[DL] Fannin' and Shootin': Auto -- house rule

[Dan Davenport <danield@flash.net>]

This is something of a repost of a rules suggestion I made a long time
ago. I'd like to hear the thoughts of the current list members.

It's always been my opinion that the fannin' and (especially) shootin':
automatics rules are deeply flawed, because they do not reflect the
increased danger to a target presented by multiple bullets. I would go
so far as to say that if automatic weapons fire worked as it does in
Deadlands, automatic weapons might never have been invented.

Think of it this way: When a soldier fires an assualt rifle on burst
mode, is he hoping that he's a good enough shot to get more than one
bullet to hit (via raises on his attack roll)? Or is he, rather,
throwing more lead at the target in order to increase the chance that
the target will be hit multiple times?

Or an even better example: You're a burgular breaking into a house.
You're confronted by an old lady with an Uzi. Are you more upset by this
than if the lady had been packing a revolver? I'd say so. But using
Deadlands logic, the Uzi really wouldn't be any more dangerous unless
Granny is a crack shot with it.

Here's what we're doing in my game:

On a successful hit with an automatic or with a fanned pistol, the
number of bullets that hit is determined by 1d3+1 per raise up to the
total number of bullets fired. (Note that a fanned pistol can still get
off more bullets than can a 1-burst automatic like a Gatling pistol.) 

To hit multiple targets, the shooter establishes one target as the
primary target. Each additional target after the primary subtracts an
additional -2 to his roll. The shooter must state how many bullets he is
assigning to each target beforehand. All attacks are covered by a single
attack roll, with the result (including penalties) compared to the TN
for each target.

EXAMPLE: Kentucky Joe decides to fan all six shots in his revolver at
three different targets. He aims two shots at the first target, one at
the second, and three at the third. All are fairly close and so have
base TNs of 5. Joe, a pretty good shot, rolls a 15.

For the first target, he subtracts the standard -2 for fannin', for a
total of 13: one raise. Ordinarily he'd roll 1d3 -- or in this case, 1d2
-- to see how many bullets hit, but there's no need: he fired two
bullets, and his raise ensures that one bullet after the first will hit.

For the second target, he subtracts -2 for fannin' and -2 for the second
target penalty, for a final roll of 11 -- still good enough for a raise,
but he only fired one bullet at this target, so it's wasted.

For the third target, he subtracts -2 for fannin' and -4 for the third
target penalty, for a final roll of 8 -- a hit, but no raise. Still,
because he fanned three bullets at this target, he rolls 1d3 and gets a
2: two bullets hit. If he'd gotten a high enough roll to get a raise for
this target, too, that would have meant that all three bullets hit.

The net effect of this system is that fannin' and automatics become more
dangerous in _any_one's hands, but skilled shooters keep their
advantage. And while it's possible to hit secondary targets with
multiple bullets, it becomes increasingly likely for each target after
the first that the shooter will get no raises and that no bullets will
hit at all.

Your thoughts?

Dan Davenport

-- 
"Beware the inveterate punster, Doyle, it's a sure sign of brewing
mental disturbance." -- Jack Sparks (to Arthur Conan Doyle), _The List
of 7_