IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

2 Pages V   1 2 >  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> Did I miss sumthin?, Change in Explosive Ammo?
TeOdio
post Apr 4 2008, 05:12 AM
Post #1


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 344
Joined: 5-January 05
From: Wherever this piece of meat rests.
Member No.: 6,937



I recently picked up Arsenal, and I noticed in the charts in the back of the book they list Explosive Ammo as +1 DV, no change in AP. They list EX Explosive as +1 DV, -1 AP. This is different from the BBB, which had Explosive at +1 DV -1 AP, and EX explosive as +2 DV, -2 AP. Is this a typo? Did they nerf the ammo? I've been running 4th ed since it came out, and while EX EX is pretty brutal, I didn't think it game breaking.
(IMG:style_emoticons/default/nuyen.gif) (IMG:style_emoticons/default/nuyen.gif) (IMG:style_emoticons/default/nuyen.gif)
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Crusher Bob
post Apr 4 2008, 05:16 AM
Post #2


Runner
******

Group: Members
Posts: 2,598
Joined: 15-March 03
From: Hong Kong
Member No.: 4,253



They nerfed explosive, EX explosive, gel, and flechette ammo. They woulda nerfed APDS too, but noticed that it sucked enough not to need nerfing.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
TeOdio
post Apr 4 2008, 05:36 AM
Post #3


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 344
Joined: 5-January 05
From: Wherever this piece of meat rests.
Member No.: 6,937



Thanks, I just went and checked out the Errata on the main site and noticed they added that since I last "updated" my BBB. My players are gonna miss that boo boo.
(IMG:style_emoticons/default/nuyen.gif) (IMG:style_emoticons/default/nuyen.gif) (IMG:style_emoticons/default/nuyen.gif)
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Larsine
post Apr 4 2008, 12:33 PM
Post #4


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 647
Joined: 9-September 03
From: Sorø, Denmark
Member No.: 5,604



If you don't finde the original rules gamebreaking, then there is no reason to change the rules.

Lars
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
HullBreach
post Apr 4 2008, 12:39 PM
Post #5


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 366
Joined: 9-August 06
From: Holiday Florida
Member No.: 9,055



I alwasy thought that the AP modifier on it was a little nuts. Given how its been described to work in the past, less like a micro-grenade or miniature cannon round and more like a very impressive explosively actuated expansion/fragmentation, the AP never made much sense to me.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
mike_the_fish
post Apr 4 2008, 05:24 PM
Post #6


Target
*

Group: Members
Posts: 80
Joined: 15-December 03
Member No.: 5,902



QUOTE (Crusher Bob @ Apr 4 2008, 12:16 AM) *
They nerfed explosive, EX explosive, gel, and flechette ammo. They woulda nerfed APDS too, but noticed that it sucked enough not to need nerfing.


Interesting note - APDS ammo (-4 AP mod) will do, on average, the same damage as EX Explosive (+1 Pow, -1 AP mod). I suppose the days of APDS sucking are now officially over (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif) Good stuff.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Cabral
post Apr 5 2008, 12:24 AM
Post #7


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 734
Joined: 30-August 05
Member No.: 7,646



+1 DV = -3 AP (on average)
So under older rules:
Explosive were equivelant to -4 AP
EX to -8 AP
Flechette to -4 AP
and Gel to -4 AP (based on Impact armor being 2 pts lower than Balistic on Average)

Post Errata (assuming I rember the changes correctly) it's:
Explosive: -3 AP
EX: -4 AP
Flechette: -1 AP
and Gel -0 AP (same assumption above)

Now, +1 DV is obviously better than -3 AP against poor or no armor but -3 AP is better against hardened armor.

If you're not dealing with hardened armor, a low AP versus a high armor can result in piling on penalties rather than taking down your foe. (This can be a GM tool if you want to hurt, but not kill your PCs) As a result, PCs desiring to be effective should always strive to deal stun damage because regardless of whether the DV is over or under the armor, it will always fill the same track. Kind GMs should always use lethal ammo, because you can switch tracks when things get hairy. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
krakjen
post Apr 5 2008, 01:41 AM
Post #8


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 280
Joined: 21-November 07
From: Shadows of France
Member No.: 14,312



Well, they don't suck, but they are not awesome either.
Versus an unarmored target they'll actually do less damage than an Ex-Ex and have an higher availability (but are less expensive)
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Larme
post Apr 5 2008, 01:47 AM
Post #9


Shooting Target
****

Group: Members
Posts: 1,653
Joined: 22-January 08
Member No.: 15,430



APDS are actually really useful ammo after the errata, specifically for punching through barriers and hardened armor. Under the original rules, there was no advantage at all to APDS.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Whipstitch
post Apr 5 2008, 01:55 AM
Post #10


Runner
******

Group: Members
Posts: 2,883
Joined: 16-December 06
Member No.: 10,386



Agreed. APDS went from "meh" to "I always keep an emergency magazine." If you're the classic mediocre marksman who carries nothing but a pistol for self-defense it can be a real life saver. It'd be a shame to get killed by a simple Steel Lynx with basic autosofts just because you can't score more than a net hit or two with your light pistol.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Werewindlefr
post Apr 5 2008, 01:58 AM
Post #11


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 321
Joined: 4-April 08
From: Detroit, MI
Member No.: 15,844



QUOTE (mike_the_fish @ Apr 4 2008, 01:24 PM) *
Interesting note - APDS ammo (-4 AP mod) will do, on average, the same damage as EX Explosive (+1 Pow, -1 AP mod). I suppose the days of APDS sucking are now officially over (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif) Good stuff.

Better than that: for the purpose of bypassing armor, APDS was just as good as EX (and did less damage). It is now way more efficient than EX, since it can bypass armors that have 2 more in ballistic rating.

But now, the question is: how do you kill a troll with an armor jacket, dermal plating 2, a helmet, and a ballistic shield with a gun? That's 18 armor. Sure, he wouldn't be able to wear all of that in the street without raising attention, but when storming a facility after a backdoor B&E, this isn't completely stupid.

You could do that with EX at creation, but now it seems imposible.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Whipstitch
post Apr 5 2008, 02:06 AM
Post #12


Runner
******

Group: Members
Posts: 2,883
Joined: 16-December 06
Member No.: 10,386



Don't forget the FFBA that's in Arsenal now, too. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)

Yeah, trolls properly using a ballistic shield are tough cookies, but that's kinda to be expected. In your example they'll make something like 5 or 6 hits vs. a 9DV -2AP shotgun blast (Base DV+ExEx+1 net hit), which means it'll likely take more than a shot or two to knock one unconscious, much less kill them. Just remember what we're talking about here though: You're essentially trying to take out the rough equivalent of a bear here, except it's a bear wearing body armor, a helmet and wielding a ballistic shield. It's going to take a few shots. It gets even crazier once you start adding cyberlimbs into the mix, but then of course, we're talking about an armored bear with metal limbs, so I don't really know what you expect there either.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Werewindlefr
post Apr 5 2008, 02:22 AM
Post #13


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 321
Joined: 4-April 08
From: Detroit, MI
Member No.: 15,844



QUOTE (Whipstitch @ Apr 4 2008, 10:06 PM) *
Don't forget the FFBA that's in Arsenal now, too. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)

There's PPP too, but neither of those 2 make sense in my opinion ("Oh, we designed a full body armor but we didn't put supplemental plates on the legs and arms even though it doesn't really make it more expensive, because we didn't feel like it! You have to add them yourselves"). And they just add to munchkin-factor, transforming a rookie runner into a tank that's almost invulnerable to anything but what was considered "naval damage" in SR3. They're so efficient that I don't see any security guy or runner not wearing them if he has the body - which means that people would not use any firearm smaller than vigorous/panther AC.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Whipstitch
post Apr 5 2008, 02:32 AM
Post #14


Runner
******

Group: Members
Posts: 2,883
Joined: 16-December 06
Member No.: 10,386



Why do you keep saying invulnerable? It's rather hard to stage bursts down to nothing even if they are stun without going the theoretical troll route, and it's pretty easy to nip that instinct in the bud. I'm willing to live with things being a li'l silly at most extreme high end if it makes things more playable at the low end. After all, in the case of Joe 2-5 body, things are in pretty good shape, and the trolls we're talking about in this case are practically walking bunkers with the level of gear/'ware you're talking about.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
mike_the_fish
post Apr 5 2008, 06:55 AM
Post #15


Target
*

Group: Members
Posts: 80
Joined: 15-December 03
Member No.: 5,902



Well against foes with Armor ratings of 4 or higher (IE - the vast majority of serious enemies), it's mathematically provable that APDS is exactly as effective as Ex-Explosive rounds. So the question of which ammo to go with basically comes down to situational elements

Ex-Explosive
--better against targets with an AV of 3 or less
--lower availability rating

APDS
--will rarely, if ever, have its damage converted from Physical to Stun
--better at punching through Barriers
--cheaper
--doesn't explode if you Crit Glitch (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)

Yep, I like me some APDS nowadays
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Daier Mune
post Apr 5 2008, 08:21 AM
Post #16


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 346
Joined: 17-January 08
Member No.: 15,341



QUOTE (Werewindlefr @ Apr 4 2008, 08:58 PM) *
But now, the question is: how do you kill a troll with an armor jacket, dermal plating 2, a helmet, and a ballistic shield with a gun? That's 18 armor. Sure, he wouldn't be able to wear all of that in the street without raising attention, but when storming a facility after a backdoor B&E, this isn't completely stupid.


Nerve gas, or a well placed manabolt, or a WP grenade. or four WP grenades.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Werewindlefr
post Apr 5 2008, 02:16 PM
Post #17


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 321
Joined: 4-April 08
From: Detroit, MI
Member No.: 15,844



QUOTE (mike_the_fish @ Apr 5 2008, 01:55 AM) *
Well against foes with Armor ratings of 4 or higher (IE - the vast majority of serious enemies), it's mathematically provable that APDS is exactly as effective as Ex-Explosive rounds.

It's not. With 1 net success, an Ares Predator punches through armor 9 with APDS, 7 with EX. APDS is way better since it doesn't get downgraded to stun as often.
QUOTE
in the case of Joe 2-5 body, things are in pretty good shape

Joe 4 body would have 11 armor without penalty, which means he only gets stun damage from a HMG, or an APDS loaded predator. Or a sniper rifle. Unless the guy shooting at him rolls well. I'm talking about a .50 browning here, the kind of weapon that rips supermuties to shreds in Fallout, so I don't think anything short to full body/SWAT/Militari armor OR a ballistic shield coupled with standard armor should stop that.

I'll allow FFBA to stack but with the standard rules for encumbrance, not their "encumbrance/2" rule. If it's so good nobody considers not getting one, then it's probably a bit too good. Makes me think of Dikote.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
MaxHunter
post Apr 5 2008, 03:00 PM
Post #18


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 718
Joined: 10-September 05
From: Montevideo, in the elusive shadows of Latin America
Member No.: 7,727



APDS is also quite expensive, particularly if you apply some markup for availability and it being F.

-"250 a clip!!!!! It's like killing guys by throwing nuyen at them!" (Simon, serbian sniper)

Cheers!!

Max
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Larme
post Apr 5 2008, 05:35 PM
Post #19


Shooting Target
****

Group: Members
Posts: 1,653
Joined: 22-January 08
Member No.: 15,430



QUOTE (Werewindlefr @ Apr 4 2008, 09:22 PM) *
And they just add to munchkin-factor, transforming a rookie runner into a tank that's almost invulnerable to anything but what was considered "naval damage" in SR3.


You think armor is too stackable in SR4? (IMG:style_emoticons/default/rotfl.gif) Even the worst of tank munchkins will get PASTED by weapons that are available in chargen. Take for instance a tank troll with 40 damage resistance dice (which I think is more than you can get starting out from chargen, if not more than you can get period). Now take a standard Assault Rifle firing a narrow full burst with ExEx ammo. The AR does 16P, -2AP. To resist that, you'd need, on average, (16 x 3) + 2 dice, or 48. As is, the ridiculous troll still takes a few boxes (assuming no staging up from net hits). All it takes to kill the tankiest tank that ever tanked is a couple mooks with assault rifles emptying clips into him. That's a lot, but it's a far cry from naval damage.

The only things that are really nigh invulnerable are high force spirits, since the biggest damage booster (full auto) doesn't affect their hardened armor. Though, of course, they have 0 armor against magical attacks, so it balances out.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Werewindlefr
post Apr 5 2008, 06:16 PM
Post #20


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 321
Joined: 4-April 08
From: Detroit, MI
Member No.: 15,844



QUOTE (Larme @ Apr 5 2008, 12:35 PM) *
You think armor is too stackable in SR4?
Not in vanilla. Yes, though, if we consider FFBA. Weapons are supposed to kill, not to stun, and a browing .50 not being able to pierce the armor that a body 4 character wears is just ridiculous.

QUOTE
(IMG:style_emoticons/default/rotfl.gif) Even the worst of tank munchkins will get PASTED by weapons that are available in chargen. Take for instance a tank troll with 40 damage resistance dice (which I think is more than you can get starting out from chargen, if not more than you can get period). Now take a standard Assault Rifle firing a narrow full burst with ExEx ammo. The AR does 16P, -2AP.


Stun damage. It's FAR from what I call pasted. Also, you're not firing at him with a light pistol here.
Against a body 4, armor 8 guy, Standard assault rifle ammo would be weak unless you aim well, and we're talking about armor without encumbrance here! An ares predator (a HEAVY pistol) would barely bruise that guy.

Now, a full auto with ExEx is not supposed to hit you (that's 7 uncompensated recoil on most AR). If it does, of course you're going to feel lots of pain... (if someone hits you with that, use edge. it's what it's here for.)
FFBA, with the curremnt rules would basically make anything short of an assault canon with AP rounds deal stun damage on a body 5 guy. That's just nonsensical. The world of shadowrun is deadly, characters can use or burn edge, have to use their brains and abilities to stay alive. If they want to take less damage, they (my players) can add additional armor layers, at the cost of agility and reaction. That's what some SWAT teams do nowadays, I don't see why low-body shadowrunners wouldn't sometimes sacrifice some agility for survivability.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Whipstitch
post Apr 5 2008, 09:45 PM
Post #21


Runner
******

Group: Members
Posts: 2,883
Joined: 16-December 06
Member No.: 10,386



Pistols are if anything overpowered in SR4; modern body armor that's available today stops pistol rounds rather effectively. As for the assault rifle thing, remember that any time you connect with a shot you already by definition have at least one net hit boosting your damage value, so it's only going to take two net hits with everyday ammo to start threatening physical against someone in an armored jacket, which is kind of a problem for the defender since it's really easy to have an 8+ firearm dicepool while it's rather difficult to have an 8+ ranged defense pool without eating into your initiative passes. I personally wish that AP was a little higher on many of the rifle and assault rifle type weapons, but as it stands now a Barret 121 will handily deal physical to the majority of targets, and knocking someone out and pushing them into physical overflow is often more effective than dealing physical anyway since heavily armored individuals tend to have higher Physical Tracks than Stun Tracks.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Werewindlefr
post Apr 5 2008, 10:21 PM
Post #22


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 321
Joined: 4-April 08
From: Detroit, MI
Member No.: 15,844



QUOTE (Whipstitch @ Apr 5 2008, 04:45 PM) *
Pistols are if anything overpowered in SR4; modern body armor that's available today stops pistol rounds rather effectively. As for the assault rifle thing, remember that any time you connect with a shot you already by definition have at least one net hit boosting your damage value, so it's only going to take two net hits with everyday ammo to start threatening physical against someone in an armored jacket, which is kind of a problem for the defender since it's really easy to have an 8+ firearm dicepool while it's rather difficult to have an 8+ ranged defense pool without eating into your initiative passes. I personally wish that AP was a little higher on many of the rifle and assault rifle type weapons, but as it stands now a Barret 121 will handily deal physical to the majority of targets, and knocking someone out and pushing them into physical overflow is often more effective than dealing physical anyway since heavily armored individuals tend to have higher Physical Tracks than Stun Tracks.

Modern *light, and partial body* armor stops Heavy pistols rounds efficiently? We're talking about armor that makes a desert eagle useless, and that's light armor, because armor vest isn't a SWAT suit (and armor jacket DOES stop any non-critical predator round). I wouldn't call guns overpowered with that kind of light armor. Remember that armor rating also takes into account the fact that some parts of the body are unprotected. It makes sense that an ares predator could deal lethal damage against a guy wearing an armor jacket and no helmet: that's called "Don't leave your brain matter on the ground".

The barret is a sniper rifle. It deals tremendous blows in vital organs, punching through armors as if it was paper. I'm not that much a specialist on sniper rifles, but I recall that they can do that kind of stuff.

Having 8 dice in an NPC dicepool means that the NPC is a professional. A tough minion. 8 die is a lot, fairly specialized runners have 14 dicepool in good conditions (except for munchkins, but I never think about them when doing calculations).
Now, a body 4 character is affraid to get shot by an AR EX burst? First of all, that won't be a damage soaking type, so it either means an agile type (and then, yes, you can use an action to dodge, if you even need to) or something else (and then you can always pile up armor and lose some agility. So what, it's not like you were a vital part of the gunfight anyway; that, or -1 agility won't change much, or you have magical/mystical armor on top of your jacket and you barely care.)
Or you could just grin and bear it. If you can't stand it, you shouldn't be in such a situation to begin with, so it shouldn't happen too often. When it happens, we're talking about a burst; that's 9 DV, and the damage reduction roll has 11 dice, so it goes back to 5-6 damage. Painful, but not deadly. But then again, shadowrun IS suppose to be about doing tough things against unforgiving adversaries, in unforgiving conditions.

And if the guy goes narrow full auto, he empties his dice pool because of recoil. That's -7 dice. Unless you're fighting a very tough guy, this is easy to dodge. If you fail your dodge... well, it's suppose to be lethal, isn't it? Maybe you picked the wrong fight (and even so, that's only 16 damage, it's totally possible to survive that without burning edge. Of course, you're unconscious and dying, but that's what your biotech specialist is for).

I think that things were relatively good with BBB, and that the only problem come from this stackable-with-only-half-normal-encumbrance-factor thing, which doesn't make much sense to me anyway. I'm just changing it to "stackable but with the normal helmet/shield rules"
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Tarantula
post Apr 5 2008, 10:34 PM
Post #23


Dragon
********

Group: Members
Posts: 4,664
Joined: 21-September 04
From: Arvada, CO
Member No.: 6,686



QUOTE (Larme @ Apr 5 2008, 11:35 AM) *
Take for instance a tank troll with 40 damage resistance dice (which I think is more than you can get starting out from chargen, if not more than you can get period).


Actually, I think 40 is the absolute maximum you can hit from chargen.

QUOTE (Werewindlefr @ Apr 5 2008, 04:21 PM) *
I think that things were relatively good with BBB, and that the only problem come from this stackable-with-only-half-normal-encumbrance-factor thing, which doesn't make much sense to me anyway. I'm just changing it to "stackable but with the normal helmet/shield rules"


You realize that does nothing to address the SecureTech PPP system right? Since that utilizes the standard helmet/shield rules?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Werewindlefr
post Apr 5 2008, 10:40 PM
Post #24


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 321
Joined: 4-April 08
From: Detroit, MI
Member No.: 15,844



QUOTE (Tarantula @ Apr 5 2008, 05:34 PM) *
You realize that does nothing to address the SecureTech PPP system right? Since that utilizes the standard helmet/shield rules?

Shield/Helmet rules aren't very clear. The way I read it, it does create encumbrance. It's just that it does stack in terms of counting armor.


BBB p149:
QUOTE
Note
that some armor items, like helmets
and shields, provide a modifi
er to the worn armor rating and
so do not count as stacked armor.


QUOTE
If a character is wearing multiple armor items,
add their ratings together before comparing to Body.


Helm/shields don't count as stacked armor but DO count as armor items. Different armor items add their armor ratings for encumbrance, unless stated otherwise.
PPP does aswell: it makes the armor heavier, less flexible, so do gel packs. That's how I run my games anyway.


Besides, my point is simple: if an item is clearly a better option than the others, with no significant drawback, then it becomes standard. PPP wouldn't even exist as an option if it didn't create encumbrance: it'd be standard issue. Same for FFBA: any 2+ character would get one since it'd make max armor raise to body*2+3. And then it's Dikote all over again.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Tarantula
post Apr 5 2008, 11:10 PM
Post #25


Dragon
********

Group: Members
Posts: 4,664
Joined: 21-September 04
From: Arvada, CO
Member No.: 6,686



Yes, shields and helmets do create encumbrance.

The downside PPP causes, is that it stacks with everything, like shields and helmets. This lets someone turn their basic armored clothing 4/0 into a 7/8 rating armor, that is still as low-key as armor clothing.

Or, this lets someone take their armor jacket of 8/6 and turn it into 11/14 armor (assuming they have the 7 body needed to not be encumbered, or aren't worried about a little encumbrance). While still not being a full body suit.

Lastly, this means the really big tank guys, once they can acquire SWAT armor (12/10) base, throwing on the PPP and the SWAT helmet get to 16/18, and thats WITHOUT a ballistic shield!

Yes, it can be encumbering, but if its a troll, chances are it won't be, and it will be the trolls who try to pile on the masses of armor like this.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

2 Pages V   1 2 >
Reply to this topicStart new topic

 



RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 29th March 2024 - 09:48 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.