Rolplaying Games and the 1-shot Kill

[Blue_Lion]

There are games that have a 1 shot kill combat system.
Rifts is not one of them it is a HP style system.

Would you ask for a 1 hit kill on a end content raid boss in say WoW or EQ?
Although things can be killed in one shot in real life rifts is not a real life Sim.

[michael silverbane]

There are games that have a 1 shot kill combat system.
Rifts is not one of them it is a HP style system.

It can be one of those game, if using certain house rules (or, as CK pointed out, with certain optional rules).

No one is telling you that you have to play the game that way. Why would you bother trying to tell people not to play the game that way, if that's the way that they want to play it?

[Alrik Vas]

There are games that have a 1 shot kill combat system.
Rifts is not one of them it is a HP style system.

Would you ask for a 1 hit kill on a end content raid boss in say WoW or EQ?
Although things can be killed in one shot in real life rifts is not a real life Sim.

WoW? Really? MMO games are the worst. SW game, strike creature with lightsaber repeatedly, still not dead on account of HP.

RPGs on the table top are close to real life sims if you tweak them that way, that's up to the consumer.

And KC: most warriors, unless foolish or without means, go into battle with protection. Subdemons included.

[Blue_Lion]

There are games that have a 1 shot kill combat system.
Rifts is not one of them it is a HP style system.

Would you ask for a 1 hit kill on a end content raid boss in say WoW or EQ?
Although things can be killed in one shot in real life rifts is not a real life Sim.

WoW? Really? MMO games are the worst. SW game, strike creature with lightsaber repeatedly, still not dead on account of HP.

RPGs on the table top are close to real life sims if you tweak them that way, that's up to the consumer.

And KC: most warriors, unless foolish or without means, go into battle with protection. Subdemons included.

You do know that there are First person shooters that are MMOs with one shot kills.

So let me get this straight a game with magic and demons is close to areal life sim?
But you have to tweak them to be so.

As I said there are table top RPGs out there with 1 shot kills. Rifts took the HP approach where you can have hero or monster fight through more damage just a few hits. The reason I used WoW is because it is a well known hp game. So seams like you are saying you want fast deaths in all your games not every one does.

[Killer Cyborg]

And KC: most warriors, unless foolish or without means, go into battle with protection. Subdemons included.

Not according to the brodkil stats, which list weapons, but never armor.

[Alrik Vas]

Hey look at that, as GM I can put them in armor if I want. That's odd.

[Jorick]

And KC: most warriors, unless foolish or without means, go into battle with protection. Subdemons included.

Not according to the brodkil stats, which list weapons, but never armor.

Gargoyle stats also don't list armor. Until they actually start going to war and find they need it. Demons have a similar problem.


No one is arguing for one shots to be frequent. In general, bandits on Rifts earth don't have a lot of material support, and in general, Brodkil don't need armor given the situations they find themselves in.

Animals, like turtles, develop armor that keeps them pretty safe in their environment for the most part. They can still be one shot by something with the appropriate skill. So, like, shooting a fury beetle in a weak spot may overcome all the armor, and it MAY even lead to a one shot (assuming the GM rules their eye is anywhere near their brain, or other vital organ is somehow unshielded in a similar way). Dinosaurs with huge shields on their backs, thus providing for large amounts of MDC, but small heads with eyes clearly near their brain are perhaps a better example.

Brodkil also seem to have eyes very close to their brains for various reasons. It stands to reason that their eye socket provides some access to the brain. It stands to reason, alternatively, that severe trauma to the head, even if it doesn't come off, can have severe consequences. Despite this possibility, the brodkil, like other creatures, generally feels pretty tough given the environment, and generally doesn't have to worry. Despite this, for all their toughness, they do commonly go for bionic and MOM conversion. If they could get their stuff together for any length of time, and create armor that fits them, or get someone to mass produce it for them, they just might. The gargoyles in Germany did.

I do very much believe that the palladium system is meant to be a "real life sim" and not like a computer game. It doesnt work as a computer game. At all. It has the difficulties inherent in any real life sim, for sure, which is why the creators constantly suggest we use "common sense" and keep coming up with new, weird rules for new, weird situations (and in doing so completely break any sense of strict codification as in a computer game).

[Alrik Vas]

Well said.

[Killer Cyborg]

And KC: most warriors, unless foolish or without means, go into battle with protection. Subdemons included.

Not according to the brodkil stats, which list weapons, but never armor.

Gargoyle stats also don't list armor. Until they actually start going to war and find they need it. Demons have a similar problem.

Generally they'd need armor any time somebody's shooting at them, if one shot could kill them, not just in war.

No one is arguing for one shots to be frequent.

Well, yeah... and that's kind of weird, because it seems like something that's quite effective with the modded rules, so why wouldn't it be frequent?

In general, bandits on Rifts earth don't have a lot of material support, and in general, Brodkil don't need armor given the situations they find themselves in.

"The nomadic warriors travel the wilderness attacking travelers, villages, and towns to plunder what they need" sounds like situations that'd put them in the path of somebody trying to stab or shoot them.

Animals, like turtles, develop armor that keeps them pretty safe in their environment for the most part. They can still be one shot by something with the appropriate skill.

1. What exactly one-shots turtles by bypassing the shell?
2. Brodkil don't have shells. They don't need them; they're as tough as suits of power armor.

Brodkil also seem to have eyes very close to their brains for various reasons. It stands to reason that their eye socket provides some access to the brain. It stands to reason, alternatively, that severe trauma to the head, even if it doesn't come off, can have severe consequences.

Right. But "severe trauma to the head" for something with hundreds of MDC is different than "severe trauma to the head" for something with dozens of MDC.
That's the point of all that MDC; it measures how tough things are.

I do very much believe that the palladium system is meant to be a "real life sim" and not like a computer game. It doesnt work as a computer game. At all. It has the difficulties inherent in any real life sim, for sure, which is why the creators constantly suggest we use "common sense" and keep coming up with new, weird rules for new, weird situations (and in doing so completely break any sense of strict codification as in a computer game).

Shooting something in the eye is not, by any stretch, a "new, weird situation."

[Killer Cyborg]

Hey look at that, as GM I can put them in armor if I want. That's odd.

You can indeed!
So your house-rule results in house changes to the setting.
Which seems like a lot more work than just running things by the regular rules, and using weaker enemies when you want a fast battle.

That's the thing about rule-changes; they tend to beget more rule-changes in order to balance out the changes.
Don't get me wrong- you can't play Rifts strictly by the book, and I'm not suggesting that anybody even try. It's just that the stuff in the game was written by people who had a certain balance in mind, and who presumably wrote the stats on monsters the way they did for a reason, and I don't see much point in tinkering with stuff that already works.

[Jorick]

And KC: most warriors, unless foolish or without means, go into battle with protection. Subdemons included.

Not according to the brodkil stats, which list weapons, but never armor.

Gargoyle stats also don't list armor. Until they actually start going to war and find they need it. Demons have a similar problem.

Generally they'd need armor any time somebody's shooting at them, if one shot could kill them, not just in war.

No one is arguing for one shots to be frequent.

Well, yeah... and that's kind of weird, because it seems like something that's quite effective with the modded rules, so why wouldn't it be frequent?

In general, bandits on Rifts earth don't have a lot of material support, and in general, Brodkil don't need armor given the situations they find themselves in.

"The nomadic warriors travel the wilderness attacking travelers, villages, and towns to plunder what they need" sounds like situations that'd put them in the path of somebody trying to stab or shoot them.

Animals, like turtles, develop armor that keeps them pretty safe in their environment for the most part. They can still be one shot by something with the appropriate skill.

1. What exactly one-shots turtles by bypassing the shell?
2. Brodkil don't have shells. They don't need them; they're as tough as suits of power armor.

Brodkil also seem to have eyes very close to their brains for various reasons. It stands to reason that their eye socket provides some access to the brain. It stands to reason, alternatively, that severe trauma to the head, even if it doesn't come off, can have severe consequences.

Right. But "severe trauma to the head" for something with hundreds of MDC is different than "severe trauma to the head" for something with dozens of MDC.
That's the point of all that MDC; it measures how tough things are.

I do very much believe that the palladium system is meant to be a "real life sim" and not like a computer game. It doesnt work as a computer game. At all. It has the difficulties inherent in any real life sim, for sure, which is why the creators constantly suggest we use "common sense" and keep coming up with new, weird rules for new, weird situations (and in doing so completely break any sense of strict codification as in a computer game).

Shooting something in the eye is not, by any stretch, a "new, weird situation."

I said "bandits" not "things that don't ever attack anything."

If you slice a turtle in the head with a pocket knife, it's gonna die. It probably would have to be written as having a lot of SDC for its size. Tortoises can take 50 cal civil round musket shots in the shell and keep ticking. Their DC is a metaphor for general hits to them. A called shot with a needle through its eye could kill it.

Brodkil have 100MDC heads. One imagines they have less than that in the eye. If their eyes have 100MDC, then yes, a laser blast wouldn't do it.

The "new, weird situations" I was referring to are ones in the books. There are lots and lots of "further explanations," "faqs," "optional rules" etc. in the books for general rules.

In neither of our described situations can anything but very skilled OCCS with multiple hit bonuses have a less than 1/20 chance to hit such a small target (assuming one allows any natural 20 to do whatever is asked of it). The numbers favor the Brodkil.

[Alrik Vas]

Hey look at that, as GM I can put them in armor if I want. That's odd.

You can indeed!
So your house-rule results in house changes to the setting.
Which seems like a lot more work than just running things by the regular rules, and using weaker enemies when you want a fast battle.

That's the thing about rule-changes; they tend to beget more rule-changes in order to balance out the changes.
Don't get me wrong- you can't play Rifts strictly by the book, and I'm not suggesting that anybody even try. It's just that the stuff in the game was written by people who had a certain balance in mind, and who presumably wrote the stats on monsters the way they did for a reason, and I don't see much point in tinkering with stuff that already works.

Ah, but offering a way to quickly kill with technique rather than raw damage suggests I see problems where you don't, and to me solving them takes out a lot of difficulty.

Subdemons in armor is a good part of this. Gargoyle empire has weapons and body armor issued to monster troops. Even brodkill on the fringes with little access to tech can make hide armor out of a large beast or something. It's really not that out of the question.

I think it's more of a stretch to say they don't wear armor.

[eliakon]

And KC: most warriors, unless foolish or without means, go into battle with protection. Subdemons included.

Not according to the brodkil stats, which list weapons, but never armor.

Gargoyle stats also don't list armor. Until they actually start going to war and find they need it. Demons have a similar problem.

Generally they'd need armor any time somebody's shooting at them, if one shot could kill them, not just in war.

No one is arguing for one shots to be frequent.

Well, yeah... and that's kind of weird, because it seems like something that's quite effective with the modded rules, so why wouldn't it be frequent?

In general, bandits on Rifts earth don't have a lot of material support, and in general, Brodkil don't need armor given the situations they find themselves in.

"The nomadic warriors travel the wilderness attacking travelers, villages, and towns to plunder what they need" sounds like situations that'd put them in the path of somebody trying to stab or shoot them.

Animals, like turtles, develop armor that keeps them pretty safe in their environment for the most part. They can still be one shot by something with the appropriate skill.

1. What exactly one-shots turtles by bypassing the shell?
2. Brodkil don't have shells. They don't need them; they're as tough as suits of power armor.

Brodkil also seem to have eyes very close to their brains for various reasons. It stands to reason that their eye socket provides some access to the brain. It stands to reason, alternatively, that severe trauma to the head, even if it doesn't come off, can have severe consequences.

Right. But "severe trauma to the head" for something with hundreds of MDC is different than "severe trauma to the head" for something with dozens of MDC.
That's the point of all that MDC; it measures how tough things are.

I do very much believe that the palladium system is meant to be a "real life sim" and not like a computer game. It doesnt work as a computer game. At all. It has the difficulties inherent in any real life sim, for sure, which is why the creators constantly suggest we use "common sense" and keep coming up with new, weird rules for new, weird situations (and in doing so completely break any sense of strict codification as in a computer game).

Shooting something in the eye is not, by any stretch, a "new, weird situation."

I said "bandits" not "things that don't ever attack anything."

If you slice a turtle in the head with a pocket knife, it's gonna die. It probably would have to be written as having a lot of SDC for its size. Tortoises can take 50 cal civil round musket shots in the shell and keep ticking. Their DC is a metaphor for general hits to them. A called shot with a needle through its eye could kill it.

Brodkil have 100MDC heads. One imagines they have less than that in the eye. If their eyes have 100MDC, then yes, a laser blast wouldn't do it.

The "new, weird situations" I was referring to are ones in the books. There are lots and lots of "further explanations," "faqs," "optional rules" etc. in the books for general rules.

In neither of our described situations can anything but very skilled OCCS with multiple hit bonuses have a less than 1/20 chance to hit such a small target (assuming one allows any natural 20 to do whatever is asked of it). The numbers favor the Brodkil.

Actually Turtles have low SDC and HP....but they have a nice AR.....which gets completely lost in MDC.......
And I guess the other question is how skilled one wants to call 'highly skilled' and how bad the penalties are. With a gun its hard to get strikes over +5 or so sure.......but with that Vibroknife? Yah +10 or more is not difficult by any means........

[eliakon]

Hey look at that, as GM I can put them in armor if I want. That's odd.

You can indeed!
So your house-rule results in house changes to the setting.
Which seems like a lot more work than just running things by the regular rules, and using weaker enemies when you want a fast battle.

That's the thing about rule-changes; they tend to beget more rule-changes in order to balance out the changes.
Don't get me wrong- you can't play Rifts strictly by the book, and I'm not suggesting that anybody even try. It's just that the stuff in the game was written by people who had a certain balance in mind, and who presumably wrote the stats on monsters the way they did for a reason, and I don't see much point in tinkering with stuff that already works.

Ah, but offering a way to quickly kill with technique rather than raw damage suggests I see problems where you don't, and to me solving them takes out a lot of difficulty.

Subdemons in armor is a good part of this. Gargoyle empire has weapons and body armor issued to monster troops. Even brodkill on the fringes with little access to tech can make hide armor out of a large beast or something. It's really not that out of the question.

I think it's more of a stretch to say they don't wear armor.

Except that there is no mention of them having armor before....
And the idea of the Gargoyle Empire (or the Minion War troops) actually wearing armor is seen as 'strange' and 'new'.....which suggests that it is not normal (and thus not needed) to wear armor.......
*shrugs*

[Alrik Vas]

Just as well, but critters in armor, if they've seen they're comrades die from knives to sensitive locations, would realize tech, like silver or iron, makes wearing protection prudent.

[Jorick]

Actually Turtles have low SDC and HP....but they have a nice AR.....which gets completely lost in MDC.......
And I guess the other question is how skilled one wants to call 'highly skilled' and how bad the penalties are. With a gun its hard to get strikes over +5 or so sure.......but with that Vibroknife? Yah +10 or more is not difficult by any means........

It's much more common for a Brodkil, or whatever, to be "one shot" by a volley of mini-missiles. Everything can die quickly, and probably does often in the world of Rifts. They don't all go around wearing missile protection. Sometimes a hero comes along that can do it in a much more subtle way. In no way is this unbalancing. And it's not that strange or far fetched given the rules, where hit location affects MDC (in non AR settings).

[Killer Cyborg]

Hey look at that, as GM I can put them in armor if I want. That's odd.

You can indeed!
So your house-rule results in house changes to the setting.
Which seems like a lot more work than just running things by the regular rules, and using weaker enemies when you want a fast battle.

That's the thing about rule-changes; they tend to beget more rule-changes in order to balance out the changes.
Don't get me wrong- you can't play Rifts strictly by the book, and I'm not suggesting that anybody even try. It's just that the stuff in the game was written by people who had a certain balance in mind, and who presumably wrote the stats on monsters the way they did for a reason, and I don't see much point in tinkering with stuff that already works.

Ah, but offering a way to quickly kill with technique rather than raw damage suggests I see problems where you don't, and to me solving them takes out a lot of difficulty.

What's the difficulty?

Subdemons in armor is a good part of this. Gargoyle empire has weapons and body armor issued to monster troops. Even brodkill on the fringes with little access to tech can make hide armor out of a large beast or something. It's really not that out of the question.

I think it's more of a stretch to say they don't wear armor.

It's not that they can't wear armor, but they seem to fall into the old Palladium "prefers its natural abilities over ________" niche in the game as-written, because they're pretty tough to kill as-written, and could therefore wander about in pretty fair confidence.
As the game officially stands, they don't really need it.
With your modifications, they definitely need it.

And that's brodkil.
What about Dragons? Manticores? Dinosaurs? Angels? Sprites? Xiticix? Spiny Ravagers? And so on, and so forth.
Such rules change the dynamic of each of these creatures, and how they interact with the world around them.

[Killer Cyborg]

Actually Turtles have low SDC and HP....but they have a nice AR.....which gets completely lost in MDC.......
And I guess the other question is how skilled one wants to call 'highly skilled' and how bad the penalties are. With a gun its hard to get strikes over +5 or so sure.......but with that Vibroknife? Yah +10 or more is not difficult by any means........

It's much more common for a Brodkil, or whatever, to be "one shot" by a volley of mini-missiles. Everything can die quickly, and probably does often in the world of Rifts. They don't all go around wearing missile protection. Sometimes a hero comes along that can do it in a much more subtle way. In no way is this unbalancing. And it's not that strange or far fetched given the rules, where hit location affects MDC (in non AR settings).

Vibro-knives are slightly more common than volleys of mini-missiles, as well as being slightly cheaper.
Not all weapons are equal.
The SDF-1 might be able to one-shot Splyncryth, but that doesn't mean that an NG-P7 should.

Also, when you watch or read material with beings like Superman and The Hulk and such, do you sit there thinking that somebody ought to be able to one-shot them if they aim for the right spot with a 5.56mm round?
Or a knife?

[Jorick]

Actually Turtles have low SDC and HP....but they have a nice AR.....which gets completely lost in MDC.......
And I guess the other question is how skilled one wants to call 'highly skilled' and how bad the penalties are. With a gun its hard to get strikes over +5 or so sure.......but with that Vibroknife? Yah +10 or more is not difficult by any means........

It's much more common for a Brodkil, or whatever, to be "one shot" by a volley of mini-missiles. Everything can die quickly, and probably does often in the world of Rifts. They don't all go around wearing missile protection. Sometimes a hero comes along that can do it in a much more subtle way. In no way is this unbalancing. And it's not that strange or far fetched given the rules, where hit location affects MDC (in non AR settings).

Vibro-knives are slightly more common than volleys of mini-missiles, as well as being slightly cheaper.
Not all weapons are equal.
The SDF-1 might be able to one-shot Splyncryth, but that doesn't mean that an NG-P7 should.

Also, when you watch or read material with beings like Superman and The Hulk and such, do you sit there thinking that somebody ought to be able to one-shot them if they aim for the right spot with a 5.56mm round?
Or a knife?

But very few people can do anything so utterly devastating with a vibro-knife.

I would never let an NG-P7 kill a splugorth. Superman and the hulk have very high MDCs in their eyes. Hitting superman's brain would arguably do nothing either. Just like hitting a murder wraith's brain would do nothing.

In order for this to work, it must be reasonable. I think I've explained why doing so to a Brodkil is reasonable, given what we can surmise about their physiology. Or a dinosaur. And I've already talked about beings against which such an action would be impossible.


I think it's a good thing to let the player be able to explain the reasoning behind an action, and allow it if it makes sense. That's really the gist of everything I'm saying. It makes the game better for the player, and it's not unbalancing.


If the Brodkil is a big deal in the campaign, or if allowing such an action could really undermine everything that has been set up, then one can still allow the action and give the Brodkil a high MDC eye. That being said, players destroy GM plans all the time, even without such things, and it's not really a big deal. You can always sub in a different kind of enemy.

[Killer Cyborg]

Actually Turtles have low SDC and HP....but they have a nice AR.....which gets completely lost in MDC.......
And I guess the other question is how skilled one wants to call 'highly skilled' and how bad the penalties are. With a gun its hard to get strikes over +5 or so sure.......but with that Vibroknife? Yah +10 or more is not difficult by any means........

It's much more common for a Brodkil, or whatever, to be "one shot" by a volley of mini-missiles. Everything can die quickly, and probably does often in the world of Rifts. They don't all go around wearing missile protection. Sometimes a hero comes along that can do it in a much more subtle way. In no way is this unbalancing. And it's not that strange or far fetched given the rules, where hit location affects MDC (in non AR settings).

Vibro-knives are slightly more common than volleys of mini-missiles, as well as being slightly cheaper.
Not all weapons are equal.
The SDF-1 might be able to one-shot Splyncryth, but that doesn't mean that an NG-P7 should.

Also, when you watch or read material with beings like Superman and The Hulk and such, do you sit there thinking that somebody ought to be able to one-shot them if they aim for the right spot with a 5.56mm round?
Or a knife?

But very few people can do anything so utterly devastating with a vibro-knife.

In Alrik's example, it was just some guy.

I would never let an NG-P7 kill a splugorth. Superman and the hulk have very high MDCs in their eyes.

Exactly.
The weapon simply doesn't have the damage output to get past the eyes, through the skull, and into the brain.

[Alrik Vas]

There's been a lot of talk about my idea, but it seems to balk at it without discussing the method.

Using my rule, even an LRM couldn't 1 shot an adult Dragon, because it can't deal 10% of it's MDC to a vulnerable location.

Same story with an NG IP-7 to a splugorth.

A knife or sword vs a brodkill works only because I include PS bonuses on melee weapons.

Then, remember, they need a -6 called shot (easier to defend against) and need to deal damage enough (impossible without critical or surprise) and the target has to fail a save.

And considering how difficult that can be, a brodkill isn't blundering into idiot territory for not wearing armor, he just isn't being cautious.

[Killer Cyborg]

There's been a lot of talk about my idea, but it seems to balk at it without discussing the method.

Part of that is because none of the rest of us have your method memorized as well as you do.

Using my rule, even an LRM couldn't 1 shot an adult Dragon, because it can't deal 10% of it's MDC to a vulnerable location.

Hm.
An adult fire dragon (CB1 121) has 1d6x1000 MDC. That'd leave about 1/6th of the population with only 1,000 MDC.
10% of 1000 is 100, so you'd need 100 MD to one-shot those weaker dragons.
All of the LRMs in RUE (p. 257) are capable of inflicting 100 MD. A medium HE LRM inflicts 105 MD on an average strike, and a heavy HE LRM inflicts 140 MD on average. A frag LRM would have trouble (average damage of 70 MD), but could still do it on a critical strike. Armor Piercing has an average of 105 MD. Plasma/heat has an average of 140, but most dragons would take reduced damage. Proton Torpedos do an average of 175 MD for medium, or 220 MD for heavy.
A nuclear LRM does 1d4x100 MD, for an average of 250 MD. A heavy nuclear LRM does 1d6x100 MD, for an average of 350 MD. A nuclear multi-warhead does 2d4x100 MD, for an average of 500 MD, and a maximum of 800 MD.

Really, I was mostly talking about hatchlings, though.

Same story with an NG IP-7 to a splugorth.

Yup. I put that one up as something that we could (hopefully) all agree on, to illustrate the point that sometimes something simply has too much MDC to be one-shotted.
We just disagree about where the reasonable line is, with me supporting the "the line is where you inflict enough damage to kill the target" view.

A knife or sword vs a brodkill works only because I include PS bonuses on melee weapons.

Understood.
BTW, though, how exactly do you include the bonuses? Does a normal human with PS 30 get +15, and a brodkil with PS 30 get +15 as well?

Then, remember, they need a -6 called shot (easier to defend against) and need to deal damage enough (impossible without critical or surprise) and the target has to fail a save.

And considering how difficult that can be, a brodkill isn't blundering into idiot territory for not wearing armor, he just isn't being cautious.

-6 in melee isn't that bad. If you have surprise or a natural 20, the attack's going to be essentially undefendable.

What's the save you use like?

[Jorick]

Yup. I put that one up as something that we could (hopefully) all agree on, to illustrate the point that sometimes something simply has too much MDC to be one-shotted.
We just disagree about where the reasonable line is, with me supporting the "the line is where you inflict enough damage to kill the target" view.

It's more complicated than that, though. Right?

Brodkil have a 100 MDC head. If you shoot the head off a Brodkil, doing less than the main body MDC of the Brodkil, do you not kill the Brodkil?

I think you do.

If it takes less than main body damage to kill a thing by shooting a weaker part of that thing, then the logic can be continued on to even weaker parts of that thing.

How weak those parts are is up to the GM, at the very least because they are not listed. But I also think it is unreasonable to act as if they are not there (and possibly not as fun for the players).

[Alrik Vas]

The save is vs Pain (16) but you get your PE bonus vs magic/poison to it. This gives many high MDC opponents a high survivability rate, but no sure thing.

As to damage bonuses in.melee, humans get PS bonus, extraordinary PS gets bonus plus punch on SDC but only PS on MDC. Robot gets MD punch plus PS bonus (when the punch inflicts.MD), SN PS gets punch and bonus all the time.

So our brodkill.friend gets weapon + punch + damage bonus.

And as to hatchlings, they are spectacularly weaker than adults. But your average adult will survive most attempts at being 1 hit killed.

[Killer Cyborg]

Yup. I put that one up as something that we could (hopefully) all agree on, to illustrate the point that sometimes something simply has too much MDC to be one-shotted.
We just disagree about where the reasonable line is, with me supporting the "the line is where you inflict enough damage to kill the target" view.

It's more complicated than that, though. Right?

Brodkil have a 100 MDC head.

Source?

If you shoot the head off a Brodkil, doing less than the main body MDC of the Brodkil, do you not kill the Brodkil?

Indeed!

If it takes less than main body damage to kill a thing by shooting a weaker part of that thing, then the logic can be continued on to even weaker parts of that thing.

Yup.
But it's too easy to get all Zeno's Paradox with it.:
"If the head has 100 MDC, then the eye has 25 MDC.
If the eye has 25 MDC, then the cornea probably has 5 MDC.
If the cornea has 5 MDC, then 1/5 of the cornea has 1 MDC.
If 1/5 of the cornea has 1 MDC, then logically 1/10 of the cornea only has 50 SDC, therefore a good enough sniper could kill a brodkil with an SDC round."

How weak those parts are is up to the GM, at the very least because they are not listed. But I also think it is unreasonable to act as if they are not there (and possibly not as fun for the players).

It's reasonable to act in accordance with the system, for the most part.
The system isn't designed with that level of granuality in mind, and utilizing such granuality can break or damage the system.

[Killer Cyborg]

The save is vs Pain (16) but you get your PE bonus vs magic/poison to it. This gives many high MDC opponents a high survivability rate, but no sure thing.

Typical Brodkil has PE 20 (SB1), which would give them a +3 bonus, dropping the save down to 13+. If my math's right, that works out to about a 60% chance of death if it comes down to the save.

As to damage bonuses in.melee, humans get PS bonus, extraordinary PS gets bonus plus punch on SDC but only PS on MDC. Robot gets MD punch plus PS bonus (when the punch inflicts.MD), SN PS gets punch and bonus all the time.

So our brodkill.friend gets weapon + punch + damage bonus.

And with brodkil's invisibility powers, they can do sneak attacks of their own quite handily (as you demonstrated in your example).

[Killer Cyborg]

And as to hatchlings, they are spectacularly weaker than adults. But your average adult will survive most attempts at being 1 hit killed.

IF they live long enough to become an adult!

[Alrik Vas]

60% seems a little low, even to me, but I've been doing it like this for a while with acceptable results.

And as to hatchlings, they are spectacularly weaker than adults. But your average adult will survive most attempts at being 1 hit killed.

IF they live long enough to become an adult!

Armor of Ithan is pretty handy, I hear.

[Jorick]

Yup. I put that one up as something that we could (hopefully) all agree on, to illustrate the point that sometimes something simply has too much MDC to be one-shotted.
We just disagree about where the reasonable line is, with me supporting the "the line is where you inflict enough damage to kill the target" view.

It's more complicated than that, though. Right?

Brodkil have a 100 MDC head.

Source?

If you shoot the head off a Brodkil, doing less than the main body MDC of the Brodkil, do you not kill the Brodkil?

Indeed!

If it takes less than main body damage to kill a thing by shooting a weaker part of that thing, then the logic can be continued on to even weaker parts of that thing.

Yup.
But it's too easy to get all Zeno's Paradox with it.:
"If the head has 100 MDC, then the eye has 25 MDC.
If the eye has 25 MDC, then the cornea probably has 5 MDC.
If the cornea has 5 MDC, then 1/5 of the cornea has 1 MDC.
If 1/5 of the cornea has 1 MDC, then logically 1/10 of the cornea only has 50 SDC, therefore a good enough sniper could kill a brodkil with an SDC round."

How weak those parts are is up to the GM, at the very least because they are not listed. But I also think it is unreasonable to act as if they are not there (and possibly not as fun for the players).

It's reasonable to act in accordance with the system, for the most part.
The system isn't designed with that level of granuality in mind, and utilizing such granuality can break or damage the system.

I think the brodkil head is in SB1 Revised. I may not remember it correctly, but it is listed somewhere. I can check later if you dont have it.

I think acting purely within the system is problematic. I think this is so because of what I said earlier in the thread:

I think the system is created to mimic reality as a first purpose. I think it wants to allow for the granularity of reality as much as a system can while using random number generators to account for the chaos of reality and limit free will to approximate the extent to which reality does so.

I think the limit on that is the reasonable choices of the players. "If you were this character in this situation, what would you try to do?" That's ultimately what the game is asking.

The game tries to give you enough ideas to expand upon for the naturally occurring unforeseeable situations and player choices.

[Killer Cyborg]

I think the brodkil head is in SB1 Revised. I may not remember it correctly, but it is listed somewhere. I can check later if you dont have it.

I think that one's on loan.

I think acting purely within the system is problematic.

I agree... but I think it's worse to unnecessarily stray.

I think this is so because of what I said earlier in the thread:

I think the system is created to mimic reality as a first purpose. I think it wants to allow for the granularity of reality as much as a system can while using random number generators to account for the chaos of reality and limit free will to approximate the extent to which reality does so.

I think the limit on that is the reasonable choices of the players. "If you were this character in this situation, what would you try to do?" That's ultimately what the game is asking.

The game tries to give you enough ideas to expand upon for the naturally occurring unforeseeable situations and player choices.

At the same time, it gives us stats and mechanisms that are designed to work together.
If there's already a wheel, there's usually no need to reinvent it.
And "I shoot him in the eye" isn't an unforseeable circumstance, except perhaps as a pun.

[Jorick]

I think the brodkil head is in SB1 Revised. I may not remember it correctly, but it is listed somewhere. I can check later if you dont have it.

I think that one's on loan.

I think acting purely within the system is problematic.

I agree... but I think it's worse to unnecessarily stray.

I think this is so because of what I said earlier in the thread:

I think the system is created to mimic reality as a first purpose. I think it wants to allow for the granularity of reality as much as a system can while using random number generators to account for the chaos of reality and limit free will to approximate the extent to which reality does so.

I think the limit on that is the reasonable choices of the players. "If you were this character in this situation, what would you try to do?" That's ultimately what the game is asking.

The game tries to give you enough ideas to expand upon for the naturally occurring unforeseeable situations and player choices.

At the same time, it gives us stats and mechanisms that are designed to work together.
If there's already a wheel, there's usually no need to reinvent it.
And "I shoot him in the eye" isn't an unforseeable circumstance, except perhaps as a pun.

I pretty much agree with everything you just said. To that extent, I'm not saying one-shotting must be allowed, only that it makes sense given the rules, and has value. One-shotting adds to verisimilitude, and both creates a danger for the characters which leads to a more thoughtful play-style, and allows for heroic (low-probability) success (which is fun). I don't think it takes away from anything, not even the supposed fearsomeness of Brodkil. I think it's a better answer all around than simply fighting poorly armed opponents.

It may be foreseeable, but many things which are foreseeable in the game are not given explicit rules. The creators always have new ideas for situations which have yet to be expressed in the books, even for otherwise forseeable circumstances. They, too, are always expanding upon the basic ideas.

[Killer Cyborg]

I pretty much agree with everything you just said.

To that extent, I'm not saying one-shotting must be allowed, only that it makes sense given the rules, and has value.

Now we're disagreeing again.

One-shotting adds to verisimilitude, and both creates a danger for the characters which leads to a more thoughtful play-style, and allows for heroic (low-probability) success (which is fun). I don't think it takes away from anything, not even the supposed fearsomeness of Brodkil. I think it's a better answer all around than simply fighting poorly armed opponents.

Not necessarily poorly armed, but rather "less well-armed than the PCs."
And heck, you can put the PCs up against enemies with superior armor and weapons under the normal rules, if you want things to get exciting and to provoke more thoughtful play.

It may be foreseeable, but many things which are foreseeable in the game are not given explicit rules. The creators always have new ideas for situations which have yet to be expressed in the books, even for otherwise forseeable circumstances. They, too, are always expanding upon the basic ideas.

Right.
Which is why they included that part about headshots and eyeshots (etc.) inflicting x2-x3 damage.

[Jorick]

Right.
Which is why they included that part about headshots and eyeshots (etc.) inflicting x2-x3 damage.

Eyes and joints (as examples), neither of which have listed MDC, and resulting in adverse affects, none of which are mechanically accounted for (but death and bleeding out are examples given) thus forcing invention. I wouldn't have even gone for X2 or X3 damage. Just decide what I want the eye's MDC to be, and a hit modifier to make sure it's hit correctly in order to do more than burn the socket.

Perhaps the shot is supposed to do x2 or x3 to the area around the target? Like the head or leg? Perhaps, but I also think it's a rule that's supposed to allow for 1 shots to large dinosaurs by very skilled hunters. Regardless, I don't want to argue that one shots are explicitly in the rules. I don't think they are. I think they can be implicitly so.

I do think that some ease in killing opponents (and thus player death) adds more to player caution than simply adding more powerful opponents. I think munchkins, for instance, are born of system gaming. I think the more verisimilitude there is, the more story will matter, and the less players will have incentive to game the system. Of course, I can just disallow it as a GM, but I think providing an environment that rewards story is a good way to do things too.

[Zer0 Kay]

Geez just RP it if you don't want it to take so long. They could take hours in game time thinking out the heard and then the general comes into view and your sharp shooter(s) take aim and pop. RPing sniper kills should only ever be used in the players favor... or when dismissing a player from the table, permanently.

[Killer Cyborg]

Right.
Which is why they included that part about headshots and eyeshots (etc.) inflicting x2-x3 damage.

Eyes and joints (as examples), neither of which have listed MDC, and resulting in adverse affects, none of which are mechanically accounted for (but death and bleeding out are examples given) thus forcing invention. I wouldn't have even gone for X2 or X3 damage. Just decide what I want the eye's MDC to be, and a hit modifier to make sure it's hit correctly in order to do more than burn the socket.

Perhaps the shot is supposed to do x2 or x3 to the area around the target? Like the head or leg?

Yes, as I've said before. That's why the damage is mulitiplied.

I do think that some ease in killing opponents (and thus player death) adds more to player caution than simply adding more powerful opponents.

You lost me.

I think munchkins, for instance, are born of system gaming. I think the more verisimilitude there is, the more story will matter, and the less players will have incentive to game the system. Of course, I can just disallow it as a GM, but I think providing an environment that rewards story is a good way to do things too.

Sure. You and I just disagree about the verisimilitude involved in one-shotting powerful opponents with low-power weapons, as well as such a thing being a good story reward.
Again, I don't see a lot of thought or innovation behind "I stab him in the groin/eye/ventricle."

[Jorick]

Right.
Which is why they included that part about headshots and eyeshots (etc.) inflicting x2-x3 damage.

Eyes and joints (as examples), neither of which have listed MDC, and resulting in adverse affects, none of which are mechanically accounted for (but death and bleeding out are examples given) thus forcing invention. I wouldn't have even gone for X2 or X3 damage. Just decide what I want the eye's MDC to be, and a hit modifier to make sure it's hit correctly in order to do more than burn the socket.

Perhaps the shot is supposed to do x2 or x3 to the area around the target? Like the head or leg?

Yes, as I've said before. That's why the damage is mulitiplied.

I do think that some ease in killing opponents (and thus player death) adds more to player caution than simply adding more powerful opponents.

You lost me.

I think munchkins, for instance, are born of system gaming. I think the more verisimilitude there is, the more story will matter, and the less players will have incentive to game the system. Of course, I can just disallow it as a GM, but I think providing an environment that rewards story is a good way to do things too.

Sure. You and I just disagree about the verisimilitude involved in one-shotting powerful opponents with low-power weapons, as well as such a thing being a good story reward.
Again, I don't see a lot of thought or innovation behind "I stab him in the groin/eye/ventricle."

I don't think a MDC gun is a low power weapon.

It's not innovation. It's story. "What would I do if I were this character in this situation? Well, I'm a sharpshooter, and I can do all kinds of fancy stuff with my guns, so I'm gonna try to hit this guy in a place it counts. Seems like he has a brain behind his eye, just like a human does. I'm going to try to shoot him in the eye, because that seems like it would do a lot of bad things to him, including possible death." GM ponders this and says "Sure, you can try to shoot him in the eye with this modifier because of these factors. The eye has a certain amount of MDC."

Player rolls well in both hit and damage, obliterating the eye. GM gives him a hit to the brain, because the hit was really good and the eye is more than gone. That takes the opponent out.

The reward is not beating the opponent. The reward is being able to do what you reasonably think you should. It's fun to a be a sharpshooter who can actually try to sharpshoot.

Saying "no, you can't hit the eye, you can only hit the head, cause that has an MDC rating, and the system only allows you to attack things with MDC," or "no this opponents eyes seem to be targets, but it doesn't matter cause this opponent has 400 MDC, and the system says you have to destroy the MDC to kill a thing" makes the system more important than story.

Then the challenge becomes playing the system, not playing the story. Therefore munchkins, or creating more mechanically powerful characters (for instance, always picking boxing), rather than story driven ones.

[Tor]

People who horde strike bonuses to make called shots allowing them to kill with less damage can be just as mechanically powerful as those who horde massive damage. The same as people who horde avoidance bonuses can be as mechanically driven as people who horde damage capacity. Either drive or be driven by story or ignore it.

[Alrik Vas]

That can be true, Tor. Though mechanics can also just be an aid to, or merely an impartial way of, arbitration. Which is their purpose. A quick or skilled person can get through a lot on just their ability, just not always or against anything.

[eliakon]

Geez just RP it if you don't want it to take so long. They could take hours in game time thinking out the heard and then the general comes into view and your sharp shooter(s) take aim and pop. RPing sniper kills should only ever be used in the players favor... or when dismissing a player from the table, permanently.

^This^
RP it out.....no problematic dice rolls and stuff.....if the plan is good its dead, if not then not.

[Alrik Vas]

There's nothing problematic about the rolls from where I am. Though there are circumstances that could dictate that a roll is unnecessary.

[Killer Cyborg]

You and I just disagree about the verisimilitude involved in one-shotting powerful opponents with low-power weapons, as well as such a thing being a good story reward.
Again, I don't see a lot of thought or innovation behind "I stab him in the groin/eye/ventricle."

I don't think a MDC gun is a low power weapon.

That depends entirely on what it's up against.
Against most SDC beings, it's overkill.
Against something with (sticking to the original example) 400 MDC, though, a 1d6-2d6 weapon is certainly low-powered.
An average human being has 19 SDC and 14 HP, for a total of 33 points. A low-powered handgun does 2d6 SDC. That'd be something like a .22 caliber. It's possible to kill somebody in the real-world with a single .22 round to the head... but it's not all that likely. There are plenty of cases of people getting shot in the head multiple times with a .22 at point blank, and not even dropping.
That's a ratio of a 2d6 weapon vs. 34 points, with SDC beings. For a ratio closer to what we're talking about, we'd need 2d6 SDC vs. something with around 400 HP/SDC.

A Grizzly Bear has 2d4x10 HP and 1d4x10+30 SDC (PFRPG M&A 215), so the biggest baddest grizzly bear on the planet--one of those 9' tall bears that weighs 1800 lbs--could have 80 HP and 70 SDC, for a total of 150 points. That's less than HALF the damage to damage capacity ratio that we're talking about, but just spend some time asking around if it's possible to take down a full-grown grizzly bear in the real world using a single shot from a .22 pistol.
Believe me, the general answer you're going to get is "Hell, no!"
Because it's simply unrealistic.
And killing something with 400 MDC using a 2d6 MD weapon is essentially like dropping an uber-grizzly that's 2.5 times bigger and tougher than any grizzly we know of... with a single shot from a .22 pistol.

It's not innovation. It's story. "What would I do if I were this character in this situation? Well, I'm a sharpshooter, and I can do all kinds of fancy stuff with my guns, so I'm gonna try to hit this guy in a place it counts. Seems like he has a brain behind his eye, just like a human does. I'm going to try to shoot him in the eye, because that seems like it would do a lot of bad things to him, including possible death." GM ponders this and says "Sure, you can try to shoot him in the eye with this modifier because of these factors. The eye has a certain amount of MDC."

Sure. Just like with Superman and the Hulk.
But if Batman throws a batarang dead-center in Superman's cornea, that's still not going to phase him.
And if somebody shoots the Hulk in the eye dead-center with a rifle, he probably wouldn't like it... but it's sure not going to kill him. If somebody wrote that kind of thing into a comic book, it just plain wouldn't make sense.
Doing something for the sake of "story" only works well if it leads to a story that makes sense, and it just doesn't make sense to drop something with 400 MDC using a single shot from a 1d6-2d6 MD weapon.

The reward is not beating the opponent. The reward is being able to do what you reasonably think you should. It's fun to a be a sharpshooter who can actually try to sharpshoot.

Sure. But again, pit a sharpshooter up against the Hulk.
He can sharpshoot all he likes, but that doesn't mean that his weapon is going to seriously injure his opponent.
If he wants to sharpshoot the hulk in each eye with two quick rounds, then run like hell while the Hulk blinks the lead out of his eyes, that's great.... but actually dropping the Hulk because you can aim well just doesn't make any sense.

Saying "no, you can't hit the eye, you can only hit the head, cause that has an MDC rating, and the system only allows you to attack things with MDC," or "no this opponents eyes seem to be targets, but it doesn't matter cause this opponent has 400 MDC, and the system says you have to destroy the MDC to kill a thing" makes the system more important than story.

None of those are things that have been advocated.
You can hit the eye, but hitting the eye isn't going to kill anything (except maybe Eylor, with a big enough weapon). You're talking about shooting past the eye, through the skull, into the brain. That's head damage there.
The way it would work is the guy makes his Called Shot, he hits the eye, and does x2-x3 damage to the head. If the GM thinks that the eye would be fragile enough to be taken out by the weapon, then he can say that the eye is damaged/destroyed. Again, though, that won't kill anything.
Shooting the eye can matter... it's just not going to warp the laws of physics and reason to the point where you can drop a 400 MDC creature with a single shot from a 2d6 MD weapon, just like you're not going to drop the Hulk with one, and just like you're not going to drop a Grizzly with a single shot from a .22 pistol even if you hit him smack in the eye.

Then the challenge becomes playing the system, not playing the story. Therefore munchkins, or creating more mechanically powerful characters (for instance, always picking boxing), rather than story driven ones.

I think that the guy wanting to break/change the rules for a quick kill probably shouldn't be tossing around the M-word.

[Alrik Vas]

Hulk and Superman are bad examples. Though HU converts into Rifts, both the examples would have either invulnerability or so many thousands of SDC they can survive a nuclear blast. That isn't something we're talking about.

Your bear is closer to what we're talking about. Yet a 7.62 can kill a bear, and it only does around 5d6. Is that only because it's rolling full damage on a critical called shot to do "massive" damage? I can see that, but I can also see a very sharp knife guided by skilled, strong opponent doing the same more often because PS bonuses make less variance in the damage roll.

[Tor]

I am okay with having damage locations for eyes and stuff so long as we get them for everyone. This would require a lot of errata, you could almost dedicate whole sourcebook to it. Some species having bigger proportionate eyes than others. Not to mention even with equal proportions, the eye of a gnome is going to be smaller than the eye of a human due to smaller heads and overall portions even if percentages all matched up.

It's a thing we want, but part of a much larger scope of problems with called shots and size/distance based targetting dilemmas.

Like... isn't it basically the same to aim at a guy 500 feet away's head and to aim at a guy 1000 feet away's head?

[Alrik Vas]

Depends on your gear. Open sights it can have a lot of issues at any range. Even the type of weapon. A longer range weapon has the same weather to worry about, but in a different way. Even lasers are affected by atmosphere.

Though to my knowledge you only take range penalties in Palladium when firing beyond a weapon's listed range. So mechanically, it would be the same penalty, assuming both weapons reach 1000ft in their listed range.

[Killer Cyborg]

Hulk and Superman are bad examples. Though HU converts into Rifts, both the examples would have either invulnerability or so many thousands of SDC they can survive a nuclear blast. That isn't something we're talking about.

Neither is invulnerable in the comics, so that wouldn't be an accurate translation.

Your bear is closer to what we're talking about. Yet a 7.62 can kill a bear, and it only does around 5d6. Is that only because it's rolling full damage on a critical called shot to do "massive" damage? I can see that, but I can also see a very sharp knife guided by skilled, strong opponent doing the same more often because PS bonuses make less variance in the damage roll.

The bear would be about 3/8 of a good example.
Even a 7.62 isn't going to kill a 2 and 2/3 grizzlies in one shot.

As for a knife killing a grizzly in one hit... I don't think that's realistic either, unless it was a weak grizzly and a very strong stabber.

[Jorick]

Hulk and Superman are bad examples. Though HU converts into Rifts, both the examples would have either invulnerability or so many thousands of SDC they can survive a nuclear blast. That isn't something we're talking about.

Neither is invulnerable in the comics, so that wouldn't be an accurate translation.

Your bear is closer to what we're talking about. Yet a 7.62 can kill a bear, and it only does around 5d6. Is that only because it's rolling full damage on a critical called shot to do "massive" damage? I can see that, but I can also see a very sharp knife guided by skilled, strong opponent doing the same more often because PS bonuses make less variance in the damage roll.

The bear would be about 3/8 of a good example.
Even a 7.62 isn't going to kill a 2 and 2/3 grizzlies in one shot.

As for a knife killing a grizzly in one hit... I don't think that's realistic either, unless it was a weak grizzly and a very strong stabber.

A brodkil or dinosaur is not the Hulk Or Superman. A titan juicer murder wraith is more like the Hulk or Superman.

The skulls of animals and (one assumes) humanoids, have large holes behind the eyes. I agree the shot should be a low percentage chance with a modifier against the shooter. A very skilled shooter should be able to one shot a bear. Same, with an MD weapon, against barely or non-supernatural opponents with physiologies that reasonably allow for it.

[Killer Cyborg]

If the weapon has enough power to penetrate MDC eyes, any MDC bone, and the MDC brain.
2d6 might get the eye, but that's about it when the target has 400 MDC.

[Tor]

As cute as Titan-Juicer Murder-Wraiths are (make them a Dwarf-Berserker too!) I doubt either could do much against Supes/Hulks, the top-tier Marvel/DC guys are in hundreds of tonnage.

[Alrik Vas]

Hulk and Superman are bad examples. Though HU converts into Rifts, both the examples would have either invulnerability or so many thousands of SDC they can survive a nuclear blast. That isn't something we're talking about.

Neither is invulnerable in the comics, so that wouldn't be an accurate translation.

Your bear is closer to what we're talking about. Yet a 7.62 can kill a bear, and it only does around 5d6. Is that only because it's rolling full damage on a critical called shot to do "massive" damage? I can see that, but I can also see a very sharp knife guided by skilled, strong opponent doing the same more often because PS bonuses make less variance in the damage roll.

The bear would be about 3/8 of a good example.
Even a 7.62 isn't going to kill a 2 and 2/3 grizzlies in one shot.

As for a knife killing a grizzly in one hit... I don't think that's realistic either, unless it was a weak grizzly and a very strong stabber.

Well, we weren't talking about comic book invulnerable characters until you brought up Supes.

There's something I don't understand about the rest of your reply. What do you mean by 3/8 bear and 2 and 2/3 grizzly?

[Killer Cyborg]

Hulk and Superman are bad examples. Though HU converts into Rifts, both the examples would have either invulnerability or so many thousands of SDC they can survive a nuclear blast. That isn't something we're talking about.

Neither is invulnerable in the comics, so that wouldn't be an accurate translation.

Your bear is closer to what we're talking about. Yet a 7.62 can kill a bear, and it only does around 5d6. Is that only because it's rolling full damage on a critical called shot to do "massive" damage? I can see that, but I can also see a very sharp knife guided by skilled, strong opponent doing the same more often because PS bonuses make less variance in the damage roll.

The bear would be about 3/8 of a good example.
Even a 7.62 isn't going to kill a 2 and 2/3 grizzlies in one shot.

As for a knife killing a grizzly in one hit... I don't think that's realistic either, unless it was a weak grizzly and a very strong stabber.

Well, we weren't talking about comic book invulnerable characters until you brought up Supes.

Again, Superman isn't invulnerable. He's just REALLY tough.
Granted, he'd probably have more than 400 MDC, but he isn't invulnerable. The Invulnerability Super Power from HU simply doesn't fit.

There's something I don't understand about the rest of your reply. What do you mean by 3/8 bear and 2 and 2/3 grizzly?

The biggest baddest grizzley has like 150 damage capacity points. twice that is 300 points. You'd still need another 2/3 of a grizzly to get up to 400 damage capacity points.
One-shotting a 400 MDC demon with a 2d6 MD rifle is like one-shotting 2 and 2/3 grizzlies with a .22 pistol.
(Yes, really it's be more like one-shotting some kind of mutant uber-grizzly that's 2 and 2/3 times the size and toughness of a normal grizzly, but it all nets out the same; highly implausible.)