IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

> Called shot on Armor, Mistakenly Played, but maybe viable?
PH3NOmenon
post Aug 10 2006, 04:20 PM
Post #1


Target
*

Group: Members
Posts: 80
Joined: 9-January 06
Member No.: 8,143
Hi folks,


Since our group is not all that familiar yet with SR4, we've been using the Called shot for negating armor a bit wrong.
QUOTE (BBB for reference)
Target an area not protected by armor. The attacking character receives a negative dice pool modifier equal to the target’s armor (better armor is more diffi cult to bypass). If the attack hits, the target’s armor is ignored for the damage resistance test; the target rolls only Body.


We've been playing it like this:
QUOTE (Us)
Target an area less protected by armor. The attacking character can choose to ignore any number of armor points the defending character may have, but receives an equivalent dice pool modifier equal to this amount.  So a character that wants to decrease its target's armor by 5 also rolls 5 less dice on its attack.


So, what do you guys think? More realistic? More abusable? Utterly ridiculous?

I was skimming across the boards and found the usual complaints about spirits again... would this particular houserule help any with that? Hardened armor only ignores the full attack if the dv does not exceed the armor... and though not all characters can afford to lose 10 dice to ignore all of a spirit's armor, losing 5 and trusting the DV of your holdout is higher than the soft spot in that earth elemental's thigh could prove quite effective...

(quick side question, a called shot MUST follow a take aim action and is then considered a free action, correct? If so, a player can only make one called shot per IP? One called shot and one additional (regular) shot? Since we only get one free action per round?)
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

Posts in this topic
- PH3NOmenon   Called shot on Armor   Aug 10 2006, 04:20 PM
- - Teux   I wouldn't allow it in my game, but each to hi...   Aug 10 2006, 04:27 PM
- - Gabriel (Argus #2323)   It's not bad, I'll try it out and see how ...   Aug 10 2006, 04:40 PM
- - Moon-Hawk   My house rule on that is to use it as written for ...   Aug 10 2006, 04:43 PM
- - Butterblume   QUOTE (PH3NOmenon)quick side question, a called sh...   Aug 10 2006, 04:45 PM
- - Moon-Hawk   Personally, I think the damage houserule should be...   Aug 10 2006, 04:46 PM
- - Brahm   QUOTE (PH3NOmenon @ Aug 10 2006, 11:20 AM) I ...   Aug 10 2006, 04:57 PM
- - PH3NOmenon   Shameless bump, cause i'd like more input. A...   Aug 11 2006, 11:42 PM
- - Shrike30   The thing that would be annoying for me is the deg...   Aug 11 2006, 11:44 PM
- - Jaid   that's a player problem, not a mechanics probl...   Aug 12 2006, 12:22 AM
- - mfb   basic subtraction is too much math? i mean... huh?   Aug 12 2006, 06:00 AM
- - Moon-Hawk   Yeah, that's what I said. I allow players to ...   Aug 14 2006, 03:10 PM
- - Dashifen   QUOTE (mfb) basic subtraction is too much math? i ...   Aug 14 2006, 07:55 PM

« Next Oldest · Shadowrun · Next Newest »
 

Reply to this topicStart new topic

 

Display Mode: Switch to: Standard · Switch to: Linear+ · Outline

Track this topic · Email this topic · Print this topic · Subscribe to this forum

RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 24th January 2026 - 07:59 PM
Powered By IP.Board © 2026  IPS, Inc.

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.