Supers VS Guns

[Hellhound_dow]

In a world of Supervillains and Superheroes, are guns a good defense against either without plot armor protecting the super?

 

[D'waawwu]

That depends on how you define any of those.

 

[Bear_Mint]

Yeah, it can vary depending on the power level of the supers and the overall tech level of the society you are placing them in. Some supers can just walk straight through a volley of bullets without a scratch while others can easily be killed by futuristic space guns.

 

[Hellhound_dow]

Specifically Worm started this debate on another thread, but any setting with superheroes and supervillains. And more as a matter of averages. My take is they are, due to not every super being invulnerable or so fast they can dodge bullets. Even the ones that wear body armor are vulnerable to them due to realistic physics since body armor only stops up to certain calibers.

 

[Bear_Mint]

That sounds like more of an issue of the author not wanting the story to end anti-climatically by someone getting shot with a gun than guns being utterly useless in a superhero setting.

 

[Hellhound_dow]

And I agree. That's why I specified about the plot armor, too. There was a debate going on about how guns in the hands of normal gangers were useless in a setting with supers which was derailing the thread, so I made this here since everyone seemed to want to continue it.

 

[D'waawwu]

Specifically Worm started this debate on another thread, but any setting with superheroes and supervillains. And more as a matter of averages. My take is they are, due to not every super being invulnerable or so fast they can dodge bullets. Even the ones that wear body armor are vulnerable to them due to realistic physics since body armor only stops up to certain calibers.

Click to shrink...

I mean Superhero setting throw realistic physics out the window. The moment someone shows up who can take a fifty cal to the face, You now have something to study to allow you to make better armor. It becomes an arms race.

 

[Hellhound_dow]

Oh for sure. But by realistic physics, I mean with body armor, not invulnerability of some fashion. With body armor, you still have kinetic force, and even the best modern body armor will only stop up to certain calibers. Even then the kinetic force can still knock you down and break bones if it does stop the round. Not to mention armor piercing rounds, explosive rounds, etc. As for body armor made from exotic tech or materials, it can't be worn all the time and isn't available to all supers, especially in Worm. I'd imagine it would still have limits like normal body armor would or even special things they'd need to avoid if its an exotic material. Spider silk armor would be great versus bullets, but not necessarily fire.

 

[Sol Zagato]

Supers can carry more gun. It all depends on the look and feel you want.

 

[tseptim]

The weak link is not the gun, it's the meat-based fire control unit holding the gun.

Meat is not perfectly mechanically reliable. It can fumble, it can miss. Meat doesn't have bug-free programming. It can hesitate, or make wrong decisions, or get overwhelmed by feedback and shut down. Meat runs on a chemical-based OS riddled with legacy code - hidden executables triggered by environmental conditions that often vary from meat to meat. Useful when older versions were current, but never patched out, and a bane as often as a boon.

Training meat can reinforce winning behaviors and reduce unwanted responses, but that takes dedicated time and effort. Untrained meat will fail more often than not, and Supers simply add new and exciting ways for untrained meat to fuck up. Sometimes meat gets lucky, but that's an exception and not a rule.

 

[Kylia Quilor]

Supers can hurt guns if the author wants them to. Because you know, superpowers don't exist IRL, same with the rules of vampirism varying from story to story. It's not plot armor if it's an established part of the setting that many superheroes are bullet resistant or bulletproof (at least to small calibers, or whatever).

For it to be 'Plot Armor' the author has to

A) Establish that this character - let's say Bob - is not actually natively invulnerable to bullets. (I.e. they don't bounce off his skin).
B) Not give Bob access to any sort of armor or ability that can otherwise allow him to resist bullets (i.e. Cap America's shield, Wonder Woman's bracelets, some versions of Batman's suits etc), or if he does, make it a complete asspull.
C) Never actually have characters who logically should use guns against Bob do so, without giving a good reason.

'Plot Armor' is specifically when a character's survival defies internal logic of the story or the established personalities of other characters, and/or is not done in a way that is narratively satisfying or convincing.

A character surviving deadly odds is not inherently plot armor.

 

[Hellhound_dow]

Supers can hurt guns if the author wants them to. Because you know, superpowers don't exist IRL, same with the rules of vampirism varying from story to story. It's not plot armor if it's an established part of the setting that many superheroes are bullet resistant or bulletproof (at least to small calibers, or whatever).

For it to be 'Plot Armor' the author has to

A) Establish that this character - let's say Bob - is not actually natively invulnerable to bullets. (I.e. they don't bounce off his skin).
B) Not give Bob access to any sort of armor or ability that can otherwise allow him to resist bullets (i.e. Cap America's shield, Wonder Woman's bracelets, some versions of Batman's suits etc), or if he does, make it a complete asspull.
C) Never actually have characters who logically should use guns against Bob do so, without giving a good reason.

'Plot Armor' is specifically when a character's survival defies internal logic of the story or the established personalities of other characters, and/or is not done in a way that is narratively satisfying or convincing.

A character surviving deadly odds is not inherently plot armor.

Click to shrink...

Agreed. A random ganger with a full auto unloading at the super and somehow not hitting them at all, even if they aren't wearing body armor or are invulnerable is plot armor. Doing so against a super that is invulnerable some way and the ricochets of the bullets never hitting the shooter is also a form of plot armor. So is said super having only one item that is actually bulletproof and somehow blocking the rounds that would hit them with it every time.

But, that means every time a super blocks, dodges, or shrugs off a bullet hitting them without the 'power' needed to do so is plot armor. Captain America getting his shield in the way of every bullet that would hit him, Batman not getting hit in his chin or face, etc. It's why I say plot armor is the only reason most supers survive in a super world, also. Getting lucky even most of the time is possible. Lucky all the time? Not so much.

Almost all the mooks or basic gangers being imbeciles, unable to aim straight, etc, is also a form of plot armor for the super.

The weak link is not the gun, it's the meat-based fire control unit holding the gun.

Meat is not perfectly mechanically reliable. It can fumble, it can miss. Meat doesn't have bug-free programming. It can hesitate, or make wrong decisions, or get overwhelmed by feedback and shut down. Meat runs on a chemical-based OS riddled with legacy code - hidden executables triggered by environmental conditions that often vary from meat to meat. Useful when older versions were current, but never patched out, and a bane as often as a boon.

Training meat can reinforce winning behaviors and reduce unwanted responses, but that takes dedicated time and effort. Untrained meat will fail more often than not, and Supers simply add new and exciting ways for untrained meat to fuck up. Sometimes meat gets lucky, but that's an exception and not a rule.

Click to shrink...

As for the meat holding the gun being the fallible part, I agree. But also remember said 'super' is meat, too, (most of the time anyway.) and fallible, as well.

 

[Kylia Quilor]

Okay, so clearly you weren't listening to me. You've decided that the superiority of guns must trump everything else.

 

[Hellhound_dow]

I have no idea how you got that out of what I said in response. I'm saying the odds are against them doing that EVERY TIME. Not without some kind of 'bullet time' or luck power, which none of them have according to the story, which means its plot armor.

Anytime there isn't a universal rule stopping it, which is 99% of super fiction, plot armor is why most supers survive as long as they do. While guns is the main focus I used in this thread, any mundane weapon fits. Anything from the stick of wood hitting a vulnerable spot to being ground zero for explosions powerful enough to destroy large portions of a city. Somehow the super survives. Sometimes with serious injuries, but still survives. I specified guns because that is easy for random low level criminals to get their hands on, while still being a threat to the average powered individual. Even unskilled users are a threat to trained law enforcement and military, even if not nearly as huge of one as a skilled user.

But molotov cocktails, homemade explosives, booby traps, homemade toxic gases, etc? All could easily be used in place of a gun in this case.

Edit: I take back the part about no idea. I think I could have said it better on the previous post. I do hope this one helps some, though.

 

[Eibon_Alain]

As for body armor made from exotic tech or materials, it can't be worn all the time and isn't available to all supers, especially in Worm. I'd imagine it would still have limits like normal body armor would or even special things they'd need to avoid if its an exotic material. Spider silk armor would be great versus bullets, but not necessarily fire.

Click to shrink...

I consider being a normal Worm Tinker to be a special kind of nightmare; permanent lack of resources, very regular mandatory maintenance, no promise that your technology will be applicable, useful, or viable. Sometimes the results will be completely random and sometimes they will have tyrannical usage conditions.

But yeah, you're a gun-toting gang member, in one of the cities with the highest rate of SupersXNormals of USA, protecting one of your gang's piggy banks, a random guy in a weird and shoddy costume comes right up to you.
What do you do?
a) Mock the guy.
b) "Hey! Who's going there?"
c) Shoot him.

Another thing that never seems to work is grenades, it's amazing how underrated they are when it's a bad guy who uses them.

 

[SuperPulp2789]

Supers get armed forces types on them as well, who also somehow miss a lot

In a melee too, many should have had their heads cracked

But they manage to turn "martial arts" into a superpower, when realistically speaking, it's almost always best to go armed against multiple opponents and even the most skilled fighters IRL have trouble against a single opponent and/or would need to do guerrilla tactics of a sort

No way you can hit multiple opponents at once or smash through them with punches and kicks like Kengan Asura/Omega

 

[Hellhound_dow]

But yeah, you're a gun-toting gang member, in one of the cities with the highest rate of SupersXNormals of USA, protecting one of your gang's piggy banks, a random guy in a weird and shoddy costume comes right up to you.
What do you do?
a) Mock the guy.
b) "Hey! Who's going there?"
c) Shoot him.

Click to shrink...

Right? How many times in movies, books, and comics does the armed mooks guarding a place see some stranger in a place they have no reason to be in at all and instead of shooting first, start going, "Hey! Who are you? What are you doing here?" It's bad enough when the person is in normal clothes, but half the time the person is in a costume or mall-ninja gear.

Edit: Especially when in real life, it would be shoot first, shoot again, double check they are dead, shoot a third time, then maybe find out who they were.
If said nutjob in a costume is invulnerable or has some kind of regeneration, that's when shit hits the fan for the mooks, but otherwise just another dead 'hero' to fill a ditch.

 

[Biigoh]

The smartest Batman goon ever!

Why didn't any of the other thugs ever try this?Clip from Batman: Mystery of the Batwoman

www.youtube.com

 

[SuperPulp2789]

Right? How many times in movies, books, and comics does the armed mooks guarding a place see some stranger in a place they have no reason to be in at all and instead of shooting first, start going, "Hey! Who are you? What are you doing here?" It's bad enough when the person is in normal clothes, but half the time the person is in a costume or mall-ninja gear.

Edit: Especially when in real life, it would be shoot first, shoot again, double check they are dead, shoot a third time, then maybe find out who they were.
If said nutjob in a costume is invulnerable or has some kind of regeneration, that's when shit hits the fan for the mooks, but otherwise just another dead 'hero' to fill a ditch.

Click to shrink...

When it comes to the more "Badass Normal" superhero types, too many practically have superpowers when it comes to their sheer fighting skill in ranged and melee

Others use lots of quirky gadgets

Realistically speaking, they would all fight the same

As in, they'll be boring generalists with no iconic/signature outfits and gear, almost all will be doing a guerrilla warfare type of combat which is said to be highly aggressive and yet makes a lot of use of stealth, ambushes and cover

Go up against mooks with guns? Will probably end up killing them

 

[Karmic Acumen]

Guns should have sauteed 85% of all parahumans in Worm, at least. A rando with a gun would've ganked Jack Slash a long time ago, for example, if the author really played the 'non-brutes' straight.

Key takeway here: bullets are faster than sound. That means that even bullshit reflexes won't do shit unless you have some manner of super vision AND see the shot coming a long way from right in front of you. Anything else and there's nothing to react TO because the bullet skewers you before the sound or air disturbance arrives. You need to be at least Flash in speed to dodge after the round already made contact.

Even for invulnerables or transformers, the gun is still the best option. You just need a more specialized bullet.

 

[Connamer]

People often have some very, very skewed ideas of what guns are commonly able to accomplish. I mostly blame SB-style logic, looking at the technical specifications of a firearm and assuming that has any bearing on how they function in practice.

A 9mm bullet fired from a handgun is dangerous at over half a mile away, capable of killing even when fired on an arcing, ballistic trajectory. Despite that, most actual hits from a handgun happen when the shooter and victim are less than three meters apart. Similarly, a 9mm bullet fired from a handgun can be accurate to within an inch or less at ranges of over 50 yards. Despite that, of all shots fired with the intent to injure or kill, less than one percent actually hit. In the same vein, a 9mm bullet can be near-instantly fatal with a single hit, given the right circumstances. However, of all gunshot-related injuries (putting aside suicide) less than 10% are fatal, and of those fatalities over 90% are due to blood loss. Less than 1% of gunshot injuries are fatal due to the bullet itself. Hell, over 80% of people who get shot in the head survive the experience, again discounting suicides.

Guns are incredibly lethal, nobody can deny that. But that lethality is very much conditional, and almost never experienced in practice. It requires a great deal of training, preparation, experience, and luck to be able to rapidly and effectively kill people with firearms. I'd say that special forces could deal with most superheroes we see in most settings, but even then they'd be at a disadvantage. Because while guns require a lot of skill to handle and are generally less deadly than people imagine, superpowers tend to simply... work. Eye lasers hit what they're aimed at. Fire breath catches its target. Ice powers catch the legs, freezing people to the ground. It's very rare to see a superhero setting where powers are difficult to use, or regularly fail. You can call that narrative convenience if you want, or you can justify it by saying that powers are more organic to the people who use them, and so using them is easier and more natural. But either way it seems to be the case.

It's also worth considering that the sort of people who have the skill and training necessary to stand up to capes with just firearms is small. Special forces are rare. It's going to be different in every setting, of course, but if we want to look at Worm as an example, there are more villains in America than there are SWAT and special forces. And the villains are a lot easier to replace.

 

[Karmic Acumen]

It's also worth considering that the sort of people who have the skill and training necessary to stand up to capes with just firearms is small. Special forces are rare.

Click to shrink...

You don't need to be special forces to fire a gun on target. You don't even need to be any kind of soldier. You just need a few sessions at the range.

No, the lethality is not at all conditional. There's good reasons why gun safety is the first and most important thing drilled into your head when you get a gun put in your hands. And why governments keep trying to disarm people - they work so good they can topple governments in the hands of a half-assed militia.

For someone who thinks people don't understand guns, you put a lot of effort into downselling them. 'Almost never experienced din practice' you say while deliberately mentioning only the most skewed statistics available, while emphasizing only the scenarios outside the specific guns' actual ratings and intended use.

I could do the same thing by judging a soldier's average performance with a 9mm based on accidental discharges by civilians in states where you're not even allowed to have them on hand in your house. Just because the statistics are accurate doesn't mean they reflect reality. Never mind context.

 

[Connamer]

You don't need to be special forces to fire a gun on target. You don't even need to be any kind of soldier. You just need a few sessions at the range.

Click to shrink...

If that was true, we'd see a lot more people using them effectively. Instead what we see in real life is a lot of people missing a lot of shots, and a lot of shots that do hit being non-fatal injuries. How many times do we see stories in the news of injured suspects fleeing the scene? How often do active shooting events end with zero fatalities? How often are there officer-involved shootings without a single person being hit?

The simple fact is that a few sessions at the range is absolutely, totally, and categorically not enough to make someone an effective combatant. Not in any way. It can let you fire a gun on target, as you said, but only if that target is stationary or moving slowly, and the shooter is in a low-stress environment with time to aim carefully. Suggesting anything more is ridiculous.

It's exactly the same as the morons who claim that going to the gym and taking a few boxing lessons would be enough to let them beat a gorilla in a fight. It's stupid on the face of it, a complete joke.

 

[Karmic Acumen]

Snip emphatic personal opinion

Click to shrink...

I guess we fundamentally disagree then.

Your argument is very disingenuous, I gotta say. I was arguing about guns vs superpowers, because that's what the tread is about. You seem determined to goal-shift it into 'civilians aren't as well trained as the people whose job it is to fire them.' Not exactly in good faith, now is it? Though you're not even doing that anymore, though you pretend you do, really well. Your arguments could just as easily be couched as 'a sword is less sharp if you're not a trained fighter.' Or, worse, 'swords aren't sharp because the randos who outnumber trained fighters just don't cut with them properly."

Congratulations, I suppose. You managed to drag me along for a little while there.

You're absolutely wrong to equate gun shooting skill with close-quarters combat, by the way, or anything else like that. Rapid skill gain is precisely why they changed the entire face of history. Everyone knows that.

 

[Connamer]

I guess we fundamentally disagree then.

Click to shrink...

While that's true, I think that my opinion is based on significantly stronger evidence than yours. I'm talking about firearms in practice. How they're actually used, and what their actual effects are in real life incidents, not on the range. I'm certainly not trying to downplay them. You mentioned NDs by civilians without training, not me. Hell, I referred to them as 'incredibly lethal', among other things. I actively said that I think special forces would measure up effectively against most capes in most settings, despite being at a disadvantage. I'm in no way trying to dismiss them as effective weapons.

I'm just also aware that they aren't some kind of magical murder sticks. The vast majority of people who get shot survive. That's a simple fact, can't be debated, and isn't a matter of opinion. It's a fundamental truth. Anybody disagreeing with that fact is simply and objectively wrong. By the same metric, the vast majority of people who are shot at are not hit. Again, that isn't a question of opinion. It's a truth. It's true in both combat and criminal shootings.

Both of those facts need to be considered when discussing the effectiveness of capes versus armed individuals. If you don't agree with my conclusions that guns would be effective but not overwhelming versus superpowers, that's fine. We can discuss that and see where our respective opinions come from. But if you're trying to dismiss my evidence out of hand then that's not a matter of opinion or disagreement. You're simply wrong.

 

[D'waawwu]

Guns are incredibly lethal, nobody can deny that. But that lethality is very much conditional, and almost never experienced in practice. It requires a great deal of training, preparation, experience, and luck to be able to rapidly and effectively kill people with firearms.

Click to shrink...

Dude Basic training is like two months

It's also worth considering that the sort of people who have the skill and training necessary to stand up to capes with just firearms is small. Special forces are rare. It's going to be different in every setting, of course, but if we want to look at Worm as an example, there are more villains in America than there are SWAT and special forces. And the villains are a lot easier to replace.

Click to shrink...

Worm is the worst example you could use and you used it in the worse manner training someone to replace a loss is a lot easier then waiting for some nobody to get traumatized and get good.

 

[Karmic Acumen]

You're simply wrong.

Click to shrink...

Yes.

'You don't hit if you miss' is, indeed, absolutely true.

 

[Connamer]

Dude Basic training is like two months

Click to shrink...

And most soldiers never hit anyone they're shooting at. Not even once in their entire career. It's why having a confirmed kill is such a big deal. Because most don't. Even those that see regular combat don't. The ratio of hits to shots fired in combat is like 1:2000. It is a ridiculously low number. Yes, obviously those numbers won't be perfectly applicable in every situation. They're averages. And yes, most shots fired in combat are suppressive. And yes, most kills in combat come from some manner of explosive, or in modern times drones. I am fully aware of all that, and I'm fully aware that it makes a perfect apples-to-apples comparison impossible. The best we can do is find a broad base of evidence and extrapolate from that to reasonable conclusions.

That's made even harder by the fact that superpowers aren't real, so we have to try break down what we see on the page into something we can reasonably use as a comparison. That's where my comments about superpowers simply working come from. We do of course see superheroes missing their attacks, but it's comparatively rare. Well, at least if the comparison we're using is to real-life gunfights. But even so, we see that even in the most chaotic situations most capes are able to keep their cool and use their powers effectively. They hit what they're aiming at very often, even if what they're aiming at is a small target moving erratically and shooting back at them. That's something that IRL soldiers can't match. Not even special forces, at least not reliably.

And again, I want to make it clear that I'm not saying guns wouldn't be effective against capes. I have quite literally said the opposite, in fact. Multiple times now. My conclusion above was that special forces would stack up reasonably well against most capes in most settings, despite being at an overall disadvantage. Because most superpowers are notably more lethal than firearms, and most heroes and villains using those powers use them more effectively than IRL soldiers and law enforcement use firearms. They also don't suffer the normal weaknesses and foibles that are so common in real combat. Panic, blue on blue, fog of war, it's all fairly rare with capes. Those are all massive advantages, and shouldn't be dismissed or underestimated.

Worm is the worst example you could use and you used it in the worse manner training someone to replace a loss is a lot easier then waiting for some nobody to get traumatized and get good.

Click to shrink...

Do you honestly believe it takes longer for capes to trigger than it does to train up a soldier capable of 1v1ing a cape?

Yes.

'You don't hit if you miss' is, indeed, absolutely true.

Click to shrink...

I'm glad you've realized your position was untenable, your arguments baseless, and you've gracefully conceded to my superior reasoning and evidence. Quite gentlemanly of you.

 

[D'waawwu]

And most soldiers never hit anyone they're shooting at.

Click to shrink...

And it doesn't matter

t. Not even once in their entire career. It's why having a confirmed kill is such a big deal. Because most don't. Even those that see regular combat don't. The ratio of hits to shots fired in combat is like 1:2000. It is a ridiculously low number. Yes, obviously those numbers won't be perfectly applicable in every situation. They're averages. And yes, most shots fired in combat are suppressive. And yes, most kills in combat come from some manner of explosive, or in modern times drones. I am fully aware of all that, and I'm fully aware that it makes a perfect apples-to-apples comparison impossible. The best we can do is find a broad base of evidence and extrapolate from that to reasonable conclusions.

Click to shrink...

You should know that.

Do you honestly believe it takes longer for capes to trigger than it does to train up a soldier capable of 1v1ing a cape?

Click to shrink...

Yes because 1vs1 isn't the goal.

 

[Connamer]

And it doesn't matter

Click to shrink...

Says who? I mean, in what possible world does the fact that most soldiers never hit another human being (while most capes do) not have a bearing on the discussion of guns versus superpowers? As far as I can see it's one of the big, central issues of the topic.

I mean this sincerely and honestly when I ask this, but what do you think could possibly matter more than that in this discussion?