Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: A few SR 4 questions / concerns
Dumpshock Forums > Discussion > Shadowrun
James McMurray
I'm still pouring through my copy (halfway through the matrix section now) and a few questions have come up.

1) Is it possible to get hardened armor for characters anymore? I could find it for critters, but apparently will have to wait for Cannon Companion 4.0 to get a suit of decent armor for high-end opposition.

2) Ammo differences. Why is EX Explosive easier to find and vastly superior to APDS? Why are Flechette and Gel ammo always better than standard ammo (assuming you don't mind doing stun damage)?

By the odds, +2 DV is worth -6 AP. That makes EX ammo vastly superior to APDS, which is supposed to be the king of the walk.

The armors given almost invariably have +2 Impact armor bringing it up to the same level as ballistic, making +2 DV in exchange for +2 AP on Impact a no brainer.

Were these intended or did they somehow slip through the playtesting cracks by a last minute edit?

3) Bonus dice are limited to a total modified value of base skill * 1.5. But what counts as bonus dice?

Skill Specializations: A few seconds of reading examples makes it pretty clear specialization doesn't count as bonus dice, but more likely as a higher base skill.

Smartgun: "+2 dice" sure sounds like "bonus dice" to me, but the Covert Ops specialist has a smartgun link with only a 2 skill. Is he limited to +1 from his link, with the other +1 waiting for him to buy some more skill?

Adept powers: These sure look like bonus dice to me, but have their own built in limits (+dice <= base skill).

Reflex Recorders, Enhanced Articulation, etc.: no mention of whether these count or not.

In my game I'll probably just say that everything counts until I learn otherwise, but I'd really love to know the official rule.

4) Deadliness of combat: With magic and guns only allowing one stat for defense vs. 2 for offense, and each hit of point of DV being worth 3 points of armor, combat just got a lot deadlier a lot faster. I don't know how much of a bad thing this is, as I've always run pretty deadly games, but it's a massive rampup of threat from prior editions (at least SR3).

Anybody care to pull the fog back from this poor GM's eyes?

5) Why doesn't the spellchecker know APDS, Flechette, Smartgun, etc.?
neko128
QUOTE
I'm still pouring through my copy (halfway through the matrix section now) and a few questions have come up.


"Poring". "Pouring" through your book would be pretty disgusting (no offense, but it would!)

QUOTE
1) Is it possible to get hardened armor for characters anymore? I could find it for critters, but apparently will have to wait for Cannon Companion 4.0 to get a suit of decent armor for high-end opposition.


Hardened armor wasn't included in the base book as gear, I think? I'd say you should look for it in Arsenal (3rd quarter).

QUOTE
2) Ammo differences. Why is EX Explosive easier to find and vastly superior to APDS? Why are Flechette and Gel ammo always better than standard ammo (assuming you don't mind doing stun damage)?


"Vastly superior" is arguable, IMHO; but if you think EX Explosive rounds are too available/cheap, then tone them down by bumping the price/availability or just have your fixers go out of stock.

QUOTE
4) Deadliness of combat: With magic and guns only allowing one stat for defense vs. 2 for offense, and each hit of point of DV being worth 3 points of armor, combat just got a lot deadlier a lot faster. I don't know how much of a bad thing this is, as I've always run pretty deadly games, but it's a massive rampup of threat from prior editions (at least SR3).

Anybody care to pull the fog back from this poor GM's eyes?


In my experience, yes, combat is rather nastier; but it isn't always 1 stat on defense. Full defense (ranged), counterspelling (magic) and all melee defense is two-statted (or more). Also, if you think combat's too deadly, there's a whole sidebar on making the game more/less deadly back near character creation; I don't have my book with me, so I can't give you a page ref at the moment.

QUOTE
5) Why doesn't the spellchecker know APDS, Flechette, Smartgun, etc.?


Lack of customization of the spell-checking dictionary?
PBTHHHHT
QUOTE (James McMurray)
2) Ammo differences. Why is EX Explosive easier to find and vastly superior to APDS? Why are Flechette and Gel ammo always better than standard ammo (assuming you don't mind doing stun damage)?

By the odds, +2 DV is worth -6 AP. That makes EX ammo vastly superior to APDS, which is supposed to be the king of the walk.


For me, I feel that denying the opponent 6 dice to resist on their armor as rather nasty. So YMMV depending on EX explosives vs. APDS.

QUOTE

3) Bonus dice are limited to a total modified value of base skill * 1.5. But what counts as bonus dice?


Another example of bonus die is aiming with your weapon. You can only get as much bonus as half your base skill.
James McMurray
[quote]"Vastly superior" is arguable, IMHO; but if you think EX Explosive rounds are too available/cheap, then tone them down by bumping the price/availability or just have your fixers go out of stock.[/quote

EX explosive is "vastly" superior to APDS, or at least, "markedly and measurably superior". For APDS you get, on average, 1.3 extra hits for your money (assuming your target has 4 armor). For EX Explosive you get 2.6 (assuming your target has 2 armor). Heck, just Ex ammo gives you an average of 1.3 hits (assuming an armor of 1). EX is a lot easier to find, can be started with, and only causes problems in freak occurrences. Normal explosive ammo is better, easier, and cheaper. The only reason to ever buy APDS in 4.0 is to say "look at this cool antique bullet I've got." (Alternative, using the "Armor reduces damage automatically" option would vastly improve APDS in most situations.

I can definitely tone it down through availabilty. Just having a crackdown by the police cause a dry market except for one source will almost double the price. I'm not so much worried about keeping it in check (I can just change it's rules if I want to). My confusion is because for decades now APDS was the shiznit. Now it's just a really hard to find poor alternative.

5.5: I originally went with "poring" but the spell-checker didn't recognize it so I assumed I'd goofed. It recognizes it now. smile.gif
mintcar
3) Bonus dice are limited to a total modified value of base skill * 1.5. But what counts as bonus dice?


This was in the errata.

The way it reads now is that modified skill value is limited to base skill x 1.5 (just like you said), but bonus dice to the dice pool are not limited by this.

The errata also fixes it so that the difference is clear in each case. For example, smart link, specializations and laser sights gives a bonus to dice pool and are not limited. Improved ability and reflex recorder however, gives a bonus to the skill directly and they are therefor covered by this rule.

Here's were you find the errata
James McMurray
QUOTE
For me, I feel that denying the opponent 6 dice to resist on their armor as rather nasty.  So YMMV depending on EX explosives vs. APDS.


I agree (when they've got 6 armor). On average (i.e. the majority of the time over a long term game) EX Explosive ammo is the same as double APDS (1.3 hits vs. 2.6 hits). However, in those instances where your opponent isn't wearing 4 points of armor, EX Explosive is even more useful. Per the base rules, unless there is a shortage of funds or a choked market, there is never any reason to buy APDS ammo other than to be flavorful. Standard Explosive does the same thing for 20 nuyen.gif cheaper, and EX Explosive does double for only 30 nuyen.gif more.

I'm not sure how I'll change it, but I'll almost assuredly change it (assuming I don't start using the Armor as free soak option.
mdynna
When looking at the deadliness of ranged combat keep in mind that the defender gets to roll Reaction first to reduce the attacker's net hits, then roll Body + Armour vs. the modified DV. In a way, it's like rolling 3 skills against the attacker's 2. Kind of.

I see now why everyone rates SR4 combat as "deadlier". Under SR3 every point of your armour always had an affect on the attack (reducing its power). Under SR4 every point of armor only has a 33% chance of reducing the DV. Yikes.
James McMurray
QUOTE (mintcar)
This was in the errata.

Thanks. But that provides another problem: In the erratta the only thing that changes a skill rating is a reflex recorder. So why is the rule there if it can't come into play except for people trying to get a reflex recorder for a skill at rating 0?
PBTHHHHT
Other reason... it's quieter? Using your silenced weapons with explosive rounds might not be as uhm... hush hush?

Kinda like whooops when the group is trying to be quiet?

edit: sorry, had to edit to make it more coherent.
Waltermandias
QUOTE
"Poring". "Pouring" through your book would be pretty disgusting (no offense, but it would!)


I just looked that up on dictionary.com, and I never knew that. I always figured it was "pouring" as in the sense of giving it your all or "pouring everything into a project." Who says nothing valuable comes off of Dumpshock?
James McMurray
mdynna: Yeah, but the attacker gets another stat vastly superior to any of the others: DV.

I'll ask my players what they think. Maybe we'll use armor as free hits, keep it as it is, or instead use the DV as more dice to roll. The base system does have the benefit of making it more likely for people to want to play "shadow" runners instead of straight mercenaries. Stealth is a heck of a lot more important in a world where bullets are so deadly.
PBTHHHHT
I just ran a game this past weekend. You know what's nasty? Chameleon suits, especially if your players are foolish enough not to spend any points in buying perception.

edit: They started using it alot and I used it right back at them. Along with thermal smoke grenades, sound suppressed smg's, and ultrasound.
James McMurray
QUOTE (PBTHHHHT)
Other reason... it's quieter? Using your silenced weapons with explosive rounds might not be as uhm... hush hush?

I didn't see anything in the ammunition description, silencer description, or perception rules that would indicate this. Am I missing something? It does sound like an option to use, but if it's just another house rule to add to the list it's less useful than a "see guys, there's a reason."
PBTHHHHT
QUOTE (James McMurray)
QUOTE (PBTHHHHT @ Mar 28 2006, 03:34 PM)
Other reason... it's quieter?  Using your silenced weapons with explosive rounds might not be as uhm... hush hush?

I didn't see anything in the ammunition description, silencer description, or perception rules that would indicate this. Am I missing something? It does sound like an option to use, but if it's just another house rule to add to the list it's less useful than a "see guys, there's a reason."

Well that's a good question, how loud is explosive rounds when they impact and go off? If it's more noticeable than APDS rounds, then you have reason to be using normal rounds and APDS and flechette with your silenced/suppressed weaponry when going the stealthy route.
James McMurray
I also saw the chameleon suits and went "yowza!" at least two players have already purchased them, and I can see a good number of specialized sec guards using them as well. But my players would never think to not buy perception. Every game I run, in every system, seeing what's around you is often the difference between life and death.
Butterblume
QUOTE (mdynna)
I see now why everyone rates SR4 combat as "deadlier".  Under SR3 every point of your armour always had an affect on the attack (reducing its power).  Under SR4 every point of armor only has a 33% chance of reducing the DV.  Yikes.

Exactly. When someone hits you in SR4, even with a light weapon, you most likely will take damage, at least stun. The basic lesson is: don't get hit.

Other matter:
I think the vision/hearing enhancements count as skill improvement (i might be wrong wink.gif ). What else comes to mind is reflex recorder and the adepts improved ability.


James McMurray
Another thing that a different thread reminded me of: background count is apparently gone. In SR3 it was a big helping to rein magic in. Heck, the mere act of casting an attack spell raised the background count to 1.

I'll definitely be using the old rules until a new version comes out. Centering would be available against it (albeit not for a few runs).
James McMurray
Adept improved ability specifically has its own limit (extra dice equal to base skill rating). Sense enhancement is described as a "positive dice pool modifier" so wouldn't apply.
Rotbart van Dainig
QUOTE (Butterblume)
I think the vision/hearing enhancements count as skill improvement (i might be wrong wink.gif ).

You are. wink.gif

BTW - ruthenium polymers are a lot less powerful in SR$, and APDS is still very neat if shooting people through obstacles.

Butterblume
Improved ability is also in the errata, at least in the german one. I can't right remember if it is in the english one yet, but it sure will come, if it is not.

It's still a insanely powerfull power wink.gif.
mintcar
QUOTE (James McMurray)
QUOTE (mintcar @ Mar 28 2006, 03:25 PM)
This was in the errata.

Thanks. But that provides another problem: In the erratta the only thing that changes a skill rating is a reflex recorder. So why is the rule there if it can't come into play except for people trying to get a reflex recorder for a skill at rating 0?

Reflex recorder and Improved ability. Might be other things, I'm not sure. There certainly will be more things in coming expansions.

The main thing is that there are things that give you a modified skill value, or attribute value; these things are written down on your character sheet in parethesis (strenght 4 (6)), and can not exceed 1.5 x base value.

Then there are things that gives a bonus to skills AND attributes put together as a dice pool for a specific test. These things are written down as a bonus value with a plus sign in front of it on the character sheet (Pilot groundcraft: car (+2) 3). These bonuses are not limited by the overall rule but may be limited in other ways.


I've had a lot of problems with this before the errata, but now there is no problem with clarity anymore. We know how the rule works. Whether we like it or not is another question.

James McMurray
Thanks! I hadn't noticed the change to Improved Ability. Makes ti somewhat better, although it's still possible to get tons of bonus dice, especially if you're willing to cross the adept / sammie barrier, but that's been true for every edition.
Jaid
APDS is better for dealing with hardened armor, and for damaging objects iirc (where it is more important to be doing physical damage, because stun does nothing).

for example, a heavy pistol shooting at a vehicle with, say, 10 armor:

DV 5, penetration -1, you need 4 net hits to deal physical damage (and therefore deal any damage at all).
with APDS:
DV 5, penetration -5, you need 1 net hit, but only because without 1 net hit you deal 0 damage.

so, there are a select few situations where APDS is better. not very many though.
Shrike30
But Jaid, the RAW for EXEX is that it's +2/-2, meaning that against that armor 10 vehicle, your baseline heavy pistol's new stylish 7/-3 profile ALSO only needs one net hit to do damage... and it starts off at 7, not 5.

My fix for EXEX was easy... I removed it from the game entirely, then made APDS avail 12F (so you could get it at character creation). Since basic EX and APDS are about equal in terms of effect, it comes down to whether or not you want to punch a hole in a heavily armored target/shoot through an object, or not overpenetrate/do better against unarmored targets.
Aku
QUOTE (James McMurray)
Another thing that a different thread reminded me of: background count is apparently gone. In SR3 it was a big helping to rein magic in. Heck, the mere act of casting an attack spell raised the background count to 1.

I'll definitely be using the old rules until a new version comes out. Centering would be available against it (albeit not for a few runs).

background counts werent in the intial sr3 book, either.
James McMurray
Yeah, Dikote, Background Counts, and Hardened Armor haven't (IIRC) ben in any of the base books for any edition. But they've been around long enough they probably should be. They did that with initiation, and I iwsh they'd done it with those others.
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