Called shot (especially when combined with Longshot) issues have a long history of issues here...

What about a simple ruling..


'trade' style exchanges (-1 die +1 dv, etc) (mostly called shots, but might be others) can only be used with 'actual dice...

If you are at negative dice... nothing left to trade.

Things that 'indirectly' modfy the result could still effect (full auto, burts, etc)

But for called shots and the like... you can only 'trade' in dice equal to what your remaining pool is...

(I would allow you to trade to zero, then make a longshot with edge, but can't trade to negative).

Likewise with this ruling, the 'called shot' trade in is the final calculation... after all other modifers...

That would work.

I see where you're going with it, but I'm rather meh towards Called Shot rules anyway. They just don't work very well in a game built around abstractions. Characters are already assumed to be doing their best to achieve their goals when performing actions; if a target isn't wearing a helmet but is otherwise heavily armored, it (should be) assumed the character is likely aiming for the head. The armor's modifier is reflecting not only how tough it is to defeat the armor, but how hard it is to hit a vulnerable spot in it.

With that in mind, a "Called Shot" is pretty superfluous.

That said, having a rule like what you're suggesting can be cool if you just approach it as a standard option rather than pigeonholing it as a "Called Shot." There should be some kind of cost or negative drawback for chosing to do so, however, be it designing a slew of new Qualities representing various styles, or a flat -2ish dice penalty when adjusting the numbers on the fly. Doubly so since having those options is one of the perks of BF/FA weapons and even they have an associated drawback in the form of recoil.

What I've never been able to understand is how a Called Shot can't be used to specifically shoot the head or foot or whatnot (meaning you can't just say you will shoot x on the person, as it is still abstact, you're just going for a "vulnerable" area), but you are allowed to shoot a pistol out of someone's hand or target the tires of a vehicle...

It just has never made sense to me. You either go with target locations or you leave everything abstract...its hard to mix both effectively!

Would anyone have even cared if there wasn't a rule for a called shot?

The called shot for extra damage is a bit silly.
Player: I want to shoot him.
GM: Okay, you try to kill him.
Player: But not just like the regular I'm-trying-to-kill-him shoot him. I want to really try to kill him.
GM: Oh, okay. In that case, you'll probably miss entirely.

WTF!?

I don't understand the confusion. Generally the game is abstract, that's why 'Calling a Shot' is a combat maneuver and not a typical "I take aim, pull the trigger and repeat as necessary."

So far I've had no problem with called shots in my game the rule is pretty simple. Now, I've had a few players ask, "Why do I have to say I'm calling a shot, it should be obvious I want the guy down in a hurry I'd naturally aim for the head." It's usually at this point I have inform a player that Shadowrun isn't Halo 2 or Perfect Dark Zero.

It's assumed a character is aiming for the largest target for greater accuracy, limbs and heads are not easy to hit unless you have image magnification. Even with heavy armor it's assumed the body is the main target (enough shots to the chest will wreck body armor) that's also why SR 4 includes rules about armor exceeding the power of the attack resulting in stun damage instead of physical.

So, under the abstract rule if a sniper aims for several actions on a stationary targets unarmored head would still have to apply his armor rating (since the armor's modifier is reflecting not only how tough it is to defeat the armor, but how hard it is to hit a vulnerable spot in it). It doesn't make sense.

Called shots increase the level of severity and gives characters that are skilled veterans an opportunity to pull off some moves that really are on the dramatic side. They are quite flashy or make things easy, even in an abstract world:

1. A Runner supports his team via a silenced sniper rifle. He spends 5 simple actions aiming. The guard is in some heavy armor but not wearing a helmet, the GM says this but feels no need to repeat it (if the player misses the reference to an easy shot, so be it). The runner takes aim and uses a called shot to the head resulting in +1 die to the attack and +4 damage. Without armor it's almost impossible for a goon to resist the damage (12P + Hits), the Runners get in with no problem... so far.

2. Private Discord (Cpt. Chaos's sidekick) is in the eye of a crapstorm. He spins from behind cover to lob a grenade into the fray. A Corp Sec Elite was holding his action while his squad laid down suppression fire. Corp Sec sees Private Discord and his friend Mr. Grenade. He interrupts PDs action and takes a called shot, targeting PDs wrist. With all is tripped out cyberware the Corp Sec nails PD easily, and applies damage ignoring armor (PD is wearing an armored vest which doesn't protect his wrists or forearms). PDs arm takes 6 boxes of physical wounds and he drops the grenade at his (and his groups) feet... the Runners have problems. Corp Sec smiles, he get's a bonus for fraggin' Runners.

With items like that introduced into the game it makes it grittier and certainly more dangerous and logical. If it's assumed that every shot is to the head since that's the part that isn't armored then snipers and stealth artists must really hate Shadowrun.

Player: "I sneak up and shoot him on the back of the head, point blank."
GM: "Okay" <rolls Body + Armor>
Player: "You said he as human, how'd his body get so high?"
GM: "Body + Armor."
Player: "His head isn't armored!"
GM: "Well, it's assumed, in this abstract world we call Shadowrun, that the armor's modifier is reflecting not only how tough it is to defeat the armor, but how hard it is to hit a vulnerable spot in it. He's pretty armored."
Player: "But his head isn't!"
GM: "Yes, well, that's a very convincing argument but, he's not about to just let you shoot him, as you aim he lowers his head to light his cigarette, the collar of his coat shifts upwards slightly as you aim and fire. He's wearing an armored jacket and the collar is just as fortified as the rest of his attire. His collar stops the bullet and he triggers the alarm with his commlink. You're up... hey... where are you going?"
<LATER> And in other news, a man was found brutally murdered in his home early this morning. Police discovered the body slumped over his kitchen table with what appeared to be several role playing books lodged violently into his colon with a toilet plunger. Police and state officials are ruling it a suicide and blaming Heavy Metal music.

-4 is +4 damage. Simple. Smartlink gives you +2, so you can more easily avoid armor, if you want to. The rules are ok, you're just perceiving them from the wrong direction

Edit: Abusing the Called Shot system this way is - imho - not a good idea. This makes called shots much to powerfull. There are rules to avoid armor. Use them.

The confusion for me is that in all but what, two instances, a called shot is abstract. You can't actually "target" anything. You can take up to a -4 penalty to get +4 DV or you can bypass armor and take a -armor to your roll. That makes sense to me, because then the GM describes what you hit based on the results.

BUT...two instances, i.e. shooting out a tire or shooting a gun out of the hand, do allow the player to target something specific.

So, why should I let me players target a gun in Mr. Glock's waving hand, but not allow him to shoot the head?

It's not really "target the specific location" but "Disarm". You can of course introduce rules like...

"-5 for shooting at the head, +2 DV, no armor without helmet..."
etc.

...but at the moment, they aren't their. And to be honest: I don't miss them

Exactly.
A called shot can target a head, or any other vital area, for a +X DV, -X DP penalty. It doesn't say it automatically hits said vital area. That is what abstraction means in this context. If the player rolls some net hits and the target doesn't soak the damge, thus taking enough damage to overflow his condition monitor, then sure, headshot, man down.
If the target doesn't take enough damage to take him out cold, the the shot, although aimed at the head, didn't properly zero in right between the eyes or something. Or it did hit the head, but instead of splattering the poor npc's brains, it did some crazy bouncing on the skullbones, creating a nasty wound, but not insta-killing him.
It's simply that "Called Shot" != "Successful Headshot".

You're more than welcome to calculate everything right down to the cm.

I've found it's logical to assume if the target dies from a head shot, you hit. If he doesn't then you were off by 15cm.

Well, if I shoot at something small (-4 DP), I have a smartlink (+2DP), spend 5 turns aiming (+5 DP), and have an imaging scope to remove the modifier for range...

Size -4 + Smartlink +2 + Aiming +5 + Imaging Scope = +3 DP to the shot.

It sure doesn't seem to small anymore. in fact at +3 dice it might as well have a bull's eye and a sign that says "Shoot Me Here".

So, yeah, yeah... it does make sense. At least to me.

Just think of the probability tradeoff. When you sacrifice 1 die for 1 damage success, you've essentially gained the benefit of adding 3 dice. When you're discussing the canon +4 damage, you've gained the benefit of 12 dice. There's no reason to do anything but make called shots for damage, if your dice pool is high enough.

Correct. -4 dice for +4 DV seems much better than -x dice for -x dice armor rating for the target. A little bit unbalanced.

Here's how I do it: To make a called shot you need an aim action first (pg 149). First it says straight you can only use it with weapons that fire in SS, SA, or burst fire mode. Thus, no long bursts or full bursts allowed. Since you need to aim (implied but not directly stated), you give up a valuable second attack with most weapons, thus this rule is not abused much in my game.

Secondly, called shots are less likely to hit, so 2 attacks at no DV bonus is often better than 2 attacks against enemies with high defense.

In my game this interpretation of the rules pretty much fixes it. Sure, it's still powerful with SS weapons, but that revolver better be good for some things, right?

I do like the idea that you can't take your dicepool into the negative to make a called shot w/ longshot. This prevents the "I call shot to bypass the citymasters armor and take it out in one shot with my ruger cause I'm mr. lucky."

Why'd you have to invoke the name? <watches and waits for Cain's arrival>

Already been here, sorry.

Yeah agree new house rule for any of my games..


You can not voluntarily take any direct negative die pool modifer for +effect, unless you actually have dice on the test...


I THINK right now called shot is the only one this is a direct die for X trade...

In my mind a 'burst' is not a direct modifer... sure it can have the 'effect' of X dice lost... and Y damage gained but the mechanics are not a straight trade...

If you made the equivilant of 'hasty shot' some how the reverse of 'aimed shot' (maybe along the line of a (you can make a paniced 'quick shot' going faster then normal.. trade one die on your attack, for a +1 increase to effective inititiave for this action only, you can only increase initiative by a maximum of your skill rating)

(hmm migh have to play test that....)

This again woulld be a direct 'giving up die' for "x effect' and again you could only do at most taking yoru die pool to zero ... (then making a longshot)...

While you COULD chose to 'run' while making a shot taking voluntary negative penalties...

In my games atleast if rules take a -x die pool penalty to achieve Y.... then you MUST have dice... (though I think I WOULD allow this to be edge dice from the long shot ...)

(I.E. if other penalties take you to negative dice pool.. but you aer 'Mr. Lucky'... with 8 edge (does genetech allow you to raise edge maximum? so is 9 possible)... you could once you declare taking a longshot... take you 8 edge dice... and chose a -4 die penalty and take a +4dv.... though you have to give up the 'edge' dice... not the infinite sized 'negative pool'

That's not the only problem. The issue is that twhen you do a +X/-X trade, you're going off at a 1:1 ratio, when the actual benefit is more of a +3/-1 tradeoff. If you've got 20 dice to trade (not difficult, considering many of the Dumpshock builds I've seen) you can trade off 10 dice for +10 damage on a heavy pistol, once again enabling you to theoretically take it out in one shot.

That's one, yes. But i was also referring to the +x/-X trades described in this thread. +4/-4 is enough of a problem, allowing it to go to the size of your entire pool is just disgusting.

The absolute worst personal armor I've seen is 18 ballistic. Given that the average specialist will have 20 dice, aims for a bit and then spends Edge, he'll still be likely to make the shot and keep exploding dice. No longshot involved.

A simple house rule that has worked for us is changing the -1/+1 into -2/+1 (max -8/+4). Two dice per point of damage is a significantly better rate of return than you'd get from rolling, but, of course, you are less likely to hit.

It works for us. Called shots get used against easy NPCs who need to be put down in one shot. This often happens with pistiols - even with good skills and Ex-ex, you need to double tap an opponent to put him down. With -4 dice and +2 DV, if you don't miss him, you'll probably take him out.

If, on the other hand, he's quite capable, you go with two shots. Works for me.