A question for narrow bursts, since I find myself away form the books. If I remember, burst DV is applied after deciding if the damage will be physical or stun. But there was an errata somewhere that may have flipped that. Or was there...

Anyhow: Narrow burst bonus DV, do you apply it before or after determining damage code>

AFAIK, the narrow burst DV bonus does not apply when determining whether dmg is stun or physical.

That's correct. Think of it this way - the bullets work together in causing damage to the body because the body is a system of cooperative organs, but they penetrate armour alone since a hole in one section does not impact on the effectiveness of another section. Hence an increase in DV but no change to the armour comparison.

It can be tricky to remember because the logic is the opposite with structures. Switch machine pistol to SA, fire 10 shots at a wall individually, and they all ping. Now switch it to FA and fire them all at once, and you blow a hole in the wall.

Good point. IIRC that applies to destroying a barrier rather than shooting through it, so I guess the distinction is whether the barrier is the target or the (extra) armour.

Interesting. Net hits do though, correct?

It'd be somewhat ironic if less focused fire actually caused substantially greater likelihood of armor penetration.

Very much so.

But not when figuring out if you have penetrated a spirits Hardened Armor. Only AP mods and the base DV of the weapon.

@magus

Net hits do count too.

@AppliedCheese

Thats the way it is...

Are you saying that because ItNW does not include the word modified, net hits do not count, even though ItNW is supposed to work like Hardened Armor?
You could go down that route, but then AP does not apply either. DV is a distinct property from AP. ItnW does not explicitly mention that AP is applied to the "armor" rating of the critter either.

Only base DV would make ItNW behave totally different from Hardened Armor, making the reference nonsense.
Additionally the base DV is never relevant in damage resistance.

Blowing holes in barriers have different rules, specifically. It takes into account how much dakka you throw at a wall at one time. Yes it doesn't make any sense that the same number of bullets in single shot wouldn't do anything, but it's one of those things the rules don't cover well (generally speaking if you're going to destroy a barrier you're going to be throwing all your dakka at it).

Re: ItNW--Here are the relevant quotes (to support Dakka Dakka's above quotes).





This tells me that the net hits are added to the DV before comparing to the modified armor. The damage modifier for the Burst does not apply for the comparison.

(Edited to make the reference clearer.)

Nobody's disputing the general rule and you can't really class them as the relevant quotes for ItNW without including the ItNW section itself ...

Aero--Dakka had already quoted the ItNW and Hardened Armor above. I didn't see a reason to requote them. The quote by Dakka Dakka from Hardened armor lists "modified Damage Value" and "modified Armor Value." I was providing the quote for how to determine those to support the quotes that Dakka Dakka provided for Magus.

The barrier rules are just wrong, so try to ignore them.

So if I am shooting a Spirit say Force 5 So ItNW / Hardened Armor = 10
My Gun = Ares Predator 5P -1 AP (Normal Ammo)
I roll 10 Net Hits (Elven Gun Bunny) 9 Agility + 6 Pistols + 2 (Speciality -Pistols) + 2 Smartlink (at close range ) DP = 19

The Spirit is now Armor 9
the way I played it was the Base DV of weapon (minus the Armor Penetration Value) is less than 9 so no damage

What it should be is
Damage Value of 5P + 9 Net Hits = 14P (14P >ItNW 9) so Damage is Assessed

Now you got it.

I think that is wrong with the net hits added to the Modified Damage Value. How is that right?

Net hits are "hit them in the head!" versus having the bullets thud into the armor vest or bounce harmlessly off a riot shield.

And it's just the basic principle of the game. You *could* change it, I guess. It'd make things much less deadly, and spirits and vehicles would be significantly more godly.

Vehicles don't have hardened armor. They simply lack a stun track.

Yes?

Because a Vehicle cannot take Stun, not because the Vehicle has "Hardened Armor."

Mechanically it works out the same. Hence the

But it doesn't. It has the same end result, mecahnically, but it is not the same effect.

Oh, I thought you were calling me nuts or something. Thought I'd fallen into Bizarro Dumpshock.

Naah... Your not nuts... not much anyways...

I mean, nobody said vehicles had Hardened Armor in the first place, so I was confused to be argue with.

The attack fails because the rules say so.

You may INFER that this is because of the rule that vehicles don't have a stun track. It's not even a bad inference. But it's not actually stated.

Two separate rules.

I, for one, call it Hardened Armor because it has the same net effect. Having two nearly identical rules items with different names just bothers my design sense.



-k

Ah!

But what happens if you cast the Armor spell on a vehicle?
What happens if you cast the Armor spell on a drake (in drake form)?

Are they functionally different then?

I.e. does the "hardened" armor of the vehicle still work the same way? That is, will the vehicle begin to take stun?

Draco has exactly why it matters. Someone with Hardened Armor 8 and then Armor 1 (say, from an Armor spell) will take (Stun) damage from a 9 DV attack. A vehicle with Armor 8 and then an extra Armor 1 (again, say from Armor - although remember the Object Resistance, QQ) would take nothing from a 9 DV attack.