 New FAQ online, a couple surprises? |
  |
 Dec 13 2006, 10:16 PM
Post
#1
|
|
|
Moving Target  Group: Members Posts: 160 Joined: 14-November 03 From: MSP Metroplex Member No.: 5,822  |
I see there's a new SR4 FAQ up at http://www.shadowrunrpg.com/resources/faq.shtml
A couple new things to me (either because they were poorly explained, or I just missed them) were:
Let's hear your thoughts. Dread Polack |
 |
 
|
|
Dec 13 2006, 10:19 PM
Post
#2
|
|
|
Runner Group: Members Posts: 2,526 Joined: 9-April 06 From: McGuire AFB, NJ Member No.: 8,445 |
Little slow on the draw...
|
|
|
|
|
Dec 13 2006, 10:21 PM
Post
#3
|
|
|
The Dragon Never Sleeps Group: Admin Posts: 6,924 Joined: 1-September 05 Member No.: 7,667 |
Hey, give the guy a break, the original FAQ Release thread last had somethign posted to it 4 or 5 dayas ago is on page 2 of the current topics.
You actually have to go to page two to find it! |
|
|
|
|
Dec 13 2006, 10:48 PM
Post
#4
|
|||||||||
|
Neophyte Runner Group: Members Posts: 2,086 Joined: 26-February 02 Member No.: 364 |
To quote one of my former supervisors quoting Demolition Man, "Where have you been? Freeze Dried or doing hard time?"
But only if there are people who would get caught in the blast who might want to dodge. If no one's there, you're fine just tossing it at the ground. My solution? A bag of drugged-up devil rats wearing AR goggles.
That's been out there since Street Magic. The errata/FAQ just takes care of the people who put their fingers in their ears and chanted in a sing-song voice "La-La, I can't hear you! Not listening!"
I'll say. And those were just two FAQ/Errata-related threads that I made myself. There have been, what almost a dozen total since last week? (Note, Quote tags appear to be broken on preview. Don't know why.) Edit:Broken after post as well. Edit Edit: Found the problem. This post has been edited by RunnerPaul: Dec 13 2006, 10:50 PM |
||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||
|
Dec 13 2006, 11:07 PM
Post
#5
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 753 Joined: 31-October 03 Member No.: 5,780 |
Actually Runner, my beef on the physical drain was that they tended to state 'physical damage' instead of drain in case of overcasting of some sort. It made it sound like it wasn't 'drain' as far as healing goes.
And I still say the fact it takes awhile to heal and you can't guarantee a full recovery keeps it relatively sane. :P But hey, it has been written, and thus is it judged. I'll just have to stick to my absorption options now. |
|
|
|
|
Dec 13 2006, 11:19 PM
Post
#6
|
|
|
Target Group: Members Posts: 9 Joined: 7-December 06 Member No.: 10,283 |
You can't aim grenades at the ground? Or, more specifically, fixed points that don't contain people?
Setting aside for a moment the raw insanity of only firing an indirect fire weapon at people, what happens when you need to take out a doorframe, or blow up a rickety shack? Or perhaps aim your grenade to attempt to hit multiple targets who don't have a guy standing in the dead middle of your intended blast effect? Boo to that noise. |
|
|
|
|
Dec 13 2006, 11:23 PM
Post
#7
|
|||
|
The Dragon Never Sleeps Group: Admin Posts: 6,924 Joined: 1-September 05 Member No.: 7,667 |
You can aim at them, it's just that everyones still rolls dice. You can't using aiming at a fixed point to avoid having someone rolling the approriate effect and dodge dice. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Dec 13 2006, 11:31 PM
Post
#8
|
|||
|
Neophyte Runner Group: Members Posts: 2,086 Joined: 26-February 02 Member No.: 364 |
Fixed points that don't contain people are ok, so long as the actual blast radius of the grenade doesn't contain people either. Per the FAQ. And if there are people, there doesn't have to be one guy dead center, just one guy who gets to be the lead dodger. It's an attempt to fix something that didn't seem broken in the first place, seeing as how if you don't actually target someone, you don't get the damage boost from an accurate throw. You're sacrificing the ability to go from ruining someone's day to really ruining someone's day, and in exchange for that sacrifice, you get an easier throw. As for indirect area effect combat spells, by not targeting a person, you're likely targeting an object, so object resistance thresholds come into play. Again, not broken. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Dec 14 2006, 12:08 AM
Post
#9
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 600 Joined: 31-August 05 Member No.: 7,659 |
It'd work best to simply toss the grenade, roll successes, abort to a dodge and roll with a penalty because of the AOE weapon, and subtract successes.
It'd be like covering fire. |
|
|
|
|
Dec 14 2006, 01:46 AM
Post
#10
|
|
|
Shadow Cartographer Group: Members Posts: 3,737 Joined: 2-June 06 From: Secret Tunnels under the UK (South West) Member No.: 8,636 |
In my games, players have previously resolved the issue by ( a ) forcing the grenade down the target's trousers, ( b ) setting them on a long delay and planting them in multiples down toilets and ( c ) (I kid you not) pulling the pins on all of them and simply running at the opposition.
There's just something about grenades in my experience, that regresses even the most sensitive role-player to a beserk five-year old with the humour of De Sade. |
|
|
|
|
Dec 14 2006, 06:28 AM
Post
#11
|
|||
|
Great Dragon Group: Members Posts: 5,537 Joined: 27-August 06 From: Albuquerque NM Member No.: 9,234 |
That's sort of clever. I just like to put motion sensors on them with a 3 second arming delay. Tends to slow down anyone chasing me a bit. . . |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Dec 14 2006, 06:35 AM
Post
#12
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 732 Joined: 1-December 06 Member No.: 10,116 |
Actually yeah I"m sort of supprised, maybe we'll see motion sensitive explosives in Arsenal. I mean 2070's tech, you can put ultrasound vision in a pair of contact lenses.
SO why not a cheap motion sensor with X radius. Pull the pin have X time to plant the grenade then it goes 'live' anything that enters that radius afterwards risks setting the grenade off if they trip the motion sensor. Bad thing is foc oruse you could put one behind an door and I can easily see that being used against PCs. And some of them at least, would definately complain about such tactics being used right back at them. |
|
|
|
|
Dec 14 2006, 10:33 AM
Post
#13
|
|
|
Awakened Asset Group: Members Posts: 4,464 Joined: 9-April 05 From: AGS, North German League Member No.: 7,309 |
A cheap sensor plus several hidden grenades detonated via AR...
@Knasser: It does not belong here either, but running the grenade towards the target is somehow not the intended purpose, is it? I might accept the idea for concussion grenades, but everything else seems suicidal. |
|
|
|
|
Dec 14 2006, 01:08 PM
Post
#14
|
|||
|
Shadow Cartographer Group: Members Posts: 3,737 Joined: 2-June 06 From: Secret Tunnels under the UK (South West) Member No.: 8,636 |
:D No - definitely not by the book grenade use. Player was outgunned, fancied a new character, decided he would take a bunch of them with him. Wasn't a single grenade incidentally. It was all of them! |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Dec 14 2006, 01:27 PM
Post
#15
|
|||
|
Target Group: Members Posts: 81 Joined: 28-June 06 From: Sol System, Earth, Europe, Germany, Saxony Member No.: 8,796 |
are you REALLY sure about that? i am pretty convinced, object resistance has nothing to do with indirect combat spells (but surely with the direct ones). when tossing a fireball you just make a ranged attack using your spellcasting+MAG (and any appropriate modifier - sight, cover, ...). thats it. target can dodge (rocks, conatiners or tiles of the ground won't :D ) and if not dodging completly (remember the AOE-modiefier for area spells), it has to resist damage. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Dec 15 2006, 02:31 AM
Post
#16
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 160 Joined: 14-November 03 From: MSP Metroplex Member No.: 5,822 |
You people think you're better than me?!?!?
To be clear, I'm only slow on the uptake. :P Guess I took a week off from Dumpshock and didn't notice that the date listed for the FAQ was the 7th. Personally, I think the grenade/indirect combat spell thing is dumb. I've instituted a house-rule that I stole from the HERO System. Grenades can either be aimed at a location, or a person. Even a regular dodge won't put you far enough from the blast to reduce damage, so anyone hoping to get out of the blast radius has to take a Full Defense action called "Dive for cover." The target rolls a Reaction+dodge test and dives 2 meters per hit away from the blast, thus taking reduced or no damage. So far, I handle indirect combat spells like a firearm, and have had no problems. Dread Polack |
|
|
|
|
Dec 15 2006, 11:00 PM
Post
#17
|
|
|
Target Group: Members Posts: 20 Joined: 18-November 06 From: Montgomery, tx Member No.: 9,898 |
Do to a big msitake i made in one of our earlier playing sessions where i shot off a nade that ended up killing two of my good friends...we have been afriad to play with nades.
|
|
|
|
|
Dec 16 2006, 05:10 AM
Post
#18
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 732 Joined: 1-December 06 Member No.: 10,116 |
Yeah I would call any attempt to avoid an indirect weapon one of those things that calls for the full 'dive for cover' ful defence dodge too to be honest. Because thats exactly what your ass is goign to do unless your either:
A) Stupid B) Some how dont notice the grenade C) At least try to throw the grenade back D) Dive on the grenade in a bid to save your buddies E) I dont know why this option is here, but it seemed a good idea at the time. As for tossing about grenades, yes.. you must be very careful with those at all times. I once had a VERY bad glitch that salsaed another PC once. I threw an aerodynamic hand grenade. These have a very large scatter radius. This was a bad thing in this case.. a very bad thing. THe grenade 'scattered' and did so, back towards us (woops) and in teh direction of the PC in question. It landed (going roughly by direction and the distance it travled) Almost right at his feet. He didnt reach cover in time. |
|
|
|
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 28th May 2023 - 03:26 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.