Quote from: GeekyBugle on November 02, 2021, 06:21:43 PM

Quote from: 3catcircus on November 02, 2021, 06:19:47 PM

Quote from: GeekyBugle on November 02, 2021, 06:16:11 PM

Quote from: 3catcircus on November 02, 2021, 06:13:51 PM

Quote from: GeekyBugle on November 02, 2021, 11:07:41 AM

Quote from: 3catcircus on November 01, 2021, 12:00:23 PM

Quote from: GeekyBugle on October 21, 2021, 11:55:39 AM
@Erik Diaz & Chris24601

Modifiers to hit : Untrained, Trained, Expert, range & RoF

Mofifiers to range: Calliber (not getting into 100's of guns/ammo) ex. Small, Medium, Large

Modifiers to Dmg: RoF, Calliber, Training & Range

Small guns are everything from .22 to .25, Medium .32 to .38s, Large .45 and up. Thinking of adding a "Magnum" type of gun, but it needs to be available to several callibers, so it would increase the price of the gun and ammo and the Dmg it does.

Might include "stingy" guns, this would be your derringer type guns with one or two shots before reloading.

Already did the research for the real range of all the firearms and bows, it's way larger than what you usually find on games that have modern firearms. What you usually find is ~1/10th of the real range and some times less than that (WTAFF!?).

The gun porn will maybe be an apendix.

This.  I would urge anyone who wants to use firearms in their games to go spend some time looking through Twilight:2000 forums. 

I've got the first 3 versions of the game and prefer the Twilight:2013 rules because they are "realistic" without being unwieldy (one of the designers shared the firearms building rules which are based on actual ballistics calculations - give me any firearm from a little pocket .25 to a .50 anti-material rifle and I can stat it up in the TW:2013 rules.  *Most* firearms have nearly the same stats if they have similar bullet mass and muzzle velocity - to the point that a generic "9mm handgun" and a "Glock 17L" and a "Browning HP-35" are going to essentially have the same stats. 

I also recommend their combat and damage rules.  No "100% effective anywhere from 100 down to 1 hp and then suddenly you shut down at 0 hp." Wound levels/locations that affect mental/physical abilities, shock, death due to blood loss are all in there and it's not unwieldy.

Hunting down the game rules, thanks.

Yep.  Different rules than d20/D&D, but they can be adapted.

https://www.drivethrurpg.com/m/product/58794

When you find a better hammer you switch hammers.

Bolting on mechanics is the least of my problems, don't get me started trying to populate, Venus, Mars, Mercury?, The Moon and the jovian moons...

Stage I rules for the game are free.

Right on! Does that include the gun rules?

Unfortunately, the *design* rules are not part of the game rules, but you should be able to see them in action in the Stage I rules.

And I misspoke - they're $5.99 for Stage I rules.

I'll ask if I can post the link to the firearms design guidelines.

Quote from: Kyle Aaron on November 02, 2021, 09:24:27 PM
Yes. Not with positive thinking - with well-trained and well-equipped professionals. And they weren't running and gunning while in the hospital waiting room.

Well, PCP is also an option but it's not really one for continued survival.

Quote from: Ghostmaker on November 02, 2021, 09:19:37 PM

Quote from: Kyle Aaron on November 02, 2021, 06:57:24 PM

Quote from: 3catcircus on November 02, 2021, 06:17:25 PMa lot of the time (fatal head or chest shot or severed arteries aside), cops and soldiers who get shot with a non-fatal wound fall over incapacitated because that's what they see on tv and that is what they expect

"You too can ignore bullet wounds with the power of positive thinking!"

Um, no.

People have been known to survive ridiculous damage. Granted, that's with top medical aid given within the hour (hence the 'golden hour').

Here's where I remembered reading about this:

http://nononsenseselfdefense.com/activeshooter.html#gunshotwound

Needless to say, the entire site is a wealth of info about getting shot, stabbed, etc., and more importantly, avoiding it in the first place.

  Surviving trauma is an odd thing in real life.  Some people survive insane punishment with little medical treatment, and others die from getting punched in the head once.   I think trying to simulate reality in a game is complete folly.  I think having consistent rules for emulating the Game's reality will be much more useful. 

Quote from: oggsmash on November 02, 2021, 09:58:07 PM
  Surviving trauma is an odd thing in real life.  Some people survive insane punishment with little medical treatment, and others die from getting punched in the head once.   I think trying to simulate reality in a game is complete folly.  I think having consistent rules for emulating the Game's reality will be much more useful.

In any game IMHO the search for realism is utter bollocks, much better to search for internal consistency and verisimilitude within the game.

Quote from: HappyDaze on November 02, 2021, 08:07:48 PM

Quote from: Kyle Aaron on November 02, 2021, 06:57:24 PM

Quote from: 3catcircus on November 02, 2021, 06:17:25 PMa lot of the time (fatal head or chest shot or severed arteries aside), cops and soldiers who get shot with a non-fatal wound fall over incapacitated because that's what they see on tv and that is what they expect

"You too can ignore bullet wounds with the power of positive thinking!"

Um, no.

I think that was an actual power in Scion. There was definitely one where you couldn't be hurt by an attacker you were unaware of because, to you, they effectively didn't exist until you acknowledged them.

Is that Looney Tunes rules? You don't fall until you look down, and you don't bleed until you notice the shooter?

Quote from: Charon's Little Helper on November 02, 2021, 10:43:17 PM

Quote from: HappyDaze on November 02, 2021, 08:07:48 PM

Quote from: Kyle Aaron on November 02, 2021, 06:57:24 PM

Quote from: 3catcircus on November 02, 2021, 06:17:25 PMa lot of the time (fatal head or chest shot or severed arteries aside), cops and soldiers who get shot with a non-fatal wound fall over incapacitated because that's what they see on tv and that is what they expect

"You too can ignore bullet wounds with the power of positive thinking!"

Um, no.

I think that was an actual power in Scion. There was definitely one where you couldn't be hurt by an attacker you were unaware of because, to you, they effectively didn't exist until you acknowledged them.

Is that Looney Tunes rules? You don't fall until you look down, and you don't bleed until you notice the shooter?

2nd Edition had a similar psionic power called "Subjective Reality". Basically, if you disbelieve in something hard enough it can't hurt you.

Sorta like this video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t5-vt38GiA0.

Quote from: GeekyBugle on November 02, 2021, 10:41:22 PM

Quote from: oggsmash on November 02, 2021, 09:58:07 PM
  Surviving trauma is an odd thing in real life.  Some people survive insane punishment with little medical treatment, and others die from getting punched in the head once.   I think trying to simulate reality in a game is complete folly.  I think having consistent rules for emulating the Game's reality will be much more useful.

In any game IMHO the search for realism is utter bollocks, much better to search for internal consistency and verisimilitude within the game.

I could not possibly disagree with this statement more.  IMO a game should be as realistic as possible except where necessary to 1) simplify play or 2) accommodate any fantastic conceits of the system and setting.  Things are always adjudicated by common sense because it's impossible to have a rule for everything, and the closer to reality the game is, the better our common sense and RL intuition work.  I also find that the more realistic a game is, the more I care about the results.  TOON is fun and all, but I just can't take it seriously.

Quote from: 3catcircus on November 02, 2021, 06:17:25 PM

Quote from: Kyle Aaron on November 02, 2021, 06:06:11 PM

Quote from: Mishihari on November 02, 2021, 02:49:50 PMThere are plenty of true life stories about someone fighting on after being wounded then dying later of blood loss.  If you're trying to emulate fiction, they they're all over the place. 

If you're trying to emulate fiction, do whatever the fuck you want. There are a thousand different fictions. If you're trying to emulate reality, then you just have them make a roll, and if they get a critical success, they can ignore the wound and carry on. But most of the time they're just going to fall over.

However, if you want to argue that in reality some guy can get shot in the head, be gushing blood and fight on, then to be fair you have to balance that with the reality that some other guy can get shot in the leg and require 6 months of physiotherapy to be able to walk again, and he'll end up on a disability pension. Careful with that "but in reality" argument, you might not end up where you'd like to.

What we actually do in practice is pick and choose from reality and fiction. Most times the "realistic" game isn't really, it's just realistic-themed. It's reasonable.

To be fair, a lot of the time (fatal head or chest shot or severed arteries aside), cops and soldiers who get shot with a non-fatal wound fall over incapacitated because that's what they see on tv and that is what they expect, which more often than not leads to their dying when they would have survived had they continued to fight.

Do you have a source for this?  It sounds right, but I'd be interested in seeing the support.  EDIT:  I just read on and saw your source.  Do you have anything else?

Quote from: Kyle Aaron on November 02, 2021, 09:24:27 PM
Yes. Not with positive thinking - with well-trained and well-equipped professionals. And they weren't running and gunning while in the hospital waiting room.

Pretty sure he's not actually talking about eventual survival - he's talking about being able to continue to operate for a while.

Quote from: Mishihari on November 03, 2021, 02:16:20 AM

Quote from: 3catcircus on November 02, 2021, 06:17:25 PM

Quote from: Kyle Aaron on November 02, 2021, 06:06:11 PM

Quote from: Mishihari on November 02, 2021, 02:49:50 PMThere are plenty of true life stories about someone fighting on after being wounded then dying later of blood loss.  If you're trying to emulate fiction, they they're all over the place. 

If you're trying to emulate fiction, do whatever the fuck you want. There are a thousand different fictions. If you're trying to emulate reality, then you just have them make a roll, and if they get a critical success, they can ignore the wound and carry on. But most of the time they're just going to fall over.

However, if you want to argue that in reality some guy can get shot in the head, be gushing blood and fight on, then to be fair you have to balance that with the reality that some other guy can get shot in the leg and require 6 months of physiotherapy to be able to walk again, and he'll end up on a disability pension. Careful with that "but in reality" argument, you might not end up where you'd like to.

What we actually do in practice is pick and choose from reality and fiction. Most times the "realistic" game isn't really, it's just realistic-themed. It's reasonable.

To be fair, a lot of the time (fatal head or chest shot or severed arteries aside), cops and soldiers who get shot with a non-fatal wound fall over incapacitated because that's what they see on tv and that is what they expect, which more often than not leads to their dying when they would have survived had they continued to fight.

Do you have a source for this?  It sounds right, but I'd be interested in seeing the support.  EDIT:  I just read on and saw your source.  Do you have anything else?

https://www.personaldefenseworld.com/2018/01/gunshot-wounds-defensive-gunfire/

https://www.wildernessarena.com/supplies/weapons/gunshots-wounds-stopping-power-myth-vs-fact

https://www.wired.com/2015/12/what-really-happens-when-you-get-shot/

https://www.police1.com/officer-shootings/articles/why-one-cop-carries-145-rounds-of-ammo-on-the-job-clGBbLYpnqqHxwMq/

Quote from: Mishihari on November 03, 2021, 02:14:56 AM

Quote from: GeekyBugle on November 02, 2021, 10:41:22 PM

Quote from: oggsmash on November 02, 2021, 09:58:07 PM
  Surviving trauma is an odd thing in real life.  Some people survive insane punishment with little medical treatment, and others die from getting punched in the head once.   I think trying to simulate reality in a game is complete folly.  I think having consistent rules for emulating the Game's reality will be much more useful.

In any game IMHO the search for realism is utter bollocks, much better to search for internal consistency and verisimilitude within the game.

I could not possibly disagree with this statement more.  IMO a game should be as realistic as possible except where necessary to 1) simplify play or 2) accommodate any fantastic conceits of the system and setting.  Things are always adjudicated by common sense because it's impossible to have a rule for everything, and the closer to reality the game is, the better our common sense and RL intuition work.  I also find that the more realistic a game is, the more I care about the results.  TOON is fun and all, but I just can't take it seriously.

In the real world, groups of individuals solve problems.  In the game, a single individual handles everything.  Effectively, instead of the LAPD you're John McClane or Jack Bauer.  That's not REALISTIC nor should it be.  Realism doesn't work well for a game that includes any elements of danger.  Getting in a car accident is bad news in real life, but it's usually survivable in movies or other media.

Consistency is good; knowing how the physics of the game is also important.  Falling from a 10-story building is nearly always fatal in real life.  In a game, if that's always fatal, that's fine.  If it's survivable, that's fine.  The important thing is that players KNOW and the results are consistent with expectations.  If that involves a certain amount of suspension of disbelief, that's a GOOD THING.

For example, a space-faring game that doesn't include Faster-than-Light travel isn't worth playing.  It doesn't matter AT ALL whether it is realistic - it just matters that it SEEMS realistic in the game.  Likewise, any system that includes MAGIC should not aim for realism.

Verisimilitude is king. 

Quote from: deadDMwalking on November 03, 2021, 03:21:15 PM

Quote from: Mishihari on November 03, 2021, 02:14:56 AM

Quote from: GeekyBugle on November 02, 2021, 10:41:22 PM

Quote from: oggsmash on November 02, 2021, 09:58:07 PM
  Surviving trauma is an odd thing in real life.  Some people survive insane punishment with little medical treatment, and others die from getting punched in the head once.   I think trying to simulate reality in a game is complete folly.  I think having consistent rules for emulating the Game's reality will be much more useful.

In any game IMHO the search for realism is utter bollocks, much better to search for internal consistency and verisimilitude within the game.

I could not possibly disagree with this statement more.  IMO a game should be as realistic as possible except where necessary to 1) simplify play or 2) accommodate any fantastic conceits of the system and setting.  Things are always adjudicated by common sense because it's impossible to have a rule for everything, and the closer to reality the game is, the better our common sense and RL intuition work.  I also find that the more realistic a game is, the more I care about the results.  TOON is fun and all, but I just can't take it seriously.

In the real world, groups of individuals solve problems.  In the game, a single individual handles everything.  Effectively, instead of the LAPD you're John McClane or Jack Bauer.  That's not REALISTIC nor should it be.  Realism doesn't work well for a game that includes any elements of danger.  Getting in a car accident is bad news in real life, but it's usually survivable in movies or other media.

Consistency is good; knowing how the physics of the game is also important.  Falling from a 10-story building is nearly always fatal in real life.  In a game, if that's always fatal, that's fine.  If it's survivable, that's fine.  The important thing is that players KNOW and the results are consistent with expectations.  If that involves a certain amount of suspension of disbelief, that's a GOOD THING.

For example, a space-faring game that doesn't include Faster-than-Light travel isn't worth playing.  It doesn't matter AT ALL whether it is realistic - it just matters that it SEEMS realistic in the game.  Likewise, any system that includes MAGIC should not aim for realism.

Verisimilitude is king.

Exactly, 100% of the time.

Quote from: deadDMwalking on November 03, 2021, 03:21:15 PM

Quote from: Mishihari on November 03, 2021, 02:14:56 AM

Quote from: GeekyBugle on November 02, 2021, 10:41:22 PM

Quote from: oggsmash on November 02, 2021, 09:58:07 PM
  Surviving trauma is an odd thing in real life.  Some people survive insane punishment with little medical treatment, and others die from getting punched in the head once.   I think trying to simulate reality in a game is complete folly.  I think having consistent rules for emulating the Game's reality will be much more useful.

In any game IMHO the search for realism is utter bollocks, much better to search for internal consistency and verisimilitude within the game.

I could not possibly disagree with this statement more.  IMO a game should be as realistic as possible except where necessary to 1) simplify play or 2) accommodate any fantastic conceits of the system and setting.  Things are always adjudicated by common sense because it's impossible to have a rule for everything, and the closer to reality the game is, the better our common sense and RL intuition work.  I also find that the more realistic a game is, the more I care about the results.  TOON is fun and all, but I just can't take it seriously.

In the real world, groups of individuals solve problems.  In the game, a single individual handles everything.  Effectively, instead of the LAPD you're John McClane or Jack Bauer.  That's not REALISTIC nor should it be.  Realism doesn't work well for a game that includes any elements of danger.  Getting in a car accident is bad news in real life, but it's usually survivable in movies or other media.

Consistency is good; knowing how the physics of the game is also important.  Falling from a 10-story building is nearly always fatal in real life.  In a game, if that's always fatal, that's fine.  If it's survivable, that's fine.  The important thing is that players KNOW and the results are consistent with expectations.  If that involves a certain amount of suspension of disbelief, that's a GOOD THING.

For example, a space-faring game that doesn't include Faster-than-Light travel isn't worth playing.  It doesn't matter AT ALL whether it is realistic - it just matters that it SEEMS realistic in the game.  Likewise, any system that includes MAGIC should not aim for realism.

Verisimilitude is king.

re: magic.  Doesn't this sorta still matter?  What I'm getting at is there is nothing wrong with making it so that someone who gets hit with a fireball and saves manages to get somewhat burned but lives to tell the tale if they manage to put out any flammable items on their person that are still on fire after the initial blast but someone who fails is going to have 3rd/4th degree burns and probably die soon after the blast. 

That's the disconnect - things that we have a real-world basis for need to feel realistic.  Things like fire damage, falling damage, drowning, asphyxia, a stabbing, etc. we have a better understanding of then what a mace could do to a skull or the insidiousness of a hydrofluoric acid exposure death or being transmuted by aboleth slime.

If you can Google image search it on Documenting Reality, having the game emulate it might not be a bad thing...

Quote from: deadDMwalking on November 03, 2021, 03:21:15 PM

For example, a space-faring game that doesn't include Faster-than-Light travel isn't worth playing.  It doesn't matter AT ALL whether it is realistic - it just matters that it SEEMS realistic in the game.  Likewise, any system that includes MAGIC should not aim for realism.

Verisimilitude is king. 

Since you apparently missed half of a very short post, I'll repeat it ...

Quote from: Mishihari

... except where necessary to 1) simplify play or 2) accommodate any fantastic conceits of the system and setting ...

If your setting requires FTL, then put it in there, but anything that isn't important to the game premise should be kept realistic.  Far too often, I see arguments that because not everything is realistic then realism isn't important for anything.  Which leads to lousy game design, IMO.