Ghost Mountain Types: the Gunslinger

ghost-mountain
#1

This is the second Ghost Mountain (and other “weird west” settings) type I’ve done up. Let me know if something’s not sitting right, or if you’d like to see a different type. Enjoy cowpokes!

Gunslinger

  • fan the hammer: on a successful attack, roll BASIC; fire up to that many shots at that many targets (limited by capacity).
  • two-gun kid: spend a shot from each pistol, and roll one attack; on a hit roll damage twice
  • pals: when CLOSE to an ally, attack rolls are EASY

Starting Loot

  • Buntline: spend a turn to attach a stock to your pistol to attack at FAR.
  • Derringer: surprise attack, CLOSE range (NEAR on NAT 20), capacity 2; roll 2 damage keep lower; interrupt with next turn’s action
  • Sawed-Off: NEAR range, capacity 2. Split damage between foes CLOSE together. Can fire both shots in 1 attack roll. MAX damage explodes. Attacks are EASY.
Need advice on one shot i started working on
I Need Your Help! What is your favorite ICRPG Community Content?
#2

Very imaginative ideas here, and definitely attacking all the tropes, but for “Scatter Gun” unfortunately that’s not quite how shotguns work, so I might consider revisiting that one. :shield:

#3

OK, how do we make it mo’ betta? Or should we go for something else entirely?

#4

It’s a common misconception from filmed entertainment sources that a shotgun firing buckshot is some kind of “alley broom,” knocking a whole crew of bad guys down as if it were some dragon’s cone-shaped breath weapon. A typical round of modern 00 buckshot contains 8 to 12 (most often 9) .33 caliber spherical pellets. Fired from a short (18” or less) barrel with no “choke” (i.e., a cylinder bore, with no constriction toward the muzzle), those pellets tend to spread in flight at about an inch per yard. That means at “NEAR distance”—approximately 30 feet or 10 yards—those pellets are all still likely hitting inside an area that could be covered by a dinner plate.

If I wanted to have a cool mechanic for a scattergun, I’d give the player two options:

  1. With one shot, “feather the pattern” to hit two adjacent opponents, both at NEAR range and within CLOSE distance of each other, dealing D4 damage to each, or…
  2. Treat a shotgun blast like a Lightning Bolt spell on multiple colinear targets, rolling D8 damage and allocating individual points at the player’s discretion but in proximity rank, so that the nearest target takes the most damage.

Realistic or not, I do like the exploding damage dice, so I would definitely keep that just for fun and flavor.

I submit these suggestions for your consideration, easy peasy tweaks to round out your type definition without riling up any gun lovers’ sensibilities. Game on. :shield:

#5

Hmm. I kinda like this rolling your damage, and being able to split it up amongst multiple targets - especially combined with the exploding damage (I waffled on whether to make damage explode at 8 or at 1). Maybe being able to do that, and give 'em both barrels at once would make it worth it. Or maybe just make hitting EASY. Lots to consider; thanks!

#6

Different scatterguns can have different types of action, so any break-action double-barreled gun could have a “Both Barrels” tag independent of the scatter ammunition mechanic you settle on, whereby you choose a target, roll HARD DEX (owing to the stouter recoil), and do DOUBLE effort, but your gun is now empty!

#7

Right now, I’m looking at ways to shorten the text to better enable players to write the whole thing on their sheet.

Looking at this style, like James Caan from El Dorado:
image

#8

Whip-It Gun: A shortened scattergun with buckshot in two barrels, NEAR range, capacity 2 rounds. Deal D8 GUN damage to one target, D4 GUN damage to each of two targets CLOSE together, or 2D8 GUN damage by unloading both barrels on one target (HARD DEX). On any maximum die result, keep it and roll again.

[This skips the colinear damage allocation option, but it’s about as condensed as you can get three complete mechanics and a description of the firearm itself. It would be a rare occurrence anyway that you would have three or more targets in a line and enough points of GUN effort to damage all of them significantly…]

#9

You have many fine skills, sir, but brevity is not among them. This is a shortened version of what you wrote:

  • Whip-It Gun: NEAR range, capacity 2. GUN damage to one target, BASIC damage to two targets CLOSE together; x2 damage dice by firing both shots at on one attack (HARD DEX). MAX damage rolls again.

Personally, I don’t like the “recoil makes the attack HARD”, since logically the recoil comes after you’ve fired. I think expending the ammo and time reloading is cost enough, but mileage may vary.

#10

It is fair for you to attack my brevity as you have attacked my beautiful syntax in my description above, but attacking my logic assumes you have fully comprehended my intent, which in this case I say with respect that you have not.

Sidestepping any debate concerning the minor effects on accuracy of recoil from two simultaneous shotshell payloads of over an ounce of high-velocity buckshot each (six or seven times the mass of a typical 9mm target round), my real intention in adding HARD DEX for Both Barrels was to introduce an additional in-game trade-off for doubling the damage output of your weapon besides just emptying it.

You may choose differently, and I accept that happily. This is the “pseudo-“ part in the “pseudorealistic gunplay” I alluded to when composing my own gun rules, where the art of being a gamemaster departs from (and trumps) the science of real-world ballistics.

#11

I hope I’m reading the humor correctly above :laughing: It was a beautiful and very detailed description

No, I got you were adding an additional cost for the benefit of the added damage; as I said, I thought the costs were already high enough. The “realism” component isn’t that important to me, but the logical disconnect hit me in a kinda funny way, the same way the original mechanic hit your sense of verisimilitude. Different audiences will land on these things differently, and that’s OK. I think I’ve got it where I want to, now (except, doubtful person that I am, I fear I may have made this option too good).