Ninja Stealth Assassination

[Anthony]

Originally Posted by blacksmith

What about in hard organs like the liver or kidneys? I would think that hydrostatic shock would bust them up pretty good, leading to more bleeding and the like.

Hydrostatic shock will not, to any meaningful degree, damage tissues near the bullet, which is the classic 'hydrostatic shock'. Overpressure caused by hydrodynamic effects may cause anything relatively sealed and relatively incapable of stretching to rupture, assuming the object is hit directly (a near miss has no significant effect). I believe the brain and the liver both qualify.

[DouglasCole]

Originally Posted by blacksmith

What about in hard organs like the liver or kidneys? I would think that hydrostatic shock would bust them up pretty good, leading to more bleeding and the like.

The effect here is not "hydrostatic shock," but rather a high energy dump into inelastic tissue.

No one will argue that high velocity projectile plus inelastic tissue equals big bloody mess. But the effect is emphatically NOT due to a shock wave.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrostatic_shock

Wiki is not an authoritative source. But the information provided in this useful summary is good enough (and I've read some of the original literature) that I don't feel too bad linking to it.

Here's a better document, in any case http://www.firearmstactical.com/pdf/fbi-hwfe.pdf

[blacksmith]

Ah I see, I was getting it confused with temperary wound cavity.

[Anthony]

Originally Posted by blacksmith

Ah I see, I was getting it confused with temperary wound cavity.

Not necessarily; the temporary wound cavity is caused by hydrostatic effects. The error in the 'hydrostatic shock' theory is the belief that temporary wound cavity is important.

[blacksmith]

Originally Posted by Anthony

Not necessarily; the temporary wound cavity is caused by hydrostatic effects. The error in the 'hydrostatic shock' theory is the belief that temporary wound cavity is important.

So it does not matter when you are dealing with inelastic hard organs like the liver? Normaly I can see why it would not be a big deal, but with hard organs like the liver kidneys and such are not damamged more than the permenant wound chanel would indicate?

[DouglasCole]

Originally Posted by blacksmith

So it does not matter when you are dealing with inelastic hard organs like the liver? Normaly I can see why it would not be a big deal, but with hard organs like the liver kidneys and such are not damamged more than the permenant wound chanel would indicate?

they are, it's just not "hydrostatic shock."

Inelastic tissues like the liver are very, very badly damaged by high velocity projectiles.

For pistols, which are, by and large, low velocity, this isn't really a big deal. For rifles, it can be.

http://www.recguns.com/Sources/IVF1.html As a bullet enters tissue, it creates a permanent, "crush," cavity and a temporary cavity, the latter of which is produced by cavitation. The bullet certainly destroys tissue in the permanent cavity. It damages tissue affected by the temporary cavity only if such tissue is stretched beyond its elastic limit. Unfortunately, many tissues of the body are very tolerant of such stretching. In addition, many of the vital structures that must be damaged by the bullet are deep within the body. A bullet, to be effective, must penetrate enough to reach these vital structures. The problem is compounded by the fact that many times a bullet enters the torso at an odd angle or must pass through an intermediate target, such as an arm, before reaching the torso at all. Drawing on his experience as a combat surgeon and his research into wound ballistics, Fackler observes the following:

Cavitation can be dramatic in tissue simulants, but many body tissues are flexible and elastic. In the living animal, it has been shown that much of the energy spent in forming the temporary cavity can be absorbed with little residual damage. The more elastic tissues--bowel wall, lung--and muscle suffer minimal permanent disruption compared to the relatively inelastic liver. Large blood vessels are also quite elastic and tolerate temporary cavity displacement well. Removal of a part of their wall by direct bullet impact however, is not well tolerated.

Rapid blood loss from bullet holes is the proven incapacitation mechanism from small arms. Other than disruption of the brain or cervical spinal cord, it is the only reliable mechanism available to the handgun user.

Insufficient penetration depth to reach and disrupt the body's major blood vessels is the greatest deficiency of the light--under 120 grains (7.8g) in .38 calibre--handgun bullet. The large blood vessels--aorta and vena cava--are located in the back of the abdominal cavity. Their average distance from the front of the abdomen is about 15cm. [3]


Finally, one should note that there is an important difference between handgun cartridges and powerful rifle cartridges. While the temporary cavity of a handgun bullet is not usually large enough to stretch tissues beyond their elastic limits, the temporary cavity of a rifle bullet is usually large enough to do so. [4] This is one reason why a rifle is vastly preferable to a pistol in a gunfight. Each round can be much, much more destructive.

[Broken Hope]

My point wasn't what kind of shock, or what exactly a direct wound from a high caliber rifle entails. It was that even with the power (and in game terms the high dice roll) of modern firearms, most humans don't die instantly from a gunshot wound in real life. They may expire seconds afterwards, or linger for minutes, hours, or even days (President McKinley lingered on for 8 days after an assassin shot him twice at point blank.) And by "alive" I mean life functions of the body remain, and possibly, but not always, brain activity. As with Kennedy, his heart and organs were still functioning, and they didn't declare him dead until after they got him to the hospital. With the back part of his head missing, how likely was it he would have been able to survive and recover?

In my mind, this is part of what makes espionage and ninja type games fun, the sneaking around, and the chance that you might not get that sentry in the first blow. Bottom line to what I'm trying to convey here though is that instant death should be rare. Just ignore the damage and look to reality. If the GM has the sentry turn and draw his sword while yelling for his comrads, ask him to stop a moment and explain how this is possible after being turned into a Pez dispenser. Even if he does still have HP, he should follow logic. Somewhere in the Campaigns book I remember reading something to the effect of being point blank to a grenade is still being point blank to a grenade no matter what the dice roll. In my games, unless there's a good reason (concealed armor, supernatural power like DR) if a PC manages to ambush the main villain and pick him off hands down with a sniper shot or blade to the neck from behind, I let him have it.

[DanHoward]

This is slightly off topic but there is some debate as to how "instant" death by decapitation is. Dr Beaurieux reports his observations with a man named Languille, guillotined at 5:30am on 28 June 1905:

I consider it essential for you to know that Languille displayed an extraordinary sang-froid and even courage from the moment when he was told, that his last hour had come, until the moment when he walked firmly to the scaffold. It may well be, in fact, that the conditions for observation, and consequently the phenomena, differ greatly according to whether the condemned persons retain all their sang-froid and are fully in control of themselves, or whether they are in such state of physical and mental prostration that they have to be carried to the place of execution, and are already half-dead, and as though paralysed by the appalling anguish of the fatal instant.

The head fell on the severed surface of the neck and I did not therefore have to take it up in my hands, as all the newspapers have vied with each other in repeating; I was not obliged even to touch it in order to set it upright. Chance served me well for the observation, which I wished to make.

Here, then, is what I was able to note immediately after the decapitation: the eyelids and lips of the guillotined man worked in irregularly rhythmic contractions for about five or six seconds. This phenomenon has been remarked by all those finding themselves in the same conditions as myself for observing what happens after the severing of the neck...

I waited for several seconds. The spasmodic movements ceased. The face relaxed, the lids half closed on the eyeballs, leaving only the white of the conjunctiva visible, exactly as in the dying whom we have occasion to see every day in the exercise of our profession, or as in those just dead. It was then that I called in a strong, sharp voice: "Languille!" I saw the eyelids slowly lift up, without any spasmodic contractions - I insist advisedly on this peculiarity - but with an even movement, quite distinct and normal, such as happens in everyday life, with people awakened or torn from their thoughts. Next Languille's eyes very definitely fixed themselves on mine and the pupils focused themselves. I was not, then, dealing with the sort of vague dull look without any expression, that can be observed any day in dying people to whom one speaks: I was dealing with undeniably living eyes which were looking at me. After several seconds, the eyelids closed again, slowly and evenly, and the head took on the same appearance as it had had before I called out.

It was at that point that I called out again and, once more, without any spasm, slowly, the eyelids lifted and undeniably living eyes fixed themselves on mine with perhaps even more penetration than the first time. The there was a further closing of the eyelids, but now less complete. I attempted the effect of a third call; there was no further movement - and the eyes took on the glazed look which they have in the dead.

I have just recounted to you with rigorous exactness what I was able to observe. The whole thing had lasted 25 to 30 seconds.

[Anthony]

Originally Posted by DanHoward

This is slightly off topic but there is some debate as to how "instant" death by decapitation is.

It's presumably not significantly more instant than simply severing the major arteries of the neck -- the brain won't shut down until enough blood runs out, which takes a few seconds, and is capable of some minimal level of function even without oxygen, though it probably isn't at the level of consciousness.

[Rupert]

Originally Posted by Agemegos

I guess there are different techniques.

The way I was taught did not involve reaching around the neck to stab from the left.

I was taught to hold the knife in a overhand grip, and to pull the sentry's head back and to the left with my left hand, then to stab the knife into the right side of his lower back, then to stab the knife into the right side of his neck, then to push the knife edge-first away from me with a punching motion.

Another couple of methods:

1) Pull the head to one side and push the knife down beside the neck into the chest cavity, and then give it a good twist.

2) Pull the chin up and back, exposing the neck and thrust down into the chest between the collar bones, and then twist/pvot the blade.

Both methods work best with decent blade lengths, and both rely on cutting the massive veins and arteries that connect to the heart, resulting in the victim bleeding out very quickly (and mostly into the lungs). This is much cleaner than cutting the neck through, but the victim probably won't lose conciousness quite as fast, which may be a bad thing.

If you are good and lucky a thin blade into the base of the skull is pretty clean and low fuss, but if you screw it up all you'll have done is **** off the would-be victim.

A Sykes-Fairbairn has a 153mm blade. A US Marines KA-BAR has a 7" (178mm) blade. A Gerber Mark II is about the same length as a Sykes-Fairbairn. What little neck I have these days is 460mm around and about (this is hard to measure) 135mm through from side to side.

I remember seeing a discussion of knife fighting and quick resolution once, and it was pointed out that 'no neck' types are going to be hard to finish with attacks to the neck (this assumes they know they're in a fight), and that even hits to the eye aren't as reliable as you'd think because many people don't really feel pain while in a fight and damage to the forebrain isn't instantly fatal, and nor is the forebrain very important for fighting.