The Smartlink Camera, Firing from cover, how do you handle it? Options

[DingoJones]

The smartlink comes with the camera and useing it you can fire from cover without exposing yourself to attack. just stick your gun around the corner and fire away!
My question is how do you guys handle this in your campaigns? I see it as being a problem becuase it will draw out combat and make combat a little less intertesting. So far I have told the players I'm not sure how to handle it yet and they don't seem to mind, realizing that it will A) give them a signifigant advantage and lead to uninteresting combat and B) that if everyone has one (their enemies) then comabt will not only change drastically but slow down considerably as ther is never really anyone to shoot at.
I am sitting around trying to figure out a way to avoiud these pitfalls, and can't come to a satisfactory answer. What I have come up with is that everyone will always be manuavering to get to a firing angle where their opponent doesn't have the cover, but again this draws things out and wouldn't really work all that well anyway (it's simple to find cover from approaching enemies in an urban setting, even for thugs and poorly trained Sec teams.

How has this issue been addressed in your games?

[HullBreach]

I haven't had it come up in-game, but have discussed it with a player (who brought up the fact that the new Land-Warrrior rigs the army is working on can do this) and we came to a few conclusions regarding it.

#1 - The smartlink conveys no bonuses whatsoever when being used in this fashion, as it isn't taking advantage of the users eyes in addition to its normal inputs.

#2 - Recoil is doubled. Only gas venting or 'chamber design' type recoil compensation counts. This is due to the akward angle the weapon must be held at. If its a heavy weapon, recoil is doubled again.

#3 - Progressively stiffer penalties should be assesed for firing at targets anywhere beyond close range, as the unstable nature of the users grip on the weapon would massively complicate aiming. I would go so far as to double the normal penalties for ranges.

Just my 2 cents.

[Prime Mover]

Current RL tech allows for this already with self correcting AR type image scopes. I let em do it if they want, can always out manuver or just plain over power there cover with spell or area effect weapons. Alway stressed cover as a life saver in combat. Nine times out of ten, players with forgo cover eventually to try somthing flashy.


Could see adding penalty for the awkward angles.

[Daier Mune]

just cuz they're firing from cover does not make them safe. bullets are incredibely destructive and will chew through just about anything. concrete walls included. grenades are also useful for getting people out of cover.

[HullBreach]

just cuz they're firing from cover does not make them safe. bullets are incredibely destructive and will chew through just about anything. concrete walls included. grenades are also useful for getting people out of cover.

You've actually got a good point here. A lot of what folks think would work as cover is next to useless. A good resource to demonstrate this is this website:
http://www.theboxotruth.com/

Particularly the subsection called "The Buick of Truth". I think many people will be surprised at just how much stuff a 9x19mm pistol round will go through, let alone what a cloud of shot from a 12 gauge actually does to a wall.

[Moon-Hawk]

Blind-fire: -6 (rationale: You can't see the target, your gun can)
Augmented Reality bonus (the gun cam image link): +3
Firing from cover: -1
Special consideration: Allow people to keep Agility rather than substituting Intuition, because it's not completely "blind"
Net result: a -4 penalty, comparable to a called shot or any other type of "trick shot", which is basically what this is.

I do not want cowering behind hard cover using guns as periscopes of doom to be standard procedure, therefore all other considerations be damned, I want a largish penalty. At the same time, I want it to be a valid, usable tactic under the right circumstances. I justify the penalty as above, and so far no one has argued.
It's not RAW or official, and as always YMMV.

[b1ffov3rfl0w]

I'd take a -3 or -4, sure, because much as I might want to shoot the other guy I do not want to be shot. But you'd better get more protection than whatever you think of as normal "firing from cover".