Firearm-rules in BRP

[Rurik]

Actually, I just had a prety radical idea on weapon damage. What if the Damage die was based on Skill (or adjusted to hit chance) and then adjusted up or down based on the weapon/round used. This would account for placement by having higher percentage shots likely to do more damage.

It might work best with exploding damage dice, so even low percentage shots could kill. Or have specials and criticals boost the damage die a number of steps (3 on a Special, 5 on a Crit for example).

Something like:
01-20% 1d4
21-40% 1d6
41-60% 1d8
61-75% 1d10
75-90% 2d6
91-100% 2d8
100%+ 2d10

That scale is for example, it needs work (more possible results).

[Nightshade]

Originally Posted by Rurik

The question becomes which real world data do you use? It seems people can never agree on that.

It doesn't help that the real world metrics are something of a moving target; is killing power what you want (Most gunfights end with someone in shock rather than dead outright)? Shocking out? What? Add in the fact that only a limited number of studies have been done on actual results as compared to on extension of data based on lab work and theories about what is effective (I still remember when hydrostatic shock was a big issue in ballistic damage theory before they found out it was only really signficant for head wounds), and the fact is we don't really know in any certain way what makes an effective round. Some things are generally assumed to be an overall better thing (impact energy), but even within those there's a lot of variables and which ones actually help or hurt are open to interpetation.

[Simlasa]

Originally Posted by Rurik

Actually, I just had a prety radical idea on weapon damage. What if the Damage die was based on Skill (or adjusted to hit chance) and then adjusted up or down based on the weapon/round used. This would account for placement by having higher percentage shots likely to do more damage.

Hmmm.... seems like I've got an old wargame around here somewhere that did it that way... quality of troops was the leading determinant on the wounds they did, modified by the weapons they carried. I'll have too look for it in the vaults and see what it was...
It kinda makes sense...

[Nightshade]

Originally Posted by Simlasa

Hmmm.... seems like I've got an old wargame around here somewhere that did it that way... quality of troops was the leading determinant on the wounds they did, modified by the weapons they carried. I'll have too look for it in the vaults and see what it was...
It kinda makes sense...

There've actually been a fair number of games where success level had as much impact on damage as the base weapon damage, and since that was primarily dependent on skill level, that was the practical effect. TORG/Shatterzone/Masterbook comes to mind.

[Simlasa]

So if skill is the prime factor in damage... would some weapons give a negative modifier... like attacking someone with a pellet gun?

[Nightshade]

Originally Posted by Simlasa

So if skill is the prime factor in damage... would some weapons give a negative modifier... like attacking someone with a pellet gun?

I would expect so.

[Joseph Paul]

Originally Posted by Rurik

The question becomes which real world data do you use? It seems people can never agree on that.

I think that muzzle energy looks good as it incorporates velocity and mass. Bigger mass equates to a bigger round except for some very odd circumstances.

My whole point here is to create a design system for BRP that will do well when we get around to needing the stats for low tech bombards and high tech hypervelocity cannon.

Once you have the ability to produce stats for most of the weapons you can go back and massage the numbers to fit a particular genre's world view. Like the .45 as a man stopper? Give it a +3 to do so. But you can do so knowing that you have made an informed choice.

I think I may check some different deesign rule sets to get a feel for things.

[Nightshade]

Originally Posted by Joseph Paul

I think that muzzle energy looks good as it incorporates velocity and mass. Bigger mass equates to a bigger round except for some very odd circumstances.

If you're only going to use a single metric, muzzle energy is probably about as good as you're going to get; its what Aftermath! used as its basis for its guns. The problem you'll run into if you don't watch it, however, showed up in Aftermath! which used that as the basis for its guns; it either ends up making some really outrageous numbers for some rifles and up, or it ends up lumping handguns together a lot. They dealt with this by massaging the hell out of the handguns, to the point some of them were clearly over the top, but if you don't want massive lumping at that end, you need to do _something_.

[Enpeze]

Originally Posted by Joseph Paul

Once that baseline is set then working out the wounding mechanics to fit various levels of play (gritty, heroic, cinematic etc) should be fairly easy. I am confident that it can result in more realistic results with little to no sacrifice in playability.

Well you want to create "realistic" firearm rules and then apply them to cinematic and heroic environments? What sense has this?
That you can play invincible-80HP-Neo-Bruce-Willis-dogde-the-bullet but your poor enemies will be subject to realistic damage?

[badcat]

Yep. Exactly.