mhd

Re: Ranged weapon reload times

Yeah, fantasy is generally all over the place, I can't count the number of setting that had Vikings alongside Renaissance knights and fencers… Although weird things do happen. If I recall correctly, slings were used up to the Romans, then not at all for quite a while, and suddenly emerged in the 30 years' war again. This only gets worse once you add tribal societes and/or races into the mix…

In my specific case, crossbows certainly will be there. Steam-/Clockwork-Punk has a penchant for everything mechanical, and that includes crossbows. But there's little need of detailed reloading rules for those, as (in my experience) they tend to fall into two extreme categories: Big Friggin' Crossbows (BFX) and "surprise a la sleeve", i.e. tricky hidden devices. The latter tend to have a very low damage, basically in the knife/shuriken range, easily reloaded, and you can just handwave the BFX's to be reloaded outside of combat (or "roughly a minute" for really long engagements). If I ever need to have a detailed Min/Max STR + reload time breakdown for everything needed for a medieval siege engagement, I'll get the "Deadly Spring" article from Pyramid magazine. And a bottle of scotch.

And you're right, considering the firing rate of the Dreyse and Chassepot, it seems that adding too much time won't be fair. It looks like it should be possible to fire it every phase, although I'd probably say that's with a Fast Draw roll (giving a 5-10 rounds/minute rate of fire for your SPD 2 normal).

Re: Ranged weapon reload times

The general basis should be, that the longer the reload the higher the damage (after armor).

Crossbows were slow and had a shorter range, but they had two advantages: Easier to train people, better at damaging armored foes.

 

Same goes for firearms, they packed so much punch that they almost ignored armor (or at least reduced the effectiveness under the point where it was feasible to equipt your army with it).

That's a rather simplified view of history, never mind that it really doesn't help a lot (unless one would create a generalized dmg die == phases rule similar to the fixed PD/weight ratio of fantasy armor…).

I'm not too hung up about the realism. I think in the end it's mostly about the arrows/bullets/strike ratio for me.

You might also want to distinguish between heavy crossbows which need a mechanism to crank back the cord' date=' and light crossbows which use a cocking lever. There would be a considerable difference in both penetration and firing speed.[/quote']

 

Yes, there's quite a difference between a hand-pulled wooden self bow and a steel arbalest operated with a windlass or cranequin. But as I wrote above, basically anything beyond pulling it by hand makes the crossbow a once-per-combat weapon, so I don't need to make detailed tables for that. Never mind that beyond a certain stage, there's no difference in HERO limitation values anyway, and I expect PCs who don't want muscle-powered weapons to get guns anyway.

Re: Ranged weapon reload times

Thanks for all the answers (and questions). Let me clarify my target weaponry a bit. Crossbows probably won't be a big factor, so whether it takes a few turns or a whole minute will hardly matter in this game. Anything within that range will turn it into a fire-and-forget weapon for the players, especially considering that there will be faster loading guns available, with at least equal damage.

As for bows, I'm mostly talking about heavy longbows, i.e. anything that your average fantasy PC expecting highly armored foes is likely to use. For that, the default rate of fire looked a bit high to me, and Fantasy Hero actually does have suggestions for slowing things down a bit. On the other hand, I'm pretty new to HERO and keep forgetting that a baseline assumption of SPD 2 quickly puts things in a more reasonable time frame. Even if we say that a highly trained longbowman is SPD 3, I would say that both an extra phase or just a full phase probably won't stretch things too far (if at all).

From a game play perspective, I would like to see three stages of capability: The more or less "untrained" user who might have the strength for it, but not the rapid firing drill. Then there's the competent soldier, able to sustain a pretty decent (possibly unaimed) rate of fire during stressful conditions. And finally the "heroic" side of things, i.e. a PC who paid some points specifically for longbow use.

And I'm not sure if I want to start out with multiple attacks for the latter, so slowing things down for the "normal" case seemed a good option.

Now about the guns: This specific campaign is set in the "Iron Kingdoms", a somewhat steampunkish fantasy. Gunpowder is alchemical and ignites by combining two components. This is done by puncturing a divider, so we've got something similar to a Dreyse needle gun. Most drawings seem to indicate a break action, similar to modern shotguns. Ammunition is contained in a silk/paper pouch, and leaves some residue in the barrel. I'm not sure whether the break action should cock the gun or manual activation of the firing pin is necessary – or whether that matters at all in game terms. In the end, I imagine the speed to be about the same as a shotgun, plus cleaning out the gunk and making sure that the ammo packet has a snug fit.

As a game play consequence, I wouldn't mind if the rate of fire is no more than half that of a bow, assuming PCs with the same point investments. Maybe even a bit more, as this is alleviated by being able to carry more than one firearm ready to fire, e.g. a brace of pistols. On the other hand, I could imagine trading some saved time by cleaning the gun more quickly with an activation roll. (Although I'm not a big fan of adding rolls to combat, which is probably why I went with Limited SPD in my original post and not with Fast Draw)

I'm considering on going slightly more "realistic"/mean than the default rules on weapon reload times, to favor melee combat a bit and reduce the potential of abuse (setting has pretty great crossbows and even guns).

So I think I'm going with an extra phase for longbows, and with at least an extra turn for crossbows and guns (breechloaders).

Now for the actual questions:

1) "Extra Turn" seems a bit too fixed for this purpose, as reloading speed should vary by character SPD. A normal person has two actions per turn, one phase costs -3/4, one turn -1 1/4. So what would be fair costs for 2 and 3 phases?

2) Let's say characters buy 2 extra speed with the limitation "reloading only", that means I have two fixed phases that I can only use for that purpose, not e.g. 4 phases from which I could only use two for reloading, right?

3) Regarding the previous item, does "reloading only" -1, and "reload or attack with bow" -1/2 sound correct?

Re: Enhancing weapons

I'll definitely go with a Multipower, fixed slots, I'm just fiddling a bit with the various powers, advantages and limitations. Definitely no Usable By Other, Extra Time (10 minutes) on the reserve, but not the slots. Some slots will have the side effect "damages weapons", I'm thinking of just going for straight BODY of the attack (or the attack bonus) vs. ED of the pistol. Not sure whether that's -1/4 or -1/2…

By the way, if I link the fire bullet RKA to the normal bullet damage, it is of course assumed that I can't use the fire damage alone, but not the other way around, right? So theoretically with a linked RKA on the gun, I still could fire normal bullets. So would it be worth anything as a limitation if that wouldn't be the case, i.e. if the gun is in "fire blast" mode, every bullet would be surrounded by the fire aura?

And then there's the signature weapons. Normal guns, but with a +x OCV (only for blasts/RKAs channeled through gun) and resistant ED (only vs. gun mage backlash). Easy enough to build, but should the character pay full price for this in a Heroic campaign or only the difference between the cost of it and a normal version of the pistols? (Also, didn't I read somewhere that secondary/tertiary/etc. weapons are a flat +5 points?)

Re: Damage Limits

The default for Heroic is x2 your weapon's DCs. So if you have a 1/2d6 k dagger' date=' you can do up to 1 1/2d6 k with it.[/quote']

 

Isn't that just for damage added for STR beyond the minimum? The Toolkitting column on 6E2 99 does suggest it as a general rule, though. Although even that column has no upper ceiling for unarmed attacks (haymaker + MA DC + DC from CSL…).

How do you handle damage limits during your campaigns? Do you have some specific maximum values for the different contributing parts (combat skills, martial arts DC increases etc.), an absolute limit or do you judge things on a case by case basis? (And of course it would help if you'd say what type of campaign it is, esp. regarding lethality and realism)

Re: Enhancing weapons

Don't worry, I'll say "uncle" once we reach or surpass the original GURPS level of complexity

Re: What is the building in which a mason works called?

Maison?

Re: Enhancing weapons

On the other hand, as this isn't supposed to fully supplant the character's normal attacks/bullets, less accuracy might actually be ok. If not, there's always the option of 5 point CSLs… Or maybe building the "signature" guns as an equal level of CSL for focused non-bullet effects.

Re: Enhancing weapons

So you want a combined attack? One attack that does Physical damage (vs PD) which does the normal damage of the bullet' date=' then another that does Energy damage (vs ED)?[/quote']

 

Yeah, that's the basic idea. Mostly for two reasons, one being the possibility of resistance/immunity against fire, and preventing armor from being to weak if you'd have combined damage. Which is why the gunmage has to choose between a non-augmented armor piercing attack and additional damage that might be worse against armor.

 

On second thought, it's probably better to make the fire damage RKA, too, as this would ease the BODY/STUN calculations.

 

The ability to fire smoke Bulliets/cast the "Smoke Bullet" spell is his' date=' but he needs a gun to focus it through. This spells damage, range, acuracy and all other things is not related to the gun used in any way (it does not have the guns limits or is affected by it's OCV/Range Modifeirs).[/quote']

 

Hmm, that's a good point, what would it cost me if the modifiers of the guns *do* matter? Dont' think the character would want to miss out on his combat skill levels for guns…

Re: Enhancing weapons

Like I mentioned above, usable on others isn't really wanted in this case anyway. "Enchanting" the weapon is just preparing it for a specific special effect, but the gun mage is still "casting" the spell for each shot. If the other characters want magical guns, they better buy them

In my little "magical theory" of things I said that the energy for this has to come from somewhere, but as the gunpowder in this world is a product of alchemy, it's coming from the bullet itself, thus no END does make sense. As there's nothing in the barrel for the "smoke bullets", I'd say that this should cost some END, yes. And while they have a higher RoF than normal bullets, that just means that you can fire every action, whereas the normal reloading time for a breech-loader of this type was 5 seconds - although that probably has to be a bit faster for HERO, just like bows.

I had the fire aura on the bullet mostly to reduce the power somehow. This way, you'd apply the armor twice, making this basically the equivalent of a magical hollow point. If the added damage is equivalent to the gun damage, Aid with reduced penetration would achieve the same effect, of course.

Re: What is the building in which a mason works called?

Don't forget that the reason is that the French for day is journee. Journee-men were day labourers.

Damn you, reality, from ruining my perfect folk etymology…

But still, as far as I know, traveling masons used to be pretty common, just like carpenters.

Re: What is the building in which a mason works called?

Don't forget that there's a reason for the "journey" part of "journeyman".

Re: Enhancing weapons

Hmm, there isn't supposed to be time limit, so I'd remove that, but on the other hand, as the gun is truly a "focus" in the magical sense, there's no requirement for Usable By Other. Also, I think the Aid would probably be more applicable if it really turns the bullets into little fireballs, if it's just surrounded by a "poof" of fire, the combination of normal and killing damage (as well as PD vs. ED) might actually be worth the added trouble. But generally, thanks, that's a pretty good idea for the gun mage's framework.

Re: Enhancing weapons

Yes, the naked advantage looks exactly like what I was looking for, as does the Focus of Opportunity. I'm still pretty new to the system (and that mostly with the Basic book), so these hints about the features and nomenclature really help a lot, thanks.

In the current version, it's fire bullets surrounded by fire. One hit roll, both sources of damage have to overcome armor separately. That sounds like a linked Blast to the RKA of the bullet. I guess if I have Link, I don't apply the focus. But reading the rules, it looks like I could apply the increased loading time of the single-shot guns. (Unless the character wants it to work instantly if she ever gets her hands on guns with a higher ammo capacity)

The smoke bullets were just a convenient way to cope with out-of-ammo situations or to increase RoF. Not very efficient compared to real bullets, mostly due to flavor reasons. In GURPS it was 1d6 bludgeoning damage as compared to 2d6 of the "large piercing" of the proper bullets, which translates nicely into normal damage as opposed to killing damage.

I'm trying to convert over a few things from other systems, and am currently looking for the best ways to have a character enhance normal weapons.

To give one example I'm currently running a campaign in the Iron Kingdoms setting, where there are "gun mages" able to enchant their weapons. In our current GURPS-based system, one PC is able to do the following three tricks:

a) add fire damage to his bullets

make the bullets armor piercing

c) fire unlimited "smoke bullets" instead of normal ammo

It takes about ten minutes to prepare a gun to use one o those tricks (in the original setting it also damages any gun not made out of a special alloy, but I don't have any specific rules for that, they just deteriorate faster than normal).

© looks simple enough, basically a blast with an OAF. ( is basically a Power Advantage to a weapon that you didn't spend points on, this being a Heroic campaign… Statting up the gun and having it cost the difference between the enhanced and the unehanced versions almost seems a bit too cheap.

Generally, does it make a big difference if a focus is specific, i.e. whether it's OAF - sword of my holy order or OAF - any weapon?

(Note: Those things are really messy to build in GURPS in a canonic way, one of the reasons why I'm looking into alternate systems)

Re: official permits and such

In German that would be a Bestallungsbrief.

Not sure about the etymology ("brief" is letter, "stall" is stable, so possibly it's a letter saying that the lord is adding you to his "stable" of retainers). If I remember correctly, when you're accredited as a physician or pharmacist by the state, that's still called a "Bestallung".

Re: What If? Fertility Control

It's inherent. I thought that was obvious in the initial post' date=' when I said people who had uncontrolled fertility were exceptional somehow, such as being under a curse. Controlled fertility is the default state; you need a potion or ritual to change that state, not to establish it.[/quote']

 

I just meant that even with a system like that, where no constant inoculation or even a "blessing" at birth might be necessary, it could be a fact because aeons ago some wizard magically brought this onto the population. There definitely has to be some kind of reason why this is so persistant, or I can imagine lots of societies where breaking that spell would be highly beneficial, at least to the ruling caste. So either some unsurpassed wizardry from the Golden Age/a great magical genius or even a divine judgment. Speaking of which, do the gods play a role in that society? As with the power of magic, this could change the setting's foundation.

Re: What If? Fertility Control

Also, if the magic is commonplace enough, it's harder to establish a feudal system. If one out of every twenty peasants has the magical equivalent of penicillin & pistol, it's harder to subjugate them.

This, of course, becomes quite a different matter if you need a lot of education to focus/channel your magical powers, or if the magical talent is genetically stable and certain lineages would be more powerful (also: if the gene is strictly maternal or paternal, this changes a lot).

Again, this depends a lot on the magical theory. Never mind that we don't know whether this contraception is due to the mages (i.e. wizardly monthly birth control enchantments) or separate from that (i.e. inborn ability). In the first case, I'd wager a bet that most societies wouldn't even get that far. There are those who fight, those who cast, and those who breed and till the soil.

Re: What If? Fertility Control

If fertility was a conscious act' date=' all the races would be at the knife's edge survival wise.[/quote']

 

If it would just be fertility control, then I'd agree. But if the total medi-magical system is good enough, then the extended lifespan and low infant mortality rate should more than make up for that. Women could actually plan having children in their 30s...

Re: What If? Fertility Control

Let's assume that the knowledge of magic is evenly divided, for an even more utopian scenario. So technically, it's better than our modern world, where technology/industry/knowledge ain't exactly universal.

Unless we're going for a straight-forward, somewhat unrealistic Star Trek TNG scenario here, there still will be war (which, as we all know, never changes). Not sure whether this will turn out okay for women. Now, at least child mortality will be *way* lower, but I still would guess that the nation that replenishes its stock of soldiers more quickly from a war will have the advantage, and that means women being as pregnant as you can be. I would almost assume this to be the normal state. Sometimes it's "a woman's duty", sometimes it's outright slavery (better leave out the discussions whether the duty is slavery, too.)

Now, as there will probably be some kind of magical arms race, some nations might have a different approach to this. If you can actually create warriors instead of just birthing them, you might have a chance. Especially considering that a lot of women will be more productive under this state of law, where battles are fought by proxy (sure, with magical medicine, pregnant women in the other societies won't be out, and willing to work for their Sparta, but I idealistically assume that a free society is more productive).

Created soldiers can take many forms: A created race (origin of goblins/orcs?), golems, vat-born super soldiers (replicants), chimeras, huge sentient blobs, demons/angels, even the dead.

How sexuality and society is different from standard fantasy worlds (or our own) will depend a lot on how a nation behaves at war.

And a lot of that depends on the details of magic. If one nation -- let's call them the Athenians -- pursues magical knowledge, with a bunch of free citizens, while another one -- let's call 'em Spartans -- is quite a bit more war-like, you'd want to know if the Athenians can come up with magical cruise missiles, or if magical capability evens out a lot before that. If every "war-wizard" is ultimately the same and a pinnacle of magical power has been reached, it all comes down to the number of war-wizards.

Re: armor and endurance

Well, a lot of armor just doesn't drape very well when you're lying on your back. So even when heat buildup isn't a problem (or actually comes in handy), it's darn tootin' uncomfortable. Mail on the other hand could work, especially in the not-quite-full-coverage fantasy warrior mode…

Re: Races of Men

Not that the Hyborian Age (and REH) didn't have its own problem with racism…

Anyhoo, leaving that discussion aside, you have to be careful not to enter Star Trek territory here, too. If you've got cultures which are that much entwined with a unchangeable "race" (and a god to call their own), you'll get a bunch of pretty stagnant, fixed societies and cultures. Couple that with a Conan-esque grim mood, and it might feel a bit too oppressive and/or bland.

Re: Races of Men

Agree, if at all it's better left as the rather dark opinion/creation myth of some not-so-nice church, not as a cold fact of the universe. (I'm generally not very fond of "mannish races" - cf. the "High Men" of MERP/Rolemaster - either make the differences bigger - elves, dwarves, etc - or just put it in cultures.)