Firearms Under Rated?

[Mamatried]

Are Firearms Under Rated?

I have been looking into some armors for other purposes than star wars
and it dawned on me that armors are really "purpose" built.

lets take a "normal" kevlar vest, this is by design made to protect against
normal handgun ammo. .22 to .45 some reinforced vests having added plates for restiting
higher calibre ammo such as from rifles.
Some even have some resistance to stabbing/knives.

However the standard run of the mill kevlar vest is basically designed to reist handgun ammo
only, and has little to any actual resistance to stabbings/Knives or higher calibre rifle ammo

if we then translate this to Star Wars, and the main battlefield weapon being the blaster
with armor designed to reist and disperse this botl of energy, and we can argue that the physical
protection comes from the thick and to some degree padded underlaying bodyglove, made from
a non (armor) protective material.

With the Star Wars Armors designed to resist the commonly used battlefiled military wepaons
being blasters, I would argue that to a degree firearms would counter this armor, defeating it
much like a rifle or a knife does a "normal" vest.

I think I can argue that a reduction in armor efficiency vs firearms is warrnated and maybe we
should give armors a vulnerability to firearms, maybe give it 1/2 the protective values given
to blaster weapons.
I will also argue reducing the physical protection is equally warrnated as I belive the impact
energy of a bullet is more than that of a energy bolt, and as such the armor paddings would
protect less against a firearms bullet than they would against the designed for energy bolt impact.

[pakman]

I remember threads like this - back on swrpg.net decades ago.

Here is the short version:
NO.

The longer version;


" ... and we can argue that the physical protection comes from the thick and to some degree padded underlaying bodyglove, made from a non (armor) protective material."

I disagree with that assumption. Or I would argue it is NOT just padding.


They have had wars for like 20,000 years. I am sure there is a reason blasters are the norm.

I am betting maybe like 19,000 years ago, someone optimized armor to be just against energy attacks, and someone clever decided to switch to kinetic weapons.

Well, then they prolly just added "armor protective material" to armor.

I mean, they have had Kevlar like cloth has been around for literally millennia

Of course every 500 years or so, someone skimps on the kinetic damage I am sure, then it gets exploited etc. Then they put the kinetic material back in the armor, then again another 500 years...etc.

If the armor says resists physical - think of it that the people who make it have literally thousands and thousands of years of experience in warfare.

Do what you want in your game - but the armor would not be skimping in my opinion.
_________________
SW Fan, Gamer, Comic, Corporate nerd.
Working on massive House Rules document - pretty much a new book. Will post soon....

[garhkal]