IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

> 'Luck' reWorked, An alternate system for impossible tests
Phobos
post Jul 6 2006, 09:16 PM
Post #1


Target
*

Group: Members
Posts: 95
Joined: 28-June 06
Member No.: 8,800



flavour by Cain

Mr. Lucky needs to take out the Citymaster chasing their van, so he aims through the window at the driver (Specifically aiming at a passenger, pg 162). He's using an AVS (8P-f), and our modifiers are as follows: -2 recoil, -3 extreme range, -3 for being seriously Wounded, -3 for being in a moving vehicle, -6 for his target having total cover, -1 for his cover, and -2 for the light rain. To top this all off, he calls a shot to bypass the armor of both the vehicle and the driver. Assuming the driver was in heavy armor with helmet, that's an additional -12, and then we factor in the Citymaster's armor of 20. That's a total dice pool penalty of -52. It could be worse than that-- Mr Lucky might not have a pistols skill at all-- but it's largely irrelevant, since there's absolutely no way he's going to have a positive dice pool. He now spends a point of Edge. 8 Edge = 2.66 successes, which rounds up to 3. The driver can't use his vehicle skill to dodge, since he was specifically targeted; and he requires a Perception test at -6 to even notice that he's been hit. Assuming that the driver has a body of 3, he'll be taking an 11P wound, and will score 1 success-- not enough, he'll be taken out instantly. The vehicle will now need to make a crash test: it has a threshold of 3, using a Pilot of 3, and a handling penalty of -1. It fails, crashes, and likely kills everyone inside.


Thanks to potentially horrendously high Dice Pool Modifiers and the nature of Longshot Tests, ‘Luck’ seems a little stranger than ever in SR4.
These Rules takes care of the Problem.

Depending on Luck (not Edge) (Optional General Rule)

Rule :

Whenever you suffer a Dice Pool Penalty, you can buy 3 Dice to your pool for +1 Threshold/+1 hits on the Opposed Role. You can never roll more dice than your original Dice Pool.

Example :

Mr. Lucky above could trade in the -52 penalty for a -1 penalty and a +17 Threshold. He better be REAL good AND lucky.



Long Shot Tests (RAW pg. 67)

Rule Change :

Longshot tests will only aim for the most simple solution of a problem, additional complexity is figured normally and handled using ‘Depending on Luck (not Edge). Effectively this concerns any Dice Pool Modifier that aim for a better degree of success or for any distraction the character could avoid.

Example :

Mr. Lucky’s core problem above is that he wants to hit the driver. So would not have to worry about the Range, Wounds, Movement, Cover and Rain – those are elements of the basic problem.
He would be subjects to the Modifiers for Recoil (‘could go singleshot) and Called Shot (he is lucky if he hits at all …)
So if he really wanted to pull that feat, he’d suffer a penalty of -14, or -2 and +4 Threshold.

If Mr. Lucky was simultaneously trying to keep his AR-game of Go running, sing the National Anthem and sustain 3 Spells, he’d suffer an additional -10 Dice as he could drop all those activities if he really cared about hitting.

And Luck won’t help you if you don’t. Care, that is.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

Posts in this topic
- Phobos   'Luck' reWorked   Jul 6 2006, 09:16 PM
- - Geekkake   Um, it seems a lot easier just to make Longshot di...   Jul 6 2006, 09:33 PM
- - Shrike30   Or to invoke GM fiat and tell your player to stop ...   Jul 6 2006, 09:34 PM
- - deek   The biggest thing rubbing me the wrong way about t...   Jul 6 2006, 09:42 PM
- - Phobos   Geekkake : I don't see exploding Longshot Dice...   Jul 6 2006, 09:55 PM
- - deek   Heh...fair enough...the difficulty is about the sa...   Jul 6 2006, 09:58 PM
- - Shrike30   *shrug* If my players want to bitch that I'm n...   Jul 6 2006, 10:15 PM
- - hobgoblin   so the shooter can do that 8 times (being human wi...   Jul 6 2006, 10:29 PM
- - Phobos   Shrike30 : no comment. (:still giggling madly:) h...   Jul 6 2006, 10:59 PM
- - Cain   QUOTE Absolutely nothing is going to kill this top...   Jul 6 2006, 11:26 PM
- - Shrike30   I figured people would just assume those and act a...   Jul 6 2006, 11:40 PM
- - James McMurray   It could work, but saying they've got +17 thre...   Jul 7 2006, 12:18 AM
- - ornot   I've been avoiding the thread on "variabl...   Jul 7 2006, 09:45 AM
- - Kremlin KOA   Am I the only GM here who wants MORE "Mr Luck...   Jul 7 2006, 10:54 AM
- - deek   QUOTE (Kremlin KOA) Am I the only GM here who want...   Jul 7 2006, 02:03 PM
- - ornot   I think the point of Mr Lucky is to "expose...   Jul 7 2006, 02:17 PM
- - deek   True, true... And whether it has been DnD, Twilig...   Jul 7 2006, 03:18 PM
- - MikeTrevin   I myself do not like the Edge mechanic a whole lot...   Jul 7 2006, 05:05 PM
- - Moon-Hawk   I haven't had this problem come up, but I thin...   Jul 7 2006, 06:07 PM
- - deek   I was thinking about this a bit more, an actual ga...   Jul 7 2006, 06:22 PM
- - James McMurray   Were someone at our table to suggest they could us...   Jul 7 2006, 06:34 PM
- - Phobos   deek and Moon-Hank if you don't like longshot...   Jul 7 2006, 06:54 PM
- - deek   QUOTE (James McMurray) Were someone at our table t...   Jul 7 2006, 06:55 PM
- - Shrike30   I think both of them meant "penalties below 0...   Jul 7 2006, 06:56 PM
- - deek   QUOTE (Phobos) You simply both forget to figure in...   Jul 7 2006, 07:03 PM
- - Moon-Hawk   QUOTE (Phobos) You simply both forget to figure in...   Jul 7 2006, 07:52 PM
- - deek   Yeah, I understand what you are saying... I was j...   Jul 7 2006, 08:12 PM
- - ornot   There is a realistic limit to how many -ve modifie...   Jul 8 2006, 03:10 PM


Reply to this topicStart new topic

 



RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 11th December 2025 - 05:13 PM

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.