Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: Gurth <gurth@******.NL>
Subject: Heavy pistol damage
Date: Fri, 4 Jul 1997 13:08:10 +0100
Bruce H. Nagel said on 10:37/ 3 Jul 97...

> > Drop heavy pistol damage from 9M to 6M (or to the same as SMGs, if damage
> > codes/rules will be changed).
> Ummmm, *why*? Heavy pistol ammo (.357, .44, etc.) is _not_ used in SMGs, they
> use lighter rounds like the 9mm or 10mm. And the damage codes are low enough
> as-is, imo.

That's exactly the argument I had with a player of mine when I said I
planned to make this change... *sigh* :)

I view heavy pistols as 9 mm Para (+ equivalents) and up; since this is
the same round that lots of SMGs fire IRL, it makes no sense to me that a
heavy pistol should do more damage than an SMG. .357s and other
high(er)-powered weapons are catered for by the Ruger Warhawk, which does
10M under SRII rules, and 7M in my house rules.

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
Without lies, there'd be 100% divorce rate, a lot of discontented
children, and no advertising industry.
-> NERPS Project Leader & Unofficial Shadowrun Guru <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/plastic.html <-

-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version 3.1:
GAT/! d-(dpu) s:- !a>? C+(++)@ U 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?
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
Message no. 2
From: "Bruce H. Nagel" <NAGELBH@******.ACS.MUOHIO.EDU>
Subject: Re: Heavy pistol damage
Date: Fri, 4 Jul 1997 13:35:01 -0500
You wrote:
> Bruce H. Nagel said on 10:37/ 3 Jul 97...

> That's exactly the argument I had with a player of mine when I said I
> planned to make this change... *sigh* :)

> I view heavy pistols as 9 mm Para (+ equivalents) and up; since this is
> the same round that lots of SMGs fire IRL, it makes no sense to me that a
> heavy pistol should do more damage than an SMG. .357s and other
> high(er)-powered weapons are catered for by the Ruger Warhawk, which does
> 10M under SRII rules, and 7M in my house rules.
Okay, here we go... would you rather take a round from a .357(or.44) or the
9mmP? I know the 9mm is a respectable round, but it has nowhere near the
energy or mass of a .44mag slug. I figure the .357 or so is the typical heavy
round, or something close to it (I recall Dirk in 2XS bitching about the heavy
recoil on his Manhunter...). The 9mm, if anything, should fall into the
category of a 'medium' pistol, with a 6M or 7M damage code. Look at the Uzi
III, 6M. SMGs use a ligher round to get controllable bursts (recall hearing
the .45 Mac10 had big problems with recoil). Heavy pistols are supposed to be
big, scary weapons, and I don't think the 9mm round qualifies.

losthalo

> --
> Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
> Without lies, there'd be 100% divorce rate, a lot of discontented
> children, and no advertising industry.
> -> NERPS Project Leader & Unofficial Shadowrun Guru <-
> -> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/plastic.html <-

> -----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
> Version 3.1:
> GAT/! d-(dpu) s:- !a>? C+(++)@ U 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?
> ------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
Message no. 3
From: Loki <daddyjim@**********.COM>
Subject: Re: Heavy pistol damage
Date: Fri, 4 Jul 1997 13:22:21 -0700
---Gurth wrote:

<snip>

> I view heavy pistols as 9 mm Para (+ equivalents) and up; since this
is
> the same round that lots of SMGs fire IRL, it makes no sense to me
that a
> heavy pistol should do more damage than an SMG. .357s and other
> high(er)-powered weapons are catered for by the Ruger Warhawk, which
does
> 10M under SRII rules, and 7M in my house rules.

That's exaclty the same way we handle it in our game, and I really
like the game balance we've seen as a result.

===

@>--,--'--- Loki <gamemstr@********.com>

Poisoned Elves: www.primenet.com/~gamemstr/

If in your adventures you happen across the skull of a dragon, turn
and leave that place quickly. Whatever killed the dragon may still be
around.
_____________________________________________________________________
Sent by RocketMail. Get your free e-mail at http://www.rocketmail.com
Message no. 4
From: "Bruce H. Nagel" <NAGELBH@******.ACS.MUOHIO.EDU>
Subject: Re: Heavy pistol damage
Date: Fri, 4 Jul 1997 16:49:35 -0500
You wrote:
> That's exaclty the same way we handle it in our game, and I really
> like the game balance we've seen as a result.

Well, since SMGs have damage codes now equivalent to heavy pistols, and
comparable concealabilities, why _ever_ bother with a heavy pistol? Why
wouldn't they have been phased out long ago? Why do people now prefer
(sometimes) a Colt Python to a .38 service revolver? Because it does more
damage, that's why. Some distinction between SMG calibers and heavy pistol
calibers (here I mean 9-10mm and the .44mag/11mm respectively) needs to be
made. Otherwise, no one will carry a heavy pistol unless they just like the
style better, whereas in reality (don't cringe when I say that) there are
reasons to want the hand cannon that is the Ruger Warhawk or equivalent. They
knock *big* holes in things with one shot, whereas SMGs and assault rifles
concentrate on sending multiple lighter rounds at the target at once. The m16
round is honestly little, as are most SMG rounds, compared to any manstopping
handgun.

And in a game balance light, reducing heavy pistols to 7M? Hmm, 2M to resist,
no one ever worries about pistols hurting them any more. The to-hit is harder
than the resistance test... Although if you've found it balanced i nyour
compaigns, more power to you, I know what it'd do to mine.

losthalo, just babbling, don't mind me
Message no. 5
From: Loki <daddyjim@**********.COM>
Subject: Re: Heavy pistol damage
Date: Fri, 4 Jul 1997 14:25:55 -0700
---"Bruce H. Nagel" wrote:
>
> You wrote:
> > That's exaclty the same way we handle it in our game, and I really
> > like the game balance we've seen as a result.
>
> Well, since SMGs have damage codes now equivalent to heavy pistols,
and
> comparable concealabilities, why _ever_ bother with a heavy pistol?
Why
> wouldn't they have been phased out long ago?

Legality/permits. Weight. Quick draw. Ever try to put an SMG in a
concealable holster?

> And in a game balance light, reducing heavy pistols to 7M? Hmm, 2M
to resist,
> no one ever worries about pistols hurting them any more.

Exactly why we ruled as thus. This makes alot more sense when Lone
Star's street cops (as an example) are wearing armor jackets or plated
vests as stock gear. More often then not, the opposition they
encounter on patrol will be bearing pistols and this stopping power
against a 6M round is what you'd be looking for. Against 9Mor 10M with
a Ballisting Armor or 4 or 5 your cops are getting waxed quite easily,
and you'd have to go to layering armor or security armor as a standard.

> Although if you've found it balanced i nyour
> compaigns, more power to you, I know what it'd do to mine.

We've done just that. It has made a lot of difference in game balance,
and the rule was actually brought up and approved by our group's hand
gun connoisseur.

> losthalo, just babbling, don't mind me

Just replying...

===

@>--,--'--- Loki <gamemstr@********.com>

Poisoned Elves: www.primenet.com/~gamemstr/

If in your adventures you happen across the skull of a dragon, turn
and leave that place quickly. Whatever killed the dragon may still be
around.

_____________________________________________________________________
Sent by RocketMail. Get your free e-mail at http://www.rocketmail.com
Message no. 6
From: Gurth <gurth@******.NL>
Subject: Re: Heavy pistol damage
Date: Sat, 5 Jul 1997 12:22:47 +0100
Bruce H. Nagel said on 13:35/ 4 Jul 97...

> Okay, here we go... would you rather take a round from a .357(or.44) or the
> 9mmP?

I'd rather not get shot at at all, thank you very much :)

I'm not going to get involved n this. "This round is better." "No that one
is." leads absolutely nowhere except to endless arguments that will never
be resolved... All I'm going to say here is that since SR doesn't use
actual calibers, onl generalized classes of weapons that can all
magically share ammunition, everyone can have their own view on the
matter; mine is that heavy pistols fire similar ammo to SMGs, yours is
that they don't. Let's leave it at that, okay?

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
Without lies, there'd be 100% divorce rate, a lot of discontented
children, and no advertising industry.
-> NERPS Project Leader & Unofficial Shadowrun Guru <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/plastic.html <-

-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version 3.1:
GAT/! d-(dpu) s:- !a>? C+(++)@ U 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?
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
Message no. 7
From: Caric <caric@********.COM>
Subject: Re: Heavy pistol damage
Date: Mon, 7 Jul 1997 10:01:28 -0700
| > > Drop heavy pistol damage from 9M to 6M (or to the same as SMGs, if
damage
| > > codes/rules will be changed).
| > Ummmm, *why*? Heavy pistol ammo (.357, .44, etc.) is _not_ used in
SMGs, they
| > use lighter rounds like the 9mm or 10mm. And the damage codes are low
enough
| > as-is, imo.

As I am sure Loki has already stated we lowered HP's to 6M in our campaign
as well, in fact I didn't know anyone else had done that. ANyway the way
that we look at is like this. The power of the attack is what is reduced
by armor, so it seems to be a measurement of the penetrating power of the
round. A HP, SMG, and assault rifle all do Moderate damage to what they
hit. An assault rifle should penetrate better in my opinion however.
Round size has something to do with it, but not nearly as much as SR would
make you think. An M-16 fires .223 caliber rounds and a Glock-17 fires
9mm. The glock fires a larger round, but will not penetrate anywhere near
as well as the m16. A second reason we made the change is that armor is
designed to stop bullets. With Hp's at a 9M damage code people were
feeling as though they had to walk around with layered armor all the time
in order to stay alive, now while we still layer armor on runs, when I go
to the local pub I can feel secure with just a jacket and I don't have to
wear that uncomfortable body armor. To me this seems more like what the
case would be. I wouldn't wear bod armor constantly in RL, why would
anyone else want to. If you were to shoot someone today with a 9mm round
from a pistol, and that person was wearing a vest, the would probab;y not
take any damage other thatn bruises or a cracked rib. I can see weapons
progressing as time passed, but wouldn't armor due the same? Finally we
wanted to bring machine pistols to a point that they made sense, and SMG's
were useful as well. With all the burst capable HP's out there now SMG's
were falling by the wayside.

-Caric

"These pretzels are MAKING ME THIRSTY!!!!!"
Message no. 8
From: Caric <caric@********.COM>
Subject: Re: Heavy pistol damage
Date: Mon, 7 Jul 1997 10:36:04 -0700
| Well, since SMGs have damage codes now equivalent to heavy pistols, and
| comparable concealabilities, why _ever_ bother with a heavy pistol? Why
| wouldn't they have been phased out long ago? Why do people now prefer
| (sometimes) a Colt Python to a .38 service revolver? Because it does
more
| damage, that's why. Some distinction between SMG calibers and heavy
pistol
| calibers (here I mean 9-10mm and the .44mag/11mm respectively) needs to
be
| made. Otherwise, no one will carry a heavy pistol unless they just like
the
| style better, whereas in reality (don't cringe when I say that) there are
| reasons to want the hand cannon that is the Ruger Warhawk or equivalent.
They
| knock *big* holes in things with one shot, whereas SMGs and assault
rifles
| concentrate on sending multiple lighter rounds at the target at once.
The m16
| round is honestly little, as are most SMG rounds, compared to any
manstopping
| handgun.

The round is smaller yes, but the bullet penatrates more effectively,
because of the velocity. In SR assault rifles, smg's, and HP's all do the
same damage...moderate. But apparently HP's penetrate barriers better. In
RL that is just not the case. A .44 will penetrate sure, but an assault
rifle can do it as well with a smaller round.

| And in a game balance light, reducing heavy pistols to 7M? Hmm, 2M to
resist,
| no one ever worries about pistols hurting them any more. The to-hit is
harder
| than the resistance test... Although if you've found it balanced i nyour
| compaigns, more power to you, I know what it'd do to mine.

You have to consider however that the defender needs more successes than
the attacker, and that in alot of cases will roll fewer dice.

-Caric

"These pretzels are MAKING ME THIRSTY!!!!!"
Message no. 9
From: "Bruce H. Nagel" <NAGELBH@******.ACS.MUOHIO.EDU>
Subject: Re: Heavy pistol damage
Date: Mon, 7 Jul 1997 14:25:15 -0500
You wrote:
> If you were to shoot someone today with a 9mm round
> from a pistol, and that person was wearing a vest, the would probab;y not
> take any damage other thatn bruises or a cracked rib. I can see weapons
> progressing as time passed, but wouldn't armor due the same? Finally we
> wanted to bring machine pistols to a point that they made sense, and SMG's
> were useful as well. With all the burst capable HP's out there now SMG's
> were falling by the wayside.
This all dows derive from the idea of a 9mm pistol being a Heavy Pistol, but
I'll agree that assault rifles should have better penetration than pistols.
However, if the burst-fire HPs were a problem, why allow them? They're
basically high-calibre SMGs if they can burst-fire, as the Uzi III can only
burst-fire. Sure they have a smaller clip, but that's partly due just to the
size of the rounds...

And if the 9mm is a heavy pistol, why aren't there some bigger guns (aside from
the Ruger)? What about cannons like the Desert Eagle (which is what I always
thought the Ares Predator and Browning Max-power were, thus their original
small clip size in first ed.).

losthalo
Message no. 10
From: "Bruce H. Nagel" <NAGELBH@******.ACS.MUOHIO.EDU>
Subject: Re: Heavy pistol damage
Date: Mon, 7 Jul 1997 14:30:26 -0500
You wrote:
> The round is smaller yes, but the bullet penatrates more effectively,
> because of the velocity. In SR assault rifles, smg's, and HP's all do the
> same damage...moderate. But apparently HP's penetrate barriers better. In
> RL that is just not the case. A .44 will penetrate sure, but an assault
> rifle can do it as well with a smaller round.
Assault rifle, yes, and the HPs and ARs are comparable (9M vs. 8M), if you're
really bothered by it, give the assault rifles a bit more or drop the HPs by 1.
That's what I would do anyway.

> You have to consider however that the defender needs more successes than
> the attacker, and that in alot of cases will roll fewer dice.
With Combat Pool and no limit to dice to resist damage? Nah. More dice, not
less. Unless the attacker really poured dice into the shot, and if they both
use as many dice as they can, the defender, with no no-more-than-your-
skill-in-combat-pool limit gets to use more dice to resist.

losthalo
Message no. 11
From: Loki <daddyjim@**********.COM>
Subject: Re: Heavy pistol damage
Date: Mon, 7 Jul 1997 13:24:37 -0700
---"Bruce H. Nagel" wrote:
>
> Assault rifle, yes, and the HPs and ARs are comparable (9M vs. 8M),
if you're
> really bothered by it, give the assault rifles a bit more or drop
the HPs by 1.
> That's what I would do anyway.

As a GM I'm usually against raising somethings power to solve an
issue, I'd much rather decrease a different area to bring about
balance.

As you suggest, we did drop the HP power level. We just cut it the
base down to 6M since dropping it by 1 or 2 had it equal to an Assault
Rifle or SMG and that's what wasn't making sense to us. Also as Caric
has said, Machine Pistols were making no sense to us. On burst the
were doing the same as a heavy pistol, but with recoil and a base
round of 6L v.s. 9m when figuring penetration against barriers and the
like. Why would anyone chose the MP over the HP? Now, with a HP doing
6M and an MP doing 9M on burst, there's a reason someone may chose one
over the other.

> > You have to consider however that the defender needs more
successes than
> > the attacker, and that in alot of cases will roll fewer dice.
> With Combat Pool and no limit to dice to resist damage? Nah. More
dice, not
> less. Unless the attacker really poured dice into the shot, and if
they both
> use as many dice as they can, the defender, with no
no-more-than-your-
> skill-in-combat-pool limit gets to use more dice to resist.

Keep in mind, most of the opposition he's referring to are NPC's with
threat ratings primarily of 3 and 4. That's not a boatload of dice
being dumped into a damage resistance test from a pool somewhere.
Also, firefights in our games aren't usually your two gunslingers
squared off in an alley one-on-one. My players aren't usually throwing
all 7, 8 or 9 combat pool dice into damage resistance. They usually
have to worry if another one or two of the guards might be taking a
shot at them before their next action, or if they should throw a few
pool dice into their shot to drop a goon before he has a chance to go.
Very rarely are all or even most of a pool being dumped into damage
resistance.

All in all, keep in mind this thread is blatantly a "this is how it is
in our game, your game may be different" issue. :o)

===

@>--,--'--- Loki <gamemstr@********.com>

Poisoned Elves: www.primenet.com/~gamemstr/

If in your adventures you happen across the skull of a dragon, turn
and leave that place quickly. Whatever killed the dragon may still be
around.
_____________________________________________________________________
Sent by RocketMail. Get your free e-mail at http://www.rocketmail.com
Message no. 12
From: Caric <caric@********.COM>
Subject: Re: Heavy pistol damage
Date: Mon, 7 Jul 1997 13:46:15 -0700
Losthalo Wrote:
| > If you were to shoot someone today with a 9mm round
| > from a pistol, and that person was wearing a vest, the would probab;y
not
| > take any damage other thatn bruises or a cracked rib. I can see
weapons
| > progressing as time passed, but wouldn't armor due the same? Finally
we
| > wanted to bring machine pistols to a point that they made sense, and
SMG's
| > were useful as well. With all the burst capable HP's out there now
SMG's
| > were falling by the wayside.
| This all dows derive from the idea of a 9mm pistol being a Heavy Pistol,
but
| I'll agree that assault rifles should have better penetration than
pistols.
| However, if the burst-fire HPs were a problem, why allow them? They're
| basically high-calibre SMGs if they can burst-fire, as the Uzi III can
only
| burst-fire. Sure they have a smaller clip, but that's partly due just to
the
| size of the rounds...
|
| And if the 9mm is a heavy pistol, why aren't there some bigger guns
(aside from
| the Ruger)? What about cannons like the Desert Eagle (which is what I
always
| thought the Ares Predator and Browning Max-power were, thus their
original
| small clip size in first ed.).

If you want to consider them .50 cal that's fine too, but you have to
assume that the technology of assault rifles and SMG's have developed as
well. They may be using higher calibers and/or more advance loads to make
them keep the same differences from pistols as guns today. We pretty much
consider a 9mm to be the top end of the LP class in our game truthfully,
but a 10mm or a .40 would be the low end of the HP class, if that puts it
into perspective from our standpoint. As far as disallowing the burst fire
capable pistols, we could have done that, but after discussion we felt that
over all heavy pistols needed to be reduced for role=playing and realism.
I just can't see the difference between a light and a heavy pistol being 3
to 5 in power AND a damage catagory...it just doesn't feel right. The 6M
damage feels right and has already made a positive influence on our game.

-Caric

"These pretzels are MAKING ME THIRSTY!!!!!"
Message no. 13
From: Caric <caric@********.COM>
Subject: Re: Heavy pistol damage
Date: Mon, 7 Jul 1997 13:55:46 -0700
| You wrote:
| > The round is smaller yes, but the bullet penatrates more effectively,
| > because of the velocity. In SR assault rifles, smg's, and HP's all do
the
| > same damage...moderate. But apparently HP's penetrate barriers better.
In
| > RL that is just not the case. A .44 will penetrate sure, but an
assault
| > rifle can do it as well with a smaller round.
| Assault rifle, yes, and the HPs and ARs are comparable (9M vs. 8M), if
you're
| really bothered by it, give the assault rifles a bit more or drop the HPs
by 1.
| That's what I would do anyway.

That's cool, but that puts the assault rifles the same as HP's when I still
contend that the penetration power is not the same.

| > You have to consider however that the defender needs more successes
than
| > the attacker, and that in alot of cases will roll fewer dice.
| With Combat Pool and no limit to dice to resist damage? Nah. More dice,
not
| less. Unless the attacker really poured dice into the shot, and if they
both
| use as many dice as they can, the defender, with no no-more-than-your-
| skill-in-combat-pool limit gets to use more dice to resist.

And then when the second shot hits?

-Caric

"These pretzels are MAKING ME THIRSTY!!!!!"
Message no. 14
From: "Bruce H. Nagel" <NAGELBH@******.ACS.MUOHIO.EDU>
Subject: Re: Heavy pistol damage
Date: Mon, 7 Jul 1997 18:20:38 -0500
You wrote:
> If you want to consider them .50 cal that's fine too, but you have to
> assume that the technology of assault rifles and SMG's have developed as
> well. They may be using higher calibers and/or more advance loads to make
> them keep the same differences from pistols as guns today. We pretty much
> consider a 9mm to be the top end of the LP class in our game truthfully,
> but a 10mm or a .40 would be the low end of the HP class, if that puts it
> into perspective from our standpoint.
Now those stats I could agree with.

As far as disallowing the burst fire
> capable pistols, we could have done that, but after discussion we felt that
> over all heavy pistols needed to be reduced for role=playing and realism.
> I just can't see the difference between a light and a heavy pistol being 3
> to 5 in power AND a damage catagory...it just doesn't feel right. The 6M
> damage feels right and has already made a positive influence on our game.
I couldn't agree with you more, I figure the light pistols should be at the
damage category of the SMGs, 6M and 7M. Heavy Pistols might run from 8M (your
.45) to 10M (the gigantic .50 and 11mm magnum rounds). Light pistols in 2nd ed
are a joke, as are hold-outs. SR has this hangup with small guns actually
doing damage, apparently all hold-outs are .22Short and .25, whereas there are
today .44mag and .357mag hold-outs. The streetline special was admittedly
neat in 1st ed because the picture made it small enough to practically pop in
your mouth, but no one was scared of it.

losthalo
Message no. 15
From: "Bruce H. Nagel" <NAGELBH@******.ACS.MUOHIO.EDU>
Subject: Re: Heavy pistol damage
Date: Mon, 7 Jul 1997 18:30:40 -0500
You wrote:
> That's cool, but that puts the assault rifles the same as HP's when I still
> contend that the penetration power is not the same.
True, but if anything I think assault rifles have been shortchanged in this
regard. Do typical vests stop assault rounds today? Anyone have ideas on
this, more info?


> And then when the second shot hits?

Aye, but the second shot is going to suffer from recoil, higher t#.

losthalo
Message no. 16
From: "Bruce H. Nagel" <NAGELBH@******.ACS.MUOHIO.EDU>
Subject: Re: Heavy pistol damage
Date: Mon, 7 Jul 1997 18:36:07 -0500
You wrote:
> As a GM I'm usually against raising somethings power to solve an
> issue, I'd much rather decrease a different area to bring about
> balance.
True, but I guess I see assault rifles as underpowered as written anyway, and
so don't have a problem raising them. Same goes for light pistols, push them
up to 5M-7M, no problem. Which would also include the machine pistols, giving
them an advantage over heavy pistols in exchange for their greater noise,
illegality (automatic weapons), and still higher concealiability. They both
have a high ammo capacity to keep up with their ROF, too. :)

> As you suggest, we did drop the HP power level. We just cut it the
> base down to 6M since dropping it by 1 or 2 had it equal to an Assault
> Rifle or SMG and that's what wasn't making sense to us. Also as Caric
> has said, Machine Pistols were making no sense to us. On burst the
> were doing the same as a heavy pistol, but with recoil and a base
> round of 6L v.s. 9m when figuring penetration against barriers and the
> like. Why would anyone chose the MP over the HP? Now, with a HP doing
> 6M and an MP doing 9M on burst, there's a reason someone may chose one
> over the other.
Yes, but now all the advantages go to the MPs, except that they're a little
louder on bursts... Why use the heavy pistol, now?
*shrug

losthalo
Message no. 17
From: Caric <caric@********.COM>
Subject: Re: Heavy pistol damage
Date: Mon, 7 Jul 1997 15:36:47 -0700
| As far as disallowing the burst fire
| > capable pistols, we could have done that, but after discussion we felt
that
| > over all heavy pistols needed to be reduced for role=playing and
realism.
| > I just can't see the difference between a light and a heavy pistol
being 3
| > to 5 in power AND a damage catagory...it just doesn't feel right. The
6M
| > damage feels right and has already made a positive influence on our
game.
| I couldn't agree with you more, I figure the light pistols should be at
the
| damage category of the SMGs, 6M and 7M. Heavy Pistols might run from 8M
(your
| .45) to 10M (the gigantic .50 and 11mm magnum rounds). Light pistols in
2nd ed
| are a joke, as are hold-outs. SR has this hangup with small guns
actually
| doing damage, apparently all hold-outs are .22Short and .25, whereas
there are
| today .44mag and .357mag hold-outs. The streetline special was
admittedly
| neat in 1st ed because the picture made it small enough to practically
pop in
| your mouth, but no one was scared of it.

We would just prefer to adjust heavy pistols down as opposed to light
pistols up, but as it stands in the rules FASA isn't consistent. And
you're right about the hold-out, that's why it's a last resort and you put
flechette rounds in it. Can you say called shot to the face? I thought
you could. :)

-Caric

"These pretzels are MAKING ME THIRSTY!!!!!"
Message no. 18
From: Caric <caric@********.COM>
Subject: Re: Heavy pistol damage
Date: Mon, 7 Jul 1997 15:41:12 -0700
You wrote:
| > That's cool, but that puts the assault rifles the same as HP's when I
still
| > contend that the penetration power is not the same.
| True, but if anything I think assault rifles have been shortchanged in
this
| regard. Do typical vests stop assault rounds today? Anyone have ideas
on
| this, more info?

I doubt that they would fully stop an assault rifle round at close range,
but they would help. The damage is high enough that when a burst is fired
it gets nasty ven with the armor layered.

| > And then when the second shot hits?
|
| Aye, but the second shot is going to suffer from recoil, higher t#.

Nah...i've got the mods. ;)

-Caric

"These pretzels are MAKING ME THIRSTY!!!!!"
Message no. 19
From: "Bruce H. Nagel" <NAGELBH@******.ACS.MUOHIO.EDU>
Subject: Re: Heavy pistol damage
Date: Mon, 7 Jul 1997 19:02:37 -0500
You wrote:
> I doubt that they would fully stop an assault rifle round at close range,
> but they would help. The damage is high enough that when a burst is fired
> it gets nasty ven with the armor layered.
Well, what happens in SR is that 8M turns into 3M, which is easy to avoid with
a dodge and some pool dice.

> Nah...i've got the mods. ;)
Well, yeah, muzzle brakes are neat, but they shoot concealability to heck. :(
Where do *you* hide your assault rifle?

losthalo, who hides his in the car, cause it never sees any use anyway. :(
Message no. 20
From: Caric <caric@********.COM>
Subject: Re: Heavy pistol damage
Date: Mon, 7 Jul 1997 16:50:08 -0700
| You wrote:
| > I doubt that they would fully stop an assault rifle round at close
range,
| > but they would help. The damage is high enough that when a burst is
fired
| > it gets nasty ven with the armor layered.
| Well, what happens in SR is that 8M turns into 3M, which is easy to avoid
with
| a dodge and some pool dice.

That's what full auto is for. :)

| > Nah...i've got the mods. ;)
| Well, yeah, muzzle brakes are neat, but they shoot concealability to
heck. :(
| Where do *you* hide your assault rifle?

Actually I leave it at home, I don't take it anywhere unless the fit is
hitting the shan and then I usually have no need to hide it.

-Caric

"These pretzels are MAKING ME THIRSTY!!!!!"
Message no. 21
From: "Paul J. Adam" <shadowrn@********.DEMON.CO.UK>
Subject: Re: Heavy pistol damage
Date: Tue, 8 Jul 1997 01:10:28 +0100
In message <199707071748.NAA10788@********.mcit.com>, Caric
<caric@********.COM> writes
>The round is smaller yes, but the bullet penatrates more effectively,
>because of the velocity. In SR assault rifles, smg's, and HP's all do the
>same damage...moderate. But apparently HP's penetrate barriers better. In
>RL that is just not the case. A .44 will penetrate sure, but an assault
>rifle can do it as well with a smaller round.

An assault rifle will penetrate walls, armour et al that a pistol will
stop dead on. A medium MG or battle rifle (my beloved old L1A1) wil
shoot through anything you see in a routine urban environment.

One of my gripes with SR is the lack of differentiation between assault
rifles and SMGs. On the other hand, "shot with an assault rifle" equals
"automatic long-term hospitalisation" for real life, so that's perhaps
not such a bad thing from a playability point of view.

SR1 lacked a lot from a realism point of view as far as firearms went,
where an armour jacket plus helmet let you ignore SMG or assault rifle
fire from most opponents (Skill 3 wasn't enough to stage up, 6pts
ballistic meant the damage was negated without a die roll).

SR2 still lacks realism, but is far more playable. Heavy pistols are
dangerous weapons. SMGs and assault rifles can be downright scary. The
realism is questionable, but I like the playability and the feel and so
I don't care :)

(Admit it: while it's unrealistic that heavy pistols do so much damage
compared to SMGs, doesn't it fit the cinematic feel that you can
actually harm someone with a pistol? You certainly couldn't in SR1...)

--
There are four kinds of homicide: felonious, excusable, justifiable and
praiseworthy...

Paul J. Adam paul@********.demon.co.uk
Message no. 22
From: "Paul J. Adam" <shadowrn@********.DEMON.CO.UK>
Subject: Re: Heavy pistol damage
Date: Tue, 8 Jul 1997 01:23:15 +0100
In message <199707072104.QAA28507@********.mcit.com>, Caric
>If you want to consider them .50 cal that's fine too, but you have to
>assume that the technology of assault rifles and SMG's have developed as
>well. They may be using higher calibers and/or more advance loads to make
>them keep the same differences from pistols as guns today. We pretty much
>consider a 9mm to be the top end of the LP class in our game truthfully,
>but a 10mm or a .40 would be the low end of the HP class, if that puts it
>into perspective from our standpoint.

You forget that some people today - my wife, for instance - found 9mm a
handful, and .45ACP downright painful to fire.

Any improvements you get out of handguns will be in bullet design.
Remember, the FBI accepted the 10mm as a more effective calibre, then
dropped it when it proved to be too much of a handful for most agents to
accurately fire. Doesn't matter how deadly the bullet is, unless you can
hit the target with it.

I don't have a problem with 9mm/.45/.40cal being the standard calibres
in 2058; sixty years ago the standard calibres were 9mm, .38 and .45,
and .357 Magnum was a speciality round for the large and robust shooter
only.

--
There are four kinds of homicide: felonious, excusable, justifiable and
praiseworthy...

Paul J. Adam paul@********.demon.co.uk
Message no. 23
From: Caric <caric@********.COM>
Subject: Re: Heavy pistol damage
Date: Mon, 7 Jul 1997 18:04:28 -0700
| You forget that some people today - my wife, for instance - found 9mm a
| handful, and .45ACP downright painful to fire.

Very good point, that's part of what I was saying I see a .50 cal as being
your Ruger Superwarhawks and the like, which in our game still do 8M
moderate damage, but penetrate better than a normal HP.


| Any improvements you get out of handguns will be in bullet design.
| Remember, the FBI accepted the 10mm as a more effective calibre, then
| dropped it when it proved to be too much of a handful for most agents to
| accurately fire. Doesn't matter how deadly the bullet is, unless you can
| hit the target with it.

True.

| I don't have a problem with 9mm/.45/.40cal being the standard calibres
| in 2058; sixty years ago the standard calibres were 9mm, .38 and .45,
| and .357 Magnum was a speciality round for the large and robust shooter
| only.

I can agree with you as well, but it's purely an academic arguement anyway
as we can assume any advancements have been made accross the board as
opposed to only HP's. Therefore the differences should remain pretty much
the same whether larger rounds are used or not. The heavy pistol is still
a deadly weapon on our game because we don't walk around looking like tanks
in layered armor all of the time. If your campaign doesn't use or
disallows layered armor then HP damage at 6M is still beefy enough. Throw
some ex explosive ammo or APDS in that bad boy and you're really tough.

-Caric

"These pretzels are MAKING ME THIRSTY!!!!!"
Message no. 24
From: "M. Sean Martinez" <ElBandit@***.COM>
Subject: Re: Heavy pistol damage
Date: Mon, 7 Jul 1997 21:54:58 -0400
Greetings!!!

Actually, the offical reasoning why Pistols do 9M as opposed to 6M is their
use of "Firepower Ammo". No specs on firepower ammo, it just does a better
job and is only manufactured for pistols.

FASA's rationale was that pistols were not powerful enough when they uped the
damage codes to 9M. There had to be a level playing field.

It has nothing to do with round size or anything realistic.

-Bandit
Message no. 25
From: hernandez <hernandez@********.COM>
Subject: Re: Heavy pistol damage
Date: Mon, 7 Jul 1997 19:04:47 -0700
Iosthalo said in response to someone whom I forgot:
<snip>
> This all dows derive from the idea of a 9mm pistol being a Heavy Pistol,
> And if the 9mm is a heavy pistol, why aren't there some bigger guns
(aside from
> the Ruger)? What about cannons like the Desert Eagle (which is what I
always
> thought the Ares Predator and Browning Max-power were, thus their
original
> small clip size in first ed.).

I don't think that you could refer to a 9mm as a Heavy Pistol. Yes granted
it has a high velocity, but it doesn't have the stopping power of say a .40
to .45 cal. pistol. Those and larger IMHO are Heavy Pistols. (Ever see the
Desert Eagle .50 cal? Sweet.)
A high velocity round will only punch through target. Whereas the larger
round will impact and the target WILL know he has been hit. (Large chunk
missing, knocked back some).

In the begining Man created God;
and in the image of Man created he him

hernandez@********.com
Message no. 26
From: Gurth <gurth@******.NL>
Subject: Re: Heavy pistol damage
Date: Tue, 8 Jul 1997 12:51:38 +0100
Bruce H. Nagel said on 18:36/ 7 Jul 97...

> True, but I guess I see assault rifles as underpowered as written anyway, and
> so don't have a problem raising them. Same goes for light pistols, push them
> up to 5M-7M, no problem. Which would also include the machine pistols, giving
> them an advantage over heavy pistols in exchange for their greater noise,
> illegality (automatic weapons), and still higher concealiability. They both
> have a high ammo capacity to keep up with their ROF, too. :)

Then how about sporting rifles? If you assume an assault rifle to be 5.56
mm, then a sporting rifle is something in the order of 7.62 mm NATO,
.30-06, and up (.338 Magnum?). 7S is a joke in that case, so they'd need
to be increased as well, probably to something like 10S to 12S. That
brings up machineguns -- MMGs would fire similar ammo as sporting rifles,
so they'd have to go to that damage as well. But that makes them more
powerful than HMGs. What do we do with those?

So in short, I think that what you're suggesting leads to an increase in
the damage for a whole load of weapons...

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
Two words: therapy.
-> NERPS Project Leader & Unofficial Shadowrun Guru <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/plastic.html <-

-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version 3.1:
GAT/! d-(dpu) s:- !a>? C+(++)@ U 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?
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
Message no. 27
From: Gurth <gurth@******.NL>
Subject: Re: Heavy pistol damage
Date: Tue, 8 Jul 1997 12:51:38 +0100
Caric said on 10:01/ 7 Jul 97...

> A second reason we made the change is that armor is designed to stop
> bullets. With Hp's at a 9M damage code people were feeling as though
> they had to walk around with layered armor all the time in order to stay
> alive, now while we still layer armor on runs, when I go to the local
> pub I can feel secure with just a jacket and I don't have to wear that
> uncomfortable body armor.

Not to mention that without armor, a 6M attack is already really deadly.
This happened in the adventure I ran last Sunday, one of the PCs got shot
with a recently-modified-to-6M heavy pistol when he was not wearing any
body armor (at a party in a hotel room where the PCs were playing
bodyguard); the shooter rolled rather well and the player rolled average.
Result? Deadly wound instantly, 0 successes on the Permanent Damage roll;
he's now in the hospital with 1 point less Quickness and a missing right
leg.

With a 9M pistol the same would have happened because the PC didn't get
a single success against the Power of 6 IIRC, so he also wouldn't have had
any against a 9, but what I'm trying to say is that had he worn
concealable armor (necessary at a party, IMHO) he'd still have faced a TN
6 or so despite his armor.

> Finally we wanted to bring machine pistols to a point that they made
> sense, and SMG's were useful as well. With all the burst capable HP's
> out there now SMG's were falling by the wayside.

One of my motivations to change them is the (too) big gap between light
pistol and heavy pistol. 6L then 9M, with nothing inbetween except an SMG,
which is much bigger and is intended for quite a different role than a
pistol.

What woul make sense would be to introduce a medium pistol class, that
sits between heavy pistol and light pistol -- in that case I could live
with 9M heavy pistols representing .357, .44, and similar rounds.

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
Two words: therapy.
-> NERPS Project Leader & Unofficial Shadowrun Guru <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/plastic.html <-

-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version 3.1:
GAT/! d-(dpu) s:- !a>? C+(++)@ U 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?
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
Message no. 28
From: Gurth <gurth@******.NL>
Subject: Re: Heavy pistol damage
Date: Tue, 8 Jul 1997 12:51:38 +0100
Caric said on 15:41/ 7 Jul 97...

> | True, but if anything I think assault rifles have been shortchanged in this
> | regard. Do typical vests stop assault rounds today? Anyone have ideas on
> | this, more info?
>
> I doubt that they would fully stop an assault rifle round at close range,
> but they would help. The damage is high enough that when a burst is fired
> it gets nasty ven with the armor layered.

Depends on the vest (did you expect anything else? :) Typical military
issue vests are designed to stop grenade and artillery fragments, not
rifle bullets, but various types of commercially available vests will stop
7.62 mm NATO rounds with the proper inserts in the vest. That really adds
to their weight, though, so you're looking at about 10 kg or more for
front and back torso protection.

These vests are not concealable in any way, but concealable vests with
similar protection do exist. They are smaller (and thereby offer less
protection), though, because they must be able to be worn under normal
clothing.

As far as this is concerned, IMO SR's armor clothing actually offers
realistic protection: an armor jacket (which isn't all that concealable)
will not stop an assault rifle round, as the wearer will still have to
resist 3M damage.

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
Two words: therapy.
-> NERPS Project Leader & Unofficial Shadowrun Guru <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/plastic.html <-

-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version 3.1:
GAT/! d-(dpu) s:- !a>? C+(++)@ U 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?
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
Message no. 29
From: Gurth <gurth@******.NL>
Subject: Re: Heavy pistol damage
Date: Tue, 8 Jul 1997 12:51:39 +0100
M. Sean Martinez said on 21:54/ 7 Jul 97...

> Actually, the offical reasoning why Pistols do 9M as opposed to 6M is their
> use of "Firepower Ammo". No specs on firepower ammo, it just does a better
> job and is only manufactured for pistols.
>
> FASA's rationale was that pistols were not powerful enough when they uped the
> damage codes to 9M. There had to be a level playing field.

Firepower ammo was introduced in the first edition SSC to create a
difference between light and heavy pistols -- back then the only
difference was 1 point in Power Level (light pistol 3M2, heavy pistol
4M2). Firepower ammo increased that to 3M2 vs. 6M2, but then in SR2 they
went overboard and added 3 to both Power Levels, as well as feeling the
need to reduce light pistols from M to L. IMHO just one of those two
measures would have sufficed, while both are overkill.

Furthermore, by that reasoning even though Firepower rounds were the
standard for heavy pistols by 2053, there would still be regular ammo of
less power, not to mention that explosive, flechette, and all the other
ammo types would be based on the regular round.

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
Two words: therapy.
-> NERPS Project Leader & Unofficial Shadowrun Guru <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/plastic.html <-

-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version 3.1:
GAT/! d-(dpu) s:- !a>? C+(++)@ U 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?
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
Message no. 30
From: "Bruce H. Nagel" <NAGELBH@******.ACS.MUOHIO.EDU>
Subject: Re: Heavy pistol damage
Date: Tue, 8 Jul 1997 08:48:21 -0500
You wrote:
> Not to mention that without armor, a 6M attack is already really deadly.
> This happened in the adventure I ran last Sunday, one of the PCs got shot
> with a recently-modified-to-6M heavy pistol when he was not wearing any
> body armor (at a party in a hotel room where the PCs were playing
> bodyguard); the shooter rolled rather well and the player rolled average.
> Result? Deadly wound instantly, 0 successes on the Permanent Damage roll;
> he's now in the hospital with 1 point less Quickness and a missing right
> leg.
Yeah, unarmored even a 9mm round would be scary. Larger rounds are just
reaaallly unpleasant without armor to slow it down.

> With a 9M pistol the same would have happened because the PC didn't get
> a single success against the Power of 6 IIRC, so he also wouldn't have had
> any against a 9, but what I'm trying to say is that had he worn
> concealable armor (necessary at a party, IMHO) he'd still have faced a TN
> 6 or so despite his armor.
FFBA 3, it'd be a 5. Using the thinner armor of form-fitting, you can't expect
it to be stopping large-calibre weapons easily, though perhaps it should help a
little more than this. *shrug* Would a think layer of Kevlar significantly
reduce the damage of a .357 round?

> One of my motivations to change them is the (too) big gap between light
> pistol and heavy pistol. 6L then 9M, with nothing inbetween except an SMG,
> which is much bigger and is intended for quite a different role than a
> pistol.

> What woul make sense would be to introduce a medium pistol class, that
> sits between heavy pistol and light pistol -- in that case I could live
> with 9M heavy pistols representing .357, .44, and similar rounds.
Mentioned this earlier in the thread, I figure give the Medium Pistols a 6M/7M
damage code like the SMGs (same ammo, 9mm or 10mm). That's what makes sense to
me.

losthalo
Message no. 31
From: "Bruce H. Nagel" <NAGELBH@******.ACS.MUOHIO.EDU>
Subject: Re: Heavy pistol damage
Date: Tue, 8 Jul 1997 08:53:34 -0500
You wrote:
> Depends on the vest (did you expect anything else? :) Typical military
> issue vests are designed to stop grenade and artillery fragments, not
> rifle bullets, but various types of commercially available vests will stop
> 7.62 mm NATO rounds with the proper inserts in the vest. That really adds
> to their weight, though, so you're looking at about 10 kg or more for
> front and back torso protection.
Today, yes, but by 2050, there is probably something better than Kevlar to use,
I think that is actually mentioned in Big Black somewhere.

losthalo
Message no. 32
From: Jonathan Hurley <jhurley1@************.EDU>
Subject: Re: Heavy pistol damage
Date: Tue, 8 Jul 1997 10:43:06 -0400
On Tuesday, July 08, 1997 07:51, Gurth[SMTP:gurth@******.NL] wrote:
> Bruce H. Nagel said on 18:36/ 7 Jul 97...
> Then how about sporting rifles? If you assume an assault rifle to be 5.56
> mm, then a sporting rifle is something in the order of 7.62 mm NATO,
> .30-06, and up (.338 Magnum?). 7S is a joke in that case, so they'd need
> to be increased as well, probably to something like 10S to 12S. That
> brings up machineguns -- MMGs would fire similar ammo as sporting rifles,
> so they'd have to go to that damage as well. But that makes them more
> powerful than HMGs. What do we do with those?
>
> So in short, I think that what you're suggesting leads to an increase in
> the damage for a whole load of weapons...

I pretty much ended up diddling various weapon damage codes for my game, and while some
weapons went up, many stayed the same or went down.

I've posted my damage codes here before, as well as on the newsgroup. If enough people
want them, I'll send by e-mail or repost them again.

--
Quicksilver rides again
--------------
Those who would give up a little freedom for security
deserve neither freedom nor security
-Benjamin Franklin
Yeah, I have Attention Deficit Dis - Hey, look at that butterfly!
Jonathan Hurley (mailto:jhurley1@************.edu)
Message no. 33
From: mARCiN sERkIES <yasiu@******.COM>
Subject: Re: Heavy pistol damage
Date: Tue, 8 Jul 1997 21:46:40 +0200
At 01:10 8.07.97 +0100, you wrote:

>An assault rifle will penetrate walls, armour et al that a pistol will

>stop dead on. A medium MG or battle rifle (my beloved old L1A1) wil

>shoot through anything you see in a routine urban environment.


My friend when he was in army shoot from AK47... bullet from it pierced steel rail from
300m (1200ft) That is advantage of rifles over the pistols.




<center>]-[ yASiU ]-[ aKa mARCiN sERkIES ]-[ e-MAiL - yasiu@******.com
]-[ </center>
Message no. 34
From: Gurth <gurth@******.NL>
Subject: Re: Heavy pistol damage
Date: Tue, 8 Jul 1997 22:32:31 +0100
Bruce H. Nagel said on 8:53/ 8 Jul 97...

> Today, yes, but by 2050, there is probably something better than Kevlar to use,
> I think that is actually mentioned in Big Black somewhere.

Fields of Fire makes mention of armor tech having increased much more
rapidly than armor piercing tech somewhere early in the 21st century
(which makes little sense from a RL viewpoint, but it's in a FASA
sourcebook so I guess we'll have to live with it... :)

However, the question IIRC was "Do typical vests stop assault rounds
today?" which I answered... Since it's possible (but heavy) today, it
should be possible (and less heavy) in SR.

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
Two words: therapy.
-> NERPS Project Leader & Unofficial Shadowrun Guru <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/plastic.html <-

-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version 3.1:
GAT/! d-(dpu) s:- !a>? C+(++)@ U 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?
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
Message no. 35
From: Loki <daddyjim@**********.COM>
Subject: Re: Heavy pistol damage
Date: Tue, 8 Jul 1997 15:35:30 -0700
---"Bruce H. Nagel" wrote:
>
> You wrote:

<snip>

> > Why would anyone chose the MP over the HP? Now, with a HP doing
> > 6M and an MP doing 9M on burst, there's a reason someone may chose
one
> > over the other.
> Yes, but now all the advantages go to the MPs.
>
> Why use the heavy pistol, now?
> *shrug

Same reasons you yourself stated, and I quote:

"Which would also include the machine pistols...their greater noise,
illegality (automatic weapons), and still higher concealiability."

===

@>--,--'--- Loki <gamemstr@********.com>

Poisoned Elves: www.primenet.com/~gamemstr/

If in your adventures you happen across the skull of a dragon, turn
and leave that place quickly. Whatever killed the dragon may still be
around.
_____________________________________________________________________
Sent by RocketMail. Get your free e-mail at http://www.rocketmail.com
Message no. 36
From: "Paul J. Adam" <shadowrn@********.DEMON.CO.UK>
Subject: Re: Heavy pistol damage
Date: Tue, 8 Jul 1997 21:08:54 +0100
In message <199707080211.TAA18608@*******.theriver.com>, hernandez
<hernandez@********.COM> writes
>Iosthalo said in response to someone whom I forgot:
><snip>
>> This all dows derive from the idea of a 9mm pistol being a Heavy Pistol,
>> And if the 9mm is a heavy pistol, why aren't there some bigger guns
>(aside from
>> the Ruger)? What about cannons like the Desert Eagle (which is what I
>always
>> thought the Ares Predator and Browning Max-power were, thus their
>original
>> small clip size in first ed.).
>
>I don't think that you could refer to a 9mm as a Heavy Pistol. Yes granted
>it has a high velocity, but it doesn't have the stopping power of say a .40
>to .45 cal. pistol. Those and larger IMHO are Heavy Pistols. (Ever see the
>Desert Eagle .50 cal? Sweet.)

Yeah, but since in SR anyone can pick up and use a heavy pistol, I don't
figure them as being _too_ powerful. My wife didn't like 9mm, but was
able to shoot it and .45 without difficulty: she had real trouble with
.357 and heavier rounds.


I see the "light pistols" as being the .32s and .380s of this world (of
which there are a surprising number, as a flip through Gun Digest will
show) while the heavies are 9mm, .40cal, .45ACP and maybe .357 Magnum.
The heavier calibres are speciality items, the 10M rounds like the Ruger
Super Warhawk.

Having fired a .44 Desert Eagle, I'd say it was neither readily
concealable, nor particularly well-suited to most shooters: at 6' 2" and
160lb, I found it quite a handful.

>A high velocity round will only punch through target. Whereas the larger
>round will impact and the target WILL know he has been hit. (Large chunk
>missing, knocked back some).

High velocity with a well-designed hollowpoint, on the other hand, will
do a hell of a lot more damage than a low-velocity round. .357 Magnum
presents as more effective as a stopper than .45ACP, according to a
study I read a summary of a while back (might have been Marshall and
Sanow?)

.45ACP and 9mm are about even in effectiveness, with proper bullet
selection: a lot of complaints about ineffective 9mm are due to using
FMJ ammo or poorly-designed hollowpoints, at which point the round
overpenetrates badly.

Wound ballistics is an extremely complex, and rather gruesome,
subject...

--
There are four kinds of homicide: felonious, excusable, justifiable and
praiseworthy...

Paul J. Adam paul@********.demon.co.uk
Message no. 37
From: hernandez <hernandez@********.COM>
Subject: Re: Heavy pistol damage
Date: Tue, 8 Jul 1997 16:12:28 -0700
If it wouldn't be too much trouble, I'd like to get a copy of your adjusted
damage codes. I'd like to see if I got mine down about the same. Still
trying to figure out all the rules and all.

In the begining Man created God;
and in the image of Man created he him

hernandez@********.com
Message no. 38
From: hernandez <hernandez@********.COM>
Subject: Re: Heavy pistol damage
Date: Tue, 8 Jul 1997 17:02:41 -0700
I'm sure that proper round selection makes more of a difference than
perhaps some people may think. All I can relate to is my own experience
with weapons. Being in the Military (Military Police), our sidearm was the
.45 ACP which uses a FMJ round. Having actually used it on a person, I
think it made a pretty good hole in him, plus it stopped him pretty quickly
(which is why there isn't a plate in my head right now).
We then switched to the Beretta 9mm (also a FMJ). A friend who went to
Somalia said he'd have to shoot a couple of times because the velocity of
the round. It would go right through them without much in the way of
"stopping" the person.
I presently hold a federal law enforcement position and our issue sidearm
is the Beretta .40cal with jacketed hollow points.
Not quite the 10mm that was tested by the FBI, but close enough.

In the begining Man created God;
and in the image of Man created he him

hernandez@********.com
Message no. 39
From: "Bruce H. Nagel" <NAGELBH@******.ACS.MUOHIO.EDU>
Subject: Re: Heavy pistol damage
Date: Tue, 8 Jul 1997 21:02:13 -0500
You wrote:
> Yeah, but since in SR anyone can pick up and use a heavy pistol, I don't
> figure them as being _too_ powerful. My wife didn't like 9mm, but was
> able to shoot it and .45 without difficulty: she had real trouble with
> .357 and heavier rounds.
I've had char's who refused to pack heavies (or even any firearm at all)
because their player didn't figure they could handle shooting much. But not
everyone is gifted with such characters. Ever ask a STR3 PC how they handle
the kick from their Ares Predator? Do we *need* a rule to tell people 'hey,
don't use this unless you have a STR of X.'? I didn't think so, but I may be
outvoted in this. Some common sense is better than more rules.

> I see the "light pistols" as being the .32s and .380s of this world (of
> which there are a surprising number, as a flip through Gun Digest will
> show) while the heavies are 9mm, .40cal, .45ACP and maybe .357 Magnum.
> The heavier calibres are speciality items, the 10M rounds like the Ruger
> Super Warhawk.

> Having fired a .44 Desert Eagle, I'd say it was neither readily
> concealable, nor particularly well-suited to most shooters: at 6' 2" and
> 160lb, I found it quite a handful.
And where do you fall in the SR strength scale?

> High velocity with a well-designed hollowpoint, on the other hand, will
> do a hell of a lot more damage than a low-velocity round. .357 Magnum
> presents as more effective as a stopper than .45ACP, according to a
> study I read a summary of a while back (might have been Marshall and
> Sanow?)
Yup. Look at 1st ed Cyberpunk, I like their take on damage categories (the 2nd
ed of that game less so).

> .45ACP and 9mm are about even in effectiveness, with proper bullet
> selection: a lot of complaints about ineffective 9mm are due to using
> FMJ ammo or poorly-designed hollowpoints, at which point the round
> overpenetrates badly.

> Wound ballistics is an extremely complex, and rather gruesome,
> subject...
Yeah, but some of us like that sort of thing in our games. Remember my
fascination with good old-fashined gritty SR games in the cyberpunk flavor.

losthalo
Message no. 40
From: "... ..." <Brother-1@*****.NET>
Subject: Re: Heavy pistol damage
Date: Tue, 8 Jul 1997 17:20:23 -1000
>>at 6'2" and 160 lbs...
>and where do you fall in the SR strength scale.
Personally, I'm 6'2" and 174 lbs. I qualify as a "skinny geek" so there
you are. Maybe skill makes up for muscle a little.
Message no. 41
From: "Paul J. Adam" <shadowrn@********.DEMON.CO.UK>
Subject: Re: Heavy pistol damage
Date: Sat, 12 Jul 1997 12:22:12 +0100
In message <01IL0AUDH1OO9I4PAP@******.acs.muohio.edu>, "Bruce H. Nagel"
<NAGELBH@******.ACS.MUOHIO.EDU> writes
>You wrote:
>> Yeah, but since in SR anyone can pick up and use a heavy pistol, I don't
>> figure them as being _too_ powerful. My wife didn't like 9mm, but was
>> able to shoot it and .45 without difficulty: she had real trouble with
>> .357 and heavier rounds.
>I've had char's who refused to pack heavies (or even any firearm at all)
>because their player didn't figure they could handle shooting much. But not
>everyone is gifted with such characters. Ever ask a STR3 PC how they handle
>the kick from their Ares Predator? Do we *need* a rule to tell people 'hey,
>don't use this unless you have a STR of X.'? I didn't think so, but I may be
>outvoted in this. Some common sense is better than more rules.

Works fine for those who know their way around guns. I'm something of a
rarity in Britain, most people my age have never shot with a firearm:
and now you can rule out any real-world experience with handguns, which
have been banned her :(

If you've never done any pistol shooting, then on what can "common
sense" draw? In the movies, the world and his wife can rapid-fire a
Desert Eagle one-handed with no undue effort.

So, yeah, those who don't shoot need a little guidance on these matters.

>> Having fired a .44 Desert Eagle, I'd say it was neither readily
>> concealable, nor particularly well-suited to most shooters: at 6' 2" and
>> 160lb, I found it quite a handful.
>And where do you fall in the SR strength scale?

Call it a 4.

Remember the original Smith and Wesson .357 Magnum was marketed as only
suitable for the shooter of larger than average stature...

>> Wound ballistics is an extremely complex, and rather gruesome,
>> subject...
>Yeah, but some of us like that sort of thing in our games. Remember my
>fascination with good old-fashined gritty SR games in the cyberpunk flavor.

I know what you mean.

I like the feel of the SR system, because it works for how we like to
play our games: heavy pistols are dangerous even to armoured opponents,
SMGs and assault rifles are deadly but not _too_ deadly, and so on.

It's not realistic, but it's playable and it's readily adapted to the
cinematic, John Woo-style firefights we like (wish fulfilment and
fantasy, rather than gritty reality). I can see, though, why if you
wanted a down-and-dirty game you'd prefer something more realistic.

--
There are four kinds of homicide: felonious, excusable, justifiable and
praiseworthy...

Paul J. Adam paul@********.demon.co.uk
Message no. 42
From: "Bruce H. Nagel" <NAGELBH@******.ACS.MUOHIO.EDU>
Subject: Re: Heavy pistol damage
Date: Sat, 12 Jul 1997 19:47:17 -0500
You wrote:
> So, yeah, those who don't shoot need a little guidance on these matters.
I think a book or two on guns might give this sort of feel for things, as
might, say an issue or two of Guns & Ammo (Dad used to subscribe, my knowledge
is eclectic, lots of different places including some shooting).
> >And where do you fall in the SR strength scale?
> Call it a 4.
Yeah, and say a .50 is prolly 5 for comfortably shooting. You might even
introduce specially gunsmithed pistols that fire really overpowered cartridges
for Orks and Trolls, since they can handle more firepower. :)

> Remember the original Smith and Wesson .357 Magnum was marketed as only
> suitable for the shooter of larger than average stature...
Which many SR char's *are*, and do need the firepower due to the prevalence of
armor among corp- and underworld types.

> I know what you mean.
> I like the feel of the SR system, because it works for how we like to
> play our games: heavy pistols are dangerous even to armoured opponents,
> SMGs and assault rifles are deadly but not _too_ deadly, and so on.

> It's not realistic, but it's playable and it's readily adapted to the
> cinematic, John Woo-style firefights we like (wish fulfilment and
> fantasy, rather than gritty reality). I can see, though, why if you
> wanted a down-and-dirty game you'd prefer something more realistic.
Yep, exactly.

losthalo, who likes it when players realize how deadly the lives their
characters lead really are
Message no. 43
From: "Paul J. Adam" <shadowrn@********.DEMON.CO.UK>
Subject: Re: Heavy pistol damage
Date: Sun, 13 Jul 1997 01:53:14 +0100
In message <01IL5TCUASFU9I4QDC@******.acs.muohio.edu>, "Bruce H. Nagel"
<NAGELBH@******.ACS.MUOHIO.EDU> writes
>You wrote:
>> So, yeah, those who don't shoot need a little guidance on these matters.

>I think a book or two on guns might give this sort of feel for things, as
>might, say an issue or two of Guns & Ammo (Dad used to subscribe, my knowledge
>is eclectic, lots of different places including some shooting).

Yep: but who buys Guns and Ammo? Shooters. Guess who's becoming an
endangered species here in Britain? I had to hand my pistol in last
weekend; by October pistol shooting is something that only the Army, the
police and criminals do.

It's getting hard to find even Gun Mart in newsagents here, let alone
anything more exciting.

>> >And where do you fall in the SR strength scale?
>> Call it a 4.

>Yeah, and say a .50 is prolly 5 for comfortably shooting. You might even
>introduce specially gunsmithed pistols that fire really overpowered cartridges
>for Orks and Trolls, since they can handle more firepower. :)

That's something I feel the SR system lacks. A Troll should be able to
conceal and handle - for instance - a revolver chambered for 12-gauge
shotgun ammo as easily as a burly human could manage a .44 Magnum or a
Desert Eagle.

>> Remember the original Smith and Wesson .357 Magnum was marketed as only
>> suitable for the shooter of larger than average stature...

>Which many SR char's *are*, and do need the firepower due to the prevalence of
>armor among corp- and underworld types.

No argument there, it's just jarring when you see Body 2, Strength 1
characters (a rigger) using a Ruger Super Warhawk.


--
There are four kinds of homicide: felonious, excusable, justifiable and
praiseworthy...

Paul J. Adam paul@********.demon.co.uk
Message no. 44
From: "Bruce H. Nagel" <NAGELBH@******.ACS.MUOHIO.EDU>
Subject: Re: Heavy pistol damage
Date: Sun, 13 Jul 1997 01:40:22 -0500
You wrote:
> >Which many SR char's *are*, and do need the firepower due to the prevalence of
> >armor among corp- and underworld types.

> No argument there, it's just jarring when you see Body 2, Strength 1
> characters (a rigger) using a Ruger Super Warhawk.

Tell him about how much he hurts his hand, let him roleplay finding a smaller,
more reasonable gun. This is a roleplaying game, the rules can't do it all.
Even Rolemaster didn't take care of everything, and it tried pretty blamed hard
to.

And if he argues 'The rules don't say I can't'... tell him to do the math. Big
people sometimes don't like the big magnums because of the kick, let alone
scrawny folks. This is really common sense, and doesn't need to be spelled out
in the rules. If the GM realizes it's silly, he lets the players know, and if
they continue packing Magnums, let them hurt their hands, suffer T# penalties,
whatever if game mechanics are the only things that move them.

losthalo
Message no. 45
From: "Paul J. Adam" <shadowrn@********.DEMON.CO.UK>
Subject: Re: Heavy pistol damage
Date: Sun, 13 Jul 1997 13:38:39 +0100
In message <01IL65NPTQPG9I55KP@******.acs.muohio.edu>, "Bruce H. Nagel"
<NAGELBH@******.ACS.MUOHIO.EDU> writes
>You wrote:
>> >Which many SR char's *are*, and do need the firepower due to the prevalence
>of
>> >armor among corp- and underworld types.
>
>> No argument there, it's just jarring when you see Body 2, Strength 1
>> characters (a rigger) using a Ruger Super Warhawk.
>
>Tell him about how much he hurts his hand, let him roleplay finding a smaller,
>more reasonable gun. This is a roleplaying game, the rules can't do it all.
>Even Rolemaster didn't take care of everything, and it tried pretty blamed hard
>to.

I'm not asking for set-in-stone mechanics (though I did once tinker with
a simple Power - versus - Strength TN table), just more clarification in
the rules that some of these things _hurt_. I wasn't GMing that game:
the GM didn't know much about guns: and the response was "but if there
was a problem it would say so somewhere..."

>And if he argues 'The rules don't say I can't'... tell him to do the math. Big
>people sometimes don't like the big magnums because of the kick, let alone
>scrawny folks. This is really common sense, and doesn't need to be spelled out
>in the rules. If the GM realizes it's silly, he lets the players know, and if
>they continue packing Magnums, let them hurt their hands, suffer T# penalties,
>whatever if game mechanics are the only things that move them.

Again, the problem is it requires the GM to know something about
firearms, preferably to have shot a little. If he knows all he knows
from movies, then you can rapid-fire a Desert Eagle in each hand without
apparent discomfort :)

Common sense needs a certain minimum of experience to base it on, and
not all players and GMs - especially outside the US - have that
experience.



--
There are four kinds of homicide: felonious, excusable, justifiable and
praiseworthy...

Paul J. Adam paul@********.demon.co.uk
Message no. 46
From: "Bruce H. Nagel" <NAGELBH@******.ACS.MUOHIO.EDU>
Subject: Re: Heavy pistol damage
Date: Sun, 13 Jul 1997 18:44:39 -0500
You wrote:
> I'm not asking for set-in-stone mechanics (though I did once tinker with
> a simple Power - versus - Strength TN table), just more clarification in
> the rules that some of these things _hurt_. I wasn't GMing that game:
> the GM didn't know much about guns: and the response was "but if there
> was a problem it would say so somewhere..."
This is a point where players shouldn't argue too hard with their GM, imo.
If he says it's not reasonable, it's not. Even in the Dirty Harry movies,
Eastwood can feeel the recoil from that .44, you can watch the barrel kick when
he fires it. Et cetera.

> Again, the problem is it requires the GM to know something about
> firearms, preferably to have shot a little. If he knows all he knows
> from movies, then you can rapid-fire a Desert Eagle in each hand without
> apparent discomfort :)
Yeah, some movies are too careless about things like this. Hell, most movies
are too careless about this.

> Common sense needs a certain minimum of experience to base it on, and
> not all players and GMs - especially outside the US - have that
> experience.
True. How about a paragraph describing recoil, in the section on Ranged
combat and firearms? Describing that light pistols are controllable, etc.

losthalo
Message no. 47
From: Avenger <Avenger@*******.DEMON.CO.UK>
Subject: Re: Heavy pistol damage
Date: Tue, 15 Jul 1997 02:55:38 +0100
In article <01IL75FQ66O09I56XP@******.acs.muohio.edu>, "Bruce H. Nagel"
<NAGELBH@******.ACS.MUOHIO.EDU> rambled on endlessly about Heavy pistol
damage
<snip>
>> Again, the problem is it requires the GM to know something about
>> firearms, preferably to have shot a little. If he knows all he knows
>> from movies, then you can rapid-fire a Desert Eagle in each hand without
>> apparent discomfort :)
>Yeah, some movies are too careless about things like this. Hell, most movies
>are too careless about this.

And of course there's the utter in ludicrous. Paired thunderbolts, fired
without penalty in each hand. Now you figure that out. Three heavy
rounds, fired simultaneously, - twice - producing sufficient recoil to
break the wrist of a relatively weak person. Some players just have no
idea at all. :)


Firearms are a difficult subject to those who's closest contact has been
a John Wayne movie, or for example those wonderful "Rambo" style movies
where infantry support weapons are fired from the hip or paired in two
hands. It's difficult to get across to someone how heavy a weapon is
for starters. The only solution is to purchase a replica weapon, and
allow the players to play with it, feel the weight and experience the
size. In some places this would not be possible, but it's a damn site
better than saying - "Hold this brick, now, toss it to the other hand
and point it at four places in the room, rapidly... " And hope the
player doesn't drop it on the glass coffee table, or smack another
player in the head with it. :)


The only other alternative, is to find out how heavy a weapon is in
kg/lbs, then find some household item of a similar weight. Players
quickly begin to realise how much the average handgun weighs, and when
you add in the weight of spare magazines, and other gear, all of a
sudden the player can't move any more, and they earn a greater respect
for the behaviour they exhibit when relating to their character. The
assault cannon and heavy machine guns, with mortar support start getting
left in the armoury, as they search for a good pistol. <g>


Movies are great for cinematic battle sequences, and John Woo's are the
best for over the top action, but tend to give across a sad impression
that it's an absolute doddle to hurl a heavy pistol around, and pop the
bad guy between the eyes, while diving through the air ignoring a hail
of incoming with the greatest of ease. A problem, that will not really
be overcome until game manufacturers start handing out real weapons with
their systems, and encouraging live fire sessions with the players...
<s>


The problem is inherent to all systems. Try and imagine how it would be
to wield a two handed sword, or a phaser pistol. It's just not possible
to imagine it, but the minute you hold something and try to swing it
about, a greater respect is earned. Replica weapons are available from
a great many retail outlets, and some of them are even good quality. A
few props can occassionally help to change the lazy attitude of players,
and GMs alike. :)


Got a player who totes an assault cannon around a lot. Fine, give that
player an upright vacuum cleaner to hold through the game session,
they'll learn pretty quick. <grin> GM arms all police units with man
portable lasers - no problem, buy a bergen and fill it with rocks, then
get him to run round the block - the laser will likely disappear. :)


(My opinion, although mine, is likely to upset someone, somewhere, all
the time) :)

--
__ \ | \ __
| | _` | __| | / _ \ \ / _ \ __ \ _` | _ \ __|
| | ( | | < ___ \ \ / __/ | | ( | __/ |
____/ \__,_|_| _|\_\ _/ _\ \_/ \___|_| _|\__, |\___|_|
A Dark Shadow in a Dark World |___/
Web page at: http://www.shalako.demon.co.uk

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about Heavy pistol damage, 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!