Making armor worth while, A house rule - Feedback appreciated |
Making armor worth while, A house rule - Feedback appreciated |
Dec 23 2005, 10:01 AM
Post
#1
|
|||
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 834 Joined: 30-June 03 Member No.: 4,832 |
In the few games that my group is playing in. We're finding that any armor pretty much amounts to squat in the current rules, especially vehicle armor. The problem we have is with the net hits adding to DV before the damage calculation. For example: It seems odd that a Predator IV can cause damage to a patrol-1 (armor 10) with 5 net hits, but not with 4. The net hits adding to DV before comparing to armor also basically eliminates the need for the called shot options because by the time you'd need to use the bypass armor option or the +4DV option, you'd be subtracting too many dice for the former and the latter wouldn't make enough difference. Considering the general level of dice pools in SR4, its not impossible or even uncommon to be able to roll 12-20 dice with standard 400 bp characters. This means that a light pistol with standard rounds could take out a steel lynx or a car in just a few shots. So, with the problem laid out. We've come up with the following house rule: (We're still trying to decide if it should apply universally on only to vehicles, but I think it should work well either way)
With this rule, here are the advantages:
With this rule, here are the disadvantages:
Well that's the basics of our new rule, feedback and suggestions are very welcomed. |
||
|
|||
Dec 24 2005, 04:45 PM
Post
#2
|
|
Running Target Group: Members Posts: 1,219 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Lofwyr's stomach. Member No.: 1,320 |
I use the very same house rule, So I think it's a good one.
As to your disadvantages: 1: Well, yes, you need anti-vehicle weapons to go against vehicle. Imagine that. 2: This is a good thing. It means less dead players, more recurring villains, more getting captured and interrogated, less fights to the death, etc. More Plot, less death. 3: Well, Yeah. Or take those called shots. You've pretty much hit the nail there. But really, we took those anyway, so it's not much of a change. |
|
|
Dec 24 2005, 06:19 PM
Post
#3
|
|
Prime Runner Group: Banned Posts: 3,732 Joined: 1-September 05 From: Prague, Czech Republic Member No.: 7,665 |
I agree that the Hardened Armor rules are messed up, but I disagree that the problem is that a 400 BP weapon specialist can fight effectively against a drone that costs 1 BP worth of :nuyen: .
Hardened Armor is all or nothing, a weapon that doesn't penetrate does nothing while a weapon that does penetrate is reduced by only 1/3 of the Armor. And it shouldn't work like that. That makes all fights against heavily armored targets into winner take all lotteries. Any weapon capable of damaging an APC or giant spirit is virtually incapable of not destroying them in one shot. That's the problem, and your proposal makes that problem worse. By moving the DV bonus from the attack roll to after the comparison to the armor, you've ensured that vehicles ignore more attacks. But you've also ensured that any weapon they don't ignore is that much larger than what they could possibly soak when the damage resistance test comes around. You've made the body of vehicles that much more irrelevent. And that's bad. --- My personal house rule, and it has served me pretty well, is that Hardened Armor simply reduces DV. That way weapons can cause small amounts of damage to vehicles by scarecely beating their armor. That's made vehicles a lot less explody, which is good. -Frank |
|
|
Dec 24 2005, 06:55 PM
Post
#4
|
|
Immortal Elf Group: Members Posts: 11,410 Joined: 1-October 03 From: Pittsburgh Member No.: 5,670 |
vehicles that don't explode? you'll never make it in Hollywood!
|
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 27th April 2024 - 02:10 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.