05-26-2009, 10:25 AM | #31 | |
Doctor of GURPS Ballistics
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Lakeville, MN
|
Re: Shouldn't the damage inflicted by firearms be fixed?
Quote:
It produces results closer to the real world, though, in that 6d bullet hitting 3d armor will do more than 3d damage, the quadrature result of just over 5d is closer to the truth, usually.
__________________
My blog:Gaming Ballistic, LLC My Store: Gaming Ballistic on Shopify My Patreon: Gaming Ballistic on Patreon |
|
05-26-2009, 12:55 PM | #32 | |
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Portland, Oregon
|
Re: Shouldn't the damage inflicted by firearms be fixed?
Quote:
Musket balls have low velocity which, I think, decreases sharply. The chief damage is from mass, but the damage from that was so great that anyone hit fairly except in a limb, might pretty well be given up on. Of course that was in part the local surgery which consisted of a saw and a branding iron(only wusses ask for opium during this!) for hits on a limb, and "prepare to meet thy maker" for hits in the abdomen. The chest was different as ribs provide natural armor. But in any case musket balls were big and in any case didn't have a jacket so might be considered equiv to dum-dums. Americans, until the widespread use of rifling, had a fondness for "buck and ball" which was one bullet and three buckshot. That would probably reduce range, but absolute range was far greater then effective range with muskets anyway. Americans also sometimes carried loose powder and made their own cartridges(sometimes using coat buttons for bullets), at least in the War of Independence which was something of an ad-hoc war at times. That is why they are portrayed carrying powder horns. Riflemen of course were virtuosos(or thought themselves such) and might well prefer loose powder to cartridges as they could satisfy their individual preferences. I don't think loose powder was normal in most armies. But it adds randomness perhaps, though it is not clear that a soldier would necessarily measure out the powder less efficiently then a pre-industrial arsenal.
__________________
"The navy could probably win a war without coffee but would prefer not to try"-Samuel Eliot Morrison |
|
05-26-2009, 01:33 PM | #33 |
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Berkeley, CA
|
Re: Shouldn't the damage inflicted by firearms be fixed?
Given the randomness of real-world reactions to damage, it would be acceptable to have a table reading 'X energy -> roll Y vs injury'.
|
05-28-2009, 09:03 PM | #34 |
Join Date: Sep 2007
|
Re: Shouldn't the damage inflicted by firearms be fixed?
My step-dad once advised me to aim a gun at a car's tire if you could; any given shot might go through a windshield, but it could bounce right off, too.
|
05-28-2009, 10:08 PM | #35 |
Stick in the Mud
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Rural Utah
|
Re: Shouldn't the damage inflicted by firearms be fixed?
That is why the command fire technique was developed. Two people firing at the window at the same time. One will likely be deflected slightly but will also shatter the glass and the second bullet will pass through with minimal change in flight path.
__________________
MIB #1457 |
05-29-2009, 09:44 AM | #36 | |
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Portland, Oregon
|
Re: Shouldn't the damage inflicted by firearms be fixed?
Quote:
In any case it is quite true. Your target might even survive with minimal injury but be frightened into submission and in any case too busy saving his car to be on guard when you have your gun pointed at him when he stops. Which is of course a more elegant display of prowess then simply killing him.
__________________
"The navy could probably win a war without coffee but would prefer not to try"-Samuel Eliot Morrison |
|
05-29-2009, 11:58 AM | #37 |
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Berkeley, CA
|
Re: Shouldn't the damage inflicted by firearms be fixed?
Or you can shoot several times. You just need a powerful enough round that it actually creates a large hole in the windshield. Note that windshield glass is different from all other glass in most cars -- the windshield glass is designed to stay intact (with a hole in it), the other glass is designed to shatter into small cubes.
|
05-29-2009, 06:03 PM | #38 | |
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Jeffersonville, Ind.
|
Re: Shouldn't the damage inflicted by firearms be fixed?
I think RAW works for damage since, looking in High Tech, an ordinary TL8 armor vest has 12DR, which is plenty to stop a .45 every time, but won't always stop a 9mm and have a decent chance of stopping a .357 on an average roll. Looking at the real life specs for a Type II and Type III vest that's a perfectly reasonable result.
__________________
The user formerly known as ciaran_skye. __________________ Quirks: Doesn't proofread forum posts before clicking "Submit". [-1] Quote:
|
|
05-29-2009, 06:05 PM | #39 | |
Join Date: Jan 2008
|
Re: Shouldn't the damage inflicted by firearms be fixed?
Quote:
-Max |
|
05-29-2009, 07:02 PM | #40 | |
"Gimme 18 minutes . . ."
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Albuquerque, NM
|
Re: Shouldn't the damage inflicted by firearms be fixed?
Quote:
|
|
Tags |
guns |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|