Printable Version of Topic

Click here to view this topic in its original format

Dumpshock Forums _ Shadowrun _ Suppressive Fire question

Posted by: jklst14 Apr 16 2006, 11:48 PM

Edit: I read it some more and I think I get. I'd erase this post but it won't let me. Thanks

Posted by: Hunga Apr 21 2006, 02:04 PM

Well, too bad you erased your post before I got to read it, because I have a suppressive fire question. This is just to show people that I did try to search

Say I want to use suppressive firing on two enemies. One has higher (A) initiative than me and the other lower (B). Say A has already spent his action for this phase and does have a free action left. Now it's my turn and I fire at both of them. My understanding is that A can spend his left over free action to drop prone, thus does not need to roll to avoid the suppressive fire. B on the other hand, cannot spend a free action to do so since it's not yet his turn so he has to roll Reaction + Edge to see if he's hit. Now on B's turn, if he doesn't drop prone or take cover but decides to just move away from the suppressive fire, then he's at risk again from the flying lead. In other words, he could potentially need to roll twice. Is this correct?

Posted by: mdynna Apr 21 2006, 02:58 PM

Free Actions can be taken at any time in the Initiative sequence. Even when its not your turn. You only get one of them for every IP you have, however.

Posted by: UndeadPoet Apr 21 2006, 03:10 PM

Person A can not actually use his action to fall prone and avoid your fire. If he wants to use his remaining free action, he has to announce that the moment you want to act. But he does not get to know what you are going to do, so he can not react to your action. If he is a mage with mindprobe on you, yes, he could fall prone to avoid your fire, since he knew you would attack this way.
If he is not a mage, he has to wait with falling prone until you are finished with your action and roll his defense roll, since he maybe gets hit.
The exactly same goes for B. He could fall prone if he liked(as mdynna said, free action available even before his initiative phase), but only before you announce your suppressive fire attempt.
Both roll their defense rolls and maybe get damage.
If they "decide to just move away from the suppressive fire" on their next action, they do not have to roll a defense roll this time. That's described on page 144.

Posted by: Hunga Apr 21 2006, 03:23 PM

(pg. 135 - second paragraph)
"A character may take a Free Action during his own Action
Phase or at some later point in the Initiative Pass. A character
may not take a Free Action prior to his first Action Phase in the
Initiative Pass."

That's why I thought A would be able to drop prone, but not B.

UndeadPoet, I don't think that's correct. I declare my action to do suppressive fire on A and B, and A may declare his free action at this point.

(p. 132 second paragraph under 3.A. Declare Actions)
"Likewise, any character who has already acted in the Combat Turn
prior to this Action Phase and still has his Free Action left may declare it at this point if he chooses."

Posted by: UndeadPoet Apr 21 2006, 03:46 PM

Okay, then there is a special ruling about using free actions... All other actions, when delayed, have to be declared before the person at whose initiative you wish to act declares his.
In this case, A and B both can fall prone and do not get any damage. Looks like person C who use suppressive fire has fucked up, because he has just emptied his weapon by 20 shells and did not hit anything. The opponents fall prone and shoot him dead right away.

Posted by: Aaron Apr 21 2006, 03:51 PM

QUOTE (UndeadPoet @ Apr 21 2006, 10:46 AM)

That's not the point of suppressive fire. In fact, if both of his or her opponents drop to the ground, then the goal of suppressive fire is met: the opponents have been suppressed (pinned down).

Consider the following scenario: a shadowrunning team is stuck with a sec squad between them and their extraction route. The rigger brings a drone (or three) around and opens up with suppressive fire on the area the security grunts are in. The grunts duck and cover, the team makes it to their extraction, the drones fly away. Everybody wins but the target (the grunts win because they get to go home to their families, which was their goal to begin with).

If that's not what you want to happen, suppressive fire may not be your best option.

Posted by: Hunga Apr 21 2006, 04:21 PM

I guess I should qualify my scenario. Let's say that I'm firing suppressively in the first action phase of the first combat turn. That means that person B cannot use his free action yet. So in this case, he is at risk of getting hit.

Aaron, you're right. That is the goal of suppressive fire, but I wouldn't be disappointed if I could nail a couple of people who are slow acting

Posted by: UndeadPoet Apr 21 2006, 04:54 PM

@Aaron: You missed the fact that the opponents still have actions besides their free one they need to let themselves fall to the ground. Still a complex one or two simple actions remaining.
Meaning, they are still able to harm the team.

QUOTE (Aaron)

If that's not what you want to happen, suppressive fire may not be your best option.

Using my whole phase to hurl twenty bullets at my opponents which, if clever, can avoid all of them. Then it's their turn, and they will not do the same favor I did for them.
I am a bit unexperienced with combat in SR4 because of my face-shaman who does not fight very often, but as far as I understand the only use of suppressive fire is for some heroic suicidal action.
"I will hold them off, get out of here!" *suppressive fire*
Or for a cool atmosphere when someone uses it to scare people away.

@Hunga: Before you convinced me that you can use free actions as you please, I would have agreed.

But since I think you were right, any opponent who has not yet made use of his free action in this initiative phase is able to fall prone.

Posted by: Hunga Apr 21 2006, 05:12 PM

QUOTE (UndeadPoet)

@Hunga: Before you convinced me that you can use free actions as you please, I would have agreed.

But since I think you were right, any opponent who has not yet made use of his free action in this initiative phase is able to fall prone.

Not quite

QUOTE

(pg. 135 - second paragraph, second sentence)
"A character may not take a Free Action prior to his first Action Phase in the
Initiative Pass."

If it's the first action phase of a combat turn, then someone with lower initiative cannot use his free action until it's his turn.

Posted by: Aku Apr 21 2006, 05:15 PM

also, dont forget, that iirc, suppressive fire lasts until YOUR next turn, so if they stand up to fire back, they again need to make a defensive roll.

Posted by: UndeadPoet Apr 21 2006, 05:17 PM

@Hunga: Doh! Okay, got it, thanks.

@Aku: Nothing hinders them from just keeping laying there and firing.

Posted by: Butterblume Apr 21 2006, 05:18 PM

QUOTE (UndeadPoet)

Using my whole phase to hurl twenty bullets at my opponents which, if clever, can avoid all of them. Then it's their turn, and they will not do the same favor I did for them.

The thing is, the area remains 'suppressed' until the shooters next action phase - which is potentially very usefull.
The opponents might opt to go full defense when suppressive fire is laid down, so they won't do anything to you during their (allready spent) action.

Edit: oh, some new posts since I started typing

Posted by: mdynna Apr 21 2006, 05:25 PM

I think the most important point of Suppressive Fire is being missed: it lasts until your next action (or the Combat Turn ends). Basically, it forces everyone in the field of fire to lose one whole IP.

Example:
Initiative order is Corp A, PC Rigger, Corp B, Corp C.
Corp A guy goes and does something.
PC Rigger now begins laying suppressive fire. Assuming Corp A still has a Free action left he can drop prone at that point. Corp B & C and in danger from the suppressive fire for now.
Corp B & C drop prone on their turn, SF is still in effect.

Next IP:
Corp A's turn suppressive fire is still in effect, so he can act but if he gets up he is in danger.
Now its PC Rigger's turn, and the SF ends. But it can be restarted if he/she wants.

Now, granted, Corp A could have delayed his action, stayed prone, and waited to see if PC Rigger would let up on the Suppressive Fire. However, that gives PC Rigger's allies time to do what they need to do (usually escape). The key in using SF is to make sure it happens before or simultaneously to any "covered" actions you want to take. Basically, if you are uber-fast Street Sam but you know Corp Goons go before your Rigger then delay until the Rigger's turn so that he/she can lay down the SF and cover your escape.

EDIT: I see now I'm re-stating what was said above. I'm just more verbose.

Posted by: dcpirahna Apr 21 2006, 05:35 PM

As I read it from the rules:

Combat Phase 1
A . shoots random person
Shooter. Use suppression fire in the area occupied by A and B
B. Either Drop prone/cover (no roll), any other movement(or standing
still) (Reaction+edge or take damage)

Combat Phase 2
Suppression fire is still in effect because Shooter has not acted again.
A. Either Drop prone/cover (no roll), any other movement(or standing
still) (Reaction+edge or take damage)
Shooter. Suppresion fire ends, unless you do it again.
...

In this way:
1) _Everyone_ in the suppressed area must drop/cover or risk being hit once.
2) You cannot hit anyone more than once.

Timing it is important, but just because you have the drop on someone doesn't give anyone a particularly huge advangage. Noone takes damage without a chance to act at all because the risk depends on their actions. From the book: "Characters in the suppressed area who do not move other than taking cover or dropping prone are not at risk. (p.144 last sentence)"

Pretending to be a statue doesn't count as "not at risk" however

Posted by: mdynna Apr 21 2006, 05:41 PM

So, people who are in the field of fire (wow, old book flashback) who have not acted yet are not at risk of injury until their action. That's fair.

Posted by: UndeadPoet Apr 21 2006, 05:47 PM

QUOTE (mdynna)

Basically, it forces everyone in the field of fire to lose one whole IP.

Do I miss a major point in the suppressive fire rules? Maybe I am confused, so I will explain you how I understood the rules.
I will just abuse your example for my vicious explainings.
Red is my colour, because I am so vicious.

QUOTE (mdynna)

Example:
Initiative order is Corp A, PC Rigger, Corp B, Corp C.
Corp A guy goes and does something.
PC Rigger now begins laying suppressive fire. Assuming Corp A still has a Free action left he can drop prone at that point. Corp B & C and in danger from the suppressive fire for now.
Corp B & C drop prone on their turn...and have all possibilities of using their remaining actions, as long as they do not involve standing up. Casting spells? Firing weapons? Both possible and possibly very dangerous for Mr. suppressive fire., SF is still in effect.

Next IP:
Corp A's turn suppressive fire is still in effect, so he can act but if he gets up he is in danger. He can, just like his two companions last phase, choose to keep laying there and fire his guns.
Now its PC Rigger's turn, and the SF ends. But it can be restarted if he/she wants.

Posted by: dcpirahna Apr 21 2006, 05:49 PM

From my interpretation you are correct UndeadPoet. Suppression only limits the targets movement, not actions. They can still shoot/cast back from a prone position.

If it limited actions as well it would be incredibly overpowered.

Posted by: hobgoblin Apr 21 2006, 05:52 PM

but by limiting movement you can control where the enemy comes from, and potentialy lead them into a crossfire. or pin them down and then drop explosives down on them.

hmm, this thread showed me that my take on free actions where a bit flawed. i had allways understood it as free actions being in unlimited quantity as long as you only took one pr initiative "count". maybe this changed given the slightly alterd way of doing initiative...

Posted by: Hunga Apr 21 2006, 06:55 PM

QUOTE (UndeadPoet)

QUOTE (mdynna)

Well, in my opinion, only Corp A guy should not be in danger from the suppressive fire, by using his free action to drop prone. Corp B and Corp C should have to make a roll on the rigger's suppressive fire turn and then they can drop prone if they choose to on their individual action.

Based on dcpirahna's reasoning, imagine this combat phase slowed down, Corp A sees suppressive fire from rigger and hits the dirt. Now Copr B and Corp C could have done the same thing, but instead look at each other, and decide to spend their respective free action to talk about the weather while bullets are flying all around them. On their actions way later in the initiative order, they now drop prone. Never mind the time that they've spent in the rain of bullets, they don't need to take any roll whatsoever?

Posted by: James McMurray Apr 21 2006, 06:58 PM

It may have been done as a play balance issue? I can see where high initiative plus suppressive fire would be incredibly nasty if the other guy couldn't avoid it because he hasn't gone first.

Posted by: dcpirahna Apr 21 2006, 07:03 PM

Corp B and C could not have talked about the weather. They do not get free actions until their turn, which is after the Rigger already layed down suppression fire. At which point they can either drop prone and not take damage, or talk about the weather and take damage.

If you mean A talking about the weather on his free action, then yes. He takes no damage until his next move before the rigger in the next IP, at which point he has the option of either dropping prone/cover, or taking damage.

The rules are an abstraction of combat. It's all happening very fast. He's not just sitting there in the bullets picking his nose.

Posted by: Butterblume Apr 21 2006, 07:13 PM

After rethinking, i agree with dcpirahna.

Posted by: Kremlin KOA Apr 21 2006, 07:38 PM

QUOTE (dcpirahna)

they could CAST back
but shooting requires movement so they would be vulnerable

on and drop rpond should not make them completely safe unless they drop prone BEHIND COVER
and if they pop out from behind the cover to shoot they should risk taking a hit

Posted by: dcpirahna Apr 21 2006, 07:39 PM

The only real issue is things that cause people's initive positions to change making them fall out of the suppression timing (never having to roll), or the shooter faller further down causing someone to be in the suppression for 2 IPs, but this can be handled on a case by case basis by the GM in my opinion.

Posted by: Hunga Apr 21 2006, 07:42 PM

It wasn't mentioned as the first combat phase, but in that case you are right.

James: dcpirahna and I are disagreeing on the timing of when targets need to drop prone to avoid being in danger of suppressive fire. Are you saying that you agree with his interpretation of the rules, that it only needs to be done on the target's turn? Because I'm not buying it. I feel it should be done at the time suppressive fire takes effect, everyone who can clear the area should do it now or roll to see if they are hit.

I feel that only requiring targets to have to drop prone on their turn makes no sense. What if someone is thrown into the area of suppression? Does that person only need to stay down (assuming he didn't land on his feet) to not take potential hit from any bullet? This person would need to make a roll to avoid being hit by suppressive fire if he was willingly diving across himself. Should these two scenarios really be treated differently?

High initiative is powerful, period. It is just as powerful using any other kind of shooting or spell casting. If you shoot someone lower on the initiative before they can take cover, they have to do full defense to have a decent chance of not getting hit, which takes up their next complex action. And targets of suppressive fire certainly can make use of full defense.

Posted by: dcpirahna Apr 21 2006, 07:45 PM

QUOTE (Kremlin KOA)

Remember that suppression is not targeted fire that fills all available space in the air. It's someone using 20 bullets to fill a 10 meter x 2 meter area. That 1 bullet per square meter on average. This isn't exactly a wall of lead. The purpose is to stop movement and pin your opponents down.

The rules say just dropping prone is fine to avoid a damage roll. (p144) And generally "movement" means moving your entire body around, not just moving your hands a bit to aim and pull the trigger.

Posted by: Hunga Apr 21 2006, 07:51 PM

I agree with targets being able to fire back. In fact, dropping prone is incredibly powerful for gun fights. If you're prone and at least 20 meters away from your opponents, then you take no penalty in shooting at them while they take -4 to their dice firing at you because you're considered to have good cover. (p. 141)

Posted by: James McMurray Apr 21 2006, 07:52 PM

I'm not agreeing with anyone until I have a book handy so I can look at the rules myself. I was just saying that if his interpretation is correct, it might have been done to avoid situations where high initiative characters get to attack 20 people, none of them getting a dodge roll.

Posted by: Butterblume Apr 21 2006, 08:01 PM

When laying down suppressive fire in a narrow corridor, i'd agree that beeing prone probably isn't enough to avoid damage.

I will decide that one when it occurs .

Posted by: dcpirahna Apr 21 2006, 08:06 PM

Typed it in for you Hopefully quoting this much isn't illegal or anything. This is the entire area on p144 about suppressive fire.

Suppressive Fire

Somtimes a character may just use full autofire to make his opponents keep their heads down. This type of shooting - where the character saturates an area with bullets without specifically targeting anyone - is called suppressive fire. A character using a full burst to suppress can target a triangular area projecting from the shooting character outward up to a distance of his choosing with a width of 10 meters at its end and a height of 2 meters. Suppressive fire takes a Complex Action and uses 20 bullets. The area remains "suppressed" until the shooting character's next Action Phase.

Suppressive fire is treated as a wide burst, but for simplicity we assume that the wide burst and recoil modifiers cancel out. The character laying down the suppressive fire simply make a Success Test using Agility + appropriate firearm skill. Note any hits.

Any character that is currently in (but not behind cover or prone) or that moves in to or out of the suppressed area before the shooter's next Action Phase risks catching some flying lead. That character must make a Reaction + Edge ( + Dodge if on full defense ) with a threshold equal to the hits scored by the suppressing attacker. If the test fails, the character is hit, suffering damage at the weapon's base Damage Value. Characters in the suppressed area who do not move other than taking cover or dropping prone are not at risk.

Posted by: James McMurray Apr 21 2006, 08:24 PM

It looks to me like if they're in it they get hit. If, during their turn, they don't leave it, get cover, or drop prone, they take it again. But it's really vague, and definitely in need of a FAQ.

How did it work in 3rd?

Posted by: dcpirahna Apr 21 2006, 08:51 PM

QUOTE (James McMurray @ Apr 21 2006, 03:24 PM)

If that was true, if you had 10 guys standing in a hallway and you get to go first, you basically get a free single shot at every single one of them. Nothing they can do about it. (Since you can't take a free action before your turn.) Other than roll against an average threshhold of 2-3 and pray.

That's some pretty impressive sharp shooting there Texas.

Posted by: Kanada Ten Apr 21 2006, 08:59 PM

QUOTE (James McMurray)

[SR3] The targets take damage on their pass, so the first person through the area or within it to have an action, would be hit first, but people in front of him or her would probably act as cover for determining the damage of "hits". I would say that any bullets that didn't do damage can still damage other targets, but subtract those that have done damage each pass from the Dodge TN. [/SR3]

Posted by: Kanada Ten Apr 21 2006, 09:02 PM

QUOTE (dcpirahna)

QUOTE (James McMurray @ Apr 21 2006, 03:24 PM)

But isn't that what would happen if you opened fire with a machine gun in real life? I mean, there is a reason we have these weapons. It's not exactly a realistic secnario you're laying out, but when it happens (people opening fire on targets in the open), pretty much everybody gets hit...

Posted by: dcpirahna Apr 21 2006, 09:12 PM

QUOTE (Kanada Ten @ Apr 21 2006, 04:02 PM)

I disagree. Unless they're purposely showing you as much surface area as possible it's unlikely you'll hit many at all but I don't want to get involved in a "IRL" argument.

The point is that this basically would be overpowered. You would get 10 free chances to do at least 5P damage to 10 targets. And anyone worth a salt with a FA weapon is going to have at around 9 dice so average of 3 hits. So reaction + edge with a threshhold of 3. And during their turn if they do anything but drop/cover, you get ANOTHER free chance.

Honestly, that can be more effective than a grenade since you don't have to deal with scatter.

And this is with a maneuver that is designed as a way to "make his opponents keep their heads down."

Posted by: Kanada Ten Apr 21 2006, 09:21 PM

QUOTE

Characters in the suppressed area who do not move other than taking cover or dropping prone are not at risk.

That line would indicate, to me, that one need not worry about it until their turn.

Posted by: dcpirahna Apr 21 2006, 09:24 PM

QUOTE (Kanada Ten)

QUOTE

Characters in the suppressed area who do not move other than taking cover or dropping prone are not at risk.

That line would indicate, to me, that one need not worry about it until their turn.

Yes, sorry. My belief on how it works is earlier in the thread which is that people only need to worry about it on their turn. Others in the thread believe that you have to worry about it immediatly AND on your turn which is what happens in the example I gave.

The example is one of the reasons why I believe it only matters on the targets turn.

Posted by: Hunga Apr 21 2006, 09:37 PM

QUOTE (Kanada Ten)

QUOTE

Characters in the suppressed area who do not move other than taking cover or dropping prone are not at risk.

That line would indicate, to me, that one need not worry about it until their turn.

I think that's how dcpirahna interprets it too. Unfortunately, that seems to be ignoring this below line, especially the bolded part of "currently in".

QUOTE (book)

Any character that is currently in (but not behind cover or prone) or that moves in to or out of the suppressed area before the shooter's next Action Phase risks catching some flying lead.

That's why I think if they are in now, and can't get down with a free action, then they are hit. On their move, if they just drop down, no worry, otherwise, roll again.

Posted by: Hunga Apr 21 2006, 09:52 PM

Here's an example of only worrying about suppressive fire on your turn becomes comedy.

Runner team of 4 tries cross a 5 meter wide hallway covered by continual suppressive fire from 10 gun turrets, they cover from ceiling to floor. Runners go in this initiative order, 1, 2, 3, 4. Asssume all runners are very strong. Runner 1 and 3 tie a rope between them. Runner 2 and 4 tie a rope between them. On the next phase, turrets still firing suppressively. Runner 1 tosses 3 over the hallway, through 10 gun turrets' suppressive fire. (But that's okay, runner 3 needs not worry about taking damage because it's not his turn.) On 2's initiative, he tosses 4 over. On 3's initiative, he's on the other side of the hallway, but he's not exposed to suppressive fire on his turn so he takes no roll to avoid being hit. Now he pulls runner 1 over. On runner 4's turn, he pulls 1 over. Voila, all 4 runners passing by the hallway and not a single one ever exposed to suppressive fire ON HIS TURN.

Posted by: Butterblume Apr 21 2006, 09:55 PM

That is a very munchkin example. Please don't do these.

Posted by: Kanada Ten Apr 21 2006, 10:02 PM

The thing is, by the rules you can only move someone on their turn...

Posted by: dcpirahna Apr 21 2006, 10:03 PM

QUOTE (Hunga @ Apr 21 2006, 04:52 PM)

Nope, that's just fine. Because when on the turn of any of the people with the rope, they have moved in to and out of a supressed area in a way other than taking cover or dropping prone. Thus, they must roll on their turn to check for damage.

ps. I did find lots of hilarity in the example however

Posted by: Kremlin KOA Apr 22 2006, 05:13 AM

QUOTE (Kanada Ten)

The thing is, by the rules you can only move someone on their turn...

"My strength 15 troll picks up the small elf and throws it out the window"

"Sorry you can only move someone on their turn, the elf successfully stands it's ground with strength 1 against your strength 15."

Posted by: Kanada Ten Apr 22 2006, 05:38 AM

QUOTE (Kremlin KOA)

QUOTE (Kanada Ten @ Apr 22 2006, 06:02 AM)

The thing is, by the rules you can only move someone on their turn...

Sorry, I forget that you all need smilies on everything.

Posted by: Hunga Apr 22 2006, 07:07 PM

QUOTE (dcpirahna)

I defeinitely agree that they should roll or take damage, but they shouldn't do it on their turn. They should be doing it when they move in and out of the area!

The point is, when something like spraying bullets happens, it's an action that should produce immediate result. (We're not talking about a delayed blast grenade here.) The area becomes saturated with bullets immediately and contiuously till the shooter's next action. It just makes no sense for the effect not to be felt by targets in the area till their movement turn. Anyone who gets in the area during the turn voluntarily or not should feel the effect immediately.

It's akin to someone rolling up the blinds of a window that causes sunlight to shine in. Any vampires that happen to be in the area of the sunlight as a result will need to take damage immediately, not until their turn.

Posted by: Kanada Ten Apr 23 2006, 05:07 AM

Reading the SR4 Full Defense rules makes me more sure that the person only takes damage if they do something other than Drop Prone or Take Cover on their turn - but they have to choose when the Suppressive Fire begins: before they even have an action. Try to remember that all these actions are taking place more or less at the same time. See example on page 151.

Posted by: Lagomorph Apr 24 2006, 09:20 PM

strangely, this is a better deal for those with poor IP, with the following line: "The area remains "suppressed" until the shooting character's next Action Phase." that to me means this.

Joe Slow and Jack Fast are in a shoot out, Joe Slow lays down the suppressive fire, Jack Fast has an entire 3 seconds of bullet dodging to do while he runs out his 4 IPs.

Posted by: dcpirahna Apr 24 2006, 09:35 PM

There's two ways to handle that.

One:
Assume there are basically always 4 initiative passes in a combat turn. Just because you don't get an action in one doesn't mean it doesn't happen. Example:

Phase 1:
Fast Jack does something (doesn't matter).
Slow Joe does suppression fire.
Phase 2:
Fast Jack must drop/cover or risk damage.
Slow Joe. Does not get turn since he has no more phases, however suppression stops.
Phase 3:
Fast Jack is in the clear to do whatever he wants at no risk.

Or two (house rule that I prefer):

Assume that suppression works until the next movement of that character even if it's in the next Combat turn. Ie, a character with Slow Joe with 1 IP keeps Fast Jack suppressed for the entire 3 seconds (the rest of the IP's in the turn). Character with extra initiative passes can choose to "continue suppression" as their only action for that pass to continue the suppression with no extra ammo used. That way a 4 IP person doesn't have to spend 80 bullets to suppress for the same amount of time as a 1 IP person.

Doing it this way makes more sense to me since sure, Slow Joe is slower than Fast Jack, but he's not just spraying an area for .75 seconds of the turn, and then not shooting bullets the other 2.25 seconds. (Though that is certainly possible.)

Posted by: Shrike30 Apr 24 2006, 09:36 PM

The "better deal" for Joe is that he only spends 1/4 of the ammo Jack does accomplishing the same thing, if they were both to suppress something.

Of course, Jack could always wait until the 2nd IP, when all the un-amped people have used up all their actions, and suppress them all, forcing a "did I get hit" check on the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th IP for anyone who couldn't duck.

What makes it pretty obvious to me that suppression checks are made on the shooter's turn (and not on the shootee's turn) is the whole IP system, actually. If a sammie suppresses a bunch of one-pass people on IP 2, then goes on to do something else on IP 3, he can't actually have hit anyone if we go by the "effect occurs on the shootee's turn" rule, since despite having slung 20 rounds of ammo downrange, our sammie didn't have the suppression going on during the first pass, which is when all of his targets actually get their action.

Yeah, it's a little nuts for someone to be able to suppress with 4 passes like a fiend. It's just ridiculous to say that slow people can ignore suppressive fire until the next turn as long as it happens after their last pass.

Posted by: dcpirahna Apr 24 2006, 09:40 PM

QUOTE (Shrike30)

Yeah, it's a little nuts for someone to be able to suppress with 4 passes like a fiend. It's just ridiculous to say that slow people can ignore suppressive fire until the next turn as long as it happens after their last pass.

They don't get to ignore it. They get a "turn" in the next action phase, they just don't get to do anything in it (except movement and possibly a "drop prone" free action).

Posted by: Big D Apr 24 2006, 09:55 PM

After seeing this whole thread, here's a wild idea...

Shooter declares suppression. Anyone within the area is immediately targeted, but may declare a free action to (as usual) go full dodge or (this case only) drop prone. Anyone who chooses the latter may still act normally on their turn, but they start out prone and under a suppressed area. If the character is near the edge of the suppressed area, the GM could allow a roll to jump clear instead of prone, although that would probably use up the character's action for that IP.

Yes, that means that if you just stand there drooling, you get attacked potentially twice in a single IP. Best I can come up with, though.

Posted by: Kanada Ten Apr 24 2006, 10:03 PM

Can you declare Full Defense after your last pass?

Posted by: Moon-Hawk Apr 24 2006, 10:07 PM

I don't see why not. Wouldn't it just come out of your first action in the next turn?

Posted by: Big D Apr 24 2006, 10:55 PM

That's my thinking.

Posted by: Shrike30 Apr 24 2006, 11:28 PM

QUOTE (dcpirahna @ Apr 24 2006, 01:40 PM)

They don't get to ignore it. They get a "turn" in the next action phase, they just don't get to do anything in it (except movement and possibly a "drop prone" free action).

I don't see it mentioned anywhere in the rules that suppressive fire creates an actionless turn during a phase a player wouldn't otherwise go in.

It makes all kinds of sense to just handle all the checks for suppressing when the burst is actually fired. Let's say on IP1 Init 10, Sam suppresses the room. Twitch went on IP1 Init 14 and at some point used his free action already, so he's not going to be able to go prone until the next turn, since Twitch only has one IP. On IP1 Init 6, Max powerbolts Sam and makes his head explode, which is a reasonable reason to believe that the suppression ends at that moment.

Except, if we wait until Twitch's next turn (or even if we wait until this mysterious next "turn" in which he has no actions, but has so that we can resolve suppressive fire) to figure out the effects of the suppression, it might or might not (!) happen, because the guy who is supposed to be suppressing him is dead when the time comes to see if Twitch got hit.

There are so many bizarre situations created by not figuring suppression for everyone in the suppression zone when the suppression starts that it'd be inane to post more of them.

The rule says:

QUOTE

Any character that is currently in (but not behind cover or prone) or that moves in to or out of the suppressed area before the shooter's next Action Phase risks catching some flying lead.

The first have of the "or" statement is "currently in (but not behind cover or prone)." However you decide to handle the whole "can he use his free action to drop prone if he's still got one?" thing is up to you, but "currently in" says to me that you make the test immediately. The only times that the suppression test would not happen immediately would be the second half of the "or" statement: when someone "moves in to or out of the suppressed area."

Twitch walks into the room on init 14. Sam cuts loose on Init 10. Twitch rolls, gets hit, goes "ow," because he's "currently in (but not behind cover or prone)" the suppressed area. Max blows Sam's head apart on Init 6. Suppressive effect ends, because the guy doing the shooting is dead.

Posted by: dcpirahna Apr 25 2006, 12:28 AM

The "moves in to" and "moves out of" both are quite obviously on the targets turn. There is no reason to conclude the third "or" statement would be otherwise from the text.

As to the rest, yes, if someone blows up their head the could suppression stop. The GM can rule that either way as it is not conclusive. When you shoot suppression in an area, it is not 20 bullets all moving at the same speed in a sheer wall of lead. They will not all get there at the same time. You are effectively spraying an area randomly throughout the span of your turn. Considering the rules are an abstraction of combat it makes perfect sense

Considering that someone earlier in the thread said that SR3 suppressive fire was also handled on the targets turn I still believe my interpretation is the most correct so far.

Posted by: hobgoblin Apr 25 2006, 01:30 AM

i would say anyone inside the suppresion zone when it gets declared must take a imidate drop prone action or take damage.

after that, if one try to move into out out of the zone until the shooters next action, one may allso draw the attention of the shooter and therefor risk getting hit as he sweeps the gun over the area.

one thing tho, the SR rules do not have any info about trying to crawl. i would guess a strength number of meters would be fitting, without getting any hits from the suppression fire.

Posted by: Big D Apr 25 2006, 03:13 AM

I would make it .5R*m for crawling safely instead of S, I think. Less to do with strength than quickness, and you're not going to crawl fast under fire.

At any rate, to sum things up, I think it sounds munchy but legal and somewhat realistic (dangerous word there) to spray wildly at a crowd, and get a suppression chance of hitting all of them rather than having to just target one of them. Then, if they stick around, or try to move into or out of the suppressed area while the fire is still going on, they run the risk of getting hit again.

I would probably rule, however, that if "suppressing" a crowd, you cannot hit more than 20 people... and probably no more than 5-10, because half of the shots will miss everyone altogether.

To balance this somewhat, the defenders get to use a free action (even if they've already used it for the IP) to drop prone, jump clear on a standing jump test, or declare full dodge (anything other than dropping prone eats up any actions they have in the next IP).

Still, a LMG with a long belt can wipe out several people in a single long burst, and keep the survivors pinned down for several seconds.

Posted by: Clyde Apr 25 2006, 03:37 AM

Seems to me the fairest way to handle it is:

Characters are only subject to suppressing fire once per Complex Action spent by the firer. If you are in the area and not prone or behind cover, you are subjected immediately. You may then act normally on your turn (assuming you survive), because you were either hit or missed by the suppressing fire. If you weren't in the area, but you move into it, you are subject to attack when you enter the area. If you were in the are, but were prone and had cover, and you subsequently break cover or stand up, you are subject to attack when you do that.

Tactically, suppressive fire does not stop an enemy from shooting back (the purpose of real life suppressing fire). However, it does prevent the enemy from safely moving across open ground. This is useful in and of itself, of course. One example might go like this: Mike, the elf decker, throws like a girl. Fortunately, he throws high explosive hand grenades. Mike and Merle, his Merc buddy, are surprised by some corp goons on the Seattle docks. Mike spends a point of edge to go first, and wings a hand grenade towards the goons. Merle, whose wired reflexes let him outroll the goons for initiative, lays down heavy suppressing fire with his Ingram White Knight LMG. The goons are already in cover or prone (they're goons, not morons), but now they're faced with a cruel choice: they can stand around and let Mike's grenade blow them to bits, or they can run and get chopped up by LMG fire. Mike and Merle don't give a crap either way, really.

Posted by: Big D Apr 25 2006, 04:00 AM

My only objection to that is that if you soak the first shot, then you have unlimited freedom to move or do anything else that you want. The rest of the bullets just ignore you.

If you remain standing when somebody sprays a LMG at you, maybe spending a point of edge to ensure that the shooter misses, and then charge the shooter with your katana and slice him in half because he's already gotten one shot at you (despite the fact that he's still shooting) and you can't be attacked again... well, that's cinematic, but a little odd.

Multiple hits from a single suppression sounds pretty munchy, until you realize what a pair of airbursts (one full action) would do to most of the folks in the suppression area.

Posted by: DrowVampyre Apr 25 2006, 06:03 AM

Hmm, well, I'm certainly no authority on it, but I'd say that anyone in the area is subject immediately to the roll, as they are currently in the suppressed area. Then, on their turn, they can choose to immediately take a drop prone free action, thus not being subjected to a chance of being hit again. Seriously, there is a reason soldiers don't move in tightly packed formations with no cover when facing automatic weapons. And while it does seem nice to be able to hit so many people, potentially, with a single attack, if they move that way they're asking for it, same as if they moved in tight formation against a grenade launcher wielding opponent. Also, while many people can be hit, they have a better chance of dodging than if subjected to a normal attack (they add Edge dice, after all) and, if they are hit, they take the weapons base DV, not increased by the shooters successes.

Another issue with suppressive fire, however, is this: dropping prone negates the chance of being hit, right? But what if the 10m x 2m area you choose to affect just happens to include the ground? Say, shooting from an elevated position down at a courtyard, perhaps? Doesn't seem like dropping prone would be much help, then, unless you could get behind something...

Posted by: CONAN9845 Apr 25 2006, 10:40 AM

Well, if you are elevated, and shooting down at someone, maybe standing up would be considered prone.

My point is that, and I know this is an unpopular opinion with most, that the rules in Shadowrun have always been vague, and open to interpretation. In the end, ask your group, have a discussion, and then have your GM make a decision. It's that simple. You will NOT get it straightened out here.

Not that there's anything wrong with discussing it. That's what the forum is for, after all. I just think it's there's a time for a little common sense. Someone blasting a bunch of bullets at me means get down and stay down. If I had a character that didn't get hit by the suppression, and then they proceeded to use that as an excuse to stand there and act normally, I would impose a Willpower check to avoid scrambling out of the way (Gut Check, actually)... maybe even dock some Karma.

Posted by: Shrike30 Apr 25 2006, 05:49 PM

QUOTE (dcpirahna @ Apr 24 2006, 04:28 PM)

The "moves in to" and "moves out of" both are quite obviously on the targets turn. There is no reason to conclude the third "or" statement would be otherwise from the text.

We agree on what applies to people moving into/out of the suppression zone... it's pretty obvious that can only reasonably be handled when the person makes that movement.

Assemble the statement without the into/out of clause, though...

QUOTE

Any character that is currently in (but not behind cover or prone) or that moves in to or out of the suppressed area before the shooter's next Action Phase risks catching some flying lead.

becomes:

QUOTE

Any character that is currently in (but not behind cover or prone) the suppressed area risks catching some flying lead.

That's the only part of the statement that applies to people not attempting to enter or leave the suppression zone during their actions, and it says characters "currently in ... the suppressed area." How that ends up being characters "in the suppressed area when their turn happens to roll around, or during what would have been their turn if they happened to have a turn during that initiative pass, which they might or might not, possibly ignoring the fact that they were in a suppression zone for a while but might not be any more if the suppressing character died before their not-turn rolled around" is beyond me.

Posted by: dcpirahna Apr 25 2006, 06:12 PM

You have A, B, and C.

B and C both mean on the targets turn. A (the word "currently in") can just as easily also mean on the target's turn. Because when it's their "turn", guess where they "currently" are. Sure, if you remove B and C the sentence can mean something completely different. I can find you lots of sentences that means something else if I can take out parts of the sentence.

But regardless. I know I am right, and you know you are right, so arguing over the word "currently" will solve nothing.

My interpretation has supressive fire as a tactical ability to keep people's heads down (as it is described in the first sentence). It effects everyone in the area evenly, and only once.

Your interpretation is an offensive ability that gives free damage against everyone in the area with a lower initiative score, and they can get hit twice in the same turn.

Feel free to use whichever is best for your player group.

Posted by: James McMurray Apr 25 2006, 06:49 PM

Currently means now. There's not really a lot of room to argue if you're trying to say that it means later.

Posted by: Big D Apr 25 2006, 07:44 PM

Please note that suppression isn't a complete freebie for the shooter.

Suppression only hits with the base DV of the gun, or at least it seems to read that way. The only modifier that seems to apply is the ammo.

It's still not a bad thing to do in the first turn, especially if you have a LMG.

Posted by: hobgoblin Apr 25 2006, 07:53 PM

and it allso costs 20 rounds, no matter if you hit anything at all or not (tho i guess one could keep track of the number of bullets that hit so that you never pass 20 pr suppression action). unless you go belt, 20 rounds are about 2/3 of a clip.

Posted by: dcpirahna Apr 25 2006, 09:29 PM

QUOTE (James McMurray @ Apr 25 2006, 01:49 PM)

Currently means now. There's not really a lot of room to argue if you're trying to say that it means later.

The washington monument is currently in Washington DC. 3 seconds from now, the washington monument will still be currently in Washington, DC.

If the player is currently in the suppression area, later when it is their turn, they are still currently in the suppression area.

"When this light turns red, I want you to sit down wherever you currently are." That doesn't mean sit down immediatly.

Regardless. We'll approach this scientifically and assume you are right.

A goes first laying suppressive fire at B. B cannot drop prone because it is not their turn yet. B rolls poorly and takes damage immediatly. On B's turn, the only movement B takes is dropping prone.

By giving B damage, you violate the last sentence in the paragraph. "Characters who are in the suppressed who do not move other than taking cover or dropping prone are not at risk."

You are directly conflicting that rule. There is no ambiguity there. Thus, the assumption is false. If you see any flaws in that proof, please tell me. I'd like to hear it. Now, while this doesn't prove my interpretation is correct it does prove that interpretation is wrong.

Posted by: James McMurray Apr 25 2006, 09:51 PM

Letting them drop prone is what I would probably do. Or use your interpretation of what the word currently means. It's all good. Until an official response comes there's too many things that conflict no matter which option you take for anyone to be 100% right.

I wasn't trying to espouse an interpretation, just pointing out that "currently" means "now." The Washington Monument is "currently" in Washington, DC. In 12 years, when it is sold to Disney, it will currently be in Florida, because "currently" changes with every second that ticks by.

Posted by: Shrike30 Apr 25 2006, 09:54 PM

QUOTE

Characters who are in the suppressed who do not move other than taking cover or dropping prone are not at risk

So, if I stand absolutely still, bolt-upright in the middle of the suppression zone, one foot directly in front of the person doing the suppression, I'm not at risk? Because that's what the rule you're tossing at us says.

"The washington monument is currently in Washington DC. 3 seconds from now, the washington monument will still be currently in Washington, DC" is a false statement. Currently refers to the present tense, three seconds from now is in the future. Three seconds from now, the Washington monument will then be in Washington DC (or in James' example, after it's sold to Disney 12 years from now, then it will be in Florida).

"When this light turns red, I want you to sit down wherever you currently are" causes continuity problems. See, when you make that statement, I'm standing near the doorway. In the time after that, I wander over to the window. Then you turn the light red, except I can't follow your order, because I have to sit down in the place I was standing near the doorway (when you said "wherever you currently are"), and by the time I go back to that location to sit, it will be *after* when you turned the light red. However, had you said "When this light turns red, I want you to sit down wherever you are then," you would have given an order that would not have continuity problems, were we trying to fulfill it literally and completely.

QUOTE (dictionary.com)

currently

adv : at this time or period; now;

If a character suppresses an area, and there's someone running across it at the moment the suppression starts, guess where he's currently located?

Posted by: Kanada Ten Apr 25 2006, 10:01 PM

A turn is a period, therefore, currently can mean within the combat turn.

Posted by: dcpirahna Apr 25 2006, 10:03 PM

re: currently. You are missing the point. It means "now" in respect to a time frame. That time frame is the same as the other two time frames. The target's turn.

re: the rule. No, choosing to "stand still" is a move. Standing still is not the same as dropping prone or taking cover. Thus you have made a move other than dropping prone or taking over and must roll.

Your example is still breaking a rule in the book. As does saying the person can drop prone before it is their turn. My interpretation does not.

Posted by: James McMurray Apr 25 2006, 10:08 PM

Your interpretation applies the word currently to the future tense and allows for people within the area of suppression to not be at any risk if they are somehow moved before their turn rolls around.

While it's possible to link statements seperated by ors, it's not always valid. They may have meant currently to apply to the future (the target's turn), or they may have meant it to apply to now.

I'll also have to disagree that choosing to stand still is a move. If you don't do anything involving muscles you aren't really moving.

I really need to bring my SR book to this house. It makes debates so much more interesting.

Posted by: Shrike30 Apr 25 2006, 10:31 PM

The current IP is also a period. So is the current Combat Turn. So is the turn during which a single character gets one free action and either two simples or one complex. So is the 6th World, for that matter. Suppression lasts until the suppressing character's next action, which would seem like a decent "period" to pick, if you were trying to steer away from "now."

But we get back to one of our earlier examples. IP1 Init 10, Dude A takes his only initiative pass and does nothing for whatever reason. IP1, Init 5, Dude B locks and loads his SMG. IP2, init 5, Dude B suppresses the area Dude A is standing in. IP 3, init 5, Dude B's magazine runs dry (he was using an MP5-TX), and he runs down the alley. Next turn on IP1 Init 10, Dude A isn't standing in a supression zone, despite having had 20 bullets fired his way.

One solution to this problem is the magically appearing, nowhere-else-in-the-rules "ghost turn" during which Dude A can get hit. If we want to use this interpretation, then Dude A gets hit with the suppressive fire on IP 3, Init 10, because he's standing in a suppression zone when his ghost turn rolls around. However, let's back up our example a little bit:

After starting his suppression fire on IP2 Init 5, Dude B is rocking out on full cyclic when on IP2 Init 2, Dude C gets hit because he (like A) is standing in the suppression zone. Not being happy about this, Dude C uses his two simple actions to give Dude A a double-tap to the head, and kills him. Now, Dude B doesn't *get* another action... he's dead. He's not shooting any more, so it doesn't make any sense that anyone else gets hit after Dude A dies. This puts us in a weirdass situation where the slower guy who would have had no opportunity to react to the suppressive fire (Dude B) *cannot* get hit, but the guy who DID have an opportunity to react to it (Dude C) *does* get hit, because he's faster.

You could always give the now-dead Dude B a ghost turn for his suppression to end on to get around THAT problem, but what happens on IP 3, Init 10 when Dude D walks INTO the suppression zone. Does he get hit? The guy "suppressing" the area was *dead* when D showed up, but to solve the whole "being slower is *gooooood* when you get suppressed" issue, the area is still suppressed. It gets even worse if dude B had suppressed on the last IP of the turn... now, despite being dead, he's rolling initiative to see when his next action would have been, were he still alive! And in the meantime, all of the guys who are currently in, were headed towards, or were possibly thinking of vacationing at the suppression zone are praying that they roll the lowest initiative score possible, so that their turn happens after the dead guy stops shooting at them.

Or, we could avoid all this, and just say that anyone currently in the suppressed area who doesn't have a free action to spare (they either used it up, or haven't gone yet) to drop prone or get cover checks to be hit when the shooting starts, on the shooter's turn. Until the shooter's next turn, anyone who wants to move into, out of, or around in the suppression zone that doesn't either have cover or prone-ness to protect their asses checks if they get hit on their turn.

Miraculously, all the questions about initiative order, multiple actions downrange, and dead shooters disappear when you do this, and you stop having people playing Statue downrange of machinegunners to avoid getting hit (because not moving means, you know, not moving... it doesn't mean that you're moving when you're not moving). Somehow, I have a feeling that the vastly simpler, much less loopholed interpretation of the rule is probably the intended one. YMMV, of course.

edited 4th and 5th paragraph

Posted by: Kanada Ten Apr 25 2006, 11:20 PM

And just making them lose their next free action to drop prone or take cover when the shooting starts - in a manner jsut like full dodge - eliminates most problems, too.

Posted by: Shrike30 Apr 25 2006, 11:33 PM

Hey, there ya go. "Full Dodge" to the ground.

Posted by: CONAN9845 Apr 26 2006, 02:54 AM

I can't believe we are having a debate about the meaning of currently. Wait... yes I can.

I think we should apply the whole "wait until the target's turn" to all shooting. It's my turn? Okay, I shoot that guy. 12 hits! Yes! He's SOOO dead! What? What do you mean he's not dead? I have to wait until it's his turn to see if he's dead? But he already acted, and only gets one pass, whereas I get two more? WHAT!? That means I have to wait until next TURN!? WTF!

There are no other instances in the rules where pulling a trigger and firing bullets at someone isn't resolved right then and there. It's absurd to think otherwise. It may not be wrong in the RAW, if that's your interpretation, but it just doesn't make any sense.

In the end, I stand by what I said before. Use what works in your group. I just know that if my GM was that crazy, I'd be packing it in and going home.

Posted by: Kanada Ten Apr 26 2006, 03:21 AM

It is applied to all shooting - just look at Full Defense.

Posted by: CONAN9845 Apr 26 2006, 04:39 AM

That doesn't make it wait until the target's next action. That moves the target's "next" action to when they are being shot, if they decide to go that route. It's completely different.

Posted by: Kanada Ten Apr 26 2006, 04:44 AM

But it could be treated the same. The only reason not to is to make Suppressive Fire more powerful, which is fine but seems counter to their wording.

Posted by: CONAN9845 Apr 26 2006, 05:34 AM

Counter to their wording in what way?

Posted by: Kanada Ten Apr 26 2006, 05:54 AM

QUOTE

Somtimes a character may just use full autofire to make his opponents keep their heads down. This type of shooting - where the character saturates an area with bullets without specifically targeting anyone - is called suppressive fire.

However, I think the rules don't follow the intent well.

Posted by: CONAN9845 Apr 26 2006, 06:10 AM

Neither do I. If you don't get hit by it (whenever you have to roll that), you don't have any incentive to keep your head down, since you know you are safe. There was the same problem in SR3, where it was very hard to hit anything with suppressive fire, and once you weren't hit, you could do anything you wanted without fear. We always made characters roll Willpower checks (TN was 4 plus number of bullets directed at your square, up to the 10 of FA).

I suppose in SR4 I will make them roll a Gut Check Attribute-Only Test to see if they can do anything other than drop prone / take cover. Maybe the Threshold can be the number of bullets coming at them. Glitches can be used for that "pissing your pants" moment.

Posted by: Shrike30 Apr 26 2006, 08:35 AM

QUOTE (Kanada Ten)

But it could be treated the same. The only reason not to is to make Suppressive Fire more powerful, which is fine but seems counter to their wording.

"Treated the same" how? You can already take your advanced Full Dodge action against suppressive fire, if you interpret it as happening on the suppressing character's turn.

I don't see how Full Defense shows attacks happening on the target's turn, rather than the shooter's. All Full Defense does is let you add more dice to your pool when you're trying not to get hit, and it has the option of spending your next action "in advance" to be on Full Defense before your turn actually happens. It doesn't actually change when the shots are fired, or when their effect is resolved.

Posted by: dcpirahna Apr 26 2006, 02:28 PM

Shrike20, your own examples have the same problems with the shooter being killed that you claim invalidate mine. However mine don't violate the last sentence of the rules and yours do. I look at it as a tactical option of less offensive value as I believe the first sentence points out. You look at it as a more offensive option.

All of my points have been laid out earlier in the thread. Reiterating them to you is unlikely to change your opinion so I won't bother.

James McMurry:

QUOTE

Your interpretation applies the word currently to the future tense and allows for people within the area of suppression to not be at any risk if they are somehow moved before their turn rolls around.

No, they are still at risk. If someone else moves them, then they had still moved into or out of the suppression area while it was suppressed and so would need to roll on their turn to take damage before they get their action.

Posted by: Hunga Apr 26 2006, 02:56 PM

I strongly agree with Shrike30's example and reasoning of full defense. I also agree with CONAN9845's statement that resolving any kind of shooting during target's turn just doesn't make sense.

QUOTE (dcpirahna)

The "moves in to" and "moves out of" both are quite obviously on the targets turn. There is no reason to conclude the third "or" statement would be otherwise from the text.

I don't think so. We've already dicussed how a target can "move into or out of" hazard area by other means out of turn, such as being dragged, being tossed, standing on a moving conveyor belt, etc. The whole resolving damage on target's turn idea, which is mind boggling to at least a few of us, came from the assumption that a target only moves on his turn, which is false.

Posted by: Hunga Apr 26 2006, 03:06 PM

QUOTE (dcpirahna)

Shrike20, your own examples have the same problems with the shooter being killed that you claim invalidate mine.

How does Shrike30's example have the same problem when the shooter's killed? The moment the shooter's dead, everyone is in the clear as there is no longer any suppressive fire. The people who were in the area and should be at risk had already made roll the moment suppressive fire started.

Basically, A opens suppressive fire at B and C. B uses his left over free action to drop prone, so he's safe. C doesn't have one left, so he rolls (as supported by rule "currently in").

Scenario 1:
On C's turn, he can drop prone now or move behind cover (that's near by) without having to roll again (as supported by the last sentence of the rule).

Scenario 2:
On B's turn, before C, he kills A from prone. So on C's turn, he can stay where he is without moving with no risk from suppressive fire again.

Posted by: Aku Apr 26 2006, 03:13 PM

i'm not sure if i've stated this yet, but heres my take on it.

unless you drop prone ro take cover when supressive fire begins, you need to roll. if you take any action within the surpressed area, and don't STAY prone or behind cover, you need to roll.

so Goon A gets cought in some surpressive fire and can't take his free action (because he hasnt taken his first action yet and so can't take a free action, which is how i understand that rule) and so he rolls. if he does anything other than drop prone/take cover on his first ip, he has to roll again because the bullets are still flying his way.

Posted by: James McMurray Apr 26 2006, 03:36 PM

QUOTE

So they would roll to see if they were retroactively killed? What about the effects taht would ahve on the other parts of the turn that already happened? Do you roll back?

For example, Mr. Runner lays some suppression fire on mooks A and B. On A's turn he takes the fire and drags B away. Mr. Runner's buddy, Mr. Otherrunner, takes his turn, which he uses to run up and grapple B. Now B's turn rolls around, he makes his defense roll because he was moved, and he dies. Why on Earth did Mr. Otherrunner risk his life leaving cover to grapple a dead guy?

Posted by: dcpirahna Apr 26 2006, 03:56 PM

I honestly don't want to argue it anymore.

By forcing people to roll immediatly you break the last sentence in the book. "Characters who are in the suppressed area who do not move other than taking cover or dropping prone are not at risk."

If you allow them to drop prone immediatly, you break the rules (p.135) regarding taking a free action before your action phase.

My interpretation does not break any rules in the book.

If FanPro releases more information and says "that's not what we meant" then I will be more than happy to change my point of view.

If you don't like those rules, feel free to not play in my games.

This is my last post on the topic.

Posted by: James McMurray Apr 26 2006, 03:59 PM

Yes, your interpreatation leaves the rules intact, but it totally destroys the flow of the combat turn, messing with the very fabric of time itself. In that situation I'd prefer to change a rule.

I'd still be interested in hearing your answer to my question. Not to argue, just because I can't see a way out other than backing up to the point where suppressive fire would have killed the guy.

Posted by: Aku Apr 26 2006, 05:23 PM

and i feel that line should be striken anyways. it is impossible for a metahuman to stay totaly and completely still in the first place, which is what you are implying they can do. i might, for shits and giggles, let a player try it. for the rest of the turn, they can literally do nothing, include dodge, fire, anything, because all of those things include movement

Posted by: Shrike30 Apr 26 2006, 05:42 PM

QUOTE (dcpirahna @ Apr 26 2006, 07:56 AM)

My interpretation does not break any rules in the book.

Fair enough. If we stick with how you define the terms "currently" (that is, to mean "now or later") and "move" (that is, to mean "move or hold still"), and don't mind creating ridiculous situations where a player sticking his head up the turn after his sniper buddy takes out the machinegunner can still be hit by suppressive fire the dead man fired off on the previous turn, and ignore the fact that characters who have a free action left over from a previous turn would be allowed to take it to go prone without even requiring the invocation of the "Full Defense" rule, then your approach to handling suppressive fire doesn't break the rules and makes total sense.

I'm going to stick with not hinging my arguement on a rule that says someone standing bolt upright in the middle of the street, not moving, is perfectly safe from the suppression fire I'm sending his way, and that doesn't require the creation of mysterious ghost turns for players to act in that don't exist anywhere else in the rulebook, and I'll try to interpret the rest of the section in a way that doesn't require the GM to alter the space-time continuum and occasionally have players undo their actions retroactively in order for it to work.

Posted by: James McMurray Apr 26 2006, 06:21 PM

Sounds like a good idea to me.

Posted by: Hunga Apr 26 2006, 07:27 PM

QUOTE (Aku)

and i feel that line should be striken anyways.

The line in question:

QUOTE

Characters in the suppressed area who do not move other than taking cover or dropping prone are not at risk.

I don't think the line needs to be striken per se. But it definitely needs to be rewritten to keep in the spirit of things. I feel that line is meant to say that characters who have already made the roll on attacker's turn can drop prone or take (nearby) cover during their turn without having to roll again.

Characters in the suppressed area whose only movement is taking cover or dropping prone are not at risk again.

Posted by: Shrike30 Apr 26 2006, 10:36 PM

I might phrase it:
"Characters in the suppressed area who move into cover or drop prone are not at risk."

Posted by: DrowVampyre Apr 27 2006, 12:42 AM

I'm with Shrike30 on this one, though I think the easiest way to fix this is, in the next errata, to change the final line to:

"Characters in the suppressed area who do not move other than taking cover or dropping prone are no longer at risk."

Posted by: Aku Apr 27 2006, 01:10 AM

QUOTE (DrowVampyre)

no, i disagree, that still mkaes it sound like you can stand still while having lead flying at you, and not be in danger i dont think thats the way it's ment to be, i think it's ment to be that aslong as you are within the supressed area, until the fireing characters next turn, you are at risk, unless you are prone or taking cover

Posted by: CONAN9845 Apr 27 2006, 01:11 AM

Personally, I think that the last sentence, "Characters in the suppressed area who do not move other than taking cover or dropping prone are not at risk" is in reference to the first sentence, "Any character that is currently in (but not behind cover or prone) or that moves into or out of the suppressed area before the shooter's next Action Phase risks catching some flying lead".

You can't say that a character that stands like a statue isn't at risk because of the last sentence, since, according to the first sentence, he most certainly is at risk. The last sentence is saying that they aren't at risk because they didn't get struck by the suppression in the first place since they were already behind cover or prone.

I just can't stand when people who claim to know the English language have to read the rules of a game (NOT written by English professors), and then try to follow the letter, rather than the intent or spirit, of those rules.

But like he said, and I agree with him, he is allowed to have whatever interpretation he wants. Ours is an interpretation as well. As long as it works in his game, not matter how deluded we may think it is, then it's fine. He said we didn't have to play in his games. I, for one, am grateful for that.