The expendables question and aiming clarification

[Mailanka]

Originally Posted by General Lee

[The reason that I ask if fast-firing could be combined with quick-shot is because a player want to make a counter-terrorism agent good with a pistol, but don't want to use a cinematical setting, so gunslinger is not a option here.

He want to spend a lot of points just in pistol and techniques, as CQB (pistol), TA/Skull (pistol), fast-firing (pistol) and quick-shot (pistol).

He argue that modern terrorists, modern urban terrorist, neverthless, use body-armor. So, he rationalize this out: shoot at head and neutralize the hostile. And, he want to do it fast.

I think your problem here is that he really wants to play a cinematic character, and you want this to be a realistic setting. First, it's kinda questionable to put that many points into those techniques. He might well be better off simply putting the same number of points into Guns (though TA "combines" with the others, so it might work out well in his favor). Second, I find it unlikely that modern terrorists will wear body armor. Most do not (And if they do, one does not Fast-Fire-Quick-Shot at their head. One brings AP bullets). Finally, no real counter-terrorist operative is going to focus so exclusively on pistols. He'll likely have an array of techniques, including SMG and Rifle, and numerous side-skills, like Interrogation, Tactics, Forced Entry, Stealth, Diplomacy (for negotiating), Throwing (grenades), Judo or Wrestling (for grapples, throws and take-downs) and so on. To put it another way, real counter-terrorist agents never go in with just pistols unless they have to, and they certainly wouldn't use techniques like Fast-Firing and Quick-Shot.

I think they certainly can be combined, but it's not really practical to do so on the point values he has access to. To really play the kind of guy who can leap into a room, firing off 6 shots from one gun in one second at two different guys and hitting them all in the head is not the sort of thing realistic characters can pull off.

I suggest either increasing the game to something more cinematic, to allow him to enjoy his vision, or to talk him down from his current concept, as there's a disconnect going on.

[sir_pudding]

I think I'm safe in saying that there was a good deal about Failure Drills in the Tactical Shooting playtest.

[Icelander]

Originally Posted by Mailanka

To put it another way, real counter-terrorist agents never go in with just pistols unless they have to, and they certainly wouldn't use techniques like Fast-Firing and Quick-Shot.

British Keenie Meenie operators did go in with just pistols and did train in and use Fast-Firing and Quick-Shot.

There are also Israeli counter-terror operators who go into Arab-controlled areas wearing street clothing. Many of them are armed only with pistols.

It's a speciality niche, yes, but it does exist. And real spec-ops people have demonstrated the ability to deliver rapid aimed fire at areas smaller than the human brain out to long pistol range.

FWIW, the skill scores given in the example seem reasonable for a realistic counter-terror operative who can actually carry out the faster failures drills as they are trained. He might even need a Guns (Pistol) score of 1-2 higher to replicate some real feats.

[General Lee]

Originally Posted by Mailanka

I think your problem here is that he really wants to play a cinematic character, and you want this to be a realistic setting. First, it's kinda questionable to put that many points into those techniques. He might well be better off simply putting the same number of points into Guns (though TA "combines" with the others, so it might work out well in his favor). Second, I find it unlikely that modern terrorists will wear body armor. Most do not (And if they do, one does not Fast-Fire-Quick-Shot at their head. One brings AP bullets). Finally, no real counter-terrorist operative is going to focus so exclusively on pistols. He'll likely have an array of techniques, including SMG and Rifle, and numerous side-skills, like Interrogation, Tactics, Forced Entry, Stealth, Diplomacy (for negotiating), Throwing (grenades), Judo or Wrestling (for grapples, throws and take-downs) and so on. To put it another way, real counter-terrorist agents never go in with just pistols unless they have to, and they certainly wouldn't use techniques like Fast-Firing and Quick-Shot.

I think they certainly can be combined, but it's not really practical to do so on the point values he has access to. To really play the kind of guy who can leap into a room, firing off 6 shots from one gun in one second at two different guys and hitting them all in the head is not the sort of thing realistic characters can pull off.

I suggest either increasing the game to something more cinematic, to allow him to enjoy his vision, or to talk him down from his current concept, as there's a disconnect going on.

I considered that and I'm talking with the others players and gauging their feelings about upgrade this game and play freely with Gun Fu.

But I don't see a way to combine quick-shot and fast-firing. I thought that it could at begining, but I and and other player that is GM, too, decided to test a hypotesis that in simple lines is what I post here. One cannot comtempt the Rcl factor.

Fast-firing, IIRC, was designed to allow characters get the benefit of +1 rapid fire bonus at one target. He also could make more shots, that would allow him to make use of supression fire, with a cost of increased Rcl. So, IMHO fast-firing has to be thinked as one action, and consequently one dice roll, or one attack.

To target two opponents with one attack, one make use of spraying fire (which cannot be executed with fast-firing) or supression fire one area with two opponents as valid targets.
If I get it right, RoF6 is the maximum that a character with pistol without any trait that allow him to have better reflexes - as ATR, ETS, Extra Attack etc. - could fire in one turn. And it's one attack.

Quick-shot, in turn, is other exception that allow a character to shoot at more than one target, at a penalty, in one turn. I just don't see how in a realistic campaign, you could envisage such combination.

In a cinematic campaign it's another history, you simply could have the result of such combination with other means - traits.

And this agent have much more to offer than just a good pistol-guy, he was beeing made under a Special Force template.

Also, using AP with civilians around is not a good idea, because you could have overpenetrations and stray bullets. The basic idea is to use hollow-points, one way to balance a session is to make the goons harder to hit, using body-armors, but it is irrelevant...

Thanks anyway.

[Mailanka]

Originally Posted by General Lee

Quick-shot, in turn, is other exception that allow a character to shoot at more than one target, at a penalty, in one turn. I just don't see how in a realistic campaign, you could envisage such combination.

1-2-3, 1-2-3, all in one second. There are people who can fire and aim that fast, realistically, though they tend to be target shooters and under controlled conditions, rather than in a wild battlefield. Still, it does not strain believability overly much.

(I still stand by my argument that there are better ways to build a realistic counter-terrorist than as a gunslinger, though).

Also, using AP with civilians around is not a good idea, because you could have overpenetrations and stray bullets. The basic idea is to use hollow-points, one way to balance a session is to make the goons harder to hit, using body-armors, but it is irrelevant...

Unless you're firing frangible rounds, collateral damage is always going to be an issue. Even so, I don't think pistol AP rounds are going to be a serious issue when it comes to over penetration. According to the book, against an unarmored target, you have to do more (basic) damage than their HP to even have a chance at hurting someone down-range. Most pistols do 2d, 2d+2 damage, which isn't going to go down range all that often (slightly less than 50% of the time). Against armored targets, you have to penetrate their DR twice to overpenetrate, which is exceedingly unlikely at the damage levels you tend to see with pistols. AP bullets tend to be pi-, which means that even if they do go "down range," they'll leave a rather minimal hole in the target. Just looking at the rules, I doubt you'd expect to see much overpenetration in a pistol fight. You need assault rifles and high powered sniper rifles before that becomes a serious issue.

No, your real problem is missing. And loading hollow-points won't protect the unarmored civilian you just accidentally hit.

[General Lee]

Originally Posted by Mailanka

1-2-3, 1-2-3, all in one second. There are people who can fire and aim that fast, realistically, though they tend to be target shooters and under controlled conditions, rather than in a wild battlefield. Still, it does not strain believability overly much.

It could be realistically represented by Extra Attack 1, two separate attacks, with correspondent full RoF at each, even in a combat. I actually, adviced this player to buy that if he make some sacrifices in other sectors of his character.

Originally Posted by Mailanka

(I still stand by my argument that there are better ways to build a realistic counter-terrorist than as a gunslinger, though).

I also agree with you. But I think that my player is a litle bit addicted in FPS games and Tom Clancy's books, like Rainbow Six.

Originally Posted by Mailanka

Unless you're firing frangible rounds, collateral damage is always going to be an issue. Even so, I don't think pistol AP rounds are going to be a serious issue when it comes to over penetration. According to the book, against an unarmored target, you have to do more (basic) damage than their HP to even have a chance at hurting someone down-range. Most pistols do 2d, 2d+2 damage, which isn't going to go down range all that often (slightly less than 50% of the time). Against armored targets, you have to penetrate their DR twice to overpenetrate, which is exceedingly unlikely at the damage levels you tend to see with pistols. AP bullets tend to be pi-, which means that even if they do go "down range," they'll leave a rather minimal hole in the target. Just looking at the rules, I doubt you'd expect to see much overpenetration in a pistol fight. You need assault rifles and high powered sniper rifles before that becomes a serious issue.

No, your real problem is missing. And loading hollow-points won't protect the unarmored civilian you just accidentally hit.

Missing is always a problem. Yeah, you have a good point. A Hollow-point round is worst in a unnarmed target than a AP round. But I'm still think that in this case he must shoot to kill his targets, if he don't want to jeopardize the life of innocents in the middle of a long firefight, so focusing his attacks in vitals and skull.