I see. Do you like rubber ducking?
This upsets me, but I have to upvote it because that's exactly the point.
Lighter than what?
"Are you solution minded or still in the feelings phase?"
Interesting. How is that?
Let's say an average Scottish military member is a level 2 warrior with +1 in each physical ability score, Weapon Focus, 2 ranks in Perception, and leather armor.
13 HP, 13 AC, +3 to hit, 1d10 damage, +5 Perception.
50% chance to hit a cat, same 95% kill. Only now the cat has to make 14 hits, and each is only a 60% chance to hit. The cat's advantage is still 3 attacks per round.
I'm running a quick Python script to simulate this, rolling proper damage. Survey says a cat has ~1.3% chance to kill a soldier. Since all the cat's damage output is nonlethal, we can assume it heals between fights. Bump that down to 1.2% after factoring in a 10% chance that the soldier sees the cat coming and shoots it from afar.
That means an average soldier should be able to kill ~83 cats before going down. Scotland doesn't stand a chance.
If I had the time, I'd use Pathfinder stats to run a full simulation. What I know is that in Pathfinder, a commoner has 3 HP and can thus survive 1 round (albeit staggered,) and a rifle wielded by a commoner has a 35% chance to kill ~95% of a cat on average (1d10 damage vs 3 HP.) Also cats have +14 Stealth and I assume they wouldn't be charging through an open field, so a commoner has ~10% chance to notice one (nat 1 or nat 20 required.)
This is assuming those are all housecats.
Well, y'know, a housecat can kill a level 1 commoner.
Cats don't like to get wet.
Except for jaguars. Jaguars swim.
It took me too long to notice. I thought the joke was that it was an unpopular game or something.
You meant Sandy, not Sally, right?
And how does that make you feel?