Availability house rules, What do you use? If any? Options

[Mordinvan]

I'm beginning to see a pattern here. Social infils never take a wrong turn, characters roll through any opposition with heavy weapons and 20 dice or armor.

Our leg work is shall I say rather extensive, and usually involves a mage mind scanning several people of interest who we're going to be coming across during the infiltration and one or two who are likely security experts on that building in particular, and becoming one of them, then using the alter memory spell to let the target know most of the stuff the actual infiltrator did during his day at the office so he never suspects anything happened. Sometimes we are more thorough and may get hired by and work at the facility for some period of time getting to know it before we actually get what we were sent for. Our weapons tend not to actually be that heavy, they're shortened bullpupped assault rifles, or a similar treatment given to a spaz 12 or an AA-12 shotgun, often with ex, or similar ammo. I think I used a MAW once, and it was more to open a hole in a wall because a ship we were on was sinking, and I didn't like the idea of being trapped below decks. As far as armor goes the numbers I'm bringing up are in general rather doable, using the custom fit rules that allow for armor 3X body, you can get even better.

[Smokeskin]

First of all, extraterritoriality might definitively be the case. Runners often operate against the big Megas.
And even if not - forbidden items are forbidden for normal citizens. You can't get a personal licence for plastic explosives, but a demolition company could certainly get some sort of certificate or license for using such. So could any other legitimiate company for legitimate reasons. Lone Star will have access to heavy weapons if need be, and they don't even have extraterritoriality, at least not in Seattle.

That said maybe small time security companies won't have access to APDS, machineguns, etc. In which case, the runners probably won't have much difficulty getting past them.

Also, against the average shadowrunner with heavy armor (not going low-key on social infiltration missions), Stick n Shock is much better than Flechette, and cheaper. It also means they don't really need assault rifles, smgs and machine pistols will do the same damage.

F legality applies to companies too imo. I see no reason why demolition companies shouldn't do with commercial explosives - if something above that was needed, I see it as a special dispensation for a specific job, not a general license to get plastic explosives.

I also normally don't have corporations or governements use explosive ammunition even with extraterritoriality, since it can misfire. Criminals who don't care much about risk, they do. But there's no way something like that would pass army requirements, and corporations probably feel the same. Sometimes they might give their guards unsafe gear to boost their effectiveness, but there's still the risk of failure at the worst time compared to the honestly marginal benefit of it, and your guards might be reluctant to fire it.

Stick-n-shock is very good in weak weapons by RAW, but I houseruled it to weapon DV-1. I don't think I'd have them use Stick-n-shock anyway, security companies place greater emphasis on deterrance, and the risk of getting shocked just doesn't deter attackers anywhere near as much as the risk of death.

[Ascalaphus]

oh...

@friendofthedork - perhaps you should try having a larger number of baddies and a more dynamic situation so that if one guy is really good at combat he can shine while everyone else has to do something themselfs even if its just self defense. I say this as a player who has gotten very annoyed at DMs for imposing a wide myriad of restrictions in an attempt to force me to make a char that would be hard pressed to take on a single guard or squad of guards.

Have you actually experienced this? We had a Vampire campaign with one combat monster character. He took down three werewolves in a single round that the rest of us wouldn't dare face if it was two of us to one werewolf.


The problem with big gaps in combat power, is that anything that challenges the powerful character, would insta-kill the rest of the party. Anything they can handle, doesn't challenge the combat monster.

[Larme]

Have you actually experienced this? We had a Vampire campaign with one combat monster character. He took down three werewolves in a single round that the rest of us wouldn't dare face if it was two of us to one werewolf.


The problem with big gaps in combat power, is that anything that challenges the powerful character, would insta-kill the rest of the party. Anything they can handle, doesn't challenge the combat monster.

Of course, if most of the characters aren't that interested in combat, you could try missions where combat is not the sole defining feature... In fact, ideally, a Shadowrun team never gets noticed unless everything goes wrong. Most of the team should be focused on getting somewhere without being seen. Then, if they screw up, Mr. Killington can swing into action. Nobody complains if the hacker handles all the matrix or the mage handles all the magic. Why not let the samurai handle all (or most of) the combat, when it happens? After all, a team that isn't composed entirely of streetsams wouldn't get sent on pure combat jobs. Making combat the endpoint of all runs is common in my experience, but it's not necessarily the best way to play when you don't have a totally combat oriented party.

The problem arises when you've got one really good combat character, and a bunch of really bad combat characters. The bad characters can't do anything except combat, and they do it badly. THEN you have a problem, because the combat monster outshines them. The solution to that is to a) help them improve their sheets before the game starts, or b) tone down the combat monster's sheet. There's no way to house rule yourself out of a power imbalance. Set a lower BP level, or limit availability, and you still have a power gamer making the rockingest sheet he possibly can, and you still have non power gamers flushing their BP down the crapper on fluff items. A power imbalance is only going to get corrected by hand, by the GM coming and saying "this is the power level we're adhering to." I know there are people on here who think that the GM telling players what to do is akin to murder, but that's how the game is set up. It relies on the GM to be involved. It's not a video game where you pick up a controller and the system handles everything. If you want a particular outcome, you have to program it manually.

[FriendoftheDork]

I think that was my point. No matter what gear you have, enough mooks with assault rifles will kill you dead. And the GM isn't limited to sending mooks with assault rifles, the GM can send in the Red Samurai or Tir Ghosts if he wants. A platoon of them will kill ANY running team, unless there's something really asymmetrical about the engagement (i.e. runners have a tank and bad guys have no anti-tank weapons).

I basically disagree with "no matter what gear you have". .. it always matters, but sometimes it is not enough.

That's one thing I love about SR4. In SR3, wearing reasonably good armor made you almost immune to light pistol fire, when it wasn't fired by a pistols master. In SR4, you take cover, and you take it NOW! If you don't have cover, you're going home with bruises (or in a box).

But yeah we're both saying the same thing in this regard. My point was, the GM can always win no matter the power of the players, and it doesn't require sending in an army of prime runners. Enough badguys will take down anyone.

If that was your point, then I agree. Not that I'm gunning for the "win." I want to challenge the players and make combat seem dangerous, not kill off their characters, or at least not often. Limited access to gear can help increase the challenge and make the players feel they're gradually improving their abilites and resources.

Noob is a pejorative term, what I mean is people who aren't powergaming. The point is, if someone wants to play Nerfenstien the sample character, everyone needs to match Nerfenstien's power level. Either that, or he's got to improve his sheet. Otherwise you've got two problems: A) The team makes no sense, because you've got a badass running with a bunch of mediocres; and B) It's impossible for the GM to set an appropriate threat level.

Just to be clear: All my players are noobs, as in newbies. They still far behind unlocking the mysteries of Shadowrun and creating broken character with 30+ dice pools. Still some are a bit better or concerned with making effective characters than others. Mostly, I let them, but I want to keep them in check as well so the power doesen't spiral out of control. Skills and abilities are very easy to keep a check on, but the myriad of equipment in the books makes it harder.

By a soft cap, I mean you're capping the availability runners can start with, but it's a cap they can pierce after play starts. Play long enough, and the cap will cease to matter. And the powergamer will still end up outstripping everyone else, because he started off with superior pools. All he lacked to begin with was the gear. Once he gets the gear he needs, your headache is just as bad as it would have been.

My cap isn't set in stone either - I fully expect the runners to get access to militairy grade equipment and SOTA gear - but not right away and not with a toss of the dice - and also bunch of karma to complement it (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

Well that's a perfect example of something I've long said about house rules: the more you tweak, the bigger mess you make. It's simply not feasible for anyone who's not a full time professional game designer to re-create a system, or even part of a system, so it fixes all targeted flaws without creating new ones to replace them. Life is too short. Instead of trying to create a complicated solution, look for a simple one that changes as little as possible.

Not to brag, but with my experience I could probably be a professional game designer... too bad the jobs offered are in short supply. Also, I like tweakling game systems (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif) But yeah I don't want to do a total redesign as it would take too much time and offer too little improvement. I think the SR system is pretty good as it is. Not 100% realistic, and a bit more complex and slow than it could be, but overall very good.
The availability rules is something I don't like at all though, so that's why I turned to you guys rather than sitting alone making my own system. Also, I want to keep a system of availability numbers, R and F rated items, etc. Just by these posts I alreadt got a much better notion on what to do and how to do it, although a some things are undecided. Changes I'm pretty certain I will include is:

1. Skill change from Negotiation to Etiquette
2. Implementation of SR4a rules on extended tests.
3. Require help from contact or knowledge skill test to get certain black-market items.

I think the real thing to do if you want to cap starting power is to impose a dice pool cap. The gear really doesn't matter. What matters is having 24 dice. Give me 24 dice and I can take down anyone, even if I'm stuck with an AK-97 instead of an Alpha. You can even impose a hard cap, like a maximum of 20 dice for all tests. That is a very simple solution that places a definite limit on power. It's not like an availability fix. Your fix covers over the problem, but play long enough, and it will no longer have the desired effect. Even if gear is more rare, given enough time, the players who want to powergame will end up with the powerful gear.

I'm already considering the 20 dice pool cap. For actions such as shooting, dodging, hacking etc. it is fine and only applicable when a player has really done some min-maxing usally requiring super gear.

I dunno, it's hard to get up in arms about APDS. It's not even that great. The thing is, each armor die is only 1/3 as valuable as each DV, because each +1 DV requires 3 armor dice to soak. When you shoot someone with APDS' -4 AP, you are having the same effect as if you increased your DV by 1.33. ExEx, on the other hand, gives +1 DV -1 AP. That is exactly the same, it effectively increases your DV by 1.33. The only reasons you might prefer APDS are: a) hardened armor, since you need to pierce the armor to hurt it at all; or b) targets with higher stun than physical, or stun immunity like Pain Editor, since APDS will more easily do physical damage instead of stun. Other than that, APDS is pretty much equal to ExEx. And both are often inferior to Stick-n-Shock, which reduces armor by half to deal with your most heavily armored foes. Of all the things to fixate on as too powerful for starting characters, APDS is not the thing I would choose.

I should say that I have houseruled armor to be able to halve damage from attacks that don't penetrate. Thus it works similar to hardened armor, although not quite so powerful. So to be able to significantly hurt someone, you need to pierce armor, which APDS often does.
EX-EX has damage value +2/+1 AP in my game (old house rule from before the errata). It's still better at piercing armor than regular ammo, but much weaker than APDS against spirits with high magic. I've also lowered S&S and taser damage by 2, which makes APDS a viable ammuntion for simply piercing armor and doing damage (and really stun is underestimated in the game). But an in game reason for the rarity is because they are seen as "cop killers."

oh...

@friendofthedork - perhaps you should try having a larger number of baddies and a more dynamic situation so that if one guy is really good at combat he can shine while everyone else has to do something themselfs even if its just self defense. I say this as a player who has gotten very annoyed at DMs for imposing a wide myriad of restrictions in an attempt to force me to make a char that would be hard pressed to take on a single guard or squad of guards.

A larger number of "baddies" will just increase the chance of a less-equipped/maxed out PC buying the farm. Or, if the baddies are weak enough, it will only mean that they can't challenge the über PC at all. And really, even the sample characters can take on basic security guards.

Also, the guy who is good at combat is still so even if he can't start with MGs and sniper rifles.

[FriendoftheDork]

Of course, if most of the characters aren't that interested in combat, you could try missions where combat is not the sole defining feature... In fact, ideally, a Shadowrun team never gets noticed unless everything goes wrong. Most of the team should be focused on getting somewhere without being seen. Then, if they screw up, Mr. Killington can swing into action. Nobody complains if the hacker handles all the matrix or the mage handles all the magic. Why not let the samurai handle all (or most of) the combat, when it happens? After all, a team that isn't composed entirely of streetsams wouldn't get sent on pure combat jobs. Making combat the endpoint of all runs is common in my experience, but it's not necessarily the best way to play when you don't have a totally combat oriented party.

The problem arises when you've got one really good combat character, and a bunch of really bad combat characters. The bad characters can't do anything except combat, and they do it badly. THEN you have a problem, because the combat monster outshines them. The solution to that is to a) help them improve their sheets before the game starts, or b) tone down the combat monster's sheet. There's no way to house rule yourself out of a power imbalance. Set a lower BP level, or limit availability, and you still have a power gamer making the rockingest sheet he possibly can, and you still have non power gamers flushing their BP down the crapper on fluff items. A power imbalance is only going to get corrected by hand, by the GM coming and saying "this is the power level we're adhering to." I know there are people on here who think that the GM telling players what to do is akin to murder, but that's how the game is set up. It relies on the GM to be involved. It's not a video game where you pick up a controller and the system handles everything. If you want a particular outcome, you have to program it manually.

A hacker can handle the matrix by himself, and it only takes one to astrally scout. However when 12 corpsec with assault rifles suddenly appear and starts shooting, then everyone will try to survive, if they are Street Sammies or not.
Mages will be as important as the combat specialist, and there are usually many other characters that are able to contribute unless the opposition is too tough.

Also, fighting is fun. Most players wants to have something to do in combat and blaze away, slinging spells, or chopping opp the foes close up. In my group we have one PC who is really bad at combat, but even he can use his hunting rifle to kill off baddies.

[Ascalaphus]

Of course, if most of the characters aren't that interested in combat, you could try missions where combat is not the sole defining feature... In fact, ideally, a Shadowrun team never gets noticed unless everything goes wrong.

A really good plan should indeed help you avoid anything you can reasonably anticipate, but a good GM will also occasionally surprise you with things you can't be expected to see coming. Plot twists that force you to improvise are part of the fun. You can't rule out the possibility of getting into a scuffle.

Most of the team should be focused on getting somewhere without being seen. Then, if they screw up, Mr. Killington can swing into action. Nobody complains if the hacker handles all the matrix or the mage handles all the magic. Why not let the samurai handle all (or most of) the combat, when it happens?

Depending on how long they take, the mage and hacker do get flak for that.. And combat does tend to take quite a while. It helps a lot if the whole team has about the same amount of IPs though. (Definitely advisable to new players)

After all, a team that isn't composed entirely of streetsams wouldn't get sent on pure combat jobs. Making combat the endpoint of all runs is common in my experience, but it's not necessarily the best way to play when you don't have a totally combat oriented party.

You're right. I think it's because we always want a climax at the end of the adventure, and combat is one way to do that. Car chases and negotiations are other possibilities. Ideally though, it's something everyone can participate in, without feeling too marginal.

[Daylen]

I've not run much SR, I've played plenty though. I have run a fair amount of other systems though. I have never had a problem with having a combat monster in a party of fluffy puppies. the only time it was an issue was when the players took issue with it when not playing. It was not an issue of the fluffy puppies having problems shining or having fun; it was an issue of one player being more powerful than them. In that they couldnt flex on the char and not be laughed at. having a combat monster in the party is not inherantly a problem unless the players dont like it. If the fluffy puppies dont like having the Thing that eats the creature in the basement as a party member its a problem; if the fluffy puppies like playing with the scary thing under the bed then there is no problem if the game is run well.

[Larme]

I should say that I have houseruled armor to be able to halve damage from attacks that don't penetrate. Thus it works similar to hardened armor, although not quite so powerful. So to be able to significantly hurt someone, you need to pierce armor, which APDS often does.
EX-EX has damage value +2/+1 AP in my game (old house rule from before the errata). It's still better at piercing armor than regular ammo, but much weaker than APDS against spirits with high magic. I've also lowered S&S and taser damage by 2, which makes APDS a viable ammuntion for simply piercing armor and doing damage (and really stun is underestimated in the game). But an in game reason for the rarity is because they are seen as "cop killers."

Oy. See, this is what I'm talking about with house rules. They are almost invariably an iterative cluster fuck, unless they are very small tweaks. You tweak armor so it's better. But then APDS is too strong. So you need to tweak availability to make it rarer. But then players will just go through contacts. So you need to tweak contacts. And it goes on forever. I mean, if that's your thing, more power to you. If you feel like spending the time on tweaking and retweaking and reretweaking the rules, knock yourself out. Me, I'd rather shotgun myself in the face. I've got other shit to do.

[Muspellsheimr]

A really good plan should indeed help you avoid anything you can reasonably anticipate, but a good GM will also occasionally surprise you with things you can't be expected to see coming.

Crazy Prepared

First Random Cop: We have to call dispatch!
Second Random Cop: And tell them what?! That a polite robot just walked into the UN?
Third Random Cop: (into radio) Dispatch, we've got a 4-2-7 at the UN...

Enough said.

[FriendoftheDork]

Oy. See, this is what I'm talking about with house rules. They are almost invariably an iterative cluster fuck, unless they are very small tweaks. You tweak armor so it's better. But then APDS is too strong. So you need to tweak availability to make it rarer. But then players will just go through contacts. So you need to tweak contacts. And it goes on forever. I mean, if that's your thing, more power to you. If you feel like spending the time on tweaking and retweaking and reretweaking the rules, knock yourself out. Me, I'd rather shotgun myself in the face. I've got other shit to do.

Seems to me you hate house rules on a general basis. Me, I don't need em to see the RAW can be horribly broken or otherwise useless. Some games are better than others (SR is generally not too bad), but it has a few issues.

The main reason is the fact that armor converts damage to stun. This would be all well and fine IF it was somehow obvious that taking stun damage is somehow much weaker than taking Physical damage. However if you're a badass troll with 13 wound boxes and 2 Willpower, taking stun is suddenly a disadvantage in combat. In some extreme situations Trolls would take OFF their armor or wear lighter armor just so the bullets were more likely to deal P damage instead of S. yeah, kinda stupid, but it goes to show that the rules were not fine as it is.

So that's why I did the half damage if you fail to penetrate. Notice that I always round up, and the halving is applied after soak, so the damage is never ignored unless the character could soak it all under normal rules. Generally speaking, this tweak has worked very well in my games and I haven't found call to change or retweak it as you said.

The reasons why I want APDS a bit less prevalent than you think are my experiences in SR2 and SR3 as a player (where it was generally tough to get), as well as the game designers choice to make APDS unavailable to starting runners. I've treated other gear with availability 13+ the exactly the same way, such as the assassins sniper rifle and heavy machine guns.

Admittedly APDS as a result is a bit better than normal, but I'm fine with that too - no need to retweak it as it was a bit too weak in the first place (especially compared to pre-errata EX-EX which would perform better than APDS in ALL situations, including shooting at Hardened Armor.

So... here have a shotgun. Let's hope you're using the tweaked rules that started as a house rule before the errata came, or you'll be in a world of hurt when shooting at your (hopefully) armored face (IMG:style_emoticons/default/nyahnyah.gif)