Call for Playtesters: GURPS Guns

[Refplace]

Originally Posted by whswhs

It sounds like a fascinating project. But though I'm interested in the physics of guns, and have done some reading about it, I don't know enough to be a productive contributor, and I certainly don't know the real world performance stats for firearms. But I look forward to seeing the results!

A loot of guns can be looked up, so your research skills should be useful here.
I did this for a MH campaign and you can get good detail often just by going to the manufacturers website. Older models may require more digging but I often found multiple sources with the stats I was looking for.

[Gigermann]

Don't suppose one of these for "vehicles" is in the works as well? ;)

[whswhs]

Originally Posted by Refplace

A loot of guns can be looked up, so your research skills should be useful here.
I did this for a MH campaign and you can get good detail often just by going to the manufacturers website. Older models may require more digging but I often found multiple sources with the stats I was looking for.

I mostly did firearms research for GURPS Low-Tech, where I was looking at things like horse pistols and muskets. Not the sort of thing that have manufacturers' websites. And I'm not sure where to look for the kind of information David would be relying on.

And while I do know how to do research, someone who actually knows about firearms would have a big head start.

[Proteus]

Originally Posted by Gigermann

Don't suppose one of these for "vehicles" is in the works as well? ;)

That's when you want David Pulver's article "Describing Vehicles" from Pyramid #3/120: Alternate GURPS V.

[Kromm]

Originally Posted by Icelander

When you say 'up to howitzers', would that include autocannon and cannon?

You would want to verify it with David, but I did thoroughly review the first draft and I saw nothing that would prevent adaptation of any of the things you listed, provided that you could find good data. The gaps in this system are:

1. TL9-12, TL(x+y), and superscience. The system covers real-world TL3-8, and fiction that apes it.
2. Rockets, missiles, torpedoes, mines, bombs, beam weapons, catapults, and anything else that doesn't release potential energy – just about always chemical – to push a projectile down and out of a barrel.
3. De novo design of totally random weapons that might technically not fall afoul of the previous two points. The system assumes designs within the parameters of real-world engineering.

However, size is not an issue. In principle, anything from a .25 ACP holdout pistol up to a 16" gun shouldn't even be a challenge.

Originally Posted by acrosome

Wow, I would be so interested in this, except that there is no way that I could make any sort of time commitment right now. I have all listed titles and more, as well as a small library of (often obscure) firearms data.

If you could find time even to serve as the terse AI that replies to "What is the muzzle velocity of . . .?"-type questions, without any other contribution, I think you'd be welcome and earn credit.

Originally Posted by Gigermann

Don't suppose one of these for "vehicles" is in the works as well? ;)

Not that I know of. Vehicles are a whole lot more diverse than guns. Going back to my gaps in the system comments, they'd make "rockets, missiles, torpedoes, mines, bombs, beam weapons, catapults, and anything else that doesn't release potential energy – just about always chemical – to push a projectile down and out of a barrel" look like the very tiny tip of a massive iceberg.

[Icelander]

Originally Posted by Kromm

You would want to verify it with David, but I did thoroughly review the first draft and I saw nothing that would prevent adaptation of any of the things you listed, provided that you could find good data. The gaps in this system are:

1. TL9-12, TL(x+y), and superscience. The system covers real-world TL3-8, and fiction that apes it.
2. Rockets, missiles, torpedoes, mines, bombs, beam weapons, catapults, and anything else that doesn't release potential energy – just about always chemical – to push a projectile down and out of a barrel.
3. De novo design of totally random weapons that might technically not fall afoul of the previous two points. The system assumes designs within the parameters of real-world engineering.

However, size is not an issue. In principle, anything from a .25 ACP holdout pistol up to a 16" gun shouldn't even be a challenge.

My concern here is that as 'guns' get bigger in the real world, the tendency is for them to have the ability to fire APHEX, SAPHE or other types of explosive warheads, which demands the ability to figure out not only explosive damage, but the damage of potential fragments.

I really, really hope that there's going to be some support for that, because while we have the stats for .50 BMG, 14.5×114mm and a couple of 20mm explosive rounds in GURPS High-Tech, my current 'system' for designing any bigger explosive rounds is basically 'compare to currently published ones and guess'.

[Kromm]

Originally Posted by Icelander

My concern here is that as 'guns' get bigger in the real world, the tendency is for them to have the ability to fire APHEX, SAPHE or other types of explosive warheads, which demands the ability to figure out not only explosive damage, but the damage of potential fragments.

I really, really hope that there's going to be some support for that, because while we have the stats for .50 BMG, 14.5×114mm and a couple of 20mm explosive rounds in GURPS High-Tech, my current 'system' for designing any bigger explosive rounds is basically 'compare to currently published ones and guess'.

There's a whole chapter on ammunition types, including everything that goes boom or bursts into a jillion bits.

[Icelander]

Originally Posted by Kromm

There's a whole chapter on ammunition types, including everything that goes boom or bursts into a jillion bits.

My joy is palpable and my day is saved.

[Blind Mapmaker]

This is really not my kettle of fish, but since it's a David Pulver book, I'll still buy the critter once it's finished. All the best to the playtesters (and the author)!

Not sure about the title. It has a lot of potential to confuse people who are just looking for more guns or gun-play. Something like Adaptations: Gun Stats might have been better if this is to be a how-to-guide.

[Kromm]

Working titles are working titles . . . If David decides, at the end of the playtest, that GURPS Adapting Guns or whatever would be better, it'd be simple to change in our databases and notes. It's only after the cover is designed that we'd object to a title change.