are there any GM'S out there who would be more forgiving with that. not all pistols or anything but would GM'S allow glock pistols for example or G3 rifles as they are very similar. so the glock 17 or 20 would still get the bonus.
what do people think?
Semiautomatic Handguns
Revolvers
Shotguns
Rifles
It seems like if it is a feat, it ought to be a little more broad than one brand or type of weapon. This is also consistent with DnD rules, that don't insist on limiting weapon focus to 'the cold-iron longswords forged by the dire dwarves in South Mordor, Union 55'.
I would break it down as follows:
Semiautomatic Handguns
Revolvers
Shotguns
Rifles
It seems like if it is a feat, it ought to be a little more broad than one brand or type of weapon. This is also consistent with DnD rules, that don't insist on limiting weapon focus to 'the cold-iron longswords forged by the dire dwarves in South Mordor, Union 55'.
Agreed.
Agreed.
Disagreed.
the whole point of WF is to zero in on one type of specific weapon, not one category of weapon (that is basically personal firearm prof).
now as for whether or not you can use different variants of your WF weapon, as a gm i would rule that if the modifications allow the weapon to do more than one additional function (ie laser sight, or grenade launcher) then it moves outside of the intense training that was put into the feat in the first place. Allowing them to change that focus could be an option.
Light Revolvers
Service Pistols SA
Service Pistols DA
Service Revolvers
Magnum Pistols
Magnum Revolvers
For balance. Close enough but not so super restricting... A crack rifleman wouldnt be so hot with a pistol, just as a revolver focused guy aint as confident with a 9mmAuto. But if you are a master of the Ruger9mm, is a Baretta92 really so alien? Ok, spend a full round to locate all the goodies & away you go. Same with a 45, if you have mastered the 45, then the SW 9mm aint a hard concept to grasp. One really big difference in accuracy is the trigger pull- focusing on DA or SA can mess you up on a different action gun.
But like I said, this is a Game Balance idea. In D&D you dont focus on one particular longsword made in one province but not the longsword made 2 countys over, the 30-40" sword genre is broken down into just 3 or4 basic types like Longsword, broadsword, katana, etc
@ Godmoney: Alright, but seriously, +1 to hit? I'd rather be able to fire two weapons at once, or fire to rounds per attack or whatever. The +1 to hit is very meager. In my campaign, we use a scaling +1/3 of BAB (round down) to hit. That way, warrior-types get a bigger bonus from Weapon Focus compared to non-warrior types.
I bought a Glock 17 a few months ago, and I still can't shoot it nearly as well as either of my other guns. The trigger, surprisingly, doesn't bother me, nor do the basic sights. It's the change in the grip angle. When I bring the weapon on-target, it's aimed way too high and I have to compensate before pressing trigger. This could be overcome through training, but that would interfere with the instinctive pointing of my 1911 and Beretta, so I don't see the point. I bought the Glock because it was a screaming deal, and they're so common that I think a shooter ought to know the ins and outs of their operation and use in the event he has to use one. I treat my Glock like my AKs: train with them enough to be proficient in the event that I have to use one, but realize that they are not the specialized tools that I prefer.
Now, all this assumes a level of knowledge regarding firearms. Most gamers don't have that, so we're left with basically three options:
1. Weapon Focus applies only to specific models.
2. Weapon Focus applies to broad categories (semi-automatic handgun, revolver, semi-automatic 'assault' rifle, traditional rifle, pump shotgun, semi-auto shotgun, etc)
3. Create a dedicated set of weapon groups (all HK roller-locked weapons, all 1911-pattern weapons, all AR-15 pattern weapons, all AK-pattern weapons, all double-action revolvers, all Glock-pattern weapons, etc) and rely on judgement calls on the part of non-gun-savvy GMs to adjudicate.
Personally, I prefer #2 or #3.
#3 would be great, #2 wouldnt be too bad.
After shooting 357 for a while I got by first 45. First shot I thought to myself "OMG, this gun is doing all kinds of crazy stuff in my hand". I really wasnt ready to experience the shove/countershove as the slide was whipping back & forth... mostly the odd sensation of the slide slamming to a stop as it finished the cycle. Really different feeling than the single spike bark of a revolver in your hand.
As for focusing in a specific model,
I had gotten pretty good at the DA trigger on my GP100, such that I was pulling fast just enough to advance the cylider & lock but pause holding that pressure to get a final aim before the last creep to drop the hammer.
I agree with stabbist.
@ Godmoney: Alright, but seriously, +1 to hit? I'd rather be able to fire two weapons at once, or fire to rounds per attack or whatever. The +1 to hit is very meager. In my campaign, we use a scaling +1/3 of BAB (round down) to hit. That way, warrior-types get a bigger bonus from Weapon Focus compared to non-warrior types.
im not saying its an uber feat or anything...
i dont take WF unless i have too for a AdC or PrC... WF ranks way down the list of feat choices for me... give me TWF and Double tap...
as for your house rule, thats good if you play lots of combat encounters
yup.
After shooting 357 for a while I got by first 45. First shot I thought to myself "OMG, this gun is doing all kinds of crazy stuff in my hand". I really wasnt ready to experience the shove/countershove as the slide was whipping back & forth... mostly the odd sensation of the slide slamming to a stop as it finished the cycle. Really different feeling than the single spike bark of a revolver in your hand.
I had the opposite experience. I grew up shooting automatic pistols, mostly 1911s. When I got my J-frame snubby, I realized just how much I was accustomed to letting the slide's forward movement bring the weapon back on target. I have to really bear down on the J to doubletap with it. Then again, my most likely use will be for a NSR drill at conversational range.
i was hoping to get all glock pistols an a group.
it is interesting to see how the question split the board. as in some agree and some do not.
more interesting when i am from the uk and have never fired any of the guns we are talking about...
Having an all-encompassing "pistols" weapon group is too broad.
I think having brand-based groups might work though (ex. Glock pistols, H&K submachineguns, or Colt rifles).
i was hoping to get all glock pistols an a group.
if you took all the full size glocks as opposed to the baby glocks, since the only difference is the barrel caliber size.
if you took all the full size glocks as opposed to the baby glocks, since the only difference is the barrel caliber size.
Actually, that's not true. The 9mm, .40S&W, .45 GAP and .357 Sig Glocks use one frame, while the .45 ACP and 10mm Glocks use a different frame. Although, you can get a .40 S&W conversion kit for the 10mm Glock...
Broad Catagories, I.E pistols.
However, when a pc gets a New pistol, of a Different make or model, they must train for an hour or two to gain proficiency/focus with it.
So here's my suggestion: Tie your Weapon Focus feat to a specific firearm. When using a similar type firearm with the same characteristics then there really isn't any reason not to apply the feat to that weapon as well. Well, no reason apart from the fact that the GM might object.
-K
Unfortunately, we cant really define the characteristics of a 2d6 RI30 Medium weapon into very tight subgroups of pistol. A snub 357 revolver is not the same focus as a 9mm auto, a 1911 is not the same focus as glocks, but a 10mm1911 works like a 9mm 1911 like a 45 1911 like Series70 like Commander. One would need, as Johannixx alluded to, some firearm knowlege to do so effectively by real qualities
I am a D20 Modern GM, and have very little understanding/knowledge of firearms. I don't want to get into arguments with players about why one pistol should be in the same group as another because the slide mechanism is such and such, or the angle of the pistol grip mirrors the same pistol that I have weapon focus in, therefore I should have weapon focus in this pistol also.
For simplicity sake, I am going to keep it simple, and play it as the game designers have created it.
How many 1hand weapons can you choose from with SimpleWeapon & Martial Weapon prof? 20-ish? If you Focus in one of them, you are 1:20 likely to be focused in what the mook you fight next will be carrying.
Now in Modern, with Simple & PFP and the Weaponlocker, how many 1 hand weapons can you choose from? 50? 60? You could fight a whole lotta mooks & not find one with your particular weapon.
Too bad, this guy had a Taurus92 and you are focused in Barreta-M9
I just thought of another take onit, Game Balance wise:
How many 1hand weapons can you choose from with SimpleWeapon & Martial Weapon prof? 20-ish? If you Focus in one of them, you are 1:20 likely to be focused in what the mook you fight next will be carrying.
Now in Modern, with Simple & PFP and the Weaponlocker, how many 1 hand weapons can you choose from? 50? 60? You could fight a whole lotta mooks & not find one with your particular weapon.
Too bad, this guy had a Taurus92 and you are focused in Barreta-M9
This is true but, if you have a 9mm (not my first choice) at least the odds are good you'll have the same caliber as the Mook you just killed or subdued.
On page 67 of d20 Past there is an example Frontier martial, and in my copy at least his Weaponfocus is listed as "Longarms" not even as rifles or shotguns but, Longarms
oh, that is just an outstanding find
Its like the writers havent even played D&D to be that out of the loop. I mean, do their Fighters have "Focus Blades"?
oh, that is just an outstanding find
Its like the writers havent even played D&D to be that out of the loop. I mean, do their Fighters have "Focus Blades"?
Oh it wouldn't surpise me, I think I was happier with d20Past then alot of gamers and even I had problems with, its hard to run a Pirates of the Caribean style game when the Undead infested East India man(The Black Pearl) vaporises the PC's stolen Scooner(The Interceptor) with its firt salvo.
Also the Wepon Focus (Longarms), typo may not appear in later printings (Mine is from May '05) depending on quality control (Though wizards may have desided to distance themselves from past all together) later runs may read Weapon Focus(Spencer .56 repeating Carbine) the martial's rifle. If the latter then I regret ever actually using my copy, who knows what I could have gotten on ebay.
Focusing on one particular gun is really not in-line with the spirit of the feat, which isn't exactly overwhelmingly powerful to start with. Again I say, generic guns in d20M solves that problem.
Now, don't take this the wrong way, I'm not trying to start a flaming session here, but I have a problem with statements such as "in-line with the spirit of the feat". Unless you were one of the developers, how do you know what the "spirit of the feat" is? Perhaps they absolutely meant what they developed? Has there been any official erratas on this? I don't think so.
There are a lot of differences between the two systems that have very specific, numerical effects on the game (non-lethal damage and massive damage spring to mind, as well as limiting spells), but the weapon focus thing just looks like someone didn't think it through. They made the design decision to list specific guns from specific manufacturers, which makes weapon focus even less valuable than it is right now.
Now, I'm really not one to complain about power levels. I think there's way too much power creep as it is, but there's just such a big difference between "weapon focus: any sword that's between 3 and 4 feet long" and "weapon focus: particular gun made by a particular manufacturer and requires particular ammo" that I conclude that it is an error in judgement on the part of the designers.
At the very, very least, I conclude that I would like to alter the rule in my own games, which I am both ethically and legally entitled to do. I'm not enslaved to the rules in the books. I use them because they work and they're (generally) pretty well though-out, but I also ignore them if my own judgement tells me to.
By the way, I don't want to seem like I'm reacting in a huff, here. It's a really good question. This is my considered answer.
DnD has Listings of 'Shortswords', 'Longswords', and Others like this, Though Depending on who mage the Sword, Ot would be Different. Either The Handle or Blade could be Slightly longer or Shorter, or mabye a Difference Wieght, but the Weaon focus Feat in this Regard, Doesnt mke you say, 'Short Swords made by...'. In d20 Modern, the Only reason there are Specific models of Gun, is so that you just dont get, '9mm Pistol' in the Listing.
I'm Going to use a DnD-ish thing here.
DnD has Listings of 'Shortswords', 'Longswords', and Others like this, Though Depending on who mage the Sword, Ot would be Different. Either The Handle or Blade could be Slightly longer or Shorter, or mabye a Difference Wieght, but the Weaon focus Feat in this Regard, Doesnt mke you say, 'Short Swords made by...'. In d20 Modern, the Only reason there are Specific models of Gun, is so that you just dont get, '9mm Pistol' in the Listing.
Unfortunenatly I think that all we can do is agree to disagree on this (and by we I mean everyone on this thread) each side has its merits, the generic arguement makes since in regaurd to the generic nature of non firearms, the weapon groups make since for the the reason that there are plenty of weapons that are basicly clones of each other. And of course the spesfic weapon argument makes sence from the RAW point of view.
Just divide your D&D Longsword into 6 or 7 different models, and have the player pick which one to focus in. Do the same to Sabres & Raipers, Cutlasses & Scimitars. That would be a lot of fun, since all 6 specific models would have basicly the exact same numbers in the stat block. Welcome to the world of 9/45 Service Pistol. Quick quiz: which WL gun are you focused in if it is Pistol 2d6 range30 wt3 crit20.
Anways, I am rambling sorry. In DnD regular, you focus on Sabres OR Scimitars OR Cutlasses, not on "curved swords"
In the same manner I believe in modern, you focus on one specific weapon type. i.e. A glock 17 but not a glock 21. A glock 17 but not a Sig 226. While they are all very similar, as similar as the 3 curved blades listed above, they also have key differences, like location of mag release, lock-open functionality, loaded chamber indicators in different spots or not present. Take a look a the Beretta 92 and teh Taurus FP92, note the safety is in two different spots. Small differences that matter.
I defenately wouldn't accept "focus: revolver" For instance, colt revolvers the cylinder turns clockwise, in smithandwesson it turns counterclockwise (very important if you only have time to load a round or two)
If your DM wants to strech it a little to be kind, well, okay, that is up to him. (personally I could see stretching a glock 17 to cover glock 19, but definately not all the rest)
Now, what you also have to realize, many parts to guns are just accessories. So I have G3 with serial number 1404013. I have a focus on G3. I paint my G3 winter cammo, does that change it enough to not be the focus? Of course not. Same with attaching a bipod, a sling, or a folding stock. You have the same base weapon, the exact same base weapon, same serial number and everyhing. How could the focus NOT cover that?
If you do somethign drastic like change where the controls are located, alter the barrel length by a large amount, or some other truely drasic change, then yea that would push it out of bounds. Other than that, if the heart of the weapon stays the same, the features and accessories placed on it are irrelevant, just like whatever color you spraypaint it is irrelevant.
an SKS with a wooden stock is still an SKS. Now you grab one with a polymer stock, still an SKS.
Personally, I'd like to have focus be +3 and have it be for one specific firearm. As in, this one here in the character's hand with serial number 15062. Go with the whole "This is my rifle. There are many like it but this one is mine" You have your M16, it is different than your buddies M16. If you pick his up, it won't shoot the same as yours. You get the bonus with your specific one only. (this really makes sense too with rifles, because serial number 15062 and the one that rolled out the factory right behind it, 15063, can shoot to two very different spots, and can have two very different ammo-prefrences. Your buddy set the sights to be dead on for his shooting style, yours is slightly different, so the sights are going to be off too. Sure, it is close enough to yours you don't get any penalty, but you sure don't get the bonus.
You use your D+D example of Scimitars, Cutlasses, and Sabers, but I point out to you that in the PHB, there is only a scimitar, if there are other versions, they are in some expansion book, and we all know that not all expansion books were good ideas. Pun-pun came from Serpent kingdoms, or something with a similar title, as I recall. However, in the PHB, there is a Longsword, which shares focus to all the other longswords, no matter the difference in balance, in weight (they are all assumed to weigh the same), in blade width, in blade length, in hand-guard, plenty of variables, and yet they all fall under one.
Unfortunately, we are trying to shoehorn real world into game terms. That always fails. Even trying to cover relatively common things would require 500 page game manuals.
Every DM is going to have to decide for himself where the line is. However, simply putting in a 100 round Beta-C mag is going to drastically change the feel of the weapon, ive never heard anyone say that should cause the focus bonus to be dropped. Same with a bipod, scope, or paintjob.
Yes, you can strip down the gun to just the receiver and rebuild it up to something entirely different. However, swapping stocks to me doesn't constitute entirely different
Here is a stripped lower
When you get this far, exactly which stock is on the gun at the time isn't going to change much at all, Collapsable vs fixed, I say it is all the same.
you wouldn't say weapon focus bonus should drop based on two slightly different kinds of collapsable stocks, would you?
vs
The military is switching to Magpul stocks, but not changing the M4 designation
What about an M16A2 with carry handle perminantly attached vs M-16A4 where the carry handle is removable, but solidly attached,?
Here you get to keep the bonus
what about this? It has the same stock as your standard M-16, but it just has a lot of accessories added on. To me, this would be much different to shoot than simply putting on a retractable stock
Or what about two slight variants of collapsable stocks?
Of course, changing caliber, "significant" alteration of barrel, etc etc, those I think you could argue would allow focus bonus to be revoked
now, we can all agree that this is probably enough of a change from your basic m-16 for the bonus to disappear
That?
You need to turn that weapon over to Hinthas, and tell him which PsyOp Pink Bradleyyou took it from. Matter of fact, dont worry about it.... PsyOps will have a specialist induce a need for you to turn it & all other contraband in on your own, and enlist for a non-specific term & undisclosable duty you may or maynot perform.
The M-Psyxteen
pl5 PsyOp Assualt Rifle
Stat Block: Use standard m16-a1 stat block for use as firearm.
Special: The M-Psyxteen is issued soley to Shock & Aww Aint That Cute troops as a part of their combat doctrine. All persons veiwing the M-Psyxteen that have not already become imune to the effects must make a Will Save DC15 or be Dazed 1d4 rounds by how cute it is. For every 10 people killed by the viewer a +1 Circumstance bonus may apply, +2 if they were killed in melee.
Thru the use of electroshock indoctrination over a 72 hour sleep depravation period of exposure to the rifle, personel may make a single Will Save DC20 to become permanently imune. This training may only be attempted once.
.jpg)
you need to modify it slightly if you are in california
besides, what other color should little girls repel the boogieman with?
oh yes, purple!
but personally, I am drawn to blue, I wonder why that is?
I wouldn't say that a slightly different stock would be worth losing the focus, but I would say that it is a change. What if you are firing with stock retracted? Lose focus then? The longswords in D+D cover the equivalent of the M16, G36, AR-18, L85, Type 89, all the variants of AKs including the Galils, FNCs, and what not, the Tavor, pretty much all of the 5.56, 5.45, and 7.62 x 39 full-sized rifles, as well as the 5.8 ones, I suppose. Then there would be the... maybe bastard swords, except without the one-handed rules, the FAL, G3, M14, BM59, Garand, all the semi-auto higher-powered guns.
Of course, the comparison doesn't work perfectly, as ammo is different and different capacities on some of them, but you get the idea.
How would it look if we did that with Bows & crossbows?
How many Simple & Martial does D&D have, Long, Short, HeavyX, LightX, and Composite L & S.....that is a total of 6 different ammo throwers. Sure there may be some funky exotics, but those would be like the shotguns in our comparison for guns.
6 types of 2handed StringFire ammo throwers for Simple & Martial Prof,
so lets just divvy up the 2handed Firearm ammo throwers into 6 types.
Light Rifle, Heavy Rifle, AutoLight, AutoHeavy(.30), Magnums, SMG/Carbines
-- Lets just throw all the non-semi/full Autos into one group... Bolt/Pump/Lever/Single --
There, done.
Auto Hvy/Lt = LongBow / ShortBow
Lt / Hvy Rifle = Lt / Hvy Crossbow
Magnums ~ Comp Longbow
SMG/Carbines ~ Comp Short
Funky Guns: Shotguns, caneguns, ~ exotic junk like HandXbow & PelletBow
I'm not saying the guns are the same power or use, but that the FOCUS would be along the same lines. There are only 6 kinds of 'Simple/Martial' 2hand StringFire ammo throwers in D&D.
#1 define the general group ala your list.
#2 get a very nice bonus (+2 or +3) when using a specific specimen "this is my rifle, there are many like it but this one is mine"
#3 for a significant cost a new specimen in that general group can become the focus. (If the original breaks beyond repair, you can get something similar, and spend a bunch of hours and money on ammo acquainting yourself with that gun, but it must be quite similar to the original)
#3 for a significant cost a new specimen in that general group can become the focus. (If the original breaks beyond repair, you can get something similar, and spend a bunch of hours and money on ammo acquainting yourself with that gun, but it must be quite similar to the original)
But that significant cost would be 3 sheets of paper, 15 bullets, and 20mins. If my m16 got mangled, I just get another one assigned, BFZ it, set my clicks from the last gun, and shoot a group at 25m. Check it, click it if needed, shoot another group of 5 to verify, check it, click it if needed, and stoot a last group for the file cabinet.
Same goes for a lost 1911, but it takes longer cause you are using a driftpunch.
Keep in mind that this is just a +1 Focus, not to be conmfused with Specialization or DoubleSpecializiation from back in the day of +3/+3 & NochedArrows . Maybe Focus should be a +1 for the class of gun, and spend another feat to get the specific model +2(+3total)
Just as Personal FireArm Prof is insanely extensive, Focus needs to be on a group, such as "Rifle-Auto/Semi-Smallbore" or "Pistol-Revolver-Bigbore" or "Shotgun-Pump" but not "Shotgun-Auto/Semi" nor "Shotgun-Single"
How many different focuses do folks want there to be?
20? 50? 200?
D&D focus is a choice of nowhere near that many styles of weapons.
But that significant cost would be 3 sheets of paper, 15 bullets, and 20mins. If my m16 got mangled, I just get another one assigned, BFZ it, set my clicks from the last gun, and shoot a group at 25m. Check it, click it if needed, shoot another group of 5 to verify, check it, click it if needed, and stoot a last group for the file cabinet.
and that is why you'd not have that specialization. If a character has some in-game limitations like being a part of a military organization where he gets weapon X and once every few months he gets a weapons qual, that kind of background wouldn't allow weapons focus any more than it would allow him to pick up knowledge: Aramaic...unless he was able to add some backstory about taking a night class on-line in ancient biblical texts
no I am talking intimate knowledge of the mechanical device. For starters, what kind of ammo does it like the best? From a military angle, the shooting team gets cherry picked M-16s, and traditionally it was a similar style of cherry picking that designated which main battle rifles would be scoped and issued to snipers. So, your cost could run into multiple purchases of the same model of firearm (althgough you could resell them at 75% value). Then there is proper barrel break-in to smooth the factory roughness out of it. Pop it open and reworking the trigger to your specifications or sending it off to have that done, possibly working up handloads that group best in that gun, and as mentioned, buying one box each of 10 major ammo makers, and then different weights of each. It is going to take a while to really establish what the gun can do.
and it is that kind of detailed knowledge that would justify a bonus. Otherwise every single grunt coming out of basic would have 'weapon focus M-16' whereas I see the average infantryman as having an average knowledge of the M-16, while the armorer, marksman coach, someone on the army shooting team, or the range master might get enough extra hands on experience to claim 'weapons focus'
while Focus Longsword is just about any 2.5-3.5' sharp steel stick with a grabby-end
(well, double edged slash/thrust anyways, not really applicable to curved or purely thrusting like a rapier/smallsword)
But therein lies the problem, attempting to shoehorn in modern ranged weapons using rules really designed around melee weapons.
It does make sense that someone highly skilled in the use of a crosshilt sword of the style of 900 AD could directly apply those specific skills to a similar sword, of 1300AD, even if one had a more tapered blade than the next, more of fewer fullers. Truth is, you can probably find more varaition between the two most extreme examples of 900 AD norman sword than between the closest two examples of a 900AD and a1300AD northern euopean sword.
Ya give Rob Roy a viking sword, he'd use it just as well, but a katana or smallsword, not so much.
That system breaks down for firearms where you have so many almost exact duplicates, and yet exact duplicates can shoot in very different ways. The techniques you learn to wring the best out of your parker and hale M85 sniper rifle would directly apply to that old SKS, and yet the intimate familiarity you have with the parker and hale may not translate to your neighbor's M85, nor to the M24.
It does however make sense that a Iriqous brave skilled and practiced with a flint dagger moreso than any other weapon in his arsenal would be able to directly apply those skills to a k-bar. Or that Aztec warrior who specailizes in war clubs, sure he can use a spear, bow, dagger, atl-atl, but he trains mostly with clubs, could easily transition his extra expertese to a baseball bat
I think they need to restrict weapon focus to melee.
come up with something different to represent the extra intimate knowlege someone has of modern ranged weapons.
Lying it on overtop is like attempting to morph riding into piloting an aircraft.
If they really need to seperate ancient ranged weapons, you could simply catagorize or define 'modern' as something that launches a projectile faster than the eye can normally follow. That would allow recurve and compound bows to follow the old rules, and some Kelto-Iberian slinger that gets sucked into a time warp is going to be equally adept at using a strap of nylon to sling pool-balls as he was using a strap of horsehide to fling clay spheres.
Akodo, it seems to me like you are underestimating the differences between melee weapons, if I had to guess, I would say your experience with guns far outweighs your experience with other weapons. Even the slight differences between two baseball bats like you used as an example will make a lot of difference in your swing, far more than your example of the magazine release on a PT-92 rather than a 92FS.
I think that older weapons here are getting oversimplified because we don't have anyone here that knows a huge amount about them, if they did, they would be able to point out a lot of differences, even just the way a weapon balances makes a huge difference. That is partially from fencing experience and partially from playing baseball for about eleven years, the differences between one bat and another are far less than the differences between one longsword and another. The difference between bats would only be a matter of a couple inches and a few ounces, it would be a difference of a foot and a couple pounds with swords. And what about clubs? I would go to say that weapon focus: club is actually covering more than weapon focus should, that is everything from a tire iron to a barbell to a baseball bat, to a walking stick or a Shillelagh, to a police baton.
You seem certain that weapon focus, which I must remind you, gives a very small bonus, should be about someone who is so specialized with one particular example of one particular weapon that he is much better with it than others. Let me remind you that the bonus you would be given with a 1911 would be enough that without far shot, you would be able to hit a given target from another 15 feet away. 15 feet is 5 yards, less than 5 meters. So take the people that shoot iron sighted M16s out to 600 meters, are you saying that with their weapon they would be able to hit at 600 meters, but with the competitor's rifle next to them, they wouldn't (which I agree with), but would if they moved a couple steps up (which I disagree with)? Weapon focus is not a mystic bond between a man and his boomstick, it is being better than average with one particular kind. What we are debating here is if it really makes sense for that little tiny advantage to only apply to one kind of service-caliber pistol, or bolt rifle, since it doesn't just apply to one kind of longsword or longbow
For example:
Personal Firearm Proficiency (as RAW)
Weapon Focus (a weapon group - revolvers/automatic pistols/bolt-action rifles/etc...)
Weapon Specialization (one specific firearm - Colt Python/Beretta 92F/AR-15)
How about this - we have 3 levels of proficiency: Proficiency in a weapon, focus in a weapon, and specialization in a weapon. Why not let each of them be one tier more specific than the last?
For example:
Personal Firearm Proficiency (as RAW)
Weapon Focus (a weapon group - revolvers/automatic pistols/bolt-action rifles/etc...)
Weapon Specialization (one specific firearm - Colt Python/Beretta 92F/AR-15)
Sounds reasonable. What bonuses would you give?
As RAW?
Proficiency: you don't take a -4
Focus: +1 to hit
Specialisation: +2 to damage
However, I'd really love to change that, for the sake of simplicity, to:
Focus: +1 to hit and damage
Specialisation: another +1 to hit and damage, total +2
This would make those feats worth a bit more and it would make the math easier to keep track of. I'm not normally an advocate of power increases, but the Weapon Focus feat is worth so little that I have only ever taken it as a prerequisite. It's worth slightly more than mastercraft, which just ain't good enough for me. And I really hate having to keep track of hit and damage bonuses separately. It's not taxing. It's just a pain in the ass.
However, I'd really love to change that, for the sake of simplicity, to:
Focus: +1 to hit and damage
Specialisation: another +1 to hit and damage, total +2
This would make those feats worth a bit more and it would make the math easier to keep track of. I'm not normally an advocate of power increases, but the Weapon Focus feat is worth so little
Sounds good to me.
What degree of group tightness are you thinking? Revolvers/Rifle-Bolt/Rifle-Auto/Shotguns(-?) etc
You think 4 pistol groups & 4 Rifle groups (+ Shotgun(1-2?)) would be ok?
Or break those down to caliber, Service-AutoPistols, Magnum-AutoPistols, SmallBore-BoltRifle etc and have maybe 25-30 groups for Focus
it would be a difference of a foot and a couple pounds with swords.
na, inches and a few ounces, get more than that and you cross out of longsword to bastard or short
http://www.thearma.org/essays/weights.htm
That actually makes a lot of sense. The better the bonus, the more specific the weapon:
Focus: +1 to hit and damage
Specialisation: another +1 to hit and damage, total +2
This would make those feats worth a bit more and it would make the math easier to keep track of. I'm not normally an advocate of power increases, but the Weapon Focus feat is worth so little that I have only ever taken it as a prerequisite. It's worth slightly more than mastercraft, which just ain't good enough for me. And I really hate having to keep track of hit and damage bonuses separately. It's not taxing. It's just a pain in the ass.
Yeah, I think that's good. Makes the feat a worthwhile choice, as opposed to a secondary or third choice.
Sounds good to me.
What degree of group tightness are you thinking? Revolvers/Rifle-Bolt/Rifle-Auto/Shotguns(-?) etc
You think 4 pistol groups & 4 Rifle groups (+ Shotgun(1-2?)) would be ok?
Or break those down to caliber, Service-AutoPistols, Magnum-AutoPistols, SmallBore-BoltRifle etc and have maybe 25-30 groups for Focus
I think that's a little too indepth for an RPG game. Unless everyone in the group is a firearm enthusiast, most people will have no idea aboutt he difference between service and magnum, etc...
How about these groups:
Revolvers, Auto-Pistols, SMGs (including machine pistols), Shotguns, Assault Rifles, Bolt-Action Rifles (all rifle groups including the associated carbine and other variants), Machine Guns... did I miss anything?
What about Simple, Archaic or Exotic Melee Weapons?
You might want to call Auto-Pistols Autoloader Pistols instead, to avoid confusion with the MachinePistols.