Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Too much net hits and now?
Dumpshock Forums > Discussion > Shadowrun
Pages: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5
nielsk
A player wanted to stun a target with a weapon that does xS-damage. But he had so many net hits that he would have brought the target into the overflow-monitor thus killing it after a few combat rounds. Can he give up net hits for not doing so much damage, therefore only stunning the target successfully?
If yes, where does this stand in the rules (I looked and couldn't find it)?
Doc Chase
QUOTE (nielsk @ Feb 14 2011, 11:23 PM) *
A player wanted to stun a target with a weapon that does xS-damage. But he had so many net hits that he would have brought the target into the overflow-monitor thus killing it after a few combat rounds. Can he give up net hits for not doing so much damage, therefore only stunning the target successfully?
If yes, where does this stand in the rules (I looked and couldn't find it)?


Maybe he shouldn't be firing those SnS on full auto, then.

You're talking about 11-20+ stun damage off one attack. I'm not sure how often that's going to happen - and if it is, there are likely balance issues that should be looked at first.
Adarael
Usually, I'm of the opinion that it depends on two things: intent, and the weapon in question. Long ago I ruled Stunbolt doesn't roll over into physical damage, because back when I started playing it was called "Sleep", not "Choke A Dude Out And Then To Death." An HMG with gel rounds? Yeah, that can kill a guy, because it's a goddamned heavy machine gun. But I figure that a lot of the time when people will have been "killed" by a lucky or accurate shot, that's an artifact of damage being tied to accuracy.

I don't like the idea of someone dying because they *insufficiently dodged a stunbaton*, especially if they have body out the yang or something and just get unlucky.
nielsk
Well, girl with no armor, already slightly bruised and low body runs straight away, he aims for three actions, has smart link, a clear line of sight, no distractions, specialization on the weapon skill, high agility score, uses Edge and thus re-rolls 6s (he really really wanted to stun her because they had to bring her in…alive and she running away screaming "rapists, rapists, they tried to rape me" for getting faster help didn't let them much time to think and throw in all they had)

Edit: Let's assume he used an Ares Pred with gel ammo (it was actually capsule round + narcojet but we did a mistake there…anyway - the question is: can one say to use less net hits/hits to not kill someone)
Yerameyahu
Taser attacks should be able to accidentally kill someone, especially if that's inconvenient for the PCs. People do die from those all the time. smile.gif
Doc Chase
QUOTE (Yerameyahu @ Feb 14 2011, 10:42 PM) *
Taser attacks should be able to accidentally kill someone, especially if that's inconvenient for the PCs. People do die from those all the time. smile.gif


As well as gel shots. It was a bad call on the part of the player/character to sight for three rounds and then blow an Edge if his pool is already high enough he's probably going to snag four net.
nielsk
QUOTE (Doc Chase @ Feb 14 2011, 11:50 PM) *
As well as gel shots. It was a bad call on the part of the player/character to sight for three rounds and then blow an Edge if his pool is already high enough he's probably going to snag four net.


The player has usually bad luck - 14 dice and two successes and stuff like that are pretty normal for him wink.gif
Yerameyahu
Yes, I agree about the gel rounds. Rubber bullets, similarly, are a serious danger. Remember, these aren't 'nonlethal' weapons. They're 'less-lethal'.
capt.pantsless
QUOTE (nielsk @ Feb 14 2011, 04:40 PM) *
Well, girl with no armor, already slightly bruised and low body runs straight away, he aims for three actions, has smart link, a clear line of sight, no distractions, specialization on the weapon skill, high agility score, uses Edge and thus re-rolls 6s (he really really wanted to stun her because they had to bring her in.



Personally, I would have allowed them to spend ANOTHER point of edge to negate some of those hits - although a severely wounded target would be a definite.

Restraint is a virtue in the SR world.
TheOOB
I would allow characters to give up dice before the test is rolled, but if they kill someone with stun damage, they killed someone with stun damage. Never fire a gun at someone you are not prepared to kill.
James McMurray
QUOTE (TheOOB @ Feb 14 2011, 07:23 PM) *
I would allow characters to give up dice before the test is rolled, but if they kill someone with stun damage, they killed someone with stun damage. Never fire a gun at someone you are not prepared to kill.


This.
CanRay
As I've told my group numerous times, "They're called LOW Lethality Weapons, not NON-Lethal Weapons." There's always a risk of killing someone with even the most passive weapons.

Just ask the Mounties that tasered the guy to death because he couldn't speak English or French, and was pissed off at being held for hours on end at an airport because no one could be arsed to get a translator. (And wasn't, BTW, making threatening movements towards anyone, as angels from cameras showed. He was just angry and yelling in a foreign language.).
Doc Chase
QUOTE (nielsk @ Feb 14 2011, 11:53 PM) *
The player has usually bad luck - 14 dice and two successes and stuff like that are pretty normal for him wink.gif


He can pop two if he thinks he's going to roll poorly. Two successes off a gel round is generally going to mean she's going down anyway if she's low bod and already stunned.
CanRay
QUOTE (Doc Chase @ Feb 14 2011, 09:43 PM) *
He can pop two if he thinks he's going to roll poorly. Two successes off a gel round is generally going to mean she's going down anyway if she's low bod and already stunned.

Huh, wha's goin' on? *Totally Stunned*
Ascalaphus
If the excess of damage is due to getting too many hits on the To-Hit roll... well, more hits suggest succeeding better at what you intended to do. And a superior shooter should be more able to put people to sleep precisely, instead of more likely to accidentally kill them.

How to implement that in rules though.. tricky..
Raiki
I would personally, as a GM, allow a player that skilled to buy hits at the standard 4:1 ratio, then use any amount *up to* that number as the total # of hits to apply. That seems like it would solve some of the problem, yes?


~R~
PoliteMan
I can't imagine he practiced shooting people just right to knock them out, he practiced shooting to kill, like everyone else. He just used too much force this time. He shot really well, like he trained to, and killed her.

I understand why he'd be mad, and it's counter-intuitive for the player to fail for doing something really well. Remind him that if the target is running away screaming you probably screwed up somewhere before and he just got unlucky trying to cover up their mistake.
TheOOB
Sometimes bad things happen in shadowrun, if the player can't handle that, they are playing the wrong system.

Once again, if you point a gun at someone and fire, regardless of what type of ammo you got, you run the risk of killing them.
Manunancy
From a descriptive side, I would describe his shoot as striking pefectly at the base of the target's skull - giving the girl the equivalent a powerfull rabbit-punch and giving her some severe concussion (if she was only into oveflow damage) or a broken neck (if she was killed outright).

In my opinion he should have used simple shots - with a simple action for each shot, he would have fired four times at the girl in the same time it took him for his single shot. With less dices to throw each time, odds are he would have knocked her out with probably only a little bit of physical damage.
phlapjack77
I think the rules for giving up net hits applied to spells, so that a mage could have less drain for a less "powerful" spell, if the optional rules for direct-combat drain were being used.

I'm going to pile on and say the guy screwed up, them's the breaks. Stuff happens. Seems like the player's bad luck continues smile.gif
Dakka Dakka
It does not help with the current situation, but he could also have called a shot to knock the target out. Besides ignoring armor or doing more damage there is also the option to generate a certain effect. IMHO he could have used that opion to knock her out cold, especially with that much successes.
Ascalaphus
As I understand it, the guy made it clear enough (everyone at the table knew it) that he wanted to stun, not kill.

So if he's more skilled, he's less likely to get the intended result? That's stupid. More hits means you did better at what you tried to do.

As for the "trained to kill" argument - I think especially in Law Enforcement, people are also trained to shoot to disable, not always kill. Aiming for legs and arms instead of the chest and such.

As a GM in this case I'd rule that any Critical Success shouldn't be turned against whoever scored it. If he scores 10 hits on shooting to stun, then he stuns that person with finesse and grace.

The standard rule "hits -> damage" is based on the standard assumption that you're trying to achieve maximum damage, not precisely enough damage.
Summerstorm
Well, i am using a houserule on this one (That i enforce with mages as well): You can limit your own NETHITS for taking a -2 penalty to the test (Punching more controlled and carefully, monitoring your spells energy carefully, making sure you don't shoot that S-n-S into his eyes...)

Works good so far. In my game that is the only way to reduce chosen nethits for direct attack spells too, and i use the +1 drain per nethit rule.

Works good so far to make it slightly harder to carfully and nonviolent take someone down than to just straight murder him.
Mäx
QUOTE (nielsk @ Feb 15 2011, 12:53 AM) *
The player has usually bad luck - 14 dice and two successes and stuff like that are pretty normal for him wink.gif

Hasn't he ever heard about using edge to reroll failures, not only is that almost always going to lead to a higher amount of hits in the end then using edge to boost the initial pool, it also means you don't end up needlessly spending edge on a roll that had no need for it and also stop this kinda of situations where you end up getting too many successes.
MK Ultra
QUOTE (James McMurray @ Feb 15 2011, 12:37 AM) *
QUOTE (TheOOB @ Feb 15 2011, 12:23 AM) *

I would allow characters to give up dice before the test is rolled, but if they kill someone with stun damage, they killed someone with stun damage. Never fire a gun at someone you are not prepared to kill.


This.


Exactly This.

I sometimes warn players that attempt s.th. like this. Usually they dont listen, but at least it reduces their bitching afterwards. My players do that kind of stuff (exidental killing) quiet often wobble.gif

One other thing I would alow is Called Shot to reduce Damage (before rolling Bod/Armor, if you play it soft you risk to play too soft), instead of increase Damage.
Fringe
QUOTE (Ascalaphus @ Feb 15 2011, 06:39 AM) *
As for the "trained to kill" argument - I think especially in Law Enforcement, people are also trained to shoot to disable, not always kill. Aiming for legs and arms instead of the chest and such.


Even in LE, the vast majority of training is to shoot for center of mass. One might see some intensive training for small targets like you suggest, or for hostage situations, but such training tends to be the exception rather than the rule. If the situation escalates to the point of the LEO having to fire a gun at all, it's escalated to the "use of lethal force" category. Also, it's a lot easier to miss an arm or leg than the chest, especially since they tend to be flailing about more (a running target's legs will be harder to target than the chest, and a fighting target's arms will be harder to target than the chest). Even the use of a taser requires the situation escalate very nearly to the "use of lethal force" category, since (as someone has posted already) tasers do kill people once in a while.

Things like gel rounds and Stick-n-Shock are nice, but you're still training to shoot for center of mass, so there is still the risk of wounding. If it comes down to it, realistically, none of that is 100%. I wouldn't be surprised to see the occasional case (surely less than 1%, but probably nonzero; maybe that's part of a glitch) where the gel casing was a micron or so too thick and didn't burst right, or the S-n-S round penetrated instead of sticking to the skin surface.
Ascalaphus
The logic behind the hits system is

More Hits -> You get more of whatever you wanted

Normally, when you shoot someone you want more damage. In this case however, you want more control over the amount of damage.

This is a case of a Critical Success, and a player shouldn't be punished for rolling it. As a GM, I'd say the enemy took enough damage to be exactly stunned with no P damage overflow at all.
Tymeaus Jalynsfein
QUOTE (Ascalaphus @ Feb 15 2011, 06:51 AM) *
The logic behind the hits system is

More Hits -> You get more of whatever you wanted

Normally, when you shoot someone you want more damage. In this case however, you want more control over the amount of damage.

This is a case of a Critical Success, and a player shouldn't be punished for rolling it. As a GM, I'd say the enemy took enough damage to be exactly stunned with no P damage overflow at all.


That is why there is a Called Shot mechanic, though... If you are going to take extra time to aim, spend edge and roll a vast pool of dice, even if the round used is Stun inducing, and then you roll enough to not only fill the stun track, but also the Physical tracl and into death, maybe the character should have not used the mechanics that were used.

There is no thing such as Non-Lethal when firearms are involved. The character was unlucky... So be it... wobble.gif
Dakka Dakka
Just a qusestion about the initial situation:

How did the shooter manage to get 13 or more Net hits? That's the amount of damage you would have to do to get an uninjured BOD 1, WIL 1 target into Overflow, assuming no damage is soaked. Even then you would still have a round to apply First Aid/Magic healing.
With 14 net hits you would kill such a target outright, but there are not many people with such low stats.
Ascalaphus
QUOTE (Tymeaus Jalynsfein @ Feb 15 2011, 02:56 PM) *
There is no thing such as Non-Lethal when firearms are involved. The character was unlucky... So be it... wobble.gif


Being unlucky because the player rolled well? I find that goes against the idea of the dice system, that rolling well is supposed to be a good thing.


QUOTE (Dakka Dakka @ Feb 15 2011, 03:01 PM) *
Just a qusestion about the initial situation:

How did the shooter manage to get 13 or more Net hits? That's the amount of damage you would have to do to get an uninjured BOD 1, WIL 1 target into Overflow, assuming no damage is soaked. Even then you would still have a round to apply First Aid/Magic healing.
With 14 net hits you would kill such a target outright, but there are not many people with such low stats.


Maybe the target was already somewhat injured?
Doc Chase
QUOTE (Dakka Dakka @ Feb 15 2011, 02:01 PM) *
Just a qusestion about the initial situation:

How did the shooter manage to get 13 or more Net hits? That's the amount of damage you would have to do to get an uninjured BOD 1, WIL 1 target into Overflow, assuming no damage is soaked. Even then you would still have a round to apply First Aid/Magic healing.
With 14 net hits you would kill such a target outright, but there are not many people with such low stats.


Apparently she was already very injured.
CanRay
Hey, just because she had a hard life is no reason to punish her with damage on her track. nyahnyah.gif
Doc Chase
QUOTE (CanRay @ Feb 15 2011, 03:39 PM) *
Hey, just because she had a hard life is no reason to punish her with damage on her track. nyahnyah.gif


In a perfect world she wouldn't have run off and needed to get shot.

In a semiperfect world, a mage would've been there with a stunbolt.

In a far-less-than perfect world, the Troll could've picked her up by the scruff of her neck and asked her if the rag smelled like chloroform.

In this crapsack world, the dude shoots her. If he wanted to minimize the risk, he should've used a different round, or, y'know - not shot her. nyahnyah.gif
pbangarth
Can't the GM just burn a point of Edge for the girl and keep her alive? It isn't like the GM is saving the player from his mistake. The girl almost certainly would want to live rather than die. The shooter learns to be more judicious in his use of firepower, and the girl learns not to turn her back on the guy with the gun.

Everybody greets the morning wiser.
Draco18s
QUOTE (nielsk @ Feb 14 2011, 05:40 PM) *
Well, girl with no armor, already slightly bruised and low body runs straight away, he aims for three actions, has smart link, a clear line of sight, no distractions, specialization on the weapon skill, high agility score, uses Edge and thus re-rolls 6s (he really really wanted to stun her because they had to bring her in…alive and she running away screaming "rapists, rapists, they tried to rape me" for getting faster help didn't let them much time to think and throw in all they had)

Edit: Let's assume he used an Ares Pred with gel ammo (it was actually capsule round + narcojet but we did a mistake there…anyway - the question is: can one say to use less net hits/hits to not kill someone)


Lets assume that your player is not an idiot.

1) He aimed for three rounds, yet she was running and screaming "rapists, rapists, they tried to rape me." He had three rounds to aim!?
2) He spent Edge. Edge is for "this really has to go down right now, with a nuke." You don't spend Edge to shoot little girls.
3) His a) high Agility b) smart link c) specialization and weapon skill should have been enough to beat her Reaction score of 2.
4) She was already injured, meaning her stun track is partially full. If he hits her and she rolls an amazing 2 successes with her Body of 2 (no armor) she's taking 6 Stun, outright. 5 from the gun, +2 for gel, +1 for nethits (minimum) -2 Resistance. 6 stun, plus the 3 Stun she already has is enough to fill her stun Track of 8 + (Half Will of 2) or 9 boxes.

Conclusion. She's dead and you need to hit someone with a rule book.

QUOTE (Ascalaphus @ Feb 15 2011, 09:47 AM) *
Being unlucky because the player rolled well?


Being unlucky because the player spent Edge for exploding 6s. It's his own fault, really.
Yerameyahu
There is no reason the player shouldn't be 'punished'. They didn't roll a Critical Success (I'm still not convinced that's a real thing, anyway) on a 'make this action turn out well for me' Test. They rolled a 'shoot this person' Test. As others have said, there are *pre-attack* options/declarations that could have been made if not harming the target was the priority (I'd allow the negative Called Shot, certainly).

Yes, the GM can do anything, including flat saying that she doesn't die (period). *shrug* Was that the question?
Dakka Dakka
QUOTE (Draco18s @ Feb 15 2011, 05:15 PM) *
1) He aimed for three rounds, yet she was running and screaming "rapists, rapists, they tried to rape me." He had three rounds to aim!?
My thought exactly.
QUOTE (Draco18s @ Feb 15 2011, 05:15 PM) *
4) She was already injured, meaning her stun track is partially full. If he hits her and she rolls an amazing 2 successes with her Body of 2 (no armor) she's taking 6 Stun, outright. 5 from the gun, +2 for gel, +1 for nethits (minimum) -2 Resistance. 6 stun, plus the 3 Stun she already has is enough to fill her stun Track of 8 + (Half Will of 2) or 9 boxes.
Huh, how does that kill her. 3 stun +6 stun is 9 stun or are you using the Mook-Condition monitor? Filling the MCM does not kill the mook, but simply takes him out of the game.
QUOTE ('SR4A p. 280')
As grunts take Physical and Stun Damage, record both on the Condition Monitor; when a grunt’s Condition Monitor is filled, he is knocked out for the remainder of combat. Do not track overflow damage.


BTW Gel-Rounds do no longer get the +2 DV. AFAIK Capsule Rounds have not been adjusted accordingly.

Capsule Rounds+Narcojet are more deadly of course, but at least the target gets two resistance tests(1 damage, 1 toxin). This should reduce the damage somewhat. Don't forget that the Narcojet's Effect only takes place at the end of the turn. Other people could have healed the initial stun damage, before the toxin hits.
Also even Grunts can spend (Group) Edge.
cndblank
QUOTE (Draco18s @ Feb 15 2011, 10:15 AM) *
Lets assume that your player is not an idiot.

1) He aimed for three rounds, yet she was running and screaming "rapists, rapists, they tried to rape me." He had three rounds to aim!?
2) He spent Edge. Edge is for "this really has to go down right now, with a nuke." You don't spend Edge to shoot little girls.
3) His a) high Agility b) smart link c) specialization and weapon skill should have been enough to beat her Reaction score of 2.
4) She was already injured, meaning her stun track is partially full. If he hits her and she rolls an amazing 2 successes with her Body of 2 (no armor) she's taking 6 Stun, outright. 5 from the gun, +2 for gel, +1 for nethits (minimum) -2 Resistance. 6 stun, plus the 3 Stun she already has is enough to fill her stun Track of 8 + (Half Will of 2) or 9 boxes.

Conclusion. She's dead and you need to hit someone with a rule book.



Being unlucky because the player spent Edge for exploding 6s. It's his own fault, really.



I'd penalize my players for not aiming and not spending edge on some thing as risky as that.
Seems that the player in this case is really in a Catch-22 for taking a careful shot.


You spend edge to make things happen YOUR way when it really matters because the CHARACTER is lucky.
How lucky is it for a professional Shadowrunner to kill the target of a snatch job?


This is not an instinctive center of mass shot in the middle of combat.
I agree there is a risk, but a professional highly skilled runner making a carefully aimed take down shot on a target he needs a live...
And a professional knows the advantages and limitations of his tools.

The first thing he will do once he gets the girl away is check her condition.
And in SR4 more net successes means the player gets closer to what he wanted.

Also 14 Net hits is triple what he needed for a critical success. (4 or more net success over Pg 65 SR20.)
By RAW, on a Critical Success the PC gets to add a flourishing details he wants.
So his flourishing detail is NOT DEAD. The extra point of Edge is not bad either.


I'd say a PC can if he is paying attention and in control of the situation, not use all of his net successes if it is counter productive to his goal.
Does he have exact control - No.
To give an example close combat is a series of moves. Unless the players is out of control, he should be able to choose to stop beating the face in of the Humanist thug before he cracks his skull.

The GM will determine the exact number of successes used based on the situation. You have to make it challenging after all.
But he should be able to put it in the ball park of what he was trying to do unless there are extenuating circumstances.
If nothing else I would have given the player a warning that he had better be careful trying to use a weapon designed for full size adults on a child.
For example the target critically glitch the damage resistance test, No once checks on the target's reaction to the drug or sees if the target is stable, or the PC is too enraged to stop and fails a Composure roll.
So he needed 5 success to knock her unconscious and ended up using 10 and breaking some bones.

This is not a runner thoughtlessly hosing down an old man with a pacemaker with Stick and Shock burst fire and leaving him on the floor.
Also has a GM you should avoid appearing to penalize the Player for doing every thing right and not giving the character credit for being a professional even if the game mechanics are distorting it.
Since you are the eyes, ears, and personal experiences of the PC, they filter every thing through you.
That also means you need to give the players some sense of the risks involved based on their character's life experience.
So you want to make sure that when the character hoses up bad, it is either clearly because of the actions of the player, the character was working with the information available to them, or part of the plot line.
And there will be no shortage of it.


So I'd have the girl injured. Maybe she hit her head when she was knocked down or her knee is shattered. Have her cry A LOT. Make them take her to a street doc. Do they know one they can trust?

Just don't take the fun out it for a player when he did every thing right.
Draco18s
QUOTE (Dakka Dakka @ Feb 15 2011, 11:37 AM) *
Huh, how does that kill her. 3 stun +6 stun is 9 stun or are you using the Mook-Condition monitor? Filling the MCM does not kill the mook, but simply takes him out of the game.


That math was 1 net hit, which was what the player "wanted" but instead he got 14, thus filling her physical and overflow monitors too.

I.E. the player pulled in too many bonuses he didn't need. He was already a more than a match for the girl. All he needed to do was connect his shot, not completely pulverize the back of her skull.

QUOTE (cndblank @ Feb 15 2011, 11:38 AM) *
Also 14 Net hits is triple what he needed for a critical success. (4 or more net success over Pg 65 SR20.)
By RAW, on a Critical Success the PC gets to add a flourishing details he wants.
So his flourishing detail is NOT DEAD. The extra point of Edge is not bad either.


You can't get a critical success when you spend edge. wink.gif
Yerameyahu
I'm not sure that 'fundamentally alter the combat system' is a 'flourishing detail' anyway. biggrin.gif

Questions of 'taking the fun out of it' or 'what's good for the story' are left up to the GM (in interaction with his players, of course). There's no reason that either branch (girl dies, girl lives) of the plot can't be equally fun or good or whatever.
Irion
If it is obvious the player does not shoot to kill, more net hits should not make im killing someone.

QUOTE ("Draco18s")
You can't get a critical success when you spend edge.

Where is this coming from?

QUOTE
Being unlucky because the player spent Edge for exploding 6s. It's his own fault, really.

Wow, how lame is it for a GM to fuck a player with game mechanics if he does everything realistic. Even with extra care.
The GM who declares the girl dead should be hit with all rule books of any RPG ever written.

Sorry, but whats that for an attitude? A player who is not trying to rape the rules in any way possible, who just plays reasonable should be punished for a resonable action? (To aim very carefully to not kill the girl)

Sorry, but every GM, worth to be called so, would go:
"With a well placed shot you knock the girl unconscious, with very little harm to her"
Meaning: Girl is unconcious and gets one point worth of Stun.

If it is against the rules fuck the rules.
sabs
Clearly with 14 hits, he hti exactly where he wanted to. So he hit the girl in the knee, or hip. Why would he hit her in the back of the head or her heart and kill her.

Why should a shot from the hip be less likely to accidentally kill someone, than a carefully aimed shot where you're calling for "I'm trying not to kill her"

Could she still potentially die? Yes, if she critgliched, or if HE critglitched. But killing her because you hit a bullseye? That's counter intuitive.

Draco18s
QUOTE (Irion @ Feb 15 2011, 12:08 PM) *
Where is this coming from?


I'm AFB, but it's under the rules for spending edge.
Yerameyahu
Did the player say, 'I'm trying not to kill her', or declare a Called Shot, or something? (I'm asking, because the OP said he 'wanted to stun', but apparently didn't try very hard *not* to murder her). Less-lethal weapons aren't non-lethal, and how is it the end of the world here? Does nothing ever go wrong on a run, even turn out to be wrong even though you think you're doing the right thing? Talk about attitude.
QUOTE
So he hit the girl in the knee, or hip
Did he? If he made a Called Shot, that's a big difference.
sabs
QUOTE (Draco18s @ Feb 15 2011, 06:13 PM) *
I'm AFB, but it's under the rules for spending edge.

I'm staring at the rules in SR4A for spending edge and I don't see anything about it.

QUOTE
Spending Edge
When you spend a point of Edge, you can choose to have one of the following happen:
• You may declare the use of Edge before rolling for any one test (or one interval
roll on an Extended Test). You may add a number of extra dice equal to your
full Edge attribute to the dice pool. All dice (not just Edge dice) rolled on this
test are subject to the Rule of Six (p. 62), meaning that if you roll a 6, you count
it as a hit and roll it again.
• You may declare the use of Edge after you have rolled for one test. In this case,
you may roll a number of extra dice equal to your full Edge attribute and add
their hits to the test’s total. The Rule of Six (p. 62), however, applies only to the
additional Edge dice rolled, not the original dice pool.
• You may re-roll all of the dice on a single test that did not score a hit.
• You may make a Long Shot Test (p. 61) even if your dice pool was reduced to 0
or less; roll only your Edge dice for this test (the Rule of Six does not apply).
• You may go first in an Initiative Pass, regardless of your Initiative Score (see
Initiative and Edge, p. 145). If multiple characters spend Edge to go first in the
same pass, those characters go in order according to their Initiative Scores first,
then everyone else goes according to their Initiative Scores.
• You may gain 1 extra Initiative Pass for that Combat Turn only (see Initiative
and Edge, p. 145).
• You may negate the effects of one glitch or critical glitch.
• You may invoke the Dead Man’s trigger rule (p. 163).
A character can only spend Edge points on her own actions; she cannot spend it on
behalf of others (except when engaged in a “teamwork” test, p. 65). No more than
1 point of Edge can be spent on any specific test or action at one time. If you spent
a point of Edge for extra dice and rolled a critical glitch anyway, for example, you
cannot use Edge to negate that critical glitch since you have already applied Edge
to that test.


QUOTE
Any time a character scores 4 or more net hits on a test (4 hits more
than needed to reach the threshold or beat the opponent), she has
scored a critical success. A critical success means that the character has
performed the task with such perfection and grace that the gamemaster
should allow her to add whatever flourishing detail she likes when
describing it. If the gamemaster chooses, he can also reward a critical
success with a point of Edge (see Edge, p. 74), though this should only
be done when a critical success was unlikely (it shouldn’t be used to
reward highly-proficient characters undertaking an easy task).
Yerameyahu
It really doesn't matter. A flourishing detail is just some fluff for *describing*. smile.gif

I'm not saying the GM must decide to kill the girl. I'm saying he has that choice, and it's not 'screwing' or 'punishing' the character or the player.
capt.pantsless
I think it breaks down like this:

If you and/or your players enjoy gritty, realistic, actions-have-consequences style of play: The girl dies.

If you and/or your players enjoy cinematic, heroic style games: The girl lives, but is injured and will need immediate medical attention.

If you think having the girl living or the girl die would be better for the story: You pick whichever one is better.

The rules are not exactly clear, so I'd go with the golden-rule and do what's the most fun for the group.
Draco18s
QUOTE (sabs @ Feb 15 2011, 12:21 PM) *
I'm staring at the rules in SR4A for spending edge and I don't see anything about it.


I'll look for it when I get home. You might be right, but I don't think so.
(Otherwise almost every expenditure of edge results in a critical success which gives the character that point of edge back)
Manunancy
My impression from what the OP said is that the player didn't trust his rotten luck and basically poured everrything he got into hitting the girl as good as possible while relying on the gel rounds rather than any special care on his part to keep the girl alive and not giving a fart about her getting injured. A very likely possibility when pouring it all into a troll-droping shot.
Doc Chase
QUOTE (Yerameyahu @ Feb 15 2011, 06:16 PM) *
Did the player say, 'I'm trying not to kill her', or declare a Called Shot, or something? (I'm asking, because the OP said he 'wanted to stun', but apparently didn't try very hard *not* to murder her). Less-lethal weapons aren't non-lethal, and how is it the end of the world here? Does nothing ever go wrong on a run, even turn out to be wrong even though you think you're doing the right thing? Talk about attitude.
Did he? If he made a Called Shot, that's a big difference.


Nailing someone in the knee or hip with a gel round is going to hurt like hell. nyahnyah.gif

Regarding getting edge/critical success - You can get a critical success by spending, but you won't get the edge back.

@Manuancy: Then he has to live with the consequences, IMO. If he doesn't trust his luck taking the shot, he shouldn't take the shot. Guns are lethal, folks - no matter what you load them with.
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