then a 13. This spares them 3 hits, so they only take 13 damage and they are still bleeding out.
It's generally accepted that in d20 realism is never a primary concern. The level system simply makes people superhuman past low level. But then again, that's how it is in action films and pulp stories, which is the stories I want to run.
|
|
Ok, I was looking at the damages for weapons in d20 modern, yes d20 modern is focused on guns as the main source of damage and I think doesnt really have the plethora of classes and feats to make the damage excessively crazy.
I guess if not monitored carefully, the higher damages in d20 moderns fireams may get nasty, as they have a revolver doing 2d6 damage as opposed to the 1d8 in pathfinder.
Though Until level 5 really as a gunslinger or level 3 as a fighter (trench fighter archetype) you dont get to add Dex to damage. There are other ways to abuse the touch AC thing like with rapid shot and double pistols.... but I think thats just a tad odd...
dunno, wont get into that.
Does the 2d6 (d20 Modern) for a revolver seem better or too overpowered compared to the 1d8 (pathfinder)
The rules I use for Pulp are here and the weapon damage values are pretty much adaptations from the Spycraft Modern Arms Guide (I always thought Spycraft was simply a better game than d20 Modern).
The damage a revolver will do will depend on the caliber of course. We have a heavy revolver doing pretty serious damage at 1d12+2.
But truthfully, Pathfinder classes simply do heavy damage, and the damage from the weapon ends up getting lost in the add ons. In my Pulp system there aren't as many ways to pump damage, so it is more under control.
|
|
ahhh, well the damage looks ok, the only thing I don't like is the damage of weapon x = 1d10 + 2
I never liked having and add this number as a base weapon damage.
though it does give a higher low end damage, it just for some reason never sat well with me which is what got me on the Enforcer Modules to.
I am just use to all the way back with 2nd Edition D&D where a weapon does a dice and the players stats/ enchantments or abilities are the pluses
but the damage dice bases do work better than pathfinder.
I have the numerical plusses to adjust averages where the weapons do close, but slightly more damage. I suppose I could have obtained about the same results with odd dice combinations (say d4+d10), but I'm not sure if people would have liked that any more.
|
|
Oh... this may add more dice rolls.... BUT...
I thought of this a while ago and just never really thought to bring it up....
but instead of just adding 10 to the AC what if they player could effectively roll for their bonus each time... yes it will add more dice rolls but, then it isn't like they are always taking "10" on AC.
I think it could work better in smaller groups and where players are more familiar with their character's sheets and such so its not like a math quiz, though we do usually type up and print out bonus for combat for each character sort of like a cheat sheet for what they can do.. i.e. power attack, cleave, great cleave each has a set and what you get for using them in combination.