One mechanic I was disapointed with was the over-generification of the firearms generally, and especially their concealability in particular.

I have gotten all the other things I wanted sorted out for my own rehash on the weapon tables, but the old concealability tables just can't mesh to the new modifiers.

Does anybody actually have some constructive suggestions? I'd love to hash this one out.

Remember: It's an opposed test, Palming vs. Perception with lots and lots of modifiers.

As a starting point:

In the old system (2nd Ed) the weapons raged as follows (higher being smaller)

Hold Out Pistol: 8-9
Light Pistol: 4-8
Heavy Pistol: 4-6
Machine Pistol: 5-6
SMG: 3-5
Assault Rifle: 2-3
Some compact longarms: 2

SR4 (lower is smaller)

Hold Out Pistol: -4
Light Pistol: -2
Heavy Pistol: +0
Machine Pistol: +2
SMG: +4
Assault Rifle: +6

Anybody else see the problem there?

OK. Floor's open. Ideas?

To answer your question directly, my well-respected fellow Dumpshocker, no, I do not see the problem there. However, that might be because I'm completely unfamiliar with SR1-3, so I'll try to figure it out as I go along.

In SR4, the numbers you've stated are modifications to the opposed test. I'm going to guess that the SR2 numbers are in fact target numbers. Correct me if I'm wrong there.

Ok, here's one thing I see that MIGHT be your problem. Average distance between
holdout and light pistol: 2.5
Light and heavy pistol: 1
Heavy and machine pistol: 0.5
Machine pistol and SMG: 2
SMG and assault rifle: 1

Is the problem that you're trying to mesh them, but running into maths irregularities converting high-is-small to low-is-small?

Is the problem that SR2 clusters pistols as similarly sized, then has a steep jump up for SMGs/assault rifles and a steep jump down for holdouts, as opposed to the evenly-spaced SR4 numbers?

Is the problem that SR2 includes a range of possible numbers for each weapon, whereas SR4 locks them all in?

You're not one to pick nits, I've seen, so this probably isn't it, but is the problem that SR4 doesn't have a number for longarms?

Is the problem in the modifiers? I know it's damned ambiguous which concealability modifiers apply to the weapon sticking out less visually, and which make it harder to find in a pat-down.

Basically, what are you trying to do that the rules aren't letting you?

I believe the intention in SR4 is to use its table as a baseline. I.E. a weapon noted in its description as either small or easy to conceal would get –1 to the average rating for its type. Similarly, a weapon noted as large or hard to conceal would get a +1 to the average rating.

Based on that, SR4 weapons can actually range from –5 to +7 in concealability.

If you want a formula that converts a 2 to 9 range into an inverted +7 to –5 range, use:

( SR2 – 5.5 ) × -12/7 +1 = SR4

What problem?

Honestly, from what you posted, the SR2 system is ass-backwards; the larger the number, the smaller the item? Makes me think of the monstrosity known as THAC0.

Well, Muspellsheimr, I don't see the problem either atm, but the larger-number=smaller-weapon makes sense if the number is the TN for a Perception check, right? Or is my knowledge of TNs completely useless?

Yes. The SR2 numbers are target numbers. And there were modifiers in that system as well. For example, IIRC a concealed holster added +2 to the concealability, so if used with a hold out pistol the searching character would have to roll a six then a five to gain a success with a relatively limited number of dice (equal to his Intelligence, which was the attribute used for Perception Tests). In other words, those were a bitch to find.

I too miss the finesse of the old concealability mechanics, but it was entirely based on variable target numbers, which (as we all know) is a thing of the past (except for those of us who are still living in the past... I'm talking to you SR3 hold outs...)

And maybe I'm a little dense, but I too am unsure what you're getting at. What's the problem exactly (other than its not the same)?

Yeah, the SR2/SR3 system makes sense given those rules. And it always worked just fine for our groups. Weapons that you'd expect to be concealed well you were able to sleaze through security (unless they had a MAD scanner), and weapons that should be too big would generally get spotted. I haven't played extensively with the SR4 concealability rules, but aside from a bit less resolution you get, I really don't see the problem with either.

If I use the Heavy Pistol as a baseline for 2nd like it is in 4th then assault rifles are harder to hide in 4th? I'm not sure if that's true, I'm not doing the math.

My only real gripe about 4th VS 2nd concealment numbers would be that they don't play such a huge role in choosing guns and their accessories in 4th. I'd say a bigger problem gear wise would be not listing the passenger capacity of vehicles in the BBB. Overall though I really like 4th.

A 2+ in SR2/3 was the lowest target number possible. In other words, if you were trying to conceal an AR anyone who even bothered to look would find it.

Well, some weapons are listed with a concealability of "-" or "don't even try". But theoretically, you could try to hide a full-size AR on your person and a particularly dense individual might not notice.

Yep. And in SR2/3 terms "theoretically" = 2+ = good luck.

Of course, ye ol' Long Coat of Mythical Protection also granted +50% to the concealability of any item, making that 2+ AR a 3+. Still not a very good choice for a concealed weapon.

+50%... So a hold-out could get up to 13? Meaning roll a six, and then roll another six, then roll a two or higher?

The "problem" is that it's not linear, especially if you try to keep the baseline - the Heavy Pistol - consistently centered.

And sorry, but an SMG is a LOT harder to hide than any version of a pistol. And Machine Pistols are about the size of a big Heavy Pistol.

So do I keep the +6 and -4 limits?

Do I just go off of common sense since the concealed holster was always a mod of 2?

That's why I wanted the discussion. Sorry I was so vague.

So you're bothered that the distance between a heavy pistol and a machine pistol is the same distance as between the machine pistol and an SMG? And also that SMGs are too easy to hide? I dunno what to tell you. Seems like changing things by two dice is too big, and one die is too small.

Maybe add an additional +1 concealability for ammo clips over 10 bullets (and +2 over 20, etc. etc.) unless the gun is hidden with no clip in it (some assembly required, and all that). If you did that, it would make sense to equalize machine pistols and heavy pistols; a machine pistol's no bigger than a heavy one, once you take out that expanded clip, right? I think this will help realism by penalizing big guns more than little guns, and add to the "you can have it hidden or have it ready to go, but not both" idea.

But shotguns rarely have clips, and almost never clips over 10 shells... fuck it, nobody's managing to hide them anyway.

Still don't get the problem. You claim it's 'not linear', but it advances by 2 each step, in each direction. How, exactly, does that not qualify as linear?

"It" is not linear. I suspect the "it" in question is the SR2 rules, which are indeed not linear. Kerenshara's making the argument that it should become exponentially more difficult to conceal an item as it gets larger, rather than linearly more difficult, if I understand correctly.

That, mostly, but more along the lines that there isn't a linear corelation between the old and the new.

A hold out pistol is very well concealable.

A heavy pistol is relatively to hide from a visual search.

A Machine pistol isn't any bigger.

An SMG is a LOT bigger in every dimension but width.

And an assault rifle is only concealable by the grace of "You rolled a critical glitch even with how many dice?"

But the SR4 is simply linear and not really tied to sizes except loosely. The old system clung much better to size and "shape" so a compact and well rounded SMG could be easier to hide than a large blocky heavy pistol.

I agree with you, I think that concealment should be based on the individual weapon instead of just a lumped together category. I also think that every gun should have a piece of art to represent it. I can see how the current system does streamline the game though.

So just to be clear- you're saying that you dislike the SR4 system because it isn't detailed enough to allow a certain hypothetically compact SMG to be more concealable that a certain hypothetically bulky HP? In other words the SR4 system is too rigid to allow overlap? With this I agree.

But come to think of it, I kinda like what McAllister said too- that it might be exponentially harder to hide something as it gets bigger... interesting thought.

I can't say I really like the concealing gear rules in SR4. They just seem a little arse backwards to me. Perhaps I'm applying them incorrectly and they're supposed to be for smuggling individual items past a guard or whatever, instead of having a corpsec plain clothes spot that you're packing while you're wandering around the local mall... and calling in the goon squad.

In prior editions, using the concealability-as-target-number system, I could do a single roll for an NPC to see if he spotted any and all hidden gear on the character. I used to just roll and then compare the results to the individual weapon/item concealability values (modified by lighting or whatever). If the roll got results high enough to exceed the target number, the NPC either spotted the item or suspected it was there (and therefore may have opted for a pat-down or similar closer inspection). Otherwise, the character managed to get away with concealing his gear. Pretty simple system. Single roll, maybe a little basic math for target number modifiers, but overall pretty quick and simple.

In SR4, however, I don't really have any nice way of performing such a mass check -- at least not anywhere I've seen in writing anyway (maybe they're in some other book that I haven't read...). I either have to make individual rolls, each modified by whatever factors apply (general category modifier, lined coat, weapon modifier, concealable holster, or whatever) -- which is a major pain -- or I have to use some kind of homebrew kludge. I've tried using the lowest modifier and having hits count as items detected, but I dunno... It strikes me that lugging around an assault rifle doesn't make spotting that chip in your sock any easier. Using the highest modifier, you have equally unrealistic results, with characters hiding away tiny items to conceal that heavy automatic shotgun they're packing.

At the moment I'm using a threshold-based kludge with a 3:1 ratio of negative modifiers to points of threshold. Positive modifiers I just ignore (or occasionally rule as being obvious to pretty much any onlooker -- no concealing that assault cannon on a gyro stabilization harness even if it is dark and you're wearing a lined coat after all). It's easy enough for most average everyday NPCs to get a single hit on a perception test -- even if you have to buy it for them. Essentially I just total up the absolute value of the concealability-increasing modifiers, divide the total by three (rounding up), and add one. That's the threshold. So something like a holdout pistol (-4) under a lined coat (-2), would give you a threshold of 4 to spot it (4 + 2 => 6 / 3 => 2 + 1 = 3).

I use a single perception test to spot the items (with standard visibility modifiers and whatnot -- never forgetting to add the +3 bonus if they're actively looking) and then just compare the hits rolled against each item's individual "concealability threshold". If you get enough hits to make the threshold, you become aware of the item's presence. Get enough hits over the threshold and you can actually tell what the item is, etc.

I can't say I really love the system (it lacks the granularity I prefer) but it's better than any of the alternatives I could come up with and it sure beats multiple rolls. Generally-speaking I just have the players add up the threshold themselves the first time detecting an item comes up and then get them to keep track of it. Short of removing clothing or whatever, it generally stays the same.

As for mapping the old game system concealability values to the new system, well... I just don't bother. When all is done and said, they didn't work in all situations either. I used to hate players using the Remington Roomsweeper (base concealability 8/6, depending on SR2/SR3) in a concealable holster (+2), under a lined coat (+2/+50%). =)

Um... you said threshold 4 and your math says 3?

Otherwise, you big up another really good point. I never realized just how cumbersome the new Concealability rules are...

This is what happens when you spend the entire day coding and come home, jump on the net, and just let your fingers type without thinking it through. Yes. I meant 3. =)

... and a double-post. It's just not my day.

You know, I was thinking about it last night while I was waiting for sleep to finally overcome me, and it occured to me, that the true break-point in concealability (old school) was a modified 8. If you could get the effective concealability up over 8, then you were starting to make progress. Keep in mind that if your dice "explode" on a 6, then statistically there is NO difference between a 6 and a 7 because you can't roll less than 1 on the second roll. BUT, at 8, only dice that first rolled a 6 had even a chance of letting you get that 2 for the awareness, whereas every die was a potential hit at 6 and below.

Now, most of the weapons were conceal 5+. The bigger pistols were kind of hard to hide without genuine help. But anything 6+ with a concealed holster went right to 8+. With a Longcoat of Concealing, even a Conceal 5 Manhunter went to 7, so in a concealed holster, you're at 9.

So, essentially, anything with an old Conceal 6 or better natively should be relatively easy to hide from untrained eyes. Untrained eyes get 3+0-1 (3 INTuition, 0 Skill, -1 Defaulting) = 2 dice. So what was 6 is now -2. Roughly on the light pistol point. But if you could get the old Conceal over 13 (again, that same statistical break point) you've got a VERY hard to find weapon. To get to 13, a longocat with concealed holster added to base Conceal 7 would get you that magic 13. So weapons 7 or better are the next step. I agree with the existing +6 DP mod for an assault rifle - "You're concealing a what? WHERE?!"

Anybody else following the logic that sort of dripped out of my ears and where I'm going? Or did I lose everybody?

Here is what I put together for my campaign

Cavalier Safeguard -4
Defiance EX Shocker -4
Defiance Protector -4
Jupiter Taser Club 0
Yamaha Pulsar -4
Ares Streetline Special -4
Cavalier Scout -5
Fichetti Tiffani Needler -4
Fichetti Tiffani Self-Defender -4
Morrisey Elan -4
Raecor Sting -5
Walther Palm Pistol -4
Ares Light Fire 70 -3
Ceska vz /120 -2
Colt America L36 -2
Fichetti Security 600 -2
Hammerli 620S -2
Seco LD-120 -2
Shiawese Armaments Puzzler -2
Walther PB-120 -3
Walther Secura Kompakt -3
Yamaha Sabura Fubuki -2
Ares Predator -1
Ares Predator 2 -1
Ares Viper Slivergun -2
Beretta 101T -2
Beretta 200ST -1
Browning Max-Power -1
Fichetti Security 500 -2
Fichetti Securty 500A -1
Morrisey Elite -2
Nitama NeMax -2
Ruger Thunderbolt -1
Ares Predator 3 0
Ares Predator IV 0
Ares WW Infiltrator 0
Browning Ultra-Power -2
Colt Government 2066 0
Colt Manhunter 0
Eichito Hatamoto II 0
HK Urban Fighter 0
Morrisey Alta -1
Savalette Guardian +1
Soviet PSK-3 Collapsible Heavy Pistol 0
Walther Secura -1
Cavalier Deputy 0
Colt Asp -1
Ruger Super Warhawk +1
Taurus Multi-6 0
Taurus Multi-6 0
Ares Crusader 0
Ceska Black Scorpion 0
Fichetti Executive Action -1
FN 5-7C -2
Glock Model 18C -1
Soviet PPSK-4 Collapsible Machine Pistol 0
Steyr TMP 0
Ares Executive Protector 0
Beretta Model 70 +3
Colt Cobra TZ-110 +3
Colt Cobra TZ-115 +3
Colt Cobra TZ-118 +3
FN P93 Praetor +4
FN Uzi IV +3
HK 227X +4
HK MP-5 TX +3
HK UMP45X +4
HK Urban Combat +3
Ingram Smartgun X +3
Ingram SuperMach 100 +3
Ingram Warrior-10 +3
Sandler TMP +3
SCK Model 100 +4
Colt M24A3 +4
HK G12A3z +5
Soviet AK-97C +5
Ares Alpha +6
Ares High Velocity Weapon +6
Colt M23 +6
Colt M23A3 +7
FN HAR +6
HK GM38 +5
HK GM38 +6
HK GM38 +8
HK XM30 +5
HK XM30 +7
HK XM30 +7
HK XM30 +8
HK XM30 +7
Nitama Optimum II +6
Nitama Optimum II +6
Sernopal vz/88V +6
Soviet AK-97 +6
Soviet AK-98 7
Steyr AUG-CSL +4
Steyr AUG-CSL +5
Steyr AUG-CSL +6
Steyr AUG-CSL +7
Mannlicher Wildhunter +7
PJSS Elephant Rifle +8
Remington 750 +6
Remington 950 +7
Ruger 100 +6
Steyr Scout +5
Ares Desert Strike +7
Barrett Model 121 +10
HK PSG Enforcer +10
Ranger Arms SM-4 +9
Walther MA-2100 +8
Ares Auto-Assault 16 +5
Boyds & Richards Desperado +5
Defiance T-250 +4
Enfield AS-7 +5
Franchi SPAS-22 +5
Mossberg AM-CMDT +6
Mossberg Super Shorty Assault Shotgun +3
N/A Street Sweeper +3
PJSS Model 55 Shotgun +6
Remington 890 +5
Remington 990 +6
Remington Roomsweeper +2
Ares MP-LMG +8
GE Vindicator Minigun +8
Ingram White Knight +8
Shiawese Armaments Nemesis LMG +8
Ares Stoner M202 +9
FN MAG-5 +9
Ultimax MMG +10
Ares Stoner M107 +11
Ruhtmetall SF20 +10
Soviet RPK HMG +11
Ultimax HMG-2 +11

Why do people say machine pistols are so much bigger than normal pistols? Some are, sure, but I know Glock has a few that are the size of light pistols.

That's what I personally hate about SR4's concealability rules. They're based on weapon class rather than the weapon itself. It's one of the few stats that should be individualized rather than generalized unlike, say, Damage Codes.

Using the existing rules, Kerenshara rolls better than 14 dice to conceal an object. Armor accessory conceal holster is -3 to the observer, Light Pistol is -2, Modification to Dual Clip is +2, no modifier for the silencer. So even patting me down, the goon's having to beat a threshold of about 5 with zeroed mods. Most NPCs aren't toting those kinds of dice pools for tactile, and with a quick visual scan (no reason to examine me in detail out of a crowd of twenty others in passing, right?) they're down -6 dice to their pool trying to hit those 5 successes... and she doesn't even wear a Longcoat of Concealment.

Now, I'm joyfully taking advantage of the rules as they stand (to the complete vexation of my GM) because we haven't managed to blage something together yet. When you can get a guard's DP down to fewer total dice than they need hits passing a mad-immune, RF-shielded, hermetically sealed ammo hold-out-pistol through a physical pat-down at the club or meet with Johnson, well, now it's getting a little silly.

And for those who are wondering, that's Palming (Legerdemain) 4, not wicky super Skill Adept stuff.

That's why I am looking so closely at Concealability. I'd like to be able to conceal weapons about myself, but as is, the guard's haven't got a chance.

(As an aside: If you're wearing a miniskirt (or a kilt for the gentlemen), and they're doing pat-downs in public, are they actually sticking their hands up between your thighs? I know it's the dark future, but I can't see the nicer clubs going for that.)

best would be to increase or decrease a bonus depending on how you conseal it, under a coat any light, heavy and machine pistol for example would work as the should, while shoving it down your pants should give a redused consealment for a Hammerli 620S but not for a Fichetti Security 600

Look in Arsenal at the FN 5-7C. It took me forever to figure out what the drek THAT was. It's an autofire version of the FN Five-seveN pistol (Medium Pistol by the rules I'm playing around with), and it's more compact than almost anything I've seen lately AND very rounded in contour, making it very easy to conceal generally (the real weapon I mean). And in the older editions, they were the size of regular pistols, if on the heftier side of the scale.

Great! Except a lot of those numbers don't coincide with the older stats that were canon (where my problem is coming in). How did you come by it?

I always thought the Concealability attribute of firearms under SR2 and 3 was pretty silly... it's an overly complex mechanic for the fairly everyday action of wearing a concealed firearm. Personally, unless my characters are going through a pat-down, I ignore all of it completely. If I judge they need to be armed for the next scene, they're armed. If they shouldn't be, they get spotted. If it's a toss up I might make some rolls, but if they've got a pistol and they're wearing a coat over it I'll probably say automatic success. SMG or bigger is probably auto-fail unless they're wearing a long coat. I just fudge it. Calculating the how concealable each illicit item my characters are wearing is seems like game time that could be better spent moving the story along, to be honest.

As you need only 1 success to spot it, using the 4:1 auto rule for NPC's is a good way to do a mass check.

Example-Joe sec guard with 2 in perception and 3 intuition = 5 dice (1 success).
KT Runner has palming 0 and agiility of 5 = 4 dice (1 success)

Throw in mods the +2 for a Machine pistol doesnt add up to much. The -2 dice for a concealable holster, similarly does little depending on the characters involved.
A +6 for the assault rifle, however means that Joe sec guard will notice (even with a concealble holster ).

Raizer, the world needs more people like you. Especially because you had the good sense to leave off any and all assault cannons.

EDIT: Kerenshara, how do you get a RF-shielded gun? And does that protect it against millimeter-wave detection systems? Because my biggest beef with the concealment system is that a rating 4 cyberware scanner finds every damn weapon on you, every damn time, and I can't figure out how to beat it without resorting to deltaware cyberimplant weaponry.

Well, I mostly extrapolated based on SR4 modifiers and compared it to the scale of SR2 & 3 modifiers. There was of course some guesswork in there based on descriptions, pictures, etc.

I really don't think that it should be any surprise that a heavy pistol in a concealed holster under a long coat is pretty concealed. And if you want to get really technical, having a high body (read: a really big, bulky character) should provide a bonus too. It's a lot easier to conceal a pistol on a 250 lb guy than it is on a 150 lb guy. But I think the thing you're missing with this talk of concealed holsters and long coats is that, if you walk into a place and look like a guy who's gonna cause trouble, they're gonna make you take the coat off, or give you a more thorough check, or any of the above. And then you've got chemsniffers and MAD scanners.

There's commentary about it in Runner's Companion, and I need to dig up the cite but I don't have the time right now. Basic rules were in Arsenal though under vehicle mods where it discusses smuggling compartments. In RC, they mention putting the same feature into bags and coats. It makes it impossible to quick-draw, but means you can sneak it into a building if it's small (pistol size and smaller in a coat, SMG in a bag unless you break down the AR). Now, that does nothing for X-Ray or the related technologies. And a gun still looks a lot like a gun in a bag under X-Ray.

Oh, no argument. I was just trying to come up with a basis to loosely convert the old thresholds into modern DP adjustments.

"Sir, would you please place any metalic items you might be carrying, keeys, loose change into the basket and step foward and open your coat... Holy shit!"