Do they both kill you? Yes? Then it makes sense.
The mind does not care if the head was filled with a hundred sharp slivers/flechettes or one big damn round. If you are dead, you are dead.
You are just as dead from the .45 slug as you are from the shotgun blast of 00-Buckshot, or the 20mm cannon round.

The thing is, circumventing armor is not efficient in itself. Unless you have a crappy AP, aiming for a vital part is much more efficient. Also the assault cannon would do at least 11P damage (you need one net hit). Don't forget that for this "headshot" you need to circumvent all of the target's armor. -12 dice or more from a decently armored target is not a modifier I'd like. Additionally unless the target is surprised, it also gets to dodge your probably very few hits. -4 for doing more damage is much better.

You mean like +5?

Yup. That's my point, there is no need to get a flechette only weapon even if under certain circumstances this weapon may not be that bad.

Strangely enough, Flechette is not worse against armor than regular ammunition (IMG:style_emoticons/default/silly.gif) But who uses regular anyways?

Or you just do not care that it has a +5 AP and use it anyway. I love me some Ares Viper Slivergun action. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

Yeah, if the target has 6 armor, then depending on your reading of the rules, you would be taking a -11 to your attack test.

Depending on your reading...

It's only -6. you subtract the armor value form the dice pool, not the modified armor rating. The same goes for a sniper rifle with APDS vs 6 armor. If the shooter wanted to circumvent the amror he would have to subtract 6 from his dice pool instead of simply tearing through the armor (-7 AP)

Thats why I said depending on your reading. I don't read it that way but I've read it here on the forums that some people do.

The "Vital Spot" rules are indeed so imbalanced that I don't use them at all, that's why i didn't mentioned them. If they are allowed at your table and you feel like rocking: Use them. Whenever you are positive you can hit your target at all. Seriously, that rule just sucks.

Try armor piercing flechettes from War. They have a high availability like most good ammo, but don't give extra armor.

Strongly disagree... The vital spot rules are what makes pistols and single shot weapons like hunting rifles actually viable. Otherwise we'd be doing all automatics all the time just because the BF rules and the overabundance of recoil comp make it far superior in most cases. Called shot with a light or heavy pistol and a large pistol on a specialized combatant is what actually allows one shot kills if the dice gods are kind. More often than not you still need two shots unless you're firing high grade ammo. If it was up to me... the only change I'd make is limiting the option to SS and SA attacks only. (and I'm not the only one who finds called shot, short wide bursts oxymoronic, narrow bursts less so).


That said... even with flechettes, it's generally better to do a called shot for damage than to try and bypass armor. Just to give a common example, an armored vest (which I think is the most common piece of armor on the market... softweave for 4/4 encumbrance and 6/4 protection worn under any normal business or day to day clothes).

So that's 4 points armor goes up to +9 after mod... but -4 dice to offset 9 dice of soak... 9 dice of soak is typically only about 3damage give or take. So you're probably better off just aiming for the vitals instead and living with the extra armor. (remember if the target has 0 armor, it doesn't add AP to it's defense, that's only if there's at least 1 point of armor to start with).


Normally the bypass armor rule though is paired with the longshot test on surprise attacks. The sniper makes an info guided attack using sensor data from someone inside the building. Then shoots through the wall(s) with something like APDS bypassing all armor on the surprised target. Drops the dice pool past zero then rolls edge only on the unopposed attack check.

I'd evens say it is just moronic. It is even weirder than what you wrote. A wide burst from a weapon firing in BF mode is allowed but a short narrow or wide burst from a weapon in FA mode is not. I'd limit it to SS, SA and short narrow bursts.

I agree

I'd say that would not work. The GM has final say if a called shot is possible. If a solid wall totally covers the target, there is no trajectory the bullet can take that does not go through armor. As such the called shot to circumvent armor is impossible because you have to avoid all armor.

It's clear that calling a shot for damage is most of the times better than circumventing armor. And that's exactly my problem - when one option is just so much stronger than another.

Plus, i find postils totally viable without the rule. And as you said, you can call a shot with an automatic weapon as well, so that's really no point.

I have no idea what you're talking about as nothing you've said really cohesively follows the steps of making and resolving an attack.

Combat has two stages, defense and resistance damage. If the target is unaware, then no defense is possible (thus an unopposed attack check). I'm pretty sure you cannot use edge to give yourself edge dice on a defense test if you have no dice pool (as indicated by no defense possible) rather than a dice pool of zero or a negative dice pool. However, that's hardly relevant since you're tossing the longshot in with the resistance test which makes no sense.

There's can never be longshot test on resisting damage. The rules even state under armor penetation "If a weapon's AP reduces an armor's rating to 0 or less, the character gets to roll no armor dice on his damage resistance test." It does not apply a negative modifier to the damage resistance test. So even using APDS on a Barret against an unarmored target means 0 armor dice and not a -8 penalty to his resistance test. He still gets his entire body. He still gets any augments or other mods that would give a bonus to resistance tests.

--



It can be interpreted either way and it mostly depends on the nature of how actions are resolved. Barrier armor rating is a separate distinct value that gets added to the target's armor rating when an attack is made. The barrier's armor rating is not added until the attack is made. It is not a permanent addition to a target's armor rating and thus should only be factored when it is relevant. A called shot, since it is a free action, is necessarily made prior to an attack.

Assume the barrier is transparent. You resolve the call shot action negating the target's armor. The target now has 0 armor. You make the attack action and the barrier's armor rating is added to the target's armor of 0. Any armor penetration on the attack is solely being used to negate the barrier armor rating for determination if the attack penetrates the barrier as well as negating that armor for the damage resistance check. I generally would place caveats on whether you could do it with info-guided attacks and opaque barriers since you may not have the info necessary to see the weak point in the target's armor in order to call your shot.

I think he is talking about a possibly surprised target with an arbitrarily high armor rating. In that case you could reduce your dice pool to 0 or less by circumventing armor and then use a longshot test (i.e only edge dice) to still shoot. Then the target would only be allowed to roll BOD dice to soak the damage.

The rules are pretty clear (if counterintuitive). First the GM decides if a called shot is possible. If he so decides, you receive a negative equal to the total armor rating of the target. There is no partial negation, whether part of the protection is transparent (bulletproof glas) or invisible (mystic armor, troll dermal deposits/orthoskin under clothing etc.) is irrelevant. If there is no path from the barrel to the target without going through the barrier (which is armor in this case) there can be no called shot to circumvent armor.

Um...did you even read his post?

Called shot says "Target an area not protected by armor. The attacking character receives a negative dice pool modifier equal to the target's armor."

1. A barrier is a barrier and it is not armor. Yes, the barrier's armor rating is added to the armor for the the purpose of armor penetration and the damage resistance test. It is also only added for an attack.
2. A barrier is not worn by the character and consequently is not part of a character's total armor until an attack is made.
3. Called shot does not specify "Total armor" in its text.
4. A called shot (the action) is not an attack. The attack is only made once the simple action to attack is made.
5. Things like troll's natural armor and orthoskin provide a bonus to the armor rating, which makes it the modified armor rating. If the AP from a weapon does not factor into called shots to reduce armor then natural armor, orthoskin, or barriers should not either.

Really, it's all a moot point since called shot for increased damage is almost always going to be better. I don't think even with crappy AP is getting -1 dice for -1AP will ever be efficient. Plus you can call shot for damage through a barrier.

--



Yes I did, and misinterpreted because of some vagueness.

Actually, -1 attack dice for -1 resistance dice just cancels each other out - as long as you do still hit in the first place with your reduced pool. If you can accomplish this, you can call to circumvent armor which has no effect statistically. The only edge case i can think of is if only one of the combatants has edge available to reroll. Then, reducing the pool of the one who cannot reroll anymore is better. But really, that won't happen often. The only in-fact advantage of doing the called shot to circumvent armor is that you get the +2 DV from flechette with no drawback. Or, with arrow pistols or the like, you can ensure that you hit an unarmored part and thus the toxin etc is more likely to get into his blood (because you need to do physical damage to inject it).

Right, which is why it should probably be a -1 penalty for every 2 points of armor (rounded up). I think -1 for every 3 would probably end up too good and it would not provide enough of a penalty given some of the dice pools we commonly see floating around.

No, the armor rating is everything that adds to the target's armor and the modified armor rating is the armor rating plus the attack's AP. Whether an item provides +X armor rating or a Y armor rating is only relevant for the calculation of the armor rating of worn armor.
If you interpret it the way you do the system breaks down. Are you really trying to say that someone wearing a helmet and several PPP items does not get the +5 dice when soaking a flechette round and that the shooter would not need to reduce his dice pool to circumvent that armor? This sounds pretty silly.

Also what happens to an unarmored troll or someone with orthoskin? Does the AP not apply to attacks against those characters?

Just for reference:
There is no distinction whether the armor rating is made up of +X or Y ratings. Either are part of the armor rating. Only by adding the attack's AP you get the modified armor rating.
While this modifies the armor rating it does not create the modified armor rating.

It's certainly less silly that someone being entirely unable to perform a called shot to negate the worn armor of a troll or anyone with dermal plating or orthoskin.

That is not what the rules say. The rules say that the GM decides if it is possible. If he says so, the dice pool is reduced by the armor rating including that from orthoskin etc.

You can't call shots with weapons that are in FA mode. Technically you are right because you can fire some automatics in BF mode but that's beside the point.

"You know what, fine. Called shot to the eyeball. There's no armor there, not even dermal deposits or orthoskin."

I salute you sir.