Personal Gear

[helbent4]

Originally Posted by kato13

The philosophy that I have always followed in games (an to be honest, life) follow the words of my namesake.

Absorb what is useful
reject what is useless
add what is specifically your own

Kato,

I couldn't agree more, and you can do this while remaining true to canon. In life we have to take the good with the bad, and that's a part of TMP as well (at least with regards to equipment if not faulty rules). It's part of what makes it feel "real" and not just some survivalist fantasy.

Originally Posted by kato13

Every group is different in terms of what will keep them happy so the path to enjoyment for each will never be the same.

Heh, well spoken, but I think your namesake would label this statement as "sophistry".

Mainly because this is demonstrably untrue. How many groups demand serious and significant changes to Star Wars or Star Trek to suit them or, gosh darn it, they just won't have fun? I think all groups (including TMP) are similar in one important respect: they want to have fun.

Most changes to TMP do not alter that in any way or add to the "fun" factor. They just reflect the personal likes, dislikes, preferences and prejudices of the PD, and most of these changes are actually kind of pointless.

That said, problem-solving should always be a primary focus of TMP. Firepower and equipment use frequently take the place of brains and imagination, placing some kind of reasonable boundaries can foster creativity when players are forced to improvise.

Tony

[kato13]

Originally Posted by helbent4

Kato,

I couldn't agree more, and you can do this while remaining true to canon. In life we have to take the good with the bad, and that's a part of TMP as well (at least with regards to equipment if not faulty rules). It's part of what makes it feel "real" and not just some survivalist fantasy.



Heh, well spoken, but I think your namesake would label this statement as "sophistry".

Mainly because this is demonstrably untrue. How many groups demand serious and significant changes to Star Wars or Star Trek to suit them or, gosh darn it, they just won't have fun? I think all groups (including TMP) are similar in one important respect: they want to have fun.

Most changes to TMP do not alter that in any way or add to the "fun" factor. They just reflect the personal likes, dislikes, preferences and prejudices of the PD, and most of these changes are actually kind of pointless.

That said, problem-solving should always be a primary focus of TMP. Firepower and equipment use frequently take the place of brains and imagination, placing some kind of reasonable boundaries can foster creativity when players are forced to improvise.

Tony

Some people like the restrictions of canon and some do not.

Personally I see a ton of flaws in logic in the project as written. The people I game with are very detail oriented individuals (a forensic account, a CTO, a human resources director, a Math professor, a doctor, and a couple of programmers) and flaws in the logic of the project would distract them.

Trust me I have gone to movies with all of them and in this group suspension of disbelief is sometimes a hard thing to for them to achieve. They are generally a group of nitpickers. They are a fun, intelligent group, but they some times complain endlessly about very minor things. Con Air and Die Hard 2 come instantly to mind.

You are right they don't complain as much about fantasy films. Star Trek and Star Wars exist in their own universe. You can easily explain away inconsistencies, just the same way you can say the 100 bugbears' food source is "magical" in D&D. Morrow (IMO) needs to more closely follow the rules of our world as it has 95% commonality during the planning stages.

For me the project expecting someone to give up the current lives and all their connections to it and then to give them only the canon equipment is almost criminal. If it costs some huge amount of dollars to find a person, recruit them and freeze them, I don't see why equipping them with anything other than everything reasonable, makes any sense. Even if that would "enhance" game play.

My players understand the limits of bureaucracy and would accept that things are never going to be even close perfect, but if the project does not have a coherent plan (after working on it for 40 years), IMO people are not going to sign up in the numbers needed.

For example, if a canon team wakes up a year after the war (by accident) and 4 years before the majority of the project assets are activated, they would almost assuredly be dead. That is why I give them access to nearly a full year of food (with pitfalls potentially blocking access of course). You may think this is "pointless" to do this, but the same way that combat veterans will tweak the combat portion of games, my administrative "veterans" appreciate when I do the same to the Project's back end logistics.

As a PD I can remove any equipment I want if I want to get it closer to the canon lists. Spoilage, seepage, bureaucratic oversight, plundered caches, irradiation, are just some of the tools I can use. However I like to start with a more logical starting point than the canon modules do in regards to project logistics.

Note all of the above is my opinion and I would never say that what I think trumps others.

[helbent4]

Originally Posted by kato13

Some people like the restrictions of canon and some do not.

For example, if a canon team wakes up a year after the war (by accident) and 4 years before the majority of the project assets are activated, they would almost assuredly be dead. That is why I give them access to nearly a full year of food (with pitfalls potentially blocking access of course). You may think this is "pointless" to do this, but the same way that combat veterans will tweak the combat portion of games, my administrative "veterans" appreciate when I do the same to the Project's back end logistics.

Kato,

I'll address this specifically: to clarify, I didn't refer to any of the above as "pointless", and my apologies if it was somehow taken as such.

Speaking personally, I give the teams 6 months supplies total so we're basically on the same page in that regard. I think that gives them sufficient time to either establish themselves locally or have Prime arrange for some kind of extraction or resupply (perhaps by automatic supply base like in Starnaman). It's still a lot of food, either way.

Originally Posted by kato13

Personally I see a ton of flaws in logic in the project as written. The people I game with are very detail oriented individuals (a forensic account, a CTO, a human resources director, a Math professor, a doctor, and a couple of programmers) and flaws in the logic of the project would distract them.

Kato,

With all due respect, you're really speaking to a point I didn't make. There certainly are flaws in Project organisation and logistics (that is, supply) that can be addressed within canon without completely reworking Project gear and (especially) the timeline.

I won't regale you with a laundry list of players who've played my games (gear-heads, professionals of different stripes, combat veterans, etc.). Most of them didn't have serious problems with the Project organisation, once a few fixes that stayed within canon were implemented. To my knowledge none of them gave TMP a pass or felt it fatally suspended their disbelief because they had to make do with an Uzi instead of an M4, they just freakin' got the job done and I think they would do so even if equipped with SMLEs. (That's not to say that typical player expectations for gear by now is insanely high, but I find that players eventually adapt.)

Project members in canon certainly do have adequate tools to accomplish the job, if playtesting (and personal experience as a player and PD) is any indication. We can always give the players more... and more... and more... but in the end the "gear queer" Project is what strikes me as pointless because the process is endless and what's "better" or "sufficient" is all a matter of personal opinion.

I think it's reasonable the Project would equip their teams to a minimum level (which for canon is still quite a lot) on the assumption they can requisition more through their supply chain. This is logical and realistic; teams were not being sent to another planet where resupply was impossible or at least very difficult. After all, teams are intended to be part of a large organisation that made plans to have every single team part of a robust and well-supplied logistical chain supported by a series of field teams, installations of different sizes (manned and unmanned) up to and including permanent depots (per TM 1-1).

Tony

[kato13]

Originally Posted by helbent4

Kato,


I won't regale you with a laundry list of players who've played my games (gear-heads, professionals of different stripes, combat veterans, etc.). Most of them didn't have serious problems with the Project organisation, once a few fixes that stayed within canon were implemented. To my knowledge none of them gave TMP a pass or felt it fatally suspended their disbelief because they had to make do with an Uzi instead of an M4, they just freakin' got the job done and I think they would do so even if equipped with SMLEs. (That's not to say that typical player expectations for gear by now is insanely high, but I find that players eventually adapt.)

Tony

Since I am discussing logistics and strategic thinking and you seem to be focusing on weapons and timeline, I think we might be arguing different points. My players could probably not identify more that 5 weapons and if I were to introduce one to them it would be (it was the one William Fichtner used in Blackhawk down). They are not gear nuts so the weapons themselves are not an issue.

I respect that you want to keep the weapons and time line unchanged, but if I want to change to non-standard calibers and steel cartridges to reduce the value of stolen weapons and ammo, what difference does it really make. If there is a logical reason in my world for the project to do so, I will.

The original timeline from TM1-1 is cool, but again I started with Phoenix Project which was more open in the cause of the "ooops". They actually recommend 4 scenarios IIRC. I kinda like that my players might not know what world they are waking up in.

One fun idea I have comes from the fact that I use timeshift equipment rather than cryotubes. I really would love to send them back to 1720 Virginia when they are expecting wake in 2150 KFS. The tech level and institutionalized slavery could keep them guessing until they noticed ultra low radiation levels.

This is so far unrecognizable from canon that you might not consider it the same game, but I still think it would be a lot of fun to roleplay.

[helbent4]

Originally Posted by kato13

My players could probably not identify more that 5 weapons and if I were to introduce one to them it would be (it was the one William Fichtner used in Blackhawk down). They are not gear nuts so the weapons themselves are not an issue.

Kato,

Heh, for some reason I had the impression your players would revolt if the canon material and timeline was used! Good to hear it's not an issue with them.

Originally Posted by kato13

I respect that you want to keep the weapons and time line unchanged, but if I want to change to non-standard calibers and steel cartridges to reduce the value of stolen weapons and ammo, what difference does it really make. If there is a logical reason in my world for the project to do so, I will.

This isn't an issue of respect for me. That is, I always assume people have logical reasons for what they propose, and no disrespect is intended or implied.

I do think while it's understandable that the Project doesn't want anyone to use captured weapons or ammunition, it would be a logistical nightmare to adopt an oddball cartridge for this end that can't be shared with others nor can teams use common calibres.

Why not equip your teams with nunchaku and "sharks with laser beams attached to their frickin' their heads"? You can make a logical case for almost ahything!



Oh hey, what about this?



To be clear, I'd have fun with almost any game, as long as it was well-run. I think TMP makes a real connection with the canon material, but I still love the post-apoc genre in general.

Tony

[kato13]

Originally Posted by helbent4

I do think while it's understandable that the Project doesn't want anyone to use captured weapons or ammunition, it would be a logistical nightmare to adopt an oddball cartridge for this end that can't be shared with others nor can teams use common calibres.

Why not equip your teams with nunchaku and "sharks with laser beams attached to their frickin' their heads"? You can make a logical case for almost ahything!

And I feel if the logic is strong enough, there is no reason to hold on to canon. I have considered going with 10mm for pistols/smgs and 6.8mm for rifles. From my perspective the project is starting with a clean slate unencumbered by any prior logistical restrictions, so they can go any direction they want. Given the Project's manufacturing capabilities could produce massive numbers of these rounds.

My thought on an additional advantage of non-standard round sizes is that a loss of a cache does not greatly assist a warlord. My assumption is that 5 years out 75-90% of pre-ooops rounds might have been expended. A majority of those rounds were directed by Americans at fellow Americans. Yes a number number were probably used for hunting but I am sure a pretty large number people died from firearms.

So the project wakes and there is a huge influx of new ammo out there. My thought is that the project whose primary goal is rebuilding might not want to upset the delicate balance which might have established itself after 5 years, with massive firefights diminishing into the occasional potshots over that time. An "oddball" caliber might keep a little more control of what is done with the ammo held by the project.

That is not to say that trading a few common rounds with hunters might not make sense as well. However I had not come up with a replacement for 7.62mm yet so the whole concept might be moot.