Face-Gunbunny seeks primary weapon, Must love long bursts... Options

[Critias]

In game, it is rarely ever necessary for a Sniper to EVER need 2 shots on a metahuman target, anyways. The sheer surprise of the incident, combined with most Snipers ability to put the bullet exactly where they want it (most of the time) is enough to pretty much eliminate the threat of a single target with a single shot. Even if it does not KILL the target.

In fact, the type of long distance shooting (Extreme Ranges right) that we are talking about have so many other factors involved that simulating them in a game is entirely pointless. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

Yes, they seldom NEED the follow-up shot -- so why are you so hell bent on arguing about it? The rules are laid out very clearly, here (for once). As long as the shooter and the target don't move (walk, run, drive a car, fly, etc), you're good to go. "Movement" as defined in combat terms isn't a fuzzy term, so why are you making it one?

[Thanee]

That rule specifies that neither YOU nor the TARGET can move to maintain that (which also means that the target cannot be driving, walking, etc.)... One or the other is sure to do so, likely both of you. So, how do you explain that one? Hmmmm? (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

Very simple. Neither you, nor the target, may walk or run (or drive or use any other mode of movement) between shots, otherwise the aim is lost.

Bye
Thanee

[StealthSigma]

In game, it is rarely ever necessary for a Sniper to EVER need 2 shots on a metahuman target, anyways. The sheer surprise of the incident, combined with most Snipers ability to put the bullet exactly where they want it (most of the time) is enough to pretty much eliminate the threat of a single target with a single shot. Even if it does not KILL the target.

happens. There's practically no damage difference between your non-hawkeye sport rifle user and my hawkeyed sniper rifle user. You're talking a potential +1 DV which -may- spell the difference on life vs death from one shot. Regardless, both of my shots with a sniper rifle stand a VERY HIGH chance of outright killing both targets and if they don't kill the target he's suffering a -3 penalty which in turn provides a defensive boost for my allies who are closer. Further, any enemies who survive are going to move to a cover position to get something between them and me which restricts their freedom of movement. I rarely target a foe that I have shot UNLESS I have already shot all the available foes on the field. It's simply an overkill for a round and dolling out -3 penalties hugely benefits my team and tacking another -3 penalty onto the range penalties and whatever else someone will have shooting at me all but eliminates them as a threat.

Just sayin'.

[Tymeaus Jalynsfe...]

Yes, they seldom NEED the follow-up shot -- so why are you so hell bent on arguing about it? The rules are laid out very clearly, here (for once). As long as the shooter and the target don't move (walk, run, drive a car, fly, etc), you're good to go. "Movement" as defined in combat terms isn't a fuzzy term, so why are you making it one?

Because it is not so clear cut as you say it is. If I fall down...DO I MOVE? How about if I spin, left to right 180 degrees? What If I am walking (a Typical Shot for a Sniper, as is a Driver in a Car - Continuous movement ends your aim attempt by the rules)? How about if the Shooter rolls left? There is MORE to movement than simply walking/running, and I am pretty sure that you know that. It is not as cut and dried as you are trying to make it out to be. Yes, it is most likely that your target will move and therefore you will have to re-acquire. In many cases, however, your shooter moves, as well. Limiting the movement rule to simple walking and/or running is improper, in my opinion. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

[Tymeaus Jalynsfe...]

Just sayin'.

And I agree with that StealthSigma... (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

Good Snipers never take more than a single shot from a single position unless they have no other choice. And they never just plink a target continuously until they stop moving, either. Of course, they really never need to do so anyways.

[_Pax._]

And you're fixing on the wrong part of the litmus test. "It's not inherent to the character, it can be removed" instead of "It's not inherent to the character."

Adept powers can be removed too. Background count. Essence loss (like being munched on by a vampire). Lots of ways.

Can the character walk off into complete wilderness with nothing but basic survival gear and the equipment he needs to practice the trade, and get that bonus with Karma?

If the Reflex Recorder is already there? Yes.

Whereas, that Adept? Unless he already (for some unfathomable reason) had at least a half-power-point unallocated? May need to head back to civilization in order to acquire the materials and facilities needed to Initiate, then raise their Magic, for a new PP.

Turns out, Adepts can, in fact, walk off into the wilderness with nothing but a gun and an infinite supply of ammunition and get that bonus with Karma. When you can grow reflex recorders with Karma, then you can talk.

Infinite supply of ammunition. Nice. :rolleyes:

[KarmaInferno]

And I agree with that StealthSigma... (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

Good Snipers never take more than a single shot from a single position unless they have no other choice. And they never just plink a target continuously until they stop moving, either. Of course, they really never need to do so anyways.

Carlos Hathcock would a disagree with you.

He related a story where he deliberately shot a target's bicycle because he felt bad about killing a teenager, but changed his mind after the target got up and pulled an AK out of a bag. Center mass on the second shot.

He did this, by the way, using an accurized scoped M2 machine gun, not a sniper rifle. At that time there weren't really any good .50 caliper sniper rifles.

You avoid sticking to one shooting position, yes, but a quick succession of followup shots is common if the first one did not have the desired effect. You probably have to move immediately afterwards, though.





-k

[Tymeaus Jalynsfe...]

Carlos Hathcock would a disagree with you.

He related a story where he deliberately shot a target's bicycle because he felt bad about killing a teenager, but changed his mind after the target got up and pulled an AK out of a bag. Center mass on the second shot.

He did this, by the way, using an accurized scoped M2 machine gun, not a sniper rifle. At that time there weren't really any good .50 caliper sniper rifles.

You avoid sticking to one shooting position, yes, but a quick succession of followup shots is common if the first one did not have the desired effect. You probably have to move immediately afterwards, though.


-k

I'm a Marine, I know all about Carlos Hathcock. Even read the book a few times. That said, he still had to re-acquire the target. He did not stay "LOCKED IN" because he had previously aimed. Having done such things IRL, I tend to have a bit of experience with it. *shrug* Not with an Accurized M2, however. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

The Game makes it horrendously simple to take those Exrtreme Range Shots that Even Carlos Hathcock would be envious of. I tend to view the minor inconvenience of re-acquisition of target to be just that... a minor, but necessary, action. And well within the rules as I presented them (and interpret them). Movement of the target qualifies for loss of Aim. Falling is movement.

[KarmaInferno]

Yeah, well, Hathcock didn't have the advantage of magic or hypertech.

(IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

I was more addressing the word "never". It depends on the situation.




-k

[Critias]

Because it is not so clear cut as you say it is. If I fall down...DO I MOVE? How about if I spin, left to right 180 degrees? What If I am walking (a Typical Shot for a Sniper, as is a Driver in a Car - Continuous movement ends your aim attempt by the rules)? How about if the Shooter rolls left? There is MORE to movement than simply walking/running, and I am pretty sure that you know that. It is not as cut and dried as you are trying to make it out to be. Yes, it is most likely that your target will move and therefore you will have to re-acquire. In many cases, however, your shooter moves, as well. Limiting the movement rule to simple walking and/or running is improper, in my opinion. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

There's a world of difference between your hypothetical being "spinning left to right 180 degrees", and "walking," and "rolling" and all that, that your initial assertion, which was simply "the recoil of the shot." It's not an always thing. It's a sometimes thing, perhaps even an often thing; movement happens, yes.

But it's not the simple matter of even just taking the shot counting as movement, like you were initially saying.

[FuelDrop]

There's a world of difference between your hypothetical being "spinning left to right 180 degrees", and "walking," and "rolling" and all that, that your initial assertion, which was simply "the recoil of the shot." It's not an always thing. It's a sometimes thing, perhaps even an often thing; movement happens, yes.

But it's not the simple matter of even just taking the shot counting as movement, like you were initially saying.

Strap a scope on a Fichetti Executive Action, "The gun that fires so fast that it doesn't have time to recoil! ©" (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

EDIT: and because I can never leave well enough alone...
For a NON-DEDICATED marksman a dicepool of about 12 is generally enough to reliably hit. Here's my reasoning:
Most targets have between 4 and 8 dodge dice, with edge cases going above or below this number. For the sake of arguement we're going to say that our target has average reflexes (3), wired reflexes 2 and reaction enhancers 2, giving him a total of 7 dice to dodge with. This means that in optimum circumstances (no penalties) our shooter has almost twice his dice pool for the first shot and exactly twice his dice pool for the second shot, assuming a semi-automatic weapon and at least one point of recoil compensation.
having twice your opponent's dice pool in an opposed check is generally considered a huge advantage around my table, and the law of averages says that you'll hit the guy more often than not.

However, perfect circumstances are hardly a given, and most non-pistols can fire faster than semi-automatic.
Example 2: the same couple are fighting a moving battle, weaving through cover and giving the shooter a total of -2 to hit (attacker in cover) and boosting the defender's dodge (Partial cover, +2) as they slowly stalk each other. this time he's fielding an assault rifle with a total of 5 points of recoil compensation (let's say gas vent 3, foregrip and shock pad, if it makes a difference). He fires two short bursts, using the wide burst option to compensate for his reduced accuracy. This means he gets two shots at 10/10, opposed by a dodge pool of 7/6. Again, barring the wrath of the dice gods he's going to hit with more than half of his shots, as purely on the law of averages he should be getting at least one hit per shot higher than the defender.

Things have gone badly for our marksman and he's been forced to wait in ambush. he's wounded (a net of -2 wound modifiers) and the lights are beginning to malfunction (partial light with no low-light [why he has no low-light is a question for another thread], -2). Mr Defender runs past (Defender running, +2), and is actively trying to avoid being shot (Full Gymnastic dodge, for the sake of argument another +2). Mr shooter sprays and prays, firing a wide full burst. he takes an extra -4 dice for uncompensated recoil. Dice pools are: Attacker 4, defender 2. Not good odds, but if i had to lay money on it I'd say that the attacker was more likely to hit than the defender is to dodge.

In conclusion: a dice pool of 12 is sufficient to get an above 50% hit ratio against a reasonably augmented opponent, even in adverse conditions that favor the defender. whether those hits are solid enough to do any damage is entirely outside of this theory craft. This is merely to show that against a non-dodge-focused opponent a dice pool of 12 is generally enough to get hits more often than not.

[PresentPresence]

On the argument on "inherent skill" vs. "total skill" I would just say, "Take it to the range." Boast about your results, not your ability. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)

[_Pax._]

For a NON-DEDICATED marksman a dicepool of about 12 is generally enough to reliably hit. Here's my reasoning:
Most targets have between 4 and 8 dodge dice, with edge cases going above or below this number. For the sake of arguement we're going to say that our target has average reflexes (3), wired reflexes 2 and reaction enhancers 2, giving him a total of 7 dice to dodge with. This means that in optimum circumstances (no penalties) our shooter has almost twice his dice pool for the first shot and exactly twice his dice pool for the second shot, assuming a semi-automatic weapon and at least one point of recoil compensation.
having twice your opponent's dice pool in an opposed check is generally considered a huge advantage around my table, and the law of averages says that you'll hit the guy more often than not.

That's an interesting analysis, but I disagree somewhat with your numbers. I don't think the "average" target has 52,000 (IMG:style_emoticons/default/nuyen.gif) and 3.6 Essence worth of cybernetics in their body. In fact, I would bet that the "average" is closer to .... just one level of initiative enhancement, if that.

So they're probably only dropping ~4 dice to defend vs a gunshot, on average; maybe 5. Which of course, only makes your case even stronger - someone with Agility 3, Skill 3, and at least a Laser Sight is dropping 7 dice before range penalties, 8 with a smartlink of some sort.

So, really just a nitpick, rather than an actual disagreement. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

[FuelDrop]

That's an interesting analysis, but I disagree somewhat with your numbers. I don't think the "average" target has 52,000 (IMG:style_emoticons/default/nuyen.gif) and 3.6 Essence worth of cybernetics in their body. In fact, I would bet that the "average" is closer to .... just one level of initiative enhancement, if that.

So they're probably only dropping ~4 dice to defend vs a gunshot, on average; maybe 5. Which of course, only makes your case even stronger - someone with Agility 3, Skill 3, and at least a Laser Sight is dropping 7 dice before range penalties, 8 with a smartlink of some sort.

So, really just a nitpick, rather than an actual disagreement. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

Or he could be on Jazz, Cram and Snuff (+3 reaction, less than 100:nuyen: ). I do however agree with your point entirely: I aimed high for the defender for exactly that reason (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif) .
also: add tracer rounds to your joe average and give him an SMG or machine pistol (shorter range). he gets BETTER when firing wildly!

[Thanee]

Yeah, Reaction 7 is a highly trained / equipped combatant. A typical combat-trained guard will have no more than 5.

Of course, there could be other modifiers as well, light, cover, etc.

Bye
Thanee

[Thanee]

If I fall down...DO I MOVE? How about if I spin, left to right 180 degrees?

Those are borderline cases.

Falling: yes. Spinning: no.

Basically, when you move away from your current position.

Note, that regular movement in Shadowrun is not really continuous. You move during your action phase, which can never happen at the same time as another character's action phase.

Falling, likewise, does not continuously accelerate at 9.8 m/s², as it does in real life. It's simplified to 50m drop during the first combat turn, then 150m drop during the second combat turn, then 200m drop during each subsequent turn. You will actually move at some point during each initiative pass (basically the initiative value at which the fall started), and then you instantly move the whole distance for that pass (which is the distance for the turn divided by the number of initiative passes that take place). Then you basically stay there while the initiative continues and everyone takes their actions, until you reach your next drop-segment.

It is an abstraction to model continuous movement.


Abstraction is a pretty good term, actually, because that is what is missing in your argument and what is the problem here.

You are using a real-life situation and applying it to the game without first running it through the abstraction filter that is the game rules.

The situation is probably like this:

Sniper fires, gun recoils, scope gets unaligned, sniper readies gun with scope and everything to prepare for the second shot. Target is still at the same position.

In the game, however, all this is handled by the very same Fire Weapon action. The preparation for the second shot happens instantly. It doesn't cost you anything (other than the recoil modifier, which is 0 for the first shot, though). It is not an action in game terms (for guns, anyways, bows OTOH ...). It is not what you do when you use the Take Aim action.

At the end of your Fire Weapon action the situation is the same as at the beginning of your action (well, the taget might be dead now). Your aim (reducing the range modifiers) is still current and active. You are ready to immediately fire again (with just another point of recoil added to the tally).

Bye
Thanee

[Midas]

For a NON-DEDICATED marksman a dicepool of about 12 is generally enough to reliably hit.
<Snip>
This is merely to show that against a non-dodge-focused opponent a dice pool of 12 is generally enough to get hits more often than not.

A voice of sanity after ShadowDragon's rant!

Yes, precisely. My table plays it pretty tactical (my NPC CorpSec want to live so at least seek partial cover when the lead starts flying, and quite often someone [usually the runners] use flash bang/smoke/thermal smoke to throw in a few visibility penalties), but I don't see the dedicated sammie with his skill of 6 + specialization particularly outperforming secondary combatants with skill 4 + spec. There is a big difference between hitting and missing, but after that, situationally the extra DV from net hits rarely makes a difference.

At my table, the big difference between the sammie and non-sammie is that the sammie has more IP to cause mayhem and can take more damage while dishing it. Obviously YMMV.

[Xenefungus]

It's indeed the dicepool that matters, so the discussion so far is kind of a moot point. And the largest part of that is Agility. With an attribute that can so easily be raised to 9-12, skill values are all but secondary.

[FuelDrop]

working on 10-12 dice being all you really need to reliably contribute to most combats, let's see what the least investment-heavy way to get there is.
Base agility 3 (20 BP or 25 Karma)
Muscle toner/replacement rating 2 (as appropriate to build) (10,000 or 16,000:nuyen: )
Automatics 1 (4 BP or 4 Karma)
Specialization: Assault Rifle (2 BP or 2 Karma)

assuming +2 for smartgun system, using either glasses or contact lenses (cost negligible).

this gives you a base DP of 10

1 BP = 5,000 nuyen.
1 Karma = 2,500 nuyen.

BP Gen: 28 BP for cyber or 30 BP for Bioware.
Karmagen: 34 for cyber or 38 for Bio.

add 8 BP or 10 Karma to up Automatics to 3, giving you DP 12.

[Xenefungus]

Actually, if you just want to shoot things, the cheapest way to go is with a cyberarm. You can have natural Agility 1 and still get 9 cheap Agi dice from the arm. Add a skill level of your choice plus spec and smartgun and you are good to go.

Only problem: Infiltration^^

[Tymeaus Jalynsfe...]

Those are borderline cases.

Falling: yes. Spinning: no.

Basically, when you move away from your current position.

Note, that regular movement in Shadowrun is not really continuous. You move during your action phase, which can never happen at the same time as another character's action phase.

Falling, likewise, does not continuously accelerate at 9.8 m/s², as it does in real life. It's simplified to 50m drop during the first combat turn, then 150m drop during the second combat turn, then 200m drop during each subsequent turn. You will actually move at some point during each initiative pass (basically the initiative value at which the fall started), and then you instantly move the whole distance for that pass (which is the distance for the turn divided by the number of initiative passes that take place). Then you basically stay there while the initiative continues and everyone takes their actions, until you reach your next drop-segment.

It is an abstraction to model continuous movement.


Abstraction is a pretty good term, actually, because that is what is missing in your argument and what is the problem here.

You are using a real-life situation and applying it to the game without first running it through the abstraction filter that is the game rules.

The situation is probably like this:

Sniper fires, gun recoils, scope gets unaligned, sniper readies gun with scope and everything to prepare for the second shot. Target is still at the same position.

In the game, however, all this is handled by the very same Fire Weapon action. The preparation for the second shot happens instantly. It doesn't cost you anything (other than the recoil modifier, which is 0 for the first shot, though). It is not an action in game terms (for guns, anyways, bows OTOH ...). It is not what you do when you use the Take Aim action.

At the end of your Fire Weapon action the situation is the same as at the beginning of your action (well, the taget might be dead now). Your aim (reducing the range modifiers) is still current and active. You are ready to immediately fire again (with just another point of recoil added to the tally).

Bye
Thanee

See, I disagree with your assessment bolded above.

As a note... My Falling comment was not meant to model falling from a height, but falling from bullet impact. Fact is, you moved. I must now reacquire you as a target. This takes time. Not a lot, to be sure, but if you are quibbling about a simple action (or possibly even a Free action, for the Krav Maga Sniper *Rolls Eyes*) that takes anywhere from a half secondf (3 passes) to just over 1 Second (1 Pass) for the typical Street Sam, then I am simply astounded.

As a GM, I would be well within my right to interpret that the targets movement is relevant enough to impact your target acquisition, and I am also within my right to determine Recoil also has an impact, again, because YOU DO MOVE under recoil (If you do not want to take the simple action to re-aim, then you suffer range penalties- see, I am not saying you cannot fire twice, or that you MUST re-aim... What I am saying is that if you do not take that action, then there are consequences). After all, if you aim for 3 rounds (for a +3 Aiming Bonus) and then take a shot, your subsequent shot does not get the +3 Bonus from your aiming action. Why would you get to reduce your ranmge penalties in perpetuity, they are the same action. Yes, it models real life a bit more, but not so excessively that it is an issue, in my opinion. *shrug*