Ballistics & Guns & such

[RDU Neil]

On the old Hero Boards, there was an amazing thread about guns and ballistics. Three or four of you out there seemed to have some serious knowledge on the topic, and this thread was well discussed, evenly debated, avoiding rancor and egos in a very mature way. It contained folks ideas about translating weapons accurately to Hero... but the majority was about force and mass and velocity, and how certain ammunition differentiated itself from others.

 

9mm vs. .45 ACP... what are the benefits of each, the downsides... 5.56 vs. 7.62... AP vs ball ammunition... sub-sonic effects, tranference of force, etc.

 

Is that thread archived anywhere I could access? Are any of those knowledgeable types on these boards, now? Anyone out there have any good information sources on this (short and concise is always best )

 

Anyway, thanks to anyone who might know anything about this subject and wishes to share.

[Guest AGLAR]

My knowledge on this subject is outdated...

 

Have you checked out a book called "A Shooters' Bible"?

 

Its been about 15 years since I looked at one, but IIRC it had a good deal of information you may find useful...

[RDU Neil]

I know the book... I'll dig up a copy. I was just really hoping that the original thread was still around. Some of the posts were well written, simple, and explained basic ballistic concepts quite well.

 

Oh well... thanks Aglar.

[Toadmaster]

I'm afraid that post is lost until (if) DoJ is able to get the files from the old board and make them available again.

 

If it is the one I think you are talking about, I participated quite a bit as did Nusord Graphite and Gewing, there was another individual who seemed quite knowledgable and who argued knowledgably against almost all of my concepts but now I can not remember who that was, I have not seen anybody pop up in gun discussions since on a regular basis except the two listed above.

 

An excellant book if you are so inclined is Understanding Ballistics

 

here is a link to it at amazon.com

 

 

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0964559846/qid=1050533752/sr=1-1/ref=sr_1_1/102-2049011-6184907?v=glance&s=books

 

 

This is one of the best books on ballistics I've found, it is written toward the avaerage person who may not have much knowledge about guns, because of the wide audiance it is aimed at it covers almost everything a gamer could want except for actual game conversions.

[Arthur]

Back in the day (around the time of Red October and the Illuminati BBS some 10-12 years ago), I did a lot of analysis of both GURPS and Hero damage ratings and how they matched up with KE (kinetic energy = 1/2MV^2).

 

I don't have all my notes, but it turned out that GURPS damage was proportional to the square root of KE (which means it was directly proportional to momentum). I contacted Mike Hurst (author of first edition GURPS High-Tech) and asked if that was the analysis he had used. He answered with "nah, I just winged it - nice to see my guesses matched up with some physics".

 

More on topic, it also turned out (in 4Ed Hero) that DC 1 was just about 50 Joules of energy. Each DC was a doubling of DC thereafter.

 

DC 1: 50 J

DC 2: 100 J

DC 3 (1d K): 200 J

 

Etc.

 

Now, with FRED, that seems to still be in place up to about DC 10 or so. After that, it appears to use the "make something up" approach. I understand the idea of "It's a game, not a physics problem" - HOWEVER - this makes it difficult to convert other RW weapons. I have a list of every weapon from an earlier edition of GURPS High-Tech and Ultra-Tech converted over to Hero. Using the math, I was able to make a consistent conversion. I'm sticking to my guns on this one (pun intended).

[RDU Neil]

Originally posted by Toadmaster

I'm afraid that post is lost until (if) DoJ is able to get the files from the old board and make them available again.

 

If it is the one I think you are talking about, I participated quite a bit as did Nusord Graphite and Gewing, there was another individual who seemed quite knowledgable and who argued knowledgably against almost all of my concepts but now I can not remember who that was, I have not seen anybody pop up in gun discussions since on a regular basis except the two listed above.

 

An excellant book if you are so inclined is Understanding Ballistics

 

here is a link to it at amazon.com

 

 

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0964559846/qid=1050533752/sr=1-1/ref=sr_1_1/102-2049011-6184907?v=glance&s=books

 

 

This is one of the best books on ballistics I've found, it is written toward the avaerage person who may not have much knowledge about guns, because of the wide audiance it is aimed at it covers almost everything a gamer could want except for actual game conversions.

 

Thanks, Toadmaster. May very well pick this up.

[RDU Neil]

Originally posted by Arthur

Back in the day (around the time of Red October and the Illuminati BBS some 10-12 years ago), I did a lot of analysis of both GURPS and Hero damage ratings and how they matched up with KE (kinetic energy = 1/2MV^2).

 

I don't have all my notes, but it turned out that GURPS damage was proportional to the square root of KE (which means it was directly proportional to momentum). I contacted Mike Hurst (author of first edition GURPS High-Tech) and asked if that was the analysis he had used. He answered with "nah, I just winged it - nice to see my guesses matched up with some physics".

 

More on topic, it also turned out (in 4Ed Hero) that DC 1 was just about 50 Joules of energy. Each DC was a doubling of DC thereafter.

 

DC 1: 50 J

DC 2: 100 J

DC 3 (1d K): 200 J

 

Etc.

 

Now, with FRED, that seems to still be in place up to about DC 10 or so. After that, it appears to use the "make something up" approach. I understand the idea of "It's a game, not a physics problem" - HOWEVER - this makes it difficult to convert other RW weapons. I have a list of every weapon from an earlier edition of GURPS High-Tech and Ultra-Tech converted over to Hero. Using the math, I was able to make a consistent conversion. I'm sticking to my guns on this one (pun intended).

 

Arthur,

I can see this working consistently for Killing Damage... but does the translation work the same for normal damage.

 

Does 3d6 Normal (3 DC) ALSO do 200 Joules?

 

I guess what I'm asking, is, without penetration/wound damage (say he has kevlar weave without padding to stop penetration, but not absorb impact)... so just impact... would a 1d6K... say a .25 Caliber... be equivalentlike a 10 STR person punching with a push (3d6 normal)?

 

Yes, I know, a million differences in real life... but for game purposes... would the impact to the heroes chest be basically the same? Can we even compare "Killing Damage" vs "Normal Damage" (game terms) using real world concepts?

 

Thanks for the info.

[Blue]

I don't suppose it's this thread from the newly restored old-boards?

 

Guns

[Toadmaster]

I don't see why the energy to damage conversion wouldn't work the same, a precordial thump (the whack the guy in the chest to try and start is heart move so popular in medical movies and tv) is generally estimated at about 50 joules, (it is used when the arrest is witnessed, the defibrillator provides a 200 to 360 joule zap if the thump doesn't work, which is why I know the estimate for it) a good solid punch could probably approach 200+ joules so 3d6 N seems fair.

[Arthur]

Originally posted by RDU Neil

Arthur,

I can see this working consistently for Killing Damage... but does the translation work the same for normal damage.

 

Does 3d6 Normal (3 DC) ALSO do 200 Joules?

 

Yes, I know, a million differences in real life... but for game purposes... would the impact to the heroes chest be basically the same? Can we even compare "Killing Damage" vs "Normal Damage" (game terms) using real world concepts?

 

 

Now THAT is a VERY intriguing question that I never even thought of addressing. In Real Life , there are probably less differences than you think: in general, Normal Damage differs from Killing Damage only in the amount of area affected. At least, that's the only real way to model the difference.

 

Any physical attack is just a transfer of kinetic energy. Bullets and swords and such transfer that energy over a small area - that's why a sharp blade is better - less area. Likewise a pointed bullet. Normal attacks like fists and clubs spread the energy over a larger impact area. That's about it for the difference, in terms of physics.

 

Let's make a real rough seat of the pants calculation here (using a couple of WAGs to get a ballpark estimate): Let's say our STR 10 hero is able to put 30% of his 100 kg body mass into a punch, and the punch travels at 10 meters/sec. That comes out to 1500 Joules, which would be DC 6. This works out if you assume it's a Martial Offensive Strike. That still seems pretty high damage, since I suspect a trained fighter can do a lot better than that. Hmmmm. This will take some analysis. If anything, modern gun damage is overrated!

 

Are you pondering what I'm pondering?

[RDU Neil]

Originally posted by Blue

I don't suppose it's this thread from the newly restored old-boards?

 

Guns

 

Can't get that page to load. It tries, and then stalls out.

 

Thanks for the link, though, Blue. If it is the one I'm thinking of, I'll owe you one.

[RDU Neil]

Originally posted by Arthur

Any physical attack is just a transfer of kinetic energy. Bullets and swords and such transfer that energy over a small area - that's why a sharp blade is better - less area. Likewise a pointed bullet. Normal attacks like fists and clubs spread the energy over a larger impact area. That's about it for the difference, in terms of physics.

 

Let's make a real rough seat of the pants calculation here (using a couple of WAGs to get a ballpark estimate): Let's say our STR 10 hero is able to put 30% of his 100 kg body mass into a punch, and the punch travels at 10 meters/sec. That comes out to 1500 Joules, which would be DC 6. This works out if you assume it's a Martial Offensive Strike. That still seems pretty high damage, since I suspect a trained fighter can do a lot better than that.

 

See... I think most punches and kicks are "over estimated" in the damage they do. But that gets into a whole 'nother issue, because most kick/punches aren't "all out" because the fist or foot takes damage, too. Yeah... I could punch through dry wall, but I'm likely to break my hand doing it. I've never seen a game deal with "damage to the attacking fist" and I'm not sure I'd want a game that detailed, actually.

 

Originally posted by Arthur

Hmmmm. This will take some analysis. If anything, modern gun damage is overrated!

 

Are you pondering what I'm pondering? [/b]

 

I don't know what you are pondering, no... sorry... but while I do, in some ways, agree that modern gun damage is over rated, I also think that games fall short on "disabling/incapacitating" damage. Yeah... a single hit from a 9mm may very likely NOT kill you... may not even knock you out... but it can take you out of the fight because of pain and shock. How do you simulate that as simply as possible in a game? I think that tweaking gun damage up, slightly, to represent, however faultily, the incapacitating shock and pain of getting shot, is a fine "gaming" technique.

 

In many ways, showing my lack of any physics or math background, I've always wanted to translate guns as to "average effect."

 

A 9mm shot to the chest of an adult male has the effect, on average, of wounding him, knocking the wind out of him, and slowing forward movement, but it often does NOT kill him, stop forward momentum, or even knock him down. Yes? No?

 

If that kind of information was available, you could translate that into game damage. Adult male has zero resistant defenses and 10 CON and 10 Body. So 9mm round to chest (average damage and stun) should do 4-7 body, and 12-21 Stun (x3 Stun multiple). That means a 1 and 1/2d6 K. Ok... that works for me.

 

So for a KA to put a normal adult male into the "dying range" in one shot, it has to do 11 Body on average. That is a 3d6 KA. What caliber bullet would this reflect? A .45? A .44 or .357 magnum? Maybe a 5.56 or 7.62 bullet?

 

I don't know. This is the information I'm trying to find out. How effective are modern guns and ammunition... so I can reflect that effectiveness (not necessarily joules or whatever... just average effectiveness against an average person) in the game.

 

(Of course, the problem is, often the average damage is fine, but to get this, it puts the high end of damage, 18 body on 3d6, much too high for gun you are trying to represent. Oh well, nothing is perfect, but this is a fun mental exercise for me.)

 

Thanks again for your information.

[Arthur]

Neil,

 

I see exactly where you are coming from on your analysis. In some ways, it is even better than my approach. The whole idea is to simulate what a typical firearm does in real life or in heroic fiction, depending on your taste.

 

However, IRL, the effect of a bullet wound varies drastically. Sometimes a single .22 round to the body will drop someone on the spot and kill him instantly (well, IRL, "instantly" means "within a few minutes" - the negative BODY rule simulates that quite well). Other cases have been reported where someone took a half dozen high-caliber rounds and kept coming. ISTR one case where a man showed up at the ER complaining of a headache. He had been shot in the side of the head with a medium-caliber pistol round. The bullet had lodged under his scalp after being deflected off his skull. He didn't even realize what it was. In heroic fiction, it varies just as much: if the story needs for the hero to shrug off that rifle wound to the shoulder and go on, then he does. If the story needs for the thug to be dropped instantly by the lady's derringer, he is.

 

Probably the overall best way would be to analyze each and every type of round for its average effect. However, this would entail a vast amount of empirical research for every weapon, either of RL data or how they are portrayed in fiction.

 

Seems to me that basing damage on KE is relatively simple, realistic, and in keeping with heroic fiction (the heroes' Big Guns do a lot more than the scrubs' little handguns). The biggest advantage to this approach, though, is that it makes it easy to come up with a GURPS Vehicles or 3G3 type system to design custom weapons.

 

BTW, Neil, you have raised some really interesting points in this discussion. You may not be the physics weenie I am, but it's clear you are a sharp cookie putting a lot of thought into what we are trying to accomplish here. I've really enjoyed this thread. Too bad you don't live in Colorado - I suspect we'd make a great gaming team.

 

P.S. The reference to "pondering" is from "Pinky and the Brain".

[Toadmaster]

Originally posted by RDU Neil

A 9mm shot to the chest of an adult male has the effect, on average, of wounding him, knocking the wind out of him, and slowing forward movement, but it often does NOT kill him, stop forward momentum, or even knock him down. Yes? No?

 

If that kind of information was available, you could translate that into game damage. Adult male has zero resistant defenses and 10 CON and 10 Body. So 9mm round to chest (average damage and stun) should do 4-7 body, and 12-21 Stun (x3 Stun multiple). That means a 1 and 1/2d6 K. Ok... that works for me.

 

So for a KA to put a normal adult male into the "dying range" in one shot, it has to do 11 Body on average. That is a 3d6 KA. What caliber bullet would this reflect? A .45? A .44 or .357 magnum? Maybe a 5.56 or 7.62 bullet?

 

I don't know. This is the information I'm trying to find out. How effective are modern guns and ammunition... so I can reflect that effectiveness (not necessarily joules or whatever... just average effectiveness against an average person) in the game.

 

(Of course, the problem is, often the average damage is fine, but to get this, it puts the high end of damage, 18 body on 3d6, much too high for gun you are trying to represent. Oh well, nothing is perfect, but this is a fun mental exercise for me.)

 

Thanks again for your information.

 

Actually based on what you say yu are looking for and your examples I think that the current damages are pretty good, you figure a 9mm does an average of 4-5 and a max of 7, doubled for a head or vitals shot, particularly when you keep in mind that two things that are taught in self defence oriented training is to double tap (two shots) and that shot placement is more important than the caliber of the weapon used. I wouldn't be as concerned with the instant death aspect as that is far to variable, people have survived being shot dozens of times or been killed with a single shot from a .22 short, the emphasis in my opinion is whether or not the target is renderd ineffective, rather than killed and I think that with the current 2d6 to 2d6+1 of most military rifles and the "average" body now being set at 8-10, most rifles stand a good chance of dropping a "normal" with one shot, particularly if hit in the head or vitals.

 

If you still don't feel guns do enough damage, I saw a suggestion of adding 1DC, while I don't feel the need to, if I played in a game where that was the house rule I wouldn't object, currently HERO is on the survivable gun shot side, adding 1DC would move it a little to the other end of that spectrum (there isn't much room to wiggle within HERO's damage scale), 1DC less and I would feel guns were clearly to weak, add 2 and I think they would be too deadly.

 

If you haven't seen it there is some discussion related to this here, http://www.herogames.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=2267 I included charts for some of my ideas in this thread which may or may not be useful to you.

[RDU Neil]

Originally posted by Toadmaster

the emphasis in my opinion is whether or not the target is renderd ineffective, rather than killed and I think that with the current 2d6 to 2d6+1 of most military rifles and the "average" body now being set at 8-10, most rifles stand a good chance of dropping a "normal" with one shot, particularly if hit in the head or vitals.

 

Yes! The "rendered ineffective" is a great point to make. It is what I'm talking about, above, with the concept of incapacitation. This is a very difficult concept to translate, as most games don't effectively simulate someone who has been shot... is not dying or unconcious, but still can't move or act very well, because of pain or ruptured tissue/muscles... etc. I've always erred on the side of having the guns do a slightly higher amount of average damage than perhaps is "realistic" to cover the fact the charcters don't have to suffer pain and incapacitation. It's a fudge... but a simple one to keep the game moving.

 

And I agree... someone can get hit with five or six .223 rifle rounds, and live. Another dies after getting shot in the elbow with a .22 short.

 

My question is... what is the average. I would assume that the above situations are actually statistically rare... but I don't know. Out of every 1000 people shot with .22 short... what was the average effect? I suspect most people cursed and yelled and called an ambulance... but were likely not dying or incapcitated... but I could be wrong. Just wondered what the experts out there have to say.

 

(And yes... I think that Hero gun stats are pretty close... but I am one who has, in the past, suggested raising all the damage by 1 DC from the stats in say, the old Dark Champions.)

[RDU Neil]

Originally posted by Arthur

Neil,

 

I see exactly where you are coming from on your analysis. In some ways, it is even better than my approach. The whole idea is to simulate what a typical firearm does in real life or in heroic fiction, depending on your taste.

 

However, IRL, the effect of a bullet wound varies drastically. Sometimes a single .22 round to the body will drop someone on the spot and kill him instantly (well, IRL, "instantly" means "within a few minutes" - the negative BODY rule simulates that quite well). Other cases have been reported where someone took a half dozen high-caliber rounds and kept coming. ISTR one case where a man showed up at the ER complaining of a headache. He had been shot in the side of the head with a medium-caliber pistol round. The bullet had lodged under his scalp after being deflected off his skull. He didn't even realize what it was. In heroic fiction, it varies just as much: if the story needs for the hero to shrug off that rifle wound to the shoulder and go on, then he does. If the story needs for the thug to be dropped instantly by the lady's derringer, he is.

 

Probably the overall best way would be to analyze each and every type of round for its average effect. However, this would entail a vast amount of empirical research for every weapon, either of RL data or how they are portrayed in fiction.

 

Seems to me that basing damage on KE is relatively simple, realistic, and in keeping with heroic fiction (the heroes' Big Guns do a lot more than the scrubs' little handguns). The biggest advantage to this approach, though, is that it makes it easy to come up with a GURPS Vehicles or 3G3 type system to design custom weapons.

 

BTW, Neil, you have raised some really interesting points in this discussion. You may not be the physics weenie I am, but it's clear you are a sharp cookie putting a lot of thought into what we are trying to accomplish here. I've really enjoyed this thread. Too bad you don't live in Colorado - I suspect we'd make a great gaming team.

 

P.S. The reference to "pondering" is from "Pinky and the Brain".

 

Thanks, Arthur... I recognize the quote, now.

 

I've only been to Colorado a couple times, to ski Winter Park. Yeah... it would be interesting to see how similar, or different, our gaming styles are.

 

Actually, I love physics on a theoretical side... I just suck at math. Equations make my head hurt. Right now, I'm reading a short history of quantum theory and interconnectivity. I just skip the equations.

[Toadmaster]

Sorry, I didn't notice when I first replied that you were asking what effect certain bullets should have, not providing an example of what a 9mm should do, it was just coincidence that I felt the 9mm is about right for the example you gave.

 

Typically most gun "experts" consider a 9mm or .38 to be the minimum caliber that should be considered as a serious defensive fire arm, most also agree no that pistol can be considered reliable for a "one shot kill" and most also agree you need a rifle or shotgun to reliably stop an attacker with only one or two shots, and even thats not assured.

 

Based on that I was thinking that a 9mm or .38 Special (1d6+1, +0 STN) with an average of 4-5 body and 12-20 stun would con stun the average (8-10 con) individual and cause them a pretty solid ouch, move that to the vitals or head and there is a good chance they are out of the fight (8-10 body, 16-40 stun), so either good placement or make that 2 hits and I'd be pretty confident that they are no longer going to be a problem to me. Now if you move up to the "man stopper" .45 ACP (1d6+1, +1 STN) the average becomes 4-5 body and 16-25 stun, normals are very likely to be out of the fight with a good hit.

 

If you start looking at the magnums, rifles or shotguns and one shot "kills" are quite likely using the current rules. I think part of the problem is most people look at the characters or semi-important NPC's when comparing the damages not "normals".

 

Again, if you want to lean to the deadlier side I can't really provide an argument against bumping 1 DC, because I don't really disagree with that concept, it just depends on how scared of guns you want your players to be. If you plan to have lots of gun play in your games I'd lean toward staying with the current damage, if you want gun play to be the exception I'd go for the +1 DC.

[gewing]

I read of a case where an argument turned violent, 2 guys shot each other. One took 5 or 6 .45 slugs to the chest, took a bus to the hospital.

 

The other died from a .22, iirc.

 

Here in my town the Sergaent at arms for a motorcycle gang was sitting at the table across from his dead attacker. The survivor had a towel held to his face and the back of his head, after being shot with a .41 MAGNUM. It went right through, he lost one eye. Maybe there was nothing else inside the skull, but....

 

Originally posted by Arthur

Neil,

 

I see exactly where you are coming from on your analysis. In some ways, it is even better than my approach. The whole idea is to simulate what a typical firearm does in real life or in heroic fiction, depending on your taste.

 

However, IRL, the effect of a bullet wound varies drastically. Sometimes a single .22 round to the body will drop someone on the spot and kill him instantly (well, IRL, "instantly" means "within a few minutes" - the negative BODY rule simulates that quite well). Other cases have been reported where someone took a half dozen high-caliber rounds and kept coming. ISTR one case where a man showed up at the ER complaining of a headache. He had been shot in the side of the head with a medium-caliber pistol round. The bullet had lodged under his scalp after being deflected off his skull. He didn't even realize what it was. In heroic fiction, it varies just as much: if the story needs for the hero to shrug off that rifle wound to the shoulder and go on, then he does. If the story needs for the thug to be dropped instantly by the lady's derringer, he is.

 

Probably the overall best way would be to analyze each and every type of round for its average effect. However, this would entail a vast amount of empirical research for every weapon, either of RL data or how they are portrayed in fiction.

 

Seems to me that basing damage on KE is relatively simple, realistic, and in keeping with heroic fiction (the heroes' Big Guns do a lot more than the scrubs' little handguns). The biggest advantage to this approach, though, is that it makes it easy to come up with a GURPS Vehicles or 3G3 type system to design custom weapons.

 

BTW, Neil, you have raised some really interesting points in this discussion. You may not be the physics weenie I am, but it's clear you are a sharp cookie putting a lot of thought into what we are trying to accomplish here. I've really enjoyed this thread. Too bad you don't live in Colorado - I suspect we'd make a great gaming team.

 

P.S. The reference to "pondering" is from "Pinky and the Brain".

[gewing]

I keep thinking that a way to deal with some of the unusual damage cases, either more or less than normal is this:

 

limited open ended damage. If I shoot someone with a .44 magnum, 2d6K, I roll my dice. If I roll a 6, I roll an extra 1/2 die, that DOES NOT affect armor. If I roll a 1, I subtract a 1/2 die.

 

No one wants to try it out in playtest.

 

Just to stimulate discussion, of course.

[Arthur]

Originally posted by gewing

with a .44 magnum, 2d6K, I roll my dice. If I roll a 6, I roll an extra 1/2 die, that DOES NOT affect armor. If I roll a 1, I subtract a 1/2 die.

 

Looked OK, until I got to the part about armor. I take you mean "bypasses armor". Not good. That means someone in MI Powered Armor (say, DEF 25, Hardened) can be hurt by a 1d K attack?

 

Now, if you want to introduce a extra damage variable BEFORE defenses, I'd bite. Or put in something about how the extra damage can't be more than the base damage. So if Trooper takes 2 points of BODY and you roll a 6 for that extra half-die, that extra half-die is capped at 2.

[RDU Neil]

Originally posted by gewing

I keep thinking that a way to deal with some of the unusual damage cases, either more or less than normal is this:

 

limited open ended damage. If I shoot someone with a .44 magnum, 2d6K, I roll my dice. If I roll a 6, I roll an extra 1/2 die, that DOES NOT affect armor. If I roll a 1, I subtract a 1/2 die.

 

No one wants to try it out in playtest.

 

Just to stimulate discussion, of course.

 

My concern with this, is that it just adds lots of die rolls and addition and subtraction in the middle of a game. I don't mind doing work outside of a game to make things balanced and accurate... but in a game... minimize the die rolls as much as possible, IMO.

 

Gun fights should be fast and furious, not take six rolls to figure out.

 

You can always add detail and accuracy by adding complexity... but the Hero System doesn't need any more complexity.

[Toadmaster]

Actually I think this is already dealt with by the die rolling system, the biker shot in the head with the .41 magnum got lucky, the shooter rolled 2 body, modified by hit location-head, thats 4 body and 10 stun, assuming the biker has a con and body of 11 (he's a bit tougher than average), he's not even stunned

 

Seriously though I think if I were going to add in extra complexity I'd go for a crit chart or perhaps extra damage based on location, limbs having less chance of extra damage and lower damage adds, head and vitals the most.

 

perhaps something like chance for crit

hands, feet 6- +1/2d6

arms, legs 8- +1/2d6, 6- +1d6

abdomen, chest 11- +1d6, 8- +2d6

Head, vitals 15- +1d6, 11- +2d6, 8- +3d6

 

this would represent the chance of hitting something extra special in the various locations, limbs basically just have blood vessels to hit causing extra blood loss, chest and abdomen have this plus important organs (stomach, liver etc), head and vitals have these plus critical organs (heart, lungs, brain etc)

 

I think this is probably a bit much for most games but if you really want to make guns dangerous, it might be worthwhile to pursue. It also goes a long way to making the shot placement more important than what gun you were using.

[Old Man]

Originally posted by Toadmaster

Actually I think this is already dealt with by the die rolling system, the biker shot in the head with the .41 magnum got lucky, the shooter rolled 2 body, modified by hit location-head, thats 4 body and 10 stun, assuming the biker has a con and body of 11 (he's a bit tougher than average), he's not even stunned

 

Almost. If he lost his eye then that's supposed to be a disabling head wound, which ought to have killed him without prompt medical attention as well as knocking him out. But I don't think any game system handles handles really bizarre head wounds like this one.

[Storn]

Neil, I believe you upped the damage in Cyber Punk and Dark Champions, not because Hero at it's baseline wasn't doing a good job of giving you the spread of damage options...

 

...but because in both genres... body armor is prolific.

 

And now I hear reports of US army body armor stopping 7.62 rounds!!! Dead center shots, not deflection. Body armor has been getting queitly better on us just in the last 15 years. That is freakin' amazing!

 

Now in a Danger Internat'l campaign, it would probalby be easier to get .50 Cal Barret sniper rifle than it woudl beto get a vest of that quality. But in cyberpunk or Dark Champions... that is dress de riguer. Now weapon of choice against that quality of body armor is going back to the shotgun... you might not even get a scratch in... but the guy is going DOWN with a +1 Stun Multiplier.

 

Actually, with our house rule of 20 Stun gets thru = 1 Body taken, upping all Stun Multipliers across the board *might* do th trick. Certainly that will "simulate" being taken out of a fight, yet not killed. A helmet might stop the bullet, but a whole heck of a lot Stun is going to get thru from even a decent roll.

[Toadmaster]

Originally posted by Storn

Neil, I believe you upped the damage in Cyber Punk and Dark Champions, not because Hero at it's baseline wasn't doing a good job of giving you the spread of damage options...

 

...but because in both genres... body armor is prolific.

 

And now I hear reports of US army body armor stopping 7.62 rounds!!! Dead center shots, not deflection. Body armor has been getting queitly better on us just in the last 15 years. That is freakin' amazing!

 

Two words.... Head shot

 

Originally posted by Storn

Now in a Danger Internat'l campaign, it would probalby be easier to get .50 Cal Barret sniper rifle than it woudl beto get a vest of that quality. But in cyberpunk or Dark Champions... that is dress de riguer. Now weapon of choice against that quality of body armor is going back to the shotgun... you might not even get a scratch in... but the guy is going DOWN with a +1 Stun Multiplier.

I've resemble that comment, in a Post Apocalypse DI game I had a character take a 12 ga round in the chest at point blank range, no body got through but recovery was measured in days IIRC

 

 

Originally posted by Storn

Actually, with our house rule of 20 Stun gets thru = 1 Body taken, upping all Stun Multipliers across the board *might* do th trick. Certainly that will "simulate" being taken out of a fight, yet not killed. A helmet might stop the bullet, but a whole heck of a lot Stun is going to get thru from even a decent roll.

 

Interesting idea, I may have to "borrow" it, hope you don't mind.