Any RPG systems have good Firearms rules and feel ?

[Bagpuss]

It totally depends on what your looking for

A simulation of action movie firearms in which case Feng Shui is probably one of the best sets of rules for it. You roll for effect against most villans and it doesn't really matter if you spray ten bullets or one to put the bad guy down (be it by a shot to the head, or knee capping Arnie in T2 style).

A reasonablely realistic simulation of firearms that plays pretty well, then Twighlight 2000 2nd Edition, (although I think its out of print) the same rules are in the latest version of Dark Conspiracy that I believe may still be in print.

A realistic as possible set of firearms rules then Millieniums End, was the best I've seen with body maps with over 20 locations, penetration charts to reflect if you shatter bone or the like and spray pattern templates to be overlayed over target diagrams.

D20 Modern is more towards to the Feng Shui level of realism but has some seriously weird rules when it comes to autofire and burst fire, that neither reflect action movie nor real life firearms. But you have the advantage of a familiar rules set. Personally I'ld learn new rules, but unfortunately most of ones I've mentioned above might be hard to get hold of.

Cyberpunk is about the same level as Twighlight 2000, although autofire isn't handled as well.

 

[buzzard]

Huh? Dropping you below zero isn't killing you either; it should be obvious from the context of dropping you to zero WP that I wasn't speaking of instand fatality either.

Yes, but you will be dead in less than a minute. This isn't realistic. The chance of a .22 knocking someone unconscious, and killing them within a minute are damned small. (appreciably less than 5% or 1% for that matter).

That said, I'm sure I could make a shot to the heart that would be lethal with a 22 if I lucked out and got past the ribcage. Not what I am talking about, though. I am two steps removed from that.

No, that is what you are talking about. If a .22 is to do lethal damage, that is the kind of shot that is required for an immediate stop (or a really lucky shot that manages to pierce the skull rather than glancing off like most .22 shots would). The probability of such a shot is less than 5%. In fact it is much less. Since we have a system which works in discrete probabilites, you cannot model certain events.

This is doublespeak. It's realistic or not. d20 modern at least has a critical system that amplifies the damage, or you could have upped the damage of smaller calibers. Either would have worked. Again, it wasn't designed to. It's not a matter of "inherent limitations of the system." It "decisions of the system designer."

Apparently you don't understand my point. Within the constraints of how a system works, you can try to be as realistic as possible. The limitations are such things as wound mechanics and probability generators. Weapons should do an amount of damage which is indicative of then type of wounds caused by the majority of shots. Thus pistols should not have a great chance of dropping people right off the bat. Only heavier calibers should have the potential to drop someone in one shot, and even then it should be rare.

Okay, and that could still be true if I gave the weapons 1d20 damage; you could still roll 3 "1's". You act as if my argument is that 22s should be lethal most or all of the time. This is a strawman.

Did you even read my post? How could that have been 3 "1"s if one of them was potentially lethal (a lung shot)? You evidently don't know what a strawman is.

I have not in any way made the case that your argument is about .22s dropping people like flies. However, if you believe d20 modern is more realistic (which appears to be the case), then you are accepting that about 2.5% of the time a .22 will kill an average person, or at least drop them (killing them within one minute) from a critical. That is far more lethal than they are in reality.

Though considering it is a hit point mechanic, the chance of dropping someone with a .22 is even higher than that. Any shot at a normal human has a 50% chance of hitting, and then a 3 in 16 chance of doing 7 or 8 hp of damage. Assuming NPCs have 6 (reasonable for 1st level), they will die within a minute. Thus, you have about a 1 in 9 chance of being dead within a minute if you are shot by a .22 by the D20 Modern rules. Reality and this are not even simmilar.

At the same time, in the recent shootings in WV, 22 shots were lethal. Point? Occasionally it can be lethal. d20 modern can take someone out of the fight and kill someone with a small caliber weapon if they get a crit. Spycraft could have done somehting like this. It was a conscious decision not to.

Actually there are means by which you can drop someone in Spycraft with a small caliber weapon. You use action dice. If I shoot you with a .22, I can bump it with an action die, which can explode into a large amount of damage. That is about as unlikely as actual one shot stops with a .22. However it is a viable mechanic.

Though, as for the WV shooting, how long was it before any of the people actually died? How many shots did they take? I doubt people were dying within a minute from single shots.

buzzard

 

[Psion]

Yes, but you will be dead in less than a minute.

Not necessarily. You have a chance to stabilize every round.

This isn't realistic. The chance of a .22 knocking someone unconscious, and killing them within a minute are damned small. (appreciably less than 5% or 1% for that matter).

Source for these figures?

A quick google doesn't reveal any fatality percentage by caliber I can find. But it does find that from the years 91-99, 26% of handgun fatalities in one major city (the first I looked at, Milwaulkee, no hunting an pecking here) were from "small caliber firearms" including the 22. If the lethality was as low as you claim, there is no way the percentages would be that high.

No, that is what you are talking about.

a) As pointed out above, that is not what I am talking about.
b) If you are going to tell me what I am talking about, then why are you having this discussion with me at all. You can gleefully have this discussion with yourself.

Because within the inherent limitations of the system, it is realistic. There are a lot of aspects of wounds (not merely gunshot), which are not adequately described by D20.

There are a lot of things that the system doesn't describe, but the basic level that it does describe is alive/dead. That is well within the the "limitations of the system." It could have created the chance of being killed by small caliber weapons as d20 modern did, so it obviously is within the "limitations of the system." It chose not to go that route, again by design.

Did you even read my post? How could that have been 3 "1"s if one of them was potentially lethal (a lung shot)? You evidently don't know what a strawman is.

Yes, I read your post. You gave the "fact" that someone survived three gunshot wounds as some sort of proof that 22 are not potentially lethal. That is no sort of proof. I could end up with a similar result in d20 modern if I just never happened to roll a critical that would allow me trigger MDT. Spycraft doesn't even have a similar potential. Again, by design.

I have not in any way made the case that your argument is about .22s dropping people like flies. However, if you believe d20 modern is more realistic (which appears to be the case), then you are accepting that about 2.5% of the time a .22 will kill an average person, or at least drop them (killing them within one minute) from a critical. That is far more lethal than they are in reality.

Again, where are you getting your figures?

Though, as for the WV shooting, how long was it before any of the people actually died? How many shots did they take? I doubt people were dying within a minute from single shots.

And again, not necessarily. In spycraft (as in D&D), a person has multiple chances of stabilizing. In d20 modern, this is even more generous, since they are allowed fort saves instead of percentage rolls. Again, your argument here relies on ignoring stablization.

 

[Psion]

Actually there are means by which you can drop someone in Spycraft with a small caliber weapon. You use action dice.

Most NPCs have no action points. Only PCs and significant NPCs have actions points. Again by design.

 

[Arnwyn]

I am playing Fallout Tactics game and I really wish to roleplay some game with similar "feel". Still my impression is that d20 is woefully inadequate for firearm games and feel. Am I wrong ?

What game do you think has the best old or modern firearms rules and feeling ? Give a hint at why.

No, you're not wrong. d20 and d20 Modern are pretty awful when it comes to firearms, IMO.

I've always been fond of FUZION for firearms. Easy to use (including the "bane of RPGs": autofire), and you can quickly set "damage/hit levels" (mooks get mowed down easily, heroes and major villains can weave, dodge, and generally avoid more - but only if you want). Also includes stats for things like recoil and accuracy.

Cyberpunk 2020 also gets a nod from me (it includes rules for concealability - which can, of course, be adapted for any game).

 

[S'mon]

Re lethality of .22s - I remember seeing on some TV documentary that Mossad assassins (and other assassin types) would commonly use .22s for hits. A favoured tactic was to go up to the target from behind and shoot them in the spinal cord. I guess you could model this with the +d6s you get for Sneak Attack.

IRL I guess a 'not particularly aimed' .22 round is unlikely to be immediately lethal, but being a low-velocity round a stomach hit from a .22 pistol can even be more lethal than a close range hit from a high-velocity rifle round that may go right through without tumbling much. In any case it's still likely to cause serious long-term injury.

 

[Ranger REG]

Spycraft has decent firearms rules within the constraints inherent to D20. They have spent a fair amount of effort of trying to get their gun data right. They also have a fair number of combat options which give a cinematic gun feel. Their full auto rules are OK.

Almost too right. One can't help but gravitate toward the firearms with the best static weapon damage ("+X").

With their use of wounds/vitality, lethality is achieved on criticals . The damage dice for most reasonable calibers can kill on a single shot to wounds.

No different that Star Wars health system, where it is actually came from.

The failing point, which is inherent to D20 is the lack of shot placement, and by virtue of this, unrealistic body armor. However to add such things would introduce a large amount of complication. All in all Spycraft seems to handle things reasonably well within the constrains of the basic system.

I will give credit for the use of both AC and DR values in Spycraft, which has been largely rejected by the majority of other d20 roleplayers (including the Star Wars gamer, which place way too much emphasis on DR, despite the armor's lack of body coverage). Then again, many shooters are trained to aim the abdomen/chest area.

You can add piecemeal armor and called shot, but as variant/house rules. Otherwise, it would add one or two more step to combat resolution and slow playing time.

Each system have its strong and weak values, but I don't favor any one of them. If I play Spycraft, I use all of its rules suitable for that game. If I play d20 Modern, I use most of its rules suitable for that game (there are a few mechanics I don't like but has nothing to do with firearms).

Then there is Call of Cthulhu, where you get a MDT of 10, no modification. If weapon damage exceed 10, you roll Fort Save ... or die, which is appropriate for such a horror RPG (either you die or you live long enough to go insane).

 

[buzzard]

Not necessarily. You have a chance to stabilize every round.

Yes you do. However this does not change the fact that the .22, in a single shot, knocked you down and unconscious. That is the fundamental problem.

Source for these figures?

Talks with EMTs, reading many discussions on gun newsgroups, reading many books about firearms and self defense, and a variety of other works on the subject. Noone in their right mind will count on small caliber handgun for self defense because the odds of a one shot stop are pathetic.

A quick google doesn't reveal any fatality percentage by caliber I can find. But it does find that from the years 91-99, 26% of handgun fatalities in one major city (the first I looked at, Milwaulkee, no hunting an pecking here) were from "small caliber firearms" including the 22. If the lethality was as low as you claim, there is no way the percentages would be that high.

Yes it would because :
A) Most of the instances will be multiple shots.
B) People die from things like internal bleeding after some time, which is not simulated in D20. An EMT one told me a story that he actually found .22s to be fairly lethal in a slow sort of way. They often tended to bounce around in the rib cage causing lots of internal bleeding. Thus if you don't get immediate medical attention you could die. However these were not instances where the target was immediately incapacitated.

You need more information than the % of handgun fatalities for this to be useful information. You need % of fatalities per shot. Light caliber weapons tend to be the most common since they are the cheapest, and most concealable.

If 10000 people are shot with .22s, 100 with 9mms, and 50 with .45s, the fact that many of the fatalities are from .22s is rather usuprising (and uninformative).

a) As pointed out above, that is not what I am talking about.
b) If you are going to tell me what I am talking about, then why are you having this discussion with me at all. You can gleefully have this discussion with yourself.

Ok, so you are convinced that the lethality of .22s isn't what you are talking about. Then I guess I have no idea what you are talking about since you are being unclear and/or slippery.

There are a lot of things that the system doesn't describe, but the basic level that it does describe is alive/dead. That is well within the the "limitations of the system." It could have created the chance of being killed by small caliber weapons as d20 modern did, so it obviously is within the "limitations of the system." It chose not to go that route, again by design.

Again (funny how that keeps cropping up), within the scope of a 1 minute death, a .22 is not at all likely to be lethal in a single shot. The D20 Modern rules do not reflect this. Do I need to draw pictograms or something?

Yes, I read your post. You gave the "fact" that someone survived three gunshot wounds as some sort of proof that 22 are not potentially lethal. That is no sort of proof. I could end up with a similar result in d20 modern if I just never happened to roll a critical that would allow me trigger MDT. Spycraft doesn't even have a similar potential. Again, by design.

OK, you read my post and didn't understand a bloody thing. The shot in question was a lung shot. That is not a "1" on a D20. That is a potentially fatal wound. However since D20 cannot simulate wounds which take a while to kill you, a major source of low caliber fatalities have been excluded. We are inherently limited to cases in which people drop and/or die immediately to have a weapon which is potentially lethal.

Maybe I'll try to find an artist somewhere...

And again, not necessarily. In spycraft (as in D&D), a person has multiple chances of stabilizing. In d20 modern, this is even more generous, since they are allowed fort saves instead of percentage rolls. Again, your argument here relies on ignoring stablization.

Are you being deliberately dense?
First you are arguing that low caliber rounds have to be more deadly to be realistic. Now you are arguing that people will live through them. Choose one, since you ought to realize they are mutually exclusive.

By D20 rules there is only one fatality condition for damage from a weapon. You get dropped to below 0 HP, either immediately to -10 and die right out, or bleed out over the course of about a minute. Thus any weapon which can kill you in a single shot, within the scope of these rules, must be able to drop a person and they must bleed out.

From my experience in reading sources on the topic and speaking with those who have first hand knowledge, .22s will not do that in any but the rarest circumstances (heart shot or lucky shot which pierces the skull). Thus, within the scope of D20 rules they should not be able to kill people (other than coupe de grace -which is the mafiosi bullet in the back of the head).

However D20 Modern, as I have said, will have a .22 dropping people 1 in 9 times. That is quite unrealistic.

buzzard

 

[buzzard]

Most NPCs have no action points. Only PCs and significant NPCs have actions points. Again by design.

You must be confusing D20 Modern with Spycraft. The GC has action DICE. He can apply them whenever he wishes. Thus if the Game Controller wants someone to die from a .25 to the head, it can be done. The GC gets 3+# of agents in action dice of d12 size. I guarantee that if he felt like applying all of those to a .25 shot, he would kill you.

buzzard

 

[Psion]

You must be confusing D20 Modern with Spycraft. The GC has action DICE. He can apply them whenever he wishes.

Sorry, I mispoke, but I sense you are either misinformed or are being pedantic. Minions cannot critical in spycraft (with the exception, of course, if you take the right thread abilities using the mission guide.)