Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Gear Listing
Dumpshock Forums > Discussion > Shadowrun
Pages: 1, 2
knasser
This is a spillover from the "Are we missing an errata" thread and my attempt to do something useful.

For reference, that thread contained lots of sniping between people who wanted weights listed for Shadowrun gear and those that said such people should just hand wave it and use common sense. Having never carried a clip of bullets, let alone a Panther Assault Cannon, I'm in the "I want some guidance camp". Those who don't like that can keep the "crap GM" comments to themselves.

I'm putting a listing of Shadowrun gear in this post, roughly divided into categories that make sense to me in my ignorance. I'm asking for suggestions for weight et al from the more knowledgeable here, which I will then edit and re-edit into this first post as conclusions are reached. I believe that I'm superbly positioned to collate people's opinions in an unbiased way as I know so little about what I'm talking about myself. smile.gif

I'm open to suggestions to re-organise these categories, add additional ones or list exceptions.

Because weight is not the be all and end all of encumberance, I'll ask for two additional values we'll tentatively call "slot" and "awkwardness". I think there is likely to be something of this kind needed, though I'm not sure what will be the simplest system, hence these two provisional categories. Example, a katana may only weigh 8kg (???) but could be much more awkward to carry than an armoured vest that weighed the same. It could also use up a "rifle" slot as there is only so much you can sling across your back. Let's scale awkwardness on the traditional SR scale, so you might say SMG, weighs 5kg, awkwardness 2, "large gun" slot.

Don't focus too much on the awkward / slot values at the moment. We'll work out how to handle them and what categories emerge as we go or just ditch the concept. Just make sure you give me the weights.

My provisional categories are as follows:

Firearms
Light Pistol: .75kg
Heavy Pistol: 1kg
Machine Pistol (same as heavy? - please comment): 1.25kg
Sub-machine gun: 2kg
Rifle, Assault & Sports: 3kg
Rifle, Sniper: 6kg
Light machine gun: 7kg
Shotgun: 3.5kg
Assault Cannon: 15kg
Grenade Launcher, under-barrel: +1.5kg
Grenade Launcher, stand alone: 5kg

LAWs
Mitsubishi Yakusoku MRL: 9kg
Aztechnology Striker: 4kg

Melee Weapons
Combat Axe: 1.5kg
One-handed Sword (e.g. Katana, Ares Monosword): 1.25kg
Polearm: 2kg

Ammo
LP/MP/SMG/AR/LMG: 0.1kg per 10 cartridges
HP/Sport Rifle/MMG: 0.2kg per 10 cartridges
Sniper: 0.3kg per 10 cartridgesp
Shotgun: 0.5kg per 10 cartridges
Assault Cannon: 1kg per 10 cartridges

Armour & Clothing
Armour Jacket: 2kg
Armour Vest: 1kg
Lined Coat: 5kg
Full Body Armour: 14kg (Please comment).

Flamebait Drones
Lone Star iBall: 1kg
Aztechnology Crawler 50kg
Lockheed Optic-X: 30kg
GM-Nissan Doberman: 70kg

Oddities
Maglock Passkey: 0.5kg
Commlink: 0.5kg - similar to mobile phone
Medkit: 3kg +1kg if extra "medkit supplies"
Critias
Here's a few off the top of my head -- if it wasn't just hitting "busy time" here at work I could fill out the list quite a bit more in a couple minutes. For most of this stuff, a quick Google search (or scan of the Modern Firearms Listing, or even just Raygun's Shadowrun Firearms page) would get you an answer in about five minutes.

Light Pistol: .75 kg
Heavy Pistol: 1 kg
Machine Pistol: 1.25 kg
Submachinegun: 1.75 kg
Shotgun: 4 kg
Maglock Passkey: negligible (.25 kg, I guess, if you really need a number -- it's a credit-card key, more or less)
Commlink: Ditto (maybe up to .5 kg, weigh your cell phone)
Medkit: 3 kg (1 kg for extra "medkit supplies")
knasser

Thanks. I've incorporated your suggestions into the initial list.

Suggestions from others about these or filling in the rest of the items most welcomed.
Critias
As a thought for Drones -- maybe look into Googling some of the larger-scale remote controlled cars, airplanes, helicopters, etc? Then modify for "Shadowrun-tech" materials. Or, of course, Drone weights might be in other sourcebooks -- I've never been big on rigging, so I don't recall.

Armor clothing -- check out some real-life armor clothing, and maybe cut the weight in half (it wouldn't be so common, if it were as uncomfortable as it is using today's tech). Someone posted a link to a "stylish bulletproof" (or similar) thread, over in the main SR sub-forum, and that might be a place to start.
Conskill
QUOTE
Maglock Passkey: Proposed negligible - similar to credit card. Comment please?

There's a picture of one in the gear section. Its interface surface is shaped like a credit card, but there looks to be a bulky (relative to the interface) frame / grip / magic computer thingy attached to it. I'd say in the neighborhood of .5 to 1kg.

QUOTE
Commlink: 0.5kg - similar to mobile phone

Would vary wildly based on year, model, whether it's designed primarily for (meta)human interface versus DNI, and possibly capacity. I imagine anywhere from negligble to 2kg for most commlinks, with some even bigger ones out there (a troll-sized metahuman interface commlink is probably going to weight in around 3-4kg).
Critias
QUOTE (Conskill)
QUOTE
Maglock Passkey: Proposed negligible - similar to credit card. Comment please?

There's a picture of one in the gear section. Its interface surface is shaped like a credit card, but there looks to be a bulky (relative to the interface) frame / grip / magic computer thingy attached to it. I'd say in the neighborhood of .5 to 1kg.

My mistake -- didn't know they had a pic of one, and in all the times I can think of hearing one described, it was just like a passkey. My bad.
knasser
QUOTE (Critias)
QUOTE (Conskill @ Aug 26 2006, 05:15 AM)
QUOTE
Maglock Passkey: Proposed negligible - similar to credit card. Comment please?

There's a picture of one in the gear section. Its interface surface is shaped like a credit card, but there looks to be a bulky (relative to the interface) frame / grip / magic computer thingy attached to it. I'd say in the neighborhood of .5 to 1kg.

My mistake -- didn't know they had a pic of one, and in all the times I can think of hearing one described, it was just like a passkey. My bad.


I also thought of maglock passkeys as being bulkier tools, rather than a credit card device. My reasoning was that it was more of a dedicated hacking tool rather than a "master key" as such. I'm going to go with this and list it as 0.5kg unless there is a slew of protests.

I'm sticking with 0.5kg for a commlink though, and even that is a bit heavy to my mind. I'm going to wait to see what others think before I change it downwards though. 2kg is the weight of a modern day laptop and there's no way I can see a 2070 teenager tripping round the mall with one of them clipped to her belt. 0.5kg is roughly 3 mobile phones, I think. So I'd like to make it less.
Austere Emancipator
I'd say it isn't safe to lump sniper rifles with assault and sport rifles -- the former tend to be far more heavily built, with very heavy free-floating barrels, bulky customizable stocks, etc.

ARs and Sport Rifles average between 3kg and 3.5kg, though they can certainly weigh less than 2.5kg or, in the case of sport rifles, well over 4kg.
Sniper Rifles, often range anywhere from 4.5kg to 9kg and beyond, depending on intended use, action and caliber. Assuming SR Sniper Rifles are commonly .300 Win Mags or .338 Lapua Mags (they still do significantly more damage than Sporting Rifles, right?), the average should be somewhere around, errm, 5kg-6kg.
LMGs also have quite a bit of variance, from 4kg-4.5kg weapons that are little more than assault rifles with heavy barrels and bipods, up to over 7kg for the more serious ones. Assuming SR LMGs are of the quick-change-barrel, high-sustainable-RoF, belt-fed type, 7kg is a decent average.
Assault Cannons will do fine at 15kg.
Grenade Launchers, well, depend hugely on whether they are single-shot, underbarrel attached models or multi-shot weapons fired from the shoulder. The first type averages somewhere around or a bit under 1.5kg, the latter from 3kg to 6kg.
LAWs also vary hugely in weight. The current trend is for the heavier types, like the AT4, at 6kg - 9kg. Crappier ones like the archetypical but aged M72 often weigh 3kg-4kg.

Combat Axes, like most hafted weapons, average somewhere between 1kg and 1.5kg, up to 2kg for the two-handed ones. Swords, depending on style, average 0.75kg-2.5kg, ranging from smallswords at the lowest end (weighing as little as 0.5kg), through rapiers, cut-and-thrust one-handers, longswords and greatswords to the biggest Zweihanders. Katanas, BTW, weigh about the same as European medieval one-handers and longswords, averaging 1kg-1.5kg. Polearms might weigh anywhere from 1.5kg to 3kg -- though the 12+ foot pikes may weigh quite a bit more.

I'd adjust Critias's estimate for SMG weight up to at least 2kg, preferably 2.5kg. The archetypical RL SMG, the MP5, weighs about 3kg with the collapsible stock. On the other hand, I'd adjust his Shotgun weight down a bit, though it's true that lots of combat shotguns weigh between 3.5kg and 4kg.

Magazine weights vary so much depending on the specific ammunition that it'd be pointless to give a straight figure for all magazines of a certain size. A Heavy Pistol magazine of 15 might weight more than twice that of a Light Pistol mag of the same size, nevermind sniper rifle, shotgun or assault cannon ammo. Generally speaking, though, LP/MP/SMG/AR/LMG mags might weigh ~0.1kg-0.15kg per 10 cartridges. Caseless ammo, at least for rifles, will weigh some 25% less (assuming cases are made of polymers anyway). HP/Sport Rifle/MMG ammo might be twice that, 3x for Sniper Rifles, 5x for Shotguns and 10x for Assault Cannons and HMGs.

Body Armor might range anywhere from 1kg to 3kg for torso coverage of flexible armor -- multiply that as necessary to get limb coverage. With rigid plates, that might shoot up to as much as 10kg or more for the vest alone (but I doubt SR4 has any type of armor with a rating high enough to justify that weight).
knasser

Okay, I've incorporated most of your suggestions into the list verbatim. Where you've made comments on Critias' figures, I've modified still them, but adjusted your figure slightly towards his. As always, I'm open to ongoing feedback.

I've split out sniper rifles into their own category and though I don't want to get into the habit of naming specific weapons, based on the wide range you suggested for LAWs, I've gone back to the fluff descriptions in SR4, one model being described as extremely light and the other being described as "double barrel". So I've listed both of them at extreme ends of your range.

I think melee weapons are a potential minefield (just to mix metaphors) as for example a troll is likely to carry a bigger version of an axe than a human. Still I've gone for an average figure and GM sense will have to come into play.

Armour I've extrapolated from your estimate for a basic vest and I've assumed that the full body armour with helmet is based on the rigid plates you described.

I must say that I'm glad I started this thread as even if for no-one else, it will be useful for me. I clearly have no idea how much this stuff weighs. I'd actually have grossly over-estimated much of it.

I'll also keep an eye on how many clips of Assault Cannon rounds a PC can carry, too. biggrin.gif
Charon
I'm not a big fan of bothering with exact weight and ecumbrance rules.

But if you positively, absolutely, have to have those weight...

Why not just start with the SR3 weights? Most of this stuff existed already in the previous edition anyway. What didn't can be approximated from equivalent items.
knasser
QUOTE (Charon)
I'm not a big fan of bothering with exact weight and ecumbrance rules.

But if you positively, absolutely, have to have those weight...

Why not just start with the SR3 weights? Most of this stuff existed already in the previous edition anyway. What didn't can be approximated from equivalent items.


We've already had a great big flaming thread about whether or not we need listed item weights. It seems logical to me that whilst those who like to hand wave encumberence are free to ignore published weights, those who need them are not free to ignore their absence. Besides which, in order to hand wave reasonably, you need a rough idea of how much things weigh and / or how bulky they are. Whilst I am good at knowing what 15kg feels like, I had no idea that a Panther Assault Cannon would weigh that much. And in fact I grossly over-estimated the weights of weapons in general. I now see that properly stowed, it's entirely reasonable for a character to carry both an SMG and a sniper rifle. Previously I might have penalised a player for this.

As to the 3rd edition weights... a new generation here, I'm afraid. I played 1st ed. but never 3rd ed. I don't have it and am dependent on the kindness of strangers. If you have it to hand, feel free to share. wink.gif
Charon
Going through the whole list would be tedious. Got a poker tournament starting soon!

Let's just say the Assault Cannon was listed at 20 kg. Heavy weapons were the only one worth looking up but since the troll handled those we quickly stopped looking those too.

Most guns were bewteen 1 and 2 kg which made keeping track of the weight rather pointless since anyone but a weakling would get out of room before he'd get out of strenght.

I mean, an average man can carry 15 AK-97 without penalty, but what is he gonna do with them? It's usually your suspension of disbelief that get stretched, not the limit of what the PC can carry, with as little as STR 3 ("How the hell are you carrying all that?!").

The only PC I've ever seen to have to seriously crunch the number of what he could carry had STR 1.

Bullets were more annoying with apprently weird value (like 0.5kg for 10 bullet!)but we'd just wing it and I told the PC to carry 2-6 clips and be done with it. I can count on one hand the number of time a PC had to reload more than once anyway.

---

A listing of volume would be more useful than a listing of weight to figure what a PC can carry.
Smokeskin
You should add the weight of the magazines themselves too. Magazines are probably plastic or polymers.

Pistol mags: 0.1 kg
Automatics mags: 0.2 kg

That look about right?
knasser
QUOTE (Charon @ Aug 26 2006, 12:23 PM)
Going through the whole list would be tedious.  Got a poker tournament starting soon!

Let's just say the Assault Cannon was listed at 20 kg.  Heavy weapons were the only one worth looking up but since the troll handled those we quickly stopped looking those too.

Most guns were bewteen 1 and 2 kg which made keeping track of the weight rather pointless since anyone but a weakling would get out of room before he'd get out of strenght. 

I mean, an average man can carry 15 AK-97 without penalty, but what is he gonna do with them? 

The only PC I've ever seen to have to seriously crunch the number of what he could carry had STR 1.

Bullets were more annoying with apprently weird value (like 0.5kg for 10 bullet!)but we'd just wing it and I told the PC to carry 2-6 clips and be done with it.  I can count on one hand the number of time a PC had to reload more than once anyway.


Yes - it's not worth looking up the weight of guns, it's not usually worth looking up heavy weapons, it's not worth keeping track of ammo, and it's "pointless" to keep track of weight carried in general.

Thank you. I have heard you. Nevertheless, I would like to know how much things weigh. We've just had a 4 page thread in which a poster asked if there were an errata due with some weights and got countless people explaining how it wasn't needed and should be ignored. In the position of GM, I am required to be able to make informed decisions for players and, where necessary, back up my judgements with some knowledge. There are many of us who have no idea how much an assault rifle weighs, nevermind an armoured vest.

Now if I may, can we get back to padding out the list?

Incidentally, your statement about most guns weighing 2kg seems off based on others feedback here. Likewise for the statement about carrying 15 AK-47s without penalty. Aside from bulk, estimates here suggest they would weigh 30 to 45kg or up to 100lbs. I can carry that for a whlie, but I doubt the averge man could without impairment.

EDIT: Smokeskin - I have no idea if the magazine / clip weights are right or not, but they sound good for small plastic boxes. I'll add them in with some sample clip sizes.
James McMurray
Thanks for this! I was going to start one but since you beat me to it I can instead start working on a Hackmaster Master Index and leave this to the quite capable hands of my fellow DSers. smile.gif
Charon
AR without grenade launcher were given at 2 kg. So 15 AR makes 30 kg which is the average CC for a man given by SR.

And indeed I commented elsewhere that even a strong man should get penalties from lugging around unevenly distributed weight even if it's well within his CC.

But then that's down to common sense anyway as there has never been a "cumbersomeness" stat for any SR gear.

SR3 pretty much listed all the pistols, SMG and AR at either 0.5 KG, 1 Kg and 2kg. It's faster to calculate if you are going to go to the trouble of keeping track of weight and really, what does 0,1 kg matter? If you are within 0,1 KG of being encumbered, you already are carrying too much crap anyway.

As I said, try using SR3 weight. Or even SR2. No need to go buy a SR3 corebook, just pick up one of the old gear book.

They had recapitualtive list for all the gear at the end. I'd scan one for you if I was sure it didn't break the rules of the board (admin?). Otherwise you can probably pick up one for 5$ in the used bin or else download one from bittorrent. No shame in downloading out-of print books, I say.

Seriously, even if you are very detail oriented, you won't get that much use out of a weight list so you should put a minimum of effort into it ; google / torrent away!
James McMurray
QUOTE (Charon)
Seriously, even if you are very detail oriented, you won't get that much use out of a weight list

Hmm.. You apparently don't game like the people that want to have weights listed. That's not a bad thing, just an observation. For instance, we were playing a D&D game last night where our characters started out naked in the forest with no idea how we got there. Carrying capacity becomes very important when you're trying to bring yourself up from nothing and need to know how fast you can run away from the giant wagon/fortresses the gnolls are chasing you down in. smile.gif
Jaid
i would personally argue that in a situation where you are literally naked and have no gear, your carrying capacity quite suddenly becomes extremely irrelevant personally =P

but at any rate, as far as using previous editions of SR weights... i believe it was mentioned at least a couple of times that the previous edition weights were hotly disputed. basically, when SR had weights, people just complained about how innacurate they were =P

so, as far as using previous editions as a guideline, it seems that wouldn't be a very popular idea. besides, i think SR3 at least said you generally didn't need to keep too close an eye on encumbrance unless you started feeling it was a little fishy anyways... much like SR4, only they actually had weight listings for you to check if you really felt like it.
James McMurray
Yeah, but we didn't stay naked and without gear forever, hence the need to figure out carrying capacities. It also comes with the "where does it all go" question, but that's not something an encumbrance system can do well without getting more complex than SR needs. Just some good size descriptions for things is plenty.
Cabral
Jaid brings up a good point: Even into SR2, the weights were scoffed at, particularly at 1 kg (2.2 lb) handheld cellphones and 15 kg (36 lb) telecoms (Vid phones).

By leaving out the weights, they avoid pitfalls of other SciFi games (OMG! My computer can have 256 kbytes of memory! I shall rule teh world!) and allows SR to instantly keep up with technology, to a degree. This also true of using Megapulses in earlier editions and removing it in 4th edition.
knasser
QUOTE (Cabral)
Jaid brings up a good point: Even into SR2, the weights were scoffed at, particularly at 1 kg (2.2 lb) handheld cellphones and 15 kg (36 lb) telecoms (Vid phones).

By leaving out the weights, they avoid pitfalls of other SciFi games (OMG! My computer can have 256 kbytes of memory! I shall rule teh world!) and allows SR to instantly keep up with technology, to a degree. This also true of using Megapulses in earlier editions and removing it in 4th edition.


Well now is the time for all those who scoffed at SR2 / SR3 weights to authoritatively declare what they should have been.

Can I take it from the lack of further feedback that we're all in broad agreement with the weights for guns and ammo and melee weapons so far?

I'm going to take a crack at guestimating the drones myself now, as I've had no suggestions for this.

I'll say again, that this thread is proving useful for me at least. How the Hell do I know if it's reasonable to carry three belts of machine gun ammo? I've never even held a single bullet. Hopefully, this will be of some use to other players too.
kzt
The problem with playing with real weights is that SR doesn't do a very good job of handling what real people can really handle. People can and do operate for long periods of time carrying heavy loads. In addition, the bizarre idea that loads are carried by Strength and armor by Body is still puzzling.

Typical equipment load for US combat troops is higher than SR allows for an "average" person. A typical fighting load (before the most recent armor updates, which added IIRC 6-12 pounds) was about 63 pounds, with machine gunners carrying 81 pounds. This is what you actually are carrying when you are actually engaged in actively shooting and getting shot at. That's a bit less than 30 kg with 37kg for MG gunners.

The actual load that they carried when they marched cross country was an average of 101 pounds, with a bunch carrying 120 pound loads. This is 54 kg. The typical load carried when vehicles were not available was 132 pounds, with several MOS carrying loads approaching 150 pounds, or 68 Kg. (As an ex-fire support guy I feel for the FSNCO with his 143 pound load)

These are not supermen with huge muscles; they are just tough and disciplined guys. The report also has a long list of weights of military equipment if I haven't discouraged you.

http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/modernw...tLoadReport.pdf
Smokeskin
QUOTE (kzt)
The problem with playing with real weights is that SR doesn't do a very good job of handling what real people can really handle. People can and do operate for long periods of time carrying heavy loads. In addition, the bizarre idea that loads are carried by Strength and armor by Body is still puzzling.

Typical equipment load for US combat troops is higher than SR allows for an "average" person. A typical fighting load (before the most recent armor updates, which added IIRC 6-12 pounds) was about 63 pounds, with machine gunners carrying 81 pounds. This is what you actually are carrying when you are actually engaged in actively shooting and getting shot at. That's a bit less than 30 kg with 37kg for MG gunners.

The actual load that they carried when they marched cross country was an average of 101 pounds, with a bunch carrying 120 pound loads. This is 54 kg. The typical load carried when vehicles were not available was 132 pounds, with several MOS carrying loads approaching 150 pounds, or 68 Kg. (As an ex-fire support guy I feel for the FSNCO with his 143 pound load)

These are not supermen with huge muscles; they are just tough and disciplined guys. The report also has a long list of weights of military equipment if I haven't discouraged you.

http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/modernw...tLoadReport.pdf

AFAIK it is commonly recognized that the soldiers lug way too much around these days. Sure, they can fight with it, but they can't fight as effectively as they could without it. This gels fine with the SR rules.

Especially the armor really weighs a lot. I think every US soldier would agree that the combined weight hampers their mobility in combat and they'd be much faster and have longer endurance without the armor. Not wearing armor has its own obvious disadvantages though.
LilithTaveril
QUOTE (Cabral)
Jaid brings up a good point: Even into SR2, the weights were scoffed at, particularly at 1 kg (2.2 lb) handheld cellphones and 15 kg (36 lb) telecoms (Vid phones).

By leaving out the weights, they avoid pitfalls of other SciFi games (OMG! My computer can have 256 kbytes of memory! I shall rule teh world!) and allows SR to instantly keep up with technology, to a degree. This also true of using Megapulses in earlier editions and removing it in 4th edition.

A megapulse was never defined in the SR world AFAIK. Besides, no real-world measuring system would use that denomination.

They may dodge the pitfall, but they fell into one of their own. How much weight is reasonable? The problem is, I best most people who play the game don't know the answer to that question. They have to guess, based on a limited or utter lack of knowledge. The result can have an elf who lifts and tosses steel lynxes in one game and a maxed-stat troll who can't carry a MMG in another. Thus, the reason for a weight system to begin with.
Rotbart van Dainig
QUOTE (LilithTaveril)
A megapulse was never defined in the SR world AFAIK.

It was... by how much it can store: 60 images, 1 minute video or 1 minute audio.
LilithTaveril
QUOTE (Rotbart van Dainig)
QUOTE (LilithTaveril @ Aug 27 2006, 03:15 PM)
A megapulse was never defined in the SR world AFAIK.

It was... by how much it can store: 60 images, 1 minute video or 1 minute audio.

Which doesn't mean anything. 1 minute of video can include any amount of frames, and one minute of audio can potentially include sounds beyond the range of equipment today. 60 images? How big? What's in the images? How much of the light spectrum are we talking about being capture per image? You have to answer those questions today with cellphones. I don't even want to guess how much can be recorded in the SR world.
Rotbart van Dainig
QUOTE (LilithTaveril)
Which doesn't mean anything.

Only on the first glance, as all those are supposedly lossless and for normal spectrum:

QUOTE (LilithTaveril)
1 minute of video can include any amount of frames,

But should at least a minimum of 24, and the maximum is limited by available lighting conditions, thus also in the 'normal' range.

QUOTE (LilithTaveril)
and one minute of audio can potentially include sounds beyond the range of equipment today.

Indeed they can, but normally don't - that requires additional equipment and values are given for plain audio.

QUOTE (LilithTaveril)
60 images? How big? What's in the images? How much of the light spectrum are we talking about being capture per image?

Photographs normal spectrum - as, again, everything else requires extra equipment, and extra images. Resolution is limited, too - you can't get better than a few atoms per dot on the sensor.

QUOTE (LilithTaveril)
I don't even want to guess how much can be recorded in the SR world.

Very much, but in SR3, it was very limited.
Given the applications and the possible algorithms for lossless compression, it would be possible to estimate rough approximations to RL data sizes... though that would be hardly worth the hassle.
LilithTaveril
QUOTE (Rotbart van Dainig)
QUOTE (LilithTaveril)
Which doesn't mean anything.

Only on the first glance, as all those are supposedly lossless and for normal spectrum:

Never really bought that. It didn't make much sense for one, and for another most photographs capture the entire light spectrum, but only display it as it would normally be visible anyway.

QUOTE
QUOTE (LilithTaveril)
1 minute of video can include any amount of frames,

But should at least a minimum of 24, and the maximum is limited by available lighting conditions, thus also in the 'normal' range.

QUOTE (LilithTaveril)
and one minute of audio can potentially include sounds beyond the range of equipment today.

Indeed they can, but normally don't - that requires additional equipment and values are given for plain audio.

QUOTE (LilithTaveril)
60 images? How big? What's in the images? How much of the light spectrum are we talking about being capture per image?

Photographs normal spectrum - as, again, everything else requires extra equipment, and extra images. Resolution is limited, too - you can't get better than a few atoms per dot on the sensor.

QUOTE (LilithTaveril)
I don't even want to guess how much can be recorded in the SR world.

Very much, but in SR3, it was very limited.
Given the applications and the possible algorithms for lossless compression, it would be possible to estimate rough approximations to RL data sizes... though that would be hardly worth the hassle.


Okay, here's a question based on that.

On page 208 of SR3, it mentions internal computer memory is sufficient for a wide range of items that, today, take up most of the memory on computers (in some cases, all of the memory or more). The way the text and wording is set up, I'd say that it's mostly independent of megapulses. Now, my question is, how do we accurately translate megapulses to modern equivolents when most of the memory hogs don't appear to cost a single megapulse?
Rotbart van Dainig
QUOTE (LilithTaveril)
Never really bought that. It didn't make much sense for one, and for another most photographs capture the entire light spectrum, but only display it as it would normally be visible anyway.

Without the capabilities of the sensor, you can't - and that's why you have to upgrade lowlight and thermal to cybereyes/sensors.

QUOTE (LilithTaveril)
On page 208 of SR3, it mentions internal computer memory is sufficient for a wide range of items that, today, take up most of the memory on computers (in some cases, all of the memory or more). The way the text and wording is set up, I'd say that it's mostly independent of megapulses. Now, my question is, how do we accurately translate megapulses to modern equivolents when most of the memory hogs don't appear to cost a single megapulse?

Because that refers to the state of the art when SR3 was written - back when text and OS made up most of the storage memory hogs - computers weren't even able to handle very much multimedia content.
Today, it's the opposite: multimedia content takes up most.
LilithTaveril
QUOTE (Rotbart van Dainig)
QUOTE (LilithTaveril)
Never really bought that. It didn't make much sense for one, and for another most photographs capture the entire light spectrum, but only display it as it would normally be visible anyway.

Without the capabilities of the sensor, you can't - and that's why you have to upgrade lowlight and thermal to cybereyes/sensors.

Meh. I'll admit I'm wrong on this one.

QUOTE
QUOTE (LilithTaveril)
On page 208 of SR3, it mentions internal computer memory is sufficient for a wide range of items that, today, take up most of the memory on computers (in some cases, all of the memory or more). The way the text and wording is set up, I'd say that it's mostly independent of megapulses. Now, my question is, how do we accurately translate megapulses to modern equivolents when most of the memory hogs don't appear to cost a single megapulse?

Because that refers to the state of the art when SR3 was written - back when text and OS made up most of the storage memory hogs - computers weren't even able to handle very much multimedia content.
Today, it's the opposite: multimedia content takes up most.


And a lot of that is games, which apparently don't take up megapulses.
Rotbart van Dainig
QUOTE (LilithTaveril)
And a lot of that is games, which apparently don't take up megapulses.

Most likely because that wasn't really game-relevant. grinbig.gif
LilithTaveril
Well, now we're out of conversation material nyahnyah.gif
Shrike30
QUOTE (kzt @ Aug 26 2006, 11:27 PM)
These are not supermen with huge muscles; they are just tough and disciplined guys.  The report also has a long list of weights of military equipment if I haven't discouraged you.

http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/modernw...tLoadReport.pdf

If memory serves, the SR4 encumberance system doesn't say "You can carry this much, but no more," rather, characters begin to accrue penalties for being overburdened.

Let's work with that range of weights you gave, 30-37 kg for combat. Throw on a few extra kilos for the armor upgrades. A Str 4 character (which should describe any active-duty soldier in fighting shape) would have no penalties from these weights. Even a small, fit person should be able to qualify as Str 3, meaning they'll be under no to minimal penalties, even if they're the MG operator.

Even under a full load (46-54 kg, per your description), a Str 4 character would be able to actively fight with fairly minor penalties, ranging around -2 to -3. It hurts a bit more to be the skinny guy in this situation, but them's the breaks.

Under your max load (68 kg) the Str 4 guy is at -6. That's a pretty severe penalty, but you probably end up pretty beefy carrying that kind of load around all the damn time. Some of these guys might be Str 5 (dropping the penalty to a -4). Others might just spend a lot of time exhausted. They almost certainly don't try to fight continually with all of that equipment strapped to them. Let's be honest... having the weight of a small person on your back is going to impede your fighting some. However, there's nothing in the rules (that I can recall) that says you become immobile with this much weight on your back... it just gets difficult to do some other stuff.

Most of the really heavy gear these guys are carrying around is arranged in such a way that they can quickly shuck a big chunk of it, should they need to. Big rucks that contain your camp supplies, your clothes, and all that really heavy stuff that has absolutely no combat application can be shrugged out of, leaving the stuff you've got slung or strapped to your belt, harness, armor, and legs. Most soldiers are going to have things like spare magazines, backup weapons, grenades, rockets, medical supplies, explosives, optics, radios, water, some food, batteries, and other useful items attached to them rather than in their rucks, for expressly this purpose.

And if the numbers really bug you, you could just houserule a larger multiplier than Str x 10.
James McMurray
If folks are curious, the reply I got from Rob Boyle via info@shadowrun was that worrying about weights is pointless, a nonissue, and a problem with the gamer, not the game. Here's the entire email:

Bolded parts are me, the rest is him. Apparently all SR GMs are in agreement as to what things weigh, because a difference between GM rulings happens so rarely it's not worth worrying about. You're also apparently supposed to boot your rules lawyers out of your game or drop an iron fist GM call on them because they're the only ones that care about weights.

QUOTE

May I ask what the reason was for adding encumbrance rules but no weights to use with them?

Because while encumbrance is a factor that a GM occasionally has to take into consideration once in a while (usually only when a character is really overloaded), it seemed to be an exercise in unnecessary bookkeeping to force players and GMs to keep track of every item's weight (not to mention a hassle to invent and track the "canon" weights for every minor item). It's much, much easier for a GM to simply benchmark the weight of a given load or set of objects as necessary, or simply look up some weights online if needed. There's no need to make players itemize weights for all of their gear -- it's boring, time-consuming, and distracts from the game.

I believe if you check Dumpshock you'll find a decent percentage of players and GMs that disagree.


I've seen the thread, and I also see a fair number of players and GMs that do agree with leaving weights out. You can't please everyone, of course. Consider this: one of the main design goals of SR4 was to simplify the system. One of the main elements there is to limit unnecessary bookkeeping. While some people might get a thrill out of itemizing the weight of every minor gadget in the game, to most people it's a massive waste of time and energy that could be better spent in just playing the game. And in our direct experience, most people ignore or hand-wave those rules anyway. The encumbrance rules we provided give GMs a solid rule to use if the issue of overload comes up in a game. It's simply a fallacy to say that if we don't list out the weights for every mundane item then it's a "half-assed rule." Weights fall squarely in the category of "use common sense" -- or simply look it up online. Sure, some futuristic items don't exist today, but it's easy enough to make a judgement call, erring on the lighter side to account for future manufacturing developments. It's certainly easier to do that than stop the game to mull over a list of weights and break out the calculator, and it doesn't impede the flow of the game.

Giving weight restrictions but no weights is not "solid." It's a framework, but to be solid you need more than just a bare bones skeleton.

It gives a limit, and it's up to the GM to decide if what's carried goes over the limit. Considering that the *vast majority* of things in an RPG are left to the GM to decide -- from setting to characters to what situational modifiers apply to what gear the bad guys are carrying -- it's not really asking much to ask the GM to make a judgement call. Especially for a side matter such as weights, which should really only have a very minor impact on the game anyway, and when the alternative is to encourage burdensome book-keeping that no one except for a few number-crunchers bother with anyway...


Ok, so how much do the various drones weigh? Or any of the many items that have no physical descriptions so we have no idea how big they are, much less how much they weigh? Like I said, I can understand the reasoning, but I have to disagree with the idea that making up weights on the fly for nonexistent objects made from nonexistent materials is "easy." At least for groups that want to maintain as much realism as possible.

Depends on the drone. Use your imagination. Wing it. It's not really that important, and if you're off a bit, the world won't end.

(Psst -- no edition of Shadowrun has ever included weights for drones.)


It is especially bad when viewed from a standpoint of players in multiple games. A player in his home game may be able to carry X amount of stuff with no problem, but when he shows up for the GenCon tourney he finds out that his GM there has a different system of weights, or just ignores weights entirely and gives unrealistic limits (like some people have suggested on DS in the past).
Or even worse, on night one he uses his contacts to get his hands on a bunch of gear, which he finds out on night two he can't carry because his GM has changed. Rules in a single group under a single GM can be fudged, but some people play in mlutiple games, like to attend conventions, and would like to have a single rulesset across all those venues.


I suspect that this is, in reality, a non-issue. It probably happens so rarely that it's not worth worrying about. The player can always try to reason with the GM, and if the GM rules otherwise, so be it. This sort of thing can apply even when the rules are clear and fully detailed, such as one GM saying a certain modifier applies in a situation and another saying it doesn't. If one GM does something different from another, you deal with it and get back to the game.

The latter instance is a problem with the GM making a bad call, not with the rule.

If a person wants to skirt the edges of what he can carry it will take longer to do it without a list of weights because you'll still need a calculator but the GM is making up the list as he goes along. Either that or the GM says "you can't carry any more" and the rules lawyer starts arguing with him about it and the game gets dragged to a crashing halt as they begin debating the relative weights between modern scooters and future material drones.

Again, that's an issue with rules lawyer behavior -- which always tends to be a problem.

The point is, the system included allows the GM to make a snap decision and move on, without wasting everyone's time. And I truly do believe that adding up weights, recalculating every time you drop two pieces of gear and add another, min-maxing your weights, and arguing over weights are *all* a colossal waste of time and energy.

Anyway, I feel like I've explained myself. You are of course free to disagree.


edit: Overall the impression that I got was "we don't use weights in our games, therefor we think they're not a good thing to have available, and therefor we won't be printing them. I'm not sure if it can or not, but a grass roots movement of emails to info@shadowrunrpg.com requesting a unified gear table with weights in Arsenal might help.
LilithTaveril
So, let me see if I have this right.

1) They want us to use common sense on this, when common sense itself states most GMs won't have a fucking clue where to start and will have to waste hours or, in some cases, even days looking up information and researching the topic just to have any information on which to set a benchmark.

2) Apparently, researching it on the internet for several hours is supposed to make up for five minutes of looking at a table. So, instead of one group of people who are being paid for their work doing it, you have 25 groups who are just trying to play this game for fun doing it.

3) Streamlining, specifically to make the rules clearer, was the issue. As part of this, things that should be "common sense" were left out. So, since apparently every GM on Earth is familiar enough with assault rifles to be able to ballpark how much they weigh, why were rules on recoil included? After all, if they know enough to know how much the guns weigh, won't they also know enough to know how much of an effect recoil has?

4) If there's an issue between the GM and a player as a result of a rule, it's automatically the player's fault. Doesn't matter if the rule is incomplete, unclear, etc.

5) Magically, all SR4 GMs will agree. Despite the fact we can't even get people on here to agree how the YSF works, let alone even come close to a compromise on weights.

6) The lack of weights was, as I accused them of earlier, from sheer laziness, and yet supposedly the entire encumbrance system inside the rules is complete instead of being utterly half-assed.

7) All rules lawyers are automatically trouble makers and should be dealt with as such. No matter if they're right or not.

Is anyone else satisfied with that reply?
Lagomorph
@knasser: Nice job on the thread, I'll try and find some weights for you.

Here's some good info on current flying Drones.

http://www.fas.org/irp/program/collect/dragon.htm
BQM-147A Exdrone
Dragon Drone
90 lbs with payload; 65 lbs without payload
This would probably be a body 2 sized drone

http://www.fas.org/irp/program/collect/outrider.htm
Outrider Tactical UAV
Max. Gross Take-off Weight: 385 lbs
This would be a body 4 sized drone

http://www.fas.org/irp/program/collect/pointer.htm
"It has a 9 feet wingspan and a 6 feet fuselage length. Its total takeoff weight, with payload, is 8.5 pounds."
That would probably be a body 0 or 1 sized drone.
Shrike30
Hell, I'd be happy if something like this topic (that is, an approximate range of weights for various common items) was provided in Arsenal. You're talking about a quarter of a page's worth of table, probably with a big ol' "OPTIONAL" over it.

Hell, I happen to know that there's players out there who don't even know the vague pounds:kilos conversion ratio (2.2:1), much less who have any idea what trying to carry 50 kilos of equipment is like.

I don't want "the weight of every minor gadget in the game," I want a vague guideline.
LilithTaveril
Shrike, at this point, I want every last object in the game. From the weight of a soyburger to that of a panther cannon. Mainly because of Rob's reply.

QUOTE (Lagomorph @ Aug 29 2006, 01:41 PM)
@knasser: Nice job on the thread, I'll try and find some weights for you.

Here's some good info on current flying Drones.

http://www.fas.org/irp/program/collect/dragon.htm
BQM-147A Exdrone
Dragon Drone
90 lbs with payload; 65 lbs without payload
This would probably be a body 2 sized drone

http://www.fas.org/irp/program/collect/outrider.htm
Outrider Tactical UAV
Max. Gross Take-off Weight: 385 lbs
This would be a body 4 sized drone

http://www.fas.org/irp/program/collect/pointer.htm
"It has a 9 feet wingspan and a 6 feet fuselage length. Its total takeoff weight, with payload, is 8.5 pounds."
That would probably be a body 0 or 1 sized drone.

How well do they resist damage? That's the majority of what Body is. You can weight 200 kilos and still have a Body rating of 1.
James McMurray
Enough emails (polite ones preferably) to FanPro with a request for an integrated equipment chart with a weight column might do the trick.
Mal-2
QUOTE (LilithTaveril)
Is anyone else satisfied with that reply?

It all seemed pretty reasonable to me.
James McMurray
It will likely seem reasonable to most people here, because for whatever reason most people who play SR don't like weights.
LilithTaveril
QUOTE (Mal-2)
QUOTE (LilithTaveril @ Aug 29 2006, 01:29 PM)
Is anyone else satisfied with that reply?

It all seemed pretty reasonable to me.

So it's reasonable to tell people that, because you didn't feel like doing it, they have to do all of the weight research just to make a rule that you wrote work or simply to make something up, to instantly make up all of the technology advances that led to why you are wrong, and that all problems that result from people having to interpret the rules are automatically on the people who interpreted them instead of on the people who wrote them to force interpretation and be vague or incomplete in many areas?

That doesn't sound reasonable to me. That sounds like not wanting to do the work and shifting the blame to the customers. They are selling a game, not a piece of software. If they really want to have that business practice, they need to change industries.
Critias
So, right. A few people are still righteously indignant about it. Want to contribute to this thread, with some suggested weight listings? Maybe once a more complete list is compiled, someone can send it to Rob and ask that it be tossed into the back of Arsenal or something.
2bit
Righteous indignation aside, it just sounds like a Community Projects thread needs to be started with links like Lagomorph provided. If a free, computer friendly version of 3rd edition weights exists, that would be an especially helpful link.
LilithTaveril
The target weight for the XM8 is 2.6 kg. Assuming we use that as a base for the XM30, we can probably extract a weight of 3 kg for the assault rifle, 2.4 for the carbine, and use the standard weights provided earlier in the topic with a bit of a weight reduction for the others.

The AK-47, on the other hand, is 4.3 kg. However, the AK-74 weighs 3.3 kg. I'd guess the AK-97 to probably be around 4 kg. This is due to how many current AK-47s are still in use.

Note the M16A2, a relatively light weapon, weighs in at 4 kg (loaded, which is the only weight I can find for it). Since it no longer exists by the time of SR4, I just provided it for reference.

The MP5A2 weighs in at 2.5 kg. I won't even guess for the SR4 version.

Really, I think the issue on the first page is people are making the weapons too light in weight. We need a weight range that is average. Otherwise, we get monstrous comparisons. Oh, and I have links for every weight I posted.

Finally, I want someone to look in the SR4 book and find me where it says encumbrance is optional. I can't find any indication of that, but the letter from Rob makes it sound like it is.
Demerzel
Well Lilith since you asked, see P54. LAst two sentances of the first complete paragraph on the page. The sentance beginning, "IF something in these { . . . ]"
Lagomorph
QUOTE (LilithTaveril)
How well do they resist damage? That's the majority of what Body is. You can weight 200 kilos and still have a Body rating of 1.

I don't know, I haven't shot or crashed one. Given that drones are divided into micro/small/normal/large, it's likely that they would have different weights associated with them which has a connection to the body number. Sure you could have a body 0 micro drone weigh 200 kilos but it doesn't really make much sense, just as I could describe a str 8 character as skin and bones. All I'm doing is trying to post some reasonable weights for drones, and so far I've just found aerial drones.

Here's some ground ones:
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/sys...agon-runner.htm
"At 15.5 inches long, 11.25 inches wide and five inches high, Dragon Runner will fit inside the standard Modular, Light Weight, Load Carrying Equipment (MOLLE) Patrol Pack. The total system will weigh 16 pounds."

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/sys...nd/fcs-mule.htm
"The MULE is a UGV weighing up to 1 ton"
"The 1,500 pound Team Retarius platform rolled out during a ceremony at Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, N.M., on 22 January 2003."
Cabral
QUOTE (LilithTaveril)
So it's reasonable to tell people that, because you didn't feel like doing it, they have to do all of the weight research just to make a rule that you wrote work or simply to make something up, to instantly make up all of the technology advances that led to why you are wrong, and that all problems that result from people having to interpret the rules are automatically on the people who interpreted them instead of on the people who wrote them to force interpretation and be vague or incomplete in many areas?

While I like SR4 as a whole alot, it seems that there are several pieces left unfished and half-assed. The weights being not that a big deal to me, but the missing info on Permits, the omited info on crimes and punishments, and a few other things are very disappointing.

It's mostly not a big deal for me since I have a shelf full of prior edition books (just about every 1st-3rd edition sourcebook), but I really thing the core rulebook should have more stand alone usefulness.
thephoenix
Have you ever thought about looking at other Roleplaying books that do list weight and using those. D20 Modern for example has a couple of books (one official and one not) that I would think does actually list weight.
PlainWhiteSocks
QUOTE
Note the M16A2, a relatively light weapon, weighs in at 4 kg (loaded, which is the only weight I can find for it). Since it no longer exists by the time of SR4, I just provided it for reference.


According to the site listed below, the M16a2 weighs 3.77kg unloaded and 4.47kg loaded.
The earlier M16a1 weighs in at 2.89kg / 3.6kg unloaded/loaded.
Would it be acceptable to use the M16a1 weight to account for 2070 materials and design?


World Guns
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