Static TNs, Query Options

[Rand]

Has anyone usd the optional rule of static target numbers? If so, how did it go? How, exactlly, did you determine the TNs? I have been looking to speed things up a bit and all the opposed rolls don't help.

[Karoline]

(IMG:style_emoticons/default/question.gif)

[Tymeaus Jalynsfe...]

Maybe I missed something, But Static Target Numbers are the Default in Shadowrun 4 (They are not an optional rule, but the standard)...

Keep the Faith

[nemafow]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but perhaps he means like a standard number of hits for an action to succeed or something?

Character shoots target in combat, needs X number of hits to succeed.

Is that what you mean?

[Drats]

That's what I read it as. When he said "all the opposed rolls don't help," I assumed he was asking if anyone had used the optional rule where ranged combat is handled as a success test against a range-based threshold.

For the record, I haven't tried it, and I don't know anyone else that has. It might speed things up, but I feel it marginalizes the defending players' abilities.

[Drats]

-doublepostery-

[nemafow]

Yes that was my first thought when I first read it, from memory (so please dont take this as fact) it was like 1 hit for close range, 2 hits for mid, 3 for long... Meant any decent runner would always hit, and most security / gangers.

[Banaticus]

Buying successes (4 dice for 1 success) or allowing average successes (3 dice for one success) sure speeds things up, but I don't see that in a game very often.

[Rand]

Sorry, I guess I could have phraased the question better. Yes, I mean for combat as well as other aspects where it is the attacker rolling skill+attributes+misc vs. the defender rolling attribute+misc (the example of ranged combat works, and yes it was: 1 for short, 2 for medium, 3 for long, and 4 for extreme). This would work for other situations like Perception checks, spells, etc.

I was thinking of making the static TNs based off the Buying Hits table, where the defenders total is refrenced and the resulting number (1, 2, 3, etc) is the TN needed by the attacker. The defender can still default to full defense, as that takes an action to perform, and I believe in this method it will encourage players to use it more often, I don't see it very much now. They all fall into the, "I punch you, you punch me, I punch you, you punch me..." pattern that carries over from other games where active defense doesn't matter because it is extremely hard to be killed in a single hit. I am hoping to encourage them to try to use more cover and stuff as well, as the added modifier would really help.

One problem I see in this is the issue of modifiers: it would be easiest if they only affected the attackers die pool. That way, once you have the defenders TN, it is pretty-well set (until an attribute or other factor is changed). Anything else you guys can think of will help. Thanks.

[Karoline]

Lots of problems with doing this 'static TN' thing. The biggest of which is that it heavily favors attackers. When you roll the dice, you get an average of 1 hit per 3 dice, but the 'buy' feature is 1 hit per 4 dice, and you can totally waste up to 3 dice because it hasn't reached the next multiple of 4 yet.

Most runners have a reaction of under 8, so that means joe wageslave who has never seen a gun in their life but has a smartlink will more often than not be able to hit a runner, even on full defense you'll usually only add one more hit on a buy, and so maybe you need someone who just started practicing with guns the other day (skill 1) and has a smartlink to be able to hit a highly skilled runner.

If you're looking to speed up the game, do defense and attack rolls simultaneously. If the two rolls are being rolled and counted at the same time, then it doesn't take any more time to do those two rolls than one roll.

I think going with set TNs would actually make people less likely to go for cover, because if that +2 from cover isn't enough to get them to the next multiple of 4, then there is no point in taking the cover. You'll similarly see a reaction+dodge pool that equals a multiple of 4, and likely the reaction will always end up being 4 or 8 with a dodge of 4 (or 2 and a ranged spec). Then don't forget about the ability to use edge on defense tests.

Personally it just seems like alot of problems to save what should be a second or two in difference between the time it takes to count up attack hits and defense hits.

[Warlordtheft]

If you find yourself needing to reduce the number of rolls, you can always use static TN for when the PCs are shooting at mooks/grunts/cannon fodder. For major NPCs, and PCs there should always be a defensive modifier.

[Heath Robinson]

Sorry, I guess I could have phraased the question better. Yes, I mean for combat as well as other aspects where it is the attacker rolling skill+attributes+misc vs. the defender rolling attribute+misc (the example of ranged combat works, and yes it was: 1 for short, 2 for medium, 3 for long, and 4 for extreme). This would work for other situations like Perception checks, spells, etc.

I was thinking of making the static TNs based off the Buying Hits table, where the defenders total is refrenced and the resulting number (1, 2, 3, etc) is the TN needed by the attacker. The defender can still default to full defense, as that takes an action to perform, and I believe in this method it will encourage players to use it more often, I don't see it very much now. They all fall into the, "I punch you, you punch me, I punch you, you punch me..." pattern that carries over from other games where active defense doesn't matter because it is extremely hard to be killed in a single hit. I am hoping to encourage them to try to use more cover and stuff as well, as the added modifier would really help.

One problem I see in this is the issue of modifiers: it would be easiest if they only affected the attackers die pool. That way, once you have the defenders TN, it is pretty-well set (until an attribute or other factor is changed). Anything else you guys can think of will help. Thanks.

I'd suggest you take a look at Frank's work on aWoD and Warp Cult. It's easy enough to translate light and heavy cover to a +1 and +2 threshold modifier, and a +1 threshold for the defender running. You'll have to figure out what, exactly, you're going to change bursts to do.

I have no answer to that question.

[Rand]

Lots of problems with doing this 'static TN' thing. The biggest of which is that it heavily favors attackers. When you roll the dice, you get an average of 1 hit per 3 dice, but the 'buy' feature is 1 hit per 4 dice, and you can totally waste up to 3 dice because it hasn't reached the next multiple of 4 yet.

I was kind of going for that, to force more active defense measures, but I see your point. (An idea to deal with that is below.)

If you're looking to speed up the game, do defense and attack rolls simultaneously. If the two rolls are being rolled and counted at the same time, then it doesn't take any more time to do those two rolls than one roll.

We already do that, and it still seems to be a bit much. Not exceedingly terrible, just a bit annoying.

It's easy enough to translate light and heavy cover to a +1 and +2 threshold modifier, and a +1 threshold for the defender running. You'll have to figure out what, exactly, you're going to change bursts to do.

This is a good way of doing that; just add flat threshold modifiers in stead of dice - and make them worthwhile, because they are. Dropping behind a car is a very effective method of keeping from getting shot. (Just about any large, solid object does the same.)
As for burst-fire, the modifer could just be switched to the firer I imagine. Will look into that some more to be sure.

[Heath Robinson]

As for burst-fire, the modifer could just be switched to the firer I imagine. Will look into that some more to be sure.

The problem is that recoil from a burst applies a modifier in the opposite direction, making wide bursts more or less do nothing 'cept waste ammo. Until you get RC, then they're straight up DP increasers.

[psychophipps]

My group went to the static number thing quite a while ago and it rocked, actually. The rules naturally favor the attacker (who really ever wastes an entire turn dodging anyway?), so we found it to be a moot point. The way we did it was to roll the attack and defense simultaneously, as mentioned above, and then applied the range modifier as a threshold increase.

[psychophipps]

The problem is that recoil from a burst applies a modifier in the opposite direction, making wide bursts more or less do nothing 'cept waste ammo. Until you get RC, then they're straight up DP increasers.

Sooo...you're saying that it makes combat more realistic. And you seem to think that this is a bad thing.

Interesting... (IMG:style_emoticons/default/indifferent.gif)

[Heath Robinson]

Sooo...you're saying that it makes combat more realistic. And you seem to think that this is a bad thing.

I think that presenting an option that does nothing except cost you money is a stupid idea for a game. Realism, or the appearance of realism, has some minor benefits for the game (some players can draw on real life experience to enhance their characters), but options you are given should be meaningful first and foremost.

[Rand]

OK, after looking over the Burst-Fire rules I have come up with the following:

The only thing that has changed is the wide bursts, narrow bursts are done just as they are in the book, as is suppresive fire. Also, as far as I am concerned, once you are shooting past medium range, wide burst does absolutly nothing for you; the spread is too great. Generally at long and extreme range the best you can do is use suppresive fire. Narrow burst could do with a lessening of DV bonus at long and longer ranges, as well - like -1 DV at long and -2 DV at extreme to reflect that the rounds do, eventually spread out.

Burst-Fire/Wide: The only benefit here is that it gives you the opportunity to hit a second target within 1 meter of the first. (Conversely, if you absolutely have to have a die modifer, just give the mod to the firer.)

Long-Burst/Wide: -1 TN to hit the target. (So a character with a 2 TN at medium range (+1 TN) would have a 3 normally, but be down to a 2 with a wide burst.)

Full-Burst/Wide: -2 TN to hit. (Using the above example, the targets TN would drop to 1.)

Shotguns (None of the DV/AP numbers are changed):

Narrow: As is.

Medium: As Burst-Fire/Wide.

Wide: -1 TN to hit target.

Defense Modifiers (All apply to the number of successes needed to hit the target):

Defender Inside Moving Vehicle: +1 TN
Multiple Attackers: Switched to bonuses for the attackers.*
Defender Prone: +/-1 TN (+1 vs Ranged attacks (non-point blank range), -1 vs close-combat attacks)
Ranged Attacks Only
Defender Running: +1 TN
Defender in Melee: No modifier, but increase the chance of glitch by 1 per opponent and if glitched, roll 1d6 assigning a number to each of the
other melee combatants and if that number comes up they are hit and must soak the attacks basic damage. (I don't agree that a target in
melee is easier to hit with a firearm, add the extra bodies around for cover and....
Defender has Partial Cover: +1 TN
Defender has Good Cover: +2 TN
The only way to defend against a grenade is to use the full-defense action and try to put something solid between you and the grenade - as well as a lot of distance.
[Bursts are coverd above.]

*For each attack after the first in the same action phase, grant the attacker a +1 die.


These were real quick numbers put up, and some fine-tuning is more than possible. Remember, what I am after here is a bit more speed in combat, plus a character can (and should) use full-defense when they can. I believe that combat in SR is more deadly than real life (unusual in an RPG, to be sure) and ends way too fast (in-game time, I haven't had a combat last more than 2-3 combat rounds ever), so encouraging the characters to use actions for defense is a good way to have a gun fight last more than 6 seconds (in game), and putting static TNs is a good way to decrease the amount of real-world time it takes to play out those 3-6 seconds.

[Tanegar]

Dude, quit saying "target number" when you mean "threshold." It's confusing as hell.

[Rand]

Dude, quit saying "target number" when you mean "threshold." It's confusing as hell.

Dude! Mellow your harsh. You understand. Just change the TN's to TH's.. sheeesh!

[Heath Robinson]

I'd like to make a suggestion.

Burst Fire/Narrow Choke gives you a -1 Threshold modifier when firing at Long range and reduces the Threshold for Perception tests targetting the attack by 1.
Long Bursts/Medium Choke give you a -1 Threshold modifier when firing at Medium range and reduces the Threshold for Perception tests targetting the attack by 2.
Full Bursts/Wide Choke reduce the Threshold by 1 when firing at Short range and reduces the Threshold for Perception tests targetting the attack by 3.

Using an Aim action with Vision Mag reduces the Threshold by 1 at Long or Extreme range.
Smartguns connected to a Smartlink system lets you use an Aim action to gain a -1 Threshold modifier at Medium or Long range.
A firearm equipped with a Laser Sight sees the Threshold reduced by 1 at Short or Medium range with an Aim action.

All of the above replace the normal rules for the respective options. You may only reduce the Threshold by 1 from the effects of Vision Mag, Smartgun Systems, or Laser Sights no matter how many are applicable. For Automatic or Burst Fire with Shotguns, the Burst and Choke setting modifiers stack. Choke settings, obviously, usually only apply when firing buckshot/flechette ammunition from a Shotgun.

Hawk Eye gives you a natural equivalent of Vision Mag that stacks with anything other than Vision Mag. It also reduces the Perception penalties for not being near the event by 1. This replaces the normal effects of the quality. You lose the benefits of the Hawk Eye quality when you replace your eyes with anything apart from cultured transplants.

Yes, you totally can reduce the Threshold below 0. Negative Thresholds just mean more damage when you hit (and you will probably hit).


Full Defense allows you to make a test, the Hits on this test establish the minimum Threshold for attacks against you. However, this minimum Threshold is modified by the effects of Bursts and Choke settings (these two effects stack as normal).


So, CorpSec often have SMGs because there's this huge jump in range categories between SMG and AR. They're unlikely to be firing past 80m, and having a shorter ranged weapon makes them more accurate when employed optimally at shorter ranges.

Someone with an Auto-Assult 16 firing in BF mode with Narrow Choke after using an Aim action with a Smartgun will probably hit, and is the worst nightmare of a dodge specialist.

[ShadowPavement]

Dang! I really like the idea of using Static Thresholds for Mooks. Saves having to keep track of 40 damage tracks.

Just assign each mook a threshold based on how tough they are. The attacking character has to score at least that many successes to take them out of the fight. If not, then they just keep on going.

Sweetness!

[tete]

Sorry, I guess I could have phraased the question better. Yes, I mean for combat as well as other aspects where it is the attacker rolling skill+attributes+misc vs. the defender rolling attribute+misc (the example of ranged combat works, and yes it was: 1 for short, 2 for medium, 3 for long, and 4 for extreme). This would work for other situations like Perception checks, spells, etc.

I was thinking of making the static TNs based off the Buying Hits table, where the defenders total is refrenced and the resulting number (1, 2, 3, etc) is the TN needed by the attacker. The defender can still default to full defense, as that takes an action to perform, and I believe in this method it will encourage players to use it more often, I don't see it very much now. They all fall into the, "I punch you, you punch me, I punch you, you punch me..." pattern that carries over from other games where active defense doesn't matter because it is extremely hard to be killed in a single hit. I am hoping to encourage them to try to use more cover and stuff as well, as the added modifier would really help.

One problem I see in this is the issue of modifiers: it would be easiest if they only affected the attackers die pool. That way, once you have the defenders TN, it is pretty-well set (until an attribute or other factor is changed). Anything else you guys can think of will help. Thanks.

I would let them take the average rather than roll if you want them to use it often. 4:1 just isnt good odds, 3:1 and now its tempting. 2:1 and its all i would ever use.