What game system would be good for having a oneshot of fast paced shooting aka a team fps board game within an rpg adventure? Its going to be in the 80s with some supernatural monsters and armed humans as opponents.
The shooting action is the important part. Aiming reloading, firing, dodging, hiding behind cover and the rest. Clearing up a map a location, like a modern "dungeon". Like a simple doom clone on paper but very much fun.
 Shopping Cart Returner Shirt $21.68 |
 Ape Out Shirt $21.68 |
Shopping Cart Returner Shirt $21.68 |
>Aiming reloading, firing, dodging, hiding behind cover and the rest.
The more options/actions you want the slower your game is going to be; I know people that run Pheonix Command for hours to simulate literal seconds of real combat.
>Its going to be in the 80s with some supernatural monsters and armed humans as opponents.
Sounds like Delta Green.
>simulate literal seconds of real combat.
not the purpose of the game but must be fun and have some procedure of action as to make that tactical part matter to a degree that is still fun.
>newbie so new, he never even heard about second-by-second systems
>The shooting action is the important part. Aiming, reloading, firing, dodging, hiding behind cover and the rest
Literally all of those things would suck in a pen and paper tactics game.
Oh yeah lets run DOOM in fricking Hackmaster dude I'm sure that it will feel exactly the same.
>it will feel exactly the same.
its not the point but it ought to feel like there is some danger and some enjoyable action as they are progressing.
doom 1 was lots of fun and very simple
>Pheonix Command
maybe a simplified version of this
"Phoenix Command has extremely detailed rules in an attempt to realistically simulate combat. The game utilizes lookup tables which resolve injuries to specific digits, organs, and bones, and simulates the physics of different attacks, such as bullets with different velocities. Simplified rules were used for most of the movie tie-ins as well as Living Steel. "
i did not know this existed
what are the tiers of complexity by system?
i was thinking something on the lines of
"Spot, stance, aim, reload, fire or fire on the move, dodge, hiding behind cover, injury consequence, move, other" regarding options per round/turn of combat.
GURPS with all the applicable rules can get very detailed, or you could just have people roll their Firearms! wildcard skill and apply damage directly without even using injury or range modifiers.Depends on how many and which rules you ignore (and you honestly should).
That doesn't sound anything like Delta Green. Why do people think that DG is a door licker simulator?
This sounds interesting, but how do you structure it for a campaign?
if you have some setting in which you want to add a sort of bullet dungeon as you or the players find the game too narrative or the rules for combat of it lame you can do something like this.
Give High Speed Death Machine a peek. One of our local autists cooked it up a few years ago by mashing up SUPERHOT, Titanfall and DOOM Eternal.
https://docs.google.com/document/d/15qYnaIoHBFVjhJrerAq2z5NFi_I70J2bkkSqZXNJQyw/edit#heading=h.1x9hkcgsl2ks
Do my eyes deceive me? Do I get the chance to proselytize about Phoenix Command? /hwg/ has a copy hanging around in the second half of their OP if you want to check it out, but to be brief, PC is a hyper-autistic wargame more than an RPG (seriously, you will need basically a whole other system to handle everything that isn't combat), with time usually calculated in 500ms ticks (though you can go all the way down to 100ms when you need to track a bullet in flight). Unlike GURPS Tactical Shooting, which weighs heavily on a diverse array of specialized skills and techniques, PC anchors on how many actions a character can take in a 2-second Phase, which is determined as a function of natural aptitude, training and experience, and encumbrance. For frame of reference, a bootfrick private in full kit will be around 4 actions per phase, with his rifle requiring 11 or 12 actions to fully aim, though returns on investment diminish sharply after the first couple actions (representing the difference between the gross muscle movement of bringing the weapon to bear and fine movement of precision adjustment). The result is that better soldiers are better not because their numbers are bigger, but because they think and act faster while under life-and-death stress.
(cont.)
For campaign play, the defining feature of Phoenix Command is, of course, the lethality, with any given bullet, no matter how anemic, having more than enough capability to instantly kill a character, and so campaigns will naturally gravitate towards intensive risk mitigation as a counter. For a SWAT raid of the week campaign, this will mean lots of intel gathering and blueprint studying to form a plan, while more freeform games like my group's own post-apoc road trip, this means route planning and diplomacy, which, ironically, means that one of the most iconic features of a freeform Phoenix Command game is how little time the party spends actually playing Phoenix Command. The threat of death is so overwhelming that the entire campaign becomes an exercise in avoiding it, and that's something I can't say of many systems outside of outright horror games.
That Heinlein quote is so fricking stupid. "An ideal society is one in which the penalty for rudeness is execution without trial!"
Very apt for high-lethality gameplay, though.
No, you're fricking stupid. A more elaborate version of the Heinlein's sentiment would be something like this: "the equal and universal distribution of the right to proportional self-defense creates immediate physical risk for those who would otherwise be predisposed to use violence (or the threat thereof) to exceed the normative boundaries of their society to inflict their will on others. The ubiquity of physical deterrence creates its own form of social deterrence, reifiyng those societal norms for behavior and making actual violence less common."
Duelling being made illegal led to less people being killed in duels, curiously enough. Apparently fiddling with the legally and socially acceptable level of violence is a lot more effective than letting people stab each other at will.
>redefines self-defense as "duelling"
>blankly evaluates (no statistics whatsoever) in terms of an artificial category not recorded by any credible source
Read the following:
https://www.heritage.org/crime-and-justice/commentary/here-are-8-stubborn-facts-gun-violence-america
Some key points (all of which have sources):
>Higher rate of concealed carry leads to a lower crime rate
>Open carry doesn't change things either way, because very few people actually open carry (normatively viewed as weird).
>2/3 of American gun deaths are actually suicides, which should be treated as a radically different category than homicide. This is higher in rural areas with more gun ownership and ironically lower homicide rates
>"Knives" and "Unarmed" murder rates by weapon are much higher than by rifle
>Stronger gun control correlates with much higher homicide rate. (check also their source directly to the Brady Campaign).
Ops and Tactics has some wonderful crunch; in many ways I prefer it to GURPS.
We know from history that the ubiquity of physical deterrence is not deterrence at all. If he has a gun and he's got it already racked and trailed on you, your gun is only going to get you killed.
As for how it seemingly reduces crimes - the kinda petty theft or robbery is usually performed by people who aren't psychotic enough to put a knife into someobdy's back for whatever small change they could pick off the corpse, so they naturally are less likely to engage in shady business when lots of guns are present. It works because the response is way out of sync with the criminal's actual willingness to engage in violence as part of their crime. It isn't proportional, you're overmatching. Though at least most defensive uses of guns usually don't include unloading them into somebody, so some parity is ultimately maintained. Which is, overall, a good thing, because being robbed is, after all, not remotely comparable to accidentally dropping a tenner at the gas station.
>source: a literal gun advocacy group
lol
>proportional
lma fricking o
I'm sure he had great evidence for "civilized" societies being less internally violent and wasn't just making assumptions about muh savages
Heritage is a conservative research group, not a single-issue gun advocacy group like the NRA. If you had actually read the article (which you didn't), you would have seen that there are direct links to hard statistics from non-partisan organizations and even from anti-gun advocacy groups like the Brady Campaign. You have raised the issue of bias to deflect from the fact that you refuse to read anything that fits your bias.
>calls that anon a b***h and then describes his own b***h behavior
In the real world, relationships are serial, not single isolated events. When someone commits a property crime against you and you do not respond, they will feel as though they can do it again. And again. And again.
This discussion also presupposes that there is some bright, magical line between property crimes and crimes against the person. When someone robs you at gunpoint, if you give them your wallet, I would imagine that you would say "well you only lost your wallet" lol. This is because you fail to understand the nature of violence. When someone evil feels like they have absolute power over someone defenseless, they do not stop.
Finally, your argument is coming from a place of privilege. The idea of a distinction between property and the person presupposes that your property is not essential to your life. If you only have $100 for the next week and someone steals it, you literally do not have food or gas. You may not make it to work (if you even have a job, and losing the $100 means that you may lose your job). You will literally starve until you get money. Therefore defending your property is literally defending your life. If you don't understand the reality of that paradigm, then you unironically should not be moral judgments about people who have had to live that everyday.
Do they have a GitHub? Do they want help? Phoenix Command could really easily be dropped into an app.
I pointed the thread his way. If he feels like reaching out, he'll do so.
Yeah, I don't feel like helping. You busy this week? We should make some plans.
I like how Robert E Howard put it.
"Civilized men are more discourteous than savages because they know they can be impolite without having their skulls split, as a general thing."
People who think violence is a disproportionate response to rudeness have not met the very rude people that exist out there. If you haven't had some loud stinking fricking moron hassling you about some complete bullshit you don't want to deal with then you can't understand it. We live with so many social contracts that it's only when you meet someone with utter disregard for it that you grasp how vital it is.
Bitch, I don't even believe in deadly violence as a response to property crimes. It certainly fricking isn't a proportional response to your feefees getting hurt.
>noble society reflects the average human experience
>bored rich kids are the yardstick for morality
ok
The issue is that there really isn't a way to relate player skill to most of these actions. Unless you literally equip your players with nerf weapons and have them shoot at bullseyes while dodging your shots, you won't really capture an fps.
The best alternative is just playing a game that moves quickly with lots of abstraction, though it can still be very detailed in the preparation phase with long equipment lists and such.
>if you weren't the stereotype of noble ennui, you didn't duel
ok
It's called "brawling" when the plebs do it.
>Bitch, I don't even believe in deadly violence as a response to property crimes
Mindset of daddy's money. Go be upper middle class somewhere else. This is a crackshack discussion.
Also Dark heresy is pretty fun for a shooty shooty bang bang game..
This homosexual thinks people didn’t get in fights unless they were noble
How much of a sheltered piss baby do you have to be to conjure of this garbage and shif it out all over Ganker?
Delusional homosexual lmao
You ever heard of duelling? It literally how it has been for most how human history.
Would it be possible to take the pain out of Phoenix Command through Foundry or some other VTT?
One of my group is actually working on a program to automate rolls as a college project. You could probably get about 99% of the way there with some manual table entry and stringing the references together with code, though in my own experience, it's not that uncommon to come across an edge case that requires an application of common sense to get the most realistic result (and if you're not playing for maximum autism, you probably shouldn't be playing Phoenix Command).
Collegegay here
If I do release it with a public GitHub repo, it'll happen late December. The version I made for the course is extremely rough under the hood. I'll probably rebuild and refactor most of it to remove a lot of the jank that got worked in when I had to rush the first iteration along.
I'll probably reach out to my friend here who lurks around /tg/ more frequently to ask about how best to spread the word, if I manage to follow through.
GURPS High Tech, Gun Fu, Action and Tactical Shooting
James Bond
>What game system would be good for having a oneshot of fast paced shooting aka a team fps board game within an rpg adventure?
Whatever OP is smoking, I want to steer clear. this guy is on a CoD Withdrawal.
>CoD Withdrawal.
no actual modern fps are too fast and you can finish a building, let us equate to a game map, pretty fast.
The suggestions thus far have been useful and i will be able to cook something up. Thanks guys.
3:15 is a doom game
Have you looked at Twilight 2000 or Ops & Tactics?
It's always possible to build any kind of scenario out of GURPS, Palladium, or D20 splatbooks, of which there are an infinity.
Maybe some kind of skirmish or narrative mini wargame? Majestic 13 comes to mind right away. Also idea mining the 5 leagues/ parsecs systems could useful.