![]() |
![]() ![]() |
![]() |
![]() ![]()
Post
#1
|
|
Running Target ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 1,288 Joined: 4-September 06 From: The Scandinavian Federation Member No.: 9,300 ![]() |
I was looking at the firing into melee friendly fire sidebar. It all makes sense that if your attack misses because the defender dodges it, you risk hitting your friend. However, it also means that the more bullets fired, the less chance that the defender will dodge it, so the only "safe" thing to do is full auto 10 bullets.
Full auto + defender in melee penalties sums up to -12, which is enough to completely negate most defense pools. Since the defender is hit, the friend in melee don't need to take a defense test, so this is by and far the safest option unless the defender has a really high defense pool. Missing outright means none of them are threatened, despite the number of rounds fired. To avoid this silliness, a simple fix: 1. If you fire semi-auto burst or short burst into melee, the friend has to defend against half the number of hits even if the defender failed his defense test. 2. If you fire long burst or full auto burst into melee, both defender and friend have to defend against the same attack. Or, to put it in other words: If you absolutely have to shoot an enemy that close to your friend, make sure to aim well and fire once. |
|
|
![]()
Post
#2
|
|
Running Target ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 1,288 Joined: 4-September 06 From: The Scandinavian Federation Member No.: 9,300 ![]() |
No input on this? Is is a bad house rule, a good one, or just not worth implementing? Or did I misunderstand the rules?
|
|
|
![]()
Post
#3
|
|
Shooting Target ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 1,973 Joined: 4-June 10 Member No.: 18,659 ![]() |
Not much to say, a harder to dodge attack being... harder to dodge? That's pretty much the rule working as intended. I think your house rule is more realistic, but Shadowrun combat frankly isn't. It's action movie combat, and wailing away with full auto weapons is part of that.
So it's just a question of what you want combat to look like at your table. |
|
|
![]()
Post
#4
|
|
Moving Target ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 152 Joined: 13-January 16 From: Fairfax, FDC Member No.: 199,957 ![]() |
I'd be more vicious. Instead of making single shots easier to avoid, have anyone in melee with a target that is being autofired at make the same defense test +1. This represents the fact only one bullet actually hits on autofire.
|
|
|
![]()
Post
#5
|
|
Running Target ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 1,288 Joined: 4-September 06 From: The Scandinavian Federation Member No.: 9,300 ![]() |
Not much to say, a harder to dodge attack being... harder to dodge? That's pretty much the rule working as intended. I think your house rule is more realistic, but Shadowrun combat frankly isn't. It's action movie combat, and wailing away with full auto weapons is part of that. So it's just a question of what you want combat to look like at your table. The problem is not the attack being harder to dodge, but the fact that it's 100% automatic to dodge for anyone close to the attack. If you don't care about your friend being hit, full auto into close combat is fine and probably will hit both of them. I'd be more vicious. Instead of making single shots easier to avoid, have anyone in melee with a target that is being autofired at make the same defense test +1. This represents the fact only one bullet actually hits on autofire. That's actually less vicious. My proposal was equal defense test, but having the test be +1 makes the intended target takes some of the brunt of the attack at least. I could go further giving the friend cover bonus of +2 or +4 if the enemy is blocking the attack. Note I'm not at all making single shots easier to avoid, single shots will use the current rules as they seem to work just fine. Dodging a single shot at -3 risks your friend being hit instead? Sure. |
|
|
![]()
Post
#6
|
|
Moving Target ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 152 Joined: 13-January 16 From: Fairfax, FDC Member No.: 199,957 ![]() |
That's actually less vicious. My proposal was equal defense test, but having the test be +1 makes the intended target takes some of the brunt of the attack at least. I could go further giving the friend cover bonus of +2 or +4 if the enemy is blocking the attack. Note I'm not at all making single shots easier to avoid, single shots will use the current rules as they seem to work just fine. Dodging a single shot at -3 risks your friend being hit instead? Sure. I meant that they make the test even if the original attack is successful. So no matter what, your friends are dodging bullets. |
|
|
![]()
Post
#7
|
|
Running Target ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 1,288 Joined: 4-September 06 From: The Scandinavian Federation Member No.: 9,300 ![]() |
I meant that they make the test even if the original attack is successful. So no matter what, your friends are dodging bullets. That's exactly what I meant too by "both defender and friend have to defend against the same attack." Plenty of bullets to go around. |
|
|
![]()
Post
#8
|
|
Old Man Jones ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 4,415 Joined: 26-February 02 From: New York Member No.: 1,699 ![]() |
|
|
|
![]() ![]()
Post
#9
|
|
Running Target ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 1,288 Joined: 4-September 06 From: The Scandinavian Federation Member No.: 9,300 ![]() |
Yup, checks out. This documented footage of real life fire exercises show how full auto is always safer. |
|
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() |
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 18th August 2025 - 03:57 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.