Not the stub revolvers and autoguns, presumably.
Mhm, that may depend on the calibre and kinetic force of the round.
Not to mention the exact ammunition type. Manstopper rounds seem to be somewhat more common in 40k than they are "now".
There is the idea that 5.56mm FMJ was designed for incapacitation rather than kill because tying up an enemy's medevac capabilities directly hurts their ability as an army...
I have heard that as well.
Actually (as far as I know, I am not a gun-history person) a shot from a musket was considerably more lethal than modern assault-rifle ammo (contra the 40KRPG ). The advantage of modern firearms is much higher rate of fire and accuracy and range, not to mention reload time, not killing power. I'm... actually relatively sure that an arrow is more lethal than a modern bullet, especially when you pull it out again (?). Modern small arms are better for different reasons.I think,
Anyway I don't think the assorted stub weapons are meant to differ appreciably from "generic" early-21st-century equivalents.
If you want to make bolt weapons more dangerous (something I don't think they need frankly -- you can't kill somebody in one shot with them without RF but few people are going to survive two), just increase their damage.
As to the OP, I'm kind of curious how his characters are being bullet sponges. The only way to do that in DH is to have good TB + flak armour or carapace armour, both of which are SUPPOSED to soak up damage from small-arms fire. Assuming he means literal bullets, SP weapons, which do somewhere between 1d10+2 to 1d10+4., usually with Pen 0.
I will be the first to agree that the DH bolter pre-errata (before it was given Tearing) and the plasma gun in all iterations in DH is absurd*, but those aren't bullets.
*a BC/OW plasma gun is scary however. Not much is going to live through a volley of that given halfway-average dice rolls.
Edited by bogi_khaosa, 09 December 2013 - 12:13 AM.