Executive Protection, does called shots ignore barrier-spells? Options

[Adhoc]

Polaris posted this another thread about the Executive Protection Anchoring mentioned on page 71 of Magic In The Shadows:

[snowRaven]

A lot of spells would help against a sniper

Barrier cannot be circumvented since it effectively covers ALL of the target - even if you allow called shots to avoid armor (which isn't canon rules) you can't call a shot against something which isn't exposed - it's the same as trying to call a shot against someone behind a wall, so so the wall won't protect them. Under NO CIRCUMSTANCES would I allow a called shot to circumvent the barrier rating of either an Armor spell or a Barrier spell. (Also, remember to add a +1 TN for those firing through a Barrier spell)

Deflect gives extra dice for dodging - there isn't anything in canon about this, but since the spell actully redirects the path of incoming projectiles, these dice should be allowed to be used even against a shot you are unaware of.

An anchored detect bullet and personal bullet armor will also help, as will an increased body spell (more dice to roll)

If you combine all of these, then the executive stands a small chance. Now, if the executive protection team has a mage with 'detect sniper' or 'detect enemies of executive' he can be forewarned that something is going to happen. If the executive protection adept has sixth sense and combat sense he can manage to act before the sniper in such a surprise situation, thereby possibly removing the target all together.

And of course, if the executive is under a physical mask spell he might not even be recognized as the target in the first place. Especially if a samurai executive protection guy has a physical mask spell to look like the executive.

[Sphynx]

FAQ

[TinkerGnome]

The FAQ entry does imply, rather strongly, that you can get around an armor spell with it (which is why I think it badly needs a rewrite). It does not, however, say word one about barriers. Barriers aren't an armor rating, so there's no reasonable way to read the FAQ ruling in such a way as to get around them.

However, I feel that most GMs out there are going to take one look at the ruling and say "Yeah, they say something they don't mean." and house rule it to something more sensical (like make the "armor only at that location" part is mandatory, not an option as it is now).

If someone wants to make called shot on something they can't see, that's fine by me. If they can hit something with a +12 to their target number, by all means, go for it.

[BitBasher]

{EDIT} post removed, it is absolutely impossible for me to reply to the absolute inane stupidity of bypassing armor in an abstract hit system where what is covered by any piece of armor and hor much armor each location has isnt even REMOTELY addressed. In short I deleted a lot of well deserved profanity, and although I never make comments like this I think whoever put that in the FAQ needs to take a *******minute and ******* realize hyst how much this ***** in the *** the complete ******* SR combat system. Especually when with a SL2 called shots are at no target number penalty. Called shot TN4, -2TN for SL2 specific bonus just for called shots = TN2, SL2 normal TN modifier =base TN.

Whoever wrote this in an official capacity needs to be dropkicked or the SR damage system needs a complete utter ******* rewrite.

[Glyph]

While Shadowrun does use an abstract armor and damage system, I still like the FAQ, since there should be some way to shoot a guy in security armor in the face - with the FAQ, it is possible, although difficult, to target unarmored areas of a target. But read it carefully, and note that it says you can target less armored areas of the target. Why would you ever want to do that, if you can simply ignore it? Obviously, because some targets won't have a completely unarmored area that you can shoot at. So what does this mean with regards to Armor and Barrier spells, which cover or protect the entire body? It means that whoever calls a shot to bypass an Armor or Barrier spell is SOL. That's just common sense. Anyone who says differently is being deliberately obtuse for the sake of rules-lawyering, and most GMs will nip that sort of nonsense in the bud quickly.

Now, I will admit that the new rules make someone with a smartlink II more dangerous, but come on - to have that TN of 4, they would have to be at point-blank range, with no other modifiers for movement, visibility, etc. If you are literally face-to-face with a marksman with a targetting computer, then you should be in trouble if you only have a plasic visor over your face, full body armor or not.

[BitBasher]

Glyph, they have the exact same target number to shoot ignoring armor that a person without a SL gets to shoot you with full armor.