Thinking of IU rules changes.... Range and weapon skills

[wisdom000]

Thinking of IU rules changes.... Range and weapon skills

The range mechanics have never quite sat right with me... For IU I have already made minor alterations, but I am thinking something more drastic is needed.

The idea that when using a non-scoped rifle, it is as difficult to hit a target at 500m as it is to hit a target a 50 meters with a pistol. Now having shot before, I can tell you, this isn't really accurate. In fact with a non-scoped rifle, it is only slightly less difficult to hit a target at 50 meters than it is with a handgun. That's about half a football field. This is a pretty significant distance.

Now its true completely that a rifle will generally have a longer reliable range than a handgun. But just because the bullet travels farther does not mean you are going to be significantly more accurate with it.

I am thinking all firearms should operate at the range difficulties of the handgun. With scopes allowing that range to be increased out to rifle ranges in varying degrees depending on the scope.

I need to giver it a bit more thought though before I make the changes... tweak it until it sits right with me.

Another thing I have been wrestling with for a loooooooooong time are the gun skills themselves. Why is there a submachinegun skill? What purpose does it actually serve. If I am Shoulder firing an mp5 with a stock, or even an Ingram Mac 10 with a stock, is that really any different than firing an AK-47 or an M-16 from a practical standpoint? If I am shooting a micro uzi without a stock, how much different is that really from shooting a Baretta... If you say because its fully auto, then what about when I am firing that micro-uzi on single shot setting, or firing a Handgun with a 3-round burst setting? Does the micro Uzi suddenly use the handgun skill? Does the Handgun suddenly require the submachinegun skill? Why does the full-auto and burst difference not translate to rifles? Firing a lever action Winchester uses the same skill as firing an M-16.

I am thinking of dropping the smg skill altogether. And thinking of changing the rules for full auto.burst fire to incur addition penalties on top of the standard modifiers. -4 with no skill, -3 with a 1, -2 with a 2, -1 with a 3, skill level 4 on receives no additional penalties.

I will probably have to word it a bit better, but I think the idea is solid enough. I understand they spread the skills out to prevent people from becoming overpowered in combat too quickly, but I don't think it really works.

Any ideas on this?

I am cross posting this across several forums, to get the broadest collaboration possible. I have other small changes to make to the IU core rules, but these 2 bits have been eating at me for a couple of years now, and I am finally getting something worked out in my head to correct the issues I have.

As always anyone with a suggestion that makes the final cut will be credited in the core rules.

 

[Don_Carnage]

With a pistol, hitting a target at 50m is pretty hard (not bracing) Bracing a gun will definitely increase your chances, but even then, it’s real hard with a pistol. A rifle stock will give a firer usually 3-4 points of contact (backgrip, fore-grip, butt, and cheek rest) to steady the shot. Also the bullet drop makes pistols ineffective at anything longer than that. Rifles can naturally shoot much much further because of the long barrel and the stock. Most iron sights on military weapons start at 300m. A pistol can’t come close to that no matter what scope you use.

I think the range rules are fine. Anything more would actually make things more complicated. I think the modifiers for shooting is what would be looked at.

Scopes should add more pluses at longer ranges. I think any open sight shot above 200m should have a -5 regardless of the weapon’s range. It just comes down to the weapon being more accurate then the shooter.
Shooting a pistol 1-handed, vs 2 handed should make a difference (+1 if 2-handed)
Bracing and tripods should add more pluses.
Firing from the hip with a rifle or SMG should have a lot of minuses since it ruins the whole advantage of the stock.

SMGs….yeah those are a funny thing. With the exception of maybe PDWs, there no real thing as an SMG. They’re either short barrel rifles that fire pistol caliburs or machine pistols. Personally, I like the idea of the SMG skill because it breaks firearms down into 3 categories. 2 is too few in my opinion and making more weapon skills starts getting complicated. After all, why is it the same skill to shoot a 12-guage as it is to fire a 50BMG sniper rifle?

Part of why I fell in love with Cyberpunk and then in love with IU is the simplicity of it. The Friday Night Firefight page holds so many rules on one simple page. It’s genius.

And thinking of changing the rules for full auto.burst fire to incur addition penalties on top of the standard modifiers. -4 with no skill, -3 with a 1, -2 with a 2, -1 with a 3, skill level 4 on receives no additional penalties.

Don't like it. Why not just add a -4 and as the players get better the minuses naturally drop off. This sounds like too much back and forth math. Please don't do this.

 

[Sardukhar]

In agreement with the Don.

Simplicity is a real virtue in FNFF. It's one of Mike's great achievements that FNFF does realism and simplicity so well, especially for when it came out.

I can hit things all day, ironsights on a rifle. Pistol, really not. My Grandmaster-class handgun shot cop brother in law can do 50m and well, but he's in a whole different class.

We both hit all day at 50m with any semi-accurate rifle, though.

2013 had damage that changed over range, which although arguably more realistic, was a pain.

SMG is a dumb thing and honestly, I just let players with Rifle skill use that if asked. An Autoweapons/Semi-Auto/Handgun skill selection would have made a better idea than SMG or Rifle or Handgun, I think.
But I'd leave it as-is, because it's not a great change.

I do miss the old Combat Newbie negatives, dependent on Cool.

 

[guidokpd]

Can not remember the last time I put points into SMG. Well, aside from getting it from the Scholar during downtime. When the Mini Draco and other short rifles that are classified as pistols appeared we talked about what skill they should use. Settled on: if it uses a rifle round use the rifle skill, if it uses a handgun round use the handgun skill. We have always wondered about shotguns using the rifle skill.

Have never even thought about changing how the ranges or full auto work.

 

[wisdom000]

With a pistol, hitting a target at 50m is pretty hard (not bracing) Bracing a gun will definitely increase your chances, but even then, it’s real hard with a pistol. A rifle stock will give a firer usually 3-4 points of contact (backgrip, fore-grip, butt, and cheek rest) to steady the shot. Also the bullet drop makes pistols ineffective at anything longer than that. Rifles can naturally shoot much much further because of the long barrel and the stock. Most iron sights on military weapons start at 300m. A pistol can’t come close to that no matter what scope you use.

Ah but again you are mixing up range with accuracy... Sure bracing the weapon should give you bonuses, but it's still your eye and hands working together to put the bean on the pip that just gets smaller the farther away it is.

I think the range rules are fine. Anything more would actually make things more complicated. I think the modifiers for shooting is what would be looked at.

Scopes should add more pluses at longer ranges. I think any open sight shot above 200m should have a -5 regardless of the weapon’s range. It just comes down to the weapon being more accurate then the shooter.
Shooting a pistol 1-handed, vs 2 handed should make a difference (+1 if 2-handed)
Bracing and tripods should add more pluses.
Firing from the hip with a rifle or SMG should have a lot of minuses since it ruins the whole advantage of the stock.

These modifiers already exist, but they have nothing to do with what I am talking about really.

As it stands, the base difficulty for hitting a target is determined by range of the weapon. And this simply doesn't mesh up.

1. You can add a stock to a pistol, at which point it uses the rifle skill, but the effective range of the round isn't going to change all that much. You could add a barrel extension, but that is missing the point. Conversely, you can remove the stock from a rifle, and fire it like a handgun. But neither of these things change the fact that shooting at someone a 50 meters off is a pretty difficult shot to make.

With a handgun 50 meters is it's Full Range, and as such it starts with a difficulty of 25. Shooting someone with a rifle without a scope at that range is still considered "Close Range", and starts you off with a 15. That's 10 points of difference before you get to any other modifiers. Hell at 100 meters the Rifle is still well within close range, but hitting with a pistol has a difficulty of 30. That a standard, well lit target standing still. In other words, a person who is moderately skill with a rifle (ref 9, skill 3) will hit the target better than half the time at both ranges. The person with a handgun and identical skill level will only be able to hit the target at 50 meters with a natural 10 followed by a roll of 3 or better, and cannot hit the target at 100 meters without rolling a natural 10 followed by a 8.

Hell even at 250 meters (half the range listed for all rifles in the original Cyberpunk 2020, and half the range for sniper/hunting rifles in IU) The difficulty is only 20, meaning shooting without a scope he still has a 3 in ten chance of hitting the target.. That's nearly 3 football fields, and all it takes is rolling a 8 or higher on the die. And that's for a schmuck character. A solo with a skill of 5... he is going to nail your ass at 250 meters with half his shots. Hell at anything closer than 80 meters (1/4rth long range, difficulty 15) he is going to hit you with every single shot, providing he doesn't fumble.

That doesn't work. That in no way approaches reality. A stock and longer barrel help, but not that much.

SMGs….yeah those are a funny thing. With the exception of maybe PDWs, there no real thing as an SMG. They’re either short barrel rifles that fire pistol caliburs or machine pistols. Personally, I like the idea of the SMG skill because it breaks firearms down into 3 categories. 2 is too few in my opinion and making more weapon skills starts getting complicated. After all, why is it the same skill to shoot a 12-guage as it is to fire a 50BMG sniper rifle?

Part of why I fell in love with Cyberpunk and then in love with IU is the simplicity of it. The Friday Night Firefight page holds so many rules on one simple page. It’s genius.

The thing is, it just makes no sense. as it is, firearms are broken up into Handguns, Rifles, SMG's, and Heavy Weapons. Rifles handle shoulder mounted fired weapons, Heavy Weapons handle indirect fired weapons (some weapons listed as being heavy actually use the rifle skill) and pistols handle firing weapons one handed. SMG really doesn't seem to cover anything unique, instead it overlaps pistols and rifles in a way that makes zero sense. I cannot, for the life of me, think of any logical justification for SMG being a separate skill.

Don't like it. Why not just add a -4 and as the players get better the minuses naturally drop off. This sounds like too much back and forth math. Please don't do this.

Firing full auto already incurs a -1 for every 10 rounds expended at any distance past close... I could just leave it at that, I guess. I was looking for a way to mitigate the loss of the SMG skill and there still being something there to represent the difference in firing 3 round burst or full auto as opposed to firing single shots.

I am not in favor of adding new rules except where necessary, but I am definitely in favor of removing redundancy. And since the definition of SMG is basically a fully automatic or burst capable weapon that fires pistol rounds, I just can't justify it being a seperate skill to my players. If it's got a stock it uses the rifle skill, if it doesn't it uses the pistol skill. Can you justify why it needs to be a seperate skill, other than you just like it being there? Because if you can, if anyone can, I am all ears... Give me a situation where logically you couldn't substitute SMG with either rifle or handgun, something that only SMG's do.

 

[jacqsynn]

On the subject of the SMG skill, how does this sound?

When firing an SMG without a shoulder stock use the Handgun skill.
When firing an SMG with a shoulder stock use the Rifle Skill.

This then breaks the weapon down into how it is fired, is it at the time more like a handgun or a rifle. In the case of an SMG with a collapsable stock then if stock in use rifle, not in use handgun. But if that is done another skill needs to be added to any career with a SMG as part of the package of course.

 

[eraser7278]

i'de vote for ditching the separate SMG skill. it's needless skill bloat really. in my admittedly limited experience with full auto weapons i went from firing an MP5 to an m-16, then an AK47 followed by an M-249 SAW. to me they felt fundamentally the same. grips and stocks in more or less the same spot, just get a good cheek weld, align your sights and hold on tight. sure the mp5 had less muzzle climb than the ak, but not enough that it warrants it's own skill in my estimation. just split it into stocked smg's go to rifle and non stocked ones pistol i say.
to illustrate the point, how could you justify a character who can wield this thing like a boss

but you hand him this and suddenly he doesn't know which end makes the loud noise?

 

[Sardukhar]

^egggzactly.

 

[wisdom000]

Aw man eraser, they are totally different.... just totally... not sure how you can even draw a comparison.

 

[chriswebb2020.736]

You could go from Pistol, SMG + Rifle to Pistol, Assault Weapons + Rifle, so that if it's automatic, it comes under assault weapons. That leaves rifle for bolt-action and semi-auto.

 

[eraser7278]

for the range thing i'm going to have to completely disagree with you wisdom. ranges are just fine as is. i generally think the rules should reflect reality to the degree that's possible without being to unwieldy. marines qualify with an m-16 at 500m, no scopes or anything. they earned their nickname of devil dogs in ww1 when they opened up on german soldiers in Belleau Wood in excess of 800m with 1903 springfields and open sights. now I'm not that good, and you might not be that good, but that's not a valid justification for saying our characters can never be that good.

i think the diff 15 for a 100m shot plays out just fine in my own experience. several years ago i took some novice shooters out to the range. never held a gun in their lives. we started them off with a 22 shooting bowling pins at the 25m line and they did ok. then we stepped them up to the supposedly accurate ar15 and let them have a go at an ipsc target at 75 m... they hit nothing. then i took them further down the line and let them shoot my ak with a bipod from the bench. suddenly they could hit, even though the ak is supposedly less accurate than the ar.

let's break that down. so it's 75m, so an easy diff 15 shot. the weapon is of the Kalashnikov lineage so call is acc 0, but it has a bipod so +2 for that (should be more in my estimation, bipods are fucking magic). the target is immobile so +4 for that. so 15 -6 means all they need now is a 9 to hit. average person has a ref in the 5-6 range, and i'd say these people fit that description (middle aged office types). so 9 - 6 ref = 3, so they need a "roll" of 3 of higher to hit. they will hit the target 80% of the time, which jives with what i encountered. as far as ranges and shooting mods go, i'd say IU tracks with the real world rather well. please don't go messing with it.

 

[Don_Carnage]

I still say keep the ranges as-is. It's simple and clean.
Range is much more than the barrel length and scope. a 9mm fired from the 9mmAR pictured previously will never go as far and straight as a 5.56 fired from a barrel of the same length. Otherwise the military would just do away with 5.56 all together.
Personally I think a Scope should do something like drop a weapon range difficulty by a category, but not increase the weapon's effective range.

Go ahead and drop SMG as a skill. The recoil rules pretty much wipe out any issue with people dual-wielding MP5's 1-handed.

But...and I'm just throwing this out...there was always 1 rule in the old Mechwarrior rules that I liked.
Specialization within a skill.

For example, Pistol is 2 categories: Semi-auto and Burst-fire
Rifle is 3 categories: semi-auto, burst-fire, and shotgun.
Specialization means that if a player chooses this, they can select 1 category within that skill and get a +1 under it, however they then incur a -1 for the other categories.

For example, let's say you have 2 players: 1 is a sniper/sharp-shooter, the other is a blow-and-go assault rifle guy. They're both 5th level Rifle and both specialized in their field. The sniper is for all purposes 6th level for semi-auto rifles, but 4th level in shotguns and burst-fire rifles. The assault player is essentially 6th level when firing burst and full-auto, but 4th level on semi-auto rifles and shotguns. However for IP they are both still technically 5th level rifle and will continue as normal when gaining levels.
I'd leave this rule optional for players wanting to customize without having to have 5 separate skills to do so.

 

[Mister_Lizard]

So far I like the idea of dropping the SMG skill and instead using rifle or pistol, depending upon whether or not is stocked. As to changing the ranges I think that they should be dependent upon the round. An SMG uses a pistol round and therefore uses pistol ranges but the weapon has a longer barrel and that adds to the Weapon Accuracy.

I would not change the burst fire modifiers at all. Higher skill in the weapon takes care of the negative that burst fire incurs. What I do do is to have 2 weapon accuracy ratings for firearms capable of semi and full auto fire. For an example, an M-16 would have a semi-auto WA of 1 and a full-auto WA of -1 whereas an M-14 has a semi WA of 1 or 2 with a full-auto WA of -3 ( I have fired an M-14 on full auto and it doesn't matter how good you are, it's recoil is too hard and its cyclic rate is too high). For these purposes burst fire and full-auto fire have the same WA.

Also for 3 round burst I do not roll 1D3 for the number of rounds that hit, I base it on the amount that you beat the TN by: 1 extra round hits for each 5 that you beat the TN by.

The main difference between shooting a pistol and a rifle comes from the sight radius of the weapon. If your front sight looks just a bit to the right on the shorter sight radius of a pistol the angle of deviation is actually much greater than with a rifle. And I have to say that making a shot at 50m with a pistol is pretty damn good shooting, not only do you have to focus more on sight alignment and picture but you will also have to elevate most pistol rounds to be able to 'drop' your round on target. If you scope a pistol you better know your range and how many mils that translates into on your particular scope, or you will miss.

 

[wisdom000]

Okay, apparently enough people think that hitting something with a rifle at 80's yards is every bit as easy as hitting something with a pistol at 15 yards (Difficulty 15)... And that hitting something with a rifle at 250 yards, without a scope or bipod, from a standing position, is every bit as easy as hitting a target from 25 yards with a pistol (difficulty 20).

Seems fishy to me, but then I have much less experience with a rifle than I do a handgun admittedly. I was basing it off of my limited experience, and more importantly, how well I can see something... at 25 yards, regardless of what I am shooting, I can see the target just fine. Hell I can read the the slogan on their t-shirt. At 250 yards, the target is a dot on the horizon, I am lucky if I can tell if they are even wearing a shirt.

But as utterly wrong as it sounds to me, the feedback has been pretty much Unanimous. So I guess range modifiers stay the same.

I haven't heard any real justification for why SMG's should be kept. However Mark Cook on my blog does make a compelling, if unintended, argument that submachineguns should suffer less of a penalty for being fired full auto, because of lesser recoil, so I will give that some thought.

 

[xkorpio]

For ranges I agree that hitting something past some distance is something more subjective (the subject who shoots) than objective (the object you are using to fire), so the dificults are:
10 Point Blank
15 up to 50 mts
20 up to 100 mts.
25 up to 200 mts
30 201 mts or more

You can apply a modifier for the weapon ranging from 1 to 5 as a bonus for the stock, long barrel, and all the stuff you think to make a difference between a handheld handgun and a more stable firing from a rifle.

As a side note I use a rule that my players love. REF+(Athletics+Dodge)/2 +1D10 as defensive roll. If its lower than range difficult, you get better between those two, for each "dodge" attempt you get -3.

And finally if you want to check my quick damage rules based on the amount of points you make your to-hit roll, you can check the android app I posted on this forums. Is a quick way of hit-damage-abstract location hit, the better result you get, the more damage you do. I do not roll for location (is implied in the fact you get better damage for better roll) but you can use it too.

 

[xkorpio]

The post for the android app:

http://www.cyberpunk.net/forum/en/threads/1468-Cyberpunk-2020-Combat-helper-App

 

[Mister_Lizard]

I haven't heard any real justification for why SMG's should be kept. However Mark Cook on my blog does make a compelling, if unintended, argument that submachineguns should suffer less of a penalty for being fired full auto, because of lesser recoil, so I will give that some thought.

The lesser recoil from the smaller round is made less important because the SMG, in general, doesn't weigh as much as an assault rifle, and they tend to have a faster cyclic rate.

But yeah I think that the skill can be lost with no real change to the game.

 

[Don_Carnage]

With SMG recoil, I'd work that into the base recoil rules for all guns instead of just SMG's to keep 3-round and full-auto the same across the board, but other issues dependent on the recoil of the particular gun.

Also, since we're going over IU combat rules, I really think you should bring back certain semi-auto guns getting naturally a +1 or +2 ROF. Having all guns be ROF 1, and the number of shots solely dependent on the character's RT, takes a lot of the fun strategy out of the game. For example I love listening to players debate why a Stermeyer 35 is better than an Armalite 44 because of 1 extra shot a round. It reminds me of the real life .45 vs .40 vs 9mm argument. I also like watching players add compensators to add to that ROF.
My house rule on it is particular guns with semi-auto above 1 allow 1 more Quick-Action when fired semi-auto.