Accuracy balance in Sci-Fi characters in Fantasy campaign

[azcromntic]

Okay, so how is it that "guns" get an additional bonus for accuracy but ranged weapons in C & C do not get such a bonus. What I'm finding is that the C & C classes (characters) are lagging behind in hits and "kills" because the AA characters have an extra bonus to hit for the Accuracy of the weapon. A 4th level Paladin with 15 DEX and Heavy Crossbow has +4 to hit whereas a 4th level Gadgeteer character with 15 DEX and Blaster Pistol (from companion book) has +6 to hit due to Accuracy of +4. If we added the difference in BtH then the Gadgeteer would have +8, TWICE what the Paladin has with the crossbow!!

The discrepancy is smaller with the weapons in the AA main rule book but still at +6 (if Bth were the same between the two characters).

Dropping the Accuracy if "mixing" C & C and AA seems more fair to me. In the comparison above dropping the Accuracy would give a +2 to the Gadgeteer (with Bth +1). This seems more appropriate.

I guess I mention this because I see some threads about mixing eras or putting out a new Star Siege and how monsters and characters should be able to be switched between AA, C & C and Star Siege without adjustment (or at least it would be nice if it were that way).

Thoughts?

[azcromntic]

The +8 I mentioned is for a Blaster Pistol from the companion book. I'll read the companion book again as it may be advised to manipulate the rules for a combined AA and C&C adventure. I haven't seen anything specific about Accuracy yet though.

[azcromntic]

Exactly. But what is more "fair" to take away accuracy bonus or to add some misc bonus for C&C? Overall I think the most fair thing to do would be to take away the Accuracy bonus UNLESS they specify they are using the AIM combat maneuver or maybe specify they are doing a head shot or something where the accuracy would really matter.

[Jason Vey]

Okay, so how is it that "guns" get an additional bonus for accuracy but ranged weapons in C & C do not get such a bonus. What I'm finding is that the C & C classes (characters) are lagging behind in hits and "kills" because the AA characters have an extra bonus to hit for the Accuracy of the weapon. A 4th level Paladin with 15 DEX and Heavy Crossbow has +4 to hit whereas a 4th level Gadgeteer character with 15 DEX and Blaster Pistol (from companion book) has +6 to hit due to Accuracy of +4. If we added the difference in BtH then the Gadgeteer would have +8, TWICE what the Paladin has with the crossbow!!

The discrepancy is smaller with the weapons in the AA main rule book but still at +6 (if Bth were the same between the two characters).

Dropping the Accuracy if "mixing" C & C and AA seems more fair to me. In the comparison above dropping the Accuracy would give a +2 to the Gadgeteer (with Bth +1). This seems more appropriate.

I guess I mention this because I see some threads about mixing eras or putting out a new Star Siege and how monsters and characters should be able to be switched between AA, C & C and Star Siege without adjustment (or at least it would be nice if it were that way).

Thoughts?

Yes. This is exactly how it should be. Guns ARE, in fact, more accurate than archaic ranged weapons. That's WHY they eventually superseded them. Guns are, put quite simply, superior to bows and crossbows in every way, and the reasons for that are range, accuracy and speed of fire.

Also, that Blaster Pistol from the book is designed from the Arcane Bolt (Magic Missile in C&C) spell, which is supposed to hit automatically. Since all ranged effects for gadgets require an attack roll (no automatic hits) it instead gets a whopping huge accuracy bonus.

As stated, it's up to you what you want to do in your game, but what you just outlined is exactly how it's supposed to be. If you're going to introduce guns into a fantasy game, they're going to run away with the game. The Archer class in the Companion is one way to offset this, as he has special abilities that make him deadly with a bow. Other than that, though, that paladin SHOULD get smoked by someone with a .45.

NOW, if you're bringing C&C character classes into a sci-fi game, you should be giving them access to modern weapon proficiencies. As a trained solider and warrior, the Paladin should be able to wield any firearm he chooses with full proficiency, as should any warrior type.

[azcromntic]

At 50 yards (ish) or closer, you know, where most combat in these games (and possibly real life) occurs, any benefit of accuracy for hitting center mass of an enemy is so small that it is not worth counting. At about 50 yards any bow type weapons start to break down in accuracy and then you'd be correct but maybe not at the +4 degree. I'd be willing to bet a good archer could shoot as good or better group at 50 yards as someone shooting a revolver or blaster pistol.

I'd agree with you across the board if we were talking about amount and transfer of energy to penetrate and cause damage. An arrow ~could~ penetrate armor but not nearly as well as a .45 or possibly a blaster pistol. They didn't invent 'guns' because they were more accurate than a bow or crossbow; it was about penetrating armor. Once the armor didn't help the enemy anymore distance became the best defense and 'guns' followed suit to take away that advantage as well. Any RANGE based accuracy benefit is a direct result of higher velocities to obtain a flatter trajectory or a more predictable trajectory with sufficient energy. Further distances represent a very small portion of the encounters in the game.

The Accuracy bonus, in my opinion, is a waste and a source of disappointment for those moving a character between AA and C&C. Longer ranges or situations where aiming is beneficial being the exceptions. The accuracy bonus would be better served in the damage area due to penetration or energy transfer but from looking at the damage in the AA books the damage is already sufficient to cover it so I'd say drop the Accuracy bonus except at greater than 100 yards (at which point one would hardly use it) or merge it into the AIM combat maneuver of which most people would only use at longer ranges or if they are trying to be an assassin or sniper.

Just my two cents.

[Jason Vey]

I couldn't disagree more.

Yes, originally the use of gunpowder provided greater punch. By the time the rifled barrel came into play, however, it was all about accuracy. I've been hunting and shooting for TWENTY YEARS, and I'm here to tell you a gun is exponentially more accurate whether it's ten yards or 100.

But now, let's ignore all that and concentrate on the idea of penetration. Accuracy in terms of bonuses "to hit" in an abstracted AC-based combat system INCLUDES penetration. Just because your "to hit" roll misses, that doesn't necessarily mean it MISSES. It could just bounce off or fail to penetrate the armor. Granted, that's not likely as much the case when you're talking about costume-based AC bonuses; those are your character's cool ability to avoid taking damage. With ARMOR, however, the accuracy bonus incorporates both physical accuracy AND penetration.

There is absolutely no question: a firearm is in every. single. way. superior to an archaic weapon. There is no way a Paladin with a crossbow and plate armor should be remotely a match for a guy with basic training in a .45 caliber pistol.

None of this even takes into account that you're actually referring to a gadget that is built around a spell which hits automatically as the spell. The high accuracy bonus in this case is to represent the fact that it's firing homing missiles! That's actually made pretty clear in the text of the Gadgeteer on page 32, "Building and Running the Gadgeteer," point 3. The Homing Blast Radium Pistol on page 78 of the Companion is built based on that example (but ramps up the accuracy bonus even more, as I wanted it to be even more of a sure hit).

It's your game; houserule as you like--that's the beauty of the SIEGE engine, after all; it's designed to encourage tweaking and house rules!

This particular issue isn't one that's going to change. It's been heavily playtested and vetted by firearms experts who have praised the execution. Also, and one more time: if you're crossing over character classes from C&C to AA, why aren't you granting them access to modern firearms proficiencies? Unless it's a Paladin from a fantasy world stepping through a portal to a modern age where he's unfamiliar with anything...he should get the same kinds of proficiencies as everyone else. Paladins are trained soldiers. If you're running a sci-fi game and using the Paladin as a base character class, they should have access to any and all weapons. I guess that's part of what I'm not understanding. Why don't your C&C character classes in modern games have access to modern weapons?

[EDIT]Finally, I'm hoping this isn't coming off as accusatory, condescending or disrespectful. I just had another member accuse me of such on another thread and it's NOT my intention in ANY WAY whatsoever.

[azcromntic]

I don't yet think you hate me so you're safe....for now.

I think we'll have to agree to disagree on a lot of what you said. I just want to clarify a few things.

I'm not talking about the gadget in this case. I'm talking about the Blaster Pistol in the Sci-Fi section of the AA companion book toward the back. The gadget is based on a spell and yes, it is homing however that doesn't apply to the blaster pistol.

You said: "Also, and one more time: if you're crossing over character classes from C&C to AA, why aren't you granting them access to modern firearms proficiencies? ... Why don't your C&C character classes in modern games have access to modern weapons?"

I have no rule in place that says they cannot have those weapons or proficiencies. This is a Sci-Fi character in Fantasy setting not a Fantasy character in a Sci-Fi setting. Albeit there is no local Sci-Fi weapon store in the Haunted Highlands for them to purchase such items and the Sci-Fi characters crash landed and have -just enough- weapons and ammunition to do the adventure (not likely they'll share). Plus, they just haven't asked to get a futuristic weapon or training.

In fact there is one Fantasy character left; a Paladin. The Dwarf Wizard was rent by a Hill Troll....ooops. The player of the Paladin has not asked to have a Sci-Fi weapon. The other three characters, a Yazarian, a Vrusk and a Drolosite, all have Sci-Fi weapons and are not jealous at all of the Fantasy weapon selection so they haven't asked if they can wield a two handed sword yet.

I put the Paladin and a Wizard in play to help the aliens (Yazarian, Vrusk and Dralasite) get into the Roadhouse. Without the aid of the Paladin I think the aliens' heads would be on a stick. Well, that's how I ran it at least. There are a couple of new players joining so we might be picking up a Cleric or an assassin type. They get their choice pretty much but I'm hoping one will be an Alchemist and one will be an Archer.

And that reminds me; why doesn't AA have compound bows in the list yet the C&C players handbook does?

Lastly, if the to hit roll (and thus the Accuracy bonus to it) is meant to 'simulate' penetration and accuracy then why is the Accuracy bonus not also added to damage? I mean, if you have a +2 sword you get +2 to hit AND damage. I dun know....I'm still leaning toward the side of "there's some kind of imbalance here that even though it ~might~ represent the real world it will suck bad for some players who choose a Fantasy class". And of course, yes, that can all be swept under the proverbial carpet of house rules.
In the famous words of Toad in the Frog and Toad book series I say "blah!" to that.

[azcromntic]

ewwww......maybe I should have put this post (viewtopic.php?f=32&t=14910) over here. Bah! I've argued the same case in two threads. Ugh.

I should also attempt to clarify my definition of accuracy. In the science of measuring (Metrology) yes, a rifled barrel, smokeless powder and a well engineered bullet will be more accurate than a "bow". THAT IS NOT however going to make a lick of difference if our target is the "center mass size". Huh?

I argue not that a modern day weapon could put rounds through the same hole in the target whereas you'd be extremely lucky to get that "accuracy" from a bow HOWEVER If the center ring of the target is a 10" round circle then being able to put all your shots in the 10" circle is doable by either weapon. If we then expand the circle to the size of a mans torso the WHO CARES if you can put all your shots in the same inch; you just need to hit their torso and they are going down.

So, with that in mind, I still find, in a combat situation where you are aiming to hit center mass, the Accuracy bonus is "blah". It means nothing. Well, unless you are intentionally aiming for some specific area of the target like "between the eyes"; then the accuracy bonus and all the Metrology would come into play.

And to my original point: If the AA, C & C and Star Siege games are to afford players to "seamlessly" switch between settings then the Accuracy (and the fact it's not also damage), even though it might represent real life, is probably going to be a point of contention.

Just saying....

[Jason Vey]

Not including compound bows was an oversight. It's actually odd that they ARE in C&C, as they're very modern technology.

Penetration does not equate to damage, that's why accuracy doesn't add to damage. If you shoot someone with a gun, or hit them overhand with a two-handed blow from an axe, the axe is going to do just as much damage to the person as the gun is. The gun, however, can punch through armor that the axe can't.

[Jason Vey]

The character classes do switch seamlessly between the two. To expect a sci-fi character with sci-fi equipment to not have a gross advantage over a primitive character with primitive equipment is something else entirely. That's one of those things that I personally feel isn't a rules issue but is in the purview of the GM to control. That being the case, for what you want to do, eliminating the accuracy bonus would even things up nicely.

I would be more inclined (just me personally) to make the high tech malfunction (insert technobabble about the high presence of magic in the fantasy world conflicting with the functionality of technology) or have them run out of ammo/batteries/power/insert-macguffin-here. But that's just a difference in GMing styles.

[mmbutter]

Not including compound bows was an oversight. It's actually odd that they ARE in C&C, as they're very modern technology.

C&C does not have "compound" bows, it has COMPOSITE bows - which are bows made with laminated wood and other materials. This technology has been around since about 2,000 BCE or around 4,000 years.

[Jason Vey]

Not including compound bows was an oversight. It's actually odd that they ARE in C&C, as they're very modern technology.

C&C does not have "compound" bows, it has COMPOSITE bows - which are bows made with laminated wood and other materials. This technology has been around since about 2,000 BCE or around 4,000 years.

Ah, thanks for the clarification. I didn't actually check before responding

[azcromntic]

More use of the rules in play recently has revealed that the Accuracy bonus, if applied only when the player states they are using AIM combat action, works perfectly; they get the bonus plus the +2 for aiming. Multiple people in the game are combat veterans and attest to the idea that the accuracy bonus would not apply to a burst of say 3 or more. I noticed a BENEFICIAL difference right away when I tailored the Accuracy bonus in this way: Bonus only if you are doing something like AIM, called shot, something of that nature and are not using a "burst". I still allowed them to use the bonus with 1,2,3 semi-auto shots and aiming however the recoil adjustment is also applied. Works beautifully.

I also noticed that the damage for some of the weapons is a bit high. I introduced some 1 HD "pirates" in my game with a blaster pistol. Repeatedly certain 4th level characters were finding themselves at 0 or less hit points in the first round. Some of that is definitely explained by the armor I allowed them to have however better armor just makes them harder to hit and would, by probability, still yield the same result just less often.

2d8 for a blaster pistol is a bit much, not only by my opinion but by using it in play. Blaster rifle is worse at 2d10! Machine pistol at 1d10 per shot is proving to be a bit much. Even if the character has a +2 dex bonus and marine combat armor they would have an AC of 18. A 1 HD pirate with a laser blaster could hit that with a 17 (assuming no Accuracy bonus) and would deal out up to 16 hit points of damage. If you add in the Accuracy bonus then the 1 HD pirate only needs a 13 to hit with damage equal to two hits from a battle axe!! Too much even for AA character classes and rules.

Then we look at this issue from another way. If I only use two 1 HD pirates (reduced to two because they can kill one character per round) then the pirates are greatly outnumbered and outgunned. It is only a 1 HD pirate however it is imbalanced enough that I could not include more or I'd kill off the whole party in like two rounds. This situation makes it difficult to create good battles; it's one sided e.g. either the party easily kills off the two pirates (because I have to reduce the number of them) or the party is constantly asking the GM to spare their character because some 1 HD pirates blew them into bits.

If I give them better armor that will help; more misses means less deaths however if the pirates are aiming then the Armor isn't going to help and the situation falls back into 'hard to make fair'. It would also help if the players would roll good to hit rolls consistently. I could also reduce the pirates' AC to make them easier to hit and thus be able to add a few more but again, more of them means greater chance of offing the characters too quickly.

So my opinion, based on using the rules and playing the rules, is that the Accuracy bonus is too much for 'every' shot and the damage is a bit too much for most of the weapons. This is with reference to only AA character classes; I'm not even factoring in the intentional design to make the Fantasy classes weaker (due to reasons already specified in a couple threads on the matter).

Don't take this the wrong way. I'm enjoying the game and rules are a huge part of that. Just making some recommendations and feedback to make them even better or at least give some feedback to those who want to tailor the game.

[Penny-Whistle]

I don't necessarily believe modern weapons are more accurate than traditional weapons. I recently read about hunters in South America armed with hand crafted bows who could not only stand balanced in a canoe but shoot a small bird on the wing through the neck. A casual called shot for the observer. The children play endless shooting games and begin practice not long after they start to walk. The bow practically becomes an extension of their arms. Accuracy in the real world can be as much about expertise as 'advanced' technology.

One reason I like these indie style games is that it is about the players' use of imagination rather than buying some pre-packaged corporate product cough-ahem-hasbro-cough. I love it when things go off-route. Thanks for sharing your experience to help us make up appropriate house rules.

[Jason Vey]

Don't take this the wrong way. I'm enjoying the game and rules are a huge part of that. Just making some recommendations and feedback to make them even better or at least give some feedback to those who want to tailor the game.

Not at all. You make very valid points. Disagreeing doesn't negate that in any way . I think there's just two different ways to look at and interpret this (as evidenced by the fact that we're both working from comments by experienced people). I've heard everything you said and I'm thinking that in future printings there will be a more in-depth discussion of the issue as well as a sidebar addressing the idea of leaving out accuracy.

Btw, however, the blaster pistol to which you're referring in the Companion? It doesn't have a +8 bonus. It's only got a +4 accuracy bonus. You mean the one on page 116, right? Unless you're talking about the rifle, which has a +5 bonus.

[EDIT]Also, I kind of agree about damage ratings--especially with rifles. I hadn't originally wanted guns to be all that much more damaging than melee weapons and rifles kind of got away from me with the 2d8, 2d10 damage codes. I'm thinking that the highest caliber, most devastating rifles should probably max out at 2d6+3 or 1d12+3 damage (the damage you'd do with a huge 2-handed melee weapon and a Str of 18).

[Jason Vey]

I don't necessarily believe modern weapons are more accurate than traditional weapons. I recently read about hunters in South America armed with hand crafted bows who could not only stand balanced in a canoe but shoot a small bird on the wing through the neck. A casual called shot for the observer. The children play endless shooting games and begin practice not long after they start to walk. The bow practically becomes an extension of their arms. Accuracy in the real world can be as much about expertise as 'advanced' technology.

This exact thing is why I developed the Archer class for the Companion. Though I was just looking at it recently and I'm thinking that from a sheer accuracy standpoint, that class needs to be beefed up a bit. In future printings I will likely revise it to make it more devastating as far as putting arrows right where you want them to go, when you want them to go there.

One reason I like these indie style games is that it is about the players' use of imagination rather than buying some pre-packaged corporate product cough-ahem-hasbro-cough. I love it when things go off-route. Thanks for sharing your experience to help us make up appropriate house rules.

Agreed 100%! C&C, AA and the SIEGE engine are built to encourage house-ruling, and I always enjoy hearing about other peoples' takes on what they do with the game and system.

[azcromntic]

...

Btw, however, the blaster pistol to which you're referring in the Companion? It doesn't have a +8 bonus. It's only got a +4 accuracy bonus. You mean the one on page 116, right? Unless you're talking about the rifle, which has a +5 bonus.

what I had said about +8 is "A 4th level Paladin with 15 DEX and Heavy Crossbow has +4 to hit whereas a 4th level Gadgeteer character with 15 DEX and Blaster Pistol (from companion book) has +6 to hit due to Accuracy of +4. If we added the difference in BtH then the Gadgeteer would have +8, TWICE what the Paladin has with the crossbow!!"

I think it is a great idea to have a side-bar or whole sub-section on the Accuracy and possibly the damage. To those who actually read it (like GM's) it would be a great resource.

And, I introduced an Archer in the game briefly and wow, the Archer took out two giant ants in no time (4th level with 19 dex). So far it seems the Archer is already powerful enough; a little more gaming with that class will possibly reveal some need for adjustment though. I like the Archer class so much I might just allow players to select it when playing in Fantasy setting. Likewise for the Alchemist (but wizards and such may already be able to do Alchemy; I just haven't read up on it in the C & C rules).

[Jason Vey]

what I had said about +8 is "A 4th level Paladin with 15 DEX and Heavy Crossbow has +4 to hit whereas a 4th level Gadgeteer character with 15 DEX and Blaster Pistol (from companion book) has +6 to hit due to Accuracy of +4. If we added the difference in BtH then the Gadgeteer would have +8, TWICE what the Paladin has with the crossbow!!"

Ah, okay. Thanks for clarifying. I'd misread you. Even still, I think that's the way it should be.

And, I introduced an Archer in the game briefly and wow, the Archer took out two giant ants in no time (4th level with 19 dex). So far it seems the Archer is already powerful enough; a little more gaming with that class will possibly reveal some need for adjustment though. I like the Archer class so much I might just allow players to select it when playing in Fantasy setting. Likewise for the Alchemist (but wizards and such may already be able to do Alchemy; I just haven't read up on it in the C & C rules).

Yeah, I think the Archer is fine for a fantasy setting. I just meant by way of balancing it against firearms. But it may be just fine as it is--it playtested fine; I was just spitballing, really.

And the alchemist might be a lot of fun for a fantasy game! Especially when you put it next to something like Rune Magic in C&C!