Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: Tzeentch tzeentch666@*********.net
Subject: Glazer or Glaser?
Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2000 15:49:55 -0700
I notice they flip-flop the spelling several times in the Ammunition and
Explosives chapter. Can I assume that "glazers" are supposed to really be
glaser safety rounds (and thus should be house ruled back to sanity?)

Ken
---------------------------
There's a war out there, old friend, a world war. And it's not about who's
got the most bullets, it's about who controls the information. What we see
and hear, how we work, what we think, it's all about the information!
Cosmo, 'Sneakers'
Message no. 2
From: vocenoctum@****.com vocenoctum@****.com
Subject: Glazer or Glaser?
Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2000 19:32:40 -0400
On Wed, 12 Apr 2000 15:49:55 -0700 "Tzeentch" <tzeentch666@*********.net>
writes:
> I notice they flip-flop the spelling several times in the Ammunition
> and
> Explosives chapter. Can I assume that "glazers" are supposed to
> really be
> glaser safety rounds (and thus should be house ruled back to
> sanity?)

I mentioned them in my reply to your initial review, basically, they just
describe them really bad.

Amend the description to read "Glazer rounds are PREFRAGMENTED rounds
with a thin metal jacket that BREAKS INTO Flechette (Shot really,
but)-like fragments upon impact."
That should correct it good enough, and the rules are good enough, even
though I (obviously) like mine better :-)

Vocenoctum
<http://members.xoom.com/vocenoctum>;

________________________________________________________________
YOU'RE PAYING TOO MUCH FOR THE INTERNET!
Juno now offers FREE Internet Access!
Try it today - there's no risk! For your FREE software, visit:
http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj.
Message no. 3
From: Tzeentch tzeentch666@*********.net
Subject: Glazer or Glaser?
Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2000 17:09:28 -0700
From: <vocenoctum@****.com>
> I mentioned them in my reply to your initial review, basically, they just
> describe them really bad.
>
> Amend the description to read "Glazer rounds are PREFRAGMENTED rounds
> with a thin metal jacket that BREAKS INTO Flechette (Shot really,
> but)-like fragments upon impact."
> That should correct it good enough, and the rules are good enough, even
> though I (obviously) like mine better :-)

Yah, I sent that then saw your response.

Sounds good to me I must note.

Ken
---------------------------
There's a war out there, old friend, a world war. And it's not about who's
got the most bullets, it's about who controls the information. What we see
and hear, how we work, what we think, it's all about the information!
Cosmo, 'Sneakers'
Message no. 4
From: Deirdre M. Brooks xenya@********.com
Subject: Glazer or Glaser?
Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2000 18:42:47 -0700
Tzeentch wrote:
>
> I notice they flip-flop the spelling several times in the Ammunition and
> Explosives chapter. Can I assume that "glazers" are supposed to really be
> glaser safety rounds (and thus should be house ruled back to sanity?)

Please describe for the class how glasers are supposed to work - not
Shadowrun mechanics, but "what happens when I shoot Gurth here with a
glaser. What will it do to his liver?"

No offense, Gurth. First name that came to mind. :-) Well, second - but
I don't want to get Bull angry with me.

--
Deird'Re M. Brooks | xenya@********.com | cam#9309026
Listowner: Aberrants_Worldwide, Fading_Suns_Games, TrinityRPG
"If you loved me, you'd all kill yourselves today."
-- Spider Jerusalem | http://www.teleport.com/~xenya
Message no. 5
From: Deirdre M. Brooks xenya@********.com
Subject: Glazer or Glaser?
Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2000 18:43:44 -0700
vocenoctum@****.com wrote:
>
> Amend the description to read "Glazer rounds are PREFRAGMENTED rounds
> with a thin metal jacket that BREAKS INTO Flechette (Shot really,
> but)-like fragments upon impact."
> That should correct it good enough, and the rules are good enough, even
> though I (obviously) like mine better :-)

That makes sense, and the mechanics fit the description nicely.

--
Deird'Re M. Brooks | xenya@********.com | cam#9309026
Listowner: Aberrants_Worldwide, Fading_Suns_Games, TrinityRPG
"If you loved me, you'd all kill yourselves today."
-- Spider Jerusalem | http://www.teleport.com/~xenya
Message no. 6
From: Gurth gurth@******.nl
Subject: Glazer or Glaser?
Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2000 12:31:29 +0200
According to Deirdre M. Brooks, at 18:42 on 12 Apr 00, the word on the
street was...

> Please describe for the class how glasers are supposed to work - not
> Shadowrun mechanics, but "what happens when I shoot Gurth here with a
> glaser. What will it do to his liver?"

IIRC, Glasers are thin-walled metal cups filled with small metal balls
(shot, basically) and a Teflon-like liquid. The round hits, the cup breaks
open, and the shot cuts into the target, giving up all its energy in a
very short amount of time.

The result is a really high chance of incapacitating the target, at the
expense that almost anything will stop the round -- even wallets have been
known to stop Glasers.

> No offense, Gurth. First name that came to mind. :-) Well, second - but
> I don't want to get Bull angry with me.

Ah, so you go for the guy who weighs about half of what Bull does,
thinking, "He won't be able to hurt me anyway"? :)

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
"There are millions of people who've got nothing to say to each other,
and who do it on mobile phones" --Ian Hislop, on Have I Got News For You
-> NAGEE Editor * ShadowRN GridSec * Unofficial Shadowrun Guru <-
->The Plastic Warriors Page: http://shadowrun.html.com/plasticwarriors/<-

GC3.1: GAT/! d-(dpu) s:- !a>? C+(++)@ UL P L+ E? W(++) N o? K- w+ O V? PS+
PE Y PGP- t(+) 5++ X++ R+++>$ tv+(++) b++@ DI? D+ G(++) e h! !r(---) y?
Incubated into the First Church of the Sqooshy Ball, 21-05-1998
Message no. 7
From: Deirdre M. Brooks xenya@********.com
Subject: Glazer or Glaser?
Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2000 04:02:12 -0700
Gurth wrote:
>
> According to Deirdre M. Brooks, at 18:42 on 12 Apr 00, the word on the
> street was...
>
> > Please describe for the class how glasers are supposed to work - not
> > Shadowrun mechanics, but "what happens when I shoot Gurth here with a
> > glaser. What will it do to his liver?"
>
> IIRC, Glasers are thin-walled metal cups filled with small metal balls
> (shot, basically) and a Teflon-like liquid. The round hits, the cup breaks
> open, and the shot cuts into the target, giving up all its energy in a
> very short amount of time.

Okay. That matches my recollections and fits the mechanics in CC nicely,
IMO.

> The result is a really high chance of incapacitating the target, at the
> expense that almost anything will stop the round -- even wallets have been
> known to stop Glasers.

Yeah. Of course, most people don't wear body armor. But they carry
wallets...hmm.

> > No offense, Gurth. First name that came to mind. :-) Well, second - but
> > I don't want to get Bull angry with me.
>
> Ah, so you go for the guy who weighs about half of what Bull does,
> thinking, "He won't be able to hurt me anyway"? :)

I know Capoeira!

--
Deird'Re M. Brooks | xenya@********.com | cam#9309026
Listowner: Aberrants_Worldwide, Fading_Suns_Games, TrinityRPG
"If you loved me, you'd all kill yourselves today."
-- Spider Jerusalem | http://www.teleport.com/~xenya
Message no. 8
From: kawaii trunks@********.org
Subject: Glazer or Glaser?
Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2000 08:49:56 -0400
----- Original Message -----
From: "Tzeentch" <tzeentch666@*********.net>


> I notice they flip-flop the spelling several times in the Ammunition and
> Explosives chapter. Can I assume that "glazers" are supposed to really be
> glaser safety rounds (and thus should be house ruled back to sanity?)
>
>

I was under the impression that glazers and glasers were two different type
of ammo? Glaser safety rounds and then the glazer rounds which is supposed
to be better for penetration? (which for some reason, reminds me of
something I've read in WoD..)

Ever lovable and always scrappy,
kawaii
Message no. 9
From: dbuehrer@******.carl.org dbuehrer@******.carl.org
Subject: Glazer or Glaser?
Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2000 08:30:13 -0600
Deirdre M. Brooks wrote:

>I know Capoeira!

Well, that goes a long way towards explaining your debating style ;)

To Life,
-Graht
http://www.users.uswest.net/~abaker3
--
"Today is the tomorrow you worried about yesterday ... and all is well."
Message no. 10
From: Gurth gurth@******.nl
Subject: Glazer or Glaser?
Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2000 20:12:45 +0200
According to Deirdre M. Brooks, at 4:02 on 13 Apr 00, the word on the
street was...

> > IIRC, Glasers are thin-walled metal cups filled with small metal balls
> > (shot, basically) and a Teflon-like liquid. The round hits, the cup breaks
> > open, and the shot cuts into the target, giving up all its energy in a
> > very short amount of time.
>
> Okay. That matches my recollections and fits the mechanics in CC nicely,
> IMO.

IMHO, only partly. The Power Level increase should only apply against
unarmored targets, IMHO, not against all targets. Although the doubling of
the highest armor rating can cut down the Power a lot, targets with little
armor (say, 1 or 2 points) will take about as much damage from a Glaser as
from regular ammo, which is not the intention behind the rules, it seems
to me.

> > even wallets have been known to stop Glasers
>
> Yeah. Of course, most people don't wear body armor. But they carry
> wallets...hmm.

In SR, I'd say most people do both :)

> > Ah, so you go for the guy who weighs about half of what Bull does,
> > thinking, "He won't be able to hurt me anyway"? :)
>
> I know Capoeira!

I need to get a firearm somewhere... *grin*

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
"There are millions of people who've got nothing to say to each other,
and who do it on mobile phones" --Ian Hislop, on Have I Got News For You
-> NAGEE Editor * ShadowRN GridSec * Unofficial Shadowrun Guru <-
->The Plastic Warriors Page: http://shadowrun.html.com/plasticwarriors/<-

GC3.1: GAT/! d-(dpu) s:- !a>? C+(++)@ UL P L+ E? W(++) N o? K- w+ O V? PS+
PE Y PGP- t(+) 5++ X++ R+++>$ tv+(++) b++@ DI? D+ G(++) e h! !r(---) y?
Incubated into the First Church of the Sqooshy Ball, 21-05-1998
Message no. 11
From: Sebastian Wiers m0ng005e@*********.com
Subject: Glazer or Glaser?
Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2000 12:09:50 -0500
Dierdre M Brooks (nice to see you here) said:
:> The result is a really high chance of incapacitating the target, at the
:> expense that almost anything will stop the round -- even wallets have
been
:> known to stop Glasers.
:
:Yeah. Of course, most people don't wear body armor. But they carry
:wallets...hmm.

What Gurth didn't mention is that this complete inablity to penetrate
even fairly thin materials is intentional to the design, and in fact is why
many people buy those types of bullets today. They are designed for /
marketed to folks who want to use a gun for home defense without having to
worry about what happens when a bullet goes through the living room wall /
cielling and into thier kids bedroom.
The fact that they (potentially) have excellent wounding properties is
mentioned (and an intended part of the design- they generally have an even
higher muzzle velocity than normal rounds) but it is not the main selling
point of the design. At least, not on paper.


Mongoose

_____________________________________________
NetZero - Defenders of the Free World
Click here for FREE Internet Access and Email
http://www.netzero.net/download/index.html
Message no. 12
From: abortion_engine abortion_engine@*******.com
Subject: Glazer or Glaser?
Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2000 15:19:17 -0400
From: "Sebastian Wiers" <m0ng005e@*********.com>
> Dierdre M Brooks (nice to see you here) said:
> :> The result is a really high chance of incapacitating the target, at the
> :> expense that almost anything will stop the round -- even wallets have
> been
> :> known to stop Glasers.
> :
> :Yeah. Of course, most people don't wear body armor. But they carry
> :wallets...hmm.
>
> What Gurth didn't mention is that this complete inablity to penetrate
> even fairly thin materials is intentional to the design, and in fact is
why
> many people buy those types of bullets today. They are designed for /
> marketed to folks who want to use a gun for home defense without having to
> worry about what happens when a bullet goes through the living room wall /
> cielling and into thier kids bedroom.

Yes, but not going through a 1/4 inch of drywall - the original intent - is
a far cry from not penetrating a leather coat, which has been seen. Rarely,
admittedly, but still...

Glasers are wonderful for people who are worried in cases of home defense of
hurting people in the next room, don't get me wrong. But they're not a
combat ammunition, and shouldn't be represented as such. Yes, when they hit,
their takedown rate nears 100%, but solid impact is by no means assured, and
if there is *any* armor present, that percentage dips a great deal.

> The fact that they (potentially) have excellent wounding properties is
> mentioned (and an intended part of the design- they generally have an even
> higher muzzle velocity than normal rounds) but it is not the main selling
> point of the design. At least, not on paper.

If you want superior wounding qualities, go with Cor-Bon +P and be done with
it.

My point - and there is one, I assure you - is that it seems FASA has set
these up as a combat round, and they're not.
Message no. 13
From: Tzeentch tzeentch666@*********.net
Subject: Glazer or Glaser?
Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2000 12:24:15 -0700
From: "abortion_engine" <abortion_engine@*******.com>

> From: "Sebastian Wiers" <m0ng005e@*********.com>
> If you want superior wounding qualities, go with Cor-Bon +P and be done
with
> it.
>
> My point - and there is one, I assure you - is that it seems FASA has set
> these up as a combat round, and they're not.

How about renaming "glazers" as "Prefragmented Rounds", glasers are
not the
ONLY round with similar effects. The Mercury rounds get the honor of being
SRs exploding bullet all to themselves. That way we can lump similar rounds
(hollow points really are not so different from glasers) together and reduce
complexity (even the rules seem to be different just for differences sake).


Ken
---------------------------
There's a war out there, old friend, a world war. And it's not about who's
got the most bullets, it's about who controls the information. What we see
and hear, how we work, what we think, it's all about the information!
Cosmo, 'Sneakers'
Message no. 14
From: Deirdre M. Brooks xenya@********.com
Subject: Glazer or Glaser?
Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2000 13:45:19 -0700
dbuehrer@******.carl.org wrote:
>
> Deirdre M. Brooks wrote:
>
> >I know Capoeira!
>
> Well, that goes a long way towards explaining your debating style ;)

What? What? Are you threatening me? :-)

--
Deird'Re M. Brooks | xenya@********.com | cam#9309026
Listowner: Aberrants_Worldwide, Fading_Suns_Games, TrinityRPG
"If you loved me, you'd all kill yourselves today."
-- Spider Jerusalem | http://www.teleport.com/~xenya
Message no. 15
From: Deirdre M. Brooks xenya@********.com
Subject: Glazer or Glaser?
Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2000 13:47:47 -0700
Sebastian Wiers wrote:
>
> What Gurth didn't mention is that this complete inablity to penetrate
> even fairly thin materials is intentional to the design, and in fact is why
> many people buy those types of bullets today. They are designed for /
> marketed to folks who want to use a gun for home defense without having to
> worry about what happens when a bullet goes through the living room wall /
> cielling and into thier kids bedroom.

Yes, I recall articles to this effect when I first heard about glazers.

> The fact that they (potentially) have excellent wounding properties is
> mentioned (and an intended part of the design- they generally have an even
> higher muzzle velocity than normal rounds) but it is not the main selling
> point of the design. At least, not on paper.

Of course not. Safety first!

--
Deird'Re M. Brooks | xenya@********.com | cam#9309026
Listowner: Aberrants_Worldwide, Fading_Suns_Games, TrinityRPG
"If you loved me, you'd all kill yourselves today."
-- Spider Jerusalem | http://www.teleport.com/~xenya
Message no. 16
From: Deirdre M. Brooks xenya@********.com
Subject: Glazer or Glaser?
Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2000 13:50:09 -0700
Gurth wrote:
>
> > Okay. That matches my recollections and fits the mechanics in CC nicely,
> > IMO.
>
> IMHO, only partly. The Power Level increase should only apply against
> unarmored targets, IMHO, not against all targets. Although the doubling of
> the highest armor rating can cut down the Power a lot, targets with little
> armor (say, 1 or 2 points) will take about as much damage from a Glaser as
> from regular ammo, which is not the intention behind the rules, it seems
> to me.

Well, "nicely" isn't always "nicely and accurately." The latter adds
an
extra step to the equation when shooting at armored targets. Or at
unarmored, depending.

> > > even wallets have been known to stop Glasers
> >
> > Yeah. Of course, most people don't wear body armor. But they carry
> > wallets...hmm.
>
> In SR, I'd say most people do both :)

Wallets?

What does a credstick look like?

> > > Ah, so you go for the guy who weighs about half of what Bull does,
> > > thinking, "He won't be able to hurt me anyway"? :)
> >
> > I know Capoeira!
>
> I need to get a firearm somewhere... *grin*

I hope you don't live in Canada.

--
Deird'Re M. Brooks | xenya@********.com | cam#9309026
Listowner: Aberrants_Worldwide, Fading_Suns_Games, TrinityRPG
"If you loved me, you'd all kill yourselves today."
-- Spider Jerusalem | http://www.teleport.com/~xenya
Message no. 17
From: Deirdre M. Brooks xenya@********.com
Subject: Glazer or Glaser?
Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2000 13:51:24 -0700
abortion_engine wrote:
>
> My point - and there is one, I assure you - is that it seems FASA has set
> these up as a combat round, and they're not.

Tis a good point.

I just go for full metal jackets. What else do you really need?

--
Deird'Re M. Brooks | xenya@********.com | cam#9309026
Listowner: Aberrants_Worldwide, Fading_Suns_Games, TrinityRPG
"If you loved me, you'd all kill yourselves today."
-- Spider Jerusalem | http://www.teleport.com/~xenya
Message no. 18
From: Sebastian Wiers m0ng005e@*********.com
Subject: Glazer or Glaser?
Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2000 16:02:42 -0500
:> The fact that they (potentially) have excellent wounding properties
is
:> mentioned (and an intended part of the design- they generally have an
even
:> higher muzzle velocity than normal rounds) but it is not the main selling
:> point of the design. At least, not on paper.
:
:If you want superior wounding qualities, go with Cor-Bon +P and be done
with
:it.

I think we just said the same thing, from different directions. Myself,
If I was worried about my loved ones inthe next room (childeren especially),
I'd go with a non lethal wepon (maybe "soft" shotgun ammo) for home defense.
I'd rather not have to explain to them "why daddy just killed the bad man".

:My point - and there is one, I assure you - is that it seems FASA has set
:these up as a combat round, and they're not.

Given the rules as they stand, none of my characters would choose them
as combat rounds. 3 points or more of ballistic armor makes them inferior
to even normal rounds, never mind explosive or whatever. I generally assume
that my targets are going to have more than 2 point of ballistic armor- if
they don't, it generally means they aren't really planning on combat, and I
can try to go for a "soft" takedown (gel rounds, melee, etc). Of course, I
didn't previously use flechetes and called shots, myself, so YMMV.
I think that its OK if they work well against lower levels of armor
(vests, clothes) because part of the reason those have low ballistic ratings
is that they do not provide full coverage. Thus, you are looking at a
decent chance the round will strike in a poorly protected (but probably less
lethal) body location, and not be affected by the armor.

_____________________________________________
NetZero - Defenders of the Free World
Click here for FREE Internet Access and Email
http://www.netzero.net/download/index.html
Message no. 19
From: abortion_engine abortion_engine@*******.com
Subject: Glazer or Glaser?
Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2000 17:15:58 -0400
From: "Sebastian Wiers" <m0ng005e@*********.com>
> :> The fact that they (potentially) have excellent wounding properties
> is
> :> mentioned (and an intended part of the design- they generally have an
> even
> :> higher muzzle velocity than normal rounds) but it is not the main
selling
> :> point of the design. At least, not on paper.
> :
> :If you want superior wounding qualities, go with Cor-Bon +P and be done
> with
> :it.
>
> I think we just said the same thing, from different directions.

That was, in fact, my intent.
Message no. 20
From: Phil pames@*****.net
Subject: Glazer or Glaser?
Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2000 16:14:38 -0500
At 12:09 PM 4/13/2000 -0500, you wrote:
> What Gurth didn't mention is that this complete inablity to penetrate
>even fairly thin materials is intentional to the design, and in fact is why
>many people buy those types of bullets today. They are designed for /
>marketed to folks who want to use a gun for home defense without having to
>worry about what happens when a bullet goes through the living room wall /
>cielling and into thier kids bedroom.
> The fact that they (potentially) have excellent wounding properties is
>mentioned (and an intended part of the design- they generally have an even
>higher muzzle velocity than normal rounds) but it is not the main selling
>point of the design. At least, not on paper.
>
>
>Mongoose
>

I'm probably offbase, but weren't they originally intended for something
like onboard airport security?
No risk of explosive decompression as the round splatters on the wall
instead of punching through.

Phil
Message no. 21
From: Tzeentch tzeentch666@*********.net
Subject: Glazer or Glaser?
Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2000 14:28:28 -0700
From: "Phil" <pames@*****.net>
>
> I'm probably offbase, but weren't they originally intended for something
> like onboard airport security?
> No risk of explosive decompression as the round splatters on the wall
> instead of punching through.

Not really, they were intended to be something like packing a "shotgun in a
pistol" with high takedown power but limited penetration.

I think you are thinking of other frangible ammunition (prefragmented).

Ken
---------------------------
There's a war out there, old friend, a world war. And it's not about who's
got the most bullets, it's about who controls the information. What we see
and hear, how we work, what we think, it's all about the information!
Cosmo, 'Sneakers'
Message no. 22
From: Mark A Shieh SHODAN+@***.EDU
Subject: Glazer or Glaser?
Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2000 17:29:03 -0400 (EDT)
"Deirdre M. Brooks" <xenya@********.com> writes:
> I know Capoeira!

Sorry, auditions for Matrix 2 were last week.

:)

Mark
Message no. 23
From: vocenoctum@****.com vocenoctum@****.com
Subject: Glazer or Glaser?
Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2000 21:01:38 -0400
On Thu, 13 Apr 2000 20:12:45 +0200 "Gurth" <gurth@******.nl> writes:

> IMHO, only partly. The Power Level increase should only apply
> against
> unarmored targets, IMHO, not against all targets. Although the
> doubling of
> the highest armor rating can cut down the Power a lot, targets with
> little
> armor (say, 1 or 2 points) will take about as much damage from a
> Glaser as
> from regular ammo, which is not the intention behind the rules, it
> seems
> to me.
>

I just used "against unarmored targets, damage is staged up one level"
"against armored targets, teh damage is staged down a level"

Vocenoctum
<http://members.xoom.com/vocenoctum>;

________________________________________________________________
YOU'RE PAYING TOO MUCH FOR THE INTERNET!
Juno now offers FREE Internet Access!
Try it today - there's no risk! For your FREE software, visit:
http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj.
Message no. 24
From: vocenoctum@****.com vocenoctum@****.com
Subject: Glazer or Glaser?
Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2000 21:00:30 -0400
On Thu, 13 Apr 2000 12:09:50 -0500 "Sebastian Wiers"
<m0ng005e@*********.com> writes:

> What Gurth didn't mention is that this complete inablity to
> penetrate
> even fairly thin materials is intentional to the design, and in fact
> is why
> many people buy those types of bullets today. They are designed for
> /
> marketed to folks who want to use a gun for home defense without
> having to
> worry about what happens when a bullet goes through the living room
> wall /
> cielling and into thier kids bedroom.
> The fact that they (potentially) have excellent wounding
> properties is
> mentioned (and an intended part of the design- they generally have
> an even
> higher muzzle velocity than normal rounds) but it is not the main
> selling
> point of the design. At least, not on paper.
>

Note: as was mentioned elsewhere, glaser is not the only (or, even the
LEADING) pre-fragmented round. Mag-SAfe (its own company) and Bee-Safe
(put out bu Cor-Bon) are both much more effective rounds, designed mostly
for stopping power.
Mag-Safe makes several different loads for each caliber, including a
"stealth" and/or "SWAT" load that won't go through walls as well and
an
"Agent" load, which actually pierces armor.

Vocenoctum
<http://members.xoom.com/vocenoctum>;

________________________________________________________________
YOU'RE PAYING TOO MUCH FOR THE INTERNET!
Juno now offers FREE Internet Access!
Try it today - there's no risk! For your FREE software, visit:
http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj.
Message no. 25
From: Sebastian Wiers m0ng005e@*********.com
Subject: Glazer or Glaser?
Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2000 22:54:44 -0500
From: abortion_engine <abortion_engine@*******.com>


:From: "Sebastian Wiers" <m0ng005e@*********.com>

:> :If you want superior wounding qualities, go with Cor-Bon +P and be done
:> with
:> :it.
:>
:> I think we just said the same thing, from different directions.
:
:That was, in fact, my intent.


Well alright then. <action> edges nervously past AE, glancing back as he
passes </action>

Mongoose

_____________________________________________
NetZero - Defenders of the Free World
Click here for FREE Internet Access and Email
http://www.netzero.net/download/index.html
Message no. 26
From: Gurth gurth@******.nl
Subject: Glazer or Glaser?
Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2000 12:34:12 +0200
According to Sebastian Wiers, at 12:09 on 13 Apr 00, the word on the
street was...

> What Gurth didn't mention is that this complete inablity to penetrate
> even fairly thin materials is intentional to the design, and in fact is why
> many people buy those types of bullets today. They are designed for /
> marketed to folks who want to use a gun for home defense without having to
> worry about what happens when a bullet goes through the living room wall /
> cielling and into thier kids bedroom.

I believe they were originally developed for use in aircraft flying at
high altitude. Shooting a hole in your living room wall might injure
someone, while shooting a hole into a pressurized aircraft fuselage will
be a bit more disastrous...

> The fact that they (potentially) have excellent wounding properties is
> mentioned (and an intended part of the design- they generally have an even
> higher muzzle velocity than normal rounds) but it is not the main selling
> point of the design. At least, not on paper.

I have a feeling most users buy them not because they don't penetrate
cover so poorly...

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
"There are millions of people who've got nothing to say to each other,
and who do it on mobile phones" --Ian Hislop, on Have I Got News For You
-> NAGEE Editor * ShadowRN GridSec * Unofficial Shadowrun Guru <-
->The Plastic Warriors Page: http://shadowrun.html.com/plasticwarriors/<-

GC3.1: GAT/! d-(dpu) s:- !a>? C+(++)@ UL P L+ E? W(++) N o? K- w+ O V? PS+
PE Y PGP- t(+) 5++ X++ R+++>$ tv+(++) b++@ DI? D+ G(++) e h! !r(---) y?
Incubated into the First Church of the Sqooshy Ball, 21-05-1998
Message no. 27
From: Gurth gurth@******.nl
Subject: Glazer or Glaser?
Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2000 12:34:12 +0200
According to Deirdre M. Brooks, at 13:50 on 13 Apr 00, the word on the
street was...

> Well, "nicely" isn't always "nicely and accurately." The latter
adds an
> extra step to the equation when shooting at armored targets. Or at
> unarmored, depending.

I don't think it adds complexity, but others may disagree.

> > > Yeah. Of course, most people don't wear body armor. But they carry
> > > wallets...hmm.
> >
> > In SR, I'd say most people do both :)
>
> Wallets?
>
> What does a credstick look like?

I always imagine it to have roughly the size and shape of a ballpoint pen.
However, wallets would still be used even in countries where cash money is
a thing of the past, IMHO, because they're handy for keeping other stuff
in -- maglock passcards, business cards, house keys, and so on.

> > > I know Capoeira!
> >
> > I need to get a firearm somewhere... *grin*
>
> I hope you don't live in Canada.

Oh, but I do, I just read all my e-mail through an account in the
Netherlands... :)

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
"There are millions of people who've got nothing to say to each other,
and who do it on mobile phones" --Ian Hislop, on Have I Got News For You
-> NAGEE Editor * ShadowRN GridSec * Unofficial Shadowrun Guru <-
->The Plastic Warriors Page: http://shadowrun.html.com/plasticwarriors/<-

GC3.1: GAT/! d-(dpu) s:- !a>? C+(++)@ UL P L+ E? W(++) N o? K- w+ O V? PS+
PE Y PGP- t(+) 5++ X++ R+++>$ tv+(++) b++@ DI? D+ G(++) e h! !r(---) y?
Incubated into the First Church of the Sqooshy Ball, 21-05-1998

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about Glazer or Glaser?, you may also be interested in:

Disclaimer

These messages were posted a long time ago on a mailing list far, far away. The copyright to their contents probably lies with the original authors of the individual messages, but since they were published in an electronic forum that anyone could subscribe to, and the logs were available to subscribers and most likely non-subscribers as well, it's felt that re-publishing them here is a kind of public service.

Thwap!