semi-tangential thread here
I am designing a roleplaying game and I am curious what kind of autofire system would make the most sense.
It doesn't have to be (and obviously won't be) perfectly realistic, but I am just looking for it to make some kind of sense.
My options are: something like GURPS, where you get a bonus to hit when shooting automatic. The higher the ROF, the more the bonus to hit. Also, the better your hit, the more bullets hit.
This bugs me because I felt like the use of autofire (if used at all) was against targets in the open and close range, OR as suppressive fire. But this bonus applies in all cases. GURPS has pretty steep range penalties, but no matter what, shooting on automatic makes you more likely to hit something.
Is that true? What about against someone in cover?
Because, ammo count nonwithstanding, the GURPS system means that shooting on full auto is ALWAYS better.
The other option is, multiple attacks, each at a penalty to hit. Higher rate of fire means more attacks, higher recoil means more penalty to hit. Realistically, the first attack would be at no penalty since there is no recoil yet, but I am unlikely to bother with that.
Is that realistic? It seems the most representative to me: you are shooting more bullets (more attacks) but they are less likely to hit (penalty to each attack).
The more game-design-relevant part of this is that the game uses two dice for each attack so rolling lots of attacks is going to be slower unless I go for the Traveller method, but that's more a /tg/ question.
And I know this is more of a /tg/ thread, but I wanted to ask on here to get /k/'s perspective.
TLDR: Should autofire in a game be represented by a single roll more likely to hit, or should it be multiple attacks, each at a penalty to hit?
I'll dump some Girls with Guns to make up for semi-offtopic thread, feel free to contribute
>>28306300
just make it cost less action points to take an automatic shot, but make accuracy decreased for that option as opposed to a snap shot or an aimed shot
>>28306300
The real differences should be improvements to suppression.
How does autofiring RPG work?
>>28306386
I mean roleplaying game (like D&D with funny dice) not rocket propelled grenade.
>>28306384
I agree. But on rare occasions you might want to spray down an area. I have thought of making something where you attack an area. if you succeed on your attack roll, they are suppressed, and if you hit really well, you actually hit them. But then the bonus to suppression would also make you more likely to hit.
I hate most games' way of handling suppressive fire and I want the tactics of the game to be taking cover, supressing enemies, then someone moves up and outflanks them and takes an aimed single shot or something to finish them off. Not sure if that's how it works in real life, which I"m sure is far more chaotic, but that's the kind of combat I want to support, for the most part.
>>28306433
The way suppression works in real life depends completely in the psychology of the combatants, and that is why it is hard to translate into an rpg format. Full auto should make it much harder to hit targets unless you have a very stable gpmg.
>>28306433
Suppression and taking cover are player and NPC tactics, not things that require special rules or skills and certainly not weapon dependent. Most realistic would be that autofiring weapons fire X amount of bullets per action at an increasing to hit penalty beyond the first bullet. Penalty is lessened if you brace or mount the gun. Can hit additional adjacent targets at normal penalty or the player can sweep a room and target all enemies for a large penalty to hit on each shot.
No matter what, if you don't enforce ammo counts and limits autofire will always be best option for a player to take.
>>28306433
in the new xcom turn based games suppression reduces the targets in the target areas accuracy and gives a free reaction shot if a target tries to move
>>28306514
So the GURPS "bonus to hit" system is shit, and I should go with the other one?
>>28306532
>No matter what, if you don't enforce ammo counts and limits autofire will always be best option for a player to take.
But that doesn't translate to real life. Otherwise everyone would just spray at each other with SAWs or drum mags and not worry about it.
Whereas with the "many rolls at a penalty" system, even not counting ammo, autofire is usually not good against hard-to-hit targets, and it's generally a high-risk high-reward thing.
The rest of what you said makes perfect sense, though, and I will probably go with that. However there wouldn't be a roll for each bullet, more like a roll for every 5 or so bullets fired, because otherwise you'd almost be guarnateed to hit once by the laws of probability. But thanks for the help.
>>28306571
Unless your target is so hard to hit the number you'll have to roll is larger what is possible on the dice it'll always be in the players best option to autofire if there are no mechanical drawbacks since the first shot isn't at a penalty. Lets say I have a target and I can hit on a 16 or higher and a full round autofire is six rolls. Hipfiring I take those rolls at +0/-1/-2/-3/-4/-5, it's possible for me to hit with five of those rolls. Now lets say I've got it braced on a bipod that reduces the penalty by 1 for every shot after the first, I'm rolling at +0/+0/-1/-2/-3/-4 and can hit with all of those rolls. Now lets say I'm taking half action to aim which increases my chance to hit with the first roll by 1 while cutting the number of shots in half, I'm rolling at +1/+0/+0.
autofire should be an attack on a square, with x bullets (based on rof). first round passes through the center of the target square and the other rounds pass through nearby squares or possibly the same one, use a d8 ( 8 squares around target clockwise, any hit on 1 or 5 will pass through target square. obviously this is from shooter's perspective). you could modify it to use a d6 if you like, for convenience.
another option could be to use a thin cone template and roll for hits based on how much of the cone width is filled by enemy.
one enemy blocking entire cone: every bullet hits him, still needs to defeat his armor if any
multiple enemies blocking entire cone: roll a hit on the closest enemy based on how much of the cone they fill, on down the line, for each bullet fired. if a bullet makes it to the last enemy, it hits them automatically (assuming the enemies have covered the width of the cone, along its length.) this will probably result in way too many hit rolls, perhaps simplify it by dividing the number of rounds fired into the degrees of the cone or w/e and assigning hits like that.
multiple enemies, not fully filling the cone's width:
as above, but without the automatic hit on the last enemy since there is still space within the cone for the bullet to miss them.
with all of these it would make sense to have the first shot fire directly down the center of the cone, but it's not really necessary.
Mounted weapons should use a much smaller cone or fire into only one square until much longer ranges.
TL;DR it should be a narrow cone attack or something similar, to take into account that misses can still hit enemies near the target or past the target.
>>28306300
I swear, I am not a paid shill for a free rpg.
But I'm also not paid to recommend it
http://www.opsandtactics.com/
Also here are the rules for OaT's auto and burst fire.
>>28306300
>Auto RPG
>>28306840
Oh yeah I've heard of this. I'll take a look again, thanks.
>>28306777
This is a good idea. I dunno how well it would work since i want this to be usable without miniatures as well as with them, but it could be done.
>>28306741
True. Unless I went with a penalty to ALL rolls, including the first one. Then it wouldn't necessarily.
nWoD 1.0 had a good system for it. Weapons capable of Automatic Fire could make attacks on extra targets near your primary target, to summarize a short burst would hit your target and a guy next to him with a slight penalty. Longer bursts could hit more guys at larger penalties (-1 for the first, -2 for the second, then -3, etc) but the attack uses Half/all of your magazine instead of one attack for one round in Semi mode.
Take a look at Only War/WH40KRPG It handles autofire in one of two ways, a directed attack or as an area attack. In an area attack the attack is easy to make, and you can hit multiple targets, but chance of hit is low. A direct attack is much harder to make, but does more damage based on how well you roll. In many cases, using autofire also causes to target to test against being pinned, which reduces the number and type of actions they can take.
>>28306300
Literally the best, most realistic rules are GURPS. In virtually any instance, firing more bullets is better. You should also look at the Suppression Fire rules, etc. For more uses of full auto.
