The stars finally aligned correctly and my local gaming group and I sat down over this past weekend and finally got started on giving SR4 a try. Overall it went as smoothly as I would expect for re-introducing a group of players that used to play SR2&3 but which had not played SR for something like 5 or 6 years. We did Food Fight 4.0 (from the SR4 quick start rules) which resulted in the usual jokes and rolled eyes over the content of the store aisles and got them role-playing some before the fight happened. Between them the players got to summon a spirit, cast a spell and engage in both melee and ranged combat as they obliterated the attacking NPCs so it worked well as far as giving them a chance to see some of the core systems.

The question I've got is whether I handled the mechanics correctly on one part of the fight. Basically, one of the characters is a bit wild and clueless which resulted in the character attempting to finish the fight by using a thrown shuriken to disable a fleeing pick-up truck. I'll describe the numbers and how I handled it here...

Attacking Character: Ork with Agility 4, Strength 4, Edge 5, Throwing Weapons 2 using a Shuriken ((str/2)P Dmg, 0 AP) at Short Range

Defending Character/Vehicle: Human with Reaction 5 and no Pilot Ground Vehicle skill driving a Toyota Gopher Pickup (Handling 0, Pilot 1, Body 14, Armor 8 )

Attacker declared a +4DV Called Shot and that they were using Edge prior to the roll.
Roll came to Agility (4) + Thrown (2) + Edge (5) - Range(1) - Called Shot Diff (4) = 6 Dice which produced 5 successes with 3 sixes which each produced an additional success due to using Edge for a total of 8 successes on the roll. (Yes, the player rolled incredibly well...)

I ruled that the defending vehicle did not roll to oppose the attack since the driver did not consider the shuriken throwing ork a threat. If I had rolled to defend it would have been either Reaction (5) + Handling (0) - Unskilled Penalty(1) for 4 dice OR pilot (1) + Handling (0) for 1 die if the autopilot was controlling the vehicle. Neither of which would likely have made a huge difference.

The attack hit with 8 - 0 = 8 net successes. The attacks modified DV = shuriken base (2P) + 8 (net successes) + 4 (called shot) = 14P

The vehicle's modified armor = 8 - AP (0) = 8

Modified damage (14) is greater than modified armor (8 ) so the attack is not downgraded to Stun (which would have resulted in zero damage since this it is being applied to a vehicle).

Vehicle resists damage with Body (14) + Modified Armor (8 ) = 22 Dice and got 6 successes which is a little below average but about the same as buying successes (which is recommended by the rules) would have gotten. SO... 14P - Damage Resistance (6) = 8P damage inflicted to the pickup truck by the shuriken to some sort of sensitive spot. That filled 8 of the truck's 14 condition track boxes and gave it -2 wound modifier.

(That modifier was conveniently enough to to cause the driver to fail a vehicle test a moment later resulting in a crash that allowed the PCs to capture the driver).

Does it look like I applied all the rules correctly and this is just a case of high edge combined with a very good roll resulting in the unusual or did I miss something?

Looks to me like you did it correctly.

I have one tiny thing to point out. When I play (and there is some ambiguity in the RAW on this), Called Shots for extra damage do not add to the Base DV of the weapon when comparing for armor penetration. In your case that would mean comparing the Base DV of the Shurken (2P) + net hits ( = 10 DV for the purpose of comparing to Vehicle Armor (. Since the attack beat the armor without the extra DV it wouldn't have made a difference.

My rationale for not adding the bonus DV for the purposes of penetrating armor is this. If the Called Shot involves targeting a "vulnerable area" in order to extra damage, it is the "vulnerable areas" of any particular thing that are most likely to be covered with armor, so it doesn't make sense to me why an attack should be better at penetrating armor by targeting an area that is (probably most heavily) armored. I understand that it will do more damage if it does penetrate, but penetrating better? That doesn't make sense to me.

In the end, in your case it didn't make a difference to the situation, but that might be something you want to think about if you run further sessions.

I disagree, mostly because I believe we're using different definitions of vulnerable. I look at vulnerable as locations where armor is either non-existent or in lesser degrees. Using medieval armor as an example, this would include the joints, especially right where the arm connects to the torso. Generally the armor coverage is lessened in order to allow more movement with the arm. This has always been the case with armor, any point which needs to be mobile traditionally has significantly less armor than any immobile area.

Though on a closer reading, I realize you're talking about the vital areas, which is typically the head and torso, instead of vulnerable areas which would be unarmored or less armored areas. In which case I completely agree with your assessment. I liken called shots for more damage to the additional damage of burst fire. I see nothing which would indicate that targeting a person's heart through body armor would give any increased chance to pierce the armor.

Thanks for the feedback guys. I just wanted to be sure I had not missed anything when the ork did that much damage to a car using a shuriken.

I'll definitely give some thought to how we'll handle the called shot bonus with regards to armor penetration.

A "Power Attack" Called Shot (take a penalty to increase raw damage) is different than a Called Shot to negate armor. I think you might be confusing the two. If you are not, I have no idea what you're talking about.

Correct. Since there is already a clearly defined mechanic for doing a Called Shot to bypass armor (find a "weak spot") I had always interpreted the "Called Shot For Extra Damage" as targeting a "vital" area.


Indeed they are different. That is why in my games I apply the extra "power attack" damage after comparing for AP, just as a burst fire attack. The attacker is either: a) trying to bypass the armor; or b) trying to hit a vital spot - which is probably the most armored. The idea of bypassing "some" of the armor (up to 4 points worth), which is what is happens when you add that damage for the purposes of penetrating armor, doesn't sit well with me

Not really, no. Run it how you want, but it is not RAW.

Anything that increases or decreases the Damage Value before Resistance Tests affects the Modified DV, which is then used to compare to Armor Value to determine Stun or Physical. The single exception to this is Burst Fire / Full Auto, because it is specifically listed as applying after the armor comparison.

I always saw the "Power Attack" Called Shot as, well, Power Attack. You focus so much on the raw damage of the attack that you let your training/accuracy slip a little.

The only thing I see wrong is that the vehicle has 14 boxes of damage. 1/2 body plus 8 would have given the vehicle 15 boxes on the condition track.

Yes, that would be the only RAW interpretation, however I think this may have been an oversight on the developer's part. The text of called shot for damage is talking about targeting a vital area. A vital area would include the head, most of the center of mass (where all the organs are) and with some precise aiming major arteries in the limbs. Damaging these areas would cause more damage to the individual as bodily functions become impaired. That is likely the basis for the increased damage. Here is the situation, you are wearing a kelvar vest, and you are shot with a bullet that would hit your left lung versus a bullet hitting you to the side of your stomach missing all organs and arteries. Normally this bullet would not penetrate the armor in the case of the side shot, but with the +4 DV for targeting the lung the bullet would penetrate the kevlar vest. There's no difference between the shot and the vest from the lung shot and the side shot. So what justification is there for the lung shot to suddenly deal lethal damage (which would mean the lung got pierced) to stun damage?

I've been over this before with someone else, but I guess I'll go over it again.


This quote specifically mentions "base Damage Value" and does not mention anything like "plus other damage modifiers" or some such.


This quote mentions that the "DV of [the] attack" is increased. Is that the "base Damage Value?" I'm not sure.

I know where you're coming from. It's this line from the rules for Narrow Bursts:

So, since this place specifically exempts the extra damage from a Narrow Burst, then all other damages must add to the "base Damage Value" for determining AP unless specifically exempted (like a Narrow Burst), right? Well, here's the kicker:

Note that Narrow Long Bursts and Narrow Full Bursts do not specifically exempt the damage bonus. Did the designers intend all bursts to function as a Narrow Short Burst? Probably. But you have to be careful when going to the "all except where noted" logic.

I've always based it on the total damage of the attack vs the Armor rating for stun vs physical damage. Otherwise you have to do an extra math to figure out the damage type. I also fail to see the logic in it as with more bullets hitting the target the more damage you do to the armor (Ceramic plates shatter/crack) and the more likely you are to hit a joint area that has little protection. You could also argue that it was a Developer oversight, in that short bursts should not have been worded that way.

IMHO: At that point I'd sooner do a wide burst over the extra +2 damage.

You are reading it wrong... your quote contains the rules for Narrow Bursts (They add damage)... so for ANY NARROW BURST, regardless of whether it is a long Busrt or a short burst, you do not add the damage for comparison values against the armor... THEY ARE STILL NARROW BURSTS afterall... teh text that you quoted for Narrow Long Bursts and Short Bursts do not need any other qualifier, as the qualifier is in the text for NARROW BURSTS itself...

Keep the Faith

You could be aiming for the left lung and actually hit between the ballistic plates at the side of the body... not all body armors wrap the target you know, your +4 Damage (for -4 Dice) would simulate something like that, as they are still getting the benefit of the armor, they are just having to deal with more actual damage potential...

Keep the Faith

In which case you would be gaining the called shot to an unarmored portion of the body, not a called shot for increased damage. It is essentially armor penetration, and there's no reason that just aiming at a vital area would give a bullet any more ability to penetrate the armor. The only possible way this could work is that aiming for a vital area increases the concussive force of the bullet to the point of causing lethal damage.

The effect of called shots is dependent on the player's and GM's mutual agreement for the effect. They can either do +1 to +4DV, bypass armor or other special effects. I would have gone for other special effects such as clipping off a radio antenna, piercing a tire to slow the vehicle down or depending on the angle a hit to the radiator to cause the engine to overheat. I wouldn't allow extra damage with a shuriken or bypassing armor against a vehicle, but that is a GM decision.

I see it as finding a weak spot in teh Armor... you are not bypassing the armor (They still get to resist the damage with the armor worn after all)

Bypassing Armor is in fact different, they get NO benefit for the Armor AT ALL... Minor point, but significant...

But then, some people just do not like the ability to gain more damage by reducing dice, and that is okay... I like it, on ocassion...

Keep the Faith