Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Dude, armor sucks.
Dumpshock Forums > Discussion > Shadowrun
Pages: 1, 2, 3
emo samurai
Even if it does work, it'll only give you stun damage, which is just as bad, if not worse, than actual physical damage. Would a houserule saying that it does 1/2 stun damage if it stops the bullet work well?
Thanee
If some hits are converted to stun you keep going longer. That isn't really a bad thing.

Bye
Thanee
hobgoblin
get yourself some hardend armor (alltho you probably have to wait for the book with military class armor in it).

atleast you live to fight another day, as long as your team gets you out of there. oh, and first aid can be used to fix stun damage now...
Signal
QUOTE (emo samurai @ Mar 26 2006, 11:02 AM)
Even if it does work, it'll only give you stun damage, which is just as bad, if not worse, than actual physical damage. Would a houserule saying that it does 1/2 stun damage if it stops the bullet work well?

There's an actual suggestion written in the book, on page 69, to let armor ratings just flat-out subtract from the DV of a weapon without need for a roll. This might make people a whole lot more durable and it's a "canon" rules option, if that sort of thing makes you feel better. It will definately make them more durable if you allow them to continue rolling their Body dice for resistance.
emo samurai
YES!!!!!! That's a good idea.
Butterblume
I don't think its that good. For example, it makes common pistols with normal ammo pretty useless again.
Azathfeld
Err, armor doesn't just convert physical damage to stun. It also adds to the resistance test, making you much more likely to take less damage. The stun conversion is really secondary to the extra dice for resistance.
emo samurai
Does it add dice for resistance if the DV is higher than the armor?
Pallantides
QUOTE (emo samurai)
Does it add dice for resistance if the DV is higher than the armor?

Yep.
emo samurai
Maybe armor DOES rock...
Grinder
In my games every runner was more than happy to wear armor. wink.gif
Pallantides
I honestly kinda like the SR4 rules for armor- simple. I like the Cy2020 ones too, but SR is infinitely more elegant and there's less number crunching involved.

But I do like the Security Armors of earlier editions now that I have some SR3 books. Here's my lame attempt at conversion:

Light Security: 8/6 Armor Vest with Full Body Armor Helmet
Medium Security: 10/8 Armor Jacket with Full Body Armor Helmet
Heavy Security: 12/10 Full Body Armor with Helmet
Red
The key problem with armor is that while every point of armor counts for the physical to stun conversion, only 1/3 of it counts toward actual damage reduction regardless of what type of armor it is. Thus the higher the armor becomes the greater the gulf. This is what leads to many of the complaints regarding the perceived uselessness of armor. On average, armor is very ineffective. It requires luck, and more often Edge to make armor have a serious effect in reducing damage from an individual blow.

It is perfectly understandable if each point of armor has only a 33% chance of counting if the armor is very limited in body coverage like an armored vest. However something like full body armor should have a greater chance of counting. The problem is that since variable TNs have been abolished, there is no way to represent this change in effectiveness without pumping the total armor rating of a given piece of armor. But since the physical to stun conversion ratio is 100%, this leads to whacky results in other scenarios.

As the current armor system is written, it is impossible to reconcile the physical to stun conversion rating, and the damage reduction rating of non-hardened armor once you get past a certain rating, say 8+ or 10+. But without variable TNs, or a hit based location damage system it is impossible to solve this problem without a heavily abstracted armor rating system like the one that has presently been chosen through playtesting.

But, I suppose if you wanted a comprimise between a universal TN 5 system, and a full success system you could use the following House rules of thumb;

Torso coverage - TN 5
Torso and arms - TN 4
Torso and legs - TN 4
Torso, and head - TN 4
Torso, (select two, arms, legs, or head) - TN 3
Torso, arms, legs, and head - TN 2

Basically each area of coverage beyond the torso might drop the test by 1. However this house rule of thumb is flawed too. It assumes that the armor rating between all the various bodily regions are roughly the same. And it might be necessary to reduce the armor ratings of some SR4 standard armors because we just eliminated the reason for some of their inflated ratings.

To become more accurate, you'd need to take even more steps toward a hit location based system. And you'd have to restat all the non-hardened body armor sources. This would take you even farther away from the fast and loose execution for which SR4 seems to have been made. Beware what you wish for.
emo samurai
You could just ramp up the armor values, too...
hobgoblin
im guessing the 1/3 effective stuff is based on the logic that you roll the armor as extra resistance dice rather then getting a direct reduction?

funny thing is that i think the new armor rules are more "realistic" in that you can get knocked out by a heavy weapon without taking any physical damage.
Butterblume
QUOTE (hobgoblin)
funny thing is that i think the new armor rules are more "realistic" in that you can get knocked out by a heavy weapon without taking any physical damage.

I don't find it funny, but i agree wink.gif.
And that you can get knocked out by a light weapon, if shot often enough.

If someone thinks less armour is better, because your physical damage track is longer, thats ok with me biggrin.gif.
emo samurai
Only if you're a troll or something... but if you're a troll, you;ll probably have ton of armor on...
hyzmarca
QUOTE (hobgoblin)
im guessing the 1/3 effective stuff is based on the logic that you roll the armor as extra resistance dice rather then getting a direct reduction?

funny thing is that i think the new armor rules are more "realistic" in that you can get knocked out by a heavy weapon without taking any physical damage.

This is where the gun experts come in and dismember you with ceremonial blades made from the preserved bones of Sir Hiram Maxim.
hobgoblin
err, i was talking in general terms. as in i never defined what a heavy weapon was (alltho i see now that its a loaded expression).

point is this that multiple rounds into a vest will leave you bruised and beaten, just as if someone was hitting you with fists or other blunt objects.

in that sense you can go down from stun damage even tho the bullets was never able to get in and mess up the tissues of your body...
Red
Yes. The 1/3 is derived from the general probability of successes given a TN of 5, with edge excluded.

My experience with statistical analysis leaves a little wanting, so I shall leave more elaborate exercises to others that have commented long before me.
Azathfeld
The effects of coverage are factored into the armor's rating already. There's little statistical difference between rolling few dice against a lower TN vs. more dice at a higher TN. The latter has the benefit of being just like the other die-rolling that goes on in SR4, though, so it doesn't need a special rule. There's a reason that an armor vest gives fewer dice than an armor jacket, despite being the same type of armor.

On average, armor is effective, when you consider that it both reduces incoming damage and diverts some attacks onto the stun track. It's unlikely that armor will totally eliminate damage from an attack in SR4, but that's not a bad thing. You should feel some effect from impacts that don't penetrate your armor, but it should lessen those, which is what this system models. It's possible for light attacks simply to bounce off a highly armored invidual, but it's unlikely, and it should be.

There is a legitimate complaint in that stun damage is pretended to be less important than physical damage, when in an individual combat the opposite tends to be true. That's a problem with the damage system, though, and not the armor system. I think I'll resolve it by adding both Body/2 and Willpower/2 to the stun track, but changing the armor system is, IMO, not the answer.
Geekkake
QUOTE (hobgoblin)
...i never defined what a heavy weapon was (alltho i see now that its a loaded expression).

...and the gun puns begin.
hobgoblin
ugh, unintended...
emo samurai
I was going to point that out and then decided against it.
Red
QUOTE (Azathfeld)
The effects of coverage are factored into the armor's rating already. There's little statistical difference between rolling few dice against a lower TN vs. more dice at a higher TN. The latter has the benefit of being just like the other die-rolling that goes on in SR4, though, so it doesn't need a special rule. There's a reason that an armor vest gives fewer dice than an armor jacket, despite being the same type of armor.

Despite my weakness in statistics, I disagree. A lower TN with fewer dice can offer the same average result but with a very different curve. It will have a lower maximum success rate for example. Combining variable TNs with a variable number of dice offers much more mathematical flexibility than a static TN.

I agree that coverage is factored in, but I disagree in that sense that I believe it is factored in very poorly. But I don't believe there is a better way to do it other than the system they've choosen. And there is nothing wrong with that in the big picture.
Edward
The problem with diverting damage to the stun track is that the stun track is usually shorter. If you make a tank build under SR4 all small arms can be made to do subdual damage

Take a troll full borg with 8 points of cyber armour. Body 12 will 2 and 6 points of worn ballistic armour. If being attacked buy weapons with a damage value between 9 and 14 he will last longer if he takes his worn armour off. Although he will on average soak 2 less boxes of damage a hit he has 5 more boxes on his physical track

Edward
The Jopp
Well, if armour is statistically good or bad is for me quite irrelevant. As an individual with the option of getting my spleen shot out of my body by a .50 magnum or a fist sized bruise and a few cracked ribs on my chest the choice is easy.

Armour is there to make sure that you donít DIE. Yes, you might pass out from the pain but you will always feel pain when you get shot. I do believe that you will raise more eyebrows running around in a pair of speedos in a firefight than a bulletproof vest.
Signal
QUOTE (The Jopp)
Well, if armour is statistically good or bad is for me quite irrelevant. As an individual with the option of getting my spleen shot out of my body by a .50 magnum or a fist sized bruise and a few cracked ribs on my chest the choice is easy.

Armour is there to make sure that you donít DIE. Yes, you might pass out from the pain but you will always feel pain when you get shot. I do believe that you will raise more eyebrows running around in a pair of speedos in a firefight than a bulletproof vest.

QFT.

Also remember that stun damage heals up a lot faster than physical. Plus, there are easy ways to stay awake even after taking a lot of stun damage.
Austere Emancipator
QUOTE (hobgoblin)
point is this that multiple rounds into a vest will leave you bruised and beaten, just as if someone was hitting you with fists or other blunt objects.

hyzmarca took all the joy out of this, but I guess it still needs to be said. I'll even ignore the "heavy weapons" bit.

When is the last time you have seen a boxer knocked unconscious by a few jabs to the body (that is to say, not to the head)? Other than inducing shock through pain, which is very unlikely if the target is healthy, what mechanism would you suggest would render an adult human unconscious when his torso is bruised? Stopping the heart or injuring the spine would be theoretically possible, but either would constitute "Physical" damage and are out of the question.

What I'm getting at is that it is not at all realistic that bullet impacts defeated by body armor reliably cause a lasting state of unconsciousness similar to what might be caused by a blow to the head. There's a certain internal game logic there -- all kinds of blunt trauma cause Stun overflow unconsciousness in SR -- but it this is not the same as real life logic.
kigmatzomat
QUOTE (Butterblume)
I don't think its that good. For example, it makes common pistols with normal ammo pretty useless again.

1) people who get shot in existing body armor by a handgun are generally uninjured.

2) Newton's laws of physics and human physiology say that future handguns may get smaller, more accurate, or have more ammo but they won't include much more kinetic energy.

In SR, people who carry handguns should expect to make called shots when facing anyone tougher than a ganger to bypass armor. Shooting SWAT or security in full body armor with pistols *should* be an effort in futility. An SMG at least has the possibility of bludgeoning them into submission with automatic fire.
neko128
QUOTE (Austere Emancipator)
What I'm getting at is that it is not at all realistic that bullet impacts defeated by body armor reliably cause a lasting state of unconsciousness similar to what might be caused by a blow to the head. There's a certain internal game logic there -- all kinds of blunt trauma cause Stun overflow unconsciousness in SR -- but it this is not the same as real life logic.

Severe blows to the torso can compress the diaphragm, put the heart into arrhythmia, compress the lungs, crack ribs, and bruise muscles; all of these affect respiration or circulation, which can decrease oxygen to the brain and put you into shock or even cardiac arrest. All of those will certainly put you under in severe cases; and most people won't be put under by stun from one bullet, but 3-4 if they're wearing armor.

It's also worth noting your example about boxers is partially false. A boxing glove diffuses and pads the impact, just like a vest will; but the bullet is moving MUCH faster, hits a smaller area, and decelerates faster, all of which increase the force you feel. I'm not 100% certain, but I believe it hits with a rather greater force than a fist, even accounting for the low weight.
neko128
QUOTE (kigmatzomat)
1) people who get shot in existing body armor by a handgun are generally uninjured.

Generally not SERIOUSLY injured. They almost invariably are left with bruises and sore spots, if not cracked ribs. Not immediately life-threatening, but certainly not pleasant.
kigmatzomat
Cracked ribs are pretty much unheard of from pistol rounds, assuming you aren't discussing the "bear killer" Biggest Finest Guns (.500, .35/70, etc). And a given bruise may or may not qualify as stun damage (e.g. "ow, I hit the table with my shin!" vs. "ow, I hit the airbag with my face!").
mdynna
You could always fix it by not having someone fall automatically unconscious when their Stun damage fills up. Have them make a Body + Will roll with a Threshold of their total Damage modifiers (Stun and Physical). If they succeed, then further Stun overflows into Physical, but they can keep on truckin'. They have to make a new roll every time they take new damage.

This would certainly allow the Troll-tanks to walk about in heavy armour, shedding bullets like water, as I think they are supposed to. The randomness of the roll would account for things like lucky shots knocking their wind out to the point that they pass out, or head/spine trauma inducing unconsciousness.
hobgoblin
QUOTE (Austere Emancipator)
When is the last time you have seen a boxer knocked unconscious by a few jabs to the body (that is to say, not to the head)? Other than inducing shock through pain, which is very unlikely if the target is healthy, what mechanism would you suggest would render an adult human unconscious when his torso is bruised? Stopping the heart or injuring the spine would be theoretically possible, but either would constitute "Physical" damage and are out of the question.

a boxer is maybe a bad example as he is trained to handle said blows, but i see where your going with it.

im no MD so i cant say what blunt damage can be done to a body to render it unconcious without lasting harm (that term is very nebulous btw, as you can get some very nice long term damage from blunt trauma).

so maybe SR should go the way of their NPCs? one track of damage?
hmm, where did i put that cp2020 book...
Azathfeld
Stun damage doesn't always represent concussive trauma. It indicates "bruising, muscle fatigue and the like". Being beaten about the head may make you black out, but taking enough bruises to the rib cage will leave you on the floor gaspign for breath, and just as effectively out of the fight.

One thing that I'm realizing does bug me about the armor system, though, is that you'll actually knock a PC down faster at high levels of armor than at medium ones, because most or all of the damage goes onto the stun track rather than the physical. When your AV is greater than the DV of all attacks, you'll be put out of the fight twice as fast as when AV is only greater than the DV of half of the incoming attacks.

I'm just going to allow players to elect to take physical damage rather than stun if they so desire, and thus extend the time that highly-armored folks stay upright. If am justification is needed, it can be seen as just ignoring your body's messages, and going on despite the pain, sustaining less trivial injuries in the process.
ThatSzechuan
My boxing coach was pro for 27 years, during which time he would spar with Lennox Lewis, among others. He beat the New York state champ back when he was still pro at the stadium in Buffalo. The man was 190lbs at fighting trim when he was in his early-mid 20s.

This man can't drop me with a body shot unless he hits me in the solar plexus when I'm not ready, and I'm neither talented nor physically fit enough to get in the ring against amateurs yet. There are 140lb women who get lifted off the ground every time he hits, and they take it with a smile. I think armor should help diffuse the blow more, even if knockdown became mandatory. nyahnyah.gif

--

As far as the armor rules go, the stun track /is/ smaller, but we did some math a few months ago somewhere on the boards. It turned out that there's a certain point of balance for Trolls where the benefit of having a metric asston of armor outweighs the statistical disadvantage of having a smaller stun track. It's somewhere in the realm of 30-35 soak dice.
mdynna
There should still be a mechanic to allow someone to "stay awake" after their Stun track fills up. Shouldn't there?
Azathfeld
QUOTE (ThatSzechuan)
As far as the armor rules go, the stun track /is/ smaller, but we did some math a few months ago somewhere on the boards. It turned out that there's a certain point of balance for Trolls where the benefit of having a metric asston of armor outweighs the statistical disadvantage of having a smaller stun track. It's somewhere in the realm of 30-35 soak dice.

Okay, well, rather than suggest to my Troll that he build a 30+ soak pool (*shudder*), I'm going to let him take some shots as physical if he wants.
ThatSzechuan
QUOTE (Azathfeld)
QUOTE (ThatSzechuan @ Mar 27 2006, 12:13 PM)
As far as the armor rules go, the stun track /is/ smaller, but we did some math a few months ago somewhere on the boards. It turned out that there's a certain point of balance for Trolls where the benefit of having a metric asston of armor outweighs the statistical disadvantage of having a smaller stun track. It's somewhere in the realm of 30-35 soak dice.

Okay, well, rather than suggest to my Troll that he build a 30+ soak pool (*shudder*), I'm going to let him take some shots as physical if he wants.

My toll has a body of 7 and can still make 26 soak without cyberware, adept powers. or equipment not available at chargen. nyahnyah.gif
Butterblume
QUOTE (mdynna)
There should still be a mechanic to allow someone to "stay awake" after their Stun track fills up.  Shouldn't there?

Pain Editor? Not available at chargen, but well worth it wink.gif.
Austere Emancipator
QUOTE (neko128)
Severe blows to the torso can compress the diaphragm, put the heart into arrhythmia, compress the lungs, crack ribs, and bruise muscles; all of these affect respiration or circulation, which can decrease oxygen to the brain and put you into shock or even cardiac arrest. All of those will certainly put you under in severe cases; and most people won't be put under by stun from one bullet, but 3-4 if they're wearing armor.

I already mentioned the precordial thump (which would be a great example of lethal blunt trauma when done wrong, or indeed right in this case) and bruising is a horribly inefficient method of disabling circulation, so you're really left with temporarily disabling the respiratory system.

I assume this could be achieved if you managed to cause extensive but not critical damage to the diaphragm, but I have never heard of that happening, certainly not when talking about blunt trauma from bullets stopped by body armor. Rather I'd expect something like that might happen if you got severely beaten in the chest and the sides with clubs -- the firearms equivalent would be wearing level III-A body armor and getting repeated point blank hits from 12Gs firing 00 buck.

QUOTE (neko128)
It's also worth noting your example about boxers is partially false. A boxing glove diffuses and pads the impact, just like a vest will; but the bullet is moving MUCH faster, hits a smaller area, and decelerates faster, all of which increase the force you feel. I'm not 100% certain, but I believe it hits with a rather greater force than a fist, even accounting for the low weight.

Look at an MMA event that doesn't use gloves, then. The bullet is far more energetic, causing a sharper impact that is much more likely to cause minor bruises, but the jab has far more momentum and more likely to have a profound effect deeper into the tissue. I wouldn't know which is better at knocking a person unconscious since I have never heard of either managing it.

QUOTE (neko128)
Not immediately life-threatening, but certainly not pleasant.

Not life-threatening, period. No fatalities from projectiles that the body armor they were stopped by was rated against and all that.

QUOTE (hobgoblin)
im no MD so i cant say what blunt damage can be done to a body to render it unconcious without lasting harm (that term is very nebulous btw, as you can get some very nice long term damage from blunt trauma).

so maybe SR should go the way of their NPCs? one track of damage?

Yeah, this ties in nicely with the good old "why do maces do Stun damage" issue. I'm not opposed to the idea of a Stun track, but at the very least we should acknowledge that categorizing all blunt trauma as Stun/non-lethal is not very logical.

QUOTE (Azathfeld)
Stun damage doesn't always represent concussive trauma. It indicates "bruising, muscle fatigue and the like". Being beaten about the head may make you black out, but taking enough bruises to the rib cage will leave you on the floor gaspign for breath, and just as effectively out of the fight.

The problem is, getting your Stun track filled means you will be completely incapable of taking any action at all for at least around 15 minutes, more likely 60 minutes, unless you get medical attention. And hell, the average SR character can take a decent shot from a shotgun at point blank range while unarmored and not be left gasping for his breath and out of the fight for any more than a Simple Action or whatever it takes to get up after being Knocked Down, which to me implies that the Stun track filling up simulates a condition far more serious than bruises on your chest.
neko128
QUOTE (Austere Emancipator)
QUOTE (neko128)
Not immediately life-threatening, but certainly not pleasant.

Not life-threatening, period. No fatalities from projectiles that the body armor they were stopped by was rated against and all that.

Both internal bleeding and broken/fractured bones can be life-threatening if you're unlucky, and both can be caused by a non-penetrating bullet.

I can't speak to "armor and projectiles it's rated for", though.
Austere Emancipator
QUOTE (neko128)
Both internal bleeding and broken/fractured bones can be life-threatening if you're unlucky, and both can be caused by a non-penetrating bullet.

I can't speak to "armor and projectiles it's rated for", though.

Got an example of a bullet stopped by body armor causing that kind of damage, then? Regardless of the rating of the armor.
Azathfeld
QUOTE (Austere Emancipator)
QUOTE (Azathfeld)
Stun damage doesn't always represent concussive trauma. It indicates "bruising, muscle fatigue and the like". Being beaten about the head may make you black out, but taking enough bruises to the rib cage will leave you on the floor gaspign for breath, and just as effectively out of the fight.

The problem is, getting your Stun track filled means you will be completely incapable of taking any action at all for at least around 15 minutes, more likely 60 minutes, unless you get medical attention. And hell, the average SR character can take a decent shot from a shotgun at point blank range while unarmored and not be left gasping for his breath and out of the fight for any more than a Simple Action or whatever it takes to get up after being Knocked Down, which to me implies that the Stun track filling up simulates a condition far more serious than bruises on your chest.

Well, I'm sorry if it causes you some cognitive disconnect, but bruising is exactly one of the things that is indicated by taking stun damage. Presumably, though, "bruises on your chest" is not really the way to protray filling your entire stun track with stun damage. That's more like having your chest be one, big bruise, and probably some light trauma to other parts of your body. By the time that you've taken 9+ levels of stun, you're in enough pain to be effectively inactive.
neko128
QUOTE (Austere Emancipator)
QUOTE (neko128)
Both internal bleeding and broken/fractured bones can be life-threatening if you're unlucky, and both can be caused by a non-penetrating bullet.

I can't speak to "armor and projectiles it's rated for", though.

Got an example of a bullet stopped by body armor causing that kind of damage, then? Regardless of the rating of the armor.

Yes. My brother is an ER doc, and he's told me stories about various gunshot victims. One story I remember in particular was about someone who took a bullet to the right side of a vest; the bullet lodged in the vest, but it cracked a rib and punctured his lung in the process. That's most definitely life-threatening if not treated. I have no idea what he was shot by, though.

Why do you seem so upset by the idea? Any major blunt force trauma can cause collatoral damage of that type.
hobgoblin
his problem is that a wound fit under physical damage, not stun damage...
Austere Emancipator
QUOTE (Azathfeld)
Well, I'm sorry if it causes you some cognitive disconnect, but bruising is exactly one of the things that is indicated by taking stun damage.

Oh I have no problem with that. I have a problem with bruises alone causing a healthy adult human to be rendered completely incapable of any action, unless the whole body is one big bruise, at which point the damage to circulation starts to get serious. Your whole chest can easily be black and blue without it being more than a minor injury. Check out some crash survivors: for example, this guy (warning: close-up of naked, bruised male, photo taken 1 week after the injury) climbed right back onto his quad and rode it a long way back to camp. 3 boxes of Stun, maybe? Stuff like this doesn't merit more than 1 box of Stun.
neko128
QUOTE (Austere Emancipator)
QUOTE (Azathfeld)
Well, I'm sorry if it causes you some cognitive disconnect, but bruising is exactly one of the things that is indicated by taking stun damage.

Oh I have no problem with that. I have a problem with bruises alone causing a healthy adult human to be rendered completely incapable of any action, unless the whole body is one big bruise, at which point the damage to circulation starts to get serious. Your whole chest can easily be black and blue without it being more than a minor injury. Check out some crash survivors: for example, this guy (warning: close-up of naked, bruised male, photo taken 1 week after the injury) climbed right back onto his quad and rode it a long way back to camp. 3 boxes of Stun, maybe? Stuff like this doesn't merit more than 1 box of Stun.

By your definition, then, bullets never do stun damage; they just do reduced amounts of physical damage. If that's how you want to play it, just eliminate the "physical->stun" conversion for firearms, and increase the effectiveness of armor.
Shrike30
I've been using a combination of rules.

Rather than rolling dice equal to Armor rating to reduce incoming damage, I just have my players subtract half (rounding up) of their armor value from the damage.

Any *ballistic* damage that is stepped down from physical to stun by the armor is cut in half just before being applied to the stun track.

More than anything else, this combination of rules means that players can take a hit or two without the risk of completely blowing them into tatters with a short burst. I don't mind players getting hurt that much, but I mind (from a gameplay point of view) when the first hit they take, despite being fairly well armored, turns them into dogmeat.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Dumpshock Forums © 2001-2012