Quote:
Originally Posted by Rupert
My current game uses RAW, pretty much. No caps, only aimed shots hit the eyes or vitals, no bleeding (too much paperwork) except in exceptional circumstances (such as a severed limb and no first aid at all).
If I used random Vitals hits I'd not cap them, or would apply the multiplier after the cap (to be consistent with all other caps, if nothing else), and I'd use the bleeding rules (with penalties based on the full, uncapped and multiplied damage), but that would be for a different game than my current 'vaguely 'realistic' but low book-keeping' Traveller game that's no longer so realistic due to 800-900 point characters.
|
Cool cheers
The reason I was asking about weather you allow vitals to be separately targeted is if the argument is rifles do so much damage (uncapped) to the torso because that represents the fact that they are more likely to hit vitals within the torso due to wound size etc. Hitting vitals would appear to already be included in the basic damage roll. So would allowing them to directly target the vitals and then giving x3 damage multiplier be doubling up?
I.e if a 7.62 doing 24 point of damage is inferred to already be hitting a vital compared to 9mm doing 9, should that same 7.62 do 24x3 = 72 when it specifically hits a vital?
Anyway just a theoretical question that popped into my head reading your post it's not important to the thread, and at the end of the day hitting something vital with a battle rifle should have serious consequences!
and as you say not that relevant to your campaign.