Thresholds and Net hits, Inspired by Eyeless Blonds Math queries. Options

[Slymoon]

The topics Eyeless posted had me rereading the threshold sections, and lo and behold I screwed up my face and wondered how I missed this.

If a shooter has 1 hit on a standard Threshold of 1, then he has 0 net hits. It is still a successful test (assuming defense has already rolled and so on).
I know many if not most of you are thinking, "no shit".
However, coming from SR3; 1 success in the same scenario would be 1 net success. ie not enough to stage up the damage but it was successful.

So based on the thresholds in SR4 it is possible and not uncommon to have a 0 net hit successful test.

Except in the case of Direct Combat spells, where you must have 1 Net hit to have a successful test. Thinking this through, on a Direct Combat spell, 100% unresisted has a base Threshold of 1. Correct? So 1 hit on the casting would yield 0 net hits, the spell would fail. Indeed any Direct Combat spell must have 2 hits unresisted to succeed as this would be 1 net hit.

So any caster that is to cast such spell type really must be throwing 6 dice for an average chance of getting the spell to even go off unresisted. (yes I know 6 dice is nothing, but think of background counts and other modifiers.) If such modifiers reduce your Spell Pool to less than 6 chances are you might as well not even try that Direct Combat spell.

And all the above is assuming no resistance.

The question is, aside from Direct Combat spells and Detection spell are there any other tests that must have 1 net hit (or 2 hits min. on a standard Threshold).

Requires 1 net hit:
Direct Combat spell
Detection spell

[samuelbeckett]

Thing to note with combat (including Direct Combat spells) is that those are all Opposed Tests. Opposed Tests do not have a Threshold, so any hits left are always Net Hits.

So shooting, stabbing and melting peoples brains cannot have a 0 Net Hit success - 0 hits are always a success for the defender.

[cryptoknight]

Thing to note with combat (including Direct Combat spells) is that those are all Opposed Tests. Opposed Tests do not have a Threshold, so any hits left at always Net Hits.

So shooting, stabbing and melting peoples brains cannot have a 0 Net Hit success - 0 hits are always a success for the defender.

So basically the base damages of all weapons are always automatically 1 higher than listed because if I roll 5 hits and your defense takes away 4 of them I have a net hit and damage is scaled by the next hits?

[samuelbeckett]

So basically the base damages of all weapons are always automatically 1 higher than listed because if I roll 5 hits and your defense takes away 4 of them I have a net hit and damage is scaled by the next hits?

Yup, any and all Net Hits for the attacker will scale damage values.

Edit: Edited to remove my stupid statement about Direct Combat spells - must be lack of coffee. They scale just like normal combat, you just can't scale them down as the resistance test is already made.

[cryptoknight]

Yup, any and all Net Hits for the attacker will scale damage values.

Edit: For standard combat of course - Direct Combat spells are all or nothing, they do not scale with extra successes.

Wow... I guess I need to retconn all the combat I've done in 4th.. we've been playing that the first success made it a hit.. i.e. base damage. And each subsequent success = +1 DV

[Daier Mune]

Wow... I guess I need to retconn all the combat I've done in 4th.. we've been playing that the first success made it a hit.. i.e. base damage. And each subsequent success = +1 DV

thats how we're playing it, since frankly the whole "minimal success and you're instantly doing better" doesn't make any sense.

[samuelbeckett]

thats how we're playing it, since frankly the whole "minimal success and you're instantly doing better" doesn't make any sense.

It isn't really a minimal success though - best way to look at it is that Opposed Tests are 'variable' Threshold, with the Threshold being the number of successes the opponent gets. So if they only get 1 success, and you get 2 successes, that is the same as getting 2 successes against a Threshold 1 Success Test. Both are 1 Net Hit, and both should scale. Otherwise you are gimping Opposed Tests.

Or you can achieve the same thing mechanically by continuing to do what you are doing, but up the DV of everything by 1 to compensate.

[Daier Mune]

if the number of hits needed to successfuly perform a task is one above what your opposition rolled, then that should be the base number from which success is measured, regardless of how many total sucesses were generated by the test.

i know this is not what RAW says, but i just can't accept that.

[Slymoon]

Thing to note with combat (including Direct Combat spells) is that those are all Opposed Tests. Opposed Tests do not have a Threshold, so any hits left are always Net Hits.

So shooting, stabbing and melting peoples brains cannot have a 0 Net Hit success - 0 hits are always a success for the defender.

Can you post a pg. number.
Trying to get this ironed out in ma' haid.

As per what I had read about the basics/ threshold and so on the scenarios would work like this:

attacker 3 hits
-defender 3 hits
-threshold 1
= -1 hits :failure

Attacker 3 hits
-defender 2 hits
-threshold 1
= 0 net hits :success
damage = base weapon DV

Attacker 3 hits
-defender 1 hit
-1 Threshold
= 1 net hit :success
damage = base weapon DV +1

[samuelbeckett]

if the number of hits needed to successfuly perform a task is one above what your opposition rolled, then that should be the base number from which success is measured, regardless of how many total sucesses were generated by the test.

i know this is not what RAW says, but i just can't accept that.

So effectively all Opposed Tests in your game have a Threshold of 1. I can see where you are coming from, but I have always assumed that DVs and other factors were already balanced in the game based on the current mechanic.

Given 3 dice advantage is effectively required per extra success, do you find your combats last longer, or does that missing +1 DV not make much of a difference?

[samuelbeckett]

Can you post a pg. number.
Trying to get this ironed out in ma' haid.

All in BBB:

p.57 Opposed Tests - 'Note that Thresholds are never applied to Opposed Tests'
p.139 Resolving Combat step 3. - 'Note the net hits (the number of hit's that exceed the defender's hits)'
p.140 Resolving Combat step 4. - 'Add the net hits scored to the base Damage Value of the attack; this is the modified Damage Value'
p.195 Direct Combat Spells - 'Handle these as an Opposed Test'
p.196 Damage Value - 'Any net hits scored on the Spellcasting Test increase the DV by 1 per net hit'

Hope this is useful with your ironing... (IMG:style_emoticons/default/grinbig.gif)

[cryptoknight]

So effectively all Opposed Tests in your game have a Threshold of 1. I can see where you are coming from, but I have always assumed that DVs and other factors were already balanced in the game based on the current mechanic.

Given 3 dice advantage is effectively required per extra success, do you find your combats last longer, or does that missing +1 DV not make much of a difference?

My combats generally make it between 2-3 combat turns.... if the DV was scaled up 1... I could see combat over in maybe 4 IPs tops.

[Slymoon]

Oof!

Alrighty, I'll reread those sections and get that straight. I need to have a concrete grasp of SR4 before I bring my players into it, they are already very apprehensive. I prefer a clear opinion of the system unbiased, no need to give them unclear rules as ammo.

[ToreadorVampire]

Er, yeah

There is no such thing as a "zero net hit success" in an opposed test in SR4 (except that optional rule about touch hits in melee, which I don't like or use since there is already a rule for touch attacks, it gives you +2 DP). But here's a different way of looking at if, for those like Daier Mune who say:

The whole "minimal success and you're instantly doing better" doesn't make any sense.

I can see where you're coming from, so try this way of thinking:

1. You shoot at someone and roll your firearms.
2. Your target rolls their reaction [+dodge]
3. You inflict damage equal to your net hits, so zero net hits = DV0 = you miss
4. If you get one more success than your opponent then you hit them and do DV1 against them, each additional hit beyond the first increases that DV by one per success
5. Now add the DV and AP from your weapon [and ammo] because a bigger weapon hits harder

So, rather than thinking of a weapon's damage code as a "base" think of it as a "bonus" to the DV1 you'd be doing them for actually hitting them. Since DV1 is the smallest damage in the game it's not "doing better".

[ToreadorVampire]

My combats generally make it between 2-3 combat turns.... if the DV was scaled up 1... I could see combat over in maybe 4 IPs tops.

This is typical of my combats by the way, but then again, I've only been going easy on the team since they are all new to SR at the moment.

Low-powered enemies (eg: Yakuza grunts with only one IP each, poor armour, dice pools of ~8 in automatics and no magical/hacker support) - the team of four runners have been clearing 13 of those away in four combat rounds (and taking some phys damage in return, but not life-threatening amounts).