Curious. If "Attacker Using Off-Hand Weapon" allows you to attack with two weapons at the same time with one simple action, and since the revolver in the book is Single Shot ("Firing a single-shot weapon requires only a Simple Action, but that weapon cannot be fired again during the same Action Phase."), could you get away with holding two revolvers, firing one in the first simple action and the second in the second simple action?

The only penalty I'm seeing is the "Attacker Using Off-Hand Weapon" by using a non-dominant hand (only -2 penalty to second attack), which could be cancelled out by taking Ambidexterity.

Since you're NOT using them both in the same action, you're technically NOT relying on the "Attacker Using a Second Firearm" rule, so smartlink/laser sights would work fine, right? Plus you wouldn't have to split the dicepool.

I see no benefit in NOT doing this for revolvers, except for the possibility of reloading problems (or non-munchkinizing roleplaying). Even then you could just drop the second gun (free), and reload the first normally, losing no time, but getting a bigger bang for your buck in the first few rounds.

Am I right or wrong?

Now, I haven't checked exactly what it says in the rulebook, but as a GM I'd say go right ahead.

You aren't using two weapons at the same time, really (though this point could be argued, I guess) and the ambidexterity should cancel out the penalty.

Reloading will of course be an issue, but it could be done, realisically (just 'hang' one revolver off your trigger finger and reload the other; repeat)


Of course, except for style-factor, you would be better off with one semi-automatic with 12 (or more) rounds in the clip, or even two of them...but style IS king, after all.

ofcourse, couldnt you then also do this firing two SA's (say, a pair of 9mm?), shooting in SS mode? you then get the ability to not only have a higher clip capacity, but also be able to fire off a pair of bursts, as needed?

I was all about to jump in with a "hell no" and let fly the rules. But then I went to the rules. And, well.

That would be if you shot them both on the same simple action, what they are saying is to fire each gun on a separate action and avoid those penaltys....I don't see why one couldn't mentally switch to the other gun....

and the rules don't keep you from doing that. after all, if you're firing each gun alternately, you're not using a two-gun attack. you're using a different gun for each one-gun attack. (i'm basically looking at the phrase "two-gun attack" as a quasi-game term that means "firing both weapons as part of the same simple action".)

Even in that situation I'd still stack uncompensated recoil.

well, yeah. me too.

Why? According to what I am reading recoil stacks when a guy fires a gun more than once in an action phase....which they wouldn't do with this loop-hole...

You answered your own question Squinky! Because it is a loop-hole...GMs can be so cruel, can't we?

I don't understand why firing 2 hand weapons would negate the benefit of smartgun link or laser sight, especially if they colour coded, blue is left and red is right, through use of either enhanced reality or different lasers.

I can see it being tricky to shoot two different targets, but that is also the case if you are shooting without enhancers. But if you were shooting at the same target it shouldn't really be that much harder than shooting a single gun.

The main disadvantage of firing two guns is that you don't have a free hand for grabbing hold of things, opening doors, steadying yourself on ledges, etc.

it overloads the brains instant processing power, like when you try and load XP on a commodore 64

ok maybe blowing it a little out of proportions but the concept is the same, using two weapons that are smartlinked, your recieving perceptory overload, which is one of the reasons i dont like this wi-fi image link stuff their doing with SR4, but hey thats my thoughts on the matter no need for it here. basically your seeing to much for your brain to catalog it fast enough and you miss stuff, usually important stuff

you've never tried hitting two seperate MOVING targets with two seperate pistols before have you eagle, i have it aint easy especially when your trying to hit them both at the same time. and if they are not moving toward each other which human targets rarely are, your really screwed

Heh, why not just rig both of your cyberarms as sentry gun drones, and spend your precious brain power designating targets for them. You'll have to run a skinlinked PAN to keep them from being hacked, of course, but most runners will be doing that anyway.

Or rig one of your arms as a sentry gun drone, and do your own shooting with your other arm...

The drone arm is getting a 'copy' of your muscular control signals, it runs a 'movement simulation' of you, and it able to more or less keep up. As the actions of the body are slow compares to the processing power of the drone arm, it should have no trouble compensating (at least partially) for your movement. Just like you would have little trouble compensating (again, partially) for any movemenys you have to make. As they are your movements, and can be passed out to the computer, the computer can compensate for them. I would imagine that is roughly how 'jumping into' drones works as well. However, with a jumped in drone, you have the problem of getting 'dron'e movement signals sent to your body as well, which is why you are just a meat puppet when you are jumped in. However, snice the 'drone arm' is your own body, there is no problem.

However, there is the problem in the reverse, you will be largely unprepared for any sudden movements your drone arm makes. You'd probably want to add the balance augmentation cyberware. And you would suffer a penalty of maybe -1 reaction when the drone arm was running, as you are slightly off balance. (Maybe -2 reaction without bal aug wear, -1 with?), of course, it depends on how wide an arc of fire you are allowing the drone arm as well. If it is going to engage 'forward 60 degrees' that is one thing, if it is going to engage 'extended side, posibly pivoting back to the limits of the shoulder joint, that's a different matter.

So to expand, there should be a 'dedicated' drone arm and a 'gun drone' modification for otherwise regular arms. The dedicated gun arm would work much better, but, of course, any idiot knows what it is.

Eh I'd argue that if you went captains chair and just had it doing its own thing it would be at a penalty, or at the very least you'd be at a severe penalty, with your arm whipping around and choosing its own targets and not allowing you to move easily (for example you want to roll back around the corner to avoid the full auto fire, but your arm has different plans and jerks you back out right into the path of the narrow burst with your name writen on it).

All in all I don't find it that practical all things considered. Especialy when considering what bad things could happen to you at very inopertune times.

I highly disbelive that scenario Shadow Prophet, after all, it is just an arm attached to you. At best, i might think it would have the torque and power to spin you about in one place, but for cyber parts to tell meat parts that it wants to fire at a target "over there" and make the meat legs move... i dont think so...

Depends on how much autonomy you want to allow the gun drone. All the way from, find and shoot your own targets to 'computer assisted aiming'. There would basically be increasing penalties to reaction, based on how much freedom you are allowing the drone.

Say:

Drone assisted aiming, +3 (slightly better than a smartlink), reaction penalty 0

Slow, Limited traverse mode: drone arm engages targets in a relatively narrow forward arc, it is alos fairly slow and conservative in it's movements:

1 init pass, 45 degree forward arc, -1 reaction

Fast, limited traverse:
The drone arm is more aggressive in its movements, but still in a limited arc

2 init passes, 45 degree arc, -2 reaction

Slow, free traverse
The arm will move within its full range of movement, but movements will still be fluid enough to compensate for.

1 init pass, 110? degree arc, -2 reaction

Fast, free traverse
What they show in the advertisements

2 init passes, 110? degree arc, -3 reaction.

[edits]
balance augmentor ware might reduce this penalty by 1.
But still, running two of these in 'fast, free traverse' basically makes you an immobile gun platform.
[/edit]

i think your base arcs should be ~90 degrees, which amounts to a foreward point arm to a side pointing arm, with the full versions being close to 150 degrees, or being able t aim roughly halfway across your chest. I would also rule that you can't go beyond being paralel with you're body, wihout risking a L wound (may roll a 1d6, a roll of 1 or 2 and you take the wound?) this representing the strain and risk of injury that sending your shoulder in that direction under the control of motors may have.

How can two laser dots overwhelm your ability to process them. The way I've understood a smartgun link to be is essentially a better version which has preprogrammed drop off and vector information, etc. I guess this is probably close to the shooting reticle in various fighter games. So in essence quite simple.

I can understand the point about shooting two separate targets as being very tricky, especially if they are moving in different directions, in widely spaced locations. (The best I can offer is computer shoot'em 2 with 2 guns, which is mostly stationary targets in a narrow angle, and my subdominant hand did not perform as often as my dominant hand, but it did give me cover fire and helped with speculative fire - electronic bounce means the shot can miss, so more lead more chance to hit).

I think I may have to use a house rule, which would allow the laser sight and smart link bonuses, but have starting penalty of 2 dice to offhand and then both hands get increasing penalties dependent on targets location and movement
No penalty for same target
-2 for separate targets
-2 for widely separated targets (cumul.)
-2 for difference in target movement (cumul.)
For a maximum penalty of -8 for off hand and -6 for on hand

One way would be to add any suitable penalties each target incurs to both targets. I.E. if both targets are running, you get double the running modifier to hit both of them - to simulate that you have to concentrate on the movement of both of them.

The same could be done for distance, cover, etc as he GM feels is approperiate for the shot.

Here's something else interesting, and I wanted everybody's input on this situation:

Under the rules for firing at two different targets, it states that you take the penalty if you fire at a second target with your second simple action in that phase.

If you are using two pistols and splitting your dice pool, could you be shooting at two different targets with no further penalty provided that you didn't switch them? The RAW seem to allow for that, but it common sense tends to make me think the penalty would still apply.

The way I'm reading it is every action phase....