Broken Rules., Or where RAW just fails. Options Track this topic Email this topic Print this topic Download this topic Subscribe to this forum Display Modes Switch to: Outline Switch to: Standard Linear+

[Dumori]

I know for one spirits can't by RAW leave the astral. What other parts of RAW are clearly not RAI or just don't even work and why? Enlighten me Dumpshock and alos maybe we could get some errata(Fat chance I know but it's worth a try). Lets not go for rule that are ambiguous but do actually work by RAW however you read it.

[Neurosis]

This is pretty bone-headed, but I heard somewhere that "Grunts can't talk because they have no language skills". I think that's gibberish, and I don't consider it to be RAW, RAI, or a rule at all. It's too nonsensical and stupid. But it is something I've heard.

[Kid Chameleon]

I'm sure that the deadliness of mid 21st century car crashes will be noted.

[Darkeus]

Stick N Shock.

Too broad in its description and better off left out of your game. It will save you headache as a GM.

[Yerameyahu]

Psh, Darkeus, that's obviously not what the OP asked for. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/nyahnyah.gif)

[Neurosis]

I'm sure that the deadliness of mid 21st century car crashes will be noted.

I don't know car crashes are pretty deadly right now?

[Cain]

I don't know car crashes are pretty deadly right now?

High speed car crashes are pretty dangerous, yes. But in SR4.5, crashing at something like 25 mph will result in instant splatter for all occupants, no matter what protective measures the car has.

[Neurosis]

Really? Can you cite examples. I have heard of this problem but not seen it demonstrated.

[Garvel]

Spirits are vulnerable to toxin. They can do combat drugs too.

Pixies get +1 reach if they take the Elongated Limbs metagenetic quality. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif)

[Cain]

Really? Can you cite examples. I have heard of this problem but not seen it demonstrated.

OK. I don't have a 4.5 rulebook handy, so I can't provide any page references. But basically, the problem is this: any vehicle that crashes rams itself, and does full damage to its passengers.

So, let's put our family in a Mercury Comet, going along at 65 meters/turn, or a sedate 48 miles per hour. Suddenly, a squirrel jumps in the way, and the car crashes. The passengers now have to absorb a base 20P damage, instantly killing anything but a maxed-out troll.

See the problem?

[Neraph]

Heck, pixies. They're smaller than gnomes but have more health and the same reach as humans and elves. This is a 1.47 foot tall creature that can miraculously strike people two to three times its total size away from itself.

Also - (cross)bows cannot Fire, as that action is reserved for firearms. I think I heard that 4A fixed that, but I don't have a copy to double check.

I'll get to thinking on more.

[Cain]

Also - (cross)bows cannot Fire, as that action is reserved for firearms. I think I heard that 4A fixed that, but I don't have a copy to double check.

Nope, AFAIK 4.5 didn't fix that. I think it's page 147 on the pdf, but my copy is acting up.

[Neraph]

A minor point, but AIs can have SINner, but they're not allowed to have Day Job or In Debt. So they're allowed to exist in a given society, but not able to contribute at all? In fact, they'd be a drain on society, as their Home Node requires a lot of upkeep (equivalent to a lifestyle), and on top of that, they can be addicted to things.

How does that work? They can take Addiction. What? Synthahol? Sex? What would they be addicted to, and how would they satisfy that addiction? The best answer I have is Addiction (BTL) in the form of studying the code for it since they don't have the nervous system to actually interpret it.

[Yerameyahu]

I don't see the problem. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif) Use 'Throw Weapon' or 'Use Simple Object'.

[Neraph]

If you "Throw Weapon" then you'd be using the arrow or bolt as an improvised weapon, not at the listed damage.

"Use Simple Action" isn't a bad one though.

[Yerameyahu]

I dunno. Projectile Weapons *are* Throwing Weapons, and vice versa. Check the category listings. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif) (There's a stupid rule right there. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif) )

[Neraph]

No. Projectile weapons and Throwing weapons get lumped together in gear listing and ranges for Combat Rules, but that's not the same as "they are the same." That's why there are two different skills for using them. The operative word that distinguishes this is "and," as in, "Projectiles and throwing weapons."

[Yerameyahu]

They're also together in the rules, as I said. Blades and Clubs are different skills, but they're still both Melee.

[Critias]

OK. I don't have a 4.5 rulebook handy, so I can't provide any page references. But basically, the problem is this: any vehicle that crashes rams itself, and does full damage to its passengers.

So, let's put our family in a Mercury Comet, going along at 65 meters/turn, or a sedate 48 miles per hour. Suddenly, a squirrel jumps in the way, and the car crashes. The passengers now have to absorb a base 20P damage, instantly killing anything but a maxed-out troll.

See the problem?

According to the vehicle customization/expanded vehicle rules in Arsenal, if they've got seat belts on and allow all the vehicle's standard crash protection (airbags, etc) features to work (rather than going out of their way to disable them, like apparently some Shadowrunners, somewhere, might foolishly do)...they take no damage. Otherwise, they take the same damage as the vehicle, resisted by Body and 1/2 Impact (like you posted).

To me the bigger issue is that it's resolved as a ram attack -- so that the more Body your vehicle has, the more damage you take (by quite a bit). Something's a little off when you're better off crashing at 100+ kmh on your motorcycle than in the back of a riot control vehicle.

[Yerameyahu]

Indeed. The ramming rules in general are a big mess, but at least there are seatbelts. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

[Neurosis]

A minor point, but AIs can have SINner, but they're not allowed to have Day Job or In Debt. So they're allowed to exist in a given society, but not able to contribute at all? In fact, they'd be a drain on society, as their Home Node requires a lot of upkeep (equivalent to a lifestyle), and on top of that, they can be addicted to things.

How does that work? They can take Addiction. What? Synthahol? Sex? What would they be addicted to, and how would they satisfy that addiction? The best answer I have is Addiction (BTL) in the form of studying the code for it since they don't have the nervous system to actually interpret it.

So AIs are essentially welfare cheats?

[Redcrow]

One rule that seems to be a bit contradictory is... most spells require LOS, but since Astral Perception technically isn't 'sight' but some sort of magical 'extra sense' Mages shouldn't be able to cast spells while using Astral Perception/Projection that require LOS. Of course the RAW describe doing just that, which is why there is a bit of contradiction. At least IMO, YMMV.

[Neraph]

So AIs are essentially welfare cheats?

As they're written now. I'm resisting comparing them to a certain group that exists today.

[Cain]

According to the vehicle customization/expanded vehicle rules in Arsenal, if they've got seat belts on and allow all the vehicle's standard crash protection (airbags, etc) features to work (rather than going out of their way to disable them, like apparently some Shadowrunners, somewhere, might foolishly do)...they take no damage. Otherwise, they take the same damage as the vehicle, resisted by Body and 1/2 Impact (like you posted).

Now I'm going to have to be the one asking for a page reference. All I could find in the customization section was an advanced passenger protection system, that adds 1-6 dice to the test to soak damage. Did I miss it?

[Mäx]

Now I'm going to have to be the one asking for a page reference. All I could find in the customization section was an advanced passenger protection system, that adds 1-6 dice to the test to soak damage. Did I miss it?

Page 103 "SAFETY SYSTEMS AND CRASHING"(also seriuosly it took me 30s to find that and i havent even read it ever before.)

[Neraph]

Apparently, after re-re-re-reading the Radio Signal Scanner, it breaks the rules horribly.

Normally to detect a wireless signal, you need to roll Electronic Warfare + Scan (Variable, 1 Combat Turn), but the Radio Signal Scanner says it can do those functions but does not list that it functions as a Scan program - only as a Sniffer program. So either it can't detect signals at all, should be listed as being a Scan and Sniffer equal to its rating, or it automatically detects all wireless signals around it, including hidden ones.

EDIT: Also, it apparently also functions as a Track program, since it can automatically pinpoint the origin of the wireless signals. For 150 (IMG:style_emoticons/default/nuyen.gif) , this R6 Radio Super Scanner is a must.

[Sengir]

So AIs are essentially welfare cheats?

What welfare? (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)

[Cain]

Page 103 "SAFETY SYSTEMS AND CRASHING"(also seriuosly it took me 30s to find that and i havent even read it ever before.)

Sorry, but that rule directly contradicts the rules in the core book. According to the section on Attacks against Passengers, a ram attack hurts the passengers, and a crash is just a ram against the vehicle itself.

[Blade]

Pixies, gnomes, dwarves and other short-legged characters get a +1 Reach bonus with the kick martial art maneuver.

[Stahlseele]

Scatter Rules for Grenades and Missles and the such . .
Niicee . . you had 4 net hits on your shooting stuff test..
That means *rolls 4d6* hmm 3+4+5+2= yep, you miss by 10 meters!
And of course, the scatter diagram which allows the missle/grenade to bounce back into the shooters direction too. . .

[UmaroVI]

Chase Combat doesn't work, like, at all. It especially doesn't work when you have more than two sides.

Emotitoys.

[Garvel]

I have never seen a GM using Chase Combat.

And I saw GMs that demanded extended Climbing(100) tests to climb a 100 meter high oil platform (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif)

[Paul Kauphart]

well, without dicepool reduction and with a 1 to 5 min interval, it still make sence somehow (IMG:style_emoticons/default/nyahnyah.gif)

[Tiralee]

More more I read this thread, the more I facepalm and go, "no, they're kidding....Please?"
-Tir.

[Stahlseele]

sad but all true.

[IKerensky]

SR4 -SR4A vehicules rules are such a joke that I will just use my CarWars edition for all and every vehicular combat, quick simple and working rules (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

[sabs]

My personal Favorite is that my Troll has just as much body as an average car.
And as much armor as a car can max out at. (and when I get access to milspec, I'll have more armor than a car can possibly have)

That's.. silly

[Tymeaus Jalynsfe...]

This is pretty bone-headed, but I heard somewhere that "Grunts can't talk because they have no language skills". I think that's gibberish, and I don't consider it to be RAW, RAI, or a rule at all. It's too nonsensical and stupid. But it is something I've heard.

That is a rules interpretation from Toturi... his point is that NPC's do not have any Knowledge Skills as Written, so they get none... It is a little crazy, but apparently it works for him...

"Oook, Oook" (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smokin.gif)

[Tymeaus Jalynsfe...]

Chase Combat doesn't work, like, at all. It especially doesn't work when you have more than two sides.

Works phenomenally for us, and we have used it extensively... even with multiple sides involved... (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smokin.gif)

[Smokeskin]

That is a rules interpretation from Toturi... his point is that NPC's do not have any Knowledge Skills as Written, so they get none... It is a little crazy, but apparently it works for him...

"Oook, Oook" (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smokin.gif)

Rofl, I just noticed almost all the NPCs are naked except for an armor vest!

[Straight Razor]

Also - (cross)bows cannot Fire, as that action is reserved for firearms. I think I heard that 4A fixed that, but I don't have a copy to double check.

i have to ask. In you games can a crossbows be shot, as in used, not as in shot-at? Or, is every crossbow in SR have the trigger welded fast upon creation?

[Doc Chase]

My personal Favorite is that my Troll has just as much body as an average car.
And as much armor as a car can max out at. (and when I get access to milspec, I'll have more armor than a car can possibly have)

That's.. silly

Unless they changed it, cars also have a *2 damage reduction for benig a vehicle, or so I thought.

[sabs]

i have to ask. In you games can a crossbows be shot, as in used, not as in shot-at? Or, is every crossbow in SR have the trigger welded fast upon creation?

The problem is this

Fire Weapon
A character may fire a ready firearm in single-shot, semi-automatic, or burst-fire mode via a Simple
Action (See Firearms, p. 153). If a character has one weapon in each hand, he may fire once with
each weapon by expending one Simple Action (see Attacker Using a Second Firearm, p. 150). Note
that single-shot weapons may be fired only once per Action Phase. Likewise, only one long burst
may be fired in each Action Phase.

Neither Use Simple Nor Use Complex Objects have any information about bows or crossbows.

Basically nowhere does it tell you what action is required to fire a bow, or a crossbow.

[sabs]

Unless they changed it, cars also have a *2 damage reduction for benig a vehicle, or so I thought.

Nope, although Vehicles have Hardened Armor, instead of regular armor. So, If your DV < Armor Rating then Damage = 0

[Piersdrach]

These threads are amusing at first then...not, I guess.

This is what happens when people think everything needs to be explained in exacting detail

and

When a game has forty billion designers attached to it all communicating with cans and string

[Traul]

Dartguns in the core book: a gun with AP -2 whose text says it ignores armor cannot be right. The implanted dartguns in Augmentation use fixed rules, but they do not officially errate the core book ones.

The 2 different rulesets for toxins and drugs, with no resistance and speed for drugs. Slab is the worst offender since it makes it the best toxin in the game just for not being listed as a toxin.

[Doc Chase]

The problem is this



Neither Use Simple Nor Use Complex Objects have any information about bows or crossbows.

Basically nowhere does it tell you what action is required to fire a bow, or a crossbow.

What about the Archery description?

And that's what they changed about vehicles. Makes'um all but immune to small-arms fire when done proper.

[Straight Razor]

this is just me, but i always go with the subject-specific modules as the more authoritative rule set in any system.

[UmaroVI]

Works phenomenally for us, and we have used it extensively... even with multiple sides involved... (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smokin.gif)

I'm not sure how you can have failed to notice the glaring problems with it - presumably your GM has houseruled the chase combat rules into something sane. Here's a good example of one of the ways in which they do not function.

A really badass rigger (rolling 30 dice on vehicle tests) on a Suzuki Mirage racing bike (Speed 200) is being chased by the cops - 15 cops (8 dice on vehicle tests) on Dodge Scoots (Speed 60). However, an angry old lady (3 dice on vehicle tests) is following the cops because they cut her off in traffic, and wants to give them a talking to. She's also riding on a Dodge Scoots.

The rigger starts at extreme range. He knows he can't take 15 cops on in a fair fight so he just wants to get away. Logically, he should be able to get away - his bike is over three times faster than anybody else's vehicle, and he's practically a superhumanly good driver. But he can't, in fact, he's going to get run off the road in short order because the rules are silly. Of course, were the old lady not angrily chasing the cops, things would be (even more illogically) completely different. It would still be utterly impossible for the rigger to actually get away, but at least the cops wouldn't be able to run him off the road either.

[Neraph]

My personal Favorite is that my Troll has just as much body as an average car.
And as much armor as a car can max out at. (and when I get access to milspec, I'll have more armor than a car can possibly have)

That's.. silly

Actually, since you're still subject to Stun and vehicles are not, it makes you much more vulnerable.

[sabs]

What about the Archery description?

And that's what they changed about vehicles. Makes'um all but immune to small-arms fire when done proper.

ARCHERY (AGILITY)
Archery governs the use of muscle powered projectile weapons.
Default: Yes
Skill Group: None
Specialization: Bows, Crossbows, Slingshots

Can you count the number of painful issues with THAT statement.

Projectile Weapons
The ranged combat rules also apply to bows and throwing weapons.
Due to their nature, however, some special rules also apply. Projectile
and throwing weapons are detailed in the Street Gear chapter.

Projectile Weapon Types
The Projectile Weapons Table (below) lists some of the projectile
weapons available in the Shadowrun universe. Note that bows are purchased
with a specified Minimum Strength rating which may affect a
character’s use of the bow (see Bows, p. 315).

Bows: A traditional longbow of fiberglass or wood, or a modern
compound-and-pulley bow. Reloading the bow takes one “Ready
Weapon” Action (p. 147).

It's this giant goto loop, with no exit, and no actual information on HOW you fire a Crossbow or a Bow (or a Slingshot)

[Doc Chase]

Ye gods. I could swear it was a Complex to fire, but I don't remember which rules I was reading.

Edit: Well wait. It says ranged combat rules apply to them. So a Simple to fire, and a Ready to reload.

[Neraph]

Rofl, I just noticed almost all the NPCs are naked except for an armor vest!

Most of them are encumbered by their armor also.

i have to ask. In you games can a crossbows be shot, as in used, not as in shot-at? Or, is every crossbow in SR have the trigger welded fast upon creation?

Just because I point out how the RAW fails or works counter to how it is commonly perceived does not mean I do not play by RAI.

[Dumori]

What about the Archery description?

And that's what they changed about vehicles. Makes'um all but immune to small-arms fire when done proper.

But if its burst fire or explosives the passengers still take the damage so unless its a drone it wont be running for much longer.

[sabs]

Ye gods. I could swear it was a Complex to fire, but I don't remember which rules I was reading.

Edit: Well wait. It says ranged combat rules apply to them. So a Simple to fire, and a Ready to reload.

potentially..
except that like I listed in the first quote. The Simple to fire says it's specifically for firearms.
Fire Weapon talks about firing a ready Firearm and then gives a page number that lists Firearms (and not bows)

I agree with you that it's the most logical ruling. But the rules are /incredibly/ vague as to be broken. Which is what this thread is actually talking about (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)

[sabs]

But if its burst fire or explosives the passengers still take the damage so unless its a drone it wont be running for much longer.

Yeah.. if you aim at the character the character gets to add the vehicle's armor rating to his own for soaking. Unless someone uses a called shot.
But if you just shoot at the car, then hey! magic the passengers take full damage(as does the car) (wait what?)

[Critias]

On the bows/crossbows front?

There's a line on page 155 that specifically says "The Ranged Combat rules also apply to bows and projectile weapons." I'd say between that, Ready Weapon, and Fire Weapon (or Use Simple Object if you're hung up on the word "firearm" being under the "Fire Weapon" rule)...you should be able to figure it out.

[Dumori]

Most of them are encumbered by their armor also.


Just because I point out how the RAW fails or works counter to how it is commonly perceived does not mean I do not play by RAI.

This is the point of this thread some of these things are just dumb rules that must be house ruled to work. Thus we compile them tell CGL the etarata it please. Then we have a better game system overall I mean some of these things are simple to fix other might need full rewrites but its better than every table in the world playing difrently even more so when we have SRM that has to play completely RAW not that it can.

One more thing to add the extended test get -1 dice each roll is ok for some but in the grand scale of things makes most things impossible and is also illogical in some cases. Sure It means you can do some thing if you spend for ever on it but oddly enough you tend to be able to IRL ignoring its illogicalness it renders some test in the books imposable no-matter what or in one a few cases needed you to have your magic stupidly high.

[Neraph]

On the bows/crossbows front?

There's a line on page 155 that specifically says "The Ranged Combat rules also apply to bows and projectile weapons." I'd say between that, Ready Weapon, and Fire Weapon (or Use Simple Object if you're hung up on the word "firearm" being under the "Fire Weapon" rule)...you should be able to figure it out.

"Can figure it out" is different from "the rules say it is only for firearms." That's the point of this thread.

This is the point of this thread some of these things are just dumb rules that must be house ruled to work. Thus we compile them tell CGL the etarata it please. Then we have a better game system overall I mean some of these things are simple to fix other might need full rewrites but its better than every table in the world playing difrently even more so when we have SRM that has to play completely RAW not that it can.

One more thing to add the extended test get -1 dice each roll is ok for some but in the grand scale of things makes most things impossible and is also illogical in some cases. Sure It means you can do some thing if you spend for ever on it but oddly enough you tend to be able to IRL ignoring its illogicalness it renders some test in the books imposable no-matter what or in one a few cases needed you to have your magic stupidly high.

I'd suggest trying to get a formed listed with proposed fixes Stickied, as I figure Catalyst would never actually go through the problems with putting out an official errata.

Also, I consider the -1 DP for Extended Tests an optional rule that my games don't opt for. Otherwise, nearly everything cool or useful is impossible (car modifications and creating spells, I'm looking at you).

[Doc Chase]

potentially..
except that like I listed in the first quote. The Simple to fire says it's specifically for firearms.
Fire Weapon talks about firing a ready Firearm and then gives a page number that lists Firearms (and not bows)

I agree with you that it's the most logical ruling. But the rules are /incredibly/ vague as to be broken. Which is what this thread is actually talking about (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)

That's just an editing goof. It is basically saying that a bow/crossbow is treated as one would a firearm, and since the mode is SS we can derive from there. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/nyahnyah.gif)

OKAY I REALIZE I AM MAKING YOUR POINT. blargh. I'd love to be able to sit down with these books on completion of the compilation phase and just edit.

[Yerameyahu]

The downward spiral Extended Tests is an optional rule that should be used situationally by the GM, though. He should judge which tests warrant it, rather than either always/never using it.

[sabs]

That's just an editing goof. It is basically saying that a bow/crossbow is treated as one would a firearm, and since the mode is SS we can derive from there. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/nyahnyah.gif)

OKAY I REALIZE I AM MAKING YOUR POINT. blargh. I'd love to be able to sit down with these books on completion of the compilation phase and just edit.

It's an editing goof that has some GM's requiring complex actions to fire bows and crossbows.
Fire Weapon should not have the word 'firearms' in it. Or it should include non-thrown projectile weapons.

Thanks for making our point. I mean, it's not a huge deal. But it is kinda weird and silly.

[Neraph]

The downward spiral Extended Tests is an optional rule that should be used situationally by the GM, though. He should judge which tests warrant it, rather than either always/never using it.

Agreed. For some reason I thought it was the core rule that was how it worked now.

I've mentioned before that I don't own 4A. One day I'll get around to fixing that problem.

[Stahlseele]

"Can figure it out" is different from "the rules say it is only for firearms." That's the point of this thread.


I'd suggest trying to get a formed listed with proposed fixes Stickied, as I figure Catalyst would never actually go through the problems with putting out an official errata.

Also, I consider the -1 DP for Extended Tests an optional rule that my games don't opt for. Otherwise, nearly everything cool or useful is impossible (car modifications and creating spells, I'm looking at you).

Well . . that official thingie DOES have an errata board . . think about it . . a COMPLETE SUB FORUM JUST FOR ERRATA!
How many errors do they expect?
And they want to encroach on free stuff done by fans in my eyes <.<

[Yerameyahu]

Free stuff?

[Mayhem_2006]

It's an editing goof that has some GM's requiring complex actions to fire bows and crossbows.
Fire Weapon should not have the word 'firearms' in it. Or it should include non-thrown projectile weapons.

Well, semantically speaking you don't "fire" a non firearm, since the term fire refers to applying fire to the charge. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)

[Dumori]

Agreed. For some reason I thought it was the core rule that was how it worked now.

I've mentioned before that I don't own 4A. One day I'll get around to fixing that problem.

It was an official rule in SR4A at least the first pdf I think they knocked it back to optional when we pointed out it was insane though I'm not 100%

[Doc Chase]

Free stuff?

The fans go through the set and point out what won't work, and the company changes it via posting errata.

Beta testing budget = (IMG:style_emoticons/default/nuyen.gif) 0

(IMG:style_emoticons/default/nyahnyah.gif)

[Dumori]

Hell we'll compile here then I'll post them there with a link to here.

[X-Kalibur]

Sorry, but that rule directly contradicts the rules in the core book. According to the section on Attacks against Passengers, a ram attack hurts the passengers, and a crash is just a ram against the vehicle itself.

It is not a contradiction, it is an addition.

Quote Arsenal Page 103

According to the standard SR4 vehicle combat rules, passengers
are not injured if their vehicle crashes or is destroyed. This
assumes the proper use of safety features and other mitigating
factors. If the characters are not wearing seatbelts and/or have
disabled the airbag systems, gamemasters should feel free to infl ict
Physical damage on characters during vehicle crashes equal to the
damage taken by the vehicle, resisted with Body and half Impact
armor (round down).




Quote SR4 (not A)

Additionally, the passengers gain protection from the vehicle’s chassis, adding the
Armor of the vehicle to any personal armor the characters are wearing.

Better than nothing I suppose.

[Neurosis]

On the bows/crossbows front?

There's a line on page 155 that specifically says "The Ranged Combat rules also apply to bows and projectile weapons." I'd say between that, Ready Weapon, and Fire Weapon (or Use Simple Object if you're hung up on the word "firearm" being under the "Fire Weapon" rule)...you should be able to figure it out.

Or we can use 'Use Skill' if we have to but I'm sure we can find SOME WAY to justify bows being firable according to RAW.

The only thing that's unclear is if it is a simple or complex action. Simple seems punishing enough. Taking a simple to reload and then a complex to fire would make bows super-awful.

[sabs]

It is not a contradiction, it is an addition.




Quote SR4 (not A)

Additionally, the passengers gain protection from the vehicle’s chassis, adding the
Armor of the vehicle to any personal armor the characters are wearing.

Better than nothing I suppose.

From SR4A

Damage and Passengers
Attacks must specifically target either the passengers (in which case,
the vehicle is unaffected) or the vehicle itself (in which case, the passengers
are not affected). The exceptions to this rule are ramming,
full-automatic bursts and area-effect weapon attacks like grenades and
rockets—these attacks affect both passengers and vehicles.
If an attack is made against passengers, make a normal Attack
Test, but the passengers are always considered to be under Good Cover
(though the Blind Fire modifier may apply to the attacker as the situation
dictates.) Passengers attempting to defend an attack inside a
vehicle suffer a –2 dice pool modifier to their dodge, since they are
somewhat limited in movement. Additionally, the passengers gain
protection from the vehicle’s chassis, adding the Armor of the vehicle
to any personal armor the characters are wearing. Called shots may be
used to circumvent one armor or the other but not both.

In the case of ramming, full-auto and area-effect attacks, both passengers
and vehicles resist the damage equally.

It's actually completely reasonable.. until you get to the last sentence.

[Malachi]

I'm not sure how you can have failed to notice the glaring problems with it - presumably your GM has houseruled the chase combat rules into something sane. Here's a good example of one of the ways in which they do not function.

A really badass rigger (rolling 30 dice on vehicle tests) on a Suzuki Mirage racing bike (Speed 200) is being chased by the cops - 15 cops (8 dice on vehicle tests) on Dodge Scoots (Speed 60). However, an angry old lady (3 dice on vehicle tests) is following the cops because they cut her off in traffic, and wants to give them a talking to. She's also riding on a Dodge Scoots.

The rigger starts at extreme range. He knows he can't take 15 cops on in a fair fight so he just wants to get away. Logically, he should be able to get away - his bike is over three times faster than anybody else's vehicle, and he's practically a superhumanly good driver. But he can't, in fact, he's going to get run off the road in short order because the rules are silly. Of course, were the old lady not angrily chasing the cops, things would be (even more illogically) completely different. It would still be utterly impossible for the rigger to actually get away, but at least the cops wouldn't be able to run him off the road either.

You start out specific and then end in a sweeping generalization, so I'm trying to follow your problem. I think I know your complaint but I'll try to follow through:

Our Rigger has 30 dice on his Vehicle test. Since he's being chased by 15 vehicles that's -2*15 = -30 (I think the rules should actually say "For each vehicle still in play beyond the first on the driver's side..."). Taking a literal interpretation, though, because the Rigger has a vehicle "in play" on his side (his own) we add +2 to his DP. That least a net DP of 2. Now the Rigger's Mirage has a 140 Speed advantage, so the Rigger gets +14 (140 / 10) to his DP, now netting him 16. For the Cops they have a base DP of 8, +30 for 15 vehicles on their side, -2 for opposing vehicles, netting 36. Given the odds involved of 16 vs. 36 it's likely that the cops will close by 1 Range category each turn. When it comes down to individual maneuvers (like trying to Ram or Cut Off) the Rigger still stands a really good chance of avoiding it, but yeah, the cops will be able to keep up with him.

Now, your "logical" assumption is the "he should be able to get away" - effortlessly, you imply. Remember, that the Chase Combat rules are very abstract in nature, they are supposed to represent the results of a whole series of turns, twists, changes, corners, traffic, buildings, pedestrians, whatever. The rules do not assume that you are on a straight, wide-open, track with no obstacles and everyone is just pinning their foot to the gas in a straight line and going. To me, looking at it, if you have 15 cops working together in an urban environment chasing down one opposing vehicle, there's a pretty good chance that they will, indeed, manage to contain or redirect that vehicle to the point where at least one of them can come within close range through the coordinated use of cut-offs, looping around, herding, redirecting, or whatnot.

If you want to track current speed and exact distance on a round-by-round basis, you can use the rules under Tactical Combat. I'm not saying Chase Combat is perfect by any stretch, but I don't think it's as bad as many are saying.

[Malachi]

I know for one spirits can't by RAW leave the astral.

Where does that come from?

[Stahlseele]

Because Materialization is a physical power, which does not work on the astral, where spirits appear when they are conjoured up . .

[Neraph]

Go read your book.

Spirits start on the Astral Plane. Materialization, Inhabitation, and Possession are all physical powers. You can't use physical powers on the Astral plane.

[Social Reject]

To me the bigger issue is that it's resolved as a ram attack -- so that the more Body your vehicle has, the more damage you take (by quite a bit). Something's a little off when you're better off crashing at 100+ kmh on your motorcycle than in the back of a riot control vehicle.

Actually this makes sense in part. Especially in single vehicle crashes, a large vehicle works against the passengers. The force being imparted if you crash into, say, a wall, is going to be the velocity times the mass. The common misconception that consumers have is that a larger vehicle is safer to be in. While this may be true in a multiple vehicle collision, in a single vehicle collision, it is the exact opposite. More likely than not, the large tree, or embankment or building has significantly more mass than your vehicle and will not be moved. Nearly all the kinetic energy generated by the crash will be directed right back at the vehicle itself. The passengers inside are going to get tossed pretty violently in the case of a high speed riot control vehicle crash and the drivers are likely to get crushed.

For motorcycles it doesn't always work because the rider typically exits the vehicle in a crash. Then it becomes the rider's more or less unprotected internal organs and skeleton versus the pavement or whatever other surface it takes up an argument with. Or, unprotected skin in the case of those foolish squids who ride without gear. So it would be the rider's kinetic energy versus the obstacle and/or the friction of the ground. Motorcycle crash damage might be better off resolved using falling damage or something though it would require more math to set up a table that equates speed of motorcycle travel with natural falling acceleration. Though off the top of my head I don't remember how falling damage is calculated in SR4. This way you simulate an ejected rider hitting a solid object as if he were falling horizontally and at a higher than normal rate of speed. Terminal velocity is approximately 200 kph, so you might be able to work backwards from that. Never going to be perfect, but might work better.

The dynamics of vehicle crashes are hard to model in a game. Obviously the key factor to surviving the crash is whether or not the vehicle survives. If its chassis survives, the passengers are going to be in better shape. Problem is in Shadowrun "deadly" damage to a vehicle technically just means it is disabled, not that it is completely obliterated. Manufacturers test cars by ramming them into a wall as opposed to another car so that they can measure the ability of the vehicle to withstand its own mass in a single vehicle collision since they know Asian people and women drive them and this will be the likely result. The rules, unless involving huge amounts of math, aren't going to be able to model the damage taken by a human body in a crash where the chassis of the car "survives" which is why I guess the default is that they take no damage if they use safety systems. But, it is a role playing game and nobody wants their character to die ingloriously in a car accident because, even though they had their seat belt on, the car was torn in half by the impact.

[Stahlseele]

Well, a bigger/larger/tougher vehicle would probably simply break through the wall, leaving some of it's energy and so on untill it is stopped, and not just suddenly go SPLAT against the first wall . . well, in reality at least . . maybe . . of course, these don't apply to shadowrun rules, much less in the context of this thread ^^

[Yerameyahu]

Someone almost mentioned this, but I view it as a 'broken rule' that Full Auto attacks hit the vehicle *and* every single person inside. That could mean 10 bullets doing full damage to 2, 4, or a dozen people… and the vehicle.

[Doc Chase]

Someone almost mentioned this, but I view it as a 'broken rule' that Full Auto attacks hit the vehicle *and* every single person inside. That could mean 10 bullets doing full damage to 2, 4, or a dozen people… and the vehicle.

Just imagine if they had 3 IP's. Blow through two mags in three seconds, amirite? (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif)

[sabs]

Just imagine if they had 3 IP's. Blow through two mags in three seconds, amirite? (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif)

Take a Riot Control Vehicle with 12 people in it.

Ingram White Knight, full auto narrow burst, shoot at the vehicle.
All of a sudden you're doing 15P to everyone inside, completely ignoring the armor of the vehicle.
x3 for 3IP
You just killed everyone in that vehicle, and the vehicle is completely untouched.

[Doc Chase]

Take a Riot Control Vehicle with 12 people in it.

Ingram White Knight, full auto narrow burst, shoot at the vehicle.
All of a sudden you're doing 15P to everyone inside, completely ignoring the armor of the vehicle.
x3 for 3IP
You just killed everyone in that vehicle, and the vehicle is completely untouched.

Just as long as you're wearing a fedora and a pinstripe suit while you're doing it.

[Yerameyahu]

I wouldn't say 'vehicle untouched'. Your Full Auto attack hits the vehicle *and* all passengers, unless you specifically fired only at the passengers; I believe you have to do so individually.

With non-Full-Auto, it's not clear if you can just say, 'I target all passengers'; that's *another* problem, because how do you decide which passenger(s) get hit? After all, it might be Blind Fire and you don't even know if there are passengers, how many, etc.

[Doc Chase]

Meh. Solve it with a "I aim for the driver's seat" or "passenger's seat", and let the lead fly where it may.

[sabs]

I wouldn't say 'vehicle untouched'. Your Full Auto attack hits the vehicle *and* all passengers, unless you specifically fired only at the passengers; I believe you have to do so individually.

With non-Full-Auto, it's not clear if you can just say, 'I target all passengers'; that's *another* problem, because how do you decide which passenger(s) get hit? After all, it might be Blind Fire and you don't even know if there are passengers, how many, etc.

I say vehicle untouched because you would need 6 net hits in order to actually damage an Ares City Master

Vehicles have hardened armor effectively. The Ares CityMaster riot control vehicle has 20 points of armor.
So you have to do 21P in order to damage the vehicle at all.

[X-Kalibur]

I don't see any rule stating that the passengers stop applying the vehicles armor to them either. Simply that they have to resist damage along with the vehicle. Right about that part it states that passengers get a bonus from the chassis equal to it's armor.

[Yerameyahu]

Oh, I see what you meant, sabs. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif) A Citymaster is a bit of an extreme case, though. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif) Most vehicles have far less armor.

[sabs]

I don't see any rule stating that the passengers stop applying the vehicles armor to them either. Simply that they have to resist damage along with the vehicle. Right about that part it states that passengers get a bonus from the chassis equal to it's armor.

At the very end it says:
In the case of ramming, full-auto and area-effect attacks, both passengers
and vehicles resist the damage equally.

[Yerameyahu]

That *could* mean no bonus armor, or it could just mean everyone is hit (both of which would make sense to mention, given the preceding paragraph). No bonus armor doesn't make sense, because the situation hasn't changed, while 'everything is hit' by area-attacks *does* make sense (within this crazy rule). At my table, we say that it's for Suppressive Fire, not Full Auto; Suppressive Fire is an area attack, after all, while Full Auto isn't.

Definitely a messy point in the rules, regardless.

[Jaid]

Because Materialization is a physical power, which does not work on the astral, where spirits appear when they are conjoured up . .

no worries, spirits with the astral gateway power can make it onto the physical plane though (IMG:style_emoticons/default/nyahnyah.gif)

so it's not quite true that spirits *can't* get on the physical... it's just really really improbable. fortunately, once they're dual natured courtesy of the astral gateway, they can then stay on the material and even leave the area of the astral gateway.

but yeah, under normal circumstances, a spirit technically can't materialise or possess anything.

[Stahlseele]

Spirits don't like being corporal for any reason.
It's as uncomfortable for them as a troll trying to squeaze into a dwarven leather gimp suit . .
Also, once they go back to the astral for any reason, they are back to square one again . .

[Malachi]

Go read your book.

Spirits start on the Astral Plane. Materialization, Inhabitation, and Possession are all physical powers. You can't use physical powers on the Astral plane.

Yeah, that's really one of those "splitting hairs" situations. I think everyone can agree (... maybe not Cain) that the RAI are that Materialization can be used, as it is what makes them actually appear on the physical.

That actually reminds me of this:

Posted: 12:42 a.m. by Kathraxis Hey, I have a question! When you preheat the oven, can you start it before you measure out the ingredients, or do you have to do it afterward? Please answer quickly, my friends and I have been arguing about it for four hours and we're getting pretty hungry.

... which is from this

[Yerameyahu]

I love that post. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif) Classic.

[X-Kalibur]

At the very end it says:
In the case of ramming, full-auto and area-effect attacks, both passengers
and vehicles resist the damage equally.

Meaning you and the vehicle resist the same attack. The preceeding paragraph states that passengers get the armor bonus of the vehicle. So while both the car and it's occupants have to soak the 15P full narrow burst (which makes no sense, Wide maybe and definitely supressing fire) the vehicle in question gets armor + body while the occupants get (armor + body) + vehicle armor.

Also depends on how you define resisting equally. The vehicle and occupants both resist the same damage with armor + body + mods. The vehicle armor is a mod for the occupants.

[sabs]

Hence why I brought it up for this post (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)
It depends on how you define resisting equally. It's very ambiguous.
And really, it makes no sense at all for a long narrow burst.

[Yerameyahu]

Right. However, I wouldn't say that 'equally' is broken in the same way as 'can't materialize'; it's simply ambiguous, and the proper interpretation is available. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif) I still think 10 bullets for vehicle + as many targets as fit *is* 'broken by design'. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif)

[sabs]

Yes, it's definitely a "what the hell were they thinking"
Not to mention, if I'm in a vehicle with 20 points of Armor.. behind closed windows,etc. How are they getting to aim at me at all?

[Yerameyahu]

They don't: you get Good Cover and Blind Fire.

[Stahlseele]

Because the seating arrangements in cars are pretty much standardized due to not being able to do it in a way that is different in a meaningfull way?

[Yerameyahu]

Doesn't matter, there are no hit locations anyway. In the case of FA, you hit everyone and the car, regardless of position.