CSC and skills proliferation

[Klaus]

The CSC is an excellent book. Overwhelming, in fact, in the amount of weaponry, both small arms and larger, chemical projectile or more advanced. However, it is guilty of something so far MGT has sort of avoided.

There are too many specialisms to Gun Combat.

TMB had just Slug Pistols, Slug Rifles, Shotguns, Energy Pistols, Energy Rifles.

Now we have: Slug Pistols, Slug Carbines, Slug Rifles, Shotguns, Laser Pistols, Laser Carbines, Laser Rifles, Zero-G Weapons, Man-Portable Artillery (for fusion pistols, etc), and Neural Weapons. From 5, to 10!

So, in a game with wide skills definitions, where a spacer can pilot every kind of spaceship, from a 10ton work pod to a million ton dreadnought, with just 3 specialisms, yet a marine needs 10 specialisms just to use small arms, and larger weaponry being a separate skill!

Now I'm not saying that said marine should be well trained in every weapon, but there a 5 specialisms just for projectile weapons, making it unlikely that even military men will be skilled in more than a couple of firearms.

I gonna be returning my game to just the original 5. SMGs will use slug pistol or slug rifle depending on their 'type'. Laser carbines (a skill with only a handful of weapon types) will use Energy Rifle, along with fusion rifles and the like, including neural weapons. And snub weapons will use the relevant slug skill.

I just hope the tendency to go back to the bad old days of needing a different skill to shoot a revolver over an auto-pistol is simply a relic of the time some of the CSC material was in T20 or CT form.

Otherwise, the occasional nitpick aside (such as a HuD giving a +2 to hit, better than a smart-gun can - I'm going to shift that to +2 Initiative), this CSC is a totally crucial buy.

 

[PathfinderAP]

Not seen the CSC book yet, but I totally agree, its crazy to have that many skills,

One idea...

Smallarms (any and all pistols)
Longarms (any and all weapons that can be fired from the shoulder, including, shotguns and crossbows)
Autofire (anything that fires on auto, semi or full, (maybe average this with the related skill, ie, with Longarms for assult rifles, Smallarms for machine pistols)
Heavy Weapon (choose one)
Archaic Weapon (choose one)

?

 

[rust]

We only use three of those skills, smallarms, longarms and support weapons.

 

[Supplement Four]

One of my gripes about MGT is that PCs receive too many skills. All those modifiers tend to stress a 2D6 system, since there are only 11 outcomes to a throw, and less than that are likely and useful (2.7% chance of 2 or 12 wipes out two results right there).

Classic Traveller started off with this type of problem back in the old days. If one had Auto-Pistol-1, why was another skill needed to fire a revolver or a snub pistol?

Then, as more supplements were published for CT, this problem was fixed. Book 4 brought in the Combat Rifleman and Pistol skills. Book 5 brought us the Handgun skill.

Now, with the Handgun skill, Handgun-1 meant that the character could apply the expertise to an autopistol, revolver, or snub pistol.

And, GMs could add the Handgun skill to Book 1 character generation tables, allowing CT characters to become more diverse with other skills besides weapons.



That's a pretty simple fix that Mongoose should consider, mirroring the advice presented in the OP.

 

[rust]

Yep, and if one thinks that a certain character should have problems to use
a certain weapon because he is not familiar with it, one can always raise the
task difficulty for the first time or the first few times he uses that weapon -
much easier to handle than a lot of separate skills.

 

[spinwardpirate]

I was thinking the very same thing the other day. I'd probably break it down into three or four basic categories at most... rifles, shotguns (smoothbores), pistols and beam weapons.

 

[PathfinderAP]

I was thinking the very same thing the other day. I'd probably break it down into three or four basic categories at most... rifles, shotguns (smoothbores), pistols and beam weapons.

I don't understand the need for a shotgun, or beam weapon skill,

if you use it like a rifle (shotgun, laser rifle) then the aiming is the same,

I added Autofire as a skill as to not give those Daniel Boone/Annie Oakley sharp shooter type characters on low tech worlds (without autofire tech) the same chance of hitting with a full auto weapon they have never used,

 

[CosmicGamer]

As usual, I agree somewhat and disagree somewhat.

I agree that from a game standpoint, less skills covering similar expertise is probably preferable.

I'm no weapons expert, so I may be wrong, but this is my take on things:

-Dissimilar weapons would require different types of routine maintenance and at times, repair.

Single Longarms skill for projectile and laser weapons:
- Knowing the effects of wind on a long range rifle shot might not be known by someone who has always used a laser weapon and never even held a projectile weapon.

Single longarms and single shortarms skill for projectile and laser weapons:
- Knowing the effects of rain, fog, and smoke might not be known by someone who has always used a projectile weapon and never even held a laser weapon.
- Knowing how to reload a projectile weapon would be different than knowing how to swap out a batter pack for a laser weapon.

Single projectile skill and single laser skill:
- The proper stance, how the weapon is held, and proper aiming are different.

I added Autofire as a skill as to not give those Daniel Boone/Annie Oakley sharp shooter type characters on low tech worlds (without autofire tech) the same chance of hitting with a full auto weapon they have never used,

I agree that there is a difference.
Single rifle skill:
- I can imagine someone who never used an fully automatic weapon wasting ammo because they are not used to the rapid fire.
- A rapidly fired weapon tends to 'lift' which will throw off someone not used to it.
(The reverse, going from automatic to single fire, is not as much of an issue)

Even a single skill for short projectile weapons has issues:
- Someone who used a six shooter their whole life, might not know how to eject a clip or reload it.

Differences in technology or tech levels for very similar weapons can even be a factor:
- Imagine someone who has always used a smart weapon with a graphic display and x-ray targeting trying to aim without his techno gizmos.

Remember, if you have any gun skill and you take up a different gun you are not unskilled with a -3 penalty, you are just not as good when using dissimilar guns.

All that said, there obviously needs to be a balance between all guns fall under one skill and every different weapon has it's own specialty.

I don't understand the need for a shotgun, or beam weapon skill,

if you use it like a rifle (shotgun, laser rifle) then the aiming is the same

Take the expert sniper and give them a shotgun to take out the guy with a hostage in front of them.

 

[far-trader]

I don't understand the need for a shotgun, or beam weapon skill,

if you use it like a rifle (shotgun, laser rifle) then the aiming is the same...

Not really. Not imo anyway but I've not done a lot of shooting.

A rifle is concerned mainly with aiming accounting for wind and drop.

A shotgun is concerned mainly with aiming accounting for pattern spread over distance (and wind and drop to a degree, but less so due to range).

A beam weapon will not be concerned with either, it may be concerned with atmopsheric dispersion.

All three are quite different in their usage and training, imo. And worthy of skill differences.

I added Autofire as a skill as to not give those Daniel Boone/Annie Oakley sharp shooter type characters on low tech worlds (without autofire tech) the same chance of hitting with a full auto weapon they have never used,

In my opinion the way to handle that is an unskilled usage penalty for any unfamiliar weapon, not adding a skill for a way to fire a weapon that is essentially familiar. Autofire is an option as a subset of Rifle skill, again imo (and in this case completely unskilled and inexperienced, I'd expect my first attempt would be laughable but I'd get the basics quickly enough). And the skill effect is broadly applicable enough that it can't really be taken that a high skill level means just a sharpshooter. It covers more than that.

My breakdown (fwiw) is generally: Handgun, Long Gun, Shotgun, Beam Weapon. With SMGs treated as Handgun or Long Gun depending on specifics of size and use (covering one-handed full auto handguns through two-handed full auto long guns).

 

[CosmicGamer]

Just thought of this so it has not had time to be analyzed (I'm sure you folks will do that for me!) but how about:

Just a single Gun Combat skill. Individual gun types or classes of guns types the character is familiar with are listed on the character sheet; these are not skills and do not get skill levels.

When using a weapon familiar with, do things as normal using Gun Combat skill.
When using guns the character is not familiar with, the GM simply adds difficulty, or a DM based on how different the weapons are.
At GM's discretion, a new weapon can be added to the list of familiar guns when the character has used it enough.

A matrix could be made listing the guns and the DM's.
Here is a simple one
PP = Projectile Pistol
PR = Projectile Rifle
EP = Energy Pistol
ER = Energy Rifle

===PP=PR=EP=ER
PP=00=-1=-1=-2
PR=-1=00=-2=-1
EP=-1=-2=00=-1
ER=-2=-1=-1=00

 

[PathfinderAP]

Take the expert sniper and give them a shotgun to take out the guy with a hostage in front of them.

Its not like he would miss, a good shot, is a good shot,

(btw I've out shot people with Sniper ratings in the past)

I can see from a technical point of view the issues of maintenance (which should be covered with another skill, as it is more than possible to be a great shot, but not know how to fix a gun) and performance (which really only matters at higher levels of skill at long ranges)

But the basic use of these weapons is the same, you aim, you shoot,
any difference would matter little in a close firefight,

 

[spinwardpirate]

A rifle is concerned mainly with aiming accounting for wind and drop.
A shotgun is concerned mainly with aiming accounting for pattern spread over distance (and wind and drop to a degree, but less so due to range).
A beam weapon will not be concerned with either, it may be concerned with atmopsheric dispersion.

That's pretty much how I see it too. And I'm fairly sure I'd lump black powder muskets in with shotgun.

 

[ThunderChilde]

Firstly, anyone familiar with a scope or sighting system has already gotten the key laser weapon skill down pat. There is little appreciable bullet drop with a hand gun, same with energy weapons.

If your sights already give you a calculated aimpoint, then you'd never notice the difference. A high powered small caliber round (varmint round) over reasonable distance has little drift from the point of aim, and the MOA on a good rifle and scope would work out the same way.

On this one your beating a dead horse.

If a pc encounters a weapon of unfamilar pattern, or tech, impose a difficulty mod that will drop with usage or practice, and having someone train them for a couple days will go a long way on this. Heck for a skilled shooter, experienced with several kinds of rifles, it might take only a few minutes to impart the key points and clear up maintence and special situations of the next day or two.

Black powder is a special category all its own, for both pistols and rifles/shotguns/blunderbusses.

So
Gun Combat
Archaic
Hangun
Shotgun
Longarm
Heavy weapons
Heavy Auto Weapons
Missiles
Artillery
Energy

 

[fiat_knox]

I'm going to put on my pointy red horns and pick up my pitchfork here.

I like this. The whole idea that nobody can be good at every kind of weapon does appeal to me somewhat.

Imagine some guy from a TL 11 culture, equipped with a TL 11 laser rifle, who loses his weapon in the bogs of some TL 3 backwoods and has to use, of all things, some old flintlock an old farmer had propped up in his homestead's broom cupboard.

The idea that a character who "likes guns" just can't automatically adapt to every new weapon type he sees, picking it up, mastering it and firing it with the skill of a van Damme, a Seagal or a Diesel, amuses me greatly.

"There are more killing sticks between here and Regina than are dreamed of in your philosophy, Horatio."

Characters should stick to a select few kinds of weapons, and get to know them really, really well. Just as a doctor can't know every speciality of medicine, characters should know what they do best, stick to it and be the best, knowing that there'll always be someone better than they are at something else.

That makes it real enough for me.

 

[ThunderChilde]

Yes and no, or maybe in YTU. In mine the players are better than the average schlub, not 4 color, but better. Any scout, or scout subcontractor in the exploration division with gun combat has a much better chance of figuring out a new to him rifle.

This is sci-fi, but there are realisticly only so many ways to make a rifle that a human can operate, and hit his semi-intended target with.

Now your prototypical TL11 weenie I am going to suppose has never ever seen historical or cultural media even poking fun at Milty von Schlub and his rediculous wheel lock armed armies shooting up his primitive matchlock neighbors on pick a neobarb world of your choice.

I suppose he was raised in a cultural and educational TL11 vaccum, and hence wouldn't even recognize that it was a weapon and not a peculiar looking crutch. Much less be able to talk to the neobarb in his fine swamp abode. If he was able to trade for said Flintlock, and the powder, ball or bullets, moulds, lead and melting crucible, spare iron pyrite flints and did not ask for a demonstration of how it all works is a fool and won't long survive.

If it takes him 6 months of hunting and marching, toss in a few fights to hike the long way to the star port, he may well have become quite handy with his new longarm. And maybe pickup survival or another level in it(if its low). Training and/or harsh experience is an excellent teacher.

 

[ThunderChilde]

I like this. The whole idea that nobody can be good at every kind of weapon does appeal to me somewhat.<snip>
Characters should stick to a select few kinds of weapons, and get to know them really, really well. Just as a doctor can't know every speciality of medicine, characters should know what they do best, stick to it and be the best, knowing that there'll always be someone better than they are at something else.

That makes it real enough for me.

Most active shooters are familiar with a large number of weapons, but really like just bare few, the few that for whatever reason fit better, feel better and they shoot better.

They also spend more time shooting them, just because there are 2 pistols, same model, evidently the same to casual observation, doesn't neccessarily mean that they are the same in a shooters hand.

I am not advocating for the "if it shoots, I can hit my target" feel, but any skilled shooter will get competent fast with a new weapon, but it does take some range time.

There are always those freaky few who have a talent.
The Annie Oakleys, John Wesley Hardings, Wild Bill Hickcocks etc.. They are historical, could shoot anything that threw lead and were scarily profient at it.

 

[Sturn]

Forgive me, I rambled, I love guns.

I have some firearms experience. Military background, police training officer, SRT leader. I've trained and been instructed in the use of auto. pistols, revolvers, assault rifles, rifles, grenade launchers, rocket propelled grenades, light machineguns, heavy machineguns, and calling for artillery fire.

Auto. Pistols and Revolvers, for game purposes, should be grouped togather. You hold them and fire them in the same way.

A carbine, assault rifle, hunting rifle, etc. should all be grouped togather, again for game purposes. I would also put shotgun in this same category. It's long, you hold it with two hands, it has a similar sighting system, and it's ballistics go by the same rules (bullet fires in an arc).

Submachineguns are tricky. Put a stock on it, you fire it like a rifle. Collapse the stock, it fires more like a pistol. Perhaps use a Handgun skill without stock, Rifle skill with stock.

I would argue for actually more differentiation in heavy weapons. A machinegun doesn't fire anything like a mortar. A mortar is fired nothing like a rocket propelled grenade launcher.

I of course have never fired a plasma gun or laser rifle, but there is still hope. I think the only difference would be in ballistics. You could argue that a slug rifle and laser rifle are held the same, fired the same, sighted the same, etc. The only true difference would be a flat trajectory vs. a slight arc. In reality, a person good at firing a slug rifle would probably be good at firing a laser rifle, possilby even better since now you don't have to worry about recoil or trajectory. However, for game purposes, I would still put "plasers" in its own category.

Slug Pistol: Snub Pistol, Auto. Pistol, Revolver, SMG w/collapsed stock.
Slug Rifle: Carbine, Rifle, Auto. Rifle, SMG w/stock.
Machinegun: Bipod and tripod mounted machineguns.
Energy Pistol: Laser Pistol, Plasma Pistol, Laser Carbine w/collapsed stock.
Energy Rifle: Laser Rifle, Laser Carbine w/stock, Plasma Guns.
Launcher: Grenade Launcher, RPGs, Missile Launcher?
Mortar: Only the kind that are a tube mounted on a ground plate.
Artillery: Heavier true "cannons", not mortars. Includes tank guns and howitzers fired directly. Perhaps Indirect Fire and Forward Observer would handle any indirect weapon (mortar, howitzer, grenade launcher) fired with a spotter?

Just my opinions and I realize all of this can be argued over and over. I put hunting rifle with assault rifle for game purposes, even though I had a real life experience that showed you do indeed have to readjust between them. I felt I was a good shot with a high power rifle. Went to US Army basics cocky. Had trouble at first firing an M16 assault rifle that felt like a toy. I couldn't understand why I wasn't good with it at an actual range. At the 50 meter paper target range I was making single holes with multiple bullets. When I got to a 300 meter range, I was doing poorly at certain ranges. Took a while to figure out it was the difference in trajectory in my assault rifle that was nowhere near as flat as my large hunting rifle (actually had to aim LOW at 150 meters). Once I understood this, qualified Expert everytime, usually 40/40. As suggested below, a -DM for familiarity would make sense. I had Rifle skill before hand, but had a -DM with the assault rifle until I got used to it, then I was back up to my default skill level.

If subskills are used in a game system, it works better in my opinion. A person that is a master of firing a rifle, gains some advantage for basic marksmanship when picking up a pistol. He may not be a master of a pistol when he picks it up, but he should have advantage over someone who isn't a master rifle marksman. A master swordsman shouldn't be a clutz with a dagger just because he never used one before. Much is similar.

Perhaps have Primary skills with subskills affected by them:

Marksmanship
Handgun
Rifle
Machinegun
etc

Melee
Unarmed
Long Blade
Short Blade
Pole Arm
etc

Archery
Crossbow
Bow

 

[Icosahedron]

My take, used since early CT days. It takes a bit of houseruling to insert into the rules, but it's simple once you've made the necessary changes to chargen:

3 skills:
Handgun
Rifle
Support Weapons

3 modifiers:
Auto Weapons
Energy Weapons
Archaic Weapons.

Each of the modifiers is a level-1 skill. If you need it and don't have it, subtract 1 from your weapon skill.

example: guy with Rifle-2 can fire any bolt action or semiauto rifle at skill=2
He fires a flintlock, smg, full auto or laser rifle (or shotgun if you like) at skill=1 unless he has the appropriate modifier.

Guy with Support-2 can fire a grenade launcher or rpg at skill=2, but for an auto-launcher, catapult, portable Plasma-A gun, he has skill=1, etc...

 

[fiat_knox]

There is a difference between the weapons you are familiar with and the weapons you are actually rated for.

You'd be considered trained in a weapon if you'd had some formal training in it: for the most part, formal military training is the equivalent of getting Slug Rifle-1 during Basic. That presumes you've done the full training and safety course, learned not to shoot your own foot (the first time, it hurts like Hell), and spent time down on the range trying to get the grouping at centre mass so your shooting can pass muster with the Sergeant.

Militaries will train up their troops for competence in a wide variety of weapons, but it's only Special Forces and Cavalry Scout types, whose routine missions involve deep penetration into enemy territory and who are therefore expected to be able to use enemy weapons, who will receive formal training in damn near every weapon under the sun, and training in how to figure out what an unknown weapon does to boot (so they don't disintegrate their own foot while trying to find out where the bullets come out).

And that is just the military. Looking at the police, they're only going to give basic sidearms training, taser and melee weapon (night stick or stun baton) training to their beat cops, and assault shotgun and sniper rifle training to their Emergency Response Unit troops. Exotic weapons like lasers, gauss rifles and FGMPs are not going to be on the menu - their remit is to detain criminals, not vapourise them and half the neighbourhood in the process - so you'd expect a cop to have Gun Combat (stunner, slug pistol) and Melee (nightstick, unarmed), and a SWAT cop to have Gun Combat (slug pistol, slug carbine, shotgun) as well as Melee (nightstick, unarmed) - and that's basically it, unless a police action somehow calls for RPGs against unarmed hippy protesters or a little light MagRail fire against a cyberpsycho (or is that too much like Talsorian's Cyberpunk?).

A soldier for hire with a rating in an exotic weapon is a treasured asset for Cadre missions - that speciality, plus Instruction skill, suddenly becomes all the more valuable if you know that nobody else is going to have that skill to hand, whether it's flintlocks or the Fusion Z cannon.

 

[rust]

There is a difference between the weapons you are familiar with and the weapons you are actually rated for.

While I see your point, it looks like "overkill" to me.

If one uses this as the justification for a high number of gun combat skills,
one could just as well introduce hundreds of other more specific skills for
other areas.

Think of sensors, a real life radar operator is rarely skilled in the use of so-
nar. Or think of a medic who knows a lot about cardiology, but almost no-
thing about gynecology. The computer operator who is almost helpless when
he encounters an unfamiliar operating system. The entomologist who is asked
to solve a marine biology problem.

So, if one would most probably see it as unnecessarily complicated to intro-
duce dozens of subskills for all the other skills, why should one want to in-
troduce a lot of subskills for the gun combat skill ?