GM'ing Question: Carrying Guns and Encumbrance

[Raellus]

So, a few of my players want to carry more than one primary long arm (assault rifle/battle rifle/sniper rifle/LSW/SAW/GPMG, etc.) at a time. To me, this seems very unrealistic. I've seen literally tens of thousands of photos/videos of soldiers in wartime and I can count on two hands the number of times I've seen a soldier carrying more than one such weapon at a time and then only under special circumstances (carrying a wounded comrade's weapon for him, collecting captured weapons, showing off, carrying a breeching gun or small GL as well as an AR, etc.).

I get a sore shoulder carrying my slung Mossberg 500 for a mile hike.

Anyway, under game rules, players are well within their rights to carry multiple long arms as long as they don't go over their carried weight limit. I just don't buy it. I will allow PCs to carry a primary long arm and then another smaller weapon like an SMG, short-barrelled shotgun, or collapsed carbine (in addition to a sidearm as well).

I've instituted a house rule that PCs may carry multiple primaries but at a penalty to movement, innitiative, and to hit rolls.

Am I being a hardass? Am I the one being unrealistic? Is my stance reasonable? What do you think? How would you handle this issue as a GM?

[Panther Al]

Rule I always followed was a player could only carry 7 bulk points of weapons, with every additional 3 bulk points moving encumbrance up a level. And the weight of said weapons counts against the player as well, so no grabbing a MILAN and a 240 and taking off with it with out penalty.

Another rule I followed regarding bulk, weight, and encumbrance is the rule I have for riding in vehicles. The limit is again bulk: In this case 4 points. But: Weight of whatever s/he might have on counts as well. Including fatigues or whatever the character might be wearing, each 5 kilo's is a bulk point. I had my characters list out what they would always have on them, and as long as it meets the 4 point limit, its the standard load-out for panic moment, such as leaping out of a burning vehicle, reaction to surprise, etc. If a character has a average of agility and strength under 4, the limit is 3 points of bulk, if over 7, 5 points.

It seems to work, and keeps the arguments down when a character is ambushed, jumps out of the back of the truck when panic, and then saying, "Oh, by the way, on the way out I grabbed my DPTGAMPP* gun..."



(*Don't Point That Gun At My Planet Please!)

[Legbreaker]

As an infantryman, I routinely carried and L1A1 SLR, M79 GL and an M72 66mm LAW in addition to webbing (roughly 15-20kgs) and pack (about 20kgs).
While they were a pain if simply tossed over the shoulder, given a few moments to strap into place properly they weren't an issue.

At another time I carried by the pistol grip an L1A1 in one hand and M16A1 in the other - definitely NOT recommended except in an emergency (as that was).

Carriage of muliple unslung weapons is not going to happen as a normal thing (several L1A1s for example can be hooked together and carried by the carried handle, but they're not in a ready for use state). Carriage of several, properly stowed weapons on the other hand is possible in a combat environment (although why any soldier would even want to carry additional weaponry as a standard practice is beyond me).

I do need to state publicly that as one of the players in Raes game I have a vested interest in this.

[Snake Eyes]

I don't think all combinations of multiple longarms are necessarily unreasonable. A shotgun or sniper/hunting rifle securely bungee'd to your pack while carrying an assault rifle or carbine at low ready isn't that ridiculous a loadout even on a long march. Strapping an M16/M203 while humping an M60 is probably pushing it.

Seems pretty easy to handle this in 2.2 with the Bulk attribute. Something like: Reduce effective Initiative by 1 for every point of Bulk carried that exceeds the character's AGL and maybe implement a similar Observation penalty too. At the very least it gets players to think of leaner and more efficient loadouts at the cost of speed and stealth.

[Legbreaker]

Using Bulk doesn't really work though. A character could load up on other stores such as 40kgs of food, a couple of manpack radios, or a packfull of 100 hand grenades.
Common sense and decent roleplaying is the answer rather than a strict ruleset.

[pmulcahy11b]

It sort of depends on how the weapon is being carried. I once carried both an M60 and a Dragon cross-country for about 3 miles tactically, and I probably wouldn't have been as tired if I didn't have the flu at the time. The dragon was slung crossways across my back and the M-60 in my hands (the damn thing was minus the sling).

[Snake Eyes]

Originally Posted by Legbreaker

Using Bulk doesn't really work though. A character could load up on other stores such as 40kgs of food, a couple of manpack radios, or a packfull of 100 hand grenades.

The existing 2.2 Load rules handle matters of mere static mass just fine. The major exception being in cases of uneven distribution of "felt" weight - i.e., it is one thing to mount 50 kilos in a well-fitted framed pack with a padded hip belt and shoulder straps and quite another indeed for one man to herk around that same load in half a dozen plastic garbage bags. I took it that The Cap'n was referring more to the unwieldiness of lugging about multiple primary weapons, which - in addition to mass - are given a Bulk rating. Their mass counts against a PC's Load, but you can still implement Bulk-based modifications to make going armed for bear a slightly less appealing tactic. It only works if there is a tradeoff, and in this case the Load rules alone don't cut it.

Originally Posted by Legbreaker

Common sense and decent roleplaying is the answer rather than a strict ruleset.

Yeah, sure. But a good and complete ruleset is a framework that serves as a fair baseline to keep everybody (players and GM) honest.

[helbent4]

Originally Posted by Raellus

I've instituted a house rule that PCs may carry multiple primaries but at a penalty to movement, innitiative, and to hit rolls.

Am I being a hardass? Am I the one being unrealistic? Is my stance reasonable? What do you think? How would you handle this issue as a GM?

Rae,

The question is not mutually exclusive! You can be right but still a hardass.

It's not clear cut, and I can see where you're coming from. Even a properly stowed weapon is going to have some effect; unlike a pack or bag longarms tend to be long and unbalanced. They catch on underbrush when moving, can be damaged if you dive for cover, restrict movement and so on.

1) Move/Init penalties make some sense when moving. Not major but enough to remind you you're carrying a burden.

2) Poorly stowed longarms can interfere with shooting stance, balance and so on, so maybe a small penalty. Not a difficulty level but (say) a -1 to skill. For example, a character picks up a rifle and slings it over a shoulder. The then

3) If firing from a braced or otherwise stable position, I can't see a longarm slung and secured properly being significantly different than any other burden as accounted for under the rules.

Tony

[HorseSoldier]

It sort of depends on how the weapon is being carried.

I agree on the real world side of things.

On the gaming side, I feel pretty supportive of penalizing characters for going all silly first person shooter with their kit. At my last unit we did a "green up" sort of event a time or two for programmers associated with the America's Army video game and it was pretty amazing how quick they figured out that hitting F1 to cycle from your M4 to your SAW to your Barrett was just daft once we handed them one of each and let them try that out in the real world. (On the plus side they were a fun bunch and took us all out on their expense account after we spent the day having them run around a MOUT site dodging simunition rounds . . .).

[Targan]

I think the T2K bulk/encumbrance system is rubbish but as all the veterans of this forum know, I'm a rules-crunchy kind of guy. In the system I use different loads cause different encumbrance penalties to different characters, based on each individual's strength and endurance.

[helbent4]

Originally Posted by HorseSoldier

I agree on the real world side of things.

On the gaming side, I feel pretty supportive of penalizing characters for going all silly first person shooter with their kit.

HS,

I wouldn't dream of abusing reality like that in an RPG.

Speaking of FPS type games, I never liked the way most handled the mechanism for switching weapons. Or where you can carry a plethora of small arms and heavy weapons, probably several hundred kilos worth! Like Half Life and Half Life 2. Games like R6 Vegas and Call of Duty/Modern Warfare allow you one main weapon, a sidearm and some grenades. Switching is a fairly long process (except for drawing a sidearm).

Tony

[Fusilier]

Originally Posted by helbent4

HS,Speaking of FPS type games, I never liked the way most handled the mechanism for switching weapons. Or where you can carry a plethora of small arms and heavy weapons, probably several hundred kilos worth! Like Half Life and Half Life 2.

In all fairness, those games aren't focused on reaslism so much as they are on the story and action.

And back on topic, I'd penalize PC's for carrying multiple weapons myself. Any added gear is going to interfere to some degree.

[LBraden]

To go onto the game front -- that Battlefield Bad Company 2 is a little more realistic on using the M203, GP-30, or AG-36 40mm grenade launchers if you switch to it from the main weapon, and back again.

Back to topic.
I am the sort of guy who would look to either create or modify something into a cart and use something to pull it to help with weight carrying, one thing that happens in Fallout that annoyed me, was that you see all these, effectively, two headed cows carrying stuff for merchants, YET you cannot have one to carry an extra couple of weapons or something like that.

However, yeah, at most, main, side, knife, few mags for each, probably a few extra items is a good loadout for most.

[pmulcahy11b]

How many don't agree with the rules for firing two handguns? One shot with one, then one with the other -- a point-blank range, one could literally "fill his target with lead" by rapidly firing both handguns at the same time. At longer ranges, this would be wildly inaccurate, but close up (about half to three-quarters short range), it's feasible.

[Raellus]

I'll take a look at the bulk rules. To be honest, I've never used them. I'm a little reluctant to start using more rules because I already feel like a lot of my GM'ing effort is being frittered away on doing actuary stuff. I'd much rather spend that time creating a good story for my players. Wherever possible, I try to streamline rules to make them more GM-friendly.

I'd rather honor the spirit of the law than go by the letter of it. If the bulk rules are simple and easy to implement, I'll go with them. If not, I'll have to think on it some more.

How a weapon is carried is an important factor in determining whether or not it is a hindrance. Unfortunately, a lot of players don't take the time to describe how their PC is doing so and there's really no place for it on the standard char-sheet. The other trouble I have is that some of my players add and/or switch weapons after every firefight and keeping track of who has what when gets to be a real burden for me. My players have done very well for themselves during the course of the campaign and they are always capturing weapons and ammo. Every one an a while, something fairly dramatic will happen to thin their stocks but, usually, they are coming out on the plus side of any gear transactions.

[HorseSoldier]

Originally Posted by pmulcahy11b

How many don't agree with the rules for firing two handguns? One shot with one, then one with the other -- a point-blank range, one could literally "fill his target with lead" by rapidly firing both handguns at the same time. At longer ranges, this would be wildly inaccurate, but close up (about half to three-quarters short range), it's feasible.

I've never tried it, but I suspect I could score hits reliably with two pistols at the same ranges I can reliably make hits firing from retention position with the pistol tucked up alongside my rib cage. At any range where aiming requires more than body positioning, however, I'd think the rules are spot on -- aim with one, aim with the other (plus there should be speed and accuracy penalties for shooting with one hand compared to a proper two handed grip).

[Legbreaker]

It all comes down to how additional weaponry is carried. Broken down and stuffed into a pack they're not going to be much of a bother, but a sniper rifle ready for use tossed over one shoulder while crawling along with a machinegun (or even a pistol) is going to be a complete bitch! The M79 for example if not carried properly had a well deserved reputation for swinging around as the soldier dived to ground and smacking them in the face. Spend a few extra seconds securing it and it wasn't usually a problem.

Wearing a pack in combat was more of a hinderance in my experience than additional weaponry. The damn things can get HEAVY and ride up preventing you from raising your head in the prone position. Of course I never tried carrying more than 2-3 long weapons at a time in a contact situation.

[Tegyrius]

I think you're entirely within your rights as GM, not to mention the bounds of sanity, to insist on some reasonable limits for ironmongery carried.

Originally Posted by Raellus

How a weapon is carried is an important factor in determining whether or not it is a hindrance. Unfortunately, a lot of players don't take the time to describe how their PC is doing so and there's really no place for it on the standard char-sheet. The other trouble I have is that some of my players add and/or switch weapons after every firefight and keeping track of who has what when gets to be a real burden for me. My players have done very well for themselves during the course of the campaign and they are always capturing weapons and ammo. Every one an a while, something fairly dramatic will happen to thin their stocks but, usually, they are coming out on the plus side of any gear transactions.

Is there any chance of getting them to put their weapon stats on 3x5 index cards, then arrange those on the table so you can see who's carrying what in any given engagement? Maybe put stats on the front and just the name on the back, then keep the cards for weapons not currently being wielded in face-down position?

ETA: If your gun safe isn't stocked for providing object lessons, do you have any scrap lumber? Cut a 2x4 to the length of an M240B, cut another to the length of an M4, and say, "here ya go, this is what your character is trying to carry." If you're feeling generous, drill some holes for a length of paracord to simulate a sling...

- C.

[Legbreaker]

Originally Posted by Tegyrius

Is there any chance of getting them to put their weapon stats on 3x5 index cards

None. It's an online game with players scattered across the face of the planet.

[Tegyrius]

Originally Posted by Legbreaker

None. It's an online game with players scattered across the face of the planet.

Is it real-time via Skype/chat or an asynchronous PbP?

- C.

[StainlessSteelCynic]

Originally Posted by Raellus

I'll take a look at the bulk rules. To be honest, I've never used them. I'm a little reluctant to start using more rules because I already feel like a lot of my GM'ing effort is being frittered away on doing actuary stuff. I'd much rather spend that time creating a good story for my players. Wherever possible, I try to streamline rules to make them more GM-friendly.

I'd rather honor the spirit of the law than go by the letter of it. If the bulk rules are simple and easy to implement, I'll go with them. If not, I'll have to think on it some more.

How a weapon is carried is an important factor in determining whether or not it is a hindrance. Unfortunately, a lot of players don't take the time to describe how their PC is doing so and there's really no place for it on the standard char-sheet. The other trouble I have is that some of my players add and/or switch weapons after every firefight and keeping track of who has what when gets to be a real burden for me. My players have done very well for themselves during the course of the campaign and they are always capturing weapons and ammo. Every one an a while, something fairly dramatic will happen to thin their stocks but, usually, they are coming out on the plus side of any gear transactions.

I tend to agree with you here, I'd rather play the spirit of the game than the rules of the game - frankly, excessive use of rules or an over-abundance of rules bores the crap out of me and makes the game deathly dull. However, the Bulk rules aren't that much more to add, mostly being concerned with how easy (or not) a weapon is to conceal and with who can bring their weapon to bear first when two opponents have the same Initiatives. They are a measure of how 'handy' the weapon is to use and store so to speak and as such, I think Panther Al's rules are worth looking at in greater detail in that regard.

The way a weapon is carried definitely makes a huge difference as has been pointed out by a few people here already - I remember being smacked in the back of the head on a few occasions from a poorly secured M79 when going to ground. Even if the PCs are carrying a securely stowed sniper rifle while carrying an assault rifle in hand, that long barrel on the sniper rifle can get caught up on all manner of things while they're crawling through the undergrowth. This is a situation where the weight isn't as much a problem as the overall size of the gear and weapons are.

I think part of the issue here is also, how many weapons the PCs can collect. For sure any survivalist thinking PC is going to pillage the dead for gear but (at the risk of extra admin work for the Referee) this is were you need to think about the condition of recovered weapons in an effort to make taking them less appealing.
For example, are they worn out/rusted up/suffering corrosion, did they suffer light/medium/heavy damage during the fight, have they already taken damage that has then been poorly repaired, did the enemy survivors recover whatever they could before bugging out? There's nothing like dodgy ammo for inconveniently lodging a projectile in the barrel or causing a ruptured case in the chamber.

Obviously you can't overuse these things but it might be worth considering some use of them if it can curb some of the looter's zeal for collecting every single weapon they find. Another option is to have the enemy use rifles that use different ammo to what the PCs already have and have it in short supply so there is little value in stockpiling said weapons (e.g. the enemy blazed away most of their ammo stocks so there's precious few rounds left).

[Panther Al]

Originally Posted by StainlessSteelCynic

I tend to agree with you here, I'd rather play the spirit of the game than the rules of the game - frankly, excessive use of rules or an over-abundance of rules bores the crap out of me and makes the game deathly dull. However, the Bulk rules aren't that much more to add, mostly being concerned with how easy (or not) a weapon is to conceal and with who can bring their weapon to bear first when two opponents have the same Initiatives. They are a measure of how 'handy' the weapon is to use and store so to speak and as such, I think Panther Al's rules are worth looking at in greater detail in that regard.

I only got to try out those rules a couple of times before the gaming stopped, but I have been fooling about with ways to account for what it is you are packing and how it effects what you are doing. Last time I gave it serious thought was a combination of weight and bulk. And on how to actually enforce an encumbrance penalty. Since the last I looked, and I didn't look very hard I'll admit, there didn't really seem to be any rules in place to keep someone from running around doing various things.

One way that I addressed it in my thought process was changing the max load figure: [(STR+CON)x2] representing the max load you can carry without stressing over if there is going to be an effect on doing things. Changing the x2 to x3 results in the range where the load will result in a one level penalty for all rolls due to encumbrance. From x3 to x4 results in a two level drop, with x4 being also max load carried. This is also tied into bulk as mentioned earlier in the thread. It can be cumbersome, but how I ran with the earlier versions was what I called basic loads. I told the players come up with your basic in vehicle load out, your patrolling load out, and any misc. load outs. Placed them on a 3x5 and didn't worry about figuring out the exact load unless it appeared to be significantly different, or they decide to grab that honking big gun they just found while running away.. err... retrograding away from a fight. Not sure yet if the weight of the weapon should count towards the 5kg = 1 bulk.

[Raellus]

Tegyrius, it's a PbP hosted on RPoL.

Originally Posted by StainlessSteelCynic

I think part of the issue here is also, how many weapons the PCs can collect. For sure any survivalist thinking PC is going to pillage the dead for gear but (at the risk of extra admin work for the Referee) this is were you need to think about the condition of recovered weapons in an effort to make taking them less appealing.
For example, are they worn out/rusted up/suffering corrosion, did they suffer light/medium/heavy damage during the fight, have they already taken damage that has then been poorly repaired, did the enemy survivors recover whatever they could before bugging out? There's nothing like dodgy ammo for inconveniently lodging a projectile in the barrel or causing a ruptured case in the chamber.

Obviously you can't overuse these things but it might be worth considering some use of them if it can curb some of the looter's zeal for collecting every single weapon they find. Another option is to have the enemy use rifles that use different ammo to what the PCs already have and have it in short supply so there is little value in stockpiling said weapons (e.g. the enemy blazed away most of their ammo stocks so there's precious few rounds left).

My PC's are a mostly good-hearted, generous bunch and they tend to keep every serviceable weapon (I do write some off to damage/poor condition) that they capture in order to donate it to the local friendly militia and/or use them for trade goods. At the moment, they're also trying to help out the undergunned turncoat 10th GTD. So, they have a tendency to take and hold on to nearly everything. As long as they have something to carry it with, it's not a problem. But, when they are on foot, it does start to become and issue.

[helbent4]

Originally Posted by Raellus

Tegyrius, it's a PbP hosted on RPoL.

Rae,

My PC's are a mostly good-hearted, generous bunch and they tend to keep every serviceable weapon (I do write some off to damage/poor condition) in order to donate it to the local friendly militia and/or use them for trade goods. At the moment, they're also trying to help out the undergunned turncoat 10th GTD. So, they have a tendency to take and hold on to nearly everything.

I agree, as a member of the game in particular I don't think we're being "survivalists" or overzealous looters but we might be considered wankers. (Perhaps a distinction without a difference?)

Our mindset is more like we're "partisans" in a literal sense, behind enemy lines and forced to scavenge for supplies. In that case, we can't afford to throw away working weapons, not the least because extra weapons can (and should) be passed along to allies or traded for some other advantage.

Now, in thinning out our hard-won kit, that's just being a big meanie! Just sayin'.

Tony

[Panther Al]

I always viewed scrounging weapons as a way to ensure the ones we have and like can stay in service.. *enter some random town where a reloader has made a name of himself* "Heya, I got a ton empty brass for a 8mmP that needs loading, I got a couple of dozen AK's and ammo, do a trade?" Or.. "You wouldn't believe how fast a 134 willgo through ammo, I need 7.62N, do a trade?"

[Caradhras]

From a T2K DM but one with no real life experience. I always had my players 1 long arm weapon and a side arm ready to use when on foot, they also could have a smaller weapon like an SMG etc but secured (ie take a couple of rounds to swap and be able to fire).

Obviously, they could carry any number of long arm weapons within their weight limits if secured in carrying form.

This may be simplistic but me and my players didnt want to get too bogged down with rules or each others views of realism. Tis the GMs game and, as long as he isnt being completely off the wall, then what he says goes imo

[StainlessSteelCynic]

Originally Posted by Raellus

My PC's are a mostly good-hearted, generous bunch and they tend to keep every serviceable weapon (I do write some off to damage/poor condition) that they capture in order to donate it to the local friendly militia and/or use them for trade goods. At the moment, they're also trying to help out the undergunned turncoat 10th GTD. So, they have a tendency to take and hold on to nearly everything. As long as they have something to carry it with, it's not a problem. But, when they are on foot, it does start to become and issue.

Originally Posted by helbent4

I agree, as a member of the game in particular I don't think we're being "survivalists" or overzealous looters but we might be considered wankers. (Perhaps a distinction without a difference?)

Our mindset is more like we're "partisans" in a literal sense, behind enemy lines and forced to scavenge for supplies. In that case, we can't afford to throw away working weapons, not the least because extra weapons can (and should) be passed along to allies or traded for some other advantage.

Now, in thinning out our hard-won kit, that's just being a big meanie! Just sayin'.

Tony

Hey no problem, I certainly didn't mean you were a pack of scavenging leeches but I know myself that I would absolutely be going through every piece of gear the dead guys had to see if I could use it - of course, that assumes I'd have the time to do so at my leisure, nothing worse than being shot in the arse because you didn't pay attention to the world around you because you were too busy examining your new found wealth!
Hell, If I found a lot of gear and I could stash all that stuff and come back next week so I have more items to barter for food, ammo, etc. I'll give it a damned good try!

I think, to stop me wandering off topic and get things on track, it comes back to how much someone can carry and how they carry it. There's only certain ways you can carry your gear and still remain able to react and be effective in combat. Anybody with average strength can carry 10-12 rifles bundled up in their arms for a short time but as soon as someone starts shooting, they can do nothing else except drop all those rifles and hope they have enough time to hit the deck before getting their head blown off.

And if they've been carrying those 10-12 rifles for more than an hour or so, they'll suffer fatigue despite their strength. They could carry maybe 6-8 weapons strapped to their pack but then if they get into a firefight, all those extra weapons are going to get caught up on something or they are going to start jabbing into their body or they're going to prevent them from crawling under/through something or rolling over something and so on. They could always drop the pack but then they risk damaging the weapons strapped to it but hey, they're going to risk that if they leave the pack on and try dropping and rolling to get out of the line of fire.

Originally Posted by Panther Al

I always viewed scrounging weapons as a way to ensure the ones we have and like can stay in service.. *enter some random town where a reloader has made a name of himself* "Heya, I got a ton empty brass for a 8mmP that needs loading, I got a couple of dozen AK's and ammo, do a trade?" Or.. "You wouldn't believe how fast a 134 willgo through ammo, I need 7.62N, do a trade?"

Exactly the same way that I view it, to me T2k is a "survival in the ruins of an apocalypse" game so scavenging isn't simply a past-time, it's a way of life, you want good barter so you can get good stuff in return.

[Legbreaker]

Originally Posted by StainlessSteelCynic

They could always drop the pack but then they risk damaging the weapons strapped to it but hey, they're going to risk that if they leave the pack on and try dropping and rolling to get out of the line of fire.

As long as they're real, solid, military weapons like the L1A1 (not the plastic fantastic M16 ) they should be fine - unless the pack is dropped over a cliff...

[weswood]

I'd let them carry as much as thier strength allows, but only have 1 longarm avaiable for immediate use. If they want to switch out during the middle of a fire fight- "Oh, gee, you dropped you pack as soon as the firing started. You want to turn your back on the enemy to go back to the pack, then spend 2 or 3 rounds untying that rifle?"

[Legbreaker]

Correct. Carriage of additional weaponry is possible IRL, but it's not going to be readily available unless the character wants to risk being hit in the face with it, or dropping it, etc
Securing the weapon with cord, bungees, bailing wire or whatever should be fine though, but it's not likely a Milan or PTRS is going to be able to be strapped onto your pack, even if the character's Load stat allows the weight.

Additionally, wearing a pack will actually reduce the amount of additional weapons able to be carried without penalty. Strapping several lots of 4-5kg weapons to the back of a pack throws the centre of balance waaaay off. Strapping them to the sides is asking to get hung up on branches and other obstacles.