![]() |
![]() ![]() |
![]() |
![]()
Post
#1
|
|
Shooting Target ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 1,632 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Portland Oregon, USA Member No.: 1,304 ![]() |
I remember reading in a previous discussion, called shots can be used to bypass armor? Is there a reference for this or is it a house rule?
|
|
|
![]()
Post
#2
|
|
Shooting Target ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 1,512 Joined: 16-August 03 From: Northampton Member No.: 5,499 ![]() |
[EDIT] Should really read the FAQ more often [/EDIT] |
|
|
![]()
Post
#3
|
|
Immortal Elf ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 11,410 Joined: 1-October 03 From: Pittsburgh Member No.: 5,670 ![]() |
the faq at shadowrunrpg.com says that you can do one of three things with a called shot: raise the damage level, bypass armor, or do a special effect. whether this is an official ruling is debatable. or, at least, it's been debated. i'd reccomend against debating it further.
|
|
|
![]()
Post
#4
|
|
Manus Celer Dei ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 16,949 Joined: 30-December 02 From: Boston Member No.: 3,802 ![]() |
Indeed. Unless you're using chemtech application gear, in which case check out Man and Machine and Cannon Companion.
~J |
|
|
![]()
Post
#5
|
|
Running Target ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 1,047 Joined: 12-November 03 From: Perilously close to the Sioux Nation. Member No.: 5,818 ![]() |
I seem to recall that mfb's post is in the main rules.
|
|
|
![]()
Post
#6
|
|
Immortal Elf ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Validating Posts: 7,999 Joined: 26-February 02 Member No.: 1,890 ![]() |
No, it's an optional rule that only refers to special attacks such as Ares Squirt pistols and whatnot. The core rule is that a Called Shot boosts the Damage Level by +1 at a +4 TN penalty. You cannot aim for a specific area on anything smaller than a vehicle, which includes metahuman targets. SR3, p. 114. The rules there are quite clear on the subject. You're not making a "Called Shot to the head" or anywhere else specific; like everything else in the game, it's abstract. You're aiming at a more vulnerable spot on the target in the hopes of doing more damage. Because that spot is very likely to be harder to hit (not aiming for center mass = more chances to miss), your chance for missing increases. Simple.
As previously mentioned, a lot of people here use the (in my opinion, horribly lame and broken) house rule to the contrary with no consideration to the fact that things like armor are abstract. To them, the flimsy piece of material that makes up the hood of Form Fitting Body Armor (Ballistics 4) is equal to the heavy plates and kevlar of an Armored Vest w/ Plates (Ballistics 4), even though they're both Ballistics 4 because the former covers the entire body with a light amount of armor while the latter protects a smaller portion with a ton of armor, yet they apparently have exactly the same stopping force in their "more realistic" house rule. In their attempts to achieve realism without applying it to everything else in the game (at least as it applies to the change), they end up with something ten times more absurd. But to each their own. If you insist on using a house rule of that nature, that's totally groovy. Just don't try and tell other people it's a core rule. |
|
|
![]()
Post
#7
|
|
Senior GM ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 1,406 Joined: 12-April 03 From: Redmond, WA Member No.: 4,442 ![]() |
The official Shadowrun FAQ describes using a Called Shot with a ranged attack such that the target only uses the Armor at the targeted location but there is no Staging Up of damage. Many dislike this ruling. More detail is described below, along with links to previous discussions on this topic.
============= The main SR3 book describes a Called Shot against a character in general terms, without the shooter having to specify what part of the body is targeted. The damage level of such a shot is raised by one level. It also describes a called shot against a subtarget of something vehicle-sized or larger where the shooter names what part is being targeted (SR3 p. 114 and 149) and though there is no damage-level increase, the GM determines the affect depending on what part is hit and how well. Other books give additional options for Called Shots against subtargets of a character. In such attacks the shooter names what part is being shot at. The following three situations are described. (1) Cannon Companion, p. 85, "Called Shot". An optional advanced melee combat rule. If using this rule, such an attack only considers the armor at the targeted location. (2) Man and Machine, p. 35. Describes Cyberware Armor (Body Plating) that can be built into cyber limbs/torsos/skulls. For normal shots, the average rating across these 5 areas is added to worn armor. For shots targeting a specific location, use the Body Plating rating of the cyber limb/torso/skull at that location instead of averaging that rating with other locations. (3) Man and Machine, p. 106, "Exposure Via Weapons, Called Shot" in the section on Drug Rules. A successful Called Shot ranged attack with a chemical weapon, such as a dartgun or squirtgun, to a non-armored location will nullify any impact armor worn. If the weapon also causes damage, the damaging part of the shot either negates armor or stages the damage level, but not both. Previous threads discussing these issues: Called Shots The New OLD Called Shot Thread called shot Called Shot, Not Again Called Head Shots (137 replies) |
|
|
![]()
Post
#8
|
|
Shooting Target ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 1,632 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Portland Oregon, USA Member No.: 1,304 ![]() |
I read the FAQ, so I now understand why everyone says the Sliver gun is so overpowered.
|
|
|
![]()
Post
#9
|
|
Immortal Elf ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Validating Posts: 7,999 Joined: 26-February 02 Member No.: 1,890 ![]() |
...
|
|
|
![]()
Post
#10
|
|
Manus Celer Dei ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 16,949 Joined: 30-December 02 From: Boston Member No.: 3,802 ![]() |
Ooh! Ooh! Silvergun reference! Can we start the flamewar now or do we have to wait the customary fifty or so replies first?
~J |
|
|
![]()
Post
#11
|
|
Mr. Quote-function ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 1,301 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Somewhere in Germany Member No.: 1,376 ![]() |
:D Funny enough that the FAQ is what actually (re-?)creates that "Slivergun Insanity" in the first place ...
But who am I to critizise Rob for transfering rules from very specific rule sections into the general combat section in his FAQ? :twirl: |
|
|
![]()
Post
#12
|
|
Incertum est quo loco te mors expectet; ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 6,546 Joined: 24-October 03 From: DeeCee, U.S. Member No.: 5,760 ![]() |
Those rules are sooo unfair! I have a dikoted AVS pistol which shoots out free spirits, and they can do called shots under melee combat rules, so that means I can do 10D,FL(stun) damage with each shot.
Sorry... I had too much fun reading over the archives... munchkins amuse me so. : P |
|
|
![]()
Post
#13
|
|||
Senior GM ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 1,406 Joined: 12-April 03 From: Redmond, WA Member No.: 4,442 ![]() |
You are a poster on Dumpshock. Therefore it is your job. Don't fret if it feels like a menial job. Many appear to think it is their calling in life, and perhaps even a noble calling. ;)
|
||
|
|||
![]()
Post
#14
|
|||||||
Mr. Quote-function ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 1,301 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Somewhere in Germany Member No.: 1,376 ![]() |
*rofl* Unfortunately for there's more to it than just being a poster on this board ...
I can only hope that it doesn't turn into a crusade :twirl: |
||||||
|
|||||||
![]()
Post
#15
|
|||||
Dragon ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 4,138 Joined: 10-June 03 From: Tennessee Member No.: 4,706 ![]() |
No, no it doesn't. The current FAQ ruling states that a called shot bypasses ALL armor on the target. A second part of the ruling seems to indicate that the idea behind the ruling is as you suggest, but the way the ruling actually reads, it does not take into account armor over the targeted location unless the shooter wants it to.
|
||||
|
|||||
![]()
Post
#16
|
|
Manus Celer Dei ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 16,949 Joined: 30-December 02 From: Boston Member No.: 3,802 ![]() |
Every so often we should all go and yell at Rob for five minutes beginning at 4:15 PM local time.
~J |
|
|
![]()
Post
#17
|
|
Senior GM ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 1,406 Joined: 12-April 03 From: Redmond, WA Member No.: 4,442 ![]() |
We all know that it requires effort to write unambiguous English, and the more complicated the issue the more effort it requires. TinkerGnome, I agree that your interpretation of the FAQ is a perfectly valid interpretation of the English that is written, but the intention of the writer is the important issue.
Now please, as an exercise, try reading the FAQ words again with the assumption that the words in parenthesis are not a different way to make a Called Shot, but an attempt by the writer to clarify the intention of the prior sentence. Words in parenthesis should not introduce a new rule but are commonly used to for clarification. Now ask yourself what you believe the intention of the writer is. You may come up with the same answer, you may not. Either way, it's a useful exercise. Personally, I think the writer intends to let the shooter bypass armor if he/she can find an unarmored spot large enough to shoot at, and the words in parenthesis are the writer's attempt to clarify for the situation where all the spots big enough to shoot have some armor. Luckily, since the writer is still alive someone can ask him if he can recall what his intention was and ask him to clarify it. But I think we'd rather disagree in our postings for the sheer joy of it. (At least it appears to me that I would rather disagree with you than ask Rob. Hmmm. What does that say about me. Let me go ponder myself.) |
|
|
![]()
Post
#18
|
|
Traumatizing players since 1992 ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 3,282 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Las Vegas, NV Member No.: 220 ![]() |
I pondered myself once. It was great! :D
|
|
|
![]()
Post
#19
|
|
Dragon ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 4,138 Joined: 10-June 03 From: Tennessee Member No.: 4,706 ![]() |
When I read the rule as written, I can't help but think "I think he isn't saying what he wants to say."
I am not on a crusade to get the rule changed, but rather one to get the wording of the rule to be in line with the spirit of it. The fact of the matter is, it's a simple FAQ. It's not a book or other ink document where what's written is unchangable. The wording should simply be changed to reflect what is supposed to be there. Mail has been sent about the issue several times in reguards to previous threads about this topic (some of which are no longer on the boards because they devolved into pointless namecalling). While I agree that the second point is probably meant as a clarification, it is not written as one. |
|
|
![]()
Post
#20
|
|||
Runner ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 3,066 Joined: 5-February 03 Member No.: 4,017 ![]() |
Would that be 4:15PM local time for each person on Dumpshock or 4:15PM local time where Rob lives? One has the benefit of bothering him hourly (with a few exceptions), while the other is a sudden burst of loudness. |
||
|
|||
![]()
Post
#21
|
|
Manus Celer Dei ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 16,949 Joined: 30-December 02 From: Boston Member No.: 3,802 ![]() |
I was thinking his local time, but if we decide we really don't like Rob we can have it be all of our local times :)
~J |
|
|
![]()
Post
#22
|
|
Shooting Target ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 1,632 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Portland Oregon, USA Member No.: 1,304 ![]() |
I think that there needs to be a way to by-pass armor. Maybe use the rule, but no SGL bonuses?
|
|
|
![]()
Post
#23
|
|
Manus Celer Dei ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 16,949 Joined: 30-December 02 From: Boston Member No.: 3,802 ![]() |
Why does there need to be a way to bypass armor, APDS notwithstanding?
~J |
|
|
![]()
Post
#24
|
|||
Great Dragon ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 5,889 Joined: 3-August 03 From: A CPI rank 1 country Member No.: 5,222 ![]() |
And why does there need to be a way to call a shot to increase damage level? Neither is very common in real firefights, but apparently they are about equally uncommon (this from articles of police shootouts and similar accounts of firefights, feel free to provide counter-evidence). |
||
|
|||
![]()
Post
#25
|
|
Manus Celer Dei ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 16,949 Joined: 30-December 02 From: Boston Member No.: 3,802 ![]() |
So as to provide the opportunity for a low-skill character to make a low-probability shot against a more skilled opponent and possibly take them out.
~J |
|
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() |
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 29th May 2023 - 04:14 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.