Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: help me reverst my strict Gm's house-rule
Dumpshock Forums > Discussion > Shadowrun
Pages: 1, 2
PlutoNick
I started playing Shadowrun 1.5 months ago. After 5 sessions, our GM rules out the rule that Cyber eyes image magnification reduces target numbers as an image scope would. So instead of having a 2 target number in medium range, my weapon specialist has 4.

In essence he loses part of his combat expertise, his years of training went down the drain, not to mention his 7000 nuyen of image magn cyberware. Instead of being Hardboiled's Tequila, Die Hard's John McLane, instead of being the neoWilliam Tell v2.0, Robin Digital Hood, he becomes one third of the three stooges, bozzo the clown if you like.

Furthermore, he says that any shot in long range suffers a -1 penalty in power rating.

Please, help me reverse his decision. Tell me some good points in order to make him understand, to see the light. If anything else fails, humiliate him so when he sees this threat, he will bow his head in humiliation and make US weapon specialists, the pride of UCAS that of any evil megacorp will fear.
Req
http://invision.dumpshock.com/index.php?sh...wtopic=1588&hl=

That -1 to power at long range seems kinda annoying, but you know I have to go with your GM on the rest of it.
PlutoNick
you are ruining everything man. If you agree with that despicable being that I have to call GM every saturday, then please, keep your opinion to yourself. If you are GMing I hope your PCs kill every puny NPCs of your at extreme range every time!!


Straight from the official shadowrun faq

--
Are you going to publish a Shadowrun, Fourth Edition?
What, are you trying to say that Shadowrun, Third Edition isn't perfect?!
No, we have no plans for SR4 at this time.
--

How dare you disregard our bible? I am sure you are a D&D player.
PlutoNick
If you are Spiros, my GM, you will never hear the end of this
Kagetenshi
How were you getting a TN of 2 at medium range, pray tell? The only way to get below 4 with a scope is if your GM allows a laser sight to stack, which still only yields a 3.
As for cybereye magnification... any idea why he forbade them? I'm not understanding the problems here.
The -1 in power is icky, yes, but arguably realistic and rarely a problem, I'd say.

~J

edit: Straight from the SR3 rulebook: "In other words, if something in these rules doesn't quite fit or make sense to you, feel free to change it. If you come up with a game mechanic that you think works better—go for it!"

Page 38, BBB, "The Abstract Nature of Rules"
Tanka
A TN2 at medium is a bit low, methinks. No matter how much training you have, it's still a shot from the hip. At short range I can see TN2 only because of a few pieces of wiz ware, other than that you have no clue where it's going (Guncam and Image Link aside.). Now, taking the time to line up your shots is another story.

If you want the TN2 at Medium, work on it yourself. I won't tell you how, but don't come whining to us when your GM makes a rule that makes sense to him. It's a house rule, and, therefore, is only applicable when he GMs. If you so stringently want it repealed, find out a way to abuse it yourself, so that way he'll either edit it or remove it entirely.
Bearclaw
The rules, as written, don't allow a smartgun and image magnification at the same time. I'm sure your GM has a problem with the TN of 2. If he follows the rules as written, you'll have a TN of 4 either way, right?

Either the base TN of 4 because your magnification knocks off the penalty for long range, or:
TN of 4 because 6 -2 for the smartgun = 4.
PlutoNick
here is how i get a 2 tn from medium range.

-2 from smartlink
and my img magnification cybereyes rating 3, reduce any range 3 stages. so long and medium become short range tn 4 (-2) = 2

"In other words, if something in these rules doesn't quite fit or make sense to you, feel free to change it. If you come up with a game mechanic that you think works better—go for it!"

My image magnfication cybereyes and the help I get from aiming, certainly fit very well and make sense to me and to the Street Samurai friend I got [His name is Red Baron and he is furious with the recent changes as well]
RedBaron
Well the solution is to try to shoot the GM in real life with a submachine when he is in medium range and see how difficult it is... (after that maybe find a new GM is needed... but it's the best way i think... plus the new GM wont abuse the rules for sure)
Tanka
It's stated many times in many books that Smartlink is not compatible with Image Mag and many other types of vision. A lot of things that also give you -TN also say they don't work with Smartlink. Your Vision Mag may make Long seem like Short, but not while using the Smartlink.
Kagetenshi
Well, given that the rules explicitly state that bonuses from magnification and smartlink don't stack... if he won't let the eyemag work at all then I'd question that, but your TN at Medium is going to be 4 anyway.

~J
Tanka
QUOTE (RedBaron)
Well the solution is to try to shoot the GM in real life with a submachine when he is in medium range and see how difficult it is...

Well, since Medium is roughly anywhere between 33+ feet to 120+ feet (11-40 meters), the TN makes sense, doesn't it? Can you honestly say you can shoot reliably at 120 feet? From the hip?

However, unless I'm reading the wrong sourcebook, your TN for Medium should only be 3.
Kagetenshi
You're right. I forgot the TN for medium range.

~J
PlutoNick
Red Baron take it easy. I think we were wrong all along.

If vision magnification works the same as an imaging scope, then you can't use a smartlink, is that correct?

Still, I prove that the GM instead of checking the rulebook, he arbitrarily made a house rule. SR3 is flawless after all. The faq was right.

So, now I only need to abuse vision magnification without smartlink as tank suggested.

Does vision magnification work while holding two guns?
Kagetenshi
Yes, it does. If you aren't going dual-gun, go with a Smartlink and Rangefinder for 2/3/4/5 TNs (IIRC); if you are, stick with the eyemag and fire away.
Keep in mind the penalties for using two firearms, though.

~J
Req
QUOTE (PlutoNick)
you are ruining everything man. If you agree with that despicable being that I have to call GM every saturday, then please, keep your opinion to yourself. If you are GMing I hope your PCs kill every puny NPCs of your at extreme range every time!!


Straight from the official shadowrun faq

--
Are you going to publish a Shadowrun, Fourth Edition?
What, are you trying to say that Shadowrun, Third Edition isn't perfect?!
No, we have no plans for SR4 at this time.
--

How dare you disregard our bible? I am sure you are a D&D player.

Heh.
PlutoNick
Don't tell this to my GM but I dont think it should.

If vision magnif works as image scopes, and it would be very difficult to use two image scopes while going dual-gun. Therefore vision magnif shouldn't work, or at least that is what the GM will claim, unless of course I am forgetting some rules detail.
Kagetenshi
I completely agree. It makes more sense that smartlinks would work with two guns than magnification of any sort. However, I don't think they thought to specifically forbid the latter, whereas they did think of the former.

~J
RedBaron
I think it should work cause u dont magnify the guns u magnify the target (now if u fire at 2 different targets ok...)
TinkerGnome
The best combo is to have both smartlink and image magnification. You only really need Smartlink-II if you plan on using grenade launchers (or really want that TN of 3 at long range), so you can even save a little bit of nuyen.gif by going with the basic system instead.

Back on the subject of why they don't stack. A loaded out gun which could use both systems would have the following TNs. (smartlink + rangefinder + rangefinder on gun + image mag 3)

Short 2, Medium 2, Long 1, Extreme 0.
Kagetenshi
TN 3 at long range? How?
But yes, even though they don't stack there are valid reasons for having both Smartlinks and magnification.

~J
TinkerGnome
QUOTE (Kagetenshi)
TN 3 at long range? How?
But yes, even though they don't stack there are valid reasons for having both Smartlinks and magnification.

Base TN of 6, -2 for smartlink, -1 for rangefinder smile.gif
The Frumious Bandersnatch
QUOTE (TinkerGnome)
The best combo is to have both smartlink and image magnification. You only really need Smartlink-II if you plan on using grenade launchers (or really want that TN of 3 at long range), so you can even save a little bit of nuyen.gif by going with the basic system instead.

Assuming you never wanted to make a Called Shot, too, considering that's the major perk of the Smartlink-2 system.
nezumi
PlutoNick, I think you're my new favorite person to read posts from...

Without debating whether the rules justify your statement or not, I'd have to side with your GM because of the basic fact that he is the GM. His job is to be the final judge (period). When RPGs turn into democracies, they turn into messes, especially with people like you who want to be able to blow the eyelashes off a fly at eight hundred yards. If you have a problem with it, than I recommend two things. 1) Talk with your GM like a normal human being, no humiliating, no whining and no shouting or insults. Write out why you think it should be changed rules wise and balance wise (the second one is very important). Discuss it out of game, when he has time to talk. If he says 'no', respect it and drop it forever FOREVER (or at least for a month). 2) Get a new GM. If you really can't stand him, I recommend YOU try running the game. I'm sure he'd enjoy a break, it's hard work GMing. Don't be mean about it, though, we're all gentle people. Simply express that this is not the sort of game you'd like to play, with your being vulnerable to small arms fire and all that, and start working on setting up a game you would enjoy.

However, I think you'll find that, when it comes down to it, this isn't such a horrible setup. It sounds like your GM is interested in keeping things fair and realistic. If you feel like your character is suffering because you previously were not aware of his house rule, tell him and see if he'll let you get the money and essence back for your eyes. But otherwise I'd say stick with it and learn to live with the fact that sometimes the GM will not agree with you rules-wise, and that's his job. Your job is to accept his rules and move on so you both can enjoy the game.
nezumi
Oh, almost forgot... Your character is not totally wasted. The SLII setup is best for short and medium range, and doesn't rely on magnification. However, for medium to extreme range, the best setup is a scope with an extreme range laser, giving you (still) a TN of 3, even at the farthest range. So if you have SLII AND mag vision AND the laser, no matter how far the target, the TN is always 3 or below.
Ed_209a
Pluto, I wouldn't let you use both SG and cyber mag vision either.

HOwever, if you had a SG link or a laser on the weapon, I would let you take the mag vision bonuses as if it were a riflescope.

But, in the end, it's not my game.
TinkerGnome
QUOTE (The Frumious Bandersnatch)
Assuming you never wanted to make a Called Shot, too, considering that's the major perk of the Smartlink-2 system.

I try not to think about called shots anymore. But someone who is stressing over the amount of nuyen seperating the two systems probably wouldn't mind giving up the called shot advantage wink.gif
Kagetenshi
QUOTE (TinkerGnome)
QUOTE (Kagetenshi @ Nov 3 2003, 04:16 PM)
TN 3 at long range? How?
But yes, even though they don't stack there are valid reasons for having both Smartlinks and magnification.

Base TN of 6, -2 for smartlink, -1 for rangefinder smile.gif

Today is not a good day for me and remembering range TNs.

~J
Austere Emancipator
QUOTE
Furthermore, he says that any shot in long range suffers a -1 penalty in power rating.

Might I ask what is wrong with this bit? It's realistic -- both damage and penetration potential, which is basically what Power means, of a bullet drop at long ranges. By the wording, I'm thinking that applies to all weapons, fired by anyone, so game balance stays the same. If the GM does the calculations, what's the problem?

So I can't help you with this rule, since I can't even think of any coherent reason why it should be reversed. In my games, in fact, all Powers drop by 1 per Range category beyond Short. If you really don't want to play the game the way your GM wants to run it, get a new GM like has been suggested above (assuming that you simply cannot agree on gaming styles).

The other bit has already been dealt with, and I agree with Ed_209a, except that I don't give the bonuses for cybereye vision mag with a laser sight, only with a smartlink.

But it ain't my game either.
TinkerGnome
QUOTE (Austere Emancipator)
The other bit has already been dealt with, and I agree with Ed_209a, except that I don't give the bonuses for cybereye vision mag with a laser sight, only with a smartlink.

Wait, so what stacks with what? Vision mag stacks with a laser sight in canon (the CC, to be exact). Nothing stacks with smartlink. Are you stacking smartlink and the laser sight?
Austere Emancipator
Nothing stacks with anything, except (obviously) Smartlink(-2) with Rangefinder. But if you've got Vision Magnification-3 and a Smartlink(-2), you can get the "scope" bonuses, OR you can use the Smartlink(-2) bonuses.

I wasn't trying to say this is a good way of ruling it or anything. I just wanted to mention it, since people were talking about different ways of house ruling the situation.
kevyn668
QUOTE
Austere Emancipator Posted on Nov 3 2003, 08:47 PM
  QUOTE 
Furthermore, he says that any shot in long range suffers a -1 penalty in power rating.


Might I ask what is wrong with this bit? It's realistic -- both damage and penetration potential, which is basically what Power means, of a bullet drop at long ranges. By the wording, I'm thinking that applies to all weapons, fired by anyone, so game balance stays the same. If the GM does the calculations, what's the problem?

So I can't help you with this rule, since I can't even think of any coherent reason why it should be reversed. In my games, in fact, all Powers drop by 1 per Range category beyond Short. If you really don't want to play the game the way your GM wants to run it, get a new GM like has been suggested above (assuming that you simply cannot agree on gaming styles).



Whoa, daddy like!! Consider that idea officially part of my HouseRule Folder. smile.gif

Can't wait to spring that one on my players next week. Hey Austere, where would you like me to tell them to send the hate mail?? wink.gif

(actually I'll probably let them gripe about for a while and then show how that rule saves some ones ass b/c there's a punk on the roof accross the street...)
Shockwave_IIc
I guess im the only one that housed ruled that to use a scope, you have to of decleared an aim action before hand.
Shadow
Heres an idea. Use the rules as written.

House rules more often than not are created to cover a specific situation and don't really cover all that apply.

The -1 power at long range is just dumb (imho) why fix something that isn't broken? And if changing it doesn't matter because you change it for everyone than why change it? (More book keeping again)

My advice to you man is to tell your GM to stick to the rules. SG doesn't stack with anything. It sounds like you weren't following them before but oh well. It's tough but there have been some good ideas above, read them and do them, but kill the lame house rules.
Kagetenshi
QUOTE (Shockwave_IIc)
I guess im the only one that housed ruled that to use a scope, you have to of decleared an aim action before hand.

Yes. You are the only one who has ever done this, and the only one who ever will. Take pride in your uniqueness.

~J
Andvare
QUOTE (Shockwave_IIc)
I guess im the only one that housed ruled that to use a scope, you have to of decleared an aim action before hand.

Nope. Me to.

I hate to say that it is not that which makes you unique spin.gif .
TinkerGnome
Scopes are for snipers. Unless, that is, you're using an ultrasound scope and goggles. Those are a bit different, I believe.
Glyph
By the way, according to the CC, you can't use any targeting or imaging accessories when using two guns at once. So, you can't use a smartlink or vision magnification when using two guns.
Tanka
My GMs always just let dual guns go with one Smartlink. Different colored crosshairs or somesuch.

Just a house rule, though. Don't go saying it's canon, because it sure as crap isn't.
Diesel
QUOTE (Austere Emancipator)
Might I ask what is wrong with this bit? It's realistic -- both damage and penetration potential, which is basically what Power means, of a bullet drop at long ranges.

[QUOTE]

Actually, if we're talking about rifles and such, penetration increases at longer range. ( Check here, page three).

This is due to the fact that bullets have much more energy at close range and as such are far more likely to yaw and fragment. That yawing is good for armor, bad for flesh. Rule as wanted.
Wonazer
QUOTE (Diesel)
QUOTE (Austere Emancipator @ Nov 3 2003, 12:47 PM)
Might I ask what is wrong with this bit? It's realistic -- both damage and penetration potential, which is basically what Power means, of a bullet drop at long ranges.

[QUOTE]

Actually, if we're talking about rifles and such, penetration increases at longer range. ( Check here, page three).

This is due to the fact that bullets have much more energy at close range and as such are far more likely to yaw and fragment. That yawing is good for armor, bad for flesh. Rule as wanted.

Leave the rules alone and call it even?
Diesel
Sounds splendid to me. biggrin.gif

Unless you want to go hardcore Raygun-esque, but I have a nagging suspicion that that is best left to my campaigns.
Austere Emancipator
I must admit that I'm surprised to hear that even .50BMG rounds penetrate better at very long ranges. And after looking at the tables mentioned there, I am very curious as to how armor piercing rounds manage at different ranges. Anyhow...

The Field Manual only talks about penetration of structural materials. With all the rounds, penetration is enhanced most by range against materials like sand bags, earth, pine board, etc. Against cinder blocks or concrete, this effect is much smaller or non-existant. The only round for which the FM shows a table for range/material/penetration, the 7.62x51mm Ball , seems to penetrate cinder blocks best at 100 meters, and penetration of concrete does not significantly change with range (up to 200 meters, that is).

All the other data seem to reinforce the view that against rigid or thin layers of armor, the shorter the range the better (at least down to 100 meters). You need (a lot) more rounds to penetrate concrete with a M2HB at longer ranges, etc.

A human being is a thick, semi-fluid object. The less the bullet penetrates of it, the better. The optimum situation is very close, where a bullet still has almost all of it's muzzle energy left, if a bullet only slightly overpenetrates, so that all of that energy is transferred into the target. Thus, against a living creature, any of the weapons and ammunition mentioned in the FM-90-10-1 are at their most leathal at as short a range as possible. For more proof of this, see Patterns of Military Rifle Bullets (once again from Raygun's site) and read through the bits about the terminal ballistics of 5.56x45mm NATO Ball rounds and the West German 7.62x51mm NATO Ball. (I'm guessing you'll know most of this already, but some people might not. And it's worth mentioning anyway, since it goes towards the "damage potential" bit of reducing Power at long ranges.)

The other medium the penetration of which is important to SR players is body armor, which is extremely thin (compared to any of the materials mentioned in the FM). Additionally, the penetration of body armor is a rather binary thing -- the bullet either goes through, or it stops cold on the outside. The data I've seen (mainly the NIJ documents which can be found on Raygun's site) indicates that it is very, very rare for a bullet to penetrate some but not all of a suit of armor.

Because of this, of the mediums mentioned in the document, body armor is most like concrete, but even more extreme. And, would you have guessed it, concrete is the medium with which the FM shows there's least advantage in penetration as range gets longer. In fact, like I mentioned above, the FM indicates that the shorter the range the better against such a material. The NIJ documents also indicate that bullets penetrate body armor best at short ranges.

So, against many (or most) structural materials (of the world in 2000), firearms do seem to have worse penetration capabilities at short range. However, in Shadowrun, breaching structural materials is a very uncommon use of firearms (at least it seems to be in my games), and against the kinds of threats most commonly faced by firearm wielders range is not an advantage but a disadvantage.

[Edit]I just LUUUUV going hardcore, but I know I haven't got what it takes to be Raygun-esque. But if you can find a good counter-argument for what I wrote above, I'll take your word for this.[/Edit]
Kurukami
QUOTE (Glyph)
By the way, according to the CC, you can't use any targeting or imaging accessories when using two guns at once. So, you can't use a smartlink or vision magnification when using two guns.

Interesting that M&M directly contradicts that under the details on the smartlink-2, and specifically says you can have one for each hand. Obviously it isn't compatible with cybernetic vision-mag, but nonetheless M&M seems to suggest paired smartlinks will work.
Kagetenshi
No, it says you can have a pad in each hand, so when the GM says your right arm has been cut off you can use your left. It doesn't mean you can use two guns at the same time; as a matter of fact, I might even give penalties as the crosshair tries to track two guns at the same time. Ever tried to use a mouse and a trackpad at the same time on the same computer?

~J
tisoz
QUOTE (Kurukami @ Nov 4 2003, 10:36 AM)
QUOTE (Glyph @ Nov 4 2003, 04:48 AM)
By the way, according to the CC, you can't use any targeting or imaging accessories when using two guns at once.  So, you can't use a smartlink or vision magnification when using two guns.

Interesting that M&M directly contradicts that under the details on the smartlink-2, and specifically says you can have one for each hand. Obviously it isn't compatible with cybernetic vision-mag, but nonetheless M&M seems to suggest paired smartlinks will work.

No, you can then fire a smartlinked weapon with either hand. What happens if you get your dominant arm whacked off? Switch to your other hand to try to stay alive.

edit: too, slow.
Ed_209a
That TM also mainly refers to the 5.56mm round impacting fairly rigid objects.

If you presume that a bullet does not change at all after an impact, then max penetration will be at the muzzle, where velocity is maximum.

However, the 5.56mm NATO round has two velocity threshholds that affect it's performance.

If it hits an object fast enough, it will break into many smaller fragments, essentially exploding on impact. If the round is moving slower than above, but faster than another critical velocity, the bullet will snap in half.

These velocity threshholds exist for all ammo, but are different depending on size and construction. Since the bullet deformation depends on target resistance, the values will probably be a bit lower when hitting something like a wall compared to a person or a sandbag.
Siege
Actually, it might help instinctive shooting at close (intimate) ranges.

Instead of tracking a laser sight, a floating smartlink reticle is probably easier to see and would help the: Is gun on target? Yes/No resolution.

Using two guns on one target is infinitely easier than trying to engage seperate targets in your field of vision, especially if you're not worried about aiming so much as putting rounds in center mass.

Not to derail the tangent on well-explored threads...

-Siege
Kagetenshi
It all depends on how exactly the smartlink works. It's entirely possible that once you introduce a second gun into a system designed for a single gun, the crosshair will no longer have any relation to the actual target of either gun. Strange things happen when you give more input than a system was designed for.

~J
Siege
Yeah, we're dealing with strict hypotheticals.

"If the system works like this, then we can do A and B."

"But, if the system works like this, then we can't do A, but we can do B and C."

grinbig.gif

-Siege
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