So... looking through SR4A again and noticed that p.183 and p.160 say the partial and good cover modifiers apply to the target when resisting a spell. Cross checking with the original SR4, cover does not seem to help against spells (or at least not against direct combat spells). I think this is probably a good move balance wise.

Have I got this right? It's worth being in cover against magic too? Pretty sure in older editions, and SR4 original, cover did not help you against direct combat spells (I could be wrong, but that's my memory of how they worked).

Well, visual modifiers help against spells, so it just makes sense.

Bye
Thanee

yes it applies, and it it is a great addition.

Pretty sure by RAW, cover helps against even direct combat spells. I find the notion a little 'odd', as I'm not sure how cover aids in defense against magical electrocution of the soul, but by the books its supposed too.

Direct Combat Spells don't use Elemental Effects, but I can see how an interruption of the LoS requirement adding dice for the target to resist.

Which justadds another question from me.

Ruthenium Polymer (stealth suit) armour gives an enemy a -4D6 to perception tests against you - does it give ANY bonus once you are spotted? Visibility modifiers for ranged attacks or close combat or even cover bonus against mages?

After all, the character is still darn hard to spot even WHEN spotted.

I think the consensus is that as soon as you see them, you see them. At my tables that penalty (and the one for camo gear) applies to Ranged Attacks also, like visibility modifiers. I think the point of contention is that the penalty for RuthPoly is a penalty, not a Visibility penalty.

I was being metaphorical with the electrocution bit, as i honestly have no other phrase in my lexicon which could describe the effect.

Does that apply to invisibility spells as well? If you knew where the character was before they cast invisibility, would you be immune to it's masking effects?

Not Invisibility per se, although you'd be Blind-Firing at them without ultrasound. Chameleon functions the same as RuthPol.

In SR4 cover was a negative modifier to the attackers pool, it was changed to a bonus to the defender in SR4A for various reasons, for example it doesn't make any sense that target being in cover makes it more likely for the shooters gun to misfire(higher chance of a glitch when you lose dice).
So ofcource cover didn't help in resisting spells in SR4, but it did make the casting the spell harder for the mage


Those being attacked with direct combat spells are definedly the ones who benefit the most from this change to cover mechanics, witch definedly is good for the game balance.

yeah ok cool so cover does help against direct combat spells now. I seem to remember from SR2, possibly SR3, the magic book making it clear that cover didnt help against direct combat spells - the mage just needed to see part of the targets aura to sync with it and then blast them.

In any event - yay - I really like this. Gives mundanes a real protective boost, and more good reason to keep moving and not the mage get clear LOS to you!

As for chameleon suit - someone had a good suggestion in an earlier thread - treat it like the Adaptive Colouration p.208 Running Wild (that critter power is -4 perception checks and -2 hit once creature is spotted).

I don't have my SR3 near me but I think every edition had cover effect all spells. Given the SR4 rules I do prefer the add to the resistance roll method as opposed to the reduce the attackers dice method.

Yea, Id go with that - otherwise the Predators in movies would be fucked the moment they are spotted if their camouflage just stopped working after someone saw them.

So how does it work in regard to direct spells in SR4A? I'm trying to transition from SR4 to Anniversary, and now I'm stumped - on one hand, it's indeed harder for the magician to focus on an obscured target, but on the other, the new cover rules can justify it in the target having more chance to deflect the spell because it wasn't targeted properly.

You could say that the lack of a fully visible aura gives tha magician a buggy connection towards the target and he 'bleeds' mana when casting a spell towards the target, thus making the final spellcasting result far weaker as a fair bit of mana is lost in translation between the caster and the target.

We could also say that he had to spend a lot of mana to make a sure connection to the targets aura due to it being so obscured.

I can probably make up a few more plausible explanations.

Hmm - Could a mage then use the Called Shot rules to ignore cover?

Can a shooter use Called Shot to ignore Cover?

Im probably mixing houserules together.

I usually rule that cover modifiers adds to the defenders defence roll since cover should not influence an attackers dicepool to create glitches - It looks a bit odd that just because soemone is hiding behind hard cover the attackers pistol explodes.

So if the defender would gain resist/doge dice from cover a called shot to ignore cover would reduce both attacker and defenders dicepool.

Cover *does* add to the defender (since they swapped it), but I'm not aware that you can Called Shot to 'reduce defender's DP' (= 'ignore cover').

There's the simple aim action to aim for an exposed part of the body, but it takes away the same amount of dice you'd get for extra damage, which is silly.

That's either 'called shot to avoid armor' or 'called shot to increase DV', though. (IIRC)

Not that silly, considering you are trading 4 dice to hit for +4DV ...whereas the 4 dice to hit is a POSSIBILITY of +4DV..

Don't forget Take Aim = +1 Dicepool.

A no-extra-roll-required bonus to damage is serious business.

The point is that neither of those (none of the called shots) are 'reduce defender DP' or 'ignore cover', right?

Attack dice for combat chracters tend to vastly outnumber defense dice for dodging and negative modifiers. Your choices become adding a point of damage for a die lost, or taking away the enemies chance to absorb a third of a point of damage.

Thats of course using normal combat characters against normal opponents.

Doublay post.

Yes, that's exactly why +4DV/-4 dice is such an amazing (too amazing) deal, one that mostly helps PCs and hurts NPCs.

Re: spells and called shots, you *can* use them in the right circumstances. But 'ignore cover' isn't even available for guns. Called shots are for 'increase DV/vulnerable spot', 'bypass armor', and 'special effects specifically like knock people off a ledge'.

Agreed, called shot doesn't (forgive the pun) cover ignoring cover. and IMHO +4DV/-4 dice is AWESOME, it means i can limit the variability of my damage a little.


On a side not, I dont have my books at work, but can you take multiple "called shots" I.E. ignore armor and aim for a weak spot? or aim for a weak spot and try to knock people off a ledge?

No. At least, it's all presented as a singular, 'or' choice; and the actions required don't help much.

Kinda the way i was leaning, just want to be prepared for it, because i know one of these days that silly sniper is going to try to call all 3 at once, just to see if he can.

No doubt he'll even want to just use the +4DV option multiple times (cuz why not?).

AHA!!! aiming for the very tip of the penis!!!! for an extra +12DV!!!!



Edit: Circumcision via .50 Calibur!

The one in my game did Called Shots to ignore the armor of people through buildings (TacNet info from teammates), dropping his dicepool into the far negatives, then Long Shot with his 7 Edge. It was disturbingly effective.

7 edge,,,, holy balls!

Ah yes... the classic "Mr. Lucky" archetype

Make a high edge char (6 to 8)... then do something piling on tons and tons of negatives... the farther below zero the better. Then cometh the longshot test :). Impossible shots are only one way to go about it... the other big one I see is the longshot social tests (for real hilarity when they assert something so ludicrous it must be true)....



It still amazes me how many people don't give all the resistance and visibility penalties out in fights.. then wonder why bullets hit so much and spells always seem to work. It's like there's no other way to fight than the OK corral with everyone standing in the open on the street instead of running for cover.

Another common one I see is people don't realize it uses up their free action to run.... (and they forget the -2 attack/+2 defense it grants to do so).

Things like that are why there's a GM, though.

They should really change how the Edge rules work. Ignoring ALL penalties while making a shot that WOULD be impossible INTENTIONALLY feels like blatantly cheating regardless of how much BP one has crammed into the edge attribute.

Lets just take a silly shot:

Target Hidden: -6
Full Darkness: -6
Off Hand Weapon: -2
Recoil Full Auto: -9
Attacker in moving vehicle: -3

Thats just a start but we still get at : -26

Ok, the character spends a point of edge for a lucky shot and STILL gets to roll dice and completely ignore a -26 dicepool.

Im suggesting a small houserule:

Edge spent on a lucky shot must be equal to Total Edge X Edge vs dice modifier - lets call this the Edge Effect.

A character with Edge 3 would have an Edge Effect of 9 (3X3) and a character with an edge of 7 would have 49. The edge effect is modified by spent edge. A character with 3 edge who spent one edge would have an Edge Effect of 6 (3X2) and the one with 7 would go down to 42.

The character with Edge Effect of 9 would be able to ignore modifiers down to -9, any modifiers above that still impacts his Lucky Shot roll.

This would mean that your luck is limited and you will also eventually run out of luck. Still, the Edge 7 guy would still be able to fire of one spectacular shot.

I like your thought process here, but I think it adds un-needed math to an already sometimes math-heavy game. This is after all a luck roll. Sometimes the "heros" are just that lucky. With 7 dice you're still only talking about 2 hits on average and if the defender doesn't get 2 hits on the defense, well sucks to be them.

Oh and you forgot -3 PD for physical damage and another -3 for stun damage bringing the entire lucky shot dice pool modifier to -32.

-D

Dont forget that at a -40 (-4 for range penalties and -4 for a +4DV) we can actually assume that the hidden target (in another building across town) is unaware and cannot dodge.

We also fire the Elephant hunting rifle with Ex-Explosive rounds so we have about 11P -2AP so we will hit with about 15P.

Yes, we keep the full auto modifier of -9 on the SS Elephantr rifle because the shooter has a serious case of parkinsons.

One success will be enough, he will most likely not survive.

These crazy edge shots would never hit though would they? Even Edge 7? So 7 dice.... vs what 4 reaction plus 4 cover most times... unlikely to hit, esp given ties go to defender

The point is that most of these crazy shots wont allow a dodge/defense test if the target is unaware.

Still, it IS up to the GM to say,yes - you hit the building and the bullet did not go through three concrete walls and hit the target.

After all, insane luck will not break the laws of physics completely.

Ah right gotcha. Yeah ambush style would work. Not so hot mid battle.

Mid battle my game's sniper ended up two-shotting a F8 (IIRC) Termite Queen through building walls. He was using the Model 121 with ADPS though - that helps.

EDIT: Wasn't my sniper.

well, all you really need is to be in a neighbouring room so the enemy is unaware and a millimeter wave radar implant. Get a sawn off PJSS hunting rifle and blow both barrels With APDS to ensure getting through that wall.

I'll guarantee the target will be surprised.

I'm trying to convice my newest player (who has NEVER played shadowrun, but is an old time gamer) to make a 7-8 edge Character, and take the Bad Luck Neg Quality. I happen to think it would be funny as hell! and make for some interesting RP

Really is not all that Funny; but it does make for decent roleplay experiences.

"I use edge to dodge the SMG fire! I... roll a 1."

"Okay, let's add up your hits to defend, use them as net hits for the attack, and you take.... 23 damage. Burn an edge and we'll see you next session."

And again... Not all that Funny...

I agree. If humor was the motivation, there's plenty of things you can do in game that don't give you a bonus to build points. In fact, I think most people will find that their GM will reward them for voluntarily taking negatives to their dicepool for humor or for humorous results, as opposed to trying to hamfist it into play.