Difference between revisions of "Talk:5.56 NATO Machine Gun (3.5e Equipment)"
From Dungeons and Dragons Wiki
Tarkisflux (talk | contribs) (commentses) |
|||
| Line 18: | Line 18: | ||
::Also, what's going on with suppressing fire? It's a full-round action that has an attack penalty on attacks you're not actually making, and it doesn't seem to consume any ammunition. And it seems like it's only a thing that happens on your turn, which isn't bad but feels weird in the fluff. It might be better written as a 1-round action zone control thing that causes anyone who enters one of those squares to make a reflex save or lose a move action, maybe even falling prone in the space if they don't have a move action to lose at that point. - [[User:Tarkisflux|Tarkisflux]] <sup>[[User talk:Tarkisflux|Talk]]</sup> 02:37, 15 October 2014 (UTC) | ::Also, what's going on with suppressing fire? It's a full-round action that has an attack penalty on attacks you're not actually making, and it doesn't seem to consume any ammunition. And it seems like it's only a thing that happens on your turn, which isn't bad but feels weird in the fluff. It might be better written as a 1-round action zone control thing that causes anyone who enters one of those squares to make a reflex save or lose a move action, maybe even falling prone in the space if they don't have a move action to lose at that point. - [[User:Tarkisflux|Tarkisflux]] <sup>[[User talk:Tarkisflux|Talk]]</sup> 02:37, 15 October 2014 (UTC) | ||
| + | |||
| + | :::Better now? "It might be better written as a 1-round action zone control thing that causes anyone who enters one of those squares to make a reflex save or lose a move action, maybe even falling prone in the space if they don't have a move action to lose at that point." How would you word that? [[User:Fluffykittens|Fluffykittens]] ([[User talk:Fluffykittens|talk]]) 02:59, 15 October 2014 (UTC) | ||
Revision as of 02:59, 15 October 2014
Ratings
|
Eiji-kun likes this article and rated it 3 of 4. |
|---|---|
| I do believe I want to use this. It looks pretty cool, and offers options beyond normal attacks. |
Interesting
I though Burst (auto) might be broken, but it's really just TWF, but with one weapon.
Dat price though, wtf... -- Eiji-kun (talk) 00:39, 15 October 2014 (UTC)
- Fixed.Fluffykittens (talk) 00:50, 15 October 2014 (UTC)
- Well, burst is a bit more than TWF with it's extra attacks. It's more like rapid fire, with TWF on top of that opening up at BAB 6. Or the other way around I guess, it's not really important. Either way it's a lot of attacks as a standard action, but not so many that I really care because tactical EWP and it cost you a move action to turn that on (so it's full-round anyway, unless you just run around in auto).
- The only thing that I'm unsure of is the lack of targeting limitation for burst. As written you could Legolas it and take your lots of attacks at lots of people very far apart from each other, and that doesn't seem a particularly burst fire thing to do. Limiting it to attacks in a cone out to 2 range increments might be worth considering.
- Also, what's going on with suppressing fire? It's a full-round action that has an attack penalty on attacks you're not actually making, and it doesn't seem to consume any ammunition. And it seems like it's only a thing that happens on your turn, which isn't bad but feels weird in the fluff. It might be better written as a 1-round action zone control thing that causes anyone who enters one of those squares to make a reflex save or lose a move action, maybe even falling prone in the space if they don't have a move action to lose at that point. - Tarkisflux Talk 02:37, 15 October 2014 (UTC)
- Better now? "It might be better written as a 1-round action zone control thing that causes anyone who enters one of those squares to make a reflex save or lose a move action, maybe even falling prone in the space if they don't have a move action to lose at that point." How would you word that? Fluffykittens (talk) 02:59, 15 October 2014 (UTC)
