Trying to get my head around burst fire/auto fire and multiple attacks.

Now under burst fire its states that burst fire weapons can be used to make multiples attacks with the same burst using the multiple attacks free action.

So first question is do the targets still get the -2 to dodge and how many extra targets can be attacked with this 3 rnd burst? Seems that you could split your skill evenly into 4 and shoot 4 targets with 3 bullets

It gets even more funky if you follow the rules for the multiple attacks free action on pg 196 which states that you can only get multiple attacks if using multiple firearms thus contradicting the burst fire rules
These issues also crop up for the SA-Burst, Long Burst, and Full Auto.

Worded a bit clumsily, but what you really get is Johnson saying, "There's a bonus in it for you if you do it quickly/quietly" or adding, "Since I need this done in the next 24 hours, I'm adding a bit extra as incentive."

(Also, the money listed is per runner, not per group. GM's should keep an eye out for runners who try to pad the team with SINless guys.)

So, a standard run, where the opposition involves a spirit on guard, a dozen-ish guards (who you should sneak past!), and a bodyguard with 12 dice in Pistols (Agility 4 bumped to 6 with cyber, Pistols 6, running his smartlink 'cold' to keep from being hacked when the client's in need), would llok like this:

Base for Strongest foe's dicepool (12)/4 = 3
Outnumbered 3:1 = +1
Total Pay per 'runner = 3000 * (3+1) = 12,000

The opposed Negotiation roll adjusting the pay by 400 per hit the Face or Johnson beats the other by. (100 * 4)

There's then a 3000 (ish) bonus per head if they can pull it off quietly.

So, if someone says "Standard rates", that's pretty well what they're talking about. From there, you can toss other modifiers, for "I need it tomorrow" (+1) or "It'll be in public, so there's a good chance you'll be seen." (+1) and so on. I wouldn't be suprised to see a "Different types of jobs" list with modifiers down the road, like Wetwork getting a +2, "Wreck the places and let the owners know they need to pay for protection" a -2, and so on.

At any rate, this is the formula that'll be used in all 5th ed Missions, as well as published 'adventures' and so on. We're well aware that some of the "I don't get out of bed for less than six figures" guys will toss the rule and move on, but we went four editions without giving GMs any guideline at all, which caused no end of flamey arguements in the boards. Now, you have an official number ... which will cause flamey arguements. But at least there's a standard! (And, yeah, there was a good level of talk over this level. Some wanted more, some wanted less, some wanted a group rate, some wanted per head.)

Now, you have a risk-reward gamble. Take easy missions that pay less or take more dangerous ones that have a better payout but could snuff you. Everything's Got a Price, chummer.

I hope you go back to more early SR model where it is a TN(dice pool penalty). It really overly penalizes the adepts in SR4. And hoenstly having to change your character sheet to handle droped atributes, initiative etc is just a pain in the ass and not very fun.

But easily handled when you know it is a thing. Coming from a table that uses Background Count often (Thank you very much TeOdio), I rarely even notice the "difficulties" of adjustment when it occurs. Of course, the Increased Drain, I notice.

And yes, BGC does suck, but fortunately, it is easy to plan for, you just have to take it into account when you build the character. Which should be second nature, since BGC is such a Thing in-Universe.

I have some dumb questions too:
- Anyone found prices for Autosofts already?
- Anyone found rules for running your own host?

Right, at which point he says how much he's adding as an incentive.



The problem is by the book these don't get figured until after the run and if you figured out a way to avoid facing that die pool and cleared out some guards (maybe with a fire alarm set off by the hacker, or you staged a distraction for them on the other side of the building) so you weren't outnumbered (or came up with a complex scam that let you waltz in and back out with your objective without being noticed) neither of these apply.





The fact that it's far to low to make Shadowrunning more viable than stealing cars seemed to be less of a problem than the nonsense of figuring how much they get paid after the run is over instead of Mr. J telling them how much he's paying at the meet.

Well, maybe it is just me, but if the J does not tell me what I get at the meet he can stick the run where the Sun doesn't shine...

The way I'm looking at it, one could theoretically look for missions that nail, say, 10k a head(which seem a little less than average), twice a month, for 20k a month. Now, that's enough to actually live high, use 5k for regular expenses(ammo, etc), and have leftover to save. Or live moderately and save even more.

That's assuming two 10k runs per month. Take 3? and you're looking even better. Lower paying runs tend to have probably less legwork and time in between, making 3 per month actually is not that out there. 30k a month, living moderately(5k), upkeep(5k), and you aren't looking terribad. I mean if 12k is standard, 9-10k is probably akin to a...I wouldn't call it a 'milk run' (perhaps that's more in the 5-7k range), but...'Beer Run?'

I guess it depends. Lower paying runs you can likely actually pull in more of(I'm sure corps are ALWAYS looking for little bits and pieces of sabotage here and there that is minor, but they add up), then you have the 'standard' 12-15k range or so which you can probably fit a couple in, and of course from there they can go up, up, and up. A massive, enormous undertaking may have you living large and getting ware upgraded but the risk attached might be rather enormous. (Of course, stuff can go wrong on milk and beer runs as well, of course. My stuff up there were in better case scenarios.)

If there is one thing, however, I always did as a GM-if wetwork is involved, the price tag tends to be pretty high. I've had runners turn those down though. Plenty of times. (To be honest...perhaps it's the people I play with, but wetwork jobs are never easily taken. There is usually a damn good reason if they do take them.)

Certainly looks that way. I went a-readin' looking for something similar to the Cyber/Bioware boosts, and didn't find it except under Improved Physical Attribute (which is +4). I think I'll be making an Adept soon.

Don't forget that parts are cred.

Recycling cyberware and decks just got a whole lot more rewarding.

huh. new favourite screwy rule: only the highest environmental modifier applies to ranged attacks (unless the two highest are equal, in which case it gets one category worse). range is an environmental modifier.

therefore, shooting someone with poor visibility is no more difficult than shooting someone in perfect visibility, when you're shooting from far enough away (unless you're using a scope, in which case suddenly it gets more difficult).

not sure how long it will last as my new favourite screwy rule... it's mostly my favourite because it's the latest one i've found.

I just find it funny when a Johnson ask a samurai, rigger, or decker to risk 200K worth of gear for chump cred (let alone the runner's life).
If you have a 5% chance of losing said gear, then you need 10K per run over and above your base fee just to break even.
Let alone cover repair of damages and replacement of expendables.

And the bribes, and the medical care if you wind up injured on a run and want to be healthy enough for the next one.

Here's a stupid question, mostly just bookkeeping - what sort of Fake License would you need for a katana?

Sword License? Blade License? Melee Weapon License? Self Defense License? If you wear it concealed (tricky, I know) do you need a separate concealed weapon license? If it's an authentic pre-modern blade does that require an Antiques License?

~Umi

If it makes people drunk when you hit them with it, do you need an alcohol distribution license?

My read has always been that maintaining the SIN is part of the negative end of it.