Printable Version of Topic
Click here to view this topic in its original format
Dumpshock Forums _ Shadowrun _ two weapons and recoil
Posted by: mfb Aug 1 2007, 09:41 PM
i didn't find any answer to this question during a quick search. hoping for some clarification.
| QUOTE (SR4 page 142) |
| Semi-automatic weapons that fire a second shot receive a -1 dice pool modifier for the second shot only. |
in other words, you don't rack up recoil modifiers for firing a second shot--you rack up recoil modifiers for firing a second shot with the same weapon. so when firing two semi-auto weapons twice in the same round, the recoil modifiers look like this:
1st shot, 1st weapon: no recoil (since this is the first shot fired with weapon 1)
1st shot, 2nd weapon: no recoil (since this is the first shot fired with weapon 2)
2nd shot, 1st weapon: -1 recoil from weapon 1, no recoil from weapon 2 (since it's only been fired once, it hasn't racked up a recoil penalty yet)
2nd shot, 2nd weapon: -1 recoil from weapon 1, -1 recoil from weapon 2.
i suppose an argument could be made that the second shots happen simultaneously, ergo the recoil from each would apply to both. that's somewhat counterintuitive, though--if you haven't rolled for the second shot, it's odd that recoil from that second shot would apply to anything yet.
am i misreading the rules? have they been errata'd?
Posted by: Eleazar Aug 1 2007, 10:09 PM
I think the same way you do mfb, though I have been told I am wrong and that the recoil modifier increases each time a gun is fired. This doesn't make sense to me because the majority of what is absorbing that recoil is the shooting arm and not the whole body.
Posted by: mfb Aug 1 2007, 10:50 PM
sensible or not, it's certainly what the rules state.
Posted by: neko128 Aug 2 2007, 01:35 AM
As per the paragraph spanning pages 141 and 142:
| QUOTE |
Attacker Using a Second Firearm Characters can use two pistol- or SMG-class weapons, one in each hand, firing both with a single Simple Action. Doing so, however, requires that the character split his dice pool between the attacks. If two separate skills are being used (Pistols and Automatics), use the smallest dice pool. Split the pool before applying modifiers. Two-gun attacks also negate any dice pool bonuses from smartlinks or laser sights. Additionally, any uncompensated recoil modifiers applicable to one weapon also apply to the other weapon. |
So yes; any uncompensated recoil from each applies to both.
Posted by: Doctor Funkenstein Aug 2 2007, 02:03 AM
Yes, it does seem to work as you described. It's a small perk for all the negatives that come with it, I suppose.
You basically choose to give your opponents extra but more easily absored shots versus fewer but harder to resist shots. If your Skill and Agility is high enough, it can be a tough choice in any situation where it's a concern. But if you're just average or not, you'd be pretty foolish to split your dice pool.
I mean, without Ambidexterity you're already getting a -4 dice pool penalty (no Smartlink, -2 for using off-hand) over a single weapon shot. So if that's ignorable, either through really high dice pools and/or Ambidexterity, then, yeah, going Wyatt Earp-like isn't that bad of an option. But in no way does it beat using just one weapon in all situations like it used to. Which is a Good Thing™.
Posted by: Sterling Aug 2 2007, 02:18 AM
So it would really be:
Right hand: Shot one is fired, no recoil. (First shot is free).
Left hand: Shot two is fired, +1 recoil (from first shot).
Right hand: Shot three is fired, +2 recoil (first and second shots).
Left hand: Shot four is fired, +3 recoil (first, second, and third shots).
So if you plan to dual weild pistols, better make sure each pistol has some decent recoil compensation. For SMGs, even more recoil compensation's needed. Plus don't forget, if you're one of the three Street Samurai in SR4 that don't have the positive quality: ambidexterity, you're down two dice on your off hand attacks.
So Samurai Bob has two predators, an agility of four, and a pistols:predator skill of six. He's not ambidextrous, so he has ten dice to split (five each), minus two on his off hand.
Now he's at five and three dice for his right and left hand shots (respectively), and with no recoil, he wouldn't be able to take that 4th shot. First shot (first with right), five dice, no penalty. Second shot (first with the left) three dice, minus one die penalty. Third shot (second right), five dice, minus two, so three dice total, and fourth shot (second left) he's down to three dice minus three dice so he fires and misses by a country mile.
Obviously there's weapons and accessories and cyberwear that will let you fire those shots with very few penalties, but even if Bob has the full five in each hand, he's now looking at visibility modifiers, range modifiers, etc (which I left out of the above example just to make it somewhat easy to follow). In partial light conditions (-2) with a light wound (-1) and at long range (-2) poor Bob has zero dice if he decides to try to fire off four attacks in a pass. We're not even going into multiple targets (-2 per additional target)
It'd be up to the GM if, in the above near-perfect conditions (no penalties beyond recoil and off-hand) if Bob could fire the two left handed shots first (three dice then two dice) and THEN fire the right handed shots (three dice and then two again) in order to have all four attacks with a small chance of hitting. As a GM I think I wouldn't mind if a player decided to choose three/two/three/two as opposed to five/three/three/zero. But that's up to the GM of the game you're in, after all.
Posted by: Doctor Funkenstein Aug 2 2007, 02:20 AM
Err, I misread the original post slightly. My reading of the rules imply that the modifiers would be:
First Two Shots: No recoil from either pistol. They're both assumed to have been fired simultaneously and haven't built up any recoil as a result.
Second Two Shots: Each pistol has generated one point of recoil, both suffer a -2 penalty.
Posted by: l33tpenguin Aug 2 2007, 02:41 AM
What sort of recoil compensation is available for pistols? I know machine pistols can have gas vent and stocks, what is available for reg. pistols?
I like two pistol builds, I think they are fun with a good deal of flair, but the restrictions against them are sometimes just silly. There isn't any reason, imo, that laser or smart link bonus shouldn't apply.
Having to half your dice pool, which I agree with, can be a handicap enough. I typically would use two firearms for most situations, typical mercs, sec guards, etc. but when it came to dealing with an actual threat I would always holster one of them to take full advantage of my dicepool. A single weapon is almost always preferable when dealing with a more difficult opponent.
Posted by: Jaid Aug 2 2007, 02:52 AM
| QUOTE (l33tpenguin) |
| What sort of recoil compensation is available for pistols? I know machine pistols can have gas vent and stocks, what is available for reg. pistols? |
pretty much nothing. unless it's built in (for examples, see the hammerli or the fubuki).
i guess there's always the trusty cyberarm gyro thing...
Posted by: l33tpenguin Aug 2 2007, 03:05 AM
I'd bring up the whole "But in the real world..." but we all know what results from those statements 
Posted by: Sterling Aug 2 2007, 03:16 AM
I can see your point there, Doctor, I think the FAQ helps clear it up.
If you want, it helps to think of it as one pistol that fires four shots. The FAQ makes the claim that every bullet fired in an action phase incurs a recoil penalty, except for the first. So in the case of two pistols, only the first shot fired would be without recoil.
From the FAQ:
"There are several things to keep in mind about recoil:
a) The first bullet never counts.
b) Every bullet fired in an Action Phase after the first incurs a cumulative -1 recoil dice pool modifier.
c) Each point of recoil compensation counteracts 1 point of recoil modifier."
So if someone was to create the four-armed gunbunny from hell, they'd have a tough time managing all the recoil unless they invested heavily in recoil compensation.
Actually, it only would take a recoil compensator with a rating two in each gun to negate any recoil penalty for firing two guns in an action phase, so a gas-vent three pr gun would help keep the four-armed gunbunny from being buried under a mountain of recoil penalties.... as long as he wasn't using pistols.
Of course, I am in no way telling anyone how to run their game, if you as a gm decide that recoil is handled in the "Doctor Funkenstein" method, it's your call.
As for recoil options for pistols.. umm.. you're kinda raw boned. I guess the only method that's in the game is the cyberarm gyromount.
As for laser sights not working with more than one weapon at a time, yeah, that's kind of strange. Either the dot's on the target or it isn't. But the rules have never allowed dual weapon use with smartlinks, something about having to deal with two crosshairs being too much for your average joe's brain. If you're going to dual with machine pistols or SMGs, there's tracer rounds which will give you beter dice at longer range than a smartlink would (plus one die at short, plus two at long, and plus three at extreme).
Posted by: toturi Aug 2 2007, 03:44 AM
| QUOTE (Sterling) |
| I can see your point there, Doctor, I think the FAQ helps clear it up. If you want, it helps to think of it as one pistol that fires four shots. The FAQ makes the claim that every bullet fired in an action phase incurs a recoil penalty, except for the first. So in the case of two pistols, only the first shot fired would be without recoil. From the FAQ: "There are several things to keep in mind about recoil: a) The first bullet never counts. b) Every bullet fired in an Action Phase after the first incurs a cumulative -1 recoil dice pool modifier. c) Each point of recoil compensation counteracts 1 point of recoil modifier." So if someone was to create the four-armed gunbunny from hell, they'd have a tough time managing all the recoil unless they invested heavily in recoil compensation. Actually, it only would take a recoil compensator with a rating two in each gun to negate any recoil penalty for firing two guns in an action phase, so a gas-vent three pr gun would help keep the four-armed gunbunny from being buried under a mountain of recoil penalties.... as long as he wasn't using pistols. Of course, I am in no way telling anyone how to run their game, if you as a gm decide that recoil is handled in the "Doctor Funkenstein" method, it's your call. As for recoil options for pistols.. umm.. you're kinda raw boned. I guess the only method that's in the game is the cyberarm gyromount. As for laser sights not working with more than one weapon at a time, yeah, that's kind of strange. Either the dot's on the target or it isn't. But the rules have never allowed dual weapon use with smartlinks, something about having to deal with two crosshairs being too much for your average joe's brain. If you're going to dual with machine pistols or SMGs, there's tracer rounds which will give you beter dice at longer range than a smartlink would (plus one die at short, plus two at long, and plus three at extreme). |
You could interpret the FAQ that way, but again the FAQ is sufficiently ambiguous enough to mean that the first bullets from both guns never count and given that the example are all single weapon questions, there is no clear indication that it is meant for 2 weapons as well. You certainly can apply your interpretation to the situation and call it the FAQ answer but another GM can also use the FAQ to mean both 1st bullets don't count and call that the FAQ answer. And to me, you'd be both right.
Posted by: Fortune Aug 2 2007, 03:53 AM
| QUOTE (Sterling) |
| Actually, it only would take a recoil compensator with a rating two in each gun to negate any recoil penalty for firing two guns in an action phase |
Technically, with pistols it would only require 1 point of RC for each gun. One point would offset each weapon's first shot, thereby eliminating the penalties altogether.
Posted by: l33tpenguin Aug 2 2007, 04:22 AM
it depends on how you read the rules.
if the first shoot from each gun is 'free' than 1 point each is fine.
if only the first shot from the first gun is free, then 2 points is needed
gun1 shot 1, free
gun 2 shot 1, 1 point
gun 1 shot 2, 2 points
gun 2 shot 2, 3 points
you would actually only need 3 points total, one in one and two in the other, but 2 points to each gun would eliminate any ambiguity as to which gun would require 1 point and which two.
As for two smart links... if someone can manage to point two weapons at a target(or two) at once, they obviously have the mental control and physical prowess to accomplish this. A smart link just gives you more precise control over something you can already do. If its really that confusing, I'd just change the color of one of the sights in my vision
*edit*
After thinking it over, I LIKE the recoil idea. It works from a game balance point of view. From a single weapon, for every bullet after the first you gain recoil. Even though there are two sources, they are treated as one weapon system.
As for smart links, I would at the least have half the bonus applied to each weapon, similar to how you have to halve your dice pool.
Posted by: Fortune Aug 2 2007, 06:50 AM
| QUOTE (l33tpenguin) |
| if only the first shot from the first gun is free, then 2 points is needed |
The first shot of the second gun would be 'free' as well ... its own recoil already compensated for, and no recoil to be added from the first shot. Only the third shot (second shot with the first gun) would start to rack up recoil, which while not added to that third shot itself, would affect the fourth shot (second shot, second gun).
Posted by: Sterling Aug 2 2007, 07:40 AM
| QUOTE (l33tpenguin) |
*edit* After thinking it over, I LIKE the recoil idea. It works from a game balance point of view. From a single weapon, for every bullet after the first you gain recoil. Even though there are two sources, they are treated as one weapon system. |
The reason I'd rule that way (and do, in my games) is that it does add one more disadvantage to dual pistol use. Keeping dual pistol use as a semi-uncommon 'signature' move means there's less chance you're going to see most PC firearms characters all using two pistols. Recoil compensation is just one more thing to detract from dual pistol use. Of course, nothing says you HAVE to shoot four times, you'd be within your rights to have your pistols on hidden arm slides, and only fire one if you wanted. This lets you focus all your dice on two shots, and then open up with both guns if you just need to throw some heavy intimidation (and nothing should force a professionalism test than a gunslinger adept with enough dice to use two pistols and hit four separate targets) or, alternatively, stick-n-shock a few people to take the fight out of them.
I'm not saying the 'every first shot is free' folks are wrong. My take on it after reading the FAQ's line that 'every bullet after the first means recoil applies' means I feel pretty comfortable in my interpretation. Of course the penalty of pool splitting before modifiers is heavy enough that not docking someone the second first point won't make for a game-breaking experience. And again, people can (and should) run their games making judgement calls on rules the way they see fit, so I'm not going to argue for the sheer sake of 'here's why you should do it *MY* way', but for the sake of getting other people's opinions and going from there. Who knows, the next poster could wax eloqeuntly enough that I'd agree with them and let them put a cybereye in their balance tail to boot.
Technically, the debate hinges on just one point, which means it's probably the least disruptive interpretation variation the boards have seen since I've started reading them.
Posted by: Fortune Aug 2 2007, 08:04 AM
| QUOTE (Sterling) |
| My take on it after reading the FAQ's line that 'every bullet after the first means recoil applies' |
The next line of the FAQ states ...
| QUOTE (FAQ) |
| Each point of recoil compensation counteracts 1 point of recoil modifier |
If both pistols have a point of recoil compensation, then no uncompensated recoil accrues until after the third shot (if then).
Posted by: Doctor Funkenstein Aug 2 2007, 09:20 AM
It's assumed the weapons are being fired simultaneously (as opposed to, say, right-left, right-left). Thus the first Simple Action has both weapons being fired at the same time, neither of which has generated any recoil at that time. It's not until the next Simple Aciton that either has a point of recoil, at which point they both suffer 2 points of recoil when fired simultaneously.
No recoil on the first shot, two on the second. Applies to both weapons.
Posted by: Fortune Aug 2 2007, 11:34 AM
| QUOTE (Doctor Funkenstein) |
| It's assumed the weapons are being fired simultaneously (as opposed to, say, right-left, right-left). Thus the first Simple Action has both weapons being fired at the same time, neither of which has generated any recoil at that time. It's not until the next Simple Aciton that either has a point of recoil, at which point they both suffer 2 points of recoil when fired simultaneously. No recoil on the first shot, two on the second. Applies to both weapons. |
Exactly.
Unless each pistol has one point of recoil compensation (somehow). In that case, there would be no recoil modifiers.
Posted by: Dashifen Aug 2 2007, 01:36 PM
| QUOTE (Jaid) | ||
pretty much nothing. unless it's built in (for examples, see the hammerli or the fubuki). i guess there's always the trusty cyberarm gyro thing... |
Also the Foot Anchor from Aug. provides some recoil comp.
Posted by: Dizzman Aug 3 2007, 05:33 AM
Hopefully the cheesiness that is custom grip will reappear in Arsenal. Ahhh, custom grip, how I miss you...
Posted by: Sterling Aug 3 2007, 08:22 AM
| QUOTE (Fortune) | ||
Exactly. Unless each pistol has one point of recoil compensation (somehow). In that case, there would be no recoil modifiers. |
While I can see your point on the 'each weapon fires at the same time' due to both first shots occuring at the same time in a simple action, the rules mention that "any uncompensated recoil modifiers applicable to one weapon also apply to the other weapon." If there was a weapon that fired two-round bursts in a simple action, there'd be a negative one die pool penalty for the first burst, and a neg three on the second, by the RAW as I interpret it. The 'not enough bullets' rule on page 143 could be read to contradict the thought of firing two rounds with zero recoil penalty as well.
I just don't see how if you fire four shots, even two sets of two fired simultaneously, that it gets around the fact that after one shot is fired, recoil applies and uncompensated recoil applies to both weapons. In realistic terms, the only manner in which a human (AFAIK) can fire two rounds simultaneously is by using a double-barreled weapon that is set to discharge both barrels on one trigger pull. The second you say 'I fire both guns at my target(s)', you have to identify the first shot (by rolling dice, etc) and your first (possibly only) target. That's where I have to default to the FAQ, nebulous as it may seem.
I guess what it boils down to is that we agree to disagree. It's not a big deal, you've explained your points very well, the both of you. It really seems to hinge on the perception of which to apply first, the recoil rule (every shot after the first) or two-hand rule (two shots in the same simple action).
Posted by: Fortune Aug 3 2007, 08:38 AM
The key word in the rules, as I see it, is 'uncompensated'.
"Any uncompensated recoil modifiers applicable to one weapon also apply to the other weapon."
After firing one shot, a pistol with one point of recoil compensation will still have racked up no recoil penalties, because the recoil has been 'compensated' for. A second shot with that pistol would garner recoil (which would be applicable if a third bullet was fired, as in the case of burst firing pistols), as the compensation has already been used.
Adding a second pistol into the mix (also with one point of recoil compensation) would not change the equation. The first shot from that pistol would not have any uncompensated recoil from the first pistol (either by benefit of simultaneous firing or the recoil comp on the first pistol), so suffers no penalties.
Subsequently, the second shot from the first pistol suffers no recoil modifiers from either gun, as both of the first shots have been compensated for.
The only sticking point is the second shot from the second pistol.
If you believe that the pistols are fired simultaneously, then there is still no recoil modifier, since the first shots from each pistol have had the recoil compensated for already, and the second shots are going off at the same time, so cannot affect each other.
If, on the other hand, you believe that the pistols fire left-right-left-right (or vice versa), then the second shot from the second pistol would indeed suffer from a -1 recoil modifier as a result of pistol #1's second shot.
The only real difference is that last shot. 
Posted by: l33tpenguin Aug 3 2007, 09:04 AM
| QUOTE (Sterling) |
| I just don't see how if you fire four shots, even two sets of two fired simultaneously, that it gets around the fact that after one shot is fired, recoil applies and uncompensated recoil applies to both weapons. In realistic terms, the only manner in which a human (AFAIK) can fire two rounds simultaneously is by using a double-barreled weapon that is set to discharge both barrels on one trigger pull. The second you say 'I fire both guns at my target(s)', you have to identify the first shot (by rolling dice, etc) and your first (possibly only) target. That's where I have to default to the FAQ, nebulous as it may seem. I guess what it boils down to is that we agree to disagree. It's not a big deal, you've explained your points very well, the both of you. It really seems to hinge on the perception of which to apply first, the recoil rule (every shot after the first) or two-hand rule (two shots in the same simple action). |
In all honesty, if firing two weapons near simultaneous (on a fraction of a second scale of time, a human can't possibly do two things at exactly the same time) neither weapon would realistically be effected by the recoil of the other. So, to say that neither first shot would be effected by recoil.
That said, from a game mechanic point of view, I think it makes better sense to count recoil in the "right, left, right, left" method, since any other time a second round is fired by a character, it has recoil applied to it.
of course, I guess, since a person firing multiple rounds from a single weapon doesn't have to halve their dice pool they do have an advantage...
by the "both weapons fired at once method, would three round bursts from double machine pistols go 0, 2, 4 points of recoil? Ouch:(
Posted by: Stinger Aug 10 2007, 05:12 AM
I've been following this thread with interest as I'm getting ready to play a two-gun fighter.
My character is Ambidextrous, with Pistol 6 and Agility 5, with a specialization in Semi-autos (+2), and reflex recorder for the Pistol skill (+1). His Predators are smartlinked (+2 per). Firing a single shot with one gun, with no other modifiers, gives him a total pool of 16 dice.
Using one gun in each hand, his pool is 14 (no smartgun mod for two-gun use), split to 7 dice.
If go with the recoil mods piling up interpretation, four shots would roll at 7,6,5, and 4 dice respectively.
If firing is simultaneous and recoil is exclusive to each weapon (which was my original interpretation before I started wondering and encountered this thread), then I roll 7,7,6,6.
I guess the reading I end up using is going to be a GM's decision, but I just want to see if that's right.
Also, does the target of those 4 shots get a Reaction roll against each shot (4 rolls total), or only one roll whose result applies to all four separately?
Posted by: Cthulhudreams Aug 10 2007, 05:23 AM
Does anything preclude you from splitting the pool unevenly? That would make it a significantly better tactic as opposed to looking decidedly average.
Posted by: Fortune Aug 10 2007, 06:10 AM
The Pool is split before any modifiers are added (or subtracted) to each sub-Pool. The basic Pool is Skill + Attribute ... pretty much everything else, including Specializations and gear bonuses, etc is added afterward, and appropriate penalties for visibility and the like are applied to each sub-Pool.
I don't recall anything in the rules about splitting the Pool evenly.
Posted by: Stinger Aug 10 2007, 06:33 AM
| QUOTE (Fortune) |
| The Pool is split before any modifiers are added (or subtracted) to each sub-Pool. The basic Pool is Skill + Attribute ... pretty much everything else, including Specializations and gear bonuses, etc is added afterward, and appropriate penalties for visibility and the like are applied to each sub-Pool. I don't recall anything in the rules about splitting the Pool evenly. |
That changes my numbers significantly then.
My pre-modifier pool is 11. So I'd have to split it unevenly 6/5. Then I add +2 specialization and +1 for the reflex recorder, giving me 9/8. That's a better deal than how I originally figured it. So a two-fisted, four-shot hail of bullets would roll 9/7/7/5 (figuring recoil at 0,1,2,3)??
Posted by: Cthulhudreams Aug 10 2007, 06:35 AM
| QUOTE (Fortune @ Aug 10 2007, 01:10 AM) |
| The Pool is split before any modifiers are added (or subtracted) to each sub-Pool. The basic Pool is Skill + Attribute ... pretty much everything else, including Specializations and gear bonuses, etc is added afterward, and appropriate penalties for visibility and the like are applied to each sub-Pool. I don't recall anything in the rules about splitting the Pool evenly. |
If you can split the pool however you like it having something like a hammerli which has one point of recoil comp wouldn't be a bad thing. if you are specialist in semi automatic pistols, have the 'big gun' in the right hand left is the hammerli, put 2 dice in, laser sight, some other random mod.
that gives you 5+ (in the case outlined below where he has smartlinks on the left hand gun he shoots at 7, 6) dice in the hammerli pool which is never going to hit, but it does give you a bonus to hit on your main gun (which is down two dice, but gets a bonus to hit from the dodge pool penalty imposed by the hammerli rounds going downrange at the target.
In this case he comes out at (14 effective and 14 effective)
If he gets a recoil mod on the main gun he can fire at 15/15 effective.
Which hey isn't bad especially if you fire more often in a round so that dodge pool penalty gets bigger.
What is even better is if you have a MATE who fires at the guy after you are done. Because then you have just given said mate free dice due to the dodge pool penalty? Right?
(This all relies on uneven pool splitting, which might not be the case)
Posted by: Fortune Aug 10 2007, 07:00 AM
| QUOTE (Stinger) |
| ... +1 for the reflex recorder ... |
Reflex Recorder adds directly to the Skill (as do the Adept Skill Powers), and hence the basic Pool.
Posted by: Fortune Aug 10 2007, 07:01 AM
| QUOTE (Cthulhudreams @ Aug 10 2007, 04:35 PM) |
| ... laser sight ... ... smartlink ... |
No Laser Sight or Smartlink bonuses with dual wielded pistols.
Posted by: l33tpenguin Aug 10 2007, 07:14 AM
| QUOTE (Fortune) | ||
No Laser Sight or Smartlink bonuses with dual wielded pistols. |
which makes no sense... I'm fully capable of pointing two guns at a target, but I can't overlay two sets of cross hairs in my vision on the same target?
Posted by: Critias Aug 10 2007, 07:17 AM
| QUOTE (l33tpenguin) | ||||
which makes no sense... I'm fully capable of pointing two guns at a target, but I can't overlay two sets of cross hairs in my vision on the same target? |
It's also hardly new. You've never been able to use smartlinks or laser sights with two guns.
Posted by: Cthulhudreams Aug 10 2007, 02:49 PM
Damn, I knew you couldn't use two smart links, but what? No dual laser sites? Damn, that hurts me inside. Dual laser sights are like a movie industry standard.
Posted by: Moon-Hawk Aug 10 2007, 03:01 PM
Just to weigh in: I rule that the four shots being taken are sequential, with +1 recoil per shot, essentially each shot has one less die than the one before it, unless there's recoil comp. I understand the arguments both ways, but until this is very clearly addressed in a FAQ I'm going with this interpretation because I find it to be the most simple.
AFAIK you know have to split the pool evenly, although heavily favoring one hand is begging for a glitch in the other. Plus, you're generally better off hitting with two shots instead of one, since you add base damage twice, so splitting evenly is generally the way to go. Unless of course your target is a dodge master or a tank (and can thus negate everything from a half-pool shot), in which case you should probably just be using one gun anyway.
As I understand it, in the above example you'd get 12 dice in your base pool (from attribute, skill, and reflex recorder), which you'd split however you liked, but probably two pools of 6 each, and then add +2 for the specialization. Now I sometimes wonder whether the intention of the writers was for negative modifiers to apply to each shot, but the way they have it written the specialization applies after the split.
No dual smart links (or laser sights, or anything), too bad we didn't see that in Augmentation. You'd think that if someone got two smartlinks and that implant that helps you multi-task (there is one, right? I'm not making stuff up?) that they might be able to handle it, but that would be firmly in the realm of house-rules.
Basically, I'm agreeing with what others have already said, and this post boils down to "Yeah!", but there's been a lot of other posts so I just thought I'd ring in.
Posted by: Critias Aug 10 2007, 04:13 PM
Keep in mind, there's no rule against using two smartlinks, or two laser sights, just for cool/descriptive factor. And you can even get the benefit for both of them, if you (for instance) only fire each gun once. You can still dive around with little red-dots-o'-death floating from enemy to enemy, marking them as targets a split second before their chest blossoms in an explosion of blood and rent kevlar as you shoot one gun twice, or each gun once...
...just not if you fire more than that.
Posted by: Kyoto Kid Aug 10 2007, 04:44 PM
...that's the way KK uses her Warhawks which are smartlinked.
Posted by: Stinger Aug 10 2007, 05:28 PM
| QUOTE (Fortune @ Aug 10 2007, 02:00 AM) | ||
Reflex Recorder adds directly to the Skill (as do the Adept Skill Powers), and hence the basic Pool. |
Lemme try again then.
Firearms 6 + Reflex Recorder 1 + Semi-Auto specialization 2 + Attribute 5 = 14 base pool
Then split 7/7 for two guns. Smartlink doesn't count. Ambidextrous. -1 for uncompensated recoil. No other mods.
Shot 1: 7 dice
Shot 2: 6 dice
Shot 3: 5 dice
Shot 4: 4 dice
So, yeah, gets more lead in the air, which is good, especially if the target only gets one reaction roll to apply to the results of all four shots (for example, 2 hits on the defense roll negates two hits out of each round fired). Higher chance of a malfunction though.
I'd be rolling all those dice at once too, to save time. Just use different colors for each shot (7 red, 6 blue, etc)
Less of a waste of ammo to fire two shots with one gun of course (because then I'd be at 16/15) and more likely to hit and get a takedown in one go. Just doesn't rock out as much~!
Two guns is really only an option for highly skilled characters.
Posted by: Unarmed Aug 10 2007, 05:36 PM
I think that if we get into the realm (probably a very stupid realm, but whatever) of attempting to dual-wield SMG's, things get more interesting.
Let's assume that you have a character dual wielding SMG's with Gas Vent III's and no other forms of recoil compensation. Your character wants to fire a series of short bursts. Depending on your interperetation of the rules, the recoil could stack up in a bunch of different ways:
Assuming Left-Right-Left-Right:
Gun A Shot 1: Recoil -2, Fully Compensated w/ 1 Comp. Remaining, No Modifier
Gun B Shot 1: Recoil -3, Fully Compensated w/0 Comp. Remaining, No Modifier
Gun A Shot 2: Recoil -3, 1 Compensated, -2 Modifier
Gun B Shot 2: Recoil -5, 0 Compensated, -5 Modifier
Assuming Simultaneous Firing:
Gun A/B Shot 1: Recoil -2, Fully Compensated w/1 Comp. Remaining, No Modifier
Gun A/B Shot 2: Recoil -3, 1 Compensated, -4 Modifier
Then there's also the cases with people stating that recoil compensation is tracked seperately per gun, but the rules seem to explicitly contradict this.
Posted by: Unarmed Aug 10 2007, 05:47 PM
I forgot to say how things would go if we assume that the first shot with each gun does not count towards recoil, which is how things could be interpereted via RAW, but realistically that just makes the last shot of left-right-left-right a -4 instead of a -5, thus making it that much better. It's interesting that simultaneous fire results in a better situation for the person firing when using pistols, but left-right is significantly better if dual wielding SMGs in the situation I set out.
Posted by: Mr. Unpronounceable Aug 10 2007, 06:46 PM
| QUOTE (Stinger) |
| So, yeah, gets more lead in the air, which is good, especially if the target only gets one reaction roll to apply to the results of all four shots (for example, 2 hits on the defense roll negates two hits out of each round fired). Higher chance of a malfunction though. |
Err...I don't think so.
He'd get a reaction roll for each attack (though it would lose one die per additional attack until his next action)
So, against people with low reaction scores (like most non-sammy, non-adepts) they end up with a very good chance of losing their entire dicepool.
So, for example, if two people were to do this at one target, even if the target has capped reaction at 9, he's going to be getting hit fairly reliably by the last shot.
I've seen this used rather effectively against someone who was benefiting from a huge number of visibility/cover/etc. modifiers. No one person could hit him, but after 4 or 5 shots, he simply didn't get a reaction roll anymore.
Posted by: hyzmarca Aug 10 2007, 08:03 PM
Imagine, if you will, you are standing on a sandy beach tide is high. The surf drenches your bare feet. Your black duster billows in the breeze. The sunset tints everything orange. Your designer sunglasses hinder your vision in the gloom is dusk but you don't care. In each of your hands is a pistol. Across from you is your mortal enemy, who has kidnapped your girlfriend in a successful attempt to lure you out of hiding. He is wearing an immaculate three-piece business suit and also holds a pistol in each hand. In the distance, an Asian man sits in a director's chair labeled 'John Woo'.
Your run towards your enemy, the surf splashes under your feet. He runs toward you and brings his pistols to bear. One Shot, Two Shots, Three Shots, Four Shots. And you respond in kind. In your first IP you fire your right pistol and then left pistol, accruing no recoil penalties. On your second IP you fire your left pistol and then your right pistol, again accruing no penalties. Each of your shots misses your charging enemy.
And then you dive away from the surf. As you dive you fire both of your pistols at the same time, twice, suffering a -2 penality on the second double shot, and missing again. Doves appear from nowhere and fly in front of you. It's baddass.
Posted by: Fortune Aug 10 2007, 10:55 PM
| QUOTE (Stinger) |
| Lemme try again then. Firearms 6 + Reflex Recorder 1 + Semi-Auto specialization 2 + Attribute 5 = 14 base pool Then split 7/7 for two guns. |
Almost.
Specialization is not part of the Basic Pool, and is therefore added after the split.
Posted by: l33tpenguin Aug 10 2007, 11:33 PM
Besides specializations, what else is added after the split?
Posted by: Stinger Aug 10 2007, 11:38 PM
| QUOTE (Fortune @ Aug 10 2007, 05:55 PM) | ||
Almost. Specialization is not part of the Basic Pool, and is therefore added after the split. |
Bloody hell.
Firearms 6 + Reflex Recorder 1 + Attribute 5 = 12 base pool
Then split 6/6 for two guns THEN + Semi-Auto specialization 2 for 8/8?
And why wouldn't specialization count toward the base but a cyber enhancement does? Specialization is learned and practiced - a natural skill enhancement - it can't be removed, damaged or turned off. The Reflex Recorder is artificial, and without it, you lose the bonus. Seems like the specialization should be part of the base.
Argh, where's the official clarification when you need it!
Posted by: streetangelj Aug 10 2007, 11:44 PM
I think laser sights should still work as long as both guns are aimed at the same target. I can find no logical reason why they shouln't. In SR3 I allowed smartgun links to work if you bought 2 induction pads and 2 balistics procesors, but since they removed those components from the Smartlink I'd now rule that option out. Hovever, I'd say neither applied if you're aiming at multiple targets, if that's even possible.
Posted by: DireRadiant Aug 10 2007, 11:47 PM
p. 75
"If your
character has a specialization, he adds 2 extra dice to the skill test
whenever the specialization applies (see Specializations, p. 109)."
p. 109
"Specializations add 2 dice to any tests made for that skill
when the specialization is applicable to the test."
p. 110
"Neko wants a sneaky character whose specialty is
urban areas. Neko takes the Urban specialization for
her Infi ltration skill. She writes in on her character
sheet as Infi ltration 5 (Urban + 2). Th at means she
rolls 5 dice (plus attribute) for her skill on Infi ltration
Tests, and 7 dice (plus attribute) when infi ltrating in
an urban area."
Posted by: Fortune Aug 11 2007, 12:14 AM
| QUOTE (l33tpenguin) |
| Besides specializations, what else is added after the split? |
Anything that does not directly add to the Skill or Attribute itself (as opposed to the Test). So basically everything except Reflex Recorders and Adept Skill boosts.
Posted by: Fortune Aug 11 2007, 12:19 AM
| QUOTE (Stinger @ Aug 11 2007, 09:38 AM) |
| And why wouldn't specialization count toward the base but a cyber enhancement does? Specialization is learned and practiced - a natural skill enhancement - it can't be removed, damaged or turned off. The Reflex Recorder is artificial, and without it, you lose the bonus. Seems like the specialization should be part of the base. |
Reflex Recorders add their bonus directly to the Skill itself, because they count every single time you use that skill. Specializations are added only to specific tests when that narrowed focus comes into play, which is not necessarily every single test made with that Skill.
Take for example, Quick Rik, who is a skilled two-gun-slinging razorboy. He has a Specialization in Revolvers, and normally uses one in each hand. If he is suddenly in a position where he has to use a Predator (in either hand) instead of one of his trusty Warhawks, his Specialization wouldn't apply (to that hand only), and would be strange to have it calculated into (or indeed left out of) the Basic Pool.
The same distinction is made with Adept Improved Skill Powers, which add directly to the Skill themselves, and thereby the Basic Pool.
Posted by: l33tpenguin Aug 11 2007, 12:28 AM
I see said the blind man! thanks!
Posted by: Doctor Funkenstein Aug 11 2007, 12:43 AM
I really don't see skill Specializations as a modifier. And it's doubly odd that you're distinguishing them as something completely different (rules wise) as a Reflex Recorder.
The whole +2 aspect of it is seems to be there to make bookkeeping easier in the case you augment a skill for whatever reason. So instead of having Automatics (SMGs) 4(6)(8) you just have 4(6)(+2). That way you only have to ever update one number rather than two. The end effect is the same though; your still have a skill of 8 with SMGs just like a Reflex Recorder, not a +2 modifier with SMGs as per a Smartlink. It's reeeeaaaaally stretching it -- in the bad way -- to try and argue otherwise.
Posted by: mfb Aug 11 2007, 12:52 AM
couldn't you have a Pistols reflex recorder, and Woo a pistol and an SMG?
Posted by: l33tpenguin Aug 11 2007, 12:59 AM
Wouldn't you be using two different pools anyway, in that case? Automatics and Pistols?
How would you cover using two weapons using different pools? you obviously can't split their pools, so do you just halve them? That brings us back to how you split the pool as well. can you favor one or the other?
Posted by: mfb Aug 11 2007, 01:03 AM
well, you use the lowest pool, if you've got two. seems to me that if you have a specializiation, that adds to your pool--unless you're using a gun you're not specialized with, in which case you use the lower pool (ie, no specialization).
Posted by: Doctor Funkenstein Aug 11 2007, 01:07 AM
I'd say it would depend on which of the skills (with or without specialization) was lowest.
Say, for example, you have Pistols (Heavy Pistols) 3(+2) and Automatics 4. You grab a Streetline Special and an Uzi and go to town. In this case, Pistols is your lowest skill at 3 and is the one you use. Later, you ditch the Streetline Special and grab an Ares Predator. Now your Pistols skill is 5, making Automatics your lowest skill and thus the one you use while shooting both.
Seems to be both the nature and the intent of the rules in question. Makes sense as well as your specialization with Heavy Pistols still had the net effect of giving you +1 die on the test.
Posted by: l33tpenguin Aug 11 2007, 01:11 AM
If specializations are added after the split, however, wouldn't you choose the smaller pool first, in both cases, pistols, then split the pool and add the specialization bonus after the split? Since specialization add after the split, they shouldn't count toward what you select to split? right?
Posted by: Doctor Funkenstein Aug 11 2007, 01:13 AM
You're assuming specializations are added after. Which makes very little sense since it's a bookkeeping modifier for keeping track of your skills and skill levels, not a condition or combat modifier like a Smartlink or Visibility modifier is.
Posted by: mfb Aug 11 2007, 01:28 AM
indeed. i don't see that specializations should be added after the split.
Posted by: hyzmarca Aug 11 2007, 01:42 AM
| QUOTE (Doctor Funkenstein) |
| You're assuming specializations are added after. Which makes very little sense since it's a bookkeeping modifier for keeping track of your skills and skill levels, not a condition or combat modifier like a Smartlink or Visibility modifier is. |
The reason for the modifier is less important that the fact that it is a modifier rather than a direct augmentation of the base statistics.
Posted by: Doctor Funkenstein Aug 11 2007, 01:48 AM
Reflex Recorders: "The reflex recorders adds a +1 dice pool bonus to a specific skill or skill group." --SR4 p. 340
Improved Ability: "This power gives you additional dice for use with a specific Active Skill. Dice purchased for the Active Skill carry over equally to any specializations of the skill you know." --SR4 p. 187
Both of those are modifiers, too. And in the case of the latter, they specifically mention your specialization for some strange reason. Thus, if you adhere to the silly notion that the +2 bonus for a specialization is a conditional modifier as opposed to a bookkeeping note, Improved Ability adds to that bonus AND your base skill! That's double your money right there! AND they all (Improved Ability, Skill Specializations, and Reflex Recorders) get added to your dice pool AFTER it gets split for dual-weilding! Yay for munchkinating!
Translation: Quit being stupid and trying to cheat.
Posted by: hyzmarca Aug 11 2007, 01:52 AM
Improved Ability and Reflex Recorders were both errataed. They directly augment the skill and are limited by the skill's augmented limit.
The fact is that SR4 treats augmentations and bonuses/penalties very differently and for this reason they must be kept separate. The (+2) notation isn't just for easy bookkeeping. It denotes a fundamental difference in what a specialization is in relation to a skill.
Posted by: l33tpenguin Aug 11 2007, 01:58 AM
| QUOTE (Doctor Funkenstein) |
| Translation: Quit being stupid and trying to cheat. |
Thats a little harsh. I'm trying to understand. Its a little different.
So, from a more easy (for me) clerical standpoint, it would read
Pistols 3
Heavy Pistols 5
Rather than a +2 modifier when using heavy pistols.
In 3rd, didn't 'specializing' a skill increase the specialization by two and decrees the base skill by two? I forget now.
Posted by: Doctor Funkenstein Aug 11 2007, 02:02 AM
It was essentially +1/-1 with a specialization; the same net difference as in SR4. So if you bought a skill at 5 you could keep it as 5 or specialize for 4(6).
And that comment wasn't directed at you, penguin. It's just silly to get so pedantic when the intent of the rules in question is blatantly clear.
Posted by: Fortune Aug 11 2007, 04:23 AM
Doc ... as hyzmarca said, check the Errata. The things I specified (Adept Improved Ability and Reflex Recorders) were addressed.
I'm not making things up, trying to be a cheat, or even getting into munchkin mode. This is the way the rules work.
If something in the rules is meant to add directly to the Skill, it specifically states as such (in the case of the above two items). If not, and you are directed to list something as (+x), then it is a dice pool modifier, in exactly the same fashion as visibility or other situational modifiers. These are all added after the Core Dice Pool is split, as they modify the specific actions taken, and not the total core ability (in the case of Specializations, the entirety of the Skill's many uses).
Posted by: mfb Aug 11 2007, 05:49 AM
it doesn't make much sense, though. using a revolver instead of a heavy pistol is not a situational modifier, unless using a pistol instead of a shotgun is also a situational modifier. making specializations a special case is just arbitrary; there's no logic to it.
Posted by: hyzmarca Aug 11 2007, 05:55 AM
Exactly.
If specializations work as suggested by Doctor Funkenstein, then they are incredibly broken one way or another.
In the unerrated RAW, a character with Agility 3 and Pistols (Heavy Pistols) 1(+2) would have a dice pool of 4 when using Heavy Pistols due to his 3 Agility and 1 Skill. His specialization couldn't come into play due to the modified skill cap of (base skill)*1.5.
This makes specializations useless is most cases and makes it incredibly stupid for anyone without a 6 in the skill to both specialize and take Improved Ability.
The errata specified that there is a difference between things that directly augment that skill and things which add dice to a test. Specializations have been clearly placed in the latter category while Improved Ability and Reflex Recorders are clearly placed in the former.
The specialization adds dice to tests with heavy pistols. It does not create a separate heavy pistols skill or modify the existing pistols skill. This ruling is necessary to make specializations as useful as they were intended to be. The side effect is that you add them after splitting the pool. Considering how damaging pool splitting is to all but the most min-maxed of characters, I don't see this as being much of a problem. It is only one die, for 'Swounds.
Edit: mfb, It is a situation modifier in the same way that that the old Home Ground Edge from SR3 is a situation modifier. It isn't that you are magically more skilled with heavy pistols than you are with other types of pistols. It is just that you are more comfortable with that particular category of pistol. It is familiarity rather than skill.
Edit2:There is an innate arbitrariness in separating skills from situations and in separating one skill from another. It is necessary to be arbitrary in any game. What matters is internal consistency and this is how specializations are categorized because they don't work if they are categorized any other way.
Posted by: Stinger Aug 11 2007, 06:16 AM
OK, here's my last stab at getting this right.
Pistol 6 + Reflex Recorder 1 + Agility 5 = 12 dice base pool.
Two guns (Predators). Ambidextrous. No smartlink bonus. Specialization (Semi-Automatics +2). Gonna fire two shots with each weapon, right-left-right-left, same target, no other modifiers.
Split the base = 6/6
Shot 1 = Base 6 + Specialization 2 = 8
Shot 2 = Base 6 + Specialization 2 - Recoil 1 = 7
Shot 3 = Base 6 + Specialization 2 - Recoil 2 = 6
Shot 3 = Base 6 + Specialization 2 - Recoil 3 = 5
Is that it?
Posted by: mfb Aug 11 2007, 06:19 AM
that's nonsensical, man. familiarity is skill. you gain skill by becoming more familiar with the subject matter. as far as usefulness goes, specializations are already the most efficient use of bp/karma in the game. how much more useful do they need to be?
i mean, i see the problem. either they're points of skill, in which case the caps apply and they suck, or they're a modifier and the caps don't apply--but they stop making much actual sense. i guess it's a special case either way. but if it's gonna be a special case, why not go all the way--make specializations ignore the skill cap, but otherwise count as skill?
Posted by: hyzmarca Aug 11 2007, 06:38 AM
as far as usefulness goes, specializations are already the most efficient use of bp/karma in the game, as far as skills go. how much more useful do they need to be?
i mean, i see the problem. either they're points of skill, in which case the caps apply and they suck, or they're a modifier and the caps don't apply--but they stop making much actual sense. i guess it's a special case either way. but if it's gonna be a special case, why not go all the way--make specializations ignore the skill cap, but otherwise count as skill?
There is an entire class of Powers, Accessories, Implants, and abilities that currently add dice to specific types of tests without modifying a skill or stat. Mechanically, specializations fit into that class perfectly. There is no need to further complicate things by creating a brand new class just for specializations.
Plus, if you rule that specializations add directly to the skill then min-maxing Adepts can fit in one extra point of IA. It isn't exactly game-breaking, but it will come up more often than the single extra die from dual-wielding specialized weapons under the common ruling.
As for the issue of familiarity being skill, that is sort of the point. We could go so far as to have separate skills for shooting a pistol in low-light and shooting a pistol in bright light, because a person who trains in low-light conditions might have better aim at night than he has in the day but we do not because there comes a point where skill granularity is just asinine and it is easier to just apply modifiers.
Posted by: Doctor Funkenstein Aug 11 2007, 06:53 AM
| QUOTE (hyzmarca) |
| Exactly. If specializations work as suggested by Doctor Funkenstein, then they are incredibly broken one way or another. In the unerrated RAW, a character with Agility 3 and Pistols (Heavy Pistols) 1(+2) would have a dice pool of 4 when using Heavy Pistols due to his 3 Agility and 1 Skill. His specialization couldn't come into play due to the modified skill cap of (base skill)*1.5. |
What the hell are you babbling about, man?!?
Is the +2 really that confusing to you? All it is is a bookkeeping note that was supposed to simplifying things for players. When you take a specialization, your actual skill increases by +2 due to said specialization.
If you have Pistols (Heavy Pistols) 4(+2), it means your skill is 4 when using a Light Pistol and 6 when using a Heavy Pistol. With a Heavy Pistol you are the equivalence of a superstar amongst special forces teams, but with any other type of pistol you're just the equal to a riot-control cop or combat veteran.
What on earth is so complicated about that?!? Specializations aren't an augmentation of the base skill, it is your skill with that particular specialization if you just use a tiny little portion of your brain. I have no idea how you got whatever you just said out of anything I was saying earlier in this thread. Because, I assure you, I never said anything that ridiculous in my life. If I did, it was a crazy, insane typo of epic proportions.
The only thing that might be slightly confusing is how augmented limits come into play. Those are, indeed, handled by the base skill and not the specialization. Unfortunately for whatever your weird... twisted... bizarre take on the rules is going on here, that has no bearing on specializations as for all intents and purposes when dealing with that specialization, your skill is two points higher.
You're arguing over a semantic of the rules that were put in place to eliminate this kind of confusion. It's incredibly ironic that it not only failed but is making a few people come up with all this... just... insanity when interpretting it. And it's no surprise that the twisting of the words and intent is trying to be used to cheat and get more dice when using two firearms. Which is exactly what's going on, whether its cheating by rules lawyering or not.
Posted by: hyzmarca Aug 11 2007, 07:11 AM
Just read the book. Just read the book, please.
| QUOTE (SR4 page 109) |
Specializations add 2 dice to any tests made for that skill when the specialization is applicable to the test. |
The book is very clear on this and both the FAQ and the Errata further clarify it. A specialization is not a skill in any way shape or form. It simply adds bonus dice to the test, nothing more or less.
Posted by: l33tpenguin Aug 11 2007, 08:11 AM
| QUOTE (hyzmarca) | ||
Just read the book. Just read the book, please.
The book is very clear on this and both the FAQ and the Errata further clarify it. A specialization is not a skill in any way shape or form. It simply adds bonus dice to the test, nothing more or less. |
So, with that direct from the book, it would indicate that specializations add to the dice pool after the split.
It clearly states that it is added to the test, not to the skill itself.
This makes them amazingly great for two weapon builds. Its like having a skill 4 points higher!
Posted by: Doctor Funkenstein Aug 11 2007, 12:07 PM
| QUOTE (hyzmarca) |
| Just read the book. Just read the book, please. |
You're assuming I care even a teensy little bit what the book says. Common sense > rules as written. Especially when those rules were put there to make your life easier rather than give people an opportunity to cheat their asses off.
I know what the letter of the rules say. The intent is clear, and the intent is equally clear when it comes to using two weapons at once. You're not intended to get the equivalence of +4 dice from a specialization simply because you did specialize. Using two weapons at once isn't a skill it's a penalty. And it's just flat-out stupid to assume you get bonus dice for a specialization for an action that penalizes you if you actually had the exact same skill at a higher base rating.
It's called a "loophole." Taking advantage of loopholes is why people like lawyers have a piss-poor reputation. It's why they call rules lawyers rules lawyers, and why rules lawyers have an equally piss-poor reputation.
Pointing out loopholes is one thing, discussing ways to fix them another thing. But not only pointing them out, but advocating them, encouraging people to abuse them, and defending them to the death despite how stupid it is both conceptually and logically is... well, nuff said on that.
| QUOTE |
| The book is very clear on this and both the FAQ and the Errata further clarify it. A specialization is not a skill in any way shape or form. It simply adds bonus dice to the test, nothing more or less. |
See above. Rationalize your cheese away all you like. It's still 100%, unequivable cheese.
Posted by: Ophis Aug 11 2007, 04:21 PM
I must admit, i dislike the specialization not being split, but it is what the rules say. I allow it to work both ways spec(automatics) gets split if you're using auto's spec(paired) counts as +2 for both guns. This allows people who wish to follow the way of Woo to use a suboptimal option (against good opponents) a bit more effectively.
Posted by: hyzmarca Aug 11 2007, 04:22 PM
Yes, the intent is clear, it is just that the intent is not what you assume it to be. I understand quite well that the intent can be different from what is written, just take a look at the conversation regarding the Endowment of Astral Form.
What you seem to be missing, however, is that specializations are intended to be a dice pool modifier, not a full skill in their own right. They were full skills in previous editions, this was changed intentionally. They are now dice pool modifiers are are treated like other dice pool modifying abilities such as Combat Sense, Great Leap, and Kinesics.
This is necessary for the system of caps to work as it was intended to work. It is how the system was intended to work.
It has been clarified time and time again, in the FAQ and on this board. It has been clarified and dealt with so often that there is no longer any controversy, except on this particular application.
And it is not, in any way, cheese. I don't care what impact this has on two-weapon combat because two-weapon combat is completely and totally useless, even if specializations are added after splitting. I'm surprised that no one else is seeing this. There is not any possible situation in the game where a character is better off using two guns than he is using one gun.
The exception to the above paragraph does not lie in specialization bonuses, which will not be enough to prevent the split pools from being reduced to 0 in most situations, but in the application of Edge. Since Edge is added on a per test basis rather than a per-pool basis, it is possible to add full Edge separately to each half of the split pool.
This isn't cheesy, either, due to the limited nature of Edge, but it is usually necessary because negative modifiers will usually be greater than the two halves of the split pool and there is only one positive modifier that might apply (specialization).
I really don't care if you add specializations or any other modifier before or after splitting (except for Edge due to the necessity of longshot tests). But specialization is a modifier. There is no doubt about that, none at all.
Posted by: Stinger Aug 11 2007, 06:47 PM
Errm, so, did I get it right?
Posted by: Doctor Funkenstein Aug 11 2007, 06:58 PM
| QUOTE (hyzmarca) |
| And it is not, in any way, cheese. |
Yes. Yes it is. But tell yourself whatever you need to in order to make yourself feel better about it.
Posted by: Fortune Aug 11 2007, 07:17 PM
Cheese or not, those are the rules. And I don't think it is 'bad form' or anything of the like to point out the way the rules actually work when someone asks.
Posted by: Doctor Funkenstein Aug 11 2007, 07:26 PM
| QUOTE (Doctor Funkenstein) |
| Pointing out loopholes is one thing, discussing ways to fix them another thing. But not only pointing them out, but advocating them, encouraging people to abuse them, and defending them to the death despite how stupid it is both conceptually and logically is... well, nuff said on that. |
Already touched on that.
Posted by: Fortune Aug 11 2007, 07:38 PM
I don't really consider this is a loophole. It is part of the way the core system works.
Posted by: Catharz Godfoot Aug 11 2007, 07:41 PM
I'm a lot more interested in how TWFing works in Shadowrun than in 'Bizarro Funkenstein Shadow-RPG'.
Posted by: Doctor Funkenstein Aug 11 2007, 07:45 PM
<just shrugs> Enjoy the stupidity then.
Posted by: Rotbart van Dainig Aug 11 2007, 07:46 PM
| QUOTE (Doctor Funkenstein) | ||
Already touched on that. |
Good to know your take on the 'immune to drowning via Trauma Dampener', then.
As a sidenote:
It's completly trivial that Specialisation is not Skill. It adds dice to your dicepool... which is splitted.
So the 'exploit' is not to get more dice out of a Spec - it's to lose less dice per shot due to penalties.
Posted by: Doctor Funkenstein Aug 11 2007, 07:54 PM
| QUOTE (Rotbart van Dainig @ Aug 11 2007, 01:46 PM) |
| Good to know your take on the 'immune to drowning via Trauma Dampener', then. |
What? That the obscure rules for things such as drowning is stupid because it doesn't include a comment about ignoring mechanics like a Trauma Damper, which otherwise works just dandy?
| QUOTE |
| It's completly trivial that Specialisation is not Skill. It adds dice to your dicepool... which is splitted. So the 'exploit' is not to get more dice out of a Spec - it's to lose less dice per shot due to penalties. |
According to some of the people in this thread -- and despite being one of the louder voices, mine isn't the only one with a similar opinion to mine -- specialization magically makes you equal to someone with FOUR points in the actual skill... but only when using two weapons at the same time. That someone with Pistols (Heavy Pistols) 3, a mere professional like a beat cop, is on par with a legend like Wild Bill or James Bond with Firearms 7, but only when using two of them at the same time. Characters who are more than twice as skilled and talented as the other one is.
Yes. That's clearly the intention and purpose of specialization. I've seen the light.
Posted by: Rotbart van Dainig Aug 11 2007, 07:57 PM
| QUOTE (Doctor Funkenstein) |
| That the obscure rules for things such as drowning is stupid because it doesn't include a comment about ignoring mechanics like a Trauma Damper, which otherwise works just dandy? |
No... that to implement a piece of gear in a way not to mesh with the basic rules is silly.
Posted by: Critias Aug 11 2007, 08:00 PM
I'm sure that any minute now one or the other of you will convince the other guy you're right and he's been wrong all along.
No, really. It'll happen any second.
Posted by: Rotbart van Dainig Aug 11 2007, 08:05 PM
| QUOTE (Critias) |
| I'm sure that any minute now one or the other of you will convince the other guy you're right and he's been wrong all along. |
You are so wrong.
Posted by: hyzmarca Aug 11 2007, 08:10 PM
Looking at it the other way, using two weapons magically gives your enemy twice as much cover and magically makes the lights twice as dim and so on and so forth. It is a consequence of applying modifiers after splitting instead of applying them before splitting.
Applying modifiers before splitting brings in whole new problems with attacking different targets, however.
Lets stop thinking about guns here and apply this to the other situations where you can split dice pool and get bonuses, such a the magician with a focus casing multiple simultaneous spells.
Actually, I'm a little more concerned with the use of a foci when casting multiple spells simultaneously than I am with two-gun shooting, since foci actually can have a huge impact when applied to multi-casting pools as modifiers rather than as a part of the base pool. And I hoonestly don't know if this would be a good thing or a bad thing.
Posted by: Rotbart van Dainig Aug 11 2007, 08:12 PM
| QUOTE (hyzmarca) |
| Looking at it the other way, using two weapons magically give your enemy twice as much cover and magically makes the lights twice as dim and so on and so forth. It is a consequence of applying modifiers after splitting instead of applying them before splitting. |
You are splitting a dicepool... wich means modifiers are already factored in at that point. And you really want to do it that way:
Factor mods in first, half then: (Attribute+Skill+Modifiers)/2
Half first, factor mods in later: (Attribute+Skill)/2+Modifiers
When is the first aproach better?
(Attribute+Skill+Modifiers)/2 > (Attribute+Skill)/2+Modifiers
Attribute+Skill+Modifiers > Attribute+Skill+2xModifiers
0 > Modifiers
The first approach is better if Modifiers < 0... which means, if your net mods are penalties.
Which is usually the case that matters... people in Hollywood tend to pull out two guns when the fit hits the shan.
Posted by: hyzmarca Aug 11 2007, 08:32 PM
| QUOTE (Rotbart van Dainig) | ||
You are splitting a dicepool... wich means modifiers are already factored in at that point. And you really want to do it that way: Factor mods in first, half then: (A+S+y)/2 Half first, factor mods in later: (A+S)/2+y When is the first aproach better? (A+S+y)/2 > (A+S)/2+y A+S+y > A+S+2y 0 > y The first approach is better if y < 0... which means, if your net mods are penalties. Which is usually the case that matters... |
| QUOTE (SR4 p141) |
| Split the pool before applying modifiers. |
The real problem with splitting after modifiers is what happens when you are shooting at two seperate targets. Target A, for example, has full cover behind a wall in a poorly lit area while target B is standing in plain view in a brightly lit open area with no possible cover.
In this case, shooting at target A would incur a -8 penalty while target B would incur a -0 penalty. Adding before the split makes shooting at two different targets completely wonky.
Posted by: Rotbart van Dainig Aug 11 2007, 08:36 PM
| QUOTE (hyzmarca @ Aug 11 2007, 10:32 PM) | ||
|
My bad.
In which case you can completly forget about ever hitting the broad side of a barn in a combat situation with two weapons.
At least that doesn't apply to Melee Combat...
Posted by: Fortune Aug 11 2007, 08:41 PM
| QUOTE (Rotbart van Dainig @ Aug 12 2007, 06:36 AM) |
| In which case you can completly forget about ever hitting the broad side of a barn in a combat situation with two weapons. |
Which is why adding in Specialization and the like after the split is not all that bad.
Posted by: Rotbart van Dainig Aug 11 2007, 08:43 PM
That's undefined, as it's not a modifier. But it doesn't really matter either way...
Posted by: Fortune Aug 11 2007, 08:50 PM
| QUOTE (Rotbart van Dainig @ Aug 12 2007, 06:43 AM) |
| That's undefined, as it's not a modifier. |
I'm not sure I understand. Specialization is indeed a modifier to the Skill test.
| QUOTE (SR4 pg. 109) |
| Specializations add 2 dice to any tests made for that skill when the specialization is applicable to the test. |
Note that Specializations do not add to the Pool, but only to specific tests where they are applicable.
| QUOTE (SR4 pg. 141) |
| Characters can use two pistol- or SMG-class weapons, one in each hand, firing both with a single Simple Action. Doing so, however, requires that the character split his dice pool between the attacks. If two separate skills are being used (Pistols and Automatics), use the smallest dice pool. Split the pool before applying modifiers. Two-gun attacks also negate any dice pool bonuses from smartlinks or laser sights. Additionally, any uncompensated recoil modifiers applicable to one weapon also apply to the other weapon. |
Posted by: Rotbart van Dainig Aug 11 2007, 08:53 PM
| QUOTE (Fortune @ Aug 11 2007, 10:50 PM) | ||
I'm not sure I understand. Specialization is indeed a modifier to the Skill test. |
It's never called that way... modifiers are the stuff you find in tables labled... modifiers.
Posted by: Moon-Hawk Aug 13 2007, 03:36 PM
| QUOTE (Stinger) |
| OK, here's my last stab at getting this right. Pistol 6 + Reflex Recorder 1 + Agility 5 = 12 dice base pool. Two guns (Predators). Ambidextrous. No smartlink bonus. Specialization (Semi-Automatics +2). Gonna fire two shots with each weapon, right-left-right-left, same target, no other modifiers. Split the base = 6/6 Shot 1 = Base 6 + Specialization 2 = 8 Shot 2 = Base 6 + Specialization 2 - Recoil 1 = 7 Shot 3 = Base 6 + Specialization 2 - Recoil 2 = 6 Shot 3 = Base 6 + Specialization 2 - Recoil 3 = 5 Is that it? |
Without getting into how it should be, I will say that this is my understanding of what the book says.
Posted by: Eryk the Red Aug 13 2007, 04:04 PM
Actually, I think that adding specialisation dice after splitting the pool is the sort of thing that makes dual-wielding a viable choice, while not making it the best choice for everyone. This is a good thing, in my book. It means the Cowboy character in my group can do his thing in the style that is appropriate to him, and still be effective, while most others are better off doing things the regular way.
I actually think that this is very balanced and makes a lot of in-game sense to me. (Especially since I allow Dual-Wielding to be a specialisation of Pistols or Automatics.)
Posted by: Sterling Aug 14 2007, 07:03 AM
| QUOTE (Fortune) | ||||||
I'm not sure I understand. Specialization is indeed a modifier to the Skill test.
Note that Specializations do not add to the Pool, but only to specific tests where they are applicable.
|
Fortune's right. If the specialization was indeed part of the skill, then you could never take a specialization if your skill was higher than four, as that would break the skill cap.
Forgetting about the positive quality: aptitude for a moment, we know the highest skill cap is a six. If you consider the specialization as part of the skill, you could have a skill in automatics of six, or a skill of automatics four, specialized in machine pistols (giving you a plus two) six.
If you do not consider the specialization part of the skill, you can then get a skill to six, and specialize to get eight dice when it comes time to roll when using the specialization. The skill cap is still six.
If a specialization is part of the skill, then it counts towards the cap. If it is merely a modifier to a skill, then it can be added on top of a capped skill.
Posted by: Doctor Funkenstein Aug 14 2007, 08:01 AM
Once again: The rules for specializations were clearly added as a courtesy to make life easier. Both from a bookkeeping standpoint and rules limitation one (so that they didn't have to cook up countless exceptions to account for specializations going over the normal maximum).
It's trying to take advantage of that courtesy that's not only ridiculous, but insulting. Someone with a Skill of 3 and a specialization is not intended to be better than someone with an actual Skill of 5. In fact, if anything, they should be slightly worse! And this is actually shown everywhere except for dual-weilding. Not because it was intended -- something would have been said and examples would have been created if it were -- but because people are trying to rape the rules to make it work. So make that person with a Skill of 3 and a specialization equal to someone with a Skill of 7 if they were both two-fisting it. Someone who was more than twice as skilled!
Sometimes common sense > rules. Doubly so when people are defending those rules because they want to rape them for those extra dice.
Posted by: Fortune Aug 14 2007, 08:30 AM
While I understand your point, I think it is a little unfair.
This particular issue has been brought up with the developers (read Rob), and he has declared that this is both how the rules work, and how he intended for the rules to work. As such, it is not really 'raping th system' to utilize the rules as they are both written and intended. YMMV of course.
Posted by: l33tpenguin Aug 16 2007, 12:06 AM
| QUOTE |
| Sometimes common sense > rules. Doubly so when people are defending those rules because they want to rape them for those extra dice. |
While I understand your point of view, Doc, we are still talking about the rules of a game, regardless of whether or not they follow common sense. As the rules read, you add the bonus from specialization to the test, resulting in an advantage when using two weapons.
Even so, there are very few instances, though, when brandishing two weapons is actually BETTER than a single weapon. (Almost) no matter what, the player would be better off using just one weapon. They will get their full dice pool plus the specialization modifier.
Defending from a 'common sense" stand point doesn't hold ground. Common sense says that using a laser sight would provide a bonus (not to mention smart link) with two pistols. I've seen it done, it helps. Ammunition should cost 1/10th of the price it does. Pistols should be able to be modified with gas vent systems.
Common sense says a lot of things in Shadowrun should work differently than they do (wireless matrix, anyone?). Its not raping the rules, its playing by them.
Posted by: Kyoto Kid Aug 16 2007, 12:11 AM
...one of the times two weapons is better is when using two SS revolvers and firing in alternating fashion. Of course it helps to have the ambidexterity quality to eliminate the off-hand penalty.
Posted by: l33tpenguin Aug 16 2007, 12:20 AM
| QUOTE (Kyoto Kid) |
| ...one of the times two weapons is better is when using two SS revolvers and firing in alternating fashion. Of course it helps to have the ambidexterity quality to eliminate the off-hand penalty. |
Even that is debatable, because if you were using a single revolver, you would get a bigger dice pool, unless you had a really low (sub 4) to begin with. Otherwise you end up with twice as many shots that are only slightly higher than half as likely to land. This is great for easy to hit baddies or to chew up someones defense pool, but up against anything substantial, you are just wasting overly expensive bullets
Posted by: Fortune Aug 16 2007, 12:25 AM
| QUOTE (Kyoto Kid @ Aug 16 2007, 10:11 AM) |
| ...one of the times two weapons is better is when using two SS revolvers and firing in alternating fashion. |
That's a little different though, as you are not splitting your Pool in that situation.
Posted by: Stinger Aug 16 2007, 12:25 AM
I'm not trying to "rape"" the rules at all. I'm trying to understand them so I can play by them correctly. If using two-guns wasn't part of my character concept, I wouldn't even be thinking about this, and I didn't bother looking it up until I decided to go with this character.
The two-hand thing is only viable because this dude has a high skill level. Even with the Specialization added to the test, it's not really so fantastic. Clearly, using one gun is better than using two. It'll be hard to resist just going with one gun like everyone else does, but I'll suck it up and take the dice pool split, because using two guns looks cool, and that's worth more to me than the effectiveness of using one gun.
Posted by: mfb Aug 16 2007, 01:26 AM
| QUOTE (l33tpenguin) | ||
Even that is debatable, because if you were using a single revolver, you would get a bigger dice pool, unless you had a really low (sub 4) to begin with. Otherwise you end up with twice as many shots that are only slightly higher than half as likely to land. This is great for easy to hit baddies or to chew up someones defense pool, but up against anything substantial, you are just wasting overly expensive bullets |
she's talking about firing them alternately, not simultaneously. one shot from each, rather than two.
Posted by: l33tpenguin Aug 16 2007, 01:32 AM
| QUOTE (mfb) | ||||
she's talking about firing them alternately, not simultaneously. one shot from each, rather than two. |
Yeah, I caught that after my post
Basically using two weapons to double your ammunition capacity rather than your rate of fire
Posted by: Ted Stewart Aug 16 2007, 02:33 AM
| QUOTE (l33tpenguin) |
| Yeah, I caught that after my post Basically using two weapons to double your ammunition capacity rather than your rate of fire |
Actually, it's both. The revolver is SS, not SA. A dual Warhawk character seems rather terrifying.
Powered by Invision Power Board (http://www.invisionboard.com)
© Invision Power Services (http://www.invisionpower.com)