Called shot on Armor, Mistakenly Played, but maybe viable? Options

[PH3NOmenon]

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.

[Teux]

I wouldn't allow it in my game, but each to his own.

Giving players the option to lower the armor value of a foe by whatever they want in exchange for giving up dice pool just seems too munchkin-esque to me. I can see players spending far too much time trying to figure out if they hit the goon in the armpit how that will affect their roll, and what's the best modifier trade off...

[Gabriel (Argus #...]

It's not bad, I'll try it out and see how it works.

I think that the armor system in SR4 could use some adjusting; I'm not really satisfied with it now. An example of why: It's easier to bypass the armor on a lined coat (which covers you neck to knee) than to bypass the armor on an armored jacket (which presumably stops at the waist). Maybe this system you have can clear this up.

[Moon-Hawk]

My house rule on that is to use it as written for partial armor (like an armor jacket) i.e. ignore the full armor value and take the full penalty. For full armor (like a citymaster or full body armor) then it becomes ignore 1/2 the armor for an equal penalty. i.e. If they have 12 armor then you can ignore 6 of it for a -6 penalty. There are still "vulnerable spots", but nothing completely unarmored.

[Butterblume]

[Moon-Hawk]

Personally, I think the damage houserule should be +2DV for -4dice, but I haven't gone so far as to houserule it.....yet.

[Brahm]

[PH3NOmenon]

Shameless bump, cause i'd like more input.


Also, i fail to see how it would be munchkinny, as noted by Teux. It even added (or adds, depending on how i rule next game) an extra tactical guessing game for my players. How much armor would they have? How many dice would be enough to fully hit? If you want to ignore it all, how do i know if i'm not spending too much dice....

Also, Moon-hawk, do you flat out disallow ignoring all armor when they're wearing full-body stuff? Or am i misreading you here?

[Shrike30]

The thing that would be annoying for me is the degree to which my players would say "okay... if I shave off 4 points of armor, this damage would be physical with the minimum 1 net success. Now, you're sure he's got 9 Ballistic? Okay, where are those dice..."

Anything that reduces the amount of math players will do prior to allowing the game to move forwards is a good thing, IMO.

[Jaid]

that's a player problem, not a mechanics problem.

that being said, the addition/subtraction can't take all that long, really... we're talking about math skills that should have been mastered quite thoroughly by the average player, i would imagine. and why do they know how much armor the target is wearing, anyways? they would have to perform an observe in detail action IMO if they want to know, and even then various types of cyber, or adept powers, or spells, could throw them off unless they have proper gear to detect that.

[mfb]

basic subtraction is too much math? i mean... huh?

[Moon-Hawk]

Yeah, that's what I said. I allow players to bypass armor (as per the rules) for partial body armor like armor jackets and the like. For something that has no unarmored spots (such as full body armor or a tank) then I allow them to use the rule, but only ignoring 1/2 the armor, and with a penalty of -1/armor point ignored. (i.e. the same ratio as normal) I fully support that FBA and tanks have weak points, but I don't like the idea of bypassing all armor with a longshot test in those cases.

[Dashifen]