I'm a Corporal 1316 currently deployed to the eastern pacific with an anphibian assult vehicle unit (gators). I figured I might have a uniqe view of military life some people might appreciate and I'd offer to answer any questions. I'm relitively new to Only War but I have a dated history with Dark Heresy mk.1 and an old history with warhammer fantasty and 40k as well as several other sci-fi and fantasy pen-and-papper RPG's.

What do you think is the one thing civilians get incorrect when trying to present the attitude of the military in terms of personality?

How do you separate the knowledge you know about the military from what is presented to you as the plan in the game if you aren't running it?

How do you separate the cut and dry morality of the Imperial Guard (basically shoot everyone for anything) from what you feel and have learned from our current day military (like P.O.W.s)?

First question.

Civilians tend to think that we're all really well trained killing machines. Like, in boot camp you spend the whole time learning to kill. The truth is you learn disipline, how to drill, handle stress, and how to live in coopers color code "yellow" in boot camp. Everyone goes to combat trainning after boot camp, boot camp has some shooting and basic combat training but that takes up a small percent and it's mostly making sure you know how to throw a punch, take a hit, and aim a rifle. Your average marine out of school isn't any more a killing machine than you are, he just knows that's enough to kill. We don't usually correct this thinking though because we want people to think we're dangerous, but we all know it. After a couple years you basiclly are what poeple think.

Our attitude is pretty much like the guys in generation kill though, jokes about baby killing are pretty common.

I don't really understand your second question. What plan in the game when I'm not running it?

Third question.

The Guard has it easier. Taking P.O.W.'s and collecting people for questioning is a pain and if we could, and it made sense, we'd shoot everyone. You kind of have to paint the scene as black and white in your mind when you enter a warzone, there is only us and them and, regardless of why, them want to kill us. That's a good enough reason for me to want to kill them back, **** politics, this is between me and him. It's weird to sequester your mind like that but it works, then you just don't think about it too much. When you do enter a firefight you are never more focused though, it's like entering a trance where your troubles all dissapear but you immediate goal, you don't think you just do what comes next.

That being said, we know we're at war. Taking the enemy alive is done because it may save marine's lives and that's worth the risk, your emotions are not more important than the mission.

What's one system (Fear, Insanity, Logistics, etc.) the Only War System overemphasizes when compared to modern military life?

What's one system Only War UNDERemphasizes when compared to the modern army?

Second Question clarification:

Say you aren't the GM of the game you are participating in. The GM presents a plan for your characters to perform, and it isn't tactically sound. How do you separate the knowledge you have as a soldier from what your character would know about tactics which may not be as much?

Former Artillery gunner here, Question for the Marine came up in my DW game wanted another combat troops opinion:
Weapon ranges, most are listed as "short range" is 100-150 M depending on the type of weapon (assuming long guns), while most weapons sights are calibrated (at least in Canada) for 200m minimums. While it was an infanteer asking the question I wanted to know what someone else's thoughts who has fired a weapon in a combat situation

To fiddler:

Those don't really translate in my opinion. I have never had to face a deamon of chaos on the battle field and the only units that have the fear trait are usually tyranids, deamons, ect. You are pretty shaken up when you roll up onto a gruesome scene though and having to wash liquified human remains out of humvee's has actually sent one of my friends into a spiral that cost him his marriage and career. Logisistics is kind of over-enphasized, but it's acually awesome in my opinion. When I showed the rules to some of my friends in the military they laughed and joked that it was about right, but it's honestly not that bad. Under-enphasized would be the gear too I guess, the Standard Guardsmen Kit is actually really really small compared to the stupid **** they saddle us with in the military. There is 100 different silly things they issue us at every duty station that are impossible to keep track of, and half of them you will never use. Seat belt cutters, sternium sinches, 3 diferent pairs of gloves, three hydration bags with no bladders, an 80$ flash-light, ect. If you loose any of them you have to pay for them too, it's pure insanity.

Thedoctor:

Marines hate to be called soldiers.

That's kinda just good roleplaying, if I think the plan is unsound but I don't think my character will know that then I just follow orders or let someone else kinda take the lead. Reminding yourself that it's a game helps and there's a lot of times when you will be given a plan that sounds dumb in the military, but actually makes sense if you know all the facts. Sometimes I'll say something by accident but I try not to step on toes. Trust your command.

Our sights are set to 200m standard and we train to shoot all the way out to 500m, however a normal lasgun has a max range of 400m and it's short range is 50m I think. That's kinda weird but I can see how thats... possible? Most of the fire fight I hear about now are around 200-300m out unless you're doing MOUT ops where you're usually within 20m of the target. I think the range on an autogun, at least, should be a lot farther since we reach 500m with 5.56 out of an m4 no problem but I just let it go. it's kinda one of those things that can be argued till the end of time. Short range is half the weapons max range though, so I think that would be 50m minus on most long arms outside of sniper rifles.

Fair enough and sorry.

Solidscarlet,

This one is coming from an airman in the weather career field...was wondering how you, as an NCO, handle leadership situations? Basically my group I'm GM-ing for currently has a Sgt however he runs the squad as an almost open forum, hears everyone's ideas then makes a decision and the squad follows. I was wondering if you do anything similar or radically different? I've heard of some characters playing a Sgt just make the decision themselves and has the group run with it and most see it as lording over everyone. However, I can see merit in the idea because most infantry (from the few I've had the pleasure of meeting) need just a clear cut idea or order to run with and then go. They leave the tactical thinking to those who are in the position to come up with tactics. Those they've been told to have faith in because of experience, training, etc.

Also, I've never heard much info on weather for marines and was wondering what was your experience with those who do your briefs, especially if its USAF.

-TheMightiestCaz

Solidscarlet,

I'm, just curious if you could elaborate on your combat experience as this statement:

I'm a Corporal 1316...

suggests that you haven't seen any, but this statement:

Third question.

... Taking P.O.W.'s and collecting people for questioning is a pain and if we could, and it made sense, we'd shoot everyone. You kind of have to paint the scene as black and white in your mind when you enter a warzone, there is only us and them and, regardless of why, them want to kill us. That's a good enough reason for me to want to kill them back, **** politics, this is between me and him. It's weird to sequester your mind like that but it works, then you just don't think about it too much. When you do enter a firefight you are never more focused though, it's like entering a trance where your troubles all dissapear but you immediate goal, you don't think you just do what comes next...

implies that you have. I also take issue with the first line quoted under Third question. That's the kind of thing people say when their entire experience of war is through movies and tv shows, such as the one you reference. Anyways, I'm not trying to be a downer here - just looking for clarification. If you are offering yourself as a subject matter expert based on experience, I think it's fair to ask what that experience is.

Gaius

p.s. (What are you considering E. Pacific? Australia, K Bay?)

A little harsh perhaps Gaius?

When I was in (Which was admittedly a LONG time ago! ) Being posted on a "Gator" in the eastern Pacific meant you were on a US Navy Amphibious assault ship of some type. Basically these are ships designed for what the defense department refers to as "littoral warfare" which means near the shore. (Shocking that Marines would do that! ).

Further: The fact that Solidscarlet is currently deployed with an Amphibious task force certainly does not imply he always has been! Many of our soldiers Airman and even Sailors have had their turn at a rotation "In the Sandbox."

Lastly, I guess I'm taking issue with the tone of your question more than it's substance. As I'm sure Nimsim would attest to; most veterans aren't that interested in sharing the gory details of their combat experience in a public forum! Asking "Where did you serve?" is a bit more polite than "When did you ever see combat?" That and, for those of you out there who never served, the world is a lot scarier place than most people living in "First world" countries realize!

A little harsh perhaps Gaius?

Perhaps... I was about to cave and take it all back and apologize, but then I started reading again.

When I was in (Which was admittedly a LONG time ago! ) Being posted on a "Gator" in the eastern Pacific meant you were on a US Navy Amphibious assault ship of some type. Basically these are ships designed for what the defense department refers to as "littoral warfare" which means near the shore. (Shocking that Marines would do that! ).

Further: The fact that Solidscarlet is currently deployed with an Amphibious task force certainly does not imply he always has been! Many of our soldiers Airman and even Sailors have had their turn at a rotation "In the Sandbox."

I should have been more clear what I was trying to set up in contrast from those statements. The combination of rank and MOS suggest that he hasn't experienced combat, not the deployment.

Lastly, I guess I'm taking issue with the tone of your question more than it's substance. As I'm sure Nimsim would attest to; most veterans aren't that interested in sharing the gory details of their combat experience in a public forum! Asking "Where did you serve?" is a bit more polite than "When did you ever see combat?"

This point is really what drew me back in, and prevented me from just erasing my previous post. Let's take a look at how this started:

I figured I might have a uniqe view of military life some people might appreciate and I'd offer to answer any questions.

Here he is offering himself up as a community resource, specifically relating his military experiences.

And then, sooo many issues:

First question.

(1) Civilians tend to think that we're all really well trained killing machines... After a couple years you basiclly are what poeple think...

(2) Taking P.O.W.'s and collecting people for questioning is a pain and if we could, and it made sense, we'd shoot everyone...

(3) You kind of have to paint the scene as black and white in your mind when you enter a warzone, there is only us and them and, regardless of why, them want to kill us. That's a good enough reason for me to want to kill them back, **** politics, this is between me and him. (4) It's weird to sequester your mind like that but it works, then you just don't think about it too much . When you do enter a firefight you are never more focused though, it's like entering a trance where your troubles all dissapear but you immediate goal, you don't think you just do what comes next.

(Numbering and emphasis mine)

1. No. Most military members are not basically really well trained killing machines, after any number of years. False.
2. Two things here:
   1. No, we wouldn't shoot everyone. Detainees/prisoners are extremely valuable, for intelligence purposes if nothing else.
   2. It sounds like he is claiming to have taken detainees/prisoners.
3. No, no, a million times no. This is counter to the Marine Corps' own teachings on this very issue.
4. Here he is clearly claiming to have been in a firefight. (Nothing wrong with that. But if he is offering himself as the board expert on combat, and is claiming to have been at least a firefight, why can't I ask him to state explicitly whether he has been in combat?)

It's very possible that I am being overly sensitive here. But when I hear people start talking about having combat experience, and doing so in a way that sounds very much like they haven't , well - in this case I wanted to at least ask.

tl;dr :

Radwraith, I appreciate you stepping up for Solidscarlet. I hope that I didn't come across as a military-basher or something. I just saw what appeared to be an inconsistency in the account, and asked for clarification. If my tone was too harsh, then I apologize for that. I can't go into a situation like this assuming someone is posing - I need to adopt a generous starting attitude.

Hope that makes sense,

Gaius

You hit my point exactly Gaius! Thank you for being a stand up guy and stepping up to it. I understand that there are a lot of posers out there but we can't assume it is so. If I had a nickel for every moron who told me they were "Special forces" I would be a rich man! (I am NOT claiming to have been btw.)

The reason I jumped up on this so quickly is that there have been a small number of very vocal trolls who have been allowed to fester on this forum for too long! I am glad to see you're not one of them!

Semper Fi!

Redwraith,

Like you, I have have encountered many people who try to build a reputation or gain influence through telling stories of their service - that are either exaggerated or invented. I didn't intend to suggest that Solidscarlet was doing this; I rather wanted to rule it out.

But, as you rightly pointed out, the tone of my post came off as much more accusatory. I'm glad that I was able to demonstrate that I am not one of the trolls, and that you reacted positively to my correction/pivot-in-tone.

It's nice to see civility on a forum every once in a while - it glues my shattered faith in humanity a little bit back together!

edit: spelling correction.

p.s. Why doesn't the message editor have an integrated spell checker?

Having been in a few modern combat situations somewhere a few years back, my mix of adrenaline, fear and training resulted in a unique experience I cannot even really begin to formulate into words for others to enjoy from a role-playing angle. In response to point three to which you take offense Gaius - it may very well be what the military as a whole trains against, but really when the rounds start going off - and especially if your inexperienced - the desire to simply fight back is strong. Or run away. Either way, the adrenaline rush or 'trance' he speaks of can and often overwhelms the logical thinking (i.e. keeping a political mind). While most will not act in a way to endanger innocents necessarily, it is true that during such a time it really does become an almost instinctual 'me or you' mentality that takes over.

I would never claim to an authority on the matter, but this is from my own, personal experience. Training helps - but it's hard to restrain oneself during a traumatic event such as a firefight. And it is - regardless of how many times it's performed. Being shot at it - with death on the line - completely wracks the mind. Those who break suffer from being shell-shocked, or those who don't can develop ptsd in later months or years.

I don't know why I really responded to this, but I guess in the end I simply feel strongly enough to justify solidscarlet's experience. It may not be what others see as a general consensus, but it's certainly valid for many on those points I addressed.

Reading through this thread, I share Gaius' curiosity with the OP's military experience. It is one thing to be in the military, but to be in a combat situation is something else. I found his description especially troubling, specifically the points highlighted by Gaius. Though it may very well be that he has served in combat and those are his own feelings, I find his blanket statements about combat suspicious. I have nothing but respect for those who serve, both in combat and out of it. What I don't like are people who abuse that respect to satisfy their own egos or to make themselves look good. '

The thing about the trances I understand. Hell, even playing paintball can elicit that sort of response - albeit in a smaller amount. What I find suspect is his opinions on "killing machines" and "killing all POWs" and everything being "black and white." While these may be his personal views, the way in which he is offering them makes it sound like that is the general opinion of those in the military. Which, of course, it is not. Furthermore, like Gaius said, he is offering himself as an expert on military life and combat - without really stating what it is that gives him that sort of expertise.

If the OP were to say, "As a person serving in the military, feel free to ask me about anything relating to day to day military life and culture" that would be okay. What I don't like is how he quickly jumps into painting combat as a no-holds-barred gun brawl where there is no distinction between enemy and civilian, only us against them.

Folks I think you may be reading more into what the OP wrote than is there. His answer to the third point, of the POW issue and the firefight mentality, was I think poorly and perhaps hastily worded. But I don't see any mention of civilians, the 'us or them', to me, is referring to the guys shooting at him and presumably other marines. In which case, the answer fits. As for the 'rather shoot them than take them prisoner,' the key part is "-if we could and it made sense." In the real world, you never can once the shooting is done (standing orders, ROE, basic humanity, and never forget being able to look yourself in the mirror the next day, the next year), and it never makes sense (the need to gain intel, the practicality of NOT unnecessarily enraging the local populace, and never give the enemy another martyr). Poorly worded, but basically true.

I have a degree in military history and spent the better part of ten years reading combat soldiers autobiographies and memoirs. I was also regular army, 11B, at least until I blew a knee out in infantry training. An end to my career, but more time to read the words of those who made it. What I read in the OPs words rang true to my training, and the words of other soldiers going back six decades. Could he be a poser? Sure. I don't think that three or four poorly worded sentences make that a certainty, or even terribly likely.

As for the timeline, Corporal. E4. Not at all unlikely that he served in the sandbox a year or two ago, as a private, and is NOW a corporal in 'gators.

I never saw combat. I'm very well educated in the field, but have no direct experience. Having said that, I don't see anything in the OPs comments that make me think he's anything other than what he says. Bad wording does not a liar make. I doubt we'll know now though. After the last few posts, if I was the OP I would definitely be leaning towards saying screw this. You've all but called him a liar, and on no real tangible evidence other than you don't like what he said, or how he said it. Not cool

5 of Solidscarlet's 6 posts were between February 13th to 15th. One more on February 28th. Gaius' first post in this thread was March 4th. The Mightiest Caz posted a question for Solidscarlet on February 17th which Solidscarlet has yet to answer. Whatever scarlet's reasons for leaving this thread, they're clearly unrelated to anything Gaius said. In any case, Gaius has already made it clear that he didn't want to come off as accusatory, and since his first post he's stated that he's looking for clarification, not making accusations. There is no reason to assume he intends to make accusations just because you don't like his tone, because tone doesn't actually communicate through the internet so you don't actually know what tone was intended.

What I don't like is how he quickly jumps into painting combat as a no-holds-barred gun brawl where there is no distinction between enemy and civilian, only us against them.

This, however, is completely unfair. Solidscarlet never once mentioned civilians, you're putting words in his mouth. Likewise this:

While these may be his personal views, the way in which he is offering them makes it sound like that is the general opinion of those in the military. Which, of course, it is not.

Solidscarlet's post uses the general "you" so the black and white sequestering is clearly something he believes that everyone has to do in order to function. That doesn't mean he claims this is the opinion of the entire military, though if he isn't he clearly thinks the military is wrong (assuming your own statements about the general opinion of the military are correct, which I will assume for the sake of argument they are). You're making assumptions about his intent and the words he's actually written don't hold up to those assumptions. What he's actually written is rather unclear and it is unfair to assume the worst.

Well, this exploded. lol.

First off, to clarify, I have never been in combat.

All of my answers are based on non-combat experience and boat loads of (basically) peace-time training. I joined the DEP in 2010 and the military in 2011 and I have been to all three (active) divisions multiple times just for good old-training. My answers were never ment to paint myself as something I am not, I don't troll anonymous people on roll-playing forums to feel like a badass, just to try and give the best answer I can. I also tried to gear them closer to conventional warfare as Only War is designed to cater better to that style I feel and, thanks to doctrine, I feel more comfortable talking about that.

Looking back on the forum post, I can see that this probably would have attracted every prior-service member on this forum like moths to a flame. Didn't even occur to me, I'm new to the forum and have only been running the system (we're on hiatus, got people off-island) for a few months. I have played Dark Hersey on and off for years though.

ThemightiestCaz:

It hasn't been a problem, my guys like to run the group open forum and they had a lot of characters die right off the bat so they rarely (although they have) pull rank.

I've never worked directly with the wing, I've driven a tank, an amtrack, and an LAV but I've only every had a few conversations with our air corps marines, usually about welding, never about the weather. I should ask next time though, sounds interesting. I think we have meteorology officers?

Gaius:

OK, that was a short sighted answer and this is and issue that could go any direction. But when we're talking about fanatic POW's, it feels right. Detainees and civilians are another issue but it seems easier to ice everyone who points a gun at you and get on with life. Even Audie Murphy would struggle with that and his best friend was killed by soldiers who had their hands up.

E. Pacific UDP, BTW

to the 1, 2, 3, count

1: People underestimate what they can do. A couple years of exercising like a pro-athlete and they daily fist-fights makes you a mean mother in a fight but, of course, not everyone becomes a real war fighter no matter how long they're in. I can hit black at 500m 10/10 times, my Tueller drill is 7 feet with a .87 second aimed draw, I can (and have) take a sledge hammer to the face, and I can run what feels like forever with a combat load. I wasn't all those things right after boot camp, but the other guys at my experience level who I've gone through the corps with are pretty similar. "killing-machine" was what I said we AREN'T, after a few years, most of us can be physically similar though.

2: Never taken either. Detainees and POW's are two very different things and I wasn't talking about civilians. I also did point out that they are valuable for intel.

3: Based on training and what works. I have never been taught counter to this so... not sure what you mean? What I ment by "trance" is, in my experience I only really remember the first and last shot I fired really clearly. Do you mean tunnel vision? I don't get that, I have a lot of focus on peripherals and sweeping every spot in every room quickly. Making things black and white in my head works really really well for me though and I have never been taught that that is in any way bad. I actually thing that all this working through your issues and thinking about things over and over is bad as replaying emotionally traumatic or depressing memories has been clinically shown to damage parts of your brain and lead to depression, clinical depression runs in my family so I've had a lot of research on this topic throw at me from my family though I have never personally had any incidents. I was confronted with death at a very young age and have had to deal with it several times, I know it's not the same or even that similar, but I equate it to that. Grit my teeth and paint the scene black and white, think to hard and you go crazy and panic.

4: Good-old sim rounds, airsoft, and paintball, USPSA, IDPA, and three-gun. Back on Lejeune I have (had) a group that did paintball about twice a month, back home I did the shooting.; I was a Bravo shooter for USPSA before I was an adult. Not an expert, just know more than a guy who's never fired a gun, not trying to steal valor.

Never ment to offend, never ment to confuse, also I don't think civilians even crossed my mind because I haven't had them in Only-War and I was talking about the game. Although that gives me a lot of ideas... Thanks.