Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Dodging grenades
Dumpshock Forums > Discussion > Shadowrun
Pages: 1, 2
James McMurray
How does it work? The dodging rules say you get -2 die when dodging a grenade, but the grenade rules themselves never mention dodge at all. So how do you dodge one?
UndeadPoet
By using the normal dodging rules. biggrin.gif
Reaction(+combatsense, for adepts or fighter-mages).
Eryk the Red
I'm confused like James. Grenades are resolved differently than other attacks. What's the actual effect of dodging a grenade (since the attack roll is used just to determine where it lands)?
James McMurray
Yeah, it's not like you can dodge well wnough to make them miss their target (the ground next to you).
warrior_allanon
unless you can get around a corner so that your in the corners blast shadow. or if on a stairway get below it to be in the blast shadow
Thanee
QUOTE (Eryk the Red @ Apr 16 2006, 04:06 PM)
Grenades are resolved differently than other attacks. What's the actual effect of dodging a grenade (since the attack roll is used just to determine where it lands)?


This is wrong. The attack roll is also used to stage up the DV.

First you remove scatter, but if there are net hits left afterwards, they add to the DV.

QUOTE
Make a standard ranged attack test using the attacker’s Agility + appropriate combat skill (Throwing Weapons or Heavy Weapons), opposed by the target. If targeting a location, treat this as a Success Test instead.


Dodging only comes into play, when the grenade is aimed at a target. I don't think you should be able to just aim for the location (of the target) instead, if the intention is to damage the target.

Bye
Thanee
James McMurray
That requires movement, not dodging, and still doesn't account for how you compare hits. If they got 50 hits or 1 to make the grenade explode exactly where they wanted doesn't change that it exploded exactly where they wanted, and you're stuck in your spot two inches away.
UndeadPoet
You all know the rules of Shadowrun are abstract, don't you?
The aim is to make it balanced, not realistic. Of course, Shadowrun is more realistic than other, especially fantasy-oriented, RPGs, but when it comes down to either improve playability or realism: Balance goes first, and that is perfectly fine for me.

For those who are confused about the grenade rules, Thanee is right.
James McMurray
Right, but assuming no net hits at all (beyond those needed to reduce scatter) how do you dodge? Dodging rolls can't remove those scatter net hits, and there's no mention on what it takes to successfully dodge the grenade.

We did it so that you just needed more net successes than their non-scatter successes to dodge it, but it made grenades practically worthless. Under that method if I drop an airlinked frag grenade into a sandbox full of kids (reaction 3 body 2) with no net successes beyond those used to reduce scatter to nothing then most of those kids will escape unharmed, while the rest will be killed instantaneously.

That's why I'm hoping there are more official rules somewhere, or an interpretation that works better.
James McMurray
Yes, Thanee is right and the rules are abstract, but it still doesn't explain how to dodge them. Are you completely immune to the grenade that landed in your crotch because you got one dodge die? Abstract rules are fine, as long as they're understandable. smile.gif
Thanee
Well... you cannot avoid the attack completely, of course. All you can do is reduce the attacker's net hits to 0.

Then scatter is determined (and not reduced in this case), then the grenade explodes where it lands and you take damage, if you are in the blast radius (if no net hits were scored, i.e. the defender rolled as many hits on the defense roll, as the attacker did, then the grenade's base DV is used, reduced by distance and resisted by body+impact).

Bye
Thanee

P.S. And I think, that dodging here does involve movement, otherwise it would make little sense. smile.gif
James McMurray
It can't involve movement, since it happens on their turn and you only move on yours. It also doesn't make sense for dodge rolls to reduce hits before scatter, as no amount of movement on one (or multiple) targets' parts is going to change the flight of that grenade towards the ground.

That could be an interesting way to do it though: let the guy move himself to accomodate for net hits, as if he were reducing scatter. It would have to count as his movement for the next turn, and would open some other problems (like being able to move when someone fires a grenade at you but not when they throw a rock).
Thanee
Maybe dodging a grenade means making funny faces to screw with the attacker's aim... biggrin.gif

Of course, you do not really move from the spot (if a map was used), it's just part of the whole abstraction thing. In the simulated reality, you probably jump out of the way, but stuff like that is too complicated to model completely, so they just use the dodge roll to simulate the effect in some manner.

Bye
Thanee
James McMurray
Yes, but which hits do you reduce and can you dodge it complete.? Maybe a helpful Fanpro person will read this. smile.gif
Thanee
Already answered in my post four above this (just added a few more clarifications, tho). smile.gif

Bye
Thanee
fool
I would like to try out something like for each dodge success you get you reduce the dv by 1 (just like anyother combat if you don't completely dodge.)
Think of it as your ability to curl around yourself into a more protective position (a standing fetal position as much as possible, is going to be more protected than standing spread eagle.)
Big D
I could really use an illustration.

Say Mage A is unloading a MGL-12 on Ganger B, 50m away and out in the open, no cover within 20m. Mage A has A3, skill1+spec(3 total), smartlink/airburst. Ganger B is hopped up and wired and has R6, dodge2+ranged spec (4 total).

Mage A wants to nail Ganger B with a range 0 detonation to maximise damage.

What happens?

Now, later, Face W is pinned down by Yak X, Yak Y, and Yak Z. Fortunately, the yaks don't realize he has Mage A's GL. Face W has A2, skill3+spec(5 total). Yak X has R4, Yak Y has R3, and Yak Z has R2 but dodge 4.

Face W wants the grenade to go off right between the Yaks. His aim point would be 2m from Y and Z and 5m from X.

What happens?
Doubtman
If you try to dodge a grenade, the objective is to get as far away from the epicenter of the blast as possible. Here's how I do it.

1. If you try to dodge a incoming grenade, you firstly judge roughly where it's going to land, what is the intended target of the attacker?

2. You try to dodge away from that spot, get as far from it as possible. Every succes would be one meter away from that hotspot, in a designated direction.

3. Than grenade scatters and goes off.

P.S. off course you can target the ground, just to get it past the corner, in front of the guards who are hidding out of sight.
Big D
Running away from it works just fine for me, when it's a normal timed fuse and the target gets 1 IP to get-the-heck-away.

Airbursts, however, don't give you any more time to dodge than a bullet, and unlike a bullet, they don't have to hit you; <1m away is perfectly fine for max damage.

Now, I might be able to see adding R into the soak roll (target hunches down and covers up vital areas when he sees the shooter aiming), but I just can't see the target--any of them--really affecting whether the shooter rolls miss range/direction.

That said, I'd really appreciate anyone's thoughts on how the above situations should be resolved.
fool
for one thing, in sr3 i ruled that net hits (successes in sr3) could only up damage on one person (i.e. the person you really really want to take out) this helped keep grenades form killin the entire party.
Aside from that you can use the abstract rules to declare that the person moved 1m per net hit or they did a better job of covering vital areas, or a combination of the two. It's kind of like the reflex saving throw in dnd, it doesn't explicitly lay out the mechanism by which it works, but it does give you a chance to survive.
hyzmarca
Maybe grenade dodging works by moving between pieces of shrapnel without touching any.
fool
like tom bombadill waving his hands over his head to keep the rain from hitting him.
Or perhapes it means turning sideways to offer a thinner profile for shrapnel to hit.
eidolon
QUOTE (James McMurray @ Apr 16 2006, 12:34 PM)
It can't involve movement, since it happens on their turn and you only move on yours.

That's ridiculous. Of course dodging involves "movement". You're ... "dodging".

Unless you've reached inner peace, and perfected the art of "zen dodging", it involves some kind of "movement". Perhaps not "movement" as in "I run 30 yards", but it's physical movement.

Try an exercise. Get together with some friends, and play dodgeball. First, have them throw at you, and you try dodging without moving. Then, allow yourself to dodge normally. Notice the difference?

And yes, the rules for "dodging" have always been an abstraction made in order to balance out the deadly nature of combat. It makes no more or less sense to be able to "dodge" a grenade, than it does to be able to dodge a bullet.
Big D
Well, in the case of a bullet, it's assumed that you're moving around rapidly enough to throw off a gunner's aim. This actually works, especially at hundreds of meters away.

However, the difference between a bullet and a grenade is that the former has to pass through a certain set of coordinates within a certain window of time in order to physically impact someone.

A grenade doesn't really care as much. Per the game mechanics, if it's within a meter, that's good enough.

If I were writing the rules for the mechanic, I would probably allow an actively dodging target (moving at least 5m/turn) to roll defense, but any hits in excess of the attacker's hits would throw the grenade off by 1m each, not the full miss distance.

That said, I didn't write the rules, and I would really like to better understand what they *do* say in this matter.
eidolon
QUOTE (Big D)
Well, in the case of a bullet, it's assumed that you're moving around rapidly enough to throw off a gunner's aim. This actually works, especially at hundreds of meters away.

That assumes two things.

One, that a lot of combat in SR happens at distances of hundreds of meters.

Two, that your target that's "hundreds of meters away" knows you're going to shoot at them.

Neither are likely to occur all that much in SR. It's a balancing mechanic with little to no basis in reality.
James McMurray
Eidelon: by movement I meant actually moving from your square (i.e making a marked change in distance between yourself and the grenade). Sorry I didn't clarify, I assumed it would be obvious.
Thanee
QUOTE (Big D @ Apr 16 2006, 09:52 PM)
I could really use an illustration.

Say Mage A is unloading a MGL-12 on Ganger B, 50m away and out in the open, no cover within 20m.  Mage A has A3, skill1+spec(3 total), smartlink/airburst.  Ganger B is hopped up and wired and has R6, dodge2+ranged spec (4 total).

Mage A wants to nail Ganger B with a range 0 detonation to maximise damage.

What happens?

IMHO, the following happens:

A rolls 3 dice to attack (1 hit).

B considers it a good idea to go full defense and defends against the attack with 10 dice (3 hits).

Now you determine base scatter, since it's airburst, that's 1d6 (-1 per net hit). You roll a 3.

Afterwards, the grenade explodes. It's 3m away from B. Let's say it's a high explosive grenade. It does 10P (-2 AP) with -2 DV/m, so B suffers 4P (-2 AP).

B now rolls Body (5) + Armor (6 Impact - 2 AP), a total of 9 dice (3 hits).

B suffers 1 box of stun damage (since the 4 DV is not higher than the 6 Impact - 2 AP).


In your second example you need a map to determine the distance to each of the targets. It's hard to figure out without one. smile.gif

Basically the Yak's will remain where they are, and the aim point plus scatter direction and distance determine where the grenade lands, then you figure individual distances to each target from that point.

The bigger question is, what you use to oppose the attack roll here... I would name a main target, which will then dodge the grenade to determine how it scatters, but have every target's dodge roll applied individually against the attack roll, in order to determine any increase to damage, that is...

Base DV + MAX { 0 , attacker's hits - attacker's hits needed to reduce scatter - defender's hits }

For example:

Scatter is 3m again, 3 hits needed to reduce it to 0 (since air burst scatter is reduced by 1m per hit), so you compare each dodge roll against the hits scored by the attacker beyond 3. If the attacker still gets net hits there, then the DV will increase accordingly against the target, otherwise it will just be the Base DV.


Or you just use targeting a location (a spot between the three) then, in that case there simply is no dodging at all. wink.gif

Bye
Thanee
Kremlin KOA
how do you dodge a grenade, you kick it before it goes off, sending it meteers away
Thanee
These are the grenade house rules I'm currently considering:

Grenade's are always targeted at a location (Success Test). Grenade scatter (p. 145) is reduced by 1 meter per hit for standard grenades or 2 meters per hit for aerodynamic grenades and grenade launchers. Additional hits have no effect.

All Grenade Damage Codes (p. 146) are increased by +2 DV.

Bye
Thanee
Big D
QUOTE
Or you just use targeting a location (a spot between the three) then, in that case there simply is no dodging at all.


That's where it gets ugly... who's going to ever claim that they're *not* just shooting at the patch of ground the bad guy is standing on? This sounds like just asking for rules debates.

Frankly, I think the net hits added to DV are less of an issue that being able to put the grenade straight on target. After all, there's just not much that's going to soak 2 minis of any type.

QUOTE
Grenade's are always targeted at a location (Success Test). Grenade scatter (p. 145) is reduced by 1 meter per hit for standard grenades or 2 meters per hit for aerodynamic grenades and grenade launchers. Additional hits have no effect.


How about this? You can't add net hits to DV unless you directly target somebody, in which case they get to roll defense, and if they beat you, the grenade misses by 1m per net hit.
Thanee
QUOTE
That's where it gets ugly... who's going to ever claim that they're *not* just shooting at the patch of ground the bad guy is standing on?


As said (somewhere) above, I would simply not allow targeting a location, if you try to get a grenade as close to a target as possible (that's *not* targeting a location, that's targeting a person), but if you try to aim between three targets, it might be alright to do so.


As for the house rules, I specifically do not want the attack roll to increase DV in any way (because it simply makes no sense; all you can do is land the grenade on spot, you cannot make it explode louder wink.gif). As a 'compensation' for the lack of damage increase, the DV gets the flat increase. As a 'compensation' for the lack of dodging, scatter reduction is a bit more difficult for most grenade types (sans airburst). The end result should be close enough to the written rules, but hopefully makes more sense.

QUOTE
...and if they beat you, the grenade misses by 1m per net hit.


You probably mean, that scatter is increased by one increment per net hit of the defender. wink.gif

Bye
Thanee
Shrike30
If my recollection of the wording is correct, scatter is reduced by net hits. Since scatter is determined quite randomly and it's rare that a character's *exact* position and heading is nailed down at any given moment (where is he, exactly, in his 8 meter move during this particular tick of initiative pass 2?) I don't have a problem with the concept of a player's movement affecting how close he is to the grenade. Since the shooter is trying to track the target and possibly get an airburst link at the same time, putting some effort into being harder to hit is fine by me. If the target has more hits than the attacker, the grenade doesn't reduce at all, and scatters where it may.

The net hits rolled by the target can also be used (as per normal ranged combat) to reduce DV. This could represent the target turning away from the blast, hunching so that a larger portion of his profile is covered in armor, or doing any number of things to try and survive a close-range explosion. I've seen combat footage of a launched 30mm grenade detonating about two feet away from a prone, armored soldier as he rolled away... he looked stunned and beaten up, but between his body armor and the low exposure profile, he managed to avoid heavy-duty penetrating injuries, and had resumed rolling behind better cover when the camera panned away.

This is not to indicate that your shadowrunners should be surviving near-point-blank grenade blasts with regularity, just to point out that it happens sometimes. Grenades in SR4 are sickeningly powerful enough without making them harder to resist nyahnyah.gif
fool
yeah but if you don't know that someone is going to shoot that grenade at you you don't get the chance to dodge.
I'd also say that all dodging involves some movement, but it doesn't actually move you. Ie. you stay in the same square on the battle board (assuming you use one.)
dcpirahna
QUOTE (eidolon)
Try an exercise. Get together with some friends, and play dodgeball. First, have them throw at you, and you try dodging without moving. Then, allow yourself to dodge normally. Notice the difference?


If you can dodge a wrench, you can dodge a grenade.
Shrike30
QUOTE (fool)
yeah but if you don't know that someone is going to shoot that grenade at you you don't get the chance to dodge.

And, uh, why *do* we get to try and dodge bullets, anyway?
James McMurray
Because when someone points a gun at you the tendency is to duck, possibly causing them to miss. When someone tosses a grenade at you, duckign is a much less viable option.

So basically what everyone is saying is that there are no clear cut rules for didging grenades? That's what I figured but I was really hoping I'd missed something. Oh well, chalk it up to another issue for the FAQ. frown.gif
Shrike30
Ducking is a perfectly viable option for dealing with grenades. Let's say you're wearing a helmet and an armored jacket when someone launches a grenade at you... if you can spin away from it and crouch, hunkering down your head, the vast majority of the surface facing the grenade is armored, and the bits that aren't (backs of your calves and your feet mostly) are not what most people would consider vital locations. Still hurt like hell to eat shrapnel there, but ducking just added a lot more protection and made you a much smaller cross-section of that sphere of expanding shrapnel. Hell, if nothing else, you could get your arms in front of your face and maybe stop a fragment with your forearm instead of your forebrain.

Besides, thrown grenades are much slower than bullets, so they're easier to dodge. Launched grenades, well, they're slower than bullets *and* there's some yahoo pointing a very high-caliber gun at you, so I fail to see the difference.
Thanee
QUOTE (James McMurray)
So basically what everyone is saying is that there are no clear cut rules for dodging grenades?

Is anything still unclear?

Bye
Thanee
James McMurray
Yes, the rules themselves don't say what your hits on a dodge test affect. Different people have given some good answers, but unless I missed something (which is entirely possible) nobody has laid out the procedure for grenade dodging as it's given in the rules, because it isn't actually given in the rules.
Thanee
Of course, it's really simple. The defense test opposes the attack test, if the grenade is targeted at a person. The only difference to a regular ranged attack is, that you cannot completely dodge the attack, the best you can achieve is, that scatter gets not reduced at all.

Here's the quote from the first page again:

QUOTE
Make a standard ranged attack test using the attacker’s Agility + appropriate combat skill (Throwing Weapons or Heavy Weapons), opposed by the target. If targeting a location, treat this as a Success Test instead.


Afterwards, the attacker's net hits reduce scatter (and potentially increase DV). The defender's net hits (if any) do nothing and are simply discarded.

When that is done, damage is dealt and resisted as appropriate for the distance. It's a two-step process (targeting and damage).

Bye
Thanee
James McMurray
Right, so if I'm targetting the ground/air by them, is there any dodging allowed? If not, there's really no reason to target a person other than just trying to be cool.
Thanee
As said above, that's not specifically explained, but I assume, that you cannot simply target the ground next to them, if you want to attack a person. Basically you do not choose whether you want to attack a person or a location, it's automatically derived out of the context of your action.

In any case, it's perfectly clear what dodging does then... nothing. biggrin.gif
When targeting a location you make a Success Test, not an Opposed Test.

Bye
Thanee
James McMurray
You can't target the ground if someone is standing on it? What if you want to target the ground in the middle of a group?
Shrike30
Or how about if there's a sniper in a window... you aren't really aiming at *him*, you're just trying to land the grenade in the room he's in. Would that still be a shot at the person? Things like this are one of the reasons I'd allow reaction and dodge checks on grenades, even if they aren't aimed at a person... there's too much grey area where people can argue otherwise, and most players are more than happy when you point out "look, this works for PCs too, keep that in mind the next time I launch a grenade at you."

(for shots like the window example, we used to flip the scatter diagram vertically. Rather than falling 2 meters "short", for example, the grenade might go off a meter below the windowsill)
Doubtman
My experience with grenades is luckly what I pick up from movies. But most of what I see seems like a good idea to me.

a. Jump for cover when you see one coming your way.

As stated above, they are relative slow moving projectiles, so I think there should be a chance for NPC's and Characters to do so.

b. If you throw a grenade you try to hit as many people as you can, take out somebody in one shot, or somebody that's behind cover (like the sniper in the window).

In some cases that means that you try to throw the grenade in an unoccupied spot.

As GM I would like to see this reflected in my game, so some opposing test would be in order here, if the victim(s) is/are aware of it. (because yelling "GRENADE" might actually save your buddies)

So anybody that is aware of the incoming grenade should be able to get a chance to dodge (in some cases this could mean, giving up your cover)
Determine the location and the distance to the victims involved, every succes on a dodge roll made beyond the hits of the attacker would mean you dodge further away from the blast zone.

Doubtman
fool
now just to make this just a little more twisted..
what if it's a surprise situation, you go next to last and shoot it at the one guy who went slower than you (presumably the mage,) who is standing in the middle of all his friends (guess the guys behind him didn't really need counterspelling.)
Since you can't act on the other guys, are they then not effected?
Protagonist
QUOTE (fool)
Since you can't act on the other guys, are they then not effected?

The grenade still explodes sleepy.gif
Doubtman
That's why we state the actions (of NPC and Characters) in reverse order. Then faster characters can react to slower characters.

In your example, the guys that went before you, could have seen you on the verge of throwing a grenade and should have jumped away. The mage on the other hand is toast.
Big D
O.K., if a defender's hits negate the attacker's hits, but net hits don't actually do anything--the grenade lands where rolled without modification from the attacker's hit roll--then I don't have as much a problem with that. I would argue that the GM should reduce or disallow defense if the defender is not actively moving. Somebody crouching behind cover may still get to defend against bullets, but they're rather exposed to airbursts.

However, I still have a problem with anything beyond 1v1... who gets to roll, etc.
Thanee
QUOTE (James McMurray)
You can't target the ground if someone is standing on it?

That's my assumption, yes.

QUOTE
What if you want to target the ground in the middle of a group?


See above, already answered in detail.

Bye
Thanee
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