Alternative Ways for Autofire.

[Toadmaster]

52 minutes ago, Atgxtg said:

Not it won't. The stock used will not  INCREASE the recoil force. At worse it will still REDUCE recoil somewhat it due to the added mass. What the "wobbly" stocks do is make bracing a weapon less effective.And I say bracing a weapon is worth more than 1 point of STR. An average person firing a SMG two handed is going to be able to handle recoil much better than a strong person firing the SMG one handed.  

 

Agree that a bad folding stock may increase felt recoil for a variety of reasons, and yes the main issue with some folding stocks is that they don't offer as good of a support for bracing. Some are pretty atrocious wobbly things but others do as good a job as a fixed stock.

I do kind of like the idea of the quality of a stock effecting the STR available to be used against recoil. I like reasons for things to be and making a fixed stock be slightly better than a good folding stock and maybe a fair bit better than a cheesy wire folding stock would offer something of a trade off for the increased portability.  

Ergonomics in general play a substantial role, but are also very subjective and very difficult to replicate for a game. Very easy to get lost down that rabbit hole.

[Atgxtg]

Yeah, and why it'sprobably best to simply recoil a bit. Have stocks and bracing apply a modifier, and possibly reduce the bonus for folding stocks. But a game like BRP would probably need a few changes to make automatic weapons work out reasonably right.

[olskool]

As you guys are already guessing, my Modifications to Recoil List involves ways to increase or decrease the STR needed to fire a weapon.  Thus "Recoil," as I'm defining it here, is just how much STR it takes to fire the weapon without a "To Hit" penalty taking effect.  The modification based on stocks being "wobbly" takes into account two factors.  The first is whether the stock allows the weapon to shift during firing (even though the stock itself is braced by the shooter).  This shifting will take the weapon's sights out of alignment with the target (usually in the vertical plane BUT not always).  I fired an Insurgent AK with an underfolding stock during RESTORE HOPE that was VERY "wobbly."  That stock was nearly impossible to use as it wobbled from side to side as well as vertically.  The captured AK-74 (probably smuggling into Somalia from Yemen) we played with was a side folder and was actually very nice to shoot.  The second factor is when the design of the stock imparts a control issue to the weapon... usually during full-auto fire.  The original design of the Thompson M1 was one of these.  The stock setup below the receiver's rear in combination with its 700 to 750 rpm cyclic rate resulted in significant muzzle climb when firing full 1-second bursts (although I must admit it WAS FUN TO SHOOT).  Experienced "subgunners" only fire 3 round burst when accuracy is important.  The original M14 was another "climber" when you held down the trigger with the "fun switch" engaged.  Its 720 rpm cyclic rate didn't help with muzzle climb either.  This is why that particular entry exists on the list.     

[olskool]

As for determining the actual Recoil of a given weapon in STR points, I think I would use the Chuck Hawk's Recoil Calculator (easily Googled).  The real issue is how to convert Recoil Energy in foot-pounds into a STR Rating.  I'm torn between using a straight formula (ie X ft-lbs = Y points of STR) versus an increasing chart that lists STR per a range of Recoil Energy so as to allow for an increasing Energy curve (for rounds like .416 Rigby, .338 Lapua, and .50 BMG) while to not overwhelming STR too quickly.  Autofire would simply multiply the Rate of Fire (Cyclic Rate/100) by the Recoil for a single round.  The larger calibers should exceed human STR (thus incurring a penalty To Hit).  Ideas on how to model this anyone?  

[Atgxtg]

On 11/27/2017 at 8:24 PM, olskool said:

  The real issue is how to convert Recoil Energy in foot-pounds into a STR Rating.  

Oh, that's easy. Just look up the recoil energy on the SIZ table as if it were a weight or mass. That way recoil would be on the same scale as STR. But, since recoil force is pretty low (ususally less that 15 ft-pds or 7 kg) you'd  need an offset of some sort.Basically, the SIZ table follows a x2 mass = +8 SIZ progression (so each +1 STA is about a 9% increase). So all you'd need to do is figure out what you think is a good value for one weapon and then use the doubling +8 progression to get the values for all the other weapons. 

 

We did something like that awhile back to determining the lethality of real word poisons. 

 

Now to make this work, you'd need to factor in the mass of the weapon, too. If you look at the Chuck Hawks data, you'll see that some weapons that have greater energy have less recoil than some lighter weapons just because of the added mass.  

[Atgxtg]

A rough table might look something like this:

Recoil/Weight STR 1.1 1 1.2 2 1.3 3 1.4 4 1.5 5 1.7 6 1.8 7 2.0 8 2.2 9 2.4 10 2.6 11 2.8 12 3.1 13 3.4 14 3.7 15 4.0 16 4.4 17 4.8 18 5.2 19 5.7 20 6.2 21 6.7 22 7.3 23 8.0 24 8.7 25 9.5 26 10.4 27 11.3 28 12.3 29 13.5 30 14.7 31 16.0 32 17.4 33 19.0 34 20.7 35 22.6 36 24.7 37 26.9 38 29.3 39 32.0 40 34.9 41 38.1 42 41.5 43 45.3 44 49.4 45 53.8 46 58.7 47 64.0 48 69.8 49 76.1 50 83.0 51 90.5 52 98.7 53 107.6 54 117.4 55 128.0 56 139.6 57 152.2 58 166.0 59 181.0 60

 To use the table you'd find the recoil value of the weapon, and read across to get the required STR. Gun weight could also be factored in on the table and subtracted from the required STR. Things like using two hands (probably worth a 8 point reduction), bipods, tripods and all that could be assigned recoil modifiers which further reduce the STR requirement. 

 

For example, let's say someone was firing a 9mm (9x19) +P round ((115gr@ 1250 fps) from a 1.5 lb pistol. According to Chuck Hawk's page the Recoil is rated at 7.3ft-lbs (that already factors in the gun weight). 7.3 is a STR of 23 on the table, so a normal human is going to get a recoil penalty. A strong person (STR 15) using two hands (-8 recoil) could control the recoil.

Now, using this method if somebody were to load those +P rounds into a 2lb pistol, he could reduce the recoil down 3 STR points (due to the greater weight) to only STR 20. Likewise if somebody were to load those rounds into a 8 pound SMG, we could use the table to see that the recoil should drop by 19 points, and be very controllable (for single shots).

[Toadmaster]

On 11/29/2017 at 9:22 AM, Atgxtg said:

Oh, that's easy. Just look up the recoil energy on the SIZ table as if it were a weight or mass. That way recoil would be on the same scale as STR. But, since recoil force is pretty low (ususally less that 15 ft-pds or 7 kg) you'd  need an offset of some sort.Basically, the SIZ table follows a x2 mass = +8 SIZ progression (so each +1 STA is about a 9% increase). So all you'd need to do is figure out what you think is a good value for one weapon and then use the doubling +8 progression to get the values for all the other weapons. 

 

We did something like that awhile back to determining the lethality of real word poisons. 

 

Now to make this work, you'd need to factor in the mass of the weapon, too. If you look at the Chuck Hawks data, you'll see that some weapons that have greater energy have less recoil than some lighter weapons just because of the added mass.  

 Which brings up something I didn't even think about. BRP has a SIZ stat which should definitely be a factor in recoil control. Recoil is essentially the acceleration of the weapon away from the bullet which is why shooting a .44 magnum out of a 1.5 lb pistol has a lively recoil, but from a 7lb rifle it has a fairly mild recoil.

With equal STR a bigger shooter will be able to take more recoil, as the gun has a harder time moving the shooter. Could be as simple as what has been discussed but replacing STR+SIZ/2 or something else to adjust the relative effects.  

[SDLeary]

5 hours ago, Toadmaster said:

 Which brings up something I didn't even think about. BRP has a SIZ stat which should definitely be a factor in recoil control. Recoil is essentially the acceleration of the weapon away from the bullet which is why shooting a .44 magnum out of a 1.5 lb pistol has a lively recoil, but from a 7lb rifle it has a fairly mild recoil.

With equal STR a bigger shooter will be able to take more recoil, as the gun has a harder time moving the shooter. Could be as simple as what has been discussed but replacing STR+SIZ/2 or something else to adjust the relative effects.  

If its this simple, just adjust the STR/DEX requirements on firearms and enforce them, yes?

Looking at the chart on BGB p255, it looks like the assumption is bigger weapon, bigger round; for that they are already onboard. Just have to make adjustments for round caliber (big gun, smaller round, less STR needed). In other words 1911A1 (a Heavy Pistol) in 9mm or .380 Auto should have a lower recoil, and thus lower STR requirement, say 9 and 8 respectively. I wouldn't go much lower in this example, because you still have to have enough STR to hold the big weapon on target.

SDLeary

Edited December 14, 2017 by SDLeary

[Atgxtg]

43 minutes ago, SDLeary said:

If its this simple, just adjust the STR/DEX requirements on firearms and enforce them, yes?

Close but not quite. The mass of the weapon being fired and if/how it it braced makes a big difference. Autofire is another factor since you have to deal with the recoil of several shots at one time. 

Shooter's skill would play a factor as well. Generally perceived recoil tends to play as much a factor as actual recoil, and greater skills lets someone get better and handling both. 

43 minutes ago, SDLeary said:

Looking at the chart on BGB p255, it looks like the assumption is bigger weapon, bigger round; for that they are already onboard. Just have to make adjustments for round caliber (big gun, smaller round, less STR needed). In other words 1911A1 (a Heavy Pistol) in 9mm or .380 Auto should have a lower recoil, and thus lower STR requirement, say 9 and 8 respectively.

It's not as assumption, more a matter of practical design. Generally speaking, the heavier the bullet, the greater the energy, and thus the stronger the weapon must be to fire it. To make a weapon stronger you either have to use stronger materials or make it heavier. The assault rifle is based on the idea of reducing the range and mass of the standard WWI military  rifle round (7.62/.303/.30-06/7.92 etc) in order to reduce the weight of the rifle required to fire said round, and the weight of ammunition carried for such a rifle. 

43 minutes ago, SDLeary said:

 

I wouldn't go much lower in this example, because you still have to have enough STR to hold the big weapon on target.

Realistically it doesn't take all that much STR to hold most weapons on target. Most firearms are designed to be controlled easily. The difficult ones tend to be the heavy pistols/revolvers (high powered high caliber), heavy rifles (big game weapons), some holdout pistols (some are high powered/low mass), and anything with autofire.  

 

But, all that said, most of the relevant factors (bullet energy, gun weight, 1-2H, autofire, bracing, and skill) could be boiled down to a small list of "required STR" modifiers. 

 

 

[g33k]

16 hours ago, Toadmaster said:

 Which brings up something I didn't even think about. BRP has a SIZ stat which should definitely be a factor in recoil control. Recoil is essentially the acceleration of the weapon away from the bullet which is why shooting a .44 magnum out of a 1.5 lb pistol has a lively recoil, but from a 7lb rifle it has a fairly mild recoil.

With equal STR a bigger shooter will be able to take more recoil, as the gun has a harder time moving the shooter. Could be as simple as what has been discussed but replacing STR+SIZ/2 or something else to adjust the relative effects.  

But what about the Chuck Norris effect?

Chuck Norris sometimes dual-wields a couple 45-Caliber Type 94's he salvaged from the Yamato...

 

[SDLeary]

18 hours ago, Atgxtg said:

Close but not quite. The mass of the weapon being fired and if/how it it braced makes a big difference. Autofire is another factor since you have to deal with the recoil of several shots at one time. 

Shooter's skill would play a factor as well. Generally perceived recoil tends to play as much a factor as actual recoil, and greater skills lets someone get better and handling both. 

It's not as assumption, more a matter of practical design. Generally speaking, the heavier the bullet, the greater the energy, and thus the stronger the weapon must be to fire it. To make a weapon stronger you either have to use stronger materials or make it heavier. The assault rifle is based on the idea of reducing the range and mass of the standard WWI military  rifle round (7.62/.303/.30-06/7.92 etc) in order to reduce the weight of the rifle required to fire said round, and the weight of ammunition carried for such a rifle. 

Realistically it doesn't take all that much STR to hold most weapons on target. Most firearms are designed to be controlled easily. The difficult ones tend to be the heavy pistols/revolvers (high powered high caliber), heavy rifles (big game weapons), some holdout pistols (some are high powered/low mass), and anything with autofire.  

 

But, all that said, most of the relevant factors (bullet energy, gun weight, 1-2H, autofire, bracing, and skill) could be boiled down to a small list of "required STR" modifiers. 

 

 

Nah, understand all that.

I'm simply trying to find a way to fit it into the existing framework. No need to reinvent the wheel unless absolutely necessary.

As for Autofire itself, I still think the way to go is to adapt Delta Green's methodology. 

SDLeary

[Atgxtg]

13 hours ago, SDLeary said:

Nah, understand all that.

I'm simply trying to find a way to fit it into the existing framework. No need to reinvent the wheel unless absolutely necessary.

Well I think you might have done just that. If we set the min STR based on the recoil energy (say by using my table above and adding an offset to try and match it up with existing min STR values for firearms) and then treated anything above the character STR as difficult, it would work. 

I'd just need to add in a modifier for using 2 hands, bracing, and autofire. Oh, and probably something for when the weapons' STR greatly exceeds the character's (so that there is a difference between minSTR 15 and minSTR 50 to a STR 10 character). 

 

13 hours ago, SDLeary said:

As for Autofire itself, I still think the way to go is to adapt Delta Green's methodology. 

SDLeary

But doesn't that mean that the stats of the one hit doesn't matter at all? That could make a big difference when dealing with large beings and others with very high stats. A burst from an Uzi probably won't kill a T-Rex right off. 

[SDLeary]

11 hours ago, Atgxtg said:

Well I think you might have done just that. If we set the min STR based on the recoil energy (say by using my table above and adding an offset to try and match it up with existing min STR values for firearms) and then treated anything above the character STR as difficult, it would work. 

I'd just need to add in a modifier for using 2 hands, bracing, and autofire. Oh, and probably something for when the weapons' STR greatly exceeds the character's (so that there is a difference between minSTR 15 and minSTR 50 to a STR 10 character). 

Because the STR requirement and can vary widely, I'm partial to the old RQ3 penalties in this area. -5% for each point of STR under the requirement. I would not necessarily have a bonus for 2 hand use with a pistol, but would probably negate part of a STR penalty. Bracing, perhaps 10%.

Quote

 

But doesn't that mean that the stats of the one hit doesn't matter at all? That could make a big difference when dealing with large beings and others with very high stats. A burst from an Uzi probably won't kill a T-Rex right off. 

You have four basic options. Single Shot, Short Burst, Long Burst, Spray. 

A short burst is considered three rounds at a single target, and has a Lethality Rating of X%. A long burst is considered five rounds at a 1m area of effect, also with a X% lethality rating. Spraying is also in short and long varieties, being the same as a long burst, but with 2 and 3 meter areas of effect.

The Lethality Rating is a percentile chance that the target dies outright from the hit, thus no rolling for number of rounds that hit, etc. If a lethality test is a success, the target drops to 0 HP; if it fails, add the two dice together (0's counting as 10s) and apply the result as damage. Regular weapon damage is only rolled for single shot. To streamline things, some larger calibers also ONLY have a lethality rating (very heavy hunting rounds, .50 BMG, etc.) even if they will only ever fire single shot. For most longarms the rating is 10%, large caliber arms up to 20%. You still have the problem with the T-Rex, but you do have the chance to kill him outright.

Now, something I don't like about the system. The lethality rating seems to be applied to all rifles, regardless of autofire or not. I would probably restrict this to automatic weapons only, and roll normal damage for bolt or semi weapons.

SDLeary

Edited December 16, 2017 by SDLeary

[Atgxtg]

10 hours ago, SDLeary said:

Because the STR requirement and can vary widely, I'm partial to the old RQ3 penalties in this area. -5% for each point of STR under the requirement. I would not necessarily have a bonus for 2 hand use with a pistol, but would probably negate part of a STR penalty. Bracing, perhaps 10%.

I dunno the idea of just making a shot difficult if STR is exceeded seems nice and simple, though. Of couse both options could be included so GMs could pick whateever one they prefer. 

I would expect 2H use and/or bracing to essentially reduce the STR min. About 4 points seems about right for two hands. And probably the reverse (or twice that) would apple when frining a 2H weapon with only 1H. So someone with STR 9 could get away with firing a STR 11 pistol without a penalty if they used a 2H grip. 

10 hours ago, SDLeary said:

Now, something I don't like about the system. The lethality rating seems to be applied to all rifles, regardless of autofire or not. I would probably restrict this to automatic weapons only, and roll normal damage for bolt or semi weapons.

What I don't like, it that it seems that the lethality % is applied the same across the board to any and all targets. I much rather do something like divide the lethality by 5% and then math that against the target's hit points on the resistance table or some such. 

 

[soltakss]

On 12/14/2017 at 5:00 PM, g33k said:

But what about the Chuck Norris effect?

Chuck Norris trancends all rules ...

[Toadmaster]

 

On 12/14/2017 at 9:00 AM, g33k said:

But what about the Chuck Norris effect?

Chuck Norris sometimes dual-wields a couple 45-Caliber Type 94's he salvaged from the Yamato...

 

 

A bit off topic but I've recently picked up machining as a hobby and I ran across an online article someone did about a special lathe chuck he made for gunsmithing. He named it the Norris Chuck, as a play on the the name of some guy named Chuck Norris. 

 

[SDLeary]

 

On 12/16/2017 at 5:43 AM, Atgxtg said:

What I don't like, it that it seems that the lethality % is applied the same across the board to any and all targets. I much rather do something like divide the lethality by 5% and then math that against the target's hit points on the resistance table or some such. 

 

Perhaps an opposed roll against the targets CON x5?

The way I like to work things is that at 0 HP rather than the person dying, they are in that downward spiral just before death. Depending upon how the damage was inflicted, they then have CON rounds, minutes, or hours to live, unless they receive First Aid, which simply stabilizes someone.

Perhaps if the Target makes their CON test, then they are at 0 HP (under the above method) and have pushed their time from one level to the next (ex. minutes to hours); a crit moving things two levels?

SDLeary

[Atgxtg]

Yeah some sort of method to factor in the target's capabilities seems vital. I'm not so sure that a burst from an Uzi would drop a T-Rex dead in it's tracks. At least not before it got a chance to try and bite the one who shot it. It would probably bleed to death or die from infection or something, but not fast enough. 

 

I'm not fond of opposed rolls in RQ/BRP, (hence my referencing the resistance table) but at least the opposed roll would be  a step in the right direction. 

 

I'd say go with HPx5%, not CONx5% because SIZ matters. A 5 ton critter has a lot more muscle and bone that a bullet must pass through in order to wreck something that can kill or disable it right away. 

[Atgxtg]

Say, does the success level of the attack roll affect the lethality in any way?

[SDLeary]

11 minutes ago, Atgxtg said:

Say, does the success level of the attack roll affect the lethality in any way?

Yes, if the attack roll is a Critical (only success level above success), then the weapons lethality rating is doubled. 

Critical attacks in the game outside of the Lethality double rolled damage. 

SDLeary

[Atgxtg]

In a way in reminds me of the old Bond RPG. In that game the wound taken from an attack was determined by the Damage Class of the weapon and the Quality Rating (=Success Level).