Here's a link to the file.
And here's the text (sans tables, because I never learned how to put those into posts):
Generic Firearms
Firearm Types
Handguns are firearms that you can fire comfortably with one hand, although using two hands is traditional. All handguns use P-type ammo.
Derringers are very small pistols with only two bullets loaded internally. They're extremely easy to hide.
Revolvers have a central barrel that rotates each fresh bullet into place. They either break at the top via a hinge just in front of the trigger, or the barrel swings out to the side. Revolvers usually have 6 chambers for bullets, but you can upgrade them to 9 or 12.
Autoloaders take box ammo that loads the handle. You reload them by simply replacing the magazine. Autoloaders use P-type ammo.
Machine Pistols are essentially the same as autoloaders, but they can switch between semi-auto and fully-automatic fire.
Longarms are firearms that you can fire comfortably with both hands. You can fire them with one hand, but you take a -4 penalty. This isn't very realistic, but neither are superheroes. All longarms use L-type ammo, except Submachine Guns which use P-type.
Rifles have long barrels and fire single shots at a time. They are either internally loaded or take box ammo. Rifles use L-type ammo.
Shot Guns are basically the same a rifles, but they can fire rounds of shot (tiny steel balls) instead of bullets. The Double-Barrel Shotgun is an old favourite, and is "semi-automatic" because you can fire each barrel in rapid succession. The Sawed-Off Shotgun is usually illegal, but makes for a weapon that is easier to conceal, although it also drastically reduces the gun's range. Shotguns use S-type ammo.
Submachine Guns are mid-way between machine pistols and machine guns. They have fully-auto fire, and they require two hands to fire, but they use pistol rounds (P-type ammo).
Assault Rifles are fully-automatic, require two-hands to fire properly, but are light enough that one person can operate them. Assault rifles use L-type ammo.
Exotic firearms are weapons that require special training or finicky operation. Machine guns fall into this category because they are belt-fed and generally only used in military situations. Rocket and grenade launchers are exotic because they simply do not operate or fire like other firearms.
Machine Guns are fully-automatic rifles that are so heavy that they must be mounted to fire properly. If you are strong enough to lift one, you can attempt to fire a machine gun two-handed, but you take a -4 penalty to hit. If you are strong enough to life a machine gun with one hand, you can attempt to fire it one-handed, but you take a -8 penalty to hit. Machine guns use L-type Ammo.
Rocket Launchers literally launch self-propelled rockets. They're basically light plastic or fibre-glass tubes you can aim with. They are single-use items. The rocket destroys them after if fires. Rocket launchers use specialised, self-propelled rocket ammo.
Grenade Launchers shoot special grenades that are shaped like large bullets (see d20 rules for the kinds of grenades you can load into a Grenade Launcher). These simple weapons simply help you to get the grenade to a target. All other rules regarding attacking with grenades apply.
Rates of Fire
"1" means you must reload the weapon every time you fire it. It takes one round of ammunition at a time. "Single" means it requires manual action (i.e., **** the hammer, pull the bolt, etc.). "S" designates a semi-automatic weapon (it automatically loads the next bullet, usually through a slide, a spring-loaded magazine, or what have you). "A" indicates a fully-automatic firearm (it auto-loads and fires bursts of bullets). Finally, "S, A" means that the weapon can switch from semi-automatic to fully-automatic as a free action.
Ammo Capacity
Each gun has a maximum number of bullets it can carry, and a mechanical means to carry them. "Internal" firearms keep their bullets in the body of the weapon. "Cylinder" firearms keep their bullets in a rotating barrel. "Box" firearms keep their bullets in a pre-loaded magazine. Finally, "Linked" firearms take bullets that are linked to each other by small metal clips of 50 at a time.
Reloading a box firearm or a cylinder firearm with a speed loader (a device that holds the bullets and slips them all in the barrel at once) takes a move action. Reloading the individual bullets into a cylinder or into an Internal firearm takes a full-round action. You can link two belts of linked ammunition to each other as a move action, and thus maintain uninterrupted fire.
Ammo Type
Ammunition breaks down into three types. The types are "P" for "pistol," "L" for "longarm," and "Sh" for "shot." Each of those types has three weights (1, 2, and 3) which correspond to the three levels of damage that that weapon does. Therefore, all pistols and submachine guns that do 2d6 damage take P2 ammunition. All longarms that do 2d8 damage take L1 ammunition.
Shot are small containers of pellets, so when they fire, the pellets spread out in a wider area, but do less damage individually. As a result, it does -1 HPs for every range increment between the firer and the target.
There are also two kinds of non-lethal rounds, Rubber bullets and Bean-Bag rounds. Rubber bullets (and variations thereon) have also been made of wood, wax, and most recently plastic. We use "rubber" as a generic term for any handgun round that's designed to be, as it were, less-than-lethal. You can purchase rubber bullets for any firearm that takes P-type ammo, and they do 2d6 non-lethal damage, except on a critical hit, in which case they do 2d6 lethal damage.
Bean-Bag rounds are small pouches filled with lead balls. You must buy a special kind of Shotgun to fire Bean-Bag rounds, however, and they follow the same rules about lethality as plastic rounds: 2d8 non-lethal, except on a critical hit, in which case they inflict 2d8 lethal.
Size
The size of firearms dictates how you grip them and who can comfortably do so. If you are the same size as your weapon, you can use that weapon in one hand. If the weapon is one size larger than you, then you need two hands. If the weapon is two sizes larger than you, then you need to either set the weapon on the ground to fire it, or use a mount (like a bipod).
You can try to use a weapon that's a size too large for you in one hand (i.e., a medium-sized person with a large-sized firearm), but you take a -4 penalty to attack. You can also try to use a weapon that's two sizes too large in two hands (i.e., a medium-sized person holding a huge-sized weapon), but again, you take a -4 to attack. Finally, you can try to use a weapon two sizes too large for you in one hand (i.e., a medium-sized person with a huge weapon), but you take a -8 penalty to attack.
With weapons that require a mount, you must take a full-round action to set the weapon in place, either flipping up a mount and positing the barrel, or lying down and firing the gun from a prone position.
Restriction
The restriction of a firearm refers to just how easy/legal it is to get your hands on. The modifiers in Table 1 adjust the PDC of a weapon when you attempt to purchase it off of the Black Market. Bare in mind, however, that these restrictions refer to the United States, which has relatively lax gun laws compared to other Western nations. If your game is set in a nation with more strict gun laws, add +1 to all of the Restrictions.
Using brand-name guns for an RPG always just seemed like a recipe for disaster, to me, because they lead to endless debates about how accurate the stats are (fun debates for the gun-nuts, tedious if you're like me and don't really give a crap).
And as new guns come out (in the real world), there's bound to be a great deal of tech-creep. What I mean by that is that no RPG, certainly not one on Wizards' publishing schedule, could possibly keep up with the tech, so why bother trying? Just go generic. Of course, the same logic applies to most technology, which is perhaps partly why I'm drawn to a more fantastic genre, superheroes.
Finally, it seemed rather unfair from a feat point of view that you have to focus-then-specialise in a gun from a single manufacturer, whereas in D&D you can focus on "all shortswords," regardless of who made them and the subtle variations in between. Generic just seems like a better idea all around, to me.
The only compelling reason I can think of why to go specific if you really, really just like guns, which is a perfectly valid reason. It's just not something I share.
Edit: I was thinking, shouldn't we get Trappedslider to make a sticky post with all the various alternate rules etc. that have been made by the members here?
I think it adds a sense of uniqueness to your choices.*(edit: DURBEDUR NOTHING TO SEE HERE FOLKS)*
in the OP linked PDF.
As for generic gun games:
I agree with some of the above sentiments- I dont mind generic gun types if there is no attempt to squeeze in disversimilative detail of fanboy/MarketingHype
The OP does have it in a list kinda broke down into light/med/heavy
in the OP linked PDF.
whoops
its a table, so it would just be ugly if he posted here
The way I see it, you can still get your gun-nerd on with a generic gun system, the same way you can get your sword-nerd on in D&D. You buy a "Heavy Revolver" and then call it a Magnum .357 (or whatever). That's why I included some customisation rules, so that if the Heavy Revolver doesn't match up with what you think a Magnum .357 should do, then you can alter it to taste. It just seems to me that the easiest place to start is with generic guns that follow a specific stat progression, and then you can mess with them as you see fit (and pay for the privilege!).
We more or less tend to use generic bases with modifications tacked on. That fact just seems to get lost on people who get lost in the tech-talk and jargon.The beef most of us gun nuts have, with d20 Modern at least, is how the writers include the marketing hype and "details that set it apart from the rest" but make no mechanical differentiation what-so-ever. Its frustrating and ruins my sense of immersion to see:
"Gun X, medium size, 2d6 damage, 30ft RI, 12 box, semiauto, pdc 15"
and then:
"Gun Y is the successor of Gun X, and is better than Gun X in every way. Its more accurate at longer ranges and uses blahblah ammunition, which is a vast improvement over Gun X's bluhbluh ammo. Its recoil compensation and advanced gas distribution only help make it the BEST GUN EVAR!
Stats: Gun Y, medium size, 2d6 damage, 30ft RI, 12 box, semiauto, pdc 20"
). I know what you mean about useless flavour text. If it's not in the rules, then don't say it as if it's important. That's probably part of the reason I leaned towards the generic thing. "Just tell me what its stats are and I'll describe it in whatever way I like, thank you very much."
2d3: .25 ACP
2d4: .22 LR, 5.45x25mm, .32 ACP, 3.4mm flechette
2d4+1: .38 S&W, .380 ACP, 9x18mm PM, .38 Long Colt, 9x19mm (subsonic loading), .38 Special, .22 WMR, 9x18mm PMM, 5.7x28mm FN, 4.6mm HK, 7.62x25mm Tokarev
2d6: .38 Super, 9x19mm, .22 Hornet, .17 Remington, .338 nova, 4.35mm flechette
2d6+1: .357 SIG, .357 Magnum, 10mm Auto, .41 AE, .45 ACP, .45 Long Colt, .30 Carbine/7.62x33mm, 7.62x25mm Tokarev (Czech loading), .300 Whisper (subsonic loading)
2d8: .45 Long Colt +p, .44 Magnum, .454 Casull, .50 AE, .440 CorBon, .50 Alexander, .458 Socom, 5.45x39mm/.21 Russian, 5.8x42mm Chinese, 20ga, .223 Rem/5.56x45mm NATO, .44 AutoMag, .300 Whisper, 4.7mm caseless, 12mm, 10.7mm
2d8+1: 7.62x39mm M43/.30 Russian, .30-30, .243 Win, 6.8mm SPC, 7.92x33mm Kurz, .510 Whisper (subsonic loading), 14mm caseless
2d8+d6: .803 gyro
2d10: .270 Win, .308 Win, .30-06, 7.62x54mm, 7.92x57mm Mauser, .300 Win Mag, 12ga, .45-70 Gov't, .500 magnum, 8mm caseless
2d10+1: .444 Marlin, .450 Marlin Magnum, .45-70 +p, 12 ga 3" Magnum
2d12: .338 Lapua, .375 H&H Magnum, 10ga, 12ga 3-1/2" Magnum, .510 Whisper
2d12+1: .458 Win Mag, .505 Gibbs, .404 Jeffreys, .600 Nitro Express, .666 magnum
2d12+2: 8ga
2d12+3: .700 Nitro Express
2d12+4: .800 Nitro Express
2d20: 12.7x109mm Soviet, .50 BMG/12.7x99mm
2d20+2: 22.4mm
2d20+4: 12mm Ramjet
Cool! Is that all ammo that's in the core book, or does it include other stuff, too?
I think thats everything, and more.
However, your generic list falls into a misconception on assault rifles.
Remember, the definition of assault rifle is 'a selective fire rifle or carbine with a removable box magazine firing an intermediate power cartridge'
An assault rifle, by definition, is using 'gimp' ammunition.
Most people don't seem to realize that your basic hunting rifle hugely outpowers your basic assault rifle.
As you have a specific ammo class for shotgun, I suggest an ammo class for 'rifle'
Most people don't seem to realize that your basic hunting rifle hugely outpowers your basic assault rifle.
Yes, in terms of 1 bullet vs. 1 bullet.
Remember RoF, Ammo Cap, etc...
More often than not, Battlerifles are rolled in with Assaultrifles, simply because the difference often only lies in the cartridge. So calling the category Battlerifle or Combat Rifle instead would solve the problem. Military Rifle perhaps?
I was unaware the US military cant get into battles
because they have lots of AssaultRifles and no BattleRifles.
Most people don't seem to realize that your basic hunting rifle hugely out powers your basic assault rifle.
Looks like his AR is on par with his LightRifle 2d8
Looks like he put the 2d10 class (308 Up) as Medium Rifle
This falls inline with somebodys suggestion that ARs should be Gimped from standard (Med Rifle 2d10) medium average par normal hunting rifles
I of course feel d20Modern did a horrible disservice to the 50BMG as well as all MagnumRifles. Clearly the die progression with AGB should have gone
2d8 MagPistol / Carbines / Lt Rifle
2d10 Std Rifle
2d12 MagRifle (.375m up)
2d16 LilCanons (50BMG class)
The OP document does indeed put ARs in class with LightRifle and had correspondingly reduced damage(2d8) from standard rifles (MedRifle 2d10)
By introducing the old Sqrl caliber chart,
that wont necessarily crash the system.... because in reality we dont make very powerful guns without adding weight: Nobody has 416mag AR clones at 6.7lb. We do however have 50BMG handguns, which apparently NewtonianPhysics has failed to Gimp
However, your generic list falls into a misconception on assault rifles.
Remember, the definition of assault rifle is 'a selective fire rifle or carbine with a removable box magazine firing an intermediate power cartridge'
An assault rifle, by definition, is using 'gimp' ammunition.
Most people don't seem to realize that your basic hunting rifle hugely outpowers your basic assault rifle.
As you have a specific ammo class for shotgun, I suggest an ammo class for 'rifle'
I'm really unclear on what you're suggesting, here. You seem to imply, first, that Assault Rifles should have less damage (and/or Rifles should have more damage), but then you seem to imply that I can fix that by introducing a different kind of ammo for Rifles, but you don't really explain what that has to do with anything. Help me out, here? Tell me exactly what you're suggesting. I don't actually know what that is unless you tell me.
(Sorry if that sounds pedantic, but in the real world, I'm English teacher.)
I of course feel d20Modern did a horrible disservice to the 50BMG as well as all MagnumRifles. Clearly the die progression with AGB should have gone
2d8 MagPistol / Carbines / Lt Rifle
2d10 Std Rifle
2d12 MagRifle (.375m up)
2d16 LilCanons (50BMG class)
My little cannon? That come in pink, or am I going to have to stick with my AR and my Abrams?
but I just write "16" on the 17-20 sides of a d20.... presto: d16 ;)
That, or roll a d8 and a Penny, heads the penny is worth 8, tails it aint
what number cab be generated by other than just one combination?
Each 1-16 result is represented exactly once, even probability, just like a d16
The Multi-16 d20 is a statistical curve I like to refer to as "The Cheat 2 Win"
Come to think of it, where can I buy a d16 from?
Here :P
using the d8 + (0/8)Penny
what number cab be generated by other than just one combination?
Each 1-16 result is represented exactly once, even probability, just like a d16
The Multi-16 d20 is a statistical curve I like to refer to as "The Cheat 2 Win"
Oh. Whoops! Right you are. My bad.
I'm really unclear on what you're suggesting, here. You seem to imply, first, that Assault Rifles should have less damage (and/or Rifles should have more damage), but then you seem to imply that I can fix that by introducing a different kind of ammo for Rifles, but you don't really explain what that has to do with anything. Help me out, here? Tell me exactly what you're suggesting. I don't actually know what that is unless you tell me.
(Sorry if that sounds pedantic, but in the real world, I'm English teacher.)
My mistake, I missed your link to the actual weapon stats.
I assumed that any weapon which would take ammo type L would do the same damage per shot.
You should clarify that there is ammo type L1, L2, or L3, and same with the other ammos.
Also, now that I glance at that chart, didn't you put it forward once before.
I recall seeing it last time and thinking about the 'machinepistol' classes
#1 - why bother having the catagory "machinepistol-light" to represent the Skorpion 32acp machinepistol (which is actually larger than say a Glock 18) There are a lot of individual weapons not covered that are a heck of a lot more common that that one.
#2 - with the Bretta 92 and Glock 17 clearly defined as pistol-medium, why define the Beretta 93 and Glock 18 as machinepistol-heavy. I'd go with machinepistol -medium.
Heck, combine #1 and #2 and simply have one catagory of machinepistol...after all, that gets closer to your concept of 'universal'
also as soon as I saw your example of Remmy 700 for light rifle I thought 'wtf...that's meaningless...you can have a remington 700 in 22 hornet or 416 rigby!'
I'd suggest 'Lever action 30-30' would be a better example weapon of a 'light' rifle.
Same with your example on 'medium' rifle. I'd go with 'Remington 700 30-06' or 'M1 Garand' or 'H&K G3'
But really, I'd suggest like with pistols and revolvers, you split the rifle catagory into Manual and Automatic or Hunting and Military or something, and have different catagories of light and medium and heavy based on those two 'branches'
That way you can have a bolt action 30-06 as Hunting-medium and have a G3 as Military-medium (aka battle rifle...just like Military-light = assault rifle)
If it were me, i'd change the Barrett to 'antimaterial rifle' and have more than a one step die incriment on that one. (I'd maybe go 3d10 on it)
But it also needs all sorts of shooting restrictions.
Heck, i'd pull it out of it's current catagory all together and put it under exotics.
I'd include the weight of hte tripod mount in the Heavy Machinegun...and just define that with some sort of trait or something. You can run around a bit with a medium machinegun like an M240 (which you have down as huge) but the heavy machinegun is in an entirely different catagory. but again, I remember going over all this once before
I'd scrap the heavy shotgun it's not worth a special catagory (20 gauge is more common than 10 guage...going to have a shotgun-light in there too?)
The shotgun damage should be higher than Rifle-medium damage slightly...with some sort of mechanic for dropping damage with range. I am pretty sure you have that in there too, just not seeing it right now. Anyways, my first thought was to go 2d10, but 4d4 is always nice...heck, i'd go 5d4. That even leaves room for a 20 gauge at 4d4 and a 10 gauge at 6d4 if you were ever so inclined.
As you can probably tell, I know nothing about actual, real-world guns. I basically just abstracted the guns that are in the d20M manual right now. The numbers you see are basically the same as the numbers in the book, just smoothed out (to create more regular progressions) and given generic names.
I'm happy to change things around, but I don't want to get too hung up on the examples--on whether this or that gun should do X or Y damage--because that defeats the purpose of the "generic" element. The goal is "here are some numbers. Buy a generic Heavy Revolver and call it whatever you like." But I don't say that to dismiss your advice! I appreciate it very much. The goal of the examples is just to give players and idea of their range of options for description.
I had wondered about hunting rifles versus military rifles, and I gathered, from others' comments, that the difference is actually just context, so that's why I wrote it the way I did. I do like the idea of separating semi-auto rifles from bolt- or pump-action rifles. That seems like enough of a functional difference to warrent a new "class" of weapons.
As for diminishing shotgun damage... I just don't know what to think about that. I just read somewhere that that's emphasised out of proportion in a lot of representations of shotguns in popular culture, that the spread isn't actually more than a few inches at close-ish range, but I know nearly nothing about how they actually work, so I just have no idea what to say about that.
Now, I know a lot of the gun nuts on these boards simply want a game system that properly reflects the real facts they are familiar with. I guess if the GM was a RL doctor, then Treat Injury would be ready for a complete rewrite, and a professional race car driver would have a thing or two to say about the vehicle rules.
The simple two-dice system for ballistic damage works fine for me.
-DF
Thats why we came up with a damage table based on caliber.
The beef most of us gun nuts have, with d20 Modern at least, is how the writers include the marketing hype and "details that set it apart from the rest" but make no mechanical differentiation what-so-ever. Its frustrating and ruins my sense of immersion to see:
"Gun X, medium size, 2d6 damage, 30ft RI, 12 box, semiauto, pdc 15"
and then:
"Gun Y is the successor of Gun X, and is better than Gun X in every way. Its more accurate at longer ranges and uses blahblah ammunition, which is a vast improvement over Gun X's bluhbluh ammo. Its recoil compensation and advanced gas distribution only help make it the BEST GUN EVAR!
Stats: Gun Y, medium size, 2d6 damage, 30ft RI, 12 box, semiauto, pdc 20"
If I were to buy a gun book (and it's not high on my list of priorities, but if), I'd want rules for suping-up guns, buying them black market, buying antique or near-future guns, different kinds of ammo, add-on products, like longer barrels for range or something. I don't want five pages on the history of Smith and Wesson, and then a table with four guns in it.
So I basically agree with Narukagami, here. I am perfectly capable of inventing my own descriptive text. If I'm going to buy a gaming book, I want numbers in it. I don't got to Wizards for actual information about the real world. I go to them for gaming supplements.
I was floored and not impressed with how much description was in the Weapons Locker and how few numbers. I could look up all of that information on the the internet. I don't need to spend $50 on a book that essentially reprints wiki pages.
If I were to buy a gun book (and it's not high on my list of priorities, but if), I'd want rules for suping-up guns, buying them black market, buying antique or near-future guns, different kinds of ammo, add-on products, like longer barrels for range or something. I don't want five pages on the history of Smith and Wesson, and then a table with four guns in it.
So I basically agree with Narukagami, here. I am perfectly capable of inventing my own descriptive text. If I'm going to buy a gaming book, I want numbers in it. I don't got to Wizards for actual information about the real world. I go to them for gaming supplements.
Understandable... that is why I figured that your weapon could be customizable which is why I started my Weapon Accessories/Customizations and Munition Shell Loads sheet which I posted here on the boards which I am taking all suggestions/etcetera on them and additions for the pages
Here are the links to the posts;
Munitions; which I am still compiling the +d damage to each shot.
http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=1130234
Weapon Accessories/Customization:
http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=1131866
If I'm going to buy a gaming book, I want numbers in it. I don't got to Wizards for actual information about the real world. I go to them for gaming supplements.
Ain't that the truth!
Understandable... that is why I figured that your weapon could be customizable
I took a quick look at that. Some very useful stuff, once it's finished. Be sure to post a self-bump when you've filled all the boxes in with stats, eh?
I was floored and not impressed with how much description was in the Weapons Locker and how few numbers. I could look up all of that information on the the internet. I don't need to spend $50 on a book that essentially reprints wiki pages.
If I were to buy a gun book (and it's not high on my list of priorities, but if), I'd want rules for suping-up guns, buying them black market, buying antique or near-future guns, different kinds of ammo, add-on products, like longer barrels for range or something. I don't want five pages on the history of Smith and Wesson, and then a table with four guns in it.
So I basically agree with Narukagami, here. I am perfectly capable of inventing my own descriptive text. If I'm going to buy a gaming book, I want numbers in it. I don't got to Wizards for actual information about the real world. I go to them for gaming supplements.
Especially since a large portion of the numbers in Weapons Locker were wrong...
I tend to take a middle ground approach. I individualize weapons, but they end up in categories based on common features. After all, what's the in-game difference between an HK33 and an M16A1? Not a damn thing. Same caliber, same capacity, same size, same barrel length, same muzzle velocity, same damage, same accuracy. But maybe someone's better with an M16 than they are with an HK, so they can take Weapon Focus in one but not the other.
I just want weapons to make sense in relation to each other. Having the 5.7mm FN Five-seveN pistol do more damage per RAW than a 12-gauge 2-3/4" Foster slug is just ludicrous.
2d4 = light pistol/machine pistol/subgun (.32ACP, .380 ACP, 9x18mm Makarov, 7.62mm Longue, etc)
2d6 = medium pistol/machine pistol/subgun (9x19mm NATO, .40 S&W, .38 Special, 7.62x25mm Tokarev)
2d6+1 = heavy autopistol (10mm, .45 ACP, .45 Long Colt, .357 Magnum)
2d8 = heavy revolver (.45 Long Colt +p, .44 Magnum, .50AE, .41 Magnum, .454 Casull), light rifle (5.56x45mm NATO, 5.45x39mm, 7.62x39mm, .30-30)
2d10 = medium rifle (7.62x51mm NATO, 7.62x54mmR, .303 British, .30-'06, 7.92x57mm Mauser, .45-70 Gov't, .444 Marlin)
2d10+1 = magnum rifle (.375 H&H, .300 WinMag, .300 WSM)
2d12 = heavy rifle (.416 Rigby, .404 Jeffreys, .500 NE, .600 NE, other 'elephant gun' calibers)
2d20 = light antimaterial rifle (.50 BMG, 12.7x109mm Russian, etc)
Individual weapon factors should follow a pattern as well. Short-barreled rifles (AKSU-74, sub-14"-bbl ARs, Sig 552, Galil MAR, etc) might have damage penalties after the first range increment due to the lower velocity, but are easier to conceal and use in close quarters battle.
Basically, no gun should be 'better' than another gun that has identical caliber and features, unless there's a reason for it. For example, my Wilson Combat CQB 1911 is definitely better than a Hi-Point. Then again, it costs about as much as 15 Hi-Points put together. It also doesn't jam all the time.
Of course, you will get people arguing that certain guns are that much better, but that comes down to the DM.
In the end, you need a compromise between reality and game-balance so that you hit those magic things called "verisimilitude" and "suspension of disbelief."
I had wondered about hunting rifles versus military rifles, and I gathered, from others' comments, that the difference is actually just context, so that's why I wrote it the way I did. I do like the idea of separating semi-auto rifles from bolt- or pump-action rifles. That seems like enough of a functional difference to warrent a new "class" of weapons.
basically yes. The standard hunting rifle of today is the standard infantry weapon of World War 1 and 2.
Note, that these weapons were 'true rifles' firing high power full caliber projectiles. They had enough power to kill a man. Heck they had enough power to kill a moose! But moose attacks on the battlefield werent' terribly common, so power was lowered so the average grunt could carry more shots in his gun. Sure, modern gun couldn't kill a moose worth crap, but it could kill 30 guys...compared to the older more powerful gun which could kill 5 attacking enemy or 5 moose. In modern times moose still weren't prevelant on the battlefield, so it was generally a good idea. Except sometimes in rugged open terrain like mountains having the power and range to kill a moose means you can shoot and hit an enemy at a range where his gun is not very effective.
As for diminishing shotgun damage... I just don't know what to think about that. I just read somewhere that that's emphasised out of proportion in a lot of representations of shotguns in popular culture, that the spread isn't actually more than a few inches at close-ish range, but I know nearly nothing about how they actually work, so I just have no idea what to say about that.
Yes, in general it is overstated in video games...especially because most videogame are military oriented with military shotguns and woudl be using buckshot. Yet John Q Average 'holy sh!t here comes the (Insert one: Zombies, Canadian army, Goblins, Faulty-Programmed-Sex-Robots)' would reach for his 'duck shotgun' and a box of birdshot...and that does have diminishing returns based on range. (Think of the guy Dick Cheney shot)
A good 'rule of thumb' is a shotgun will spread about 1 inch per yard, and if anything that is overstating the spread, but it is pretty simple and easy to deal with.
I can definately see skipping the spread. As far as diminishing damage, I think I'd bring it into play just so people aren't trying to turn shotguns into long range rifles...yet not totally leave a guy impotent simply because the enemy is one inch beyond a magical game distance. We aren't talking about 'inside a building' ranges, we are talking 'half way down the block' you'd have a fair amount reduced damage using good old birdshot.
of moose on the battlefield has led to the demise of the need for highpower battle rifles,
the prevelance, or perception there of,
of a need to punch NIJ-IIIA troop armor has replaced the battlemoose.
So it looks like a good idea to actually separate out the bolt-/pump-action rifles, just so they're there, and give them basically the same stats as a comparable weapon, except their rate of fire.
Has anyone play-tested applying range increment penalties to damage as well as attack roll? Adoko's description of proper shot (not duck shot) made me think that might be the appropriate way to go. Just a stray thought, based on nothing more than what's been said here.
While the occurance, specificly the lack there of,
of moose on the battlefield has led to the demise of the need for highpower battle rifles,
the prevelance, or perception there of,
of a need to punch NIJ-IIIA troop armor has replaced the battlemoose.
"Except sometimes in rugged open terrain like mountains having the power and range to kill a moose means you can shoot and hit an enemy at a range where his gun is not very effective."
yup, moose killers work wonderfully for defeating armor that would stop your standard M-16 or AK-47
This also means Grandpa's old war rifle he brought back from WW2 might be a better choice than an M-16 if the Big Bad in your story decides to buy some lions and Zombieize them, or has genetically enhanced pitbulls, or you are facing bugbears or anything that is harder to kill then the average grunt...then going to the hunting rifle and world war 2 rifle is going to be a great decision.
So it looks like a good idea to actually separate out the bolt-/pump-action rifles, just so they're there, and give them basically the same stats as a comparable weapon, except their rate of fire.
here's what I suggest. Create the following 4 generic catagories
Assault rifle damg 2d8 Rng Inc 25M 30 box
Light Rifle damg 2d8 Rng Inc 25M 6 int
Battle Rifle damg 2d10 Rng Inc 30M 20 box
Medium Rifle damg 2d10 Rng Inc 30M 5 int
you could rename Light and Medium to 'carbine' and 'hunting rifle' or whatever you like.
Want to add a 'sniper rifle?'
Prescision Rifle Damg 2d10 Rng Inc 50M 5 box
that is using your damages. Personally I'd give medium autoloader and medium revolver 2d6 representing 9mm and 38 special, and I'd give heavy autoloader and heavy revolver 2d8 representing 45acp and 357 magnum,
Then I'd give assault rifle and light rifle 2d10...battle rifle and medium rifle get 2d12
Leave out Deagles and Barretts etc. If you are going generic you get off-course trying to recreate specific weapons especially ones that are far from the norm. If a player wants to label his 'heavy pistol' as a Deagle rather than a 'colt 45' then that's fine, he can do that. This also prevents people from basically buying into unbalance.
Spinning back to the pistol layout. I'd balance it such. All revolvers get +4 to any durability or jam or fail or whatever check.
Medium revolver has a low PDC making it a good choice for those created with low wealth.
Medium Autoloader vs Heavy (either) is a case of 15 shots of 2d6 vs 6-8 shots of 2d8. Both are good choices.
Heavy Autoloader vs Heavy Reviolver i'd up the revolver's range incriment a little bit, that plus the +4 durability makes up for having 2 less rounds.
This makes all 3 'standard' handguns good choices...allowing players to pick the gun that best fits their mental image without being hamstrung by getting a bad choice. (think back to the 2nd edition DnD days, where a longsword was 1d8/1d12 and a warhammer was 1d4+1/1d4...no one would ever pick a warhammer no matter how much it fit their character because the stats were too much of a hinderance)
and you even have the medium revolver for those guy who build characters with small amounts of starting wealth...plus a great weapon for the low level enemy to be using. (EvilCorps mall secuirty guards)
Has anyone play-tested applying range increment penalties to damage as well as attack roll? Adoko's description of proper shot (not duck shot) made me think that might be the appropriate way to go. Just a stray thought, based on nothing more than what's been said here.
IF you are going to assume that the users is using proper shotgun ammo and aren't going to worry about spread, then you probably don't need to put range incriment penaltyies to damage in for shotguns.
One thing that stands out to me on modern especially modern with monsters thrown in...and movies along a similiar line is that John Q average player and watcher seems to think running to the military hardware is the answer.
Generic action move or videogame or PnP game, Veloceraptor shows up...hero decides for more firepower he will dual-wield a pair of Glocks or maybe a pair of microuzis.
He's still just throwing out slow chucks of lead giving maybe 400 Ft-lbs of energy.
6 foot tall 10 foot long 1200 lb dino isn't going to care.
Now, if you got what THIS GUY is shooting you can pop a pack of Raptors and not break a sweat.
for comparison. 357 magnum = 600-800 ft-lbs of energy, 44 magnum = 800-1000 ft-lbs of energy, 50 AE per the Deagle is 1,200 ft-lbs of energy.
475 Linebaugh like he is shooting is giving 1750 ft-lbs of energy...in a package half the size of a Deagle. About the only thing that beats it is 500S&W, but that thing is the size of three of these.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5DZdfdAuxCA
You could wear the revolver John has there on your belt with an untucked shirt and no-one would notice...until the Bear on Combat drugs dropped in and proceeded to eat all the fools dual-wielding 9mm.
Same thing in shoulder weapons. Giant rampaging Gorilla? Hero always throws down his handgun and grabs a belt fed 556 machinegun (energy 1,200-1,500) and proceeds to deliver a large amount of fleshwounds.
However, if Hero would grab Grandpa's old 'Elephant Gun' in 416 rigby (5,500 ft-lbs energy)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n9fbo-9Dg24
and Mighty Joe Young is now Corpse Joe Young
of course, when people who know what they are doing shoot a heavy kicking gun it never is nearly as dramatic as the unskilled who loose control of the gun
This guy shoots the same gun as these other guys
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CQ0qwhOQWzE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QP_3C9IyccY
the first one isn't nearly as impressive without the second to demonstrate the power of the gun...gone bad.
I am saying that for me personally (and the kind of gamer that I think I represent), that level of realistic detail actually gets in the way of my cinema-fantasy fun. If I actually knew what kind of damage a M-16 could do (or for that matter, a rapier!), then I don't think I'd be able to play this game. It would be too disgusting.
Which is why I wanted to make generic guns. If you don't claim that the PC is buying an actual M-16, then I think he or she will be less likely to complain that the M-16's d20M stats don't make any sense.
Yeah. Right on man.
As a gamer, I can deal with a game that says
All Handguns 1d12
All Longarms 1d20
and ROLE play the game with a lot of enjoyment. Heck, we have one character that 90% of the time is unarmed, and Princess is not a KungFuJoe pugilist type character: She is role played as a noncombatant type character.
Akodo-
Just what are you talking about?
[INDENT]Assault rifle damg 2d8 Rng Inc 25M 30 box
Battle Rifle damg 2d10 Rng Inc 30M 20 box
Light Rifle damg 2d8 Rng Inc 25M 6 int
Medium Rifle damg 2d10 Rng Inc 30M 5 int[/INDENT]
He already has it setup that way... just ask for the BattleRifle to get on the list.
[INDENT]Assault Rifle (e.g., AK-47), 2d8, 80
BattleRifle (FAL/m14), 2d10, 80
Rifle, Light (e.g., Remington 700), 2d8, 90
Rifle, Medium (e.g., HK PSG1), 2d10, 90
Rifle, Heavy (e.g., Barrett Light Fifty), 2d12, 120
[/INDENT]
I disagree slightly on his use of Heavy Rifle as BMG rather than the 338-460mag class guns... I am willing to let that slide for an otherwise fine generic system.
Regarding your latter post,
all that is the reason why to use a Generic system rather than try to accurately model the relationship / verisimilitude of firearms energy and ability to impart that energy in the form of killingness, and how much killingness each different person/item can take before getting kilt.
more ramblings
One thing that stands out to me on modern especially modern with monsters thrown in...and movies along a similiar line is that John Q average player and watcher seems to think running to the military hardware is the answer.
Generic action move or videogame or PnP game, Veloceraptor shows up...hero decides for more firepower he will dual-wield a pair of Glocks or maybe a pair of microuzis.
He's still just throwing out slow chucks of lead giving maybe 400 Ft-lbs of energy.
6 foot tall 10 foot long 1200 lb dino isn't going to care.
Now, if you got what THIS GUY is shooting you can pop a pack of Raptors and not break a sweat.
for comparison. 357 magnum = 600-800 ft-lbs of energy, 44 magnum = 800-1000 ft-lbs of energy, 50 AE per the Deagle is 1,200 ft-lbs of energy.
475 Linebaugh like he is shooting is giving 1750 ft-lbs of energy...in a package half the size of a Deagle. About the only thing that beats it is 500S&W, but that thing is the size of three of these.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5DZdfdAuxCA
You could wear the revolver John has there on your belt with an untucked shirt and no-one would notice...until the Bear on Combat drugs dropped in and proceeded to eat all the fools dual-wielding 9mm.
Same thing in shoulder weapons. Giant rampaging Gorilla? Hero always throws down his handgun and grabs a belt fed 556 machinegun (energy 1,200-1,500) and proceeds to deliver a large amount of fleshwounds.
However, if Hero would grab Grandpa's old 'Elephant Gun' in 416 rigby (5,500 ft-lbs energy)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n9fbo-9Dg24
and Mighty Joe Young is now Corpse Joe Young
of course, when people who know what they are doing shoot a heavy kicking gun it never is nearly as dramatic as the unskilled who loose control of the gun
This guy shoots the same gun as these other guys
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CQ0qwhOQWzE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QP_3C9IyccY
the first one isn't nearly as impressive without the second to demonstrate the power of the gun...gone bad.
A lot of truth in this post, but I'd add one thing. Energy isn't everything. Shoulder-fired weapons can't pack enough energy to really utilize hydrostatic shock on large animals (such as buffalo, rhino, elephant, large dinosaurs, etc). When you get into that class of animal, you want a weapon that will punch a bullet deeply enough into the body to hit vital organs/structures. That's why most elephant hunters still use FMJ rounds instead of hollowpoints or softpoints. They need the penetration. This is especially important when you have a light rifle, like Karamojo Bell (who routinely took elephants with 7x57mm Mausers and .303 British rifles, cartridges considered suicidal for elephant work by most folks both now and back then).
With people-sized game, you can rely on hydrostatic shock from medium-caliber rifles, but not most handguns. Even a .44 Mag pretty much relies on the physical contact of the bullet with flesh to do damage. The permanent wound cavity won't be much larger than the bullet itself, and often times ends up smaller. A 7.62mm NATO round, with proper bullet design, will cause massive trauma to a human-size animal such as a deer, or a human.
Orion-
Akodo-
Just what are you talking about?
[INDENT]Assault rifle damg 2d8 Rng Inc 25M 30 box
Battle Rifle damg 2d10 Rng Inc 30M 20 box
Light Rifle damg 2d8 Rng Inc 25M 6 int
Medium Rifle damg 2d10 Rng Inc 30M 5 int[/INDENT]
He already has it setup that way... just ask for the BattleRifle to get on the list.
[INDENT]Assault Rifle (e.g., AK-47), 2d8, 80
BattleRifle (FAL/m14), 2d10, 80
Rifle, Light (e.g., Remington 700), 2d8, 90
Rifle, Medium (e.g., HK PSG1), 2d10, 90
Rifle, Heavy (e.g., Barrett Light Fifty), 2d12, 120
[/INDENT]
I disagree slightly on his use of Heavy Rifle as BMG rather than the 338-460mag class guns... I am willing to let that slide for an otherwise fine generic system.
Part of my recatagorization was because 'light' was represented by an average hunting rifle, and medium by a 'super accurate' sniper rifle. Part of my balancing was properly placing average hunting rifle in medium and a light carbine type in light
I too would just skip the Barrett, but one of the benifits of a generic system is to gun knowledgeable people like you and me, when we read 'sniper rifle-hevy, we glance at the dice, and then looking at how much more damage it is in our mind's eye say 'oh, a 300 winmag rifle' or 'oh a 338 laupa rifle' whereas the action movie fan can look at that same entry and say 'oh 50 cal sniperz riflez!' Same thing with heavy pistol, you can read into it what you want. I think that is why it is best to NOT put 'actionboy' names next to the generics, but rather more common names. Action movie fans will see the Deagle and the Barrett whever they want.
Regarding your latter post,
all that is the reason why to use a Generic system rather than try to accurately model the relationship / verisimilitude of firearms energy and ability to impart that energy in the form of killingness, and how much killingness each different person/item can take before getting kilt.
My point was that there is a tendancy to look to the military ONLY for 'better killing machine' It seems silly to me when games include multiple types of LMG and multiple types of MMG which are really going to be as rare as hen's teeth, but skip the fact that there are a bazillion 338 winmags floating around...and if there were an attacking Rabid Zombie Bigfoot your generic 338 winmag would be a heck of a lot more effective than an M249
A lot of truth in this post, but I'd add one thing. Energy isn't everything. Shoulder-fired weapons can't pack enough energy to really utilize hydrostatic shock on large animals
I partly agree and partly disagree. Yes, you need about 2200 ft per second if not more to get hydrostatic shock. However, bullet style plays a big factor. A lot of these heavy hitters specifically chose blunt noses, even though this is the exact opposite of what you want for flying through the air to the target.
it goes back to militaries using blunt rounded nose bullets in the 577/450 Martini-Henry or a 45-70 US Govt. having extreme stopping power against humans as well as large beasts. The brits roll into the 303 in the earliest blackpowder days with a spitzer bullet (pointy, more areodynamic in flight) having more energy than the old fat bullets in the old single shot guns, but really lacked stopping power.
deal is, the small fast spizter wasn't quite fast enough to generate hydrostatic shock, so the pointy little bulllet didn't do much. Soldiers started taking their knives and cutting the points off (both making it blunt and revealing the lead core within the brass jacket) and lethality greatly improved (as did the beginnings of the legend of Dum-Dum bullets) but later with better powders they were able to get high enough velocity to MATCH the stopping power of the old fat rounds who were killing just fine without hydrostatic shock.
If you've ever seen cattle shot with 'elephant calibers' and then the carcasses cut open to reveal the wound results, even though there wasn't any hydrostatic shock there was huge amounts of damage from the big blunt 416 rigbys or 458 winmags in there smashing the crap out of anything and everything as it plowed through.
If we are talking zombies and robots I don't think hyrostatic shock would even be relevant, but smashing the F*** out of the internals still would.
One thing that stands out to me on modern especially modern with monsters thrown in...and movies along a similar line is that John Q average player and watcher seems to think running to the military hardware is the answer
Of course military hardware is the answer.... I dont even need to know the question.
Some dude giving you trouble? 1911
Need more? m16 with ball.... or with AP if you got a tough target
Not enough? m14 Blacktip for the Velociraptor
Giant Gorilla? How "giant"? 50BMG, 20x102, 30x173?
40 Bofors, 57Auto, 76towed
LAW, AT4, 90RR, Javelin
and for swarms of LilNasties: m134, mk19, m202Flash, 155 'Uh-oh, Its raining grenades
and lets not forget the futuristic McStomp & GRKtG
of course there is a Military weapon for you problem, more so than hoping there is a civilian weapon that can get the big job done.
Of course military hardware is the answer.... I dont even need to know the question.
Some dude giving you trouble? 1911
Need more? m16 with ball.... or with AP if you got a tough target
Not enough? m14 Blacktip for the Velociraptor
Giant Gorilla? How "giant"? 50BMG, 20x102, 30x173?
40 Bofors, 57Auto, 76towed
LAW, AT4, 90RR, Javelin
and for swarms of LilNasties: m134, mk19, m202Flash, 155 'Uh-oh, Its raining grenades
and lets not forget the futuristic McStomp & GRKtG
of course there is a Military weapon for you problem, more so than hoping there is a civilian weapon that can get the big job done.
ha ha BACKWARDS
good luck having a Ma Duce available when needed, or being able to tote it aorund effectively. 1000 lb Gorilla? I'd take a 458 Lott in a fast handling bolt gun over a Ma Duce or a 57mm recoilless rifle.
I'ts also why the military constantly turns to civilian world for the fun toys. The Barrett 82 was originally designed for the sport 50BMG long range rifle shooting, and only later moved over military markets. The current M40A3 new fancy stock is just catching up to what civilan precision shooters have been using for decades. Most combat shotguns used by the military have been civilain shooters first. Those few shotgus designed from the ground up by the military or for military have generally been failures. Same with handguns, and rifles. Mostly success is gained by tweaking weapons already in useage by civilians for military use.
The Barrett 82 was originally designed for the sport 50BMG long range rifle shooting, and only later moved over military markets.
nice try
Johnny B made the 50BMG to fit that Long Distance Rifle role,
many many decades before Ronny B made a smaller magfed one.
Did the Army use civilian TommyGuns?
Or did Col Thompson make a military gun, and sold it first to the civilian market then the army. The Colonel designed a gun he wanted the army to use, and eventually they did... civilians were using military hardware in the 20s. Not my fault some clowns decided to ruin it with the NFA & GCA and state bans.
You cant say the military uses civilian weapons,
because the military dont make weapons, they have civilians make them. Stoner didnt make the ARMY15 .223 gasop, Stoner made a Stoner for sale to the military (and got the civillian Colt invloved too). General Electric makes lightbulbs and 20mm rotary autocannons.
How can you seriously impart Availability into the discussion this late in the debate? Obviously, in that case, the best gun for the job is the gun you can get... regardless of its performance. If you have a hard time getting a hold of 50BMG class weapons, move out of NYC. RonnieB or LAR will be happy to help you out of you 50BMG shortage.... just swap the upper on your AR and fight the good fight.
Generic guns to avoid all the favoritism
and let folks concentrate of roleplaying more then equipment munchkining.
You had a good setup from the get go.
nice try
Johnny B made the 50BMG to fit that Long Distance Rifle role,
many many decades before Ronny B made a smaller magfed one.
JMB made the 1919 MG, and later modified it into the M2 50BMG heavy machinegun. The M2 and the 50BMG were designed to fit a Heavy Machinegun roll, they were never designed to be used as 'long distance rifles' The M2 is an entirely different weapon that the Barret M82, and fills an entirely different roll. The only similiarity is caliber. The long range rifle shooting crowd happened to usitilize the 50BMG as well.
THIS is a smaller one
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rBbjt3OZydg
Did the Army use civilian TommyGuns?
Or did Col Thompson make a military gun, and sold it first to the civilian market then the army. The Colonel designed a gun he wanted the army to use, and eventually they did... civilians were using military hardware in the 20s. Not my fault some clowns decided to ruin it with the NFA & GCA and state bans.
The army used civilian tommy guns. This is a perfect example. In the 1920s it WAS a civilian gun (and a post office gun). Hence, in a storyline set in the 1920s, the best gun for many purposes would have NOT been a military gun, but a civilian gun. Same in 2008.
You cant say the military uses civilian weapons,
because the military dont make weapons, they have civilians make them. Stoner didnt make the ARMY15 .223 gasop, Stoner made a Stoner for sale to the military (and got the civillian Colt invloved too). General Electric makes lightbulbs and 20mm rotary autocannons.
I am not sure what you are trying to say here. But here is an example of what I am trying to say. Beretta made the M92 pistol before the US army showed interest in transitioning to a 9mm sidearm. Hence, whe the US army decided to buy the pistol, they were buying a civilian weapon slightly tweaked to fit their needs. Same with the Navy purchase of the P226, they were buying a civilian weapon. Same with the WW1 and WW2 aquizition of pump shotguns. Same with the Vietnam era adoption of the Winchseter Model 70 for a sniper rifle.
To use Stoner...Perfect example, the 'best rifle' in the late 1950s to early 1960's was the AR-10. It was not a military weapon (even though it was offered to them)
An older example would be the Henry Rifle, 14 shots of 44 rimfire at the flick of a wrist was well ahead of the standard issue Springfield muzzleloading rifle-musket. Very few were purchased by the military, but many troops bought them on the civilian market with their own money.
Yes, the army doesn't make it's own guns...but they DO design firearms, or at least draw up a list of specifics that they want a gun to do. Firearms built to these specifics in general are abject failures. The SOCOM pistol is an example of this, same with the OICW, and it's step-spawn the XM8.
The military has had it's best success when rather than drawing up weapon requirements based on what they think they want, but instead look hard at exactly what is offered already to the civilian market and ask the manufacturers to tweak it slightly. Two great examples of this are the Barrett M82, designed for civilan shooting, picked up by the Swedes, and later bought by the US army for Desert Storm. Then the Military set up 'requirements' for a similar weapon designated M107, but demanded it be bolt action. The M95 was created for this purpose, and put in for consideration, as were a bunch of other bolt action 50BMGs. The the military decided the M95 while exactly matching what they asked for, was in no way superior to the existing M82, so they simply renamed the M82 the M107 and bought a bunch more. Had the army stuck to it's listed design features it indeed would have a weapon inferior to the civilian counterpart.
Another example of this is the Mark 11 Mod 1, which goes all the way back the the AR-10,* which the military had passed on. The AR-10 basic design was floating around being made by the likes of knight Industries and Armalite (same name, different company) including target versions. The Navy Seals turned to these civilian weapons as they best met their needs. Later, the US Marine Corps needed a sniper rifle and rather than drawing up a 'dream list' of what it should do, looked at the civilian world and said 'Hey, let's buy those! the SEALs liked em!' and asked for just a few minor changes. Same thing with the M110. Design perameters were not set out in a vaccum, but heavily dictated to what was already in existance as a civilian weapon. It was really an offical way of saying 'we want X, but just with a rail...and in green'
Slightly tweaked civilian weapons like the M82 and M110 = win
military requested weapons like the M107(bolt) and OICW = loose
even the famous 1911 was really a tweaked 1905, which was the 1904, but in 45acp and 9mm not the originally planned 41acp and 9mm, but even the 1904 was a slight improvement of the basic 1900 in 38 acp, but which also lead to versions in 32acp, 380 acp, and 25 acp, and from the very getgo the 1900 family was aimed at the trifold market of civilian shooter, police issue, and military issue.
*AR-10 which Eugene Stoner was working on a wide variety of gun, and heard the US military was going to be doing trials for a new main battle rifle. He beefed up one of his existing designs ('nylon' rifles were all the rage in design and he was working on a light sporter rifle) into the AR-10 and offered it to the military, they declined. He slimmed it down to the AR-15 and offered it as a light sportsmans rifle, police rifle, etc. The airforce took notice, wanted a slightly different chambering, and adopted the lightweight carbine as a handy gun ala the M1 carbine to be carried by the chairforce personell in charge of patrolling and protecting airfields. The AR-15 caught on and eventually became the current issue firearm, but the AR-10 was still shuned by the military, but really liked by many long distance tactical sport shooters.
How can you seriously impart Availability into the discussion this late in the debate? Obviously, in that case, the best gun for the job is the gun you can get... regardless of its performance. If you have a hard time getting a hold of 50BMG class weapons, move out of NYC. RonnieB or LAR will be happy to help you out of you 50BMG shortage.... just swap the upper on your AR and fight the good fight.
again, I am not sure what you are saying. I will restate that the Barrett 82 and any other large caliber preicion rifle is NOT an HMG, and is a class of predominantly civilian weapon with a few specific makes and models being adopted by the military. They are also not very quick handling. Take the scene in Jurassic Park where the game warden type guy is going into the tall grass. A Barret 82 or a 50BMG upper on an AR-15 lower would NOT be a good choice for an enemy that is giong to pop up in your face. A nice fast handling 375 Holland and Holland or similar weapon WOULD be the best choice. A nice 338 winmag or similar would be a very strong second choice, especially in say a browning BAR (note, different than the 1918 BAR) third would be an AR-10 utilizing a 338 federal upper, and then finally to the M-14
Any time the M82 would be called for as a good choice vs an 'elephant gun', I'd look beyond the military's weaponchest and select something like the Anzio 20mm antimaterial rifle
The army used civilian tommy guns. This is a perfect example. In the 1920s it WAS a civilian gun (and a post office gun). Hence, in a storyline set in the 1920s, the best gun for many purposes would have NOT been a military gun, but a civilian gun. Same in 2008.
No
Col Thompson didnt set out to design a civilian firearm.
He designed and built a gun for a military function: He designed a and built a military gun that civilians bought before the Army did. He considered the military trench sweeper needs without having Sid from Marketing gather a focus group of civilians to decide on what color curtains to put on it for civilian appeal.
You are correct that it is a perfect example:
Just because a civilian can buy a gun designed for the military dont make it a civilian weapon. It further demonstrates what I said earlier, that the military dont make military guns, they have civilians design and make them (JohnyB, Col T, Stoner).
As for 2008,
if you would like top say the 416Barret is a civilian caliber from 2008, go ahead. But the 50bmg was not one for decades before Ronnie made a gun for. Dont confuse the M2 with the 50BMG, one is a gun and the other is a caliber (cartridge spec). Barret didnt make a military gun, he made a civilian gun based on the ancient 50bmg , that after a while the military & California said "oooh, I want one" & "We want them but will ban it at the same time"
But all this is just over your semantics problem with thinking Military weapons are high volume low power. No, the high power stuff is exclusively military gear, the moderate & low power stuff has civilian counterparts. So of course we will go for the military hardware when confronted with something too big for our weapons: We have civilian power weapons and need the big boys to deal with Velociraptors & 80' Apes. The entire premise of needing to grab something implies that what we have aint gonna cut it, and we have civilian weapons.
There is no need to grab military gear of 50BMG power
if we have Barret / BigBoar / AR50 civilian weapons,
or a civilian 50FatMac which is no more than having a military 20mm marry a military 50BMG to have civilian 50FatMac kids... aka 50YGK (You Gottabe Kidding)
No
Col Thompson didnt set out to design a civilian firearm.
He designed and built a gun for a military function: He designed a and built a military gun that civilians bought before the Army did. He considered the military trench sweeper needs without having Sid from Marketing gather a focus group of civilians to decide on what color curtains to put on it for civilian appeal.
That was the schpeil he gave the military upon first offering it, but he told his other potential markets other stories.
You are correct that it is a perfect example:
Just because a civilian can buy a gun designed for the military dont make it a civilian weapon. It further demonstrates what I said earlier, that the military dont make military guns, they have civilians design and make them (JohnyB, Col T, Stoner).
Right. However, in most cases civilians can buy a gun before the military adopts it...if they ever do. The Beretta 92F doesn't stop being a civilian gun upon getting an army contract, nor does the Ruger 95P now that a small group of them have been purchased by the military, nor does the whole myrad of other 9mm semiautos that just haven't been purchased by the military yet.
As for 2008,
if you would like top say the 416Barret is a civilian caliber from 2008, go ahead. But the 50bmg was not one for decades before Ronnie made a gun for. Dont confuse the M2 with the 50BMG, one is a gun and the other is a caliber (cartridge spec). Barret didnt make a military gun, he made a civilian gun based on the ancient 50bmg , that after a while the military & California said "oooh, I want one" & "We want them but will ban it at the same time"
The 50BMG is a cartridge yes. 50BMG long range target rifles existed for decades before Barrett made his M82. Neither the M82 nor the myrid of other rifles chambered in 50BMG were designed for the military. They are civilian weapons the military adopted
But all this is just over your semantics problem with thinking Military weapons are high volume low power. No, the high power stuff is exclusively military gear, the moderate & low power stuff has civilian counterparts. So of course we will go for the military hardware when confronted with something too big for our weapons: We have civilian power weapons and need the big boys to deal with Velociraptors & 80' Apes. The entire premise of needing to grab something implies that what we have aint gonna cut it, and we have civilian weapons.
again wrong. The high power stuff is not exclusively military. The moderate and low power military stuff is a military purchase/tweak of civilian stuff.
There are many examples of which there are civilian versions with no military counterparts.
The AR-15 would still be around even if they never caught on militarywise...it just wouldn't be as popular. The fact that the military did adopt it eventually does not change the fact that it was originally a civilian weapon. Same thing with the AR-18. 100% civilian weapon, no military to my knowledge has adopted it. If one did, it would then be another case of militaries adopting civilian weapons.
Yes, the time to grab something is when what oyu have doesn't cut it. People don't carry around Velociraptor Droppers on a regular basis. Hence, when one is encountered, there is a need to grab up something. The 5.56 NATO would be a very poor choice for dealing with a Raptor, be it in a bolt action scoped prarie dog rifle or a full auto AR-15. So you step up to somethign more powerful. Stepping up to a M249 is NOT stepping up to something more powerful (although stepping up to a M240 would be...but not so great for carrying aorund all day) Stepping up to a 416 rigby or something similar would be the right choice.
There is no need to grab military gear of 50BMG power
if we have Barret / BigBoar / AR50 civilian weapons,
or a civilian 50FatMac which is no more than having a military 20mm marry a military 50BMG to have civilian 50FatMac kids... aka 50YGK (You Gottabe Kidding)
I am familiar with some 50BMG neck-ups, but I have no idea what you are trying to relate here.