Firearms granularity

[archermoo]

Re: Firearms granularity

 

It could, and I also have house rules for that.

 

But it's not a requirement for those who only want to represent the weapon side of things better.

 

Very true.

[Guest Black Lotus]

Re: Firearms granularity

 

Wow. I love your site, Fox1... repped. You obviously put a lot of time, effort, and research into statting them out (and designing the philosophy for statting them out). There's a lot of food for thought there.

 

Also, now I'm thinking of doing role-oriented firearms instead of crazily statting out everything. You know, itty-bitty Derringers no one will ever notice; small, concealable firearms; big brawny pistols; big, loud, extremely effective and long range sniper rifles; smaller, quieter snipers that maybe collapse, but have less damage and range; etcetera.

 

You should add some more firearms to your list, though; I have a large database, if you need anything specific. Some very odd pistols/ revolvers/ machine pistols/ submachine guns/ machine guns/ sniper rifles out there. I hear there's a new model of sniper rifle that uses a .17 projectile of some sort (a small guess there on my part), is silenced (or nearly so), and is much smaller than most sniper rifles.

[Fox1]

Re: Firearms granularity

 

Wow. I love your site, Fox1... repped. You obviously put a lot of time, effort, and research into statting them out (and designing the philosophy for statting them out). There's a lot of food for thought there.

 

Thanks.

 

I put it up for my own gaming group, but I love it when it's of use to others.

 

 

Also, now I'm thinking of doing role-oriented firearms instead of crazily statting out everything. You know, itty-bitty Derringers no one will ever notice; small, concealable firearms; big brawny pistols; big, loud, extremely effective and long range sniper rifles; smaller, quieter snipers that maybe collapse, but have less damage and range; etcetera.

 

Certainly an acceptable way of doing things. I was considering it for my Shadowrun game, but decided to just rename modern weapons and use them instead and save the work for other things.

 

 

 

You should add some more firearms to your list, though; I have a large database, if you need anything specific. Some very odd pistols/ revolvers/ machine pistols/ submachine guns/ machine guns/ sniper rifles out there. I hear there's a new model of sniper rifle that uses a .17 projectile of some sort (a small guess there on my part), is silenced (or nearly so), and is much smaller than most sniper rifles.

 

Perhaps the .17 HMR.

 

Interesting round basically designed for Varmint rifles. A smaller faster round than the .22 LR filling the same role with better ballistic characteristics. A much flatter shooter.

 

A little too small for sniper work, shot placement would be really critical. It would be easy to silence and would fit in a small weapon however.

 

 

 

 

If you're interested in seeing anything added to my website just PM me the weapon stats and I'll add it forthwith.

 

I need the following:

 

Weapon Name

Nation Producing

Era of Production

Ammo Cap

Cyclic Rof if automatic

Overall Length

bbl Len

Unloaded Wgt

Ammo Weight (per 'clip')

Caliber

Bullet Mass

Charge (powder) Mass

Muzzle Velocity

 

Generally I can research and come up with the above values if I need to, but it would be quicker if you had them.

[Toadmaster]

Re: Firearms granularity

 

Wow, I always find it amazing how worked up people get when somebody wants a little more detail in a "realistic" type game, but if the same poster was asking about how to stat out Spiderman's webshooters or Excalibur that would be fine.

 

It is true that it is nearly impossible to create a highly accurate combat system in a game, there are just way to many variables but it is quite possible to make a good effort and for some of us this is what matters, that the firearms rules allow for a suspension of disbelief, just as most of you would not accept a fantasy game with only 3 spells, or a Champs game that didn't allow enough variation to tell the difference between Batman, Daredevil and Spiderman why should us gun freaks have to settle for the current big gun, little gun.

 

As I often say HERO can support many genres but it is a disservice to the rules to expect the same writeup to serve all genres equally. 4 color supers don't need to have a wide range of weapons and in fact such a listing would probably take away from the genre, ultra realistic rules in a pulp game would definately take away from the game, so why do people expect a modern or military genre game that expects a high threat from combat to make due with weakly written combat rules designed for more cinematic genres? James Bond just wouldn't be as cool using a "small auto pistol" instead of a Walther PPK or driving a "midsize sports car" instead of an Aston Martin DB5.

[Guest Black Lotus]

Re: Firearms granularity

 

Perhaps the .17 HMR.

 

Interesting round basically designed for Varmint rifles. A smaller faster round than the .22 LR filling the same role with better ballistic characteristics. A much flatter shooter.

 

A little too small for sniper work, shot placement would be really critical. It would be easy to silence and would fit in a small weapon however.

 

You're right, but this sniper rifle is supposedly designed for use by an expert sharpshooter: headshots only. If you hit anywhere else with that tiny bullet, it doesn't do much good, of course... well, generally, anyway.

 

If you're interested in seeing anything added to my website just PM me the weapon stats and I'll add it forthwith.

 

I need the following:

 

Weapon Name

Nation Producing

Era of Production

Ammo Cap

Cyclic Rof if automatic

Overall Length

bbl Len

Unloaded Wgt

Ammo Weight (per 'clip')

Caliber

Bullet Mass

Charge (powder) Mass

Muzzle Velocity

 

Generally I can research and come up with the above values if I need to, but it would be quicker if you had them.

 

I WISH I could find all that information for a given firearm on the Internet. Well, I probably could, but it takes a lot of digging -- depending of course upon the popularity of the firearm. I DO believe you should add the ultra-rare Heckler & Koch G11 Assault Rifle (4.7 mm caseless, bullpup configuration). I usually make that into my "Holy Grail" assault rifle for a campaign: great RoF, range, damage, ammo capacity, and accuracy. They tested it in the 80s and it worked amazingly, but because of beaureaucratic/ political/ money factors it never went into real production.

 

Hmmmm.

[Guest Black Lotus]

Re: Firearms granularity

 

Another problem I'm having is that certain diameters of ammunition -- say the .44 Magnum or .44 Automatic Magnum Pistol -- are widely considered to be more powerful than, say, .45 Automatic Colt Pistol, even though it's bigger. For example, in FREd, a .30 cartridge does the same damage as a .40 cartridge. To make matters worse, no one really knows for sure which shells DO do more damage, except in broad terms. I'm guessing the .30 pistol mentioned in FREd uses .30 rifle ammo.

[sinanju]

Re: Firearms granularity

 

Hey' date=' a lot of people like hard stats on stuff. [i']Most especially[/i] 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.

 

Well, yeah, if I was using guns in Champions, I'd probably point my players at the Dark Champions book. If they want to quibble over how accurate the stats are, they're out of luck. But that's as far as I'd go in that direction. As for how many points Dr. Tornado's weather machine costs...as many as it needs to fulfill its plot function, so why count?

 

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.

 

Now THAT'S a reason I can understand. I've done my share of that too. It's when they start off by saying that they need a plot device for an adventure or a campaign, but they don't know how to go about building it that I start to wonder. If it's a plot device, it doesn't need a point cost IMHO.

[Fox1]

Re: Firearms granularity

 

I WISH I could find all that information for a given firearm on the Internet. Well, I probably could, but it takes a lot of digging -- depending of course upon the popularity of the firearm.

 

True.

 

This site is one of the better ones (bet you've already found it), but it justs lists the primary military weapons for the most part and doesn't always have all the information.

 

http://world.guns.ru/main-e.htm

 

 

 

 

I DO believe you should add the ultra-rare Heckler & Koch G11 Assault Rifle (4.7 mm caseless, bullpup configuration). I usually make that into my "Holy Grail" assault rifle for a campaign: great RoF, range, damage, ammo capacity, and accuracy. They tested it in the 80s and it worked amazingly, but because of beaureaucratic/ political/ money factors it never went into real production.

 

Ah, one of the great failed weapon experiments (along with the US gyro-jets and Flechette weapons of the 60s).

 

I have all the needed stats for that weapon (I'll put it up on my site later today). My understanding is that they ran into two major problems with the ammo- consistent production and cook offs. These combined with political changes doomed it.

 

I'll stat it up and put it on the website. Like the Five-seveN, the base stats won't be impressive (it was built when tiny bullet at high velocity was the style) but by adding the "Semi-AP Fragmenting" ammo type to it (which it very likely was), it would work.

 

 

Edit: G-11 added to the webpage. I put it in its own experiment weapon section at the bottom of the Modern Era page. I'll likely go back and add in the gyro-jet, flechette and ACR duplex weapons later just to be complete.

 

Let me know if there's anything else you (or anyone else) wish added.

[Fox1]

Re: Firearms granularity

 

Another problem I'm having is that certain diameters of ammunition -- say the .44 Magnum or .44 Automatic Magnum Pistol -- are widely considered to be more powerful than' date=' say, .45 Automatic Colt Pistol, even though it's bigger. [/quote']

 

The 44 mags fire a faster (and in some cases, a little heavier) bullet. So the total KE is far greater, which results in people calling them more powerful.

 

In practical effect on a human target, most of the extra energy is wasted outside the target. Against non-human targets however the extra penetration can be just the ticket. They also have a greater effective range.

 

 

In my house rules the .44 mags do slightly less damage (2 1/2d6 vs. 3d6-1) than the .45 ACP. However they are much better vs. armor (1.25x instead of 2x) and do more stun (+2 vs. +1). Thus that are well suited as 'hunting handguns', i.e. the role they often have in real life.

 

The stun modifier advantage is debatable in realism terms, but fun even so.

 

 

 

 

For example, in FREd, a .30 cartridge does the same damage as a .40 cartridge. To make matters worse, no one really knows for sure which shells DO do more damage, except in broad terms. I'm guessing the .30 pistol mentioned in FREd uses .30 rifle ammo.

 

HERO always used a pure KE conversion to damage. A not very meaningful measure. They just added a +1 stun mod if it was a big bore or the like. In 5th edition they also took to just increasing the base damage to bring the weapons with a rep as a 'man stopper' up to where they could at least attempt to claim that title.

 

A very inconsistent and ungrounded approach, which is why I had to develop my own.

 

I'm not sure what .30 pistol your referencing in FREd, but its stats are likely a result of this process.

[Toadmaster]

Re: Firearms granularity

 

HERO always used a pure KE conversion to damage. A not very meaningful measure. They just added a +1 stun mod if it was a big bore or the like. In 5th edition they also took to just increasing the base damage to bring the weapons with a rep as a 'man stopper' up to where they could at least attempt to claim that title.

 

A very inconsistent and ungrounded approach, which is why I had to develop my own.

 

And this is probably why all this gun talk is "peculiar" to the non-gun bunnies, you call energy a not very meaningful measure, I consider it fairly important, and I'm sure we could debate it for hours without ever changing the others mind (kind of like Hulk vs Thing debates )

 

An official HERO gun book will probably never be a really good idea since its main audience would probably end up hating it (but we would still buy it ).

[Fox1]

Re: Firearms granularity

 

And this is probably why all this gun talk is "peculiar" to the non-gun bunnies' date=' you call energy a not very meaningful measure, I consider it fairly important, and I'm sure we could debate it for hours without ever changing the others mind (kind of like Hulk vs Thing debates )[/quote']

 

This is a lot like saying you can convince a flat earther that the world is round. It's a true statement, but it reveals more about the side that has rejected all reputable modern science than it does about the person saying the world is round.

 

I don't care if I convince you. I'm simply content knowing that I'm backed by every creditable research group working on the subject today be it military, law enforcement, or private.

[Toadmaster]

Re: Firearms granularity

 

This is a lot like saying you can convince a flat earther that the world is round. It's a true statement, but it reveals more about the side that has rejected all reputable modern science than it does about the person saying the world is round.

 

I don't care if I convince you. I'm simply content knowing that I'm backed by every creditable research group working on the subject today be it military, law enforcement, or private.

 

 

I wasn't suggesting that you convence me, experts paid by the military and law enforcement can't agree so its doubtful its going to happen on a game board. My point for posting was to emphasize the many variables and interpretations involved, there is no one right way to do it.

 

As far as being backed by every creditable research group that is unlikely, its hard to find two that agree, the .45 vs 9mm debate has been raging since at least 1911 and shows no sigh of stopping. In fact one point I look for in a games firearm rules is that it does not choose a side, I'm very happy if players try to convence others that the 9mm or .45 is a better choice in game terms (based on the rules, not personal preference of the real thing), if the game discussions mimic real life gun discussions then I feel they did a good job.

 

I've spent the last 20+ years researching the effects of firearms so I am pretty comfortable with the rules I have developed. I don't make this statement to reduce your rules, simply there are many ways to do something, not just one.

 

Energy may not be perfect and it certainly can not stand alone as the measure of a cartridges effectiveness but it is a measurable comparison and it does mean something. I always love when somebody calls energy a paper figure just to turn around and give their own factor (which in reality is just another paper figure, as all are), even when a researcher goes out and uses actual shooting data or gelatin people discount it for one reason or another (sometimes good reasons sometimes just because it doesn't fit their beliefs)

 

Its good you feel strongly about the rules you developed, but all of the data is open to interpretation.

 

Lighten up Francis its just a game

[Fox1]

Re: Firearms granularity

 

As far as being backed by every creditable research group that is unlikely' date=' its hard to find two that agree, the .45 vs 9mm debate has been raging since at least 1911 and shows no sigh of stopping. [/quote']

 

It has stopped everywhere but internet boards where people such as yourself can still be found clinging to discredited ideas.

[Toadmaster]

Re: Firearms granularity

 

It has stopped everywhere but internet boards where people such as yourself can still be found clinging to discredited ideas.

 

Really so which one won, looks to me like both are still alive and kicking with 9mm remaining a popular military and police handgun but .45 hanging on showing up in the hands of elite forces, of course there is the .40 for people who can't make up their mind.

 

Do you have to be snotty about everything, it must be nice to be all knowing. You obviously have spent some time researching you ideas so I thought there might be a point in discussing them with you, I guess not. Good day sir, nice talking with you.

[Fox1]

Re: Firearms granularity

 

Really so which one won' date=' looks to me like both are still alive and kicking with 9mm remaining a popular military and police handgun but .45 hanging on showing up in the hands of elite forces, of course there is the .40 for people who can't make up their mind.[/quote']

 

The rule is simple, use the most (i.e. largest caliber that meets min. penetration requirements) weapon that you can comfortable fire.

 

Not everyone can handled a .45, not everyone can handle a .40 S&W. Almost anyone can handle the wimpy 9mm.

 

No single creditable group states otherwise. Not the FBI, not the IBW, not the US military.

 

Currently use of 9mm continues mostly due to expense of changing weapons, a percieved need to provide weapons usable by small frame men and women, and in some cases- political agreement.

[ghost-angel]

Re: Firearms granularity

 

Fox1,

 

You'd almost swung me over to argue on your side of the fence.

 

Except for the fact that you're a jerk and can't sperate a discussion of rules, rule variations and how to handle effects in a game from personal attacks.

 

Your beligerant attitude marks you as a child, a well researched and possibly accurate child. But still a child. I get more intelligent conversation from 3 year olds.

 

Don't bother to reply - you're being ignored.

 

Just pointing out you might have a better chance of convincing people of your ideas if you dropped the "holier than thou" attitude and discussed topic without insulting anyone.

[prestidigitator]

Re: Firearms granularity

 

In any case' date=' at the very least, about a dozen different weapons may be appropriate for a modern campaign: concealable pistol, pistol, revolver, silenced pistol, heavy pistol, sniper rifle, hunting rifle, antimateriel rifle, assault rifle, submachine gun, machine gun, shotgun, combat shotgun, etcetera. All of those broad categories I mention are very distinct and each can serve very differently in different capacities.[/quote']

One of the cool things about the 2nd edition World of Darkness core books is that their weapon charts gave stats for broad groups of weapons, and then gave examples of weapons that fit into each group. The biggest mistake was putting it all into one chart, because players then get the impression that the statistics given are for the particular example weapon. I thought the general approach was a good one, even if the delivery stunk. Having stats for an entire category of weapons makes a lot of sense to me, especially in Hero; a +1 on the attack roll or +1 DC just feels like a pretty large difference in the system. Too large to use in differentiating one light pistol from another, for example. That's my take, anyway.

[Fox1]

Re: Firearms granularity

 

Having stats for an entire category of weapons makes a lot of sense to me' date=' especially in Hero; a +1 on the attack roll or +1 DC just feels like a pretty large difference in the system. Too large to use in differentiating one light pistol from another, for example. That's my take, anyway.[/quote']

 

I believe this problem in HERO was the whole reason the original poster created the thread.

 

For myself it's a good thing that one can show the damage differences between weapons with more than just a DC difference, if I hadn't developed my house rules for such- I wouldn't be playing HERO today.

[Black Omega]

Re: Firearms granularity

 

I just stumbled in here, but interesting discussion. Some good, informative webpages as well. for me it would so depend on the game. For four color Champions, most military hardware wouldn't be much use against super heros and villains. For my upcoming human level game, I want a more cinematic feel, so I'll probably stick with the book results instead of bumping up the damage from weapons.

[Sir Ofeelya]

Re: Firearms granularity

 

The trouble with being a new member you come in late to all the good discussions.

 

In my Sci-Fi games (2300AD for example), most guns are douign 2d6-1 to 3d6 K. Almost all Assault Rifles are doing 2d6+1 K. If you roll a 2 then it was a nick, if you roll a 12 you hit something important. The difference between different calibres is hardly important when the range of damage is 2-12, 3-18, 4-24 etc etc.

 

Cheers

Brian

[archermoo]

Re: Firearms granularity

 

The trouble with being a new member you come in late to all the good discussions.

 

In my Sci-Fi games (2300AD for example), most guns are douign 2d6-1 to 3d6 K. Almost all Assault Rifles are doing 2d6+1 K. If you roll a 2 then it was a nick, if you roll a 12 you hit something important. The difference between different calibres is hardly important when the range of damage is 2-12, 3-18, 4-24 etc etc.

 

Cheers

Brian

 

That would be much more true if the ranges were linear (which I will grant is the case with KAs up to 25 or 30 DCs). However the fact that damage ranges that are on a bell curve overlap is considerably less important. Can a .22LR do as much damage to someone as a .45ACP? Certainly. But on average a .45ACP does much more. I think the Hero system does a decent job at modeling this.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Firearms granularity

 

Disclaimer: I have not read the whole thread, so sorry if someone has already mentioned this:

 

I know nothing about firearms but I know a little phyics and biology and it seems to me that the reason we have variable weapon damage is not because we can't be sure how much energy a bullet is carrying but because what really matters is where it hits.

 

So, for a granular approach in games using hit locations (or see below) why not buy bullets by the point of damage?

 

Based on an average roll of 3.5 for 1d6, 1 point of damage would cost 4.25 points, or close to, but I'd probably stick with standard damage and simply run with 1 point of killing damage costs 5 points, or 1 point per DC, in effect.

 

That way you know what BODY damage a gun will do if it hits a target, in terms of energy delivered and 'stopping power' but the actual result is still random because it is all going to be down to where the shot hits: a head shot would do maximum damage (as if you'd rolled and got all 6s) and a hand shot will do something very like minumum damage.

 

I mentioned 'see below' - this is it. Even if you don't use hit locations per se, you can still use the hit location chart to randomise damage, just don't necessarily tie the damage to a particular location, OR you could randomise the damage to an extent: roll a normal die and on a 1, halve damage after defences, on 2-5, leave it as it is, and on a 6, double it after defences. Roll the stun multiplier as normal, if you use this variant.

 

You'd only randomise damage against complex/living targets - as the damage variation depends on whether or not you hit a vital spot and the inanimate rarely have them.

[archermoo]

Re: Firearms granularity

 

Disclaimer: I have not read the whole thread' date=' so sorry if someone has already mentioned this:[/center']

 

I know nothing about firearms but I know a little phyics and biology and it seems to me that the reason we have variable weapon damage is not because we can't be sure how much energy a bullet is carrying but because what really matters is where it hits.

 

So, for a granular approach in games using hit locations (or see below) why not buy bullets by the point of damage?

 

Based on an average roll of 3.5 for 1d6, 1 point of damage would cost 4.25 points, or close to, but I'd probably stick with standard damage and simply run with 1 point of killing damage costs 5 points, or 1 point per DC, in effect.

 

That way you know what BODY damage a gun will do if it hits a target, in terms of energy delivered and 'stopping power' but the actual result is still random because it is all going to be down to where the shot hits: a head shot would do maximum damage (as if you'd rolled and got all 6s) and a hand shot will do something very like minumum damage.

 

I mentioned 'see below' - this is it. Even if you don't use hit locations per se, you can still use the hit location chart to randomise damage, just don't necessarily tie the damage to a particular location, OR you could randomise the damage to an extent: roll a normal die and on a 1, halve damage after defences, on 2-5, leave it as it is, and on a 6, double it after defences. Roll the stun multiplier as normal, if you use this variant.

 

You'd only randomise damage against complex/living targets - as the damage variation depends on whether or not you hit a vital spot and the inanimate rarely have them.

 

Except that doesn't take into account another variable: How "cleanly" you hit. Did the bullet just graze, or did it penetrate solidly? Grazing someone to the head would do less body and stun to them than a good solid shot to the hand would.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Firearms granularity

 

Except that doesn't take into account another variable: How "cleanly" you hit. Did the bullet just graze' date=' or did it penetrate solidly? Grazing someone to the head would do less body and stun to them than a good solid shot to the hand would.[/quote']

 

I don't like the hit location rules as a 2d6 RKA can do 24 BODY if it hits in the head, which is twice what you could roll on the dice alone - the rules don't add detail - they change how the game works.

 

I did consider the point you make and was going to suggest a slightly different approach to hit locations:

 

Use the current hit location table, If the multiplier would be x1, then roll 1d6, on a 1, halve the damage, on a 6, double it. If the damage location indicates a better than x1 multiplier, roll 1d6 and on 1 it does half damge, on 2-3 it does 1x damage, on 4-5 it does x1.5 damge ond on 6 it does 2x damage. If the multiplier would be less than x1, roll 1d6 and on 1-4 it does 1/2 damage and on 5-6 it does 1x damage.

 

Seems a bit complicated though, although it retains the 'damage within possible range' advantage.

[Pattern Ghost]

Re: Firearms granularity

 

I don't like the hit location rules as a 2d6 RKA can do 24 BODY if it hits in the head, which is twice what you could roll on the dice alone - the rules don't add detail - they change how the game works.

 

 

Head shots should HURT, though. Of course, you have the low roll possible of 4 BODY, which isn't too bad, maybe a case of the bullet whizzing around the inside of the skull and not hitting too much gray stuff. It can happen. So can the 24 Body, head exploding like a melon type damage.

 

Now, I'm assuming that 2d6 is coming out of a rifle at the very least, so I don't see a big problem with the multiplier in that case.