"Basic Run-down of Mechanics" Topic

Just updated my blog for the first time in a long time…

I started off thinking it'd just be a preliminary "trying to get back in the game!" post, but ended up giving a basic mechanical rundown of some rules I've been tinkering with (rules I've mentioned on this forum before).

Start at point 5 to skip to the game design stuff:

link

Please, any comments would be appreciated. As I didn't initially go in trying to write a whole overview, there will probably be clarifying questions that I need to answer, as well…

Joe, rules are the fundamental "glue" that binds gamers, and I commend you for giving thought to the mechanics. I read your blog, and one point I would suggest is to enhance the effect of training and experience. If skill level 5-6 for example, movement might be by individual. If higher skill level, movement may be by sections or groups, say up to 4 figures. This would reflect the training and experience that allow more coordinated maneuver, assault and defense, and might speed game play as well. I look forward to your progress and comments from others.

I too commend your process of sharing. I have always been more of a fan of d10 play rather than d6.

I only glance at the post once I saw that it is RPGS based. I have 30+ years experience at design but none at RPGs. One comment on the firing at a guy in the open. It would not be an automatic hit. Even in modern warfare hits per shot is a low percentage. A study right after WW2 showed that Americans fired four rounds average per encounter per hit caused. The percentage goes way down for cover targets. The same is still true for modern combat. The skill level among troops vary even with training. Weapon systems have improved but the basic soldier has not based on some studies of SQT results.

Thanks for the quick replies!

I suppose I should first note that when I say "RPG" I mean something closer to the board game Ambush than Dungeons and Dragons. Perhaps "Narrative Skirmish" would be a better description?

Condotta-- you raise an interesting point. My feel is that coordination of a unit is already rolled into activation In Contact. Better troops can activate on higher rolls (and may have more rolls to pick from, further increasing their odds of being able to share a high successful roll). This results in better troops bring more able to coordinate actions. The rules do treat simultaneous actions as simultaneous (so if two soldiers activate together and pop out of cover, and enemy cannot respond to both separately).
But something more than that could be interesting. I'll have to think about how they could manifest.

RudyNelson: so as I noted a fair shooter catching an enemy completely in the open (standing in the middle of the street) has a 50% of dropping them with a single Aimed Shot. But for that to happen means a bunch of things have already gone wrong for the targeted soldier. Usually there is some cover, and the option to hit the deck as well, if spotting didn't go right. All of this adds up to mean that even with an ambush where the firer is well set up to take a good shot, the enemy squad isn't getting wiped out in one burst. And of course with the bird's eye view offered by the tabletop is is even harder to get into that situation, which gives the soldiers a sort of natural simulation of instinct to avoid kill zones.
More often the actual point of first contact will involve moving troops who don't aim. The same level of shooter actually faces a 59% of not even causing suppression with his assault rifle. But he also has some chance of causing multiple hits where the aimed shot does not. So in a situation where two enemies turn a corner and see each other in the open, there's still only a 41% of either hitting the other with a whole burst of fire.

Edi: and that burst is 3 "shots," possibly more rounds in reality. So this tends to result in a lot of fire for only a few casualties.

Basic infantry traing calls for the use of firing stakes and firing charts to be made from each position. These are meant to integrate fields of fire in order to cover all approach areas. Yes it could happen that an enemy soldier could stand in a position where the firer closest to him is not looking in his direction. But he should be in someone's field of fire.
Many of these techniques tend to be modified or ignored as the enemy closes during the attack. Individual actions vary greater between those on offense and defense.

Round off your percentages to the nearest whole 10 if you want a faster playing system.
Make sure your time scale for a turn is long enough to encompass a complete action.
I saw a WW2 game many years ago that it took 5 turns to reload a weapon since the time frame was less than 10 seconds iirc.

Rudy-- yeah, all those tactics become important when reactions let troops on overwatch be much more effective than the directly active troopers. That applied to responding to threats that present themselves completely anew. (By moving in) or through an action (the enemy starts to fire but is likely to quickly be outgunned by waiting trooops on overwatch.

Right now I have no rules for rekoading. I've been assume g that poor activation or reaction rolls, or even missed shots, eepresent the flow I clouding reloading just fine… Then again a bit more detail in that simple area of the game wouldn't necessarily hurt.

Changing to 1d10 rolls isn't necessarily faster (it only really is if it's not easy to pair up your d10s to let you roll them all at once). It does mean more fudging of the relationships and potentially more math in resolving die rolls (right now you just see if your number is up or the number is lower than your skills). This lets the advantages of aiming become greater for better shots, for example!