[X] My Assistant

[Ravennus]

Hey again,

Yes, this has to do with my bio-adept concept character I posted about in the other thread... however, I wanted to keep the other topic on track in regards to adept powers. Also, I've had these other questions for a while now and they apply to various possible characters.


First off. Shields.
Now if I use a Ballistic Shield... I know it grants me a stacking 6/4 AP, and reduces my physical skill dice pools by -1. Fair enough.
However, I was wondering if it was possible for a large shield to actually grant you cover as well? I looked all through the books I have, and searched the forums and couldn't find any possible reference to this (though my search-fu on this forum is admittedly rusty).

I know that we are talking about a game here... but just curious... in real life, don't riot police and SWAT (among others) use those massive shields as mobile cover? I know that mechanically in SR4 this is somewhat represented by the additional AP.... but I'm wondering if there's any possible way to use a large enough shield as cover.
After all.... according to the rules, I could hide behind a couch or flip over a table and use that as cover.... why not a large ballistic shield that was specially designed to be used as cover and deflect bullets?

Not sure if this has been brought up before... if it has, my apologies! (and linkies appreciated) (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif)



Another Shield related question is this.... would it be possible to use a shield as an off-hand weapon for the TWF maneuver purposes? I'm aware that I'd likely have to buy and use Exotic Melee Weapon: Shields as a seperate skill and also get Ambidexterity to negate the -2 dice pool penatly...
But would this allow me to, say, get a Full Parry with the Shield, then get a normal attack with a main-hand weapon (or fist, foot, whatev).


On another TWF related note... and I'm sorry if this seems silly...
But is it possible to apply the TWF maneuver to unarmed attacks? Again, I'd likely need the Ambidexterity advantage to negate the -2 penalty for 'off-hand', but would this allow me to possibly get a full parry/block in the same IP as attacking unarmed in melee?


Thanks again for your help everyone!


Cheers,
Ravennus

[Ravennus]

Just checking in... still no responses. Wow, I'm surprised this has never come up! (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)


Here's my opinion thus far. Since this isn't explicitly covered in the rules (however possible, if you consider the shield a possible 'barrier' as well as armor), I've thought of a possible way to handle it.

How does this sound?
Normally the shield will apply partial cover (less than 50%), and so provide +2 dice to avoid attacks. However, the character must be able the wield the shield without obstruction and definitely be aware of any attacks against him. Surprise attacks can completely negate the cover, unless the attacker has no line of sight to the character other than facing the shield. For example, if someone was coming down a tight corridor with the shield ahead and walls and ceiling around them and the ambusher was further down the hallway facing them (not behind). The shield would still provide cover in that case even though the defender wasn't aware of the attacker initially.

As well, if (and only when) the character uses a full defense action can the shield count as full cover (50%+) and provide +4 extra dice to avoid attacks. However, under no circumstances would an attacker ever receive the penalty for shooting blind.... it's pretty obvious where the character is, and he probably could never get absolute 100% coverage (unless the shield was SO large that it would be utterly impractical to use in most or all circumstances).

Of course, the character utilizing the shield would still receive a -1 dice penalty to all physical actions (including attacks). The shield also adds to the characters armor encumbrance, which could potentially slow down all but the beefiest orcs and trolls who decided to wear a lot of other armor.


Sound fair?

[Brazilian_Shinob...]

I'm AFB right now, but I think that shields are treated just like armor, isn't it? I think this is covered in Arsenal. About the unarmed TWF, well, I think it works just like you said.

[cndblank]

First yes shields can be used in a two weapon combo.

You might even be able to make the case that you don't need the exotic weapon skill if you are only using the shield defensively.

Your suggestions look good.

I wouldn't count the armor of a shield against armor encumbrance when it is already giving you -1 to active skills.

Especially if you have even a rating one Shield weapon skill.


A large shield like that would also protect you from direct spell attacks.

[3278]

However, I was wondering if it was possible for a large shield to actually grant you cover as well?

I would rule that no, it does not. This isn't because people don't take cover behind riot shields - they do! - but because shields use the armor rules, and their benefits to you are granted through those mechanics. On the other hand, some fast talk with the GM may convince him that people don't know where, behind the shield, to aim, and that it's worth some degree of cover dice. I'd say no, others may say yes.

A large shield like that would also protect you from direct spell attacks.

I would rule that shields would not protect you from direct spell attacks. The argument that they should is based on "visibility," right? But if you actually have to see the skin of a person to target them, full-body armor of any sort will protect you from being targeted by direct [or area-effect] spells. Covering your body in paper would do the same.

The justification used in previous versions was that your aura - what's actually being targeted by the spells - extends beyond your body by a couple inches, extending through military body armor but not, say, a wall. [Unless it's a very thin wall!] This meant that, yes - and this was explicitly stated - if you were leaning against, say, the glass of your car, even if the windows were polarized, you could be targeted.

The alternative - that the aura stops at skin - means touch spells don't work through clothing. So we don't mind using the "three inch aura" rule. On the other hand, because your arm is against the inside of the shield, you could be targeted through it. Certainly it'd be possible to design a shield which extended further from your wielding arm, but at some distance, this is likely to prove unwieldy.

Details like this are seldom explicit in the rules - although the extension of auras beyond the skin may be in SR4 and I've missed/forgotten/not read it - and are thus best decided by GM ruling, or by yelling back and forth with people on Dumpshock about it. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)

[Tymeaus Jalynsfe...]

The justification used in previous versions was that your aura - what's actually being targeted by the spells - extends beyond your body by a couple inches, extending through military body armor but not, say, a wall. [Unless it's a very thin wall!] This meant that, yes - and this was explicitly stated - if you were leaning against, say, the glass of your car, even if the windows were polarized, you could be targeted.

The alternative - that the aura stops at skin - means touch spells don't work through clothing. So we don't mind using the "three inch aura" rule. On the other hand, because your arm is against the inside of the shield, you could be targeted through it. Certainly it'd be possible to design a shield which extended further from your wielding arm, but at some distance, this is likely to prove unwieldy.

Details like this are seldom explicit in the rules - although the extension of auras beyond the skin may be in SR4 and I've missed/forgotten/not read it - and are thus best decided by GM ruling, or by yelling back and forth with people on Dumpshock about it. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)

I have seen nothing about the Aura extending away from the skin to any extent; I have always interpreted it that the Aura was vibrant enough to be seen through minor intervening barriers (ie. Clothes and Armor)... 6 in One half a dozen in the other...

Keep the Faith

[hobgoblin]

iirc, aura extending beyond armor came up in a earlier edition as a explanation as to how one could cast spells on people in hardened military armor...

btw, the opening post makes me wonder what game its really being talked about...

[Tymeaus Jalynsfe...]

iirc, aura extending beyond armor came up in a earlier edition as a explanation as to how one could cast spells on people in hardened military armor...

btw, the opening post makes me wonder what game its really being talked about...

Ahhh... Must have missed that particular explanation...

Keep the Faith

[Dakka Dakka]

First off. Shields.
Now if I use a Ballistic Shield... I know it grants me a stacking 6/4 AP, and reduces my physical skill dice pools by -1. Fair enough.

But don't forget that the shield also adds its Armor Rating to Encumbrance.

Another Shield related question is this.... would it be possible to use a shield as an off-hand weapon for the TWF maneuver purposes? I'm aware that I'd likely have to buy and use Exotic Melee Weapon: Shields as a seperate skill and also get Ambidexterity to negate the -2 dice pool penatly...
But would this allow me to, say, get a Full Parry with the Shield, then get a normal attack with a main-hand weapon (or fist, foot, whatev).

That would work for melee weapons with reach 1 or less but not with unarmed attacks

On another TWF related note... and I'm sorry if this seems silly...
But is it possible to apply the TWF maneuver to unarmed attacks? Again, I'd likely need the Ambidexterity advantage to negate the -2 penalty for 'off-hand', but would this allow me to possibly get a full parry/block in the same IP as attacking unarmed in melee?

Nope. As above TWF only works with melee weapons of reach 1 or less.