Using a 20th level character as an example for anything in the way of realism is utterly specious. I am astonished that a person with any intellegence would do so.
Psion said:
There are rules for that situation, but they are cinematic rules. The SEH only allows you to use the CDG rules outside of the normal requirement of the target being helpless if you use the "dangerous situation" rule on page 179 of the SEH. This requires you to expend an action dice.
As I recall action dice are a fundamental mechanic of the game. Their required use does not invalidate the presence of the rule. Rather like using an action die is required to jam a weapon. This does not imply that weapons cannot jam.
Though now it is time for modelling 101, since you appear to be ignorant about how models are constructed and used. That is the central aspect to this discussion (in spite of your oft bandied words of strawman and ad hominem).
Say I want to cast a block of aluminum in a mold. Pretty simple stuff you would think. However, I need to know how much shrinkage there will be when I do this so I can design an appropriate feed system so the block has the right shape at the end, and the part doesn't require a bunch of machining after casting which would drive up the cost.
How do I do this? Do I try to simulate all aspects of solidifcation, heat transfer and fluid flow to make sure I can predict everything. Well I certainly can do that, but it is much more demanding on time and the expense of the modelling software. This I make decisions at the outset as to what I really need. Do I need to figure out the porosity of the final casting? Do I care how much of the microstructure is columnar or equiaxed? Do I need to understand local solidifcation conditions down to a very small size?
All of these question must be considered, and then you decide on a mesh size, what physics model to use, and what starting conditions you wish to run with.
For a shrinkage calculation you can often get away with just a heat transfer/solidification calculation. Because of the lack of fluid flow you have to choose a heat transfer approximation which compensates for convective heat transfer, and you probably have to make it temperature dependent. So you choose your model and you run with it. It predicts where the solidification voids will be, and you introduce feed system which keep those areas supplied with liquid aluminum until the block is fully cast, thus avoiding the problem.
Then, someone comes in and wants you to predict where the transition from columnar to equiaxed solidification occurs. You tell him that the model can't do that. If he then tells you that the model is unrealistic, would he be wrong? I mean you certainly did use a very approximate method when you subbed in the heat transfer numbers, but you simply couldn't simulate the fluid flow, and didn't need to. This could be called cinematic casting simulations, though quick and dirty would probably be more accurate.
Now that I have confused everyone, let me explain the relevance.
D20 is a model of reality. It is not very granular. It is quick and dirty. It could also be seen as cinematic, but that is a different aspect of the rules than the base mechanic in many ways.
In D20 the 'mesh size' is such that killing can only be done in the space of a 1 minute kill. This is the nature of the model. While there are certainly wounds in reality which can kill you that take longer than that, the D20 mesh cannot predict those wounds, and therefore keeps them from being potentially lethal. Those are the starting assumptions of the model. Once you have made those assumptions, you have to accept these limitations as to what is really predictable.
In D20 a dagger pretty much can't kill someone(OK it can on a crit). Many knife wounds kill people, and in a lot of cases this is due to internal bleeding. D20 does not simulate this. This is akin to asking my shrinkage model to predict microstructure. It simply can't. It is a level of detail which is outside the bounds of the system. That is not an issue of cinematic vs. realistic, it is an inherent issue of model complexity.
So now, back to guns. The problem with the D20 Modern numbers on small caliber weapons is that it is high enough to drop people right off the bat. This is an extremely unlikely occurance. Yes, it can happen, but my knowledge on the subject says its a much smaller chance than is within the granularity of the probability system. Of course your thirst for "real numbers" questions my view, and that's fine. I will justify my position momentarily (probably not to your satisfaction, but I get the impression that you only derive satisfaction from screaming about strawmen). I would question whether or not it is even possible to obtain information on the subject at had. Unless you managed some rather twisted experiment to find out how many people dropped unconscious immediately after the first shot under controlled conditions, then you cannot likely collect any convincing evidence.
But, back to my justification for caliber damage numbers.
First we have to accept the premise that pistols aren't all that deadly. It is a fact that far more people are shot by handguns and survive than die. If you require a cite for this, I suppose I could dig one up, but this is common knowledge. Rifles are more deadly (in general) than handguns. This is why the average grunt is issued a rifle and not a pistols (range is also an issue of course). Armies generally aren't stupid.
This leads to some considerations which we must make that have to fit our mesh. First of all the majority of pistol shots shouldn't kill people(immediately). Second, different calibers ought to do different damage since police departmens, gun enthusiasts, and special ops teams choose different calibers for different reasons.
If we look at D20 modern, there are very few damage categories.
you have 2d4, 2d6, 2d8 2d10 and 2d12. This provides for an increase in average damage of 2 for the increases (5,7,9,11,13). This covers the whole range from .25 ACP (a bad joke of a caliber) to the .50 BMG. Assuming we have 1st level people with 6 HP (reasonable methinks, since we need to have the model apply to normal people, otherwise we are being silly), then the majority of shots with any firearm except the low end (even those will disable 6 in 16), is enough to immediately drop someone. This does not reflect reality. Pistols simply aren't that effective.
Also because of the compacted range of damage options, differentiation between calibers is absent. A 9mm is a .40 cal, is a .45 is a 10mm. This has nothing to do with reality. The FBI adopted the 10mm because the 9mms proved inadequate in stopping power. The US SOCOM choose to have a pistol in .45 ACP since they decided that they needed more stopping power than a 9mm, which is the standard sidearm. In D20 Modern, there is no difference whatsoever.
This is a unnecessary lack of granularity. If this were the case, everyone would use a 9mm since you can carry more bullets. You will find that most police departments have been moving from the 9mm to higher calibers in search of more effectiveness. This aspect of reality ought to be considered. In Spycraft it is, in D20 Modern, it is not.
Let's look at the comparative power of different calibers, specifically .22 LR (the most powerful of the small caliber cartidges, though the .32 is sort of comparable). It fires a 40 grain bullet at maybe 1200 fps (from a rifle, less from a pistol). That's 173 joules of energy in a wound channel of .04 square inches cross section(yes, I know I'm mixing units, but energy is easier in metric).
Now let's compare this to my cartridge of choice, the .45 ACP.
It fires a 230 grain bullet at about 900 fps. This gives us 562 joules. The wound channel will be .16 square inches in cross section.
Thus we have about three times the muzzle energy, and about four times the wound size,and we do an average of two more points of damage. That doesn't work for me. Now granted, the max damage is 50% greater, but even that doesn't convince me.
How can this be resolved? Well I suppose you could up the damage of the .45 some more, but then we will have pistols probably being lethal beyond reality. Otherwise we can drop the damage at the low end. Of course we lose lethality for those weapons, but considering that their lethality is probably not reasonably reflected in our mesh size, I don't consider that much of a loss.
Though, as an aside, someone else mentioned shock. This is certainly a valid consideration, since most people drop from shock when injured. However shock is as much of a threat if I stick a knife in you as if I shoot you, so this should not enter into a considering of damage by caliber. Shock is also a rather varaible occurance, and won't necessarily set in immediately. Thus it isn't modelled generally in D20. It would be more appropriately done as a rule where if you are wounded you make a fort save to avoid shock. In the Pulp D20 game we play around here, everyone makes a fort save once they take wound damage or are rendered unconscious. This is a decent way of modelling shock IMHO.
Now of course you, Psion, are just going to disregard everything I just said and calculated, and yammer about strawmen, but I figured someone else might profit from the information.
buzzard
