Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Horwath" data-source="post: 7397768" data-attributes="member: 6801299">IMHO, all the damage is too low.Or firearm attacks ignore armor.But if for simplicity you want to keep the armor math then even 9mm should start at 3d6 damage. As it is impossible to dodge the projectile and no medieval armor or shield is going to hold the bullet.Also wounds from bullets are quite more deadly than arrows. Arrow hit is clean and straigth. Bullets break up, tumble while going through tissue and even do shockwave damage.If we had current level ER service in 14th century there would be maybe 10% of deaths from arrows after battle than what it was back then.Also fire rate. Maybe extra bullets per &quot;attack&quot; could be balanced by having cumulative attack penalty per shot because of recoil and the need to stabilize the weapon after each shot.&nbsp;Depending on the weapon it could be -3 per attack up to -10 per attack. Higher str could reduce the penalty by some amount.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Horwath, post: 7397768, member: 6801299"] IMHO, all the damage is too low. Or firearm attacks ignore armor. But if for simplicity you want to keep the armor math then even 9mm should start at 3d6 damage. As it is impossible to dodge the projectile and no medieval armor or shield is going to hold the bullet. Also wounds from bullets are quite more deadly than arrows. Arrow hit is clean and straigth. Bullets break up, tumble while going through tissue and even do shockwave damage. If we had current level ER service in 14th century there would be maybe 10% of deaths from arrows after battle than what it was back then. Also fire rate. Maybe extra bullets per "attack" could be balanced by having cumulative attack penalty per shot because of recoil and the need to stabilize the weapon after each shot. Depending on the weapon it could be -3 per attack up to -10 per attack. Higher str could reduce the penalty by some amount. [/QUOTE]

Verification