What caliber of gun do you need to pierce a dragon's scales? .22? 9mm? .45?
 |
 DMT Has Friends For Me Shirt $21.68 |
|
What caliber of gun do you need to pierce a dragon's scales? .22? 9mm? .45?
What caliber of gun do you need to pierce a dragon's scales? .22? 9mm? .45?
|
DMT Has Friends For Me Shirt $21.68 |
|
8" of raw steel and sex appeal.
Depends on how old the dragon is, the mass in grains of the bullet, and the projectile velocity of the specific loading of the specific bullet in question.
Since you haven't provided that information, you don't deserve an answer.
Plate armor provides +8 AC. A Great Wyrm red dragon has a natural armor bonus of +39, nearly 5 times higher. So, anything that would penetrate steel 5 times thicker than plate armor, would penetrate dragon scales.
Fullplate also covers all forms of harness from late 14th century iron plate to 15th century gothis harness and late 15th to mid 16th century bulletproof steel armour.
So, by this metric I must repeat anons statement.
Probably not, for most dragons anyway. Also, mass relative to mass, it won't do much more than sting a little.
>So, by this metric I must repeat anons statement.
Then you're a moron. Part of plate's defense is deflection, so penetrating it with a bullet means having enough force to overcome that deflection and the strength of the steel combined, +8 is just the sum total of that, a high attack roll represents getting a good angle to not be deflected, thus you overcome the armor easier. But dragon scales have no deflection, so the scales are 5 times better than the defensive value of plate deflection PLUS plate resilience, which is +8.
According to this anon
The dragon scale could be anything from 10mm-20mm of steel, so a 20mm anti-material rifle could probably do it. Or you know just any Anti tank weapon, like an RPG, AT/field cannon, Any tank shell, IFV autocannon (Bushmaster/BMP) etc...
There is absolutely no logic in this calculation, only autism. But then again, you are a D&D crunchgay.
Where am I wrong?
You're wrong in assuming that D&D numbers have a hard real-life correspondence or foundation rather than being just abstractions meant not for realism but for gameplay structure.
You're wrong in assuming that the amount of natural armour on a monster is meant to convey anything except for how poorly thought-out the game system is. Natural armour is an arbitrary bonus given to creatures so that they meet the desired AC threshold to be as tough as the designers wanted them to be for their CR bracket. As in, "the average attack bonus at this level is +X and this monster's Dexterity only carries its AC up to Z so we need to give it Y more points and call it 'natural armour' so that on average it gets only hit N% of the times".
You're wrong in assuming that the numerical proportion between the AC bonus would have a direct correlation to the armour's thickness. By that logic, a chainmail should have the same hardness and toughness as double-thickness leather armour.
These are just numbers at the service of a game. It's not meant to be an accurate simulation. It is not supposed to scale with the mechanical properties of the materials involved, it scales in function of the benefit or challenge they're meant to provide. And on top of that, the way you use these numbers is just as arbitrary: you arbitrarily choose what kind of armour to use as your starting point, for example, and to use the absolute value of the AC bonuses as your reference points where you could just as well be comparing the derived AC that a character gets from wearing that armour for your calculations.
For example, a character wearing plate armour (+8) doesn't get four times the total AC they'd have if they were wearing leather armour (+2), they only get 150% of the AC (from 12 to 18, since these bonuses are applied to a starting AC of 10 ignoring other bonuses). So, is the armour four times as strong, or only strong enough to provide 50% more protection?
So your argument is, "you're wrong because D&D." So nothing you say matters. Gotcha.
None of my arguments are based on "D&D bad", I only made an offhand comment to D&D being poorly thought out which wasn't even directly related to the point I was making.
My point derive from the fact that D&D mechanics are an abstraction and not an accurate simulation (which is a good thing for a game, to be clear).
Now I don't know whether you're just trolling, or cherrypicking that one off-hand mention for your bad faith dismissal, or if your reading comprehension is really that appalling. So I don't know whether you're a c**t, a moron, or a combination of both. Either way, it's not looking good for you.
>My point derive from the fact that D&D mechanics are an abstraction
Read, Black person
How does that post have any bearing on mine? That's not from me and not responding to something I wrote.
It just looks like you are either grasping for straws or assuming that everyone who disagrees with you must be the same person.
The second post was mine, because it accounts for the abstracted nature of D&D. Plate's strength and deflection are abstracted into a single value, bypassing plate with a high attack roll is an abstracted way to depict not only punching through the metal but overcoming the deflection as well. Dragon scales don't deflect, their armor bonus represents resilience only, but the total value of that resilience can still be compared to the strength+deflection offered by plate armor, because a powerful enough blow will penetrate plate armor despite the angled surface. So, comparing the total value of plate, to the value of dragon scales, is entirely valid.
Absolutely baffling reply anon. They laid out a number of great points.
None of their points were good frickin idiot
So you're counter-argument is "I'm moronic".
A .22 couldn't pierce a wood plank
A 9mm is notoriously mediocre and is what most legal "body armor" is made to protect against
>a .45
This is in the right direction but I unironically think
This anon
Is right. For a fully grown dragon you'd want pic related: an ntw-20 anti-materiel rifle
Every damn time
>Every damn time
Looks like a nat 1 to me, mate.
>AC
Why even bother asking this question if that's the system you're using? Just make some shit up, it's not like the system is even pretending to attempt to be consistent or realistic.
Okay, name your preferred system then.
GURPS, which actually has rules for this specific scenario.
I said system, dingus.
GURPS is a system, dingus
It's really not, it's an exercise is autism.
Oh, ok so you're unfamiliar with the system and a meme-obsessed secondary. Thank you for letting me know I can disregard all of your further posts.
>reee how dare you not play gurps reee!
Okay, how much protection from damage does plate armor provide in GURPS? How much protection do dragon scales?
Heavy Plate give +9DR, a 30' long western dragon has 6DR.
Okay, so dragon scales are 33% weaker than plate. It's the exact same fricking principle as using D&D, so the guy who defaulted to D&D did nothing wrong, he just chose a system you didn't like, boo hoo.
There's more to it than that. but I'm not going to explain how a system you have already written off as "autistic" because you are a meme poisoned secondary works because it would be a waste of my time and you won't be arguing in good faith,
>or realistic.
Black person this is about dragon scales, why the frick are you talking about being realistic? This is your brain on gurps, fricking moronic.
3.PF's guns takes both armor's and natural armor's bonus to AC and throws them to the trash, where they belong.
Armor as resistance + threshold between lethal and non-lethal damage is where it is, realism-wise. Especially if there is degradation.
Armor as resistance (period) is where the fun is.
The age of the dragon is really the only thing that matters. Outside of the autism of /k/ gun guys normally don't normally take things like +P and unconventional barrel lengths into account when doing thought experiments about ~~*stopping power*~~.
If we're working on the broad categories of AD&D dragons, I'd say hatchlings can be killed with a .22LR, with 9mm and .45 being needed for juvenile to young adult. Adults you need a rifle caliber like the 7.62 Soviet or the 5.56 NATO. Wyrms and Great Wyrms likely need anti-material rifles to do any real damage too. Oh, I don't doubt massed fire from riflemen can do shit to them, but in less than 3 hits you need something that can knock a jet out of the air.
You're wrong about +p
reloading is a HUGE part of gun culture and developing different loads for different situations.
I don't think you know much about guns.
This is a super common opinion shared by people who think they're in the gun culture but don't actually spend time on the range.
So, basically...
Shut up norange.
lol ok
Gun larpers from /k/ are funny.
lol k
>20 guage varmint gun
>non-handload shells
Yep, a larper. And a liar! Naisu
most people don't hand load. you vastly overestimate the impact of your gun nut culture on fat suburban guys in pickup trucks.
People who hunt and actually use their guns to kill things do.
If the glue melted off any. Well except the birdshot.
Depends on how strong you think the scales are and what load/projectile used in the round.
Just as a quick and dirty reference: If the scale is as strong as 1 cm of steel it will stop most handgun rounds and some weak rifle rounds. 2cm steel will protect against most rifle rounds and 3 cm of steel would require specialized ammo or huge rifle rounds to penetrate.
That's not dirty, that is an absolutely abhorrent reference
Nah I shoot steel plates pretty regularly and it's close enough for D&D.
>steel equals steel, no further details ever required
Citation needed. Badly.
Nice trips, sadly wasted asking a moron about chemistry they'll never comprehend.
Thanks for reminding me why I stopped playing D&D with randos.
>pierce a dragon's scales? .22?
>pierce
>.22
Holy kek mate
If you were already in the dragon's mouth, had an intimate knowledge of dragon sinus cavities, and could somehow line up the shot, it's possible you could get lucky enough to snake a round into an important bit of its brain. Dunno if that's going to help you, on account of having already been eaten by a dragon.
>on account of having already been eaten by a dragon
>Frick, Jimmy got eaten!
>What do we do!?
>Muffled gunshots from inside the dragon
How do you one-shot an elephant with a mundane gun in D&D or Pathfinder?
https://www.quora.com/Can-a-22-caliber-hand-gun-kill-an-elephant
https://www.quora.com/Can-a-9mm-handgun-stop-a-charging-elephant-in-any-scenario
https://www.quora.com/What-caliber-can-kill-an-elephant
https://www.quora.com/Can-a-30-06-kill-an-elephant-with-a-single-shot
In real life, elephants can be one-shotted with .22 LR by firing directly into their ear canal.
https://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/elephant.htm
https://www.d20pfsrd.com/bestiary/monster-listings/animals/elephant/elephant/
https://www.dndbeyond.com/monsters/elephant
https://2e.aonprd.com/Monsters.aspx?ID=201
But elephants in D&D and Pathfinder always have such huge hit points...
coup de gra
the creature suffers critical damage automatically and must make a fortitude save vs a dc of 10 plus the damage taken
If you assume .22 lr deals 1d4 damage(a flintlock does 1d8) with the standard firearm crit multiplier of x4 the average DC would be 10+2.5x4 or 20 an elephant has a fort save of +13 so an elephant would die from that average coup de gra 30% of the time assuming that the person administering the attack was using a non magical 22 and had no experience in killing thing through precise strikes or special training that would boost weapon damage which would boost the dc by 3.5 per sneak attack die or 4 for each point of flat damage
5.56 AP could probably do it, what's your point?
This thread should be moved to /k/, where most has gunz touch grass
Last time some twat brought up the dragon armor meme, thread devolved into moronation with shills and boomers arguing about the military trial results
I would argue this thread is about to head the same way, lol.
Magic bullets. The caliber is irrelevant.
Even .22lr out of a 5" barrel will pierce the scales of the mightiest dragon if you apply enough attachments to your gun.
>made in USA
As if anyone ever seeing this monstrosity needed that spelled out for them
>mag between trigger and grip
what the actual frick is this
It's a zip22 with a bunch of attachments
This is like when a lung tumor metastasis (sp?) Then grows teeth and hair.
UCK!
You will live to see man-made horrors beyond your comprehension
Unless it has aftermarket recoil springs you ain't piercing anything with that thing.
one in 20 shots will get through no matter how weak a caliber, so the most cost effective dragon hunting is perhaps .22 in full auto
Not 1 in 20 shots, one in 20 attacks. Due to abstraction, if you hold down full auto for six seconds it is still only a single attack roll, its just one that deals a lot of damage. Rate of Fire doesn't actually help you here.
Not him but the way D&D handles full auto fire is by giving your opponent a saving throw.
Overwhelming majority of ranged weapons in DnD work on the principle of 1 projectile = 1 attack.
Hasted fighter with a bow gets more attacks by firing more arrows.
There's no reason why gun should be treated otherwise just because it can fire them very fast.
The abstraction is the bs part. Fully unloading a Colt SAA is 6 attacks at x1 damage, fully unloading a Glock 18 is 1 attack at x17 damage, assuming all rounds hit.
>1 attack at x17 damage, assuming all rounds hit.
would mean that either all rounds hit or none of them do, depending on how well you rolled on that 1 attack
As an aside, the 'actual' dragonscale body armor turned out to be a con. It never functioned as suggested.
Obsidian. Caliber doesn't matter, you need a material composed of the same nature as the dragon itself: fire and darkness. Drop a rod from god on the dragon and all you'll do is knock it over, it gets up completely unharmed. Cut it was an obsidian knife, however, and you draw blood.
At least Tzar bomba tier stuff
>.22
homie I've shot pigs who shrugged off .22 like it was nothing.
>homie I've shot pigs who shrugged off .22 like it was nothing.
Pigs are large and powerful superpredators, so that's not very surprising.
well, most cops nowadays wear a full tactical vest. of course they shrug off .22.
Depends on which of my settings:
>donut steel setting where dragons are powerful but not Demi-gods.
You basically need an anti-material rifle to hurt them. And I mean hurt, doesn’t necessarily mean a kill. If you dropped one into our world there’d be plenty of things that could kill them, mostly tank cannons, etc. the issue is that in addition to their toughness they’re quicker and dodgey as hell on top of it and not actually that big a target (think horse sized). I’d say best baseline for actually killing them with modern tech is A-10 thunderbolt II.
>My recent campaign setting where dragons ARE/WERE a race of Demi-gods
It’s basically throwing down with Omni-Man with bullshit magic. Hope you have a lot of nukes and orbital lasers.
>Horse sized
You'd kill that with a 5.56 no matter
>A-10
The A-10 isn't good at doing it's only job
don't frick around with a dragon, hit it with 120mm APFSDS
Neither of those calibers can reliably (key word - reliably) kill a fricking wolf, not to mention a big cat. And you ask if something in size of a small house would react to a pistol round. Mass to mass comparison alone, you dense frick
That's bullshit, I killed a mountain lion with my .45 aero survival and that thing was way bigger than a wolf
Mountain lions aren't big cats despite being physically large cats
Big cats are the pantheras, i.e. lions, tigers (and ligers by extension), jaguars, leopards and snow leopards
Ok, and that has frick all to do with anything mentioned prior.
What were we talking about
Yeah? Well, I used to bullseye womp rats in my T-16 back home.
An Abrams can accurately swivel its main gun, draw a bead on an airborne target, and fire with basically 100% accuracy, all in less than a quarter of a second.
?t=146
A dragon stands no chance.
Depends on the setting.
it's really hard to discuss this without anything to ground it in, because I don't think any of us here really agrees on the specifics of the dragon we're shooting at. Some settings have dragons the size of mountains, no gun in the world is gonna hurt that. And in some others settings, the weapon you use matters little, it's about the heroism in your soul or whatever.
The best answer is probably just to pick which caliber you want and be consistent about it.
Anything .308 or bigger. With steel like scales you should do what is done irl and get something moving really fast. A 220 swift broadside would crack through the scales no problem but may not cause enough damage to the internals. In this case there’s a point where where you hit is more important than what you shoot.
>9mm
maybe if your dragon's scales are made of wet paper
Dragons are just bigger, meaner alligators with wings, so look into alligator hunting and you'll find your answer.
>What caliber of gun do you need to pierce a dragon's scales? .22? 9mm? .45?
I'm just here to say "depends on so many variables that it renders your question moot, anon."
Well.
Scales are scales, dragons dont min-max like birds do irl so their bones must be light while being stronger, that doesnt mean that outright the bones are significantly stronger than other animals, just that they are exceptionally strong for their weight. We can therefore assume that dragon bones are as strong as a large terrestrial mammal or archeosaur.
In lizards and snakes the scales tend to be made of keratin for the epidermis, some have bony plates beneath called osteoderms which support the keratin. We will assume a dragon has a similar arrangement, so there is a keratin surface with a bone backing. The scales seem to generally be overlapping like with snakes and lizards rather than segmented like with crocodiles.
For thickness.
Skin layer thickness is proportional to body mass.
An alligator's skin is 1/4/-1/2 inch thick on average with an average weight of 250kg, the heaviest alligator recorded was 907kg. Larger animals such as elephants have skin up to 1.5 inches thick but usually less than an inch, rhinoceri and hippos have 2 inch thick skin. Elephants can be up to 7 tonnes and 4 metres tall. This might present a problem as dragon's mass would have to be low in order to fly, its unlikely to be more than 7 tonnes, however we will just assume that its skin is especially thick due to its sheer size, need for protection and a higher blood pressure, but its going to be hard to justify it being thicker than that of an elephant at 1 1/2 inches.
The largest flying animal known is quetzalocatlus, which looks fricking moronic but had a 12 metre wingspan and weighed somewhere around 200kg. This gives an idea of how little a dragon needs to weigh in order to fly. The average weight of the dragon is not known, thick scaly skin is only possible if its bones are especially light and strong for their weight, however the keratin is a different matter entirely.
Lets say the dragon has a wingspan of 20 metres. 200/12=16.66. 20x16.66=333.33kg. (cont)
(cont). This is horrible maths but gives a rough estimate. Quetzal were thin, had four limbs, a very long and thin neck and a short tail while dragons are stockier, have six limbs, large and thick necks and long and thick tails, so a dragon is going to weigh much more than a scaled up Quetzal. Indeed a dragon looks a lot like an alligator or crocodile, especially in its tail length and stockiness, the largest crocodile was about 1 tonne and >6 metres long. A dragon with a wingspan of 20 metres would have a tail of at least 10 metres and an overall length of around 20 metres, judging by normal works of art, so it ought to be around 3,300kg. This would be extremely heavy for a flying animal, especially when you compare it to something like a quetzal which would be around 330, but we will say that its significantly slimmer than the fat fricks that mature alligators/crocodiles are, and its got stronger and lighter bones allowing more muscle and having a larger wing surface area, as the Quetzal's was rather thin and not a strong chiroptean wing like a dragons is depicted to be, although the mass of the wings themselves needs to be considered, which leaves us still around 3000-3,300kg. While probably too heavy for extended flight, this is still light compared to a large terrestrial animal and so its skin is likely to be closer to an alligator in thickness (1/2 inch) compared to mammalian megafauna (1-2 inches). Due to its size, lets be generous and say its 1 inch.
So we have 1 inch inch skin, which is part dermis, part osteoderm, and part keratin/epidermis. Ostoederms tend to be very thick so lets say that the osteoderms are around 3/4 inch, while the rest is made up of keratin and normal skin.
The bone is most significant, however bone density varies by animal, we have magic dragon bones which are very dense and very light. Its hard to find ballistics data for bones (cont)
If dragon bones are low density then even 3/4 inch (19mm) of bone osteoderm will be penetrated by most rifle and intermediate rounds but may stop some pistol rounds. If they are of a moderate density then they might stop most pistol rounds but would still struggle to stop rifle and intermadiate rounds, although at long range these may bounce off. However as they are high density and magically light, theres no ballistic scale to use and absolutely nothing to compare them to. I'm going to bullshit and say its equivalent to carbon steel. The hypothetical 20m wingspan dragon weighs about the same as a griffon spitfire, which had an 11m wingspan, so this is unlikely, but its magic dragon bone.
3/4inch (19mm) steel, would reliaby stop most rifle calibres up to and including .50 ball, but would be penetrated by .50 AP, although at range (>200m) and an angle it may bounce these, especially when the keratin and rest of the skin is taken into consideration and the scales are always likely to present an angle as the dragon is not a square.
So you need .50 AP to kill a magical dragon, a physically constrained dragon would likely have keratin scales only, weigh 330kg and you could kill it with a 9mm.
Penetration is only part of the equation the other part is reaching vital organs through the creatures muscle mass which can quickly become a problem at larger scales. While .50 BMG would be effective in volume you would likely want to move into heavier stopping rifle cartridges
all this, and you left out the "dragons are fricking magic"
Dragons could hypothetically exist and would obey the normal laws of nature, the only magical component needed is a uniquely lightweight yet strong bone which would let them be large and stocky with bony scales and yet still capable of flight. Without that a dragon is unlikely to have heavy bone scales and is more likely to have keratin scales and/or feathers, or look bat-like, like the fell-beasts from LOTR.
Allowing for the magic lightweight bone, you can estimate how thick the scales ought to be and how much protection that thickness should offer. Bird bones are actually denser than other animals and weigh the same proportion as other animals of the same overall mass, they are simply larger and stronger.
.50 BMG
You aren't slaying a dragon with those tiny bullets
>What caliber of gun do you need to pierce a dragon's scales?
Literally and unironically anything can pierce a dragon on account of dragons being huge fricking jobbers who will be unbeatable in one instant only to lose to whatever the plot demands no matter how stupid it may be.
If you assume dragon scales are roughly like rocks, you need at least a rifle caliber to effectively pierce dragon scales. Pistol calibers will damage the scales, maybe even pierce but they'll lose most of their energy.
you don't want to try and shoot through a dragon's scales individually
you want to put holes in its wings and fire as much ordinance as you can right into its mouth - even a good heavy shotgun will manage this if you're lucky or good
now, you CAN take it down with heavy calibre AP ammo, but you're going to be at it forever and it's going to be fighting back the whole time - unless you've got a big bunch of lads, in which case you can all load up with AP and unload on it at once
taking out its eyes is also a possible strategy, but it's harder than you'd think and you're not likely to get it in the brain even if you get it in the eye - best to do this from extreme range before the main engagement if you really need to
Depends on the origin of the Dragon and so forth I'd say.
If the dragon requires a magical weapon to hurt it... well that's a horse of a different color. If that's the case, then the caliber won't matter at all. If the dragon is immune to conventional weapons, then unenchanted projectiles are gonna bounce right off or will hit and just either pass through doing no damage, or will flatten on the skin and plop. If it's not immune to conventional weapons, then I'd say nothing under .3006 would likely be able to penetrate a dragon's scales. They're supposed to be extremely strong, flexible, and resistant to projectiles. So all handgun's would likely be out right there. You'd need something with a lot of propellent to get the bullet up to speed that it could penetrate. I'd also suggest that a lead core is going to be unsuitable at any range, including any jacketed. You'd need a solid core perpetrator round. Something with a steel or tungsten core would be more sensible.
not perpetrator ... should be Armor penetrating not sure how autocorrect got Perpetrator out of that.
9mm
Its so huge and deadly you can blow a Dragons lungs clear out it body!
10mm
10mm can do anything
There are 4 classes of body armor, with class 3 and 4 being mostly thick armor plates. Those have caliber rating.
But let me say one thing:
> None of the calibers you mentionned are worth shit to pierce armor.
If you want to pierce armor, you need higher velocity. More powder, less bullet. For example, check the difference in weight between a 9mm x19 parabellum cartridge (mostly a pistol /SMG round) and a 5.56 mm NATO rifle cartridge.
> The exact same
And you get WILDLY different results. 5.56 is better penetration, better accuracy at range, better velocity, and MUCH harder on your ears. It is also larger.
> Because gunpowder is lighter than lead.
So, to answer your question, probably the MP7 (7mm, special design by H&K to use by non-combat millitary against armored paratroopers) as well as the calibers against which armor grade 3 is designed, grade 4 if your dragons are especially tough, would do the trick.
...
> Ironically, the most realistic game when it comes to bullet wounds, is goddamned Shadowrun. And they just use nukes on dragons. Just sayin'.
Start with 50.cal and go down from there.
any caliber assuming its enchanted to deal magical damage otherwise the bullet, no matter how large, will just plink harmlessly off the dragons 'mundane-damage-immunity' scales
No they won't because the DM will houserule that armor-piercing guns ignore a set amount of damage immunity.
unfortunately the DM and I are sex friends and I convinced her to revoke that houserule after a few rounds of wall-slamming sex last night
If it's really young, a heavy hunting rifle round like 300 win-mag would do the trick, but for most dragons you'll need a proper anti-materiel round like AP 50 BMG. If it's a really big fricker, or one of the ones with lots of stone in their scales, you'll probably want something like an HE 20 mm gun at least, although obviously that's not man portable.
The dragon casts protection from missiles, dumb martial Black person.
A fictional creature's defenses are however powerful the author decides they are. The question has no answer. You WILL stop posting low quality threads or face real life consequences. Your IP is visible to everyone in the thread, by the way.