 Misc rules questions 2, drones, nade launchers, recoil, stance |
  |
 Oct 8 2007, 11:11 PM
Post
#1
|
|
|
Moving Target  Group: Members Posts: 573 Joined: 17-September 07 Member No.: 13,319  |
If I fire the grenade launcher on my Ares Alpha with a Simple Action, and then fire a long burst with my second Simple Action, that's a lotta firepower in one IP. If I fire the long burst first, and then fire the grenade launcher, does the second action take any recoil penalty?
If I install an Ares Alpha (or HK XM30) on a drone, does it need a Targeting (Automatics) autosoft and a Targeting (Heavy Weapons) autosoft to use both functions of that weapon? Can drones use smartlinks? The +2 bonus requires a smartgun sensor on the gun, and for metahuman users, a way to display the point-of-aim on the user's field of vision; does one pay the listed costs for Image Link and Smartlink as direct upgrades to the drone? There's a listed cost for buying a Camera with sesory enhancements, but presumably a drone without a Camera already has a built-in visual sensor, just not an image-capturing (picture-taking) function. Do a smartlink system and an airburst link interact/stack in any way other than the +2 to the to-hit roll yielding more net hits to reduce the scatter roll? Can a drone such as Doberman or Lynx use a bipod or tripod? Can they be effectively "sitting or kneeling" at will, and does that affect anything else? I imagine them as being inherently more stable than a metahuman, if they rest on 4 brakable wheels rather than 2 feet. Does a flying drone take any different modifiers for recoil? Why are MMGs, HMGs and assault cannon usable only on foot, and not mountable on vehicles? If a metahuman extends a bipod or tripod, fires from sitting/kneeling, then runs and fires from another position, do any penalties apply for having an extended bi/tripod? Does sitting/kneeeling affect one's Reaction roll to evade incoming attacks? (I notice that there is both a "Defender prone" +3 to a melee attacker's dice pool AND a "defender prone" -2 to the defender's dice pool.) In other words, is there anything besides house rules to discourage ALWAYS having an extended tripod and declaring a sitting stance? And is there any advantage to firing from prone? (None in RAW, but oddly enough, many soldiers seem to choose prone stance when firing rifles.) I'm inclined to house-rule that firing from sitting/kneeling gives +1 recoil compensation, and firing from prone gives +2, even without a bipod/tripod. Or possibly even a direct +1/+2 to the attack roll; good stance helps even when using a weapon with negligible recoil (eg a BB gun). Also a cover bonus when the attacker only has LOS to the prone person's head/shoulders, which usually happens at medium or long range. |
 |
 
|
|
Oct 8 2007, 11:43 PM
Post
#2
|
|||
|
Runner Group: Members Posts: 2,883 Joined: 16-December 06 Member No.: 10,386 |
Ah yes, the eternal question. I keep waiting for for Gene Wilder to pop in and say "Wait, flip that, reverse it." but it never happens. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Oct 9 2007, 01:03 AM
Post
#3
|
|||||||||||||||||
|
Technomancer Group: Retired Admins Posts: 4,638 Joined: 2-October 02 From: Champaign, IL Member No.: 3,374 |
I would apply the recoil from the long burst to the grenade fired after the long burst. I'm not sure if that's by the book, but it certainly makes sense to me.
I would argue yes, if only because it helps to limit the effectiveness of such a weapon. That being said, I have a house rule that allows grenade launchers that are an integral part of another weapon (like the Ares Alpha) to be fired with the skill of the base weapon, in this cause Automatics. But, as I said, that's only a house rule.
I don't allow them to, no. The targeting autosoft is the best you can do to give them extra dice in combat.
Bingo. Don't forget that the airburst link also makes the grenade explode in the same pass as its fired rather than in the same pass during the next phase.
I wouldn't allow it. I picture them as mobile gun platforms, basically a gun on stick attached to wheels (or treads) with the ability to adjust elevation and angle to aim. No way to attach a biopod or tripod to reduce recoil.
Not that I'm aware of.
Because the rules say they can't. Perhaps they're too large to be supported by the basic weapon mount in the main rulebook or the recoil is too much for the support strength of the mount and it would rip itself loose. Pick whatever reason you want for your games. That being said, Arsenal may include other forms of weapon mounts for all your vehicle customization needs.
I don't know of any penalties to running with an extended bipod or tripod. Jayne Cobb .... I mean Adam Baldwin .... does it repeatedly in Full Metal Jacket without too much difficulty it seems. As you indicate, I would apply at least a -1 if not the full -2 for Defender Prone for Dodge tests while firing a bi- or tripod weapon from a sitting or kneeling position. |
||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||
|
Oct 9 2007, 01:08 AM
Post
#4
|
|||||||||||||||
|
ghostrider Group: Retired Admins Posts: 4,196 Joined: 16-May 04 Member No.: 6,333 |
How I'd rule:
Yes, I'd assess the recoil penalty from the burst to the grenade shot, just as though you were to fire a long burst and then a single round or another burst. Likewise I would treat the grenade as a round being fired, and would assess a -1 to the following burst (of course accounting for RC).
Yes.
Nope.
I'd say no to a bipod or tripod being used, since the weapons are mounted, but I might look at giving them the effective RC of using them, since they are presumably fairly stable. Really I'd probably want to rule by drone type/size, and I'm lazy enough to let Arsenal come out before trying to do anything about it myself. I'm not that bothered by drones not getting RC.
Realistically it would depend on the size of the drone, size of the weapon, etc. I would think. Book wise and as far as I'm concerned, nope. Regular recoil mods.
Arsenal isn't out yet. :) What's stopping you from mounting them now? Just ignore that sentence if it means playing the way you want.
Rule that getting up from a sitting position takes the same simple action that standing up takes. The only weapon I've ever run with while the bipod was extended was a M-249 SAW, and it didn't really change anything. Was pretty much the same as running while carrying it with the tripod folded, except that when I dropped prone it was a hell of a lot quicker to set up and engage the target. A tripod IRL is an entirely different matter, and the ones I've been around are so damn heavy and unwieldy that the gunner doesn't even carry it himself. It should not be easy to pick up a tripod-mounted heavy weapon and jog around with it; if not because of the weight (we know how ridiculously strong SR characters can be) then because they're huge and would get in the way. I don't know how to address this without getting into the "but this is a game" argument, but I'd personally say that you're well within rights to rule that the player must take the complex action described in the rules for the Tripod to set up and tear down a tripod mounted weapon for movement (at least more than a few feet). That's just my take on it, I'm sure someone will be along to argue with me shortly. Here's what I'm talking about, btw: Bipods: http://www.harrisbipods.com/ MMG on bipod: http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/LAND-FORCES/...Images/0236.jpg HMG on a tripod: http://www.kmike.com/KWjpg/mghb.jpg And there are a couple of practical reasons for firing from the prone. For one, you're more accurate than when firing from a standing or kneeling position (speaking of the average person here, not SUPER TRAINED EXCEPTIONS TO THE RULE™). For another, you're less of a target. Hope some of that helps. If I didn't address something I don't have anything useful at the moment. edit: got rid of a joke that didn't come across like I intended edit edit: Fixed some typos. |
||||||||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||||||||
|
Oct 9 2007, 02:20 AM
Post
#5
|
|||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 398 Joined: 16-August 06 Member No.: 9,130 |
The M60 GPMG Adam Baldwin would have used, if the movie is historically accurate, is 23 pounds. Depending on the strength of the character this could be a considerable penalty, or not one at all. You also have to realize that these weapons are going to be considerably lighter than those of today. If the character has a smart-link I would allow the tripod or bipod to be retracted as a free action. They just have to make sure their arms and hands aren't in the way of the mechanism. Probably one of your best indicators would be to ask a soldier if they are hindered when they use the M249 SAW, which would be the equivalent of Adam Baldwin's M60 GPMG. Dashifen, major kudos for the Firefly reference. "The Hero of Canton" continues to play through my head. If you wanted to include this rule it would be a houserule. Currently, I don't see any need to limit machine guns in the way you are proposing. If you were to include this houserule I would think very seriously about this penalty in regards to high strength characters. NOTE: Adam Baldwin's version is a light configuration for the gun that uses a light bipod. Tripods are definitely heavy. For the same M60 referenced it would make the gun weigh in at 38 pounds (15 more pounds). |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Oct 9 2007, 02:32 AM
Post
#6
|
|||
|
ghostrider Group: Retired Admins Posts: 4,196 Joined: 16-May 04 Member No.: 6,333 |
Yup, and the 60 isn't even a "big" weapon. It was normally fielded on a bipod, rather than a full tripod (at least when being carried in a squad). The tripod that the .50 caliber Browning HMG was fielded on weighed ~44 pounds by itself. Probably didn't see a lot of "carrying" in most cases, but it does give you an idea of why you shouldn't be letting a character of average strength pick up a tripod-mounted HMG and go hauling ass across the battlefield. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Oct 9 2007, 02:39 AM
Post
#7
|
|
|
Technomancer Group: Retired Admins Posts: 4,638 Joined: 2-October 02 From: Champaign, IL Member No.: 3,374 |
Wow ... I've been totally picturing tripods wrong. Thanks for the reference, eidolon.
|
|
|
|
|
Oct 9 2007, 03:12 AM
Post
#8
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 385 Joined: 20-August 07 Member No.: 12,766 |
As a personal side-note, it's no secret that the ranged combat rules have some holes in terms of immersion, one of the worst being the complete lack of incentive for supported or prone firing.
|
|
|
|
|
Oct 9 2007, 03:19 AM
Post
#9
|
|||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 573 Joined: 17-September 07 Member No.: 13,319 |
You write tripod in both paragraphs, but I'm guessing you mean bipod on the M-229 SAW. Yeah, I sure hope that Arsenal includes a Vehicular Heavy Weapon Mount. The ruling on grenade and bullet fire also suggests a similar ruling if one fires an assault rifle or machine pistol single shot, then a short or long burst. I imagine that a grenade launch does more recoil than a standard bullet; for a full-detail-rules game I'd give grenade launchers and assault cannon 2 recoil for the single shot; most such weapons would have a shockpad, and the shooter benefits a bit from any other source of RC (eg high STR). Dashifen: would you also rule that a drone gets no bonus from a targeting laser? I'd say that having a red dot on the where-you'll-hit spot would be a plus for a drone, but YMMV. Possible houserule: metahumans firing from a stable position (prone, braced against firing slit, etc.) and wheeled drones *with their wheels locked* get +1 to attack dice pool and +1 RC. Simple action for a drone to lock/unlock its wheels. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Oct 9 2007, 03:19 AM
Post
#10
|
|
|
ghostrider Group: Retired Admins Posts: 4,196 Joined: 16-May 04 Member No.: 6,333 |
No sweat. Here's a few other good images:
.50 M2 HMG being used mounted on the deck of a ship: http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNUS_50cal...MG_Fife_pic.jpg As used by infantry: http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/m-...cal-dvic552.jpg M240 MMG mounted on a vehicle: http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/m-...240-dvic549.jpg same being fielded by infantry: http://images.military.com/EQGpics/EQG_WSAM240g_1.jpg M249 SAW LMG being used standing (with bipod extended no less ;)): http://www.army.mil/-images/2007/05/14/497...5-23-154617.jpg and from a foxhole: http://www.floridaguard.army.mil/assets/m-249.jpg |
|
|
|
|
Oct 9 2007, 03:26 AM
Post
#11
|
|
|
Running Target Group: Members Posts: 1,269 Joined: 18-September 06 Member No.: 9,421 |
If the grenade recoil is uncompensated I would guess it would be doubled since grenade launcher = heavy weapon.
Chris |
|
|
|
|
Oct 9 2007, 03:28 AM
Post
#12
|
|||||||
|
ghostrider Group: Retired Admins Posts: 4,196 Joined: 16-May 04 Member No.: 6,333 |
Hell. Yeah, and I also wrote M-229 instead of M-249. I'll fix it, thanks. :)
Yes. Any combination of fire modes. Every bullet (or in my ruling, other projectile) after the first fired in the same Phase adds a -1 recoil penalty.
The only underbarrel grenade launcher I have any experience with is the M-209, and honestly, it barely kicks, considering the size of the round (40mm). And I am and was harldy considered an overly "strong" individual. 6'1" in shoes and was about 195 at the time. The recoil was less of a pain than just switching mental "modes" from aiming the grenade launcher and going back to firing the rifle. (Was't a weapon I got to use much at all.) DJFarstar is right by SR though. It's a heavy weapon, so any uncompensated recoil from it would be doubled. If you fire the grenade first, good to go. Burst that eats up your RC and then a grenade? -2 just to fire it. |
||||||
|
|
|
||||||
|
Oct 9 2007, 03:30 AM
Post
#13
|
|
|
Creating a god with his own hands Group: Members Posts: 1,405 Joined: 30-September 02 From: 0:0:0:0:0:0:0:1 Member No.: 3,364 |
AFAIK, in WWII. the standard infantry MG team had three people:
One guy to carry the 30 cal M1919 machine gun. (31 lbs) One guy to carry ammo. (as much as possible) One guy to carry the tripod. (10lbs + more ammo) one guy with m60 = big improvement |
|
|
|
|
Oct 9 2007, 04:14 AM
Post
#14
|
|
|
Running Target Group: Members Posts: 1,269 Joined: 18-September 06 Member No.: 9,421 |
Heh, sweet, apparently I am DJ Farstar now. That sounds significantly more awesome than my actual name. Hmmm.... maybe I should change it.
Chris |
|
|
|
|
Oct 9 2007, 07:19 AM
Post
#15
|
|||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 573 Joined: 17-September 07 Member No.: 13,319 |
Would your experience suggest that the skill of properly aiming a bullet-firing weapon, and a grenade-lobbing weapon, are substantially different, even when they're on the same stock? Then again, in SR4, firing a hunting rifle and an assault rifle have no overlap of competency. I'd be open to a houserule that if you have Automatics, you can use it to fire Longarms with perhaps a -2 penalty, and vice versa... and if you have Longarms, you can fire an assault rifle in semi-auto mode, single shot per Simple Action, with no penalty at all, same for using Pistols to fire a machine pistol in semi-auto mode. I imagine that the difference lies in the grips - both hands together on a pistol, off-hand on foregrip with SMG or MP, off-hand on barrel shroud with AR; opinions from those who have more experience? |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Oct 9 2007, 01:28 PM
Post
#16
|
|||||||||||||||||||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 133 Joined: 18-August 03 From: Apopka, FL U.S.A. Member No.: 5,516 |
According to page 160 of the rules, firing a vehicle weapon counts as a complex action. I believe that ruling prevents you from firing both the grenade launcher and the assault rifle on the same action phase. This ruling is what I enforce for my players, and the way I play my rigger character.
First, the drone does not REQUIRE the targeting autosofts to fire the weapons, but they are helpful. Second, firing the weapons by hand requires both the automatics and heavy weapons skills. It's not spelled out in the rules, but I think the rule should also apply to the drone when using targeting autosofts. (There was an SR3 rule that allowed you to default to the weapon skill of the weapon to which the grenade launcher was mounted, but that rule no longer exists in SR4.)
There is nothing mentioned in the rules. We allow the bonus for a rigger controlling or rigging the drone, but don't allow it when the drone is firing on its own. The weapon on the drone would require a smartgun link, and the drone would require camera sensors with a smartlink installed. The thought is that the smartlink bonus is really there to help a metahuman mind process targeting information, but isn't helpful for a computer.
That is all.
Your logic is sound. A vehicle should be a more stable platform. However, currently there are no rules for providing bipod/tripod bonuses when a weapon is mounted on a drone.
None as written. Don't forget movement modifiers though.
Good question. Let's see what happens in November with Arsenal.
Remember you have to use the Run and Drop Prone free actions, the Ready Weapon, and Stand Up simple actions, and the Fire Mounted Weapon complex action. I think those actions limit the amount of running and shooting from a bipod/tripod that happens in the same action phase.
I tend to assume that the base dice pool your characters use for firing weapons takes into account that they have a good stance, and would remove dice if they had less sure footing. Adding dice can lead to power creep IMO. Robert (aka Spanner) |
||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||
|
Oct 9 2007, 02:34 PM
Post
#17
|
|||||||||
|
ghostrider Group: Retired Admins Posts: 4,196 Joined: 16-May 04 Member No.: 6,333 |
Damn. I blame beer and being up too late. :D
Yes, without a doubt. The two actions are 100% different outside of "pull the trigger". Different sights, different hand position, different technique.
You're basically talking about allowing defaulting to other skills. This is how it was done in 3rd edition. It makes sense in a "realism" kind of way, but remember that SR4 is designed differently, and you might be screwing with balance. I'd be loath to do this since there is already a defaulting mechanism in place.
Eh, an Ares Alpha in your hands isn't mounted on a vehicle, though. ;) It's not a bad house rule, I just don't view it the same way. |
||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||
|
Oct 9 2007, 03:02 PM
Post
#18
|
|||||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 133 Joined: 18-August 03 From: Apopka, FL U.S.A. Member No.: 5,516 |
Whoops! You know, I saw the other drone questions and made an unjustified mental leap. My apologies. A PERSON firing those weapons is a whole different ball of wax. Robert (aka Spanner) |
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
Oct 9 2007, 03:21 PM
Post
#19
|
|||
|
Dragon Group: Members Posts: 4,664 Joined: 21-September 04 From: Arvada, CO Member No.: 6,686 |
Yes, yes it does! SR4, 162, Drones and Gunnery, "Drones must have an autosoft appropriate to the weapon they are wielding in order to attack." |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Oct 9 2007, 07:20 PM
Post
#20
|
|||
|
Technomancer Group: Retired Admins Posts: 4,638 Joined: 2-October 02 From: Champaign, IL Member No.: 3,374 |
I don't see how a drone would know where the dot is as they don't have visual sensors, as I understand it. Thus, barring information to the contrary within this thread, I don't give drones a laser sight bonus either. They can perform a take aim action if they're instructed to fire carefully, but if you want to make a drone better at combat (outside suppression fire which is how I see them used most often), you better upgrade the Pilot and Autosofts or jump in and rig it. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Oct 9 2007, 07:49 PM
Post
#21
|
|
|
Target Group: Members Posts: 52 Joined: 12-June 07 Member No.: 11,895 |
I'll second pretty much everything Eidolon said.
The only thing I'd add is that if the person using the weapon with the bipod extended happens to be in particularly tight terrain, (like narrower than standard corridors or in a tightly-packed wearhouse), I might add an additional penalty for them when maneuvering the weapon around. |
|
|
|
|
Oct 9 2007, 08:08 PM
Post
#22
|
|||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 573 Joined: 17-September 07 Member No.: 13,319 |
That is a major question, and has come up in other threads. The Doberman comes with Clearsight pre-installed, and is marketed as a security drone. If it's blind, that might reduce its effectiveness. Some text indicates that most vehicles can do a simple "pilot self from location A to location B"; again, that'll be tough if they're blind. Optical/visual sensors are darn handy for current RL drones, and assuming the image-processing tech gets better in the next 70 years, it would be perverse not to use it. I'm thinking the rules writers did not have clarity or consensus on this question. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Oct 9 2007, 11:34 PM
Post
#23
|
|||||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 133 Joined: 18-August 03 From: Apopka, FL U.S.A. Member No.: 5,516 |
The FAQ addresses the missing sensor types issue. Robert (aka Spanner) |
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
Oct 10 2007, 12:26 AM
Post
#24
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 834 Joined: 30-June 03 Member No.: 4,832 |
to address the tripod on a drone, I disallow it. But, as a house rule in my games, ground drones are already considered tripods providing -6 RC. I'd rule air drones have no RC.
|
|
|
|
|
Oct 10 2007, 04:16 AM
Post
#25
|
|||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 573 Joined: 17-September 07 Member No.: 13,319 |
The FAQ refers to the capacity of various drones, but is silent on whether an off-the-shelf drone or vehicle really lacks *any* pre-installed senses, which strikes me as darn silly, and contradicts the bit about vehicles having basic capacity to drive themselves (unless that only means taking orders from GridGuide). |
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 25th April 2024 - 10:34 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.