IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> Firearm Creation Rules, Am I cheating or not?
Musashi Forever
post Oct 1 2005, 12:21 PM
Post #1


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 523
Joined: 13-March 05
Member No.: 7,155



Yesterday I designed a custom shotgun. I wanted something that an overly tough street-sam could use as a sidearm. As far as I can tell, it is legal to take Barrel Reduction in the design phase and also take the Sawed-off option in the modification phase. Is this for real?

Now you do suffer some hefty restrictions. Heavy Pistol Ranges minus 10% overall range and -1 to the Power of the weapon. But you also gain 4 points of conceal. With the Improved Concealability option I wound up with a shotgun that has a conceal of 8! I thought it was kinda sick and I don't think a GM should allow it, but did I really use the rules correctly?


Also, do you guys think there should be a "Remove Stock" option? It would add 1 point of conceal for rifles and shotguns, but add 1 recoil and maybe some modifiers to shots at long and extreme range. I ask because there are plenty of shotguns without stocks in the world, even the SPAS-22 has a folding stock, but the Firearms Creation Rules state that rifles and shotguns cannot take the folding stock option. For rifles I just thought it would be cool to turn a sport rifle into a pistol that fires rifle rounds. (If you have played Fallout you can get a weapon like this for clearing a special mission.)
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Fix-it
post Oct 1 2005, 02:07 PM
Post #2


Creating a god with his own hands
***

Group: Members
Posts: 1,405
Joined: 30-September 02
From: 0:0:0:0:0:0:0:1
Member No.: 3,364



conceal rules are horribly, horribly broken.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
northern lights
post Oct 1 2005, 03:02 PM
Post #3


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 223
Joined: 23-December 03
Member No.: 5,929



you can't just remove the stock on a rife, but you could use a pistol styled stock with a rifle chambered round. remington has a .221 fireball that is popularly used in bolt action pistols with reduced barrels. but as it is, the angle of the grip is all wrong to be used without the rest of the stock providing support from your shoulder. otherwise it would fly right out of your hand, esp with the shotgun.

have your sammy use a sawed off mossberg they don't have stocks.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Corywn
post Oct 2 2005, 04:11 AM
Post #4


Target
*

Group: Members
Posts: 71
Joined: 26-February 02
Member No.: 1,832



QUOTE (Fix-it)
conceal rules are horribly, horribly broken.

I think my GM just about shat himself when I told him about the assault rifle I designed with 9 conceal. Of course, I was just fooling around, making something terrifying. Ultimately, it wasn't meant for the game, and I'm sure anyone could remake the stats on the drop of a hat.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
jervinator
post Oct 2 2005, 04:21 AM
Post #5


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 178
Joined: 4-September 05
Member No.: 7,682



That's why I would like to see a DECENT set of conversion rules from 3G3 to SR. For those of you who are not familiar wiith 3G3, it's a non-game-specific set of rules for weapon creation.
Unfortunately, the only set of 3G3-->SR conversion rules I've seen are worse than just winging it :(
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
northern lights
post Oct 2 2005, 07:25 PM
Post #6


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 223
Joined: 23-December 03
Member No.: 5,929



um how about:

"uh, gunsmiths don't really exist anymore. everyone just uses what's available on the street."

or for those that need it spelled out:

"as a GM, i don't feel like investing that amount of time, thought and energy on creating a suitable ruleset for it when i could instead spend those resources on the other aspects of our games such as plotline, character development, etc. so you as a player are going to have to live with it, or create your own suitable ruleset for it and if i approve it, we can implement it."

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
hobgoblin
post Oct 2 2005, 09:33 PM
Post #7


panda!
**********

Group: Members
Posts: 10,331
Joined: 8-March 02
From: north of central europe
Member No.: 2,242



from what i understand the SR4 series of books will not contain design rules.

modification rules i cant comment on tho...
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Trax
post Oct 2 2005, 09:38 PM
Post #8


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 470
Joined: 2-January 05
From: Quebec
Member No.: 6,924



It's too bad that I'm playing the weapons specialist from the SR3 book, I could've put those B/R skills into something better. Too bad I didn't know any better when i first started. :P
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
TheBovrilMonkey
post Oct 3 2005, 01:08 AM
Post #9


Target
*

Group: Members
Posts: 37
Joined: 26-February 02
From: England
Member No.: 1,927



I decided that when I was GMing that unless a character had the skills, contacts, money and equipment to actually make the guns that the player was designing, the guns were being manufactured by one of the various arms corps.

So, if the players designed a horrible weapon for their characters, it meant that it was also available to any NPC who had the cash. I found it very surprising how the players rarely put together any really nasty weapons ;)
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
hyzmarca
post Oct 3 2005, 01:19 AM
Post #10


Midnight Toker
**********

Group: Members
Posts: 7,686
Joined: 4-July 04
From: Zombie Drop Bear Santa's Workshop
Member No.: 6,456



QUOTE (northern lights)
um how about:

"uh, gunsmiths don't really exist anymore. everyone just uses what's available on the street."

or for those that need it spelled out:

"as a GM, i don't feel like investing that amount of time, thought and energy on creating a suitable ruleset for it when i could instead spend those resources on the other aspects of our games such as plotline, character development, etc. so you as a player are going to have to live with it, or create your own suitable ruleset for it and if i approve it, we can implement it."

Umm.... There are already firearm design rules written for SR3 in the Cannon Companion.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Aku
post Oct 3 2005, 02:12 AM
Post #11


Running, running, running
*****

Group: Dumpshocked
Posts: 2,220
Joined: 18-October 04
From: North Carolina
Member No.: 6,769



i think they key word may have been "suitable" hysmarca...
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
northern lights
post Oct 3 2005, 05:27 AM
Post #12


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 223
Joined: 23-December 03
Member No.: 5,929



yeah, it was meant as a comment on how people were looking at the canon rules and thinking they were broken, then looking for other rules to adapt and thinking that those weren't right, etc.

sorry bout the clarity issue, hyzmarca
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Corywn
post Oct 3 2005, 08:18 PM
Post #13


Target
*

Group: Members
Posts: 71
Joined: 26-February 02
Member No.: 1,832



Raygun had a pretty nice and comprehensive set of rules if I recall...

A little complicated to utilize, but seemed to be decent.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Musashi Forever
post Oct 4 2005, 12:17 AM
Post #14


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 523
Joined: 13-March 05
Member No.: 7,155



But it seems that to make Raygun's work you need to buy into all of his rules for firearms, armor penetration, conceal and all that jazz. I love Raygun's site and all that he's done for the game, but in my personal experience that stuff is just too real for my games.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

Reply to this topicStart new topic

 



RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 14th April 2024 - 07:54 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.