GURPS Tactical Shooting

[Kalzazz]

I'm one of those people who (mostly) run screaming in the opposite direction whenever the shadow of realism darkens my RPGing, however I do always love new gear and options and such

Would there likely be enough stuff in TS that Id want to get it anyway?

[Crakkerjakk]

Mrgh, just got to Precision Aiming. Total max bonus is lower of weapon Acc or scope bonus? Really? First of all, why is a scope one of several things you can pick from to be able to use the precision aiming if the technique doesn't do anything without one? Secondly, I can tell you right now that I wouldn't be hitting 95% hit percentages at 500 yards with my iron sights on my M16A2 if I was firing every three seconds, and I'm guessing that this is the case for the vast majority of jarheads. But according to GURPS I have the exact same bonus with that weapon despite doing something that looks an awful lot like precision aiming for 10-20 seconds.

House-rule I'll be using in my games is that you don't have a scope, you can get a bonus of half your Acc (round down) from Precision Aiming.

[Crakkerjakk]

Originally Posted by Kalzazz

I'm one of those people who (mostly) run screaming in the opposite direction whenever the shadow of realism darkens my RPGing, however I do always love new gear and options and such

Would there likely be enough stuff in TS that Id want to get it anyway?

Pages 53-80 are all gear, loadouts, gear mod options, etc.

[Dinadon]

Originally Posted by Crakkerjakk

Mrgh, just got to Precision Aiming. Total max bonus is lower of weapon Acc or scope bonus? Really?

Yes, since High Tech when it first appeared.

[sir_pudding]

Originally Posted by Dinadon

Yes, since High Tech when it first appeared.

Yeah and it's been a problem since then. It didn't make sense then, and it still doesn't.

[Mailanka]

Originally Posted by Kalzazz

I'm one of those people who (mostly) run screaming in the opposite direction whenever the shadow of realism darkens my RPGing, however I do always love new gear and options and such

Would there likely be enough stuff in TS that Id want to get it anyway?

I'm a huge fan of cinematic stuff too, but to me, knowing how things work helps keep them cinematic. For example, the discussion of "how not to die" is very handy, and using the more realistic options for everyone who DOESN'T have gunslinger makes the gunslinger feel awesome. And, in general, I think the advice is overall useful. For example, in a military game, cinematic or otherwise, suppressive fire should have an effect on moral, keeping people pinned not because "There's a marginal chance I'll be hit" but because "OHCRAPTHAT'SALOTOFLEAD!" Likewise, the discussion of lighting conditions are very useful, and the sidebar about gun skill will actually give you a solid idea of what skill levels your mooks should have (and help KEEP THAT DOWN). After all, Guns (Pistol) 18-20 should feel amazing, and I think with tactical shooting, it will.

To me, this is less about "realistic" shooting, and more a Big Book On How Shooting Works. You get this to understand the nitty, gritty details on gunplay, and then you get gun-fu to make it awesome. The only reason I wouldn't use this is if I had a group that just didn't care about the details of gunplay.

[Icelander]

Originally Posted by Dinadon

Yes, since High Tech when it first appeared.

Yes, but this received complaints during the playtest and we wanted that changed.

Several real life shooters commented that they were trained to use Precision Aiming with iron sights and historical enthusiasts pointed out that what sound a lot like Precision Aiming is attested in multiple sources before magnifying optics became widely available.

So it made little sense to say that you absolutely couldn't do it without a scope. Granted, it may be more difficult without one, but that is not the same as saying that it is impossible.

[Crakkerjakk]

Originally Posted by sir_pudding

Yeah and it's been a problem since then. It didn't make sense then, and it still doesn't.

I know that this came up during the PT. Were all the proposed solutions just deemed too fiddly or wordy?

[sir_pudding]

Originally Posted by Crakkerjakk

I know that this came up during the PT. Were all the proposed solutions just deemed too fiddly or wordy?

I liked allowing up to half ACC for iron sights. How is that too fiddly? I suppose "or half base ACC without a scope" might have exceeded the word count.

[Icelander]

Originally Posted by sir_pudding

I liked allowing up to half ACC for iron sights. How is that too fiddly? I suppose "or half base ACC without a scope" might have exceeded the word count.

It creates odd edge cases where it is worse to have a scope with a magnification anywhere below 8x than to use just the iron sights of a precision rifle.

That would require a few other words of verbiage to resolve and call for some fancy wording.

Not that I wouldn't have liked it included. But I'm still giddy with happiness that what seems like every other suggestion we made is there in the final text. This is truly the best GURPS book I have seen and the ways in which it will enhance any game using realistic gameplay are literally legion.