BRP Vehicle rule

[carnifex]

Hi there!
I has worked out a BRP vehicule building rule. It was largely inspired (copied) after the Hero and Fuzion system. I writed it in french for the TOC web site and i has included numerous vehicule from the roaring 20
(cars, planes, tanks, etc, etc). The only thing i was insatisfied in this rule is the fact my player will be able to put out of commission a Ford model A with a burst of a thompson. The G-men of this era have to use a Browning monitor (automatic rifle caliber 30-06) or a shotgun caliber 10 with slug to have a reasonnable chance of doing-it.

I want to know if other player have also worked on a brp vehicule and what was the strong and feeble pount of their rule.

[Atgxtg]

I'd like to see your rules. THey might be just the thing we've been looking for.

BTW,
What did you use for AP/Hull Quality for your vehicles? Rasing that migth solve the problem, although BRP does have .45s doing way to much damage in reation to 30-06s and other big guns.

[The Tweaker]

I just encountered this thread at yog-sothoth.com, wherein member Count_Zero proposes a simple vehicle rules system. Looks interesting.

[Atgxtg]

Originally Posted by The Tweaker

I just encountered this thread at yog-sothoth.com, wherein member Count_Zero proposes a simple vehicle rules system. Looks interesting.

Interesting, but I think the HP are too low. I thing vehicle HP should be eqaul to SIZ, and then either use a major wound rule or hit locations to Damage, Incapacitate, "Kill" the vehicle.

[Nightshade]

Originally Posted by Atgxtg

BTW,
What did you use for AP/Hull Quality for your vehicles? Rasing that migth solve the problem, although BRP does have .45s doing way to much damage in reation to 30-06s and other big guns.

The problem is that you don't have a lot of spread to work with, and lack of hit locations acerbates the issue. If you make the handguns too weak, they can't kill people; if you make the rifles too strong, they kill too reliably.

[Atgxtg]

Originally Posted by Nightshade

The problem is that you don't have a lot of spread to work with, and lack of hit locations acerbates the issue. If you make the handguns too weak, they can't kill people; if you make the rifles too strong, they kill too reliably.

One reason why I liked a bleeding rules, major wounds, critical's hits & impales.

The thing I don't like about the CoC chart is that there is too much spread between the handguns, and not that much between the high powered pistols, rifles and heavy weapons.

For instance the difference between a .30-06 and a +45 ACP is actually much more significant that the difference between the .45ACP and a .32ACP, but in the game the difference is about the same.

Go back to 1st edtion CoC damages with the .45 down to the D8 level and it solves most of the problems.

Another idea would be to say the firearms can't impale vehicles and other objects. That would make AP much more useful.

Or maybe change the impale effect to double damage that gets past the target's AP. That would make a lot of sense. If a round can't penetrate a certain level of ballistic vest it shouldn't do so 20% of the time due to an impale.

[Nightshade]

Originally Posted by Atgxtg

One reason why I liked a bleeding rules, major wounds, critical's hits & impales.

Those help, but they still only give you so much range to work with.

The thing I don't like about the CoC chart is that there is too much spread between the handguns, and not that much between the high powered pistols, rifles and heavy weapons.

For instance the difference between a .30-06 and a +45 ACP is actually much more significant that the difference between the .45ACP and a .32ACP, but in the game the difference is about the same.

That's probably an issue of them deciding what you'd see in play more often.

Go back to 1st edtion CoC damages with the .45 down to the D8 level and it solves most of the problems.

Another idea would be to say the firearms can't impale vehicles and other objects. That would make AP much more useful.

Most likely it should work that way anyway.

Or maybe change the impale effect to double damage that gets past the target's AP. That would make a lot of sense. If a round can't penetrate a certain level of ballistic vest it shouldn't do so 20% of the time due to an impale.

Not sure I agree; impaling is in some respects a reflection of an attack that hits dead on rather than slightly at an angle, and those _do_ tend to penetrate better.

[Atgxtg]

Originally Posted by Nightshade

Not sure I agree; impaling is in some respects a reflection of an attack that hits dead on rather than slightly at an angle, and those _do_ tend to penetrate better.

It has to do with ballistics. Certain Class rated vests will stop certain slugs. With BRP, since the impale effect is double damage, then it results in a shot being able to penetrate twice the AP protection. This means than a 45 bullet that impales (2d10+4) penetrates better than a 30.06 (2d6+4). That's messed up. Likewise a .32 caliber bullet that implales has the penetrating power of a M16!

Since the spread is so large, the problem gets more pronounced with vehicles.

If the benefit is to represent the attacks ability to damage a person, then ballistic armor should come off first.

As a side note, this would be one way to distinguish between archaic armors and modern ones. That way a 5 point ballistic vest could stop a bullet better than might stop a bullet better than a 7 point shirt of maille.

[Nightshade]

Originally Posted by Atgxtg

It has to do with ballistics. Certain Class rated vests will stop certain slugs. With BRP, since the impale effect is double damage, then it results in a shot being able to penetrate twice the AP protection. This means than a 45 bullet that impales (2d10+4) penetrates better than a 30.06 (2d6+4). That's messed up. Likewise a .32 caliber bullet that implales has the penetrating power of a M16!

If you're not literal minded about it, that just means the impaling shot will transfer some energy in, not that it literally penetrates. Given some of that almost always happens (which is why bruising and cracked ribs frequently result at close ranges) I don't see that as a big problem.

As a side note, this would be one way to distinguish between archaic armors and modern ones. That way a 5 point ballistic vest could stop a bullet better than might stop a bullet better than a 7 point shirt of maille.

Well, often its the opposite; ballistic armor (especially without plates) should be really _poor_ at stopping most non-ballistic attacks.

Really, part of the problem is that damage values to living things aren't quite the same as to inanimate objects, and "structured" objects (those with working bits) are somewhere inbetween.

[Atgxtg]

Originally Posted by Nightshade

If you're not literal minded about it, that just means the impaling shot will transfer some energy in, not that it literally penetrates. Given some of that almost always happens (which is why bruising and cracked ribs frequently result at close ranges) I don't see that as a big problem.

THe problem is that it is trannsfering too much energy. The major advantage of ballasitc armor is that it spread out the enrgy over a wider area, resulting in much less serious injury. If the armor doesn"t get penetrated, the victim isn't going to die. Sure, there will be some brusing, and in exterme cases a cracked rib or two, but as long as the armor isn't penetrated, not much is getting through, perhaps a D4.

Well, often its the opposite; ballistic armor (especially without plates) should be really _poor_ at stopping most non-ballistic attacks.

True. I was thinking in terms of firearms. The reverse could hold true for other types of attack.

Really, part of the problem is that damage values to living things aren't quite the same as to inanimate objects, and "structured" objects (those with working bits) are somewhere inbetween.

Yup. Addtionally, "damage value" has two other problems.

First, it reflect both penetrating power and disruption of tissue. So something that can punch through armor also does a lot of structural damage (something that isn't always true).

Secondly, is that with the way hit point work, damage is handle by attrition, where more realistically it is more a factor of just what part/organ was fdamaged rather than a running total.

For instance, you can shoot right through most cars with a 30-06 and the only effect the damage will have is against the vehicles resale value, waterproofing, and wind resistance. Start shooting through the engine block and one or two hits will cause any vehicle to eventually stop working.


That's hard to reflect with BRP. Maybe a Luck roll could be one option. If the driver makes the Luck roll, then damage is only cosmetic? TO reflect the effect of overkill, we could alter the LUCK roll by how much damage the attack inflicts. So something that does more damage that the vehicles HP in one attack might roll against POWx3% or just half the LUCK roll.