v4 Rules & Mechanics Discussion

[Raellus]

I'm interested in what y'all think about v4's rules and game mechanics. Please keep discussion of the v4 game world over in:

https://forum.juhlin.com/showthread.phpp=85705#post85705

-

[Olefin]

Good idea to move the mechanics here. I would also like to be able to discuss the artwork here as well which is one thing that V4 is definitely excelling it. I think that its very good and definitely one feature they got right

[Raellus]

Yes!

I would also like to be able to discuss the artwork here as well which is one thing that V4 is definitely excelling it.

Hey, something we agree 100% about! The artwork is indeed amazing.

-

[mpipes]

Yay....about those mechanics....where do I start.

I am not a fan so far. Yes, I have bitched over the years about the attribute and skill ratings and rules in V 1, 2, 2.1, and 2.2, but they are absolutely first rate compared to these!! I was hoping for something at least a bit more D&Dish that was a bit more intuitive, but alas that hope has been dashed.

The A, B, C, and D drivel is just that.....not at all intuitive. I was wanting to see a more straightforward set of attributes built around Strength, Constitution, Agility, Dexterity, Charisma, and Intelligence with Education being more akin to a learned skill and tied to Intelligence. Still not sure how to roll for anything. Skill bonuses seem to make sense, but not sure they allow for truly exceptional (like my current PC Sniper "Morg" Cole - 56 kills in the Campaign - 17 skill overall in Rifle).

Weapon rating system. Clunky and non-intuitive. GDW much easier to understand. Meters and kilos. And the ratings are far from intuitive (a .50 BMG M82 is Damage 4 while a 7.62 M21 is Damage 3 and a 14.6mm KPV is a Damage 4 - I just don't buy that) I just don't like the combat damage system as presented. The Critical rules look very promising. Vehicle combat looks a mess, but I am just tired at this point.

I could go on, but I think I will leave it to others to flesh it all out. I just don't find it intuitive. You'll have players going back and forth constantly to the rules and forever bickering about that "not sounding right." And alas, the KPV 14.5mm IS MUCH MORE POWERFUL (about twice more) than a .50 - that's just physics. Not sure what these guys are using, but their conversion formula is either far too coarse or just plain wrong.

[mpipes]

One last thought tonight....

These mechanics seem wildly messy to me and not intuitive at all, but I grew up in the old style D&D and SPI era, so maybe I am just damaged goods in a sense.

Does anybody think they are good Or an improvement over V 1 or 2.2

Please, someone that truly likes them chime in and say SOMETHING!!

[Rainbow Six]

Does anybody think they are good Or an improvement over V 1 or 2.2

Please, someone that truly likes them chime in and say SOMETHING!!

It will probably take me weeks to try and get my head round the mechanics. I may even wait until I get the hardcopy.

[StainlessSteelCynic]

One last thought tonight....

These mechanics seem wildly messy to me and not intuitive at all, but I grew up in the old style D&D and SPI era, so maybe I am just damaged goods in a sense.

Does anybody think they are good Or an improvement over V 1 or 2.2

Please, someone that truly likes them chime in and say SOMETHING!!

I don't like these mechanics. They're derived from the Year Zero rules that Free League uses as the base for all their games (as far as I am aware). They suit episodic, non-campaign style games and I've seen a particular trend among fans of the Year Zero rules that seems to bear this out.
They will play one Year Zero game until they get bored with it and then they'll start up a new game with a different Year Zero game. When they get bored with that one, they ship over to the next Year Zero game until they complete the circle and come back to the first game.

I don't see any longevity in that approach, it seems to me that they are simply playing the game to kill time rather than to follow the journey of their character.
I'd rather play RIFTS with all the problems of its hashed together AD&D mechanics because at least I can expect the game to last more than a few adventures.

[Targan]

Yep, the mechanics were a dealbreaker for me from day one.

[Benjamin]

Theres a pretty good version of Cepheus Engine game rules that have been tailored for modern military role-playing. Its by Zozer Games. In fact theres even an add on setting called oeBaltic War that might be very well received by many of the people here.

There is even a newly released supplement called oeAir Strike that allows one to integrate modern air combat directly into their games.

Just as a disclosure, I helped co-write a hard sci-fi setting, oeOrbital with Paul Elliot, the person behind Zozer Games. He does good stuff.

[StainlessSteelCynic]

Theres a pretty good version of Cepheus Engine game rules that have been tailored for modern military role-playing. Its by Zozer Games. In fact theres even an add on setting called oeBaltic War that might be very well received by many of the people here.

There is even a newly released supplement called oeAir Strike that allows one to integrate modern air combat directly into their games.

Just as a disclosure, I helped co-write a hard sci-fi setting, oeOrbital with Paul Elliot, the person behind Zozer Games. He does good stuff.

Personally I'd use the Cepheus Engine rules every single time in preference to a lot of other recent rules such as the Year Zero rules or the Gumshoe system

[Ewan]

Theres a pretty good version of Cepheus Engine game rules that have been tailored for modern military role-playing. Its by Zozer Games. In fact theres even an add on setting called oeBaltic War that might be very well received by many of the people here.

There is even a newly released supplement called oeAir Strike that allows one to integrate modern air combat directly into their games.

Just as a disclosure, I helped co-write a hard sci-fi setting, oeOrbital with Paul Elliot, the person behind Zozer Games. He does good stuff.

Modern War is an excellent rules set and very easily adaptable to the T2K setting and already there has been a good number of supplements released for it including one for WW1.

The Baltic War supplement has a limited war between NATO and Russia in Belarus and the Baltic states that has not escalated (yet) to neighboring countries. The campaign is open ended enough that you can develop it as you see it. I might be a bit biased about Baltic War has I helped out on it but its a really good supplement.

In addition I've written a short article that was published in the Cepheus Journal which details an early 80s British section for the game (see attached).

[StainlessSteelCynic]

Oh by all that's good & decent in the world of gaming...
Has anyone tried to make sense of the ammunition mechanic in this system
It appears to have been designed by people who have no actual experience with firearms.
It's awful.

The rules seem to work on the idea that if your character is not particularly good at combat then they are going to waste ammo - I don't particularly disagree with the intent but I do disagree with the implementation. But further than that, it also effects the percentile chance of having a mishap with the firearm. It seems to be that the more you fire in a turn, the higher your chances for having a mishap and this pays no attention to skill level of the shooter.

I can't express it, or my misgivings about it, as well as the person who posted the following on the Free League forums (emphasis mine): -

https://forum.frialigan.se/viewtopic.phpf=127&t=7058&start=10

Post #17 by cheeplives -
"... the way the game is set up you have a 25% chance of mishap WHENEVER you use 4 Ammo dice. That's basically saying that a pintle mounted MG get messed up a quarter of the time its used in combat. That .50 cal on the Abrams After suppressing the enemy for a bit, it's definitley going to need to be replaced/repaired/unjammed. Once again, this is a spot where the mechanics start creating disincentives for specific actions due to flukes of the system, not because of any kind of modeled reality, verisimilitude, or reason... it's just a wrinkle with no real reason."

[mpipes]

I guess they never heard about water cooled machineguns in WWI that routinely fired upwards of 1 million rounds with no stoppages.

[StainlessSteelCynic]

It gets worse...
Every firearm has a reliability rating from D to A (A being best). Most weapons in the player's book are rated at A
However...
This seems to have very little impact on your chance for a malfunction due to the random nature of the ammo dice mechanic

So why have reliability at all
I am scratching my head so hard I'll have bald spots soon!

[swaghauler]

Oh by all that's good & decent in the world of gaming...
Has anyone tried to make sense of the ammunition mechanic in this system
It appears to have been designed by people who have no actual experience with firearms.
It's awful.

The rules seem to work on the idea that if your character is not particularly good at combat then they are going to waste ammo - I don't particularly disagree with the intent but I do disagree with the implementation. But further than that, it also effects the percentile chance of having a mishap with the firearm. It seems to be that the more you fire in a turn, the higher your chances for having a mishap and this pays no attention to skill level of the shooter.

I can't express it, or my misgivings about it, as well as the person who posted the following on the Free League forums (emphasis mine): -

https://forum.frialigan.se/viewtopic.phpf=127&t=7058&start=10

Post #17 by cheeplives -
"... the way the game is set up you have a 25% chance of mishap WHENEVER you use 4 Ammo dice. That's basically saying that a pintle mounted MG get messed up a quarter of the time its used in combat. That .50 cal on the Abrams After suppressing the enemy for a bit, it's definitley going to need to be replaced/repaired/unjammed. Once again, this is a spot where the mechanics start creating disincentives for specific actions due to flukes of the system, not because of any kind of modeled reality, verisimilitude, or reason... it's just a wrinkle with no real reason."

I guess I'd have to ask WHY there is an "ammo dice" mechanic at all Are we as gamers getting so lazy that we cannot keep track of basic supplies in lieu of a dice mechanic in a game where "resource management" is one of the key features That seems like some lazy game design to me.