Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Game level
Dumpshock Forums > Discussion > Shadowrun
Pages: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11
Glyph
QUOTE (Ravor)
Yeah, but I place the blame mostly on the fault of DMs and Players who forget that in Fourth Edition, natural dicepools of 6-8+ are supposed to be considered the norm with Runners being slightly ahead of the curve.

Of course, I should disclaim myself by saying that if you are having fun with high dicepool games then more power to you, I however believe that the game's engine breaks once the dicepools start climbing and that it is a bug, not a feature that starting characters can be "world class" and better straight out of the box using the default char gen rules.

No one's "forgetting" anything, because there is nothing in the SR4 rules stating that. You're welcome to your opinion, but that's all it is... an opinion. And it's not really supported by the rules. They allow characters to start out with high dice pools. They don't say anywhere "You can start out with 18 dice without suffering in other areas, but really, you should actually stop around 12 or so."

Although the high dice pools aren't really broken, because they tend to accrue to specialties that involve opposed dice contests and lots of situational modifiers. Characters with lower dice pools tend to be those with specialties requiring less dice, but a wider spread of skills, to be effective - hacker, faces, covert ops specialists, and so on.
CircuitBoyBlue
QUOTE (Whipstitch)
let's face it, most of us aren't really pushed to the edge of our abilities on a regular basis.

I'm sure pushed to the edge of my patience everyday. I've got a willpower DP of, like, 9. I get situational modifiers for resisting bullshit if instead of listening to it, I'm actually thinking of lightsaber duels and the Clash.
Ravor
*shrugs* I hardly consider the statement that Fourth Edition is broken at higher dicepools to be "an opinion" when toturi can and has pointed out how a screaming naked man painted day-glo orange has a damned good chance of sneaking past corp-sec or when the party's Face can piss all over the Don's Mother before charming his pants off.
Fortune
QUOTE (Ravor)
... a screaming naked man painted day-glo orange has a damned good chance of sneaking past corp-sec or when the party's Face can piss all over the Don's Mother before charming his pants off.

Shrug. Only if you're playing in 'video game mode', as opposed to having an intelligent and imaginative GM at the helm.
Ravor
So what? A creative DM can make virtually any system run smoothly, but that fact doesn't change the reality that Fourth Edition's rules return broken results as the dicepools grow larger.
Cain
The "if you were a good GM" argument has been done to death. None of that changes the fact that the system is broken. A good system is one that helps the GM/players out as much as possible. Any system that relies on its players to fix it is inherently bad.
Jhaiisiin
A good GM can make Paladium systems *not* be a powergamer haven. A good GM can turn a DnD Hack'n'slash style game into an epic and engaging story. None of this changes the fact that at their hearts, certain games lend to certain playstyles by default. Certain game system rules tend to generate certain characters and stories, just because of how the rules are laid out. A good GM can do a lot of things, irregardless of the material at his fingers. But Cain is right. It shouldn't require a good, imaginative and adaptive GM to make a game system work. The system should hold up on it's own, and a good GM should make it into a great system.
Ravor
Ironically enough, I think that aside from a few warts Fourth Edition is a fairly good system provided you keep the dicepools at a managable size, the problem as I see it is that the default char gen rules don't seem to realize the limitations of the game engine. (I don't claim to be a math wiz, but I remember a couple of threads that blamed Fourth Edition's quirks on the difference between having a Fixed TN vs Floating TNs.)
FrankTrollman
QUOTE
a screaming naked man painted day-glo orange has a damned good chance of sneaking past corp-sec


What, pray tell, is the penalty to your infiltration pool for screaming? For that matter, what is the penalty to your longarms check for shooting in the wrong direction? The penalty to your mechanics test for leaving the item untouched on a shelf?

Some actions don't carry a heavy penalty, they simpy involve not attempting to use the skill in question. These actions can't be overcome by you knowing how to do the action better. Knowing more about the skill means that you don't do those things if you want to succeed.

-Frank
Glyph
QUOTE (Ravor)
*shrugs* I hardly consider the statement that Fourth Edition is broken at higher dicepools to be "an opinion" when toturi can and has pointed out how a screaming naked man painted day-glo orange has a damned good chance of sneaking past corp-sec or when the party's Face can piss all over the Don's Mother before charming his pants off.

So what? Toturi's opinion is still just an opinion.

I don't think you even need a "good and imaginative GM" to nix the naked orange guy or the face pissing on the mafia don's mom, just one who doesn't adhere to toturi's unique approach to RAW where, if a modifier is not enumerated in the book, it is not applied. Most GMs would have the "attempt" automatically fail, since neither case involves the player actually seriously using a skill. Like someone said in another thread, the guy with 30 pistols dice still can't kill people by pointing his finger at them and shouting "Bang! Bang!"

High dice pools are only unbalancing when GMs don't apply combat modifiers, or treat social skills like mind control instead of subtle influence, or present nothing but mundane opposition to the group's mages. There are a few things that can be broken in the game (bloodzilla, etc.), but the normal game play in general seems fine. Any game with a GM does require that GM to exercise some common sense and resolve the occasional rules tangle. I don't think SR4 presents an undue burden to the GM on either account. Indeed, its flexible power level (controlled by build points allocated) and numerous optional rules make correcting any perceived imbalances relatively easy.


I agree that the system shouldn't rely on players to choose a certain level of ability when they can make characters with a higher level of ability. I dispute that the game is asking for that in the first place, though.
toturi
QUOTE (Glyph @ Jan 11 2008, 04:20 PM)
I don't think you even need a "good and imaginative GM" to nix the naked orange guy or the face pissing on the mafia don's mom, just one who doesn't adhere to toturi's unique approach to RAW where, if a modifier is not enumerated in the book, it is not applied.  Most GMs would have the "attempt" automatically fail, since neither case involves the player actually seriously using a skill.  Like someone said in another thread, the guy with 30 pistols dice still can't kill people by pointing his finger at them and shouting "Bang!  Bang!"

The penalties are already stated in the book, except that those penalties while encompassing the situation do not adequately reflect the severity of the penalty that should be applied.

QUOTE
Some actions don't carry a heavy penalty, they simpy involve not attempting to use the skill in question. These actions can't be overcome by you knowing how to do the action better. Knowing more about the skill means that you don't do those things if you want to succeed.


If the player said that his PC was going to scream and run pass corp sec, then yes, he is not attempting to use the Infiltration skill, perhaps he is trying to use some Athletics skill. If the guy said his PC was going to sneak pass corp sec despite screaming and painted in day-glo orange, then he is using the Infiltration skill. Knowing more about the skill means you can succeed despite doing things someone else normally won't do, because you know enough or capable enough to circumvent those actions as reflected in the penalties.

A simple way to go around this is to simply to ask the player what skill he want to use and roll the dice first before describing how the situation unfolds. But I find that most GMs(I have spoken to) do not do this because it places a limit on what the player can roleplay. They do not realise that this is precisely what the game mechanics are supposed to do. Most game systems do not adequately reflect the fact that some actions are largely metagame in nature. For example, if you get shot at, what do you do? Some people just stand there and look around. Some people people duck. Some people duck behind cover. Most GMs give their PCs a free pass on the "duck behind cover", when the response of the PCs should be dictated by some tactics skill they may or may not possess or at least some form of Intelligence roll. I try not to allow my players to describe in detail what their PCs are doing or attempting to do and I try my best not to do so in games that I play in.

And Glyph, the "t" in toturi is not capitalised. Thanks. biggrin.gif
Critias
I'm the opposite. I ask my players to describe, in as much detail as they care to use, what their characters are doing when they attempt something. I then generously and/or ruthlessly have been known to provide die pool or TN modifiers (or whatever else, depending on what system we're using) based on that description.

If Stealthy McStealth says "lol zomg I'm painting myself day-glo orange and running past the guards, screaming, whut die roll penalty iz my stealth check at?" I say "minus one billion," and a moment or two later guards shoot at him.

It's pretty simple, really. It also tends to handle the issues that sometimes crop up concerning how to role play fast talkers, con-men, etc, etc (at least for me and my group), because those who can be bothered to role play well find themselves rolling around on piles of bonuses, and those that just want to say "I tell him a lie to get past the gate" either shape up/warm up to the group, or stop trying to play fast talkers.
FrankTrollman
There is no dicepool modifier for screaming. If you yell, it sets the threshold of the security guard's perception test to 1, as described on page 117. This means that whatever else it is you are doing to be stealthy, your infiltration attempt is pretty much screwed.

Infiltration sets a best case threshold for the potential perceivers to spot. If there's a better axis for their perception test, they'll make that one.

For example: Let's say you are an elite ninja with a 12 die infiltration pool and get 4 hits. And you're wearing a stealth suit, knocking down their visual perception test by 4 dice. There are not going to see you. Then you open fire with an atomatic shotgun on something. They still don't see you, but the test to detect you by the gunfire is extremely easy - they need 1 hit and get a +2 dicepool bonus.

In the example of the glowing orange neon and the screaming, their visual or auditory perception tests are both only looking for 1 hit. Your infiltration test is only covering other avenues of spotting (astral overwatch for example), and will probably not sneak you past a mundane guard with a panic button.

Edit: That's not to say you can't do some crazy stuff, you totally can. But this specific example does not work.

-Frank
Cain
There's still the fact, as mfb demonstrated, that even with hefty penalties a highly skilled character can still pull off an impossible shot. For example, -17 isn't such a big deal when you've got 20 dice plus Edge to spend. Taking that one step further, no amount of penalties is a big deal when you consider the Longshot rules. Past a certain point, no matter how you pile on the penalties, you still have the exact same chance of success. This has been demonstrated time and time again by one-shotting a Citymaster and making a one-klick-out-to-sea shot without bothering to aim.

The game not only breaks down at high dicepools, it breaks down at the low ones as well. Edge exacerbates the problem in both cases.
FrankTrollman
People didn't one-shot citymasters in those examples though. They did one shot that damaged city masters with improbable weapons. Not the same thing.

Yes, people with very high dice pools can do superheroic stuff, and yes you can do various other superheroic stuff if you happen to have a high edge.

But that doesn't mean that it's a problem in game, and you do yourself no favors by grabbing your points of hyberole from the examples which don't work that way in the rules. You can talk about people managing to soak down a successful called shot to the face with an anti-vehicular rocket, or you can talk about shooting people who are a kilometer away at night when you have nothing but indirect data feed from a compatriot to know where they are.

But the one-shot "kills" with pistols against city masters only actually did like a box or two of damage, the screaming sneaking person is still spotted on just one hit, and the literal "shot in the dark" still automatically misses because if you can't get a location on your target you can't target it with ranged attacks.

---

I'm fine with people complaining about dice pools leaving the human range at the high and low end. They do. I'm also unclear on how someone cybered or magiced up well past human potential should concern themselves over much with being on the human range to begin with. But if you're going to be complaining, complain using real Shadowrun rules examples, not this crap that doesn't work.

Shadowrun Does Not Work That Way!
Goodnight!

-Frank
Blade
Personally I'd consider that running around screaming is NOT infiltrating, hence the infiltration skill doesn't apply.

If the character tries to infiltrate while painted with glowing orange paint, he can roll infiltration, but will have a modifier that's not written in the tables because we don't want a whole book full of tables listing all modifiers that could apply to infiltration tests (infiltrating while playing Jokari, infiltrating while breakdancing, infiltrating with a chicken on your head...). Instead, there's a short text somewhere stating that there are some common modifiers listed in tables, but other than that the GM can add whatever modifiers he judges apply to that situation.

As for screaming, it has no relationship with the infiltration test. It's a different test for the guard to check if he's heard screaming.

But I agree that high dice pool can allow characters to do some amazing actions but in that case there's always a way to explain it. For example, a Face is nearly dead, handcuffed and naked. His arch-enemy wants to kill him, but the Face with his incredibly high dice pool (even with all his negative modifiers) can order him to drop his weapon, and get enough hits to get the guy to do so. Actually, I doubt the Face will only say something like "drop your gun" (let's consider that he's not using any mind-control spell/power) to get that result. What he could say would be something like "There's a bomb right under your feet, the detonator is my cranial commlink. If you kill me, the bomb goes off. Now drop your weapon or I activate it.".
Getting enough hits means that he was able to find the good argument (if you don't ask the player to find his own arguments) and saying it convincingly enough, even in those circumstances.

And by the way, if you strictly follow the rules, you'll use common sense before the rules, because the rules say so.
Stahlseele
QUOTE
Like someone said in another thread, the guy with 30 pistols dice still can't kill people by pointing his finger at them and shouting "Bang! Bang!"

uhm . . don't both magic and cybernetics as of SR4 quite disagree there? O.o
yes, yes, i will be going back to bed now . . posting while being sick with fever and headache=bad idea x.x
toturi
QUOTE (FrankTrollman)
There is no dicepool modifier for screaming. If you yell, it sets the threshold of the security guard's perception test to 1, as described on page 117. This means that whatever else it is you are doing to be stealthy, your infiltration attempt is pretty much screwed.
-Frank

Frank, the screaming "stands out in some way", which is just a +2 dice modifier.

You can set the Threshold to 1 but to me, isn't that the same as saying that the PC is not sneaking? If the PC is sneaking but despite also yelling and day glo orange, then wouldn't it be still an Opposed Test?

OK, let's game this out: Yelling - either Threshold 1 or the dice pool modifier, agreed? We know what happens if it is a just dice pool modifier(for those people who dont get it, the dice pool mod ain't gonna matter since the stealth guy has such a large dice pool it doesn't matter), so for the sake of the argument, we go with Threshold 1.

A RAW corp sec goon has Intuition 3 and no Perception, not even Infiltration. So he defaults. That's 2 dice. What are the odds of getting 1 hit on 2 dice? If said stealth boy is one of those extreme stealth ninja builds chances are that he might have a spirit Concealing him too and he can have a Force 2 spirit with a (for purposes of summoning) Magic of 1 if he is a Mystic Adept. That's 0(zilch, nada, nothing, numero nono) dice. You are not getting even 1 hit with 0 dice, unless the GM decides that this time he is spending group Edge.
Fortune
QUOTE (Cain)
None of that changes the fact that the system is broken. A good system is one that helps the GM/players out as much as possible. Any system that relies on its players to fix it is inherently bad.

I have never seen a non-broken system. All RPG systems rely on the GM and Players to work at making things run the way they want.
Critias
QUOTE (toturi)
OK, let's game this out: Yelling - either Threshold 1 or the dice pool modifier, agreed?

No. Yelling means "not sneaking." So no Infiltration roll is necessary, no perception roll is called for; the guards spot you.

In much the same way, if I declare my character is wiggling his fingers and singing something in Latin while tap-dancing, it's immaterial how high my Electronics skill is because I'm not using the skill right now so the keypad I'm trying to hack isn't being affected by my complete and utter nonsensical actions.

This is just a silly argument, I'm sorry. It's a common sense thing. I'm not by any stretch defending this rules set (make no mistake) but all anyone's doing at this point is wasting bandwidth and arguing for arguing's sake.
Stahlseele
QUOTE
In much the same way, if I declare my character is wiggling his fingers and singing something in Latin while tap-dancing, it's immaterial how high my Electronics skill is because I'm not using the skill right now so the keypad I'm trying to hack isn't being affected by my complete and utter nonsensical actions.

someone will try and use this as a geas for his technomancer, you just wait *g*
toturi
QUOTE (Critias)
QUOTE (toturi @ Jan 11 2008, 08:53 AM)
OK, let's game this out: Yelling - either Threshold 1 or the dice pool modifier, agreed?

No. Yelling means "not sneaking." So no Infiltration roll is necessary, no perception roll is called for; the guards spot you.

In much the same way, if I declare my character is wiggling his fingers and singing something in Latin while tap-dancing, it's immaterial how high my Electronics skill is because I'm not using the skill right now so the keypad I'm trying to hack isn't being affected by my complete and utter nonsensical actions.

This is just a silly argument, I'm sorry. It's a common sense thing. I'm not by any stretch defending this rules set (make no mistake) but all anyone's doing at this point is wasting bandwidth and arguing for arguing's sake.

I disagree. If you said that you were programing something(using Computer) by wiggling his fingers and singing something in Latin while tap-dancing, then you are using the Computer part of the Electronic skill group.

To me, this is common sense. What you are essentially doing is you declare what skill you are using and want to make things more difficult for yourself. Look, you and nearly everyone else on this forums know my POV is, you are not changing my POV and I don't think I am going to change anyone elses, so let's just leave it at that.
Fortune
So toturi, how would you rule things for a Face who was trying to talk his way out of a certain death situation (player states his character is using Negotiation), who then proceeds to state that he wants to make things harder for his character by having him not actually speak, move, or use any other form of communication in any way? I mean, the player did state that he way using Negotiations, after all.
toturi
QUOTE (Fortune)
So toturi, how would you rule things for a Face who was trying to talk his way out of a certain death situation (player states his character is using Negotiation), who then proceeds to state that he wants to make things harder for his character by having him not actually speak, move, or use any other form of communication in any way? I mean, the player did state that he way using Negotiations, after all.

Depending on his answer to this question: Is he attempting to influence the person with his non-communication?

If yes, then roll the dice.

If no, then there is no roll since by RAW, Cha-linked skills are defined that way.
Fortune
Yes, and as far as I am concerned, Stealth skills are defined as a person actually trying to be stealthy, and Electronics skills are defined as a person actually interacting and manipulating a device in some manner, and so on.

They are not defined, in my opinion, by a Player merely stating that his character is utilizing a Skill, and then having that character go out of his way to perform actions of a totally opposite nature in-game.
toturi
QUOTE (Fortune)
Yes, and as far as I am concerned, Stealth skills are defined as a person actually trying to be stealthy, and Electronics skills are defined as a person actually interacting and manipulating a device in some manner, and so on.

For the most part, your definitions coincide with the RAW descriptions of the skills. Generally, if the definitions of the skill do not preclude whatever action/s the PC is doing to make his own life difficult, then I will allow it.
TheOneRonin
QUOTE (CircuitBoyBlue)
QUOTE (Whipstitch @ Jan 10 2008, 08:21 PM)
let's face it, most of us aren't really pushed to the edge of our abilities on a regular basis.

I'm sure pushed to the edge of my patience everyday. I've got a willpower DP of, like, 9. I get situational modifiers for resisting bullshit if instead of listening to it, I'm actually thinking of lightsaber duels and the Clash.

LOL...sounds like you work in IT. wink.gif
Kyoto Kid
QUOTE (toturi)
QUOTE (Whipstitch @ Jan 11 2008, 09:21 AM)
So looking at it that way, a lot of people and NPCs in my games could be considered "lower powered" and unskilled, but then, I have lower expectations of what it really takes for many people to do their jobs, since let's face it, most of us aren't really pushed to the edge of our abilities on a regular basis.

If we were constantly being pushed to the edge of our abilities, then the big GM in the sky might feel compelled to give us more karma, which would encourage us to push further which will further perpetuate the cycle until we meet requisite Red Samurai/Tir Ghost and we do not pass Go or collect our 200 nuyen.gif.

...or slap us upside the head to see just how good we are as compared to how good we think we are.

The Great Mother is known to do such things just to make us think.
ElFenrir
See, how I would work the aformentioned screaming guy trying to Infiltrate, is to use the threshold 1 Perception roll. If the guards fail, Ie, get NO hits, or glitch, or even critical glitch, what i would say happens is the guard just thinks the screaming is coming from some fool outside, someone trying to play a joke, or something along those lines, and he simply doesn't care. If PCs can critically glitch, so can NPCs. If PCs can simply fail, so can NPCs.

I would say being orange and screaming is generally idiotic to try, and highly suggest they DONT go that route, but if they wanted to, i'd let the dice fall. Who knows, maybe they'd fail. But with only one hit needed to see, probably not(though the average guard only tosses about 4-6 perception dice.

Now, if someone wanted to be the Screaming Orange Guy to DISTRACT the real Infiltrator....then that's a bit more clever. While the guards are trying to deal with the screamer, i'd assign a HIGHER threshold to their Perception tests to see the proper, quiet Infiltrator, since they already have their hands full. Of course, i might hope that the PC attempting the distraction has some decent protection, since fire will be focused on them.

I usually don't like saying no, unless it's obviously, blatantly, impossible(leaping from the Empire State Building to the Sears Tower, defeating a space shuttle with a holdout and gel rounds, etc.) If something has at least a tiny, remote, snowball's chance in hell of MAAAYBE making it with an amazing stroke of luck, ill give it a try, letting them know that it's going to be damned hard and might be disasterous if they fail.
FrankTrollman
QUOTE
OK, let's game this out: Yelling - either Threshold 1 or the dice pool modifier, agreed?


No. Not agreed, because it is both. Because the Perception test defines "yelling" as being threshold 1 for the guard to perceive. In addition it grants the guard a +2 bonus if it stands out (as it would in most cases).

You can rant about using the RAW and then ignore the RAW. The RAW says that if you are screaming, the guard gets a +2 dicepool bonus and their threshold to detect you is only 1. It says this regardless of what your sneaking may otherwise accomplish. So at that point your sneaking is only of any use if the guard is deafened, at which point he'd be making tests based on other senses where his threshold would be higher.

-Frank
Apathy
Everybody has a different interpretation of the rules. In my mind wearing a Mitsuhama uniform when everybody else in the crowd is wearing a Yametetsu uniform meets the intent of the "stands out in some way" clause. That would be worth +2DP to some guard watching the door when Mr McSneaky walks through. Common sense would dictate that screaming and being naked and being painted dayglo orange would a more significant penalty than that.
Moon-Hawk
A lot of people are stuck on whether or not it is the intent of a character to sneak if they've painted themselves orange and are screaming.
Would it help if we revised the example?
How about this:
The character in question is still Sneaky McNinja, the ultimate sneakster you've never heard of. He's been captured and thrown in prison, where they've stripped him naked, painted him day-glo orange, and put a screamer on his ankle that makes an annoying noise if he leaves his cell. He manages to leave his cell, and has to sneak out of the facility.
Still day-glo orange and screaming, but now none of it is voluntary, and the character really is trying everything possible to sneak.
Does that change anything? Is there any way to salvage this discussion?

edited for typos
Fortune
Still a Perception test for the guard with a Threshold of 1 and a Dice Pool modifier of +2 (+ possibly others ... I'm not looking it up right now).
Cain
QUOTE
People didn't one-shot citymasters in those examples though. They did one shot that damaged city masters with improbable weapons. Not the same thing

Incorrect. You take out a Citymaster with one improbable shot, by shooting the driver, thanks to a loophole in the rules and an abuse of the Longshot test.

Here's the example: Mr. Lucky needs to take out the Citymaster chasing their van, so he aims through the window at the driver. (Specifically aiming at a passenger, pg 162, not a called shot yet.) He's using an AVS (8P-f), and our modifiers are as follows: -2 recoil, -3 extreme range, -3 for being seriously Wounded, -3 for being in a moving vehicle, -6 for his target having total cover, -1 for his cover, and -2 for the light rain. To top this all off, he calls a shot to bypass the armor of both the vehicle and the driver. Assuming the driver was in heavy armor with helmet, that's an additional -12, and then we factor in the Citymaster's armor of 20. That's a total dice pool penalty of -52. It could be worse than that-- Mr Lucky might not have a pistols skill at all-- but it's largely irrelevant, since there's absolutely no way he's going to have a positive dice pool. He now spends a point of Edge. 8 Edge = 2.66 successes, which rounds up to 3. The driver can't use his vehicle skill to dodge, since he was specifically targeted; and he requires a Perception test at -6 to even notice that he's been hit. Assuming that the driver has a body of 3 (his armor has been bypassed, so the AP penalty of the flechette round does not apply), he'll be taking an 11P wound, and will likely score 1 success-- not enough, he'll be taken out instantly. The vehicle will now need to make a crash test: it has a threshold of 3, using a Pilot of 3, and a handling penalty of -1. It fails, crashes, and likely kills everyone inside.

The loophole here is that targeting the driver isn't a called shot. The abuse is the Longshot test in its entirety. Since the Citymaster has two dice to make a Threshold 3 test, it's doomed once you take out the driver. You've one-shotted it with a flechette pistol, without actually breaking any rules.

QUOTE
I have never seen a non-broken system. All RPG systems rely on the GM and Players to work at making things run the way they want.

It's a matter of degree. Some systems, like Wushu, have a built-in mechanic to encourage player input, as part of its basic workings. Others, like SR4, rely on GMs producing house rule after house rule to make things function. The fewer house rules you require, the better off you are. It's a bit of an unfair comparison, but I've never seen anyone have to house-rule a Wushu Reloaded game.
Fortune
QUOTE (Cain @ Jan 12 2008, 04:07 AM)
Others, like SR4, rely on GMs producing house rule after house rule to make things function.  The fewer house rules you require, the better off you are.

I disagree with that assessment. I haven't found SR4 to need any more (and in fact quite a bit less) house ruling than most other systems I have played.

As for Wushu, from all accounts it seems to basically boil down to being all house rules. biggrin.gif
Blade
You can't compare Wushu's system to Shadowrun's. Wushu is simplistic, Shadowrun is simulationist.

This leads to Shadowrun rules being more detailed which in turns makes it more difficult for it to cover every possible situation. That's why, I repeat, Shadowrun rules explicitely state that the GM can add modifiers that aren't listed in the BBB if he thinks they are needed.
So he can decide that being painted with glowing orange paint leads to a +4 modifier to detect. It's not houseruling, it's the rules.

Personally, I use Dying Earth RPG's Overarching Rule of Efficacious Blandishment:
QUOTE
The overarching rule of efficacious blandishment is the most important rule of this game. It states that if you wish your character to do something that is not within the letter of the game's other rules, you may do so, provided you can convince the GM that your desired course of action falls within the spirit of the story. Thus the only true circumscriptions on your actions are your persuasiveness and your GM's guillibility.
DireRadiant
Is the screaming orange guy trying to get into a Denver Broncos game?

I need rule for that in the book. Don't I?
Kyoto Kid
...now if he's going to a Syracuse game he actually gets +2 dice. grinbig.gif
Ryu
You don´t know the rules? The rules say you do not need to roll Perception to notice something obvious. So you see the sneaking, screaming neon-orange metahuman being. Without test.
Cain
QUOTE (Fortune @ Jan 11 2008, 11:14 AM)
QUOTE (Cain @ Jan 12 2008, 04:07 AM)
Others, like SR4, rely on GMs producing house rule after house rule to make things function.  The fewer house rules you require, the better off you are.

I disagree with that assessment. I haven't found SR4 to need any more (and in fact quite a bit less) house ruling than most other systems I have played.

As for Wushu, from all accounts it seems to basically boil down to being all house rules. biggrin.gif

In my experience, every aspect of SR4 (Matrix, magic, basic combat, social tests, core mechanic, etc) requires at least one house rule, if not more. Lots more. Just take a peek at all the Dumpshock threads on rule-fixes. On the other hand, I haven't seen any threads at all on rules-rants on the Savage Worlds forums. That's not to say that there aren't any, just that I haven't seen them.

As for Wushu, I did say that it was an unfair comparison. However, the simplistic, narrative structure results in more details than Shadowrun can possibly hope for. Because its rules are much more flexible and virtually impossible to break, there's no need for house rules at all. It's very freeform, but hardly "all house rules".
Jhaiisiin
Okay, wait a tick here. You bypass *all* the armor of a citymaster? How the crap do you pull that off? You can't bypass armor if there's no way to bypass it. He's in full enclosure, and no matter what, you have to fire THROUGH armored glass to hit the guy. It's not like there's a single, unarmored peephole on something like that. In reality, the armored glass will have a lower armor rating than, say, the side of the citymaster that has the 2inch armored plating, but as SR doesn't do hit locations, you can assume that the glass has the same armor as the rest of the vehicle. Even if you did lower the armor of the glass, you'd be unable to bypass it as it counts as a barrier for the target. The fact that you gave the target full cover (see below for how I modify this) further supports that you can't just ignore the barrier.

Now I'll be optimistic and say the glass only has an effective armor of 8 (per the Barrier ratings table on pg 157 SR4).
So here's what your breakdown should look like:
-2 from recoil
-3 Extreme Range
-3 wound modifier
-3 for moving vehicle
-4 for good cover (only his torso/head visible. He's not blind firing because you can see through the friggin' window)
-1 Firing from cover
-2 for Rain
-12 for difference of armor (20 armor - 8 armor of armored glass that you can't bypass because the target is completely behind it)
Total = -30 DP Modifier.

In the end, he still shoots with just edge, but the driver soaks with his body of 3 + 10 armor from the citymaster's window (8 armor + 2 from flechette bonus) That's an average of 4 hits, and potentially more. It's survivable, and thus you can't one shot the driver unless the longshot test rolls really well and the driver soaks really badly.

And that's all assuming you even allow flechette ammo to penetrate vehicular armor. I'm sorry, but a shotgun-style weapon isn't going to do anything but tink off the armor at extreme range when using flechette ammo.
Cain
QUOTE
Okay, wait a tick here. You bypass *all* the armor of a citymaster? How the crap do you pull that off?

You use the called shot rules. One of the options is to bypass *all* the armor on a target. You're essentially making up a house rule on the spot, telling a player he can't do what the rules expressly allow him to.
Stahlseele
i think what confuses him is the fact that you bypass the armor OF THE CAR which is ON THE CAR and not ON THE DRIVER per say . . but that would be circumvented by expressly aiming for the Driver, which, in itself, is a dodgy reason at best i'd say . .
Riley37
QUOTE (Cain)
You use the called shot rules. One of the options is to bypass *all* the armor on a target.

I call it interpretation, not house rules, when the GM says "You can call a shot to bypass the armor the driver is wearing. The armor of the Citymaster is not *on* the driver. It's around him. If the Citymaster is parked in an underground vault, that's even more armor and barrier that is between you and the target, without being armor *on* the target."

That said... yeah, those rules could have been written a lot more clearly. If the writer was visualizing armor with gaps, and not, say, plating that fully covers a drone, and the writer wrote a general-case rule while visualizing a special case, then that's sloppy writing. Phrases such as "...to the extent that the armor has exploitable gaps..." would be helpful. I visualize full body armor as having variable coverage, eg the chest plate is tougher than the knee joint and the faceplate, but the weakest point is maybe 2B/2I rather than 0.

But can you bypass all the armor on a Thor Shot station with a called shot? That's a lot of armor, you'll need a longshot... and you'll also need Knowsoft: Thor Shot Launch Station Design, stolen by spies with the positive quality "Countless" and transported by loading it onto the Pilot chip of a maintenance drone.
JonathanC
Wouldn't being inside of a Citymaster count as being behind a barrier, rather than being behind armor? Last time I checked, a called shot can't bypass a barrier. You have to shoot through it (good luck with that).
DTFarstar
I really wish they had just phrased the called shot rules slightly differently so that it said something like "You may call a shot on a specific region of the target to bypass armor not covering that portion of the body." Which would allow the bypass all armor alot of the time. There is very rarely armor that doesn't have a weak point of coverage somewhere. However, if someone is completely covered, especially by a freaking barrier, it wouldn't bypass THAT. Though the way I work call shot isn't IGNORING armor, it is a modification. So, ok called shot to bypass armor -12, well they have an armor of 0 now, +whatever the barrier is. Oh, even if you are just wearing normal clothes I give flechette ammo the +AP. I would probably give it to you naked. I treat everyone as having base armor 0, not no armor. Makes sense to me.

Chris
Caine Hazen
QUOTE (JonathanC)
Wouldn't being inside of a Citymaster count as being behind a barrier, rather than being behind armor? Last time I checked, a called shot can't bypass a barrier. You have to shoot through it (good luck with that).

Ding ding ding.. correct.. and Cain loves to ignore the rule that a called shot's effect has to "occur, at the players choice and with the gamemaster's agreement" Again effectively negating the argument to GM fiat. In my case I'd tell the player to choose the increase in damage, as they are still going to face the 8 BR
Jhaiisiin
But you can't bypass all the armor in the case of the citymaster. The armor of the glass is in the way at all times, you can't "bypass" it, because there's no holes to shoot through, no appendages visible, basically no vulnerable spots.

QUOTE ("SR4 @ pg 149-150")
Target an area not protected by armor. The attacking character receives a negative dice pool modifier equal to the target’s armor (better armor is more difficult to bypass). If the attack
hits, the target’s armor is ignored for the damage resistance
test; the target rolls only Body.

Emphasis is mine. The person is completely covered, ie, no unprotected parts, so you can't bypass it all.

As others mentioned, you're firing through a barrier, simple as that.
hyzmarca
QUOTE (Cain)
The driver can't use his vehicle skill to dodge, since he was specifically targeted; and he requires a Perception test at -6 to even notice that he's been hit. Assuming that the driver has a body of 3 (his armor has been bypassed, so the AP penalty of the flechette round does not apply), he'll be taking an 11P wound, and will likely score 1 success-- not enough, he'll be taken out instantly.

Unless the driver was surprised, however, he does get reaction to dodge + dodge skill if he uses full defense. Vehicle skills are linked to Reaction so we can be sure that the driver has at least 4 in that attribute, almost certainly more. It isn't unreasonable for the driver to have 8 or more dodge dice.
Jhaiisiin
That's a good point. If a driver sees a gun pointing at him, he's likely to swerve to help the shot miss. The only way they wouldn't is if they're confident the armor would protect them, which in this case it pretty much would.
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