Need info on damaging weapons, especially barrier ratings, The core mechanics say use damaging barriers but lack better detail Options

[HaxDBeheader]

Hello all,

I'm looking into the details of damaging gear, especially weapons. Arsenal says to use the damaging barriers rules but gives no guide regarding toughness of various items. Has anyone worked out a rough guide of armor/structure ratings? Obviously not practical to have a complete list but a couple examples would be useful to extrapolate from.

Thanks,
Hax

[Dakka Dakka]

There are no additional rules. You will have to eyeball it. Commonly used materials are in the barrier table, but the problem is that each Structure rating boxes of damage corresponds to 0,1 m³ destroyed material. I know of no weapon that has that much volume.

[Yerameyahu]

Yeah. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/frown.gif) Damaging items is simply not part of the normal rules at all.

[thorya]

Consider treating attacks on guns like attacks on drones. They're about the same size as micro-small drones, depending on the weapon. You can use the drone armor and body as a guideline for the weapons. Weapons are probably a little tougher/more armored, since they're more solid material and less circuitry.

[Tymeaus Jalynsfe...]

Consider treating attacks on guns like attacks on drones. They're about the same size as micro-small drones, depending on the weapon. You can use the drone armor and body as a guideline for the weapons. Weapons are probably a little tougher/more armored, since they're more solid material and less circuitry.

I just give them (Guns) 8 Boxes of Damage potential, they suffer issues with damage like any other piece of damageable tech. Easy and done.

[Dakka Dakka]

I just give them (Guns) 8 Boxes of Damage potential, they suffer issues with damage like any other piece of damageable tech. Easy and done.

Do they get rsistance dice according to their materials? An axe handle should be broken more easily than a melee hardenend assault rifle.

[Tymeaus Jalynsfe...]

Do they get rsistance dice according to their materials? An axe handle should be broken more easily than a melee hardenend assault rifle.

Nope... just simple damage. Try to keep it simple.
You could definitely go with the Barrier Guidelines and work everything out, but it is easier to just say "X" boxes.
For actual barriers, we use those rules. For weapons and other "Things" it is either 8 Boxes or GM Fiat (for something considered "more fragile")

[snowRaven]

TJ's 8 boxes works.

It's interesting that there's spells specifically for damaging gear, but no rules for how much damage they can take =)

[Neraph]

Because of the level of composite materials combat axe handles should be fairly difficult to break - that 8 boxes is a good eyeball. I'd suggest extra boxes/some armor for certain materials or addons, like Melee Hardening. And possibly making the Wound Penalties from damage to the weapon apply to the wielder.

[Tymeaus Jalynsfe...]

Because of the level of composite materials combat axe handles should be fairly difficult to break - that 8 boxes is a good eyeball. I'd suggest extra boxes/some armor for certain materials or addons, like Melee Hardening. And possibly making the Wound Penalties from damage to the weapon apply to the wielder.

We do the latter. If the "Weapon" has taken enough boxes to have penalties, then those penalties apply to the use of the weapon by the wielder.

[Yerameyahu]

All of that sounds good. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif) What about damage to other things: commlinks (cuz they have that armor mod), armor/clothing, etc.?

[Tymeaus Jalynsfe...]

All of that sounds good. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif) What about damage to other things: commlinks (cuz they have that armor mod), armor/clothing, etc.?

IIRC, there are Optional Rules for Armor Damage. As for Electronics, well, if they impose a penalty due to damage, they apply to the character's DP.

As for damaging Electronics... It is fiat or Houserule at that point. Though you are right about the Armor Mod. Give it 6-8 Boxes, apply the Armor as soak dice, and go from there. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

[HaxDBeheader]

IIRC, there are Optional Rules for Armor Damage. As for Electronics, well, if they impose a penalty due to damage, they apply to the character's DP.

As for damaging Electronics... It is fiat or Houserule at that point. Though you are right about the Armor Mod. Give it 6-8 Boxes, apply the Armor as soak dice, and go from there. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

Thanks guys, that's a great starting point. I'll do some pondering and reply with any further thoughts I might have.
Hax

[TheOOB]

It's interesting that there's spells specifically for damaging gear, but no rules for how much damage they can take =)

There are also spells for doing fire and acid damage, but no rules on exactly how those spells work. GM-Fiat is the name of the game with Shadowrun.

[snowRaven]

There are also spells for doing fire and acid damage, but no rules on exactly how those spells work. GM-Fiat is the name of the game with Shadowrun.

Not quite sure I follow you here.

There are rules for the acid and fire effects, and rules for indirect spells and spellcasting - which rules are missing?

[phlapjack77]

Not quite sure I follow you here.

There are rules for the acid and fire effects, and rules for indirect spells and spellcasting - which rules are missing?

I think he's referring to the section for fire:

The gamemaster should use her discretion as to which objects in the area are worth rolling a test for; most effects can simply be improvised. The gamemaster also decides which items have caught on fire and will continue to burn—as a rule of thumb, any item with a (modified) Armor rating less than the Fire DV has caught fire...<snip>...The exact secondary effects of Fire damage on items are determined by the gamemaster...

[snowRaven]

Ah, alright - I can see what he means then, kind of.

But the same applies to grenades, for instance - I'm sure no one rolls resistance tests for every piece of gear, armor, wall, trash can, etc within the area of effect.

[Neraph]

Ah, alright - I can see what he means then, kind of.

But the same applies to grenades, for instance - I'm sure no one rolls resistance tests for every piece of gear, armor, wall, trash can, etc within the area of effect.

Right, we just roll for people and walls. Walls are important for Chunky Salsa.

[TheOOB]

Not quite sure I follow you here.

There are rules for the acid and fire effects, and rules for indirect spells and spellcasting - which rules are missing?

Yeah, as phlapjack mentioned, there are no rules for fire damage, just a polite suggestion, and even whats there is more referring to mundane fire. If I cast a force 5 flamethrower spell on you, after I roll for the spells damage, what happens? It's up to the GM. It should be crystal clear, it's not some obscure case, it's a spell in the main book, a spell I spent karma to acquire, drain to cast, and may use several times a session. It's not even an obscure spell, almost every shadowrun book has a mage casting flamethrowing or fireball.

As far as I can tell, the secondary effects of acid spells do nothing, except maybe leave a cloud. A spell referring to damage rules that are designed for mundane hazards is frankly bad game design.

Honestly Electricity is the only energy damage in the main book that is clear what it does(luckily it's awesome).

Grenades are also another area where the rules break down, more because the damage rules can get incredibly complex an inclosed space.

[Neraph]

It actually bothers me that the Lightning Bolt spell deals physical damage but the Sonic element would deal stun. The expanded rules from Street Magic indicate that Lightning Bolt should be Stun unless you increase the Drain by another +2.

[Dakka Dakka]

It actually bothers me that the Lightning Bolt spell deals physical damage but the Sonic element would deal stun. The expanded rules from Street Magic indicate that Lightning Bolt should be Stun unless you increase the Drain by another +2.

No, it shouldn't. Lightning Bolt has the same drain as Flamethrower, which does physical damage. A self-developed physical indirect combat spell with an elemental effect and physical damage would have the same drain code as those two. If it were stun, the drain should be one lower.
It is debatable whether a sonic elemental spell would cause physical or stun damage. The descriptions of both elemental effects list stun damage but the stock electricity spell does physical damage and is draining the magician accordingly.

[Neraph]

No, it shouldn't. Lightning Bolt has the same drain as Flamethrower, which does physical damage. A self-developed physical indirect combat spell with an elemental effect and physical damage would have the same drain code as those two. If it were stun, the drain should be one lower.
It is debatable whether a sonic elemental spell would cause physical or stun damage. The descriptions of both elemental effects list stun damage but the stock electricity spell does physical damage and is draining the magician accordingly.

No, as per the expanded rules in Street Magic Sonic deals Stun damage (sidebar, page 165). Following that same logical rule, the Lightning Bolt spell should also deal Stun damage for the same Drain, as Electricity damage is Stun (SR4A, page 163). If it were Physical instead of Stun, it would be a +1 Drain (sidebar, page 163 [Physical Damage +0, Stun Damage -1]). And technically you can't even have the Sonic element dealing Stun damage like it tells you to because the Elemental Effect modifier on the Drain Modifiers sidebar says "(must be Physical spell with Physical damage)".

So I'd either like consistency, where Sonic and Electricity do Stun damage like they are supposed to (elements are elements), or all Indirect Combat Spells deal Physical damage (which makes Sonic the absolute best choice evah!). The RAW does not allow some of these spells to operate as intended, the RAI is exactly like I said - Sonic deals Stun, Electricity deals Stun, you can get a Physical version for +1 Drain Value.

[Dakka Dakka]

No, as per the expanded rules in Street Magic Sonic deals Stun damage (sidebar, page 165). Following that same logical rule, the Lightning Bolt spell should also deal Stun damage for the same Drain, as Electricity damage is Stun (SR4A, page 163). If it were Physical instead of Stun, it would be a +1 Drain (sidebar, page 163 [Physical Damage +0, Stun Damage -1]). And technically you can't even have the Sonic element dealing Stun damage like it tells you to because the Elemental Effect modifier on the Drain Modifiers sidebar says "(must be Physical spell with Physical damage)".

It would be logical to either use lightning bolt spell as precedent for spells dealing physical damage with an elemental effect regardless of the effect's description at the posted drain (LOS +0, P spell +1, elemental Effect +2) or do one that does stun damage but has reduced drain (LOS +0, P spell +1, elemental Effect +2 Stun damage -1). The Lightning Bolt/Ball Lightning spells should be adjusted accordingly.
The other option would be to ban all elemental effects that deal stun damage because the can't satisfy the "must be Physical spell with Physical damage"condition.

So I'd either like consistency, where Sonic and Electricity do Stun damage like they are supposed to (elements are elements), or all Indirect Combat Spells deal Physical damage (which makes Sonic the absolute best choice evah!). The RAW does not allow some of these spells to operate as intended, the RAI is exactly like I said - Sonic deals Stun, Electricity deals Stun, you can get a Physical version for +1 Drain Value.

It would be more consistent yes, but as I said above the stock spells should be adjusted down if they deal stun damage.

[Neraph]

I don't know. I think the secondary effects would be sufficient to make Electricity and Sonic spells Stun damage with the same Drain Code, and then getting Physical versions with a +1 DV. Similarly, you could theoretically get Stun versions of the other elements for -1 DV.

[TheOOB]

The cost for lightning bolt, as reference by street magic, is for an indirect spell that deals physical damage, which strongly implies to be that if a stun version were made it would have less drain(because we all know stun damage is worse than physical /sarcasm).

I guess I was wrong, the electric damage spells are unclear, because the rules say two separate things. This is what happens when your spell rules don't actually say what your spells do.