Arrow Damage

[Gary]

Why is arrow damage roughly comparable to handgun damage?

 

According to numerous posters, Hero operates on a logrithmic damage system where each additional DC = roughly 2 times kinetic energy.

 

A 9 mm pistol bullet has roughly 450-500 joules of energy and is rated as 1d6+1 damage in the book. However, arrows usually range from about 20 joules for a reed arrow from a light bow, to a little over 100 joules from an arrow from a heavy longbow. That would seem to imply that arrow damages should only range from 1 pip to 1/2d6.

 

Anything wrong with my reasoning?

[Monolith]

I think the only real reasoning involved is the fact that arrows kill within their respective genres just as easily guns kill within theirs. As with the conversations we once had in the Star Hero thread, I do not believe you should be trying to compare apples to orange. I think you are just supposed to look at cause and effect. People get shot with bows, people die. People get shot with guns, people die. Trying to lock it all into a single mathematical is well outside of what the influence of the genres are all about, IMO.

[Bartman]

Re: Arrow Damage

 

Originally posted by Gary

Why is arrow damage roughly comparable to handgun damage?

 

According to numerous posters, Hero operates on a logrithmic damage system where each additional DC = roughly 2 times kinetic energy.

 

A 9 mm pistol bullet has roughly 450-500 joules of energy and is rated as 1d6+1 damage in the book. However, arrows usually range from about 20 joules for a reed arrow from a light bow, to a little over 100 joules from an arrow from a heavy longbow. That would seem to imply that arrow damages should only range from 1 pip to 1/2d6.

 

Anything wrong with my reasoning?

 

Not that I can see, but I am one of the nuttier logrithmic fanatics

 

These numbers are probably right on for someone playing a 'realisitic' fantasy campaign. A quick look at ancient battles shows pretty quickly that the average injury in battle was not very likely to kill a person. Well at least not quickly. Someone was far more likely to die from infections then the wound itself. And people did take multiple wounds and survive.

 

However the extra DCs don't bother me much in these cases due to the fact that many arrows/quarrels should probably have some AP or penetrating to reflect the arrowhead design. Replacing these advantages with a few extra DCs seems reasonable in this case for genre reasons Monolith mentioned

[Pattern Ghost]

I see one flaw in the reasoning: Damage from some arrows can greatly exceed that from any non-magnum handgun. A broadhead arrow (and this would probably include a lot of medieval arrow designs as well as modern) makes a nasty, nasty wound channel. Energy is not the only factor in wounding by a long shot. Frankly, I'd rather be shot by a 9mm than a hunting arrow any day.

 

I'd say bows should range from the fairly light at around 1d6 (or even less) to the heavier longbows and modern bows with broadheads at up to 2d6. This doesn't have to do with energy calculations, but with the end results. You get hit in a COM hit with an arrow, and you've got a life-threatening wound. 1/2d6 just won't get you there, even against an unarmored normal. Definately not against a bear or other large game that's regularly taken with bows and has a high body and possible resistant defenses (I'd say a bear has to have at least 2 or 3 rPD from the fur and fat layers, not to mention muscles. Wild boars, even more armor.)

[BNakagawa]

A bullet might pass completely through a body, imparting less than 100% of its kinetic energy. This scenario is somewhat less likely for an arrow. (especially a broadhead)

 

I'm not very interested in getting hit with either, really. I don't care what the writeup says.

[Vondy]

Not all wound factors for projectile weapons are the result of joules of energy. The most common wound factors that are taken into account are:

 

Permanent Cavity (Wound Size)

Temporary Cavity (From Stretching)

Blood Loss (Wound Placement)

Organ or Nervous System Damage (Wound Placement Part II)

 

A 9mm handgun (not the most lethal bullet in the world) is fast and would create more temporary cavity damage than an arrow, but most arrow heads are much bigger and would create more permanent cavity damage. A rifle is probably a better comparison than a handgun (unless its a much larger round, such as a .45 or .44).

 

As for blood loss and organ/nervous system damage - thats all placement, though weapons that do more permanent cavity damage have better odds in hitting something important (arteries, spines, brains, hearts).

 

Go to a sporting goods store and set a deer hunting arrow head down next to a 9mm round. The advantages of each will become abundantly clear. A deer hunting arrown is a razor X almost an inch across, a 9mm is tiny by comparison. Many war arrow heads were comprable to modern hunting arrows in dimension, if not material quality.

 

Wounds are complicated things - they aren't easily pigeon holed into joules.

[Gary]

All these factors would indeed make arrows more lethal than their raw joules would indicate, but shouldn't this mean that arrows and bolts should receive a reduced penetration limitation? After all, when trying to penetrate armor, raw energy and surface area of impact are the only real relevant factors. A 9 mm should punch through chainmail or platemail a lot better than any arrow or bolt.

 

Also no matter how the arrow is shaped, it's kinda hard to believe that a 100 joule arrow will do 2d6 damage while a 500 joule bullet will do 1d6+1 damage. The shape of the arrow can only do so much.

[Pattern Ghost]

I don't believe a 9mm has the capability of doing much against either type of armor, really. A hyper velocity 22 would be better against chainmail.

[Vondy]

Its not so much shape as size. Its the same reason larger bullets are better (increased powder and velocity notwithstanding). They create bigger permanent cavities and have a better chance of hitting something important.

 

As for penetration - material will be a critical factor. Most modern handgun bullets are made of a mixture of copper and tin (bronze) or lead that won't be very effective against armors made of iron/steel, whereas an iron/steel arrow head won't turn into mush when it hits iron/steel armor. We don't bother with harder bullets because most armor today - if worn at all (most people don't) - is discreet.

 

A 9mm round is also a bad choice because it doesn't have much mass (its an overrated round altogether and police departments are starting to recognize it. The FBI recently returned to the .45 and many departments are looking at the same, 10MM, or .40).

 

Bigger bullets would have a better change of carrying through, or causing blunt trauma to someone in chain, but I question how effective a fast bronze age projectile will be against a harder armor type. A steel jacketed round... now that's another issue.

[Gary]

Originally posted by Pattern Ghost

I don't believe a 9mm has the capability of doing much against either type of armor, really. A hyper velocity 22 would be better against chainmail.

 

That would be simulated by the fact that a 9mm damage is only 1d6+1 vs 6-8 def for chain or plate. However, a 2d6 arrow has a decent chance of doing body vs someone wearing the same armor even though it has only about 1/4 to 1/5 of the kinetic energy of the bullet.

[Gary]

Originally posted by D-Man

Its not so much shape as size. Its the same reason larger bullets are better (increased powder and velocity notwithstanding). They create bigger permanent cavities and have a better chance of hitting something important.

 

As for penetration - material will be a critical factor. Most modern handgun bullets are made of a mixture of copper and tin (bronze) or lead that won't be very effective against armors made of iron/steel, whereas an iron/steel arrow head won't turn into mush when it hits iron/steel armor. We don't bother with harder bullets because most armor today - if worn at all (most people don't) - is discreet.

 

A 9mm round is also a bad choice because it doesn't have much mass (its an overrated round altogether and police departments are starting to recognize it. The FBI recently returned to the .45 and many departments are looking at the same, 10MM, or .40).

 

Bigger bullets would have a better change of carrying through, or causing blunt trauma to someone in chain, but I question how effective a fast bronze age projectile will be against a harder armor type. A steel jacketed round... now that's another issue.

 

That's interesting. Are you saying that material strength makes so much difference that a 100 joule steel arrow head has significantly more armor penetration than a 500 joule bronze or lead bullet?

[Pattern Ghost]

I think we've gone from the subject of damage to armor penetration just a bit with these last few comments. Which is cool. So, let's look at it this way:

 

The broadhead will do more damage against an unarmored or lightly armored target than the 9mm. People do hunt bears with arrows, but nobody in their right mind would do it with a 9mm, right? So, how to model that? I tend to think bears just have a lot of body and a low amount of rDEF.

 

Now, against an armored target: A 9mm won't do much, it's got too low of a DC. Let's look at a rifle and a broadhead:

 

Let's say they're both 2d6K damage. Both weapons have enough oomph to punch through armor at that DC. However, if you build both with the Real Weapon limitation, you can just call the arrows Reduced Penetration vs. certain targets. They'd also be incapable at whittling away a wall to any great extent and other things they can't do, so that seems like the logical way to handle it.

[cutsleeve]

about 5 years ago i started to get into hunting and i was debating getting into bow hunting instead of rifle. So i study up on it a bit and i saw something interesting on a bow hunting show geared twords begginners they had a metal bucket full of sand and behind it a glass mirror.

 

They shot the bucket of sand with the rifle and it stopped the bullet the mirror was intact but there was a big hold in the bucket.

 

They took the same kind of set up and shot it with a recurve bow and the arrow went through the metal bucket broke the mirror and was poking out both sides of the bucket.

 

Take all that as you will thats just something i saw. all i do know is you can always get a bigger bullet you cant always get a bigger bow. and if that bucket had been an inche thick the arrow would have bounced off while the rifle round would still have penetrated.

 

Moral in my eyes. certain materials would provide differant forms of defence agaisnt differant forms of damage.

[cutsleeve]

no bears and arrows

 

i have to admit there are people who do hunt bear with arrows. theyre called idots. i wouldnt hunt a bear with anything less then a .44 magnum with a scope. even then it doesnt really matter what gun you use or what tool what matters is accuracy if you dont hit that bear in a nasty spot and kill it in one hit your gonna end up being Mr.Bears breakfast.

 

Thats why they made .50 caliber hunting rifles you get a lil more leway and a little more distance from you to the bear in case you only injure Mr.Bear.

 

sooooooo In case of brear bear id say thats accuracy not weapon type.

[Pattern Ghost]

Ever see a sportsman's archery competition? The accuracy is there with a bow, trust me. There are people who can take a rabbit on the run, and there are people who can hit the vitals of a bear. (They don't take rabbits on the hoof in the aforementioned contests, but do demonstrate some remarkable bowmanship skills.)

 

Personally, I think hunting bear with a .44 is insane, too. Especially anything bigger than a smallish black bear. Then again, hunting things that can kill you if you screw up is kind of silly. (I hunt at the grocery store. I have a 100% success rate at bagging my prey. =)

[Col. Orange]

[bLINKS]

 

So, to sum up, are we saying Arrows should be low DC AP attacks?

[Bartman]

Originally posted by Col. Orange

[bLINKS]

 

So, to sum up, are we saying Arrows should be low DC AP attacks?

 

I think we are saying that the real world is significantly more complicated than the Hero system. The energy of a weapon is a great starting point to determine the amount of damage it should do. But it doesn't take into account such things as the composition of the target. cutsleeve provided the great example of bucket of sand. In that case an arrow was able to easily pierce the sand while a bullet of unknown caliber wasn't. Kevlar is another good example. Kevlar does great against the 'blunt' attacks bullets do. But it does very poorly against cutting attacks. A good sharp broadheaded arrow will slice through Kevlar without losing any of its killing power.

 

To really properly model this you need to, not only give arrows a series of advantages and disadvantages, but you would also need to modify the bleeding, impairment and hit location rules to take into account the nature of the attack along the lines that D-Man points out. As I mentioned earlier, I for one am willing to forgo all this and just give the things a few extra DCs.

[Beetle]

Fie! There is nothing more complicated than HERO! Do you think the word "logrithmic" pops up in discussions of D20?

[Talon]

I think the better solution would be to limit armor so that it worked differently against different types of attacks. Plate armor not working well against bullets (despite being DEF 8 or whatever) and Kevlar not working well (as I'm given to understand) against arrows as examples.

 

This could be done in the existing system with Limitations...all you have to do is get everyone to agree on what the real-world effects are. (Muahahahaha! )

[austenandrews]

Eh, don't lose any sleep over real-world complexity. We're playing games here, not running scientific simulations.

 

-AA

[Monolith]

Originally posted by austenandrews

Eh, don't lose any sleep over real-world complexity. We're playing games here, not running scientific simulations.

Thank you. I could not have said it any better myself, even if I do say it in my sig file with every post.

[Bartman]

Originally posted by Beetle

Fie! There is nothing more complicated than HERO!

 

Says the lucky soul who has never played Phoenix Command. IIRC it had hit location charts that included 'second joint on left pinky.'

[cutsleeve]

rolemaster rolemaster rolemaster:D

[Vondy]

Originally posted by cutsleeve

rolemaster rolemaster rolemaster:D

 

Ah... Chartmaster!

[Gary]

It still boils down to 100 J = 2d6 RKA for arrows, while 450 J = 1d6+1 for a handgun, and 2000 J = 2d6+1 for an assault rifle.

 

The arrow should sacrifice something in terms of either fewer DC, or reduced penetration, no matter how the arrowhead is shaped or what material it's made of.