Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Net Hit Verification
Dumpshock Forums > Discussion > Shadowrun
Beetayasol
I am still new to this game, and such I have a rather newbie question that I would like to have verified.

Myself and two other players where playing a Shadowrun game (duh!) with the fourth player being the GM, and my friend preformed a move in Street Magic called Nerve Strike. The move states that each net hit, instead of dealing damage reduces the opponents stat by one. He preformed this move against a Lone Star Officer in full gear in an attempt to take his gear from him. My question, too which he and our GM fought for a while, was the term Net Hits.

He got 8 hits on his Unarmed Attack, to which the Lone Star Officer, not knowing that the attack was coming, could not dodge.

He stated that he is going to reduce one stat by the entire 8 points, however the GM stated that he still has to roll the Officers Body + Impact Armor.

It was at this moment that the entire game pretty much halted. I was in agreement with the GM that he should get to roll his Unarmed Defense to see how much gets through his armor (Officers) in his attempt to paralyze him (that and I believe that the GM is always right regardless if he is wrong). But the other two stated that net hits doesn't involve the damage, just the attack.

Here is the question, when preforming a move that has the Net Hits (like Nerve Strike), does it take their armor into account, or does it negate armor?

Second question. Does the martial arts forms that add +Unarmed DV increase the amount of stat drain done on the opponent?
Malachi
I agree with the player's interpretation.

The power states instead of doing damage. The Body + Armor roll is part of Damage Resistance, but this power is not inflicting damage. The "Net Hits" refers to Net Hits on the attack test alone. Yes, catching someone off-guard with this power probably results in instantaneous paralysis. It's the SR equivalent of the "Vulcan nerve pinch." No, I don't think it's overpowered because it costs 1 Power Point, which is a hefty price to pay. Elemental Strike (Electricity) is generally more effective for cheaper.

Second question: I would say no, for the same reason the defender doesn't get Body + Armor above: Nerve Strike causes paralysis instead of damage. Therefore +DV to damage doesn't affect Nerve Strike.
Runner Smurf
"Net hits" generally applies to the number of hits after the defender makes his Defense Roll. Since the target was unaware of the attack, he doesn't get a Dodge/Melee defense roll, so, the net hits are whatever the attacker rolled. I can see why the GM would be inclined to give the target a Damage Resistance Test first - generally speaking, a target always gets to resist when you try and do something to them. However, a strict reading of the Nerve Strike Power indicates that it is purely the net hits. If the description had said "damage boxes" instead, I'd give the target a Damage Resistance Test.

As for applicability of armor, I'd say yes. Nothing in the description of the attack indicates that armor doesn't apply. So the target would roll Body + Impact Armor. Each hit reduces the Net Hits by one. If he manages to roll 8 hits, the attack does no damage at all. A "Called Shot" might be used to bypass the armor at a dice penalty equal to the armor rating. As a GM, I would be inclined to allow the called shot and reduce the Called Shot penalty since the target was unaware, but it depends on the armor. If he's wearing full Military Grade armor, I'd say no way as there is no vulnerable.

The martial arts powers typically state that the +1 DV applies on a specific type of attack ("Unarmed Combat attacks", "Attacks of Will", etc.), so I would rule that it doesn't apply to nerve strike. For the bonus to apply, I think it would have to state "+1 to DV of Nerve Strike attacks.".

Which makes me think a stealth/intrusion Physical Adept should always take Nerve Strike. Incredibly useful for dispatching guards.
Muspellsheimr
QUOTE (Runner Smurf @ Jul 21 2009, 02:47 PM) *
As for applicability of armor, I'd say yes. Nothing in the description of the attack indicates that armor doesn't apply. So the target would roll Body + Impact Armor. Each hit reduces the Net Hits by one. If he manages to roll 8 hits, the attack does no damage at all.

Nerve Strike does not deal damage, thus, a Damage Resistance Test (Body + Impact) has no effect whatsoever on the power.
BullZeye
QUOTE (Muspellsheimr @ Jul 22 2009, 12:33 AM) *
Nerve Strike does not deal damage, thus, a Damage Resistance Test (Body + Impact) has no effect whatsoever on the power.

True, but how do you hit a nerve if there's a metal plate in between? So I would rule the armor still has an effect.
edit: And after reading the rule... I'd read it so that you roll body+armor and then reduce the attribute from net hits... But it can easily be read so that it's only the melee rolls that effect...
QUOTE
Instead of inflicting damage, each net hit reduces his opponent’s Agility or Reaction....

As said, I'd rule that armor still helps smile.gif
Muspellsheimr
One problem with that - Damage Resistance does not affect Net Hits, but Damage Value.
Adarael
By the letter of the rules this is correct.

By the spirit, I'd let the player roll Impact or half Impact (and no stat) to indicate the presence of "junk in the way." I am not fond of the idea that Nerve Strike is as effective on an unsuspecting guy in heavy military armor wearing a helmet as it is on an unsuspecting hobo.
Malachi
QUOTE (Muspellsheimr @ Jul 21 2009, 04:33 PM) *
One problem with that - Damage Resistance does not affect Net Hits, but Damage Value.

Yeah, I'm with you. Body + Armor is rolled as part of Damage Resistance, so it is not rolled with Nerve Strike since Nerve Strike does no damage. If the opponent got to roll the Opposed Melee Check and Damage Resistance, then this power would be completely useless in comparison to Elemental Attack (Electricity) which is: cheaper, incapacitates faster, and halves armor. The fact that the opponent doesn't roll Armor is the only thing that keeps it going, IMO.
RedeemerofOgar
QUOTE (Malachi @ Jul 21 2009, 05:47 PM) *
Yeah, I'm with you. Body + Armor is rolled as part of Damage Resistance, so it is not rolled with Nerve Strike since Nerve Strike does no damage. If the opponent got to roll the Opposed Melee Check and Damage Resistance, then this power would be completely useless in comparison to Elemental Attack (Electricity) which is: cheaper, incapacitates faster, and halves armor. The fact that the opponent doesn't roll Armor is the only thing that keeps it going, IMO.


I fall in-between. I would absolutely give a body + armor check, sort of. The Nerve Strike effect happens "instead of inflicting damage." I would therefore give the defender a body + armor check but it would be all or nothing - if the check exceeded the successes on Nerve Strike, the strike would do nothing (the armor got in the way). If the defenders check was anything less than the attackers, full net hits on the nerve strike would apply.
Apathy
By a strict rules interpretation, I'd reluctantly agree with the player - neither body nor armor would apply. I also don't see the power as uber, because it's a touch attack, and everone knows that in SR melee gets pwned by ranged attacks. If I was the GM, I'd be inclined to give the player his hits during that engagement.

But after the run I might make an announcement about a new house rule that the target gets to roll his armor (not body) to reduce net hits, because I agree with some of the other posters that it's harder to find a nerve when they're all covered by military grade armor. Along with the announcement I'd give the player the opportunity to trade out the power for something else if he no longer liked the cost.
jmeis982
I'm a little curious how the Lone star officer was unaware, I'm curious to know what kind of armor he was wearing as well. Depending on the armor he had I might give him an armor roll
Malachi
Two things to keep in mind with this power:
1) It only requires physical contact with the area, and does not do damage therefore the Adept probably doesn't need to hit hard enough to do damage (a GM may even be convinced to give the +2 bonus for a touch-only attack)
2) It is fueled by Magic

The power doesn't say the adept needs to strike exposed skin, just "hit" the target. It's a Magic power: it might just need to "strike" the appropriate area, and Armor doesn't matter. Yes the Armor stopped the "kinetic" energy of the attack, and thus the actually "strike" did no physical harm, but that's not what the Adept is going for.
BullZeye
QUOTE (Malachi @ Jul 22 2009, 10:47 PM) *
The power doesn't say the adept needs to strike exposed skin, just "hit" the target. It's a Magic power: it might just need to "strike" the appropriate area, and Armor doesn't matter. Yes the Armor stopped the "kinetic" energy of the attack, and thus the actually "strike" did no physical harm, but that's not what the Adept is going for.

How about mystic armor or spells?
dirkformica
THIS is why Nerve Strike ignores any and all armor.
Apathy
QUOTE (dirkformica @ Jul 22 2009, 04:37 PM) *
THIS is why Nerve Strike ignores any and all armor.

I thought that was the penetrating strike adept power?
Malachi
QUOTE (BullZeye @ Jul 22 2009, 03:18 PM) *
How about mystic armor or spells?

All designed to reduce physical impact. Not protect mystical nerve paralysis.
Zurai
QUOTE (Malachi @ Jul 22 2009, 06:09 PM) *
All designed to reduce physical impact.


Not true. The spell Mystic Armor and the adept power of the same name provide astral armor, which is useless against physical impact and only useful against magical stuff.
Malachi
QUOTE (Zurai @ Jul 22 2009, 04:26 PM) *
Not true. The spell Mystic Armor and the adept power of the same name provide astral armor, which is useless against physical impact and only useful against magical stuff.

Fair enough. I still don't think the Nerve Strike adept power calls for an Armor roll.
kzt
QUOTE (jmeis982 @ Jul 22 2009, 12:44 PM) *
I'm a little curious how the Lone star officer was unaware, I'm curious to know what kind of armor he was wearing as well. Depending on the armor he had I might give him an armor roll

I'd suggest the player do a practical test, like do something to make the cops stop him and then see how hard it is to be within arms reach of an unaware cop without another cop standing there watching him. Just for science. cool.gif
Tymeaus Jalynsfein
QUOTE (kzt @ Jul 22 2009, 04:26 PM) *
I'd suggest the player do a practical test, like do something to make the cops stop him and then see how hard it is to be within arms reach of an unaware cop without another cop standing there watching him. Just for science. cool.gif


Not all cops have partners...
Tymeaus Jalynsfein
QUOTE (Zurai @ Jul 22 2009, 03:26 PM) *
Not true. The spell Mystic Armor and the adept power of the same name provide astral armor, which is useless against physical impact and only useful against magical stuff.



Wrong... Mystic Armor provides physical armor protection (+1 Ballistic and Impact) that stacks with worn armor... IT ALSO protectswhen in Astral COmbat... SEE PAGE 188 SR4 (Not sure the page number for SR4A)
Zurai
QUOTE (Tymeaus Jalynsfein @ Jul 22 2009, 06:33 PM) *
Wrong... Mystic Armor provides physical armor protection (+1 Ballistic and Impact) that stacks with worn armor... IT ALSO protectswhen in Astral COmbat... SEE PAGE 188 SR4 (Not sure the page number for SR4A)


No, I was not wrong. I said they provided astral armor, which doesn't help against physical impact. I didn't say that they ONLY provided astral armor, or that the spell/power wasn't effective against physical attacks as a whole (although the spell Mystic Armor is, indeed, useless against physical attacks). Please read more carefully before you go off.
Tymeaus Jalynsfein
QUOTE (Zurai @ Jul 22 2009, 09:24 PM) *
No, I was not wrong. I said they provided astral armor, which doesn't help against physical impact. I didn't say that they ONLY provided astral armor, or that the spell/power wasn't effective against physical attacks as a whole (although the spell Mystic Armor is, indeed, useless against physical attacks). Please read more carefully before you go off.



Zurai... Please read your quote... Which I included...
QUOTE
(Zurai @ Jul 22 2009, 03:26 PM)
Not true. The spell Mystic Armor and the adept power of the same name provide astral armor, which is useless against physical impact and only useful against magical stuff.
...

Seems to me you were saying that Adept's Mystic Armor was useless against physical damage... (See Highlighted text)
If that was not your intent, that is okay, no harm and no foul, but that IS what you said... not including the remaining relevant text tends to imply exclusivity in this instance, especially with your statement about physical impact... Just saying...

Keep the faith...
Zurai
I'm not going to debate grammar with you, because it's clearly off-topic, but I assure you that my sentence was grammatically correct and means exactly what I said it does to anyone who knows the rules of English grammar.
Tymeaus Jalynsfein
QUOTE (Zurai @ Jul 23 2009, 10:19 AM) *
I'm not going to debate grammar with you, because it's clearly off-topic, but I assure you that my sentence was grammatically correct and means exactly what I said it does to anyone who knows the rules of English grammar.



And now you get insulting... Who would have guessed...
Tallyho...

And just a reminder... Not everyone is a master of the English Language... Your statement could have EASILY been misconstrued by non-native English Speakers... Which is why I said something...

Keep the Faith...
Adarael
WELCOME TO DUMPSHOCK! Where "gotcha" is the game everybody plays!
Zurai
QUOTE (Tymeaus Jalynsfein @ Jul 23 2009, 03:25 PM) *
And now you get insulting... Who would have guessed...


It wasn't intended as an insult. As a matter of fact, I'm a little insulted myself that you'd think it was; I'm not one of those English-is-the-superior-language people who thinks that not knowing English means you're an inferior person. Not knowing English just means ... you don't know English. What a concept. One of my absolute best friends doesn't know how to spell or diagram a sentence in English to save his life, even though he's now a professional writer. I proofread for him because English spelling and grammar are completely intuitive for me. I certainly don't think any less of him that he needs my help.

What happened here is that you claimed I was wrong-- in bold type, indicating severity or conviction -- which is utterly untrue. Then you tried to back out of it saying "oh, I was just thinking of the non-native English speakers here and was trying to point out that it's possible to misread what you wrote". Bullshit. YOU said that I was "wrong'. I wasn't. Be man enough to admit your mistake, don't try to cover it up.
Tymeaus Jalynsfein
QUOTE (Zurai @ Jul 23 2009, 03:50 PM) *
It wasn't intended as an insult. As a matter of fact, I'm a little insulted myself that you'd think it was; I'm not one of those English-is-the-superior-language people who thinks that not knowing English means you're an inferior person. Not knowing English just means ... you don't know English. What a concept. One of my absolute best friends doesn't know how to spell or diagram a sentence in English to save his life, even though he's now a professional writer. I proofread for him because English spelling and grammar are completely intuitive for me. I certainly don't think any less of him that he needs my help.

What happened here is that you claimed I was wrong-- in bold type, indicating severity or conviction -- which is utterly untrue. Then you tried to back out of it saying "oh, I was just thinking of the non-native English speakers here and was trying to point out that it's possible to misread what you wrote". Bullshit. YOU said that I was "wrong'. I wasn't. Be man enough to admit your mistake, don't try to cover it up.


In the context of the Quote, I believe You were wrong, and I corrected what I perceived to be the inaccuracy... However, I was man enough to say that it was possible I misunderstood you... The main reason that I posted that response was because it could be Misleading, in general (lots of little things added up here, that are of no real relevance)... the CONTEXT of the quote you used, in my opinion, could have been better delineated...

But... AS I have said... I was wrong, I Misunderstand you... I am sorry... I generally have no qualms with your posts or your style... So as I said in the original post... If I misunderstood, No Harm, No Foul... No need to continue the argument...

Keep the Faith...
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