Printable Version of Topic

Click here to view this topic in its original format

Dumpshock Forums _ Shadowrun _ gun options

Posted by: Snow_Fox Dec 29 2007, 03:52 AM

I don't know if this will have much interest, and anything I get off I'm sure Raygun can correct. More details than you get in SR but something to consider for role playing.

After an unpleasant experience on a country road I realized I needed something heavier to carry with a suit than my little .25. so I picked up a .38sp S&W with very interesting extras but each had a trade off.
pros:
It was hammerless-meaning no spur sitting off the back to snag when you draw it,

A snub nose- only a 2in barrel so again easily fits into a pocket or bag.

light weight material so not too much drag on pockets.

Slim build for a revolver.

It has a laser sight, but this is set on the side, behind the cylinder just above my thumb, NOT under the barrel

Cons;
The lack of a hammer means it is definitely a double action gun but you cannot manually cock it, that means the pull is tougher than I'm use to. also the lack of a hammer was compensated by a slightly longer frame. No big deal in your hand but a stone bitch to fit into a holster. Officially a "J Frame" it did not fit into a S&W shoulder holster for a "J frame"

The snub nose, combined with the more powerful bullets means range is really limited. At my usual 50ft training range I was aiming so high I was getting badly frustrated. Finally I took out the .25, also with a 2 inch barrel and was relieved to see that hit with the accuracy I'm use to.

The light weight material kepts the drag on my cloths down BUT the material holds heat a LONG time and there was nothing to absorb the recoil. I've got a .357 mag with a 4 inch barrel and have a Mataba Uniqua that abuses the hell out of your ear drums even with padding and has a back blast of air right in your face but this little S&W had the nastiest kick of any gun I've ever fired.

It took about 2 full boxes (100 rounds) to get comfortable with the weapon and even then at 30 feet it was aiming high because of the kick-the guys at the range were shocked I was sticking with it.
This was just a .38sp and I was feeling it for days afterward. The same shelf in the store also had .50 magnums with a 2 inch barrel-great if your mugged by a killer whale but pretty much going to break your hand.

The slim build limits the chamber to only 5 bullets before you reload.

So these are pretty crappy trade offs but they are all logical. and for what I want the gun for it is still a great piece. If I don't need a fitted suit I can get away with my .380 beretta Cheetah.

Again I know this is far more detail than most SR games will come close to but it certainly gives food for thought, I hope.
One thing very interesting is the placement of a laser sight on the side, which opens up a lot of possibilities for other guns.

Posted by: Wounded Ronin Dec 29 2007, 04:28 AM

Well, in terms of weird placements of things on the gun (i.e. laser sight on the side) what immediately comes to *my* mind is a Bren LMG from World War II with the magazine jammed in upside down on the top, which precludes the use of alternate sights. The actual iron sights are off to the side.

Don't carry a .25 or a .38, carry a machine gun!

Joking aside, I really would love to have firearms customization in my RPGs with the level of detail like you're describing. I've been thinking a bit about this sort of thing in the context of my personal "80s-run" project, but I feel like I've kind of hit the following problem: I love the SR system and am more familiar with it than I am any other systems, but in order to try and make probability curves that are realistic or simulationistic with the firearms I started toying with tweaks to the system and from that point on wasn't sure which way was the best to proceed. Since the SR system has a degree of granularity which would seem to not be sensitive enough to reflect such things as the laser sight on the side or a 2 inch barrel on a .38 versus a 2 inch barrel on a .45 making the pistol harder to operate, it would seem like if you did want to have a whole firearms customization system you'd need to really overhaul the system to make it more sensitive.

Does that make sense?

The other gaming site where I think about guns a lot is ja-galaxy-forum.com, and there in the context of JA2 they've gone and implemented foregrips, bipods, grip pods, various types of LAMs, 7x scopes, 10x scopes, 2x scopes, a bunch of reflex sites, and folding stocks, but the problem with all of this is that a lot of times there are disagreements about how exactly each thing should work in terms of game statistics.

I almost feel like if you start with a system that's designed to represent certain things and later try to add all sorts of details that weren't there before you're going to have a really hard time. Maybe we need to hire some Nobel prize physics winner to write us "Firearms Realism: The RPG" that is set up to handle all these sorts of accessories in great detail for it to really go smoothly. I dunno.

Posted by: kzt Dec 29 2007, 04:52 AM

SR isn't a sufficiently detailed "or granular" enough system to reflect these in a realistic fashion. HERO or GURPS might, but I'm not sure you could capture all of them without creating something silly.

In my NSHO most of the variations on the basic models in SR are pointless, or they arbitrarily create some supergun that violates all the rules and everyone uses because it's a supergun that violates all the rules. I'd argue that 25 to .38 special is light pistol to heavy pistol, but .38 to .45 isn't enough of a change to justify a change. In terms of th real world I'd probably want to go the the bizzaro handcannon rounds (as in .500 SW), before giving more damage than the base "heavy pistol". And I'd accompany them by not allowing multiple shots per IP due to the recoil.

Posted by: Critias Dec 29 2007, 05:55 AM

I've always thought a dirt simple mechanic would just be "better concealability = worse recoil compensation," as a quick slap patch. The lighter and sleeker and easier to hide a handgun is (due to a slim profile, light material, short barrel, etc), the harder it is to fire quickly and accurately at the same time.

Since recoil doesn't really matter very much in Shadowrun, though (unless you make the mistake of firing a weapon on full auto), it matters about as much as the bipod on a sniper rifle.

Posted by: Mercer Dec 29 2007, 06:20 AM

My theory is if you describe your firearm as being more concealable, the NPCs will roll worse to spot it. I don't know why I think this or where it comes from, but I believe it on an instinctual, lizard-brain level.

Also, if I declare my character is doing weapon maintence, I will be less likely to roll a botch.

And if I describe the care my character takes when aiming, I will roll better on my shot.

The Defiance T-250 springs to mind. There's the normal shotgun, and then the sawed-off version mentioned in the text with a shorter range and less damage. (The weird thing is as a shotgun it was as concealable as the Ruger Super Warhawk, and as a short barreled rifle it was as or more concealable than any Heavy Pistol and all but one of the Light Pistols in the BBB. Basically, in order of Concealability it goes Hold Out Pistol, Light Pistols and Short Barreled Shotguns, and the Heavy Pistols and Long Barrelled Shotguns. (Just pointing it out, I'm not claiming it isn't wonky as all hell.)

But that's probably what I'd do. A bonus to Concealability and a drop in range and Power Level. Of course, saying it out loud (or typing it, as the case may be) it occurs to me that you can convert a Heavy Pistol into something more concealable as a Light Pistol this way-- but you almost make it Light Pistol doing so. Say a 9M Heavy Pistol becomes a 7M weapon that uses the Light Pistol range, with a Concealability of around 7. A snub-nosed Super Warhawk would be a Con 6, 8M pistol that uses the Light Pistol range. That doesn't offend me.

I'd probably raise the concealabilities of all the Light and Hold Pistols by 2. (In fact, I am 90% sure my group did that. Otherwise, there was no reason for Light Pistols to exist.)

Posted by: Crusher Bob Dec 29 2007, 08:40 AM

Why the wheel gun over something like a Kel-tec or sub-compact glock?

Posted by: ShadowDragon8685 Dec 29 2007, 10:35 AM

Just as an aside...

I wonder what the "unpleasent encounter" was. That said, I'm not sure the move from .25 to .38 is really all that useful - especially if you 'upgraded' to a weapon which it harder to use comfortably, and especially if it gets hot in a hurry.

Woulden't it be wiser to tailor your suits so that you can carry something effective and comfortable to use - a larger semiautomatic, such as a compact or even a full 9mm - without looking too awkward? In the manner that police detectives wear theirs in shoulder holsters - if you have a full, closed jacket, it shoulden't be too noticable if the jacket is appropriately padded and bulked out.

Posted by: Snow_Fox Dec 29 2007, 04:08 PM

I'll admit a temptation to give an anoyingly ambiguous SR answer like "it was on a run, you don't need to know where."

But the short version was driving home from work on a back country road I was brought to a stop by a man who had blocked the road with his car and was running around screaming. There was one car between me and him and he was screaming at them. A car came behind me so I couldn't turn around. So as he came towards my car, still screaming, I drew my .25 and, keeping it low, had it ready. From what he was screaming it seems he had been drinking and gotten lost on unlit country roads, some of these lanes can get pretty confusings and add booze to the mix and he reached melt down level. Luckily the car behind him could give him directions.

It occurred to me that if he was going to be a problem the little .25's might not be enough, a .38 sp at that range would be. After all a woman along on a back road with a lunatic screaming at you and no room to turn around? Not good.

QUOTE (Critias @ Dec 29 2007, 12:55 AM)

Better concealibility does not always mean worse recoil. it's a combination of weight of gun, action and size of bullet. A semi-auto absorbs a lot of recoil just to work the action. I fire a box of .357 out of my S&W revolver with a 4 inch barrel and I'll feel it across my shoulders for an hour or two. I fire the same .357 mag's in a Mataba, a semi-auto revolver, and I don't feel it. The new toy is a revolver so the action doesn't help any and it's light weight metal means the bitch has no mass to catch the blast.

You're sort of right about rapid and accurate usually being incompatible. My .357 I usually manually cock between shots, which means I'm taking it out of line between shots. The .25 and .380 are semi-automatics so can stay on line but only the .25 is small enough to not kick slightly off line.

The exception to the rule-and this could have an interesting SR possibility is the Mataba. I'm a big fan of Italian guns and this is a semi-automatic revolver designed for rapid fire target shooting. and no "semi-auto revolver' is not an oxymoron, the british invented it in WW1 but it was outclassed by the better Browning 1911 and so fell out of fashion. The Mataba with a 6 in barrel is the most accurate handgun I've ever fired. Consistent and the recoil action works the action so it recocks itself.

The .25 is definatley a hold out. the .380 a light pistol. The .357 a heavy pistol. Your call as to whether the .38sp is a heavy or light round, Raygun also have Med level so it's probably in there. But wusing "hold out" ranges.The .500 Mag is a monster, I don't even want to think about. At normal size, sure, ease, but the kick on my little .38sp was pretty bad, I think you'd be lucky to get off one shot without dropping the .500!

Posted by: Wounded Ronin Dec 29 2007, 05:02 PM

QUOTE (Crusher Bob)

Why the wheel gun over something like a Kel-tec or sub-compact glock?

The revolver has more panache. Nobody will doubt that you have testicles the size of the Rocky Mountains after you manage a reload under fire with the revolver.

Snow Fox: Seeing as the fellow wasn't visibly armed and just seemed to be a maniac, I'd think that deploying a firearm in that situation might just lead to unnecessary escalation to the deadly force level. IMO a situation like that calls for unarmed hand to hand combat if anything until the fellow pulls a weapon.

I remember back when I was a grad student in New Orleans there was a time that one evening when I was walking down the street to my apartment from Burger King some random young local guy starts jumping around in front of me on the sidewalk trying to block my way. I step forward fully intending to attack him; I'd been doing a lot of judo at the time so I was about to use this one, which when done well (using the whole body, and not just the leg) tends to seesaw the person's head and upper body towards the ground very hard; it looks simple but it can be quite nasty if you do it with the intent to whip the person's head into the cement: http://www.judoinfo.com/images/animations/blue/osotogari.htm

At the last moment he jumps away from me and runs off down the street, so in the end no violence needed to happen. On the other hand, if I'd pulled a .25 on him, who knows how the situation could have become more complicated? What if I'd been forced to open fire? I think the advantage of hand to hand combat is that you can go all out with it in a low-level self-defense situation and not worry so much about causing an accidental fatality.

Posted by: CircuitBoyBlue Dec 29 2007, 05:33 PM

Not to mention the egg that will be on your face when the cops show up and ask why you shot an unarmed man.

Posted by: kzt Dec 29 2007, 05:37 PM

Women who go hand to hand with crazy men don't do well, even if they are really good. Hell, men who who go HtH with crazies often don't do well. Crazy/drunk/high people often don't react to pain and unnaturally strong. Had a friend who watched a crazy (on PCP) throw 4 cops across a room. This is why you often see pictures where 4 cops pile on these people to take them down. And why they often use tasers on probe mode as an opening move if they have to go HtH.

I've been told be people who know a lot more than me that a j-frame s&w is the most concealable gun that they would trust. J-frames in ankle holsters are hard to spot, and they work well in pockets. I have a kel-tec in .380, and it's just not that well made. I had the hammer spring break (for no reason - I wasn't using it) at a class once, and it's not going to go bang then. It's better than nothing, I hope. But .38 special with good HP is a lot more effective than .380s.

And the glock 27 is twice as thick as the p3at and larger overall. But 10 .40 sure beats 7 .380. I'm going to try a desantis nemisis, but we'll see.

In a car, you could have lock box under the seat with a full sized pistol in it.

Posted by: Critias Dec 30 2007, 01:05 AM

QUOTE (Wounded Ronin)

Snow Fox: Seeing as the fellow wasn't visibly armed and just seemed to be a maniac, I'd think that deploying a firearm in that situation might just lead to unnecessary escalation to the deadly force level. IMO a situation like that calls for unarmed hand to hand combat if anything until the fellow pulls a weapon.

There are folks out there -- more folks than not, in fact -- who can't go one-on-one hand to hand with a looming maniac on a gravel road and come out on top. In fact, I'd wager plenty of folks that think they could go hand to hand with a guy like that would be wrong in their assumption (note: I'm not saying you are one, don't take it as a jab. For all I know, I'm one). The manly art of fisticuffs isn't exactly something everyone gets taught in public school any more.

And if I was a gal, alone, I know "hah! I shall grapple and strike him into submission!" isn't gonna be the first thing to jump into my head upon being confronted by a frothing madman. The ladies that carry often carry because they know they're not built, and sometimes not trained, for that sort of thing. No one wants to be the one-legged man in the asskicking contest, and there are lots of women (and men!) who've just flat out accepted they've got reach and power and leverage and bulk and strength issues enough that they're gonna do all they can to stay out of arm's reach.

And, hell. Even I'd go for my GLOCK or my Kershaw (or my TDI, shit, if he was big enough) and want it in my hand and hidden before confronting the guy. Why fight fair, if you've gotta fight at all?

Posted by: Snow_Fox Dec 30 2007, 02:16 AM

Exactly, and thank you for understanding. I'm 5' 1" and petite, I have defeated a mugger in NY with judo but I'd rather not have a repeat performance thank you very much. I was calm enough NOT to wave the gun around, in a 'get away from me' panic. Being well aware of ther perminant state of things if I pulled the trigger, I'm not going to blaze away on a country road at 50 feet BUT if a crazy man tries to break into the car while I'm sitting there, and there's only the glass window between me and him, we enter quickly into the 'justified use of force' realm of things. I have/had no idea what was going on but there was enough evidence of him not being in his right mind.

Even if a man and built like Arnold I still wouldn't want to risk the rough and tumble with someone clearly a few fries short of a happy meal on an unlit country road if I could avoid it.

Posted by: ShadowDragon8685 Dec 30 2007, 04:50 AM

This is why I don't like to stop dead behind someone, especially on a place like that.

Your pistol can send a little lead flying in Mr. Maniac's direction.

The accelerator can send two tons of steel flying in Mr. Maniac's direction. Plus, if you have to flatten him to get away, you can tell the cops you were just trying to evade him and he got in front. Of course, it's better if it's the TRUTH...

That said, if you're in a car, why futz with what you can conceal on your person? Dosen't a CCL cover in your own auto? Then why not have something that's clearly a "get the fuck away", like a full-sized Glock 9mm or something big and flashy in the range of .357-.44 where you know it is and can get at it, but nobody can see if they just look in the window.

Hell, if you get a Mr. Crazy, even a round from a .38 special might not put him down.

Posted by: martindv Dec 30 2007, 06:31 AM

QUOTE (kzt)

That's been my position for a long time. I figure that a d6 game where a heads-up display that turns your sidearm into a DNI-controlled weapon platform only gives you a -2 TN and lasers give -1 to winging it with the naked eye it would take a significant alteration to the gun to start affecting the target number. Even the modifications in Cannon Companion seem excessive without handwaving the effect away as "well, it's good enough". Especially considering has gas ports are used by competitive pistol shooters vs. their effects in SR in affecting the recoil as it relates to fractions of an inch.

Posted by: martindv Dec 30 2007, 06:41 AM

QUOTE (Wounded Ronin)

Critias is right. You are assuming way too much for your suggestion to be applicable to the vast majority of people. First of all, any escalation of force is entirely necessary, because going into the situation half-assed and self-handicapped is just stupid. Second, how is it going to help the average unarmed person, man or woman, when the driver is buckled into their seat and the lunatic punches through the window.

You may be Johnny Danger Kung-Fu Master. Most people aren't. And your suggestion is the kind of ignorant nonsense that gets normal people killed.

Posted by: Mercer Dec 30 2007, 08:25 AM

QUOTE (martindv)

I've always considered the smartlink to be a slightly more accurate laser sight; lasers travel in a straight line and bullets don't, so something that puts a target dot in your field of vision that compensates for the rise and drop of the round is better than one that doesn't, but it doesn't change the fundamentals that much. (Technically the benefit of of the latter would be more noticeable at range, whereas the laser sight would be less useful at ranges it wasn't sighted for. The system doesn't really clamor for that level of detail, so its just, Hey, this one is better than that one.)

Posted by: G.NOME Dec 30 2007, 08:58 AM

The Mounties decided on 9mm over .38 and wrote a report to say why.
http://www.cprc.org/tr/tr-1995-01.pdf it is.

That having been said, being able to shoot your firearm straight is more important than its stopping power, and most ballistics experts agree that bullets with more mass are better as far as damage goes.

Sidebar for the purposes of showing off some cool gear: Being a fairly healthy man living in a decidedly liberal city where they've effectively banned firearms for self-defense purposes (and don't have any country roads), I'd probably use http://www.defensedevices.com/taser-laser-m18l.html as my self-defense weapon of choice, if I felt like I needed one.

Posted by: Mercer Dec 30 2007, 09:07 AM

QUOTE (martindv)

First of all, any escalation of force is entirely necessary, because going into the situation half-assed and self-handicapped is just stupid.

Personally, I think confronting the guy at all would be moronic. Stay calm and call the police. If he engages you, defend yourself. If you're a kung-fu master, use that, if you're not use the gun or the car, whatever. If someone else is attacked and you think you should intervene, by all means, let your conscience be your guide. But if there's a maniac raving in the street, it seems like the last thing you want to do is engage and escalate the situation, particularly with deadly force. (Unless you're Batman, in which case, go for it.)

Posted by: JBlades Dec 30 2007, 10:47 AM

Snow Fox: Got one of those Airlights, eh? Titanium frame? with the Crimson Trace grips? Been wondering about those. Seems like a good little CCL gun but I imagined the kick would be as you describe it.

I'm a big guy (6'1" 250), and have training (black belt, ex-cop, ex-bouncer), and Critias is absolutely right, if I could help it I wouldn't engage the guy at grapple range. Crazy people are not a party, contrary to many people's beliefs.

Sounds to me like you called the situation perfectly, Snow, as far as pulling the gun but keeping it down. Better safe than sorry, but safe and unnoticed is best!

As for SR, a lot of details are brushed over in the system, and adding detail can be fun, but the first 2 sentences of this post probably lost half the readers on Dumpshock, and they're the ones who put a lot into it, so I can see why they keep it general. I usually just go with the common sense rule, and tailor what I consider to be common sense to the player's knowledge in an area in RL. Some of my players I expect more of as far as gun choice in a given situation, others less, but as long as it's fun and doesn't make me spew soda all over the table through my nose I figure it's ok.

Posted by: ShadowDragon8685 Dec 30 2007, 11:42 AM

I thought it wasen't a good night until you've had at least one laugh-propelled, soda-powered nasal cleansing?

The sting is how you know it was a good one!

Posted by: martindv Dec 30 2007, 02:53 PM

QUOTE (Mercer)

QUOTE (martindv)

First of all, any escalation of force is entirely necessary, because going into the situation half-assed and self-handicapped is just stupid.

Are you stupid?

The entire premise of my post. The entire premise of this thread is a situation where the option of flight in "fight or flight" is not available. It's not a situation where you can call the cops because the crazy motherfucker is almost on top of you, NOW.

In that situation, discretion is nonsense. Any sane person's only instinct would be to ELIMINATE THE THREAT. And as such, my comment to Mr. Billy Badass over here is that 99% of people, and I'm sure 99% of people on this board, in that situation would only be capable of doing that with a force multiplier, which hey, a gun just happens to be.

A criminal defense lawyer is a hell of a lot cheaper than my life. So when there is doubt, there is NO doubt about whether to try and disarm them versus shooting the bastard in the motherfucking face.

Posted by: CircuitBoyBlue Dec 30 2007, 05:04 PM

QUOTE

Are you stupid? The whole point of Batman is that he does absolutely everything in his power to avoid lethal force. And as far as guns go, he'd rather die than use one. Read his origins, noob.

Haha. On a more serious note, the anger and hatred in that last post scare the shit out of me. If you honestly believe that lethal force is the only acceptable first resort, you can probably make that point without calling other people stupid, and then going off about some imaginary "bastard's" "motherfucking face."

Also, maybe this makes me "Johnny Badass," but when I'm scared of someone, my first instinct is not to ELIMINATE THE THREAT.

*edited because I for some reason managed to quote the wrong post

Posted by: Herald of Verjigorm Dec 30 2007, 07:03 PM

QUOTE (CircuitBoyBlue)

Also, maybe this makes me "Johnny Badass," but when I'm scared of someone, my first instinct is not to ELIMINATE THE THREAT.

Actually, if you read the whole anger-filled post, the "first instinct" part is not quite accurately a first instinct. It's more "first instinct when you realize you are cornered and are dealing with something that appears both vicious and incapable of rational debate" which probably puts it closer to the 5th instinct from realization that there may be an issue.

Posted by: Snow_Fox Dec 30 2007, 07:45 PM

To calm the vitriol, gentlemen, when on my own time and can dress less formally I usually have a .380 berretta cheetah with a 4 inch barrel in a hip holster. A loose jacket covers it.

but I work in finance and usually wear fitted suits. I can usually get away with the .25 I do not accept carrying a larger gun in my bag because that can be grabbed by a mugger and bingo, I'm disarmed and he's suddenly doing much better.

The .38sp is too large to carry in my suit-but it does fit nicely in the breast or side pocket of my coat.

I'm still frustrated with formal wear. Men can carry a gun in a tux. I wear the little black cocktail dress and there, biggest thing I can hid on it is a small lock blade.

Posted by: Kagetenshi Dec 30 2007, 08:31 PM

Don't suppose you can carry two pistols, can you? Then you can stash something bigger in your bag and unless the assailant grabs it and rifles through it on the spot you're just down to a smaller firearm.

~J, unaware of what possible legal or practical barriers might exist and too sick to do his own research today

Posted by: Snow_Fox Dec 30 2007, 08:59 PM

It's not that, but for a purse grabbed, the bag is the first things they go for, I don't want to let him take one gun then have to grab the other and suddenly I'm in a shootout?

Posted by: Mercer Dec 30 2007, 09:04 PM

QUOTE (martindv)

Are you stupid?

Maybe.

But, I'm willing to bet all the money in my pocket right now, versus all the money in your pocket right now, that I've dealt with hundreds more drunken maniacs than you have, and that I'm a lot better at it than you are.

Because talking calmly to, or avoiding altogther, psychopaths is so much more badass than shooting them in the face. I'm practically Charles Bronson over here with my violence as a last resort, and you're Mahatma Ghandi with your Escalate the Force!!! I believe it was the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King who said it best with, "I've always preferred the classic Panzer blitzkrieg."

Posted by: Kagetenshi Dec 30 2007, 09:10 PM

QUOTE (Snow_Fox @ Dec 30 2007, 03:59 PM)

It's not that, but for a purse grabbed, the bag is the first things they go for, I don't want to let him take one gun then have to grab the other and suddenly I'm in a shootout?

Sure the bag is the first thing grabbed, but do muggers really search the contents of the bag on the spot any meaningful percentage of the time? I mean, it's bad news having your pistol in the hands of someone else like that in general, but I have difficulty imagining a realistic scenario where they're going to discover it in time to use it against you—are there any examples of this happening?

~J

Posted by: Fortune Dec 30 2007, 09:25 PM

Well, seeing as the bag would be heavier with the inclusion of the gun, the mugger could grab her bag and the hit her over the head with it.

Posted by: nezumi Dec 30 2007, 09:48 PM

I have to admit, discussions like this make me think that maybe men really aren't cut out to carry guns, and we should just let the ladies worry about it. Cool it, guys. And read entire posts before you comment.

Back to the topic... No, Shadowrun with its d6 really isn't precise enough for a lot of the gun details we'd like. I think if you were to use a multiple d10 or d20 system (same as Shadowrun, except bigger dice) you could probably do it gracefully, although it would be a LOOOONG list of modifiers. I also rather suspect WR wouldn't mind if his system were a little wacky...

Posted by: kzt Dec 30 2007, 09:58 PM

This is the kind of thing that non-linear distributions do better, where you get a normal curve. Like multiple D6 added together, as with Gurps/Hero, etc. You are shifting the curve with modifiers, with means the effect of a single +1/-1 is normally trivial, but as they add up things get interesting. And you can go low odds shots, like events that happen 3%, like on roll of 17 or greater on 3d6.

But that's neither here nor there...

Posted by: Kagetenshi Dec 30 2007, 10:02 PM

You could do it with d6s, probably pretty easily. You'd have to do a lot of rerolling, of course, but you can get a very gradual and smooth progression (the most exaggerated but simple example is reroll-2-through-6, add 1—you can get a finer progression through slightly more complicated methods).

Edit: I respect GURPS, but from what I know of the rules it does not handle unlikely but possible events well—or does it have a mechanism to get more uncommon than three-1s or 3-6s? Shadowrun doesn't handle extremely likely events well some of the time, especially when it's supposed to only be extremely likely for some people but not others, but I've yet to see a significantly different system top it in terms of the ability to express extremely unlikely events.

~J

Posted by: ShadowDragon8685 Dec 30 2007, 11:13 PM

Snow Fox, not to sound too wierd, but what are the potential drawbacks for wearing a tux/other heavier wear yourself, versus the benefits of being able to conceal an effective weapon you're comfortable with?

Posted by: kzt Dec 30 2007, 11:25 PM

I own gurps, and a bunch of gurps sourcebooks (back when they did sourcebooks...) but I've played gurps only a bit. Mostly Hero. Which has it's own special issues with damage, but otherwise is a pretty nice system.

The 1/216 chance covers unlikely events in games pretty well. It's a lot better than they way SR does, where the lowest chance you can give someone is 1/3, unless you provide multiple dice for them to roll, at which point things get complex statistically (and it implies they are also getting more skilled). I mean, if you have 18 dice what is the success probability change between needing 4 successes and 5 successes? If I give you +4 or -4 dice, how does that change it? How can I easily figure it out in a game?

And it also means that someone with minimal skill can never achieve anything that requires more success than he has dice and has a vanishingly small chance if dice=success when success >3

SR perception is where this clearly shows up. Whoever wrote this didn't think about what this means. An average person walking down the street, not paying attention, has 11% chance of rolling the two success needed to notice the swat team walking into the building in front of him. They have zero chance of noticing the burning skyscraper 4 blocks away.

Posted by: Mercer Dec 30 2007, 11:39 PM

QUOTE (ShadowDragon8685)

Benefits: You can carry a concealed firearm.

Drawbacks: You'll be given drink orders every five minutes.

Posted by: ShadowDragon8685 Dec 30 2007, 11:48 PM

QUOTE (Mercer)

QUOTE (ShadowDragon8685 @ Dec 30 2007, 11:13 PM)

Benefits: You can carry a concealed firearm.

Drawbacks: You'll be given drink orders every five minutes.

Hmmmmmmmmm....

Sometimes dosen't hurt to know what people like to drink. Especially if it buys you the opportunity to dose them...

Posted by: kzt Dec 30 2007, 11:52 PM

I've seen pictures of the wacky thigh holsters. No idea how they work.

Like this http://www.usgalco.com/HolsterT3.asp?ProductID=2638&CatalogID=374

Posted by: ShadowDragon8685 Dec 31 2007, 12:03 AM

From the looks of it, it looks like it works very well to guide your finger inside the trigger guard on the draw and to direct the barrel into your thigh for that wonderful blow-your-knee-outwards-shot...

Posted by: Kagetenshi Dec 31 2007, 12:06 AM

QUOTE (kzt @ Dec 30 2007, 06:25 PM)

The 1/216 chance covers unlikely events in games pretty well. It's a lot better than they way SR does, where the lowest chance you can give someone is 1/3, unless you provide multiple dice for them to roll, at which point things get complex statistically (and it implies they are also getting more skilled). I mean, if you have 18 dice what is the success probability change between needing 4 successes and 5 successes? If I give you +4 or -4 dice, how does that change it? How can I easily figure it out in a game?

I should say, as I must every so often, that whenever I discuss "SR", I mean SR3. A quick search can let you know my opinion on the other version. The lowest odds of success you can give someone is arbitrarily low, though 0.012% per die is the usual floor (TN 30—compare to .4% for triple-1s or triple-6s).

For reference, the odds of success at TN 30 exceed the floor for GURPS at about 36 dice.

~J

Posted by: kzt Dec 31 2007, 12:40 AM

At 0.012% I'd just say you fail. Or you can force another roll after you roll a 3. But I tend to prefer to allow PCs to pull of low odds things occasionally, as long as they didn't do something dumb to get them to where they needed that.

Posted by: Kagetenshi Dec 31 2007, 12:52 AM

And lo and behold, at 0.012% (0.00012), a one-in-ten-thousand event is in fact one-in-ten-thousand. Or, for the reasonably highly skilled (Skill 6), 0.072% (0.00072), or slightly under one-in-a-thousand.

Rare events are rare, instead of impossible, and no special measures are required. Pretty successful, I'd say.

~J

Posted by: martindv Dec 31 2007, 04:11 AM

QUOTE (Herald of Verjigorm @ Dec 30 2007, 02:03 PM)

QUOTE (CircuitBoyBlue @ Dec 30 2007, 12:04 PM)

Also, maybe this makes me "Johnny Badass," but when I'm scared of someone, my first instinct is not to ELIMINATE THE THREAT.

No.

It's the first instinct once you reach step five.

QUOTE (nezumi)

I have to admit, discussions like this make me think that maybe men really aren't cut out to carry guns, and we should just let the ladies worry about it.

Yes. Because we are all irrational idiots who can't control ourselves in public while armed because of a emotionally-charged response to nonsense posted on the Internet.

About Smartlink, when I use the term I actually mean Smartlink II--which actually provides even larger TN mods at long and extreme ranges (if you have a rangefinder), ostensibly to compensate for things like, oh.... bullet drop. But a -4 TN at extreme with Smartlink II isn't a 400% change in the TN compared to the -1 from a laser, but depending on the final TN is usually much less than that. Given that fact, I really don't see the point in worrying about relatively insignificant details like where the laser is located.

As for recoil, since it's already so screwed up to where it alters the statistics whether you're firing a .22 or a .50 AE or a 10 ga the exact same way, what the frame weighs or is made of is utterly immaterial.

Posted by: Kagetenshi Dec 31 2007, 04:24 AM

If you die on the internet, you die in real life.

~J

Posted by: martindv Dec 31 2007, 04:27 AM

I wish that was true some times.

Posted by: ShadowDragon8685 Dec 31 2007, 05:43 AM

QUOTE (martindv)

I wish that was true some times.

Another 40 years and Black Hammer will hit the Streets. Then it will be true.

Posted by: Daddy's Little Ninja Dec 31 2007, 04:30 PM

QUOTE (Mercer)

QUOTE (ShadowDragon8685 @ Dec 30 2007, 11:13 PM)

Benefits: You can carry a concealed firearm.

Drawbacks: You'll be given drink orders every five minutes.

And she is vain enough about her wardrobe to show off the LBD.

Posted by: martindv Dec 31 2007, 05:00 PM

QUOTE (ShadowDragon8685)

QUOTE (martindv @ Dec 31 2007, 12:27 AM)

I wish that was true some times.

Another 40 years and Black Hammer will hit the Streets. Then it will be true.

But I want to stab people in the face over TCP/IP now...

Posted by: nezumi Dec 31 2007, 05:00 PM

It's a shame we're not LARPers or we could just all agree to pretend to be stabbed as appropriate.

Posted by: Kagetenshi Dec 31 2007, 05:16 PM

Would you settle for UDP/IP, or TCP/IP/CP?

~J

Posted by: Mercer Dec 31 2007, 07:19 PM

QUOTE (Kagetenshi)

If you die on the internet, you die in real life.

~J

Is it true that only a ninja can kill a ninja... on the internet?

Posted by: X-Kalibur Jan 1 2008, 12:13 AM

Snowfox, I've fired a S&W .38 before and I have to agree with you, they kick like all hell and accuracy after about 30 ft goes straight to hell. Of course, you are using it as a personal defense weapon so 30 ft is actually rather decent. My wrists were actually sore for a couple days after firing one at a range, I'll stick to a semi-automatic .40 or .45 any day... although with the right rounds packed in it, I bet you could conceal a Walther PPK quite nicely, and they make them in a .380

Posted by: Snow_Fox Jan 1 2008, 04:07 PM

it's the short barrel combined with the larger round that blows out the accuracy. My .357 S&W with a normal barrel is just fine. The lighter metals make it what really kicks so painfully.

I'm surprised no one here has really commented on the placement of the lazer sight on the side.

DLN you are just soo lucky my God-daughter loves you!

Posted by: Kagetenshi Jan 1 2008, 06:10 PM

Why would the side-placement be a bad thing at the kind of range something with a barrel that short would be useful for?

~J

Posted by: kzt Jan 1 2008, 07:16 PM

QUOTE (Snow_Fox)

it's the short barrel combined with the larger round that blows out the accuracy. My .357 S&W with a normal barrel is just fine. The lighter metals make it what really kicks so painfully.

Is it really the recoil, or is it anticipation of the recoil? Have you tried randomly mixing in some dummy rounds and seeing what happens?

Posted by: hyzmarca Jan 1 2008, 11:58 PM

QUOTE (CircuitBoyBlue @ Dec 30 2007, 12:04 PM)

QUOTE

Are you stupid? The whole point of Batman is that he does absolutely everything in his power to avoid lethal force. And as far as guns go, he'd rather die than use one. Read his origins, noob.

Batman doesn't uses guns or lethal force due to concessions made during the time that controversy over violent crime comics was ramping up. Classic Golden Age Batman makes The Punisher look soft on crime by comparison.

http://www.coverbrowser.com/image/batman/15-1.jpg
As you can clearly see, the real Batman wants us to keep the bullets flying.

Posted by: Snow_Fox Jan 2 2008, 01:24 AM

QUOTE (kzt)

QUOTE (Snow_Fox @ Jan 1 2008, 09:07 AM)

it's the short barrel combined with the larger round that blows out the accuracy. My .357 S&W with a normal barrel is just fine. The lighter metals make it what really kicks so painfully.

Is it really the recoil, or is it anticipation of the recoil? Have you tried randomly mixing in some dummy rounds and seeing what happens?

It's the real recoil of the gun. This isn't a case of a newbie picking up a fire arm and 'oh my." Sure the first time I pulled the trigger on a pistol I was tense expecting something horrible to happen, but now, I've been shooting for years and am well use to the recoil of a hand gun. This was different and even if it was the antici.......pation, my hand wouldn't be hurting the next day.

Posted by: DTFarstar Jan 2 2008, 02:03 AM

I know this isn't precisely on topic, but are there any particularly good fun sites or forums I could be directed to. Mostly interested in handguns of the concealable and self-protection variety although SR has stirred up my interest in everything involved with guns. A friend of mine is going to get a CCL and a gun soon because of some things happening near campus and I want to help him out and I will probably be moving to a much larger city in a year and a half and plan on doing the same myself sometime before I get there. I'm a huge guy and decently trained as far as HtH goes, but when it comes down to it bullet beats fist.

Chris

Posted by: CircuitBoyBlue Jan 2 2008, 02:28 AM

QUOTE (hyzmarca)

QUOTE (CircuitBoyBlue @ Dec 30 2007, 12:04 PM)

QUOTE

Are you stupid? The whole point of Batman is that he does absolutely everything in his power to avoid lethal force. And as far as guns go, he'd rather die than use one. Read his origins, noob.

No, the Batman that keeps a cave full of rainbow colored batsuits and appears in Christmas pageants with the police wants to keep the bullets flying. The real batman, who skulks around in the dark being moody and kicking your ass without a gun because he's all man, didn't come around until much later. The Golden Age is for reactionaries and 5 year olds.

Posted by: Fortune Jan 2 2008, 02:53 AM

QUOTE (DTFarstar @ Jan 2 2008, 12:03 PM)

I know this isn't precisely on topic, but are there any particularly good fun sites or forums I could be directed to. Mostly interested in handguns of the concealable and self-protection variety ...

Nice typo!

Posted by: Lindt Jan 2 2008, 02:56 AM

QUOTE (Snow_Fox @ Jan 1 2008, 09:24 PM)

QUOTE (kzt @ Jan 1 2008, 02:16 PM)

QUOTE (Snow_Fox @ Jan 1 2008, 09:07 AM)

it's the short barrel combined with the larger round that blows out the accuracy. My .357 S&W with a normal barrel is just fine. The lighter metals make it what really kicks so painfully.

Is it really the recoil, or is it anticipation of the recoil? Have you tried randomly mixing in some dummy rounds and seeing what happens?

I have seen the combination of both first hand. I brought a petite female friend of mine to the 'local' range, and she decided to start with a little 38 special, and it was just kicking her ass for the reasons you mentioned. It just had no weight.
The range master eventually switched her to a 9mm of some sort, and to her it was more manageable.

Posted by: hyzmarca Jan 2 2008, 04:01 AM

QUOTE (CircuitBoyBlue @ Jan 1 2008, 09:28 PM)

QUOTE (hyzmarca @ Jan 1 2008, 06:58 PM)

QUOTE (CircuitBoyBlue @ Dec 30 2007, 12:04 PM)

QUOTE

Are you stupid? The whole point of Batman is that he does absolutely everything in his power to avoid lethal force. And as far as guns go, he'd rather die than use one. Read his origins, noob.

You're confusing the Silver Age with the Golden Age. The upbeat postwar Silver Age was full of camp. The Golden Age, taking place smack dab in the middle of the Great Depression, two World Wars, the Spanish Flu, the Dust Bowl, Lynchings and Melvin Pervis's FBI, was substantially darker than the modern age.

Heroes of the time killed criminals regularly, without hesitation or remorse. They acted like the cops and the G-Men of the time. The morality was black and white. If you attempt to murder an innocent person or a cop or a superhero then you deserve to die. The Batman of the time understood that slapping a mass murderer like The Joker on the knuckles with a ruler and making him promise never to kill hundreds of people for fun again just isn't going to cut it. And he understood that people have the right to defend themselves from attempted murder.

The original Batman sulked more and was more moody than the modern Batman. He also tended to http://www.silverbulletcomicbooks.com/soapbox/100601621162395.htm.

The squeaky-clean no-kill Batman of the modern era is an idiot, as demonstrated simply by the hundreds of murders committed by The Joker on his watch. His dislike of guns boils down to the belief that everyone should spend the vast majority of their lives training to be ninjas in hidden Japanese monasteries and those that don't simply don't have the right to defend themselves. He's a liberal billionaire playboy who advocates liberal billionaire justice, leaving the poor with no alternative but to die.

Posted by: Kagetenshi Jan 2 2008, 04:09 AM

QUOTE (hyzmarca)

His dislike of guns boils down to the belief that everyone should spend the vast majority of their lives training to be ninjas in hidden Japanese monasteries and those that don't simply don't have the right to defend themselves.

It's not a belief that you can reasonably disagree with, I'd say.

~J

Posted by: Mercer Jan 2 2008, 10:07 AM

QUOTE

I always liked his speech from the Dark Knight Returns, about how guns make killing people too easy, that we spare ourselves the work.

Although for my money, I've always preferred Rorschach. (Who's playing him in the new Watchman movie, btw?)

Posted by: nezumi Jan 2 2008, 04:25 PM

QUOTE (DTFarstar)

The best best best place it you genuinely want to learn and are willing to dedicate the time is www.thehighroad.org . It's a forum dedicated for gun enthusiasts. Some of the guys really, really know their stuff, a lot of people there are like me ('the side of the gun with the hole in it you point at the bad guy. Don't put the bullets down the hole! You need to do something more complex to load the gun...') (Hmm... Just got an image of me holding the breech at the bad guy with a bullet sticking out of the muzzle. No matter, you get the idea.)

Sign up so you can use the search features. Then just read, search and comment on threads when you have a question. It'll take some time, but you'll come away knowing way more than you'd learn from any single site, and a lot more practical knowledge as well.

Posted by: Critias Jan 2 2008, 05:07 PM

QUOTE (DTFarstar)

I'd suggest Glocktalk.com, if you've got the time to devote to it. The place is positively huge, so wading through everything is an exercise in futility -- you've got to pick two or three sub-forums to keep up with (there are forums there for almost anything you can think of, gun related or otherwise), but all in the all the signal-to-noise ratio is pretty solid if you take the time to read what's there. You can learn a lot, about..well...almost anything.

Posted by: Snow_Fox Jan 3 2008, 02:39 AM

QUOTE (DTFarstar)

http://thefiringline.com/forums/

A really good site, their forums are devided into laws, general and particular classes of guns- revolvers, semi auto etc.

Most states declare that CC permits do not allow you to carry on college campus or school grounds.

Posted by: DTFarstar Jan 3 2008, 07:20 AM

And here I thought my request was lost in all the Batman stuff. 3 answers here and a PM from someone all right after the other. So, now I'm a member of getoffthex.com, thefiringling.com, glocktalk.com, and thehighroad.org forums. I'm never going to get anything done anymore, but oh well. Thanks everyone, for the good answers. I hope to see you around here and there.

Chris

Posted by: Snow_Fox Jan 26 2008, 04:24 AM

I've practiced a bit more with it since I started the post. it still kicks like a son of a bitch but I've worked on improving accuracy. surprised hell out of the ugys at the range with good shooting at 30 feet. and that brings this back to the topic.

When I tried using the hard sights on the gun, like I'd do with my other guns, it aims high, probably what the range guys were thinking. If I try to combine the hard sights with the laser, forget it, worst shooting I've ever done, BUT if I use just the laser accuracy goes way up., including shootnig from the hip. Which shows how trying to combine different aiming systems doesn't work. trust me, I use the hard sights and laser and it is completely f'ed up!

I'm still surprised by the laser on the side. I mean in SR such aims must be under or over barrell. the laser on my .38 add another 'slot' to the options.

Posted by: Daddy's Little Ninja Jan 28 2008, 03:36 PM

And this is my daughter's godmother. Interesting role model.

Posted by: kzt Jan 28 2008, 05:29 PM

QUOTE (Daddy's Little Ninja)

And this is my daughter's godmother. Interesting role model.

Well, there is Paxton Quigley.

Posted by: Wounded Ronin Jan 28 2008, 06:11 PM

QUOTE (hyzmarca)

QUOTE (CircuitBoyBlue @ Jan 1 2008, 09:28 PM)

QUOTE (hyzmarca @ Jan 1 2008, 06:58 PM)

QUOTE (CircuitBoyBlue @ Dec 30 2007, 12:04 PM)

QUOTE

Are you stupid? The whole point of Batman is that he does absolutely everything in his power to avoid lethal force. And as far as guns go, he'd rather die than use one. Read his origins, noob.

Hyzmarcowned! Especially following the "noob" comment.

Posted by: Wounded Ronin Jan 28 2008, 11:12 PM

QUOTE (Snow_Fox)

I'm still frustrated with formal wear. Men can carry a gun in a tux. I wear the little black cocktail dress and there, biggest thing I can hid on it is a small lock blade.

OK, I thought of it. For formal occasions go totally overboard with a French courtier's ginormous skirt with wireframe from the 1700s, and stash an AT4 under it.

Posted by: Kagetenshi Jan 28 2008, 11:29 PM

Bring back bustles!

~J

Posted by: Critias Jan 29 2008, 09:01 AM

QUOTE (Daddy's Little Ninja)

And this is my daughter's godmother. Interesting role model.

Yeah, no kiddin'. When I have kids, I want to make sure each and every one of them understands the cops are for protecting them, and they'll never have to even think about doing so themselves.

Posted by: kzt Jan 29 2008, 07:36 PM

Just don't tell them about about the Supreme court case where they decided it is a "fundamental principle of American law that a government and its agents are under no general duty to provide public services, such as police protection, to any individual citizen".

Or these cases.

Hartzler v. City of San Jose, 46 Cal. App. 3d 6 (1st Dist. 1975)
Riss v. New York, 240 N.E.2d 860 (N.Y.1968)
Warren v. District of Columbia, 444 A.2d 1 (D.C. Ct. of Ap., 1981)
DeShaney v. Winnebago County Department of Social Services (109 S.Ct. 998, 1989; 489 U.S. 189 (1989))
Balistreri v. Pacifica Police Department (901 F.2d 696 9th Cir. 1990))
Zinermon v. Burch (110 S.Ct. 975, 984 1990; 494 U.S. 113 (1990))

But, yeah, other than that, you don't have to plan to protect yourself.

Posted by: nezumi Jan 29 2008, 09:19 PM

I'm pretty sure Critias was being facetious.

That, or he feels his genetic stock would serve him better as cogs in the machine.

Posted by: Kagetenshi Jan 29 2008, 09:47 PM

They're still going to be cogs even if they know the cops won't protect them. It's not until they learn that guns are for killing police, military personnel, and other governmental agents that they will be free.

~J

Posted by: nezumi Jan 29 2008, 10:16 PM

Agents only means law enforcement and the like, right?

Posted by: Kagetenshi Jan 29 2008, 10:35 PM

Not at all—it means those acting on behalf of the government. I would say that it is rather more of a difficult matter of determining when the civilian governmental agents become fair targets than those in law enforcement or the armed forces, but so long as civilian authorities (counting law enforcement as non-civilian for this discussion) ultimately give the orders there must be some point at which they become valid targets.

~J

Posted by: Kanada Ten Jan 30 2008, 12:05 AM

I think this follows one of the topics in here: there was an infomercial advertising "foam girdles" on the box a month or so ago - which made me cringe as the father of a young girl - but one could imagine such with a culvert for a firearm or defense drone of some sort to accessorize that evening dress. (Culvert's probably not the right word here, dimple, perhaps?) Sort of along the bustle idea, only tagline: breath easier by not breathing at all.

Posted by: kzt Jan 30 2008, 12:42 AM

QUOTE (Kagetenshi)

ultimately give the orders there must be some point at which they become valid targets.

Look! Black Helicopters!

Posted by: Critias Jan 30 2008, 06:51 AM

QUOTE (kzt)

For the record, I was being sarcastic. I think it's safe to say I'm somewhere in the top five or ten DSers, were we to ever be ranked, when it comes to taking responsibility for one's personal safety.

Posted by: nezumi Jan 30 2008, 02:24 PM

QUOTE (Kagetenshi)

Not at all

*whew* *wipes brow*

I don't give orders or enforce anything at all!

Posted by: Snow_Fox Jan 31 2008, 03:11 AM

Don't make me get out my neuralizer