Vehicle Armor and You, Rules clarification Options

[Warlordtheft]

Stupid question time-but was just pondering something just because it may come up in the near futue. In the rules it states that if the power of the attack does not exceed the modified armor it does stun damage. Now vehicles cannot suffer stun damage. Therefore-if the power of the attack fails to exceed the armor of the vehicle, it does no damage.

Am I understanding this right?

[Neraph]

Stupid question time-but was just pondering something just because it may come up in the near futue. In the rules it states that if the power of the attack does not exceed the modified armor it does stun damage. Now vehicles cannot suffer stun damage. Therefore-if the power of the attack fails to exceed the armor of the vehicle, it does no damage.

Am I understanding this right?

Yes and no. You are correct in your observation of armor and damage, but vehicles' armor counts (effectively) as Hardened Armor, so if the modified damage of an attack does not exceed the modified armor of the vehicle (not including things like Reinforce or Armor), then the attack is unsuccessful, no roll needed. Check the section labeled Vehicle Armor in SR4, page 158.

[knasser]

Stupid question time-but was just pondering something just because it may come up in the near futue. In the rules it states that if the power of the attack does not exceed the modified armor it does stun damage. Now vehicles cannot suffer stun damage. Therefore-if the power of the attack fails to exceed the armor of the vehicle, it does no damage.

Am I understanding this right?

Vehicles actually have "Hardened Armour". If an attack's modified DV does not exceed the vehicles modified Armour, then it actually does no damage at all - "The attack fails", SR4A, pg. 167.

Hope that helps,

Khadim.

[Warlordtheft]

Thanks....trying to remember 500+ pages of rules and the occasional edition creep makes me miss somethings.

[Draco18s]

Of course, rules like this get silly when you start slamming armored trucks into walls.

(Damage to the vehicle? What damage?)

IIRC there is in fact one vehicle that can ram into itself at 30mph (each) and just bounce off.

[Kerrang]

IIRC there is in fact one vehicle that can ram into itself at 30mph (each) and just bounce off.

The SR equivalent of bumper cars?

[knasser]

Thanks....trying to remember 500+ pages of rules and the occasional edition creep makes me miss somethings.

You need the Toturi co-processor implant. Only handles crunch, though. You need the "Ancient History" Expert System for fluff.

[Draco18s]

The SR equivalent of bumper cars?

I just remember that it showed up in some thread about crashes, and how the drivers (and passengers, if any) would all be creamed in the resulting crash, but that the cars themselves wouldn't even have scratched paint.

[DireRadiant]

I just remember that it showed up in some thread about crashes, and how the drivers (and passengers, if any) would all be creamed in the resulting crash, but that the cars themselves wouldn't even have scratched paint.

I don't find this kind of result unreasonable. Well, except the paint. But there's no reason a vehicle can't be serviceable while the contents suffered damage.

[Malachi]

A common house rule to the vehicle damage/passenger damage thing is to have the passengers only take the damage the the vehicle took after its soak roll.

Also, I've been toying around with an idea (just in my head right now) of tweaking the Hardened Armor rules. Basically, my change would alter the wording to say:
"Hardened Armor automatically reduces the DV of an attack equal to its rating (modified by the AP of the attack)."

This would eliminate what I call the: *ping* *ping* KA-BOOM effect. Basically, when attacking something with a lot of hardened armor you usually end up doing no damage (no penetrating) or getting a butt-load of hits, penetrating the armor, and nuking the whole thing. If Hardened Armor automatically reduced the DV, then it would only have to resist the portion that was over and above the Hardened Armor value, rather than the full DV of the attack. Thoughts?

[knasser]

A common house rule to the vehicle damage/passenger damage thing is to have the passengers only take the damage the the vehicle took after its soak roll.

Also, I've been toying around with an idea (just in my head right now) of tweaking the Hardened Armor rules. Basically, my change would alter the wording to say:
"Hardened Armor automatically reduces the DV of an attack equal to its rating (modified by the AP of the attack)."

This would eliminate what I call the: *ping* *ping* KA-BOOM effect. Basically, when attacking something with a lot of hardened armor you usually end up doing no damage (no penetrating) or getting a butt-load of hits, penetrating the armor, and nuking the whole thing. If Hardened Armor automatically reduced the DV, then it would only have to resist the portion that was over and above the Hardened Armor value, rather than the full DV of the attack. Thoughts?

I'm kind of fine with the "ping ping boom" effect. I've never shot a car as it drives along, but I imagine the effect of each shot on the performance of the car would be either minimal (I put a bullet through a door, break a window or whatever) or critical (I put one in the engine or the battery or something). There would be cases where I merely impede the performance, I suppose, but I can't think of many. I blow out a tire, perhaps. Vehicles don't strike me as degrading under damage the same way people do. Certainly people have analogues to the critical hits on cars, but they also have a degrading zone where they are wounded and in pain, but still functioning. I just don't see what equivalent state can be inflicted on a car by bullets.

[Draco18s]

I don't find this kind of result unreasonable. Well, except the paint. But there's no reason a vehicle can't be serviceable while the contents suffered damage.

It's not that it's servicable, or even merely drivable, its that the vehicle took 0 boxes of damage, while the occupants took enough damage to nearly kill them.

After a 60 mph headon collision (each vehicle moving at 30 mph).

[Dragnar]

Also, I've been toying around with an idea (just in my head right now) of tweaking the Hardened Armor rules. Basically, my change would alter the wording to say:
"Hardened Armor automatically reduces the DV of an attack equal to its rating (modified by the AP of the attack)."

This would eliminate what I call the: *ping* *ping* KA-BOOM effect. Basically, when attacking something with a lot of hardened armor you usually end up doing no damage (no penetrating) or getting a butt-load of hits, penetrating the armor, and nuking the whole thing. If Hardened Armor automatically reduced the DV, then it would only have to resist the portion that was over and above the Hardened Armor value, rather than the full DV of the attack. Thoughts?

I use a similar house-rule (counting hardened armor as automatic hits, instead of rolling, which does basically the same), but I only use half its rating that way. I'd advise against using the full rating, otherwise spirits get even more difficult to kill than they already are and military vehicles are basically immune against most light AT-weaponry.

[Tymeaus Jalynsfe...]

You need the Toturi co-processor implant. Only handles crunch, though. You need the "Ancient History" Expert System for fluff.

That's great, I love it... I think that I will order me a set...

[Draco18s]

You need the Toturi co-processor implant. Only handles crunch, though. You need the "Ancient History" Expert System for fluff.

Where can I get one?

[knasser]

Where can I get one?

I believe that they will be detailed in Shadows of Latin America in Holostreets which is scheduled to appear soon.