What are some good systems that handle 20th century combat well? Let's say anywhere from World War 2 all the way up to the modern day.
>>46697162
I know people say this a lot, but I mean it unironically: GURPS.
There are things GURPS can't do, but one of the things GURPS is actually pretty good at is operators operating operationally and other mostly-modern gunplay scenarios.
>>46697190
Can confirm. I once ran a C&C Commando game in GURPS and it turned out quite all right.
>>46697162
Chain of Command by Too Fat Lardies.
From the Great War or WW2 to Fighting Season in the present in Afghanistan or Iraq.
>>46697162
Phoenix Command, you didn't say easy
>>46697190
>There are things GURPS can't do, but one of the things GURPS is actually pretty good at is operators operating operationally and other mostly-modern gunplay scenarios.
nope its not, gurps is bad at realism.
it just have detail, but not realism
Depends on your scale.
Force on Force and Command Decision 4 are my go to, though A Fistfull of TOWs 3 is good too
Five Core system:
Five men in Normandy
Five men at Kursk
No End in Sight
>>46697162
Deluxe Revised Recon
>>46699755
How is Recon? I've been looking into it for a while and it seems pretty decent, but I've never played it.
>>46697162
d6 Adventure would work well.
>>46697658
Phoenix Command wasn't really difficult, it was just heavy on tables that caused a lot of page flipping.
I put all the relevant tables into a GM Screen (Admittedly, a 6-panel Screen) that sped up play quite a bit.
We played Living Steel for a couple years using the full Phoenix Command ruleset. Man, I miss Living Steel. That was a bad ass game
>>46697162
Depends on if you want realism, cinema style action, or some other subgenre.
D6, Savage Worlds, and similar games work nicely for action movie cinema styled games.
GURPS, EABA, the 40k RPgames, and the like are detailed and internally consistent, by not necessarily "Realistic".
>>46698126
This. Five Parsecs From Home and No Stars In Sight is a dope scifi version too.
If you're into more granular simulation rules, fuck it, go with Advanced Squad Leader.
>>46697162
Traveller is excellent at gunplay and vehicles, and done in a nice simple way. Most modern vehicles and weapons are statted out, and its made to run Tech Levels from medieval through modern through futuristic.
Assuming you wanted an RPG system.
Did you want an RPG system? or are you actually going to do some wargaming? if so >>46698051 are good
>>46701514
RPG system, preferably.
>>46701514
Traveler is a fun game, but its combat and damage system isn't really particularly good.
Twilight 2000 was a great game that balanced realism and playability well. It was also scaleable from individual to vehicle combat. It could easily be retooled for different eras.
I would prefer the Twilight 2013 version, as its character creation and skill systems were more robust.
Let's say I want to do WWI-era gunplay realistically. What system would be my go-to?
>>46701933
Traveller is pretty good for realism.
Only problem with realism in 20th century warfare is that PCs wont last very long.
We used to run a WW2 pacific RPG where the players were marines. It was only ever run as one shots, due to low survivability.
One player even died in the first 5 minutes of a game once. He did run into a jungle on his own, after being told that particular area was swarming with japs, failed to spot an MG nest and was shot in the head and upper torso, instantly killed. It was totally his own fault, but still. Shows just how deadly modern combat is. Once MGs and HE become a thing, human flesh doesn't stand much of a chance out in the open.
That said, the Twilight games would probably be closer to OPs needs than vanilla Traveller
>>46701968
any system that kills your character as soon as he sticks his head out of the trench.
>>46701968
There isn't really a "go to" for modern combat RPGs. perhaps try out a couple of gunfights in GURPS or Twilight 2013 or FiveCore, and see which you like best.
Sometimes realism needs to be slightly eschewed in favor of fun and longevity (ie. having a campaign instead of just running one shots)
Through the mud and blood could also be pretty cool, its in here:
https://www.mediafire.com/folder/b35x147vmc6sg/World_War_One
this is from the historical wargames /hwg/ thread OP (from the WW1 folder)
>>46701968
See >>46701240.
This is especially if you're in a setting like the Great War where body armor is nonexistent and the weapons of the day do something like 6D to 8D damage, the average soak without armor is somewhere between 2D and 4D, and a weapon's roll only needs to beat soak by about 16 to insta-kill, nevermind the stages of wounding that can happen before that (with a stage of wound giving a -1D penalty to EVERYTHING), the system can be pretty brutal.
Good use of cover alongside the Dodge reaction skill means that things like fighting smartly and aiming before firing are quite well rewarded. Character stat blocks are pretty minimalist for the most part, but also allow pretty much any character to attempt (not always succeed, but attempt) anything, and the gameplay is simultaneously cinematic, rewarding, and in the era you want to play, absolutely fucking brutal.
Grunt captures the Vietnam war pretty well from what I can tell. The combat isn't super detailed, but it does some neat things (like never letting you know exactly how many VC you're fighting and often you're firing at where you THINK they are/where incoming fire is coming from rather than actually seeing your enemy).
