[Spooky]

Even for shooting someone, it doesn't make a whole lot of sense. I simply cannot imagine how shooting someone could result in stun damage.

Even when the character uses gel rounds or other incapacitating rounds? That are specifically designed for stun damage? I agree that using lethal rounds means no stun capability, that's why stun rounds were designed. And this is just about firearms, not melee weapons. Just wanted that clear.

[Namikaze]

Even for shooting someone, it doesn't make a whole lot of sense. I simply cannot imagine how shooting someone could result in stun damage.

Even when the character uses gel rounds or other incapacitating rounds? That are specifically designed for stun damage? I agree that using lethal rounds means no stun capability, that's why stun rounds were designed. And this is just about firearms, not melee weapons. Just wanted that clear.

What Adder means is that when you use a normal bullet against a normal person, it will shred them.  This type of thing makes it hard to picture using regular bullets to intentionally deal stun damage.  The rules for splitting the damage seem like an attempt to make the armor take the brunt of the bullet's force, and the rules for splitting the damage start to fall apart with melee weapons.  Adder has suggested some house rules to make using bullets for stun damage a little more logical, while keeping melee weapons in mind as well.

[Adder]

Yep, thanks for clarifying Namikaze before I could get to this. In the context of the discussion, I was referring only to regular, lethal bullets. I apologize if it sounded like I was referring to all projectiles.