Printable Version of Topic
Click here to view this topic in its original format
Dumpshock Forums _ Shadowrun _ Linked Weapons
Posted by: Ghost in the Machine Oct 17 2009, 11:52 PM
In theory, it should be easy to build a drone with dual weapons linked together for simultaneous fire, which would use only a single action and single dice pool to utilize. However, are there any official rules on this?
Posted by: Prime Mover Oct 18 2009, 03:00 AM
~Ghost in the Machine
Creepy I was just thinking about this last night but haven't had time to research it. Gonna do some looking in the morning curious to see what gets posted between now and then.
Posted by: Summerstorm Oct 18 2009, 03:44 AM
No official rules. Of course we all thought about it (right, right???)
As i GM i would allow it of course, but in a realistic fashion: cumulative recoil, depending on the distance and angle between the weapons, a few more bullets may hit a target.
Heat buildup and ammo usage goes through the roof. Last time i had that problem was in third edition, when some character restorated a quad-barreled WWII Flak-Cannon and mounted it on a trailer for "surprises" I just ruled that it counts as one very fast gun with high recoil. (Ah well the characters mureder a few people with it and got blown up afterwards, so it wasn't seeing much action anyways *g*)
But i think it would be fair enough if you let such a gun count as a minigun. Let it fire 20 bullets, let 15 be useful. (or 40/20 with a quad weapon??) Recoilmods count for every barrel. (with logic exceptions) and all rest accumulates.
Ah you will find your rule. Just try a bit.
Posted by: Prime Mover Oct 18 2009, 12:28 PM
Not seeing anything in Arsenal, were I would expect it.
Roll each weapon separately using the same dice pool/penalties for each. Allowing an attack with all linked weapons each round.
The question would be cost/time for linking a set of weapons.
Posted by: Prime Mover Oct 18 2009, 12:32 PM
As an alternative you could assign an agent to each weapon allowing multiple attacks each pass.
Posted by: Falconer Oct 18 2009, 02:53 PM
Depends on how you're fire linking....
If you're talking like a WW2 anti-aircraft gun where in order to increase ROF all they did was welded 2 HMG's on the same frame so they were always aimed in the same direction and same point. Then I'd just treat it as more ROF and use the normal rules. If it's on a drone, I'd automatically consider this requiring a heavy mount, limiting it to bigger drones.
Roll attack pool once.... But that short wide burst now fired 2x3==6 bullets... or -5 reaction or +5 damage narrow burst. Cumulative recoil and recoil comp on both guns. This very quickly turns a little bit silly if it stages up even more linearly. (look at how much damage a railgun or heavy autocannon does). You wouldn't want it to increase the individual base bullet damage for hardened armor purposes... (doesn't matter how fast you fire spitwads at the heavy tank...). Probably need to house rule, it doesn't matter if you're throwing 1 bullet or 20 30 40 50+... if the damage on each one is reduced to 0, it doesn't matter (complicating damage calcs when barriers or ItNW is in play).
On the other hand, if you're talking about fire linking via software 2 completely seperate turrets... then I'd just treat it as seperate attacks. Each turret would need it's own contol mechanism, and agents cannot use autosofts IIRC, so you need to use a pilot program to do that. Still not that hard... order the pilot to fire the second gun at whatever you shoot at w/ the first. You fire as a complex action, pilot fires the second turret as a complex action... (raises wierdness if you're not using command to shoot but rigging, as now the pilot program has no control of the drone... remember a rigged drone cannot be spoofed or accept commands, from another decker/rigger or it's pilot program).
Just to repeat that last part, agents can't use autosofts I thought. Autosofts are exclusive to Pilot programs (which are very specialized agent/system OS's in their own right). Even AI's need to have a special quality which says I'm descended from a drone in order to run autosofts. If an AI (which is an agent program on steroids), needs a 10BP positive quality just to load and use autosofts (p91 runners companion), then I have a hard time seeing how a mere cheap agent is going to do so.
Posted by: Neraph Oct 18 2009, 03:37 PM
The short answer would be to follow the Dual Wield rules. Or equip two full-auto weapons and Suppress.
Posted by: Prime Mover Oct 18 2009, 04:15 PM
Might also be an accuracy issue. Maybe just use suppressive fire rules.
Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Oct 18 2009, 05:52 PM
If you're talking like a WW2 anti-aircraft gun where in order to increase ROF all they did was welded 2 HMG's on the same frame so they were always aimed in the same direction and same point. Then I'd just treat it as more ROF and use the normal rules. If it's on a drone, I'd automatically consider this requiring a heavy mount, limiting it to bigger drones.
Roll attack pool once.... But that short wide burst now fired 2x3==6 bullets... or -5 reaction or +5 damage narrow burst. Cumulative recoil and recoil comp on both guns. This very quickly turns a little bit silly if it stages up even more linearly. (look at how much damage a railgun or heavy autocannon does). You wouldn't want it to increase the individual base bullet damage for hardened armor purposes... (doesn't matter how fast you fire spitwads at the heavy tank...). Probably need to house rule, it doesn't matter if you're throwing 1 bullet or 20 30 40 50+... if the damage on each one is reduced to 0, it doesn't matter (complicating damage calcs when barriers or ItNW is in play).
On the other hand, if you're talking about fire linking via software 2 completely seperate turrets... then I'd just treat it as seperate attacks. Each turret would need it's own contol mechanism, and agents cannot use autosofts IIRC, so you need to use a pilot program to do that. Still not that hard... order the pilot to fire the second gun at whatever you shoot at w/ the first. You fire as a complex action, pilot fires the second turret as a complex action... (raises wierdness if you're not using command to shoot but rigging, as now the pilot program has no control of the drone... remember a rigged drone cannot be spoofed or accept commands, from another decker/rigger or it's pilot program).
Just to repeat that last part, agents can't use autosofts I thought. Autosofts are exclusive to Pilot programs (which are very specialized agent/system OS's in their own right). Even AI's need to have a special quality which says I'm descended from a drone in order to run autosofts. If an AI (which is an agent program on steroids), needs a 10BP positive quality just to load and use autosofts (p91 runners companion), then I have a hard time seeing how a mere cheap agent is going to do so.
Just a note... There are agent based "Autosofts" included in Unwired (page 112-113)... so there is a precedent for their use...
and yes, a Pilot is just an Agent with a different function thematically...
Also... in your first example, on a properly mounted turret or weapon mount, used by a vehicle, there would be NO recoil penalties according to RAW... you could of course go with the optional rule of allowing the Body of the Vehicle to provide a set amount of RC value, but this is not necessary, and is an Optional Rule... and Burst/FA additions to damage never add their damage bonuses when you are comparing totals against Armor for Hrrdening/ITNW purposes anyway, so this is not really a concern here...
Keep the Faith
Posted by: Stahlseele Oct 18 2009, 06:16 PM
"Twin-Linked Laz-Guns Baby!"
Use something that does not generate too much recoil.
Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Oct 18 2009, 06:18 PM
Use something that does not generate too much recoil.
And upon consideration, I would apply the damage from each weapon seperatly, as it would be no different than multiple individuals firning at a single target in effect...
Yes... Dual Heavy Lasers for the Win... though I might be inclined to use Dual Gaus Cannons myself...
Posted by: Stahlseele Oct 18 2009, 06:20 PM
2 Mounts with 2 Twin-Linked weapons each.
One Side Laz-Gun and Gauss, other side Laz-Gun and Panther ^^
Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Oct 18 2009, 06:24 PM
One Side Laz-Gun and Gauss, other side Laz-Gun and Panther ^^
Works for Me...
Posted by: PBI Oct 18 2009, 06:26 PM
I believe the way it was ruled in my last campaign was that both weapons fired at the same time, at the same target, and used recoil penalties as if only one weapon was firing (these were LMGs). Not sure on the recoil, though; it may have been some extra recoil, but not a lot.
Posted by: Doc Byte Oct 18 2009, 07:09 PM
It's easy as long as you don't try to hit the target with both guns. If you want hit with both weapons, you need to detect the range and adjust the angle of the guns for crossing the fire at the desired point of inpact.
Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Oct 18 2009, 07:22 PM
Hey, why is Real Life intruding upon my dystopic future?
Posted by: Falconer Oct 18 2009, 07:29 PM
Only true if you're dealing w/ widely seperated guns like those on a WW2 fighter... where the distance of convergence of fire in front of the craft was a big deal.
If the guns are seperated by say an inch or two... I'd let it slide.
The bigger problem though is like the one player noted... what if I put a MG and a laser rifle on the same weapons mount. Then you pretty much have someone trying to get two guns for the price of a single weapons mount... I'd call that a no go and require a heavier weapons mount (by which point he might as well just have bought 2 light weapons mounts than one big one).
The weapons are too dissimilar in ballistics and fire characteristics to use together. It's a pretty straightforward exercise to make a machine gun fire faster and toss more lead downrange. However, firing both a lasgun and a grenade launcher at the same time... no.... one needs a high ballistic arc and the other is just pointed at the target. So to that end, I'd say only allow the trick as a trick to increase ROF w/o resorting to gatling guns and the like.
Even things like 2 gauss rifle are pretty straightforward... +1 extra bullet, +1DV... (look at the PJSS elephant rifle... and other double barrel gun adaptations... they simply get +1DV for double barrel action).
You still have an ammo problem on MG type weapons... 250 round belt... == what... 2 120rd belts now? You'd almost be better off using 2 individual mounts for the doubled ammo capacity than one big one w/ a linked weapon for more ROF but w/ less ammo.
Powered by Invision Power Board (http://www.invisionboard.com)
© Invision Power Services (http://www.invisionpower.com)