Are there any rules on multiple remote fired vehicle weapons? Example, a car with 2 front mounted concealed LMG weapon mounts.

I'd imagine it uses the normal rules on firing multiple weapons or using multiple attacks in general. DP is split, then modifiers (such as visibility) are applied to each DP separately.

Hmmm, but if they are fixed position, both aimed the same direction, and both fired by the same control, what then? Are they considered a "weapon system" and the damage stacks? Obviously, in this case they could only shoot something the car was aligned with, so the uses would be sort of limited to chase combat or death race scenarios, but it would be useful in those cases. If there's a rule for this, I'm coating a GMC Bulldog in MGs all facing forward, loaded with HE Explosive, and setting them all up on the same trigger. Paint it red and get a custom plate that says "MO DAKA". And use it to delete corp security cars from existence.

Well, if they're fixed position then only one is generally going to be hitting unless the target is fairly big. Would be limited to narrow bursts though (Well, suppose you could shoot during a turn, but it'd make keeping up more difficult). Honestly I'm not even sure what you would roll to hit if you couldn't track with the guns at all, it wouldn't really be gunnery as you wouldn't be aiming with the guns, you'd be aiming with your ability to drive the car.

Hmm, maybe you could have each net hit equal 2 extra damage instead of 1 to represent all the extra bullets flying around?

Really, despite the fixed, I think the rules would still technically treat it as two separate weapons that need to use a split DP. Kind of like how you need to when using two guns, even if you keep your hands together so that both guns should be tracking exactly the same.

Hmm, suddenly had a thought of someone actually taping two guns together and setting them up to fire at the same time

There really aren't rules for it.

Sure there is, just not in Shadowrun. It's called "Car Wars".

Well, yes. Go play Car Wars, it's great!

Treat them like drones.

In what way?

Unrelated: to what extent *do* parallel guns aim at the same thing? I mean, anti-aircraft guns are one thing, but… inherent wide bursts?

Depends on how they are set up and how big the target is. If they are perfectly parallel, they hit however far apart they are physically placed, which means a target smaller than the distance between the two guns might actually be harder to hit because you have to aim off-center for one gun or the other to actually hit anything. For targets larger than the distance between the two guns, you are basically just throwing out twice as many bullets, perhaps giving the benefit of both narrow and wide burst.

It really brings up the same question as "What happens if I tape two guns side by side, and set them to both fire on a single trigger pull" which the game really isn't equipped to deal with, sort of like it isn't equipped to deal with someone wearing shock gloves and punching someone, or mixing ammo types in a clip.

That's what I figured. It just doesn't seem like a good idea. *Maybe* some kind of Wide Burst effect, at large enough ranges.

So, let's assume flex mounts instead. We're in the realm of house rules, of course. To me, that'd be two guns individually aiming at the same target; right? Just like a humanoid with 2 SMGs, as you mentioned at the beginning. What about more than 2? Keep splitting the pool, I'd assume.

Any other fun, simple, and balanced options?

Yes, just like someone with more than 2 hands splits their DP into more than 2 new DP when using multiple weapons.

As for the original setup, I think if I was GMing I'd have the setup impose a -2 penalty to firing at targets smaller than the difference between the guns (to represent having to aim off-center) and give an extra point of damage for every 2 net hits (Maybe 1 net hit, would have to see how 2 worked out first).

Do you mean firing effectively larger bursts? Double burst is 5 Base DV + 2 burst + 3 burst = 10 DV (not for beating armor, as normal)? So a double full would be 5 + 9 + 10 = 24. That's… almost reasonable, with a little aiming penalty, sure. Assuming we're talking Narrow, of course. Wide would almost instantly drop their dodge to 0, so who cares. The really powerful thing would be Wide+Narrow, which is why it wouldn't be allowed.

I have a feeling this would get used against barriers a lot, which is probably fine. Just count all the bullets.

No, I mean instead of getting 1 extra DV per net hit as normal, you'd get 1.5 (or possibly 2) DV per net hit to represent the extra bullets. I think simply treating it as a burst with twice as many shots being fired gets too large too fast, it's far too much incentive to set up a system like this. I might also impose some sort of cap on the DP based on the driving ability of the driver, or an outright penalty for not being able to aim, or base the attack test purely on the driver's driving skill.

And no, you couldn't do wide + narrow because whatever you did with one gun would happen with the other gun.

Mine's simpler, no one likes 3/2 systems. What are we comparing against, though? Against a single attack, it's stronger, but *less* than twice as strong, even at Full Burst. HV or minigun rates get closer to double, but still don't hit it. Against 2 attacks, it's actually weaker (although the dynamics of pool-splitting and all that are complicated).

With 3+ guns, it does get different real fast, though. :/ Still, it's only doing (tons) of stun.

Yeah, I know fractions confuse people but it is how I'd do it, with halves rounding down in this case. And yeah, I think we're comparing against a single attack or a split pool for two guns, in which case it is stronger than either one. It is superior to the single attack because it does more damage (obviously) and it is roughly even with a split pool because you don't suffer negative modifiers twice, which may or may not negate the lost 5 or so DV, not to mention you have a smaller chance of missing outright.

So yeah, guess your system works, but it seems a bit too good for having fixed guns. I think I'd use your system for damage, but add in penalties or some other oddities for the difficulty of aiming due to being fixed.

I think the easiest thing to do would just make one attack, add +2 dice to hit, for firing 2 LMGs and target gets -2 to dodge.

Just use them like a Minigun. Simple, and the rules are already in place.

With 2 extra mod points, you could mount them as flexible mounts, giving yuo a 90 degree field of fire (horizontal, and some give vertically)

Or just fire one MG until it's dry, then fire the other one.

Radical Concept there Canray, absolutely radical...

Or load different ammo into each MG. Standard ammo in one when someone cuts you off, AV Ammo in the other for when someone SLOTS you off.

So now that we have seen some options for handling 2 burst fire weapons, ill have to ask about handling multiple non burst weapons.
Like for example a fighter bomber with 11 fixed gauss cannons firing them all with the same trigger pull

just add up the rounds fired, subtract 1, apply that as the recoil modifier for the attack...

as long as your not mixing weapons or ammo types, it will just be a very long burst.

Indeed. Multiple weapons firing simultaneously really shouldn't be any different mechanically than one weapon firing multiple times in rapid succession.

Except for the multiple attacks/base DV issue. I suggested what I think you've said: Base DV once, + every extra bullet as normal. Now, what if they're not identical guns? Different range, DV, AP, etc.? Personally, I'd just refuse to allow it (say that the ballistics are too different or something).

Indeed, then it falls under "Why can't I put different kinds of ammo into my clip?" The answer being "Because you can't."

except you totally can put different kinds of ammo in your clip.

That's how ammo skipping systems WORK.

You're right. I suppose I should have specified that you can load different kinds of ammo into your clip, but if a burst would cause you to switch ammo types, you cannot fire that burst.

But, burst fire of capsule round each containing different toxin is allowed and the compounts all do damage seperatly

Only in the sense that it's not specifically disallowed. That whole area is a mess begging for the GM to punch you. I'd call any difference between bullets (except tracers) a change in ammo, and not allowed mid-burst.

Actually in a sense that how it tells you to do it in page 58 of Ghost Cartels.

the only thing multiple bullets do is increase the DV/lower the defense by 1 per bullet and the recoil by 1 per bullet.

i guess if the GM wants to be cruel, he could go with taking the worst damage and AP and combo that...

That's what I'd do if I was the GM and someone absolutely insisted on being able to fire different kinds of ammo in a single burst.

Indeed... all other ammunition benefits would be wasted...

It depends on how close the guns where mounted. Assuming they were side-by-side and always aimed in the same direction, if the guns are, say, 2 inches apart, then resolve it like a narrow burst. If they're a foot apart, it's a wide-burst. If they're on opposite sides of the car, it's suppressive fire. Or something like that.

You'll want to work this out IN DETAIL between the GM and player.

Psh, Ghost Cartels doesn't count.

Capsule rounds barely make sense as it is, but I'd compensate by charging for a full dose of the chemical per individual capsule.

Pepper punch is great in this case. 5 nuyen a pop is still not terribly expensive.

Strange because there is the real world example of this, fighter aircraft.

If each gun were controlled by a different person they would count as different attacks right? If they were controlled by the same human I guess they would have the same rules for a human firing two weapon in the flesh.

I would think a drone could do better though. No in built biological reason for not being able to look in two different directions and fire at each with full concentration if the computer running the guns is good enough.

Maybe you could fire one gun with a targeting laser attached and the drone would just be set to just fire at where the laser is pointed. Rule though... a lack of rules is a problem.

There may be no biological reason a pilot program couldn't fire two guns at the same time, but it does have another same problem that a human has: Multitasking. Just like we have to split our attention to aim two weapons at the same time, the pilot would have to split its processing power and targeting programs between the two guns, which would split its dice pool just like it splits a metahuman's. So yeah, no off hand penalty, but it still has to split its DP.

As for separate people controlling the guns, yes, that's how it would work.

And yes, real world aircraft used (still use?) this sort of setup, but they are generally firing at targets notably larger than the distance between the guns even against other aircraft because the guns are generally placed near the center of the plane.

As for the targeting laser, with the sophistication of targeting and pilot software, I don't see that being particularly easier than just trying to hit targets on its own.

That is certainly the justification, I guess I just don't buy it. A cyber deck or drone is able to run a number of high rating programs simultaneously without penalty. As far as game mechanics and game balance I can see it being vetoed I just don't think it makes sense in fluff.

I guess a compromise might be to slave the weapon arm to a comlink that you need to buy and get software for, and it counts as a separate drone for the purpose of issuing it commands and taking over direct control of the weapon.

Another way to look at it is in some ways you could see this is like making a new weapon instead of new rules. Like how firing both chambers of a double barreled shot gun counts as a a short burst. The only problem is that the weapon mount will need to lift both guns.

I am thinking if it is separate dice-pools, or separate rolls then the damage is rolled normally for two different guns. But if it is one roll then it would be like a burst fire weapon with more bullets.

A drone can't run multiple Pilots, though. That's really the only relevant part. It is a tricky spot that the GM has to deal with, in the end.

You don't do that already?

Of course, but it doesn't make sense to. How does a capsule contain the same amount as a gas/splash grenade? Ugh.

Yeah, but that is totally irrelevant to the game system.
A Dose is a Dose. Does it really matter?

Fluffwise, obviously, the concentrations are greater for larger munitions that affect areas. Cost is obviously the same. After all, creating large quantities of most chemicals in a lab is quite cheap. Unless, of course, you want the fine granularity of tracking hundred of chemicals based upon dosage and weight tables. I know that I do not...

Wait till someone duct-tapes x smart firing platforms to a vehicle.

Indeed...

Yep, that's been the traditional solution. It's perfectly valid and playable, as far as I'm concerned.

On the subject of mounting, I would think the best way to do it would be to not have them exactly parallel, and actually "zeroed" at a particular distance (like say 100 meters) which should give you a decent grouping on anything at standard engagement ranges.

As for firing two weapons at the same time...we have an elephant rifle and a few other "double barrel" weapons that are not that different from 2 guns strapped together...and how do they work that? +1 DV...

So I would agree, Base of one of weapons +1 per additional bullet from each gun. so 2 LMGs short bursted would do 6DV base +5DV burst.

Though Tymeaus' suggesting about using minigun rules would be simpler...but not quite as crunchy. I like crunchy.

And for different weapons, as long as they use the same ranges you should be ok. If the weapons are too wildy different on the range tables their trajectories will be much too different and I'd start applying large DP penalties beyond short range. Otherwise I would just Average the base DVs/AP (after factoring in ammo)