 Wizkids having Problems?, News... |
  |
 Jun 21 2006, 02:50 PM
Post
#51
|
|||
|
Manus Celer Dei  Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 17,008 Joined: 30-December 02 From: Boston Member No.: 3,802  |
The book provides two distinct things. One is a setting, which is Vietnam during the Vietnam War with supernatural elements. The other is a campaign (several of them, actually). I haven't read the campaign, so I don't know how much it was altered when my GM ran it and we started as new recruits (who eventually, towards the end of the campaign, were indeed inducted into the Phoenix Program once they were no longer new recruits), but the setting does not assume everyone to be special forces. Indeed, the path to doing so is, using standard chargen, extremely restrictive (and for several branches outright impossible). ~J |
||
 |
 
|
||
|
Jun 21 2006, 03:08 PM
Post
#52
|
|||||||||||||||
|
Great Dragon Group: Members Posts: 5,430 Joined: 10-January 05 From: Fort Worth, Texas Member No.: 6,957 |
That's all fine and dandy, but it's unrealistic and hence I don't like it. You're free to like it, but you won't convince me that one skill for every weapon known to man is a good thing.
That may or may not be true, but it isn't what's being discussed. The simplification of everything down to a fighting skill means that once someone has tought you how to box, you're also capable of using jiujitsu, swords, and ladders at the same level of expertise.
Except that in some settings they will both exist. Simplification is not necessarily a bad thing, but it can be taken too far. IMO Savage Worlds takes it too far.
If popularity is a valid measure of a game's "goodness" then d20 is the greatest system ever developed in the history of RPGs. Why are you playing that lame Savage Worlds when the clear choice for exceptional rules is plainly d20? WoD also won a popularity contest in 2004. Does that mean it's a great system and spectacularly popular now?
Obviously not. I'm stating that some things that which win popularity contests aren't necessarily good, useful, or of high quality. I'm not stating that everything that wins a popularity contest is automatically crap. I've never even implied that, but you're a big fan of arguing points that weren't made, so it's cool. I'll happily keep correcting you. :)
That may be true, but the exact opposite (training in one weapon = training in all weapons) is equally nonsensical.
What about a soldier in vietnam who sees an alien spacecraft crash land, goes on board, finds an alien rocket launcher, and suddenly knows everything about using the weapon because it falls under the shooting skill. |
||||||||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||||||||
|
Jun 21 2006, 03:49 PM
Post
#53
|
|
|
Running Target Group: Members Posts: 1,095 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Ontari-airee-o Member No.: 1,115 |
it would fall under his skill if he had alien gunnery. 8)
|
|
|
|
|
Jun 21 2006, 03:54 PM
Post
#54
|
|
|
Great Dragon Group: Members Posts: 5,430 Joined: 10-January 05 From: Fort Worth, Texas Member No.: 6,957 |
From what I can see there is no alien gunnery, or even human gunnery. Anything that involves a ranged attack and isn't a thrown weapon is done using the Shooting skill.
To expand on the example, as I wasn't clear about what I'm envisioning: this alien culture is one that tries to avoid violence whenever possible. As such it makes all of its military weapons incredibly difficult to use because it wants to ensure that anyone using the weapon has gone through the proper training (which includes mind control procedures that prevent the trainee from using the weapon without orders). Somehow this person who has never even seen a scifi movie or read a scifi book is magically capable of shooting this weapon just as well as he can shoot the rifle he's grown up with as a kid. To avoid any hassles that might a=occur trying to argue about alien technology, here's another example: Captain Jack, lifelong archeologist and Indiana Jones fan has practiced with firearms for decades. On his most recent excursion into the South American jungles in search of the Lost Nutsack of Tutenkamen he is ambushed by a tribe of pygmies firing at him with blowguns and bows from the treetops. He manages to drop 6 of them but then his trusty revolver is out of ammunition. Unable to reach them he needs a ranged weapon and he needs it fast! Aha! One of the fallen pygmies had a blowgun! He races over, snatches it up, and uses his extensive training in pistols and rifles to unerringly hit 5 more pygmies before running out of darts. Luckily one of the newly dead midgets of mayhem has dropped a bow. Racing over, he once again uses his incredible knowledge of firearms to unerringly fire the bow, finishing off the pygmies with narry a scratch to himself. Here we have a character with really good shooting and no specializations. He's trained only in pistols and rifles, because he didn't even know blowguns existed and had never seen a bow outside of a museum. But, because of his training with guns he is able to snatch up and instantly master both blowguns and bows. This to you is a good system? |
|
|
|
|
Jun 21 2006, 04:40 PM
Post
#55
|
|||
|
Running Target Group: Members Posts: 1,095 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Ontari-airee-o Member No.: 1,115 |
I think this disserves its own thread, but I envision clusters of weapons that behave similarly. Shooting a bazooka, seems quite a bit different than shooting a pistol, or using a blow dart or a bow. There are subtleties with each that give each weapon a unique characteristic. All of them have "aiming" in common. The good Dr can master the blowgun because of his firearms skill, but has a modifier because moving through the skill web. Some shooting skills are quite dissimilar and thus have the extra bump on them. Part of the reason that I stuck with SR2 was the firearms/melee skills. It encompasses so much. Now using a pistol is different from a rifle, but as you outlined not very much. There are differences between a knife and a sword, but if you are an expert with one, you will have a good idea of how to use something similar. Besides you learn so many tactics with fighting. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Jun 21 2006, 04:48 PM
Post
#56
|
|
|
Great Dragon Group: Members Posts: 5,430 Joined: 10-January 05 From: Fort Worth, Texas Member No.: 6,957 |
I agree. It's one reason I'll probably never play a non-House ruled version of Savage Worlds.
|
|
|
|
|
Jun 21 2006, 09:04 PM
Post
#57
|
|
|
Grand Master of Run-Fu Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 6,840 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Tir Tairngire Member No.: 178 |
First of all, Captain Jack, being an archaeologist of the first order, is probably already familiar with blowguns. He's at least not totally unskilled with them. I'm not an archaeologist, and I've fired a blowgun once or twice, and a bow a lot more than that. It's impossible that any trained archeologist wouldn't be at least passingly familiar with them.
Second, he's probably got a Trademark Weapon edge, or similar edges relating to his use of revolvers. So, when he picks up that blowgun, he's suddenly not able to use all these nifty edges and abilities he's picked up. Mechanically speaking, he's not as good with a blowgun as he is with his pistol. Instead of a punitive system, where players are penalized for using unfamiliar weapons, Savage Worlds tends towards a "carrot" system, where players are rewarded for staying withing their concept. I know you've expressed an interest in punitive play styles before, so YMMV. However, I've discovered that the reward system is generally a lot more fun that applying penalties left and right whenever a player gets out of line. As for your alien culture example, you simply say that it requires a Mad Science roll to use, as opposed to a standard Shooting roll. In the case of really foreign objects, you can require an appropriate Knowledge skill to recognize it as a weapon in the first place. You're also free to use the Improvised Weapon rules for certain things not quite designed to be a weapon. |
|
|
|
|
Jun 21 2006, 09:12 PM
Post
#58
|
|
|
Great Dragon Group: Members Posts: 5,430 Joined: 10-January 05 From: Fort Worth, Texas Member No.: 6,957 |
So you're saying that I have to put a familiarity with blowguns into my character history if I want to play Captain Jack, someone who I would prefer to have never had see a blowgun? I am also not allowed to represent study in all manner of firearms with just the shooting skill but must spend several trademark weapon edges on each particular one? Man, now I know I don't want to play this game.
What if Captain Jack were instead captain of the marksmanship team and not an archaeologist. Does he still automatically know all about blowguns and bows, despite having never seen one even inside a museum? LOL "Carrot system?" There's no reward for someone who has studied all manner of firearms to stay within firearms. In fact, it's exactly the same when he shoots a pistol as when he shoots a blowgun or bow. That's neither carrot nor stick, it's just plain silly. |
|
|
|
|
Jun 21 2006, 10:05 PM
Post
#59
|
|
|
Running Target Group: Members Posts: 1,213 Joined: 10-March 02 From: Back from the abyss. Member No.: 2,316 |
Just because I like to add nothing to a debate that isnt going anywhere.
First the green beret was around before Viet Nam, but became official in 1961 because of JFK. The special forces in Viet Nam were Green Berets, but not officailly named that till 1961. Saying precursors and modern day is a bit silly. Not much has changed in their training or their whole esprit de corp. Of course weapons and equipment will change so that training will be changed or added. But ultimately the special forces before 61 are the special forces of today. And to give you a counter point to your Noobie SCA players becoming master swords men 10 minutes after putting down the butter knife (because they are similar weapons). I was in a combat group and one guy in our group had a foriegn exchange student who was an award winning fencer from france. As a fencer he thoroghly destroyed me. Though I was catching on. We changed to broadswords and not rapiers. Guess what, I destroyed him as that was my weapon of choice. But not only did I beat him thoroughly but continued to do so for hours. He tried fighting other people in our group with broadswords. He couldnt beat even our newest recruit (several weeks of practice). He just couldnt grasp the ability to use the broadsword. And I find that more common then not, I see people struggling with one weapon then getting almost completely flustered when trying to move to a new weapon. |
|
|
|
|
Jun 21 2006, 11:08 PM
Post
#60
|
|
|
Great Dragon Group: Members Posts: 5,430 Joined: 10-January 05 From: Fort Worth, Texas Member No.: 6,957 |
In Savage Worlds (at least the test drive rules) he'd just be one die lower when using a radically different weapon. If he never spent the points on specializing in fencing he'd have the exact same skill.
I'm not saying Savage Worlds is a horrible system. I've got no experience beyond reading far enough into the test drive rules to realize I don't like the way something as basic as combat is oversimplified. But I will say that it is indeed overly simplified and that if it's greatness is demonstrated in it's popularity then it is barely a pale shadow to the awe inspiring uberness that is the wildly popular d20 system. |
|
|
|
|
Jun 22 2006, 01:56 PM
Post
#61
|
|||
|
Running Target Group: Members Posts: 1,095 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Ontari-airee-o Member No.: 1,115 |
So you have an edged weapons skill of 5, and he has a specialization in foil of 8. his edged weapon skill might be 2 ... for everything not foil, or an incometance. What's the big deal? Just because 1 person was so specilized that he could not switch strategies doesn't mean everyone is a boob Maybe he didn't have the strenght to weild it properly. I will give another example. badminton and squash. two raquet sports, with some cross over. but the swings are different and the strategy is a little differnt as well. Each player specialized will destroy the other in their sports, but both will in general destroy the average player because of their control and various strategies that will still apply. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Jun 22 2006, 02:18 PM
Post
#62
|
|||
|
Immortal Elf Group: Members Posts: 11,410 Joined: 1-October 03 From: Pittsburgh Member No.: 5,670 |
actually, that's not really true. i'm not going to say that the way SW handles weapon proficiency is super-realistic, but it's as realistic as, say SR (3 or 4). it simply emphasizes different aspects of reality. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Jun 22 2006, 02:22 PM
Post
#63
|
|
|
Great Dragon Group: Members Posts: 5,430 Joined: 10-January 05 From: Fort Worth, Texas Member No.: 6,957 |
Platinum, you're absolutely right. But the discussion is about Savage Worlds. Savage Worlds has no "Edged Weapons." It has "fighting." If you have a skill of 8 with a foil it's because you have a skill of at least 6 in every melee weapon known to man, and possibly every melee weapon not known to man. If you don't have "Trademark Weapon (Foil)" then your skill with a foil is exactly identical to your skill with a broadsword, club, nunchuku, kung-fu, Muy Thai, Tai Bo, Jiujitsu, and kusari-gama.
|
|
|
|
|
Jun 22 2006, 02:29 PM
Post
#64
|
|||||
|
Great Dragon Group: Members Posts: 5,430 Joined: 10-January 05 From: Fort Worth, Texas Member No.: 6,957 |
Lumping every melee attack under the same skill is incredibly unrealistic. I'm not saying that SR3 or SR4 are hyper-realistic, but they are more realistic in that they seperate weapon skills into similar weapon groups. If you feel that having the same level of knowledge about all combat types simultaneously emphasizes an aspect of reality, then you may want to do a little research. Or perhaps you're just not explaining yourself well or I'm not comprehending well. A game's realism level is often tied directly to it's complexity. The more realism in the rules desired the more complexity required. Savage Worlds, from what I have seen, is an incredibly simple game. This isn't a bad thing, but it does mean that realism suffers in comparison to most other games with a higher complexity level. Savage Worlds (simple) is less realistic than Shadowrun (moderately complex), which is less realistic then Rolemaster (complex), which is one of the more realistic games I've played but is certainly not a mirror of reality. I'm sure there are systems wout there that are both more realistic and complex than Rolemaster. |
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
Jun 22 2006, 02:30 PM
Post
#65
|
|||||
|
Immortal Elf Group: Members Posts: 11,410 Joined: 1-October 03 From: Pittsburgh Member No.: 5,670 |
that's only partially correct. having a fightin' skill of 6 does not give you 6 points in every fighting style known to man. you don't know kung-fu unless you pick kung-fu as opposed to, say, muy thai.
the reason you feel that way is that you're viewing melee skills the way SR treats them--as distinct sets which cannot be combined. SW takes the approach that if you know fightin' 6, you have a 6 skill in hurting things, no matter what you've got in your hands. which, like i said, is not unrealistic. if you know how to hurt things, you know how to hurt things. you're not going to turn into Bruce Lee if you find yourself wielding a pair of nunchaku; you won't be able to, say, knock a cigarette out of someone's mouth without hitting them. you'll be able to swing the numbchucks at someone's head, though, and have a reasonable chance of denting that head. |
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
Jun 22 2006, 02:39 PM
Post
#66
|
|||||
|
Great Dragon Group: Members Posts: 5,430 Joined: 10-January 05 From: Fort Worth, Texas Member No.: 6,957 |
I don't have anything but the fast start rules, but those combined with Cain's supplied info leads me to believe you're wrong. No matter what you attack someone with in melee combat you use fighting. If you opt to kick someone, despite having been trained as a boxer, then you have exactly the same chance of doing the same damage as a punch. If you elect to use the whip you stole from Indiana Jones your odds of hitting are exactly the same as with a roundhouse punch.
See above. Skill in "hurting things" is not realistic, as least not if you allow that skill to apply to every possible method of dealing pain and/or damage. See the above example of a fencer with a broadsword. See the example of a boxer with a whip. See the example of a firearms guy and a blowgun. These things do not have similar techniques for using them. Your skill in hurting people with them will almost never be identical unless you've taken the time to train in all of them concurrently. You are of course free to have the opinion that it's realistic. In my opinion you're wrong, but I prefer a finer granularity on things, and a bit more realistic (IMO) definition of skillsets. |
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
Jun 22 2006, 02:49 PM
Post
#67
|
|||
|
Immortal Elf Group: Members Posts: 11,410 Joined: 1-October 03 From: Pittsburgh Member No.: 5,670 |
agreed. that, right there, is what SW chooses to ignore. SR, as a counterpoint, chooses to ignore the fact that if you know how to hurt someone with your hands, you've got a much, much better chance of hurting someone with a knife than does a person who doesn't know how to hurt somone with their hands. knowing how to fight with any weapon is as much about know where to strike, how to hold your body, and the simple raw experience of knowing how to take a hit and keep going as it does with the specifics of how to strike--eg, specific weapon techniques. there's a whole body of knowledge involved in fighting that applies no matter what implement you're using. SW chooses to exaggerate this fact; SR, and other systems, chooses to understate it. the realistic approach is, unfortunately, incredibly complex--so much so that i'd say you're better off just falling to one side or the other. but neither side is more realistic than the other. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Jun 22 2006, 02:51 PM
Post
#68
|
|
|
Great Dragon Group: Members Posts: 5,430 Joined: 10-January 05 From: Fort Worth, Texas Member No.: 6,957 |
Which is why I said I'd probably never play a non-house ruled version of Savage Worlds. I feel that SR's choice is more realistic than SW's choice.
I hate the idea of someone being equally skilled with every weapon on the planet. For some folks that idea is palatable. That's cool. I don't demand that everyone agree with me all the time. :) |
|
|
|
|
Jun 22 2006, 02:52 PM
Post
#69
|
|
|
Immortal Elf Group: Members Posts: 11,410 Joined: 1-October 03 From: Pittsburgh Member No.: 5,670 |
i do. SUBMIT!
|
|
|
|
|
Jun 22 2006, 02:54 PM
Post
#70
|
|
|
Great Dragon Group: Members Posts: 5,430 Joined: 10-January 05 From: Fort Worth, Texas Member No.: 6,957 |
You can take away our keyboards, but you'll ne'er take our FREEDOM!
|
|
|
|
|
Jun 22 2006, 03:10 PM
Post
#71
|
|||
|
Manus Celer Dei Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 17,008 Joined: 30-December 02 From: Boston Member No.: 3,802 |
Unarmed combat does not, indeed, default to Edged Weapons. Clubs, Polearms, and (of all things) Chainsaw do. Hm. This started as an argument that SR3's treatment is still more realistic, but I guess that's a hard sell… ~J |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Jun 22 2006, 03:13 PM
Post
#72
|
|||
|
Shooting Target Group: Members Posts: 1,635 Joined: 27-November 05 Member No.: 8,006 |
It has more detail, figity bits as it were, which is indeed widely errantly mistaken for Realism™. 8) |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Jun 22 2006, 03:17 PM
Post
#73
|
|
|
Immortal Elf Group: Members Posts: 11,410 Joined: 1-October 03 From: Pittsburgh Member No.: 5,670 |
what i really hate about the way SR3 handles things is the fact that a badass master of, say, jiujitsu turns into a stumbling moron the moment he tries to use something from the muy thai class he attended last week. that, more than anything, is why i say SW's treatment is just as realistic as SR's. SR4 has at least ameliorated this somewhat, by combining large groups of skills.
|
|
|
|
|
Jun 22 2006, 04:35 PM
Post
#74
|
|||
|
Shooting Target Group: Members Posts: 1,635 Joined: 27-November 05 Member No.: 8,006 |
Having dice pools composed of Attribute+Skill also helps with that. Since related Skills typcially have the same Attributes that Attribute works sort of like a basic general ability that tasks of various related Skills sit on top of. SR3 had it somewhat indirecting in that there was a potential for the Skill to be learned easier. But until you attempted to learn the Skill you didn't get the benefit of the lower karma cost. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Jun 22 2006, 06:02 PM
Post
#75
|
|
|
Running Target Group: Members Posts: 1,095 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Ontari-airee-o Member No.: 1,115 |
SR2 handled it the best... Armed combat for if you have a weapon, unarmed if you don't, and firearms to shoot, gunnery to launch. simplistic and balanced. You didn't have to worry about all of your players taking mystic ninjitsu and having 25 fighting styles and all that jazz. Everyone had 1 fighting style .."unarmed combat" if your dojo fights with weapons, then heck ... take armed combat on top... no 1 style does all.. / bs matchup styles garbage. Simple clean.
You do not have to worry about someone who uses a pistol not knowing a thing about a rifle. |
|
|
|
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 4th February 2025 - 09:00 PM |
Topps, Inc has sole ownership of the names, logo, artwork, marks, photographs, sounds, audio, video and/or any proprietary material used in connection with the game Shadowrun. Topps, Inc has granted permission to the Dumpshock Forums to use such names, logos, artwork, marks and/or any proprietary materials for promotional and informational purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not affiliated with the Dumpshock Forums in any official capacity whatsoever.