Note that an unaware person being shot in the back of the head is a Helpless Target, and so takes double damage.

Doesn't giving Accurate Pistols the extra damage make them too powerful? It struck me that the intention of the errata was to realistically rebalance the effectiveness of longarms v. short ones (it does specify Basic weapons get the extra d...).

Ichiban11 said:

Let's take a gunbunny with a 45% WS, and no penalties to hit, and aiming for +10 before shooting...

If a normal hit, he's got a 55% chance to hit the target, but only a 5.5% (10% HLT, * 55% TH) of hitting the head

If shooting a called shot, he's got a 35% change of hit, but it's always a hit to the head, for a 35% chance of head hit. If the head is significantly lower armored (due to damage or simply no/weak helmet), that can affect damage drastically.

If he's shooting a TB 3 Hd AV4, Torso AV 6, RA/LA AV6, RL/LL AV 6 target and doing 1d10+1 damage, he's got a 20% chance of damage non-head, and a 40% chance to the head... so in case general shot, expected damage is 0.1*1 + 0.1*2+0.8*0=0.3, and the head shot is 0.1*1+0.1*2+0.1*3+0.1*4+0.6*0=1

Extending this to include hit chance (and ignoring righteous fury for simplicity of calculation), general shot has 0.9*0.3 + 0.1*1=0.37 expected damage per hit; 0.37* 0.55 per shot, approximately .2 dp per shot. Now, mr. head shot has a 0.35 to hit, times an expected 1 point per hit, or 0.35 damage per shot, and is able to increase that the following shot courtesy of Armor Degradation, to about 0.52 per shot, as 1 point less armor is 1.5 per hit...

With a 75% TH base, it's more profound (same armor, for simplicity): Direct shot 0.75*.37 = 0.2777, vs 0.55 * 1=0.55 expected, and the follow up can be expected to be 0.55 * 1.5 = 0.825 expected damage per shot, and the following shot after that, 1.15 per shot, as you carve off the armor.

bogi_khaosa said:

Technically, this only applies to melee attacks, unless there's been an erratum I've missed.

Ichiban11 said:

Uhm "dont matter"?

If you look through the critical tables you'll see that targets hit in the head die a lot quicker once they reach critical injuries than if they are hit in the arm or the leg. If a hit to the head reduces a character to between -7 to -10 (depending whether the attacks nature), it is usually fatal outright. If you get hit in the arm or leg then the attack is usually only fatal if it reduces the characters wounds to -9 or -10 (somtimes already at -8 with some weapons).

Hence, headshots are more deadly with the original rules. So what do you mean by that it doesnt really matters whether you get hit in the head or not?

Remember, anything, and I do mean *anything* that makes combat more lethal will result in more PC deaths.

Yes, it may be a little less realistic, but if you want realism, go find an original box of Cyberpunk RPG, including Friday Night Firefight. Pretty much *the* most lethal combat ruleset ever written, compiled from hundreds of FBI reports, ballistics experts, and pretty much all the science of things that go dakka dakka dakka.

The end result is a system where the vast majority of shots fired will never hit (something like 10% or less actually hit in a firefight), and *any* shot will put you out of comission, with an *excellent* chance of you dieing without immediate medical attention within the next few minutes.. Armor is nice against small calibur handguns, but anything more than 9mm will at least break bones, if not pass through the vest.

When I ran the game, I pretty much warned the players to bring an extra character or two, just in case.

Personally, I find Dark Heresy to be plenty lethal. I can imagine that combat would chew through PCs without the TB to the head. It's worth trying without it, but generally, from a game design standpoint, anything you do to make combat more lethal will end up with PC deaths, specifically because you will always have more NPCs, but the players only get one PC at a time, who will face this rule dozens of times in their career.

TheFlatline said:

^^^^Exactly, plus I have ran a character that ran around with a hunting rifle. The new Accurate rules will take someone out in one shot once you get the right set of talents. You won't be able to be a super sniper assassin at first rank ever, and while you can be a sniper without marksman, sharpshooter or any of the shooting talents, once you have them your sniping ability increases 10 fold. Then you throw in Manstopper rounds and you will negate or take away the majority of helmets AP.

Second point, in my opinion, most NPCs aren't important enough to go into criticals, once their wounds are gone they die, nuff said. Especially if they are just gangers or mooks. On the other hand, if you are trying to snipe the GMs big boss, theres a good chance for story reasons why you won't kill them in one shot.

I once run a Zombie variation game of DH. With a TB of 6 the Zombies where quite hard to take down (3-4 shots at average) Hits to the head ignored the bonus and once the players started making called shots the Zombies died after an average 1-2 hits.

Of course this was intended (as everyone knows, Zombies are easier to kill with headshots).

Im thinking about ignoring TB with hits to the head in my normal DH games too, but on the other hand the effect on my players could be deadly, too.

I have to thing about it and maybe i give it a try.

Regards

Wolflord

You won't be able to be a super sniper assassin at first rank ever

Er... I won't?

Starting BS 35 (depending on your method of rolling, should be reachable)
+10 BS (350 XP for all careers with cheap BS advances)
+10 Accurate (Hunting Rifle)
+30 Unaware Target
-0 Distance (Scope)

Makes for an 85 BS roll against a target up to 600 metres away. If you roll a 44 or less, you inflict 3D10+3 damage, quite often enough for a Righteous Fury (or just for killing the enemy outright). Below 75 metres, add another +10 to the BS.

Sniping at unaware targets is pretty deadly, especially if you're willing to give up another fate point.

I stand corrected - although none of my characters have been able to afford a scope at first rank, I can see it happening. And while you did not include a called shot in your calculations, aiming for a full round would offset that anyway

Good point - for some reason, I always forget to take Aim into consideration although Accurate and Scope both need it anyway.

One thing to think about when considering ignoring TB is that many creatures heavily on their TB to be a threat rather than armour. It's a bit of a hangover from WFRP probably but at some point you might want to put in an ogryn, deamon or monsterous Alien and the person who can call a shot with no penalties will have a huge advantage.

This kinda bothered my group as well, especially since we generally have someone playing a sniper, so rather than work out locational wounds or some other bookkeeping system (I'm an accountant by trade, I get enough of that during the day), we just said that hits to the head only get half TB (rounded up). That way they're a little more lethal, but not so much so that we're rolling new characters every week.

Those who are interested in realism might want to check out my wounding system:

http://www.darkreign40k.com/house-rules/a-more-realistic-damage-wounding-system-2.html

Crimsonsphinx said:

That is wrong unless the enemy is just a head in a jar and if that is the case you are going to take the penalty for small targets. If the only thing you can see is the head then you are going to have to do a called shot to hit the head. Any other shot is going to be randomized as normal and probably hit whatever the npc is hiding behind.

Since the errata came out I do not see a problem with how called shots are handled.

If you want to plug someone between the eyes there are rules for it, use them.

It just seems to me that people are upset that it is so hard to get 1 hit kills. They seem to forget that what goes around comes around.. If it is easy to kill thier enemies with head shots then it is easy to kill them as well.

First off are your enemies using cover? If they are not they should be. Once the players have to deal with smart enemies who do not want to die, they will no longer think called shot is to weak.

If you do make called shots (to the head of course) more deadly, are your aclyotes using it alot? If so then there is probably a reason and thier enemies would use it just as much as they do. Once you have a bunch of dead players they may have a whole new view of the called shot rules.