Well, I found Franks article pretty fascinating, however I do have
some comments.
First, it can't be true -- I haven't seen it on COPS 8-)...
From the sounds of these encounters, it sounds like John Woo has
the most accurate portrayal of gunfighting in Cinema today.
I don't think any game system I've seen can represent the speed at
which (I imagine) some of these encounters happened. Games break
these situations down into frames of animation. One step at a
time. Before/during an encounter, people are moving, things are
happening, there's a flow, a tension, speed, anxiety then *BANG*!
Combat mode. The flow stops, dice are rolled, and 13.6 units of
blood flow from 2.7 PCs and NPCs.
I think that the article shows the value of shock and being
incapacitated versus killed. It also shows the value of having a
hospital nearby.
Finally, I think that it brings home something that, despite the
engineering/calculus or Real World data, we are discussing the
"Lethality" of a game. I don't think anyone is going to go home and
try to duplicate the articles results with their favorite game system.
They're not going to come back and say "Lopez has Initiative-X and
Small Arms-Y" etc. And I would hope that nobody is going to run home
and shoot themselves through the neck just find out how bad it is, or
how survivable.
Combat is a plot device that is used to direct the flow and path of the
party. Most GMs know the result of the encounter before characters
even arrive. There are very few scenarios where the GM has an "If the
characters survive" paragraph. Its pretty much implied that the
characters are going to survive. Deterred from their chosen path, but
alive. Otherwise, game over, clean up the chips and beer, and go home.
Most GMs have rolled the damage dice against a character, looked at
all of the 6's, and decide "Umm..3 points George, hmm..you seem
to black out".
We want things realistic so that we can have a point of reference. We
want to stretch our reality in one way, but it still needs to be
anchored some place else. If the guns and bullets work as we expect,
then the absurdity of our situation is OK.
"Allright, you guys cut through the electric fence, sneaked past the
dogs, knocked out the guard, and have reached the computer center. The
computer doesn't respond to CTRL-ALT-DEL." says the GM, making
eye-contact with his group of pot-bellied, pale players while they
suck back another Coke and a handful of chips. Fred is scratching
something.
"Hey, that's not realistic! I've seen those computers at Video Blips,
and that always works!" screams the "Intrusion Specialist".
So, regardless of what the article presents, regardless of what the
book says, regardless of what Really Happens (tm). The result of any
action is pretty much determined by the GM. If the GM and players like
a game with lots of spent cartridges and dead NPCs, then thats what
will happen. If the GM feels that guns should be very dangerous, armor
fragile, etc., then .22 revolvers end up doing 22D6 damage.
Lethality is a plot device, at least for most of us. The GM knows
how effective something is, its their game, and their adventure. We
play it, not live it. That's a Good Thing.
Will
([email removed])