Printable Version of Topic

Posted by: tasti man LH Feb 20 2013, 01:31 AM

So, I'm planning a run for my PCs, in which they will be infiltrating/storming a farmhouse that's filled with a cell of militant TerraFirst! members.

Very, very militant...so militant, that one of them actually is packing a Panther Assault Cannon (4th edition version)!

Now, reading up on the fluff of this bad boy, I get presented with the idea that this is the go-to weapon for all heavy-weapons specialist runners. And that the fluff mentions the thing having a hell of a recoil. Which, you know, should be expected from a gun that's supposed to deliver the same firepower as main gun on small tanks.

In 4th, they state that all heavy weapons' uncompensated recoil gets doubled. The problem is that the Panther Assault Cannon fires in Single-Shot only.....and Single Shot weapons typically have no recoil. At all. Meaning that in-game, firing a Panther Assault Cannon incurs no recoil penalty (if we were to exclude the numerous recoil compensators).

...

...am I missing something?

I find it hard to believe that what's essentially a portable tank cannon to have NO recoil. I can't find any special note or rules regarding specifically just assault cannons (at least in Core), and I even went back to peek through at the old Street Samurai Catalog to see if that Panther has any special notes...and nothing.

I feel like I'm not seeing something important but I dunno...I'd rather not just slap an arbitrary recoil penalty on the gun and call it a day.

Help, please?

EDIT: Also, the enemy in question that wields the assault cannon may or may not have the Increase Reflexes spell.

Posted by: bannockburn Feb 20 2013, 01:32 AM

Recoil affects everything beyond the first shot. As there is no second shot in a single phase, the recoil is there and it's massive*, but doesn't have any crunch impact at all.
Just fluff.

*massive means: The same as ... a shotgun. Or a LMG. Or any other heavy weapon. Crunchwise, that is

Posted by: Umidori Feb 20 2013, 01:39 AM

You can mod a Panther to be FA if you really want - at which point, the recoil most certainly matters.

It's easier to just mod to SA fire and add a single point of RC, though. Oh, and there's no rule saying an assault cannon can't use a Silencer either.

Meanwhile, the crazy people who think that High-Powered chambering inflicts a -2 dice penalty on each and every shot that can't be compensated for by recoil compensators seem to think that it makes sense for a single round fired from a Holdout Pistol chambered for High-Powered rounds to suffer the exact same penalty as two rounds fired from an SA Assault Cannon.

~Umi

Posted by: SpellBinder Feb 20 2013, 01:51 AM

You cannot. The Firing Selection Change is available to any gun that does not have an unusual loading mechanism or uses exotic ammo. As assault cannons all use exotic ammo (they have their own special "Assault Cannon" entry in the ammo list), they cannot be so modded.

Posted by: Umidori Feb 20 2013, 01:55 AM

I can easily see that contested. Would you call flechette ammo exotic? There are weapons that can ONLY fire flechettes, after all.

There's nothing inherently unusual about the loading mechanism or the ammo of an assault cannon - it's just really big ammo. The limitation is intended to apply to things that are clearly not normal firearms, like the Screech Rifle or Lasers, things where you aren't chambering a physical round of ammunition into an ordinary firearm.

~Umi

Posted by: SpellBinder Feb 20 2013, 01:59 AM

That's what I've thought too, but that's the same basis that I had thrown at me when mentioning making an assault cannon FA.

And as far as flechette ammo being exotic, actually, no, I wouldn't call it exotic.

Posted by: NetWraith Feb 20 2013, 02:05 AM

I've had this problem for a while... I solved it by having a knock down test for the firer based on the damage resisted by body. Modified by bracing and such.

Posted by: NetWraith Feb 20 2013, 02:05 AM

EDIT:: Double post

Posted by: Umidori Feb 20 2013, 02:36 AM

Had what problem? Players running around with FA Assault Cannons?

That's not the sort of problem that should be coming up commonly. For one thing, they're awfully big, noisy, and attention grabbing, so they shouldn't crop up too terribly often. For another thing, remember that anything the players and their characters abuse can and should be adopted by the enemy. Full Auto Assault Cannons are only fun and laughs until the runners are staring down the wrong end of one.

~Umi

Posted by: tasti man LH Feb 20 2013, 02:44 AM

I might go with resisting Knockdown as suggested by NetWraith.

I do realize that the thing with Single Shot weapons is that their recoil is supposedly so bad, that the can't be fire again in the same action phase.

The reason why I bring all of this up (which I think I should have mentioned in the OP...I'll get to that after I finish this post) is because the guy that's wielding it, I'm playing around with the idea of giving him the Increase Reflexes spell.....

(...too evil? lol)

Posted by: SpellBinder Feb 20 2013, 02:51 AM

Should take a look at one of my favorite wish-list weapons, the Ares Thunderstruck (Arsenal, page 30).

Also in Arsenal, page 162, is an advanced combat rule Carrying Heavy Weapons. Aside from requiring a Body & Strength of 8 (each), the firer takes half the weapon's power (round down) as Stun damage, and can be knocked down. That is, of course, if you're not using something like a gyro stabilization unit.

Posted by: KarmaInferno Feb 20 2013, 04:51 AM

"Exotic" is like musket balls or arrows or rockets. Or ghoul midgets.

Assault cannon rounds are just gigantic bullets.




-k

Posted by: SpellBinder Feb 20 2013, 05:02 AM

Here's the start of a similar discussion from a long while ago on the subject of assault cannon rounds being exotic or not: http://forums.dumpshock.com/index.php?s=&showtopic=34589&view=findpost&p=1053364

General consensus, as I understood it, assault cannon rounds qualify as exotic ammo.

Posted by: Umidori Feb 20 2013, 06:02 AM

The "general" consensus in that thread seems to mostly consist of Yerameyahu, so I'd call it more a "specific" consensus.

That said, why exactly are you against Firing Selection Change on assault cannons? Are modded assault cannons honestly a problem for you? Or are you just arguing for the sake of arguing?

For example, compare to sniper rifles. Why is it cool to have a FA modded Barret Model 121 (9P, -4AP, 14c), but a FA modded Panther XXL (10P, -5AP, 15c) is off-limits? Especially when the sniper rifle is not only smaller, cheaper, more available, and can use EX-Explosive Rounds to match the Panther's damage and armor penetration, BUT it also suffers half as much uncompensated recoil as the Panther AND uses the very common Longarms skill instead of the highly rare Heavy Weapons skill?

What rational, reasonable complaint do you guys have about a FA modded Assault Cannon? Clearly it's not imbalanced or overpowered compared to other available options - quite the opposite, really. So I can only assume you're just being pedantic and getting hung up on the word "exotic" without having any practical reason for doing so.

It's not like we're trying to rapid-fire surface-to-air rockets or compressed-air-launched dildos or 18th century naval cannons and cannonballs. Assault cannons fire normal firearm ammunition, with a bullet, a casing, propellant, and a primer that is either detonated by impact or electrical spark. They are chambered exactly like smaller bullets. They fit in a clip (yes, we know, technically a magazine) just like smaller bullets. In every respect except for size, they are normal bullets. They should not qualify in any way as "exotic" ammunition.

~Umi

Posted by: Mantis Feb 20 2013, 06:37 AM

I think the 'exotic' part comes from these quotes.

Assault Cannon Rounds: These highly stable explosive rounds are made of HDX superplast compound. (pg 323 SR4A)

Panther XXL: This enormous assault cannon fires special ammunition common to the primary weapon in many small tanks. It comes with a smartgun system. (pg 320 SR4A)
Emphasis mine.

That said, I agree with you on modding the weapon. It isn't such a big deal to make this thing full auto since you can't pack that much recoil comp into it anyway (not a machine gun so no gas vent for you) and FA mod uses up a lot of your mod slots. Your only real option is the gyro mount and if you are pulling all this out in a gun fight then you better need it. You can bet the cops with respond with extreme prejudice if you do.

Posted by: Stingray Feb 20 2013, 07:20 AM

..by accepting that rule in game, humans and elves can say tear-jerking goodbye to Ares Alpha
due it's under-barrel Grenade launcher. (wo using gyrostabilization, or being Adepts boosting attributes...)

Posted by: SpellBinder Feb 20 2013, 07:50 AM

Yet another example of where the rules aren't clear.

You could if you go on the train of thought that all weapons that use the Heavy Weapons skill are the heavy weapons spoke about in that rule. If so, then even the compact ArmTech MGL-6, a pistol sized weapon that uses the Heavy Weapons skill and shoots mini-grenades, is out of the question for the smaller metatypes.

I'd expect the intent was towards machineguns and assault cannons and weapons that are frequently used with things like bi-pods, tri-pods, and the sort. Even present day, people can use the single shot M203 40mm grenade launcher on the M-16 without getting knocked on their ass. A weapon that I figure is very similar to the underbarrel grenade launcher on the Ares Alpha you mention, save that the Ares Alpha gets a six round magazine.

Posted by: Stingray Feb 20 2013, 08:16 AM

..personally i suspect that rule is left-over from SR3 ed, (vaguely remember) where is actually cyberware (Dermal sheath?? + high level Muscle replacement??) that
make it possible the humans and elves have 8 Bod & 8 Str..

Posted by: Stahlseele Feb 21 2013, 12:24 AM

SR3 had a bit more bite in the Recoil for the PAC:
9l Stun Damage if you fire it without having at least body and STR 9 i think.

Posted by: Tanegar Feb 21 2013, 12:40 AM

8S, AP- vs Impact armor, Composure test (3) or the target spends a whole combat turn doing the heebie-jeebie dance.

Posted by: All4BigGuns Feb 21 2013, 12:50 AM

If someone shows up at your table with a character with a Full Auto Panther Assault Cannon, take the advice of Mirikon from the other forum. Smack them with a phone book.

Posted by: Stahlseele Feb 21 2013, 12:53 AM

Yeah, doing that is stupid.
He should go for a battery of missle launchers.

Posted by: Umidori Feb 21 2013, 01:35 AM

If someone shows up at my table with a Full Auto Panther Assault Cannon, I'll raise an eyebrow, check their Heavy Weapons skill, and ask them why they have it and what they plan to use it for. If they answer in a way that leaves me doubtful as to their sound judgement, I'll ask them to reconsider. If they persist, only then will I involve my good friend Mr. Telecom.

~Umi

Posted by: Mantis Feb 21 2013, 04:13 AM

Sound advice for many of the things players bring to the table. Asking them about it forces them to think about and justify the choice which can lead them to rethink the choice, all without the GM having to say no.

Posted by: SpellBinder Feb 21 2013, 05:45 AM

Hopefully. I knew a guy who would've said he'd want it for the noise it'd make when he fired it.

This is also the same kind of guy who'd always say "I dodge." during a D&D session whenever his character was declared a target of an attack.

Posted by: tasti man LH Feb 21 2013, 05:56 AM

...yea, no. A FA Assault Cannon is far too silly for my taste, even if it is feasible or not.

Just like how I warned against one of my players on how silly it would be if he tried to use his heli to air drop drones like it was 1944 in Normandy.

(because despite being plausible, that would be silly)

Posted by: StealthSigma Feb 21 2013, 01:48 PM

I'm questioning why that would be silly. In every situation? Yes. That is silly, but there are certainly cases where air dropping drones could be useful.

Posted by: tasti man LH Feb 21 2013, 05:28 PM

Just the mental image of it raining drones like cats and dogs is enough for me to facepalm, despite how it's technically plausible.

Then again, this is the same guy who wanted to make all of his Steel Lynx drones essentially the Tachikomas from Ghost in the Shell...until I pointed out to him that drones can't really develop personalities of their own unless driven by a sentient AI.

Posted by: Stahlseele Feb 21 2013, 05:45 PM

you realize that there are drones made especially for this right? O.o

Posted by: tasti man LH Feb 21 2013, 05:46 PM

The air drop drones or the Tachikoma drones?

Posted by: Stahlseele Feb 21 2013, 05:54 PM

airdrop at least.
and tachikoma are just medium to large size drones with wheels and walker adaption technically.
the only thing where they fall short is the no metahuman transportation capacity on any drone . .

Posted by: StealthSigma Feb 21 2013, 07:39 PM

Well, airdropping drones into a compound would probably make security flip their shit and provide ample distraction for the rest of the team.

Posted by: tasti man LH Feb 21 2013, 07:48 PM

Well, as long as he doesn't spam air-dropping drones like there's no tomorrow, it's fine.

Otherwise, the exploits of the man that Rains Drones will pass quickly throughout the corpsec world, and suddenly he'll find himself going up against facilities that are armed with Anti-Aircraft guns/drones.

(and hey, I have my own love of theatrics myself. hell, when the time comes for me to be a player and not a GM, my planned rigger character is going to do his best to recreate this famous scene, but with micro to mini drones: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V94K2eJnuCA)

Posted by: All4BigGuns Feb 21 2013, 07:50 PM

What about Drop Bear bio-drones?

Posted by: tasti man LH Feb 21 2013, 08:56 PM

Eh? Biodrones?

*quickly looks them up*

...

...you people are SICK.

Posted by: SpellBinder Feb 21 2013, 09:03 PM

That's what you get with unlimited funds and no scruples.

Posted by: StealthSigma Feb 21 2013, 09:44 PM

If he's talking about air dropping drones then they're either really inexpensive and disposable (because recovery will be very difficult) or their very expensive and fewer in number and he will attempt to recover them.

Posted by: Umidori Feb 21 2013, 10:18 PM

I'd just airdrop feral ghouls. Use enough of them and it's really hard to shoot them all out of the sky while they're parachuting down. And even if you do, that turns them into air-deployed HMHVV bombs.

~Umi

Posted by: Lionhearted Feb 21 2013, 10:44 PM

*smirk* Wait until you look up dropbears, or stumble into the OG dropbear thread

Posted by: Dakka Dakka Feb 21 2013, 11:01 PM

You put that weapon (or the modded Barrett if the assault acnnon rounds are special enough to disallow firing selection change) on a C-D Dalmatian modded for undetectability, so recoil is not an issue... wait a minute, what I can figure out the GM can as well and he has a bigger budget.

Posted by: KarmaInferno Feb 22 2013, 02:14 AM

Rigger cocoon?

Or Special Storage + Rigger Cocoon if you want to be conservative about it.



-k

Posted by: Umidori Feb 22 2013, 02:24 AM

Exactly. Once it becomes known that a runner team is doing missions in the region with a drone equipped with a FA assault cannon, the local corps are gonna take extra measures. That can be anything from more drones, to more mages, to more vehicles, to an enemy team of runners.

And even if the corps can't beef up their physical security at every conceivable target site, they can outfit an HTR team with a military gunship and have them on standby to respond to the next big break-in the runners pull off. Nothing drives a runner team to ground like the threat of Death From Above™.

~Umi

Posted by: toturi Feb 22 2013, 03:06 AM

I think the corps in question would do their own cost-benefit analysis. Depending on the runner team, such a threat might not work and may even backfire.

Posted by: ShadowDragon8685 Feb 22 2013, 04:09 AM

If the Runner team is slick enough, getting an HTR team put together against them might be exactly what they want, so they can then provoke an HTR response and intercept the HTR VTOL in the air and hijack it.

If you're crazy enough to air-drop drones equipped with full-auto panther cannons, you're crazy enough to try anything, and so crazy it might just work.



[e]Of course, at that point, if you're air-dropping drones with FA panthers and hijacking airborne HTR VTOLs, chances are the corps will be willing to pay you handsomely to go somewhere else. Or else pay to employ you. That's about the point where you should be making the transition from "Shadowrunners" to "Mercenaries," I'd say.

Posted by: Stahlseele Feb 22 2013, 08:59 AM

i think the cocoon can only be placed into vehicles, not drones O.o

Posted by: Dakka Fiend Feb 22 2013, 09:58 AM

Especially as high-powered directional jammers (and maybe cannons that fire that sticky foam whatever it's called) are a more efficient approach. "Thanks for the drones. You may leave now."

Posted by: Summerstorm Feb 22 2013, 12:08 PM

Eh, if you put that much stuff on a drone, you can have them upgraded to work perfectly independent und secure (Wifi disabled).. also load them up with bombs to selfdestruct. NOBODY gets my drones.

I remember having a rigger in my games (SR3) who had a roto-drone loaded up with two auto-cannons. Under the rules it had like a 15-minute usability and only ammo for about 2-3 combat rounds on board because it was so overmodded and heavy.

The damn thing got activated, heaved itself out of his vehicle flew a few meters to the targeted location and MURDERED everything, shooting through walls and cover, completly ruining whole buildings... then left and locked itself into the charging station. Fun times...

I don't have anything against that, or FA-modded Panther's. Those things always come back to you, and it's just over-the-top-fun.

Posted by: X-Kalibur Feb 23 2013, 12:09 AM

Rule of cool trumps all. And this coming from a rules lawyer! Sometimes it's okay to throw out rules to make the game fun and memorable... when done responsibly. As stated, there isn't really anything game breaking about an SA or FA PAC vs a modded out sniper rifle that can achieve the same level of destruction. Now, if you wanted to re-do the PAC ammo so that it had some sort of bonus against barriers (for busting thru walls and cars... and tanks........) then we could talk.

Posted by: SpellBinder Feb 23 2013, 12:28 AM

Just expect the NPCs to do the same thing as well.

Got a burly ork toting around a full auto Panther cannon? Well, look out for the really burly troll down the street doing the exact same thing.

Posted by: tasti man LH Feb 23 2013, 01:16 AM

^Just like the Squirt Gun Wars, so many years ago?

Posted by: toturi Feb 23 2013, 02:58 AM

No, you see, the PC is the really burly Fomori down the street and at best the GM can clone the exact same build and have the PC's twin to do the exact same thing.

Posted by: SpellBinder Feb 23 2013, 03:16 AM

At least you got the point.

Posted by: KarmaInferno Feb 23 2013, 06:14 AM

If you are referring to the line about drones not carrying passengers, a lot of folks view that as descriptive rather than restrictive.

Because by default, it is true most drones are not designed with passengers in mind.

Right away, though, we have exceptions - at least two wheelchair drones are in Arsenal.

Under the mod rules the Rigger Cocoon is "standard", meaning it can be put on medium or larger drones. Some GMs may additionally require actual passenger space, which can be handled by the Special Storage mod.



-k

Posted by: Irion Feb 24 2013, 03:12 PM

Oh come on. Of course the assault cannon ammunition is "exotic". No other guns use it. Geez.


There is only one kind of ammounition, where you really have a grey area. And that would be the battery packs. (Because they are the general ammunition for any kind of energy weapon...)


And yes, recoil rules in SR are silly.
Starting with ignoring the size of the bullet in general and resetting after every pass...

Posted by: Dakka Dakka Feb 24 2013, 03:45 PM

That same argument could be made for the assault cannon shells. OK, since Arsenal assault cannons can also shoot AV shells. But having different projectiles is not something only assault cannons have (almost every firearm can do that).


I partially agree on the first part but the lack of differentiation between weapon types may be simply due to the granularity of the rules. What's wrong with the reset? Resetting after each pass is not more silly than resetting after each round. The time it takes for the bullets to leave the weapon is much shorter than the time an action phase occupies. So it is not unreasonable to assume that the character takes the rest of the time to get the weapon under control.

Posted by: Umidori Feb 25 2013, 08:50 AM

Now this argument is just stupid. Every class of gun has its own exclusive ammunition type. Shotguns can't load light pistol rounds, ya know.

~Umi

Posted by: Irion Feb 25 2013, 10:41 AM

They all use the standart ammunition. After the rules, you can.

Posted by: Umidori Feb 25 2013, 10:52 AM

Go home, Irion. You are drunk.

~Umi

Posted by: ShadowDragon8685 Feb 25 2013, 01:49 PM

An assault cannon round is mentioned as being the same sort of ammunition used by the main weapons of some light tanks.

If we assume that by "some light tanks" they're actually talking about "infantry fighting vehicles," then it makes sense to assume that that means the assault cannon rounds are basically autocannon ammunition, and troll-portable assault cannons are really just REALLY FRIGGING BIG anti-material rifles/carbines chambered for those autocannon rounds. Basically, it's like a 30mm rifle.

30mm weapons can and are made to be fully automatic. Granted that in modern times we tend to mount those on things like helicoptors and such, but even so, IRL we don't have soldiers the size of trolls to carry them.

So, yes, you can definitely make a Panther AC (or any other kind of assault cannon) fire at full auto. Now, why would you want to is another matter, because frankly that's probably stupid unless you're using it from a fixed or semi-fixed position, anywhere you can have a huge box full of ammo on a belt. You might prefer burst fire, or semiautomatic, for a more practical application...

But honestly, when you just have to kill everymotherfucker in every room of a building that's facing you dead, nothing beats autocannon fire.

(Also, you should definitely be able to get AC ammo in the various ammunition varieties... But even the best fixer is going to (a) look at you funny and (b) have a hard time scoring you 2,000 rounds of autocannon EX-EX.)

Posted by: Mach_Ten Feb 25 2013, 02:06 PM

Having found myself shoulder deep in the working mechanism of a 30mm Cannon trying to catch a piece of moving machinery with my bare hands before the breech closes (3 kilos of solid gunmetal and takes my hand with it

Then, having been sat in a tank firing (SA) 30mm shells at a target 2.5KM away

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RARDEN

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/30_mm_caliber

I can happily say I would Not like to try and fire or be on the pointy end of it .. in ANY firing mode, the -> "Ammunition" ALONE is 17 cm LONG
or in the form of caseless up to 25 cm long. and Three cm width

considering a few things

1) the sheer time it takes the mechanism to Fire - recoil over 2 feet of barrel - collect new round - carry round 2 feet forward - breech lock --- fire -- etc.
2) the amount of force generated by that amount of ammo charge ( the old rule of equal and opposite forces)
3) the exisiting size & weight of the weapon and the encumbrance of it, the Barrel is over 4 metres long

the absolute best you could expect would be BF (wide burst) not FA in a full complex action ( like the savalette guardian pistol ?)
the firer would need to compensate a huge amount of recoil to get the round anywhere near target as well as being able to carry it in the first place.
and be able to avoid getting knocked flat on his arse by the force of the shot (these are tank mounted for a reason.

the force in the round takes it on a FOUR Kilometre journey

That said, 70 years of technological progress could quite easily see that weapon compacted and simplified and easily made into a beast of a machine
but pure physics alone says, the second shot is gonna go SO wide it's not worth it but the value of doing it is another discussion over the ability to just do it.


As for the Ammo,, they come in any flavour you want ,, APDS HEAT, and should be considered Anti-vehicular by design. this is NOT a man hunter it's a tank killer

You buy an MMG and "under-Barrel mount" it for killing people, even then the machine guns of today are suppressive fire .. full auto puts 30 rounds into a 50m^2 area .. they are not precise ( due to barrel heat and recoil etc.)


Hooo Boy ... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XM307

25mm man portable fully auto Grenade launcher .... not quite assault cannon ... but ... I want one !

Posted by: Dakka Dakka Feb 25 2013, 02:43 PM

30mm seems a bit large for what the BBB describes as "common to the primary weapon in many small tanks". The http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marder_(IFV) and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wiesel_AWC for example use 20mm cannons. That brings the calibre much closer to those of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-tank_rifle. Assuming the assault cannon is a modern successor of an anti-tank rifle also fits the size of the panther (essentially man-portable) much better than assuming an actual cannon.

But yeah the XM307 is a much more plausible weapon that the beefed up anti-tank rifles. But then again IRL LAWs and other rockets can actually hit the broad side of a barn.

Posted by: Mach_Ten Feb 25 2013, 03:02 PM

there does seem to be some discrepancy on the size of the round on the panther ... so many tanks .. so many variants in ammo

http://mybloggityblog.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/dscf1389largeon2.jpg

also called Panther vs Barret vs LMG

I'd suggest 20-25mm would be the range to look at
as anything larger os 150 kilos of weapon without ammo, without gyro mounts and tripods and yada yada
and just could not be wielded in any way let alone be effective !

I do like a full auto mini grenade launcher with a 2KM range though .... it is just .. tasty

Don't get me started on LAW .. in SR3 a purpose built anti tank weapon is not considered AV ... but my new mantra is "this is not RL .. this is NOT RL !"

Posted by: StealthSigma Feb 25 2013, 03:50 PM

Light Tanks in WW2 (assuming Light Tank is synonymous with small tank).

Panzer II - 20mm
Panzer 35(t) - 37mm
Panzer 38(t) - 37mm
M2A4 - 37mm
M3 Stuart - 37mm
BT Tank - 45mm
Type 98 - 37mm

All other light tanks were using machine gun weapons rather than large caliber cannon. If 30mm is still the standard for a light tank in 2070....

Posted by: ZeroPoint Feb 25 2013, 04:19 PM

I think they were looking at something like the M2 Bradley IFVs which use a 25mm gun. Or any of the many other IFV's (which at least in looks, are much closer to tanks then just the beefed up APCs that they are) that use 20-30mm guns.

Either way, 20mm is a good sight bigger than the .50 (~13mm) ammo that the Barret uses. I'd say that fits the bill pretty well, and any bigger is just ridiculous. I've held a GAU-8 round. I can't see even a troll in heavy military armor firing a weapon designed to fire that and still be standing afterwards.

Posted by: Sage2000 Feb 25 2013, 05:16 PM

Interesting...

I aways though this: the reason the Panther Cannon was Single Shot was freaking game balance. In the old "18Deadly" days, one shot was almost 100% (over)kill. Was about gamming style and character style.

Now the "Minigun+gyromount" guy was able to kill even 3 enemies in one round, but there was a lot more randomness and crazieness, tons of recoil and multitarget penalties, very messy.

That was the important diference.

When I see that people are managing to use "recoiless" miniguns and "full automatic assaut cannons", the game balance and differences between playing styles just go down the drain - the game becomes a poor, powerplaying game. Ence we have the "optimum" choices.

This remminds me of an old D&D discussion about staves and rods for wizards. I wanted my wizard to use a staff, but what I wanted to do with it was considered - in game terms - a rod. The DM, wisely allowed me to use a staff, fitting the character concept and apearence, that was a rod in mechanical/rules terms.

As aways, just an opinion, trying to look at the big picture and trying to remmember why we play RPGs.

Posted by: ShadowDragon8685 Feb 25 2013, 05:18 PM

In the game of Shadowrun, when it comes down to mundane technology and game balance versus verisimilitude, game balance can eat a dick, in my opinion. Tech is already the poor man's option if given a choice between tech or magic.

Posted by: Sage2000 Feb 25 2013, 05:51 PM

I see your point, but I was just trying to keep the comparison between different kinds of tech: let's not make this an arms race (almost literaly). Magic was not a factor in my post.

Verisimilitude is desired, but we are talking about futuristic techs, in an alternate universe. On top of that the rules systems will never, ever, be able to grasp "reality"; so I advocate game balance instead, in a way that the aftermentioned "mini-gun guy" and "panther cannon dude" can both have fun, in different styles, in the same party, without anyone being "sub-optimal".

At least every single DM, in every single group that I saw trying to use rules "in the way he saw reality", failed miserably, becuse the "reality" is just too damm complex, and we are not playing in a simulator, its an RPG (a game of interpretation, its about having fun).

Thats why I aways keep an eye at game balance, and uniqueness of choices.

Posted by: Irion Feb 25 2013, 06:06 PM

Still, Standart ammunition. You do not seem to get it. What you quote is fluff. Buying 20 shots for your shotgun is (seen from the rules) exactly the same as buying 20 rounds for your light pistol.
As a matter of fact, they do not act differently in ANY way. You may declare them as shotgun rounds. But as a matter of fact, thats happening when you write them next to your weapon. What you buy is generic ammo (after the rules).

Please learn to distinguish between fluff and game mechanics. There are games with different costs, weights, availabilities etc. for small arm ammunition. Shadowrun is not one of them.

@ShadowDragon8685

It is not as much about game balance as it is about making silly arguments. It is quite clear what is meant by non-exotic ammo...
And I am sorry, there are very few things less exotic than the assault cannon.

Posted by: ShadowDragon8685 Feb 25 2013, 06:24 PM

Irion, you're steadfastly sticking to an irrational interpretation which is nowhere spelled out in the rules.

Arrows are exotic, crossbow bolts are exotic. Grenades are exotic (though there is, in fact, an FA grenade launcher.) Rockets are exotic, ferrous SLUGS from a railgun are exotic!


Assault cannon rounds are a normal bullet writ large. It doesn't have some bullshit clockwork mechanism in it, it's a propellant charge at the ass-end of a bullet, either held together by a brass case or epoxied together in the manufacturing process. It's loaded into the chamber by a recoil mechanism, it fires electrically or with the dropping of a hammer, and the weapon recoils as the round leaves the barrel, causing the weapon to chamber another round and, as necessary, ejecting a case in the process.

Making that process happen very, very quickly, and continue to operate as long as the rifleman holds the trigger down is not new technology. By the time of Shadowrun 4, it's almost two fucking centuries old: the first fully-automatic firearm to operate on that principle was produced in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mondrag%C3%B3n_rifle.

Posted by: Irion Feb 25 2013, 06:27 PM

@ShadowDragon8685
What destinguishs an assault cannon round from an arrow/bolt rulewise?

Posted by: Dakka Dakka Feb 25 2013, 06:28 PM

I guess the problem with game balance and verisimilitude starts with the poor performance of a single shot from dedicated FA weapons (MMG, HMG) compared to the single shot from a sniper rifle/AMR even though they should be similar. A burst from an MMG would need 3 net hits to penetrate a Mitsubishi Nightsky whereas the Ranger Arms would need only need one. Not to mention that without modification the attack from the machine gun costs at least three times as much.

So people who want the dakka dakka flavor instead of the big badaboom flavor seek options to rival or exceed the other flavor's crunch.

@irion: Nothing. And before you start building FA bows, bows still have the unusual loading mechanism.

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Feb 25 2013, 06:54 PM

Their Names.

Posted by: Irion Feb 25 2013, 06:59 PM

@Tymeaus Jalynsfein
Thats true for everything... So? There ain't any exotic ammunition?

Posted by: bannockburn Feb 25 2013, 07:08 PM

Consider this: There are only exactly two kinds of assault cannon ammunition. No frangible, no Hi-C, no APDS, etc. pp., just AV and regular ammo.
Every non-exotic kind of ammunition is available in just about every variation, with few exceptions (Deathdealer rounds only available for certain kinds of weapons come to mind; and aren't there door openers for shotguns only?)

I'll go out on a limb with Irion here and say, yep. Assault cannon rounds are exotic ammunition. Just as gauss rifle rounds are.

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Feb 25 2013, 07:13 PM

Of course Assault Canon Rounds are Exotic. Irion is not stating that, I do not think.
I could be mistaking in that, but that is how he is reading, anyways.

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Feb 25 2013, 07:14 PM

Of course there is.
Assault Canon Rounds are an example.

Posted by: bannockburn Feb 25 2013, 07:16 PM

I am at a bit at a loss here. I think I just supported his view on them being exotic, didn't I?

Edit, and now with actual content: I'm hoping no one is going to quote the Anti Tank rounds from War, p.156. Those are less expensive than AV rounds and, IMO another fine example of really bad editing / rules writing in that monstrosity of a book.

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Feb 25 2013, 07:26 PM

From my reading, he seems to be arguing that ALL ammunition is Exotic, so therefore none is.
He is a bit confusing (or I am a bit confused).

Posted by: bannockburn Feb 25 2013, 07:27 PM

Or we all are

Posted by: KarmaInferno Feb 25 2013, 08:11 PM

Irion was of the opinion that Assault Cannon ammo is Exotic. He was responding to ShadowDragon.

I for one do not agree. Assault Cannon rounds are bullets, just larger. This is in contrast to arrows, musket balls, or netgun ammo.

They are loaded like bullets, they fire like bullets, and there are existing full-auto weapons in the game that do use assault cannon rounds in the game. Hell, we have full auto 20-30mm cannons in existence TODAY. If it's a projectile attached to a propellant charge designed to be placed into a firing chamber, where the propellant generates rapidly expanding gasses driving the projectile at high speeds out the barrel, it's a damn bullet, regardless of the size.

Granted, the definition of "Exotic" is imprecise in SR, but I feel that it refers to stuff that is clearly not anywhere close to "bullet", or bullet-like. The restriction against full auto for those makes sense, because it'd be difficult if not impossible to create a reliable auto-loading mechanism for them. More of a practical limitation, rather than any sort of game balance limitation.





-k

Posted by: bannockburn Feb 25 2013, 08:13 PM

And yet, you don't get them in all the different ammo types and they have separate prices and categories
As this is true for gauss rifles, flamers and dartguns, I hold it's true for assault cannons as well.

I am not really knowledgeable in the world of ammunition and guns, but this doesn't sound like a regular bullet to me.

Posted by: KarmaInferno Feb 25 2013, 08:26 PM

I understand your argument, you are looking at it from a rules point of view.

As someone who DOES know a good bit about ammunition and guns, I am looking at it from a practical point of view.

To me, the fact that they are on different charts is completely irrelevant.

They are projectiles launched out of a barrel by the chemical based propellant. There is no good practical reason you should not be able to use the same basic design an assault rifle uses to auto-load ammo for an assault cannon. A real world weapons engineer could theoretically modify a 20mm class cannon to full auto today, with some work.

In contrast, trying to make a full auto, say, arrow launcher would more or less require designing a whole new weapon from the ground up, and as such would be beyond the modding rules.


-k

Posted by: bannockburn Feb 25 2013, 08:29 PM

Yes, I see where you're coming from, then
I also hold that there are full auto assault cannons. Those are called autocannons ^^
No need to mod them, as even the notion of a fully automatic assault cannon being fired from a person, not from a vehicle, seems supremely silly to me

Posted by: Dakka Dakka Feb 25 2013, 08:54 PM

There is no indication that there is a relation between assault cannons and auto cannons or a connection between their respective ammunitions (the latter does not even have ammunition AFAICT). The GE Light/Heavy Cannon on the other hand is said to shoot something that could possibly be similar to assault cannon rounds. It is also described as not exotic. Those two weapons also use the same range as Assault Cannons

The vehicle weapon is not an automatic assault cannon. The autocannon is much more closely related to a minigun.

Posted by: bannockburn Feb 25 2013, 08:57 PM

No, they're just similar enough in damage codes to make the comparison. Sorry if that was unclear.
I still would laugh in the face of every player trying to fire one from the hip.

Posted by: Umidori Feb 25 2013, 08:58 PM

Whether there is a need to mod a Panther XXL for FA fire or not is irrelevant. It's still possible. And It's still not imbalanced.

People are being really pedantic about this. The Firing Selection Change mod gives very good examples of what sorts of things it considers to be unacceptable. First is the Sakura Fubuki, which has 4 separate barrels, a non-standard magazine, bullets stacked in-line in barrel, and no moving parts. Second is the Pain Inducer, which is a microwave beam weapon that operates off peak-discharge power packs.

Assault cannons don't come anywhere near that level of difference. They fire bullets - very large ones, but bullets all the same. They have a regular loading mechanism, and the ammunition is stored in a "clip" or spring-fed magazine, just like every single FA capable weapon in the game.

~Umi

Posted by: Stahlseele Feb 25 2013, 09:05 PM

why you would want to mod one is beyond me anyway . .
at that power, that's too much diminishing returns in my opinion.

Posted by: bannockburn Feb 25 2013, 09:07 PM

Never said it was imbalanced.
I dispute your 'possible', as does Irion. RAW clearly says "This modification is not available for weapons using unusual loading mechanisms or exotic ammunition" and then gives two weapons as examples. Inferring from those examples that there needs to be a correlation to another unmoddable weapon is a fallacy. The Fubuki and the pain inducer would be examples for 'unusual loading mechanisms', not necessarily exotic ammunition.
Your 'possible' is entirely dependent on your interpretation of what is and what isn't exotic ammunition. I don't share that interpretation for reasons stated above. You chose to scoff at this reasoning, but that does not make you right or me wrong. Nor does posting something in bold face and calling people stupid, btw.

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Feb 25 2013, 09:13 PM

By That Logic, Rockets are not Exotic. I am pretty sure we can consider them as such from a Game point of View.
Practicality has absolutely nothing to do with it.

Posted by: Stahlseele Feb 25 2013, 09:14 PM

Technically, the fubuki should be FA capable in stock . .

Posted by: Dakka Dakka Feb 25 2013, 09:22 PM

And much faster than HV too.

Posted by: Mach_Ten Feb 25 2013, 09:24 PM

I'm with BOTH Umi & KarmaInferno on the Ammo, but not on the ability to midify

the Ammo is not exotic, it's big bullets

BUT, the RAW of it says "unusual Firing Mechanism or exotic Ammo"

and as posted previously I've been shoulder deep in many a cannon "Wahey!"

the mechanism .. in my experience is an entirely different beast to that of a standard "Bolt fed" weapon.

not only in the slowness of picking up the round, but essentially it's a goddamn conveyor belt with a mechanical arm that grabs the round and feeds it into the chamber the breech is closed and then it fires with the recoil exerting the force to re-cock.

it's just so different (on the weapons I worked on) as to be unsuitable for switching to burst or FA.

that's not to say 70 years of advancement etc. etc. .. but still by game terms ... not applicable
#edit#
I should add, the cannon is question is SA not SS .. there is a 3 round shelf on it for loading rounds.

Posted by: ShadowDragon8685 Feb 25 2013, 09:27 PM

Mach_Ten: The Panther has a clip-magazine, though. It's not a breachloader. It's a normal rifle firing mechanism writ large.


It's probably impractical or impossible to do with today's materials science, but the Shadowrun 2070s materials science beats the pants off ours.

Posted by: All4BigGuns Feb 25 2013, 09:29 PM

I look at the "exotic ammunition" phrase as applying to weapons that can only fire one specific ammo type, and since a Panther can only fire 'assault cannon ammo' it would apply. (And yes, I would apply the same to any weapon with High Power Chambering since that mod restricts the weapon to one ammo type.)

Posted by: bannockburn Feb 25 2013, 09:31 PM

Technically, two kinds of ammo, since there's regular and AV, and even a third kind that's specific to gauss rifles (which are an undercategory of assault cannons, but who's keeping track), but that's the core of my argument, yes.

Posted by: Stahlseele Feb 25 2013, 09:36 PM

Sabot Rounds!

Posted by: ZeroPoint Feb 25 2013, 09:45 PM

http://www.anzioironworks.com/MAG-FED-20MM-RIFLE.htm

The second picture down is a comparison of the 20mm rifle to a what is essentially the .50 Barrett.

Just so we're all clear.

Posted by: StealthSigma Feb 25 2013, 10:04 PM

It lists two examples that can be 1:1 mapped with the Fubuki as an example of the unusual loading mechanism and the Pain Inducer as exotic ammunition. Exotic does not mean unique. That only one weapon uses the ammunition is not sufficient to make it exotic. It seems to me that exotic ammunition is referring to exotic weapons that don't otherwise describe themselves as using the same ammunition as a non-exotic weapon.

Posted by: bannockburn Feb 25 2013, 10:11 PM

In regards to the mentioned weapons: note the word 'necessarily'
Your interpretation is valid, too. There is no clear definition in the book as to what kind of ammunition is considered exotic, so it's entirely up to the GM arbitrating the issue.
In Umidori's and your groups it would be possible to mod an assault cannon for fully automatic fire (if somewhat strange ), in mine and Irion's it wouldn't be.

Posted by: Umidori Feb 25 2013, 10:24 PM

Let me just get the core of your argument straight, for the record.

Are you saying that as Assault Cannon rounds are unique to Assault Cannons, they are therefor exotic?

~Umi

Posted by: bannockburn Feb 25 2013, 10:35 PM

No. I am saying: Assault cannons have a very strict restriction on what kind of ammunition they load. This ammunition is a category of its own. It has a separate price, separate availability and is even explicitly called "Assault cannon round", respectively "AV Assault Cannon Round".

On the other hand, you have loads of generic ammunition. Basically all other ammunition is available for the same price and the same availability.
It does not matter if you buy a regular round for a shotgun (which is a slug) or a heavy pistol (which could be a 9-10mm bullet). The price and availability is the same. The same goes for frangible rounds. For APDS rounds, for flechette and all the other kinds of ammunition.

These types of ammunition are generic and another thing they all have in common is, that you cannot load them into an assault cannon. Vice versa, you cannot buy an AV assault cannon round and load it into a gauss rifle, nor into a light pistol. THAT is the difference, in my interpretation between exotic and generic ammunition.
Edit for clarification: Of course I am not proposing that you can load a bullet bought for an assault rifle into a light pistol. But the _entry_ you buy from the gear list is still the same.

You can only ever load flamer ammunition into a flamethrower, in a similar vein, and furthermore, there is no way to get "APDS flamer fuel" or any other kind of specialized, but generic ammo.

You may not share my interpretation, but you haven't made compelling points for yours. StealthSigma has, and I can understand his point, but I do not share it.

Posted by: X-Kalibur Feb 25 2013, 10:45 PM

It depends entirely on your interpretation of the word "exotic".

1. of foreign origin or character; not native; introduced from abroad, but not fully naturalized or acclimatized: exotic foods; exotic plants.
2. strikingly unusual or strange in effect or appearance: an exotic hairstyle.
3. of a uniquely new or experimental nature: exotic weapons.
4. of, pertaining to, or involving stripteasing: the exotic clubs where strippers are featured.

point 1: I think we can all agree, this does not apply to the ammo.
point 2: As has been demonstrated, there is nothing truly unusual or strange about the rounds or how they work versus any other firearm
point 3: nothing uniquely new or experimental about the PAC
point 4: only if lesbian elves are involved.

So... how is it exotic again? Mind you we are talking about modern (by our standards or SR4 standards, really) firearms. Is the ammo listed anywhere as being "exotic" or is this merely being extrapolated from being unique, which is not a qualifier? A cursory glance at my SR4 PDF shows that neither the weapon or its ammo are listed as exotic.

<edit>
I'll also note that Archaic can sometimes be used as a synonym for exotic, leading to things like arrows, musket balls, etc still being exempt by the wording.

Posted by: Mach_Ten Feb 25 2013, 11:22 PM

So, ummm .. why are we even havin this discussion then ?

cause that's just ... "Cause, magic" as we have no basis to go off other than two really badly worded lines in a book.

which really means this could quite possibly go on all year and we'll still be in the same place arguing over whether a 30mm (or smaller or larger) shell that by todays standards is APDS or HEAT or Depleted Uranium.
is exotic or not,


it's just gonna get messy and redundant.

Posted by: ChromeZephyr Feb 25 2013, 11:26 PM

That's what we call "normal" around here.

Posted by: Umidori Feb 25 2013, 11:54 PM

So what about Shotgun-Only Ammunition? Flare and Shock-Lock Rounds? They're clearly in a category of their own, they're explicitly "Shotgun-Only".


And so what if the price and availability are the same? They're still different rounds - the ammunition rules explicitly state this fact. You cannot buy 100 rounds of caseless light pistol ammo and then use it in a shotgun, or even in a light pistol that requires cased rounds.

The only reason costs and availability of the rounds for smallarms are the same is because it cuts down on bookkeeping. There are technically dozens of varieties of different ammunition available with all those options, but they all share the same price and available because that's just easier to keep track of. And the only reason Assault Cannons have their own separate listing is because you can't have special varieties like an APDS or EX-Explosive round for an assault cannon.

Yes, assault cannons lack the extra options of other ammunition types. Yes, assault cannon rounds have a separate cost and availability. But that's completely unrelated to how assault cannon rounds operate as ammunition, how they fit into clips, how they are chambered in the barrel, and how feasible it is to modify an assault cannon for full auto fire.


Again, what does it matter if they have the same gear listing entry? You're stating that the format of the information, chosen entirely for practical purposes of simplifying the rules and reducing word count and printing space, is the true measure of RAI?


Flamethrowers use liquid fuel. It is literally impossible to mod for Full Auto fire because the physics do not operate that way, and because the rules obviously and plainly cannot represent such a thing, even in abstraction. Flamethrowers are obviously exotic, not because they only have one type of fuel listed purchaseable, but because you're shooting a goddamn stream of flaming liquid and not a bullet.


Let's compare our compelling points, shall we?

Argument Against Exotic

• AC Ammo Is A Kind of Bullet
• AC Ammo Is Kept In A Clip
• AC Ammo Is Loaded And Chambered Like All Other Non-Exotic Ammo
• AC Ammo DV and AP is IDENTICAL to Non-Exotic Barret Model 121 EX-Explosive Round
• Absolutely No Game Balance Reason To Deny Assault Cannons FA
• Absolutely No Fluff Reason To Deny Assault Cannons FA Fire
• Absolutely No RAW Reason To Deny Assault Cannons FA Fire

Argument For Exotic

• Separate Ammunition Type Listing, Price, and Availability
• Standard Ammo Type "Options" Not Available

~Umi

Posted by: X-Kalibur Feb 25 2013, 11:58 PM

You're assuming a bit much at the end there, Umi, after all, if there was absolutely no reason, RAW or Fluff, to deny the weapon mod, we wouldn't be having a disagreement here, now would we?

Posted by: Umidori Feb 26 2013, 01:59 AM

There ISN'T any reason.

RAW does NOT state ANYWHERE that Assault Cannons use exotic ammunition, nor that they cannot accept the FSC Mod.
Fluff I will concede is open to some debate, chiefly because it's so vague in wording, but I'm prepared to drop that point of contention.

~Umi

Posted by: Irion Feb 26 2013, 09:10 AM

You said different name. If a different name is enough to lable one exotic ammunition and not the other it is a logical conclusion, that every ammo except one is to be considered exotic.


@X-Kalibur
The problem with your argument is: How is anything exotic with this reasoning?
Arrows and Bolts have been around thousands of years, known to everyone.
Darts, the same.
Batteries? They should be known in SR to the public.

Posted by: Stahlseele Feb 26 2013, 10:27 AM

@Umidori:
On the other Hand, the Rules don't state that Trolls can't fly and the Fluff is up to debate because it's a bit vague on wording, but i am prepared to drop that line of thought, because it'd be a tangent and not on topic any more ^^

Posted by: Dakka Dakka Feb 26 2013, 10:38 AM

I would not consider those as exotic ammunitions, but the weapons that launch them do feature exotic loading mechanisms, except maybe the sci-fi crossbow of SR4. Then again these cannot be modified anyways, because they don't have one of the modifiable firing modes.

Yes, batteries are known to the public, but are they known as propellant for ammunitions (gauss weapons)? I think you can even argue that the energy weapons of SR (lasers, pain inducers etc.) don't use http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/ammunition at all - at least by definition one. If whatever you use to damage a target includes the figurative meaning of ammunition as in definition two, the idea of exotic ammunition becomes pretty meaningless.

@Stahlseele: Trolls can't fly, even if you go by the "if it's not forbidden, it must be allowed" position. Trolls are metahumans which are humans except for some explicit rules and real world humans can't fly. If you deny any connection between a real world concept/object/ect. and the SR concept/object/etc., you can do all sorts of crazy things. Now satyrs don't have a real world counterpart to fall back on....

Posted by: Umidori Feb 26 2013, 10:49 AM

See, if my entire argument was based solely on the notion that RAW doesn't disallow it? I'd totally be with you.

Byt my argument is NOT based solely on the notion that RAW doesn't disallow it.

My argument is that it makes perfect sense given all the evidence we have available. That 1) Assault Cannon rounds are not radically different from normal bullets, that 2) they are not chambered or reloaded radically different from normal bullets, that 3) they are clearly nowhere near as outlandish or exotic as the listed examples of non-moddable weapons like beam weapons and guns that lack moving parts, that 4) FA assault cannons are not imbalanced from a game systems standpoint, and that 5) there is already an equivalent or better option allowed and available with the Barrett Model 121 Sniper Rifle.

Meanwhile, the best evidence anyone can seem to level AGAINST my argument is "Well they have a separate listing in the gear category, so they MUST be exotic!", which is absolute fallacious nonsense.

Honestly, Stalh, I expect better, I really do. You're comparing me to, and treating me like, some impertinent scrub trying to outlandishly break the system by being willfully obtuse about what the rules should reasonably allow or disallow.

Clearly the evidence is in my favor. Clearly the people trying to disallow FA assault cannons don't have a solid leg to stand on. You should be chewing them out for being stubbornly pedantic for no reason other than to be contrary. They're literally trying to disallow something they have no rational reason to disallow.

~Umi

Posted by: Stahlseele Feb 26 2013, 11:15 AM

*shrugs*
i would allow FA PAC . .

Posted by: bannockburn Feb 26 2013, 11:27 AM

First off, sorry for the quote chopping. I don't like it, but in this case it is necessary to better illustrate what I'm answering to.

I've mentioned those in an earlier post. I do believe that this is exotic ammunition, but seeing as shotguns can _also_ fire all other kinds of ammunition, that they can still be modded for FA.


My point is that those 100 rounds of caseless light pistol ammo cost _exactly_ the same as 100 rounds of shotgun ammo. Or heavy machine gun ammo. And so on.


I agree on the bookkeeping. But that also makes the generic ammunition the standardized type of ammunition.
To answer directly to your bolded 'only reason': I think, that this is an assumption on your part. It is an interpretation, nothing more and nothing less. I interpret the fact that they don't have special varieties as the ammunition being exotic, although at this point I'm not sure how many times I should reiterate that.


See? I don't believe that this is 'completely unrelated'. I think it's an indication of what is and what is not considered to be exotic.
If something is NOT of the generic type, it is, by definition, more exotic than said generic type.


Yes, I state that the format is another indication, since there is at no point in the book defined what is exotic and what is not. Your statement that this was chosen for practical purpose and simplification is pure assumption.


Of course they aren't shooting bullets. But that's not the point. The point is, that flamer fuel is, as well as assault cannon rounds, exotic, because it is in a separate category, with separate price and separate availability.
Oh, and it is, as well as assault cannon rounds, listed under 'Miscellaneous ammo', which says:

"Miscellaneous ammunition includes special types of ammunition usually used in exotic or otherwise unique weapons" (Arsenal, p. 35)
Admittedly, this is only another indication, and it isn't listed there in the core book, but it's another point that supports my interpretation.


These are all real world reasons. Even if it's a kind of bullet, kept in a clip and is chambered like every other firearm, that does not mean it isn't exotic.
If real world reasoning would apply, a whole lot of other things would work very differently. Multiple pages threads on this forum have gone back and forth about those issues without resolution either


Good point, in principle, but: Do assault cannon rounds also explode when you roll a critical glitch? No. Sorry, this doesn't cut it.


I agree.


These are no arguments, these are statements, and, as I've already said: They are entirely dependent on your interpretation of the words in the books. I don't share it, hence we have different opinions.
By fluff reasons, I assume you're referring to the thing about real world firearms? If so, I agree, but I can't discuss this properly, as I have not enough knowledge about it.

To wit:
I've used the time to look up if there is _any_ kind of exotic ammunition in either arsenal or the core book. I've found none that is described as such, only the 'Miscellaneous' entry in Arsenal.
Not flamethrower fuel tanks. Not water, not any kind of ammunition that is loaded into exotic weapons is described as 'exotic ammunition'.
Furthermore, an exotic weapon does not necessarily require exotic ammunition, so I don't think "Exotic ammunition is what is loaded into an exotic weapon" is a valid definition either.

And, to reiterate:
I do believe that your view is entirely valid. You have to come up with a definition for what ammunition is exotic to really decide if a weapon can be modded for FA. There is none provided. Your definition is different than mine.



Edit: Oh, and after reading your last posting, Umidori. I am not going down to your levels of condescension and snarkiness, but your tone is hurting your points. It is not as clear as you make it out to be and your 'fallacious nonsense' insult will not win you a flower pot. At this point, I am out of patience and will stop discussing the topic with you, since this seems to be your default behavior when someone is not sharing your views. You're free to consider or ignore my points, have a nice day.

Posted by: Irion Feb 26 2013, 01:09 PM

No, you can't. They are listed under ammunition, so ammunition they are...
To use real world arguments/definition is always a bit dangerous. Not only considering magic. Why? Because rules are always simplifications and people tend not to check their wording in the dictionary very often.


You are making assumptions to declare something forbidden. But if you follow the "if it is not forbidden"-Dogma you would need to quote a rule saying so. Otherwise it would be allowed...
The point is, NOBODY really follows this kind of interpretation all way through. Most people only do it to arguee for quite specific things, they feel should be allowed...

Posted by: ZeroPoint Feb 26 2013, 02:25 PM

Points for or against FA PAC...there are only 2 that matter.

1) Does it use an exotic/unusual loading mechanism?

2) Does it use exotic/unusual ammo?


The loading mechanism we know IS NOT exotic. Its the same as most every fire mode modable firearm. So this shouldn't even warrant bringing in most of the other examples mentioned. There is no reason for flamethrowers, dart/bowguns, lasers, rocket launchers, compressed air dildo launchers, pain inducers, sakura fubukis or other such weapons to enter into the conversation since they all have unusual loading mechanisms and are outside of the scope of the conversation, and anyone who uses them as an argument point is NOT contributing.

The only point of contention is whether it is exotic ammo. Unfortunately we have very little to work with since there are not many other weapons in the books that have normal loading mechanisms yet use exotic ammo. Grenade launchers is about as close as we can get perhaps...except we have grenade launchers with all firing modes available, as we do in real life. The best example is actually the Gyrojet pistol. Uses a clip loading mechanism, but the rounds are small rockets. Rockets don't create enough blowback pressure to power an automatic weapon (so that makes sense to me).

But unlike gyrojet rounds, Assault Cannon rounds are still normal bullets with an explosive warhead (essentially highly stable EX-ex rounds). Nothing exotic about that. The different listing (which is in the same table as all the other generic rounds) in my mind is because they are OBVIOUSLY designed for military hardware, unlike every other type of standard round, so even your standard assault cannon round is forbidden and will have a different availablilty and cost.

This doesn't make it exotic, it just means that the designers were at least making an ATTEMPT at keeping the world somewhat sane.

Posted by: X-Kalibur Feb 26 2013, 05:35 PM

I'll point out again that something being unique does NOT qualify it as exotic, by definition.

Posted by: Irion Feb 26 2013, 05:36 PM

@ZeroPoint
Which still begs two questions: How do you define "unusual" loading mechanism?

Most of your argument resolves around, that everything with a bullet and a barrel is not exotic. Thats kind of circle logic.
You would not allow a regular cannon to be modded full auto... (Or any front loaded rifle for that matter...)

The loading mechanism form an assault cannon is nothing like the loading mechanism from any "normal" firearm.

There is a HUGE differance between you can't mod them and there ain't any.
You can't mod a single, barrel front reloaded granade launcher to become full auto. Still there might be a full auto granade laucher out there.

Could you build an full auto assault cannon? Yeah, probably. And then you can fit it on a mech.
The question is, can you mod an existing autocannon to become fire full auto.

Posted by: Stahlseele Feb 26 2013, 05:41 PM

why would you need to mod an existing autocannon for fully automatic fire?
don't they come standard with full auto?

Posted by: Irion Feb 26 2013, 07:42 PM

Well, that was a typo. Probably thinking about mechwarrior a bit too much.
It should have read assault cannon.

Posted by: KarmaInferno Feb 26 2013, 08:31 PM

Actually, as a magazine fed weapon, most of what you'd need for a auto-loading system is already there. Install a gas tube and return spring to turn the manually operated bolt to a recoil driven one, and you're done.

Fun fact: It is easier to design a full auto weapon than a semi-auto. The semi-auto has additional mechanisms that prevent the weapon from just firing again if you keep the trigger held down.


-k

Posted by: Umidori Feb 26 2013, 09:18 PM

I assume mean old age of sail muzzle loading black powder cannons? Or do you mean modern artillery pieces? Or do you mean actual modern cannons such as the kind that go on light tanks, APCs, and aircraft?

If you mean an old fashioned cannon, those are obviously "exotic" in that they are muzzle loading weapons without cartridges. If you mean modern artillery pieces, those are also exotic, in that they do not use a "clip" magazine and the cycling of their breeches are relatively slow do to the nature of their designs. And if you mean actual modern cannons, almost all of them are already "autocannons", designed for full auto fire and used in place of machine guns.

The reason muzzle loading is exotic is because modern firearms are designed as breech loaders. The cartridges get loaded into a "clip" magazie, the magazine gets slotted into the gun, and the internal mechanism chambers each round in succession. You can't really create a system for full autofire for a weapon that loads via the muzzle. It's theoretically possible, but needlessly complex. Moreover muzzle loaders don't employ metal cartridges, further complicating the process as you need to add propellant and shot separately.

~Umi

Posted by: X-Kalibur Feb 26 2013, 09:55 PM

Again, exotic can also mean archaic, so in regards to muzzle loaded weaponry, guess what? They are archaic and therefore exotic.

Posted by: cryptoknight Feb 26 2013, 09:55 PM

It's not fired from a bowstring? Lacks feathers, and doesn't use the archery skill?

Posted by: Stahlseele Feb 26 2013, 10:27 PM

technically, strictly from a RULES perspective, none of these apply to either Arrow nor Bolt . .

Posted by: Umidori Feb 26 2013, 10:59 PM

Stahl.

A mere three posts back you were JUST complaining about invoking a technicality of rules left unwritten to bypass common sense. What the hell, man?

Moreover, by the rules, Arrows and Bolts are indeed fired from bowstrings (bows and crossbows) and they use the archery skill. I trust you can easily find those sections, and that I need not quote the appropriate segments here, but correct me if I am wrong and I will gladly quote them.

As for feathers? There you technically have the right of it. There is no mention of feathers on arrows or bolts. For arrows, it is not needed because of reasonable assumptions that people know what an arrow is like, replete with flights. For bolts, it is not needed because they lack flights altogether.

But still, needlessly pedantic.

~Umi

Posted by: Irion Feb 27 2013, 08:49 AM

@ Umidori

He said that it is silly to allow everything which is not directly banned in the rules. Which is kind of a no-brainer afterall.

He did at no point say: Ignore the rules or add to the rules if you see it fit.

There is a huge differance here.

If you argue about any RPG you should stay with the rules and not use real world arguments. The only point where you can use the real world arguement is at the end. The rules technically allow it, but it is totally silly, so the rules are probably badly worded. Thats the only point.

Why should you not use real world arguments in the middle of the discussion? Because you leave the field eventually.
Well, since I do not have a better example, lets take rounding errors.

Lets say after each step the numbers are rounded to full numbers.
If you get to choose the steps were you just use the "full-number", you can alter pretty much everything to the point you need it. (Having enough steps)
Now, the approximaition of reality found in the rules are pritty big, so there are a lot of rounding errors to be found. Just start with recoil. Recoil in general does not matter in single shot weapons.

Posted by: Umidori Feb 27 2013, 09:14 AM

He JUST said that arrows do not have feathers. Are you trying to tell me he was being sarcastic and that I missed it? Because from where I'm standing he sounded like he was being a hypocritical imbecile. I really do hope he was just being sarcastic, because I'd rather not actually think that about the fellow.

I'm not at all contesting your point about not allowing things that are "totally silly". Indeed, just the opposite, which is why I was so angry at Stahl. He seemed to have made that exact point, and then turned around and ignored it completely.

What I am contesting is the reasoning people are using for deeming AC rounds "exotic". I find it woefully inadequate.

There is nothing "totally silly" about allowing an Assault Cannon to be modded for Full Auto Fire. It is not absurd in the least. To compare it to Trolls flying and Arrows lacking feathers and not using the archery skill is baffling at best, and maliciously disingenious at worst. I have demonstrated - without any kind of direct contention whatsoever! - numerous points of evidence which reinforce this notion, and which suggest that AC rounds are not exotic.

Moreover, the only opposing evidence to be offered up is laughable - a wild, unprecedented extrapolation from the chosen style of formatting of the Gear Listing entries!

My opponents have shown every callous disregard for the clear and obvious intentions of the rules. There is no doubt in my mind, not the slightest shred of possibility, that AC rounds are not exotic - that they were never meant to be exotic, and that if you asked the minds behind the Shadowrun system themselves, they would without hesitation say "No, of course they aren't exotic! That'd be silly!".

~Umi

Posted by: Irion Feb 27 2013, 12:03 PM

@Umidori
The point is about "whats in the rules". And the rules make no point about feathers.

You are going back an forth. This way you can justify ANY interpretation.
The rules don't fit your desired outcome, argue real world.
Real world and the rules don't fit argue, that it is a game.

And I am saying to you, that he did not.

It is he differance between the way to get somewhere and the result.

If you strictly follow the rules you get to ask yourself if the result is silly. At the end.

Rules are silly all the time, if you take a closer look. The recoil rules? Totally silly. Even the way shooting stuff works can get in the silly corner. Just saying sniper rifle in close combat.
They have to be. Nobody has the nerve to play a simulation.

Posted by: Stahlseele Feb 27 2013, 12:53 PM

i am that close to taking this:

as a personal insult.
watch your tone.

Posted by: Umidori Feb 27 2013, 01:05 PM

I'm sick of this bullshit. Stop talking to me about hypotheticals and running circles around the topic at hand, and address my actual goddamn arguments.

I made solid, bulleted points. Respond directly to those points, or concede them as accurate. I'll list them here again, in simplified form.

1 - Assault Cannons Fire Bullets

All weapons that are moddable to FA fire bullets. Do you contest this?

2 - Assault Cannons Load Ammunition From Clips

All weapons that are moddable to FA load ammunition from either internal magazines or "clips". Do you contest this?

3 - Full Auto Assault Cannons Are Not Imbalanced

No weapon that would be imbalanced if operating in Full Auto is moddable to FA. Do you contest this?

~Umi

Edit - I'm sorry Stahl, I admit I was out of line with that comment. I'm frustrated because this discussion is being continued without addressing any of my arguments directly. It feels as though people are being evasive and duplicitious. That said, I have no grounds to fly off the handle and should conduct myself far better regardless of my own frustrations.

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Feb 27 2013, 02:21 PM

How about this one, then, Umidori?

We have a RL basis of comparison for Sniper Rifles and the Barrett, and pretty much any Machine Gun you wish to talk about (except mini-guns, which are pretty rare for ground troops). No contention there.

Unfortunately, we do not have a Real world, In common use, personally carryable 30mm Assault Cannon used by a single Individual (Unless I missed something). Even if we were to have such a weapon, it would be a rarity in deployed forces. That rarity denotes exotic. If it was common place, everyone would have one.

Squad Automatic weapons are common in a Marine Corps Unit - I had 3-4 of them in my Squad, and there were 12-16 in my Platoon (Platoon size changed frequently).
MMG's are Common, we had a whoe section of them in our Company.
The HMG is UnCommon... though they are almost on every vehicle mount you can find, and we had an entire section of HMG teams in my Battalion.
This Assault Cannon would be rarer than that, even, and it would NOT be a single man device in deployment (Ammo weight preculdes that right now), and that very rarity would make it an exotic weapon attached to your unit.

Does that make more sense to you?

As for being overbalanced? Probably not... For me it is an aesthetics issue, more than anything else. *shrug*

Posted by: Stahlseele Feb 27 2013, 02:59 PM

The only reason why such weapons are an oddity(not even rarity) today, is because they are not userfriendly enough.
If we had many people who could wield such a weapon on their own, then they would not be rare, they'd be pretty much common.
Why?
Because the military usually thinks like this:"how can i get the most ammount of firepower with the least ammount of money?"
kinda like we do over here on dumpshock.
so taking a weapon that you usually need to field on vehicles which usually cost several times the cost of the single weapon, you could take the weapon several times without the vehicle and drop it on grunts.
presto, you have multiplied the firepower available to the same number of grunts that used to be in the vehicle with the weapon originally AND made it cheaper for you to boot!
grunts can die, but they can also go places where vehicles can't go. and if a vehicle is disabled it's usually destroyed for good. a grunt that has been disabled can maybe be patched up to go again.

now in the world of shadowrun, we both have lighter, stronger materials and metahumans who can wield such weapony on their own just fine. and lives are cheap too.
so why an automatic version of an assault cannon should not be more common is beyond me. on the other hand, if we are going that way, why not go that way from the other end?
instead of trying to make a PAC fully automagic, why not instead take a fully automagic PAC(autocannon) and make it man(metahuman)-portable?

Posted by: Dakka Dakka Feb 27 2013, 03:12 PM

Where do you get that number? I'm pretty sure the writers of Shadowrun never mentioned calibers in their rulebooks. Most definitely not in SR4 (which is the only relevant edition, unless you play older ones).

As I said before I see SR's assault cannon in the 20mm range. And such weapons http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_97_20_mm_AT_Rifle.

The frequency does not make the ammunition http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/exotic. It would require a set of properties that sets the AC rounds apart from all other rounds. One could argue that the lack of imposed misfire and explosion on a critical glitch would warrant such a distinction.

Posted by: KarmaInferno Feb 27 2013, 03:20 PM

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XM307_Advanced_Crew_Served_Weapon

I can see a troll lugging that around.

Technically, it is a grenade launcher, but Assault Cannons kinda blur the line with grenade launchers anyhow.



-k

Posted by: Stahlseele Feb 27 2013, 03:31 PM

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-tank_rifle
here, there are SEVERAL such rifles. not 30mm, i'll admit.
ok, they are not automatic either it seems . .

oh, hey, here we go:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M242_Bushmaster < = 25mm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bushmaster_II < = 30mm
big and heavy. but not that bad for better materials and trolls/orks and cyber/bioware

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Feb 27 2013, 03:40 PM

No doubt...

I agree that making the FA PAC man-portable is a better idea than trying to mod up something that is less effective.

Posted by: Dakka Dakka Feb 27 2013, 03:40 PM

Not really. while they have the accuracy grenade launchers should have, they have no way of inflicting area damage.

Posted by: ZeroPoint Feb 27 2013, 03:46 PM

Check out the post I made a while ago with the 20mm rifle. Essentially uses the 20mm Vulcan round, and basically looks like a massive Barrett. That is the Panther assault cannon.


Barrett / GE Vigilant Light autocannon = .50 (~13mm) = real world comparisons in the Barret and GAU-19 (A/B)
Assault cannon = 20 mm = M61 Vulcan primarily
GE Vanquisher Heavy Autocannon = 30mm = GAU-8/A Avenger "This large autocannon is primarily used as a secondary weapon on ships or as main weapon on tankbusters [A10 Thunderbolt]...)

Not to mention anything firing 30mm rounds wouldn't even be troll portable, let alone human portable.

Posted by: ZeroPoint Feb 27 2013, 03:58 PM

Those are chain powered [require external power source] weapons that weight 260+ lbs without ammo. Even with improved materials for reduced weight its gonna weight almost 300 lbs before all is said and done, and you'll still need the gyro harness to carry it. And a 20+ ton tank can handle the recoil of that 30mm round (fires the same round as the GAU-8 ) than can a 700 lb troll.

You could probably make one that was blowback operated instead of chain powered, that would also weight less, but you would still be on your ass after every shot.

Posted by: ShadowDragon8685 Feb 27 2013, 04:26 PM

The 30mm figure came from me. Sorry about that. Having thought about it, I don't believe a PAC is 30mm. It's probably less than that.

Posted by: ZeroPoint Feb 27 2013, 04:33 PM

No problem, it was a good starting point when looking at what it would be to get the conversation started.

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Feb 27 2013, 04:42 PM

Even 20-25mm is a LOT of Firepower in a small, contained package...
Modding that for FA Fire, as a Man-Portable device, is ludicrous beyond reason. *shrug*
But that is just me. Like I said earlier, it is an Aesthetic issue for me.

Posted by: ShadowDragon8685 Feb 27 2013, 04:45 PM

I find that when it comes to killy hardware, the designers and consumers usually worry about performance first, and aesthetics never.

Posted by: Mach_Ten Feb 27 2013, 04:59 PM

I posted that one a few pages back before -- popcorn-- ensued but re-reading it I found

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XM312 to the 25mm Bullet version the XM312

it's really just a HMG ... not really the Cannon that the PAC I imagine would be like

otherwise it fits the bill in most respects :
large calibre
Full auto
doesn't need to be mounted on a fraggin tank

Posted by: StealthSigma Feb 27 2013, 06:20 PM

They do not mention calibers but they do provide a comparison of "small tank". What small tank means can be left up for grabs. I've pointed out that the light tanks of WW2 used between 20-45mm guns with the mode being 37mm. IFVs tend to be 20-40mm with a mode of 30mm.

Posted by: All4BigGuns Feb 27 2013, 06:42 PM

1: The only thing I saw posted trying to contradict Assault Cannon Ammo being exotic was that there is an Anti-Vehicular variant of it. One additional variant does not make it not exotic, in fact it would go further into it being exotic since it not only takes a special ammunition normally, but the AV version of the ammo is also different from the AV ammo for other guns.

2: How the Assault Cannon loads ammunition is immaterial, only the ammunition itself.

3: Also immaterial to anything.

Posted by: X-Kalibur Feb 27 2013, 07:09 PM

I can't believe I'm having to quote myself here.

Unique does not equate to exotic. Please stop positing this.

Exception going to something being unique and new, which the Assault Cannon is not, it has existed and been improved upon since SR1.

Posted by: All4BigGuns Feb 27 2013, 07:15 PM

Does it use different ammunition than other firearms (even those that are also governed by Heavy Weapons skill)?

Answer: Yes.

By this, the ammunition is exotic and thus the weapon is ineligible for the modification that grants Full Auto.

Posted by: StealthSigma Feb 27 2013, 07:20 PM

Do shotguns use different ammunition than assault rifles?
Answer: Yes
By this, shotgun ammunition is exotic and thus shotguns are ineligible for the modification that grants Full Auto.

Do assault rifles use different ammunition than heavy pistols?
Answer: Yes
By this, assault rifle ammunition is exotic and thus assault rifles are ineligible for the modification that grants Full Auto.

Do submachine guns use different ammunition than sporting rifles?
Answer: Yes
By this, submachine gun ammunition is exotic and thus assault rifles are ineligible for the modification that grants Full Auto.

Erotic ammunition is not defined in the book so any definition of exotic ammunition is entirely arbitrary and GM fiat.

Posted by: X-Kalibur Feb 27 2013, 07:20 PM

No, that makes the ammunition unique, not exotic. What truly makes it different, in game rules, than other heavy weapons? Well, it doesn't fire rockets or grenades (just like the MGs) and it has it's own ammo entry because it's not firing a 5.56, 7.62, or .50 cal round. Does this make its ammunition exotic? Does it have a different firing mechanism? Does the ammo work a different way (such as a musket ball, flame thrower, rail gun, laser)? No, it does not. Is the ammo listed anywhere in game text as being "exotic". No, it is not. Seems to me a lot of you are extrapolating over a misinterpretation of the word exotic.

I mean, really? I can make a revolver into an FA weapon but not an assault cannon?

Posted by: Kiirnodel Feb 27 2013, 07:21 PM

I know this argument has been going back and forth for a while now, but I think I just noticed something that might tip the balance.
Personally, I am actually very torn, I'm not sure which side I agree with. On the one hand, an assault cannon is a very powerful weapon, and making it be able to fire more often than the standard (SS, Complex Action) one shot per Pass can be devastating. But on the other hand, pushing the gun up to FA or even BF means you have very little space left for recoil compensation and with the doubling of the uncompensated recoil it balances things out a bit.

From what I've seen, the biggest (and primary) argument against Assault Cannons being modified is that the modification states that it cannot be put on guns with exotic ammunition. And the argument is that since Assault Cannon ammunition is listed as its own type, that makes it exotic.
On the other hand, most of the guns cited as having exotic ammunition (the ones exemplified in the modification for instance) don't have special ammunition listed on a chart. I believe the intent there being that you pay for regular ammunition and just label it yourself as being for that gun (no mechanical difference, just has different ammunition that makes it inexchangeable with other weapons, even of the same type).

Underlining done by myself for emphasis.
This section seems to indicate that, at the very least, Assault Cannons are "exotic or otherwise unique". This could then be attributed to the ammunition as well. Past this, I think it comes down to what the GM decides...
I don't know if I agree with it completely rules-wise, but the fact that Assault Cannons have unique enough ammunition to need their own specialized Ammo listing, and that their only advanced ammunition (the AV Assault Cannon Rounds) is listed in the "Miscellaneous Ammunition" section and not the regular ammunition for regular firearms; this leads me to believe the Assault Cannon would fall into the category of "weapon with exotic ammunition".

Posted by: Stahlseele Feb 27 2013, 07:22 PM

if it's a light tank cannon, then it uses the same ammo as other light tank cannons.
thus it's not exotic i'd wager . .

Posted by: X-Kalibur Feb 27 2013, 07:23 PM

You just fell into the unique equals exotic folly.

Posted by: Stahlseele Feb 27 2013, 07:24 PM

how?
by pointing out that it probably uses the same ammo any number of light tank cannons use? O.o

Posted by: bannockburn Feb 27 2013, 07:25 PM

A dictionary definition isn't all there is. The context in which the word is used in the rules is important, too.
How are flamethrowers exotic weapons, in your definition? They are neither foreign, nor strikingly unusual (in fact they are used rather regularly in different capacities), nor experimental or new, and (I am quite certain) they are not lesbian ninja elf strippers.
Going through the list, there are only a very few weapons that come close to adhering to the dictionary reference. Lasers for being experimental if you're generous (they're in use for 20 years ingame time now).
Garrotes? Nope.
Kusarigama and Sai? Maybe, if you apply the 'foreign' definition. But why then aren't japanese characters allowed to use them with a different skill?
Why are whips exotic again?
Blowguns and Bolas? Very foreign from a very limited point of view ... other than that ... not really exotic.
Shooting Bracer? Of course, good spy gadget, very exotic, even after the dictionary.
Sonic rifle? I'd agree here.

Point being: The majority of what is an exotic weapon after the rulebook definition isn't exotic at all if you follow the dictionary.

Posted by: bannockburn Feb 27 2013, 07:27 PM

I giggle silently. And I agree.

Posted by: StealthSigma Feb 27 2013, 07:28 PM

These weapons are all exotic because the rules declare them so. There is no definition of erotic ammunition therefore the only guide you have is inference from examples of exotic ammunition (of which one or two might be provided) or to rely upon the dictionary definition.

However, one thing that can be said is we do have defined exotic weapons. Exotic from exotic ammunition need not be an adjective describing ammunition but rather it can be a noun where exotic as a term is referencing exotic weapons. Do you have any exotics on you? Thus exotic ammunition would mean ammunition for exotics.

Posted by: bannockburn Feb 27 2013, 07:31 PM

This is entirely my point, StealthSigma. The rulebook defines them as exotic. This definition of exotic does not match to the dictionary's.
Thus, I contest X-Calibur's view that unique does not mean exotic.
Well, not necessarily, at least.

Posted by: X-Kalibur Feb 27 2013, 07:31 PM

Not you Stahl, above you.

@Bannock - that's all well and fine when they actually bother to specify something as exotic. But when it isn't spelled out as such? Then what? You have this. The rules do not, as stated, strictly prohibit modding the fire mode to FA on a PAC. Your interpretation of the PAC ammo as exotic, rather than unique to this portable weapon (and as Stahl said, not unique to other light tanks).

Personally I'd only ever mod it to SA, but why hurt someone's fun when other things are practically more powerful out of the box and don't inform the entire 1 mile radius around you that you're firing it?

Posted by: StealthSigma Feb 27 2013, 07:34 PM

The rulebook defines exotic weapons. This is a specific redefining of exotic, or specific trumps general.

Posted by: bannockburn Feb 27 2013, 07:35 PM

No, actually I don't fall back to the dictionary at first. I first fall back to other examples in the rulebook. Such as the flamethrower, which is defined as an exotic weapon. AND is unique. Only if there is no similar precedence in a rulebook do I consider a real world source.


My point is, for the umpteenth time, that it is entirely up to the definition of exotic ammunition if it is allowed to mod an assault cannon to FA. Nothing more, nothing less. I could care less about 'balance issues' or 'ruining fun'.

Posted by: All4BigGuns Feb 27 2013, 07:36 PM

Basically it comes down to whether one can use EX-Explosive, APDS, SnS or various other different ammunitions with the weapon. If the answer is no, then it can't be modified to Full Auto. (Yes, I realize that this would apply to anything with High Power Chambering as well, but no big issue there, as it gives reason to use any printed Full Auto capable weapons with that mod rather than just making your own through modification.)

Posted by: X-Kalibur Feb 27 2013, 07:37 PM

You say that, and yet, the RAW does not disallow it because neither the PAC or it's ammo are actually listed as exotic. So... why are you arguing this, exactly?

Posted by: Stahlseele Feb 27 2013, 07:37 PM

@X-Kalibur
Oh! ^^#

Posted by: bannockburn Feb 27 2013, 07:41 PM

I'm sorry. Did you not read the last few pages? Or are you willfully ignoring the points that have been made so far?
There is no ammunition listed as exotic. At all. Thus, there needs to be a definition of what is and isn't exotic ammunition. No one is contesting that the assault cannon is a heavy weapon, not an exotic one.
But as the rulebook does not tell us what is exotic ammunition, you need to find one. You decide to look at a dictionary. It is valid to do so. I decide to first look at other precedents of what is used in this context inside the actual rulebook.

Again, quoting StealthSigma:


Thank you, I rest my case.

Posted by: X-Kalibur Feb 27 2013, 07:43 PM

Then you're not using RAW, you're using your own version of RAI.

Posted by: Kiirnodel Feb 27 2013, 07:44 PM

Actually, if you read the text I quoted from Arsenal. The Assault Cannon weapon type is explicitly listed as being "exotic or unique". Thus why the AV rounds for it are listed in the Miscellaneous Ammunition section.

As for exotic != unique, they seem to use it synonymously through most of the books...

Posted by: StealthSigma Feb 27 2013, 07:45 PM

He's listening clearly. This is a common problem I've noted when All4BigGuns comes into any topic. He parades his arbitrary fiat rulings as RAW and does not accept or even cede that any other definition is also equally correct. Many people on the forums haven't recognized this and so fall into the same trap over and over, myself included though my trap tends to be trying to get him to realize that he's parading arbitrary fiat as RAW.

Posted by: bannockburn Feb 27 2013, 07:45 PM

There is no RAW, if interpretation is needed.
RAW would exist, if there were a passage telling us "Exotic Ammunition is defined as X". There is none. Do you not understand this?

Posted by: StealthSigma Feb 27 2013, 07:46 PM

The miscellaneous ammo section only exists in Arsenal. Assault Cannon rounds are group will ammunition in general in SR4a. Anyway, the sentence is clearly stating that the ammunition in miscellaneous is used in exotic weapons and not that the ammunition itself is exotic.

Posted by: X-Kalibur Feb 27 2013, 07:54 PM

An undefined rule is still a rule. However, as written, nothing falls into that rule. Do you not understand this? The rules, as written, say the mod cannot be applied to weapons that use exotic ammo. However, there is no ammo defined as exotic. The rule still stands, it merely doesn't work. I mean, you can certainly mod your flame thrower or rocket launcher for FA... but given their rules for firing and/or clip size, I wouldn't recommend it.

Posted by: bannockburn Feb 27 2013, 07:55 PM

I've stopped reading here. Good night.

Posted by: StealthSigma Feb 27 2013, 07:57 PM

The rule as written lacks definition and only provides two examples. Those examples just happen to be the only two weapons that one can say with certainty cannot accept the modification.

Posted by: All4BigGuns Feb 27 2013, 07:59 PM

If you guys want to make the serious mistake of letting that thing be Full Auto, have at it, but don't say no one warned you. Also, if someone ever tries coming into one of my games with that, I'm grabbing the phone book.

Posted by: Stahlseele Feb 27 2013, 08:04 PM

The FA PAC is in NO WAY worse than the Minigun or the Gauss-Rifle in terms of game balance . .
Or than a Missle/Rocket-Launcher. Or a Grenade-Launcher.

Posted by: X-Kalibur Feb 27 2013, 09:15 PM

Well, it's more accurate than the launchers. But you have the right of it. Although honestly I'd say that FA is a bit overkill for it (or for any of the sniper rifles really). SA keeps them perfectly reasonable and accurate.

Posted by: Stahlseele Feb 27 2013, 09:26 PM

The only thing i see wrong with an FA PAC is that it simply does not help as much as one would think.
High Base Damage means diminishing returns are way worse than with smaller guns.
I mean, look at the Minigun. It has, under SR3 rules, a BASE DAMAGE of 7S. And with 15 bullets fired, it goes up to 22D
Which is THREE TIMES the base damage in Power and an automagical jump in Damage.
The PAC, under SR3 Rules, has an 18D Base-Damage. Fully-Automagical means a maximum of 10 bullets for 28D.
Not even doubled the Power and no jump in damage AT ALL. So even if it would be the single strongest Attack you can launch, it is, technically speaking, not worth it.
Add in Ammo-Cost and availability and it gets even worse. And the limited Magazine-size means you probably can't even go all out even once, because the Magazine runs out of bullets first.
Don't know the SR4 Numbers, but i suspect it to be similar there.

Posted by: Irion Feb 27 2013, 09:47 PM

Well, they make it a bit better. Only DV 10 if I am not misstaken. (In SR3 I guess the recoil would kill you, so...)
But yeah, it is silly anyway. It is just the look at me shooting my PAC in short burst having fun with the "recoil" rules....

Posted by: Stahlseele Feb 27 2013, 10:27 PM

Oh no, that's not a Problem.
Getting 3 points of RC on that won't be too hard.
And only uncompensated Recoil gets doubled in Shotguns and Heavy Weapons.
So if you can get enough RC in, no Problem at all.
This is also why the Minigun is so craptastically useless as a man portable weapon.
No way in hell of getting 15 points of RC to counter that. and even if you get 10 points of RC in, you still have 5 points left which get doubled for 10 . .
So yes, in my eyes an FA PAC is more viable than the Minigun, but it just does not profit enough from the FA compared to other weapons to be viable at all in my eyes . .
And no, the minigun ain't viable for personal use in my eyes either, because of the recoil problem . .

Posted by: KarmaInferno Feb 27 2013, 10:33 PM

There is a reason miniguns are usually vehicle mounted.


-k

Posted by: Stahlseele Feb 27 2013, 10:37 PM

it is classified as a man portable weapon, and as such, in my eyes at least, should be viable for use as such <.<;,
hell, we have these today and it works reasonably well enough i guess . .

Posted by: Umidori Feb 27 2013, 10:42 PM

It amuses me how All4BigGuns "responded" to my bulleted arguments by not at all responding to them.

Me: Assault Cannons use bullets, as do every kind of FA moddable weapon. Do you agree?
A4BG: I'm going to completely ignore your point and talk about Gear Listings again instead.

Me: Assault Cannons load from a clip, as do every kind of FA moddable weapon. Do you agree?
A4BG: I going to just claim that your argument is invalid without any logical reasoning on my part whatsoever.

Me: FA Assault Cannons aren't imbalanced, and no weapon that would be is allowed to be modded to FA. Do you agree?
A4BG: I can't hear you over the sound of my ignoring your arguments entirely! La la la la la la laaaaa!

Any other takers? I have a line of rational thought that I'd like to actually dicuss. Or should I just assume that people concede my points, albeit begrudgingly?

~Umi

Edit - As for the viability of the Minigun, you can actually hit 14 RC, even without using the optional High Strength reduces recoil rules from Arsenal. Which leaves you with 1 recoil, doubled to 2, which is entirely manageable.

Posted by: Stahlseele Feb 27 2013, 10:45 PM

i think the FA PAC is well within the rules, it's just dumb to do it.
can be done for hillarious results, but i still think it's not worth it.

Posted by: Umidori Feb 27 2013, 10:51 PM

I agree. The Barrett Model 121 loaded with EX-Explosive rounds does the EXACT SAME damage and armor penetration, uses Longarms instead of Heavy Weapons, doesn't suffer doubled uncompensated recoil, is cheaper and easier to get, fires ammo that is cheaper and easier to get, and is smaller and more concealable. The only downside is it holds 1 less round per clip.

Probably neither one is worth modding to FA, but if you really wanted to you could.

~Umi

Posted by: Stahlseele Feb 27 2013, 10:55 PM

The PAC has, ironically, always been the better sniper of the two, for exactly these reasons . .
Better to mod a Barret to fire Burst or Full Auto and use the PAC as a Sniper instead . .

Posted by: Umidori Feb 27 2013, 10:58 PM

Yeah, in SS or SA terms, the PAC is definitely a better sniping tool if you don't mind the Heavy Weapons skill. You can even put a silencer on it.

~Umi

Posted by: Stahlseele Feb 27 2013, 11:01 PM

Who would EVER mind that skill? O.o

Also, technically, PAC and Barret are one and the same as we all know . .
Because the PAC is based on the Cobra Assault Cannon from Robocop . .
Which is only a Barret after all . .

Posted by: Umidori Feb 27 2013, 11:14 PM

But Stahl, that can't possibly be true! Because assault cannons rounds are listed separately in the the Gear Listing tables!

~Umi

Posted by: Stahlseele Feb 27 2013, 11:17 PM

just a marketing ploy to get more money, wanna bet?

Posted by: All4BigGuns Feb 28 2013, 01:28 AM

With this sort of silliness, no wonder you won't listen to reason. No one in their right mind would let someone put a silencer on a fragging ASSAULT CANNON.