No Accounting Ammo

#1

After being reminded of the ammo dice @Shadymutha implemented in a version of Black Light, I was just hit with this idea. Is it the lack of sleep talking or am I on to something?

Instead of tracking bullets fired and when to reload and how much more ammo you have left… how about this?

The first time in a session that you roll a 1 for gun damage, you must reload the gun before firing it again. The second time in a session that you roll a 1 for gun damage, you are out of ammo for that particular weapon for the rest of the combat. The third time that you roll a 1 for gun damage, you are out of ammo for that weapon the rest of the session.

Thoughts? Refinements?

#2

Hey that’s a cool way to do it.
Many ways lead to Rome!

#3

I usually prefer ammo rolls after combat to not bog the combat down but still have the “oh crap I am out” situation. But your version is fast enough to work! I like it.

#4

I think that is brilliant! No extra rolls, no nothin’. I don’t call you The Resident Mad Scientist of ICRPG for nothin’!

Using the damage roll rather than the attempt roll is superb. This has a couple of implications too: If the gun in question does non-standard effort then the behavior of ammo also changes like say if it uses MAGIC EFFORT for example (less likely to run out of ammo). Conversely, if it uses multiple dice, it is more likely to run out.

This is simply brilliant!

If the tone of the adventure/setting doesn’t require such things and if I want to track ammo (I generally don’t), I’d use the method Chaosmeister suggested. Also there is nothing preventing the GM asking for a usage/ammo roll at critical points in the adventure.

#5

As long as the GM overrides two 1 Rolls in a row. That would be colossal bad luck but it does happen. What if you used the same mechanic as the death die? On a critical miss, roll a D6 and you have to reload by the end of the timer?

#6

Sure, the GM can do that but to me there is no need override any rolls. Any weapon that uses multiple dice for damage is a powerful weapon. It is understandable that a powerful weapon needs more “ammo” or chews through ammo faster. I’d even say that this is a good game design.

#7

Differentiation of weapons gets weird with this. But when shooting is not that important in the game, I’m good with it.

#8

This would probably work well. For my personal taste however, it makes reloading too rare. I normally use “three shots, then you’re out” for pacing reasons (forces ppl to switch tactics if the battle runs long). But that’s just preferences.

#9

I don’t see a reason to override two rolls of 1. That is why you have other weapons.

#10

Good mechanic that is easy to remember. It could be tracked with ammo coins. Either you start with three coins and give them up as you roll the 1’s or you receive a coin everytime you roll a 1.

Of course, spent shells could be used instead of coins.

#11

@Chuck_Lemons D00000d!

You are speaking my language with the Ammo Tokens! You know I love some table clutter!

At first I was quick to agree that two 1s on one hit would run you out of ammo usually and this is no big deal due to all the great logic above.

But there is the case of what if they hit a nat 20, and then rolled 1 on their D6 and 1 on their D12.

That particular situation just doesn’t have the right “game feel” I’d want after a nat 20… do 2 points of damage and then out of Ammo for some period of time. As a Player I’d feel cheated a bit. If it was my first time with ICRPG or gaming in general, it might even result in me not coming back to give a second chance. So that edge case would be enough to make me at least give some more thought to the “rolling Two 1s for same damage” eventuality.

Fortunately, I think @Alex and @Runehammer have already though this one out for me though with a current game project I’m not sure is in the open to discuss out here in forum land yet. But hopefully the rule itself is okay to summarize. (If not, ping me guys and I’ll revise.)

The rule that would fix this one particular situation is to generally allow PC to reroll a 4 or less when rolling ULTIMATE.

#12

I just do " roll a 1 on a gun roll, you’re empty. EMPTY meaning no more mags… hell, the barrel is melted. You wrecked it." This keeps players hoarding and scavenging guns, which is a hoot

#13

Re-roll Dx if result is y or less is not a great mechanic. 4 rolls later you finally get a result.

But in adding ultimate with your system you not roll a 1 you would roll a 2…

But by that logic. if I add 2 to weapon damage then I never roll less than a 3.

There is a certain elegance that is lacking with this. Damage roll of 1 and you are empty. I feel it really depends on genre.

1 in 6 can be harsh. When last attack digit and damage digit match…you are empty. So 1-6 and 11-16 are danger attack rolls for being empty. But it just exasperates things if both rolls are 1.

There are many ways to do this, what it the goal? Or are we just wanting the one ring to rule them all? That’s cool to. But thematically are we talking lucha libre, or MechWarrior?

It really makes a difference in theme. If all things do D6 you don’t count, but if you upped it and roll a d12, a roll of 10,11,12 means you need to reload…but you did good damage on the enemy.

A roll of 6 on a D6 requires a reload. you do good damage, but need to take a round not doing damage. But if you are keeping track of reloads per session per gun, you are still Tracking ammo…just not with granularity.

What’s the goal?

#14

Ooo that would be fun @Runehammer ! Probably not as a standing every game rule for me, but certain genres and tables practically DEMAND that kind of John Wick nuttiness!

In my mental ICRPG version of the Fate Toolkit, I’m already filing this option away along a spectrum of options as a way to do it for Gonzo Guns A Blazin Action.

(And Whoa! If you ever want input on what to work on next in all your copious free time :joy: an ICRPG Toolkit would be AMAZEBALLS!)

#15

I see your point @Paxx. I don’t employ a lot of triggered reroll mechanics generally, hardly any Reroll mechanics at all really. I try to keep chosen or triggered rerolls pretty sparse but as consistently and universally applied as possible across a campaign or one shot.

So if this “reroll 4 or less on Ultimate Effort” was used, it would be my only (or next to only) re-roll rule in play, which is manageable without too too much drag on play in the moment.

Also—and I know this is a silly quibble, but it’s mine—I just dislike the way something like “add 4 to a d8 instead of Rolling d12 for ultimate” would pull all the table attention into rules minutiae land. If I couldn’t accept a straight d12 (my #1 option), my followup preferences would be, from best to worst: #2 some kind of Reroll; #3 fixed Bonus replaces Ultimate, some round number like +10; and then #4 adding any other flavors of extra dice and math. This is totally just my preference though.

#16

Another fun way to implement this would be as part of a TAG for a character whose playstyle fits:

SPRAY & PRAY: Whenever you roll firearm damage effort, you may choose to add d6. BUT if at any time you roll a 1 for firearm damage, that gun is permanently out of commission.

I could see using some variation of this for PCs who get bent out of shape about not having “Dual Weild” mechanics too.

#17

I think we are in pretty much agreement here!!! No idea on a clean system…damage dice Outcomes for degrees of success or degrees of failure is workable, but is totally bull in certain setups and totally perfect in others.

Post apocalyptic/goblin experimental Vs modern. Vs badly maintained.

#18

OO! OO!

What if rather than a reroll until a five or greater is Rolled on ULTIMATE EFFORT, the rule was… keep adding D12s when rolling ultimate until the total D12 value is five or more?!

It would (somewhat) neatly eliminate Edge case of rolling a critical success and then getting ones interacting with the ammo rule suggested in OP in a wonky way — AND it would lead to some really exciting moments and dice chucking LOL

#19

Everyone knows their own table best, but I see two issues that you might want to take into consideration @Lon

  1. The proposed rule means that higher is not always better. If you allow additional dice on a four or less, the optimal roll becomes “4, then 12”. So the interpretation of the ultimate die would not only differ between rolls, but would often not correspond to the normal sequence of numbers (by averages, the sequence becomes 12, 11, 4, 10, 3, 9, 2, 8, 1, 7, 6, 5; by possible maximums, 4-1 are best). The risk is this leads to more unsatisfaction with outcomes, rather than less.
  2. Unless the actual problem is a dislike for ones-fours, you are just shifting the baseline. There’s still going to be a lowest/worst number, only now it’s five. So after a while, players will probably start to feel that everything but ultimate is sort of irrelevant (max with weapon = worst with anything + ultimate), meaning that all rolls of four or less are irrelevant, meaning that maybe people should also get to reroll magic on a one for balance…
    In other words, you risk devaluing a whole range of outcomes and options.

Point is: if you don’t want bad rolls for ultimate, consider instead just replacing the roll with a static bonus.

#20

Forbidden Lands uses a mechanic where consumable resources (including ammo) have a die representing the amount you have left. Between a d6 and a d12 I think. Whenever you use one of the resource, you roll the die. On a 1 or 2 you lower the die one step. If you’re on a d6 and roll a 1 or 2, you’re out of the resource. Supplies, like a quiver of arrows, can be spent to increase the die one step or ignore a 1 or 2. That system is survivalist and has emphasis on limited resources.

Personally I prefer not having players keep track of ammo for common weapons, but it depends on the genre.