IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

7 Pages V   1 2 3 > »   
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> SR4A and Gel Rounds, Did these really get -1 DV?
Draco18s
post Jul 18 2011, 12:04 AM
Post #1


Immortal Elf
**********

Group: Members
Posts: 10,289
Joined: 2-October 08
Member No.: 16,392



Due to the inability to search the forums for "gel" anything, the SR4A pdf says that gel ammo does -1 (stun) DV with +2 AP (vs. Impact).

Did the book go to print like that? It seems a rather big change from SR4 where gel did +2 DV, +2 AP.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Aku
post Jul 18 2011, 12:09 AM
Post #2


Running, running, running
*****

Group: Dumpshocked
Posts: 2,220
Joined: 18-October 04
From: North Carolina
Member No.: 6,769



Yea, looks the same in both of my books as well, and really, it makes sense, to me. If you're using Gel rounds, you're really trying to NOT kill someone, so less damage makes sense.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Draco18s
post Jul 18 2011, 12:37 AM
Post #3


Immortal Elf
**********

Group: Members
Posts: 10,289
Joined: 2-October 08
Member No.: 16,392



QUOTE (Aku @ Jul 17 2011, 08:09 PM) *
Yea, looks the same in both of my books as well, and really, it makes sense, to me. If you're using Gel rounds, you're really trying to NOT kill someone, so less damage makes sense.


On the other hand, they are now worse than SnS by a significant margin.

6(s) is better than -1 DV (stun). Oh, and you get the electrical effects. Oh, and half armor.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Hida Tsuzua
post Jul 18 2011, 12:38 AM
Post #4


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 328
Joined: 26-February 02
Member No.: 1,353



They changed it in one of the SR4 prints. For better or for worse, just use SnS for (nearly) everything.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Draco18s
post Jul 18 2011, 12:52 AM
Post #5


Immortal Elf
**********

Group: Members
Posts: 10,289
Joined: 2-October 08
Member No.: 16,392



QUOTE (Hida Tsuzua @ Jul 17 2011, 08:38 PM) *
They changed it in one of the SR4 prints. For better or for worse, just use SnS for (nearly) everything.


What is it now? Is there any errata online?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
CanRay
post Jul 18 2011, 12:55 AM
Post #6


Immortal Elf
**********

Group: Dumpshocked
Posts: 14,358
Joined: 2-December 07
From: Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada
Member No.: 14,465



Just hope there's no reason that the person has health issues that electrical discharges can cause problems with.

"Well how the frag was I supposed to know he had a ten-year old cyberheart??? The damn Type-O hearts are in the bargain bin at the General Hospital!"
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Neko Asakami
post Jul 18 2011, 01:05 AM
Post #7


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 228
Joined: 30-July 09
Member No.: 17,450



I actually made a decent house ruling on that: SnS can only be bought for a shotgun (treated as slug ammo) due to size issues. My thinking is that it's a giant electro-conductive gel round with the miniaturized guts of a taser in it. The capacitive technology of the 2070s isn't advanced enough to put the guts of a taser into a smaller round, so gel rounds become the next best thing.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
KarmaInferno
post Jul 18 2011, 01:10 AM
Post #8


Old Man Jones
********

Group: Dumpshocked
Posts: 4,415
Joined: 26-February 02
From: New York
Member No.: 1,699



QUOTE (Neko Asakami @ Jul 17 2011, 08:05 PM) *
I actually made a decent house ruling on that: SnS can only be bought for a shotgun (treated as slug ammo) due to size issues. My thinking is that it's a giant electro-conductive gel round with the miniaturized guts of a taser in it.


So, pretty much the Taser XREP.




-k
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Draco18s
post Jul 18 2011, 01:10 AM
Post #9


Immortal Elf
**********

Group: Members
Posts: 10,289
Joined: 2-October 08
Member No.: 16,392



QUOTE (Neko Asakami @ Jul 17 2011, 09:05 PM) *
I actually made a decent house ruling on that: SnS can only be bought for a shotgun (treated as slug ammo) due to size issues. My thinking is that it's a giant electro-conductive gel round with the miniaturized guts of a taser in it. The capacitive technology of the 2070s isn't advanced enough to put the guts of a taser into a smaller round, so gel rounds become the next best thing.


My GM is being rather anal about using the SR4A rules as they exist in the PDF, which is annoying, because I know some of them (like the OR table) are wrong.

I think I'm going to buy a physical book, just to have the RIGHT rules.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Fikealox
post Jul 18 2011, 01:18 AM
Post #10


Target
*

Group: Members
Posts: 42
Joined: 23-September 10
Member No.: 19,064



What's wrong with the OR table in the SR4A pdf? [edit: If your copy has the values 1, 2, 4, 6+ (rather than 1, 2, 3, 5+), the latest SR4A pdf has fixed that].
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Fringe
post Jul 18 2011, 01:21 AM
Post #11


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 151
Joined: 18-February 10
Member No.: 18,170



QUOTE (KarmaInferno @ Jul 17 2011, 08:10 PM) *
So, pretty much the Taser XREP.


Wow, nice find, K! And we have 60 years to miniaturize it to 9mm! (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Udoshi
post Jul 18 2011, 01:34 AM
Post #12


Runner
******

Group: Members
Posts: 2,782
Joined: 28-August 09
Member No.: 17,566



QUOTE (Fikealox @ Jul 17 2011, 07:18 PM) *
What's wrong with the OR table in the SR4A pdf? [edit: If your copy has the values 1, 2, 4, 6+ (rather than 1, 2, 3, 5+), the latest SR4A pdf has fixed that].


Also the PDF Bow rules are out of date.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Fikealox
post Jul 18 2011, 02:01 AM
Post #13


Target
*

Group: Members
Posts: 42
Joined: 23-September 10
Member No.: 19,064



QUOTE (Udoshi @ Jul 18 2011, 11:34 AM) *
Also the PDF Bow rules are out of date.


In what respect? If you mean it has a strength cap of 12 (rather than (IMG:style_emoticons/default/cool.gif) and a damage cap of rating x 1.5 (rather than the lower of bow/arrow rating), then that's been fixed in the latest pdf as well. Was there something else wrong with bows?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Udoshi
post Jul 18 2011, 02:21 AM
Post #14


Runner
******

Group: Members
Posts: 2,782
Joined: 28-August 09
Member No.: 17,566



QUOTE (Fikealox @ Jul 17 2011, 08:01 PM) *
In what respect? If you mean it has a strength cap of 12 (rather than (IMG:style_emoticons/default/cool.gif) and a damage cap of rating x 1.5 (rather than the lower of bow/arrow rating), then that's been fixed in the latest pdf as well. Was there something else wrong with bows?


No, they nerfed bows TWICE.
One in PDF 4a, one in print.

Strength max of 8, arrows have a rating.(which is really dumb)
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Neko Asakami
post Jul 18 2011, 03:14 AM
Post #15


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 228
Joined: 30-July 09
Member No.: 17,450



QUOTE (KarmaInferno @ Jul 17 2011, 07:10 PM) *
So, pretty much the Taser XREP.

-k



Bingo. Realistically, I could see it being possible to invent super-capacitive materials in the next 60 years that would allow it to be possible to have one of those in a 9mm form factor, but I don't like the idea of a hand gun doing such retarded amounts of damage. Plus, it has the added benefit of allowing the adept with skills at poisons to use his skills to subdue the target(s) when they can't sneak a shotgun past security.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Draco18s
post Jul 18 2011, 03:39 AM
Post #16


Immortal Elf
**********

Group: Members
Posts: 10,289
Joined: 2-October 08
Member No.: 16,392



QUOTE (Fikealox @ Jul 17 2011, 09:18 PM) *
What's wrong with the OR table in the SR4A pdf? [edit: If your copy has the values 1, 2, 4, 6+ (rather than 1, 2, 3, 5+), the latest SR4A pdf has fixed that].


I have been unable to locate said updated PDF.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Mäx
post Jul 18 2011, 03:40 AM
Post #17


Prime Runner
*******

Group: Members
Posts: 3,803
Joined: 3-February 08
From: Finland
Member No.: 15,628



QUOTE (Draco18s @ Jul 18 2011, 03:37 AM) *
On the other hand, they are now worse than SnS by a significant margin.

6(s) is better than -1 DV (stun). Oh, and you get the electrical effects. Oh, and half armor.

Depends on what gun you use them in, from a BArret they do 8S AP -2 impact, witch is pretty nice.

But the change isn't thaat big to SR4A, for example the first print of Arsenal tables lists them as -(stun) +2 impact, as does the Corebook errata version 1,8.
Don't know why they decided to change it to -1 for the Anniversary edition, it's not even listed in the Changes Document(not that that is anything new)
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Muspellsheimr
post Jul 18 2011, 03:47 AM
Post #18


Neophyte Runner
*****

Group: Members
Posts: 2,336
Joined: 24-February 08
From: Albuquerque, New Mexico
Member No.: 15,706



QUOTE (Draco18s @ Jul 17 2011, 09:39 PM) *
I have been unable to locate said updated PDF.

Go to where you purchased your PDF and download a new copy.

The PDF was updated before the book went to print.


Edit: The three significant changes are:
  • Bow ratings have a maximum of 8.
  • Object Resistance of drones/etc is 5+
  • Net Hits increasing Direct spell drain is optional (apparently they didn't want to redo the layout of the book to remove it entirely).
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Draco18s
post Jul 18 2011, 04:08 AM
Post #19


Immortal Elf
**********

Group: Members
Posts: 10,289
Joined: 2-October 08
Member No.: 16,392



QUOTE (Muspellsheimr @ Jul 17 2011, 11:47 PM) *
The PDF was updated before the book went to print.


Yes, I know it was. Which is why I have to keep pointing it out to my GM.

Anyway, I'll see if I can get an up to date PDF.

Edit:
Success. Gel ammo is still -1(s), +2 AP, which I agree with, but at least my group has the current book now.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Hida Tsuzua
post Jul 18 2011, 02:53 PM
Post #20


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 328
Joined: 26-February 02
Member No.: 1,353



QUOTE (Mäx @ Jul 18 2011, 04:40 AM) *
Depends on what gun you use them in, from a BArret they do 8S AP -2 impact, witch is pretty nice.

But the change isn't thaat big to SR4A, for example the first print of Arsenal tables lists them as -(stun) +2 impact, as does the Corebook errata version 1,8.
Don't know why they decided to change it to -1 for the Anniversary edition, it's not even listed in the Changes Document(not that that is anything new)


8S AP -2 impact is nice, but that's as good or worse than literally any BF SnS firearm. Same DV, better AP (even with nonconductity on nearly any target you're actually worried about not being able to take down). More importantly, the electrical damage check always at least leaves a possibly stacking -2 to all rolls debuff and once in a blue moon takes a guy out of the fight right then. If you can't two shot your target (which might be the case the 8S range), debuffs are good.

On gel rounds, I suspect the writers fairly realized that without careful stacking, your impact armor is going to be less than your ballistics. In a lot of cases going from AP 0 ballistics to AP +2 impact is not a meaningful change. So they wanted to have a "cost" to go to non-lethal measures. As for why SnS is still around then, there's some sort of blind spot writers seem to have.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Fatum
post Jul 19 2011, 07:25 PM
Post #21


Runner
******

Group: Dumpshocked
Posts: 2,801
Joined: 2-September 09
From: Moscow, Russia
Member No.: 17,589



QUOTE (Neko Asakami @ Jul 18 2011, 07:14 AM) *
Bingo. Realistically, I could see it being possible to invent super-capacitive materials in the next 60 years that would allow it to be possible to have one of those in a 9mm form factor, but I don't like the idea of a hand gun doing such retarded amounts of damage. Plus, it has the added benefit of allowing the adept with skills at poisons to use his skills to subdue the target(s) when they can't sneak a shotgun past security.
Minding that you have commlinks working pretty much any amount of time on one charge, and brick-shaped LAVs capable of flight and bearing heavy weaponry without stabilization issues, I'd say Shadowrun tech is very far down the line of pressing a lot of energy into small amounts of space.
So I just warn my players that if they use SnS, the opposition will do that, too.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Yerameyahu
post Jul 19 2011, 07:28 PM
Post #22


Advocatus Diaboli
**********

Group: Members
Posts: 13,994
Joined: 20-November 07
From: USA
Member No.: 14,282



That's such an unpleasant metagame reaction, though. It's better to actually fix it, make them something that's a conditionally-useful, balanced tradeoff. Make them even more expensive, weaker, (sure, maybe shotgun-only), etc.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
sabs
post Jul 19 2011, 07:52 PM
Post #23


Prime Runner
*******

Group: Members
Posts: 3,996
Joined: 1-June 10
Member No.: 18,649



comparing anything to SnS ammo is not fair. SnS ammo is the best ammo in the game. It's stupidly over powered. It's so overpowered it's probably one of the very first things a GM bans. Or stealth bans,by having all his guys have non-conductive on their armor.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
DamienKnight
post Jul 19 2011, 08:26 PM
Post #24


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 943
Joined: 24-January 04
From: MO
Member No.: 6,014



QUOTE (Yerameyahu @ Jul 19 2011, 02:28 PM) *
That's such an unpleasant metagame reaction, though. It's better to actually fix it, make them something that's a conditionally-useful, balanced tradeoff. Make them even more expensive, weaker, (sure, maybe shotgun-only), etc.

Honestly, it makes sense. If SnS worked so perfectly, and is perfectly accessible, NPCs would use as much as players. If this happens, then everyone would get non-conductive upgrades on their armor.

And so they do. Any armored opponent in my games is about 90% likely to have rating 6 nonconductivity. Its not metagaming, it is just common sense. If for a cheap price (and it is really cheap) you can save yourself from getting pwned by all the Stick And Shock ammo running around. Its like when kevlar was invented, people started wearing it. If everyone is going to be shooting bullets, everyone expecting to get in a gun fight wears kevlar. Now if everyone brings SnS to a fight, everyone else is going to have rating 6 non-con.

If every player can do it for low cost and availability, and every player DOES, then it makes sense that everyone would think that way.

Also, in our game, we have houseruled that SnS ammo does damage based on your weapon.

So a Heavy Pistol is 5S(e) instead of 6S(e), and a light pistol is only 4S(e). However Shotguns are a nice 7S(e). If you have a larger projectile, it should be able to pack more punch. If you have a smaller projectile, it should pack less punch. Just makes sense to me...
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Blitz66
post Jul 19 2011, 08:33 PM
Post #25


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 174
Joined: 2-July 11
Member No.: 32,605



QUOTE (DamienKnight @ Jul 19 2011, 09:26 PM) *
Now if everyone brings SnS to a fight, everyone else is going to have rating 6 non-con.


I love the sort of reasoning you use in this post, and use it myself. If something happens because of the rules, characters will notice this outcome eventually and adjust accordingly, based only on in-character observation and rational thought.

But if everyone brings SnS to a fight, who is 'everyone else'? Why wouldn't the ones with non-conductive armor be the same as the ones who bring the electric bullets? They'd be the ones knowing to expect it, after all, and if that's everyone, there's not many people left to wear the armor.

(IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

7 Pages V   1 2 3 > » 
Reply to this topicStart new topic

 



RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 29th March 2024 - 12:59 PM

Topps, Inc has sole ownership of the names, logo, artwork, marks, photographs, sounds, audio, video and/or any proprietary material used in connection with the game Shadowrun. Topps, Inc has granted permission to the Dumpshock Forums to use such names, logos, artwork, marks and/or any proprietary materials for promotional and informational purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not affiliated with the Dumpshock Forums in any official capacity whatsoever.