anyone else think the D20 Modern Firearms are weak?

[BlueWitch]

A effing Shotgun only deals 2d6
And I think a Pistol is only 1d8

A Machine gun was like, 2d12.

I feel like they should be at least one more die. Like 3d6 to 3d12

Guns can eff somebody up. More so than a sword. And it's faster.
OVerall, I really don't like how weak they made firearms. It doesn't seem right.

EDIT:
A good idea could be to make Head Shot's deal double damage and not require a Critical.

[ShurikVch]

A effing Shotgun only deals 2d6
And I think a Pistol is only 1d8

A Machine gun was like, 2d12.
Actually, Shotgun is 2d8 or 2d10 (depending on a model)

Pistol is 2d6 on average (some are 2d4, but some others are 2d8)

And yes - M2HB is 2d12 (M-60 is 2d8)

But the worst offender among the d20 Modern is the artillery - when tank cannon most of the times is mathematically incapable to 1-shot an elephant... :smallsigh:


I feel like they should be at least one more die. Like 3d6 to 3d12
For comparison -

Pistols:
Pistol ("The Way of the Gun", Dragon #321) - 1d8
Dwarven Pistol ("Greyhawk 2000", Dragon #277) - 1d8
Kolter Pistols ("Firearms in Freeport", Dragon Annual #6) - from 1d10 (Clockwork FP) to 2d8 (Dragon FP)
Flintlock Pistol (Warcraft the RPG) - 2d6/3d6 (Small/Medium)
Pistols (Call of Cthulhu d20) - from 1d8 (Remington Double Derringer, .41 RF Short) to 2d10 (Desert Eagle, .50 AE)
Pistols ("Pulp Heroes", Dungeon #90) - from 3d4 (Light Pistol) to 3d8 (Revolver)

Shotguns:
10-gauge (Call of Cthulhu d20) - 3d8/2d8/1d8 (depending on distance; buckshot), 3d4/2d4/1d4 (birdshot), 2d10 (slug)
12-gauge (Call of Cthulhu d20) - 3d6/2d6/1d6 (buckshot), 3d3/2d3/1d3 (birdshot), 2d10 (slug)
16-gauge (Call of Cthulhu d20) - 3d6/2d6/1d6 (buckshot), 2d3/2d3/1d3 (birdshot), 2d10 (slug)
20-gauge (Call of Cthulhu d20) - 2d6/1d6/1d4 (buckshot), 2d3/1d3/1d2 (birdshot), 2d8 (slug)
28-gauge (Call of Cthulhu d20) - 2d4/1d4/1d3 (buckshot), 2d2/1d2/1 (birdshot), 2d6 (slug)
.410 (Call of Cthulhu d20) - 1d8/1d3/1d2 (buckshot), 1d4/1/1 (birdshot), 1d10 (slug)
Shotgun ("Pulp Heroes", Dungeon #90) - 3d10

Machine Guns:
Machine Gun ("Pulp Heroes", Dungeon #90) - 3d8
Dwarven HMG ("Greyhawk 2000", Dragon #277) - 4d8

Do you like any of those numbers more?


Guns can eff somebody up. More so than a sword. And it's faster.
OVerall, I really don't like how weak they made firearms. It doesn't seem right.

EDIT:
A good idea could be to make Head Shot's deal double damage and not require a Critical.
The thing is: IRL, firearms are kinda unpredictable - they can kill in a single shot (and not even necessarily to the head or heart), or the victim would be left bleeding, but still active
Watch the Lawyer Dodges Bullets (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9tkMYoOLAhk) video - he was actually hit several times, but walked away (and no - no body armor!)
Even headshots aren't always as lethal as movies tell us: there were many cases when people were shot to the head, but survived it - from 7-year-old Alexis Goggins (took the full clip from the point blank range - including at least one bullet through the eye!) to Joe "The Mighty Atom" Greenstein (bullet just bounced away from his skull)

[tyckspoon]

A effing Shotgun only deals 2d6
And I think a Pistol is only 1d8

A Machine gun was like, 2d12.

I feel like they should be at least one more die. Like 3d6 to 3d12

Guns can eff somebody up. More so than a sword. And it's faster.
OVerall, I really don't like how weak they made firearms. It doesn't seem right.

EDIT:
A good idea could be to make Head Shot's deal double damage and not require a Critical.

Find a video of somebody cleaving a pig carcass in half with a test-cut of a sword (or if you want less gore, should be able to find similar done with ballistic gelatin, same as is used for test shooting for projectile damage estimates) and see if you still think a sword can't ruin somebody's day as badly as a bullet.

Fundamentally, this is just the same old problem the D20 system has always had - it does not present a world where combat with weapons is lethal. Whatever mental constructs you have to be ok with that in the fantasy milieu (where you can 'hit' somebody with a 2d6 Greatsword five times before they drop) should also be applied to the Modern rules variants - the Shotgun is the Modern Greatsword, a pistol is the Modern Longsword, a derringer/holdout/small pistol is a Dagger. If you can't find a way to be ok with somebody needing to be 'shot' multiple times before they go down or take critical injuries, it's not because the guns need to do more damage - you should be looking for a rules variant that changes how HP works to better align with what you want the game fantasy to be.

(These will usually be listed as 'gritty' or 'high lethality' variants, because that is usually what happens when you make guns 'stronger'. Default game starts at least at 'fantastic Action Hero' level, where a gunfight usually results in the Heroes not actually being hit, and if they are it's a painful flesh wound but not actually something needing immediate emergency medical attention. Which is what most gunshot wounds *and* melee weapon wounds would be in actual reality.)

[Alabenson]

When evaluating the D20 Modern weapons, you need to keep in mind that D20 Modern uses a very lethal version of the death from massive damage rules, where any single hit that deals damage equal to or exceeding your Con score triggers a Fortitude save to avoid dying outright. That means that a lot of the D20 Modern weapons are far more likely to score a kill on any given hit than the damage would indicate.

[pabelfly]

If you buff them too much, guns are going to be the preferred method of fighting to the exclusion of all else - they'll have all the benefits of ranged combat, and then do more damage than melee on top of that. What's the point of using anything else in such a system rework?

[Elkad]

The problem isn't the damage. The problem is the rate of fire.
1 aimed shot per second should be the standard for even an untrained user. And BAB 5/10/15 should add another shot per second each. Plus Feats, etc.
Burst fire (with feat) should be the first round at normal hit chances, with -4 added for each additional round (so -16 on the last of a 5rd burst). Firing a burst uses 2 of your attacks (or has a 1-attack "recoil recovery"). (so the untrained guy can fire 3 per 6-second round)

Does that imbalance melee? Yes.
I'm not sure that's a problem. Don't compare John Wick to Conan, compare him to a Wizard.

[thorr-kan]

I don't think they're too weak, for both their variability and the massive death save mentioned above.

What I *do* think is there are too many of them. They should have been made as generic as melee weapons are.

[Crake]

When evaluating the D20 Modern weapons, you need to keep in mind that D20 Modern uses a very lethal version of the death from massive damage rules, where any single hit that deals damage equal to or exceeding your Con score triggers a Fortitude save to avoid dying outright. That means that a lot of the D20 Modern weapons are far more likely to score a kill on any given hit than the damage would indicate.

This isnt quite correct, the fort save isnt vs dying outright, its vs being put to -1 hp.

But yes, this is where the major balancing point lies. Weapons dont need to whittle away your hp, they just need to do enough damage to go over your con score, and trigger those fort saves. This also makes every little bonus to damage valuable, as it could be the difference between triggering a fort save or not.

[BlueWitch]

When evaluating the D20 Modern weapons, you need to keep in mind that D20 Modern uses a very lethal version of the death from massive damage rules, where any single hit that deals damage equal to or exceeding your Con score triggers a Fortitude save to avoid dying outright. That means that a lot of the D20 Modern weapons are far more likely to score a kill on any given hit than the damage would indicate.

I did overlook this so you are right!

[Crake]

The problem isn't the damage. The problem is the rate of fire.
1 aimed shot per second should be the standard for even an untrained user. And BAB 5/10/15 should add another shot per second each. Plus Feats, etc.
Burst fire (with feat) should be the first round at normal hit chances, with -4 added for each additional round (so -16 on the last of a 5rd burst). Firing a burst uses 2 of your attacks (or has a 1-attack "recoil recovery"). (so the untrained guy can fire 3 per 6-second round)

Does that imbalance melee? Yes.
I'm not sure that's a problem. Don't compare John Wick to Conan, compare him to a Wizard.

Actually, with the massive damage rule, having double tap or burst fire adding one or two extra damage dice respectively is better than having extra attacks, as the harder hitting attack will trigger massive damage more often. A bunch of single shot 2d6 pistol rounds will probably not trigger massive damage, and in fact CANNOT against anyone with more than 12 con, but a burst fire glock doing 4d6 damage per shot now has a much better chance, and will in fact, almost guarantee a save against average con.

If we used your idea, every shot would still be 2d6 damage, meaning above average con could soak damage all day long.

Also, burst fire doesnt require a feat, it just requires proficiency with advanced firearms. Otherwise your only choices are full auto and single shot

[Remuko]

ive played a quite lengthy campaign using d20 modern (and some future) rules and yeah as a few others said, the massive damage system does make things much more dangerous than it looks. also characters felt way less durable in general than in 3.5 on top of that. those massive damage fails in the game i played led to some really nice excuses to have some cinematic drama. my character over the campain lost both arms and both legs (and had them replaced with future-tech style prosthetics to become a badass cyborg).

[Ramza00]

Guns can eff somebody up. More so than a sword. And it's faster.
OVerall, I really don't like how weak they made firearms. It doesn't seem right.

Okay I am going to be difficult

1) yes guns can really mess people up if they hit a center mass, the head, or other important organ
2) but if this does not occur they often do not kill people in six seconds

Swords and Axes can kill people in six seconds, especially if we do movie dramatic flairs which is one of the inspirations for DND and D20. Of course the same logic of 1 and 2 also applies to swords and axes.

[Malphegor]

I always like to point out that d&d and d20 modern aren’t always perfect simulations of reality nor should they, but instead be ‘feels right’ vibes for the action movie that we are trying to basically convey using dice and words.

So a gun might be weak because in the action combat movie a hero might get shot at dozens if not hundreds of times and while it chips off their ‘health’ which need not be all directly their actual health but their willpower to continue as well, wheras one critical hit or sneak attack at the right dramatic moment will be a plot relevant severe injury

[icefractal]

I've found that most versions of guns in 3.x and PF1 are rather weak, with the futuristic versions being a prime offender. Yeah, I'm really going to get excited by a Laser Pistol that does 1d8 fire damage with a range increment of 50, for a mere 10,000 gp!

At least in PF1, guns are potentially quite good if you're a Gunslinger or Trench Fighter. Touch attacks at full BAB with Dex-to-damage is nothing to scoff at. But for people without that ability, they're pretty unimpressive. I guess their comparison point is an average chump (BAB +0, Str 10, Dex 10), and with those parameters they are at least better than a sword (although also much more expensive than one).

[BlueWitch]

I've found that most versions of guns in 3.x and PF1 are rather weak, with the futuristic versions being a prime offender. Yeah, I'm really going to get excited by a Laser Pistol that does 1d8 fire damage with a range increment of 50, for a mere 10,000 gp!

At least in PF1, guns are potentially quite good if you're a Gunslinger or Trench Fighter. Touch attacks at full BAB with Dex-to-damage is nothing to scoff at. But for people without that ability, they're pretty unimpressive. I guess their comparison point is an average chump (BAB +0, Str 10, Dex 10), and with those parameters they are at least better than a sword (although also much more expensive than one).

Agreed 100%

I think they need to take into account Speed and Rate of Fire.
As another poster said, about 3 Attacks per turn sounds fair for an untrained user.
That and an increase to damage.

It would make melee weapons obsolete but that's true anyway more often than not so I don't get why the game designers bent over backwards to "balance" it.
It's why most people have a gun for home defense instead of a mace.

The weakness of Firearms should be the ammo running out or something.

[Crake]

Yeah, I'm really going to get excited by a Laser Pistol that does 1d8 fire damage

i believe a laser rifle fired in burst fire will do 6d6 damage per shot, which would bell curve to 21 damage average, meaning 9/10 a successful hit is gonna be triggering a fort save vs massive damage per shot.

Also note that burst fire IS three five shots in one attack.

[loky1109]

It's why most people have a gun for home defense instead of a mace.

No, it isn't. Most people have a gun for home defense because:
1) it looks easier to use gun;
2) you don't need years of training to win gun-to-gun duel;
3) you don't need to be stronger than your opponent;
4) you don't need to engage into melee;
5) guns are cooler and more frightening;
6) civil guns are less lethal (yes, it's benefit), with same or better stopping power;
7) guns are smaller and lighter.

[Beni-Kujaku]

No, it isn't. Most people have a gun for home defense because:
1) it looks easier to use gun;
2) you don't need years of training to win gun-to-gun duel;
3) you don't need to be stronger than your opponent;
4) you don't need to engage into melee;
5) guns are cooler and more frightening;
6) civil guns are less lethal (yes, it's benefit), with same or better stopping power;
7) guns are smaller and lighter.

Especially 3) and 4). Gun means impunity (or at least perceived impunity) as even if you miss you can shoot again while the guy attacking you closes the distance, while melee weapons means you have the risk of missing and being punched/stabbed whatever.


Also, there's something you have to remember: people are weak. The vast, vast majority of people are level 1. A commoner has 4 HP. Even the most durable 1st level trained professional has 16 HP (Barbarian 1, 18 Con). A single bullet will drop a guy in the street. A few, or a shotgun volley, will most likely incapacitate your average 1st level soldier. Also, real life guns aren't that deadly to big animals. Ostriches have 22 HP in Pathfinder, and emus are known to survive with little to no problem full machinegun volleys during the Great Emu War in Australia, and continue running like nothing happened.
Adventurers, on the other hand, can have 5 or even 10 hit dice, and have more HP than elephants. The problem is not that firearms are weak, it's that adventurers make no biological sense.

TL;DR: Humans are weak, animals are stronk, adventurers are absolute monsters that change everything in the way people should approach warfare.

[ShurikVch]

When evaluating the D20 Modern weapons, you need to keep in mind that D20 Modern uses a very lethal version of the death from massive damage rules, where any single hit that deals damage equal to or exceeding your Con score triggers a Fortitude save to avoid dying outright. That means that a lot of the D20 Modern weapons are far more likely to score a kill on any given hit than the damage would indicate.
But the save DC is still abysmally low (15!)
Yeah, sure, creature with +12 Fort would fail it... at natural 1 or 2!
At least, in d20 Modern there is the same rule for PC and NPC - in the Call of Cthulhu d20 Massive Damage triggered at 50 damage for monsters, but for PC - at 10 (!!!)



Fundamentally, this is just the same old problem the D20 system has always had - it does not present a world where combat with weapons is lethal. Whatever mental constructs you have to be ok with that in the fantasy milieu (where you can 'hit' somebody with a 2d6 Greatsword five times before they drop) should also be applied to the Modern rules variants
But that's different things: if somebody wasn't killed by a Greatsword - it's mean either they're almost dodged the blow, and got merely a shallow cut or even just a bad scratch (otherwise they would be just chopped apart), or actually big enough to "tank" the blow
If somebody is completely unable to dodge - refer the Coup de Grace rules, or even Profession (Executioner)

Firearms are different: IRL person (let alone - a beast) can be hit with multiple bullets but stay alive
Examples:
Alexis Goggins (https://www.foxnews.com/story/girl-shot-6-times-while-shielding-mother-from-gunfire-recovering) - 6 bullets from point blank (one - through the right eye)
Angel Alvarez (https://www.nydailynews.com/news/crime/harlem-shootout-gunman-lived-21-shots-broke-record-forensic-expert-article-1.203631) - 23 bullets
Howard Morgan (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Howard_Morgan_case) - 28 bullets
Kenny Vaughan (https://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/03/nyregion/03shot.html) - 20 bullets (from mere 5' away)
Mike Day (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/men/thinking-man/11503612/Meet-the-Navy-SEAL-who-was-shot-27-times-and-lived-to-tell-the-story.html) - 27 bullets
Roy Benavidez (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roy_Benavidez#%22Six_Hours_in_Hell%22) - 37 separate bullet, bayonet, and shrapnel wounds from the six-hour fight with the enemy battalion
Yogendra Singh Yadav (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yogendra_Singh_Yadav) - 12 bullets (+ a broken leg and shattered arm)

Even headshots aren't always fatal - Jacob Miller (https://www.indystar.com/story/news/history/retroindy/2020/07/22/bullet-between-eyes-hoosier-soldier-most-remarkable-survivor-civil-war/3287791001/) was hit with musket ball to the forehead (almost in between the eyebrows), but still survived

https://www.gannett-cdn.com/presto/2020/07/20/PIND/756ac098-7fdf-4a05-8bb1-65889e88d37b-Screen_Shot_2020-07-20_at_1.23.15_PM.jpg?width=300&height=440&fit=crop&format=pjpg&auto=webp

Let's just use the "fictional action reasoning": if somebody IRL at some moment was able to do something, then "a hero" should be able to do it... consistently



I've found that most versions of guns in 3.x and PF1 are rather weak, with the futuristic versions being a prime offender. Yeah, I'm really going to get excited by a Laser Pistol that does 1d8 fire damage with a range increment of 50, for a mere 10,000 gp!
:smallconfused: What kind of Laser Pistol is it?
Laser Pistol in d20 Modern: Future does 2d8 fire; in Dungeon Master's Guide - 3d4 untyped (also, both are not priced in gp - the different system of purchasing is used in d20 Modern)
Blaster from [I]Return to the Temple of the Frog does 6d6 fire, and costs 3,500 gp
DiM pistol from Greyhawk 2000 does 1d12 piercing, and costs mere 200 gp



emus are known to survive with little to no problem full machinegun volleys during the Great Emu War in Australia, and continue running like nothing happened.
Actually, they killed 986 emus with 9860 shots
10 shots per kill
Not a bad results for a non-snipers
For comparison, in WW1, it was 10,000 bullets per confirmed kill - and those numbers go only bigger in the all later wars. (But just 1.3 shots per kill - for snipers)

No need to underestimate lethality of firearms for big animals: soldiers on a "hunt" managed to kill a bear with low-caliber Kalashnikov (but bear, before its death, forced them to escape up a tree).
.50 caliber rifle should be able to kill even a T-Rex

[loky1109]

if somebody wasn't killed by a Greatsword - it's mean either they're almost dodged the blow, and got merely a shallow cut or even just a bad scratch (otherwise they would be just chopped apart), or actually big enough to "tank" the blow
All this also could be true about firearms. Dodge, scratch, or big-to-tank.


Firearms are different: IRL person (let alone - a beast) can be hit with multiple bullets but stay alive
It's true about melee weapons, too. Yes, not about every weapons, but still.


emus are known to survive with little to no problem full machinegun volleys during the Great Emu War in Australia, and continue running like nothing happened.
I’ll allow myself to doubt it. Direct hit machinegun bullet should kill emu on the spot. Highly likely torn bird to shreds. Emus "survived" machinegun volleys because of their amount. Most of them. But hit should be lethal. It's machineguns after all, not pistols.

[Myth27]

the average person has like 4 pf though

[ShurikVch]

All this also could be true about firearms. Dodge, scratch, or big-to-tank.
For firearms, it - obviously - would be less "dodge" and more "bad aim"
But if the weapon actually did maximal damage for its dice - then it should be pretty solid hit, no reason to suspect near-miss
And, while larger creatures are, indeed, somewhat better to withstood firearm damage - there are limits for it: above I already mentioned a bear killed with 5,45 bullets; and elephant gun (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elephant_gun) called this because it designed to kill elephants


It's true about melee weapons, too. Yes, not about every weapons, but still.
tyckspoon used Greatsword as example: non-glancing hit from it should mean loss of a limb, decapitation, disembowelment, or even complete bifurcation

[icefractal]

:smallconfused: What kind of Laser Pistol is it?
Laser Pistol in d20 Modern: Future does 2d8 fire; in Dungeon Master's Guide - 3d4 untyped (also, both are not priced in gp - the different system of purchasing is used in d20 Modern)
Blaster from [I]Return to the Temple of the Frog does 6d6 fire, and costs 3,500 gp
DiM pistol from Greyhawk 2000 does 1d12 piercing, and costs mere 200 gp
PF1, Technological Weapons. TBF, Laser Pistol is one of the worse offenders since fire damage is starting to be resisted fairly often by the time you can afford it. The Gravity Pistol (force damage and can provide TK) is probably worth it for many high-level Gunslingers, despite the 95k cost.

Still doesn't live up to the "holy ****, this high tech stuff is on par with artifacts" presentation some of the books give it though.

[Crake]

But the save DC is still abysmally low (15!)
Yeah, sure, creature with +12 Fort would fail it... at natural 1 or 2!

Right, but keep in mind, base saves are lower in d20 modern, a good save starts at 1, not 2, and there are no ability score booster items, so unless you're putting your level up point into con, you're probably not getting more than +2 or +3 con, so you're not getting +12 con until like, really high levels, in which case, if you're a character with a good fort progression, you SHOULD be making your save most of the time, since you're like, practically an action hero.

Also, people make the mistake of using the dnd animal stats for d20 modern, but in d20 modern, animals are a lot more genericised, and have HD based on their size, so a Huge animal (all huge animals, so elephants included) only has 4d8 HD and 20-21 con, meaning it's fort save is +9, still decent, but it's also got a 25% chance of failing that massive damage save. Sure, it's maybe not realistic to have all huge animals statted roughly the same, but d20 modern also isn't a game that focuses heavily on combat with animals.

A lot of stats in general are much more deflated in d20 modern than in dnd.

[RandomPeasant]

I think they need to take into account Speed and Rate of Fire.

IMO explicitly modeling rate of fire is a trap. Just declare that each attack from a gun represents several individual bullets and set the damage accordingly. Just as we don't track the individual sword swings that make up an attack with a Greatsword, we don't need to track the individual bullets coming out a semi- or fully-automatic firearm.

[loky1109]

For firearms, it - obviously - would be less "dodge" and more "bad aim"
But if the weapon actually did maximal damage for its dice - then it should be pretty solid hit, no reason to suspect near-miss
Why do you think it works only for firearms?
"But if the Greatesword actually did maximal damage for its dice - then it should be pretty solid hit, no reason to suspect near-miss" is tantamount to you point.


tyckspoon used Greatsword as example: non-glancing hit from it should mean loss of a limb, decapitation, disembowelment, or even complete bifurcation
Replace greatesword with Barrett, or Kord, or Elephant gun you'd get the same.

[Bohandas]

A effing Shotgun only deals 2d6
And I think a Pistol is only 1d8

A Machine gun was like, 2d12.

I feel like they should be at least one more die. Like 3d6 to 3d12

Guns can eff somebody up. More so than a sword. And it's faster.
OVerall, I really don't like how weak they made firearms. It doesn't seem right.

The real draw of firearms isn't that they're deadlier, it's that they're comparatively easy to use (and in the case of modern firearms also faster, as you said). Also, IIRC the actual wounds inflicted are pretty inconstant, so instead of that 3d6 maybe have them do 1d20

[Crake]

IMO explicitly modeling rate of fire is a trap. Just declare that each attack from a gun represents several individual bullets and set the damage accordingly. Just as we don't track the individual sword swings that make up an attack with a Greatsword, we don't need to track the individual bullets coming out a semi- or fully-automatic firearm.

That's literally how d20 modern does things. Burst fire fires 5 shots per attack, and increases the damage of the gun by 2 damage dice, double tap fires two shots from a semi-automatic weapon and increases the damage by 1 damage dice. Full auto uses 10 shots, attacks an area and every creature in the area makes a DC15 reflex save or takes a hit from your gun. See above for why DC15 is not actually a bad DC in d20 modern (tldr: saves and ability scores are deflated from dnd, so DC15 doesn't become irrelevant except at high levels for dex-based characters).

Double tap and burst fire do require their's own feat however. But otherwise, you can still single shot or full auto with automatic weapons, though you need to hit AC10 to actually control the auto well enough to target the area you want.

There's also a feat called strafe that lets you change the full auto area from a 10x10 to 5x20.

[ShurikVch]

The whole "damage" thing may work better if Vitality And Wound Points (https://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/adventuring/vitalityAndWoundPoints.htm) - where hp damage is never a "real damage", while wound - is always "real damage"


Right, but keep in mind, base saves are lower in d20 modern, a good save starts at 1, not 2, and there are no ability score booster items, so unless you're putting your level up point into con, you're probably not getting more than +2 or +3 con, so you're not getting +12 con until like, really high levels, in which case, if you're a character with a good fort progression, you SHOULD be making your save most of the time, since you're like, practically an action hero.
I meant the situation when Elephant would consistently survive the direct hit from M1A2 Abrams tank cannon - as long as cannon wouldn't roll above 10 on its d12 damage dice, and Elephant - roll below 3 on its Fort save against Massive Damage
Heck, it can even survive a Critical Hit - in case of cannon don't rolling above 5 - despite the fact Critical Hit is supposed to model damage of some vital point...


Also, people make the mistake of using the dnd animal stats for d20 modern, but in d20 modern, animals are a lot more genericised, and have HD based on their size, so a Huge animal (all huge animals, so elephants included) only has 4d8 HD and 20-21 con, meaning it's fort save is +9, still decent, but it's also got a 25% chance of failing that massive damage save. Sure, it's maybe not realistic to have all huge animals statted roughly the same, but d20 modern also isn't a game that focuses heavily on combat with animals.
It's incorrect even for the Core d20 Modern - Huge Crocodile have 7d8 HD
For Large size, we have examples of 3 HD (Horse), 4 HD (Ape, Deinonychus), 5 HD (Herd Animal), 6 HD (Bear, Tiger) - and it's all just from the Core!
Elephant (Urban Arcana) is still 11 HD, 104 hp, and Fort save +12



Why do you think it works only for firearms?
"But if the Greatesword actually did maximal damage for its dice - then it should be pretty solid hit, no reason to suspect near-miss" is tantamount to you point.
Because of IRL examples
What can be deadlier than a headshot? Bullet to the heart? But "standard combat" isn't designed to model it (CdG aside)...


Replace greatesword with Barrett, or Kord, or Elephant gun you'd get the same.
Götz von Berlichingen (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G%C3%B6tz_von_Berlichingen) and Matt Louis Urban (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matt_Urban) are continued to fight after being hit by cannons - elephant gun is a peashooter in comparison...

[loky1109]

Because of IRL examples

IRL examples of what?
I can't understand why did you decide what max on dice should be in-world good hit. I see no link between this two events.

Max damage is only max damage. How DM will describe it - DM's choice. If he want he'll say it was a completely miss, or will say it's direct hit, an exit wound in a head with a diameter of fist, but has no effect on survivability. Why not? Who does prohibit?



Götz von Berlichingen and Matt Louis Urban are continued to fight after being hit by cannons - elephant gun is a peashooter in comparison...
First of all, if we talk about Götz von Berlichingen elephant gun is actually more lethal than XV century cannons. And he lost his right arm. If we compare it with greatsword wound... I don't see why somebody can't continued to fight after being hit by greatsword - without hand. It's the same case.

If we talk about second one...

Captain Urban was wounded in the leg by direct fire from a 37mm tank-gun.
It couldn't be direct hit. It was a ricochet, or tangential wound, or shrapnel wound, or hit after barrier penetration. Direct hit in the leg from 37mm gun is amputation without any other options.
Maybe you doubt I could find many examples surviving after greatsword hit?

I'd repeat my point.

You said: "non-glancing hit from it [Greatsword] should mean loss of a limb, decapitation, disembowelment, or even complete bifurcation"
I answered: "non-glancing hit from Elephant gun should mean loss of a limb, decapitation, disembowelment, or even complete bifurcation, too"

And your examples: one is loss of a limb, another is unclear, but highly likely it was a glancing hit.

[Crake]

It's incorrect even for the Core d20 Modern - Huge Crocodile have 7d8 HD
For Large size, we have examples of 3 HD (Horse), 4 HD (Ape, Deinonychus), 5 HD (Herd Animal), 6 HD (Bear, Tiger) - and it's all just from the Core!
Elephant (Urban Arcana) is still 11 HD, 104 hp, and Fort save +12

Hmm, i was looking at the animal table, but i guess i missed the minimum part of “minimum recommended HD” in the text.

[Bohandas]

Götz von Berlichingen (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G%C3%B6tz_von_Berlichingen) and Matt Louis Urban (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matt_Urban) are continued to fight after being hit by cannons - elephant gun is a peashooter in comparison...

IRL examples of what? First of all, if we talk about Götz von Berlichingen elephant gun is actually more lethal than XV century cannons. And he lost his right arm. If we compare it with greatsword wound... I don't see why somebody can't continued to fight after being hit by greatsword - without hand. It's the same case.


Is anybody else imaginibg the swordsman scene from Raiders of the Lost Ark turning into the Black Knight scene from Monty Python and the Holy Grail?

[TotallyNotEvil]

If you want turbo-lethal gunfights, GURPS will welcome you.

I rather like the fact that a real high level archer is doing damage equivalent to a spaceship's cannon with every arrow. The premise of some people deal in tech, others in magic, but either are equally scary, just good at different things tickles my fancy, and it's, IMO, one of the strengths of the usual d20 stuff.

[lightningcat]

A human does not survive a direct hit by a tank round, even a little tank round. A glancing blow would still amputate something.
You can search "what happens if a tank shoots directly at a human (point blank)" in YouTube. I would share the link, but it is not safe for work. And it is only using ballistic dummies.

[Crake]

A human does not survive a direct hit by a tank round, even a little tank round. A glancing blow would still amputate something.
You can search "what happens if a tank shoots directly at a human (point blank)" in YouTube. I would share the link, but it is not safe for work. And it is only using ballistic dummies.

Depends on what your definition of a “glancing blow” might include. You may well get missed entirely, but still get hit by the shockwave of the tank shot and be flung aside, taking damage making it “hit” in game terms, but a low damage hit, even though physically it missed

[rel]

Not super familiar with modern, but a similar issue (maybe the same issue) exists in a lot of D&D and applies to guns, crossbows, siege engines and anything else that isn't adding a stat to damage.

The basic purpose of all these weapons is to throw something Harder than even a very strong human can manage. But in practice, a strong human deals far more damage with their own strength than someone relying on the supposed superior technology.

As an example, the town guard armed with a heavy crossbow can take a turn to wind up the massive contraption and fire for D10 damage (5.5 average).
Meanwhile the barbarian the guard is threatening can throw a dagger for 1D4+4 (6.5 damage average) with a higher minimum damage of 5.
And this problem gets more noticeable the larger the stat bonuses get and the bigger the weapons that don't add stats become. To the point that there's no reason to build a siege engine when Little John can get an order of magnitude more damage output from his composite longbow.

A fix that I've suggested for crossbows is to make them explicitly never benefit from any stat bonus to damage and instead give them an inbuilt static damage to represent the killing power coming from a mechanism rather than the wielder.
So light crossbows might get an inherent +3 to damage, heavy crossbows a +5 and so on.
This approach can be extended to other weapons in this category, with siege engines getting the strength of a giant for example. And guns can be given a strength appropriate to their stopping power.

If the idea of an inherent damage bonus feels too inelegant, an alternate approach is to swap the bonus for additional damage dice that approximate the same thing. so an extra 1D6 for a +3, an extra 1D10 for a +5 and so forth.

A one line fix that works for most 'self powered' 3.5 weapons is to disallow adding stats to damage through chicanery and double the damage dice.

[Crake]

Not super familiar with modern, but a similar issue (maybe the same issue) exists in a lot of D&D and applies to guns, crossbows, siege engines and anything else that isn't adding a stat to damage.

The basic purpose of all these weapons is to throw something Harder than even a very strong human can manage. But in practice, a strong human deals far more damage with their own strength than someone relying on the supposed superior technology.

As an example, the town guard armed with a heavy crossbow can take a turn to wind up the massive contraption and fire for D10 damage (5.5 average).
Meanwhile the barbarian the guard is threatening can throw a dagger for 1D4+4 (6.5 damage average) with a higher minimum damage of 5.
And this problem gets more noticeable the larger the stat bonuses get and the bigger the weapons that don't add stats become. To the point that there's no reason to build a siege engine when Little John can get an order of magnitude more damage output from his composite longbow.

A fix that I've suggested for crossbows is to make them explicitly never benefit from any stat bonus to damage and instead give them an inbuilt static damage to represent the killing power coming from a mechanism rather than the wielder.
So light crossbows might get an inherent +3 to damage, heavy crossbows a +5 and so on.
This approach can be extended to other weapons in this category, with siege engines getting the strength of a giant for example. And guns can be given a strength appropriate to their stopping power.

If the idea of an inherent damage bonus feels too inelegant, an alternate approach is to swap the bonus for additional damage dice that approximate the same thing. so an extra 1D6 for a +3, an extra 1D10 for a +5 and so forth.

A one line fix that works for most 'self powered' 3.5 weapons is to disallow adding stats to damage through chicanery and double the damage dice.

D20 modern's fix to this is basically limiting your ability scores to the ones you generate at character creation, and the +1 bonus you get every 4 levels. So if you're lucky enough to get an 18, then yeah, you can throw that dagger for 1d4+4, up to 1d4+6 at 16th level, but you're throwing one dagger per attack, while the dual wielding dex hero with double tap is blasting double desert eagles for 3d8 per attack, at 4x the range, the M4 wielding soldier with burst fire is shooting for 4d8 per shot at 6x the range, and the precision shooter with a winchester is practically sniping with 3d10 shots at 9x the range.

Each one of those is also dealing enough damage on average with their attacks to trigger massive damage rolls against MOST enemies from level 1, while the dagger won't trigger massive damage against anything except a 10 con human at 16th level.

Honestly, being strong in d20 modern's main perks the weight of the equipment you can carry. Having 18 strength isn't for the +4 bonus to melee attacks, it's for being able to sling a 35lb barrett .50 cal over your shoulder and hustle while keeping up with the party, before taking aim freehand and double tapping that monster for 3d12 damage.

[Berenger]

It would make melee weapons obsolete but that's true anyway more often than not so I don't get why the game designers bent over backwards to "balance" it.

Because d20 Modern is meant to emulate pulpy action movies, not reality, and "guy in a trenchcoat wielding a katana" or "vampire hunter with a crossbow" needs to be a viable fighting style to make good on this promise.

Suggestion:

1. Make a house rule that one combat turn is not six seconds, but one second.
2. Divide all movement speeds by five.
3. Ranged attacks with longarms are not possible while enganged in melee, attacks with handguns are made at -4.
4. A dying character loses 1 HP every five rounds instead of every round.

Any rookie with Personal Firearms Proficiency can now fire off 57 rounds per minute with a Beretta 92F or 600 rounds per minute with a belt-fed machine gun (and it's not like it's totally unrealistic to stab sixty times a minute with a knife). Professionals with high BAB / Double Tap / Two-Weapon Fighting / Quick Reload can multiply this number. Melee combatants will have a very hard time approaching ranged combatants without the use of stealth or concealment (they can be shot at six times as often while charging). In turn, ranged combatants have a very hard time bringing their weapons to bear against melee combatants that manage to get close.

If this effect is too extreme (i think it might be), try shortening the combat round to three or two seconds instead of one for a middle ground.