Wondering about ruthenium, 12 scanners? Options Track this topic Email this topic Print this topic Download this topic Subscribe to this forum Display Modes Switch to: Outline Standard Switch to: Linear+

[Moon-Hawk]

So, you get yourself a full body suit of ruthenium and want to do the whole chameleon cloaking thing. Good. But it doesn't work without scanners. You have to get at least 4 scanners, for a +4 modifier for people shooting at you. Of course, if you want it to work better, you can have up to 12 scanners, each one will add another +1 to the TN. +12 TN for people to see/shoot/etc you.
Here's where the problem comes...
So I'm trying to shoot said individual and my GM tells me the TN is +12. Yikes. So I cover my eyes. Not the TN is only +8 for blind fire. WTF?

As a GM, I let my players put up to 12 scanners on their ruthenium suits, but I never let them have more than +8 for fully visual tests. Of course, ruthenium is only half effective against thermo, so I let the 12 scanner guy get +6 against that. If scanners are damaged or something, it stays at full effectiveness, etc. But I never let them get more than +8 (the blind fire modifier).

Mostly, I was just wondering if anyone else had thought of this, or handled it differently. It seems like it would make sense, but as far as I know it never mentions (under the ruthenium section) any limitation to the effectiveness.

[sidartha]

the +12 should only apply to perception tests to notice the player while sneaking. During combat when you are moving quickly(dodging, running, punching) the runthenium makes you more noticable. if a guard is trying to shoot at a sneaking char then I would say only the +8 blind fire mod applys, but not when the PC's shoot back

[Moon-Hawk]

I still don't see why the fibers should make you more stealthy than if you're completely invisible (which would only grant +8 ) Otherwise, the on-duty guard would have a better chance to notice you by closing his eyes than by looking for you.

[Pthgar]

Maybe because when you're looking at something you're relying on your vision which Ruthenium is design specifically to defeat (T# +12). In a blind fire cituation your vision isn't used so you rely on your other senses which can detect a ruthenium outfitted person, albeit badly (T# +8 ).

What would really be messed up is a runner kitted out with Ruthenium and a Stealth spell cast on them.

[Arethusa]

The blind fire situation is predicated on knowing that your oponent is present, but not being able to actually see him or her. Hence, there are other senses, as well as just general prediction. That said, I personally feel the blind fire penalty should be +10 or +12, but that's another debate entirely.

[Moon-Hawk]

Yes, heaven forbid a thread goes in a direction other than originally intended.
Let's talk about that.
Blind fire +8, too lenient? Discuss...

[Grey]

Yeah, I only allow a player to take a blind fire shot if they know the general area the target is. Maybe they heard foot steps, or saw the dust being distrubed on the dirty floor. But if they don't know the target is there, they don't even have a chance to shoot.

[Alania]

Ruthenium gets less effective the faster you're moving with it
so you can still use the 12 scanners for moving arround without penalty compared to 8 scanners.
..up to 8 meters/ turn more ..can make quite a difference.

[Zazen]

I just use +8 instead of +12 for the maximum modifier.

[John Campbell]

I also house-rule cap the modifier at +8. Makes no sense for it to be more effective than complete invisibility.

[BitBasher]

same here

[Grey]

What do you guys think of this?

They get max of +8, but with more than 8 scanners, they can move a little faster than normal without the system going haywire on them.

[Zazen]

Too much for me to keep track of. The only advantage of extra scanners is redundancy.

[Jason Farlander]

Where does it say that invisibility grants a +8 to sight based perception tests? It isnt in the spell description (pg 195, SR3), and it's not in the perception test modifiers table (pg 232, SR3). I've always ruled that if someone fails to resist when observing an invisible thing, that person is simply incapable of succeeding in a vision-based perception test to detect that thing.

I dont know about you, but I think that "impossible to detect visually" is a little better than "+12 TN to detect visually, unless the perciever has themographic vision")

Then again, I also rule that its impossible to detect someone visually when in total darkness without some sort of vision enhancement (which just makes sense).

Finally, I only allow the +8 TN to blind fire if the shooter has some reason to know/guess where the invisible person/thing is. So, even if you succeed at your base difficulty 16 (+ lighting and cover mods, + stealth test result) perception test against a person with ruthenium/12 image scanners, you still have a +8 blind fire TN (note that the description of ruthenium does not mention that the +12 applies to combat)

Considering all of this, I dont think the possibility of attaining a +12 perception TN from ruthenium is at all unreasonable.

[Teulisch]

something i just though of-
you use ruth, it covers what it covers. But you still have a shadow.

so if its late afternoon, and you have a shadow, ruth isnt going to stop anyone from seeing that shadow of you, and if your shadow is on a wall, you just started drawing attention.

[sidartha]

Who knows what runthenium covered shadowrunners lurk in the coridors of SK?...
THE SHADOW KNOWS

[darloth]

Not that i ever think this would work with such a thin material without some really weird science (Something even shadowrun miht have trouble with) but i think ruthenium, in shadowrun, is assumed to actually emit the exact same amount (And colour) of light on the other side as was detected at the front.

Thus, you don't cast a shadow. Thats how i work it anyway.
(And no, it is not armour against lasers. Anything that high power burns through anyway, but it probably will transmit torch-beams or similar... Could be fun to use for other applications if this is the case)

[BlackSmith]

well you get the +8 if you cant see the target AND you have to gues where he is. you simply cant just roll the dice with +8 to TN and hit. you have to gues where the target might be and then make the lucky shot, but GM would only know if you hit even close.

if you want to get a blind shot, you gues where he is, roll and GM simply looks if your shot is in the same line as the might-be target. if not, it is a miss what ever the roll came up.
if you want to shot a ruthenium suit holding 12 scanners you get a max +12 to TN but at least you know your shoting at the right direction thus there realy is a chance for hitting the right target.

[mfb]

where the heck did you people come up with the crazy idea that ruthenium adds its rating to the TN for ranged attacks? it certainly doesn't say anything like that in the rules, unless there's an errata that i'm not aware of. if you wanted to, you could allow a ruthenium-coated runner to gain the effects of camouflage--+1 TN, or +1 per 4 'points' of camo if you're feeling generous.

[Arethusa]

I don't know about you, but near-total invisibility seems like it'd make targetting me just a wee bit more difficult. And considering that the rules word it as a "perception modifier," it's a safe bet that it was intended to be applicable in combat.

[The Jopp]

Why not say that for ranged combat modifier you apply the base TN of 4+ for shooting and then add another +1 for every scanner above 4? This would be equal to the total of blind fire + base modifier for ruthenium.

Now, remember, this is a person looking like something out of the predator movie by creating an optical illusion by 'warping' (ok, not really but you get the point) light around itself so you would have serious problems hitting such a target.


Also, you should reduce the hit modifier in such a situation with Thermographic vision and Ultrasound vision since the first one would still se the heat signature of the target and another modifier for Ultrasound since it doesn't give a damn about ruthenium.

[Jason Farlander]

Nope. When encountering someone in a ruthenium suit, you make a perception test. This perception test covers all of the means by which you could sense the person - for most runners this would be vision and sound (rarely smell). If the character manages to generate at least one success at the TN determined by visual modifiers, the character's stealth test, and the modifiers provided by the ruthenium suit, he or she may shoot at the character without regard to the ruthenium suit's existance. If he or she fails to generate a success on vision based perception, but do manage to generate a success in some other means of perception,the character may fire at the target, but must add the +8 TN modifier for blind fire. If the character fails to generate any successes at all, he or she is completely unaware of the target. Its all pretty straightforward, methinks.

[The Jopp]

Agreed, sounds good since you get the BF mod anyway. That's a minimum of 12+ TN for a non smartlinked character. With a smartlink you'd have a 10+ to base TN that can be modified by vision mods i think.

[BlackSmith]

[Jason Farlander]

The +12 is never added to your ranged combat or spellcasting TN. its added to your perception test, and only your perception test, TN. if you succeed on your perception test, you have NO modifier to your attack roll unless some other modifier (cover, lighting, etc) applies. If you fail on your perception test you get the +8 for blind fire, assuming you hear or otherwise become aware of the target, and you CAN NOT cast spells at the cloaked target, because you fail to see the target.

The fact that you get a perception test to notice a ruthenium-cloaked target is indicative of the fact that the target is not perfectly camouflaged.