Guns are only weapon you need in modern RPG setting?

[Anterean]

Originally Posted by Jacob.Tyr

Show me a system that has stats for a half-brick in a sock, and I will buy it from you on the spot.

Although I am more partial to the one-time use pillow case filled with soda cans.

Violence have stats for a "sock full of quarters" does that count ?

Ofcourse it's value as an rpg system is... debatable, but it's a good laugh

[Kelb_Panthera]

Originally Posted by Ashtagon

What makes a weapon suitable for children? Should I be looking for something that says "for ages six and up"?

In some cultures (I'm thinking southeast US, since that's where I'm from) it's not uncommon for a boy to be given some kind of weapon for his 12th or 13th birthday. I got a .22 caliber varmit rifle for my 13th birthday and so did many of my friends. Whether or not a weapon is appropriate for a "child" depends on the culture, the child's maturity, and (of course) local laws. As with many potentially dangerous objects, learning to handle weapons safely goes much further in preventing accidents than trying to prevent access. See also; half of what's in your kitchen.

Originally Posted by Water_Bear

Drama =/= Action. True helplessness teaches you alot about a character, but it's not so hot for player agency. It's one of those things that you shouldn't try until you've mastered the system already, because it's so much harder to do correctly.

That is entirely dependent on the notion that the enemy has superior weapons to the PC's and would be just as true if we were talking about melee weapons or even differing tech levels in a more historical setting. If the enemy has iron blades and composite bows, while the PC's are stuck with wooden clubs and flint-knives, it's the exact same thing.

Originally Posted by ahenobarbi

It's troublesome to get a gun that you can freely use to kill people in real life, but everyone has fists and knifes! Well in RPG you can just put a few points in place where you'd want them anyway (wealth and black market access) and get illegal fire arms, ammo and fake permits from back story.

That's extremely system and GM dependent.

Most people don't carry around guns 24/7! That's because they have regular lives, your character doesn't so it should have no problem with that.

Another unfounded assumption. This is as dependent on the player as it is on the GM, system, and setting.

Most people aren't proficient with guns! Yeah, but RPG systems don't care if you spend XP on Firearms proficiency or bare fist fighting, it costs the same.

This one I'll give you. Most systems don't make a significant distinction between becoming proficient with guns and becoming proficient with any other kind of weapon, as I understand it.

But it's easier to get knife into secured place! No. And if you plan to take on heavily-secured place bare fist...

Right again, though whether knives and fists are as effective as guns in storming a well defended building is, once again, system dependent.

Guns are noisy! No..

Wow that's wrong. A silenced, low-caliber weapon firing sub-sonic amuntition -might- be quiet enough to use in an stealth scenario, but the stopping power would be just sad. You'd have to be nearly as precise in your shots as you would if you were using a knife, the only advantage you've preserved in using a gun is range, assuming you only have isolated targets. If you've got two guards chatting it up, your gun is now officially no better than a knife since the optimal choice is to bypass these guys.

Guns jam, run out of ammo etc. ! That's why you carry more than one gun and extra ammo.

Because cost and weight capacity are never things you need to worry about in an RPG. You never need to conceal you weapons either right?

But if guy with a knife is next to you you are screwed! Not in any RPG I played.

This is generally true, but there are specific systems and circumstances. Supers and stealth-kills anyone?

But knifes, axes,... have extra utility! So carry them around for utility, not for combat.

This may not add to their lethality at all, but it's certainly not something to be completely disregarded.

Also guns can out damage melee and unarmed fighting (with the same investment) in any (modern) RPG I played. And have range advantage.

For the weapon alone, sure. But many systems have the weapon's base damage as only one of a number of factors in a damage calculation. In these systems the best weapon is the one you built your character around, be it a melee weapon, an archaic ranged weapon, or a modern firearm.

Originally Posted by ahenobarbi

Sneaking onto someone, holding them helpless and silent and slicing their throat on top of that seems extremely hard.

IRL, it's not as hard as you'd think. It takes skill to be sure, but so does effectively using firearms; especially at medium to long range. Spray and pray is horribly inefficient and strongly discouraged by military training in any but a select few situations. In an RPG it's (once again) system dependent.



The simple fact of the matter is this: all other things being equal and close to reality; yes, guns are the go-to weapon for taking down other equally well-armed foes. The rarity of all things being equal is astounding in all but a select subset of gaming situations though; nevermind it almost never being the case in reality.

[snikrept]

I dunno about vampires, but with ninjas you just lure them into groups of other ninjas. When the ninja density gets high enough, bullets mow them down quite easily even when shooting from the hip.

[Ashtagon]

Originally Posted by Slipperychicken

It's called a Crossbow. Or just a regular bow. Or craft a Stake-Gun.

Get the machine-gun crossbow which Van Helsing used in the movies. I know it's complete nonsense, but it would be great for vampires.

No, crossbows are not "wood-tipped bullets". Crossbow bolts are traditionally wood with steel tips, although modern versions tend to replace the wooden shaft with a hollow aluminium one.

An actual wooden bullet fired from a gun would only be possible for a low-energy round, as the explosion of the propellant charge would otherwise shatter the bullet. This principle (fragile bullets that disintegrate on firing) is in fact used for designing certain "blank" firearm rounds.

[Ashtagon]

Originally Posted by Jacob.Tyr

Show me a system that has stats for a half-brick in a sock, and I will buy it from you on the spot.

Although I am more partial to the one-time use pillow case filled with soda cans.

Complete Warrior has rules for this. It's an improvised light flail.

[paddyfool]

Another reason for making melee weapons an option is Rule of Cool (not commenting on the relative cool of melee vs ranged, so much as the fact that sufficient people will find the idea of RPing a melee weapon expert cool to want that option). And replayability / flexibility - it's nice if you can try different modes of dealing with combat situations, either with one flexible character or two different characters in two different games within one system.

I can't really comment on the mechanical implications in most modern-world systems, however. To my mind, a modern-world system should cover rules for unarmed, improvised-weapon, proper melee-weapon, and ranged-weapon combat, with everything else being gravy. Unarmed should be mechanically inferior to the others unless you're going for very high cinematics, in which case, fine, your kung fu expert can somehow hit as hard as an AK47, but proper melee weapons should be marginally superior to ranged weapons at close quarters (less so for shotguns or sidearms than for rifles, but you still have to aim and shoot, rather than just swing/stab).

[Maugan Ra]

I once ran a Call of Cthulhu game in modern-day Britain. All of my players are British, and we realised a short way in that actually, weapons can get you into a lot of trouble in Britain. You'll probably be fine if you keep it hidden and don't draw attention to it, but really, that's quite difficult to do in these games...

(Of course, the fact that one player insisted on Roleplaying a complete lunatic did not help. Wandering into a hospital with a balaclava on and politely asking to be let into the morgue...)

[Ravens_cry]

Reminds me of a d20 modern campaign we were part of. We, the players, were all Canadian, it was set in Canada, and most of us didn't have firearms proficiency, let alone carry around a pistol everywhere.

[Mike_G]

It's not how fast a weapon kills you, it's how fast it stops you.

I've treated many kinds of wounds, and guys who get shot tend to be incapacitated even if they survive. Guys who get stabbed keep right on functioning until they bleed out.

For making a guy fall down and leave you alone, you can't beat a bullet.

So, guns are the best choice. But you do want a viable backup, which won't jam or run out of ammo. So a good knife is a good idea.

And if you are playing a horror type game, there may well be a reason to carry a big melee weapon. A machete might dismember a zombie where emptying a clip of 9mm into him might not do all that much.

[Mark Hall]

Originally Posted by Frozen_Feet

My counter-point to this is simple: it's easier to make make-shift explosives from kitchen supplies, than it is to legally carry a gun around.

I play, and tend to set games in, Texas.

[The Glyphstone]

Originally Posted by Mark Hall

I play, and tend to set games in, Texas.

Texas: The state where you need a license to not carry a weapon.

[Mark Hall]

Originally Posted by The Glyphstone

Texas: The state where you need a license to not carry a weapon.

Not quite, but I have heard that put forth as a good idea.

[erikun]

A lot of people have mentioned knives, but I'd also like to mention clubs and club-like weapons (crowbars, baseball bats, nightsticks, Maglites). At least in a psudo-realistic setting, you probably don't want everyone you encounter dead. The ability to injure/incapacitate a person without the risk of bleeding them out or damaging internal organs (intentionally) is probably worth carrying around a stick of wood.

That, and tear gas/flash-bangs are expensive and far more noticable when used.

[Aragorn_cro]

I agree with erikun, 'weapons' that would allow person to incapacitate his enemies (like tazer) would be invaluable in such setting.

[Slipperychicken]

Originally Posted by Ashtagon

No, crossbows are not "wood-tipped bullets". Crossbow bolts are traditionally wood with steel tips, although modern versions tend to replace the wooden shaft with a hollow aluminium one.

Put big wood stick through vampire's heart -> Vampire is staked. Who cares if there's a bit of metal on the end? Just take the tip off and sharpen the end (or get all-wood bolts) if it actually matters.

[nedz]

In a modern setting: those who live by the sword — get shot.

One of the main advantages of guns is that they don't require much skill to use. To shoot at long range, and hit, sure — but at close range, not so much.

Given an expert swordsman V a novice with a hand gun, at less than 30' range: my money would be on the swordsman. At longer ranges, or with less skill, the odds favour the man with the gun.

Originally Posted by Eldan

Could you make a wood-tipped bullet? Or would that just shatter on impact?

I've seen candles fired from shot-guns. Also baton rounds.

[Talya]

Originally Posted by Ashtagon

What makes a weapon suitable for children? Should I be looking for something that says "for ages six and up"?

[Slipperychicken]

Originally Posted by Talya

[Keep Out of Children]

That says "keep out of children"... so many disturbing implications...

[Kelb_Panthera]

Originally Posted by Slipperychicken

That says "keep out of children"... so many disturbing implications...

One would think that would go without saying.

The label there says it's manufactured in Osaka, maybe army brats in japan are roudier than we think?

That's just a joke, btw.

[Fhaolan]

Beware the escallation.

Part of the role of the GM is to challenge the characters. If the players insist of being armed to the teeth all the time, the GM will likely feel the need to over-arm their opponents as well. And given the opponents of most modern-day RPGs are rich corporation-backed mercenaries and similar, these opponents can afford stupidly expensive weapons. Which will end up in the PC's hands, so the GM then feels that they have to put even more armanents into the hands of the opponents; wash, rinse, repeat.

I find that in most of the modern-day games I've played in, the characters who stealth the session with garrotes, combat knives, and tasers, and the characters who provides overwatch as snipers, hackers or even old-fashioned lookouts, are the ones that last longer overall than the bruiser who tries to carry a minigun with built-in grenade and flamethrower down a busy city street.

[Narren]

Originally Posted by Boci

Neither of those are going to get you access to firearms in Britain.

Why would having criminal contacts not gain you access to firearms? I don't know much about gaining illegal firearms in Britain, but how else would you do it?

[Wardog]

Originally Posted by Frozen_Feet

My counter-point to this is simple: it's easier to make make-shift explosives from kitchen supplies, than it is to legally carry a gun around. The most abundant weapons are not guns, but various types of knives and axes.

Although is it easier than to illegaly carry a gun around?

Making explosives from a few household chemicals in the proper proportions requires knowing something about chemistry. (Or at least knowing a receipe for explosives).

Legally acquiring a gun might normally be difficult for someone, but if the plot hands you one, anyone could carry one around illegaly, and probably without being noticed (assuming it's a small handgun).



However, you've all missed one other important reason for non-firearm weapons:

Also, I think knives are a good idea. Big, -off shiny ones. Ones that look like they could skin a crocodile. Knives are good because they don't make any noise, and the less noise they make, the more likely we are to use them. - 'em right up. Makes it look like we're serious. Guns for show, knives for a pro.

[The Glyphstone]

Knives being quieter was discussed for most of a page, actually, and partly debunked in that people stabbed/cut with knives and not instantly killed can be very, very loud indeed.

[Jade Dragon]

Originally Posted by The Glyphstone

Knives being quieter was discussed for most of a page, actually, and partly debunked in that people stabbed/cut with knives and not instantly killed can be very, very loud indeed.

Loud enough that the guy stabbing him would need ear protection so he won't risk permanent hearing loss? People don't wear those ear covers because it's cold at the shooting range.

And people scream because they see you about to stab them with a knife, not because you stab them with a knife. Seriously, try to picture someone suddenly being stabbed in the back. Does a big loud scream make sense in that situation? Or is a sharp intake of breath at the sudden, unexpected pain more appropriate?

[Kalmarvho]

I believe the virtues of the knife being 'quieter' hinges on situations that require no noise at all. So in such a situation, someone hollering from a botched stab to his meaty-ass traps is just as dangerous as as gunshot.

[Gnoman]

Originally Posted by Ashtagon

What makes a weapon suitable for children? Should I be looking for something that says "for ages six and up"?

Late to the conversation, but there's specific models of firearms specifically designed for adolescents. Typically, these are .22LR rifles or shotguns in 20-gauge or .410 that are built on smaller dimensions than an adult arm. The inherently low recoil of these rounds combined with the better handling permitted by the smaller size makes range accidents (often caused by a dropped weapon or the recoil taking you well off target) much less likely, while the lower power limits the damage such accidents cause in the event that they do occur. This makes them excellent training weapons for youths in families that hunt or own a firearm for other reasons.

[DontEatRawHagis]

Originally Posted by Jade Dragon

Seriously, try to picture someone suddenly being stabbed in the back. Does a big loud scream make sense in that situation? Or is a sharp intake of breath at the sudden, unexpected pain more appropriate?

Pain exists. If you stab someone expect them to say something afterwards and yell. The illusion that you can stab someone in the back quietly is similar to that of Suppressors on guns stopping noise altogether. Will the scream of being stabbed be heard as loudly as a gun shot, no, but it would probably get the guys in the next room over quickly to hear what happened.

I think if you realized that you were just stabbed in a battle situation you would yell at your allies to warn them. That is, if your allies don't know you just got stabbed.

I don't like Hollywood when they have melodramatic scenes where people get stabbed cough up blood or make little to no noise. Sometimes they stay alive just long enough to finish their monologue, other times they die in a split second.

Edit: Hell even if you use a chemical to try and knock someone out they will be fighting for a long time before it takes effect. Not to mention the brain damage such chemicals can cause.

[Kelb_Panthera]

Haggis is right. Killing someone silently with a knife requires that you catch them completely off-guard and either cover their mouth with your free hand, and/or bury your knife in a spot that makes crying out impossible.

The old ear-to-ear cut makes saying more than "gurgle" more than a little difficult, and a quick thrust into the brain-stem actually is an instant kill, but any of these techniques requires more than a little skill, though I wouldn't say it's significantly more skill than successfully making a kill-shot against a target with a gun from more than 100ft; depending on training and circumstance.

[snikrept]

The half brick in the sock seems like the better choice for sneaky silent combat, over the knife. Hard to yell when you've been conked on the head and knocked out.

[Boci]

Originally Posted by The Glyphstone

Knives being quieter was discussed for most of a page, actually, and partly debunked in that people stabbed/cut with knives and not instantly killed can be very, very loud indeed.

But aren't their studies that show humans can be remarkably blase with their response to hearing screams?

Originally Posted by Narren

Why would having criminal contacts not gain you access to firearms? I don't know much about gaining illegal firearms in Britain, but how else would you do it?

That's how you'd do it, its just unlikely that a teenager who got into organized crime would have access to guns. Meatcleavers and drugs? Sure, but not guns.