Guns, guns and more guns

[Toadmaster]

Ok, now that the initial gushing over DC seems to have died down (and I admit it is a pretty good book even if I didn't get everything I wanted from it) how about some discussion of the combat section. For me some parts are very nice to see but unfortunately there are also several parts I disliked.


I like many of the manuevers and optional rules, some I will use as written others give me some good ideas. I like grace under fire, CQB and Piercing in particular. Some were also amusing such as the firing the gun sideways, no game value to me but it made me smile and I understand why its there. Others I don't particularly agree with the execution but it gives me ideas for example recoil, I don't care for the -1 OCV per shot which I think is way to much and doesn't take into account the shooter or gun but it did give me the idea of adding to the strmin per shot which I think will work out nicely (so a big burly 18 str guy shooting a .22 pistol (strmin 10) will not have as much trouble rapidly shooting as a pencil neck (str 7) blasting away with a .44 Mag (strmin 12).

I don't like the ammo section much, there are really only 4 kinds of bullets armor piercing, enhanced damage (hollow points), accurate (match grade) and "cargo" carrying (tear gas, he etc), pretty much everything else falls into a sub catagory of these. Considering the narrow range of damage in the HERO system this section was way over done in my opinion and could have been better used to provide some description of the weapons for those who don't know what the variuos guns and such are (not a problem for me personally since I have enough gun books to choke a Brontosaurus, sorry Apatosaurus but I know many gamers who don't).

I also am really disappointed that Steve did not take the time or space to explain how he came up with the stats. Why does the .45ACP a low velocity handgun get an OCV bonus but the S&W M586 .357 Magnum which is nearly double the velocity and generally longer barreled not get one. Why does the .45 ACP do more damage than the .357 Magnum and .41 Magnum both of which are significantly more powerful, why does a .22 handgun have a strmin of 10 and a .44 Magnum have a Strmin of 11 (I've fired both and there is quite a differance between them). I found the stats to raise all kinds of these questions as I read through it. As Steve said these things will probably be debated forever so its not surprising that I disagree with some of them but it would have been nice to know what the criteria was for deciding the stats.

So what did the rest of you think about the combat section (come on you lurking gunbunneys I know there are some of you out there, Gewing, NuSord...)

[PoorWandering 1]

I'll agree with you that it needed a line or two of description of each gun. That way non gun bunnies can at least have some idea what that string of numbers looks/feels like.
~ PWO the anti-gunbunny

[Edsel]

I have always prefered a bit more leathality in the firearms in our DC games. So I have been re-evaluating the guns we use in our games to determine our own values for damage, STUNx, and AR (Armor Rating) which we use to measure how well the gun in question penetrates armor.

Right now I've got a spread sheet (with lots of different cartridges in it) that accounts for bullet diameter to the thousandth of an inch, weight in grains of the projectile, Velocity in feet per second. With that input I can determine ft./lb. of energy, Momentum (in slug feet), Sectional Density, and the Taylor Knockout value. It's great. It gives me a dizzying array of numbers to play with.

However there are just so many variables when dealing with guns and cartridges that... gaaah! You get the idea. My system may work okay for figuring out how some rounds compare to each other but there are some rounds that just defy logic. For instance if you feed all the data in for the P90 submachine gun you find that it should really be very poor at penetrating anything (the momentum of the round is horrible). On the other end of the scale you'll find that H&H new .700 Nitro Express penetrates armor as well as a .50-cal HMG. Of course maybe a 1000 grain .700 dia. bullet at 2000 fps would penetrate quite a bit if it weren't for that round nose.

In the end I really just have to rely on my own knowledge and experience (which is questionable) and give it my best guess.

[Maelstrom]

Why does the .45ACP a low velocity handgun get an OCV bonus but the S&W M586 .357 Magnum which is nearly double the velocity and generally longer barreled not get one.

For a long time, the M1911A1 was the standard pistol of the military, and was considered very accurate. Still, IMO, one of the best handguns of all time.

[Maelstrom]

Right now I've got a spread sheet (with lots of different cartridges in it) that accounts for bullet diameter to the thousandth of an inch, weight in grains of the projectile, Velocity in feet per second. With that input I can determine ft./lb. of energy, Momentum (in slug feet), Sectional Density, and the Taylor Knockout value. It's great. It gives me a dizzying array of numbers to play with.

So, DUDE, POST IT!

[Edsel]

Well here is a zipped copy of the spreadsheet. It is in Excel. One warning anything that you see shaded in yellow is my own experimentations. If it ain't in yellow its real data. It may seem pretty chaotic to you as well.

[Edsel]

For a long time, the M1911A1 was the standard pistol of the military, and was considered very accurate. Still, IMO, one of the best handguns of all time.

The +1 OCV may have to do with it being single-action. I have fired a lot of double and single-action semi-automatics. I always shoot better with single-action. Most competition marksmen use single-action due to the shorter trigger pull. The millisecond delay caused by a double-action trigger pull can allow for a normal human's trimbling hands to wander off target by just the slightest amount. Even dual action guns have this problem since the trigger pull is still longer. Of course this may just be my personal bias entering into it as well. Different people do better with different guns.

Gee, I spell terrible.

[AaronD]

Well here is a zipped copy of the spreadsheet. It is in Excel. One warning anything that you see shaded in yellow is my own experimentations. If it ain't in yellow its real data. It may seem pretty chaotic to you as well.

Thanks. I made a similar spreadsheet but just for WW2 weapons. My gunnutfu isn't so good so there are probably errors. Plus, it generates stats for d20 instead of Hero. I've been trying to come up with some sort of way to judge a weapons accuracy from its stats; it's non-trivial.


Aaron

[Toadmaster]

For a long time, the M1911A1 was the standard pistol of the military, and was considered very accurate. Still, IMO, one of the best handguns of all time.

I'm actually not so concerned with why the M1911A1 got a +1 OCV, its more on the how it was determined. From looking at the stats I am guessing there was no rhyme or reason just "that looks good" the reason I picked the M586 to compare with the M1911A1 is that they are very similar guns in accuracy and quality and the .357 is natuarally a more accurate round although it does have more of a "flinch" factor due to its greater power. Revolvers are also natuarally more accurate since they have fixed barrels, semi autos particularly Browning designs such as the M1911A1 the barrel moves so alignment with the sights varies slightly from shot to shot.

But my point wasn't so much one gun to the next just I would have expected some discussion on how to assign stats.

Edsel I have a new computer without Office or similar program installed so I can't actually look at your files yet but it sounds like we have similar ideas on figuring stats, although I base damage (penetration) on muzzle energy and "knockdown" (stunX) on a formula using bullet weight and velocity (favors bullet weight), penetration is further modified with levels of piercing which are gained from velocity, finally Rmod bonuses are also gained from velocity (faster = flatter trajectory).

[Edsel]

Here is how I have been going about getting the data for my guns/cartridges. Hopefully it will be of some use to some of you. I am curious if Toadmaster is using this sort of data for his calculations.

I have a book "Cartridges of the World, 10th Edition, Revised and Expanded". Of course this is this years edition. Published by Krause publications. ISBN 0-87349-605-1. It is one of the most exhaustive books I have found giving data for various cartridges. I know Amazon carries it. I got my at the Oklahoma State Department of Libraries main branch (right next door to my office) Over 1500 cartridges in this book. It gives you diameter to the thousandth of an inch, weight in grains, and muzzle velocity for all the cartridges it covers. Of course these can only be used as a baseline since barrel length and other factors can have a big effect on velocity, etc.

Next we have the formula that I use to derive various bits of information.

Muzzle Energy in ft./lb. = (Weight in grains * Muzzle velocity in fps squared) / 450395

Momentum is the tendency of an object in motion to STAY in motion. Anyone who has pushed a car in neutral and then tried to stop it will understand this -- the more momentum it has, the more resistance it will take to stop it. Momentum is measured in "slug feet per second".

Momentum in slug-feet per second = (Weight in grains * Muzzle velocity) / 225120

A ping-pong ball thrown at a pop can will bounce off. A BB will go right through. What makes the difference? The Sectional Density. Even though they may weigh the same, in a BB the weight is much more concentrated. Since it is striking a smaller area on the target, more of the momentum is conserved, and it will penetrate deeper. Other factors being the same, a denser projectile will always penetrate more effectively than a lighter one. Sectional density is measured in pounds per square inch.

Sectional Density = (Weight in grains / 7000) / Diameter in inches Squared

Taylor Knockdown formula (TKO), sometimes called "Taylor Index", which integrates calibre and momentum to generate a relative value that is a guide to the potential of a round to incapacite a target. The science behind this is questionable but based on the results that big game hunters report it seems to be somewhat accurate.

Taylor Knockout = (Weight in grains * Velocity in fps * Diameter in Inches) / 7000

Most pistol hollowpoint rounds are designed to expand to 150% of their original diameter, so one can multiply the calibre by 1.5 to get an idea of how the round will perform if it mushrooms. Since we don't know the likelihood of mushrooming we must express the bullet's TKO value as a range rather than an average. Therefore a 230gr Hollowpoint .45 at 850fps has a TKO of 12.57-18.85 and a 124gr 9mm Hollowpoint at 1200fps has a TKO of 7.55-11.32.

Some argue that TKO is only useful for comparing pistol bullets to pistol bullets or rifle to rifle. Some hunters that have used both handguns and rifles assert that TKO is relevant for comparison. A 44 magnum 240gr at 1400fps with a TKO=20.6 is more likely to drop a deer more often than a .270 Win 130gr at 3100fps with a TKO=15.9.

Damage Notes (assorted misc. notes I've made)
Fragmentation: Bullets traveling in excess of 2650 to 2950 ft/s tend to shed lead fragments within the body. This significantly increases the severity of wounds. Only riflerounds tend to do this. No pistol loads (even the new hot ones) generate enough velocity to do this.

Bullets traveling in excess of 1300 ft/s tend to cause large temporary wound cavities in their targets. This may give a boost to the Stunning power of the round.

Penetration of the bullet is of primary concern when talking about handguns. The ability to penetrate 18"+ of soft tissue is ideal. 12" is the minimum for a law enforcement weapon. Unless a rifle is low-powered its penetation ability will probably not be a factor.

As long as penetration requirements have been met, bullet diameter is probably the most important criteria for determining the amount of damage person will sustain.

None of the data presented above even begins to address things like bullet shape or ballistic coefficents (which I am still hazy on). Obviously a ball (round tip soft lead) round is much poorer at penetrating than a sharp nosed full metal jacket round.

Next I could start to rant on why I think there are three types of guns:
"Plinkers": .22 LR pistols fun for target shooting and eliminating vermin (snakes, rats, etc.)
"Real Guns": For Revolvers .357 M or larger, for Semi-Autos .45 ACP and up.
"Tweeners": Everyting in between. Too big for a plinker and too small to be a real gun. (I believe that 9mm is too small a calibur for a combat hand gun, give me a .45 ACP.)

[Toadmaster]

It does look like we do things similarly, one differance is your use of a momentium formula, I use straight muzzle energy although my stun mod formula is similar to the momentium formula.

Damage = ME (joules) base 100J> = 1DC, each doubling adds a DC (200 J = DC2, 400J = DC 3 etc) this works out very close to the original Hero stats.

StunMod = bullet weight (grams) x caliber (mm) + (Vel(m)/20) / 100

99> = +0 stnmod
100-199 = +1 stnmod
200-399 = 2 stnmod

etc

From my reading it seems two things determine a bullets stopping power, high velocity and a big heavy bullet, in pistols most of the "man-stoppers" are big bores but the velocity portion allows medium bore high velocity cartridges like the .357 Magnum to get that +1. Similarly lighter bullets at high velocity in rifles (such as the 7.62mm NATO) also get that +1.


I also add piercing and rmod based on the cartridge in addition to rmod based on the gun. Velocity is important to armor penetration (I based this fact on formulas for figuring cannon armor penetration). Since the damage combines tissue damage and penetration piercing gives a little bonus to high velocity rounds without adding to the lethality of it. This is handy for rounds like the 5.7mm FN which have good penetration but questionable effect on tissue (small hole in and out).

Piercing
velocity
0-299 m/s = +0
300-599 m/s = +1
600-1199 m/s = +2
1200-2499 m/s = +3

etc

Rmod
velocity
0-249 m/s = -1 Rmod
250-499 m/s = +0 Rmod
500-1000 m/s = +1 Rmod
1000-2000 m/s = +2 Rmod

Again velocity is important, the faster a bullet the flatter the trajectory, so a fast bullet is easier to aim.


The overall formulas tend to favor velocity over bullet weight but because the stun mod is so heavily weighted towards big bullets I think it balances out. The .45 is still one of the best "man stoppers" in the service handgun catagory but it does not totally overshadow the 9mm Parabellum (the .45 is better but you can get more 9mm cartridges into a magazine which tends to be the real argument as well). The problem I found with many formulas I tried is they tended to seriously either favor heavy bullets or fast bullets, I think this one is balanced. I generally look at 9mm vs .45 and 5.56mm vs 7.62mm when playing around with damage formulas, there are valid arguments on each side and all have seen extensive real world use, if they all still have a reason to exist but also still have advantages over each other then I feel like I have a workable system.

As far as references go, Cartridges of the world is a good one, I have bought several editions over the years, another one I really like is Understanding Ballistic by Robert Rinker, this is by far the best book on the subject I've found, it takes a rather complex subject and puts it in terms most people can understand. While it is aimed at hunters and home defense you couldn't ask for a better book for a gamer trying to design a system.
For larger cartridges Rapid Fire by Tony Williams is good, it deals with heavy machine guns and auto cannons. Finally I have several old 70's NRA type books I found in used book stores that have some good information.

As far as your opinion on guns I would agree except for the 9mm, I believe the .45 and .357 mag (my personal favorite) are superior, but the 9mm has been around for along time and is still a widely used combat round, if it was as bad as the big bore crowd claimed I don't think it would still be used after 2 world wars, numerous smaller wars and years of law enforcement use. I saw a discussion on the 8 bore elephant gun and some one made the comment that when smokeless powder took over people complained the .577 Nitro was too small to be effective (8 gauge is around .80"), I guess bigger is always better but its hard to decide whats good enough.

[HewhoisMatt]

Jeez guys with all the math when do you have time to roleplay? I mean for the love of six siders I grew grew up in a gun store(it was dads)and I don't put that much thought in to gun damage.

I would have liked to have seen more pics of the guns in question and some better descriptions. I know however that the folks at hero did not have time to go out and shoot every gun and test every round.

All in all I think the book was well done.

[Edsel]

I like the book too. It is an improvement of the old 4th Edition DC and that is high praise. I even agree, pretty much, with Steve's measure of how the various guns stack up against each other. I just prefer to have my guns be a bit more lethal. Our campaign just bumps up the base damage for most caliburs up a damage class or two. For instance our 9x19mm guns do 2d6+1 RKA, 1d6-1 StunX. Our .45 ACP's do 3d6-1 RKA, 1d6 StunX. However we assign a value called AR (Armor Rating) to all our guns. A 9mm has a 1.5 AR and a .45 has a 2 AR. AR is the value that resistant defense is multiplied against that attack. For instance a bullet proof vest get double its normal resistant defense against a .45 since a .45 is not as good a penetrator. The 9mm multiplies armor by 1.5.

Something like a .50 BMG is 3d6 RKA but has no AR instead it has 6 points of piercing and has a StunX of 1d6+2.

Part of the reason I am revisiting all of the gun data our group uses it because I don't necessarily like what we have now. Since 5th Edition is now out I figured it was a good time for a review.

Another problem we run into is that changing all of the gun damage values means that we have to revamp all of the body armor. Personally I am so tired of messing with it all that I am tempted to just adopt one of the options that the DC book mentioned and up the BODY multiple for any guns shot wounds. For instance a Chest hit becomes x1.5 BODY, x3 Stun and a Head hit would become x2.5 BODY, x5 Stun. That way our guns are more lethal but I don't have to rework all the guns and body armor. I can just use them straight out of the book with only a few minor tweaks here and there.

Now I just gotta get the rest of my gaming group to buy this concept.

[Zeropoint]

The +1 OCV may have to do with it being single-action. I have fired a lot of double and single-action semi-automatics. I always shoot better with single-action. Most competition marksmen use single-action due to the shorter trigger pull. The millisecond delay caused by a double-action trigger pull can allow for a normal human's trimbling hands to wander off target by just the slightest amount. Even dual action guns have this problem since the trigger pull is still longer. Of course this may just be my personal bias entering into it as well. Different people do better with different guns.

I was recently checking out some pistols at a sporting goods store, and I can confirm that the single-action semi-autos have a MUCH better trigger pull than the double-actions (when cocked).

Zeropoint

[gewing]

I don't have the book yet. From what you just posted....

Should I buy it, or will it DRIVE ME NUTS????

OK, yes I do get rather Anal about some things.

Ok, now that the initial gushing over DC seems to have died down (and I admit it is a pretty good book even if I didn't get everything I wanted from it) how about some discussion of the combat section. For me some parts are very nice to see but unfortunately there are also several parts I disliked.


I like many of the manuevers and optional rules, some I will use as written others give me some good ideas. I like grace under fire, CQB and Piercing in particular. Some were also amusing such as the firing the gun sideways, no game value to me but it made me smile and I understand why its there. Others I don't particularly agree with the execution but it gives me ideas for example recoil, I don't care for the -1 OCV per shot which I think is way to much and doesn't take into account the shooter or gun but it did give me the idea of adding to the strmin per shot which I think will work out nicely (so a big burly 18 str guy shooting a .22 pistol (strmin 10) will not have as much trouble rapidly shooting as a pencil neck (str 7) blasting away with a .44 Mag (strmin 12).

I don't like the ammo section much, there are really only 4 kinds of bullets armor piercing, enhanced damage (hollow points), accurate (match grade) and "cargo" carrying (tear gas, he etc), pretty much everything else falls into a sub catagory of these. Considering the narrow range of damage in the HERO system this section was way over done in my opinion and could have been better used to provide some description of the weapons for those who don't know what the variuos guns and such are (not a problem for me personally since I have enough gun books to choke a Brontosaurus, sorry Apatosaurus but I know many gamers who don't).

I also am really disappointed that Steve did not take the time or space to explain how he came up with the stats. Why does the .45ACP a low velocity handgun get an OCV bonus but the S&W M586 .357 Magnum which is nearly double the velocity and generally longer barreled not get one. Why does the .45 ACP do more damage than the .357 Magnum and .41 Magnum both of which are significantly more powerful, why does a .22 handgun have a strmin of 10 and a .44 Magnum have a Strmin of 11 (I've fired both and there is quite a differance between them). I found the stats to raise all kinds of these questions as I read through it. As Steve said these things will probably be debated forever so its not surprising that I disagree with some of them but it would have been nice to know what the criteria was for deciding the stats.

So what did the rest of you think about the combat section (come on you lurking gunbunneys I know there are some of you out there, Gewing, NuSord...)