So I am looking at several things. And just understanding Paizo's logic.
Auto Fire - Why does this only work at a cone effect. What if I want to full auto into 1 target? I fail to understand this logic. Are we only basing this on how Hollywood portrays this? Because somehow it looks cool? Why can we add a mechanic to allow for single target?
It's simple to incorporate. Sure the math may be need to be tweaked but the concept is there. 3 action activity, you then enter auto fire mode and continuously make attacks each round. So you have to make an attack roll each round to stay on target, this incorporates the concept of recoil. Each round you could take a -2 penalty attack to account for this. the benefit is the damage out put goes up. So every round you get to add the weapon damage plus an extra die. Then we can incorporate muzzle heat. After x amount of rounds it becomes temporally inoperable. Each round you will expend that weapons expendable rounds x2 (what ever mathematically makes sense)
So in this case we will look at the machine gun
1d8 P - 20 Rounds, expend 1
I spend 3 actions to go focused auto fire -
Round 1: No penalty to hit 1d8 spend 2
Round 2: -1 Penalty to hit 2d8 spend 2
Round 3: - 1 Penalty to hit 2d8 spend 2
After 3 rounds the weapon has overheated needs a round to cool down.
Damage output 3 rounds 5d8 expending 6 rounds
Normal output 3 rounds 3d8 expending 3 rounds
Could do cumulative damage, r1 2d8, r2 2d8, r3 3d8 with cumulative penalty to hit.
Could incorporate ability to help bypass DR as you are focusing on one thing.
Could add automatic x (x is the amount of ammo the weapon expends when going full auto. Keep it simple.
This is what autofire is meant to do. Pump as much lead into one thing, to inflict as much damage as possible as quickly as possible. Put the target down as fast as possible with out care for ammo. Again this DEF needs to be fine-tuned.
-------
Bipod - Why is this only available for weapons with the Kickback trait? Again what is the logic or reasoning? Do they actually understand what a bipod is and the actual use? Because this functionality and concept is not a bipod. My problem is the lack of knowledge on what things are. Bipods are used typically in prone and kneeling stances to mount the weapon to a surface for increased control over muzzle fire.
A fore grip is used to stabilize weapons with recoil control. Sometimes you can get the 2 integrated into 1 item. I personally don't care for that option. Both are super easy I am sure to incorporate and make both work.
Foregrip - should be this. and the bipod should be there to mount to stabilize shots.
-------
Why don't we have a sight attachment (red for or holo) - I mean they do have a purpose vs using iron sights. We had it in first edition Starfinder.
So I am looking at several things. And just understanding Paizo's logic.
Auto Fire - Why does this only work at a cone effect. What if I want to full auto into 1 target? I fail to understand this logic. Are we only basing this on how Hollywood portrays this? Because somehow it looks cool? Why can we add a mechanic to allow for single target?
It's simple to incorporate. Sure the math may be need to be tweaked but the concept is there. 3 action activity, you then enter auto fire mode and continuously make attacks each round. So you have to make an attack roll each round to stay on target, this incorporates the concept of recoil. Each round you could take a -2 penalty attack to account for this.
Close. All you are missing is the MAP penalty. Instead of a cumulative (or maybe non-cumulative?) penalty for subsequent rounds, you have a -5 penalty for the second attack and a -10 penalty for the third.
Because as far as I can tell, any weapon with the Auto-Fire trait also allows for single-target Strike actions. You can certainly make three Strike actions each round if you feel like it.
The reason for using the Multiple Attack Penalty instead of a per-round penalty is because combat usually only lasts 3-5 rounds. The amount of damage done by being able to make 3 Strike actions of damage each round with only a -2 penalty on later rounds is too much for the game balance to handle. So the accuracy penalty from kickback needs to be accounted for during each round.
The Doylist reason for the bipod is that kickback provides an incentive for ranged characters to have a higher strength (being comparable to the propulsive trait for bows), but the developers know that the -2 penalty to hit with one would make their use prohbitive to lower strength characters. So they needed some way for a low strength character to control a high recoil gun. They called the workaround a bipod when the kickback trait was created for guns in PF2, and for cross compatibility's sake I don't think it will change now.
Also expecting full parity with real-life is a bit of a fool's errand, that's not the goal or intention of either PF2E or SF2E.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It's not the only time Paizo has screwed up firearm mechanics. The Orc-designed Barricade Buster is a sequential fire volley gun, but its ammo is bought in magazines because the writers didn't know what else to call the 8 musket balls it is reloaded with in a single activity.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Also expecting full parity with real-life is a bit of a fool's errand, that's not the goal or intention of either PF2E or SF2E.
Yeah, selective realism is a bane on a roleplaying game since we apply it to things that are somewhat close to reality but never to something far away. We only corral something like "magic" by doing game balance, so why restrict something more realistic more?
So I am looking at several things. And just understanding Paizo's logic.
Auto Fire - Why does this only work at a cone effect. What if I want to full auto into 1 target? I fail to understand this logic. Are we only basing this on how Hollywood portrays this? Because somehow it looks cool? Why can we add a mechanic to allow for single target?
It's simple to incorporate. Sure the math may be need to be tweaked but the concept is there. 3 action activity, you then enter auto fire mode and continuously make attacks each round. So you have to make an attack roll each round to stay on target, this incorporates the concept of recoil. Each round you could take a -2 penalty attack to account for this.
Close. All you are missing is the MAP penalty. Instead of a cumulative (or maybe non-cumulative?) penalty for subsequent rounds, you have a -5 penalty for the second attack and a -10 penalty for the third.
Because as far as I can tell, any weapon with the Auto-Fire trait also allows for single-target Strike actions. You can certainly make three Strike actions each round if you feel like it.
The reason for using the Multiple Attack Penalty instead of a per-round penalty is because combat usually only lasts 3-5 rounds. The amount of damage done by being able to make 3 Strike actions of damage each round with only a -2 penalty on later rounds is too much for the game balance to handle. So the accuracy penalty from kickback needs to be accounted for during each round.
Put part of the concept is your effectively only attacking one a turn so MAP wouldn't be a consideration in this instance. The idea of Auto Fire I am proposing is the ability to unload a full magazine and get extra effect for it. I understand what MAP is for and how to balance that.
The current Auto Fire is just plain stupid and based on some stupid Hollywood concept that is neither effective or entertaining.
The concept of being able to focus all the fire into one object vs just shooting it three times is to maximize the damage. For example I would rather have my M-16 full auto and dump the whole magazine in to an armored vehicle verse semi auto. In this case I want to get as much lead down range as fast as possible. So with this concept you would have the penalties of more recoil and the barrel getting hotter with the payoff of increased damaged in a shower period or more damage to a specific spot, like an armored door.
The Doylist reason for the bipod is that kickback provides an incentive for ranged characters to have a higher strength (being comparable to the propulsive trait for bows), but the developers know that the -2 penalty to hit with one would make their use prohbitive to lower strength characters. So they needed some way for a low strength character to control a high recoil gun. They called the workaround a bipod when the kickback trait was created for guns in PF2, and for cross compatibility's sake I don't think it will change now.
Sure I get what they are trying to do. But that is what a Foregrip is called. The 2 items have 2 separate functions. Why was the bipod usage left out? There should totally be 2 options in the game.
Bipod - Ability to mount to surface to help offset MAP and/or other optionsForegrip - Current bipod ability.
Also expecting full parity with real-life is a bit of a fool's errand, that's not the goal or intention of either PF2E or SF2E.
Not expecting that at all. Just expecting something that doesn't seemed half baked (keep it pg) There current interpretation of auto fire is dumb. In all of the first edition Starfinder I played and I PLAYED A LOT. Autofire never was useful as it was currently written and was ever even thought of after the first reading. I get what they were trying to do and that is fine. But throw the other option in there as it does have purpose. And can be added in game and balanced.
The other issues is just more or less nick picking. Again lack of understanding proper terms. Words have meaning for a reason. A bipod does not do what they say it does. Ill leave the example at that
Think of this as constructive criticism.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
That's kind of a staple of all derived d20 fantasy games from the OG, though. Like, Archery should be Strength, and a lot of weapons are misnamed or don't map to what they are, and then even the idea of like damage dice being different for certain weapons, etc.
Basically, I think it's fine - a lot of people just straight up don't care, and I'd rather they focus on other things then minutiae that most players won't even notice.
Not that it's not valid to feel the way you, just that I doubt something like that would be changed, especially when a lot of it is using stuff already established in PF2E.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
The current Auto Fire is just plain stupid and based on some stupid Hollywood concept that is neither effective or entertaining.
The concept of being able to focus all the fire into one object vs just shooting it three times is to maximize the damage.
All you are saying here is that you are doubling down on the idea that you want to break the game math on how much damage per round a character is expected to be able to do.
For reasons of 'realism'.
That isn't how TTRPG game mechanics are designed.
So I am looking at several things. And just understanding Paizo's logic.
Auto Fire - Why does this only work at a cone effect. What if I want to full auto into 1 target? I fail to understand this logic. Are we only basing this on how Hollywood portrays this? Because somehow it looks cool? Why can we add a mechanic to allow for single target?
It's simple to incorporate. Sure the math may be need to be tweaked but the concept is there. 3 action activity, you then enter auto fire mode and continuously make attacks each round. So you have to make an attack roll each round to stay on target, this incorporates the concept of recoil. Each round you could take a -2 penalty attack to account for this. the benefit is the damage out put goes up. So every round you get to add the weapon damage plus an extra die. Then we can incorporate muzzle heat. After x amount of rounds it becomes temporally inoperable. Each round you will expend that weapons expendable rounds x2 (what ever mathematically makes sense)
So in this case we will look at the machine gun
1d8 P - 20 Rounds, expend 1I spend 3 actions to go focused auto fire -
Round 1: No penalty to hit 1d8 spend 2
Round 2: -1 Penalty to hit 2d8 spend 2
Round 3: - 1 Penalty to hit 2d8 spend 2After 3 rounds the weapon has overheated needs a round to cool down.
Damage output 3 rounds 5d8 expending 6 rounds
Normal output 3 rounds 3d8 expending 3 roundsCould do cumulative damage, r1 2d8, r2 2d8, r3 3d8 with cumulative penalty to hit.
Could incorporate ability to help bypass DR as you are focusing on one thing.
Could add automatic x (x is the amount of ammo the weapon expends when going full auto. Keep it simple.This is what autofire is meant to do. Pump as much lead into one thing, to inflict as much damage as possible as quickly as possible. Put the target down as fast as possible with out care for ammo. Again this DEF needs to be fine-tuned.
-------
Bipod - Why is this only available for weapons with the Kickback trait? Again what...
The best depiction of full auto fire that I have seen in an RPG was in the d20 version of Traveller. Burst fire gave you a bonus to hit based on the number of rounds in the burst OR it gave you a bonus on the damage you did. The other auto fire option was to target an area. Anyone or anything in the primary area of effect had to make a saving throw for full or half damage and anyone in the secondary area had to save for half or no damage. It ranged from +1 to hit or +1 die of damage for a 3 round burst on up to a +10 to hit or +10 dice of damage for a 100 round burst. Under the D&D 3.0 rules that T20 Traveller was based on, a character with more than one attack per round could make a burst fire attack with each of their attacks (if they had enough ammo).
These are the rules that I would have used had I run a Starfinder game that included any weapons with auto fire capacity.
I'd propose using auto fire on a single target might use something like Power Attack mechanically.
Extra actions for extra dice of damage?
I'd propose using auto fire on a single target might use something like Power Attack mechanically.
Extra actions for extra dice of damage?
It should not take any extra actions, unless you want to make it an action to switch the weapon from single shot to automatic.