|
I've been thinking about the
rank question that came up earlier and it has started to bug me. The idea
of characters getting promoted at the end of each adventure just doesn't seem
very realistic. Even having a chance of being promoted doesn't seem very
realistic. Promotions usually, even in war, came after time in service and
time in grade(time spent in current rank) requirments were met. Granted
there were exceptions, but they were just that, exceptions. Battlefield
promotions did come along, but they were usually on the spot to replace a senior
member that was KIA or WIA. I think medals are a great idea. That is
what they were for, rewarding heroic and valorious deeds. Rank was a tool
for setting the chain of command. With rank comes more money and even in
times of war the military bueracracy is still tight stringed.
I think players buying rank
during character creation is a good idea. After that promotions should
come from 1. time in grade requirements (6 months to go from an E-1
private to an E-2 Private First Class) etc. oe 2. Game Master
promotions when a player's character has been filling a position normally filled
by a rank higher than the one he has. This should be stressed as a huge
reward becuase more often than not the military would transfer in someone of the
appropriate rank rather than promote someone meritoriously. For
example: Four players make their characters. One buys rank so he can
be a 2nd Lt. the other three decide there are better things to spend
points on and play buck privates fresh out of boot camp. They are all
assigned to the same platoon (lots of NPCs) THe NPCs make up the remainder of
the PCs squad including the squad leader as well as the members of the other
squads. Lets just say this is a brand new "green" unit and the three
privates are put in to a fire team together. Hopefully one of them,
through role playing, will take charge of his team. After an adventure or
two, and not necessarilly in combat, the 2nd Lt. player may talk to the GM or
the GM may decide on his own to make the player that took charge of the fire
team a PFC, a rank befitting his position. Later on, during the platoons
first fight, they take some heavy losses. The players squad leader goes
KIA. If one of the players does some good roleplaying and takes charge of
the squad it would be ok for him to be promoted to corporal. If however
the pc's fend for themselves but don't take charge, they shouldn't get
promoted. Same situation would need to occur for a pc to make
sergeant. The platoon sgt. would need to get WIA or KIA to open the
position for one of the PCs to have a shot at promotion.
The downside of this means that
the game will need to include some rudimentary table of organization for basic
units. i.e.:
Rifle Platoon:
1 Platton Leader (1st - 2nd Lt)
1 Platoon Sgt
(Sgt+) 1 Radio
Operator (Sgt-Pvt)
3 Rifle
Squads
Squad
Leader (Cpl-Sgt)
3
Fire Teams
FireTeam
Leader(PFC-Cpl)
3
Riflemen(Pvt-PFC)
1 Weapons Team
Team Leader (PFC-Cpl)
1 BAR Gunner
(Pvt-PFC)
1 Assistant BAR
Gunner(PVT-PFC)
1
Rifleman(Pvt-PFC)
1 Weapons
Squad
Squad Leader(Cpl-Sgt)
2
Weapons Teams
Team Leader (PFC-Cpl)
1 Machine Gunner
(Pvt-PFC)
1
Assistant Machine Gunner(PVT-PFC)
1
Rifleman(Pvt-PFC)
1 Weapon
Team
Team Leader (PFC-PFC)
1 Bazooka (Pvt-PFC)
1 Assistant gunner (Pvt-PFC)
1 Rifleman (Pvt-PFC)
an assosiated Table of Equipment would make it even easier for GM's to
flesh out their units and would provide starting weapons for players.
using the above example:
Rifle Platoon:
1 Platton Leader (1st - 2nd
Lt) Pistol
1 Platoon Sgt
(Sgt+)
Thomspon SMG or M-1
Carbine
1 Radio
Operator (Sgt-Pvt)
Pistol or M-1 Carbine(carbine should cost extra points
though)
3 Rifle
Squads
Squad
Leader (Cpl-Sgt)
Thompson SMG or M-1 Carbine
3
Fire Teams
FireTeam
Leader(PFC-Cpl) M-1 Carbine or M-1
Rifle
3
Riflemen(Pvt-PFC)
M-1 Rifle (one rifleman per platoon would
be the platoon sniper and get a springfield 1904 with scope and
bi-pod)
1 Weapons Team
Team Leader (PFC-Cpl) M-1 Carbine or M-1
Rifle
1 BAR Gunner
(Pvt-PFC) BAR
1 Assistant BAR
Gunner(PVT-PFC) M-1 Rifle
1
Rifleman(Pvt-PFC) M-1
Rifle
1 Weapons
Squad
Squad Leader(Cpl-Sgt)
Thompson SMG or M-1
Carbine
2
Weapons Teams
Team Leader (PFC-Cpl)
M-1 Carbine or M-1 Rifle
1 Machine Gunner
(Pvt-PFC) .30 Machine Gun
1
Assistant Machine Gunner(PVT-PFC) M-1
Carbine
1
Rifleman(Pvt-PFC)
M-1 Rifle
1 Weapon
Team
Team Leader (PFC-PFC)
M-1 Carbine or M-1 Rifle
1 Bazooka (Pvt-PFC)
Bazooka and pistol
1 Assistant gunner (Pvt-PFC) M-1
Rifle
1 Rifleman (Pvt-PFC)
M-1 Rifle
Promotions before time in grade should only come if their is a vacancy open
in the table of organization. Some specialized units were slightly
different depending or training requirements. Airborne and Rangers spent
enough time in training that everyone was a PFC unless they had gotten in
trouble and lost rank. The GM should be reserved the right to promote
characters as a reward for good role-playing and if their is a vacancy for the
rank.
The table of Equipment will prevent players making up squads loaded with
thompsons or bazookas. The only unit I have read about that could choose
any weapon they wanted was the rangers and they still stuck to the norm out of
choice more often than not. If you think about it, this game will be
completely different from almost every other roleplaying game in the fact that
characters don't get a lump some of points/money to buy what ever equipment they
want. The military issues the soldier what they need (and better hope
supply has it in stock(there;s a evil idea, come up with the basic issue
uniforms, socks, pack, etc plus weapon and ammo but put an availability numer
with the items, then have the players roll to see what the supply sgt. had to
give them and what they just have to go without)) During a mission players
would of course be able to loot the dead but after the missions anything over an
enemy pistol or knife was usually confiscated. Otherwise you would have
seen a whole bunch of americans running around with MP-40s.
I think equipment may be one area that will need a major
deviation from normal game rules to keep it realistic.
On a roll tonight but that just made me think of
something else. Weapons familiarity. Although anyone could pick up a
gun and pull the trigger reguardless of type of weapon and origin of
manufacture. Your standard grunt in the grass would not be familiar with
the maintanence and upleep of very many weapons. Enlisted Americans would
all be familiar with the M-1 rifle and officers with the .45 pistol. But
they would not all be familiar with the M-1 carbine, the thompson, a bazooka, a
bar or a .30 MG, let alone an enemy or even allied weapon. Should they use
a weapon they are not familiar with and it jam they would have next to no chance
of clearing it. The same would go for enemy equipment. In the play
test notes the heroes stealing the german APC should have taken some serious
rolls just to start the thing. I don't think familiarity should
necessarily be something that a player would have to spend points on, but it
should be something the 1. they must spend game time using and 2. must either
have someone familiar with a new weapon show them how to maintain and use it or
spens a lot of time figuring it out. For example, any gun enthuisiasts out
there, there is a big difference of how you disassemble a baretta 9mm and a Colt
Sigma .40 and for those who do or don't know putting the Sigma back
together if someone hasn't shown you the secret little 2 buttoins to hold down
would be next to impossible. Or the S&W 4046 (alos .40) will not fire
if the magazine is not fully seated inside the weapon. From experience
while I was in the Marine Corps my buddy (who was my units armourer) and I
bought a WW2 british lee enfield bolt action .303 rifle. It took us a
whole weekend to figure out how that very simple piece of equipment was stripped
all the way down and put back together.
Well, I'm going to get off of my soap box now, sorry for ranting and thanks
for listening.
Mikhael |