Full Version: Shooting at passengers
And I have to say I agree with you there, especially with the way body armor works in canon SR3.
| QUOTE (Austere Emancipator) |
| A lighter, faster FMJ will fare much worse. According to FM 3-06.11 COMBINED ARMS OPERATIONS IN URBAN TERRAIN, a brick veneer or a 2-inch thick, non-reinforced concrete wall will protect you against 5.56x45mm FMJs fired at less than 50 meters. The FM also states that the same rounds might not fully penetrate a car body, and thus a car can be considered cover gainst it. Meanwhile assault rifles will penetrate building materials like this in SR. |
I cannot speak to the manual as I haven ot read it. I can say, however, that I have seen 9mm rounds pass completely through a police car door, in and out of the trunk (separate round), and in the driver's door and out the passenger (though in this instance I do not believe it carried lethal force). These were standard 9mm police issue rounds.
I have seen an AK pass through 16 layers of drywall, a cement block and a brick, all with lethal force on the exit side.
The only thing I would consider as "cover" would be an engine compartment, a large tree, or a very large distance.
I have seen a small calibre (typical gang-banger round) pass through a brick wall to lodge itself roughly head level in the shower (through 2 interior walls of drywall construction and one wall with drywall on one side and standard tile on the other). The shot was fired far enough away to not wake the occupants of the house.
What do you mean by typical gang banger round? That varies quite a bit, from the dirt poor kid with the .25ACP Raven P25 to the gang bangers packing police surplus 9mms (oh, the irony!) to the now ever popular Glock .40 (thank you, 50 cent). Hell, .357 magnum and .45 ACP show up a lot too.
Yeah, what kind of gangist coment is that? 
Out of curiousity, is part of this debate stemming from a definition of lethal force?
I really don't know, but it seems like there may be two (or more) different assumptions of what lethal force means.
I mean, I'll buy that an AK round will penetrate through all of that stuff, but is it going to do the same kind of damage? It ain't just going to bounce off of your skin, but it may not cause as much trauma.
So I guess my question is how are you guys defining lethal force? And we kind of have to consider that Shadowrun damage tends to be focused on the "immediate" kind of lethal force, not the kind of lethal force that has someone bleeding out after an hour or so.
This isn't a flame or anything. I'm just honestly curious and, frankly, a bit confused since it seems that I'm hearing about several *completely* different ballistics effects, all being ascribed to the same rounds.
I really don't know, but it seems like there may be two (or more) different assumptions of what lethal force means.
I mean, I'll buy that an AK round will penetrate through all of that stuff, but is it going to do the same kind of damage? It ain't just going to bounce off of your skin, but it may not cause as much trauma.
So I guess my question is how are you guys defining lethal force? And we kind of have to consider that Shadowrun damage tends to be focused on the "immediate" kind of lethal force, not the kind of lethal force that has someone bleeding out after an hour or so.
This isn't a flame or anything. I'm just honestly curious and, frankly, a bit confused since it seems that I'm hearing about several *completely* different ballistics effects, all being ascribed to the same rounds.
Force that is intended to cause or that carries a substantial risk of causing death or serious bodily injury...
Meant something around 9mm
OK Frater. I guess what I'm noticing is that it seems like the others are thinking more along the lines of
Force that is intended to cause or that carries a substantial risk of causing immediate death or immediate incapacitation.
Obviously that would be a deadly wound, but, it seems that even a "Moderate Wound" would still probably be significant trauma in RL. If SR was more realistic we'd have players rolling for shock and rolling willpower to be able to continue operating, *and* the target number modifiers would still be there. (Not to mention deteriorating wounds)
I don't know, I'm a mathematician so words like "substantial risk" and "serious injury" always make me kind of twitchy in a conversation since they're so, oh, I don't know, vague.
Of course, there's a strict mathematical definition for "absolutely almost simple", so we're a bit paranoid about hedging
Force that is intended to cause or that carries a substantial risk of causing immediate death or immediate incapacitation.
Obviously that would be a deadly wound, but, it seems that even a "Moderate Wound" would still probably be significant trauma in RL. If SR was more realistic we'd have players rolling for shock and rolling willpower to be able to continue operating, *and* the target number modifiers would still be there. (Not to mention deteriorating wounds)
I don't know, I'm a mathematician so words like "substantial risk" and "serious injury" always make me kind of twitchy in a conversation since they're so, oh, I don't know, vague.
Of course, there's a strict mathematical definition for "absolutely almost simple", so we're a bit paranoid about hedging
My problem is that most characters can shrug off a 4or5M wound (which is the average you would take from behind a wall) like it was nothing. Now, I'm all for the hero PCs being able to walk away from punches, explosions, bullets, etc... But this mechanic allows, nay encourages, PCs to walk into the path of a bullet laughing. I simply think PCs should have to think twice before they "take a bullet."
Hiding behind a wall is not "walking into the path of a bullet laughing." It's hiding behind a wall and laughing. Walls are suposed to make it harder to get injured when you hide behind them, whether it is for the +8 TN to shoot blindfire or the damage reduction, a defensive tactic is supposed to make survival easier.
That doesn't mean that the GM should never toss in a sniper bullet or some HVMMG fire just to throw off the "oh, the wall and armor are enough, I won't waste combat pool" mentality.
That doesn't mean that the GM should never toss in a sniper bullet or some HVMMG fire just to throw off the "oh, the wall and armor are enough, I won't waste combat pool" mentality.
Point taken.
| QUOTE (The Other DSE) |
| I don't know, I'm a mathematician so words like "substantial risk" and "serious injury" always make me kind of twitchy in a conversation since they're so, oh, I don't know, vague. |
They're vague because there really is no way to substantiate them in a discussion like this. Whether through a brick wall or not, a FMJ round fired from an AK-47 that hits you in the head is very likely to kill you. Assuming the bullet doesn't fragment, you're also likely to be critically injured if the bullet hits you square in the chest, whether it has gone through a brick first or not.
On the other hand, if your arm happens to be in between, a bullet that has already gone through a brick wall might be stopped in it, or just barely penetrate it and only go an inch or two into your chest. Likewise if the shot comes at an angle, there's a good chance it won't penetrate deep enough to get at the good stuff. And as you increase the hardness of the barrier, the bullet (or what's left of it) will penetrate less and less tissue, meaning lower and lower chance of being critically injured.
| QUOTE (Frater Inominatus) |
| I cannot speak to the manual as I haven ot read it. |
Generally speaking, I trust the US Army to be right about easily observable things related to firearms and their effects. There's always the possibility that they'll get some things mixed up (like they have in some Field Manuals about the terminal effects of rifles), but at least they've got plenty more hands-on experience than I do, since I've only lugged around and fired an assault rifle for 9 months.
I expect that firing through a car is really down to chance. You get lucky, the .22 RNL won't hit any sturdier bits and only has to go through two thin plastic sheets and the interiors and will still poke out the eye of the guy hiding behind. You get unlucky, and the .44 Magnum FMC hits a rigid crash bar and doesn't get through the first door. I expect type of car is also very important -- you'll see a lot more penetrations if you try this out in a major city in Western Europe than you would in rural areas of the US.
The reason why light high-velocity bullets (like 5.56x45mm FMJs) don't fare well in comparison to pistol bullets when it comes to penetrating cars, or anything else rigid and either rather thick (like brick or concrete walls) or consisting of several layers (a car body, 2 interior walls with a room inbetween), is that they tend to fragment on the first impact. Pistol rounds travel so much slower that they generally don't have to bother with such things.
The AK-47 has a significant advantage over 5.56x45mm ARs in that it fires a much heavier bullet at much lower speeds. Unfortunately armies which still have service weapons in 7.62x39mm don't publicize as much research material as the US Army so I can't say for sure, but I have a feeling 7.62x39mm FMJs will penetrate just about everything much better than any common handgun defense loads.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.