![]() |
![]() ![]() |
![]() |
![]()
Post
#1
|
|
Shooting Target ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 1,973 Joined: 4-June 10 Member No.: 18,659 ![]() |
So, given that the following is in the rules:
QUOTE (Ammunition Table, page 433, italics mine) Stick-n-Shock Damage Modifier : –2S (e) Armor Penetration : –5 Availability : 6R Price : 80¥ QUOTE (Gear Listing, Page 434) Stick-n-Shock: Stick-n-Shock rounds deal electrical Stun damage of equal to the damage of the base weapon –2. They have a flat AP of –5 that replaces the weapon’s AP instead of stacking with it. QUOTE (Combat Basics, Page 170-171) Electricity Damage A wide variety of nonlethal weapons are designed to incapacitate targets with electrical shock attacks, including stun batons, tasers, cyberware shock hands, and similar electrically charged weapons. These weapons rely on a contact discharge of electricity rather than kinetic energy. Spells and critter powers such as Lightning Bolt and Energy Aura cause similar effects. Electrical damage is treated as Stun or Physical damage depending on the source and/or target. The Non-conductivity armor upgrade (p. 438) adds its full rating to the Armor value. The gamemaster can also decide which (if any) other factors may modify the target’s damage, such as extra conductivity for a character covered in water. An Electricity attack that does damage can stun and incapacitate the target as well, though if there is no damage, there is no secondary effect at all. Secondary effects for characters injured by Electricity damage include a –1 dice pool penalty on all actions and Defense Tests, but not Damage Resistance Tests, for 1 Combat Turn and an immediate Initiative Score reduction of 5. The dice pool penalty and Initiative Score reduction do not accumulate with multiple attacks, but the length of the penalty is extended by 1 Combat Turn for each successful damaging attack while a character is affected. If the character’s Initiative Score is reduced to 0 or below, they lose their last action. If they have no Initiative Score left the reduction comes on the start of the next Combat Turn. Electronic equipment and drones can also be affected by Electricity damage. They never suffer Stun damage so Electricity damage is Physical when used against electronics and drones. They resist damage as usual and suffer a secondary effect if they take even a single box of damage. The secondary effect for electronics and drones damaged by Electricity damage is shorting out or overloading. In game terms this is reflected as secondary Matrix damage equal to half the Physical damage rounded down. Vehicles can be damaged by Electricity attacks but do not suffer any secondary effects. Specific systems of vehicles can be targeted by a Called Shots (p. 195). QUOTE (Called Shots, Page 195) Harder Knock: Whether it’s shooting a gel round into an opponent’s face or punching someone in the throat with your fist, sometimes you want an attack designed to do Stun damage to do Physical instead. This Called Shot changes the damage code on Stun-based weapons to Physical with no other change to the DV. Free Action to Call A Shot, Simple Action to Fire Weapon. Stick and Shock does slightly (2) less damage, but with more AP than even APDS, and reduces the target's Initiative by 5 and Dice Pools by 1 for a combat turn plus 1 turn per subsequent damaging hit. Why in the world would anyone not use Stick-n-Shock again? |
|
|
![]()
Post
#2
|
|
Moving Target ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 115 Joined: 5-March 09 From: Bay Area, CA Member No.: 16,942 ![]() |
The initiative penalty only happens on the first electrical damage attack. That is what is meant by the line "The dice pool penalty and Initiative Score reduction do not accumulate with multiple attacks..."
|
|
|
![]()
Post
#3
|
|
Moving Target ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 364 Joined: 12-July 13 Member No.: 127,215 ![]() |
So, given that the following is in the rules: Free Action to Call A Shot, Simple Action to Fire Weapon. Stick and Shock does slightly (2) less damage, but with more AP than even APDS, and reduces the target's Initiative by 5 and Dice Pools by 1 for a combat turn plus 1 turn per subsequent damaging hit. Why in the world would anyone not use Stick-n-Shock again? Why even call a shot to do physical? most people have lower stun tracks, and you are less likely to be wanted for murder. I mean.... if you really have to eliminate them just go step on their trachia as they convulse on the ground. Stick-n-shock was always good. Most of our runs packed it in light pistols because it use to have a flat damage code of 6s. |
|
|
![]()
Post
#4
|
|
Shooting Target ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 1,973 Joined: 4-June 10 Member No.: 18,659 ![]() |
Why even call a shot to do physical? most people have lower stun tracks, and you are less likely to be wanted for murder. I mean.... if you really have to eliminate them just go step on their trachia as they convulse on the ground. Stick-n-shock was always good. Most of our runs packed it in light pistols because it use to have a flat damage code of 6s. Mostly just to point out that it does better than APDS as a physical damage round. I wouldn't bother, myself, especially since electrical damage already does physical damage against drones without the called shot. |
|
|
![]()
Post
#5
|
|
Runner ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 3,039 Joined: 23-March 05 From: The heart of Rywfol Emwolb Industries Member No.: 7,216 ![]() |
and the line finishes with 'but the length of the penalty is extended by 1 Combat Turn for each successful damaging attack while a character is affected.'
Under the old ruling a lot of tables didn't allow S&S or FFA because they were considered too good. However I would probably argue against allowing it to it to change all of the damage to physical damage, the damage from the S&S is mostly the energy (the zap) which is sort of outside the normal remit of the Harder Knock I would wager. Now the damage that came from the gel portion of the round could be counted for physical. (maybe a shot to the groin or similar) but how do you divvy this? |
|
|
![]()
Post
#6
|
|
Moving Target ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 364 Joined: 12-July 13 Member No.: 127,215 ![]() |
Mostly just to point out that it does better than APDS as a physical damage round. I wouldn't bother, myself, especially since electrical damage already does physical damage against drones without the called shot. I'm going to argue with you that its beter as a physical damage rounnd. With an Ares Alpha (Sure there are other ARs, but why use them?) with APDS you would have 11 DV and a total of -6AP. Remember other special ammo adds to the existing AP and DV of the weapon. so you are looking at 9 DV -5 AP vs 11DV -6 AP. Explosive ammo is sitting in the middle ground of the two at 12DV -3 AP. IMO +3 damage on the shot is worth more than double that in AP. |
|
|
![]()
Post
#7
|
|
Moving Target ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 364 Joined: 12-July 13 Member No.: 127,215 ![]() |
However I would probably argue against allowing it to it to change all of the damage to physical damage, the damage from the S&S is mostly the energy (the zap) which is sort of outside the normal remit of the Harder Knock I would wager. Now the damage that came from the gel portion of the round could be counted for physical. (maybe a shot to the groin or similar) but how do you divvy this? What if i shoot him in the pace maker? |
|
|
![]()
Post
#8
|
|
Runner ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 3,039 Joined: 23-March 05 From: The heart of Rywfol Emwolb Industries Member No.: 7,216 ![]() |
|
|
|
![]()
Post
#9
|
|
Moving Target ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 115 Joined: 5-March 09 From: Bay Area, CA Member No.: 16,942 ![]() |
Also, Called Shots incur a -4 dice pool penalty. So it is -2DV and -4 dice.
|
|
|
![]()
Post
#10
|
|
Shooting Target ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 1,973 Joined: 4-June 10 Member No.: 18,659 ![]() |
|
|
|
![]()
Post
#11
|
|
Moving Target ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 115 Joined: 5-March 09 From: Bay Area, CA Member No.: 16,942 ![]() |
Ah, there it is, on a table several back for no damn good reason. I swear, the layout of this book is going to drive me up the wall yet. I agree the layout of the book isn't great. But it also mentions the -4 penalty on page 195 in the second paragraph of Called Shot, just before it mentions the types of called shots. |
|
|
![]()
Post
#12
|
|
Runner ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 2,575 Joined: 5-February 10 Member No.: 18,115 ![]() |
Yeah, -4 to hit and -2 DV is not at all worth a flat -5 AP when most firearms already have -1 AP. Remember, each 3 additional points of armor penetration is (roughly) equal to less one point of enemy damage mitigation. So you're gaining an average of 1.33 DV going from -1 AP to -5, but then losing 2 DV and 4 hit dice, which also average 3:1 for damage. Net DV loss of 1.66, and you're more likely to miss.
Meanwhile you could just load up with Explosive Rounds for +1 DV and -1AP and then take a Vitals called shot for another +2 DV. Net gain of 3.66 DV that way, same chance to hit as the Harder Knock SnS. ~Umi |
|
|
![]()
Post
#13
|
|
Moving Target ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 364 Joined: 12-July 13 Member No.: 127,215 ![]() |
Yeah, -4 to hit and -2 DV is not at all worth a flat -5 AP when most firearms already have -1 AP. Remember, each 3 additional points of armor penetration is (roughly) equal to less one point of enemy damage mitigation. So you're gaining an average of 1.33 DV going from -1 AP to -5, but then losing 2 DV and 4 hit dice, which also average 3:1 for damage. Net DV loss of 1.66, and you're more likely to miss. Meanwhile you could just load up with Explosive Rounds for +1 DV and -1AP and then take a Vitals called shot for another +2 DV. Net gain of 3.66 DV that way, same chance to hit as the Harder Knock SnS. ~Umi If you have the dicepool for it always shoot at the vitals. Its a great jump in efficency. |
|
|
![]()
Post
#14
|
|
Runner ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 2,575 Joined: 5-February 10 Member No.: 18,115 ![]() |
Yeah, it's pretty nice getting a guaranteed +2 DV in exchange for an average +1 Hit.
Not 4E nice, mind, where -4 dice got you +4 DV, but that was admittedly a little stupid-broken. ~Umi |
|
|
![]()
Post
#15
|
|
Shooting Target ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 1,973 Joined: 4-June 10 Member No.: 18,659 ![]() |
Yeah, -4 to hit and -2 DV is not at all worth a flat -5 AP when most firearms already have -1 AP. Remember, each 3 additional points of armor penetration is (roughly) equal to less one point of enemy damage mitigation. So you're gaining an average of 1.33 DV going from -1 AP to -5, but then losing 2 DV and 4 hit dice, which also average 3:1 for damage. Net DV loss of 1.66, and you're more likely to miss. Meanwhile you could just load up with Explosive Rounds for +1 DV and -1AP and then take a Vitals called shot for another +2 DV. Net gain of 3.66 DV that way, same chance to hit as the Harder Knock SnS. ~Umi I'd say it is still worth it, as the -1 DP to everything but damage resistance -and- -5 initiative take away a lot of your target's defensive options. |
|
|
![]()
Post
#16
|
|
Neophyte Runner ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 2,389 Joined: 20-August 12 From: Bunbury, western australia Member No.: 53,300 ![]() |
Since my character took Code of honour: Assassin's Creed, S&S is really good because it works against drones but is unlikely to kill anyone I'm not being paid to. Considering the damage difference APDS is superior for actually killing stuff by any reasonable metric, while Gel is about even on flat damage and massively cheaper, I don't really think it's badly broken.
|
|
|
![]()
Post
#17
|
|
Target ![]() Group: Members Posts: 32 Joined: 28-March 10 Member No.: 18,382 ![]() |
If stick and shock had an AP-5, don't forget that armor can have up to rating 6 of nonconductivity upgrade which lead to an AP+1 finally.
|
|
|
![]()
Post
#18
|
|
Moving Target ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 364 Joined: 12-July 13 Member No.: 127,215 ![]() |
|
|
|
![]()
Post
#19
|
|
Moving Target ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 321 Joined: 4-April 08 From: Detroit, MI Member No.: 15,844 ![]() |
|
|
|
![]()
Post
#20
|
|
Prime Runner ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 3,803 Joined: 3-February 08 From: Finland Member No.: 15,628 ![]() |
Not so much, no. Remember that defense dice pools can be huge; you're increasing the chance your attack will be dodge entirely. He did state "if you have the dicepool for it" if the enemy has a good chance to dodge then you obviously don't have the dicepool for it (IMG:style_emoticons/default/cool.gif) |
|
|
![]()
Post
#21
|
|
The ShadowComedian ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 14,538 Joined: 3-October 07 From: Hamburg, AGS Member No.: 13,525 ![]() |
"called shot to the nuts!"
|
|
|
![]()
Post
#22
|
|
Moving Target ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 973 Joined: 8-January 10 Member No.: 18,018 ![]() |
|
|
|
![]()
Post
#23
|
|
Moving Target ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 321 Joined: 4-April 08 From: Detroit, MI Member No.: 15,844 ![]() |
He did state "if you have the dicepool for it" if the enemy has a good chance to dodge then you obviously don't have the dicepool for it (IMG:style_emoticons/default/cool.gif) That's a pretty common "if" in SR5, especially with interrupt actions. So I don't think it's unbalanced. A fair bit of extra damage payed with a serious increase in the likelihood you won't deal *any* damage. |
|
|
![]()
Post
#24
|
|
Prime Runner ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 3,803 Joined: 3-February 08 From: Finland Member No.: 15,628 ![]() |
That's a pretty common "if" in SR5, especially with interrupt actions. So I don't think it's unbalanced. A fair bit of extra damage payed with a serious increase in the likelihood you won't deal *any* damage. It is, but i don't think anyone claimed it to be unbalanced, just a great leap in efficiency if you can manage it. |
|
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() |
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 16th May 2025 - 02:47 AM |
Topps, Inc has sole ownership of the names, logo, artwork, marks, photographs, sounds, audio, video and/or any proprietary material used in connection with the game Shadowrun. Topps, Inc has granted permission to the Dumpshock Forums to use such names, logos, artwork, marks and/or any proprietary materials for promotional and informational purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not affiliated with the Dumpshock Forums in any official capacity whatsoever.