Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Tony Vargas" data-source="post: 7621098" data-attributes="member: 996">Damage shouldn't be a sticking point in modeling firearms - they kill people, so do knives, clubs, knitting needles, slipping in the shower, and swans - they need to do damage,  but it needn't be crazy.With older firearms, RoF could actually render them pointless in the context of 6-second rounds, while the RoF of a revolver or semi-automatic weapon could be problematic in the other direction... and then there're automatic weapons. So there's that.Then, as I said, there's the gunfight tropes that permeate fiction.  Lots & lots of bullets, few off then contacting human flesh, with those that do tending to instantly kill minor characters while consistently finding the hero's shoulder (which, realistically is a much nastier wound than old westerns'd have us believe, but thats so not the point - so's getting brained with a mace). Then there's the whole guns are magic wans thing - mind-control devices and talismans that protect you from bullets as long as you keep shooting......But, to D&D sensibilities, a gun is a weapon, weapons do damage, iff they hit, otherwise, nothing  -if they make people drop prone or surrender or whatever, it can only be because of fear of massive damage, and if you empty a glock twice without hitting anyone, you must just be a terrible shot.  That's not tenable - resolving 32 shots as individual attacks, none of which hit, is going to be tedious and make the gunfighters look like clowns.So, it's not just the system, it's attitudes and expectations.</blockquote>

Verification