IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

8 Pages V   1 2 3 > »   
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> Stun rounds vs vehicles
lodestar
post Dec 2 2003, 05:09 PM
Post #1


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 424
Joined: 11-May 02
From: Marauding the mighty North Saskatchewan
Member No.: 2,720



Something interesting came up in game play last night. A security dude mistakenly opened up on one of my drones with a weapon full of gel rounds. Is there any rules covering this? While it states somewhere that Body 0 vehicles are destroyed if they take any weapon damage what about Body 1 or 2? Especially flying ones it would seem that there might be some effect.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Bearclaw
post Dec 2 2003, 05:14 PM
Post #2


Shooting Target
****

Group: Members
Posts: 1,632
Joined: 26-February 02
From: Portland Oregon, USA
Member No.: 1,304



A quick and dirty answer, without knowing the exact situation would be, no effect.
I would probably add wound modifiers til the end of the round or something, just for the impact, but no actual damage.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
TinkerGnome
post Dec 2 2003, 05:17 PM
Post #3


Dragon
********

Group: Members
Posts: 4,138
Joined: 10-June 03
From: Tennessee
Member No.: 4,706



Hmm... in canon, there doesn't seem to be an effect. I'd make you take a crash test, though, for a flying drone if the "damage" would have caused knockback (using the drone's body, etc).
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Ol' Scratch
post Dec 2 2003, 05:18 PM
Post #4


Immortal Elf
**********

Group: Validating
Posts: 7,999
Joined: 26-February 02
Member No.: 1,890



It doesn't matter if you whack a car with a sword or a baseball bat, they're both going to do damage. The same is true of the various ammunition types; it doesn't matter if it's regular or gel rounds, they're still doing damage.

Though the amount of damage is going to be neglible in most cases due to the rules for standard weapons and vehicles, especially vehicles with armor. If you didn't have any armor on the vehicle... well, it was going to go down sooner or later on a run.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
TinkerGnome
post Dec 2 2003, 05:19 PM
Post #5


Dragon
********

Group: Members
Posts: 4,138
Joined: 10-June 03
From: Tennessee
Member No.: 4,706



QUOTE (Doctor Funkenstein)
It doesn't matter if you whack a car with a sword or a baseball bat, they're both going to do damage.

Gel rounds only do stun damage, though.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
moosegod
post Dec 2 2003, 05:26 PM
Post #6


Running Target
***

Group: Members
Posts: 1,047
Joined: 12-November 03
From: Perilously close to the Sioux Nation.
Member No.: 5,818



I'd say do the suggested knockback rules. Maybe damage on a really good roll.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Traks
post Dec 2 2003, 05:29 PM
Post #7


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 226
Joined: 4-June 03
Member No.: 4,685



Still I agree about kinetic energy. Also you could make some body test to see if sensors were hit or clogged with gel.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Ol' Scratch
post Dec 2 2003, 05:30 PM
Post #8


Immortal Elf
**********

Group: Validating
Posts: 7,999
Joined: 26-February 02
Member No.: 1,890



QUOTE (TinkerGnome)
QUOTE (Doctor Funkenstein @ Dec 2 2003, 01:18 PM)
It doesn't matter if you whack a car with a sword or a baseball bat, they're both going to do damage.

Gel rounds only do stun damage, though.

So do baseball bats. What's your point?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Spookymonster
post Dec 2 2003, 05:31 PM
Post #9


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 639
Joined: 22-April 02
Member No.: 2,638



QUOTE (TinkerGnome @ Dec 2 2003, 01:19 PM)
QUOTE (Doctor Funkenstein @ Dec 2 2003, 01:18 PM)
It doesn't matter if you whack a car with a sword or a baseball bat, they're both going to do damage.

Gel rounds only do stun damage, though.

And where do you apply Stun damage when you've got no room on your stun monitor? ;)
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Cray74
post Dec 2 2003, 05:32 PM
Post #10


Running Target
***

Group: Members
Posts: 1,428
Joined: 9-June 02
Member No.: 2,860



QUOTE (Doctor Funkenstein)
QUOTE (TinkerGnome @ Dec 2 2003, 11:19 AM)
QUOTE (Doctor Funkenstein @ Dec 2 2003, 01:18 PM)
It doesn't matter if you whack a car with a sword or a baseball bat, they're both going to do damage.

Gel rounds only do stun damage, though.

So do baseball bats. What's your point?

What are the rules for stun damage attacks to vehicles?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Ol' Scratch
post Dec 2 2003, 05:35 PM
Post #11


Immortal Elf
**********

Group: Validating
Posts: 7,999
Joined: 26-February 02
Member No.: 1,890



The Condition Monitor. It makes no distinction between Physical or Stun damage because both are equally effective against a vehicle. Vehicles are not humans; it doesn't matter if you're smashing them or puncturing them, they both have the same end effect. You'll also note that vehicles don't have different Ballistic/Impact ratings.

The condition is up to you to find a rule that states that Stun damage is ignored, not me to find one where it states that it's not.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
TinkerGnome
post Dec 2 2003, 05:35 PM
Post #12


Dragon
********

Group: Members
Posts: 4,138
Joined: 10-June 03
From: Tennessee
Member No.: 4,706



QUOTE (Spookymonster @ Dec 2 2003, 01:31 PM)
QUOTE (TinkerGnome @ Dec 2 2003, 01:19 PM)
QUOTE (Doctor Funkenstein @ Dec 2 2003, 01:18 PM)
It doesn't matter if you whack a car with a sword or a baseball bat, they're both going to do damage.

Gel rounds only do stun damage, though.

And where do you apply Stun damage when you've got no room on your stun monitor? ;)

Eh? If you want to get technical:

QUOTE (SR3 @ p145)
Vehicles do not take stun damage

So nowhere.

I'd let a baseball bat or gel round destroy a body 0 drone but not much else. A crash test would probably be involved, too, for moving drones (that would have taken damage only).

[edit] To make that more sensical, if a vehicle/drone would have taken damage from the attack (had it not been stun) after applying body modifiers and armor and rolling damage resistance, I'd make it take a crash test. Generally, the only things you'll see hitting that category are body 2 or less vehicles and drones. Joe Troll would need a strength of 19 to even have a hope of making a citymaster budge, for instance (and even then, it'd be resisting 2L with its body dice). [/edit]
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Ol' Scratch
post Dec 2 2003, 05:37 PM
Post #13


Immortal Elf
**********

Group: Validating
Posts: 7,999
Joined: 26-February 02
Member No.: 1,890



I stand corrected then.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Zazen
post Dec 2 2003, 05:43 PM
Post #14


Shooting Target
****

Group: Members
Posts: 1,685
Joined: 17-August 02
Member No.: 3,123



I'll chime in with "no effect".

It might damage a glass lens or other vulnerable sub-part if they call a shot.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
BitBasher
post Dec 2 2003, 05:43 PM
Post #15


Traumatizing players since 1992
******

Group: Dumpshocked
Posts: 3,282
Joined: 26-February 02
From: Las Vegas, NV
Member No.: 220



Also vehicles and drones do not suffer knockback, knockback specifically applies to characters.

You do not slide a vehicle a meter sideways by shooting it.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Spookymonster
post Dec 2 2003, 05:43 PM
Post #16


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 639
Joined: 22-April 02
Member No.: 2,638



QUOTE (Doctor Funkenstein)
The Condition Monitor. It makes no distinction between Physical or Stun damage because both are equally effective against a vehicle. Vehicles are not humans; it doesn't matter if you're smashing them or puncturing them, they both have the same end effect. You'll also note that vehicles don't have different Ballistic/Impact ratings.

The condition is up to you to find a rule that states that Stun damage is ignored, not me to find one where it states that it's not.

Actually, I was concurring with your argument, not TinkerGnome's. My point was that just because vehicles don't have stun monitors doesn't mean they ignore stun damage. Rather, the stun damage to a vehicle is treated just like overflow stun damage to a living creature, i.e., apply it to the physical monitor.

As to TinkerGnome's quote:
QUOTE
Vehicles do not take stun damage

I'd be interested in seeing what the rest of that paragraph has to say as well (don't have my books here with me at work, unfortunately :().
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Zazen
post Dec 2 2003, 05:52 PM
Post #17


Shooting Target
****

Group: Members
Posts: 1,685
Joined: 17-August 02
Member No.: 3,123



QUOTE (BitBasher)
Also vehicles and drones do not suffer knockback, knockback specifically applies to characters.

You do not slide a vehicle a meter sideways by shooting it.

But if it's in the air, it'll move at least slightly. I think opening up on a small flying drone with a full-auto burst of gel rounds should be enough to knock it into a nearby wall or something. I wouldn't say it's out of the question, realism-wise.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
TinkerGnome
post Dec 2 2003, 06:02 PM
Post #18


Dragon
********

Group: Members
Posts: 4,138
Joined: 10-June 03
From: Tennessee
Member No.: 4,706



QUOTE (Spookymonster)
QUOTE
Vehicles do not take stun damage

I'd be interested in seeing what the rest of that paragraph has to say as well (don't have my books here with me at work, unfortunately :().

It's not helpful, really, one way or another, but since you ask:

QUOTE (SR3 @ p145)
Vehicle Damage
Condition Monitors are used to track damage to vehicles, in the same way as tracking damage to characters.  Vehicles do not take stun damage, so they have only a physical damage track (see the Vehicle Condition Monitor). Vehicle damage may be Light, Moderate, Serious, or Destroyed (equivalent to Deadly).  Vehicles receive target number modifiers, Initiative penalties and Speed Rating reductions based on their damage status, as shown on the Vehicle Damage Modifiers Table.

I do want to note that I'm not making an argument for crash tests in canon. It'd be a house rule.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Ol' Scratch
post Dec 2 2003, 06:05 PM
Post #19


Immortal Elf
**********

Group: Validating
Posts: 7,999
Joined: 26-February 02
Member No.: 1,890



It is still easy to interpret it the way I have in my games. Sure, they don't take stun damage because they have nothing to stun, but that doesn't mean Stun damage (notice the change in capitalization) doesn't affect it. The vehicle just takes it as regular damage.

But I understand others who might choose to ignore it. It's just how I prefer to see it.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
CoalHeart
post Dec 2 2003, 06:07 PM
Post #20


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 280
Joined: 22-October 03
Member No.: 5,757



Vehicles don't take stun damage at all. They ignore it completely. Rather oddly in my opinon.

I'd say if your car takes D stun from a gel round apply a L wound to the car.

A gel round would break a window or dent a panel, but it wouldn't penetrate the vheical and actually harm something important unless you had a gaping hole in the armor already :)
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ThatSzechuan
post Dec 2 2003, 06:14 PM
Post #21


Target
*

Group: Members
Posts: 58
Joined: 4-September 03
Member No.: 5,581



Agreed. It's hard to bruise a car.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
TinkerGnome
post Dec 2 2003, 06:16 PM
Post #22


Dragon
********

Group: Members
Posts: 4,138
Joined: 10-June 03
From: Tennessee
Member No.: 4,706



Which is why I'd probably not do real damage to a vehicle from stun rounds, but would likely call for a crash test in certain situations. Take a guy on a motorcycle that gets nailed with a gel round. Does the motorcycle break down (well, realisticly, it might, but probably not)? It's more likely that the guy on the motorcycle gets knocked to the side a bit as his vehicle takes the impact. The same thing for flying drones.

Thus the crash test to see if the sudden jerk sends them into a wall, etc.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
BitBasher
post Dec 2 2003, 06:46 PM
Post #23


Traumatizing players since 1992
******

Group: Dumpshocked
Posts: 3,282
Joined: 26-February 02
From: Las Vegas, NV
Member No.: 220



QUOTE
Thus the crash test to see if the sudden jerk sends them into a wall, etc.
The kinetic energy from that is negligable. It's roughly the same as the recoul felt by the person firing the gun. That's not a sudden jerk at all, especually to a drobe that probably weights a hundred kilos or so. That's like saying they should roll a crash test from the recoil of firing a heavy pistol on a weapon mount without any recoil comp.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Zazen
post Dec 2 2003, 07:05 PM
Post #24


Shooting Target
****

Group: Members
Posts: 1,685
Joined: 17-August 02
Member No.: 3,123



QUOTE (BitBasher)
The kinetic energy from that is negligable. It's roughly the same as the recoul felt by the person firing the gun. That's not a sudden jerk at all, especually to a drobe that probably weights a hundred kilos or so.

Whereas a character that weighs a hundred kilos or so can potentially be knocked back several meters. :P
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Dende
post Dec 2 2003, 08:24 PM
Post #25


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 124
Joined: 21-November 03
Member No.: 5,837



The way I see it...if you stage up a baseball bat or gel round shot high enough, you will do REAL damage anyway. So why worry about anything else. If the car takes physical, viola...if you didn't stage it up far enough, then the shot sucked...the bat didn't hit hard enough...etc.

Otherwise I would assume only cosmetic damage, that gel may be bad for paint, maybe a mirror knocked off, but nothing worth noting short of atmosphere.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

8 Pages V   1 2 3 > » 
Reply to this topicStart new topic

 



RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 28th March 2024 - 05:56 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.