PDA

View Full Version : Most Realistic System?



SynissterSyster
2010-12-02, 04:15 PM
Hello fellow gamers. I have a question for you all. As the title says I am wondering what current or past rpg system is the most realistic? The gaming group I am in has two members who want to make their own rpg and seek to make it realistic. I have a bad feeling about it as they may be aiming for a goal they can't reach.

As of now they have been trying to modify the nWoD material to bring about more realistic combat. So far they have added in blunt, slashing, and piercing damage to the armor system. I came here as, I believe, Giant has the most creative people and you all will give honest answers.

Thanks in Advance

subject42
2010-12-02, 04:17 PM
GURPS probably has the most thorough system, but realism is, oddly enough, a very subjective term.

General rule of thumb: If GURPS does it, look at it hard and think about including it. If RIFTS does it, don't do that unless you really can't think of any better way to do it.

Oracle_Hunter
2010-12-02, 04:19 PM
Define "realistic."

Seriously. If you want a "realistic" game you're going to have to point out what the system needs to be able to do. Does it need to do combat "realistically?" Model social interactions "realistically?" Simulate crafting "realistically?"

Still, if you want a "realistic" system, I'd start with SR3 instead of any WoD. It, at least, had a wound recovery system that modeled permanent injury.

Morty
2010-12-02, 04:21 PM
From what I've heard, Riddle of Steel is incredibly detailed and realistic when it comes to melee combat.

Kelb_Panthera
2010-12-02, 04:23 PM
actually, e6 with no magic and the class-based ac variant is fairly realistic.

SynissterSyster
2010-12-02, 04:30 PM
The pair want a realistic combat system. One that takes into account layers of armor, that kevlar is not bulletproof, ect. Where a guy in full plate with a sword is a bad butt in the real world current time. I have heard GURPS, Shadowrun, and even Champions. I am thinking of a system where you can die from a single bullet to your leg, like in Cyberpunk 2020.

This came about as we are using the nWoD system to play a zombie apocalypse game. It is set in our hometown and things got out of hand. Since the DM is new the older players, whom know the town, managed to acquire a .50 calibur gun to use. He managed to take everything away and make it even but the two players are looking for a more realistic combat system.

Totally Guy
2010-12-02, 04:32 PM
I'd start with SR3 instead of any WoD.

Shadowrun 3rd edition?

I'm playing in one of those at the moment but I struggle with the believability of lots of things that happen on a fairly regular basis.

Seerow
2010-12-02, 04:37 PM
Shadowrun 3rd edition?

I'm playing in one of those at the moment but I struggle with the believability of lots of things that happen on a fairly regular basis.

ah SR3, the founder of my group's meme about dodging in place.

Hardly the most realistic system, though it is moreso than D&D by a fair margin.

DukeofDellot
2010-12-02, 04:37 PM
FATAL, definitely FATAL, "The Dice do not lie."

...

I usually use GURPS for my "realistic" games, as it produces reasonably believable outcomes with relatively simple procedure... beyond character creation... I've had my players build some retarded characters and there's little stopping that.

GoatBoy
2010-12-02, 04:40 PM
FATAL, definitely FATAL, "The Dice do not lie."


Came in here to say this.

So, the next time someone complains that your interpretation of the rules isn't "realistic," ask them if they want to play the most realistic, detailed system ever devised.

Then roll. ROLL for anal circumference!

SynissterSyster
2010-12-02, 04:49 PM
Came in here to say this.

So, the next time someone complains that your interpretation of the rules isn't "realistic," ask them if they want to play the most realistic, detailed system ever devised.

Then roll. ROLL for anal circumference!

I dunno if I want them to break their minds...though it may improve the personality of one of them. Anywho..:smallbiggrin:

big teej
2010-12-02, 04:59 PM
Then roll. ROLL for anal circumference!

seriously? :smallconfused:

the system accounts for these things!?


WHY WOULD IT MATTER?!!?!?!:smalleek:

oh gods!!!

BRAIN BLEACH BRAIN BLEACH BRAIN BLEACH!!!!

Amphetryon
2010-12-02, 05:00 PM
Aside from Riddle of Steel for combat (+1), look at how Mouse Guard models interactions.

Spiryt
2010-12-02, 05:03 PM
seriously? :smallconfused:

the system accounts for these things!?


WHY WOULD IT MATTER?!!?!?!:smalleek:

oh gods!!!

BRAIN BLEACH BRAIN BLEACH BRAIN BLEACH!!!!

Yeah, seriously, circumference has completely nothing to do, while all that matters is size and tension of surrounding muscles is all that matt...

* police breaks into the house, connection shuts down *

The Big Dice
2010-12-02, 05:03 PM
If you want realistic combat, it's got to be GURPS. The only system to have rules for a poke in the eye, punch in the nose and breaking fingers that I can think of.

Oracle_Hunter
2010-12-02, 05:09 PM
Shadowrun 3rd edition?

I'm playing in one of those at the moment but I struggle with the believability of lots of things that happen on a fairly regular basis.
Such as?

IMHO, no other system has handled combat as "realistically" as SR3. Among other things, it gives you:
- Different resolution mechanics for melee and ranged attacks
- Dynamic armor systems
- "Gritty" wound and healing rules
- Intricate modeling of various forms of firearms
- Highly lethal combat

WoD has a simplified wound system and does little to model the differences between using different sorts of weapons. Nor does the system itself give you a "simulationist" view of the world - most of what happens is solely at the ST's discretion.

Gavinfoxx
2010-12-02, 05:10 PM
Gurps if you want to MODEL actions and physics and stuff... but sometimes the results are wonky...

Riddle of Steel if you want to actually do how martial arts melee fights where people are trying to kill each other with swords and hand to hand weapons actually play out.

FYI, in case it wasn't obvious, the FATAL stuff was a joke, it is widely considered the worst role playing system in the history of role playing games. The creators were probably certifiable...

SynissterSyster
2010-12-02, 05:16 PM
I am getting some great answers here. So I pose this question to you all. Does it matter how realistic a game system is? Does it matter if there is a rule to see how to hit someone in the eye with a paper clip fired from a thin rubber band? I, myself, would rather have a system where combat is realatively quick to resolve and I don't have to worry about JimBob there wanting to fire his 30.06 rifle using NATO rounds (I know that make no sense but the group I game with think they know it all for guns and melee. They do Amtgard as well as Airsoft.)

Callista
2010-12-02, 05:18 PM
If you really want realistic, then the most realistic system is free-form role-playing; it can be as realistic or as fantastic as you want. But if that's not your thing, then you should probably try going for a system with very minimal rules, which would allow you to do most things via flavor text and a small set of very basic rules.


I am getting some great answers here. So I pose this question to you all. Does it matter how realistic a game system is? Does it matter if there is a rule to see how to hit someone in the eye with a paper clip fired from a thin rubber band? I, myself, would rather have a system where combat is realatively quick to resolve and I don't have to worry about JimBob there wanting to fire his 30.06 rifle using NATO rounds (I know that make no sense but the group I game with think they know it all for guns and melee. They do Amtgard as well as Airsoft.)In my experience, a very detailed set of rules actually makes a system less realistic. Whether that's a good thing depends mostly on whether you want a realistic world or not. After all, throwing a Meteor Swarm at someone is not realistic at all, but it sure is cool.

SynissterSyster
2010-12-02, 05:25 PM
Callista: That is what I am worried about with these guys. I see them making this complex rules set that bog a game to a very slow crawl and then they will complain when combat takes 7 hours to get through a turn. Free form, via AOL, was fun and simple to do but these guys are "old school" gamers who think THAC0 was better then 3.x.

As for the FATAL idea. Yeah it is a joke but if I suggest it to them and see if they run with it then it will be either silly or worse then what they are trying to do now.

Again thanks all!! :smallbiggrin::smallbiggrin:

Oracle_Hunter
2010-12-02, 05:33 PM
I am getting some great answers here. So I pose this question to you all. Does it matter how realistic a game system is? Does it matter if there is a rule to see how to hit someone in the eye with a paper clip fired from a thin rubber band? I, myself, would rather have a system where combat is realatively quick to resolve and I don't have to worry about JimBob there wanting to fire his 30.06 rifle using NATO rounds (I know that make no sense but the group I game with think they know it all for guns and melee. They do Amtgard as well as Airsoft.)
IMHO, trying to make a "realistic" system is a Fool's Errand at best and FATAL at worst.

Nobody wants to play a "life simulator" RPG; people want to play fictional characters in stories. When designing a system, it is far better to pick what kind of stories you want it to tell and then figure out how to make a system which makes telling those sorts of stories a game.

In case you are interested in name-dropping, this is known as the Purpositivist Design Paradigm ("PDP") school of game design. AFAIK I'm the only one who calls it that but hey - someone needs to found these schools :smalltongue:

EDIT: It sounds like these guys would like some classic Shadowrun ("SR") - third edition or earlier. Or possibly GURPS though I've always said GURPS is a toolbox for making a system rather than a system itself.

The Big Dice
2010-12-02, 06:29 PM
Nobody wants to play a "life simulator" RPG; people want to play fictional characters in stories. When designing a system, it is far better to pick what kind of stories you want it to tell and then figure out how to make a system which makes telling those sorts of stories a game.
Nobody wants to play a character in a story. Stories are boring and take control away from the players. Stories are railroads under a different name, sold in great numbers because people think that a McRib is a better option than a Big Mac.

People want to play characters in situations. Which is a completely different paradigm.


It sounds like these guys would like some classic Shadowrun ("SR") - third edition or earlier. Or possibly GURPS though I've always said GURPS is a toolbox for making a system rather than a system itself.
GURPS is a system in need of a setting. And it does Orcs 'n Elves 'n Cyberpunk better than Shadowrun imo :smallwink:

AstralFire
2010-12-02, 06:32 PM
I've heard Harnmaster is extremely realistic.

www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?p=9828297

Grelna the Blue
2010-12-02, 06:35 PM
Haven't played it in years, but maybe Rolemaster, aka Rollmaster. Takes forever to create a character, and you can lose a character in combat to permanent death with incredible ease. It can be fun with a good GM, but aren't they all?

Kuma Da
2010-12-02, 06:37 PM
A realistic system, you say?

Go perfectly diceless. Have no rules, other than 'does this make narrative sense'.

That's as close as you can get to perfect realism in gaming.

Knaight
2010-12-02, 06:38 PM
Nobody wants to play a character in a story. Stories are boring and take control away from the players. Stories are railroads under a different name, sold in great numbers because people think that a McRib is a better option than a Big Mac.

People want to play characters in situations. Which is a completely different paradigm.

No, its uncommon for people to want to play a character in a completed story. An emerging story is a perfectly good idea, and how the story emerges depends partly on system--granted, players and GM are far more significant--hence PDP.

I've heard Cyberpunk 2020 is realistic, that seems extremely questionable. However, Burning Wheel is an extremely realistic system in many respects that tries to pass for narrativist, while remaining simple enough to actually play.

golentan
2010-12-02, 06:40 PM
For combat realism I'd plug traveller. Simple, to the point, brutal and detailed. Mongoose edition pocketbook's cheap to pick up and easy to read.

My favorite system for modern/sci fi, and if you take out tech 5+ equipment it does historical as well. If using psionics, fantasy too!

The Big Dice
2010-12-02, 06:42 PM
I've heard Cyberpunk 2020 is realistic, that seems extremely questionable. However, Burning Wheel is an extremely realistic system in many respects that tries to pass for narrativist, while remaining simple enough to actually play.
Cyberpunk has HUGE holes in it. Like how do you defend yourself against a melee attack and how do you throw a grenade.

One test for gaming realism is a game of cricket. Or baseball, or some other sport that involves teams that have to throw aball, hit it, catch it and throw it back accurately.

GURPS can do it, but not many other games can.

aaron_the_cow
2010-12-02, 06:42 PM
I'd say champions, aka the hero system. Its the most realistic system I've played, and is flexible and realistic to the point of being semi-unplayable.

tbarrie
2010-12-02, 06:46 PM
If you really want realistic, then the most realistic system is free-form role-playing; it can be as realistic or as fantastic as you want. [...]In my experience, a very detailed set of rules actually makes a system less realistic.

That was my initial reaction too, but upon further thought I'm not sure it's true. Even detailed RPG systems are still RPG systems, which means they're almost always written with the assumption that the GM is going to override the rules if they give nonsensical results. And a well-designed set of detailed rules is a useful guide for situations where the GM honestly isn't sure what would realistically happen.

Detailed rules are only a problem if you're gaming with the sort of person who honestly thinks drowning can heal you in third edition D&D, and that this is a knock against the system's realism. And I'm unconvinced such people exist other than on internet forums.

SurlySeraph
2010-12-02, 07:05 PM
Phoenix Command has rules for how quickly you can aim that involve taking the square root of the length of the barrel of your gun. It was literally designed by a rocket scientist. It's extremely realistic, and thus so detailed that you have to be insane to play it

Twilight 2013 is a very simulationist system for modern combat that's a lot more playable, though it has a clunky core mechanic.

But yeah, excessive simulationism doesn't tend to end up being that much fun. I mean, I'd love to play a TW2013 campaign, but I'm not going to want to play one as much as I'm going to want to play DnD, WoD, and other systems that are pretty straightforward. And learning a completely new and very system as complex as TW2013 will probably have a worse ratio of effort required to fun gained than just adding some houserules to NWoD.

On FATAL: don't forget that it's possible to roll negative anal circumference. If I could imagine what that would look like, the image would haunt me forever.

DragonBaneDM
2010-12-02, 08:09 PM
Gamma World. :smalltongue:

The Big Dice
2010-12-02, 08:11 PM
But yeah, excessive simulationism doesn't tend to end up being that much fun.
Forget GNS. It's been debunked many,many times. So many that it's got no real credibility. And besides, all RPGs are simulations. If there's a game mechanic to resolve any kind of situation where the outcome is in doubt, then it has both simulation and game mechanics.

randomhero00
2010-12-02, 08:14 PM
DnD :smallbiggrin:

Seriously. Cause I want magic and dragons and such. And if there ever were such a thing DnD seems the most realistic. So there.

Aux-Ash
2010-12-02, 08:59 PM
I might have a few suggestions, but the're language limited (as in: no translations available) so it might be prudent to ask which languages you speak/read first?

kyoryu
2010-12-02, 09:05 PM
What are they looking for, detail, or realism? The two are not necessarily the same.

SurlySeraph
2010-12-02, 09:10 PM
Forget GNS. It's been debunked many,many times. So many that it's got no real credibility. And besides, all RPGs are simulations. If there's a game mechanic to resolve any kind of situation where the outcome is in doubt, then it has both simulation and game mechanics.

I'm using "simulationist" as a descriptor, not as an immutable category. For example, DnD 3.5 is more simulationist than 4E, and less simulationist than Riddle of Steel.

Tengu_temp
2010-12-02, 10:01 PM
DnD :smallbiggrin:

Seriously. Cause I want magic and dragons and such. And if there ever were such a thing DnD seems the most realistic. So there.

Seriously? No. The existence of magic and monsters does not excuse any of the absurdities of that system. It's not necessarily bad, but it sure as heck isn't realistic. Even if you play E6.


Forget GNS. It's been debunked many,many times. So many that it's got no real credibility. And besides, all RPGs are simulations. If there's a game mechanic to resolve any kind of situation where the outcome is in doubt, then it has both simulation and game mechanics.

The details of the GNS theory might be wrong, but the general idea is pretty much true:
Gamist playstyle focuses on making the game (which usually means combat) balanced and challenging.
Narrativist playstyle focuses on co-operative creating a story where the PCs are the main characters.
Simulationist playstyle focuses on verisimilitude and making a world that's as realistic (within its own rules) as possible.
Do note that all of these are sliding scales, not binary values.

Incanur
2010-12-02, 10:49 PM
I'm such a medieval combat geek that I found The Riddle of Steel insufficiently historical/realistic for my taste. Various aspects of that system conflict with my understanding of period fighting manuals and human physiology. It's also a bit more detailed than I would prefer, though I can see the appeal.

Almost nothing could be worse than 3.x D&D, though. The human species wouldn't have lasted a generation given how much animals overpower 99% of the population.

Draz74
2010-12-03, 01:26 AM
World of World of Warcraft. Frighteningly realistic. :smallwink:

Totally Guy
2010-12-03, 01:39 AM
Such as?

- Highly lethal combat

The Hoop and Nelson rule...

Gun to the head, bang. Don't worry, she Hoop and Nelsoned.

The Renraku Archology is full of deadly chemical weapons that eat your blood. But it's ok, you can Hoop and Nelson.

A sword to the heart! Wow, that'd be lethal if he wasn't Hoop and Nelsonning.

I hate the Hoop and Nelson rule. When I had the option of using it I resisted because I felt it was damaging to the reality of the game. But then the GM took that as a signal I wasn't enjoying myself. I said I didn't think it was realistic but he said Hoop and Nelson is a legitimate rule and everybody uses it. As evidenced above!

You fail to use the blowtorch. You are now on fire resist the wound. Roll your blowtorch skill open the door. You fail and you are now on fire again. The door is still closed. Wow, you're good at catching fire! Looks like another month of intensive care. - I lost my arm from that. We'd done everything else right. I could not conceive of my character really being that stupid. I know which end to point away from me.

And then there's the whole losing my ear from a sword to the chest.

So the things I expect to be lethal, like combat, aren't. And things I don't expect to be lethal, like using a blowtorch, are.

Yahzi
2010-12-03, 05:45 AM
GURPS will give you the mechanical wonk you want. And still be fun.

FelixG
2010-12-03, 05:52 AM
For combat realism I'd plug traveller. Simple, to the point, brutal and detailed. Mongoose edition pocketbook's cheap to pick up and easy to read.

My favorite system for modern/sci fi, and if you take out tech 5+ equipment it does historical as well. If using psionics, fantasy too!

I am glad someone mentioned Traveller.

It is precisely what you want and or need! look no further :smallbiggrin:

Character creation can be just as deadly as play.

Aotrs Commander
2010-12-03, 06:10 AM
Haven't played it in years, but maybe Rolemaster, aka Rollmaster. Takes forever to create a character, and you can lose a character in combat to permanent death with incredible ease. It can be fun with a good GM, but aren't they all?

Not really much longer than, say, Shadowrun (by the time you've finsihed faffing around with all your cybernetics), though there's marginally more maths involved than Rolemaster and the system is marginally less straight-foward.

(And, by-the-by, despite it's reputation for complexity, there is no difference except for a factor of 10, in the mechanic resolution between 3.x and Rolemaster; only the fact the number is looked up on a table, instead of a DC. Really, all you need is to be able to add tens and units quickly, and have a DM who knows where to find the appropriate tables. It is more complicated than many system, but it's not that bad.)

That said, Rolemaster is probably one of the most realisitic systems, theoretically. In practise, open-ended rolls mean that as often as not, you can get some of the most delightfully random events of any game system I've ever played. Oh, the tales I can tell you...

JaronK
2010-12-03, 06:24 AM
The Hoop and Nelson rule...

Gun to the head, bang. Don't worry, she Hoop and Nelsoned.

In other words, she got lucky one time, and one time only. Instead of the bullet instantly killing her, it caused a severe concussion and fractured the skull but didn't cause much permanent brain damage. However, she's still bleeding, unconscious, on the floor, and will require immediate medical attention.

You can invoke this once in your life. And since it burns your karma pool, you're definitely effected in the long run. It doesn't ignore the hit, it just means you won't die from it right now. You can still take permanent long term injuries, you're still useless for quite a long time.


I hate the Hoop and Nelson rule. When I had the option of using it I resisted because I felt it was damaging to the reality of the game. But then the GM took that as a signal I wasn't enjoying myself. I said I didn't think it was realistic but he said Hoop and Nelson is a legitimate rule and everybody uses it. As evidenced above!

It's an optional rule. And it doesn't just make you totally fine... it makes you dying instead of dead. Useless instead of completely gone. It's a one time shot, and you're still not only out of the current fight, you're also probably useless for a month (if not far longer) and require serious hospitalization.

It's not unrealistic that in a future world with better scientific medicine and the addition of magical healing that you can survive situations where by rights you should have died... once... given enough medical care.


You fail to use the blowtorch. You are now on fire resist the wound. Roll your blowtorch skill open the door. You fail and you are now on fire again. The door is still closed. Wow, you're good at catching fire! Looks like another month of intensive care. - I lost my arm from that. We'd done everything else right. I could not conceive of my character really being that stupid. I know which end to point away from me.

Shadowrun doesn't have this to my knowledge. What the heck were you doing? Where is this blowtorch that burns you all the time, and if you were using a blowtorch that had this "feature" why weren't you wearing adequate protective gear (like fire retardant clothing, which is easily obtainable)? Unless there's some blowtorch rules that specifically call for lighting yourself on fire (which I haven't seen) and you were wearing flammable clothing and you had a very low skill, this shouldn't have happened by the rules... and if that was the case then you deserved to be on fire!


And then there's the whole losing my ear from a sword to the chest.

That's bad DMing. Shadowrun doesn't have hit locations, generally. Called shots in melee generally don't happen. If he was going to use the optional medical rules to randomly state where the long term damage was, he should have called that a gashing wound to the side of the head. SR has rules for this, your DM was just playing fast and loose with them.

JaronK

Totally Guy
2010-12-03, 06:41 AM
I still felt cheated by the situation. Stop or I kill the girl. I thought death was on the line. And it wasn't. Instead she became totally evil so that was what was at stake instead. But for that one session I was so annoyed because I thought I'd been cheated out of the failure consequences I'd anticipated.


It doesn't ignore the hit, it just means you won't die from it right now. You can still take permanent long term injuries, you're still useless for quite a long time.

For some reason none of that stuff happened at the table. I Hoop and Nelsoned and I was back to kicking ass in no time. I couldn't take the miraculous survival seriously which is why I was going to opt to die there and then but a bit of peer pressure brought me back. I hope the GM didn't bring me back all healthy because he was worried I'd be upset... because that'd be kind of ironic.

I got killed off a short while later however by the girl who'd turned evil.

JaronK
2010-12-03, 06:49 AM
Then your DM was changing the rules on you. That's not SR3's fault at all.

The actual HN rule says that one time in your character's career, when you absolutely would be dead but there's some plausible way you could live, you can invoke it. Doing so burns your entire karma pool (permanently, so while you can build new pool the old one never comes back). Now, instead of dead, you're dying. You're still at 10 boxes (or more) damage, but you're going to be stable. You still need medical evac. Modern medicine can't get you back up and running in any reasonable amount of time (you're looking at at least a week before you could even function at all, as much as a month depending on how tough you are)... a magic spell could, but that would be extremely dangerous (Deadly drain code, TN 10-essence, one box reduced per success) and unlikely to even wake you up, and even if you did wake up you'd likely be at a serious condition, one hit away from death, +3 to all TNs, dramatically slowed down, and basically useful only for dragging yourself towards safety. You're still going to be basically out of the running for weeks. Either way, you're looking at magic loss (if you had magic), permanent scarring, organ failure, and lost limbs.

It's perfectly realistic for being badly shot or stabbed or hit with chemical/bio weapons. People don't die THAT fast usually. With proper advanced medical care, you can survive incredible beatings.

But since it's a one time thing, it's still a very deadly game.

JaronK

Totally Guy
2010-12-03, 06:56 AM
Then your DM was changing the rules on you. That's not SR3's fault at all.

Agreed. It's annoying when there are house rules in effect that change stuff and it messes with how we perceive and communicate about it.

DragonBaneDM
2010-12-03, 09:28 AM
Wow, I didn't even know that rule existed. Guess it's either somewhere totally obscure or my GM just didn't want us to know about it?

And it's good to know I'm not the only one on here mixed up in a below-par Shadowrun game with an oversensitive understudied GM, haha.

Also, still Gamma World.

But to prevent the trolling charges, I'd like to side with Callista on the secondary question. Tried a 3.5 game with a bunch of homebrew rules to make it more realistic, and it took twice as long for half the fun as a normal game.

It's like playing a game you made up as a kid. Once someone starts adding too many rules, the fun kinda just tapers off.

JaronK
2010-12-03, 10:46 AM
Wow, I didn't even know that rule existed. Guess it's either somewhere totally obscure or my GM just didn't want us to know about it?

And it's good to know I'm not the only one on here mixed up in a below-par Shadowrun game with an oversensitive understudied GM, haha.

Main rule book, near the section on spirits. It's in the section on how you can use karma pool. From what G. said he was allowed to use it multiple times and it got him back up and running right away, but that's not how it's supposed to work. SR is a deadly game, and the HN rule is only there for a single use... and there are serious consequences for using it (destroying your karma pool SUCKS).

JaronK

SynissterSyster
2010-12-03, 11:53 AM
Wow. I do other things for a bit and the whole thread expands. I have SR2 and 3 rules. They may work but the rules, at least SR2 have it to where someone can survive a nuke to the melon and not have damage overflow. What is more the problem is that two of the other players seem intent on making armor real world style. Lemme give a small history:

The St for this WoD game is new, as in he maybe ran two games before, and the gaming group can have up to eleven people playing. So he has his hands full but not the point of this discussion. It is zombie apocalypse in our hometown and the group are some of the few survivors. They found a way to become immune to what ever is causing the dead to rise. Since the ST said we are playing ourselves the group went out of hand by leaving town quickly, then they got themselves very heavily armed, and even managed to put together a reasonable tank. ST set up an ambush and took away all their toys.

Now two of the players complained that the armor rules in the game did not make sense. See the group are Amtgarders so they have things like make shift plate mail as well as chainmail. They are fighting the zombies with swords and axes as well as guns. The most of the group have done things like airsoft too so they "know" how armor and guns work. Sorry for the long rant...

Oracle_Hunter
2010-12-03, 11:57 AM
Wow. I do other things for a bit and the whole thread expands. I have SR2 and 3 rules. They may work but the rules, at least SR2 have it to where someone can survive a nuke to the melon and not have damage overflow. What is more the problem is that two of the other players seem intent on making armor real world style. Lemme give a small history:
Meh, if they don't like the OHKO-Proofing in SR you can just hand out insta-kills. I mean, it's even suggested in the SR3 rules.

I still have no idea what your players mean by "making armor real world style." If it's about layering armor, SR3 has rules for that too. If it's about "damage types" then SR's ballistic v. impact rules should be sufficient.

Tyndmyr
2010-12-03, 12:08 PM
If you want realistic combat, it's got to be GURPS. The only system to have rules for a poke in the eye, punch in the nose and breaking fingers that I can think of.

GURPS is also the only combat system I can think of where the party generally ends up with wierd appendanges, a wild array of dysfunctional character quirks, and random assortments of weaponry. A laser cannon wielding tentacled cat with a deathly fear of the letter Q is fairly normal.

Yes, GURPS contains realistic stuff. This is because GURPS contains just about everything. The system isn't inherently realistic, unless you trim out....a great deal of stuff. Like most other systems.

OP, realistic what? Modern combat? Historical combat?

Edit: Ignore GNS entirely. Just list what you want from a system, and find those that match. There is no need to bring in all that junk.

SynissterSyster
2010-12-03, 12:50 PM
Meh, if they don't like the OHKO-Proofing in SR you can just hand out insta-kills. I mean, it's even suggested in the SR3 rules.

I still have no idea what your players mean by "making armor real world style." If it's about layering armor, SR3 has rules for that too. If it's about "damage types" then SR's ballistic v. impact rules should be sufficient.

Ballistic v impact would also be nice but they take into consideration that chainmail can stop a sword slice but not a stab. A good portion of the group complained when the ST brought up Kevlar is bulletproof, in nWod rules. A roar of "that's not true" "I seen people cut in half while wearing Kevlar" ect. I helped the ST by using a more streamlined damage system that makes the game more lethal, as found in one of the splatbooks for nWoD. I also told him to intoduce system shock rules so the game is more lethal, flip a coin and call it, if you win you live if you lose you die, simple.

Zen Monkey
2010-12-03, 01:03 PM
Realistic to modern times, or sword and sorcery simulation?

Early versions of Legend of the Five Rings were very good at realistic swordplay. You could always remove magic if you want to. A quicker character doesn't just go first, but sees what other characters are trying to do on their turn and still gets his action in first (slow characters declare action first, and quick get to respond accordingly). Also, a sword wound can absolutely ruin your day. An inexperienced but lucky town guardsman can still wreck you with a spear to the chest, and an injured character gets penalties to whatever they are attempting.

warmachine
2010-12-03, 01:04 PM
Presuming that your friends want to make their own world and rules that support that world, sounds like GURPS. GURPS is a toolkit system where the GM combines the rules he wants to get the effects he wants. Other toolkits exist but I think GURPS is the most based around plausible realism.

EDIT: Really sounds like your friends want detailed, plausible realism. GURPS does grant bullet proof armour higher DR (Damage Reduction) against piercing damage (bullets) than against anything else. Every model of gun has an Acc bonus for aiming and rifles tend to be better whereas Bulk score is a penalty when moving (or turning) and firing and pistols have lower Bulk. GURPS has detailed, plausible realism all over it.

Tyndmyr
2010-12-03, 01:09 PM
Realistic to modern times, or sword and sorcery simulation?

Early versions of Legend of the Five Rings were very good at realistic swordplay. You could always remove magic if you want to. A quicker character doesn't just go first, but sees what other characters are trying to do on their turn and still gets his action in first (slow characters declare action first, and quick get to respond accordingly). Also, a sword wound can absolutely ruin your day. An inexperienced but lucky town guardsman can still wreck you with a spear to the chest, and an injured character gets penalties to whatever they are attempting.

Weren't the people who made that the same people that made 7th Sea? Another system with rather decent swordfighting mechanics, and an easy to ignore/remove magic system. Also, a rather realistic world, for a given era.

Oracle_Hunter
2010-12-03, 01:17 PM
Ballistic v impact would also be nice but they take into consideration that chainmail can stop a sword slice but not a stab. A good portion of the group complained when the ST brought up Kevlar is bulletproof, in nWod rules. A roar of "that's not true" "I seen people cut in half while wearing Kevlar" ect. I helped the ST by using a more streamlined damage system that makes the game more lethal, as found in one of the splatbooks for nWoD. I also told him to intoduce system shock rules so the game is more lethal, flip a coin and call it, if you win you live if you lose you die, simple.
...right.

So, take an Armored Vest in SR3. It has 4 points of Ballistic Armor and 2 points of Impact Armor. When you shoot someone with a FMJ round, it is resisted by Ballistic Armor - for 4 points. However, when you cut someone with a sword or beat them with a club it is resisted by Impact Armor - for 2 points. Additionally, when you shoot someone with nonlethal rounds ("Gel Rounds") you use Impact Armor to resist it rather than Ballistic.

This should adequately model the differences with how armor resists bullet attacks versus "slower" attacks. White Wolf does a terrible job of modeling "realistic" combat generally; it's a Storytelling system, not a Dice Rolling one.

SynissterSyster
2010-12-03, 01:22 PM
Yeah GURPS seems to be the answer. I will suggest it tonight at session. You, warmachine, hit the nail on the head. They want a system/make a system where some guy in full plate won't need to worry about small calibur rounds doing any damage to him or something along those lines.

For me I will stick to games that are fun and not worry that, in say D&D, I took an arrow to the eye and have no worries about it.

Aux-Ash: Are you talking about that french game Rever Orbors (or Dream the Rever [SP?]). I downloaded a copy from dtrpg a while back and it has a great, detailed system.

daxos232
2010-12-03, 01:30 PM
If your looking for a more realistic system I would recommend either Mongoose's RuneQuest 2 or Basic Role Playing by Chaosium. Both of them use the D100 percentile system, so the content from one is easily adaptable to the other.

They are both very realistic, anyone can die in one hit from a well placed sword swing, spell, or bullet. Armor actually reduces damage that you take, rather than making you harder to hit. There are no classes or levels, you simply have your character learn whatever you want them to.

I'm not sure what setting your going for, I saw you mentioned apocalypse, zombies, and firearms from a previous post. RuneQuest 2 is mostly for medeival fantasy settings but you could get BRP which has info on all types of settings and would have rules for modern things, like firearms.

The Big Dice
2010-12-03, 02:47 PM
GURPS is also the only combat system I can think of where the party generally ends up with wierd appendanges, a wild array of dysfunctional character quirks, and random assortments of weaponry. A laser cannon wielding tentacled cat with a deathly fear of the letter Q is fairly normal.
You know what? I played GURPS for nearly 10 years and never once saw a character even vaguely like that.

Yes, it's possible to make some seriously dysfunctional characters, but then who wants to play an OCD Coward with a paralysing fear of the colour green? Especially when Will rolls automatically fail on a 14 or more on the dice.

The difference between a GURPS character and a character in every other RPG I ever encountered is, a GURPS character feels like a character. Nota collection of numbers, but a little person, ready to be in a movie or a stage play.

As for the realism of L5R, a game I've been playing on and off since it came out. It's very forgiving in that you can take two or three hits from a katana before your character falls over. But it's not very realistic for the same reasons that D&D combat isn't: the defender has no say at all in whether or not he gets hit, other than providing a passive TN.

TechnoScrabble
2010-12-03, 02:50 PM
Star Wars d6 v3. Most realistic combat and permanent wound system I've ever seen, though it's complicated as hell. The skills are very...finite in what they can do, but it's been set up so there is a skill and a realistic system for everything.
Space combat's a bit limited, though.

kyoryu
2010-12-03, 03:28 PM
You know what? I played GURPS for nearly 10 years and never once saw a character even vaguely like that.


It can, if you allow people to use every sourcebook ever.

If you don't have a problem with telling players "no," it's not an issue.

The Big Dice
2010-12-03, 04:10 PM
It can, if you allow people to use every sourcebook ever.

If you don't have a problem with telling players "no," it's not an issue.

It can isn't a reason to dislike it. D&D can turn into The Adventures of Pun-Pun, but it doesn't.

Theoretical possibility isn't a guarantee of anything.

Bayar
2010-12-03, 04:32 PM
On FATAL: don't forget that it's possible to roll negative anal circumference. If I could imagine what that would look like, the image would haunt me forever.

You know how the skin on your elbow looks and acts when you hold your arm straight ? Probably kinda like that.

kyoryu
2010-12-03, 04:51 PM
It can isn't a reason to dislike it. D&D can turn into The Adventures of Pun-Pun, but it doesn't.

Theoretical possibility isn't a guarantee of anything.

Yes, I know, which is why I primarily ran GURPS for many years.

I don't buy into the philosophy that DMs/GMs should never say "no." In fact, I absolutely disagree with the idea that "if it's in a book, the players can use it and the DM has no right to say otherwise."

If you run GURPS by that philosophy, it will be a nightmare. That's (IMHO) a problem with the philosophy, not with GURPS.

I was actually agreeing with you - sorry if that wasn't more clear.

fusilier
2010-12-03, 05:01 PM
You know what? I played GURPS for nearly 10 years and never once saw a character even vaguely like that.

Yes, it's possible to make some seriously dysfunctional characters, but then who wants to play an OCD Coward with a paralysing fear of the colour green? Especially when Will rolls automatically fail on a 14 or more on the dice.

The difference between a GURPS character and a character in every other RPG I ever encountered is, a GURPS character feels like a character. Nota collection of numbers, but a little person, ready to be in a movie or a stage play.

I want to second this. That's what I like about designing GURPS characters, I feel like I have a real character rather than a complicated chess piece. In my experience, most players sit down and design a reasonable character, with sensible background skills etc.

However, I do know of a couple of players who seem to have trouble with making characters. One likes to try to "break the system" by purposely designing characters that make no sense. (He also has a tendency to show up late to the game so I haven't even seen the character he's designed until we are already playing). The other wants to do things that aren't necessarily correct for a player character (like taking Megalomania). Unfortunately, as GM, this means I generally end up rejecting their characters.

Just because you can make it in GURPS doesn't mean it's appropriate to the setting, or even works well within the rules (somebody earlier described it as a toolbox system). I think some D&D players have trouble transitioning to GURPS for this reason.

Anyway, for realism I would certainly look at GURPS. Even if we ignore details of the system, it has a lot of support (weapons, equipment, background info) for the real world.

fusilier
2010-12-03, 05:05 PM
Star Wars d6 v3. Most realistic combat and permanent wound system I've ever seen, though it's complicated as hell. The skills are very...finite in what they can do, but it's been set up so there is a skill and a realistic system for everything.
Space combat's a bit limited, though.

West End Games old Star Wars RPG? That was one of my favorite RPG's and I think the first I ever played. It's a very nice, easy to learn system (the fundamentals anyway), and while I would consider it more realistic than D&D, it's still pretty cinematic, not as realistic as GURPS can be. Nonetheless, I pine for it. It's my preferred system for Sci-fi.

Drascin
2010-12-03, 05:17 PM
The difference between a GURPS character and a character in every other RPG I ever encountered is, a GURPS character feels like a character. Nota collection of numbers, but a little person, ready to be in a movie or a stage play.

Interesting, my (admittedly low, as I've only been able to partake of two GURPS games) experience has been the exact reverse. The whole "GURPS has everything" thing seems to encourage GMs to go "if it isn't in your sheet, no", which does usually end up reducing the characters to the piles of numbers in the sheets.

WeLoveFireballs
2010-12-03, 05:25 PM
Classic Traveller is excellent and all of the 50-60 books (including adventures) can be picked up in PDF for 35 bucks!

This is "Gritty" allowing people to be incapacitated in mere seconds and leaving weeks for recovery though on the spot death is rare. Character progression is close to nonexistant after generation and if they do it takes weeks of training. It took me a while to fully understand the rules but we have had some great games with it. It also allows a lot of room for houseruling. To make real sword "duels" I added a simple parry system (opposed attack rolls, -1 for every parry after the first, one parry per attack, +2 if you make no other actions except parry, -2 on every attack after the first, +2 attack if you make no parry)

It is based on 2d6 rather than d20 so skill matters more rather than blind luck.

Gavinfoxx
2010-12-03, 05:30 PM
Isn't Traveller that one where you can die in character creation? And character creation is sooo random?

I about DIED laughing when I saw the update to that system on Free RPG Day... at least I think it was Traveller...

kyoryu
2010-12-03, 05:46 PM
Interesting, my (admittedly low, as I've only been able to partake of two GURPS games) experience has been the exact reverse. The whole "GURPS has everything" thing seems to encourage GMs to go "if it isn't in your sheet, no", which does usually end up reducing the characters to the piles of numbers in the sheets.

GM ability (or lack thereof) trumps system, every day.

Bayar
2010-12-03, 05:53 PM
Isn't Traveller that one where you can die in character creation? And character creation is sooo random?

I about DIED laughing when I saw the update to that system on Free RPG Day... at least I think it was Traveller...

No, it was DeadEarth. And it is free off the internet. The author made it free before they went bankrupt.

kyoryu
2010-12-03, 06:01 PM
No, it was DeadEarth. And it is free off the internet. The author made it free before they went bankrupt.

You can die in character creation in Traveller as well.

Callista
2010-12-03, 07:05 PM
Wow. And I thought rolling straight 3d6 and random first-level hit points was bad.

The Valiant Turtle
2010-12-03, 07:09 PM
I definitely second RoleMaster as the most real system. You gotta a love a system that has individual spells for healing burns, bleeding, nerve damage, broken bones and damaged internal organs... and a crit system that makes that necessary.

GURPS is pretty decent as well. The one time I created a character for GURPS I nearly broke it completely by accident. I missed a multiplier on a particular skill. That skill was bio/genetic-engineering so it's not like I was uber-dangerous in combat, but I could pretty much walk into a jungle and McGyver up a Borg Cube in a few minutes. Unfortunately that game never got very far.

Incanur
2010-12-03, 07:36 PM
The Riddle of Steel also has a complex real-world wounding system, though I think they have too many instant stops.

Meek
2010-12-03, 07:54 PM
FATAL is the most realistic system. It has footnotes and scholarly references to prove it! :smalltongue:

Incanur
2010-12-03, 08:00 PM
FATAL is the most realistic system. It has footnotes and scholarly references to prove it!

:yuk: I don't even want to think about FATAL.

Yahzi
2010-12-03, 08:35 PM
Yes, it's possible to make some seriously dysfunctional characters (in GURPS),
You just have to control character creation.

I ran a fantastic campaign where all the players were members of the same noble house. This placed certain limits on creation, and it worked out great.

I ran another campaign where they could make up any character they wanted. By the second session their dysfunctional psychotics were killing each other. :smallbiggrin:

Heksefatter
2010-12-03, 09:03 PM
I find the question unanswerable. The different systems that I've tried are realistic in different respects.

When it comes to combat alone, the most realistic system I know is Dragon og Dæmoner Ekspert (Dragons and Demons Expert), the Danish version of a Swedish RPG. In there, if you are hit by a two-handed sword in your arm, then unless you are wearing plate mail or are insanely lucky, your arm is maimed and likely lost permanently. You also have a good chance of being dead. Also, while there is magical healing, there is no resurrections.

I think that this RPG was based off RuneQuest, but not being familiar with the latter, I cannot vouch for this. Others here are likely better informed than I.

However, Drager og Dæmoner is not very good when it comes to skills. It is based off a d20 with skill ranks from 0-20 which I found unrealistic and uninspiring.

But generally, I don't know that many games which have good skill systems. Perhaps the Storyteller games (ie. old and new World of Darkness), but they are not realistic per se. Even so, they're probably more realistic, especially Old World of Darkness, than anything else I can think of on the top of my head, except for the fact that PCs generally have too high skill levels.

tbarrie
2010-12-04, 07:06 AM
I want to second this. That's what I like about designing GURPS characters, I feel like I have a real character rather than a complicated chess piece. In my experience, most players sit down and design a reasonable character, with sensible background skills etc.

I try to do that, but I confess I do get pretty annoyed when I'm building a character in a point-buy system and find I need to give him or her higher scores than I wanted in order to save points.

The Big Dice
2010-12-04, 12:11 PM
I try to do that, but I confess I do get pretty annoyed when I'm building a character in a point-buy system and find I need to give him or her higher scores than I wanted in order to save points.

That's the difference between optimisation in GURPS and in D&D. People here are familliar with the idea of D&D optimisation: make the most powerful character possible.

GURPS optimisation is all about how to get the most effective use out of hte points you have. It's about counting points to see if it's cheaper to raise yout Intelligence by 1 or to raise all your Mental Skills by 1.

Renrik
2010-12-07, 10:26 AM
Mouse Guard. Mouse Guard has the single most realistic system ever.

Also, the most realistic setting.

No, but seriously, there's this system with super-realistic rules. It's called 'Larp'.

Incanur
2010-12-07, 10:34 AM
No, but seriously, there's this system with super-realistic rules. It's called 'Larp'.

Larping perfectly simulates dressing up in fun outfits and playing rock-paper-scissors. Similarly, tabletop roleplaying immerses you in the experience sitting around with your friends, drinking Mountain Dew, and rolling fancy dice. Neither system even requires DM adjudication for these purposes. :smallamused:

Psyx
2010-12-07, 11:07 AM
Ok, for a contemporary game... The winner HAS to be Millennium's End.

Hands down.

Anyone arguing for other systems probably hasn't read it :smallwink:

It's long out of print, but if you want wound impairments, hydrostatic shock, bleeding, and a lethal combat system that's pretty realistic, it's the only way to fly. Heck: There's about 30 hit locations and an entire book-full of contemporary firearms.

Certainly GURPS, d6 SW, Rolemaster, Spacemaster, Shadowrun, CP and indeed every game system I've seen mentioned int he thread are VERY pale in comparison. However... it's complex. Pretty darned complex. But I've yet to see anything more realistic for the period.

Riddle of Steel is more medieval in scope but at a similar standard of realism.





No, but seriously, there's this system with super-realistic rules. It's called 'Larp'.

So realistic that you use fake weapons and aren't allowed to punch people. C'mon...

grimbold
2010-12-07, 11:09 AM
middle earth rpg is needlessly complicated and has very realistic combat

Psyx
2010-12-07, 11:23 AM
MERP is a simplified Rolemaster.

It has (like several other cited games) a very complex combat system, which is very deadly... but it's not realistic, per se.

SurlySeraph
2010-12-07, 11:47 AM
Ok, for a contemporary game... The winner HAS to be Millennium's End.

Hands down.

Anyone arguing for other systems probably hasn't read it :smallwink:

I haven't read it, but I'm still going to argue for Phoenix Command.

I want to show you the character sheet, but I can't find a pdf of one. Instead, this is the statblock for a pistol. (http://www.phoenixcommand.com/Deseeagle50.htm) Not even one with full-auto or selectable-fire capabilities or anything. Just a pistol.
Here's a summary of combat. (http://forum.rpg.net/showpost.php?p=8179042&postcount=15) Note the number of charts and tables.
Here's a highly simplified example of play. (http://forum.rpg.net/showthread.php?t=534963)

Earthwalker
2010-12-07, 12:13 PM
They want a system/make a system where some guy in full plate won't need to worry about small calibur rounds doing any damage to him or something along those lines.


Is this even the case ?
I thought a guy in plate harness would get the dreaded deaded when going against someone with modern firearms, even just small arms fire.
Sure Plate will help against swords and knives but not firearms.

Grelna the Blue
2010-12-07, 12:23 PM
Is this even the case ?
I thought a guy in plate harness would get the dreaded deaded when going against someone with modern firearms, even just small arms fire.
Sure Plate will help against swords and knives but not firearms.

Depends. Armor was "proofed" by firing a bullet into it to see whether it bounced, but firearm tech was more primitive then and I wouldn't care to put that armor up against anything modern. OTOH, I'd rather be wearing it than nothing if someone shot me.

LibraryOgre
2010-12-07, 12:24 PM
MERP is a simplified Rolemaster.

It has (like several other cited games) a very complex combat system, which is very deadly... but it's not realistic, per se.

After all, how many invisible dead turtles can there be on a single battlefield? :smallbiggrin:

Psyx
2010-12-07, 12:42 PM
I haven't read it, but I'm still going to argue for Phoenix Command.

Heh... that's not an RPG: It's a mathematics course :smallbiggrin:

PC is a VERY detailed combat simulation system... I'd actually hesitate to call it an RPG in some ways. The streamlined version used in the Aliens RPG is a lot more playable, although the game does still come down to: You've been shot... were you wearing armour? No? Then you're incapacitated for two weeks.


They want a system/make a system where some guy in full plate won't need to worry about small calibur rounds doing any damage to him or something along those lines.

Then they don't want a realistic system.

A guy in full plate DOES need to worry about small calibre rounds. Sure: Late harness was proofed in certain areas against the musket balls of the time, but FMJ rounds are easily capable of defeating 2mm of steel. Given the choice, I WOULDN'T want to be wearing harness if I was being shot at. Not only is it going to cut down my chances of running away, but it's possible it would make wounds worse, by deforming and breaking up the round, which will make the wounds more 'complex' and messy.

SynissterSyster
2010-12-07, 01:01 PM
Psyx: The group seems to want to be able to use all their real world knowledge about guns and other things ih the campaign. So when one guy attacked some baddy in armor with a hatchet, got the hit but didn't do enough damage to kill the guy out right, he was like "He is moving around with a hatchet in his neck?" The ST said yes because he didn't get enough damage.

I am tempted on bringing up Phoenix Command and see how they like to play after 2-6 hours to get through one round of combat. That or I say we use my rules. If you get hit by any damage roll stamina/constitution/ect. If you succeed then you are fine, if you fail though I flip a coin, you call it and if you are wrong you are dead, if you are right you are in a coma for a year. That way they get the realism.

I am going to bring up FATAL also just so they can appriciate that a rpg can be fun without being mind numbingly detailed for realism.

Psyx
2010-12-07, 01:22 PM
So any attack with a hatchet that damages someone in plate results in them having an axe stuck in their neck? I think the player's imagination is overshooting the capabilities of his dice... :smallsmile:


If their real world firearm knowledge consists of 'bullets bounce off plate harness', then I think it's probably left OUT of the game, for realism's sake :smallwink:

A Phoenix Command, Millenium's End, Riddle of Steel and Rolemaster character gen and taster session should soon have them BEGGING for some Feng Shui and NWoD.

SurlySeraph
2010-12-07, 01:56 PM
Twilight 2013 chargen is a lot of fun, if you want to be nice to them. It's a bit powergameable once you figure it out (Cognition 10, Prodigy 4 will make most characters significantly better, especially if they're getting high-skill lifepaths like Elite Infantry or the espionage ones), but it's very flexible and enjoyable.

LibraryOgre
2010-12-07, 02:23 PM
I am going to bring up FATAL also just so they can appriciate that a rpg can be fun without being mind numbingly detailed for realism.

I think it should be stressed (and I may be misreading you): FATAL is in no way fun. It is excruciating to read, and tied up in the author's perception that rape is fun and common, racist portrayals of various ethnicities are realistic, and that there is a deep and important need to know the diameter of your body's various orifices.

It is a horrible, horrible game; a screed of stupidity and bile bound together with horrible rules and arcane die rolls. FATAL exists so other games have something to say "At least I'm not..."

Earthwalker
2010-12-07, 03:25 PM
See I now am not sure what the players in question want.

I think Phoenix command is complicated and I have only seen it played once, never played it. It did indeed take 4 hours for three guys in swat armour to kick open and door and fight two guys in the room behind. It just seemed painful, but I am told accurate.

I think the group might be better off with GURPS not as realistic but hopefully they can make of it what they want.

It seems to be that they don't want realistic anyway just from the comments about plate harness stopping small arms fire.

Gametime
2010-12-07, 03:35 PM
I haven't read it, but I'm still going to argue for Phoenix Command.

I want to show you the character sheet, but I can't find a pdf of one. Instead, this is the statblock for a pistol. (http://www.phoenixcommand.com/Deseeagle50.htm) Not even one with full-auto or selectable-fire capabilities or anything. Just a pistol.
Here's a summary of combat. (http://forum.rpg.net/showpost.php?p=8179042&postcount=15) Note the number of charts and tables.
Here's a highly simplified example of play. (http://forum.rpg.net/showthread.php?t=534963)

That might be the single most awesome, and most terrifying, summary of gameplay I have ever seen.

Incanur
2010-12-07, 03:37 PM
I think plate armor would stop some rounds. Supposedly the old M-16 ammo could only penetrate about 1 mm of steel. Most armor was that thick or thicker. Obviously an AP assault rifle round would blow through it but softer ammo and weaker handguns might encounter trouble.

Eric Tolle
2010-12-07, 05:41 PM
GURPS I'm afraid isn't very realistic. For a start, any game that involves point allocation is inherently unrealistic; people in the real world are essentially created randomly, and character point balance doesn't exist. Likewise, any system where the player either has complete control over the skills they learn or no control isn't realistic. Point allotment games tend not to be very realistic when it comes to all the various small skills people pick up: I can count on one hand the GURPS characters I've seen with basic life skills like sewing or neighborhood knowledge. Also, the skill one person has may differ greatly from the same skill another person has. Something like a career system would work, as long as there's a lot of flexibility in the way skills are defined.

When it comes to combat, one of the major problems is that real life isn't very realistic. Study the statistics for the results of violence, and you get people who die from being stuck in the foot with a knife, and others who survive multiple gunshot wounds to the chest. People don't have hit points- they aren't whittled down like a tree- when adreneline starts flowing they tend to take a lot of abuse until something vital is hit, and then they go down. In this case any game with hit points, GURPS included absolutely fails to be realistic. Probably your best bet would be some sort of damage save mechanic with a heavy random element.

The bottom line is that really no game out there is all that realistic, which is probably a good thing.

The Big Dice
2010-12-07, 05:44 PM
When it comes to combat, one of the major problems is that real life isn't very realistic. Study the statistics for the results of violence, and you get people who die from being stuck in the foot with a knife, and others who survive multiple gunshot wounds to the chest. People don't have hit points- they aren't whittled down like a tree- when adreneline starts flowing they tend to take a lot of abuse until something vital is hit, and then they go down. In this case any game with hit points, GURPS included absolutely fails to be realistic. Probably your best bet would be some sort of damage save mechanic with a heavy random element.

The bottom line is that really no game out there is all that realistic, which is probably a good thing.

On that basis, 2013 Cyberpunk is possibly the most realistic system ever, with 2020 not far behind.

Incanur
2010-12-07, 10:06 PM
Wounding effects may be quite varied but they're not beyond comprehension. To force a stop for physiological reasons you must disrupt the central nervous system, bone, or muscle. Beyond that incapacitation comes form blood loss. For critical area such as the heart this can happen almost instantly or within roughly ten seconds but often takes longer.

Psyx
2010-12-08, 06:35 AM
I'm not too sure players would enjoy shooting some bad guys, and for them to carry on firing for a combat round or two.

'But I shot him in the heart'.
'Yeah: He's dead. But he made a stamina check, so gets to act because he hasn't realised yet. He shoots you. *roll* In the face. You die. Then so does he.'


"On that basis, 2013 Cyberpunk is possibly the most realistic system ever, with 2020 not far behind."

It has a lifepath and dangerous combat, but that's pretty much it. In 2013, you can dodge gunfire, after all. I like 2013, and it's brutal, but not very realistic. Armour stacking jumps immediately to mind, for example.


"Wounding effects may be quite varied but they're not beyond comprehension. To force a stop for physiological reasons you must disrupt the central nervous system, bone, or muscle. Beyond that incapacitation comes form blood loss. For critical area such as the heart this can happen almost instantly or within roughly ten seconds but often takes longer."

M.E. breaks wounds down into 'insta-kill' (over 25 damage in one location, or 16 to the face), impairments (a percentile negative to all actions with that body part), bleeding (time taken to bleed 1/4 of blood and fall into shock), broken bones (affects healing), KOs and stun checks (with modifiers). Wound types are blunt/concussive, slashing, piercing and hydrostatic shock.



"I think plate armor would stop some rounds. Supposedly the old M-16 ammo could only penetrate about 1 mm of steel. Most armor was that thick or thicker. Obviously an AP assault rifle round would blow through it but softer ammo and weaker handguns might encounter trouble."

Well, you're talking about 40 year old ammunition there, and probably at something like 500m, too. That figure still rings alarm bells a bit, though.

Here's what happens when you shoot a handgun at a car door. The rounds are slowed only enough to tumble and make more of a mess: http://www.theboxotruth.com/docs/buickot3.htm

The same site demonstrates 9mm ammunition going through SIX double-skinned sheet rock walls and EIGHT 3/4" pine boards. That's Jacketed hollow point ammo too... not AP.

I certainly wouldn't trust plate armour to stop anything. I'd rather make it easier for the paramedics to get to the bleeding. :smallbiggrin:

WhiteHarness
2010-12-08, 07:37 AM
I've shot at enough sheet-steel in a lifetime of being an armour/weapons enthusiast to say that I'd trust around 2mm (~14ga) of mild steel to stop a commonly-available .22 LR round in most cases, but that's about it; and generally only the helmet and breastplate on a historical harness approached or surpassed that thickness.

Incanur
2010-12-08, 09:52 AM
Here's what happens when you shoot a handgun at a car door.

I know folks who've put swords through car doors as well. It's not the same thing as armor at all.

The Big Dice
2010-12-08, 12:44 PM
I've shot at enough sheet-steel in a lifetime of being an armour/weapons enthusiast to say that I'd trust around 2mm (~14ga) of mild steel to stop a commonly-available .22 LR round in most cases, but that's about it; and generally only the helmet and breastplate on a historical harness approached or surpassed that thickness.

With historical armour it's not so much the thickness as the geometry that gives it the protective qualities. Rather than it simply stopping a blow (and transferring blunt trauma to the person wearing it), plate armour is usually designed to encourage strikes to glance off. Deflecting the force rather than simply opposing it.


It has a lifepath and dangerous combat, but that's pretty much it. In 2013, you can dodge gunfire, after all. I like 2013, and it's brutal, but not very realistic. Armour stacking jumps immediately to mind, for example
I always assumed you were dodging the shooter rather than the shot. Layering armourin 2013 comes at a price too. There's a limit on how much stopping power you can stack, and it reduces mobility. And evenmaxed out, it won't do much aghainst rifle firing armour piercing ammo.

SynissterSyster
2010-12-08, 12:47 PM
Mark you are misreading me Mark. I know FATAL is a dud system but the sheer amount of stupid detail it has would help shatter the minds of some of the players. Along with Phoenix Command they probably would really want to use a more simple system.

The armor topic is not worth it. See the player with the hatchet attacked a Team Force Valkerie squad member. He didn't do enough damage to kill the npc outright and the player was confused at how the npc can be moving after a hatchet to the neck. Yeah the ST could have said it hit differently but the ST is new and learning so I am not holding it against him.

I just think it funny to see a a good amount of people dressed in plate, chainmail, and hardened leather taking on zombies.

kyoryu
2010-12-08, 01:12 PM
It has a lifepath and dangerous combat, but that's pretty much it. In 2013, you can dodge gunfire, after all. I like 2013, and it's brutal, but not very realistic. Armour stacking jumps immediately to mind, for example.


You can't dodge a bullet, but you can *certainly* dodge the aim of the person firing the bullet.

Psyx
2010-12-08, 01:35 PM
I know folks who've put swords through car doors as well. It's not the same thing as armor at all.

I didn't say it was...

But I was unable to find penetration data of steel for 9mm in a brief trawl. If you could find that data, or something at least preferable to pine board penetration, that'd be great and very illustrative.


With historical armour it's not so much the thickness as the geometry that gives it the protective qualities.

Which is moot as regards all but the most glancing of angles with high velocity munitions. The greatest advantage of angled armour would probably the additional thickness of it that it would present.


I always assumed you were dodging the shooter rather than the shot. Layering armourin 2013 comes at a price too. There's a limit on how much stopping power you can stack, and it reduces mobility. And evenmaxed out, it won't do much aghainst rifle firing armour piercing ammo.

Well yeah, but that still assumes that every PC can keep track of where every enemy is aiming a firearm. Pretty impressive stuff.
Plus the fact that armour layering really works. The lack of mobility really isn't 'enough' for the huge SP gained. Ah...Cyberpunk I love you, but your day has gone...

Now fighting zombies in chainmail... that's a solid plan. So long as I could still outrun them!

The Big Dice
2010-12-08, 02:04 PM
Well yeah, but that still assumes that every PC can keep track of where every enemy is aiming a firearm. Pretty impressive stuff.
Plus the fact that armour layering really works. The lack of mobility really isn't 'enough' for the huge SP gained. Ah...Cyberpunk I love you, but your day has gone...
The layered armour will stop a handgun cold, but against something with a bit more oomph behind it, especially if that something is an armopur piercing round, SP 30 isn't all that much. 7.62Nato rounds do something like 11d6 in 2013. That's an average of 33 or so even before ammo type modifiers. That's enough to cause wounds through even the heaviest of armours.

But I do agree that Cyberpunk is both awesome and also has had it's day.

Though with a bit of rewiring on how the Net works, it could be revived from the coma that the Matrix and the real internet put it into...

Spiryt
2010-12-08, 02:09 PM
Thing about penetration is pretty wonky thing - I would definitely WANT to wear plate armor against handgun fire - simply because it would in fact protect quite a bit.

Then there's a thing that nobody obviously wears plate today - as way's of defeating it name is legion.

However, in silly hypothetical situation where somebody in good plate would be shot at from some Glocks, it could potentially save his ass.

Here you have some more sensible experiment. (http://www.kryminalistyka.fr.pl/praktyka_helm_03.php) In polish, but pictures and basic bullet, range etc. data is perfectly clear.

Result - type 67 1.4 mm thick helmet, made for completely different purposes than resist firearms, without any padding or suspension, in fact resist "low caliburs" just fine.

You can also see interesting phenomenas - like bullets with more energy, more momentum, more mass fail to penetrate, but lighter, weaker ones go trough - as steel can't keep up with deforming at this speed - and breaks.

Slower bullet causes big deformations in both helmet and it's own body, but doesn't penetrate.

Psyren
2010-12-08, 02:56 PM
DnD :smallbiggrin:

Seriously. Cause I want magic and dragons and such. And if there ever were such a thing DnD seems the most realistic. So there.

You'd still have to deal with the "realism" of drowning to heal and other such wonders :smalltongue:


World of World of Warcraft. Frighteningly realistic. :smallwink:

I see what you did there (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rw8gE3lnpLQ)

WeLoveFireballs
2010-12-08, 07:01 PM
Wow. And I thought rolling straight 3d6 and random first-level hit points was bad.

However it is very well balanced anyway. Any pre-adventuring career has more powerful skills if it is harder to re-enlist (to get more skills) and harder to survive.

You are not likely to die as a merchant but building a combat monster from that career is going to be hard. If you want to make a scout (the ultimate adventurer with skills in everything especially useful and a decent chance of starting with a STARSHIP) then you can take a 7+ survival check each term.

Ragitsu
2010-12-08, 07:03 PM
I'm going to give another vote to GURPS: you get very close to reality with very little work.

---


GURPS I'm afraid isn't very realistic. For a start, any game that involves point allocation is inherently unrealistic; people in the real world are essentially created randomly, and character point balance doesn't exist. Likewise, any system where the player either has complete control over the skills they learn or no control isn't realistic. Point allotment games tend not to be very realistic when it comes to all the various small skills people pick up: I can count on one hand the GURPS characters I've seen with basic life skills like sewing or neighborhood knowledge. Also, the skill one person has may differ greatly from the same skill another person has. Something like a career system would work, as long as there's a lot of flexibility in the way skills are defined.

Sorry, but your argument is flawed for a few reasons.

1. The Point Buy option is there as a means of inherent freedom. A GM can enforce an "average person" Template if they so wish, which cuts down on character builds that don't mesh with their conception of "realistic" people.

2. A GM is fully within their rights to restrict the learning of certain Traits if a character has no viable means with which to learn them (be it the right book, a teacher, enough Wealth to get training, etc).

3. Rules for learning (which, in my opinion, are closer to reality than most systems) are built into this system. Not everyone uses them, but they are there.

4. Just because you haven't seen something, doesn't mean it can't happen, or doesn't happen.


When it comes to combat, one of the major problems is that real life isn't very realistic. Study the statistics for the results of violence, and you get people who die from being stuck in the foot with a knife, and others who survive multiple gunshot wounds to the chest. People don't have hit points- they aren't whittled down like a tree- when adreneline starts flowing they tend to take a lot of abuse until something vital is hit, and then they go down. In this case any game with hit points, GURPS included absolutely fails to be realistic. Probably your best bet would be some sort of damage save mechanic with a heavy random element.

Character is wearing a leather jacket (DR1) and gets hit by three 9mm bullets, the first two of which do minimum damage (4) in the Torso, the latter which does average damage (9) to the Vitals.

3 damage, plus 3 damage, plus 24 (8 x 3 for the Vitals) = 30 damage. This puts an 10 HP person at -20, which forces two checks for death. Not impossible to survive by any stretch of the imagination.

If you use a shotgun shell loaded with pellets instead of a 9mm pistol, survivability tends to go UP for the character with DR 1. And, we haven't even factored bleeding in yet (an Optional rule that many use).

Of course, this isn't the average scenario, but it CAN happen. People that get shot three plus times in the chest usually DO die, but not always! GURPS does model this "randomness" well enough, in my opinion.

Draz74
2010-12-08, 07:33 PM
I see what you did there (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rw8gE3lnpLQ)

I'm glad someone finally caught it.