This is a site for discussing roleplaying games. Have fun doing so, but there is one major rule: do not discuss political issues that aren't directly and uniquely related to the subject of the thread and about gaming. While this site is dedicated to free speech, the following will not be tolerated: devolving a thread into unrelated political discussion, sockpuppeting (using multiple and/or bogus accounts), disrupting topics without contributing to them, and posting images that could get someone fired in the workplace (an external link is OK, but clearly mark it as Not Safe For Work, or NSFW). If you receive a warning, please take it seriously and either move on to another topic or steer the discussion back to its original RPG-related theme.
NOTICE: Some online security services are reporting that information for a limited number of users from this site is for sale on the "dark web." As of right now, there is no direct evidence of this, but change your password just to be safe.

Author Topic: Lets talk guns and granularity in RPGs  (Read 4780 times)

PsyXypher

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 11
  • Aspiring Game Designer
Re: Lets talk guns and granularity in RPGs
« Reply #90 on: October 24, 2021, 02:11:25 AM »

Don't quote me on this cuz I could be remembering wrong, but there's one edition, I think, that does take bleeding into account. Now, I might be missremembering and confusing a clone with D&D.


I wanna say it's the Unearthed Arcana for 3.5...lemme check. http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/adventuring/vitalityAndWoundPoints.htm Here we go.

Kyle Aaron

  • high-minded hack
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9223
  • high-minded hack
    • The Viking Hat GM
Re: Lets talk guns and granularity in RPGs
« Reply #91 on: October 24, 2021, 03:32:42 AM »
It's notable that the people who you'd think care - police and military - simply don't pay attention to calibres in statistics of death and wounding among their people.

From the FBI collation of officers feloniously killed:

2010-19         
Type of weapon, Incidents,   WIA,   KIA
Firearms - 22,088 - 2,032 - 471
Knife   - 10,008 - 1,201 - 3
Personal (fists etc) - 436,630 - 127,059 - 5
There were also 32 homicides with a vehicle, but they don't record how many assaults. For injuries they don't record firearm type at all, but for homicides they break it down into handgun, rifle or shotgun.

In the military stats mentioned by the pseudonymous Charles Franklin, calibre is likewise not considered at all, all that matters is whether the body armour stops it. In his proposed alteration of GURPS rules, he has just a few modifiers to wound severity, and a lot more to armour penetration.

Chris24601

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • C
  • Posts: 2083
Re: Lets talk guns and granularity in RPGs
« Reply #92 on: October 24, 2021, 08:58:21 AM »
The BS with bullets, knives, swords or anything that causes BLEEDING in real-life is it doesn't translate well to TTRPGs. I suppose the key is keeping the PCs upright ... BUT ... I have to suspend my disbelief when a PC/NPC gets hit with an axe and takes X HP loss AND NO MORE LOSS FOR THE CONTINUED BLOOD LOSS because they continued to fight rather than bandage the wound.

D&D has always been, from the beginning, an arcade game. GURPS and Hero System addressed bleeding. Made it something to deal with. But, man --- to hear players whine about it. Most players just want to be comic book superheroes stomping through an adventure. This whole culture of gaming --- I mean it is what it is.

Let me run you through Phoenix Command or a gritty game of GURPS where, YEAH, your PC can bleed out and die from an injury. It forces a player to prioritize what's important. Attack? Okay but you lose another X HP. Stop and handle the wound? You're out of combat a round or two.

Bleeding wounds change the game. But, so many players look at that as "adversarial". Heaven forbid the game has a certain level of verisimilitude.

I get D&D damage is abstract. It's nonsense damage. Okay. No wounds, no bleeding. This is why D&D is a "Gateway Game" to more sophisticated systems like GURPS & HERO. D&D is playing with your Invisible Barbie.

Enjoy.
This only applies though if hit points are entirely meat. You envision the axe hit as landing dead center and penetrating into flesh. I envision the axe hitting armor and glancing off, leaving maybe a bruise to the flesh underneath, or where the target blew a bunch of their stamina reserves on a desperate evasion… both of which diminish your durability, but not in a wat that means you’re bleeding out from an axe in the middle of the skull.

If anything, the idea that PCs are running around with dozens of arrow, sword and axe holes in their flesh because every hit must look like a direct penetrating blow is what is video-gamey. Instead of always going “the axe cleaves into his gut for X damage” try “the axe connects but glances off as the target maneuvers so his armor deflects most of the blow; its clearly winded him though… he won’t be able to keep it up for long.”

deadDMwalking

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2342
Re: Lets talk guns and granularity in RPGs
« Reply #93 on: October 24, 2021, 09:55:44 PM »
I'm putting together an old west game, and my players don't really want to have to learn about different calibers and especially not about different clambering.

As a result we'll distinguish between small pistols (.22), medium pistols (.38), and large pistols (.44).  We'll have buffalo rifles (.50) but probably won't specify the size.  Some rifles (like a Winchester) will use the same ammo as pistols.

In fantasy we give crossbows a STR bonus to damage.  I'm still going to finalize the damage of each type, but am leaning toward 1d6+4 for a Derringer with Armor Penetration 0 and scaling up, possibly 2d6+6, 2d8+8 and maybe 4d6+12. 

We're not tracking individual shots in most cases.  If a player didn't reload a revolver they'll roll a d6 before they can attack the following round.  A 1 will indicate that they either spent all of their ammunition in the preceding round or suffered a misfire.  Players will have an incentive to reload every round to avoid potentially having their pistol fail at a critical moment.  A box of ammunition will represent a certain number of 'reloads' rather than a specific cartridge count.
When I say objectively, I mean 'subjectively'.  When I say literally, I mean 'figuratively'.  
And when I say that you are a horse's ass, I mean that the objective truth is that you are a literal horse's ass.

There is nothing so useless as doing efficiently that which should not be done at all. - Peter Drucker

Ghostmaker

  • Chlorine trifluoride
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2511
Re: Lets talk guns and granularity in RPGs
« Reply #94 on: October 25, 2021, 07:59:55 AM »
It's notable that the people who you'd think care - police and military - simply don't pay attention to calibres in statistics of death and wounding among their people.

From the FBI collation of officers feloniously killed:

2010-19         
Type of weapon, Incidents,   WIA,   KIA
Firearms - 22,088 - 2,032 - 471
Knife   - 10,008 - 1,201 - 3
Personal (fists etc) - 436,630 - 127,059 - 5
There were also 32 homicides with a vehicle, but they don't record how many assaults. For injuries they don't record firearm type at all, but for homicides they break it down into handgun, rifle or shotgun.

In the military stats mentioned by the pseudonymous Charles Franklin, calibre is likewise not considered at all, all that matters is whether the body armour stops it. In his proposed alteration of GURPS rules, he has just a few modifiers to wound severity, and a lot more to armour penetration.
Possibly because caliber isn't as much of a issue as muzzle velocity/force, except at the far ends of of the curve? Just speculating here.

jhkim

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9412
Re: Lets talk guns and granularity in RPGs
« Reply #95 on: October 25, 2021, 02:01:29 PM »
D&D has always been, from the beginning, an arcade game. GURPS and Hero System addressed bleeding. Made it something to deal with. But, man --- to hear players whine about it. Most players just want to be comic book superheroes stomping through an adventure. This whole culture of gaming --- I mean it is what it is.

Let me run you through Phoenix Command or a gritty game of GURPS where, YEAH, your PC can bleed out and die from an injury. It forces a player to prioritize what's important.
This only applies though if hit points are entirely meat. You envision the axe hit as landing dead center and penetrating into flesh. I envision the axe hitting armor and glancing off, leaving maybe a bruise to the flesh underneath, or where the target blew a bunch of their stamina reserves on a desperate evasion… both of which diminish your durability, but not in a wat that means you’re bleeding out from an axe in the middle of the skull.

I feel both of these are missing some things.

(1) Not dying from bleeding isn't just a video game trope - it's also true of a lot of the fiction. It's not just superheroes - loads of fantasy and genre films have characters taking wounds and continuing with just a grimace or similar. Even movies based on real life often have unrealistic handling of guns, wounds, and similar. (I think of Black Hawk Down, for example.)

(2) Conversely, bleeding rules do make a concrete difference in the game that is different than D&D hit points. With D&D hit points, it's impossible that you be up and fighting now, but then collapse later without more damage being done to you.

Theory of Games

  • Disaffected Game Warrior
  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 282
Re: Lets talk guns and granularity in RPGs
« Reply #96 on: October 25, 2021, 07:49:59 PM »
The BS with bullets, knives, swords or anything that causes BLEEDING in real-life is it doesn't translate well to TTRPGs. I suppose the key is keeping the PCs upright ... BUT ... I have to suspend my disbelief when a PC/NPC gets hit with an axe and takes X HP loss AND NO MORE LOSS FOR THE CONTINUED BLOOD LOSS because they continued to fight rather than bandage the wound.


D&D has always been, from the beginning, an arcade game. GURPS and Hero System addressed bleeding. Made it something to deal with. But, man --- to hear players whine about it. Most players just want to be comic book superheroes stomping through an adventure. This whole culture of gaming --- I mean it is what it is.

Let me run you through Phoenix Command or a gritty game of GURPS where, YEAH, your PC can bleed out and die from an injury. It forces a player to prioritize what's important. Attack? Okay but you lose another X HP. Stop and handle the wound? You're out of combat a round or two.

Bleeding wounds change the game. But, so many players look at that as "adversarial". Heaven forbid the game has a certain level of verisimilitude.

I get D&D damage is abstract. It's nonsense damage. Okay. No wounds, no bleeding. This is why D&D is a "Gateway Game" to more sophisticated systems like GURPS & HERO. D&D is playing with your Invisible Barbie.

Enjoy.

I mean, if you're going with a hyper-realistic sort of game, then yes, D&D doesn't do that. But if you want a game that runs off rule of cool, D&D's Hit Points do that pretty well. Not everyone wants a game like Cyberpunk 2020 where the only thing between you and death is rolling lower on your initiative than your opponent. I personally like a good slugfest between characters.

I very much disagree that this breaks verisimilitude. Those wounds should have a chance to get infected too, but that's not really fun, is it? Not for most people. There's nothing wrong with wanting a sort of comic book superhero physics to the world. That's why some games have more realistic wounding systems than others.
Exactly. Certain systems brings varying degrees of verisimilitude. My point was using "Guns" for anything D&D wasn't akin to reality since D&D HP loss has nothing to do with actual ballistic injury. As Tim Kask has repeatedly stated, D&D HP loss is an "abstract" --- an "ouchy" rather than bleeding wounds that result in long-term damage and scarring.

And yeah, that arcade-style damage does break verisimilitude with some players looking for something more "real". Thus, I suggested GURPS or Phoenix Command or any other system that accommodates those kinds of groups. "FUN" is up to each and every group, not one non-existent overriding body of Twitterati trying to tell the rest of us we're playing games wrong.

I'm sure you agree no one outside your group can tell you how to run or play your games/stories.

Kyle Aaron

  • high-minded hack
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9223
  • high-minded hack
    • The Viking Hat GM
Re: Lets talk guns and granularity in RPGs
« Reply #97 on: October 25, 2021, 10:01:29 PM »
Possibly because caliber isn't as much of a issue as muzzle velocity/force, except at the far ends of of the curve? Just speculating here.
The main difference is between handguns and rifles. Past 1,200fps you get a lot, lot more damage.

That, and shot placement - which is essentially just chance on the two-way firing range. And that's why in police-suspect shootouts, from around the world as I said,
Quote
In one big study of police-suspect shootings, the cops fired something like 5-6 rounds if the suspect was unarmed, and 10-14 rounds if he was armed. About 1 in 3 rounds hit when the guy was unarmed, and about 1 in 6 when he was armed. Either way it's 1-3 hits and he goes down.