 Parachuting |
  |
 Dec 9 2004, 04:55 PM
Post
#1
|
|
|
Dragon  Group: Members Posts: 4,664 Joined: 21-September 04 From: Arvada, CO Member No.: 6,686  |
I'm curious as to how many people have actually used parachuting in their games. What sorts of circumstances did you have that facilitated it? Was there another way? Any specific reason?
Just looking at it, it seems as though its overall a largely fluff skill, and not very useful for 99% of shadowrunners. |
 |
 
|
|
Dec 9 2004, 05:02 PM
Post
#2
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 334 Joined: 17-November 03 From: Texas Member No.: 5,828 |
The only time I've seen it was in a military themed game, and then it comes up about once per mission :) You almost always insert by parachute or fastrope.
|
|
|
|
|
Dec 9 2004, 05:03 PM
Post
#3
|
|
|
Ain Soph Aur Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 3,477 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Montreal, Canada Member No.: 600 |
I have. And yeah, they're not typical runners.
Also, the CC rules are complete crap. I just make them roll a few tests and wing it from there. However, my life is made pretty easy by the fact that there's usually a Shaman to summon a spirit that casts Guard on the runners, so bad landings aren't much of a problem. |
|
|
|
|
Dec 9 2004, 05:09 PM
Post
#4
|
|
|
Target Group: Members Posts: 31 Joined: 6-December 04 From: Wichita Falls, Tejas Member No.: 6,872 |
I ,as a new GM to shadowrun, have only used these rules twice. Once when a character wanted to parachute off a building as an escape route(paranoid) and another when I shoot down a player stolen t-bird (don't ask). There have been a couple times when I wanted to send the players to some remote area of nowhere and push them off a plane on to a moving boat (cool mission idea but it's the dreaded boat/water missions allot of ppl hate),but they usally ignore getting new skills and lack variety in skill selection.
Hmmm....now that i think about it....I think I might put them on an oil tanker somehow...Parachuting...hmmm.... |
|
|
|
|
Dec 9 2004, 05:30 PM
Post
#5
|
|
|
Dragon Group: Members Posts: 4,664 Joined: 21-September 04 From: Arvada, CO Member No.: 6,686 |
Just curious, since having hydraulic jacks at rating 4 or 5 would eliminate damage from parachuting, would you still require the quickness test to land on your feet? or does parachuting by virtue make you land on your feet?
|
|
|
|
|
Dec 9 2004, 05:37 PM
Post
#6
|
|
|
Immortal Elf Group: Members Posts: 11,410 Joined: 1-October 03 From: Pittsburgh Member No.: 5,670 |
with a wind from the wrong direction, there's no guarantee that you'll land on your feet. and, well, even if you do hit feet-first, there's no guarantee (IRL) that you won't break an ankle.
incidentally, i houserule the parachuting test to that the parachutist's skill acts as a complementary roll to the rigger's (the guy who packs the parachute, not the guy who drives the plane) packing skill roll. |
|
|
|
|
Dec 9 2004, 06:37 PM
Post
#7
|
|
|
Dragon Group: Members Posts: 4,664 Joined: 21-September 04 From: Arvada, CO Member No.: 6,686 |
I can't see how a strong wind would cause you to not land on your feet. At worst, a persons weight hanging from a parachute might go 60º but still enough to hit on your feet.
mfb, you're right, people do break legs semi-regularly when parachuting, thats why I specifically mentioned hydraulic jacks. They're made to take hard landings, and if you look, jacks at rating 4 or 5 eliminate any chance for damage from parachute falls. |
|
|
|
|
Dec 9 2004, 06:41 PM
Post
#8
|
|
|
Ain Soph Aur Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 3,477 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Montreal, Canada Member No.: 600 |
I tried messing with the rules a while back... you can check the thread here
|
|
|
|
|
Dec 9 2004, 06:42 PM
Post
#9
|
|
|
Immortal Elf Group: Members Posts: 11,410 Joined: 1-October 03 From: Pittsburgh Member No.: 5,670 |
if your body is tilted to sixty degrees, you're not coming down on your feet--you're coming down on your ankle. hydraulic jacks are handy, yes, but they can't help if you're not coming almost straight down on the flats of your feet. jacks exert downward force, almost straight down--not force at a 10 degree angle.
|
|
|
|
|
Dec 9 2004, 06:47 PM
Post
#10
|
|||||
|
Running Target Group: Members Posts: 1,428 Joined: 9-June 02 Member No.: 2,860 |
I have trouble seeing how you would land on anything but your feet, unless you were tangled in the chute's lines or in a powerful gale. Landing standing is another matter. On my first jump, before I knew how to collapse a parachute (very easy once instructed), I landed upright but the light breeze pulled me over and dragged me about 5ft. I think in my next four jumps, I went down on one knee once, but remained standing otherwise. The basics of parachuting, particularly with the maneuverable square parachutes, are pretty darn easy. I'll have to review the Cannon Companion rules to see how they compare with limited experiences. I know during the weekends that I jumped, there were hundreds of other jumps at the same location by other skydivers with no injuries. Even from the newbies.
Are they that limited? The hydraulic jack reduction in falling damage doesn't specify landing angle. It seems like a general reinforcement of the legs to handle jumping and falling stresses. |
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
Dec 9 2004, 06:48 PM
Post
#11
|
|||
|
Dragon Group: Members Posts: 4,664 Joined: 21-September 04 From: Arvada, CO Member No.: 6,686 |
HJ reinforce your entire leg, including the ankle to better take impact. Coming down on your heel would be just fine. They don't exert straight downward force, they exert force through your leg, whichever orientation it happens to be in. They also reduce energy by converting kinetic into heat, which is precisely what they would be doing under a parachute jump. Changing all that kinetic energy that will cause the 4M into a lot of heat vented from the jacks, and you being fine. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Dec 9 2004, 07:11 PM
Post
#12
|
|
|
Immortal Elf Group: Members Posts: 11,410 Joined: 1-October 03 From: Pittsburgh Member No.: 5,670 |
eh, i dunno. the thing with parachuting is, you're not really supposed to land on your feet. you're supposed to hit feet-first, yes, but you don't stay standing--your roll with the impact, so that your legs don't shatter. if you're parachuting into an open field, yeah, there shouldn't be a problem hitting feet-first even in strong winds. however, if you're parachuting into a tangled area, you're likely to snag on a protrusion that jerks you off-center. if this happens at the wrong moment--and it always does--you're probably going to hit with your legs highly non-perpendicular. i'm not sure hydraulic jacks are designed to assist with, for instance, impacts to the side of the shin and thigh, which is where you'd probably end up hitting. similarly, if you're coming in with the wind behind you, you might be tilted too far forward; you'll hit on the points of your toes on your way to landing in a kneeling position.
|
|
|
|
|
Dec 9 2004, 07:21 PM
Post
#13
|
|
|
Running Target Group: Members Posts: 1,408 Joined: 31-January 04 From: Reston VA, USA Member No.: 6,046 |
I think a lot of it depends on your chute. The only parachutes I ever got to use were T-10B's in the Army, virtually the same design they were using back in WWII. In class they taught us that, in a dead wind, the T-10B only slows your descent to the equivalent of a 20-foot drop, and that if you didn't roll with it you really would shatter your legs.
From what I've heard the modern chutes are much better at controlling your fall - does someone else have experience with these? |
|
|
|
|
Dec 9 2004, 07:25 PM
Post
#14
|
|
|
Immortal Elf Group: Members Posts: 11,410 Joined: 1-October 03 From: Pittsburgh Member No.: 5,670 |
hey, that'd be a neat option to add: parachute ratings. add their rating as complementary dice to the roll. or, actually, just reduce the TN of the test by the rating of the chute. make the max rating 5 or so.
|
|
|
|
|
Dec 9 2004, 07:46 PM
Post
#15
|
|||||||
|
Running Target Group: Members Posts: 1,428 Joined: 9-June 02 Member No.: 2,860 |
Sure...if you're using a military round parachute. My father said exactly the same thing about his training in the 101st: hit feet first, then roll. Actually, he was just talking about this last week. It was a gesture of bravado to try to remain standing, but should only be done if the ground was wet/soft.
Yes - 5 jumps. Enough to get my "wings" in the Army, but a complete and total n00b by sport skydiving standards, where people often have hundreds and thousands of dives on their records. I landed standing everytime (except the first, as previously noted) with the square parachutes. As you get near the ground, the wing-like effect of the square chutes has turned some of your downward fall into increasing horizontal speed - you can do a nice running-speed buzz of onlookers, but it'd be hard to land at that speed. Notice the leg positions of this skydiver: out in front. He's moving horizontally quite quickly and ready to take up shock in that direction. So as you're ready to land, you "flare" - yank both control lines, which causes you to climb. That saps out your forward motion (you're a glider - the upward motion needs energy from somewhere) and you do this short hop upward, stall, and drop to the ground light as feather. Photo-intensive summary of a first-time dive experience. The last pics detail the landing approach: http://ssa.web.cmu.edu/members/eudaemon/skydiving.html Approach (note the arms): http://ssa.web.cmu.edu/members/eudaemon/skydive10.jpg Flare (note the arms yanking the control lines): http://ssa.web.cmu.edu/members/eudaemon/skydive11.jpg http://ssa.web.cmu.edu/members/eudaemon/skydive12.jpg
Again, I need to get into the rules before I comment on how to implement this in game, but... IRL, there are very different kinds of skydiving parachutes. The square chutes (parawings) can actually do loops. Here's a diagram of a "landing hook." The skydiver on the left is, in fact, diving at the ground: http://www.bpa.org.uk/skydive/pages/articl...jun99/Dia-4.gif http://www.veloce-skydive.com/b-a-ba/voile/bt502.gif Parawings come in different sizes, which affect their performance. A professional sport diver will use a small (75-90 square foot, IIRC) parawing for high agility and speed, while students use (IIRC) 120sf chutes, and tandem jumps will use 250sf chutes. As for adding dice to the landing...well, it's mostly a matter of the landing flare, which is an aerodynamic maneuver depending on use of the parawing's controls, rather than the features of the chute itself. Found an animated .gif of a parawing landing: http://www.veloce-skydive.com/b-a-ba/anim/flare.gif |
||||||
|
|
|
||||||
|
Dec 9 2004, 07:55 PM
Post
#16
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 675 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Seattle Member No.: 2,034 |
A person with hydraulic jacks could either use a normal chute with less chance of injury, possibly not even needing to do the roll to the side thing (depending on various factors), or use a smaller faster chute in the same way as a person without jacks can use a normal chute. Doesn't the millitary have special chutes that go faster and are only good for jumping into water? A guy with jacks could probably use one of those over land.
A highly athletic sam or adept could also probably cut loose 20-30 feet of the ground and land safely most of the time, provided they found a reasonably level spot. Paratrooper parachutes are designed to get the person onto the ground as fast as possible without incapacatating more of them than might get shot out of the air if they fell slower. ...Hmm actually they could only cut loose 10-20 feet off the ground, since they are already moving downward as if jumping off of something 10-12 feet high. |
|
|
|
|
Dec 9 2004, 08:28 PM
Post
#17
|
|||
|
Dragon Group: Members Posts: 4,664 Joined: 21-September 04 From: Arvada, CO Member No.: 6,686 |
I'd say landing from a parachute counts as a type of fall, and that the jacks would reduce the damage by their rating as they do in a standard fall (provided you land on your feet). Hrm, whats the IG equivilent height drop that would produce a damage level of 4M? A guy with jacks can drop from considerably higher, provided he makes his land on his feet, and would be fine. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Dec 9 2004, 08:32 PM
Post
#18
|
|
|
Immortal Elf Group: Members Posts: 11,410 Joined: 1-October 03 From: Pittsburgh Member No.: 5,670 |
8 meters, as i recall. power = 1/2 distance fallen, and damage level is based on distance as well; i think 1-4m is L, so 8 should be M.
|
|
|
|
|
Dec 9 2004, 08:42 PM
Post
#19
|
|||
|
Dragon Group: Members Posts: 4,664 Joined: 21-September 04 From: Arvada, CO Member No.: 6,686 |
In that case, it wouldn't be too terribly unfeasible to do a drop of... 15-18 meters with level 5 jacks. Drops it down to I'm assuming a base D power of 8-9. Reduce by rating, down to 3-4 for reducing. You might take M, most likely L or less. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Dec 9 2004, 09:04 PM
Post
#20
|
|
|
Immortal Elf Group: Members Posts: 11,410 Joined: 1-October 03 From: Pittsburgh Member No.: 5,670 |
i dunno. that just seems really excessive, to me. i don't care what you've got in your legs, you shouldn't be able to drop fifty feet or more and land with no ill effects. even if your legs themselves don't break, shouldn't your insides get sloshed around pretty hard from the sudden stop?
|
|
|
|
|
Dec 9 2004, 09:35 PM
Post
#21
|
|||
|
Running Target Group: Members Posts: 1,428 Joined: 9-June 02 Member No.: 2,860 |
The point of the jacks is to draw out the period of the "hard stop" at the end of the fall, thus reducing acceleration experienced by the jumper. Still, 50m sounds like a good splat with or without jacks. You'll be moving at 115kph/70mph (neglecting drag) when you hit. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Dec 9 2004, 09:37 PM
Post
#22
|
|
|
Dragon Group: Members Posts: 4,664 Joined: 21-September 04 From: Arvada, CO Member No.: 6,686 |
I agree it seems excessive, but realize the TN for landing on your feet is quickness (5) + (length of fall -5 min 0).
So while you can slip out of the chute at 18 meters.... you're looking at a 13 to land on your feet to take no damage. Balance tail + balance aug drops that down to 10. Which is still rather unfeasible. |
|
|
|
|
Dec 9 2004, 10:07 PM
Post
#23
|
|||
|
Running Target Group: Members Posts: 1,326 Joined: 15-April 02 Member No.: 2,600 |
If you were going to revamp falling damage to fit to the damage by speed table, what would it look like and what would it cap out at? I don't have my book in front of me, so my numbers may be a little off, but a 50m fall is a 25D at half impact, right? And if you were hit by something moving 115kmph, it would be around a 10D. (I could be wildly off, but 115kmph divided by 1.2 to get the meters per turn rounds out to about 96, divided by 10 to get the damage code rounds up to 10 Deadly or Serious. I'm guessing D but I don't have my books, but for non-vehicles I guess it'd have to be.) The discrepancy comes from one is the damage for falling and one comes to the damage by speed from vehicles, but it seems to me there shouldn't be too much difference between hitting something going 96mpt and being hit by something going 96mpt. Especially not +15 to the power level. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Dec 9 2004, 10:12 PM
Post
#24
|
|
|
Dragon Group: Members Posts: 4,664 Joined: 21-September 04 From: Arvada, CO Member No.: 6,686 |
Realize that if it was a 10D from a 50M fall. Rating 5 jacks could reduce that to 5D which wouldn't be too terribly hard to stage down... The hard part of that, is making the 47-50TN quickness test to land on your feet.
|
|
|
|
|
Dec 9 2004, 10:51 PM
Post
#25
|
|
|
Creating a god with his own hands Group: Members Posts: 1,405 Joined: 30-September 02 From: 0:0:0:0:0:0:0:1 Member No.: 3,364 |
The thing about military-style parachuting is they're also accounting for the hundred pounds or more of gear you're carrying, right?
So if you're dropping light with a modern chute, I wouldn't forsee any problems, barring bad luck. |
|
|
|
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 28th April 2024 - 03:00 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.