rennarda
Posts: 32
Joined: Fri 20 Dec 2019, 15:28

Re: Ammo Dice...why?

Mon 07 Dec 2020, 12:54

I think if you add ammo dice one at a time, similar to the way Coriolis does it, it suddenly makes a lot more sense.

You make your base attack, but then you can freely add ammo dice one at a time to your attack, up to your RoF. Each dice rolled either shows additional ammo used, a bonus hit, or an explosion symbol. Matched explosions symbols mean something bad happened - like a weapon misfire, or you lost discipline and used up all your ammo. Additional hits are exactly as per the rules as written.

This is only a very minor mod to the rules as written, but feels more interactive: Instead of rolling all the ammo dice at once, you add them one at a time.

Also, I would not count the additional hits as using 6 ammo. I think the benefit of the additional hit should not automatically cost you 6 shots(yes there's a small chance of rolling amazingly well but not expending additional ammo, but I can overlook that). Instead I would say additional ammo dice use up 1 ammo, OR whatever number you rolled, and remove the '6' value from the hit side. For weapons with burst fire, each additional dice should just cost you the burst amount of bullets (eg. fixed 3 per dice)

For example: I miss on my base attack roll, but want to nail that sucker so I keep firing on full auto: I add an ammo dice - roll a 3 so mark off another 3 bullets used. I roll another dice, but roll an explosion. I'm running the risk of something bad happening if I roll another one, but I keep firing. This time roll a bullet - so I hit the target for base weapon damage. Conceptually this can be though of as missing on the initial aim, but walking the bullets onto the target, winging them.

You could even get more sophisticated, and say with CUF A you can add ammo dice one at a time, but with CUF B you must add them 2 at a time, and C or D 3 at a time. This represents greater control with higher CUF, and being aware of whether or not you landed a hit or just kept on firing regardless. Just a thought.
Last edited by rennarda on Mon 07 Dec 2020, 14:22, edited 1 time in total.
 
User avatar
Ursus Maior
Posts: 35
Joined: Tue 25 Aug 2020, 20:58
Contact:

Re: Ammo Dice...why?

Mon 07 Dec 2020, 12:55

@pansarskott
Weapons are really hard to break, if you do not actively see to it by willingly (and usually knowingly) leaving the realm of construction specifications. Yey, you can permanently damage your barrel by overheating it, but you need to put triple-digits of bullets through it within an engagement of only a few T2K combat rounds. And everything else - broken pins, levers, springs etc. - is really rare. Yes, even a good shooter might no see it coming, because capillary cracks in e. g. the firing pin will not be visible, but this should still be a rare event.

And maybe a GM should not tell the reliability code to their players? It's one thing to remove gunk from the chamber to prevent failures to feed, but as explained, you might not see constructional failures coming.
liber & infractus
 
User avatar
Ursus Maior
Posts: 35
Joined: Tue 25 Aug 2020, 20:58
Contact:

Re: Ammo Dice...why?

Mon 07 Dec 2020, 13:02

I think if you add ammo dice one at a time, similar to the way Coriolis does it, it suddenly makes a lot more sense.

You make your base attack, but then you can freely add ammo dice one at a time to your attack, up to your RoF. Each dice rolled either shows additional ammo used, a bonus hit, or an explosion symbol. Matched explosions symbols mean something bad happened - like a weapon misfire, or you lost discipline and used up all your ammo. Additional hits are exactly as per the rules as written.

[...]

For example: I miss on my base attack roll, but want to nail that sucker so I keep firing on full auto: I add an ammo dice - roll a 3 so mark off another 3 bullets used. I roll another dice, but roll an explosion. I'm running the risk of something bad happening if I roll another one, but I keep firing. This time roll a bullet - so I hit the target for base weapon damage. Conceptually this can be though of as missing on the initial aim, but walking the bullets onto the target, winging them.

[...]
I like this a lot more than the alpha rules. I still would like to see ammo dice use the same code as skill dice, so a better trained shooter can choose to *brrrrt* more by using his d10 or d12 and even get two hits out of it, while making it less likely that something odd will happen. Skill level equals survival in a firefight, in my opinion, much more than is given credit by many gamers / players. And T2K has a wonderful way to show this by using its dice mechanic to full effect.

The physical side effect of this would be that ammo dice sets would need to contain several types of dice of course. Maybe up to four of each. But that can be solved by adjusting the price; a total of 16 dice shouldn't be too expensive.
liber & infractus
 
User avatar
pansarskott
Posts: 90
Joined: Mon 24 Aug 2020, 19:29

Re: Ammo Dice...why?

Mon 07 Dec 2020, 13:14

Good points, Ursus Major. My idea was not complete, just some fodder for the discussion.
But the weapons doesn't break until reliabilty rating drops below D.

Maybe mishaps should depend on the reliability rating as well? Lower risk of mishaps if the weapon is in good condition. With the idea of a static target number, the risk of mishaps will increase as RR decreases.

So, another example
1) 1 on dice = potential mishap. Roll over X with weapon's RR to avoid.
2) if mishap: Roll over X with weapon's RR to avoid dropped RR.
 
rennarda
Posts: 32
Joined: Fri 20 Dec 2019, 15:28

Re: Ammo Dice...why?

Mon 07 Dec 2020, 14:18

I still would like to see ammo dice use the same code as skill dice ... The physical side effect of this would be that ammo dice sets would need to contain several types of dice of course. Maybe up to four of each. But that can be solved by adjusting the price; a total of 16 dice shouldn't be too expensive.
Yes, I like that idea too - that's similar to how the artefact dice in Forbidden Lands work. Those are d8, d10 or d12 and can contain multiple hits on the highest values.

If ammo dice were rolled one at a time, then you wouldn't even need multiple sets of dice - one of each would do. You just need to tally up the results as you rolled.
 
User avatar
Vader
Posts: 598
Joined: Fri 15 Nov 2019, 14:11
Location: The Frozen North

Re: Ammo Dice...why?

Mon 07 Dec 2020, 14:56

Perhaps one should consider the following procedure, as an evolution on Pskott's idea:

  1. 1 on all Base Dice and at least two Ammunition Dice = potential mishap. Roll over X with weapon's RR to avoid.
  2. If mishap: Roll over X with weapon's RR to avoid dropped RR.

Thus weapon degradation would become much rarer, not really possible when only shooting limited bursts, but still more likely to occur when really letting 'er rip...
[i]Before[/i] clicking that response button — [i]are you sure you actually [b]read[/b] it?[/i]

...[i]and[/i] checked if something more was posted after it? ;)
 
User avatar
Fenhorn
Moderator
Posts: 2505
Joined: Thu 24 Apr 2014, 15:03
Location: Mariestad

Re: Ammo Dice...why?

Mon 07 Dec 2020, 15:08

My suggestion on the dropbox (always a hoot-and-a-half to write something in that) about mishaps was to have the dice roll test be done before you decrease your weapon reliability and you only reduce it if you fail. If you do reduce it then you get a weapon jam. So if you get a mishap with an A class weapon you make a test with 2d12, if you fail, the weapon jams and is now B class. Easy to remember.
“Thanks for noticin' me.” - Eeyore
 
User avatar
Ursus Maior
Posts: 35
Joined: Tue 25 Aug 2020, 20:58
Contact:

Re: Ammo Dice...why?

Mon 07 Dec 2020, 15:10

@rennarda
You are of course right about the dice and how many would be needed. That makes it even more player friendly!
Maybe mishaps should depend on the reliability rating as well? Lower risk of mishaps if the weapon is in good condition. With the idea of a static target number, the risk of mishaps will increase as RR decreases.

So, another example
1) 1 on dice = potential mishap. Roll over X with weapon's RR to avoid.
2) if mishap: Roll over X with weapon's RR to avoid dropped RR.
I think, reliability rating should definitely be a factor, exactly as you point out. In theory, weapons would have two such ratings: one by design and one by their actual state maintenance and care taken. Some waepons are built badly, others are just gunked up. That's to clunky obviously and would reduce playability by adding book keeping.

But I would argue that the production rating offers a value that could not be surpassed, but it could be lowered by wear and tear. I like you approach for this, but would tie it to the character's skill, too: A rifle with a reliability rating of d6 used by bad shooter (skill level d6) should fail more frequently than the same gun in the hands of a well-trained soldier (skill level d10). This simulates better preparation for use as well as the veteran knowing what to do in case of a small failure, e. g. cycle the bolt, re-insert magazine etc.

So, when a firearms skill check comes up "snake eyes", you roll Reliability Rating plus Skill Rating and if both dice come up with a "1" (snake eyes) again, you have a mishap.

And at that point, I would argue, the character and his gun are in a mixed pickle. No third roll is needed, the weapon looses one step of RR immediately and suffers a random mishap. I would like to see these mishaps to be not to detailed. Something like: 1-2: part breaks down, the weapon suffers a structural failure and has to be repaired using a replacement part, before it can be reused (bright side: this restores one level of RR in the process); 3-4: nasty jam, take one full round to clear the weapon, while checking for casing debris in the action and then re-inserting the magazine (good luck doing this with gloves on); 5-6: ammo runs out, reload and resume firing next round.
liber & infractus
 
User avatar
Ursus Maior
Posts: 35
Joined: Tue 25 Aug 2020, 20:58
Contact:

Re: Ammo Dice...why?

Mon 07 Dec 2020, 15:18

  1. 1 on all Base Dice and at least two Ammunition Dice = potential mishap. Roll over X with weapon's RR to avoid.
  2. If mishap: Roll over X with weapon's RR to avoid dropped RR.

Thus weapon degradation would become much rarer, not really possible when only shooting limited bursts, but still more likely to occur when really letting 'er rip...
Again, this would link the amount of bullets put through the action or barrel within a set timeframe (i. e. 'one combat round') to the rate of mishaps occurring to a gun. This is not the case, unless one is using a weapon way outside its specifications or the gun is badly designed. Point in case, the German MG42 of WW2 had such an issue by design and it was rectified later in the Cold War German MG3. But a good design does not care if you cycle the action once per round or 20 times, because it just does its thing.

A bad design should be noted by the rules, which is covered per Reliability Rating.

You can only enhance the chance of mishaps on a user's level by taking the weapon outside its specified use, either not taking proper care, using unqualified ammunition, shooting it hot on purpose or something similar. And that's more likely to happen, if the user is not properly trained.

Hence my idea to tie Skill Rating and Reliability Rating together to determine mishaps. Once the user fumbled ('snakeeyes') in the skill roll, there is a second chance, but that's it.
liber & infractus
 
welsh
Posts: 151
Joined: Sun 29 Nov 2020, 15:53

Re: Ammo Dice...why?

Mon 07 Dec 2020, 15:20

As (ex-)servicemembers know, ammo is used in a firefight like there's no tomorrow.
And very few hits are scored. All this talk of adding DMs to hit when you shoot off more ammo: well, it will certainly make players feel like the system is better and more realistic. But I doubt it actually makes the system more realistic. It's highly instructive to put belts through a machine gun and then walk downrange and count the holes in your targets.

This is the sort of thing that can't be resolved through playtesting. People will play with the alternate rule and declare they like it, because it satisfies their expectation of more hits. That's just circular thinking: "There should be more hits; let me add a DM to cause more hits; wow this is better there are more hits."

At its root this is just a discussion around a complaint that the system as written uses too much ammo per hit scored.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests