Called "Shots" with melee weapons, any rules about this? Options

[Sponge]

Oh, great, now a knife can one-shot a Citymaster. Just what I needed to hear. And no, I'm not explaining it this time.

I would argue that a Citymaster doesn't have a weak spot in its armor big enough to fit a knife through, let alone fit a knife and enough of your body such that you could reach an occupant inside with the knife.

DS

[Cain]

That's rather the point. IMO, the called shot rules are absolutely absurd, and have several major design flaws that can completely break a game. You can legally pull off the strike, if only from a technical standpoint.

[nathanross]

Easily solved, Cain - just rule that you can't take optional modifiers to reduce your dicepool past 0.

You know, I think this is probably the best rule towards longshot rules that I have heard so far. Of course, it really depends on the City/Mobmaster, but Id say that its armor is at least in the 20's (I forget what it is by RAW). This is obvious since even runners can easily get this many soak dice. Also, even if a knife could somehow punch into a Citymaster, it is not a one hit, done deal. Not by a long shot. Can you deal it enough damage before you run out of Edge to actually destroy it?

[Sponge]

That's rather the point. IMO, the called shot rules are absolutely absurd, and have several major design flaws that can completely break a game. You can legally pull off the strike, if only from a technical standpoint.

I don't really want to rehash this argument - personally, I think it is sufficient that the rulebook explicitly leaves it up to GM discretion as to whether a called shot is possible or not.

DS

[Cain]

You know, I think this is probably the best rule towards longshot rules that I have heard so far. Of course, it really depends on the City/Mobmaster, but Id say that its armor is at least in the 20's (I forget what it is by RAW). This is obvious since even runners can easily get this many soak dice. Also, even if a knife could somehow punch into a Citymaster, it is not a one hit, done deal. Not by a long shot. Can you deal it enough damage before you run out of Edge to actually destroy it?

Since we're speaking theoretically, yes. A Citymaster has 20 armor, and a called shot can bypass this. A sufficiently strong metahuman (Str 8 or higher) with a combat axe could do enough damage to pull off the trick. A knife could do it with enough successes.

I don't really want to rehash this argument - personally, I think it is sufficient that the rulebook explicitly leaves it up to GM discretion as to whether a called shot is possible or not.

That's also not a good thing, IMO. The whole point of paying for a rulebook is so you don't have to pull rules out of your butt every time you turn around. And I'm trying to not get into this one as well.

[Mr. Unpronouncea...]

A rulebook, by its very finite nature, cannot cover all circumstances - that's why a GM is required.

What you're asking for is guaranteed to have all the limitations that universally get complained about in computer games - like not being able to step over a two inch tall rock in the path, or the ever popular evil dialogue choice = rude & stupid.

[Cain]

A rulebook, by its very finite nature, cannot cover all circumstances - that's why a GM is required.

What you're asking for is guaranteed to have all the limitations that universally get complained about in computer games - like not being able to step over a two inch tall rock in the path, or the ever popular evil dialogue choice = rude & stupid.

Actually, no There are many RPGs out there that do not require a GM, merely player collaboration. I only have limited experience with one, Capes, but I know of others. What I'm asking for is that the rules do their job of helping the GM and players make decisions, not toss them into the open and then demand one.

[Mr. Unpronouncea...]

Player-collaberation fills the same role as GM, IMO.

All I'm saying is, I'm not aware of very many* systems with significantly fewer gaping rule-holes than SR4 (I'm aware of systems where that claim is made, but evidence mitigates against it.)

*systems where there are very few rules at all tend to be the systems with the fewest gaps - but that's exactly opposite what you seem to be asking for.