QUOTE (Critias @ Mar 30 2008, 09:44 PM)

Congrats on showing the world that RPGs really
are full of crap when they overprice high-damage weapons in the name of "game balance." For the price of one tricked out 1911, you could outfit more than a dozen men with Mosin Nagant's, or SKSs, and a case or two of ammo to train and then outfit them with. Shhh, don't tell anyone, the firearm charts of every game ever will flip upside down.
...
Or you know, you could just outfit them with surplus M1911's. Can't be that expensive.
On another note: There are actually some RPG's that do have the prices approximately right. I'm actually thinking of WoD specifically. The example that comes to mind is that of the surplus M1 Garands. The given price is as low as WoD can simulate without making them free (one dot, if you are familiar with the system). Actually, in general WoD's firearms fluff is quite good (In
Armory at least) even though its rules provide for a oversimplified and not very accurate simulation.
Of course, while many of us may be interested in playing a moderately or fairly realistic game, there is still quite a bit to be said for game balance. It is my contention that properly balanced games are more fun. They certainly allow a wider range of play styles without one strategy coming to dominate. So I guess I am saying I'd rather put up with a little more unrealism than have a game suffer in playability because of its anal attention to reality.
Still though, I do have a tendency when contemplating simulation systems that I might potentially create to go overboard on detail and realism. Fortunately my intended medium is with computer programs which allow most of the headache and complexity to be hidden from the user. I guess what I'm saying is that while realism has its place, eventually one has to concentrate on the experience of the player/user. Any negative impact on experience from realism or the lack of it, should be avoided where possible.
Oh, and Wounded Ronin, I hope you enjoy your Mosin Nagant.