Printable Version of Topic

Click here to view this topic in its original format

Dumpshock Forums _ Shadowrun _ Heavy Pistols/Hand Cannons

Posted by: Sir_Psycho Feb 16 2007, 04:10 AM

First off I'd like to say, I'm reluctant to change any game stats to do with heavy pistols. I think they're a good combat alternative for characters without a big range of firearm skills.

However, I feel that the heavy pistol is over-used by runners, all the time. Going to the shops? Well, you might encounter a troll with a cybertorso, better pack that Manhunter, maybe with some Ex-Ex. Going for a walk around the lake? Where's my Warhawk?

Anyone who would really go out carrying a concealed side-arm in the real world may pack a decent handgun, a beretta or something. But I doubt many people have a freaking desert eagle hand cannon when they go out, not even a lot of criminals.

In shadowrun, I think the light pistol needs to come into prominence a little more, it should be your side-arm, your going out weapon. As it is, for balance, we have to give a lot of gangers huge heavy pistols as well, just to make sure that Runners don't wholesale slaughter them without a second thought. If you get arrested with a heavy pistol, you're copping the same as you would for a light pistol. The concealability bonus is negligible.

As I said before, I'm reluctant to fiddle with stats, so I'd rather fix this in some sort of roleplaying sense, but have little idea how. What conceivable way could we achieve this without "you cannot take your ares predator out of the house! Dissalow! Dissalow!!"

Thoughts?

Posted by: Glyph Feb 16 2007, 05:03 AM

Personally, I would change the damage code from 6L to 6M. Still less than a heavy pistol, but enough to actually be effective, rather than laughable.

You might also want to raise Concealability by 2 or 3 across the board for light and holdout pistols. Because currently, why pack a light pistol, when a heavy pistol front-loaded with accessories has similar Concealability?

Posted by: bibliophile20 Feb 16 2007, 05:09 AM

have there start being reports of heavy pistol owners of questionable legality being picked up in eeriely-accurate sweeps by Lone Star; some Lone Star wagemages recently came up with a form of ritual spellcasting that allows them to detect firearms of a certain model/type within a certain area with each casting, and a bound spirit linked to the mages is riding shotgun, pointing out the carriers to the officers, who then kindly walk up to the citizen and ask him to show them his pistol license. The legal ones check out and walk on... the illegal ones... well... while the spell is borderline illegal in terms of illegal search and seizure, Chief Loudon is desperate enough at the moment to utilize the technique, because it allows for more targeted crackdowns and a means of showing the city how good a job Lone Star is doing.

So, until the runners figure out what is going on and a way to stop it (probably via the court of public opinion) most heavy pistols are going to be off limits, because they are being targeted as having the best "crime bust image" with the least amount of threat (they could, after all, start tracking down LMGs, but a, they're less common than heavy pistols, and b, they're a little more than your average Lone Star officer can chew).

Posted by: Thain Feb 16 2007, 05:11 AM

Most CHL holders I know carry a full-size .45 APC semiautos, weather permiting. One bloke carries a .357 Magnum revolver... which is basically what the Warhawk is suppossed to be.

Heavy Pistols are common enough, just look at their availability.

Posted by: Wounded Ronin Feb 16 2007, 05:36 AM

Uhh, Ruger Warhawk - Ruger Redhawk, a .44 magnum.

.44 magnum > .357 magnum, and is usually a lot more difficult to control, hence the uber leet +1 power.

In any case, I see the overpowered heavy pistols as being something of a genre cliche. Why do heroes in 80s movies run around with pistols and have no problem blowing away entire enemy platoons with rifles? Because pistols do 9M damage.

Posted by: Kagetenshi Feb 16 2007, 03:00 PM

Pistols are awesome because Robocop had one. Robocop didn't use a rifle, so neither should you.

And IMO, absolutely don't do what bibliophile suggests. No offense.

~J

Posted by: Butterblume Feb 16 2007, 03:06 PM

I know someone has to say it, so I'll do it: in SR4 there are lots of chars with light pistols.

I am glad we got that out of the way .

Posted by: kigmatzomat Feb 16 2007, 03:20 PM

Well, from a game standpoint, there's not much point in medium pistols. Given the tight band between Light and Medium, there's not going to be anyone who will compromise in-game. IRL there are concerns with comfort, feel, weight, etc but those are easily waved away in game.

I'm considered a freak by my friends because I dislike the feel of Glocks; the shape and material makes it feel like it is constantly trying to twist out of my hand. But then, I like my CZ-52 for the "shock and awe" effect.

And to be that guy, a lot of my characters have light pistols. They are loaded with either gel or Stick'n Shock, have licenses (on at least one identity) and are my "going out in public" weapons. Big enough to defend myself, small enough to not draw excess attention, and sufficiently "gentler" to make life a little easier if someone does pay attention.

On runs I tend to go with something heavier though.

Posted by: Kyoto Kid Feb 16 2007, 03:46 PM

QUOTE (Thain)

[...the Super Warhawk is basically a descendent of the Super Blackhawk series which is a . 44.]

...oops beat to the punch

Posted by: Hagarzen Feb 16 2007, 04:07 PM

Greetings,

I think the biggest problem is using logic in a illogically situation. I have my character use a Aries predator for stopping power against trolls and below. IRL you don't need a heavy since there are no trolls. Also how many civvies are wearing body armor?

Best
Hagarzen

Posted by: Austere Emancipator Feb 16 2007, 04:27 PM

All body armor commonly worn today defeats handguns up to the .44 Magnum range anyway, so scaling your handguns up would be no use if body armor was commonly worn by civvies.

The HK UCP and FN F-N are more Light than Heavy Pistols, as far as I'm concerned.

Posted by: Thane36425 Feb 16 2007, 08:18 PM

QUOTE (Butterblume)

I know someone has to say it, so I'll do it: in SR4 there are lots of chars with light pistols.

I am glad we got that out of the way

Light pistols are more functional in SR4. Body armor is still a problem though.

Posted by: kigmatzomat Feb 16 2007, 08:32 PM

QUOTE (Austere Emancipator)

All body armor commonly worn today defeats handguns up to the .44 Magnum range anyway, so scaling your handguns up would be no use if body armor was commonly worn by civvies.

"Defeat" is such a strong word. "Reduces" or "mitigates" is probably better. Shooting people wearing armor is still like punching them, at least with a heavy pistol that packs enough joules to make the target know they were hit. Light pistols will be more like slapping them.

SR4 does pretty well with the conversion of damage from physical to stun. Most people aren't fully armored and when they are there are hard to armor spots (joints, face, hands, etc), which can result in incapacitating injuries. Even futuristic, phase-change armor that hardens in nanoseconds, since a crease can turn in a sharp edge.

It breaks down that heavy pistols are strong enough to hurt people wearing armor, if not punch through the armor. Light pistols are effective against unarmored targets and are more concealable. Anything in the middle is a design-by-commitee, neither fish nor fowl nor beast of land.

Posted by: Austere Emancipator Feb 16 2007, 09:10 PM

"Defeat" is the word used by the National Institute of Justice for minimum standard IIIA vs. 240gr .44 Magnum SJHPs at 1400fps, and I certainly won't claim to understand the effects of body armor better than them.

Posted by: Kagetenshi Feb 16 2007, 09:59 PM

QUOTE (kigmatzomat @ Feb 16 2007, 03:32 PM)

Shooting people wearing armor is still like punching them, at least with a heavy pistol that packs enough joules to make the target know they were hit. Light pistols will be more like slapping them.

Assuming a 230-grain ACP traveling at Wikipedia's nominal estimate of 259 m/s, that would be 0.0149037493 kilograms or 0.0149037493*249 kgm/s (that's momentum, as per the units). That would be 3.711 kgm/s. Assuming that those parts of my fist and arm that are moving when I punch someone are 1/18th of my total body mass (which is, last I checked, almost exactly 100 kilos), I would have to punch someone at .667 m/s to match the momentum of that impact.

That's a remarkably slow punch, unless I'm very mistaken with my visualization.

(In actuality, a proper punch would get a decent part of my body mass behind it, but figuring out how all of that moves is something I don't want to get into. Suffice it to say that unless the kinetic energy goes into something I'm not seeing, a non-penetrating bullet shouldn't be doing much. If anyone sees problems with my reasoning, please let me know.)

~J

Posted by: Sir_Psycho Feb 16 2007, 10:10 PM

That's all well and good, but it's a little off topic. This is a Role-Playing/gaming issue, we know from experience that such conversations about ballistics don't really get us anywhere in that regard.

6M I could deal with, actually. Either 6M or 9L is where the debate is going to be.

Posted by: Moon-Hawk Feb 16 2007, 10:15 PM

QUOTE (Sir_Psycho)

Either 6M or 9L is where the debate is going to be.

If people can reach a semi consensus on which of those two is better, (yeah, right) then that's probably the one to use for light pistols if you want to see more of them in your games.

Posted by: Sir_Psycho Feb 16 2007, 10:21 PM

Yeah, the difference is would a light pistol be able to do the same damage, but be easier to shrug off, or would it be just as hard to resist as a heavier type, but inflict less damage.

Another thing to take into account is professional ratings: Most of the time, if you're out on the town, most people are going to give up fighting you after a moderate or serious wound, a pedestrian would be a light wound, but as if they would fight you in the first place. Just food for thought.

Posted by: Raygun Feb 16 2007, 11:20 PM

QUOTE (kigmatzomat)

I'm considered a freak by my friends because I dislike the feel of Glocks; the shape and material makes it feel like it is constantly trying to twist out of my hand. But then, I like my CZ-52 for the "shock and awe" effect.

If you're complaining about the way a Glock feels but you're in love with a CZ-52, your friends are right. There is definitely something wrong with you.

QUOTE

As Aus said, "defeat" is the term used by the NIJ, the agency responsible for classifying body armor in the US (and whose outlines most other countries tend to follow). Basically, it means preventing penetration within a backface deformation limit of 1.73" (44mm). The number of rounds and angles at which the armor can defeat a threat differs with the type (threat level), but all of them follow the rule above.

I think we all get the idea that getting hit with a .44 Mag means having to displace significantly more energy than common defensive handgun cartridges. But as far as "hit" versus "slap", I think what Kage is getting at is that the terms are subjective and really rather meaningless. Having never been shot with either before, I can't really tell you what it feels like. However, on several occasions I have heard people (police, military) say that they never even noticed that they were hit at all until the fight was well over with. Others have said that it felt like getting hit with a sledgehammer. Honestly, I think whether you notice it or not and what it feels like depends more on the circumstances than just the energy involved.