Firearms granularity

[Fox1]

Re: Firearms granularity

 

Realism is the stuff we do every non game day' date=' so why be so insistent on including it in all of our games as well?[/quote']

 

Because for some people it's fun. Far more fun than not doing so.

 

Seems a simple enough answer to me.

[Guest Black Lotus]

Re: Firearms granularity

 

Because for some people it's fun. Far more fun than not doing so.

 

Seems a simple enough answer to me.

 

Yeah. Personally I prefer to have many different types from each broad firearm category in my games, because some weapons are better for some situations -- or characters -- than others. Also, it really adds to the genuine feel of a game. If the players walk into a gun shop, there ought to be at least a modest variety of authentic weapons availabe. If the storekeeper says, "Yeah, we have the Pistol, the Shotgun, or the Rifle -- which do you want?" you know you're not really in New Orleans. Stands out like a sore thumb, by God.

 

Statting all those weapons realistically can be a chore, though.

[Fox1]

Re: Firearms granularity

 

Statting all those weapons realistically can be a chore' date=' though.[/quote']

 

Not for me

 

I have the uber cool spreadsheet, give me a handful of values and it instantly throws out all the HERO System values for the weapon.

[Mentor]

Re: Firearms granularity

 

Because for some people it's fun. Far more fun than not doing so.

 

Seems a simple enough answer to me.

That is a perfect reason to do so. If you and your gaming group enjoy the realism and specificty of the number crunching, then nobody should tell you different.

 

That having been said, those to whom the genre of fiction and fantasy depictions reflect what weapon effects they want to occur do not deserve to be told that they are stupid, that their games and rules are flawed and that they are doing it wrong.

[Fox1]

Re: Firearms granularity

 

That having been said' date=' those to whom the genre of fiction and fantasy depictions reflect what weapon effects they want to occur do not deserve to be told that they are stupid, that their games and rules are flawed and that they are doing it wrong.[/quote']

 

I don't believe anyone has made that claim, rather the exact opposite claim has been made in thread.

[ghost-angel]

Re: Firearms granularity

 

Realism is the stuff we do every non game day' date=' so why be so insistent on including it in all of our games as well?[/quote']

 

Excellent point. IMO, anyone bent on simulating every exact detail of a real life system in a game is being unessecarily extranious and anal retentive. But that's my opinion.

[Fox1]

Re: Firearms granularity

 

Excellent point. IMO' date=' anyone bent on simulating every exact detail of a real life system in a game is being unessecarily extranious and anal retentive. But that's my opinion.[/quote']

 

And to prove my last point, the insults continue.

 

Funny thing is, this from people on a site for a game system that is often seen by fans of other systems as "unessecarily extranious and anal retentive" itself with its 592 page core rulebook.

 

Even within the same closest, people still insist on knifing each other. What a sad world we make for ourselves.

[Guest Black Lotus]

Re: Firearms granularity

 

Excellent point. IMO' date=' anyone bent on simulating every exact detail of a real life system in a game is being unessecarily extranious and anal retentive. But that's my opinion.[/quote']

 

In that case, instead of carefully designing the character concept, I'll just write "tough guy w/ pwr armor." The point is, a designation like "Desert Eagle: Israeli .50 AE Double-Action Autoloader Pistol, 3d6 RKA, 9 Charges, (etc)" and the like gives color to a weapon (or other item), makes it cool, unique. Likewise, carefully selecting a player character's abilities, writing a detailed character concept sheet, naming him, and giving him pertinent Powers and Advantages makes him unique.

 

Another example:

 

• "You go into a building. You see three people there."
  
• "You go into the warehouse. You see several toughs nearby."
  
• "Stealthily, you inch your way into the tumbledown ruins of the Dragon 888 Warehouse. Out of the corner of your eye, you catch sight of a welcoming committee: three of Bishop's thugs. They don't look pleased to see you."
  

 

Now, which of those three sentences is the most exciting, engaging, and interesting? Please. It's no contest. Some GMs (and players) prefer to add interesting and sometimes useful quirks and details to everything in their game: vehicles, weapons, locales, armor, PCs, NPCs, treasure, etcetera. It's no different with modern firearms. You feel more "there" when it's more authentic. In my experience, anyway.

[NuSoardGraphite]

Re: Firearms granularity

 

Hmmm, I'm disappointed in what I've read here.

 

SNIP!

 

No need to be so hostile! Everyone here is entittled to their own opinion. Though I do agree that oftentimes people do tend to dismiss certain requests out of hand and or criticize people for making certain suggestions, it is their right to do so if they wish (and its our right to flame them for it, just as you've done) but lets try to keep inflammatory posts to a minimum. We've seen how bad these can get on other threads...

 

And the suggestion for the original poster to "check out Dark Champions" is a good one. First of all, the rules in DC might actualy be enough to satisfy his friend, in which case, problem solved. Secondly, suggesting to new players additional HERO material that they can purchase is never a bad thing (Lets keep HERO/DOJ in business!)

 

And if you noticed in my own post, after I suggested the poster check out Dark Champions, I added that if the rules in there were inadequate for his groups taste, to post again and help would be forthcomming. This is the HERO board, how often do we ignore a newbies need for rules expansion and clarification and variation?

 

Not very.

[NuSoardGraphite]

Re: Firearms granularity

 

Amen. Repped! I agree completely. I'm boggled by the number of threads I see here asking how you'd build this, that or the other thing. Most of the time, if I were the GM, I'd simply handwave it as necessary to the plot or "since I'd give the NPC enough points to get the effect I want anyhow, what difference does it make how many points it would take? It's not like he's on a budget!"

 

Which is probably why, though I'm playing a couple of online Champions games, the game I'm _running_ uses Fudge for the game engine.

 

Hey, a lot of people like hard stats on stuff. Most especially the players. My players want to see the hard stats on the guns, blades and armor they are using. They want to know how much damage it does, how accurate it is, what the range is and how much ammo it holds. I couldn't "handwave" that kind of stuff if I wanted to, they wouldn't stand for it.

 

Besides, its kind of fun to build stuff like that. Its a challenge for many HERO veterans to find new and interesting builds for various posts on "How do I simulate X". Thats why there's so many of these posts and why they get numerous replies. Heck, I think thats the biggest reason why the HERO message boards are some of the most prolific RPG boards on the web.

[Markdoc]

Re: Firearms granularity

 

The first problem with just using caliber to determine damage is that there is more to the equation than the diameter of the round. For example' date=' what differentiates the .22 long rifle bullet from the .223 is certainly not the .003 difference in diameter. Bullet length and shape, amount of propellent, and weapon from which the weapon is fired are the other characteristics determining damage. Hit location would be the other main factor. Unless the GM and the players want a reallt deadly campaign, I hardly recommend true granualarity.[/quote']

 

Exactly. I don't think anyone was suggesting a .22 short and an AK 101 are exactly the same. But number crunching based on calibre or joules is going to yield a largely arbitrary set of numbers. They'll be different from the equally arbitrary set of numbers in Dark Champions - probably no worse, probably no better.

 

In real life, which does more damage - a 9 mm handgun or a 7.62 assault rifle? The correct answer is - it depends. It depends on range, it depends on the kind of target, it depends on who is pulling the trigger, it depends on where the bullet hit and its path afterwards.

 

As Fox1 noted, soldiers coming back from iraq are calling for weapons Mod.s - but almost universally they are not talking about stopping power or range. They want a better designed gas recoil system to stop the AR15 family from spitting debris back into the firing chamber. They want better ergonomics for loading. Combat engineers and artillery want bullpups instead of carbines or rifles. Everyone wants thermal sights that don't catch and get knocked out of alignment and better designed ejector slides that don't gum up with dust. The Marines want lighter weapons (they've chosen not to pick up the OICW - not because of any concerns over accuracy or damage, but simply because it's too heavy).

 

The important thing is to give the players a feeling of choice - and to use stat.s for those choices which encourage the players to choose appropriate weapons (ie: not handguns for a sniping mission and not a TOW for a firefight). If adding an extra layer of detail helps your gaming experience - fine, go for it. But it's neither necessary, nor necessarily "more accurate". Other groups of gamers may well have other priorities.

 

Cheers, Mark

[Fox1]

Re: Firearms granularity

 

As Fox1 noted' date=' soldiers coming back from iraq are calling for weapons Mod.s - but almost universally they are not talking about stopping power or range. [/quote']

 

Actually they are.

 

The barrel on the M4 carbine series is shortened, with a resulting drop in muzzle velocity, which has a direct and negative impact on terminal bullet flip and fragmentation which in turn lowers effective engagement range. The M4 is in very wide use due to the often city based combat setting.

 

Even the full barrel length M16 series is running into stopping power and range issues. The bullet flip/fragmentation effect is velocity dependent, and thus limited in range- a problem worsen by the move to a heavy and slower bullet for the weapon some years back. The current US solider is far more skilled than the typical solider of the era that spawned the M16, add in the new and widely used optics for the weapon and the engagement range has exceeded the point where the velocity drops below the required point for a good flip/fragmentation.

 

Add in extensive drug use on the opposing side, and we're not that different from what happened in the Philippines (which resulted in the Army dropping the .38 sidearm in favor of the .45).

 

Thus the growing calls for a different standard cartridge for a new US service rifle/carbine series such as the 6.8 SPC.

 

In the meantime, squads have taken up an old Soviet practice- the Squad Designated Marksman. This solider is armed with a modified M14 in 7.62x51mm (.308). Generally consider too large of a rifle for close in work, the concept is to at least address part of the range/power problem facing the Squad.

[Trebuchet]

Re: Firearms granularity

 

Exactly. I don't think anyone was suggesting a .22 short and an AK 101 are exactly the same. But number crunching based on calibre or joules is going to yield a largely arbitrary set of numbers. They'll be different from the equally arbitrary set of numbers in Dark Champions - probably no worse, probably no better.

 

In real life, which does more damage - a 9 mm handgun or a 7.62 assault rifle? The correct answer is - it depends. It depends on range, it depends on the kind of target, it depends on who is pulling the trigger, it depends on where the bullet hit and its path afterwards.

 

As Fox1 noted, soldiers coming back from iraq are calling for weapons Mod.s - but almost universally they are not talking about stopping power or range. They want a better designed gas recoil system to stop the AR15 family from spitting debris back into the firing chamber. They want better ergonomics for loading. Combat engineers and artillery want bullpups instead of carbines or rifles. Everyone wants thermal sights that don't catch and get knocked out of alignment and better designed ejector slides that don't gum up with dust. The Marines want lighter weapons (they've chosen not to pick up the OICW - not because of any concerns over accuracy or damage, but simply because it's too heavy).

 

The important thing is to give the players a feeling of choice - and to use stat.s for those choices which encourage the players to choose appropriate weapons (ie: not handguns for a sniping mission and not a TOW for a firefight). If adding an extra layer of detail helps your gaming experience - fine, go for it. But it's neither necessary, nor necessarily "more accurate". Other groups of gamers may well have other priorities.

Great post, Mark.

 

Small details can certainly add a level of engagement and veracity to a story, but too much detail can bog the story down (a criticism often directed at Tom Clancy's novels) and of course a totally wrong detail can derail the suspension of disbelief so necessary for action fiction in film, literature, and RPGs. It is, of course, impossible to make every aspect of Hero 100% accurate, because it is not intended as a simulation of the real world but rather as a system for representing the heroic events typical of film and fiction.

 

To make a weapons chart with 100% accurate representation of various weapons and calibers may be a bit pointless without providing a correspondingly accurate formula or chart for calculating the effects of fast moving metallic projectiles on the human body. When one's target is already flying by sheer force of will and wearing unrealistic bullet-proof-spandex, what's the point of knowing the shooter is using a SIG-Sauer semi-automatic pistol firing a .40 S&W hollowpoint bullet? How does that force-of-will thing and bulletproof-spandex work anyway?

[Fox1]

Re: Firearms granularity

 

To make a weapons chart with 100% accurate representation of various weapons and calibers may be a bit pointless without providing a correspondingly accurate formula or chart for calculating the effects of fast moving metallic projectiles on the human body.

 

Bad logic on a number of levels.

 

First, the original post was not a call for an accuratate representation of firearms, it was rather a call for granularity in the game mechanics of firearms. One could assume that the post likely desired that the resulting granularity produces a result that ordered in the various weapons in the proper matter.

 

Thus a .45 ACP should do more damage than a .40 S&W which should do more than a .38 special- but the actual damage values may or may not be realistic.

 

Which is the case now matter how much work is put into the mechanics, as the actual effects of these weapons expressed in any objective valuation is unknown to current science. Only relative effectiveness can be judged.

 

 

Second, in game design is quite acceptable to focus mechanics on only one side of an issue assuming a static condition on the other. It is a neccessary simplification to keep the game playable. Changes in target make-up is handled by how that target is made up in the game.

 

Thus in the case of your "target is already flying by sheer force of will and wearing unrealistic bullet-proof-spandex" victim, the .40 S&W will react with it depending upon its BODY, STUN, and defenses just as any other weapon would.

 

This isn't 100% of course. It's a game mechanic simplification that suits some people.

 

But those who whine about peoplle wanting a little more realism in their game fail to understand a very simple point. Realism is not a on/off switch, it's a continuum that ranges from None to Complete.

 

Individuals desire different points along that continuum. At no time does a desire for more realism in one part of that vast range force an individual into more realism in other areas. That's a straw man put up by biased and ignorant people who can't let a poster ask for something as simple as Firearms Granularity without attacking them.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Firearms granularity

 

I know very little about guns. Mind you I know a lot of people like their guns and like their guns simulated in games. Fairy Nuff.

 

One thing I've never understood though is this: if one gun is better than another, why chose the inferior one?

 

I mean why don't all the armies all carry the 'best' assault rifle instead of all having different designs and calibres? Why don't armed police all carry .44 magnums or whatever?

 

I presume, apart from cost, it is because there isn't one gun or calibre which is 'best'.

 

This is not how guns are built in Hero though: in hero the main things that differentiate gun stats are:

Damage

Rof

Accuracy

Range modifiers

Autofire

 

Frankly, looking at the stst blocks, why would anyone with a 13 or more strength who wanted a handgun chose anything other than a desert eagle? It is the best gun. OK if you want concealable, get something smaller, but othrewise, desert eagle every time.

 

I doubt this is realistic. I doubt it is as accurate as everything else or causes twice the damage. If it does, why are there any other guns?

 

There doesn't seem to be enough variation in the accuracy and range mods to make any other choice valid.

 

Can anyone help me out here?

[Guest Black Lotus]

Re: Firearms granularity

 

One thing I've never understood though is this: if one gun is better than another' date=' why chose the inferior one?[/quote']

 

Simple! Not all weapons will be available at the beginning of the game, or in a given gun shop. For example, a Desert Eagle (.50 AE) or Raging Bull (.454 Casull) would be hard to find in many of my games.

[Brother Jim]

Re: Firearms granularity

 

also a desert eagle has a huge handgrip. i don't have small hands, but it was too big for me to comfortably hold....and i would not want to shoot it without being able to hold it right.

 

you know, i was going someplace with this, but my brain just went-------------

 

 

 

sorry.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Firearms granularity

 

OK then, but in a game where you build the characters yourself, getting a desert eagle is going to happen if you want one, or it all becomes very contrived.

 

As for the handgrip - well, again, characters are probably going to be defined as having large hands, or you need to have a perk 'Big hands' (3 points) before you can use the gun without a -2 penalty.

 

Assuming that you have big hands and a well stocked gun shop nearby though, is the DE the best hanndgun there is (well, of those presented in the book, anyway?) Is it actually more accurate than a Browing HiPower or a .38 S+W?

[bigdamnhero]

Re: Firearms granularity

 

One thing I've never understood though is this: if one gun is better than another, why chose the inferior one?

 

I mean why don't all the armies all carry the 'best' assault rifle instead of all having different designs and calibres? Why don't armed police all carry .44 magnums or whatever?

 

I presume, apart from cost, it is because there isn't one gun or calibre which is 'best'.

 

1) Part of it is style and personal preference.

 

2) Not everyone agrees on what is "best."

 

3) What's best for one person may not be best for another person.

 

4) What's best for one mission may not be best for a different mission.

 

Last but not least,

 

5) Cost is definitely a big factor. Most armies and police departments can't afford "the best" in mass quantities.

 

 

bigdamnhero

"Life. Don't talk to me about life."

[Sean Waters]

Re: Firearms granularity

 

1) Part of it is style and personal preference.

 

2) Not everyone agrees on what is "best."

 

3) What's best for one person may not be best for another person.

 

4) What's best for one mission may not be best for a different mission.

 

Last but not least,

 

5) Cost is definitely a big factor. Most armies and police departments can't afford "the best" in mass quantities.

 

 

bigdamnhero

"Life. Don't talk to me about life."

 

That's the problem though, isn't it?

 

You stat out the guns and you will wind up with one that IS best, no argument. Why should a PC take anything less, assuming they can afford it, and they usually can or will at some point.

[Fox1]

Re: Firearms granularity

 

One thing I've never understood though is this: if one gun is better than another' date=' why chose the inferior one?[/quote']

 

In real life there is a large number of reasons. To answer a few of your questions:

 

 

I mean why don't all the armies all carry the 'best' assault rifle instead of all having different designs and calibres?

 

They don't really have different calibres. There are basically only three.

 

5.56x45mm, 7.62x39mm, and 5.45x39mm

 

All western nations use the 5.56x45mm. All 'eastern' nations use the 7.62x39mm or 5.45x39mm developed by the USSR. The 5.45x39mm was intended to replace the 7.62x39mm however there are so many of the old weapons out that and new Russia production is so low that 7.62x39mm will be around for a very long time.

 

Many nations have different designs, often out of national pride or the need to maintain independence of production. Sometimes this results in the use of greatly inferior weapons like the English L85 or French AAT Mod.52 (I think that was the model).

 

 

Why don't armed police all carry .44 magnums or whatever?

 

If you ever had to carry the weight of one these throughout your entire work day, the primary reason would become apparent.

 

In addition consider low ammo capacity and recoil/flash levels beyond what most part-time shooters can handle (most cops are very much part time shooters), and the question is answered.

 

 

 

I presume, apart from cost, it is because there isn't one gun or calibre which is 'best'.

 

There are a long number of different needs and requirements that drive weapon decisions. Not all of them are rational.

 

 

Frankly, looking at the stst blocks, why would anyone with a 13 or more strength who wanted a handgun chose anything other than a desert eagle?

 

Now we're just considering HERO system Firearms. The official rules show far less differences between weapons than my own house rules (at the website in my sig), so there will of course be less reason to choose between different models.

 

Given the differences, I'll only answer your question with respect to my own game and rules. There one handled use of the Desert Eagle .44 Mag requires a 17 STR as I base STR upon recoil.

 

I'll run through one group of characters in my Shadowrun campaign (I'll use modern weapon names to represent their choices).

 

 

Donovan has a 18 STR, even so he still prefers using two handguns of a size that is somewhat concealable. Thus he has selected twin Colt Delta Elites in 10mm.

 

Casey selected a Browning Hi-Power in .40 S&W.

 

Slag uses a S&W .500 Mag Revolver or a Ruger Alaskan Revolver in 545 casuall.

 

Oagato doesn't use any firearms, carrying blades, thrown weapons and bows instead.

 

Olivia and Dallas each use a 9mm Walther P5 Compact for low required STR (7 in this case).

 

Ty uses a Walther PPK .380 for concealability.

 

 

The general rule in the game and real life is to use the most gun you can:

 

a) carry at all times

 

can comfortably fire (i.e. STR Min).

 

 

Point 'a' is influenced by concealability and weight. There may also be requirements (such as some law enforcement agencies or the military).

 

Point 'b' is influenced by primarily recoil although total weapon weight has an impact in some cases. Ammo capacity has a significant impact here as some people think it's better to put out a higher volume of fire than it is to put fewer more powerful shots. Lastly, some weapons just shoot better for some people than others fitting their personal style better and that may influence their choice.

[Guest Black Lotus]

Re: Firearms granularity

 

OK then, but in a game where you build the characters yourself, getting a desert eagle is going to happen if you want one, or it all becomes very contrived.

 

As for the handgrip - well, again, characters are probably going to be defined as having large hands, or you need to have a perk 'Big hands' (3 points) before you can use the gun without a -2 penalty.

 

Assuming that you have big hands and a well stocked gun shop nearby though, is the DE the best hanndgun there is (well, of those presented in the book, anyway?) Is it actually more accurate than a Browing HiPower or a .38 S+W?

 

No. The best handgun (though not statted for HERO officially that I know of) is probably the H&K SOCOM (Special Operations Command), chambered in .45. It's got a lot of features: a rail underneath the barrel for attaching the illuminator/ laser sight, a screw-on suppressor, can fire cold-loaded ammunition (and with the suppressor, makes the gun silenced), and has a slide lock mechanism to complete the silencing effect, making it pretty much totally quiet. All that, with a decent magazine capacity, waterproof and corrosion resistant coating, high quality of manufacture, and more-than-decent stopping power combine to make one helluva weapon.

 

Also, earlier you said something about how not allowing all weapons to be available at the beginning of the game is contrived. That's silly. A character could just buy "Unlimited Wealth" for 15 Character Points and buy a tank, submarine, or helicopter, too, but I doubt I'd allow it at the beginning of the game. Some items are special and/ or precious, and should be treated as such.

 

And finally, the .50 Desert Eagle is probably the most powerful handgun ever made, but in some situations (need for greater accuracy, need for silence, need for concealability, need for cheap and readily available ammo, etcetera) other pistols perform better.

[Mentor]

Re: Firearms granularity

 

Bad logic on a number of levels.

 

First, the original post was not a call for an accuratate representation of firearms, it was rather a call for granularity in the game mechanics of firearms. One could assume that the post likely desired that the resulting granularity produces a result that ordered in the various weapons in the proper matter.

 

Thus a .45 ACP should do more damage than a .40 S&W which should do more than a .38 special- but the actual damage values may or may not be realistic.

 

Which is the case now matter how much work is put into the mechanics, as the actual effects of these weapons expressed in any objective valuation is unknown to current science. Only relative effectiveness can be judged.

 

 

Second, in game design is quite acceptable to focus mechanics on only one side of an issue assuming a static condition on the other. It is a neccessary simplification to keep the game playable. Changes in target make-up is handled by how that target is made up in the game.

 

Thus in the case of your "target is already flying by sheer force of will and wearing unrealistic bullet-proof-spandex" victim, the .40 S&W will react with it depending upon its BODY, STUN, and defenses just as any other weapon would.

 

This isn't 100% of course. It's a game mechanic simplification that suits some people.

 

But those who whine about peoplle wanting a little more realism in their game fail to understand a very simple point. Realism is not a on/off switch, it's a continuum that ranges from None to Complete.

 

Individuals desire different points along that continuum. At no time does a desire for more realism in one part of that vast range force an individual into more realism in other areas. That's a straw man put up by biased and ignorant people who can't let a poster ask for something as simple as Firearms Granularity without attacking them.

Your point is well taken in that there are times when you want the guy with the .25 caliber pocket pistol to be intimidated by the guy with the .45 1911. The only real way to indicate sufficient granularity would be to use more dice for the larger calibers. Using 1D6-1 for a .22 and (using an arbitrary number for arguement sake) 5D6 for a 7.62 NATO, which would possibly more correctly indicate the potential spread of damage would create numerous balance issues for the rest of the system, such as 10 or 12 BODY would be nothing and the infamous STUN lottery issue would be even more greatly exagerated.

 

My point is that I have seen and participated in many attempts at tweeking the system to reflect how an individual or group prefers to game and sometimes they are OK for a specific campaign or game. I have not seen them satisfactorily address all issues for all games. At some point, one must accept that these are the parameters of the system and play within those parameters.

 

Please do not take any insult at this approach. This is not a slam at your efforts in any way. If your tables work for game then I commend you and your efforts. Having seen them, they are not optimal for our group. But neither one of us is wrong, we simply want something different out of the system and ultimately that is why I prefer the open ended nature of the Hero system.

[bigdamnhero]

Re: Firearms granularity

 

You stat out the guns and you will wind up with one that IS best' date=' no argument. Why should a PC take anything less, assuming they can afford it, and they usually can or will at some point.[/quote']

 

Good point. The trick is to make it a trade-off between different advantages. So if it's a choice between, say:

- Gun A which does 2d6K with a +1 OCV,

- Gun B which does 2d6+1K but only +0 OCV, or

- Gun C which does 2d6+1K and +1 OCV, but only carries 6 rounds

...then which one is "best" will vary from character to character. It may require some subjective "fudging" from the real-life stats, but that's an acceptable fudge in the name of dramatic license. (To me, anyway: others may draw the line elsewhere.)

 

However, I have seen the sort of “inflation†you talk about in games, where everyone wants the biggest gun. Usually I handle it by appealing to the players’ sense of character: “Would a suave secret-agent guy really carry that?†or “You’ve described your character as small and wiry, but you want to carry the largest handgun made by man?†That sort of thing. It normally works pretty well, at least with my players. I also tend to put them in situations where for one reason or another they don’t have their own “preferred†weapons and have to make do with what they can buy locally. (This is not for a supers game, obviously.)

 

One other recommendation for Atlascott: treat each type of round as doing the same range of damage regardless of the weapon it’s fired out of. This isn’t completely technically accurate, but it’s close enough for gaming. That way, once you’ve decided that all 9mm rounds do 1d6+1K and all .44M rounds do 2d6K (or whatever), then the different guns simply reflect different accuracy, range, magazine capacity, size & concealment.

 

 

bigdamnhero

This sounds like a twelve change-of-underwear trip.

[bigdamnhero]

Re: Firearms granularity

 

Given the differences' date=' I'll only answer your question with respect to my own game and rules. There one handled use of the Desert Eagle .44 Mag requires a 17 STR as I base STR upon recoil.[/quote']

Wow, I have a 17 STR? Cool!

 

 

bigdamnhero

Shrinker: "Why should I trust you?"

Avon: "Because I have the gun!"