Just a couple of thoughts I had, as I'm working on firearms for my latest game design project.
First question: Will two different firearms of the same caliber, let's say the 9mm berretta and the 9mm glock, deal roughly the same damage... or is there a consistent difference in power? Is it enough to make any sort of difference in combat?
Second question: How much does range factor into damage? What's the difference between a .44 at five feet and a 44. at 100ft? Is power increase/decrease over range worth representing in a combat system?
Thanks.
M.V.
Ps. I hate how every board here looks the same. I mean, I accidentally posted this in the Champaigns section this morning (I was viewing both that board and this board at the same time). @_@
Just a couple of thoughts I had, as I'm working on firearms for my latest game design project.
First question: Will two different firearms of the same caliber, let's say the 9mm berretta and the 9mm glock, deal roughly the same damage... or is there a consistent difference in power? Is it enough to make any sort of difference in combat?
The performance of different firearms on that end is something you can ignore. For sake of game design its easier to stat damage by caliber.Second question: How much does range factor into damage? What's the difference between a .44 at five feet and a 44. at 100ft? Is power increase/decrease over range worth representing in a combat system?
Yes and no, while there is a difference you could easily get away without figuring it. If you did want to stat it I wouldn't say any more or less than +1 point blank, -1 beyond first range increment (or maybe even further)Ps. I hate how every board here looks the same. I mean, I accidentally posted this in the Champaigns section this morning (I was viewing both that board and this board at the same time). @_@
Thats why I'm SO glad they at least gave us the ability to delete our own posts!
Another thing I would strongly consider if you're trying to shoot for a dash of realism is increasing the range increments. The effective ranges of almost all the guns in Modern is twice or more what their range increments are listed as.
The performance of different firearms on that end is something you can ignore. For sake of game design its easier to stat damage by caliber.
That small a difference, huh? Well, less work for me. lol
Yes and no, while there is a difference you could easily get away without figuring it. If you did want to stat it I wouldn't say any more or less than +1 point blank, -1 beyond first range increment (or maybe even further)
You know, I actually thought point blank would mean something more damage-wise... but I guess that's all Hollywood junk?
Thats why I'm SO glad they at least gave us the ability to delete our own posts!
No kidding. Just what I did with the original post. lol
Another thing I would strongly consider if you're trying to shoot for a dash of realism is increasing the range increments. The effective ranges of almost all the guns in Modern is twice or more what their range increments are listed as.
Effective range as-in first range increment, or the maximum range you can hope to shoot someone at? I'm pretty sure a number of the rifles have a better range than 200ft, particularly if they have scopes mounted.
Effective range as-in first range increment, or the maximum range you can hope to shoot someone at? I'm pretty sure a number of the rifles have a better range than 200ft, particularly if they have scopes mounted.
if you want to create variation in say 9mm caliber pistols, or 7.62 caliber rifles, have you considered variations in ammunition as well as weapon types.
In regards to various ammunition types for firearms I recently purchased the Modern Player's Companion for my own use and somewhere on my flashdrive I have that same ammunition table excerpt by itself.... anyways it does help to know if the PC chooses 9mm Hollowpoint for his pistol or SMG
Effective as in, barring wind, the M-16 doesn't see significant shot deviation until 600ft. This is the range an average soldier (essentially, someone with Personal Firearms Proficiency) should be able to hit a man-sized target consistently.
Noted, good sir.
Going off of wikipedia, the bullet should arrive at that range in a little under a tenth of a second (assuming the slow-down mid-air isn't that huge at that point.) How fast does accuracy go to crap after that point?
@ Stplong and Animesniper - Thank you for the ideas. When I get around to using the information from this thread (might be a bit), I'll be sure to incorperate varying ammunition types.
@ Master_vega: I can e-mail the pdf excerpt of the ammunition table to you once I find which flashdrive it is on... and correct me if I am mistaken but after a certain range the bullet fired tends to lose momentum and falls a certain degree from whence it was fired... I know it happened to civil war era ball/cannon munitions
@ Master_vega: I can e-mail the pdf excerpt of the ammunition table to you once I find which flashdrive it is on... and correct me if I am mistaken but after a certain range the bullet fired tends to lose momentum and falls a certain degree from whence it was fired... I know it happened to civil war era ball/cannon munitions
Nope, bullets nowdays fly in a straight line forever, regardless of the intensity of gravity or amount of friction they encounter. ;)
Nah, dude. You're right. I just don't happen to know where to find statistics like "but how far will this bullet GO"? I'll start a more serious study of it when I have time/when I get around to this half of the project.
I'm working on the D&D version of the d20 upgrade first, partially because of the broader audience... and partially because I want some more experience with the changes before I start crafting a Modern version. The crowd playing modern-era campaigns needs a polished game, not another half-developed side project. :P
As for the chart, sounds like a neat idea. Is it legal for you to transfer it to me?
yes since the company Green Ronin or authors who published the book Modern Player's Companion was the one to release the Excerpt similar to how Wizards did the book excerpt for their products and BTW check your gmail account.
Thanks. I'll look at the PDF next time I'm conscious. @_@
sounds like you want the ballistic tables data
for finding out for a given bullet (at its drag coeficient), fired at a given muzzle velocity,
at various ranges what is its "drop" and velocity at that point
Try using the tabels for Sierra slugs here Exterior Ballistic Tables (4th Edition Reloading Manual)
Use either 'common knowlege' bullet weights & speeds, or wiki what slugs go how fast for a particular gun.
You will find that 'fast' slugs lose more % of their speed (&energy) than 'slow' slugs from a given gun,
and that for the most part, its a couple hundred yards before it matters and we play a game of 5' squares.
Perhaps that would be a different thread, though.
I could be wrong, but range increment stats would have to be unique on a weapon by weapon basis, wouldn't they? I mean, not every assault rifle has the same muzzle velocities etc, and therefore would have different fall off points.
I always assumed preset range increments in gaming systems were designed to be a simplistic interpretation of what would otherwise be a lot of data.
I could be wrong, but range increment stats would have to be unique on a weapon by weapon basis, wouldn't they? I mean, not every assault rifle has the same muzzle velocities etc, and therefore would have different fall off points.
Not nessecarily, many of them are similar enough you could eyeball the figures, especially since we're working strictly with multiples of 5. And it only takes a few seconds and an internet connection to look up a firearm's effective range.
Plus the RI's are unique on a weapon by weapon basis already. They're just too short.
I always assumed preset range increments in gaming systems were designed to be a simplistic interpretation of what would otherwise be a lot of data.
Again, the problem is they're far, far, far too short. Many of them have range increments so short their maximum ranges (10 range increments) don't even come close to their real life effective ranges. It has nothing to do with simplicity or complexity.
The most extreme example of this is the Barret Light Fifty. In the core rule book it has a range increment of 120ft, the furthest of all the core longarms. In real life, the effective range of the Light Fifty is measured in miles.
I agree with both of you guys' points, especially in combination:
While the many differnt guns of a certain set of parameters (caliber, bbl length, action) can be considered the same in game, many times the lower velocities are due to shorter barrel or action gas bleed / gapflash etc that rae common to that set of parameters: we can group 2" 357 revolvers with their short barrels and gapflash
But yeah, its hard to get the detail right in the coarsenes of d20
To some extent, teh upper effective range of any hand-held weapon is limited by the frailties of teh human body. We aren't machines, but liviung breathing flesh and blood. We adjust our stance, shifting weight from one leg to teh other, we get itches in annoying places, heck, we breathe. All these combne to make very subtle movements when holding a gun, which limits effective range.
I'm quite happy to believe many modern guns have ranges in miles when fired from an appropriate bipod or tripod mount. But when held by a human, that high muzzle velocity is usually wasted.
Run Sherry!
High velocity is not the only determining factor for long range,
the slugs that go dozens of miles are going 30-06 speed
But as was just said above,
it is the +4 Class Def & +2 DexDef dancing around that limit how far we can effectively shoot,
(by limiting the actual time spent as steady aiming)
not how tight the gun can group them at 200m
Befeore we talk about how tight one gun is vs another,
maybe we need to recognize that our dancing and weaving of +3DexDef gives us -3ToHit Ranged.
Treat ClassDef and DexBonus as ToHit penalties because they represent excessive unsteadyness & movement. You want to avoid the penalty, then dont dance around so much: Waive some or all you dancing Def Bonus for better marksmanship
Huh? Are people actually suggesting dodging bullets? Call me crazy, but I thought Class Defense was either anticipating where the shot would go, and being out of the way when the gun went off, or presenting a more elusive profile in general in order to be harder to hit.
I know d20 Modern is cinematic. I didn't know it was The Matrix.
Given similar barrel length, two weapons firing the same cartridge will do the same damage. A Glock won't hit any harder than a Beretta, and vice versa.
Where it gets interesting is when you factor in range. Bullets deal damage by combining mass and velocity, with velocity making up an exponentially larger portion of the kinetic energy equation. As velocity decreases, the bullet's performance changes. For example, some rifle rounds have better penetration at longer ranges, because they stabilize in flight and don't tumble/fragment when they hit due to the reduced velocity. However, they don't do as much tissue damage along the path of penetration. It depends on the size of the target you're shooting at.
To make it simple, I have all weapons reduce their damage by 1 die size after the third range increment. This means short-barreled weapons do less damage sooner (smaller range increment), which is realistic, but it also means that adding a scope delays damage loss, which is not realistic.
I've also pondered making the damage drop dependent on the theoretical maximum range increment, rather than the current range increment, to keep it steady. In this case, an M4 Carbine (RI 70' normally, 140' with scope and Far Shot) would go down to 2d6 damage after 420', while a full-size M16A2 (RI 80' normally, 160' with scope and Far Shot) would go down to 2d6 damage after 480'. A G3 (RI 90' normally, 180' with scope and Far Shot) would go down to 2d8 damage after 540'. In my gaming, I've seen very few combats take place at more than 200' away (limited by the size of gaming mats), so this rule never really comes into effect anyway.
I am actually curious, now, about ranges. Has anyone tried to stat up realistic range increments for the gun types in d20M? I'd like to add them to my Generic Firearms rules for Phoenix. Perhaps that would be a different thread, though.
I've done it for WWII firearms in my heavily-houseruled Weird War II game.
Hold-out pistols = 20'
Service pistols = 30' (40' if equipped with shoulder stock)
Magnum revolvers = 40'
Submachineguns = 40'
M1 Carbine = 60'
StG-44 = 80'
Gewehr 43 = 90'
M1 Garand, SVT-40 = 100'
M1903 Springfield, Kar98k Mauser, M1891/30 Mosin = 120'
These ranges assume the user is firing from an unsupported, offhand position. If the user crouches, he ignores one point of range-related penalties. If the user is prone and/or well-supported (bipod, sandbags, rucksack rest, etc), he adds +50% to the base range increment and ignores one point of range-related penalties.
A telescopic sight lets you ignore 1 point of range penalties per doubling of magnification. Thus, a 2x scope lets you ignore 1 point of range penalties, a 4x scope ignores 2 points, a 6x scope ignores 3 points, and an 8x scope ignores 4 points. Each range increment imposes a minimum of -1, so high-powered scopes are only truly useful at long ranges. To use a scope, you must spend a full-round action to aim and fire the shot. If you attempt to fire more quickly (say, as a standard action, or to make a full attack action with multiple shots in a round), the scope gives no bonus to hit, and instead imposes a -1 penalty for each magnification (so a 6x scope would impose a -6 penalty). A scope does NOT add to the range increment of the weapon.
Far Shot works as normal.
The Sniper prestige class in my campaign gains an additional +50% to the base range increment of the weapon.
'Sniper' rifles in WWII are almost always standard service rifles that have shown exceptionally small groupings and are then selected to be fitted with scope mounts. Thus, most 'sniper' rifles are not Mastercraft weapons, but their better-than-usual precision lets them ignore 1 point of range-induced penalty.
So, a high-level Sniper with Far Shot and a Kar98kZF with 6x optic, firing from a prone position with good support, has a range increment of 300', and ignores a total of 5 points of range-induced penalties. For the first five range increments, he suffers only a -1 penalty to hit per range increment. After that, he suffers a -2 penalty per increment, normally. This gives him a maximum range of 1000 yards. Given that the accuracy standard for 'sniper' rifles in the German army was 4.72 MOA (all shots had to fall inside a 120mm circle @ 100 yards), that means his rifle will be capable of shooting somewhere inside a 47" circle @ 1000 yards. Hard to guarantee a hit on a man-size target at that range with that level of precision, thus the -13 total range penalty for the end of the 10th range increment.
Historically, most German snipers would not risk a shot over 400 yards, though the best would reach out to 600 yards at times. The above Sniper character would have a -3 penalty to hit @ 400 yards, and a -5 penalty @ 600 yards. With a 4x scope, the penalty @ 600 yards increases to -6.
Huh? Are people actually suggesting dodging bullets? Call me crazy, but I thought Class Defense was either anticipating where the shot would go, and being out of the way when the gun went off, or presenting a more elusive profile in general in order to be harder to hit.
I know d20 Modern is cinematic. I didn't know it was The Matrix.
No, no one is suggesting you are watching him fire a bullet and then stepping out of the way. That's silly. What happens is that you notice he has a gun in his pocket, and he probably isn't pleased to see you. So you starts ducking and weaving and jinking around, so that when he pulls his weapon out, he has a harder target, which is reflected by you having a higher Defence score.
How are these ranges? Note: These actually aren't from the d20 redesign project; they're actually from a tactical game project with a post-apocalyptic backstory. It's just the best example I have on-hand. Most of the ranges are taken from Wikipedia.
Characters get a lot of HP in the tactical game, hence the high damage numbers (system's designed to support anything from slings to railguns. :/ )
Are the ranges for said weapons all out of whack? Should range increments increase or decrease in size further out?
How are these ranges? Note: These actually aren't from the d20 redesign project; they're actually from a tactical game project with a post-apocalyptic backstory. It's just the best example I have on-hand. Most of the ranges are taken from Wikipedia.
Are the ranges for said weapons all out of whack? Should range increments increase or decrease in size further out?
I'd say they're out of whack. The M14 out-ranges the M16 and M4 easily, and while it may not be as accurate as a match-grade AR, the bullet will certainly go further with less wind drift. The AK is not as accurate as any of these weapons, but it's a lot more accurate than you give it credit for. Most of the AK's problems stem from poor-quality ammo and crappy iron sights. Give it decent fodder and a proper combat optic, and it'll shoot reasonably well, though not as flat as a 5.56mm AR.
Yeah, that's what I get for using wikipedia for effective ranges. :P
What numbers would you use for the same guns, just asking? Also, the nature of the range increments in the tactical game is that each is double the last. Should it be the other way around (first range increment being huge, with progressively smaller range increments afterwards)?
I'd say the ranges should be such:
AK = 70'
M4 = 80'
M16 = 90'
M14 = 120'
But all of these presuppose my house rules for adding range increment for various factors such as a stable shooting position, Far Shot and prestige classes.