 Layering Penalties when not Layering?, Applying Quickness Penalties |
  |
 Nov 16 2003, 12:19 AM
Post
#26
|
|
|
Free Spirit  Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 3,950 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Bloomington, IN UCAS Member No.: 1,920  |
Does cyber armor count toward quickness penalties or layering?
|
 |
 
|
|
Nov 16 2003, 12:24 AM
Post
#27
|
|
|
Running Target Group: Members Posts: 1,047 Joined: 12-November 03 From: Perilously close to the Sioux Nation. Member No.: 5,818 |
I think it applies to quickness and not layerering. Although my SR3 is in my drom room and I don't feel liek trekking across campus for it.
|
|
|
|
|
Nov 16 2003, 01:43 AM
Post
#28
|
|
|
Free Spirit Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 3,950 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Bloomington, IN UCAS Member No.: 1,920 |
Ok, does cyber armor get figured in to quickness and combat pool penalties when also wearing armor?
|
|
|
|
|
Nov 16 2003, 01:48 AM
Post
#29
|
|
|
Dragon Group: Members Posts: 4,138 Joined: 10-June 03 From: Tennessee Member No.: 4,706 |
Both penalties may come from the plating, it seems.
|
|
|
|
|
Nov 16 2003, 02:06 AM
Post
#30
|
|
|
Free Spirit Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 3,950 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Bloomington, IN UCAS Member No.: 1,920 |
I also meant from things like Dermal sheath and bone lacing etc..
|
|
|
|
|
Nov 16 2003, 02:38 AM
Post
#31
|
|
|
Immortal Elf Group: Validating Posts: 7,999 Joined: 26-February 02 Member No.: 1,890 |
As far as I know, cybernetic/bionic armor bonuses are immune to layering completely; they add directly to your total armor. No halving, no Quickness penalties, no Combat Pool penalties, no layering at all.
|
|
|
|
|
Nov 16 2003, 02:54 AM
Post
#32
|
|||
|
Immoral Elf Group: Members Posts: 15,247 Joined: 29-March 02 From: Grimy Pete's Bar & Laundromat Member No.: 2,486 |
That's what I thought as well. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Nov 16 2003, 03:01 AM
Post
#33
|
|
|
Shooting Target Group: Members Posts: 1,512 Joined: 16-August 03 From: Northampton Member No.: 5,499 |
I do it the same as Fortune and Dr F.
|
|
|
|
|
Nov 17 2003, 02:00 PM
Post
#34
|
|||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 214 Joined: 26-February 02 From: UK Member No.: 340 |
Those sentances aren't at odds to one another. It is allowable, and sometimes favourable to layer more than two pieces of armour, even if we continue to use the rule that only the Highest Rated and second Highest Rated pieces are used to calculate the overal Rating. Example: Vest with Plates (4/3), Armour Clothing (3/0) and a Leather Jacket (0/2). In this case the Ballistic rating is made up from the Vest with Plates and Armour Clothing Highest Rating: 4 Second highest rated: 3, halved round down is 1 Total = 5 However for the Impact Rating the benefit is gained from Vest With Plates and the Leather Jacket Highest Rating: 3 Second highest rated: 2, halved is 1 Total = 4 For a final armour rating of 5/4 This shows that it is beneficial to layer 3 pieces of armour even with the rule that the lowest rated piece doesn't have any effect. Is this realistic? Probably not, but is this the rule as written? It would seem so. Does the implications of the sentances conflict with the rule? No! I would more readily accept the interpretation that layers beyond the 2 highest rated count towards the final rating if the sentance had been something to the effect of: Add the Highest rating to half the ratings of the other layers of armour or Add the highest rating to half the rating of the second highest rating armour, and so on. Also there is an assumption that if all layers count toward the final rating, that you use Half the Rating of further layers. This is not clear, and as stated requires an assumption to be made to make that interpretation work (an assumption not needed for the interpretation that only the 2 highest ratings count). For example, teh assumption could also be that you use Full Rating of Highest, Half Rating of second Highest, One Quarter rating of third highest, One eighth rating of 4 highest etc. Hell, for all we know that could have been the original intention, but in playtesting they realised that 1 quarter of the third highest rating often rounded down to zero, and so they made the rule to only count the 2 highest. Anyway, enough rambling... :) |
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 16th October 2025 - 03:33 PM |
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.