Full Version: Buying Hits
| QUOTE (mfb) |
| ah. then i can cut my example down to 13 dice. with blindfire and extreme range, that leaves you with 4 dice, which i believe allows you to buy a single hit. even if it doesn't, 4 dice gives you upwards of a 50/50 chance. find me someone irl who can hit a distant target while blindfolded every other time he fires, and i will pay you one hundred dollars. |
Not to pick on MFB, but I've seen people mention stuff like this regarding buying hits, and his was just the most recent example. And honestly? He's wrong.
p55, SR4
Buying Hits
If the gamemaster allows it, a character may trade in 4 dice fron her dice pool in exchange for an automatic hit. Gamemasters should only allow this when the character has an exceptionally large dice pool (and is unlikely to fail) or when the situation is non-threatening and non-stressful. If the character might suffer bad consequences from failing the test, then the gamemaster should require her to roll the test rather than buying hits. Buying hits is an alll-or-nothing affair; you cannot spend part of your pool to buy hits and then make a test with the rest.
Now this says to me several things (And this was the intention behind this rule when we playtested it, at least as far as I know).
Number one, 4 dice is not an exceptionally large dice pool. Sure, you had a ton of dice before hand, but not anymore after modifiers. And the final dice tally is what should count here. You're not likely to roll zero failures on 13 or 15 dice, it's somewhat likely on only 4.
Number two, and this is the most important thing people overlook, is that the situation is supposed to be non-threatening and non-stressful. This means you can't do it to pick a lock when there are sec guards wandering around, you can't use it to stealth past a Lone Star patrol, and you certainly can't use it in any sort of combat situation. Especially in combination with the "character might suffer bad consequences from failing the test" part of it.
The example in the book is for searching a room. Other examples would be while making a casual minor reapir on a vehicle, or while... you know, there really aren't many situations that I can see this rule really applying to, that aren't almost 100% Roleplay oriented, when you want to avoid getting bogged down with rules and rolling dice.
Which was the entire point of the rule.
Instead folks seem determined to use this as an example of how the game is broken and caters to power gamers. The only reason this rule might do that is if the GM allows it. And if the GM is allowing it, and you feel it's a problem, well... That's a problem with the GM and both his and your fellow RPG group members play styles, and not a fault of the rules.
Bull
This rule just struck me as useless. Like Bull says, it applies to almost nothing. "If the outcome doesn't matter and success is 95% certain anyway, you can buy a small number of successes - but you might as well roll the dice, because you've got a good chance of getting more hits that way anyway."
ah. i'd heard that the buying success thing was limited, but i didn't know the wording. regardless, the example in the other thread still stands (50/50 is about as bad as 100/0, in this case).
It's in there to mitigate an additional roll of the dice.
Like, if all you need is 1 hit to open a lock when you have plenty of time to work on it, then you can just tell the GM "Okay, I have 4+ dice in my pool, I unlock it. Now what happens?"
Like, if all you need is 1 hit to open a lock when you have plenty of time to work on it, then you can just tell the GM "Okay, I have 4+ dice in my pool, I unlock it. Now what happens?"
| QUOTE (Azralon) |
| It's in there to mitigate an additional roll of the dice. Like, if all you need is 1 hit to open a lock when you have plenty of time to work on it, then you can just tell the GM "Okay, I have 4+ dice in my pool, I unlock it. Now what happens?" |
Exactly, as I said, it's really there to speed up roleplay (And rollplay
). Bull
| QUOTE (Azralon) |
| It's in there to mitigate an additional roll of the dice. Like, if all you need is 1 hit to open a lock when you have plenty of time to work on it, then you can just tell the GM "Okay, I have 4+ dice in my pool, I unlock it. Now what happens?" |
Or, as per the other thread, you're blindfolded and a half mile away from your target (can you imagine a *less* distracting environment?) then you can just tell the GM "Okay, after penalties I have 4+ dice in my pool, I shoot it. Hell, I shoot it seven times, just to be sure. Now what happens?"
Heh. I'd be all, "Well, it's quiet."
On the flip side, even if you insisted on rolling for it, you only have a 19.75% chance of missing the target ( 2/3 ^4 ). Hitting 80% of the time is certainly less than 100%, but considering the conditions that's still pretty insane.
Doesn't four dice give you better than fifty fifty odds?
Yes. Like I said, it gives you an 80.25% chance of hitting (no hits in only ~19.75% of possible dice rolls.) So much better than even odds.
Not to mention, if they were a half mile away, they would probably be surprised...thus negating the dodge roll.
And if you are firing from a half mile away, chances are that weapon you have has a healthy damage code. You may not kill them with one shot from that far, but you'll hurt 'em.
And if you are firing from a half mile away, chances are that weapon you have has a healthy damage code. You may not kill them with one shot from that far, but you'll hurt 'em.
its a simple rule to say someone with X dice can do a task in Y time, without any risk of failure, or he can try to do it faster and maybe have a glitch.
You could use it in combat, if you have good reaction/dodge vs a very poor hit by an enemy. but its generaly to resolve downtime issues swiftly- maintaining your gear, writing software, and so on.
You could use it in combat, if you have good reaction/dodge vs a very poor hit by an enemy. but its generaly to resolve downtime issues swiftly- maintaining your gear, writing software, and so on.
Personally I would make the characters roll anytime something critical is on the line examples would be crash tests or combat tests. I would use the buy success rule for things that would have been Build/Repair tests under SR3 or for low criticality perception checks, particularly if stopping to make the test would be disruptive to game narative or scene setting.
| QUOTE (stevebugge) |
| Personally I would make the characters roll anytime something critical is on the line examples would be crash tests or combat tests. I would use the buy success rule for things that would have been Build/Repair tests under SR3 or for low criticality perception checks, particularly if stopping to make the test would be disruptive to game narative or scene setting. |
That's an excellent use for the rule, btw: if, for example, an adventure said that a character would need 3 hits on a test to notice something, and the GM knows that he has enough dice to buy those 3 hits, the GM can just proceed as if the character noticed it, no tests necessary, no need to let the players know that there may have been a test.
this is similar to taking 10 in d20, which can't be done while stressed.
I'd be tempted to say, you'd need at least 12 dice to do this.
and, it's always up to the GM to allow it, or not
I'd be tempted to say, you'd need at least 12 dice to do this.
and, it's always up to the GM to allow it, or not
question already asked and replied to.
Keep in mind that although that passage suggests that it be used primarily in low-stress situations, other parts of the books explicitly suggest the use of that rule in combat (for damage resistance, see sr4.158 under "vehicle armor.")
Mind you, whether or not armor holds is really not related to whether the situation is combat or not, so maybe you could argue that this passage is not relavant. Point is, the book does endorse it's use in combat in certain situations.
Mind you, whether or not armor holds is really not related to whether the situation is combat or not, so maybe you could argue that this passage is not relavant. Point is, the book does endorse it's use in combat in certain situations.
| QUOTE (Vaevictis) |
| Keep in mind that although that passage suggests that it be used primarily in low-stress situations, other parts of the books explicitly suggest the use of that rule in combat (for damage resistance, see sr4.158 under "vehicle armor.") Mind you, whether or not armor holds is really not related to whether the situation is combat or not, so maybe you could argue that this passage is not relavant. Point is, the book does endorse it's use in combat in certain situations. |
Yea, I was going to mention this too. I had assumed, originally, that buying hits was for "non-stressful" situations as well; but that example changed my mind. Now I'm not sure which to believe.
I highly doubt that a vehicle's armour is fretting about how well it rolls on the test (even though the driver and/or Pilot might be). 
That might be how it was seen falling into "no stress" catagory. *shrug*
That might be how it was seen falling into "no stress" catagory. *shrug*
| QUOTE (blakkie) |
| I highly doubt that a vehicle's armour is fretting about how well it rolls on the test (even though the driver and/or Pilot might be). |
I can see that, but in that case, does character armor in the 15+ range also get automatic hits?
| QUOTE (Vaevictis @ Dec 3 2005, 04:03 AM) | ||
I can see that, but in that case, does character armor in the 15+ range also get automatic hits? |
Normally they don't roll Armor alone, usually the pool includes their Body. Beside personal armour tending to move around a lot with the wearer's different body poses. *shrug*
But no, it's not a perfect explaination by any stretch. They might have just thought it made more sense to avoid wild swings in damage avoidance by vehicle armour. *shrug*
Unless you happen to have your unlucky day, buying hits is usually much worse in results than to roll, anyway.
So, if you want to use it in damage resistance... why not?
So, if you want to use it in damage resistance... why not?
| QUOTE (Rotbart van Dainig) |
| Unless you happen to have your unlucky day, buying hits is usually much worse in results than to roll, anyway. |
No argument. However, there are cases where buying is preferable because you know exactly what you're going to get. If you have just enough armor to buy off all of the damage, then it's obviously preferable not to risk the die roll, for example.
In any case, I'm not advocating that you should generally do so, I'm just saying that the book is slightly inconsistent on when you can buy hits. (slightly)
I think the suggestion for "buying hits" on vehicle armor tests was more to keep people from having to roll 36 dice for the City Master. But since weapons now do the same damage to vehicles as they do to people (unless I missed that!), it seems a that the structural integrity argument has some validity to it as well. I know I've seen fifteen dice get rolled and only two or three hits come up. I've noticed too no mention of vehicle armor being "Hardened" like the critter power. I know it pissed people off a lot in my 3rd Ed game, but I liked being able to bounce off small arms fire if your armor was strong enough. Nobody is taking out a T-72 with their M-16 in real life (IF they have , I HAVE to see that)
| QUOTE (Vaevictis) |
| If you have just enough armor to buy off all of the damage, then it's obviously preferable not to risk the die roll, for example. |
But then again, that's a very good example of 'an exceptionally large dice pool (and is unlikely to fail)', isn't it?
| QUOTE (TeOdio) |
| I've noticed too no mention of vehicle armor being "Hardened" like the critter power. I know it pissed people off a lot in my 3rd Ed game, but I liked being able to bounce off small arms fire if your armor was strong enough. |
Look closer, it's on page 161, Vehicle Damage.
| QUOTE |
| Whenever a vehicle is hit by an attack, it resists damage as normal, rolling Body + Armor. If the attack’s modifi ed DV does not exceed the vehicle’s modified Armor, no damage is applied. |
Vehicle Armor is still "hardened".
| QUOTE (Darkness) |
| [QUOTE=TeOdio,Dec 4 2005, 08:23 AM] Look closer, it's on page 161, Vehicle Damage. [QUOTE]Whenever a vehicle is hit by an attack, it resists damage as normal, rolling Body + Armor. If the attack’s modifi ed DV does not exceed the vehicle’s modified Armor, no damage is applied.[/QUOTE] Vehicle Armor is still "hardened". |
While it tends to have the same effect as SR3 "hardened" armor, imo, it's not really quite the same. I think it has more to do with the fact that vehicles don't take stun damage and the fact that if you don't exceed the armor, the damage is applied as stun.
| QUOTE (mfb) |
| ah. then i can cut my example down to 13 dice. with blindfire and extreme range, that leaves you with 4 dice, which i believe allows you to buy a single hit. even if it doesn't, 4 dice gives you upwards of a 50/50 chance. find me someone irl who can hit a distant target while blindfolded every other time he fires, and i will pay you one hundred dollars. |
I might be missing the point here, but I thought that mfb's original comment was more a complaint that the new system is poor at modeling very difficult or impossible (IRL) tasks. His example was meant to illustrate an example where a task was nearly impossible, and yet a highly proficient player could score a success most of the time, not a complaint about the mechanism for buying hits.
[ Spoiler ]
Is this wrong? Are the voices in my head mis-leading me again?
| QUOTE (Vaevictis) |
| While it tends to have the same effect as SR3 "hardened" armor, imo, it's not really quite the same. I think it has more to do with the fact that vehicles don't take stun damage and the fact that if you don't exceed the armor, the damage is applied as stun. |
If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck ...
Whatever the reasons, or the name, as long as the effect is the same, who cares.
| QUOTE (Darkness) |
| If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck ... Whatever the reasons, or the name, as long as the effect is the same, who cares. |
While I generally agree, I'm just waiting for someone to come up with some crazy loophole unintended-side-effect that lets you make vehicles explode by looking at them or something.
Probably won't happen, but you never know.
I have the converse of that, methinks.
Since vehicles never take stun damage, then an unarmed troll with a 15 Strength can't even dent a Dodge Scoot.
Since vehicles never take stun damage, then an unarmed troll with a 15 Strength can't even dent a Dodge Scoot.
At least blunt weapons can do physical damage now. In the last version your troll with 15 strength couldn't damage a Dodge Scoot using a sledgehammer.
GM's discretion at some point, y'all could always have the high strength translate over from stun damage to physical damage in some house rule if you're concerned about the Troll unable to damage a dodge scoot.
| QUOTE (Apathy) |
| [mfb's] example was meant to illustrate an example where a task was nearly impossible, and yet a highly proficient player could score a success most of the time, not a complaint about the mechanism for buying hits. |
this is at least partially correct. i wasn't quite sure in what circumstances buying hits is allowed, so i made an example that works whether you can buy hits or not. in my example, if the shooter doesn't buy hits, he still manages to shoot the target 8 times out of 10. that's horribly, horribly bad.
as for the counterpoints:
1. given that cyberware is going to add, at best, 3 or 4 dice, i think it's safe to judge what's possible or impossible on the basis of real life. if a real life olympic shooter can't hit a target blindfolded at extreme range even 1 time in 10, i think it's fair to say that a shooter in SR should be able to do it 8 times out of 10 just because he's got a smartlink and a reflex recorder.
2. granted. i already pointed this out, in the argments surrounding the original example.
3. i'm not familiar with this. i don't recall anything about the GM being able to arbitrarily raise the threshold on a task just because he believes it's difficult. i don't see why he should have to--the whole purpose of the rules is to model the difficulty of various tasks, and allow characters to pit their abilities against that difficulty.
moreover, as i said in the other other thread, these points miss the basic argument i'm making. that, however, is a discussion for the other other thread.
GM discretion...
You got it. Some GM seem so discreet around dumpshock that you can wonder if they are game mastering their game or if it's just a bunch of players sitting around a version of a rulebook unable to get on with the game they try to play.
At the same time, i agree that it's unconvinient for a str 15 Troll to technically be unable to damage a scooter... that should have been anticipated by the game designer.
But you know i'm the GM, everything will be fine. There are no rule concerning a lot of things, we will get around it.
-Spider
You got it. Some GM seem so discreet around dumpshock that you can wonder if they are game mastering their game or if it's just a bunch of players sitting around a version of a rulebook unable to get on with the game they try to play.
At the same time, i agree that it's unconvinient for a str 15 Troll to technically be unable to damage a scooter... that should have been anticipated by the game designer.
But you know i'm the GM, everything will be fine. There are no rule concerning a lot of things, we will get around it.
-Spider
| QUOTE (mfb @ Dec 5 2005, 02:25 PM) |
| in my example, if the shooter doesn't buy hits, he still manages to shoot the target 8 times out of 10. that's horribly, horribly bad. |
What did you think of my response in the spoiler? Because by my interpretation he only hits 1% of the time. Am I mis-interpreting this?
see my edited comment above. i should really stop adding major sections to posts through edits.
| QUOTE (mfb) |
| 3. i'm not familiar with this. i don't recall anything about the GM being able to arbitrarily raise the threshold on a task just because he believes it's difficult. i don't see why he should have to--the whole purpose of the rules is to model the difficulty of various tasks, and allow characters to pit their abilities against that difficulty. |
Sorry, I don't mean to beat a dead horse here, but your response makes me think I must be mis-interpreting the rules on p56.
| QUOTE |
| Thresholds Hits represent a measure of achievement on a test. In order to succeed completely on a Success Test, you must meet or exceed a gamemaster-determined threshold with your hits. The higher the threshold, the more difficult an action is. The standard threshold is 1 (so only 1 hit is necessary to succeed), though other test may have a threshold as high as 4. The Difficulty Table lists a range of difficulty levels along with a standard threshold for each. In some cases, a threshold modifier may apply to an action, raising or lowering the threshold by the stated amount. The more net hits a character scores (the more hits exceed the threshold), the more the task was pulled off with finess and flair. So a character who rolls 4 hits on a threshold 2 test has scored 2 net hits. [...] Leila wants to pilot her speedboat between two larger ships and then take a hard turn down a narrow canal. The gamemaster decides that this is much more difficult than a normal Pilot Watercraft Test and increases the threshold to 3. Leila has a Reaction of 4 and a Pilot Watercraft of 2. Leila rolls and gets 2 hits, but that's not enough to meet the threshold so she does not succeed. |
Why would this not apply to shooting something at extreme range blindfolded?
| QUOTE (mfb) |
| Why would this not apply to shooting something at extreme range blindfolded? |
I think the arguement that is being made is that the system *already* has modifiers figured in for both "blind fire" and "extreme range." People just aren't bothering to figure in "can't hear it, can't smell it, don't know quite what direction it's in..."
| QUOTE (Azralon) |
| Since vehicles never take stun damage, then an unarmed troll with a 15 Strength can't even dent a Dodge Scoot. |
Sure he can. Pick it up, slam it against the concrete, treat the concrete as a club
| QUOTE (Apathy) |
| ...rules on p56. |
wow. that's even worse than i thought it was. this is why i don't discuss the SR4 rules very often--every time i do, i find something several orders of magnitude more horrible than what i knew about before.
| QUOTE (Shrike30) |
| Sure he can. Pick it up, slam it against the concrete, treat the concrete as a club |
Heh. That reminded me of: "I'm not slamming his head into the ground, I'm slamming the planet into his head. What's the damage bonus?"
if you consider the planet to be a vehicle (hey, it's carrying you through space) and use the R3 rules, the base damage is at least D. i think it ignores armor, too.
and isn't the power equal to the speed of the "vehicle"?
relative speed/10, i think. being hit with a planet generally has low power, high damage. unless you're a wookie, i guess. *sniff*
The problem still remains that it is linear. It scales the same way.
Something that is really difficult is only going to be a set amount more difficult, and when you assign modifiers and even threshhold it rapidly gets crazy.
Of course, shadowrun has a really massively unfriendly curve once you get past TN 8.
Part of that can be changed by switching to d10s with the old system, and scaling the system to match. 0's count as 0's and a 9 again rule. Makes for a more even curve. On the other hand, that is a lot of work. I would have rather they changed the dice than the mechanic though.
Either way, it's kind of an irregardless sort of situation though, as what has happened has happened and we have the new system now for better or worse.
Something that is really difficult is only going to be a set amount more difficult, and when you assign modifiers and even threshhold it rapidly gets crazy.
Of course, shadowrun has a really massively unfriendly curve once you get past TN 8.
Part of that can be changed by switching to d10s with the old system, and scaling the system to match. 0's count as 0's and a 9 again rule. Makes for a more even curve. On the other hand, that is a lot of work. I would have rather they changed the dice than the mechanic though.
Either way, it's kind of an irregardless sort of situation though, as what has happened has happened and we have the new system now for better or worse.
| QUOTE (Apathy @ Dec 5 2005, 02:02 PM) | ||||
Sorry, I don't mean to beat a dead horse here, but your response makes me think I must be mis-interpreting the rules on p56.
Why would this not apply to shooting something at extreme range blindfolded? |
| QUOTE (page 57) |
| Note that thresholds are never applied to Opposed Tests. |
Two cavets here:
1) As was pointed out by someone a while back, is it still an Opposed Test if there is no opposing roll (such as a blind shot at someone unable to Dodge).
2) This use of "threshold" shouldn't be confused with different levels of success based on the number of net hits.
A problem with blind shooting in SR is that the rules aren't explicit about forcing the shooter to first correctly specify the location of the target, such as there is in D&D with first requiring the attacker guess the correct 5' square (or larger if AoE) and then adding a further randomness (if not an AoE) of 50/50 to determine if they guessed the correct location within that square.
Once the GM enforces the a requirement for the attacker to correctly specify the location, even without adding in an extra house rule for randomness (blind luck as it were
), things start to make a bit more sense.
| QUOTE (blakkie) |
| Two cavets here: 1) As was pointed out by someone a while back, is it still an Opposed Test if there is no opposing roll (such as a blind shot at someone unable to Dodge). |
AFAIK, and as we run it, the opposing player getting shot always gets at least his base reaction as an opposed roll, even if it is a blind shot (They just can't use the Dodge skill).
Hey, if you can blindly fire into the night with no idea where I'm hiding and have a chance of hitting me, I have a chance of stumbling or tripping at just the right moment, and maybe dodging your attack.
The exception to that, of course, is if the target is totally restrained or unconscious/asleep.
Bull
Statistically speaking, one hit per three dice is a more accurate simulation of a roll; I intend to house-rule this (i.e. trade 3 dice for a hit instead of 4 for a hit) both due to statistic reasons and in order to encourage players to use this time-saving mechanism on the less important tests.
Dice and SR3: Actually SR3 benefits really well from changing to d8s, re-rolling 7s, and treating 0 as 0 (assuming 0-7 dice). It fixes a lot of things.
SR4: Rule 1 for SR4 - ignore all other rules. The game has been designed for two groups of people: hardcore minmaxers, and hardcore roleplaying Shadowrun fans. More the former than the latter in the design, but I really like the 2070s setting so I'm going to have to try it at least once and hope it's not too frustrating.
SR4: Rule 1 for SR4 - ignore all other rules. The game has been designed for two groups of people: hardcore minmaxers, and hardcore roleplaying Shadowrun fans. More the former than the latter in the design, but I really like the 2070s setting so I'm going to have to try it at least once and hope it's not too frustrating.
Now now, let's be fair: that's not Rule 1; it's Rule 0.
Somewhat seriously, you really do need to spend a lot of time min-maxing to get a usable character out the gate. This is especially true as they've continued the BP/Karma duality, even though the BP system has become integrated well enough that the distinction is no longer necessary.
Somewhat seriously, you really do need to spend a lot of time min-maxing to get a usable character out the gate. This is especially true as they've continued the BP/Karma duality, even though the BP system has become integrated well enough that the distinction is no longer necessary.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.