Printable Version of Topic
Click here to view this topic in its original format
Dumpshock Forums _ Shadowrun _ Fletchette Ammo Question
Posted by: Ed_209a Aug 17 2003, 02:53 AM
There's one thing about fletchette ammo that confuses me.
When you use Fletchette ammo against an unarmored target, you bump the damage up one level. That is clear.
"For the target's armor rating, use either double it's impact armor rating, or it's normal ballistic rating, whichever is higher
Could someone explain why that is a disadvantage?
Unless the rules are wrong in my BBB, you are still keeping the +1 damage level, and the target is only increasing their effective armor by a point or so.
Did they mean to drop the damage level, or double both ballistic and impact for resisting fletchettes?
Posted by: Clipwing Aug 17 2003, 03:12 AM
The way I read it, flechette rounds only increase their damage level against unarmored targets:
SR3, p. 116: "Against unarmored targets, flechette rounds increase their damage codes by one level. . . Against armored targets . . . "
I think you're just thinking that rule should apply for both, whereas it actually should only apply for the unarmored targets. The armored targets get the benefit of increased armor if double their impact armor is greater than their ballistic. Now, if it's not, the whole thing's a wash, there's no particular advantage or disadvantage to using flechette.
Posted by: Kagetenshi Aug 17 2003, 04:19 AM
I think you're supposed to not stage up for armored targets, which is how most of my GMs have treated it (and the way I treat it when I GM; "most" of my GMs is all two of them at this point); otherwise, there's not much point beyond cost to using anything but flechette ammo. After all, even at a power of 2 that's another two body dice the opponent has to have to be able to stage.
~J
Posted by: Glyph Aug 17 2003, 06:36 AM
Flechette ammunition only stages up its damage level against unarmored targets. The rules are very explicit about this. Even dermal armor prevents it from staging up a damage level. Against armored targets, it uses its normal damage level, and the target uses either ballistic or double impact armor to resist it. For "normal" armor, this is not much difference, but there are many ways to have a high impact armor. The armor spell, which provides both impact and ballistic armor, effectively doubles its rating against flechette ammo. The cybernetic combination of dermal sheath and bone lacing, or the adept power of mystic armor, or higher-end armor such as security armor, can all seriously reduce the power of flechettes.
Posted by: Switchblade Aug 17 2003, 04:50 PM
So an attack with a slivergun against an unarmored target would be 9S, and an attack against a target wearing 4/2 points of armor would be 5M; if there's still any question.
It's really not too much of a huge disadvantage. Most people don't like it though because... how often does a shadowrunner get into combat with some one in no armor? Next to never.
Posted by: Talondel Aug 17 2003, 06:46 PM
In other words, flechette ammo is fantastic for hosing down crowds in an old folk's home or library something, but not as good as regular ammo for shooting anyone else (armored targets).
The "double impact or normal ballistic" doesn't often work out to a huge difference in their final soak TN, but in games where layering armor happens more often than not (and everyone waddles around in form fit 4, overalls, a vest, an armored jacket, a shield, and a helmet)...well, they just sorta bounce off. So, naturally, if you ask anyone who plays in that sort of game, they'll tell you flechette ammo sucks.
Posted by: Ed_209a Aug 17 2003, 06:58 PM
OK, that makes sense. My BBB wasn't perfectly clear on the topic. Maybe a later printing was more clear.
Posted by: Glyph Aug 17 2003, 11:14 PM
The thing to remember, though, is that unless someone has hardened armor, the TN for resisting damage can't go below 2. And ranged combat works on net successes, so a shooter who spends a lot of Combat Pool can, under ideal conditions, bring someone down with low-powered ammo. In other words, if they get 10 successes, the other person, even if they roll 10 successes themselves, will still wind up taking the base damage.
That said, most runners would still not be likely to bother with flechette ammo, except that the Ares Viper uses that ammo. The Ares Viper is a great "stealth" gun, because it has 6 Concealability and a relatively low weight, even though it carries a 30-round clip, has an integral silencer, and can shoot bursts. So will you take an Ares Viper to that corporate party, or a light pistol with the same Concealability, no silencer, less rounds, and far less damaging capability?
Yay! The AVS has been re-introduced to the forums! 
Posted by: Switchblade Aug 18 2003, 12:42 AM
Boo! The AVS has been re-introduced to the forums! 
Some one said it's good for hosing. It's not. Flechettes do not spread like a shotgun. It's still just a one target for one shot firearm. Now the Enfield AS-7 with 50 round drum, now *there's* a gun for hosings.
Posted by: TinkerGnome Aug 18 2003, 02:39 AM
The best use for the flechette rules is as it applies to shotgun ammo since it's hard to dodge. Flechette ammo itself is good in a few situations where armor is impractical for your foes (social situations, for instance) or they simply don't wear it.
Posted by: Talondel Aug 18 2003, 03:01 PM
| QUOTE (Switchblade) |
Some one said it's good for hosing. It's not. |
I said it was good for hosing down crowds at old folks' homes, yeah.
And I'm standing by it.
You pop a 60 round flechette clip into an Ares Hvar, and you'll be opening up spots at Whispering Groves retirement center faster than dumping gamma-anthrax in their water supply.
Against unarmored opponents, suppressive fire (as per the CC) and a crate of flechette ammo is hard to beat. Fire 18 rounds per complex action into the rec hall, spread it out for about a six meter area, and watch the shuffleboard area clear out faster than the nurse with the rubber gloves. 3 shots per meter means every decrepit old bag of bones in that six meter spread needs to get 3 successes on a Combat Pool test (good luck, gramma, hope that plastic hip doesn't slow ya down!) or they get hit. When they do get hit, you're making a TN 6 attack roll (period/paragraph, recoil doesn't do diddly squat during suppression, remember?) and their base damage taken is 6S. Base damage taken, for everyone in that six meter area. I double dog dare you to find a retirement home community that wouldn't get the cafeteria cleaned out by about six seconds (two combat rounds) of that sort of fire.
All the jell-0 you want, man. It's yours for the taking.
Now, I'm not saying flechette ammo is the only thing good for hosing, and I'm not saying it'll do much (using suppressive fire and flechettes) against armored opponents. But if all you want to do is make sure there's a room open for your dear old ma when she finally makes the decision to move out of your old house and into assisted living, well, it's hard to beat.
Posted by: Laughlyn Aug 18 2003, 10:58 PM
As a house rule I implement, there are more than just two armor levels. Those being "no armor" and "armored". So if a guy is in a leather jacket or just a motorcycle helmet, he can still be screwed up by a flechette round, hollow point and or an anti personnel grenade.
Flechette Damage Rules vs armor
1. Flechette Damage is treated normally for unarmored targets.
2. Flechette Damage is not automatically staged up against people with dermal plating dermal sheathing, etc).
3. Flechette Damage against armor is not staged up if the power of the attack is reduced 50% or more.
Ex 1: A heavy pistol (9M) firing flechette ammo against a target with 5 points of ballistic armor or 3 points of impact armor would not be staged up. If the target had 4 points of ballistic or 2 points of impact, the damage would be staged up as per the rules.
Ex 2: An SMG firing a 3 round burst (say 10S base) of flechette ammo against a target wearing 5 points of ballistic armor or 3 points of impact armor would not be staged up. If the target had 4 points of ballistic or 2 points of impact, the damage would be staged up as per the rules.
Posted by: Lilt Aug 18 2003, 11:39 PM
| QUOTE (Laughlyn) |
| As a house rule I implement, there are more than just two armor levels. Those being "no armor" and "armored". So if a guy is in a leather jacket or just a motorcycle helmet, he can still be screwed up by a flechette round, hollow point and or an anti personnel grenade. Flechette Damage Rules vs armor 1. Flechette Damage is treated normally for unarmored targets. 2. Flechette Damage is not automatically staged up against people with dermal plating dermal sheathing, etc). 3. Flechette Damage against armor is not staged up if the power of the attack is reduced 50% or more. |
| QUOTE |
| Ex 2: An SMG firing a 3 round burst (say 10S base) of flechette ammo against a target wearing 5 points of ballistic armor or 3 points of impact armor would not be staged up. If the target had 4 points of ballistic or 2 points of impact, the damage would be staged up as per the rules. |
Any chance of invoking Raygun to comment on this topic? I'm going to check what his site says about flechette ammo now anyway.
[edit]Heh. Raygun's site says nothing about staging damage up/down whatsoever for flechette ammunition. Can anyone point me to a section of his site about the rules for various round types available in the different calibers? I just can't find the section I'm looking for anywhere[/edit]
Posted by: Laughlyn Aug 19 2003, 04:56 AM
The armored and unarmored I was refering to is the "Shadowrun" armor system.
I added the burst fire rule because most people wearing armor, aren't fully covered in armor. Most armored people are wearing an armored jacket, vest with plates, etc. Anyone pushing past 6/4 armor are going to resist flechette rounds pretty easily. With a burst means a bigger shot pattern. Most weapons don't fire a simple burst that stays in one small area, it spreads.
Posted by: Kagetenshi Aug 19 2003, 05:29 AM
Well, yes. If the bullets all hit in the same spot, in quick succession, I'd think that the additional tissue damage would be tiny.
~J
Posted by: Arethusa Aug 19 2003, 05:58 AM
Honestly, there's no point in waiting for a Raygun response to this one as there is absolutely no parallel between real life flechettes and their Shadowrun incarnation. If Shadowrun flechettes were even close, they'd be getting double range tables, a damage code reduction, and increased power. Real flechettes do a great job of sailing straight through armor; problem is, they do a great job of sailing straight through people, too, which leaves them with relatively little stopping power (but you'll die in a few days from a punctured liver!). As it stands, SR flechettes have more in common with dum-dum/frangible rounds or that flak cannon from Unreal Tournament than they do with anything real.
Posted by: Kurukami Aug 19 2003, 06:30 AM
| QUOTE (TinkerGnome) |
| The best use for the flechette rules is as it applies to shotgun ammo since it's hard to dodge. Flechette ammo itself is good in a few situations where armor is impractical for your foes (social situations, for instance) or they simply don't wear it. |
And speaking of shotguns, why does "shot" ammo (which might arguably be considered "flechette") cost five times as much as slug ammo? I know we're dealing with an imaginary universe here, but the last time I checked "shot" shotgun shells weren't $10 apiece.
Posted by: Arethusa Aug 19 2003, 06:39 AM
| QUOTE (Kurukami) | ||
And speaking of shotguns, why does "shot" ammo (which might arguably be considered "flechette") cost five times as much as slug ammo? I know we're dealing with an imaginary universe here, but the last time I checked "shot" shotgun shells weren't $10 apiece. |
Because Mulvihill wrote the firearms section on a two year bender.
Posted by: Glyph Aug 19 2003, 06:44 AM
Personally, I have always assumed that both shot and slug rounds were considered "regular" ammunition.
Posted by: Arethusa Aug 19 2003, 06:47 AM
I was under the impression that shot rounds were handled as flechette rounds for numbers purposes?
Posted by: Switchblade Aug 19 2003, 08:51 PM
I pity the character that has to worry about the extra money for a few rounds.
Flechette rules only apply to shotguns when determining damage. Says so in the book. Apply "regular ammo" for purchasing shotgun shells.
Posted by: Laughlyn Aug 19 2003, 09:43 PM
They used to have "real life" flechette in the game. I think it was called needle ammo and it was in the Neo Anarchist Guide to Real Life. Basically it ignored 3 points of ballistic and was stopped cold by 4 or more points of ballistic armor. If I remember correctly, it used the old armor system so you might figure it would ignore a bit more armor under the newer one (non first edition).
Shot and slug are both regular ammo in the way of costs. God knows why though, I pay less for 5.56mm than I do for buckshot or slug for my 12ga. Give or take it's around $11 for 20 5.56mm (Rem .223), solid 2 3/4 12ga slugs are $9 for 5, 2 3/4 12ga buckshot is $3 for 5 shots, and 3in 12ga buckshot is $4 for 5. But that's the Shadowrun ammo system for you. I won't go into using buckshot with a rifled barrel and accuracy issues that causes.
Posted by: Arethusa Aug 19 2003, 10:47 PM
Assuming Shadowrun makes any sense at all with its shotguns, the slugs are rifled, allowing them to be fired through the smoothbore necessary for shot.
Posted by: Austere Emancipator Aug 19 2003, 11:48 PM
| QUOTE (Arethusa) |
| Assuming Shadowrun makes any sense at all with its shotguns [...] |
That's one hell of an assumption!
Search for "flechette penetration" or "flechette" with the name Raygun on the Old Forums if you want a few dozen extra reasons why SR flechette doesn't make sense.
Use Ammunition By Caliber -rules or similar, and you can also make ammunition prices per caliber and round type. Making up extra numbers is always fun.
Posted by: Laughlyn Aug 20 2003, 10:54 PM
Arethusa
Slugs fired through a rifled barrel (both regular slugs and sabot) are similar in action to what Shadowrun uses for ranges. Smooth bore shotguns firing a rifled slug suck in a big way. The accuracy just isn't there. You go from firing in 2.5in pattern (5 shots in rifled barrel) to a 3in pattern at 50yds with rapidly growing pattern.
So it's pretty much one or the other. Granted you could use a rifled barrel for short range shooting using shot (to include buckshot). But again that's short range, the action of the pellets spinning causes the pattern to open up way too much. Or a smooth bore to fire slugs at short range.
Posted by: Arethusa Aug 20 2003, 11:30 PM
I was under the impression that rifled slugs offered fairly decent accuracy and that a rifled slug gun pushed the shotgun platform well beyond its normal range?
Still, assuming a smoothbore shotgun firing slugs is high inaccurate (a situation I'd been led to believe only really happened with unrifled slugs): looking at this from the perspective of a combat shotgun carrying soldier, the versatility of being able to switch between shot and slugs— the latter of which not really seeing much use outside of breaching— is a lot more beneficial than the range offered by a rifled slug barrel. On top of that is the fact that a rifled barrel will be shredded by shot after a couple hundred rounds at best.
Of course, all this is kind of moot. Slugs in SR are the default ammo and shot's been thrown out. I'd say it's fair to assume that the slugs of 2060 have significantly improved rifling, allowing them to be effectively fired from a smoothbore with effective results.
Posted by: Laughlyn Aug 21 2003, 02:41 AM
Nope, refiled slugs in a smoothbore still suck. That's why they offer rifled barrels in shotguns. Second the cup for the shot does wonders for saving the rifling in the weapon.
I'm not going to make any excuses for morons who wrote up the gun system. It's not realisic, they didn't try hard enough, and they've make no attemp to fix it. The fact is shotgun make poor slug throwers compared to rifle. Use the shot gun for what it's supposed to be used for, close combat fire fights. The only reason people don't use buck shot in Shadowrun is because of those idiotic flechette damage rules. Yet another rule they pulled from their fifth point of contact.
Posted by: Cursedsoul Aug 21 2003, 06:14 AM
Wouldn't Fletchette ammo (Or Glazer, Or Mercury) make sense for called shots to say, the face or some other unarmored area?
I don't THINK the BBB says anything about negation of armor when calling a shot, but it makes perfect sense to me...
So take a 9M pistol loaded with fletchette. Against armor it sucks monkey nuts, but a called shot is different....
Most people aren't wearing helmets, so wouldn't you get the +1DL bonus?
So you get 9M +1DL Fletchette +1DL Called Shot = 9D attack, no armor
Assuming I'm wrong and the BBB second option for hitting sub-sections will negate armor not worn on the part in question...you still get a BASE of 9S, which is tough nuggets to resist without help.
Speaking of Fletchette, why bother with it when you can get, at half the price (at chargen anyways...) Mercury rounds which do the same thing but don't suck against barriers. Even if you aren't blowing up doors, you still get twice the amount of ammo for the same cost.
Posted by: Arethusa Aug 21 2003, 06:40 AM
The canon rules don't allow for negating armor with a called shot. As I believe has been previously stated before, the Awakening gave everyone an armored face.
Posted by: Cursedsoul Aug 21 2003, 08:29 AM
I have missed those topics obviously.
Oh well, yet another reason why the people who developed Shadowrun's rules need a swift kick in the face and why house rules just kick untolds amount of ass.
Posted by: motorfirebox Aug 21 2003, 08:58 AM
yeah, i mean, you're spinning it--centrifugal force + shot pattern = whiff!
if it's of any interest, the rules can be twisted so that called shots ignoring armor is an acceptable interpretation. as laughlyn argues, it weirds up the armor values, but the system is whacked either way; pick your poison.
Posted by: Arethusa Aug 21 2003, 09:40 AM
| QUOTE (Cursedsoul) |
| I have missed those topics obviously. Oh well, yet another reason why the people who developed Shadowrun's rules need a swift kick in the face and why house rules just kick untolds amount of ass. |
Preach, brother.
Posted by: Laughlyn Aug 21 2003, 02:00 PM
Cursed Soul
No actually a swift kick to the face can be done. You simply can't shoot around armor.
Not to defend the system in the game, but with a serious revamp of the weapon rules and armor system. Short of that, ignoring armor abusing the system that's in place.
Posted by: Game2BHappy Aug 21 2003, 02:20 PM
| QUOTE (Arethusa) |
| The canon rules don't allow for negating armor with a called shot. As I believe has been previously stated before, the Awakening gave everyone an armored face. |
Would those canon rules include pg. 106 of M&M under "Called Shots"?
Posted by: Laughlyn Aug 21 2003, 02:59 PM
For those of us who don't want to banter words back and forth. Or those people who mention rules pages, but don't give much else.
Ranged combat cannot ignore armor, even with a called shot.
For the purpose of delivering drugs only, ranged combat can deliver a drug dose that bypasses the targets armor.
Unarmed Combat can ignore armor, with a called shot.
Posted by: Fortune Aug 21 2003, 02:59 PM
| QUOTE (Game2BHappy) | ||
Would those canon rules include pg. 106 of M&M under "Called Shots"? |
As far as I know (no book access at the moment), those rules are for either Melee or Chemical attacks.
Posted by: Game2BHappy Aug 21 2003, 03:34 PM
| QUOTE (Laughlyn) |
| Ranged combat cannot ignore armor, even with a called shot. For the purpose of delivering drugs only, ranged combat can deliver a drug dose that bypasses the targets armor. Unarmed Combat can ignore armor, with a called shot. |
Please read the entire section to ensure that this is not taken too far out of context for your own use, but for our group it is clear enough for general use.
While the section is discussing chemical weapons such as the supersquirt or capsule rounds I don't think it is too much of a stretch to believe that what can be done with a capsule round can be done with a normal round. The section has a separated passage below that includes the following:
| QUOTE |
| Called Shots: A character can intentionally target a non-armored body part. A successful called shot nullifies any Impact armor worn." |
Posted by: Laughlyn Aug 21 2003, 03:48 PM
Whatever dude. The point is and always will be…how do you play your game? Hey if you to bust the combat system allow anyone to make a called shot with a ranged weapon to ignore armor, do it. I don't care. See how long it takes before the runners are covered head to toe in armor or they don’t want to play.
Besides which, stretching the imagination to include words that you want isn't what in the core rules. The rules allow you do a called shot to ignore armor for chemicals. Even if the round hits an unarmored area, you still apply armor. That's the whole point of an abstract combat system. This is not Cyberpunk 2020, Battle Lords of 23rd Century, Fringeworthy, Twilight 2000, etc.
Posted by: Laughlyn Aug 21 2003, 03:54 PM
Forgot something.
That portion of the rule you quoted, what context is it used in? Does it refer to melee combat, ranged combat (not), chemical weapons ranged combat, etc?
The more you elaborate, the more your point gets across. By making vague statements without context you simply don’t make a good point or a impression. It appears that you're intentionally trying to leave something out that doesn't support your cause.
Posted by: Game2BHappy Aug 21 2003, 04:03 PM
Here's another interesting aspect of the quote - I just skimmed the next line at first, but I'll put the full quote in to discuss it.
| QUOTE |
| "Called Shots: A character can intentionally target a non-armored body part. A successful called shot nullifies any Impact armor worn. If the weapon used also causes damage, the called shot modifier can either negate armor or stage the weapon's Damage level." |
Looking at the last line and applying it to normal rounds, if someone used the called shot to negate armor using a normal ranged weapon, they would be unable to apply successes to stage up the damage. Its possible this could cover some concerns about an armor-negating shot becoming too powerful.
Posted by: Fortune Aug 21 2003, 04:10 PM
| QUOTE |
| "Called Shots: A character can intentionally target a non-armored body part. A successful called shot nullifies any Impact armor worn. If the weapon used also causes damage, the called shot modifier can either negate armor or stage the weapon's Damage level." |
Note the use of the word Impact when describing the type of armor that is avoided. This rule clearly refers to chemical/drug attacks, not all called shots.
Posted by: Cochise Aug 21 2003, 04:23 PM
First: I'm no fan of the various inconsistant forms of armor negation possibilities (melee, chem tech rules and armor in cyberlimbs) within the otherwise abstract damage system of SR. It just f*cks up the system royally
Second:
| QUOTE (Game2BHappy) |
| Looking at the last line and applying it to normal rounds, if someone used the called shot to negate armor using a normal ranged weapon, they would be unable to apply successes to stage up the damage. Its possible this could cover some concerns about an armor-negating shot becoming too powerful. |
Let's just assume that this section from the chem tech rules would actually be applied to normal ranged combat and ballistic armor as well. Now the chem tech rules even allow armor negation in the section that's targeted. The same would be true for the standard ranged attack as well.
I guess from that point on the most common type of attack would be: Salvo to the head with Flechette rounds in a smart-II equipped weapon => Base TN of 4 (4-2 from smart + 2 for reduced TN-mod with smart-II for called shots) *getting 3 points of recoil comp isn't much of a problem* and damage of 9 to 12 D without armor (not counting exceeding successes) and that from heavy pistols, assault rifles and SMGs *provided the target has no dermal armor / Orthoskin, the latter still not granting any armor, since the rule allows to negate even that*...
I'd "love" to see the faces of my players once the npcs started to do the very same ...
Posted by: Austere Emancipator Aug 21 2003, 04:24 PM
I wonder, how many times has this exact same topic been discussed with the exact same quotes, the exact same words, per year at best? Apparently at least 3, but has that record been beaten in the Early Years, just after SR3 and M&M came out?
http://jive.dumpshock.com/default/thread.jsp?forum=1&thread=9385 is probably the latest with that quote from the old forums.
Posted by: Game2BHappy Aug 21 2003, 04:25 PM
| QUOTE (Fortune) |
| This rule clearly refers to chemical/drug attacks, not all called shots. |
Thats a good point. I agree that this was written to follow the section about attacks with chemical weapons or weapons coated with chemicals.
Let me use an example to demonstrate my opinion:
If I fire a heavy pistol capsule round with NarcoJet I am firing a 7M Stun weapon with a 6D chemical inside.
Under normal circumstances, I can choose to use my successes to stage the 7M Stun damage from the impact, or to increase the power of the NarcoJet (not both). Impact armor protects against both the damage from the capsule round hitting the target and the chemical inside.
If the capsule round was empty, I would just stage up the damage as normal and Impact armor would resist.
With an armor negating called shot on the Capsule Round/NarcoJet, the called shot "nullifies any Impact armor worn". "If the weapon used also causes damage [which this does] the called shot modifier can either negate armor or stage the weapon's Damage level."
Because of this, the NarcoJet damages the target without applying armor as does the 7M Capsule Round. The only difference is that successes cannot be applied to stage up the Damage level.
If I then empty the drug from the Capsule round, I should be able to make the same called shot to negate armor, but not stage up the Damage level.
[edit] changed last line for clarity [/edit]
Posted by: Laughlyn Aug 21 2003, 05:53 PM
Here's another interesting aspect of the quote - I just skimmed the next line at first, but I'll put the full quote in to discuss it.
| QUOTE |
| "Called Shots: A character can intentionally target a non-armored body part. A successful called shot nullifies any Impact armor worn. If the weapon used also causes damage, the called shot modifier can either negate armor or stage the weapon's Damage level." |
Looking at the last line and applying it to normal rounds, if someone used the called shot to negate armor using a normal ranged weapon, they would be unable to apply successes to stage up the damage. Its possible this could cover some concerns about an armor-negating shot becoming too powerful.
Dude what section is that under? Hmmm, I wager a guess that the section is referring to melee combat or chemical weapons. It's not refereeing to normal weapons. If we went around applying things out of context it's easy to see how you do, ie wrong. So you can't stage the damage up, big deal. That's still way overpowered.
Bubba runner is tired of having to deal with security goon note dying when shot, so he aims a burst from SGM as the back of the security goon's knee and puts 3 rounds into it.
Player of Bubba runner resist 10S no armor asshole.
So yea I can see that getting way out of hand. A burst from a shotgun doing 13D comes to mind.
Lastly the armor negation is for the drug, not the round.
Posted by: Talondel Aug 21 2003, 07:27 PM
Laughlyn, I love watching you "work."
No, really. I mean, who else can say "this isn't worth arguing over, play your game like you want to play your game. Oh, but if you don't play your game like I play mine, you're ruining it and you're wrong."
That's beautiful. For real. You're an artist.
Point being, people, this is a conversation that's happened a hundred times before, and will happen a hundred times again if we're dumb enough to let it. Some people like to house rule it so that you can bypass armor and shoot someone in the face, some people like to play by the letter of the rules and not let that happen.
Any chance we can leave it at that, and not resort to claiming one method is better than the other?
Posted by: Herald of Verjigorm Aug 21 2003, 07:32 PM
| QUOTE (Talondel) |
| Any chance we can leave it at that, and not resort to claiming one method is better than the other? |
No.
Posted by: Fortune Aug 21 2003, 07:44 PM
| QUOTE (Talondel) |
| Point being, people, this is a conversation that's happened a hundred times before, and will happen a hundred times again if we're dumb enough to let it. Some people like to house rule it so that you can bypass armor and shoot someone in the face, some people like to play by the letter of the rules and not let that happen. |
I'm all for people playing with their own house rules. The problem is when these same house rules are proclaimed to be canon.
Posted by: Cursedsoul Aug 21 2003, 09:08 PM
Sorry for causing all the ruckus guys. I didn't mean it. 
You guys are forgetting cover too.
Anyone standing in the middle of the street when guns are going off SHOULD be shot in the face.
Its always possible to simply add to the TN. Ideally you can take a heavy pistol, fire a called shot for 9S damage with a TN of 3, assuming SL2 and one simple action of aiming.
That could get out of hand...but whose to say you can't focus entirely on the subject at hand? Facing down some go-gangers would be rather distracting, with them swing chains/chairs/people, whooping and holloring. Not to mention whatever the hell else is going on.
Afraid your players will abuse armor negation? Simply counter that with some ingenuity.
And like someone mentioned (forgive me, I forget who) the PCs wont like it when it happens to them...so they'll be damned tentative about combat in situations where this is likely.
Posted by: Laughlyn Aug 21 2003, 09:18 PM
Talondel
I see you're still reading things that you want to and ignoring the rest. As I posted, "For those of us who don't want to banter words back and forth. Or those people who mention rules pages, but don't give much else." Then I gave the rules. Then the person in question continues to go on about how bypassing armor is cannon. So at the point I don't care how he plays his games. But when he tries to play his interpretation of why called shots are cannon, at that point I have to call "bullshit" and let the person know. At no point did he say that because of how he read the rules he'd make a house rule.
Posted by: Cain Aug 21 2003, 10:59 PM
You guys seemed to have missed Cochise's point. Let's say the target is a guy with Orthoskin 3 and Titanium Bone Lacing. Somehow, for being shot in the head, he gets *none* of that armor protection, wheras if he were shot in normal combat, and the successes meant the shot went to the head, he'd get all of it.
Posted by: Arethusa Aug 22 2003, 05:54 AM
I think any GM with any sense would apply the orthoskin and titanium lacing benefits to a shot anywhere on the body. If a called shot negates armor, it should negate the armor that isn't present— not all of it for no good reason.
Posted by: Laughlyn Aug 22 2003, 02:45 PM
I can't think of a good reason why bonelacing would help stop a chemical attack. Perhaps the burst to the head that was mentioned hit the guy in the mouth? I also can't see bypassing orthoskin or dermal sheathing. It just doesn't pass the common sense test.
The easiest shot to get around armor is a groin shot. No matter how tough your skin or bones are, that doesn't help your 'package' out in the slightest.
Posted by: Talondel Aug 22 2003, 04:43 PM
Of course, the TN mod for a called shot like that would vary wildly. Some people have way smaller dicks than others.
Posted by: Arethusa Aug 22 2003, 05:05 PM
Just to clarify, I'm not talking about a chemical attack. Sorry; was pretty tired when I posted that.
(also, groin shot modifiers at any sort of range would most likely start at +8 and move from there)
Powered by Invision Power Board (http://www.invisionboard.com)
© Invision Power Services (http://www.invisionpower.com)