3 Combat-related questions Options

[mister__joshua]

I'm currently still reading through the combat chapter of SR5 and had a few questions. Apologies if these have been covered before and lost pages into a thread somewhere.

1) Can SA weapons fire in SS mode? If not, what's the difference between firing a single shot from a SS weapon and a SA weapon? By the rules the SS weapon doesn't suffer recoil while the SA weapon does even if it only fires one shot per action just like the SS weapon.

2) Can you use the Multiple Attacks action to target the same enemy twice? In the multiple attacks action section it doesn't specify, but in the burst section it says 'multiple opponents'. If you CAN'T do this, why not? Surely shooting 2 people is harder than shooting one person twice?

3) Is there any difference between a burst and a semi-auto burst? I can't see any. Why does SA burst exist?
SA burst is complex action, burst is simple action.

Answers to any and all appreciated.

Thanks

Josh

[Dolanar]

1. in order for a weapon to fire in SS it must have the SS option, if the gun says SS/SA then it can fire as either or, if it has SA only it can only fire SA, however, just because you have SA doesn't mean you can;t just fire a single shot regardless.

2. By a strict reading of the rules, you cannot fire a single firearm twice in the same round. However if the GM has bypassed this little detail, then I don't see any reason you'd be forced to split it into different targets so long as you split the dicepool as normal.

3. All SA guns can fire Semi-auto Burst (SB) as a complex action. but not all SA guns can fire Burst Fire (BF), also BF is done as a simple action while as mentioned the SB is a complex, but otherwise they are identical.

[mister__joshua]

1. in order for a weapon to fire in SS it must have the SS option, if the gun says SS/SA then it can fire as either or, if it has SA only it can only fire SA, however, just because you have SA doesn't mean you can;t just fire a single shot regardless.

2. By a strict reading of the rules, you cannot fire a single firearm twice in the same round. However if the GM has bypassed this little detail, then I don't see any reason you'd be forced to split it into different targets so long as you split the dicepool as normal.

3. All SA guns can fire Semi-auto Burst (SB) as a complex action. but not all SA guns can fire Burst Fire (BF), also BF is done as a simple action while as mentioned the SB is a complex, but otherwise they are identical.

1. Yeah, I got that much. I wondered why a Semi-Auto gun firing at the same rate as a SS gun suffers recoil while the SS gun does not?

2. You can by the burst rules though. It states 'Burst Fire weapons can take advantage of the Multiple Attacks Free Action to fire at multiple targets with the same burst.' I'm wondering why you can't also fire at the same target multiple times with the same burst, especially with a Semi-Auto Burst where it's technically 3 separate shots. I'm going to assume it's just to represent bursting an area, but it still seems weird. Can you multi attack the same person in melee?

3. I missed that a SA burst was complex while a burst is simple. That's the difference then (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

[Dolanar]

well its also that SB is available to ALL SA weapons, while BF is not.

[Jaid]

1) as i recall, there was some indication that the devs basically meant that if you ever do something in between taking shots, your recoil drops back to zero. so for example if you shoot and then ready a grenade on your first action, then shoot and throw a grenade on your second, you wouldn't suffer recoil.

which basically means that SS only really has the advantage if you <not shoot> + shoot, then shoot + <not shoot> right after. still a little screwy, but whatever.

edit: note that i am not saying this is errata, or that i'm even saying this will be errata (although it appeared that's what the authors who were commenting on it thought should happen). i'm just saying that this is what some of the authors (who may or may not have been the author that wrote the rules in question, i don't know) thought it was supposed to work like.

also note that i would (edit: wouldn't) hold your breath on waiting for that errata...

[Isath]

As far as I understand it, you could also:

Aim // Shoot // Aim // Shoot // and so on... and by aiming reset the recoil.

This, all in all, leads to extensive recoil on firemodes, that use a complex action, unless you stop to take a breath in between.

[SpellBinder]

Wish Aim // Shoot // Aim // Shoot did reset Progressive Recoil, but by my understanding it does not. The example on page 177 has the character Shoot (at -1 due to Progressive Recoil) // Take Cover // Aim (noting here that Progressive Recoil is now reset) // Shoot.

From page 175: "Recoil penalties are cumulative over every Action Phase and Combat Turn unless the character takes, or is forced into, an action other than shooting for an entire Action Phase." An entire Action Phase, for the purposes of resetting Progressive Recoil, is apparently the equivalent of two consecutive Standard Actions (which can extend from one Action Phase to the next) in which you do not shoot, or one Complex Action where you are doing something other than shooting.

[Jaid]

Wish Aim // Shoot // Aim // Shoot did reset Progressive Recoil, but by my understanding it does not. The example on page 177 has the character Shoot (at -1 due to Progressive Recoil) // Take Cover // Aim (noting here that Progressive Recoil is now reset) // Shoot.

From page 175: "Recoil penalties are cumulative over every Action Phase and Combat Turn unless the character takes, or is forced into, an action other than shooting for an entire Action Phase." An entire Action Phase, for the purposes of resetting Progressive Recoil, is apparently the equivalent of two consecutive Standard Actions (which can extend from one Action Phase to the next) in which you do not shoot, or one Complex Action where you are doing something other than shooting.

like i said, some of the authors seem to think it works differently (or at least, that it was supposed to work differently). not saying that's what it does say, but i am saying that's what those authors thought it was supposed to work like.

of course, we won't know if CGL plan on changing it until we see some errata, and who knows when that's going to happen.

[SpellBinder]

Considering SR4 books that could use some errata, I certainly am not holding my breath for SR5's core book.

[FuelDrop]

Considering SR4 books that could use some errata, I certainly am not holding my breath for SR5's core book.

That might actually work. If we tell Catalyst that we'll ALL throw an immature tantrum and not buy their stuff anymore unless they give it the support needed to make it playable then they might take notice of the lost revenue and actually release a timely errata.

[SpellBinder]

I think we'll find a universally acceptable fix for technomancers before we convince enough people to boycott Catalyst products. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/frown.gif)

On the plus side an archery question was resolved: Firing an arrow is a Standard Action. Too bad it took a new edition to get that one.

[Dantic]

2. You can by the burst rules though. It states 'Burst Fire weapons can take advantage of the Multiple Attacks Free Action to fire at multiple targets with the same burst.' I'm wondering why you can't also fire at the same target multiple times with the same burst, especially with a Semi-Auto Burst where it's technically 3 separate shots. I'm going to assume it's just to represent bursting an area, but it still seems weird. Can you multi attack the same person in melee?

I think you are reading too much into the statement about multiple targets. It states 'Burst Fire weapons can take advantage of the Multiple Attacks Free Action to fire at multiple targets with the same burst.' It doesn't state that you must fire at multiple targets, particularly if you don't use a free action to state that you are firing at multiple targets.

[Dantic]

I think we'll find a universally acceptable fix for technomancers before we convince enough people to boycott Catalyst products. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/frown.gif)

On the plus side an archery question was resolved: Firing an arrow is a Standard Action. Too bad it took a new edition to get that one.

First one is easy, we eliminate all of the creepy little freaks, with extreme prejudice. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smokin.gif)

[SpellBinder]

I have a technomancer main character in a line of fiction I'm still seriously considering retiring once the timeline hits 2075.

Either that or run him as a full on decker with a Fairlight Excalibur instead.

[Jaid]

I have a technomancer main character in a line of fiction I'm still seriously considering retiring once the timeline hits 2075.

Either that or run him as a full on decker with a Fairlight Excalibur instead.

the good news is that technomancer skills are no longer separate.

so you actually can, provided you get your hands on a good cyberdeck, instantly switch over.

that said, i'm sure they'll manage to overcompensate when the matrix comes out and instead of making technomancers balanced, they'll give them some ludicrous echoes that make them completely insane once you get a couple of submersions under your belt.

[Slithery D]

They really need a Centering equivalent for Fading and a Filtering equivalent for Noise. The power imbalance between Echoes and Metamagics is ridiculous.

[SpellBinder]

the good news is that technomancer skills are no longer separate.

...

Yeah, I know. Of which I've pretty much had to house rule how that's handled for the SR5 conversion since that little tidbit was not mentioned.

If the technomancer has ranks in both versions of a Cracking and/or Electronics skill, they get added together (max 6) before being converted to the SR5 scale, gaining karma for the excess levels.

[Jaid]

They really need a Centering equivalent for Fading and a Filtering equivalent for Noise. The power imbalance between Echoes and Metamagics is ridiculous.

the SR4 core rulebook echoes were generally not that great either. look at what happened in the expansion =S

[mister__joshua]

I think you are reading too much into the statement about multiple targets. It states 'Burst Fire weapons can take advantage of the Multiple Attacks Free Action to fire at multiple targets with the same burst.' It doesn't state that you must fire at multiple targets, particularly if you don't use a free action to state that you are firing at multiple targets.

Not really. I'm aware that you don't have to fire at multiple targets. My query is if I can burst 2 people to attack twice using the multiple attacks rule, why can't I burst 1 person and attack twice using the same rule. You're effectively just halving your dice pool to attack a second time. It's more that it doesn't work in my head, especially with a semi-auto burst. Really what it's saying is that I can shoot 2 people once each with one attack, but I can't shoot one person twice, which is notably easier than switching targets IRL.

[Dantic]

Not really. I'm aware that you don't have to fire at multiple targets. My query is if I can burst 2 people to attack twice using the multiple attacks rule, why can't I burst 1 person and attack twice using the same rule. You're effectively just halving your dice pool to attack a second time. It's more that it doesn't work in my head, especially with a semi-auto burst. Really what it's saying is that I can shoot 2 people once each with one attack, but I can't shoot one person twice, which is notably easier than switching targets IRL.

You can actually burst 3 people, but I would say that using the burst for multiple targets doesn't get the -2 defense penalty, where using it on a single target does.

[Epicedion]

My thought is that the burst mechanic is already supposed to take care of the 'shooting a guy twice' version -- fewer defense dice = more damage, after all. Then you get into the abstraction of rolling one net success = one bullet hit (9P for a heavy pistol), five net successes = a solid hit and a couple grazes (13P for a heavy pistol), or however you want to describe things.

[Smash]

I'm currently still reading through the combat chapter of SR5 and had a few questions. Apologies if these have been covered before and lost pages into a thread somewhere.

1) Can SA weapons fire in SS mode? If not, what's the difference between firing a single shot from a SS weapon and a SA weapon? By the rules the SS weapon doesn't suffer recoil while the SA weapon does even if it only fires one shot per action just like the SS weapon.

No. This is purely a balance issue, not a logical one. SS weapons have the advantage of not accumulating recoil where SA weapons can do burst attacks.

2) Can you use the Multiple Attacks action to target the same enemy twice? In the multiple attacks action section it doesn't specify, but in the burst section it says 'multiple opponents'. If you CAN'T do this, why not? Surely shooting 2 people is harder than shooting one person twice?

The burst mechanic covers this. You shoot multiple bullets at one target and it mofies defence pools. The intention behind 5th ed is to streamline combat so people don't take 20minutes for each turn. It's counter intuitive to be able to do the same action mechanically 2 different ways. By RaW you can't, if you really want to then by all means do it, but I'm guessing that the only reason you would want to is because against some opponents you see there being a damage advantage in doing so.

3) Is there any difference between a burst and a semi-auto burst? I can't see any. Why does SA burst exist?
SA burst is complex action, burst is simple action.

Yes, one is designed for weapons capable of burst fire, so you pull the trigger once and it fires 3 bullets, while the other is just a abstraction of firing multiple shots at a single target by pulling the trigger multiple times. It makes pistols a little more versatile.

[Remnar]

From page 175: "Recoil penalties are cumulative over every Action Phase and Combat Turn unless the character takes, or is forced into, an action other than shooting for an entire Action Phase." An entire Action Phase, for the purposes of resetting Progressive Recoil, is apparently the equivalent of two consecutive Standard Actions (which can extend from one Action Phase to the next) in which you do not shoot, or one Complex Action where you are doing something other than shooting.

See, you read "other than shooting for an entire action phase" as doing something other than shooting "for that entire action phase" i.e two simple or one complex non shooting event.

I read it as doing anything that doesn't "shoot for an entire action phase"; ie complex shooting actions or multiple single shooting actions consecutively.

So by my reading Aim|shoot // Aim|shoot would reset recoil.

Aim|shoot // Shoot|something else would not.

Complex shoot // Aim|simple shoot would also reset.

But Complex shoot // Simple shoot|something else would not.


Its up to your interpretation of the sentence and definately needs clarification.

[Lobo0705]

@Renmar,

The problem is that the book has two examples, one right after the other that seem to contradict one another:

"Wombat is plugging away at some obnoxious gangers who
insulted his street name. He starts with 1 free point and has a
Strength of 3, giving him 2 points of compensation. He’s using
a Colt Manhunter with 1 point of recoil compensation, which
brings his compensation total to 3.
On his first Action Phase he fires a Semi-Auto Burst, which
is 3 bullets. That takes his compensation down to 0, meaning he
has no penalty on this shot.
On the next Action Phase he fires only one shot. That moves
his recoil penalty down one more point, making it –1. He has to
take a single die away from his dice pool before rolling his attack.
He then uses his other Simple Action to Take Cover. In the
following Action Phase, he uses a Simple Action to Take Aim,
which removes the effects of progressive recoil and resets his
recoil compensation back to its initial 3 points. (He also has the
option of increasing his dice pool by 1 or increasing his applicable
limit on the next shot by 1.)
On the fourth Action Phase he attacks with a Semi-Auto
Burst again, which again reduces his recoil compensation to 0.
Again, he has no penalty on this roll.
Starting a new Combat Turn, Wombat continues to fire. On
his first Action Phase of the new Combat Turn he fires another
Semi-Auto Burst. That’s 3 more bullets fired, moving his recoil
score from 0 to –3. He has to take 3 dice out of his pool before
rolling his attack.
On his next Action Phase, Wombat again fires a Semi-Auto
Burst. That means his recoil score drops by 3 more points, taking
the penalty down to –6. He’s going to have trouble hitting
anything, but he’ll probably stop shooting soon so he can reload."

In the above example, you'll note that simply by taking two non-shooting actions in a row, even ones that occur in two different action phases, he resets his progressive recoil.

Now look at the next example:


"Full Deck prefers the extra hitting potential of firing in bursts
with his Ingram Smartgun. His Strength of 4 gives him 2 points
to add to his 1 free point of compensation The Smartgun adds 2
more points of recoil compensation, making a total of 5.
On his first Action Phase Full Deck fires in Long Burst mode.
6 rounds are subtracted from the 5 points of recoil compensation,
meaning he has a –1 dice pool penalty when he fires.
On the next Action Phase he goes for Burst Fire. That’s 3
more bullets, so it makes the recoil penalty –4. The accumulated
recoil is starting to stack up, so he may want to think about not
attacking in the next Action Phase."

If two non-shooting actions in a row reset progressive recoil, then when he acts in the second Action Phase, he can shoot the burst, and then Aim (or Observe in Detail, or any other Simple Action) and then in the next action phase, Aim again (or whatever) and the progressive recoil is gone, and he would not have to "to think about not attacking in the next Action Phase" as he can reset his recoil.

It is like two different people read the rule, and then wrote the examples separately, and never read each other's work. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/frown.gif)

[Smash]

@Renmar,

If two non-shooting actions in a row reset progressive recoil, then when he acts in the second Action Phase, he can shoot the burst, and then Aim (or Observe in Detail, or any other Simple Action) and then in the next action phase, Aim again (or whatever) and the progressive recoil is gone, and he would not have to "to think about not attacking in the next Action Phase" as he can reset his recoil.

It is like two different people read the rule, and then wrote the examples separately, and never read each other's work. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/frown.gif)

You're right. I'd wager the second example is writen assuming that a regular burst is a complex action, rather than a simple.

The bigger problem in my mind is the micro-management needed to manage this. Some players will be excellent at it while others are not and the GM has to remember who took 'scratch my balls' actions after shooting last round and those that don't.

In my mind it would be much simpler if you just had to not shoot in an action phase for it to reset, which could be filled with reloading clips, readying grenades, sprinting between covers, etc.