[penllawen]

How do *I* feel about this?

Yes!

Good riddance.  Tracking recoil was, rightly, mocked as one of the needlessly complicated things that kept 5e from being more popular/drawing more players to Shadowrun.  It was the kind of detail you HAD to handwaive if you wanted to have a smoothly flowing and exciting combat.

Ok. Cool; not just me then! I dislike tracking any per-person variable from turn to turn if I can help it. Health/damage; sure; can’t escape that. Initiative: same, need that. But 5e’s recoil is too damned fiddly.

penllawen,

Hello! I’ve had a drink. Please bear with me. [1]

I'm not mocking you.

Sure.

But I am wondering if you noticed 6we doesn't have a suppressive fire rule

Hah! I had not.

and if you think that's as unacceptable? It, like a mechanic for delaying your initiative turn, is likely to be in the upcoming combat rules expansion splatbook.  I'd imagine, anyway.  If it's not there, then yeah I'd find that odd, too.

Aw hell, I think “unacceptable” is a stretch, for either. Did I say that? “Odd”, maybe, sure. You have to balance page count of the CRB versus how often players will do a thing versus how easy GMs could ad lib a thing, I think. Which for delaying a turn, the former part seems more often, but the latter part seems to be fairly easily. For suppressing fire, I’d say it’s reversed; players maybe don’t want to do it as often but it’s a little harder to rule how it’d worry if they do spring that in you.

(Dunno, I’m drunk and writing this with zero forethought.)

I’d be very surprised if both weren’t in this combat supplement, agreed.

[1] I feel like I need to qualify that. I am a Brit / Londoner. When I say “I’ve had a drink” what I mean is “I’ve drunk enough to make my Michigander in-laws whisper about me, but not enough to make them call an ambulance.”

[Reaver]

[1] I feel like I need to qualify that. I am a Brit / Londoner. When I say “I’ve had a drink” what I mean is “I’ve drunk enough to make my Michigander in-laws whisper about me, but not enough to make them call an ambulance.”

It's noon already???

[penllawen]

Ow my head.

It's noon already???

Look, the sun’s over the yardarm somewhere...

[lunatec]

[/quote]

It's noon already???
[/quote]

It's always noon....somewhere

[Tecumseh]

I'll swim against the tide and say that I actually like(d) recoil. As the GM, I'm willing to track it.

When 5E initially came out, you needed to spend an entire Complex Action without shooting to reset your recoil. I liked this a lot because it really added to the tactics of a firefight and required players to pace themselves (and their fire). I enjoyed the forethought and planning that this required.

The rule was quickly errata'd so that only a Simple Action was necessary to reset recoil. I didn't like this change because it made the "Aim plus Simple FA" too optimal, as 90% of shooters with an FA weapon would just do that, rinse and repeat. The other 10% were using suppressive fire.

I'm okay with recoil going away in 6E, if only because rolling recoil into AR at least mimics some of the risk-and-reward considerations that require some tactical thinking by the players.

I'm less okay with Strength getting removed from melee damage, as that pushes me past Stainless Steel Devil Rat's "suspension of disbelief/line of reasonableness". But there are house rules for that.

[penllawen]

When 5E initially came out, you needed to spend an entire Complex Action without shooting to reset your recoil. I liked this a lot because it really added to the tactics of a firefight and required players to pace themselves (and their fire). I enjoyed the forethought and planning that this required.

Oh! I had no idea that was a thing. Now at least that's a mechanic with some teeth to it, as you say. My primary objection to recoil as it stands in 5e-with-errata is:

The rule was quickly errata'd so that only a Simple Action was necessary to reset recoil. I didn't like this change because it made the "Aim plus Simple FA" too optimal, as 90% of shooters with an FA weapon would just do that, rinse and repeat.

Yes, exactly. It's not just that I'm tracking recoil, it's that I'm doing it for almost no reason, because it's almost trivial for players to work around. Shadowrun throws enough numbers around, I need a reason to track any more. The pre-errata form of that rule is maybe enough of a reason. The post-errata isn't, to my mind.

Wonder why that got errata'd that way.

On a similar track, I've considered getting rid of the Simple/6-round FA burst entirely, and making all FA be a complex action. Which would end up in the same place and emphasise that FA weapons are a bit special.

[ApesAmongUs]

Wonder why that got errata'd that way.

People don't like taking a pause in their orgy of death.

[BeCareful]

On the one hand, I didn't mind recoil, and also included the rules of complex FA only & recoil resets after an entire IP of not shooting.

While everyone keeping track of recoil across IPs can be majorly confusing, it's a lot easier of you've figured out a way to set up recoil reduction of 3/6/10 and just alternate between firing and reloading/taking cover somewhere else/closing into hand-to-hand combat/tossing grenades/spellcasting/aiming a Data Spike to (at least) give someone -2 attack & accuracy on their next attack.

(EDIT: Or, if you aren't up against anyone/thing that warrants hails of bullets or are trying to Conserve Ammo, you can just switch to Semi-Auto and shoot one bullet at a time for 6 IPs like it's a Warhawk!)

On the other, it was still another thing to remember, so merging it with the other things into just one thing does make it easier to remember. 
But that leaves me wondering: what'll happen to all the gun add-ons that help with recoil compensation? Reduce the drop in AR for going Full-Auto? Something related to Edge if you're shooting the proper way at the correct time?

But this is all ranged combat & strength. As for melee combat & strength, that errata where STR adds to melee AR sounds sensible to me.

[mcv]

When 5E initially came out, you needed to spend an entire Complex Action without shooting to reset your recoil. I liked this a lot because it really added to the tactics of a firefight and required players to pace themselves (and their fire). I enjoyed the forethought and planning that this required.

The rule was quickly errata'd so that only a Simple Action was necessary to reset recoil. I didn't like this change because it made the "Aim plus Simple FA" too optimal, as 90% of shooters with an FA weapon would just do that, rinse and repeat.

Ah, that explains it! I kept getting confused about whether resetting recoil required a full complex action (or two simple actions) not shooting, or just a simple action. Because just a simple action would be lame.

I prefer it requiring a complex action. If we're going to track recoil, I'd like it to have some teeth. Requiring only a simple action basically amounts to "let's not track recoil".

[Michael Chandra]

I think if you only attack once per round (rather than 3+ times), it's not that big a problem anymore, though it's definitely worth considering for if you use 2 Majors in a turn.

[Stainless Steel Devil Rat]

I'm not sure if recoil has anything to do with the rule, but I'm 100% ok with simply leaving a minimum strength requirement to use machine guns.  I'm not sure if anyone actually bothers to enforce it, but it's been around in 5e and iirc editions before that, too.  Putting that minimum requirement basically lets you hand waive recoil as being essentially managed by that minimum requirement.

[Hobbes]

5e Recoil was a simple system mastery issue.  There were multiple ways to negate it, generally just a matter of digging it out of the rules and tossing some Nuyen at it.  I do prefer the simpler 6E approach in this case.

[BeCareful]

Yeah, when it comes to 5E recoil, I just tell new players, "There's a chart that basically boils down to Recoil=Bullets Fired, your target takes Bullets - 1 as a Dodge test penalty. If you want recoil to never be an issue, just put these attachments on your gun and fire every other turn. Or buy a double-barreled shotgun, or a Warhawk."

Minimum STR to wield huge weapons is fine, and is a sort of RAW workaround for that rule that says, "you can carry 10xSTR kg before you get encumbered" but weight is listed for nothing but explosives.

I don't mind because granular encumbrance by weight alone always has odd/not-fun corner cases, and because an upper limit on the amount of C-12 you can personally transport is, in this case, a good thing.

[Michael Chandra]

SR6 is Str*Str*10, making carrying your packs, or a small car, no problem whatsoever for a strong Trog.

[Reaver]

Yeah, when it comes to 5E recoil, I just tell new players, "There's a chart that basically boils down to Recoil=Bullets Fired, your target takes Bullets - 1 as a Dodge test penalty. If you want recoil to never be an issue, just put these attachments on your gun and fire every other turn. Or buy a double-barreled shotgun, or a Warhawk."

Minimum STR to wield huge weapons is fine, and is a sort of RAW workaround for that rule that says, "you can carry 10xSTR kg before you get encumbered" but weight is listed for nothing but explosives.

I don't mind because granular encumbrance by weight alone always has odd/not-fun corner cases, and because an upper limit on the amount of C-12 you can personally transport is, in this case, a good thing.

Some days I wish they did put weights next to weapons... it might solve some logistics issues I have seen....

"Let me get this right.... You're an Ork... with 5 STR.... and your weapons carried currently are... A mini-gun... A stoner heavy machine gun, a Cannon, AND a grenade launcher???"

No. Just, NO.


Which usually gets boils into an argument, then a google search.. a little paperwork... and some one trying to justify 1000kg of weapons and ammo being carried around in hand...