Date: Mon, 9 Dec 1996 19:12:43 -0500 From: "Michael A. Bott"To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Weapon Law: Firearms
Has anyone come up with another way to handle the modern armor types (I-IV) as presented in Weapon Law? I think that the way they're written, they don't properly account for the beefed up armor types such as those found in SpaM.
Here's the way we're doing it.
AT I-IV represent AT 5, 6, 7, and 8 respectively. 9-12 are AT I-IV (respectively) with a 140 max 13-16 are AT I-IV with a 130 max 17-20 are AT I-IV with a 120 max.
This is courtesy of Justin Koch's reasoning, and I agree with it. It accounts for the heavier ATs and doesn't discount the power of guns the way SpaM did. We're happy with it.
BTW, everyone in my group got REALLY frightened when I showed them the attack tables. I like the way weapon law works. It pleases me.
-Mikey *********** * * Michael A. Bott * ** * Integrix, Inc. * * * * 2001 Corporate Center Drive * ***** * Newbury Park, CA 91320 * * * * Tel: 800.300.8288 x111 Fax: 805.376.1001 * ** * *********** email: mbott@integrix.com i n t e g r i x ***********