IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> Firing multiple turrets at once?, My players never play riggers...
Laodicea
post Aug 17 2013, 01:45 AM
Post #1


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 558
Joined: 23-June 10
Member No.: 18,749



Until now, it seems.

I know(or think I know) how it works when a player has several different drones that will fire during combat. What has me confused is if a single vehicle has multiple turrets. How does that work? Say he's got 4 light machine guns mounted on a boat? Can he fire all 4 at once? Using his gunnery skill? Using a Command program?

Do you roll each turret separately and treat it as a separate attack? Do you roll them all together and treat it as one attack with a higher base DV? Can he attack multiple targets at once this way? Would that split the dicepool?

edit: Also, can you put multiple guns on one turret? it seems like you can. Any pros/cons?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Jaid
post Aug 17 2013, 07:17 AM
Post #2


Great Dragon
*********

Group: Members
Posts: 7,089
Joined: 4-October 05
Member No.: 7,813



technically, the rules say somewhere that only one gun can be fired per vehicle, no matter how many turrets or controllers there are.

mind you, that's generally considered to be a pretty stupid rule. a more reasonable one would require you to split your dicepool just like a person using 2 guns or 2 melee weapons, except divide by the appropriate number of weapons being used (in your example that would be 4 of course), and count it as 4 separate attacks.

it would definitely use gunnery, and provided you're not using manual controls i see no problems using the command program (if you're actually using manual controls and only have 2 limbs, i'd limit you to controlling 2 at a time).

pretty sure you can't technically put multiple weapons on the same turret without using underbarrel weapon mounts. that said, i for one would have no real problems if you decided to pay the price of 2 turrets (including the vehicle having room etc) and saying that it's two guns mounted on one turret.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Erik Baird
post Aug 17 2013, 02:56 PM
Post #3


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 213
Joined: 19-August 10
Member No.: 18,949



Sure, you can put two or more weapons in a turret. It just depends on the size of the turret. Main gun with coaxial machine gun is the default configuration for just about every turreted military vehicle in existence. Some ADA turrets have four or more weapons. Typically, however, all these weapons are linked together and will fire on parallel trajectories if they are of the same caliber. Missile mounts tend to be fired individually.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Jaid
post Aug 17 2013, 05:56 PM
Post #4


Great Dragon
*********

Group: Members
Posts: 7,089
Joined: 4-October 05
Member No.: 7,813



QUOTE (Erik Baird @ Aug 17 2013, 10:56 AM) *
Sure, you can put two or more weapons in a turret. It just depends on the size of the turret. Main gun with coaxial machine gun is the default configuration for just about every turreted military vehicle in existence. Some ADA turrets have four or more weapons. Typically, however, all these weapons are linked together and will fire on parallel trajectories if they are of the same caliber. Missile mounts tend to be fired individually.


i got the impression he was asking about in shadowrun rules, not for real life...
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Erik Baird
post Aug 17 2013, 10:32 PM
Post #5


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 213
Joined: 19-August 10
Member No.: 18,949



I just looked at Arsenal, and I can see why he's wondering. The rules there (pp146-47) are excessively vague. Rigger 3 had much better rules for customization. As far as the number of weapons that may be fired, I found SR4:160 stating that firing a weapon while rigging is a Complex Action, but nothing further about the number of weapons (I may be missing something). I think if you had a vehicle with two weapons mounted in a linked configuration, firing both together would be no issue. I think having a single gunner fire four weapons at separate targets is stretching things a bit.

One of the things to look out for with multiple turrets is overlapping fields of fire. If all of the turrets are stacked, they won't interfere (much) with each other, but that's a very unlikely configuration unless the stack is a series of progressively smaller turrets (i.e., a main turret with a cupola for the commander, common for main battle tanks). If you had four separate turrets on a vehicle, say in a line like a naval battleship or destroyer, each turret will be restricted because each cannot fire through the other turrets or any superstructures above the turrets.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Bigity
post Aug 18 2013, 02:37 AM
Post #6


Shooting Target
****

Group: Members
Posts: 1,840
Joined: 24-July 02
From: Lubbock, TX
Member No.: 3,024



Except those big naval guns almost never fire over the bow or aft. The swing out for an old school broadside...just like 15 miles away instead of a couple hundred yards.

Of course, each turret has it's own gun crew.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ShadowDragon8685
post Aug 18 2013, 02:43 AM
Post #7


Horror
*********

Group: Members
Posts: 5,322
Joined: 15-June 05
From: BumFuck, New Jersey
Member No.: 7,445



The simple solution for the rigger on-the-go who doesn't want to divide his dice pools is to buy a commlink and gunnery autosoft and install them in each of the turrets, with instructions to pick their own targets according to his RoE, unless he manually fires a turret, in which case the turrets that also have line-of-sight to his target focus their fire on that target as well.


There definitely should be rules as regards coaxial weapons or multiple weapons of the same type mounted together to fire together.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Erik Baird
post Aug 18 2013, 06:24 AM
Post #8


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 213
Joined: 19-August 10
Member No.: 18,949



QUOTE (Bigity @ Aug 17 2013, 07:37 PM) *
Except those big naval guns almost never fire over the bow or aft. The swing out for an old school broadside...just like 15 miles away instead of a couple hundred yards.

Of course, each turret has it's own gun crew.


The recoil on a 16" gun tends to be a bit higher, too. I wish I'd gotten to see one doing a live fire before they were decommissioned. Watching a video just isn't the same.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Ryu
post Aug 18 2013, 08:56 AM
Post #9


Awakened Asset
********

Group: Members
Posts: 4,464
Joined: 9-April 05
From: AGS, North German League
Member No.: 7,309



QUOTE (Erik Baird @ Aug 18 2013, 12:32 AM) *
I just looked at Arsenal, and I can see why he's wondering. The rules there (pp146-47) are excessively vague. Rigger 3 had much better rules for customization.

Even with all the years that have passed IŽd not call R3 customization "better". The level of detail was higher, as was the potential for abuse.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Erik Baird
post Aug 18 2013, 03:36 PM
Post #10


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 213
Joined: 19-August 10
Member No.: 18,949



To each their own. I think SR3 was a better ruleset. Rules that are too vague can be easily abused as well.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ShadowDragon8685
post Aug 18 2013, 06:07 PM
Post #11


Horror
*********

Group: Members
Posts: 5,322
Joined: 15-June 05
From: BumFuck, New Jersey
Member No.: 7,445



I would. (Call Rigger 3 better.) While the potential for abuse was there, I prefer a more highly-detailed system than one which is not.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

Reply to this topicStart new topic

 



RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 20th July 2024 - 12:25 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.