Hey I want to continue the off topic discussion in "best shadowrun work" thread here.

First of all I must admit I made my own house rules for ammo inspired by.. Synner was it?

Anyway here is how I do it, I'd like other opinions (and the errata itself, can't really remember it).

Flechette: Old stats: +2 DV, +2 AP. Although not quite as powerful as EX-EX, this ammo is easily available and legal with license.
My stats: +2 DV, +5 AP (but max AP=armor. Leather jacket vs flechette or buckshot=fail). I believe the errata was very similar.

EX-EX: Old stats: +2 DV -2 AP. As listed, probably the best ammo there is as it can do good damage AND penetrate armor with ease.
My stats: +2 DV +1 AP. Slightly nerfed, making it worse than APDS at armor penetration but better at pure damage.

EX: As above, except DV=+1.

S&S: Old stats DV= 6S, regardless,AP= -half Armor.
My stats: DV=4S and all Tasers have -2 DV to compensate.

These are what I can think of ATM.

errata found at shadworun4.com

Yeah I don't need the whole errata, I just don't remember the EX-EX rules from it so agh ok here they are.



Surprisingly, EX-EX with +2 Damage +1 AP is actually better than the one in the errata (+1DV -1 AP). I mean, more damaging. The errata version on the other hand is slightly better at piercing armor causing P damage.

Doesn't this just make APDS awesome and other ammo terrible? Let's face it, if you shoot an unarmoured target they become un-alive whatever ammo you pack, so you keep around ammo for shooting at the tough guys. You've just make flecette completely unusable for example - why would anyone ever buy that.

If that is a weird conspiracy to bilk your players for ammo money, I'm not sure the sammies need the punch to the face, but YMMV.

I never understood all the hubabaloo people have about the ammo choices in the game. Just like in real life, some types of ammo are just plain better than others. And when talking about such microscopic price differences (compared to the thousands and tens of thousands of nuyen a runner typically has), why wouldn't the best ammo types be the norm?

The only one I can almost see as being an issue is Stick-n-Shock. And the solution for that one is simple: Just add S(e) to the damage value of the weapon of choice, rather than a set DV, and keep the -half armor penetration value. Smaller guns using smaller types of ammo won't carry as much of a charge. Bigger ones will. Pretty easily solution without having to completely kick all types of taser-like weapons in the nads. And hell, combined with my previous comment, that just makes it even less of an "omg, awesome" ammo type, and instead turns it into a specialty type. Sure, it's a specialty type that trumps gel rounds in a major way, but that, too, fits in to my previous comment.

For stick and shock in my campaign i've found that to balance it out so it didnt become the ammo of choice its now (-2) to the base damage of the weapon and (-half) to Impact Armor. This works out well and still allows the shorter range taser to be effective.

I found a simpler solution: The 6S damage is not effected by the net hits. Problemsolved. The weapon skill test is only to measure, if the player hits the target. If the target is hit, it suffers 6S damage against which it resists normally with half impact armor. It's not that hard to get 6 hits on a resistance test.

I thought the problem with SnS was that each shot counts at full DV by RAW. So with SnS in a burst fire weapon the target resists 6Se damage 3 times from one successfull attack in a narow burst.

Please tell me Im wrong about that. If I'm wrong I might alow SnS in the next game I run.

[edit] another issue with SnS is that I think it breaks physics.
A SnS dart would have to be extremely power dence to produce an effective shock. Which means a high voltage maintained over a significant fraction of a second right? Seems to me this would require at least several highly efficient and powerful capacitors packed into the space not much larger than a normal slug from any particular gun.

So, a SnS dart probably has close to the same dencity and almost the same mass as a normal bullet.

Not only that but the range of the weapon is not any less than the normal range of the weapon fireing SnS so it would still need a fairly high propellant charge.

So, a SnS dart fired from say, a colt manhunter, would probably end up having something close to the kinetic energy of the slug fired by that same gun.

Which means if you get hit by a SnS dart and it penetrates your armor, the DV 6Se is the least of your worries because you now have a SnS dart in your lung.

SnS is a lame idea. The whole concept is flawed and requires too much handwaivium.
for ballance the DV of a SnS burst ought to be the same as for other ammo: +1DV / additional round.

for realism;
Ranges for weapons fireing SnS ammo out to be cut by at least 50% and extreme range eliminated.

I don't care how magical energy dencities of have become by 2070, smaller guns like holdouts, machine pistols, and ARs probably shouldn't be able to fire SnS darts. at least lower the DV to the base of the weapon as suggested above. But, I'd limit the use to heavy pistols and shotguns.
[/edit]

I've seen people say that, but I haven't seen jack squat in the rules that supports it. It's just another type of ammo, albeit with a set damage value rather than one dependent on the gun itself.

That would be correct, if you used my house rule. It is somewhat unclear in the actual RAW (see below)

Fair point. The idea comes from the fact that the damage is applied AFTER the bullet scored a hit. This is reason, logic and partly fluff, so you are correct that technically the RAW treat SnS as just another type of ammo.

It is plausible to assume, however, that (since SnS has its own damage value), SnS hits are dealt with independently of the weapon skill test. Plausible does not mean RAW, though.

What do yopu mean? AP gets worse the more armor the target has? Vs leather jacket +2 vs armored clothing +4 and anything with an armor value of 5 or greater +5? This just sounds weird.

This makes especially dedicated electric weapons less viable. What about melee stun weapons? Are they nerfed as well?

@D2F Why do you propose a counterintuitive rule that makes it impossible to take down Joe Average with a single taser dart and nigh impossible to achieve it in one Action Phase?

Because it is more consistent with reality, logic and physics. Some people like for their rules to make sense, even the abstract ones, relative to their abstraction level. I also said it was a house rule.

Hmm. I'd always thought that all taser weapons (shock glove, S&S, tasers) *already* did their set damage without any increase from net hits. I guess I just subconsciously house-ruled that. It seemed eminently intuitive to me.

OneTrikPony, did you see the recent web buzz about the Taser shotgun shells (http://www.taser.com/products/law/Pages/TASERXREP.aspx)? I feel like technology should be better in 2070.

Ya I've seen that. It kinda proves someof my points.
that projectile is 18 grams. (~270 grains. my 40cal fires 160-180 grain slugs, typical 5.56 is 60-65 grains, 22lr is 36 grains)
it has it's own battery and generates NMI for 20 seconds.
it has a maximum effective range of 100 yards.

Obviously you can make a taser slug for a shot gun.

But can you put enough capacitors in a slug the size of a 40cal to produce NMI for an effective period of time with a mass that will not penetrate the target and a propellent charge that yields similar ranges to a normal slug? Probably not. In a 5.56 or smaller I have to say definitly no.

It would be more realistic to just make magical stunbal bullets.

I reiterate; guns that fire slugs smaller than a heavy pistol probably shouldn't be able to use taser rouns.

Considering that you can have microdrones and powerful sensors built into things the size of a pinhead, all independently powered... and don't forget nanites, too... well, yeah, I don't see why you'd have any trouble making S&S rounds. In all honesty they should probably be significantly more powerful if they wanted to be realistic to the setting.

Keep in mind that the law of conservation of energy still applies in shadowrun, despite magic =) Espcially for non-magical processes.

but there really arent any powerfull sensors in a "pin head" in SR as far as I know. There are no rules for the fuel capacity and operational duration for microdrones either. (I genrally rule that ambulation or flight times for a body 0 drone is measured in minutes.)

as I recall the smallest sensor capacity is about the size of a coin which will hold one sensor and ignores it's power supply.

someone who graduated highschool could probably figure out the theoretical maximum wattage a volume and mass equivelant to a 180 grain slug could hold assumeing nano-capacitors and room temparature super conductive materials. I might be surprized but I don't think so.

[edit] Dr. Funk; a mutual freind told me you might like to play Eclipse Phase PBP. Is that so?[/edit]

Not really.

allready been mentioned and analyzed.
but thanks it's cooler in motion.

I agree that the whole Stun damage bit is not very realistic but tasers should be able to take down most people. Maybe we could do away with the stun damage altogether but make the incapacitation roll more difficult to resist. Something like the (6+net hits)S(e) are soaked as per RAW but remaining damage is not applied to the condition monitor but instead increases the threshold for the WIL+CHA(3) test. If this is too hard make the "damage" the threshold. Incapacitation lasts for 30 seconds. Better get to the target quickly.

K. doing some envelope calculations. I'm not really qualified so I'll show my work and someone will need to check my numbers.

I read somewhere that the thoretical limit (the most that physics of this univers can accomplish) of energy dencity for nano-capacitors or superconductive loops is 25 kilojouls per kilogram. I'm trying to find the source I can't remember if it was on the internet or in one of the dead trees stacked around my house.

so: Energy 25j/gram

.40cal slug (fmj) = 180 grains.

so: weight 12 grams

Thoretical energy maximum of superconductive loops or nano-capacitor taser dart in .40cal = 300 joules

Typical police stun dart produces 50,000 volts at .02 amps for 10-20 seconds. (lets put this in SR terms and say it's effective in 3 seconds--1 round)

So: NMI requires 3000 watts

Well obviously there's something wrong here because I just calculated that the shotgun dart is physicly imposible.

Would someone who is smart please help?

[edit] OK my source for thoretical energy density seems to have been Orion's Arm wich is interesting but pretty much useless. There's another reference to capacitors here and I'm still trying to make sence of it. [/edit]

.40 cal bullet != 12 gauge shotgun shell.

In fact, a 12 gauge shell is .729 cal (not to mention longer--caliber is only a measure of bore diameter).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/12_gauge#Conversion_guide

37.80g of material gives us 945 joules. Also, watts are "joules per second," so not even the same unit. At 3,000 watts the shock need only last 0.315 seconds.

Correct. But it doesn't matter which you use even an atmospheric sensor can be put in that coin. Only the directional microphone does not fit.
Not quite a rule but a guideline at least:

Obviously I havn't been clear in my point of contention. I've said (twice I think) that I doubt you'd be able to put an effective taser dart in a package smaller than a heavy pistol slug.

I'm useing my own pistol as an example of the bottom of the range of heavy pistols .40cal. and trying to analyze what kind of energy dencity you could fit in that space and or weight.

Additionally I contend that if you managed to put an effective taser dart in a package that small it wouldn't matter because you'd still be fireing a progectile of around 100 grains at a velocity of around 900 Fps. So if you're shooting them with something the mass and velocity of a bullet what's the point of calling it a taser round??? how is that "less than lethal"? Do you apply the 6Stun damage before or after you apply the 4physical damage to the face?

If the argument that light pistols can shoot taser darts because the tech makes the rounds really light I'd counter that I don't think you can put that much energy storage in a round that light and I'm working on an analysis of that.

If the argument is that taser rounds are slow and use a very light propellant charge I'd argue that the ranges should be very very short.

I'm just a bit anoyed that SnS is the "magic bullet" it seems it should have some serious physical limitations that are not coverd in the rules.

Oh, I agree with that point.

Also, if you put stabilizing fins on it (like the shotgun round) then it wouldn't be moving at 900 fps.

Heck a 3" long 1/4" wide streamer would slow it down significantly.

An idea I had for SnS that went like this: change their damage to 4P AP 0, and if the shot does at least 1 point of damage, the target takes 6S(e) (net hits add nothing, still -half Impact). It would work kind of like a toxin with an injection vector.

I'd suggest 1 point of physical. If only stun, I'd give them a bonus on the secondary damage (odds are the prongs wouldn't have penetrated).

Good point.

Or perhaps if the initial shot does Physical then no armor dice get to be rolled to resist the Electricity damage, if its only stun then the target gets Armor dice.

another thought (just so I don't have to go back and keep re-editing posts)

If the SnS projectile is accelerated from a normal firearm the propellant charge and slug weight would have to be at least enough to work the action of the firearm.

The fact is that there are myriad problems making SnS work with SR technology the way RAW says they do. All of the problems make it feel like metagaming and magic. No character or npc of mine will ever use them.

And I have zero problem assuming that they slow down in flight, and that the technology of 2070 can handle it. Every character or NPC of mine will use them.

Shotgun only. Problem solved.

Capacitance = Permittivity of material between plates * Surface Area of one of the plates / Separation of the plates

You don't need (or benefit from) superconductors; you just need to get the surface area really high, and the separation distance really low. Happily, those two work together; smaller separation lets you pack more surface area into a given volume. Nanotech would make it possible to push both of those to nearly atomic scales, cheaply. The main remaining technical problem becomes, how much voltage can you pump in before you overcome the resistance between the plates (which decreases as the space between them goes down) and short the thing out? That's the main bug in current day nano-scale capacitors; if you have one spot where the separation is abnormally low, its a focus for a short. If you can nail that problem, power density goes through the roof.

All in all, my gut tells me energy density of capacitors wouldn't be a problem. In fact, super-density capacitors would explain why its safe to ignore the issue of power consumption for most (non drone) portable electronics in SR.

EDIT- BTW, a bit of research shows that current day "ultracapcitors" can have energy densities approaching 10 Wh/kg, and can fully discharge in under 1 sec. Seems up to the task to me, IF you could make a taser dart that small.

I think this is the best solution. I'd also rule it as a slow moving projectile so a Phys add could potentially catch it.

Yes. The more armor, the less likely the flechette ammo is to penetrate. The reason is that although they have less penetrating power than even normal rounds, they can still deal with low-armor targets (and is great against unarmored ones.) Thus, against leather jacket they have AP +2, giving the leather 4 dice to soak (in addition to body) instead of 7 dice (almost as good as regular ammo on armor jacket). Note that one is a fashion statement and the other is an armor designed to protect you against bullets.

However I'm considering using the pre-errata rules for Flechette again, and retain the errata ones (or my option which is almost identical) only for buckshot (which can only be fired from Shotguns and pistol shotguns. Also to compensate I wil l use the same cost for buckshot as for regular ammo (it IS regular ammo for shotguns after all). And Flechette IS just as expensive as EX-EX ammo after all, which makes it one of the more expensive ammo in the game. Does that sound like gangers would use on a regular basis?

Dedicated electrix weapons are still very good. Tasers have damage 6 (as good as Assault rifles) or 4 (as good as light pistols and S&S), which means they are pretty much as effective in damage as bullets and with alot better armor penetration. In my book, Stun damage is just as effective as Physical, actually it's better since you get the chance to take people alive and reduce collateral damage. The only real drawback is against vehicles and drones which are immune to Stun damage. Stun batons already are underpowered, so they keep their damage. After all why should a Taser that fires a darth with a capacitor do more damage than a full size baton? Melee is nerfed enough as it is.

Also what most people forget is the secondary effect of electrical damage, which quite often causes the target to be incapacitated on the floor or at the very least cause the -2 penalty! This is something my players have used to great effect and is IMO the primary effect of tasers and S&S.

The main effect here is that IMHO nonlethal attacks should almost always be less effective than normal lethal ones. If people could just as easily win wars without killing anyone that would have been preferred, but the truth is that the evolution of weapons often has lead to more lethal ones rather than less lethal ones, as the goal is to incapacitate the enemy as quickly as possible.

Also, another question to everyone: Do you guys find it strange that the errata lists shotgun(f) and Slivergun (f) as +5 AP? Shouldn't it be +4 AP for the shotgun since base AP of shotguns is -1 AP? Or does the +5 from flechette supersede base weapon AP?

Did you drop the +2DV of RAW flechettes? Even the errataed RAW ones are actually better than normal rounds against armored targets. Tou counter the +2DV statistically you would need 6 soak dice, but flechette only adds 5 and a shot with buckshot or flechettes is resisted with impact armor which is usually lower than ballistic.

It could work. In your houserule net hits add to damage right?
Agreed, but electric stun damage has the possibility to incapacitate a vehicle all the same.
I agree on the opinion about the stun batons, but melee should be less powerful than ranged combat. "Never bring a knife to a gun fight".

The problem is that you can only expect the -2, not the incapacitation. Getting 9 or more dice out of CHA+WIL+half Impact+electrical protection isn't that hard. Since the -2 isn't even cumulative the only sure way to incapacitate someone with SnS or tasers is to fill their condition monitor. With your houserule this is more difficult.

Not really, most effective are weapons that do not kill but incapacitate, wound and maim. As such not only is the enemy deprived of the fighting power of the hit soldier but this wounded soldier also ties up the resources of all sorts of medical personnel.


This has been this way since the first printing (with +2 then). The rules say that ammo statistics are added thus it should be +4, which is what we use in our game

Real life isn't a game. In a game, this is simply bad design

A) Keeping 'bad' options in just means that mechanically uninformed players may make choices that are clearly suboptimal - if you want something to be an option it needs to be useful.

B) It uses pointless amount of text in the book that could have been used for something else (see: Adam complaining about word count restrictions when doing layout)

With this in mind, options that the game provides should all be viable. If an option is not viable, it should be removed entirely to free up space for viable options in another area.



This is built into the game rules, as melee is a complex action, but firing is a simple action - so you get two shots per 1 melee attack. With this in mind, non-concealable Melee weapons need to be significantly more powerful than guns to be useful.

I guess a lot of things in the game must really piss you off, then. Because the game is full of gear that's suboptimal. Just like most any other game I can think of. Example: Why buy a Walther PB-120 when you can get a Fichetti Security 600 instead? It comes with more than twice the ammo capacity and two accessories for practically the same cost. Why buy an Armor Vest when you can get a Lined Coat instead? It has the same exact armor ratings, is more available, and comes with a concealability bonus. Why buy an expensive Fairlight Excalibur commlink with a custom rating 6 System/Firewall OS when you can just blow 1,200 nuyen on a rating 6 Micro-Transceiver which, by the rules, is way more effective (having a rating of 6 across the board)? And hell, why get the Transciever when you can just buy a Certified Credstick (which has a Device Rating of 6, too) to serve the same purpose? etc.

Options are not a bad design decision. Just because the players won't be using the subpar equipment, that doesn't mean NPCs or specialty concepts won't. Or are you really arguing that all ammo should be equivalent to Regular Ammo? Because, in reality, that's exactly what you're arguing. Hell, by your logic, there shouldn't really even be variations on weapons. At best, one weapon per category. Because, inevitably, one of those options is going to be superior to all the others... and we simply can't have that. Particularly with items that have such relatively microscopic and meaningless prices, thus negating any possible advantage a cheaper option (like Regular Ammo) may have.

You know… those are fixed now. Both are periphery nodes. Even the issue of getting the cheapest commlink, then upgrading to 6/6 is fixed.

Just there shouldn't be complete uber-options.
S&S is broken for two things: It overrides weapon damage code, even in smallarms and it changes the damage to elemental damage (arguably the best elemental damage type, because it can incapacitate or hinder enemies even if they don't go down from the damage itself) without any penalty.
Try that with any other kind of elemental damage and you'd be torn apart – no matter if going creative with rating 6 acid capsule rounds or white phospor capsule rounds.

Yes, it is really bad.



I never said that. I said 'bad options are bad design' - that said the problems you point out with device ratings is just 'the hacking rules are shit' which is well established SR fact.



There is lots of room for variation on weapons. One assault rifle can be F and have a smart gun, one can be R and have a red dot sight stock. Those two are in the book, and do offer a useful point of differentiation. You could then easily add a third one can be F, not have a smart gun and offer a collapsible stock giving it a conceal ability option. A forth might have no mod cons, very low availability and low cost. this gives us a weapon model of

A) Baseline, restricted, small bonus accuracy
B) Dangerous, illegal, high bonus accuracy
C) Assassin, illegal, no bonus accuracy, concealable
D) Cheap, legal/restricted, no bonus accuracy, very low price and availability.

That gives you variation between the four - clearly one is better for mages and one is better for street Sammie, and even then the third 'concealable' option might be the go if you need to take your gun through a security checkpoint into a no weapons zone. The restricted version might be more useful in many circumstances to because it offers a 'legal' option that you can explain away if a cop finds it in your car boot. If you quickly need to find an assault rifle after having landed in Europe, your arms dealer can connect you up with the forth. Bam! Differentiated weapons that all have a clear role.

As you point out, stuff that is 'Like A, except worse' is just a waste of space and should be removed because why do we have that, and replaced with differentiated weapons. In pistols, again you could see something similar (a powerful forbidden model, a less powerful restricted model, a cheap as chips model and a concealable assassin model) offering you 4 guns that players might want to use. Which also makes this



Total bullshit. I just dashed out 4 differentiated weapons concepts no problem. None of them is superior to all the others. yes, in a particular role one is better, but in another role, you might prefer another. Of course you could just have 4 guns, but only a weapons specialist is likely to do that, and hey, that's a fine character schtick too.

Ammo just needs strong points of differentiation because it's unlikely to can support multiple weak differentiating points. Given that, there is no reason for lots of types if you cannot support it. An example of ammo model could be: 'easily available, non lethal, AP bonus, damage bonus' where easily available is R and the other two types lethal types are F, offers differentiation and low word count. It's reasonable for a player to want to choose any of the 4 available types.

Yes I keep the +2 DV. However, in my game attacks that fails to penetrate armor are halved (round up) after soak, so +AP is much worse than normal. Also in game +2 DV +5 AP is very bad against spirits and vehicles with hardened armor.



Hmm can't remember that part about vehicles being vulnerable to electric stun. I thought most vehicles were shielded against such? Oh and believe me, melee IS alot worse than ranged, as pointed out. An enemy could theoretically shoot you 8 times before you can get close enough to him.
In fact even with the debuff using stun batons is kinda stupid as you need a simple action to draw it and can't attack until next round, while you can pull up a taser and shoot in the same pass.. in fact since they are essentially pistols you can quickdraw them!



In my game most people being hit with tasers have failed this test. Even an ork! And it's Body+Willpower+half impact (3). Non-conductivity isn't that common in my game, but of course changes things. But normal people and standard security guards will often go down, and even one of the PCs have done so already so it is nothing to scoff off.

Weapons that can maim can also kill. These are not stun weapons you're talking about, but non-expanding bullets and shrapnel/flechettes that main rather than outright kill.


Yes I found it strange it isn't changed in the errata or clarified. Confusing to new players as well.

<shrugs> I don't care much for video game mentalities in my roleplaying games. In the real world, there are clearly superior options when it comes to gear and equipment. Especially with ammunition. I have absolutely no problem with some being far and away better than others. What's more, I've had numerous characters who took regular rounds and gel rounds over EX explosive or Stick-and-Shock rounds simply because they were more appropriate to the concept. (Which, incidentally, were more Average Joe type characters). Despite the price difference being miniscule and the benefits being worse. Not everyone in the game's universe is a top-of-the-line professional criminal who knows the intricacies of every ammo type on the market.

Game balance means something completely different in a roleplaying game than it does in a video game.

Just the margin of that difference is much, much smaller. In fact, it can be small enough to be the same thing when abstracted.

This. I can't tell you, how many times our SR group(s) had IC conversations about a particular weapons manufaturer, whichgun is better, what ammo to buy and what sighting systems. To me, the preseted list needs to provide a realistic abstraction of the currently available and currently developed weapons of our current age, to ease the transition into the SR universe. An HK is better than a Colt. Simple. A Barret hits harder than a PSG. Simple. APDS cuts through armor better than regular ammo. Simple.

It is exactly the mentioned viedo game mentality that keeps ruining not only PnO RPGs, but video games in general. All that "everyone must be equal" bullshit. I have a solution for that: One option. Then everyone is equal. It's no fun, it's bland and it certainly will not carry any long term motivation, but hey: all options are equally powerful and perfectly balanced. Yay?

And in abstract game terms, they are pretty much the same.

And all those real weapons and ammunition operate within a certain frame of reference, differences being quite small.

And while one is a higher quality, higher price item to be slightly better, the other is a step up in size category to be better. Simple.

And in real life, APDS would cause less permanent wound cavity, thus reducing damage. Simple.

Stop lighting the strawman, will you? No-one is talking about "everyone must be equal".

It's about keeping the game within a certain frame of reference, where one easily exchangeable option isn't so ridiculously more effective than every other.
Because that what's S&S is – it's stun-phaser ammunition for regular firearms.

Then there is plain gear creep and dragging along artifacts from previous editions:
In SR3, APDS didn't work against vehicles, so AV was invented… being pretty much the same, just somehow magically more much effective against vehicles.
In SR4, APDS just works fine against vehicles… but to have something nice and new in Arsenal, AV rose from the dead, still being pretty much the same as APDS, just still magically more effective against vehicles… and now barriers, too.
Does that really add anything to the game? Maybe if we added another armor-pierceing ammunition that just works better against barriers would be great. And then we could add even more options, for all variations between APDS and AV. It would be really cool to have a -4 against persons, -5 against barriers, -4 against vehicles, or a -4 against persons, -4 against barriers, -5 against vehicles, wouldn't it?

And yet not everyone uses it. How can that possibly be?

Gross inconsistency.

If S&S is used by RAW, it's the perfect security & police ammunition – less-than-lethal, doesn't overpenetrate, bypasses armor, disorients / incapacitates and even does more damage in a light handgun than a heavy handgun. All for just 4 times the price of the cheapest ammunition available – even if it were 10 times, it would dominate the market.

And here comes the fun part:
Tasers are worse than a light handgun loaded with S&S when it comes to ammunition capacity and firing speed. All of them. The only one doing more damage still has wires to transmit it. There even is a taser out that that sacrifices some damage for a slight bit of more ammunition.

The specialized device is worse than the generic device equipped with a more expensive kind of expendable materials.
It's completely out of any frame of reference.

If S&S for light handguns really exists, you could easily strip the propellant, saving space, then build a retrofitted compressed-air nail-gun with full-auto capacity around it and call it the Tasorator.

That heavily depends on your abstraction level.


If you want to do them justice they need a difference in game terms as well, otherwise you could simly leave them out. It is perfectly viable to increase the abstraction weapon and state that "ammo includes various different types, ranging from primitive lead bullets to semi-autonomous seeker projectiles" but that wouldn't be any fun now, would it?


Way to miss the point! *tipshat*


You want to argue damage mechanics? The damage model of SR is on a much higher abstraction level than their weapon stats.


You got me on the AV ammo, as I think it's bullshit as well. Other than that, however, I don't agree with your that a rulebook containing:

-Generic Rifle A
-Generic Rifle B
-Generic Rifle C
-Generic Rifle D

as my four options would be anywhere close to satisfying. I don't know about you but my group and I are somewhat of weapon nuts as well. We love to talk about pointless differences between various weapons and weapon systems. Some are indeed small, but make a large difference in how you perceive it. Naturally that way certain preferances develop. Personally, I like the Tavor TAR-21 very much. It is natural to want that in the game as well, and if I were to implement a Tavor TAR-23 into SR, I would want to make sure it has something to stand out against the rest of the available options (note: I said "stand out" not "be superior").
I am fairly confident I am not alone in this and adding the newly created Tavor TAR-23 to the "Generic Rifle C" Category just won't do.

Lets stick to the SR4 abstraction level here. Ho much variance do you see in handgun damage code? Most of them is just the secondary stats, and some details.

It's gear creep, plain and simple – to get people bying more books. At least the new stuff isn't better then the one in the main book anymore.

Not entirely – add a variant system like for vehicles in arsenal.

What would be so bad about Standard, Amorpiercing, Antipersonel, Less-Than-Leathal & Explosive as base types? Because that's basically what it already is, plus some SR-Specific names.
Additional stuff like Incendery, Shock and the niche stuff for shotguns and high caliber? Absolutely plausible.

Why not? It's the same for vehicles. Then take the variant system, and declare that B1 has a few more hots, but no internal laser pointer, and so on.

An Ares Alpha variant with unterbarrel shotgun instead of a grenade launcher, called Nitama Optimum? Works just fine.

The thing is, that's even easier with basic examples provided and a variant system.

We will just have to agree to disagree. While I see your point when it comes to different munitions types, we differ greatly when it comes to weapon types. Even your comparison doesn't hold water. You use the vehicle variants as an excemple, but no one uses them. Find me a single character builder that uses them. If you were referring to vehicle categories, I have to disapoint you as well, as the vehicles within a given category vary drasticaly.