Edit - OK, this thread has changed from the title line a little. It started off with me misreading the table in the book and talking about the wrong gun - I'm actually talking about the Ingram White Knight

I'll keep this concise:

Page 310 BBB: Stoner Ares M202 is listed with Recoil Comp 5(6)

wtf? No, really, wtf?

Do we think that is a typo that should have been errata'd or what? Gun doesn't mention any gas vent 5 system or anything like that.

in my PDF, it has '-'

the white knight, on the other hand, has 5(6), which is probably what you're looking at. unless your copy is messed up.

OK ... forget I even started this topic ...

I was reading the table like a complete idiot , and making a kneejerk reaction based on it.

Now reading the correct gun description I see that the White Knight says it has a wacky GV5 system and that the gun can't be modified at all. That's not so bad since you're then capped at 6 points of RC.

OK ... erm, let us never speak of it again

I might be mis-remembering the description, but my read of the WK said that the gas vent system can't be modded, not that the entire weapon was unmodifiable.

Since a heavy barrel, foregrip, and an electronic firing mechanism puts it up to 8(9) RC, I've got a vested interest in knowing if your read is the correct one

Well, I consider this a typo/mistake anyway - since the game system does not define any way to modify a gas vent system.

Seeing as a GV 5 system already goes 66% above the game system limit for a GV system (inside a pretty much 'off-the-shelf' weapon) for balance reasons I interpreted that to mean "the gun can't be further modified". I don't believe it should be possible to modify any heavy weapon such that you can just fire it on full auto every combat round with impunity (not even having to consider recoil penalties) without either a gyromount, or a tripod or equivalent "heavy recoil compensation".

However, that's interpretation and not RAW - the RAW only says that the GV system can't be modified, whatever that's supposed to mean.

Note the wording. It does not say '... an integral gas-vent system that provides 5 points of recoil compensation that cannot be further upgraded'. It is a complete sentence. The entire sentence describes the weapons integral 'modifications' (all two of them), and goes on to state that the weapon cannot have any more modifications done. Seems clear to me.

I think this is one of those "floating comma" problems with English. If it was intended to say that the IWK was un-upgradeable, it should have been written thus:

"It's equipped with a detachable folding stock,(remove this comma) and an integral gas-vent system that provides 5 points of recoil compensation(add comma here) and (add "it" or "the weapon") cannot be further upgraded."

As written, what it says is that:
1) It's equipped with a detatchable folding stock, and
2) (It has) an integral gas vent system that provides 5 points of recoil compensation and (this gas vent system) cannot be further upgraded.

Looking at what's written, I'm okay with people interpreting it either way, but the grammar nazi in me is inclined to go with my "as written" interpretation. I'm aware, of course, that there's many little grammar slips throughout the rulebooks.

I think Shrike is correct. When I read this, there was no question in my mind whether it was the gas vent or the entire gun that couldn't be upgraded. I don't know much about grammar, but I have a very good grammar-dar that knows how things are supposed to be read most of the time

Further support is the fact that, if you read it to say it was totally unupgradeable, that would prevent you from using a gyromount or a bipod or tripod, the only things actually in the BBB that could actually improve the White Knight's recoil comp. That just doesn't pass the giggle test -- it has such a good gas vent system that an actual, physical mount on a tripod couldn't help it? Huh??? And they definitely weren't referring to the recoil compensating mods in Arsenal, because they did not yet exist... They were like a year in the future. The fact is, if they wanted to clarify that it was totally unupgradeable, now that Arsenal actually gives us upgrades that could apply to it, they could just stick that in an errata. They haven't, so let's just stick to common sense, neh?

Not true. You can always add externally-mounted attachments, just not 'integral modifications'.

Fine. You just proved my point even more. If we accept your interpretation, then the SR4 devs wrote specifically that the White Knight, which appears in the BBB, can't be further upgraded, when there is not one single integral recoil upgrade in the BBB that could actually be applied to it. Did they intend to exclude recoil upgrades that didn't even exist until a year or two later? I don't think so. QED.

Shrug. Arsenal didn't exist in print, but the book's core concepts (which definitely include weapon modifications) were certainly being taken into consideration when the core book was being written.

The idea that the devs were able to plan that far in advance is lolworthy. The devs have, on numerous occasions, failed to make the rulebooks internally consistent. Arguing that they actually wrote rules anticipating what would be published years in the future can only be answered with a few of these:

Regardless, the grammar is unambiguous. Your refusal to accept that isn't relevant to the argument. You go ahead and play it your way, but this discussion is not going to go anywhere, so let's end it, k?

Given that the IWK starts with 5(6) RC, it's not exactly lacking for compensation. Certainly, having a portable heavy weapon that's easily modded to the point where it can go full auto with no recoil at all while still being fired from the shoulder (no tripod/bipod necessary) can be a game balance issue for some games. There's no such thing as an Upgrade... there's Accessories and Modifications, which only leaves us with more amusing oddball details to run circles with. I've really got no interest in doing so, however.

My read on the sentence structure in the book is that it indicates you can't alter the gas vent, but that the RAW could be easily and understandably misinterpreted (due to the distinction involving finicky reading of commas, and everyone being aware that the RAW itself doesn't have perfect grammar) to mean that the weapon is unupgradeable. If that means "no mods" or "no mods or accessories" or "no accessories" is up to whoever's interpreting the sentence. Personally, I don't think it has a huge game-shattering effect any way it gets read, and people should do whatever works for their games.

You're right of course. Whether or not the White Knight can take additional recoil mods, it is a sweet piece of equipment. The only gun (in the core book anyway) to hold a candle to it is the Alpha, since the Alpha (with an added gas ven 3) can get the same amount of recoil comp, with an underbarrel grenade launcher. But the Knight still wins out on range and ammo capacity.

Have a nice day.

Mmm, I think my comment here is regardless of grammar nazi-ism. It's just a game balance thing to me. Even if it said in black-and-white that the gun has a gas vent 5, a shoulder brace and the book read "the gas vent system cannot be modified, however the gun can", I would query it as a typo and house-rule it anyway.

In my mind (with game balance) heavy weapons are a rare and special thing that deserve respect from the players. Being able to swing one around on full autofire like it was a pea-shooter (not using one of the really big mount systems) is something that should be impossible with any heavy weapon (IMHO).

With the Arsenal mods (assuming the gun can take them), it's possible to have the White Knight fired on full auto without any of of the bigger recoil compensators. Now, whilst the devs wouldn't have any of the rules in Arsenal ready to roll when the core book was printed, they must have known "there will be some more ways to compensate recoil in there".

To me - saying that the White Knight can't accept any further gun mods (of any kind) balances out the fact that "off the shelf" in it's (comparatively low) availability, it comes with more recoil comp than any other gun in the system, including a "can't exist in any other gun in the game system" gas vent 5. Since the WK is a heavy weapon, and I don't like heavy weapons being fired on full auto without a mounting platform of some type (although I realise with a cyberarm gyromount you can still do it, but then - a cyber gyromount is a hefty investment and a specialist bit of kit, so I'll allow that). Shock pads/Heavy barrel/customised grip and all of that guff, I'll say that doesn't apply to a WK, since they break my take on the game.

It's actually Arsenal's existance that supports my decision actually, if Arsenal had included the ability to put a gas vent 5 into another gun as a modification then maybe I would have ruled the other way (since then the WK would be balanced with other guns, albeit that balance would have made it really easy to fire any gun with no recoil!).

Also - again - I point out that the interpretation "the gas vent system cannot be modified" doesn't make any sense, since neither the BBB nor Arsenal contain any rules for modifying a gas vent system.

It's possible, with mods, to get any machinegun up to 7 points of RC, 8 if you don't use a full burst, and that only involves tossing on an autoadjusting weight, gas vent 3, personalized grip and a shock pad. Compensating for recoil got made real easy this time around... i think that ends up running something like 750 nuyen to do.

Yeah, I just don't like that too much ... anyway - it's done now ...

http://toreadorvampire.co.uk/rpg/shadowrun#IngramWhiteKnight

Being able to fire a Heavy Machine Gun on a full burst from the hip without caring about recoil is (to me) a bad thing, and not the direction I want my game to go in. So, I guess this then becomes a "my game balance is different to your game balance" issue.

In fact ... I may even add a strength requirement to even attempting that move without a gyromount ... that's for later thought - at least now the "White Knight" hole is closed.

Hey, I just got a player modding his with an electronic firing system; It's not a huge game balance issue for me. Being the character an ork tank : he already has 2 points of natural recoil compensation, plus the gun's own it was only a dice we were talking about. One dice mod for 2000 nuyen it is quite all right in my book.

Besides, it makes sense to me; according to my reading of the rules, it's the gas vent which provides the recoil compensation, so IMO there is "room" in the gun for an electronic firing system. If they really wanted it they could have added something into Arsenal to ret-con older guns and list their included upgrades (as I believe they did with some vehicles)... Verbs have a tendency to stick to the closest preceding noun, that's it.

Cheers!

Max

It wouldn't be terribly off to consider that the integral recoil compensation of the Whiteknight includes mods like barrel weights as well as the gas vent.

I've not got my copy with me right now, but what would you need to add to get 5 points of RC as the mods rules currently stand? Assume that the WK has those mods already in it, and they can't be removed or augmented (for example if you needed a foregrip for the listed RC, you could not fit a grenade launcher).

Oh you crazy house rules people You have to remember that the Ares Alpha, with a gas vent 3, and a shock pad, has the same amount of recoil as the White Knight. Plus an underbarrel grenade launcher. All you're going to do by house ruling the White Knight is cause people to switch to the Alpha, a shorter ranged but ultimately more destructive weapon. If you house rule the White Knight for game balance, you'd want to house rule other guns that are just as good/better so they won't become "duh" alternatives, and then you're stuck in a vicious circle of never ending house rules. But If that's what floats your boat

"Room" is not a reading of the rules, it's a house rule. Gas vents and electronic firing systems are compatible. Special gas vents unique to the WK are not excluded.



It would be off, if you're going with RAW. It has no barrel weights, just a special gas vent system that provides 5 recoil. You can pretend that it has more mods than that to make up its 5 recoil comp, but that's a house rule.

[rant]
What's the instant compulsion people have to nerf everything that's good? You guys DO realize that it's futile to try and nerf everything that's powerful, right? If you make the WK worse, players will seize on another thing that's powerful, like the Alpha. If you nerf that, they're onto the next thing. It's like whack-a-mole. If you act this finnicky, houseruling everything that isn't just exactly absolutely right according to your generalized gut feelings, you're doing little more than making the game more confusing by adding extra rules that people need to learn in addition to the book rules. And you're putting pressure on your players to find loopholes and other broken things. Your life as a GM will be easy if the players just pick up a White Knight and go "oo, this gun is cool, watch me fire without recoil." Firing a machinegun without recoil is the very least of a GM's worries! It's probably one of the least cheesy combat options I can think of! If you end up house ruling the WK, your players are going to start REALLY abusing the rules. Like modifying an MGL-12 to fire fully automatic! You think the WK is bad, a full burst of 10 HE grenades will make you shit your pants. Or even worse, what if they fire 2 HE grenades, 2 flash-bangs, 2 flechette grenades, 2 white phosphorus grenades, and 2 incendiary grenades? THAT will be fun for you. If you just let your players use the basic stuff in the core book as written, they will probably not range as far looking for the stuff that is actually broken and deserves a house rule. You will be able to save your house rules for things that actually hurt the game, instead of just basic, everyday options that just feel slightly too good.[/rant]

I'd say it's a houserule to say that the WK's description is wrong, and that it actually CAN be modified. If you're going to stick to RAW to avoid getting caught in an endless cycle of houserules, then you need to actually stick to RAW, rather than pick one houserule and say another will lead to such a cycle.

I don't know how the WK works. Maybe the gas vent system is a lot more integral to the design of the gun than other GVs, which would explain why you can't buy GVs for other guns that give that much RC, and also why you can't just go taking apart the WK to put other stuff in. Personally, as GM, I'd allow a tripod mount, but not much else. I see no problem with reading what's in the BBB as applying to stuff in Arsenal. Books like Arsenal aren't meant to "trump" the BBB, just add more options. And let's face it, no matter what mistakes the devs have made in the past, I think we ALL knew Arsenal was coming, from the moment SR4 was announced (and, being devs, they knew from the moment it was conceived). As long as there's any form of SR, there's going to be some form of supplemental book in the works to give people more guns and more things to do with them.

This is the best account of how the RAW ought to be read. The only rebuttals to it have been "that's not how *I* read it." But the BBB is written in English, not YouSpeak. You read it how you want, but until someone comes up with something better, that's what I consider the RAW. I don't argue to be right, I argue to find out what the best answer is. Because Shrike has provided the best answer, and stands unrebutted, it is the gas vent that cannot be modified. I think the reason they told us you can't modify the gas vent, even though gas vents ordinarily can't be modified, is to make perfectly clear that you can't add another gas vent, or you can't take the gas vent out of the WK and put it elsewhere. It was redundant, and ultimately, it has confused a lot of people on this board. But gramatically, that's what they were referring to. The only way to read it the other way is to decide that the comma in the RAW was misplaced. That's what you call deciding that the RAW is wrong. That is what you're doing, and accusing me of doing.

And from a policy perspective, you do not gain anything by ruling the other way. By reading it your way, you just shove everyone into using the Alpha, which is in many respects a better weapon. When two interpretations of the rules are possible, you ought to pick the best one. Here, because the WK is actually not unique in terms of its potential for recoil comp, all your interpretation would do is turn it from a great option into a sub-optimal option. Having less optimal options means less character diversity, means a worse game. This comes at your own expense. Even if there was a solid grammatical argument backing up the opposing side, and reasonable minds could differ, your interpretation would still come out on the bottom. To me, it stinks of knee-jerk nerf-batting, making good things bad just because they're good.

Yes, I used the words "house rule" and conceded that by RAW you can modify the gun as much as you want.



...except for ensuring that "if you want to use a heavy weapon machinegun on full autofire, you need to be be using a mount platform of some kind.



But it's not a heavy weapon machinegun - thus lower range, less damage and less "scary" - assault rifles are a penny a pound. if you want to put a GV3, shock pad, foregrip and (whatever other mods you need to stack to get RC into an Alpha that's cool ... that's my limit - an Alpha (or any assault rifle) is the best gun I will allow to be modified such that is can be fired with impunity like that, but not a heavy weapon. They're called "heavy weapons" for a reason.

Anyway - at this point we are nearing a debate which I often have - which is:

"I'm not playing the game as a tournament, and the RAW doesn't matter too much to me, I'm not running SR missions, nor am I interested in doing so. It doesn't matter what rules I play with my group, since there are no 'game police' that will come and tell me badwrongfun"

And I think we can leave it at that ... I think we all said everything we wanted to say a fair few posts ago ...

Agree to disagree I guess.

As I recall, the WK is designed to fill the niche in weapons roughly analogous to the M60 machine gun. In that role it is superior to the Ares Alpha. In the role of 'assault rifle', the Alpha is the superior gun.

Bear with me, here.

What we see here is too much looking at numbers, not enough grasp of actual usage. As an emplaced weapon, either defensively in a reasonably mobile form, or offensive (if mounted to a light vehicle on a pintle or ring), the Ares Alpha is actually sub-par. It has less range (guessing here, I haven't memorized the game rules on weapon ranges) and presumably less raw damage. Most importantly, it has less ammunition. Even if the magazine on the alpha happens miraculously to match up to the amount of bullets on a single belt of ammo, belted ammo has a singular advantage in that you can just hook more ammo to the end of the belt for that 'continous stream of fire'. In short, an Alpha can only sustain fully automatic fire (sustained fire, for example) for a few brief seconds while the White Knight, in theory, can do so for several minutes before logical limits on how many belts are available come into play, and realistically no more than 2 minutes before the barrel melts into a droopy arc and the next round fired blows back into the operators face (this is real world stuff here, no hyperbole), though a barrel change (or god forbid some sort of super ceramic non-melty barrel) is expected to extend the operational life of the weapon.


For carrying around and shooting random people, the White Knight, deservedly, is the inferior weapon. Realistically, it should suffer penalties for being unwieldy. SR, no matter the edition, has never really gone for that, sadly, which is why you have so many runners with LMGs instead of assault rifles, Assault rifles instead of SMGs and SMGs instead of pistols, or Troll Bows instead of damn near anything else out there up to and including vibro pole arms!

Belts are a liability for just lugging around. Trust me on this, they get snarled something fierce and you're likely to trip on them if they are more than 100 rounds long. Its heavy and tends to being point heavy, making it a pain to aim while standing. You aren't going to bring it up to your shoulder, regardless, though I could see a troll pulling it off, though he'd probably burn his fingers something feirce. Dermal deposites are not made of asebestos, after all.

never mind the specialized training it requires unlike the Assault rifle (which at a minimum is compatable with SMGs, and if you go for a rounded program allows you to fire pistols and sniper rifles too...).


Seriously it's like pointing out that the Dragon AGTM is a much better weapon than a modern Muzzleloader for hunting deer.


In what world?

Well, then nothing I said was aimed at you, and I respect your position






Both of you are saying "it's a machinegun, so make it act like one." That's a perfectly fine argument. If you wanted to make sure that the WK stays as a heavy weapon that people don't carry around as a main-line combat piece, then house rule that bitch into next year. I don't care. I just don't want anyone to pretend that it's what the RAW requires.

But I would offer an alternate conception of the WK: it's a light machinegun, it really just barely fits into the heavy weapons category. I would not expect a serious military operation to have White Knight gun emplacements. If they do, they must be pretty small-time jokers. The White Knight is not an emplacement weapon, it's much more like the SAW - people carry it around as part of a squad. It's light enough, and has enough recoil compensation that it can be used as a main-line walking-around kind of weapon. The fact that it's in the Heavy Weapons category doesn't really require that it be treated as if it's a big time, major piece of artillery. It really isn't. It's just a longer ranged assault rifle with better ammo capacity, in effect. It shouldn't be forced into a role it wasn't made for. The WK, like the modern SAW, is made to be toted around on patrols, not stuck to a tripod or vehicle turret. It can do those things, but I don't think it should be forced to. It just doesn't make sense, given its stats.

I've always seen the IWK (and really, all SR LMG asides from the Vindicator minigun, which we can probably all agree is a special case) as something along the lines of an Ultimax or a Stoner 63A... true "Light Machineguns" intended to be portable and easily used by an infantryman in an "Automatic Rifle" capacity, rather than as weapons that require emplacement, mounts, sandbagging, etc to be used effectively. The two weapons I've just mentioned weigh about 10-12 pounds, sans ammo... the same weight as the old Thompson SMGs, which I've never heard anyone complain can't be fired from the shoulder.

I can't imagine that an XM30, with it's six round, detatchable-mag-fed grenade launcher loaded up, weighs much less.

The MMGs and HMGs frequently come with a tripod or bipod mount standard, which only 1-2 of the LMGs do. That speaks of a much more "emplaced" role in my mind, with MMGs representing things like the M60/M240B, and HMGs being.... something nebulous, but theoretically approaching .50 caliber, even if SR4's damage stats don't quite bear this out.

Larme, when did I suggest houseruling?

If you want to consider the WK a SAW instead of an M60, that's all well and good. In real life the SAW is not much of an upgrade to the M16, and in fact in most cases the M16 is the superior weapon. However, and still, when doing 'machine gun' tasks.... sustained fire, lots and lots of autofire, the SAW is, in fact, superior. It, in fact, replaced the full auto version of the M16 as the squad automatic weapon, and from a purely logistical perspective the much more fiddly burst fire M16 now dominates as the standard weapon.


In the real world, just like the Rule world, the LMG is not designed to be inherently 'superior' to the Assault Rifle (or necessarily vice versa), and each weapon has its purpose.

Again: Don't look at the raw numbers and think you've got it all figured out. The Ares Alpha is just as superior as it used to be, but it still does not, tactically, replace a belt fed machine gun when a machine gun is called for.

I'm not sure what you're arguing, Spike. I think the Alpha is to the White Knight is what the M16 is to the SAW. I'm not sure if you're agreeing with me, or disagreeing with me, or whether you're for or against letting people upgrade the White Knight.

Actually, I was reiterating my point, as you seemed to think I was saying something needed houseruling. My original point was that the Ares Alpha is not 'the superior weapon' as some people insisted..

'We need to be able to upgrade this because an upgraded Ares Alpha is so much better than it! Waaahhhh!!'


Which makes no sense. Different type of weapon, different tactical employments. You could argue that the entire 'SAW' concept is sort of weak and pointless, and you might have a point (it did originally replace the fully auto assault rifle, after all...), but in its designated role it outperforms the Ares Alpha. Just like it should.

The alternate point is that it cannot be upgraded at all, not just upgraded recoil. And there is one internal upgrade in the BBB. Smartgun. As for your later comment about the devs' foresight. They knew they would be addressing revising the Canon Companion's customization rules even if they had not decided to update them yet. The amount of foresight required for making accomodations for Arsenal's weapon modding rules is actually quite small.

My personal interpretation of the text is that the gas vent is integral to barrel and cannot be replaced or removed.

I said:

a) The RAW says, according to the conventions of the English language, that the gun in general, just not the gas vent, can be upgraded, and nobody has rebutted this argument (exemplified by Shrike) except to say "In my opinion English works the way I say, and I read it the other way;" and

b) there should not be a house rule to the contrary because the Alpha is already better. People should not nerf the WK for being too good, because it's really not that special. I'm approaching it from a game balance persepctive. Nerfing the WK does not help game balance, it just reduces the number of optimal weapon choices, which is bad. You're approaching from a reaslism perspective: maybe some guns ought to be worse than other guns, because that satisfies your sense of realism more. That's a fine argument. I, however, do not change the rules based on realism unless they're patently insane.

Larme: you are missing the point. I've never weighed in on how the WK should or should not be modified.

What I'm saying, and this is fully supported by the rules btw, is that in its designated role the White Knight is superior as is.

Here is why: the White knight has the ability to accept 100 round belts. It has a maximum range of 800 meters. Its purpose is to lay down autofire over extended periods in area denial, crowd clearing and other circumstances when burst fire just won't cut it. Even if you ignore the fact that belts can be linked together it has more than double the ammo of the Ares Alpha (which, to be honest, has an extra large magazine.. just because)

The Ares Alpha, while capable of full auto, and boasting a reasonably sturdy (just because) magazine of 42 rounds simply is not meant for use as a machine gun. It is sub par in that catagory because it lacks the belt fed capacity of the White Knight, and if you have emplaced defenses with long fields of fire, it lacks the range as well. It is sub par.

It is, however, a superior assault rifle for all the reasons people felt compelled to mention already.

That is how it should be, if you want to have one gun per catagory that EVERYONE uses.


In short, as written, either gun COULD be used in the place of the other and suffer accordingly, but would perform BETTER if used tactically as it was designed to.


And not a single house rule was touched inappropriately in making this post so please exclude me from your ongoing debate over houseruling, or not, the weapon mods rules. I repeat because you seem hung up on it for some reason.

Umm, ok. Seems like a fairly tangential point. But I don't think I ever disagreed. I continually stated that while the Alpha is better overall because of its versatility, the WK has better range and ammo capacity. Which, as you correctly put it, makes it a better support weapon.

Perhaps my point has been misunderstood.

It is not unreasonable to assume that when the IWK was first stated some form of future RC mods was in the mind of the devs. A rating 5 gas mod could easily be shorthand for 5 points of assorted RC. As has been stated before, it is not hard to mod any weapon to make it recoilless. gas vent 3, compensating barrel weight, electronic firing system, fore grip etc etc. Saying that some of these are integral to the IWK just makes them cheaper, and does not nerf the gun.

As far as saying that it is the equivalent of a SAW; fair enough, but you try firing a SAW without experiencing recoil.

It isn't unreasonable, but it isn't written that way either. You can do whatever you want, I'm primarily just trying to be clear what the RAW says. I don't think it needs to be changed, but I really don't have a stake in what you do in your own game.

Having just read the relevant part of Arsenal last night (and admittedly not enough of it), I'm actually REALLY interested in this. Grammatic arguments aside, is it possible that the RC offered by the WK comes from sources other than GV that would be incompatible with certain upgrades? And if not, and we're reading it as purely a super GV that doesn't exist anywhere else, what else should we be able to do with it? Obviously (at least, I think we're all agreed), the GV can't be taken out of the WK and slapped on another gun. But can a similar super GV be designed for other guns? It seems to me that you would at least be able to crack the thing open, see how it works, then design it into a new gun you're designing from scratch (provided you have the technical skills, of course).

I think earlier editions (2nd, in particular... I can't remember how 3rd handled the split here) might bear out my line of thinking on LMGs. IIRC, the "firearms" group used to include LMGs, while "heavy weapons" used to include MMGs and heavier.

Yep, that's the way it worked (well, it was "gunnery," but yeah...)

Sure you could design a gun with a similar integral gas vent system to the White Knight. But according to the book, IIRC, designing a gun from scratch is a process that takes months and a whole team of engineers and a facility. So it's not something the players can just pull out of their butts. Obviously, the GM could whip up some new commercially available guns, or approve player ideas for those, but that's neither here nor there, GMs can always allow whatever they want.

bah. I just allowed the electronic firing into the IWK and that was it. I had not even considered it unbalanced at the time, and, after reading this thread, I think I did fine.

Cheers.

Max

The point is that some people were arguing that the White Knight needs some sort of buff (on either side) because no one would use it as it is utterly inferior... more or less.

You are right, the Alpha is more versatile, and thus 'better'. Like I said, I hate the 'one gun to rule them all' phenomenon: At that point its better to just have 'generic' guns. (Heavy pistol, Assault rifle) than specific, useless, models, but thats not the point. Like all versatile generalist items, the Alpha is actually the inferior choice when competeing with a more specialized item.

True: most runners will have little use for that specialized item, but that doesn't mean you'll never see it in game. Because it is a specialized item, and already superior in that regards it does not need special treatment from the rules, or the houserules to be a viable choice, as some have suggested in this thread. It simply requires an understanding of the tactical niche that particular gun is designed to fill, the area where it doesn't need further buffing or nerfing to compete.

Its a tangental point to how the rule reads on the Gas Vent (I can see it disallowing further gas venting, a 'Duh' rule, or I could see it disallowing further barrel mods (a technical rule)... but as written the existing Gun Mods rules (gas vents really...) don't match up with reality much, so the entire topic can only be based on 'what works for your game'.

Which is why I don't want to get involved with how to read the rule in any depth. I'd rather focus on the wrongheaded idea that we need to make LMG's compete with AR's on some sort of level playing feild or simply ignore the existance of said LMGs because they are somehow 'inferior'.

Not an assault rifle, ergo, does not compare to assault rifles in assault rifly duties.

I was arguing the other way -- the White Knight should not be nerfed because it's already not that great. I thought people were saying "it's too good! nerf-bat!" And I want to make clear that it's not that good, and doesn't need to be weakened for balance. A subtly different yet distinct point.

I was actually trying to cover both sides of that argument, so it includes you too. As a Light Machine Gun it is not either too good because of its recoil (thus in need of nerfing) nor 'too bad', due to its 'unfavorable comparison to the assault rifle' in need of protection. The only fair thing to do is compare it to other LMG's. Off the top of my head, since the others are in arsenal (only on PDF for me atm, and annoying to read as a result..) its the only belt fed LMG... which makes it a superior performer given its role.

Its the entire habit of 'looking at the numbers' as 'proof positive' of superiority or inferiority that I'm against here. In this case the argument misses the vast difference in tactical employment. Other arguements in this vein are a little less obvious (the SMG/AR debate, fer ex), as there is no rules supported reason to make those two catagories ATM. There is, however, a distinct, and rules supported, reason to discuss LMGs as seperate from ARs (Full auto standard, supported by sufficent ammo capacity (belt fed) for sustainability of said full auto fire for extended periods...)

Since SMGs and ARs, in shadowrun usage, are interchangeable, there is little reason to use the inferior SMG when AR's are readily available. In real life SMGs are more conveinent for close quarters, but that's it. Nothing in SR remotely governs that except concealabiity, and I believe many SMG's are not really concealable at all anyway thus from a purely rules perspective the divide is artificial (doubly as they use the same skill).

You can dual-wield twin SMGs, but you can't do that with Assault Rifles.

In communist SR assault rifles dual-wield you.

According to the note I made on the sticky by my desk... I predicted that.

And that...