 What's up with securetech armor? |
  |
 Feb 17 2005, 08:33 AM
Post
#1
|
|
|
Running Target  Group: Members Posts: 1,011 Joined: 15-February 05 From: Montréal, QC, Canada Member No.: 7,087  |
Am I missing something about the securetech armor? They're just better than their normal counterpart for a lower price.
Armor Jacket : 5/3, concealability 6, 900$ Secure Jacket : 5/3. concealability 9, 850$ Lined Coat : 4/2, Conc. 8, 700$ Secure Long coat, conc 10, 650$ They're ALL like this. It made no sense when it appeared in SSC and it's even more idiotic when they appear on top of each other in SR3. Not that's it's hard to fix, ignore or live with. It just makes no sense! I hate it when things make no sense... Ya know what? One of these day I'll design a run where the runners are hired by Ares to extract the geniuses working at the marketing department of whichever company produces these inferior product at a superior price and still manages to stay in business! Next run will be Ares hiring the runners to extract the geniuses working at securetech in the production department who manage to produce these armor at such a low cost while increasing concealability by as much as 50%. Ares will put these guys to work together and then they will conquer the world. |
 |
 
|
|
Feb 17 2005, 08:39 AM
Post
#2
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 192 Joined: 19-July 04 From: N 42° 43.799'. W 84° 27.901' Member No.: 6,496 |
Heh heh. Yeah, there's not much that really justifies the way Securetech armor is priced. That's probably why they decided Securetech armor is too "ergonomically tailored" to be able to accept armor modifications (CC p 52) like the Chemical Seal or Fire Resistance. Take that, Securetech! (Yet FFBA can accept those mods... huh)
On a side note, Securetech armor tends to be marginally heavier. Not a big deal unless you're playing with encumberance rules and have low strength though. This post has been edited by Endgame50: Feb 17 2005, 08:41 AM |
|
|
|
|
Feb 17 2005, 08:44 AM
Post
#3
|
|||
|
Running Target Group: Members Posts: 1,011 Joined: 15-February 05 From: Montréal, QC, Canada Member No.: 7,087 |
Yeah, that's true. That makes even more sense : Heavier AND more concealable. They must use a secret super dense material so the armor can be thiner but winds up heavier. Let's see if it can be melted and turned into AV ammo. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Feb 17 2005, 10:39 AM
Post
#4
|
|||
|
Great Dragon Group: Members Posts: 5,889 Joined: 3-August 03 From: A CPI rank 1 country Member No.: 5,222 |
In the field of body armor that can in fact happen, and it is certainly possible the heavier and more concealable alternative is cheaper to produce. Consider, for example, the following 10" x 12" (25cm x 30cm) rifle protection plates designed to be worn alone, providing NIJ Level III protection: Polyethylene, 0.75" (1.9cm) thick, 1.4kg, $380 Steel, 0.25" (0.64cm) thick, 4.1kg, $110 (Source: BulletProofMe.Com) There are plenty of materials of which body armor is weaved, and there is a lot of variety in density, strength/thickness and cost. A situation where more concealable (less thick but perhaps equally flexible) but heavier armor would end up costing less to produce is conceivable, and that's excluding any other factors which affect market price. Of course, with the weight of items being a complete non-issue in most SR games, while Concealability remains very important, these items might be out of balance. Go ahead and correct them, if you will. I use strict encumbrance (house) rules, so this would be no problem for me even if I used canon pieces of body armor. This post has been edited by Austere Emancipator: Feb 17 2005, 10:40 AM |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Feb 17 2005, 01:09 PM
Post
#5
|
|
|
Neophyte Runner Group: Members Posts: 2,086 Joined: 26-February 02 Member No.: 364 |
From what I understand, the Securetech was originally intended to be an "Errata" to the armor clothing stats that were in the original Big Blue Book, but unfortunately, the intent wasn't well communicated or documented among the developers at FASA in the early first edition days, so both the core rulebook's "Generic" armor clothing, and the Street Samurai's Catalog Securetech ended up persisting throughout the editions, until the Cannon Companion authors decided to further distinguish the two.
|
|
|
|
|
Feb 17 2005, 03:01 PM
Post
#6
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 280 Joined: 22-October 03 Member No.: 5,757 |
Isn't Securetech armor suppose to enhance concealability of any holsters or items hidden underneath it to a large degree?
I think that's why it costs more, and can't take mods. It has some kind of anti scanner layer that takes up most of it's weave. If not. Then I'm completely mistaken and this should be fixed up a bit give it some kind of perk for the higher cost. |
|
|
|
|
Feb 17 2005, 03:07 PM
Post
#7
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 316 Joined: 18-July 03 Member No.: 4,963 |
SecureTech armor can be forced to make sense. The trick is this: You have to assume it is just a Brand Name.
I talk about this a bit here. My personal opinion is that you should view it as a precursor to the armor outlined in CC. It's basically a brand name with strange traits all its own that don't really make much sense. |
|
|
|
|
Feb 17 2005, 05:17 PM
Post
#8
|
|
|
Traumatizing players since 1992 Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 3,282 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Las Vegas, NV Member No.: 220 |
Or, it's cheaper because it cannot accept armor mods of any kind, like nonconductive or insulated. This makes it pretty damn unattractive in my games. Those are popular.
|
|
|
|
|
Feb 17 2005, 05:24 PM
Post
#9
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 230 Joined: 3-December 04 Member No.: 6,863 |
That is what I think it is. The higher concealability is offset by the fact that it can not be moded and this is also why it is cheaper.
|
|
|
|
|
Feb 17 2005, 07:24 PM
Post
#10
|
|||
|
Running Target Group: Members Posts: 1,011 Joined: 15-February 05 From: Montréal, QC, Canada Member No.: 7,087 |
Didn't notice that. But in that case you have the explanation backward. The securetech has been cheaper with higher concealability back since SSC in 1991 or so. Only with CC has mod been introduced. So the 'No mod' rule for securetech has been added over a decade after introduction of the wacky stats, therefore the rule was made because of the stats, not the price fixed because of the rule. So I guess I should amend my question to : What were the designers thinking at the time? :D BTW : While cracking open my Street Samurai Catalog, I noticed that form fitting armors are introduced in the page opposite to securetech clothing. And while reading that entry, I noticed that back then, FFA was not usable with other forms of body armor. Nowadays they stack with no penalty. Things have changed since the 'old days', eh? |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Feb 17 2005, 08:09 PM
Post
#11
|
|
|
Chicago Survivor Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 5,079 Joined: 28-January 04 From: Canton, GA Member No.: 6,033 |
Also, didn't the fluff text describe the securetech as being for law-enforcement types, that it was modeled after "respectable" clothing type stuff. I know the old SSC pictures showed cheezy, detective type styling
|
|
|
|
|
Feb 17 2005, 08:42 PM
Post
#12
|
|
|
Free Spirit Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 3,948 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Bloomington, IN UCAS Member No.: 1,920 |
It said it came in a full range of designer styles and colors.
|
|
|
|
|
Feb 17 2005, 09:08 PM
Post
#13
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 478 Joined: 18-December 03 From: Louisville, KY Member No.: 5,918 |
And don't we all just need designer body armor?
|
|
|
|
|
Feb 17 2005, 09:15 PM
Post
#14
|
|
|
Running Target Group: Members Posts: 1,011 Joined: 15-February 05 From: Montréal, QC, Canada Member No.: 7,087 |
No, we don't. What we really need are armored bathing suits.
Beach runs are the worst. |
|
|
|
|
Feb 17 2005, 09:29 PM
Post
#15
|
|
|
Free Spirit Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 3,948 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Bloomington, IN UCAS Member No.: 1,920 |
Paradise Lost
|
|
|
|
|
Feb 17 2005, 09:30 PM
Post
#16
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 478 Joined: 18-December 03 From: Louisville, KY Member No.: 5,918 |
Yeah, I can see a Troll in an armored bikini. Yuck.
|
|
|
|
|
Feb 17 2005, 09:31 PM
Post
#17
|
|
|
Chicago Survivor Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 5,079 Joined: 28-January 04 From: Canton, GA Member No.: 6,033 |
Wouldn't it have to be armored? How else would it "hold up"
|
|
|
|
|
Feb 17 2005, 09:32 PM
Post
#18
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 478 Joined: 18-December 03 From: Louisville, KY Member No.: 5,918 |
There goes my lunch. Cheers, chummer. LOL
|
|
|
|
|
Feb 17 2005, 10:51 PM
Post
#19
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 881 Joined: 1-May 04 Member No.: 6,295 |
I thought that was what things like second skin armor was for, so you could go to the beach and not look like you were crazy.
|
|
|
|
|
Feb 17 2005, 11:00 PM
Post
#20
|
|||
|
Runner Group: Members Posts: 2,901 Joined: 19-June 03 Member No.: 4,775 |
This is a bit of a non sequitur, but I was poking around the site and noticed the ballistic goggles. Any idea if it's possible to put prescription lenses in the low profile sunglass style goggles? |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Feb 17 2005, 11:10 PM
Post
#21
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 478 Joined: 18-December 03 From: Louisville, KY Member No.: 5,918 |
I'm sure if they have the technology to make cybernetic eyes it would be quite easy.
|
|
|
|
|
Feb 17 2005, 11:25 PM
Post
#22
|
|
|
Runner Group: Members Posts: 2,901 Joined: 19-June 03 Member No.: 4,775 |
Um, I'm kind of talking about reality. You know, the one that matters.
|
|
|
|
|
Feb 17 2005, 11:27 PM
Post
#23
|
|||||
|
Runner Group: Members Posts: 2,751 Joined: 8-August 03 From: Neighbor of the Beast Member No.: 5,375 |
Edited: Arethusa answered my question. |
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
Feb 17 2005, 11:30 PM
Post
#24
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 478 Joined: 18-December 03 From: Louisville, KY Member No.: 5,918 |
Reality? What's that?
|
|
|
|
|
Feb 18 2005, 12:50 AM
Post
#25
|
|
|
Immortal Elf Group: Members Posts: 11,410 Joined: 1-October 03 From: Pittsburgh Member No.: 5,670 |
they're just cool-looking safety glasses, which do come in prescription. the BCG glasses issued by the military perform the same function.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 25th May 2025 - 10:32 AM |
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.