Firearm-rules in BRP

[Atgxtg]

The reduced damage values would work with the bleeding rule I inbtroduced eariler.

As for the damaged in the book, they are pretty random, and do not match up well with the actual energy of the various rounds. FOr example a .38 round is not nearly as lethal as a 9mm round. A .38 special round on the other hand is.

The big problem I have with the 5th edition damage is that the pistols are overpowered compared to the rifles. For example, an 5.56 nato round has more energy than a .44 Mag, yet the damages are about the same. It also has nearly twice the penetrating power, an important factor when dealing with body armor.

First edition CoC (and most Chaoisum products) put the 9mm at 1D8 so I went with that.

I suspposed I could redo the damages with the 9mm at 1D10 and shift up the rifles a little, but was worried about making some weapons "autokills". With general HP and little armor to speak of, I am concerned about making the guns too lethal. In the real world, one shot from most weapons won't kill you-at least not right away. Lying on the ground, bleeding, crying for your Mommy, yeah, but not dead.

BTW, I was assuming that double damage on an impale was still the standard rule for CoC, so that, combined with the shot range modifier would make most pistols pretty dangerous at the 20 foot range that they are typically used at.

[Rurik]

As to impaling I've always had guns Impale. That is only way a handgun can kill in one shot typically.

To accurately model modern ballistics Penetration (the ability to penetrate armor and other hard substances) and Damage should be differentiated. The Armor absorbing damage model of BRP fails to capture this. It works well enough for Melee weapons, but with modern ballistics, armor piercing rounds, hollow point and hydroshock rounds, and advanced weapons like flechette weapons the combined damage/penetration used by BRP starts breaking down.

A 9mm should penetrate better than a .45, but the .45 should be more effective against an unarmored foe. A shotgun does massive damage against an unarmored foe but is not effective against armor. Flechette is sort of the opposite of the shotgun (high penetration but low damage - the damage compensated for by volume of fire and low recoil - making it easy to put a LOT of rounds on target).

Armor Piercing rounds should penetrate better than standard rounds, but do less damage. They also suffer a loss of accuracy at long ranges.

Hollow Point rounds should do more damage but armor should be more effective against them.

Without introducing a seperate Penetration value (though adding penetration is certainly an option for an advanced set of rules) I think a guidline like the following makes sense:

AP rounds: Reduce the Damage die one step and any damage add by one. Armor value is halved. Optionally additional hit penalties at long ranges. (A .45 acp does 1d8+1)

HP Rounds*: Increase the Damage Die one step but armor is doubled. (A .45 does 1d12+2)

On an Impale damage that penetrates armor is doubled. A crit Impales AND ignores armor.

Thoughts?

Other areas poorly covered by BRP: Auto-fire, Recoil, Psychology of gun combat (performing under fire), and range system (very poor recreation of snipers using RAW).

[Nightshade]

I think there's certainly an argument that guns are going to look odd as long as you don't differentiate penetration and damage, that's not unique to them; there are distinct problems with other types of weapons in this area, too (as far as that goes the psychology of combat thing is more general; people behave erratically under fire, but I don't doubt the same thing is true when rude people are swinging battleaxes at your person).

[Atgxtg]

Not too shabby Rurik,

About the only thing I'd dispute is that AP rounds loose accuracy over long distance. I don't think that is a property of AP as much as a property of less mass, and thus lower inertia. Main reason I bring that up is because a lot of AP rounds have increased powder for more energy and flatter trajectories. Oh, and the AP anti-tank round typically have the longest range.



BTW, Sandy may have used Jane's to get the weapon damages, but for whatever reason, those numbers were thrown out when they revised the game. First edition CoC damages are different that what is is 5th, and seem to work better IMO.

P.S. Rurik, you sure you haven't read Timelords? Your damage idea is fairly similar to what they do there.

[Rurik]

Originally Posted by Atgxtg

Not too shabby Rurik,

About the only thing I'd dispute is that AP rounds loose accuracy over long distance. I don't think that is a property of AP as much as a property of less mass, and thus lower inertia. Main reason I bring that up is because a lot of AP rounds have increased powder for more energy and flatter trajectories. Oh, and the AP anti-tank round typically have the longest range.



BTW, Sandy may have used Jane's to get the weapon damages, but for whatever reason, those numbers were thrown out when they revised the game. First edition CoC damages are different that what is is 5th, and seem to work better IMO.

P.S. Rurik, you sure you haven't read Timelords? Your damage idea is fairly similar to what they do there.

AP Rounds lose accuracy because they are teflon coated. The reason is that AP rounds are made out of harder metals (steel or alloys) than non AP rounds. When first being developed the hard rounds ruined a weapons rifling in short order. The teflon coating helps reduces friction and so the round does less damage to the barrel's rifling, but also does not 'take' to the rifling as well, and less rotational spin is created (which is the whole point of the rifling).

Good old soft lead takes to the rifling very well so actually shoot straighter (and also does verry little damage to the rifling because lead is so much softer than the barrel's steel).

Positive I've never read Timelords. Sounds decent though.

[Enpeze]

Originally Posted by Atgxtg

BTW, I was assuming that double damage on an impale was still the standard rule for CoC, so that, combined with the shot range modifier would make most pistols pretty dangerous at the 20 foot range that they are typically used at.

Yep. Guns are impaleweapons in CoC (20% special)

[Rurik]

Originally Posted by Nightshade

I think there's certainly an argument that guns are going to look odd as long as you don't differentiate penetration and damage, that's not unique to them; there are distinct problems with other types of weapons in this area, too (as far as that goes the psychology of combat thing is more general; people behave erratically under fire, but I don't doubt the same thing is true when rude people are swinging battleaxes at your person).

While the psychology of combat applies to melee as well, in a medieval type game most combatants are conditioned for personal combat to the point it is a non factor (until the Fear Spell is cast, or some creature that inspires fear come along). Also, the best defense against the axe weilder in your face is fighting back, or at least defending yourself. Curling up into a little ball and wimpering like a baby is not likely to save you. When being shot at on the other hand, the fetal position is a much better defense, particularly with good cover. Shooting back while under fire just does intuitively seem the best way to save yourself when you have a perfectly good ditch. Modern soldiers, even with the best of training, panic under fire. That is why people trained in firearms that can hit a target every time at a range miss with most rounds in a real firefight, even at very close range.

The question becomes is it significant enough to model, and the answer to that is going to vary by each gaming group and game. I'd probably not use these rules for a pulp, Indiana Jones type game. But for say a game where the characters are say Delta Force or professional mercenaries against say third world military forces I'd say such rules would be very desireable.

[TRose]

Thing to remember if you start adding bullet types out there there a ton of different types out there. Starting with explosive bullets(The Soviet snipers used them as " markers" in their rifles during WWII) To my favorite Glaser rounds. Don't think I would want to do the work but would be glad to see some one else do it.

[Nightshade]

One thing that you have to watch when setting weapon damages is making them _too_ robust. Handguns kill people, and do so regularly, but people also eat four or five shots and keep coming; rifle rounds are more reliable, but people still survive being shot with rifles (and even .50 caliber machine guns). That's why I suspect keeping the damage somewhat modest and expecting impales to make up the difference is going to work better than getting too carried away with base damage.

Of course you also run into some problems where what works in a system using hit locations won't work in one that doesn't; in practice our black powder rules are much more deadly in RQ than they'd be in most versions of BRP.

[Trifletraxor]

Gotta get the wiki up and running so we can save some of these suggestions. Do anyone know how it's handled in the core book?

SGL.