 To build a Green Beret..., No, not the silly hat... |
  |
 Jan 11 2008, 01:00 PM
Post
#76
|
|||||
|
Awakened Asset  Group: Members Posts: 4,464 Joined: 9-April 05 From: AGS, North German League Member No.: 7,309  |
I think everyone knows that. What astn writes questions if that is right. I think while most 5´s are encountered in some kind of special forces group, the opposite is not true. Not just any SF operator has firearms 5. |
||||
 |
 
|
||||
|
Jan 11 2008, 02:26 PM
Post
#77
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Running Target Group: Members Posts: 1,109 Joined: 16-October 03 From: Raleigh, NC Member No.: 5,729 |
That happens. Mostly because of Hollywood and Television. In general, if you haven't served, or don't have a distinct interest in knowing what SF is all about, you probably won't know the difference. Part of my goal in starting this thread is to see what the Dumpshock community thinks Army SF is all about, and maybe deepen everyone's understanding by sharing what I know.
Specialoperations.com is a good resource, and I've used it myself MANY times.
Indeed. And this thread has at least touched on, if not covered that. In fact, something I think that most of the posters might have missed is that I asked for a write up of an Army SF shooter...basically a weapons sgt, though I didn't use that term. Most of the characters posted to this thread read more like generic operators than 18Bs.
Right. We actually covered that in this thread a few times:
I'm not trying to be an ass, just want to make sure you didn't miss anything in your initial read-through of this thread. :-)
Now THAT is really good info that I neglected to post. Thanks for putting it out there.
Yeah, we covered that too:
Again, I'm not trying to be an ass. Just trying to be helpful.
Absolutely. Again, I blame Hollywood, TV, and Video Games for this misconception.
I try to ignore the 18X stuff because it goes against one of the basic premises of Army SF...ODAs are supposed to be composed of EXPERIENCED soldiers. That means several years of being on duty and doing missions. 18X people, though they go through all the schools and training that other SF operators do, are NOT experienced. Personally, I think that makes them a liability.
"Not that hard" for whom? It wasn't that hard for me, but the fact that of all of my company's dismount infantryman (48 guys), only about 3 of us routinely shot Expert. The company's 1st. Sgt, and 3 of the Platoon Sgts. would frequently shoot expert, but that was about it. The rest of the dismounts, and the mounted crews would generally only shoot Marksman, with a handful shooting Sharpshooter. Out of the roughly 120 men in my company, usually only about 6 would shoot expert on the qualification range. For the general Infantry soldier...yes, I would say that shooting Expert at the qual range is not easy, or even common.
SR doesn't really have the granularity to properly represent stuff like this, but if I had to, I would put people who shoot Marksman at maybe 2, and people who shoot Expert at 3. And SF operators need to shoot better than that. And even if they can pass Selection with only a skill of 3, it will be a least a 4 by the time they get out.
That is RIGHT on target. A lot of people tend to think of SF more like SWAT or just Hostage Rescue/Entry teams. But these guys are a lot more complex than just "room-clearers".
Agreed.
Fixed that for you. 8-)
I dunno...it's lots of fun for me. And I'll bet it's good fun for most of the people posting in this thread. The problem is in getting it right. :-) |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Jan 11 2008, 02:34 PM
Post
#78
|
|||||||
|
Running Target Group: Members Posts: 1,109 Joined: 16-October 03 From: Raleigh, NC Member No.: 5,729 |
Right. Personally, I feel like the breakdown would be more like this: Jr. Level SF Operator (Non Wps Sgt) -Automatics 4 -Long Arms 2 -Pistols 3 Sr. Level SF Operator (Non Wps Sgt) -Automatics 5 -Long Arms 3 -Pistols 4 Wps Sgts would probably look more like this: Jr Wps Sgt: -Automatics 4 (Assault Rifle +2) -Long Arms 4 (Sniper Rifles +2) -Pistols 4 St. Wps Sgt: -Automatics 5 (Assault Rifle +2) -Long Arms 5 (Sniper Rifles +2) -Pistols 5 |
||||||
|
|
|
||||||
|
Jan 11 2008, 02:40 PM
Post
#79
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 944 Joined: 19-February 03 Member No.: 4,128 |
When you compare firing range performance to SR4 skill rankings, remember that shooting 40/40 at the range is a whole different animal from shooting 40/40 with a Taliban platoon coming up the hill at you.
It's a lot easier to hit that 200m target when you know that target will not shoot back at you if you miss. GURPS handles this by assuming that the stats on your character sheet assume use under dangerous circumstances. Doing the same thing in a safe environment gives a hefty bonus. |
|
|
|
|
Jan 11 2008, 02:50 PM
Post
#80
|
|||
|
Running Target Group: Members Posts: 1,109 Joined: 16-October 03 From: Raleigh, NC Member No.: 5,729 |
You know, that's VERY true. Unfortunately, SR rules don't really have the mechanics to represent that. I would love to see some rules that would add that bit of flavor, but not totally break the rest of the game. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Jan 11 2008, 03:28 PM
Post
#81
|
|
|
Awakened Asset Group: Members Posts: 4,464 Joined: 9-April 05 From: AGS, North German League Member No.: 7,309 |
Composure Test against a threshold determined by the GM, lacking successes translate into a negative DP mod for all offensive actions?
|
|
|
|
|
Jan 11 2008, 04:13 PM
Post
#82
|
|||
|
Running Target Group: Members Posts: 1,109 Joined: 16-October 03 From: Raleigh, NC Member No.: 5,729 |
Possibly...or a flat offensive dice-pool penalty that can be offset by hits on a composure test. Keep in mind that a WIL 2, CHA 2 joe on the street will still average at least one hit on that test. You could even have a positive quality that grants extra dice on composure tests, or maybe even negates having to make them when taking incoming fire. It sounds good on paper, but it looks like it will add a bunch of dice rolling at the beginning of combat on both sides. And if the GM isn't making composure rolls for the badguys, he is seriously stiffing his players. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Jan 11 2008, 04:22 PM
Post
#83
|
|||||
|
Great Dragon Group: Members Posts: 5,537 Joined: 27-August 06 From: Albuquerque NM Member No.: 9,234 |
And, as far as I can tell, nobody who writes SR has any clue about statistics, firearms or computer networking. Many things don't actually work like their rules. |
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
Jan 11 2008, 05:11 PM
Post
#84
|
|||
|
Immoral Elf Group: Members Posts: 15,247 Joined: 29-March 02 From: Grimy Pete's Bar & Laundromat Member No.: 2,486 |
Or, if as in GURPS, you assume that the actual skill rating applies to combat situations, you could just give a flat +2 Dice Pool modifier when used in a calm, non-threatening situation. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Jan 11 2008, 05:18 PM
Post
#85
|
|||||
|
Running Target Group: Members Posts: 1,109 Joined: 16-October 03 From: Raleigh, NC Member No.: 5,729 |
Do you think a +2 mod is substantial enough to reflect the difference? |
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
Jan 11 2008, 05:26 PM
Post
#86
|
|
|
Immoral Elf Group: Members Posts: 15,247 Joined: 29-March 02 From: Grimy Pete's Bar & Laundromat Member No.: 2,486 |
To be honest, I don't think this kind of thing is needed at all.
That being said, yes, I think that it is a substantial enough bonus to make a difference when you consider normal sized dice pools. And when abnormally large dice pools are involved, then the difference is not as dramatic, which kind of adequately reflects that person's ease in combat situations, as there would be less of a difference between the two 'environments' with the hard core types. |
|
|
|
|
Jan 11 2008, 05:36 PM
Post
#87
|
|||
|
Great Dragon Group: Members Posts: 6,640 Joined: 6-June 04 Member No.: 6,383 |
One thing I hope to do hopefully not too far in the future is figure out a way to implement a suppressive fire mechanic where a person may be suppressed. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Jan 11 2008, 06:02 PM
Post
#88
|
|||||
|
Running Target Group: Members Posts: 1,109 Joined: 16-October 03 From: Raleigh, NC Member No.: 5,729 |
I would love to see really good and accurate Suppressive Fire rules. Let me know if I can be of any assistance in your work. |
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
Jan 11 2008, 11:06 PM
Post
#89
|
|||||||
|
Running Target Group: Members Posts: 1,210 Joined: 5-September 05 From: Texas Member No.: 7,685 |
That's very true and I would like to see a rule that worked well. Just to keep the game going it is usually better for a GM with a typical team to not try to raise the bridges, but to lower the river. First the GM needs to remember the "Being shot at" gut check for non harden combat veterans (like most Shadowrunners and true military as oppose to most Corporate Security). Also you can assume a bonus when target shooting (Targets not shooting back, not getting the shakes before hand, and so on) I will say that when they (the writers) give a shooter special forces (SAS, Red Samurai's, Ghosts, Seals, Delta Force, and so on) team member a 5 with fire arms, isn't it more likely a 3 with a specialization? Also as noted before Green Berets are generalists. Also FASA made the point a while back that with virtual reality combat simulators you can take a bunch of goons and get them competent with firearms and at last familiar with basic tactics really fast because they can run them through almost any simulation they want again and again with almost off the shelf gear. They think they are playing a game, but they are really learning what will get you killed the fastest. Who cares if they are using 20 year old Army training sims or the latest first person shooter. I remember a convention about 10 years ago where a marine was commenting on how the teenagers at the convention we were gaming with had such good firefight tactics just by playing team video games. This is of course their explanation why Alamos 20000 and all the other terrorist can come up with the horde of shooters that can at least threaten a Shadowrun team. Flip that around and I bet with the best combat simulators available the special forces in 2050 can pull off at least one or two skills level of five with specializations before you add in cyberware. I mean from the game mechanic viewpoint, they need to be a serious threat to the runners. Plus these guys don't have to pay for their toys, the ammo, or the cutting edge cyberware they are packing plus they certainly don't have to be out on the streets trying to do enough Biz to make the rent and pay off their loanshark. |
||||||
|
|
|
||||||
|
Jan 11 2008, 11:15 PM
Post
#90
|
|
|
Runner Group: Members Posts: 2,883 Joined: 16-December 06 Member No.: 10,386 |
That is discounting the fact that a lot of Shadowrunners are going to be former company men or special forces types themselves. A straight shadowrunner to special forces comparison is going to be very hard because it makes a lot of assumptions about the characters and power level involved in the game. An 8 or 9 dicepool before any other considerations are taken into account for a generalist Special ops guy is plenty good enough to threaten a shadowrunner. Granted, it may not be enough to take down one on one a tuned and tweaked Samurai, but tuned and tweaked Samurai shouldn't be considered that terribly common either, since we're usually talking about someone who again, IS former special forces, the company man equivalent, or at the very least someone who managed to claw their way up out of the urban jungle despite all odds and become one of the top predators in the whole sprawl. And your average chargen street samurai would STILL likely have far less versatility than the special ops guy, even if he did have a slight advantage in a stand up fight.
|
|
|
|
|
Jan 12 2008, 03:16 AM
Post
#91
|
|||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 640 Joined: 8-October 07 Member No.: 13,611 |
The boot camps they run in the western UCAS/CAS, Cal and the Anglo rezes probably play some role as well. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Jan 12 2008, 06:39 AM
Post
#92
|
|||||||||||||||||
|
Target Group: Members Posts: 7 Joined: 21-July 07 Member No.: 12,323 |
I did miss a few of those posts, TheOneRonin. Thank you. A few notes on of them you quoted.
GWoT has messed a lot of this up. There are more missions then troops for a lot of this right now, so while each group (properly abbreviated "SFG(A)") still maintains it's geographic specialty, you see a lot of guys pulled for tours in Iraq or Afghanistan from the other groups. Commo guys and medics have always been short, even pre-war(s), so anytime they want to go (and more then often when they don't want to) they can probably get a deployment. The SF language courses are actually pretty sub-par now that they're run out of Bragg. Most of the instructors are contract staff and all they care about is keeping their jobs. Most of the troops don't really want to do anything other then pass the DPLT with the minimum score anyway, so that's what they do--and forget it pretty quickly afterwards. That's not to say that language proficiency isn't valued, but just as often as not you'll get an interpreter anyway. The old courses out of Monterey, of course, were rockin', and anyone who's been to DLI should know their shit.
This isn't the first time in history we've had an 18X-type program, and both in the current and past eras SF-babies have proven their worth. Selection and qualification tends to cull out the undesirables, and then some times with a team will take off the rough edges. While some regular army time is considered desirable, and the theory is that you want troops who've already led regular troops, the quality of individual units ranges from high speed to truly awful, even among infantry units, much less with the REMFs, so in my opinion you can often spend more time breaking bad habits from a good troop then just teaching them to do it right the first time. It's all an opinion, and I've heard it both ways.
Yeah, but what do you expect of a bunch of legs? :) The Army's marksmanship program is horrible, and needs a lot of improvement. I recognize what you're saying regarding to anecdotal evidence (hell, I'm sure even statistics will back you up) but that is a function more of a lack of training rather then the difficulty of pop up targets on a range. I never shot less then Expert, myself, and I've been in platoons/companies with 70% expert and noone shooting less then marksman. I know some of them "cheated" ('cuz you can shoot the ground in front of the target, effectively doubling the size of the target) but I don't think the Army qualification really validates the shooting skills of the average soldier or even infantryman.
I can understand what you're saying, and would agree that those numbers sound about right. I just don't think 5s, 6s, or 7s are really that terribly common. 18B put a lot of range time in, and can see a lot of killer advanced training in their career (SOTIC comes to mind), so they could potentially be on the high-side, but SF just isn't as gun oriented as an organization like the Rangers or SEALs.
I wasn't trying to say "don't do it", it's a free world, so whatever makes anyone happy as long as it doesn't affect my bottom line is cool. :) I just think that almost anything can be considered "Special Forces" within very basic guidelines, especially with the wide variety of skills and backgrounds. The most important part is the background. Lastly, someone said that they figured all SF would have very high edge (I think "Mr. Lucky" was the term that was used.) A lot of guys would probably be offended by that, but frankly in a SR game (and iRL) I'll take statistically reliable luck (edge) over skill any day. :) |
||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||
|
Jan 12 2008, 01:50 PM
Post
#93
|
|||
|
Hoppelhäschen 5000 Group: Members Posts: 5,807 Joined: 3-January 04 Member No.: 5,951 |
Indeed, some have 6. Just the idea 'SFO with less competence than a regular grunt' doesn't fly. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Jan 12 2008, 02:40 PM
Post
#94
|
|||||
|
Shadow Cartographer Group: Members Posts: 3,737 Joined: 2-June 06 From: Secret Tunnels under the UK (South West) Member No.: 8,636 |
"Military Grunt" is the exact phrasing used to describe Firearms rating 3 on the skills table. |
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
Jan 12 2008, 02:57 PM
Post
#95
|
|||
|
Hoppelhäschen 5000 Group: Members Posts: 5,807 Joined: 3-January 04 Member No.: 5,951 |
Indeed - Which rules out Level 2 completly. That still doesn't make a SFO with 3 or 4 more than a bottom feeder - he's only as good as an average soldier or marine. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Jan 12 2008, 05:26 PM
Post
#96
|
|||||
|
Shadow Cartographer Group: Members Posts: 3,737 Joined: 2-June 06 From: Secret Tunnels under the UK (South West) Member No.: 8,636 |
Uh, no. Someone with 4 in firearms is better than the average soldier who has 3. That's what 4 means according to the skill chart. And I would think that the biggest difference between the average special forces soldier and the average non-special forces soldier is perhaps the level of independent and creative thinking, the greater range of other skills, e.g. survival, communications and some degree of physical fitness also. Willingness to carry out more dubious tasks as well, probably. In your game, then by all means liberally scatter 6 ratings amongst the unnamed opposition, but you don't really leave yourself anywhere to go after that. |
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
Jan 12 2008, 05:53 PM
Post
#97
|
|||||||
|
Hoppelhäschen 5000 Group: Members Posts: 5,807 Joined: 3-January 04 Member No.: 5,951 |
Sorry for not making my point clear: The normal soldier has 3, the normal marine has 4, the normal specop has 5. A specop with 4 is only as good as a marine, a specop with 3 only as good as a soldier... and sub-par to the normal specop.
I don't tend to 'liberally scatter' Tir Ghosts and the like around, thank you very much. ;) |
||||||
|
|
|
||||||
|
Jan 12 2008, 09:13 PM
Post
#98
|
|
|
Running Target Group: Members Posts: 1,408 Joined: 31-January 04 From: Reston VA, USA Member No.: 6,046 |
Everybody seems to have different ideas about what skill levels mean, and what the typical skill levels of soldiers are, especially with firearms. My interpretation of relative skill levels is:
|
|
|
|
|
Jan 12 2008, 10:07 PM
Post
#99
|
|||
|
Freelance Elf Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 7,324 Joined: 30-September 04 From: Texas Member No.: 6,714 |
Since when does that matter? :D |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Jan 12 2008, 11:01 PM
Post
#100
|
|||
|
Hoppelhäschen 5000 Group: Members Posts: 5,807 Joined: 3-January 04 Member No.: 5,951 |
So 'Qualified Marksman' means 'Trainee in police academy or military boot camp' and every 'Regular beat cop or military grunt' is a 'Qualified Sharpshooter'? Because that is the official list:
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 13th November 2025 - 02:27 AM |
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.