Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: two weapons and recoil
Dumpshock Forums > Discussion > Shadowrun
Pages: 1, 2, 3
Ol' Scratch
I really don't see skill Specializations as a modifier. And it's doubly odd that you're distinguishing them as something completely different (rules wise) as a Reflex Recorder.

The whole +2 aspect of it is seems to be there to make bookkeeping easier in the case you augment a skill for whatever reason. So instead of having Automatics (SMGs) 4(6)(8) you just have 4(6)(+2). That way you only have to ever update one number rather than two. The end effect is the same though; your still have a skill of 8 with SMGs just like a Reflex Recorder, not a +2 modifier with SMGs as per a Smartlink. It's reeeeaaaaally stretching it -- in the bad way -- to try and argue otherwise.
mfb
couldn't you have a Pistols reflex recorder, and Woo a pistol and an SMG?
l33tpenguin
Wouldn't you be using two different pools anyway, in that case? Automatics and Pistols?

How would you cover using two weapons using different pools? you obviously can't split their pools, so do you just halve them? That brings us back to how you split the pool as well. can you favor one or the other?
mfb
well, you use the lowest pool, if you've got two. seems to me that if you have a specializiation, that adds to your pool--unless you're using a gun you're not specialized with, in which case you use the lower pool (ie, no specialization).
Ol' Scratch
I'd say it would depend on which of the skills (with or without specialization) was lowest.

Say, for example, you have Pistols (Heavy Pistols) 3(+2) and Automatics 4. You grab a Streetline Special and an Uzi and go to town. In this case, Pistols is your lowest skill at 3 and is the one you use. Later, you ditch the Streetline Special and grab an Ares Predator. Now your Pistols skill is 5, making Automatics your lowest skill and thus the one you use while shooting both.

Seems to be both the nature and the intent of the rules in question. Makes sense as well as your specialization with Heavy Pistols still had the net effect of giving you +1 die on the test.
l33tpenguin
If specializations are added after the split, however, wouldn't you choose the smaller pool first, in both cases, pistols, then split the pool and add the specialization bonus after the split? Since specialization add after the split, they shouldn't count toward what you select to split? right?
Ol' Scratch
You're assuming specializations are added after. Which makes very little sense since it's a bookkeeping modifier for keeping track of your skills and skill levels, not a condition or combat modifier like a Smartlink or Visibility modifier is.
mfb
indeed. i don't see that specializations should be added after the split.
hyzmarca
QUOTE (Doctor Funkenstein)
You're assuming specializations are added after. Which makes very little sense since it's a bookkeeping modifier for keeping track of your skills and skill levels, not a condition or combat modifier like a Smartlink or Visibility modifier is.

The reason for the modifier is less important that the fact that it is a modifier rather than a direct augmentation of the base statistics.
Ol' Scratch
Reflex Recorders: "The reflex recorders adds a +1 dice pool bonus to a specific skill or skill group." --SR4 p. 340

Improved Ability: "This power gives you additional dice for use with a specific Active Skill. Dice purchased for the Active Skill carry over equally to any specializations of the skill you know." --SR4 p. 187

Both of those are modifiers, too. And in the case of the latter, they specifically mention your specialization for some strange reason. Thus, if you adhere to the silly notion that the +2 bonus for a specialization is a conditional modifier as opposed to a bookkeeping note, Improved Ability adds to that bonus AND your base skill! That's double your money right there! AND they all (Improved Ability, Skill Specializations, and Reflex Recorders) get added to your dice pool AFTER it gets split for dual-weilding! Yay for munchkinating!

Translation: Quit being stupid and trying to cheat.
hyzmarca
Improved Ability and Reflex Recorders were both errataed. They directly augment the skill and are limited by the skill's augmented limit.

The fact is that SR4 treats augmentations and bonuses/penalties very differently and for this reason they must be kept separate. The (+2) notation isn't just for easy bookkeeping. It denotes a fundamental difference in what a specialization is in relation to a skill.
l33tpenguin
QUOTE (Doctor Funkenstein)
Translation: Quit being stupid and trying to cheat.

Thats a little harsh. I'm trying to understand. Its a little different.

So, from a more easy (for me) clerical standpoint, it would read

Pistols 3
Heavy Pistols 5

Rather than a +2 modifier when using heavy pistols.

In 3rd, didn't 'specializing' a skill increase the specialization by two and decrees the base skill by two? I forget now.
Ol' Scratch
It was essentially +1/-1 with a specialization; the same net difference as in SR4. So if you bought a skill at 5 you could keep it as 5 or specialize for 4(6).

And that comment wasn't directed at you, penguin. It's just silly to get so pedantic when the intent of the rules in question is blatantly clear.
Fortune
Doc ... as hyzmarca said, check the Errata. The things I specified (Adept Improved Ability and Reflex Recorders) were addressed.

I'm not making things up, trying to be a cheat, or even getting into munchkin mode. This is the way the rules work.

If something in the rules is meant to add directly to the Skill, it specifically states as such (in the case of the above two items). If not, and you are directed to list something as (+x), then it is a dice pool modifier, in exactly the same fashion as visibility or other situational modifiers. These are all added after the Core Dice Pool is split, as they modify the specific actions taken, and not the total core ability (in the case of Specializations, the entirety of the Skill's many uses).
mfb
it doesn't make much sense, though. using a revolver instead of a heavy pistol is not a situational modifier, unless using a pistol instead of a shotgun is also a situational modifier. making specializations a special case is just arbitrary; there's no logic to it.
hyzmarca
Exactly.

If specializations work as suggested by Doctor Funkenstein, then they are incredibly broken one way or another.

In the unerrated RAW, a character with Agility 3 and Pistols (Heavy Pistols) 1(+2) would have a dice pool of 4 when using Heavy Pistols due to his 3 Agility and 1 Skill. His specialization couldn't come into play due to the modified skill cap of (base skill)*1.5.

This makes specializations useless is most cases and makes it incredibly stupid for anyone without a 6 in the skill to both specialize and take Improved Ability.

The errata specified that there is a difference between things that directly augment that skill and things which add dice to a test. Specializations have been clearly placed in the latter category while Improved Ability and Reflex Recorders are clearly placed in the former.

The specialization adds dice to tests with heavy pistols. It does not create a separate heavy pistols skill or modify the existing pistols skill. This ruling is necessary to make specializations as useful as they were intended to be. The side effect is that you add them after splitting the pool. Considering how damaging pool splitting is to all but the most min-maxed of characters, I don't see this as being much of a problem. It is only one die, for 'Swounds.

Edit: mfb, It is a situation modifier in the same way that that the old Home Ground Edge from SR3 is a situation modifier. It isn't that you are magically more skilled with heavy pistols than you are with other types of pistols. It is just that you are more comfortable with that particular category of pistol. It is familiarity rather than skill.

Edit2:There is an innate arbitrariness in separating skills from situations and in separating one skill from another. It is necessary to be arbitrary in any game. What matters is internal consistency and this is how specializations are categorized because they don't work if they are categorized any other way.
Stinger
OK, here's my last stab at getting this right.

Pistol 6 + Reflex Recorder 1 + Agility 5 = 12 dice base pool.

Two guns (Predators). Ambidextrous. No smartlink bonus. Specialization (Semi-Automatics +2). Gonna fire two shots with each weapon, right-left-right-left, same target, no other modifiers.

Split the base = 6/6

Shot 1 = Base 6 + Specialization 2 = 8

Shot 2 = Base 6 + Specialization 2 - Recoil 1 = 7

Shot 3 = Base 6 + Specialization 2 - Recoil 2 = 6

Shot 3 = Base 6 + Specialization 2 - Recoil 3 = 5

Is that it?
mfb
that's nonsensical, man. familiarity is skill. you gain skill by becoming more familiar with the subject matter. as far as usefulness goes, specializations are already the most efficient use of bp/karma in the game. how much more useful do they need to be?

i mean, i see the problem. either they're points of skill, in which case the caps apply and they suck, or they're a modifier and the caps don't apply--but they stop making much actual sense. i guess it's a special case either way. but if it's gonna be a special case, why not go all the way--make specializations ignore the skill cap, but otherwise count as skill?
hyzmarca
QUOTE (mfb @ Aug 11 2007, 01:19 AM)
that's nonsensical, man. familiarity is skill. you gain skill by becoming more familiar with the subject matter.

as far as usefulness goes, specializations are already the most efficient use of bp/karma in the game, as far as skills go. how much more useful do they need to be?

i mean, i see the problem. either they're points of skill, in which case the caps apply and they suck, or they're a modifier and the caps don't apply--but they stop making much actual sense. i guess it's a special case either way. but if it's gonna be a special case, why not go all the way--make specializations ignore the skill cap, but otherwise count as skill?

There is an entire class of Powers, Accessories, Implants, and abilities that currently add dice to specific types of tests without modifying a skill or stat. Mechanically, specializations fit into that class perfectly. There is no need to further complicate things by creating a brand new class just for specializations.


Plus, if you rule that specializations add directly to the skill then min-maxing Adepts can fit in one extra point of IA. It isn't exactly game-breaking, but it will come up more often than the single extra die from dual-wielding specialized weapons under the common ruling.

As for the issue of familiarity being skill, that is sort of the point. We could go so far as to have separate skills for shooting a pistol in low-light and shooting a pistol in bright light, because a person who trains in low-light conditions might have better aim at night than he has in the day but we do not because there comes a point where skill granularity is just asinine and it is easier to just apply modifiers.
Ol' Scratch
QUOTE (hyzmarca)
Exactly.

If specializations work as suggested by Doctor Funkenstein, then they are incredibly broken one way or another.

In the unerrated RAW, a character with Agility 3 and Pistols (Heavy Pistols) 1(+2) would have a dice pool of 4 when using Heavy Pistols due to his 3 Agility and 1 Skill. His specialization couldn't come into play due to the modified skill cap of (base skill)*1.5.

What the hell are you babbling about, man?!?

Is the +2 really that confusing to you? All it is is a bookkeeping note that was supposed to simplifying things for players. When you take a specialization, your actual skill increases by +2 due to said specialization.

If you have Pistols (Heavy Pistols) 4(+2), it means your skill is 4 when using a Light Pistol and 6 when using a Heavy Pistol. With a Heavy Pistol you are the equivalence of a superstar amongst special forces teams, but with any other type of pistol you're just the equal to a riot-control cop or combat veteran.

What on earth is so complicated about that?!? Specializations aren't an augmentation of the base skill, it is your skill with that particular specialization if you just use a tiny little portion of your brain. I have no idea how you got whatever you just said out of anything I was saying earlier in this thread. Because, I assure you, I never said anything that ridiculous in my life. If I did, it was a crazy, insane typo of epic proportions.

The only thing that might be slightly confusing is how augmented limits come into play. Those are, indeed, handled by the base skill and not the specialization. Unfortunately for whatever your weird... twisted... bizarre take on the rules is going on here, that has no bearing on specializations as for all intents and purposes when dealing with that specialization, your skill is two points higher.

You're arguing over a semantic of the rules that were put in place to eliminate this kind of confusion. It's incredibly ironic that it not only failed but is making a few people come up with all this... just... insanity when interpretting it. And it's no surprise that the twisting of the words and intent is trying to be used to cheat and get more dice when using two firearms. Which is exactly what's going on, whether its cheating by rules lawyering or not.
hyzmarca
Just read the book. Just read the book, please.


QUOTE (SR4 page 109)

Specializations add 2 dice to any tests made for that skill
when the specialization is applicable to the test.


The book is very clear on this and both the FAQ and the Errata further clarify it. A specialization is not a skill in any way shape or form. It simply adds bonus dice to the test, nothing more or less.
l33tpenguin
QUOTE (hyzmarca)
Just read the book. Just read the book, please.


QUOTE (SR4 page 109)

Specializations add 2 dice to any tests made for that skill
when the specialization is applicable to the test.


The book is very clear on this and both the FAQ and the Errata further clarify it. A specialization is not a skill in any way shape or form. It simply adds bonus dice to the test, nothing more or less.

So, with that direct from the book, it would indicate that specializations add to the dice pool after the split.

It clearly states that it is added to the test, not to the skill itself.

This makes them amazingly great for two weapon builds. Its like having a skill 4 points higher!
Ol' Scratch
QUOTE (hyzmarca)
Just read the book. Just read the  book, please.

You're assuming I care even a teensy little bit what the book says. Common sense > rules as written. Especially when those rules were put there to make your life easier rather than give people an opportunity to cheat their asses off.

I know what the letter of the rules say. The intent is clear, and the intent is equally clear when it comes to using two weapons at once. You're not intended to get the equivalence of +4 dice from a specialization simply because you did specialize. Using two weapons at once isn't a skill it's a penalty. And it's just flat-out stupid to assume you get bonus dice for a specialization for an action that penalizes you if you actually had the exact same skill at a higher base rating.

It's called a "loophole." Taking advantage of loopholes is why people like lawyers have a piss-poor reputation. It's why they call rules lawyers rules lawyers, and why rules lawyers have an equally piss-poor reputation.

Pointing out loopholes is one thing, discussing ways to fix them another thing. But not only pointing them out, but advocating them, encouraging people to abuse them, and defending them to the death despite how stupid it is both conceptually and logically is... well, nuff said on that.

QUOTE
The book is very clear on this and both the FAQ and the Errata further clarify it. A specialization is not a skill in any way shape or form. It simply adds bonus dice to the test, nothing more or less.

See above. Rationalize your cheese away all you like. It's still 100%, unequivable cheese.
Ophis
I must admit, i dislike the specialization not being split, but it is what the rules say. I allow it to work both ways spec(automatics) gets split if you're using auto's spec(paired) counts as +2 for both guns. This allows people who wish to follow the way of Woo to use a suboptimal option (against good opponents) a bit more effectively.
hyzmarca
QUOTE (Doctor Funkenstein @ Aug 11 2007, 07:07 AM)
I know what the letter of the rules say. The intent is clear, and the intent is equally clear when it comes to using two weapons at once.

Yes, the intent is clear, it is just that the intent is not what you assume it to be. I understand quite well that the intent can be different from what is written, just take a look at the conversation regarding the Endowment of Astral Form.

What you seem to be missing, however, is that specializations are intended to be a dice pool modifier, not a full skill in their own right. They were full skills in previous editions, this was changed intentionally. They are now dice pool modifiers are are treated like other dice pool modifying abilities such as Combat Sense, Great Leap, and Kinesics.

This is necessary for the system of caps to work as it was intended to work. It is how the system was intended to work.

It has been clarified time and time again, in the FAQ and on this board. It has been clarified and dealt with so often that there is no longer any controversy, except on this particular application.


And it is not, in any way, cheese. I don't care what impact this has on two-weapon combat because two-weapon combat is completely and totally useless, even if specializations are added after splitting. I'm surprised that no one else is seeing this. There is not any possible situation in the game where a character is better off using two guns than he is using one gun.

The exception to the above paragraph does not lie in specialization bonuses, which will not be enough to prevent the split pools from being reduced to 0 in most situations, but in the application of Edge. Since Edge is added on a per test basis rather than a per-pool basis, it is possible to add full Edge separately to each half of the split pool.
This isn't cheesy, either, due to the limited nature of Edge, but it is usually necessary because negative modifiers will usually be greater than the two halves of the split pool and there is only one positive modifier that might apply (specialization).

I really don't care if you add specializations or any other modifier before or after splitting (except for Edge due to the necessity of longshot tests). But specialization is a modifier. There is no doubt about that, none at all.
Stinger
Errm, so, did I get it right?
Ol' Scratch
QUOTE (hyzmarca)
And it is not, in any way, cheese.

Yes. Yes it is. But tell yourself whatever you need to in order to make yourself feel better about it.
Fortune
Cheese or not, those are the rules. And I don't think it is 'bad form' or anything of the like to point out the way the rules actually work when someone asks.
Ol' Scratch
QUOTE (Doctor Funkenstein)
Pointing out loopholes is one thing, discussing ways to fix them another thing. But not only pointing them out, but advocating them, encouraging people to abuse them, and defending them to the death despite how stupid it is both conceptually and logically is... well, nuff said on that.

Already touched on that.
Fortune
I don't really consider this is a loophole. It is part of the way the core system works.
Catharz Godfoot
I'm a lot more interested in how TWFing works in Shadowrun than in 'Bizarro Funkenstein Shadow-RPG'.
Ol' Scratch
<just shrugs> Enjoy the stupidity then.
Rotbart van Dainig
QUOTE (Doctor Funkenstein)
QUOTE (Doctor Funkenstein @ Aug 11 2007, 06:07 AM)
Pointing out loopholes is one thing, discussing ways to fix them another thing.  But not only pointing them out, but advocating them, encouraging people to abuse them, and defending them to the death despite how stupid it is both conceptually and logically is... well, nuff said on that.

Already touched on that.

Good to know your take on the 'immune to drowning via Trauma Dampener', then.


As a sidenote:

It's completly trivial that Specialisation is not Skill. It adds dice to your dicepool... which is splitted.
So the 'exploit' is not to get more dice out of a Spec - it's to lose less dice per shot due to penalties.
Ol' Scratch
QUOTE (Rotbart van Dainig @ Aug 11 2007, 01:46 PM)
Good to know your take on the 'immune to drowning via Trauma Dampener', then.

What? That the obscure rules for things such as drowning is stupid because it doesn't include a comment about ignoring mechanics like a Trauma Damper, which otherwise works just dandy?

QUOTE
It's completly trivial that Specialisation is not Skill. It adds dice to your dicepool... which is splitted.
So the 'exploit' is not to get more dice out of a Spec - it's to lose less dice per shot due to penalties.

According to some of the people in this thread -- and despite being one of the louder voices, mine isn't the only one with a similar opinion to mine -- specialization magically makes you equal to someone with FOUR points in the actual skill... but only when using two weapons at the same time. That someone with Pistols (Heavy Pistols) 3, a mere professional like a beat cop, is on par with a legend like Wild Bill or James Bond with Firearms 7, but only when using two of them at the same time. Characters who are more than twice as skilled and talented as the other one is.

Yes. That's clearly the intention and purpose of specialization. I've seen the light. ohplease.gif
Rotbart van Dainig
QUOTE (Doctor Funkenstein)
That the obscure rules for things such as drowning is stupid because it doesn't include a comment about ignoring mechanics like a Trauma Damper, which otherwise works just dandy?

No... that to implement a piece of gear in a way not to mesh with the basic rules is silly.
Critias
I'm sure that any minute now one or the other of you will convince the other guy you're right and he's been wrong all along.

No, really. It'll happen any second.
Rotbart van Dainig
QUOTE (Critias)
I'm sure that any minute now one or the other of you will convince the other guy you're right and he's been wrong all along.

You are so wrong. grinbig.gif
hyzmarca
Looking at it the other way, using two weapons magically gives your enemy twice as much cover and magically makes the lights twice as dim and so on and so forth. It is a consequence of applying modifiers after splitting instead of applying them before splitting.

Applying modifiers before splitting brings in whole new problems with attacking different targets, however.

Lets stop thinking about guns here and apply this to the other situations where you can split dice pool and get bonuses, such a the magician with a focus casing multiple simultaneous spells.



Actually, I'm a little more concerned with the use of a foci when casting multiple spells simultaneously than I am with two-gun shooting, since foci actually can have a huge impact when applied to multi-casting pools as modifiers rather than as a part of the base pool. And I hoonestly don't know if this would be a good thing or a bad thing.
Rotbart van Dainig
QUOTE (hyzmarca)
Looking at it the other way, using two weapons magically give your enemy twice as much cover and magically makes the lights twice as dim and so on and so forth. It is a consequence of applying modifiers after splitting instead of applying them before splitting.

You are splitting a dicepool... wich means modifiers are already factored in at that point. And you really want to do it that way:

Factor mods in first, half then: (Attribute+Skill+Modifiers)/2
Half first, factor mods in later: (Attribute+Skill)/2+Modifiers

When is the first aproach better?

(Attribute+Skill+Modifiers)/2 > (Attribute+Skill)/2+Modifiers
Attribute+Skill+Modifiers > Attribute+Skill+2xModifiers
0 > Modifiers

The first approach is better if Modifiers < 0... which means, if your net mods are penalties.
Which is usually the case that matters... people in Hollywood tend to pull out two guns when the fit hits the shan. wink.gif
hyzmarca
QUOTE (Rotbart van Dainig)
QUOTE (hyzmarca)
Looking at it the other way, using two weapons magically give your enemy twice as much cover and magically makes the lights twice as dim and so on and so forth. It is a consequence of applying modifiers after splitting instead of applying them before splitting.

You are splitting a dicepool... wich means modifiers are already factored in at that point. And you really want to do it that way:

Factor mods in first, half then: (A+S+y)/2
Half first, factor mods in later: (A+S)/2+y

When is the first aproach better?

(A+S+y)/2 > (A+S)/2+y
A+S+y > A+S+2y
0 > y

The first approach is better if y < 0... which means, if your net mods are penalties.
Which is usually the case that matters...

QUOTE (SR4 p141)
Split the pool before applying modifiers.


The real problem with splitting after modifiers is what happens when you are shooting at two seperate targets. Target A, for example, has full cover behind a wall in a poorly lit area while target B is standing in plain view in a brightly lit open area with no possible cover.

In this case, shooting at target A would incur a -8 penalty while target B would incur a -0 penalty. Adding before the split makes shooting at two different targets completely wonky.
Rotbart van Dainig
QUOTE (hyzmarca @ Aug 11 2007, 10:32 PM)
QUOTE (SR4 p141)
Split the pool before applying modifiers.

My bad.

In which case you can completly forget about ever hitting the broad side of a barn in a combat situation with two weapons.
At least that doesn't apply to Melee Combat...
Fortune
QUOTE (Rotbart van Dainig @ Aug 12 2007, 06:36 AM)
In which case you can completly forget about ever hitting the broad side of a barn in a combat situation with two weapons.

Which is why adding in Specialization and the like after the split is not all that bad.
Rotbart van Dainig
That's undefined, as it's not a modifier. But it doesn't really matter either way...
Fortune
QUOTE (Rotbart van Dainig @ Aug 12 2007, 06:43 AM)
That's undefined, as it's not a modifier.

I'm not sure I understand. Specialization is indeed a modifier to the Skill test.

QUOTE (SR4 pg. 109)
Specializations add 2 dice to any tests made for that skill when the specialization is applicable to the test.


Note that Specializations do not add to the Pool, but only to specific tests where they are applicable.

QUOTE (SR4 pg. 141)
Characters can use two pistol- or SMG-class weapons, one in each hand, firing both with a single Simple Action. Doing so, however, requires that the character split his dice pool between the attacks. If two separate skills are being used (Pistols and Automatics), use the smallest dice pool. Split the pool before applying modifiers. Two-gun attacks also negate any dice pool bonuses from smartlinks or laser sights. Additionally, any uncompensated recoil modifiers applicable to one weapon also
apply to the other weapon.
Rotbart van Dainig
QUOTE (Fortune @ Aug 11 2007, 10:50 PM)
QUOTE (Rotbart van Dainig)
That's undefined, as it's not a modifier.

I'm not sure I understand. Specialization is indeed a modifier to the Skill test.

It's never called that way... modifiers are the stuff you find in tables labled... modifiers.
Moon-Hawk
QUOTE (Stinger)
OK, here's my last stab at getting this right.

Pistol 6 + Reflex Recorder 1 + Agility 5 = 12 dice base pool.

Two guns (Predators). Ambidextrous. No smartlink bonus. Specialization (Semi-Automatics +2). Gonna fire two shots with each weapon, right-left-right-left, same target, no other modifiers.

Split the base = 6/6

Shot 1 = Base 6 + Specialization 2 = 8

Shot 2 = Base 6 + Specialization 2 - Recoil 1 = 7

Shot 3 = Base 6 + Specialization 2 - Recoil 2 = 6

Shot 3 = Base 6 + Specialization 2 - Recoil 3 = 5

Is that it?

Without getting into how it should be, I will say that this is my understanding of what the book says.
Eryk the Red
Actually, I think that adding specialisation dice after splitting the pool is the sort of thing that makes dual-wielding a viable choice, while not making it the best choice for everyone. This is a good thing, in my book. It means the Cowboy character in my group can do his thing in the style that is appropriate to him, and still be effective, while most others are better off doing things the regular way.

I actually think that this is very balanced and makes a lot of in-game sense to me. (Especially since I allow Dual-Wielding to be a specialisation of Pistols or Automatics.)
Sterling
QUOTE (Fortune)
QUOTE (Rotbart van Dainig @ Aug 12 2007, 06:43 AM)
That's undefined, as it's not a modifier.

I'm not sure I understand. Specialization is indeed a modifier to the Skill test.

QUOTE (SR4 pg. 109)
Specializations add 2 dice to any tests made for that skill when the specialization is applicable to the test.


Note that Specializations do not add to the Pool, but only to specific tests where they are applicable.

QUOTE (SR4 pg. 141)
Characters can use two pistol- or SMG-class weapons, one in each hand, firing both with a single Simple Action. Doing so, however, requires that the character split his dice pool between the attacks. If two separate skills are being used (Pistols and Automatics), use the smallest dice pool. Split the pool before applying modifiers. Two-gun attacks also negate any dice pool bonuses from smartlinks or laser sights. Additionally, any uncompensated recoil modifiers applicable to one weapon also
apply to the other weapon.

Fortune's right. If the specialization was indeed part of the skill, then you could never take a specialization if your skill was higher than four, as that would break the skill cap.

Forgetting about the positive quality: aptitude for a moment, we know the highest skill cap is a six. If you consider the specialization as part of the skill, you could have a skill in automatics of six, or a skill of automatics four, specialized in machine pistols (giving you a plus two) six.

If you do not consider the specialization part of the skill, you can then get a skill to six, and specialize to get eight dice when it comes time to roll when using the specialization. The skill cap is still six.

If a specialization is part of the skill, then it counts towards the cap. If it is merely a modifier to a skill, then it can be added on top of a capped skill.
Ol' Scratch
Once again: The rules for specializations were clearly added as a courtesy to make life easier. Both from a bookkeeping standpoint and rules limitation one (so that they didn't have to cook up countless exceptions to account for specializations going over the normal maximum).

It's trying to take advantage of that courtesy that's not only ridiculous, but insulting. Someone with a Skill of 3 and a specialization is not intended to be better than someone with an actual Skill of 5. In fact, if anything, they should be slightly worse! And this is actually shown everywhere except for dual-weilding. Not because it was intended -- something would have been said and examples would have been created if it were -- but because people are trying to rape the rules to make it work. So make that person with a Skill of 3 and a specialization equal to someone with a Skill of 7 if they were both two-fisting it. Someone who was more than twice as skilled!

Sometimes common sense > rules. Doubly so when people are defending those rules because they want to rape them for those extra dice.
Fortune
While I understand your point, I think it is a little unfair.

This particular issue has been brought up with the developers (read Rob), and he has declared that this is both how the rules work, and how he intended for the rules to work. As such, it is not really 'raping th system' to utilize the rules as they are both written and intended. YMMV of course.
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