Re: weapon list to peruse

[Greg Mowczko <mooch@ns1.cioe.com>]

> From: Wright Frazier <khelek>
>
> > Ummm. With Lyle here. There is no concensus with what a DP is. The best I
> > can get is as you fight more you learn to take the hit more. So while the
> > hits keep coming you can ignore them more. I don't like the "tired out"
> > part of your reasoning. A hit needs to mean a hit that impairs you. Get
> > punched in the face a couple of times and you fall down and maybe get
> > back up. If you don't get back up you have less DP. Most of DP damage I
> > would guess is bruising damage. The weapon hits you/your armor and you
> > feel it but aren't down for the count. In real life you get shot while
> > wearing a bullet proof vest you go down and then get up with a bruise. The
> > difference is our armor can take all the repeated hits without detriment.
>
> I completely disagree with your examples.  If you get hit with a sword
> while wearing no armor in your example you get bruised?  Wrong, you
> get cut, and cut bad.  You can't 'soak' a broad sword hit that cuts
> you in the chest, and probably very badly.

Obviously they didn't hit you where you are unarmored and did I say that
the hit was an edge hit? nope. Since in AQ we can't differentiate between
a sidelong whack and a cleave those not as bad hits are whacks.

> You can't 'absorb' a hit swith a battle axe by what you define a
> hit as.  You're hit is a full on wack, no dodging or defense at all, you
> flat out get hit buy the guy as hard as he can.  That has absolutely
> no bearing on reality.

No it isn't a full on hit. My thing still allows for those glancing blows
that you use and your defence is in there as well.

> Also, armor does not absorb damage in AQ.  Further your example breaks down
> for the guy in a t-shirt who gets hit.  He has nothing to absorb the
> blows he's taking.  How does your example of getting a solid hit in
> explain how a guy in no armour that just got wacked with a broadsword
> survive?  I wack you with one under these conditions, you  are gonna
> be dead or disabled.

See you keep thinking that when I say you are hit it is a solid hit. Where
do crits fall into your scheme of things? As for the armor not absorbing
no duh, armor in AQ is not absorbative ( did I make a word up :) ) and
along time ago we tried to devise a way to do that but it wouldn't 
work with everything else so it got absorbed into DP.

> In your gun example.  You get shot, you are gonna be down sucking
> on air _IF_ your vest protects you(i.e. it didn't hit a limb or
> your head).  However if you are not wearing a vest, and you get
> shot in the chest, you are probably gonna be dead.  Marine Corps rated
> the 12gauge shotgun-with buckshot ammuntion, as having a 86% casualty
> rating.  You example breaks down here.  If by the example you
> give, you get a full on shot with a shotgun, you should die or become
> incapacitated 86% of the time, or in AQ terms be reduced to 1 dp or so.
> Hmmm..thats a bit convoluted, but regardless.  By your example of how
> a hit works, people should not survive being shot or hit by anything
> intent on killing them and capable of massive bodily harm.

Obviously my hit with a gunshot was not a shotgun I was using the example
of being hit WHERE your vest is not where it isn't. 86% casualty comes
from the 8 or so pellets hitting you for multiple trauma points and a
higher statistical possibility of hitting a vital. My example does not
break down here my example is not a shotgun.

> By my idea, you can explain why a shotgun does not put you down 86%
> of the time, and how some people can take getting shot 6 times and
> surviving.  By my system you get shot at, and you might get grazed(high
> damage), or you just duck and tucker yourself out a bit(low damage).
> By my system, you catch the blow on your shield and it stings a bit(low
> damage) or you catch it on the side of your breast plate and get a
> bit of bruising(high damage).  This works for armored and unarmored
> combat.  In unarmored combat you spend much more time and energy
> dodging your foes and parrying.  This will tire you out eventually.
> In armored combat you take the blow on a shoulder plate getting a
> bruise, but proceed onwards and hack at the guy who might parry it
> back.  My system also takes the concept of built in defense in to account.
> Yours does not.  By yourse you just stand there and take the shot.

> Wright

I never say your just standing there. Your example for DP fails to account
for why a miss ( which is probably due to your avoidance ) doesn't
tucker you out as well. By your example you should lose a DP or two for
just being in a melee. My reasoning always implies a hit does some type
of impact to you. I don't say it is the best impact but there is one.
My case does not give adaquate reasoning for unarmored combat but yours
misses a few points as well. My thought train worked on the fact avoidence
and not getting hit shouldn't damage you at all and as you get better
at the whole being hit thing you can take more and more abuse ( which
works well for lower impact and slight cuts than it does for high impact ).

The problems with a game vs. reality there is no place for DP. 2 people
standing side by side get "hit" with a sword cross the midsection they
both go down to pick their entrails back up no matter how long they've
been at it. But DP is there to make you feel happy that as you can dish
out more you can take more.
						Greg