Printable Version of Topic

Click here to view this topic in its original format

Dumpshock Forums _ Shadowrun _ XM-30 typo?

Posted by: Moon-Hawk Mar 12 2007, 03:31 PM

Longarms are assumed to have a stock, and you get no recoil compensation for it. Of course, you can put a shock pad on to get 1 point.
SMGs do not necessarily use a stock, but if you do use one (usually a folding and/or removable stock) you get 1 point of RC, and you can get an additional point if you put a shock pad on it.
Right?

So when the XM-30 is in it's compact carbine configuration, shouldn't it have RC of (2), rather than (1)?

Thanks.

Posted by: Jack Kain Mar 12 2007, 03:41 PM

On a weapons recoil the (2) in these marks () usually denotes the use of the stock or other recoil absorbing feature that isn't always active some guns recoil is written as x(x) because it has a higher recoil when the tri-pod is down or the stock is in use.

I don't know about the X-M30 carbine, I don't have the book on hand.

EDIT: The only X-M30 I see is the

HK-XM30 which have various attachments, including the carbine.

Posted by: Moon-Hawk Mar 12 2007, 05:55 PM

Right. That's the gun I'm talking about. And when it is operating as a carbine (an SMG by SR4 definitions) it should receive 1 point of RC for using a stock, since all SMGs get a point of RC for using a stock. Plus it still has shock pads, bringing the total RC contribution of the stock up to 2. Right?

Why does the XM-30 in SMG-mode not get a free point of RC from using a stock? Obviously, it doesn't get a free point in any of the other modes, because all of those weapon types are assumed to use a stock and offer no benefit for it. In sniper rifle mode or assault rifle mode or LMG mode the stock itself offers no benefit, since those weapon types don't get a benefit for using a stock, but it does have a shock pad on the stock so you end up with 1 point of RC.

Am I not explaining this well?

Posted by: hobgoblin Mar 12 2007, 06:02 PM

i think the idea of rifles not getting a benefit from the stock is that the stronger round cancels out the benefit. and a carbine iirc is a rifle with a shorter barrel, but firing the same round.

but thats just me doing a "out of the ass" explanation.

the interesting bit is that the carbine mode is in all regards a inferior weapon to the full size rifle. that is unless the gm gives it a better concealment...

and to top it of, it costs 500 extra...

Posted by: Moon-Hawk Mar 12 2007, 07:20 PM

Is it? I thought I carbine was a rifle that fired pistol ammo, but I'm not really standing behind that statement.
My logic goes like this:
A) All SMGs get a point of RC for using a stock. 2 if it has a shock pad
B) The XM30 is a SMG when configured as a carbine. Carbines are defined as SMGs in SR4, just look at the AK-97 carbine.
so either:
1) The XM30 is a special exception.
2) There is a typo in the description and it should have an extra point of RC in that configuration.

So where have I gone wrong?

You're right that SMGs, aside from their concealability, are game mechanically inferior to assault rifles in every way; except for the free point of RC that they all get if they use a stock

Posted by: Jack Kain Mar 12 2007, 07:35 PM

The XM30 is an assault rifle, even with a carbine attached it is still an assault rifle(though for specialization purposes the carbine may be an SMG).

The carbine attachment does not replace anything on the HK-XM30. Its an add on just like the the grenade launcher.

The HK-XM30 comes with a rigid stock and a shock pad yet its recoil is only mentioned at (1)
The carbine attachment does not have a stock, the HK-XM30 has a stock, the carbine is mounted below its barrel. Firing from the under barrel area could easily effect the recoil.

One good reason to attach the carbine(as its damage and AP is worse then the gun stand alone) would be the main barrel is gas vented while the carbine has a sound suppressor.

Posted by: Moon-Hawk Mar 12 2007, 07:37 PM

QUOTE (Jack Kain @ Mar 12 2007, 02:35 PM)

It is not still an assault rifle, and yes the carbine does replace the standard gun.
The grenade launcher and shotgun are underbarrel attachments.
The carbine, assault rifle, sniper rifle, and LMG are complete reconfigurations of the weapon. It's based on the XM-8.
edit: Reference the picture of the weapon from the core book.

Posted by: hobgoblin Mar 12 2007, 07:53 PM

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbine
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Submachine_gun

Posted by: Jack Kain Mar 12 2007, 07:53 PM

Sorry from what I read, I say underbarrel shot gun and got the idea they were all under barrel.

Posted by: Moon-Hawk Mar 12 2007, 07:57 PM

hobgoblin: Thanks for the clarification there. Regardless, it would seem that SR4 treats automatic carbines as SMGs. Again, I point to the AK97 carbine.

Jack Kain: I've seen that interpretation a few times on this board, but I'm pretty sure I'm right about this, because of the picture and the XM-8 (which it is obviously inspired by) Further, the XM-8 is definitely using the term "carbine" to refer to an SMG-like weapon.
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/ground/images/xm8-poster.jpg

Posted by: hobgoblin Mar 12 2007, 08:01 PM

hmm, i had missed that AK carbine. ok, now im officially confused...

btw, as i was reading the carbine wikipedia page, it dawned on me that the carbine designation seems to be very very liquid.

also, it may not be only the xm-30 carbine config that have wonky RC. take a look at the LMG. where did those 2 permanent points of RC come from?

if its from the bi-pod then it should have imo been entered as only (3) as you only get the benefit from the bi-pod when properly deployed...

Posted by: mfb Mar 12 2007, 08:07 PM

"carbine" is a really loose term, as is "submachine gun". both of them can refer to the same thing. you can call a given weapon a carbine or a submachine gun, and be correct.

carbine tends to be used for weapons which are in some way related to rifles. maybe it's a rifle that fires pistol rounds; maybe it's an SMG that fires rifle rounds. it's a carbine (or an SMG!) either way.

the only way you can possibly use "carbine" wrong is if you apply it to a machine pistol. and even then, you'll probably have enough people who are also wrong that the lot of you could qualify as "differently right".

Posted by: hobgoblin Mar 12 2007, 08:10 PM

then im starting to wonder. do one have to pack SMG ammo for use with the carbine config, and lmg ammo for when your using the LMG config?

Posted by: X-Kalibur Mar 12 2007, 08:13 PM

QUOTE (mfb)

Or you could just shoot the people who disagree with you and be done with it.

Posted by: mfb Mar 12 2007, 08:18 PM

QUOTE (hobgoblin @ Mar 12 2007, 03:10 PM)

then im starting to wonder. do one have to pack SMG ammo for use with the carbine config, and lmg ammo for when your using the LMG config?

negative, as long as you ignore the fact that the LMG does more damage than the AR. you could chalk that up to the LMG's longer barrel, i guess. basically, the main difference between the LMG setup and the AR setup is that the LMG setup can accept belted ammo (i assume--don't have the book in front of me) and possibly a longer barrel.

Posted by: X-Kalibur Mar 12 2007, 08:18 PM

QUOTE (hobgoblin)

then im starting to wonder. do one have to pack SMG ammo for use with the carbine config, and lmg ammo for when your using the LMG config?

Here's the thing, the parts are changing, but the receiver isn't, so it's chambered for the same round regardless of what mode it is in. The HK SR9 for example (an assault rifle) can have parts swapped around in order to have everyone's favorite sharpshooter rifle from videogames... the PSG-1. Still chambered for the same round mind you. Even the LMG is going to fire the rounds, but you'll need a belt of them to feed it.

Posted by: hobgoblin Mar 12 2007, 08:23 PM

ugh, now i wish that they (fanpro) introduced some kind of ammo designation so that one could just at a glance see if a weapon could share ammo or not...

say pistol/rifle/custom or something like that...

because if the xm30 use the same rifle ammo all the time, then it may well be that the AK97 carbine also use rifle ammo, and cant share ammo with other SMGs as they may be using pistol ammo with longer (the a normal pistol) barrels.

Posted by: mfb Mar 12 2007, 08:31 PM

yep.

Posted by: hobgoblin Mar 12 2007, 08:33 PM

huh?

Posted by: Moon-Hawk Mar 12 2007, 08:38 PM

Yeah, I agree that they all fire the same ammunition.
I agree that the reason the LMG has more power is because of the longer barrel (and I very quickly stop thinking about it). Similarly the carbine has less power because of the shorter barrel. (quick, stop thinking about that part)
I agree that the LMG gets its 2 extra points of RC from the bipod, and I agree that it should've been in the parenthesis.

But none of this answers my original question.
Why doesn't the XM-30 carbine-mode get one more point of RC, if all SMGs get a point of RC for using a stock?

Posted by: mfb Mar 12 2007, 08:46 PM

QUOTE (hobgoblin)

huh?

yep, it'd be nice if SR had more specific ammo classifications. better than the Genesis game, i guess, where a clip would give you 9 rounds for a pistol or 20 for an SMG (and the same clip could be switched between weapons, creating or destroy rounds in the process).

Posted by: hobgoblin Mar 12 2007, 08:49 PM

QUOTE (Moon-Hawk)

ammo again?

and if so, that may be a hint that the ak carbine/smg fires "smg" ammo but otherwise share its design with the ak97 assault rifle, but the xm30 carbine config use the "assault rifle" ammo...

again, stop thinking quick

(hmm, i wonder if i should incorporate that into a sig or something)

Posted by: Moon-Hawk Mar 12 2007, 09:04 PM

QUOTE (hobgoblin)

(hmm, i wonder if i should incorporate that into a sig or something)

Aha! An actual answer! I'm not sure if it's right, but it's at least an answer.
Of course, that leaves us with the interesting problem of all SMG class weapons doing the same damage regardless of whether they use pistol or rifle rounds, but oh well.

Still, it seems to me that it should get an extra point of RC. The extra point of RC is what makes SMGs useful weapons (in game; forget reality for a moment). Otherwise, the only difference between them and assault rifles is damage, which the rifle is flat-out better.
Okay, you could argue concealability, but where the heck are you sneaking into with a SMG in your pocket that you couldn't get a rifle in just as easily? I admit there are situations, but not really enough to make it a good weapon.
That point of RC lets you use that weapon when it's appropriate without feeling like you're completely nerfing yourself by not taking an assault rifle.

Posted by: X-Kalibur Mar 12 2007, 10:07 PM

My best guess is that it is not using the same stock.

Posted by: hobgoblin Mar 12 2007, 11:47 PM

QUOTE (Moon-Hawk)

QUOTE (hobgoblin @ Mar 12 2007, 03:49 PM)

(hmm, i wonder if i should incorporate that into a sig or something)

you can hide some of the smaller SMGs under a lined coat i think (the matrix lobby scene. still, those guns may have been machine pistols, not SMGs)...

hmm, i dawned on me that the problem here isnt the xm30 on its own. but the xm30 carbine config compared to the ak97 carbine.

they have the same stats, except the ak97's (1) RC, and the xm30 carbines total cost of about 3000

(the ak costs about 400)

given the near pointlessness of converting the xm30 to carbine in the first place (a loss of one point on both damage and AP for a cost of 500

extra), the carbine part of the kit could very well be removed in a future revision of the book and no-one would miss it imo...

the SMG, carbine and assault rifle even share the automatics skill...

im starting to think you will be better of just forgetting the carbine kit even exists...

Posted by: mfb Mar 12 2007, 11:51 PM

does the conceal rating not change? hell, does SR4 even still have a conceal rating?

Posted by: hobgoblin Mar 12 2007, 11:54 PM

there is a general consealment table on page 302...

the baseline for it is a heavy pistol, grenade, taser, googles or comlink at no pool modifier. then it go either up or down in steps of 2, with a max of 6.

if one can argue that a carbine is the size of a SMG, then its a +4 rather then a +6 (assault rifle) to the dice pool of anyone looking for it.

interestingly, a sword and a katana share the same numbers

Posted by: pestulens Mar 13 2007, 12:00 AM

QUOTE (Moon-Hawk @ Mar 12 2007, 03:38 PM)

But none of this answers my original question.
Why doesn't the XM-30 carbine-mode get one more point of RC, if all SMGs get a point of RC for using a stock?

P 311 "Shock Pad: This shock-absorbing pad can be mounted on the rigid shoulder stock of a rifle, shotbun, or heavy wepon, and provides 1 point of recoil compensation."
So SMG's and by extenchen carbins do not benefit from a shock pad. ordanaraly I would argue that becas the XM-30 apears to keap the ridged stock that the shock pad should still apply but since the XM-30 basic is "just better" I realy don't think it is worth debating.

QUOTE

does the conceal rating not change? hell, does SR4 even still have a conceal rating?

p301 it is a modifire to perception checks witch means lower numbers are better.

Posted by: Moon-Hawk Mar 13 2007, 01:48 PM

QUOTE (pestulens)

QUOTE (Moon-Hawk @ Mar 12 2007, 03:38 PM)

But none of this answers my original question.
Why doesn't the XM-30 carbine-mode get one more point of RC, if all SMGs get a point of RC for using a stock?

AHA! So that's it. So the XM-30 carbine IS benefiting from the standard SMG-using-a-stock bonus, but does not get the shock pad bonus, so the total is still (1).

I see your point about the apparently rigid stock, and if it DID benefit from both for an extra point of RC it would give the carbine mode some purpose, but at least I've resolved my perceived inconsistency in the book.

Posted by: hobgoblin Mar 13 2007, 04:50 PM

funny thing then that the art present the gun as a bullpup (magazine in the stock), as that basically makes any kind of folding stock useless.

but as we all know, never use the art to figure out the stats...

Posted by: Moon-Hawk Mar 13 2007, 06:25 PM

Ooh, I have a new question. If it's using the same chamber and the same ammo for all these modes (which I think is pretty much obvious at this point) then why does the ammo capacity change in sniper rifle mode?
Assault rifle and SMG have the same capacity, duh. LMG has the option to take a belt feed, but no big conflict there, either. The grenade launcher and shotgun are underbarrel accessories, so they have their own magazine. But why-oh-why does the sniper mode have a reduced ammo capacity?

Posted by: mfb Mar 13 2007, 06:40 PM

'cos!

Posted by: Fezig Mar 13 2007, 06:57 PM

Because, as everyone knows, its a balancing factor and ever since FPS games became popular it is expected

Actually, the reason I'd say is that sniper rifles have smaller clips so that its sleek to the weapon so when in a prone sniping position the magazine won't interfere with either the position or the sniper. Thats just my personal justification though.

Besides, isn't it supposed to be one shot one kill? What kind of a sniper needs a huge magazine anyway

Posted by: X-Kalibur Mar 13 2007, 07:02 PM

Going by the artwork... which is obviously stupid because I don't see a point in having a bullpup sniper rifle... (and WHY does the LMG have a magazine coming out of it?) You'll notice the the sniper mode magazine is MUCH shorter than the Carbine or Assault Rifle modes.

Posted by: Clyde Mar 13 2007, 07:07 PM

The short clips might also be made to a higher standard of quality - in repeating weapons (semi and full auto types) the magazine causes a great many of the jams that occur. A short magazine that doesn't get dinged around and is better made would enhance reliability. Mostly, though, it's gotta be one of those "because we said so" rules. In reality, it's often possible to select a lot of different magazines for the same weapon. M-16 rifles can take 5, 10, 20, 30, and even 40 and 100 (Beta C Mag) shot capacity magazines. A baby glock 26 can take a 10, 15, 17 or even bigger magazine - it just sticks out of the grip farther.

Posted by: mfb Mar 13 2007, 07:13 PM

a bullpup sniper rifle will have a longer barrel in a more compact form, so it's not entirely dumb. as for the LMG with the clip, it's actually a pretty good idea, as long as the weapon accepts both clips and belted rounds. if your LMG accepts both, then you have to worry less about running out of ammo--and if you're issuing a multi-configuration weapon to your troops, then the ability to share ammo is something you'll want to take advantage of. if it only accepts clips, then, yeah. pretty dumb.

Posted by: X-Kalibur Mar 13 2007, 07:23 PM

Well, the stats for the weapon indicate that it is 100 (b) which makes the artwork for it entirely stupid. Now, if it were 100 (b)© it would be a different story. I also fail to see what would stop you from using a 200 round belt feed in the LMG, but I'm no gun expert.

Posted by: Austere Emancipator Mar 13 2007, 07:38 PM

You're right. With any regular belt feed, as long as the operating mechanism is powerful enough to manage a longer belt -- not usually an issue with a properly designed belt pouch, or another soldier helping with the feed -- you could use belts of any length from 1 to thousands.

Bullpup sniper rifles are not uncommon, and neither are accurized marksman rifle/sniper variants of assault rifles that accept the same large magazines. I love the idea of an H&K PSG1 with a 100-round C-Mag -- the gun already weighs almost 18lbs, what's another 10.5lbs?

Posted by: X-Kalibur Mar 13 2007, 07:57 PM

Well, at least you'd be lying prone with that extra 10.5 pounds. My SR9, while I love it to death, is just abuse on me to fire. Weighs alot AND has a good kick to it.

Posted by: mfb Mar 13 2007, 08:01 PM

well, the thing is, if you use a 200-round belt in a weapon that's listed as using 100-round belts? you are kicking the baby jesus with hitler. you don't want to kick the baby jesus with hitler, do you?

Posted by: X-Kalibur Mar 14 2007, 05:47 AM

I... I think I might have to sig that...

Posted by: Fezig Mar 14 2007, 06:00 PM

Wow...how profound mfb....wow. Haha, after all my years involved in competitive speech I thought I'd heard every Hitler reference imaginable, but you've given me a new one....awesome.

Posted by: Fix-it Mar 14 2007, 06:53 PM

QUOTE (X-Kalibur)

pictures= fluff.

fluff=pictures.

I take weapon stats and call it something different all the time.

like for example:

Ares Predator 4? no, it's a Para Ordanance PXT P14•45. I get the fluff, the GM doesn't have to agonize whether the rules are balanced.

AK-97 Carbine?

nope, it's a beaten up surplus FAMAS-F2 with a bipod and a rail.

's what's great about these games. you can pretend they make sense.