IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

2 Pages V   1 2 >  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> Form-fitting Body Armor, clarification of cannon
hunter5150
post May 1 2004, 11:16 PM
Post #1


Target
*

Group: Members
Posts: 49
Joined: 24-February 03
Member No.: 4,152



Somewhere, sometime I got it in my head that layering does not pertain to form-fitting armor. What a wonderful and glorious invention. However, my hopes were shattered when I checked M&M and according to cannon FFA only negates combat pool penalties. Anyone know where I may have picked up that incorrect info? Maybe errata or something?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
TinkerGnome
post May 1 2004, 11:22 PM
Post #2


Dragon
********

Group: Members
Posts: 4,138
Joined: 10-June 03
From: Tennessee
Member No.: 4,706



Check the errata (www.shadowrunrpg.com). I do believe it removes the quickness penalties, as well.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
hunter5150
post May 1 2004, 11:25 PM
Post #3


Target
*

Group: Members
Posts: 49
Joined: 24-February 03
Member No.: 4,152



But it does layer like normal armor right?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
A Clockwork Lime
post May 1 2004, 11:33 PM
Post #4


Shooting Target
****

Group: Members
Posts: 1,616
Joined: 15-March 04
Member No.: 6,158



Yep, it's halved if you're wearing any armor with a Ballistic or Impact rating higher than its rating, otherwise it's at its full ratingl. Beyond that, it basically doesn't count as another layer of armor.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Kakkaraun
post May 2 2004, 12:37 AM
Post #5


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 309
Joined: 26-February 02
Member No.: 1,548



I can't seem to find the rule, and I know one of ya'll must know this off the top of yer head, so, in layering, do you round down or up?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Connor
post May 2 2004, 12:47 AM
Post #6


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 511
Joined: 30-May 03
From: Tulsa, OK
Member No.: 4,652



The rule is to round down, but most of the time we house rule it to round up, as long as people aren't getting crazy with stacking. We see no reason a 3/1 form-fitting half suit shouldn't go ahead and give 2/1 on top of a jacket or long coat or something.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Kakkaraun
post May 2 2004, 12:53 AM
Post #7


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 309
Joined: 26-February 02
Member No.: 1,548



I'd say, round down, to a minimum of 1. So, a 3/1 half suit would be 1/1. Or a 4/1 full suit would be 2/1.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
mfb
post May 2 2004, 02:28 AM
Post #8


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

Group: Members
Posts: 11,410
Joined: 1-October 03
From: Pittsburgh
Member No.: 5,670



by the book, you round down with no minimum. minimum 1 is a fairly common houserule, though.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Lantzer
post May 2 2004, 04:57 PM
Post #9


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 693
Joined: 26-March 03
Member No.: 4,335



Yeah, I looked in the rules, and saw that it only affects combat pool penalties, as well. which is all fine and good, but it's the quickness penalties that are more restrictive when layering.

I'll have to look for the erratta. Even if the errata doesn't fix this, FFBA still has a role to play - FFBA 1 & 2 are still pretty concealable under normal clothing. Nobody ever wears FFBA 3 - cause how are you going to hide the hood, gloves and booties?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
A Clockwork Lime
post May 2 2004, 05:06 PM
Post #10


Shooting Target
****

Group: Members
Posts: 1,616
Joined: 15-March 04
Member No.: 6,158



They come with those things, you don't have to wear them to gain the benefit of the armor. They're an extra incentive for someone who wants, say, Thermal Dampening or Ruthenium Polymers... or to hide their fingerprints and face on a run.

Note that the Half-Body Suit only covers the thighs, groin, and torso; the arms and lower legs are fully exposed. That's where the extra Ballistic +1 comes into play with the Full-Body Suit.

Unless you use house rules or aren't wearing any other armor, the Half-Body Suit doesn't provide any functional armor improvement over the Shirt; +1/+0 for both.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Kagetenshi
post May 2 2004, 05:17 PM
Post #11


Manus Celer Dei
**********

Group: Dumpshocked
Posts: 17,012
Joined: 30-December 02
From: Boston
Member No.: 3,802



QUOTE (Lantzer)
how are you going to hide the hood, gloves and booties?

Clearly you can somehow, as it has a Conceal of 10 IIRC.

~J
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
A Clockwork Lime
post May 2 2004, 05:25 PM
Post #12


Shooting Target
****

Group: Members
Posts: 1,616
Joined: 15-March 04
Member No.: 6,158



It's actually Concealability 12, I believe.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Connor
post May 2 2004, 05:40 PM
Post #13


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 511
Joined: 30-May 03
From: Tulsa, OK
Member No.: 4,652



Yeah, but still. Hiding the hood and gloves isn't going to be practical in a walking around everyday type situation. Now, once you get down to business on the run, that's one thing, but meeting up with the Johnson or doing bodyguard work, etc, you're going to probably stick to the half-suit so you don't look like a complete idiot.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Kagetenshi
post May 2 2004, 05:44 PM
Post #14


Manus Celer Dei
**********

Group: Dumpshocked
Posts: 17,012
Joined: 30-December 02
From: Boston
Member No.: 3,802



Conceal 12 sounds eminently practical. The only thing I can think of that would make it impractical is Summer.

~J
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
A Clockwork Lime
post May 2 2004, 05:47 PM
Post #15


Shooting Target
****

Group: Members
Posts: 1,616
Joined: 15-March 04
Member No.: 6,158



Again, the context is that the hood and gloves are extras. They're not required for the armor benefits. You would have to strip off the arm and lower leg portions to get to the equivalence of the half-body suit.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Connor
post May 2 2004, 05:50 PM
Post #16


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 511
Joined: 30-May 03
From: Tulsa, OK
Member No.: 4,652



well, I'm not saying it would be easy to hide, but to hide a hood covering most of your head you'd have to wear a hood or something else covering most of your head. Which, in most situations isn't practical. Obviously the FFBA would be easily hidden, but the means to do so are obvious, at least with the hood. Gloves over the FFBA gloves are less conspicuous, but I still don't see gloves coming back into fashion or anything.

Just because it has a Conceal of 12 just means it's not hard to cover up, but at the same time covering up 95% of your body in most places, especially indoors just isn't practical or inconspicuous, imo. How often do you go out and about and see someone covered from head to toe except their face? Not very often.

I suppose you could use some sort of wig with long hair or something on the hood, but I still think wearing it out and about around town just isn't practical. Suit up with the full suit for the actual run, but wear the half-suit around town and for everday protection.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Kagetenshi
post May 2 2004, 05:56 PM
Post #17


Manus Celer Dei
**********

Group: Dumpshocked
Posts: 17,012
Joined: 30-December 02
From: Boston
Member No.: 3,802



Tucking the hood into the back of your collar or whatever. Unless you're going to houserule the conceal to only apply under certain conditions, there is incontrovertibly some way to conceal it while wearing normal clothes (long pants, long-sleeved shirt).

~J
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Kakkaraun
post May 2 2004, 06:22 PM
Post #18


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 309
Joined: 26-February 02
Member No.: 1,548



Step 1.) Wear jeans, wear shoes, wear long-sleeved shirt.
Step 2.) Remove hood, remove gloves.
Step 3.) Place hood and gloves in pocket.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Connor
post May 2 2004, 06:25 PM
Post #19


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 511
Joined: 30-May 03
From: Tulsa, OK
Member No.: 4,652



But if you're not wearing the hood and gloves does it still give the full benefit of protection? Where do you draw the line between the half-suit and the full-suit?

If you take off the gloves and hood the only difference between the two at that point is that the full suit continues to cover the forearms and calves. Do you lower the protection rating of the full-suit without the hood and gloves? Do you just ignore it?

I'll admit it's something we ignored for a long time, and everyone just wore full FFBA suits all the time...
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
A Clockwork Lime
post May 2 2004, 06:29 PM
Post #20


Shooting Target
****

Group: Members
Posts: 1,616
Joined: 15-March 04
Member No.: 6,158



QUOTE (Connor @ May 2 2004, 12:25 PM)
But if you're not wearing the hood and gloves does it still give the full benefit of protection? Where do you draw the line between the half-suit and the full-suit?

Again, the context is that the hood and gloves are extras. They're not required for the armor benefits. You would have to strip off the arm and lower leg portions to get to the equivalence of the half-body suit.

QUOTE
If you take off the gloves and hood the only difference between the two at that point is that the full suit continues to cover the forearms and calves. Do you lower the protection rating of the full-suit without the hood and gloves? Do you just ignore it?

And the only difference between the shirt and the half-suit is that it covers the crotch and the thighs. If you put on some gloves and a hood, you still don't have a full suit because they don't provide any notable armor protection. They're useful extras for everything mentioned earlier.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
FlakJacket
post May 2 2004, 08:33 PM
Post #21


King of the Hobos
*****

Group: Dumpshocked
Posts: 2,117
Joined: 26-February 02
Member No.: 127



QUOTE (Connor)
If you take off the gloves and hood the only difference between the two at that point is that the full suit continues to cover the forearms and calves. Do you lower the protection rating of the full-suit without the hood and gloves? Do you just ignore it?

We always just ruled that without the gloves/hood it counted as a half-body suit for armour rating. One just for common sense, and the other because it's only a point lower balistically- and helmets, or in this case the hood, give you a +1 armour rating- so it kinda follows internal logic.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
TheScamp
post May 2 2004, 09:08 PM
Post #22


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 400
Joined: 26-February 02
Member No.: 825



QUOTE
We always just ruled that without the gloves/hood it counted as a half-body suit for armour rating.

So, the full sleeves and lower leg coverings don't do anything?

QUOTE
...and helmets, or in this case the hood, give you a +1 armour rating- so it kinda follows internal logic.

It follows logically if you think that a thin fabric hood can provide the same type of protection as a hard military-style helmet.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
FlakJacket
post May 2 2004, 09:18 PM
Post #23


King of the Hobos
*****

Group: Dumpshocked
Posts: 2,117
Joined: 26-February 02
Member No.: 127



Hence the kinda. All of this is IMHO and YMMV of course. :)
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Eyeless Blond
post May 2 2004, 09:30 PM
Post #24


Decker on the Threshold
******

Group: Dumpshocked
Posts: 2,922
Joined: 14-March 04
Member No.: 6,156



Well, also keep in mind that helmets typically provide Impact armor, so by that logic FFBA without the cowl would be 4/0 :P
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
A Clockwork Lime
post May 2 2004, 09:53 PM
Post #25


Shooting Target
****

Group: Members
Posts: 1,616
Joined: 15-March 04
Member No.: 6,158



And yet, oddly enough, the half-body suit, which doesn't have the optional accessories, provides 3/1. Go figure. :P
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

2 Pages V   1 2 >
Reply to this topicStart new topic

 



RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 8th August 2025 - 10:57 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.