[savaze]

9mm Parabellum is supersonic.  .45 ACP is subsonic (Barely.).  Both might be classed as heavy rounds.

Most 9mm PA fire in the subsonic range unless you buy the high dollar rounds or have a longer barrel, which most people prefer not to put a hunting barrel on a 9mm (most 9mm PA are in the 900-1100 fps range).  Ammo manufacturers can also embellish on the speeds of their products to help with marketing (they'll fire the rounds in non standard conditions, with non standard barrels, to get higher speeds), that's why everyone is always arguing about the actual speeds of ammo in all the different gun magazines (that and there's slight barrel length differences on service pistols that alter the flight characteristics just enough)...

[savaze]

Since these are more house rules/player preference, we'll leave the info here. It's not errata, per se, since the discussion is about intentional mechanics mostly.

In fact, they might be more along the lines of an FAQ topic.

Wouldn't some of these things count as broken rules errata and others as canon errata (fluff not matching the rules)?  I don't disagree about some of them fitting better in a FAQ's section...

[CanRay]

9mm Parabellum is supersonic.  .45 ACP is subsonic (Barely.).  Both might be classed as heavy rounds.

Most 9mm PA fire in the subsonic range unless you buy the high dollar rounds or have a longer barrel, which most people prefer not to put a hunting barrel on a 9mm (most 9mm PA are in the 900-1100 fps range).  Ammo manufacturers can also embellish on the speeds of their products to help with marketing (they'll fire the rounds in non standard conditions, with non standard barrels, to get higher speeds), that's why everyone is always arguing about the actual speeds of ammo in all the different gun magazines (that and there's slight barrel length differences on service pistols that alter the flight characteristics just enough)...

Ah, lies, damned lies, and marketing.

I worked Tech Support.  What I have to say about Marketing shouldn't be printed.

[FastJack]

Since these are more house rules/player preference, we'll leave the info here. It's not errata, per se, since the discussion is about intentional mechanics mostly.

In fact, they might be more along the lines of an FAQ topic.

Wouldn't some of these things count as broken rules errata and others as canon errata (fluff not matching the rules)?  I don't disagree about some of them fitting better in a FAQ's section...

I haven't been reading this thread in detail, but it seems to me most of the proposals are for personal preferences. I'll read it in detail tomorrow (when I'm bit more awake) and see if it's more than my first impression.

[savaze]

I'm not sure my late night thoughts are cohesive... here's to sleepily hoping!

Marketing and facts don't make good diner dates...

[FastJack]

Okay, read through the thread again and I still think that it's not errata.

• Trying to apply real-world gun physics and such to a game world doesn't work. You either wind up with a game that's nearly impossible to play, or so deadly to the characters that no one wants to play. Because, if guns in the SR universe were anything like real guns, all our characters would be dead or maimed the first time they got shot.
• As I stated before, this is more personal preference on fluff descriptions than errata. Are some of the ammo/gun fluff pieces incorrect? Yes. But the general gamer just wants to fire cool guns at bad guys and aren't worried about whether the stuff makes sense. Kinda like how a Katana and Monofilament Sword do the same damage.

[CanRay]

On the one hand, you have gun nuts like myself freaking out left right and center.

On the other, you have a much larger group that just wants a gun to shoot people in the face for money, and have no idea about "Caliber", "Barrel Length", "Muzzle Velocity", or even name all the parts that make up a piece of ammunition.  They barely understand what "Caseless" means, and were happy to have the Internet to look it up.

That larger group is who you have to aim at pleasing.  Damnit.

[FastJack]

On the one hand, you have gun nuts like myself freaking out left right and center.

On the other, you have a much larger group that just wants a gun to shoot people in the face for money, and have no idea about "Caliber", "Barrel Length", "Muzzle Velocity", or even name all the parts that make up a piece of ammunition.  They barely understand what "Caseless" means, and were happy to have the Internet to look it up.

That larger group is who you have to aim at pleasing.  Damnit.

Just remember, there's nothing preventing you from writing up your own house rules and implementing them in your game.

[EmperorPenguin]

I think it's about more than 'pleasing the masses' (though it's guaranteed that marketability plays a part).  Game mechanics really do benefit from not having too many levels of complexity.  I'd say (boldly) that this is true across all types of games, with some relative considerations.

RPGs benefit from plenty of expansion material, which may seem like a moneypit.  You don't need them to play, but they add depth to the game world.  Usually it's depth of choice and not depth of complexity, because choice is what draws a lot of people to RPGs in the first place.

'House rules' might seem like a brush-off, but really it is the best place to add the depth you're looking for.  If you have a passion for a particular part of the game (firearms, hacking, etc) you can add the depth you want thanks to the unique balance factor of a Game Master.

[CanRay]

Just remember, there's nothing preventing you from writing up your own house rules and implementing them in your game.

Nothing except being the only gun nut in my group.  The blank looks I get when I mention even something as simple as Rimmed and Rimless cartridges...  *Shakes Head*

[PeterGol]

Hello everybody.

I have a question (probably a silly one) regarding the ammo. More exactly, regarding the modifiers applying for the Gel Rounds.

In SR4 it says: Gel rounds add +2 DV but have an AP of +2 against armor. Gel rounds inflict Stun damage and are resisted with Impact armor. Gel Rounds +2 (Stun) +2AP (ammo reference table p.314)

But in the 20th anniversary book it says: Gel rounds inflict Stun damage and are resisted with Impact armor (AP +2). Gel Rounds –1 (Stun) +2AP (ammo reference table p.324)

I have checked the "CHANGES REFERENCE DOCUMENT" and did not see there any references to changes in the gel rounds modifiers.

So my question is, which is the right DV modifier for the gel rounds ammunition? Assuming it has +2AP, deals S damage and reduces target's Body by 2 when checking for knockdown.

Many thanks in advance and my apologies if this could be a very noob question

[Medicineman]

the 4A (aniversary Ed) is the Errattaed Version of the older SR4 Version

with an Errattaed Dance
Medicineman

[The_Gun_Nut]

I keep hearing my name called.  What's up with that?

Essentially, the writers used terms that were pretty familiar with anyone who had seen any kind of war/action movies/TV.  They slapped the terms in there to differenciate between different bonuses that could be gained by different ammunition types.  For the typical non-gun-nut gamer, this is enough.

The kicker is, of course, that many of the "types" that they listed are actually traits or things that are in addition to the basic type of ammunition.  For example:  armor piercing (APDS), explosive, and incindiary are all listed separately, but IRL all these traits can be combined into a single round (AP-EX-I).  There are many, many more, but my sleep addled brain (it's time to go to bed so I can get up and go to work ) can't come up with any that make sense right now.

BTW, FJ, it is entirely possible to get shot 5 or 6 times and not go down (even as a regular Joe).  I think the game models both aspects of combat (lethal and survivable) fairly well.

[CanRay]

BTW, FJ, it is entirely possible to get shot 5 or 6 times and not go down (even as a regular Joe).  I think the game models both aspects of combat (lethal and survivable) fairly well.

When it comes down to the "Shot and fall down/die" thing, shock is the dropper/killer.  It's almost as much mental capacity to deal with issues as physical ones.

That's how you get the guy who has been shot a dozen times keep on fighting until his body gets the message, "Hey, idiot, you're hurt bad/dead, fall down!"  Either they're in "The Zone" and so prepared for anything mentally, or on drugs, or both.  The "Both" guys are scary.

It's also how, sometimes, even the most minor wound can have someone just drop dead.  I heard about one guy that was shot in the foot and just fell down, dead before he hit the ground.

That said, I'd like to stay away from the "Getting shot" bit as much as possible.

[savaze]

It's true that shock is devastating... When I was working with the police out in CA there was an officer that had a negligent discharge and shot himself in the foot (the big toe actually).  He died before the ambulance showed up. It was a sad day... In reality he didn't lose enough blood to have any substantial injury. He wasn't in an adrenaline situation, that would have saved his life, he just kept looking at his foot and saying he'd been shot from what eye witnesses said...

I've seen athletes go into shock from seeing their broken ankles and had to get critical care. For those that have never had the training go out and get first aid training and I highly recommend First Responder training as well (it deals with more severe injuries and shock prevention and treatment).

As far as combat situations and people getting shot several times, it depends on the situations...  Soldiers shooting people several times does happen A LOT! That has more to do with the ammo they're using, armor piercing 5.56 is the popular round of the day. It's not designed too have stopping power.  The only one hit kills I've seen and heard about are head shots... The original design of the 5.56 was for it to be a tumbler, meaning the round started to spin after it hit something, giving it stopping power more on par with larger rounds.  That was engineered out of it to make the round more accurate and consistent. Now a .22 LR has more stopping power, but not nearly the penetration as the 5.56. Even the civilian version of the 5.56, the .223, has engineered the round to be more accurate and consistent by engineering the tumbling out.

Law enforcement around the world aren't as concerned with penetration as they are with stopping power.  They want the one shot equals down (incapacitated or dead) and don't want over penetration because most criminals aren't wearing military body armor and there are innocents nearby, so they have special units that focus on that. It use to be that police only carried handguns and had shotguns (with 00 buckshot) in their cruisers (usually in a quick-grab location). As criminals became more dangerous and armored, cops started carrying deer slugs for their shotties (the great equalizers) and wearing body armor. It became increasingly more common for them to have heavier body armor and carbines in the trunks on their rides as well for more militaristic perpetrators.  Cops using carbines regularly don't want the problems the 5.56 brings to the picture and are upgrading their weapons to fire rounds like the .458 SOCOM (uses the 5.56 magazine) and the like. Politics being what they are cops are more frequently encouraged to use under powered rounds like the 9mm. In the past no one would have thought twice of law enforcement using a .38 Special (politicians have labelled them school killers) or the .45 ACP. Depending on department policies many cops still go out of their way to use rounds that stop the intended target cold in their tracks over something that allows them to continue to shoot back.

So if SR is using an even more demented version of the 5.56, then yes damage would be where it's at. Prior editions had damage that was more on par with where it should be. 4e is going with a more ..."epic"..., that's the word that comes to mind, damage system. I keep wanting to calling it more D&D-like.