| From: | Ron Clark <rclark@****.NET> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: Shadowrun and creatures (long) |
| Date: | Wed, 2 Dec 1998 00:23:19 -0600 |
*snip*
>A light pistol won't stop an elephant, now or then. I don't even need
>to calculate on that one.
Neither will a heavy for that matter.
>So.. the rules work well enough relative to the situation today, but
>it's very deadly using 2060's combat technology. I'm not 100% sure
>what I feel about that. I think it's a bit too effective but OTOH gun
>tech has evolved a lot more in these 62 years than the elephant's
>bullet proof west has, so it might be okay. But while it might be
>realistic it's better for most wilderness stories if the biggest,
>most dangerous animals aren't one shot, one kill sort of targets.
Yes, gun tech will have changed greatly in 62 years, but basic ballistics
won't have changed that much, a bullet is a bullet no matter how you design
it.
Lets go back 62 years and compare to todays weaponry. The year is now 1936
and the world is still developing automatic weapons. Primary battle rifle
was moving to the M1 Garand (please forgive me, but I can't find my books
dealing with this at the moment). The Springfield '03-A3 is still a popular
weapon in service. Standard sidearm is the Colt 1911 .45ACP or .38 special
revolvers.
The weapons of today haven't changed that much so far as damage is
concerned. More effecient cartridges have been developed, cyclic rates
have been improved, that's about it.
Now let's compare today's weapons against an elephant
Light/hold out pistol .38 special, .22 long rifle, .380 Auto, .25ACP
(what a joke), 9mm and so on. I don't care how may shells you pump into
this beast, he ain't going down.
Heavy pistol .45ACP, .45 long colt, .44 Mag, .50AE, .454 Casull (need I go
on)
Probably will put one down, but it will take quite a few rounds.
SMG 9mm see light/holdout pistols
assault rifle .223 Rem (5.56 NATO), .308 Winchester (7.62 NATO), 7.62x39.
Don't stand in front of it for too long :)
Sporting rifle see assualt and add .30-'06, .30-30 Win., .45-70 Govt, 7mm
Rem Mag to name a few. probably will fall faster, but be sure to have some
spare rounds ready.
LMG/MMG see assault rifle. generally belt fed with faster cyclic rate of
fire
HMG .50 BMG, .308. the fifty most definately, thirty, don't think so
OK, so most of these IMHO won't stop an elephant (easily), so what will you
ask. Let's see .460 Nitro Express, .600 Nitro Express, and .50 BMG. The
first two are primarly used in African big game hunting. The fifty is just
big!!
Lets talk about the Barett 121 heavy sniper, yeah that's the ticket.
>> 2) how do you correct or adjust it if
>> you don't think a pistol should be able to do that?
>
>Hm.. D. Buehrer suggested using vehicle rules for large creatures. In
>3rd edition, that means -1 damage level and halve the power level
>IIRC. This overcompensates, I think - even a fairly powerful hunting
>rifle in the hands of an expert would barely tickle an elephant, and
>that is unrealistic too. Reducing the damage level only sounds like a
>good compromise to me, and failrly realistic, considering relative
>size.
I think that I'd use a mix of vehicle rules and armor rules. Elephants,
water bufflo, rhinos (all that I can think of at the moment) are fairly
thick skinned, not to mention dense skulls and alot of meat surrounding the
vital organs, and difficult to put down, hense why I suggest some rating of
ballistic armor. Think of it as natural dermal plating. Large game and
smaller, deer, elk, moose, etc. would have a lesser armor value than the
above or no armor value at all (varments such as skunks, coyotes, wolves,
and thier like wouldn't have anything).
To sum it up, yes I think animals, especially the big and/or dangerous ones
should be difficult to put down or take really big guns to to do so.
-snip sig-
Ron
#include disclamer.h
