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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Argyle King" data-source="post: 6067001" data-attributes="member: 58416">The .22 is often used because it tends to tumble and ricochet inside the target rather than just punching through.  This causes more internal damage.  There are similar reasons behind why the US uses the 5.56 round instead of the more common 7.62.As for the .50 cal... I can assure you that it is as effective as you'd think.  I'd go so far as to say many action movies actually downplay what an actual .50 cal will do.  From real world experience, I can honestly say that I've seen what just one round for a M2 will do to a human being's head, and I assure you that it isn't pretty.  Suffice to say the entry wound was rather impressive in size; when I looked for the exit wound, I discovered that the back of the target's skull was missing.  You're right; bigger isn't always better.  However, there are reasons for why those weapons were invented.  In the context of D&D, why those weapons were invented doesn't often come into play because the combat system is abstract enough that we wouldn't notice. For example, slashing weapons (such as a sword) often have a very hard time getting through armor.  A weapon like an axe or a war pick which can act as a lever to amplify the user's strength (especially in the case of the pick) can very easily get through some of the very armor that a slashing sword might struggle against.  In D&D, all of that is (usually) handled by attacks vs AC.What I mentioned about being a lever is true too.  Weapons which are designed to be swung are designed that way to leverage the strength of the user.  Take a look at a simple hammer for nails; it's designed in that shape for a reason; with the right technique, it allows the user to impart more power into the head and the blow against the target.  Such weapons do have their downfalls though.  Typically, it is more difficult to recover from a swing and get back into a position where the user can defend himself.  In games which aren't D&D, that might be portrayed by saying the battle axe cannot be used to parry on the same turn it was used to attack.  In D&D -as already mentioned- we use attacks versus AC and different sizes of dice for damage, and that's it.  The game doesn't bother to illustrate those minor differences because it is beyond the granularity level of the game.  Those differences might not matter in an abstract system which doesn't care about such things, but there are indeed differences which matter.</blockquote>

Verification