Electronic Firing and Personalized Grip don't stack -- why? Options

[Regiment]

Ok... here's one for ya then:

Has anyone come up with an alternate set of what is, or is not, compatible for reducing recoil that makes more sense, yet maintains a semblance of balance?

Or for that matter, an alternate gun mod system?

[Banaticus]

Lots of people have, but do the rest of us agree that the house rules are balanced? (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif) Your mileage may vary.

[Ol' Scratch]

Ok... here's one for ya then:

Has anyone come up with an alternate set of what is, or is not, compatible for reducing recoil that makes more sense, yet maintains a semblance of balance?

It's a matter of opinion, like anything else.

My system is pretty straightforward. Only one recoil compensation system per gun mount; Top, Barrel, Under, Butt/Grip, and Internal (including triggers, firing mechanisms, chamber designs, etc).

Which is all the rules had to say to begin with, since that's pretty much what they say anyway. With the sole exception of Electronic Firing and Personalized Grip, which to this day I don't see why they're specifically limited. Especially since Removed Trigger doesn't impact the benefits of Personalized Grip, which it should if half the arguments in this thread are supposed to make a lick of sense.

[Regiment]

Heh... the one that always confused me the most is that stocks and shockpads are not compatible.

Stock = the wooden (or metal or composite) butt that extends from the trigger area to your shoulder.
Shockpad = the cushy or rubbery piece that is stuck on the end of the stock to make dealing with recoil more comfortable than just with the plain butt of the stock.

so... if they're not compatible, you pick one... so pick shockpad and stick it on your forehead so that when the gun recoils up out of control and hits you in the noggin it doesn't hurt as much?

I mean.. how can these two in particular NOT be compatible?

[Dakka Dakka]

The thing is you can't add an additional stock to Long Arms and Assault Rifles. The already installed stock does not provide recoil compensation. Only SMGs and machine pistols benefit from a stock. If you want additional RC on larger weapons you need a shock pad on the existing stock.

[Deadmannumberone]

Ok... here's one for ya then:

Has anyone come up with an alternate set of what is, or is not, compatible for reducing recoil that makes more sense, yet maintains a semblance of balance?

Or for that matter, an alternate gun mod system?

The issue with that is that RL is not balanced.

[Yerameyahu]

Honestly, I don't know why P. Grip affects RC in the first place. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

[Dakka Dakka]

Probably because the developers thought that an unconditional +1 die would be too powerful.

[Samoth]

Probably because the developers thought that an unconditional +1 die would be too powerful.

that's basically what a personalized grip is, though.

[Dakka Dakka]

By RAW only for melee attacks.

[Regiment]

The thing is you can't add an additional stock to Long Arms and Assault Rifles. The already installed stock does not provide recoil compensation. Only SMGs and machine pistols benefit from a stock. If you want additional RC on larger weapons you need a shock pad on the existing stock.

I don't buy that... I've never interpreted it that way, frankly, I don't see how it can be done. A stock provides recoil compensation. If it comes with one... and it's used... point. If it doesn't come with one, and it's added... point.

A shock pad would work the same on either situation, and the stock would work the same on either situation.

Bleh, just chalk it up to blatant efforts at balance without a single care for making sense; same as electronic firing and personalized grip.

[Yerameyahu]

I think it makes sense. Adding a stock to an non-stocked small weapon (SMG) gives RC, but longarms already have that factored in. They fire bigger bullets. It's not like you lose anything, because you can add a shock pad *instead*.

[Dakka Dakka]

Exactly.

[Samoth]

I think it makes sense. Adding a stock to an non-stocked small weapon (SMG) gives RC, but longarms already have that factored in. They fire bigger bullets. It's not like you lose anything, because you can add a shock pad *instead*.

What if you add a stock and a shock pad to an SMG with no stock, why should you only get 1 point of RC?

Additionally, why do some rifles/ARs come with a "stock" stock yet get no RC benefits from it?

[Caadium]

What if you add a stock and a shock pad to an SMG with no stock, why should you only get 1 point of RC?

Additionally, why do some rifles/ARs come with a "stock" stock yet get no RC benefits from it?

Because firing a rifle without a stock can be very dificult. The stock it comes it does benefit it, it lets you fire it without negatives. Part of the nature of rifles really.

Vehicles come with stock tires, but people don't ask how come you don't get a benefit from them. That's because without tires, you can't drive. There are times when things are there to make it work right, not to give extra benefits.

[Yerameyahu]

AFAIK, you *can't* add a stock and shock pad to an SMG. SMG gets stock, longarms (/assault rifles) get shock pads. Done.

If you're just dying for fluff, let's say that shock pads are for the bigger individual shocks of rifle bullets, so SMGs wouldn't benefit. Whatever you like.

[Dakka Dakka]

Correct.

[Samoth]

Because firing a rifle without a stock can be very dificult. The stock it comes it does benefit it, it lets you fire it without negatives. Part of the nature of rifles really.

Vehicles come with stock tires, but people don't ask how come you don't get a benefit from them. That's because without tires, you can't drive. There are times when things are there to make it work right, not to give extra benefits.

Thanks, that's a good analogy.