I've been thinking about how battle rifles basically make it pretty much pointless to get the assault rifles... as they're strictly better. Then the idea struck me... since they enjoy sporting rifle ranges and calibre while also enjoying the full-auto abilities of assault rifles... why not merge them in a wierd way with the in-game skills.

Put simply... the character uses the LOWER of his automatics or longarms skills. He effectively needs both skills to use the weapons to their full potential. (the classic buy only automatics and maybe pistols gunbunnies... will have trouble with that, while the less min-maxed guys with the weapon groups will make out nicely).

Thoughts...


A similar idea could be put towards SMGs... if used single handed--- use the worse of the automatics or pistols skill. It helps limit the classic automatics as the one true gun skill which you never need any other if it only fully applies to machine-pistols and assault rifles.

Automatics is already a pretty beastly skill with just machine pistols and assault rifles. You have machine pistols for concealment, and an AR for pwning. Battle rifles are better, but not 16 or so BP better you'll have to pay for Longarms 4.

I would collapse the number of firearms skills to just 2. The first skill would be Handguns and cover pistols to SMGs and the other would be Longarms and cover assault rifles to sniper rifles. Heavy Weapons would remain unchanged. There really isn't enough room for three skills in the pistol->sniper rifle range. Really you want a concealable piece for subvert operations and a bigger firearm for overt operations. That's why the "good enough*" automatics skill is so popular since it's got good options for both.

It's not worth 3 skills to be proficient with every firearm. It's likely worth 2 however. Depending on how 2 skills go, it might just be worth 1. In a SnS world, there's an argument for just using Handguns but even then there's a decent case for Longarms (range and SnS immune/resistant opponents). You could also move SMGs over to Longarms or have them use either Handguns or Longarms depending on how playtesting works out.

*- Automatics isn't as good as Pistols for conceal carry but the +2 conceal machine pistols work. However, Automatics is generally way better than Longarms expect for the "very long range suppressed sniping when you can't use a gyromount" niche.

The other idea I'd been toying with is having the skills overlap, so machine pistols would be covered by pistols and automatics, assault rifles would be covered by longarms and automatics. Help to make pistols/longarms closer in scope and versatility to automatics.

Personally, pistols, Rifles, SMG's, Assault rifles all are pretty much the same basics. The problem is two fold, somebody who has never shot a pistol but has shot a rifle for his entire life would need some practice to get as good as he is with a rifle. But he would not need as much as some one with no previous firearms skill. Where do draw the line, and what categories do you have.

In SR4 the automatics skill covers most weapons that runners would like to use. Pistols covers the firearms they most likely can use (depending on the mohawk vs mirrored shades level). Anything else is optional. Longarms is useful but few people go with shotguns. So a decker wanting to be able to shoot his way out could easily take a decent pistol score and be come the back-up street sam.


Back OT: I look at battle rifles and note that yes they are better than assault rifles. Their big drawback is not appparant in SR. Their weight, their ammo weight, and recoil (for some reason they did not put a -2 for each point of recoil like LMGs that use a similar round. ANother drawback is that they usually have lower ammo capacity than assault rifles. Concealibility is also a problem-but a feral city or war based campaign make this a non-issue.

Battle rifles aren't better, they fill a different niche. Full on damage still goes to the Assault rifles modded to increase firing rates.

I've personally experimented a little with several different ways of reconciling firearm types but it's deceptively difficult to tweak the system in ways that don't upset it even worse. Definitely leave the firearm rules alone, with only minor tweaks at best - it can easily spiral into madness.

The one real change I house-rule at my table is that machine pistols can use either the pistols or the automatics skill. It just gives a little more flexibility of firepower on the smaller end without making things nutso. Machine pistols are at the high end of still-potentially-concealable, they only do light pistol damage as base, they have zilch in the way of AP and RC as standard, and there are literally only 5 of them in the most commonly used rulebooks (2 in SR4A, 3 in Arsenal, one of which is 20F because it's collapsible).

Their pros and cons kinda equal out fairly. Their big advantages are Burst Fire out of the box (fun fact, only 1 standard machine pistol actually fires in Full Auto, while almost all SMGs and Assault Rifles are FA ready) and larger magazines of ammunition. In exchange, they're a lot less accurate due to recoil which requires mods to compensate, you chew through (and thus have to spend more nuyen on) ammo, they're harder to conceal than even a Ruger Super Warhawk, they have higher base costs and availabilities than other pistols, and a they're far more restricted in many governments than their cousins.

Compare machine pistols to a generic heavy pistol. With a machine pistol you can squeeze off two 3 round narrow bursts for 6P / 0AP each and suffer -2 from recoil on the first burst and -3 on the second burst. Or with a heavy pistol you can squeeze off two shots for 5P / -1AP and suffer 0 recoil on the first shot and -1 or even 0 recoil on the second.

The other option of course is using the machine pistol for wide bursts. Now you've got two 3 round bursts for 4P / 0AP each, and you still suffer the -2 from recoil on the first burst and -3 on the second burst. But your opponent now also suffers -2 dice to dodge on the first, and -3 on the second. Since dodge pools are smaller than shooting pools, you get an edge up, but only a slight one.

Now, for about the same amount of money, slightly smaller magazine size, and slightly worse availability, you could get a Fichetti Executive Action - same damage, same armor penetration, same recoil compensation, same Burst Fire advantages, but it's a Light Pistol so it's -2 concealability rather than +2, and it's a lot more legal in many regions than a machine pistol would ever be.

My point is that machine pistols are a side-grade at best. They fill a niche in the one handed firearm world, but they aren't outright better than other handguns. I have a lot of issues with Automatics being its own skill, but with machine pistols it's even worse because they're overwhelmingly Burst Fire weapons, not Fully Automatic. I can at easily concede that an assault rifle firing in full auto is going to handle significantly differently than a sporting rifle, but with machine pistols being so weakly differentiated from other pistols, I really couldn't see a good reason not to let them count as either Pistols OR Automatics.

~Umidori

With the Arsensal rules, it's not hard to get 5 or higher RC on a machine pistol or other automatic. However overall, machine pistols are a "good enough" solution for a conceal piece. Instead of getting Pistols 4, you bank the 16 BP and just use a FN 5-7C* with Automatics 6. You can then grab a Ares Alpha, HVBR or Supermach for when you pink mohawk/bug hunt and use the same Automatics 6 skill.

The Fichetti's big flaw is that a lot of the common sources of RC don't work on light pistols like gas vents or stocks nor does it have innate recoil compensation. Anyways the true light pistol is the Fubuki. That's a BF wonder horse who's only flaw is no FA fire option since you explicitly cannot mod it for FA fire.

As for tweaking SR, it's a very flawed system. If you do try to change stuff in it, usually the failures of the system just collapse on you and either rendered your changes moot or make those flaws all the more apparent.

*- A sample FN 5-7C with Chameleon Coating [2], Underbarrel Weight [2], Personalized Grip [1], Reduced Barrel [1], Stock, Sound Suppressor (Barrel) in a concealable holster has -4 conceal, 4 RC, and suppressed fire. That's 6P -0 first shot and 6P -0 at -1 die (or effectively +1 AP). You can skip the stock or go FA with gas vents/gyromount cyberlimb mod, but those have their own drawbacks.

The point I was making is that allowing either Pistols or Automatics for Machine Pistols gives a little more flexibility to the straight Pistols users, the kind of folks who aren't going pink mohawk/bug hunting.

Also, I specifically focused on stock weapons, because yeah, mods can change things up quite a bit. To be fair, you could also mod a heavy pistol much the same way and give it burst fire, and then you're in roughly the same place, with an extra 2 points of concealability. (Although your numbers are off - you've got 7 slots worth of mods on a 6 slot weapon. Chameleon = 2, Weight = 2, Grip = 1, Barrel = 1, Stock = 1.)

Personally, I'm a fan of the Colt Government 2066. Give it a Small Firing Selection Change for burst fire, Stock, and Electronic Firing (better than Personalized Grip because it gives extra sound suppression at the cost of using caseless rounds) for -3 RC on top of the -1 innate. Then add the Sound Suppresor Accessory, the Chameleon Coating, and the Concealable Holster for -5 concealability, 3 RC, and suppressed fire, and a spare mod slot for something else. That's 7P, -1AP at 0 recoil first burst, and 7P, -AP at -2 recoil for the second burst (which is actually NOT effectively +2AP: you lose dice to hit and increase your glitch chances, while +AP doesn't affect your chance to hit or glitch, but will make life harder against hardened armor). More legal, more concealable, one more mod slot to fill, more damage, more armor penetration, AND much better ranges (0-5, 6-20, 21-40, 41-60 vs. 0-4, 5-12, 13-24, 25-40). The tradeoff is the ammo capacity: 14 compared to 20. Maybe use that final mod slot to get an Extended Clip, bringing it up to 18, which is a multiple of 3 anyway, giving you the same six bursts, you just don't have 2 spare rounds left to deal with.

Anyways, I always found the Underbarrel Weight mod to be stupid - if you can't use underbarrel accessories on any kind of pistol, why does the weight work as a mod? And why doesn't it (or most mods and accessories that add material to the weapon) affect concealability? And even worse - why does the gun get the Chameleon bonus when it's inside the concealable holster?

~Umidori

On a different not, does anyone else get annoyed by things like the MGL-6, "the pistol version of the popular ArmTech MGL-12 grenade launcher"? Not only do they not say how big of a pistol it's supposed to be the size of, but it also still uses Heavy Weapons rules?

Really? Really?!? Firing a pistol sized weapon launching minigrenades that explode on impact (why do they even offer airburst links for Grenade Launchers anyways?) is more akin to firing rockets out of a shoulder mounted launcher or spitting lead on full auto from a massive machine gun than it is to shooting explosive rounds out of a Ruger Super Warhawk?



~Umidori

So that players like me, who make a face/fixer, can have a DP of 6, dual wield it, and then do massive amounts of damage.

The single biggest selling point for Machine Pistols in the Pistol vs. Machine Pistol argument is that you can put Gas-Vents on a machine pistol, but not on a pistol. Mods and accessories really are pretty significant because they are one of the few things that actually cares about "type." You can get a B&P MP-9 that has 7 recoil compensation and FA fire without relying on any user-based recoil (ie, without assuming you are implanting a cyberarm gyromount or foot anchors, or have a 6+ strength), and pistols just can't do that.

As a shadowrunner, you really should be modding your guns. It's a cheap way to massive increase your firepower. If you can't afford a few thousand every few runs, you should have been a mage since they're making out like bandits.

You can actually just put the stock on as an mountless accessory on a machine pistol (Arsenal 34) so that's 6 slots used.

It's actually a Large Firing Selection Change for SA to BF (Arsenal 151) so that's 4 slots right there. The Colt 2066 is just as legal as the FN 5-7C in SR's legal world (i.e. Fake License or GTFO) and the Large Firing Selection Change would make it F. The Colt 2066 also doesn't have any innate RC. The 1 point RC is from Electronic Firing since they factor in RC from built in mods into the RC column. Thus a Colt 2066 with a stock has 2 RC. A better base is the Thunderbolt since it's already BF and has Gas Vent 2 which you can't put on a normal heavy pistol. I will grant that it can cause Lone Star aggro. You can also use one of the innate RC heavy pistols in Gun Heaven 2. Range can be a drawback, but 4 meters + move is going to cover most rooms and for much longer ranges, you're going to use your image magnification regardless. Thus, the real difference is 4-5 meters range and 40-50. Everywhere else, it's going to work to pretty much the same.

However even if we took your sample pistol as given, is it 16 BP better? I can get Palming 4 for that price! That's why you're using a FN 5-7C instead of one of the better pistols, so you don't have to buy Pistols 4.

That said, you can be a pure pistol users in SR. There's decent enough pistols for heavy assaults actually. Honestly, not much happens if you let machine pistols be used by the pistols group. You're going to use the Thunderbolt or Fubuki anyways. I'm actually a huge fan nowadays of Pistols + Heavy Weapon users. You focus on pistols for black trenchcoat, but you can pull out the guass rifle when needed. Jumping up from a BF pistol to a guass rifle/grenade launcher/HMG is actually worth 16 BP. The Automatics user's big advantage is that you have a alright black trenchcoat gun and heavy duty guns in the same skill. That's a tempting choice as well. Longarms's really the odd man out since he really has two pieces to his name. The even more meh than the FN 5-7C, short barreled T-250 for conceal and the Barrett 121 which is a cool but niche gun.

As for recoil penalty basically being +AP, it's basically the case if you're rolling 15+ dice* which you ought to be at this level of optimization. You aren't glitching noticeably more on 13 dice versus 15. You're going to hit the vast majority of people especially since they'll have -1 from the first shot and any wound penalties. You're right against hardened armor, AP matters more, but even there it's a small case. Either it's trivial to beat the meager hardened armor value or you're going to need 5 net hits or something. Thus for a very small subset of opponents (dudes with hardened armor and have hardened armor values that aren't easy to beat nor nearly impossible to beat), you're right. Against everyone else, you rolling an extra dice is basically the same as them rolling one fewer dice to resist damage.


Oh yeah. What guns fall under which skills is both important and very silly and stupid. It's generally bad in the pistols->machine pistol->SMG range. Why can this BF pistol have gas vents while this other can't? But that's SR. As for the airburst, it's actually quite vital for Grenade Launchers. Otherwise, the 3d6 scatter is a pain in the neck. On the average scatter roll (10-11), you'll need 5-6 net hits to hit your target. With airburst, you only need at most 3 ever.

*- That's Agility 5(7) from Muscle Toner 2, Automatics 6, and a Smartlink. Core Only and everything. With a bit of play under your belt, you can get a specialization, reflex recorder, and tacnet 4 for 22 dice shooting. You'll have that roll even if you use the dice pool cap rules.

@UmaroVI

Quite right - it's far easier to get FA on a machine pistol than on a heavy pistol, and that's when you actually need that level of recoil compensation.

Although at that point, you're probably better just going with a submachine gun. Better base damage, a lot more built in recoil compensation and other goodies, FA comes standard on most, tend to have larger ammo reserves, similar costs and often better availabilities, more room for mods (because you're not modifying as much to to get FA and recoil compensation), and much better ranges. The tradeoff is +2 additional concealability in comparison to machine pistols (which can partially be compensated for with a reduced barrel, which isn't so bad given the extended ranges of SMGs).

Again why I say machine pistols are more beneficial to a Pistols user than to an Automatics user. And hence the houserule.

~Umidori

Well damn. How did I miss that? I read it like five times and still never saw it. Think what threw me is that BF can go to SA for a small.

Touché. Should have caught that, was just using the stats list where it lists 1 RC because it factors that in. My bad.

You're consistantly failing to get my point, though.

I was specifically talking about someone who has a high Pistols, zero Automatics, and my houserule that allows Pistols users to use Machine Pistols as ordinary Pistols. Yes, there are arguably more optimal ways to build your character that focus on the Automatics, but that's the point of the house rule - it makes Pistols a more attractive choice for the more Black Trenchcoat style of play without being overpowered or unreasonable. That's all I was ever talking about.

Ahh, forgot the scatter reduction. That'll do it.

~Umidori

The problem with that is pistols is already an attractive choice in such games. Adding machine pistols adds barely anything. A Fubuki is better than nearly any machine pistol. A Thunderbolt even with the legacy of Lone Star aggro is a great gun. It's no Supermach, but it's far more legal and easily to get "enough" RC for. In a Black Trenchcoat game, tasers and Elans are amazing. Tasers have the rare distinction of being legal, and the Elan ignores MAD scanners. The easiest (and RAW) change to buff pistols is to remember that SnS exist. SnS also help greatly with mundane versus spirits too and that's a plus in my book.

Edit- Honestly, it isn't pistols that need saving. Concealable firearms are really important in SR and Automatics are only good enough at that role. It's Longarms that really needs saving and ultimately, it'll better to merge Longarms and the larger automatics together. Then you cut out the smaller automatics and put them into Pistols not because pistols needs it but to deprive the new engorged Automatics a vital role. Then you can go Pistol only, Pistol + Heavy Weapons, Pistol + Merged Automatics/Longarms. Right now, you have Pistols, Automatics, Pistols + Heavy Weapons and everything under longarms gets left in the cold.

I think some get the point exactly... the one gentleman with his comment about "It's not worth 16BP for pistols when I put 16 in palming to hide the machine pistol". I can't see a better argument in this thread that automatics are far better than any other single gun skill. Others completely missed it or don't understand the rules... such as paraphrasing "can't make a hyper-velocity battle rifle". The rules state that battle rifles are equivalent to assault rifles for all modifications. So a Battle rifle is simply an assault rifle with +1DV better base code and range for all effective purposes of the rules. Yet by the strict reading of the same rules I can't put the same hyper-velocity on a belt-fed heavy weapon MG!!!

That's why I suggested using automatics as a 'helper skill'. Another option along those lines is we only have pistols and longarms... use the right one whenever you fire in SA or slower. However as soon as you start trying to use burst-fire... cap the skill at your automatics skill. So if you have a 5 in pistols... but only a 3 in automatics... aimed shots with a machine pistol are great at 5... but as soon as you flip the switch to full auto your automatics caps you to 3 dice (which you'll more than make up with the extra damage on a narrow, or the added penalty of dodging a wide burst).


I'll also preface this with this much... I believe one of the reasons that mages get a bad rap is because Spellcasting is too concentrated... I believe that it needs broken up into 5 (a skill for combat, illusions, healing, detection, mental manipulations, material manipulations), eliminate ritual magic as a seperate skill, and move counterspelling as an independant skill. So I don't see the need for only 1 or 2 firearms skills... automatics strike me as a problem because automatics is basically a firing mode (which requires special training), not a weapon type in itself. Also this is a systemic problem, the system de-emphasized skills over attributes. When my attribute can go to 9 or 12 (and cyber/bio/magic to augment attributes is so much cheaper than the ones for skills...) and skills only to 6 (9 with skill mods... which tend to be costly).


No insult intended to the other author, but I avoided commenting on the other firearms house rules thread with it's emphasis on shotguns... in SR3 I remember the be all and end all that shotguns were and didn't care for it. And I thought a lot of his rules were way to egregiously overpowered and essentially gun pr0n... (mid teens stun damage with a shotgun anyone before soak).

When I see this the only thing that really makes the automatics skill unique is it's ability to handle burst fire rules and weapons. What do you do, allow someone with longarms to use an assault rifle but only on SA mode?! Use automatics as a secondary skill only giving proficiency with burst fire modes?

Unlike most here I do see 3 distinct 'grades' of weapons. Pistols (1h), Carbines(1h w/ penalty or 2h), and Longarms (2h). Carbine is a smaller weapon that is designed primarily for 2 handed use, but can also be used 1 handed. SMG's are the poster child for this. But people are right a carbine wielded purely two handed is practically a longarm though they are noticably faster and agile with their lighter weight (pay for this by firing smaller rounds though)... however one-handed they handle nothing at all like a normal pistol (it's like trying to use sword training to fight with a mace... ones small light and agile, the other is big slow and hurts when it hits and kinda hard to hold out at arms length for any length of time). Carbines though is probably too much detail for a streamlined game system.

I believe heavy weapons are fine as is outside of the stupid recoil rules. Explanation... a MG is normally twice as heavy as a rifle... the extra weight REDUCES recoil problems doesn't *DOUBLE* them. And the big guns like an assault cannon only fire SS or SA anyhow so recoil is pretty much a non-issue for them! I also believe that automatics in game are problematic because heavy weapons don't do significantly more damage than them, and the sole reason to bring a white knight over an ares alpha is simply the ability to use an ammo belt. (innate recoil 2 + gas3, vs gas5... and lots of mods not available to heavy weapons at all). Why is it the heavier gun suffers more recoil than the smaller more agile one. (the reason the M-14 was trouble was because it was TOO LIGHT to effectively fire full auto). Even the HMG is a joke compared to hunting/sniper rifles.

Once you start going down that path... then suddenly... well there should be double recoil penalties on pistols, longarms, and carbines (one-handed). No double recoil on heavy weapons or SMG's (2hands... -1DV+1AP compared to AR's less damage per round but far more controllable in bursts). Like I said though it starts to get a little too messy when you try and make things streamlined and easy to run with.

I say some of that again speaking from personal experience... I've had a malfunctioning .45 go full-auto on me... even in a two-handed grip the thing was completely uncontrollable and I was lucky I was able to keep it pointed downrange while it emptied itself.

Then again this is also a game... so whatever needs done needs be simple...

How to balance Battle Rifles? Easy, use recoil, conceal, and weight, the things that IRL counter the increase in firepower. Should a battle rifle put out more damage than a traditional automatic, (AK) YOU BET. Light machineguns do more damage (and should really have higher damage codes) and are essentially heftier made battle rifles (at least as far as modern battle rifles are concerned).

Daylen... really... Lets pull out a very basic example which disproves your assertion.

M-14... battle rifle (fires 7.62, 11lb)
M-16... assault rifle (fires 5.56, 9lb)
SAW... LMG (fires 5.56, 22lb)
M60... MMG (fires 7.62, ~20lb unloaded... others are loaded weight)

They fire the exact same round... the exact same distance... with the exact same damage....

Most, if not all, commonly used LMG's in service today simply fire the same ammunition as used in the assault rifle. The LMG itself though is normally twice the weight and accepts belted ammunition feeds (and in some cases, also accepts assault rifle mags in a pinch). Assault rifle is light and not designed for sustained automatic fire... the LMG on the other hand IS designed for sustained automatic fire (hence the bipod and the heavier mass and more recoil absorption features). In fact, the MMG is commonly only seen mounted on vehicles (which fires the 7.62 round above used by the battle rifle).

Even going back to WW2... the .30cal MG fired the same round as the battle rifles... but the reason it was a 'light' MG and not a medium MG back then was because it was mounted on a bipod with a lightweight air-cooled barrel for mobility and lacked sufficient cooling to engage in sustained fully automatic fire. (unlike the tripod mounted ones with water jackets... also firing the same ammo). The HMG of course in the allied arsenal being the M-2 .50cal.

I kinda of like this distinction better, but for pistols it is not that they are 1 handed (you optimally use both hands) but that the grip and stance used is different from that of a rifle. Carbines/SMGs are kind of in between the two. Anyone with RL xp using a SMG (like an MP5, Uzi, Mac-10, grease gun, or M-4) can comment on how it feels compared to an M-16 or a Pistol?

I've fired an MP5, AR-15 (civ M-16), M-4 and M1a (civ M-14), but I'm not an expert. I'm sure there are people that fire SMG's from the hip or like a pistol, but the MP5 to me just seemed like a really light small longarm with very little recoil. It's nothing like a pistol. We held it the same way as a rifle and I think the skill to use an M-16 or MP5 easily translate. The Carbine (the M-4) feels very similar to the AR-15, but it has noticeably more recoil. Still not a lot of recoil, since it's still firing a .223, but enough that I noticed the difference. The M1a (the battle rifle) is heavy and has way more recoil, it would take a much bigger guy than me to keep something like that under control in full auto if I was firing from the shoulder.

My vote if you're going to change the rules would be two firearms skills, hell I would probably collapse crossbows into long arms since firing the two is very similar (at least at close range, longer range when you start having to account for drop it gets very different very fast)-
Pistols, covering tasers, hold-outs, light, heavy, and machine pistols. (Spec, Automatic fire, Semi-automatic fire, tasers, Moving Targets)
Longarms, covering shotguns, submachine guns, carbine and the various rifles.

Double post.

To back up Thorya, I tend to fire the MP-5 from the hip. Chalk it up to learning to shoot with paintball guns before graduating to the real thing. True story, with a single shot from the hip, I took out a flying dragonfly at 35 yards (with the MP-5). Might not be much of a modifier in SR's world, but damnit if that wasn't an impressive shot at the time.

I'm also inclined to agree on firearms skill by fire type. SS and SA are identical. BF? I wouldn't even know how to aim, nevermind the madness of an HV-slinging assault rifle.

For the sake of theorycrafting, how would that be handled?

Let's just say we've got the two firearm skills - Standard and Automatics. If you're only skilled in shooting Standard and using an SS or SA weapon, it would of course be as normal. But what if in a pinch you had to use an Automatic? How would that be handled? Default for no skill? Partial dice?

And of course the opposite scenario - skilled only in Automatics, but have to use a Standard weapon. Is it really that different to fire only one round from an automatic rifle compared to three? Wouldn't it actually be easier? At worst, maybe you'd overcompensate, expecting more recoil than you suffer? Again, does it make any sense to default for having no skill in Standard weapons, or is partial dice reasonable?

I think one of the major factors here is that in SR recoil is it's own universal event, unrelated to your skill with a weapon. And yet in real life, your skill with a weapon is chiefly concerned with how well you can point the thing, and how well you can compensate for recoil. So as long as the weapon skills and the recoil system are divorced from each other, nothing is ever going to make sense. If we're going to consider ways of revamping the firearms skills, we need to think about how guns operate at their core levels.

Shadowrun's primary matter of concern is how you hold a weapon - handguns versus longarms. But you can't just divide firearms purely based on that. A high powered handgun can have a lot more recoil and be substantially harder to use than a low powered longarm. In general, a firearm's difficulty of use has two main components. First is the weapon's caliber - the more powerful a round is, the more recoil you face. The second is rate of fire - shooting more bullets produces more recoil.

So let's look at what we need to factor into our Firearms skills so far.

1) Manner of handling.
2) Recoil from weapon power.
3) Recoil from automatic fire.

Now, there's already some inherent interaction going on between these qualities. For a given amount of recoil produced by a given round, smaller and lighter guns are affected more drastically while larger and heavier guns are less affected. There's nothing stopping you from firing .50 anti-material rifle rounds from a handgun, but the recoil is going to be much, much worse because a lighter gun has less inertia and absorbs far less of the energy from the round, meaning you need to have it clamped down with a vice if you don't want it to go flying out of your hand.

Likewise, recoil is also affected by the amount of time between shots. For example, an expert with revolvers doesn't try to simply outmuscle the recoil from their weapon - rather they work around it, redirect it, or even make use of it. To properly use a high powered revolver you must properly time your shots, giving yourself enough of a window between rounds to properly wrangle the recoil and get your gun back on target, without eatting up too much time either. True experts can also use the muzzle climb to their advantage when shooting at multiple targets in a horizontal line, by angling the gun roughly 90 degrees to one side. (A better known, although wholly ineffective, offshoot of this technique is the "street" style of shooting displayed by urban gangs.)

A similar effect crops up with automatic weapons. The reason the three round burst became such a staple of modern combat is that it puts more lead in the air with a minimum of recoil while maintaining an economy of bullets. You get a bit of climb, sure, but nowhere near as much as if you just unload on full auto. Of course, once again, the heavier the gun, the less of an effect this recoil has. The important thing to remember is that a weapon adds recoil with every new round fired, and the faster you fire, the more quickly that recoil builds up and the more effort you have to put into compensating for it.

So here's what we might do.

1) Work out a specific recoil value for each type of round.
2) Work out recoil reduction values for various weapon weights or weight categories.
3) Work out recoil reduction values for the weapon handling styles - handgun vs longarm.
4) Work out recoil reduction values for specially designed recoil compensation systems like gas-vent and the like.
5) Work out recoil reduction values for external factors like character strength, gyro-stabilization, etc.
6) Multiply the final modified recoil value by the rate of fire to determine final recoil.

Gonna make up some numbers here, totally off the cuff, so don't put too much stock in them.

So for example, let's say you've got two weapons that fire the same kind of rifle round - one weapon is a longarm, the other is a handgun. Both start with a Recoil Per Round of 10. For this example, let's say the handgun's weight reduces recoil half as much as the longarm, and that using one hand is half as effective as using two, but all other factors are the same.

Handgun: We start with 10 base, -2 for weight, -2 for handling, and we've got a Final Recoil Value of 6.
Longarm: We start with 10 base, -4 for weight, -4 for handling, and we've got a Final Recoil Value of 2.

So let's say that for every, I dunno, 5 points of Final Recoil, you get 1 die off, whatever. Prove the concept first, then make the numbers work.

Handgun

1st Shot at 6 = -0 *
2nd Shot at 12 = -2
3rd Shot at 18 = -3
4th Shot at 24 = -4
5th Shot at 30 = -6
Etc.

* No recoil on first round fired.

Longarm

1st Shot at 2 = -0
2nd Shot at 4 = -0
3rd Shot at 6 = -1
4th Shot at 8 = -1
5th Shot at 10 = -2
Etc.

So firing the same round from a handgun with half the weight produces a lot more recoil than firing from a full weight longarm.

Thoughts so far?

~Umidori

What are you trying to show?

Well, if you take weight and encumbrance out of the equation, of course battle rifles are superior.

One of the big reasons there was a switch to the lighter assault rifles was at that time, soldiers were being send on longer patrols long distances away from supply bases. So they needed a rifle with lighter ammo, since they needed to carry more and carry that additional load longer. It helped that studies at the time concluded that firefights were happening at short range most of the time anyway, and that wounding might be better than outright killing since a wounded soldier eats up more resources and manpower than a dead one.

More recently, we're seeing a swing back to heavier calibers since many troops are on short patrols close to home base. If they need to penetrate deeper into 'enemy' territory, well by golly they establish a new supply base further in. Weight and encumbrance become less of an issue, as does the need to carry a ton of extra ammo. Additionally, due to not fighting in low-visibility battlegrounds like jungles, firefights are happening at longer ranges, requiring more powerful ammo.

But Shadowrun really doesn't model weight and encumbrance all that much. So it's not surprising that battle rifles appear strictly better.



-k

See : Landmines.

But I still disagree with the second part. Upmodding an FA AR to HV is damned potent, and most BRs (all that I know of) can't do that.

I was showing that you had things clearly and provably wrong... that a LMG firing the same round as an assault rifle should NOT have a higher damage code than the AR, merely be better at slinging more bullets faster and in a sustained manner. Any changes in damage code should be a result of automatic fire, not of the weapon itself.

A MMG is effectively the MG equivalent of a battle rifle, not a LMG.

I was also showing why MG's SHOULDN"T have double recoil penalties while AR's/SMG's/MP's should.



KarmaInferno:
That wounding bit is an urban legend... the full size m-16 was liked for the lethality of it's round under 200m (which tends to fragment on impact at those ranges). The M-4 on the other hand stops fragmenting at 50m with it's shorter barrel and lower muzzle velocities (it really is a true carbine, it doesn't take full advantage of the round). The problem is if you are in a 'short range' firefight (compared to artillery/mortar/support weapon ranges)... wounded soldiers still fire back. Not only that, capturing wounded puts a heavy toll on your own support apparatus.

Where wounding does come in is with artillery... if you shell the other guys base or lines far away from your own troops... then the support costs imposed are much more strategically relevant and less dangerous to your men at risk.

The other bit on ammo weight is spot on but for a different reason. Full auto and volume of fire were the big things then... and carrying more ammo was a necessary cost of it. The thought being more smaller rounds was superior to one big one. The range part of the equation was mostly a side effect of prevailing army doctrine and the central theatre of operations. Jungle fighting didn't call for long range small arms.... And standing army doctrine was to fix the target with the infantry, then engage it with artillery, air support, mg's, armored vehicles... or other larger support weapons.

The reason you're seeing larger weapons again in the desert is because you're not in a jungle with limited sight lines. They needed weapons with effective ranges more than 200m again!!! (5.56 beyond 200m only tends to be good for poking small holes in things, not putting them down). So you started to see a move back towards this with the inclusion of a designated marksman armed with a 7.62 rifle in many squads. Not the whole squad re-armed but one man trained to be a marksman to take out point targets at long ranges without the collateral & civvy damage which comes with MG's and other support weapons.



Umidori:
Overall I think that's simply too complex for most people....

Another mechanic I can think of which might work simply enough though is heat. Using cased ammo helps with heat dissipation but leaves behind shell casings as evidence. Caseless doesn't have a heatsink it ejects every time you fire the gun. MG's are designed for sustained automatic fire so don't suffer from it. But anything smaller start running a heat surplus as they fire... use it as a jam percentage... or even worse slam firing. (chamber gets so hot.. it sets off rounds as soon as they're loaded whether you hold the trigger or not, reason many old SMG's/MG's fire from an open bolt...).

For every round you fire you gain 1 heat. You dissipate say 4 heat per combat pass with a AR/SMG, 5 if using cased ammo. For every say 3 points of heat leftover from previous rounds... you need 1 less '1' to glitch.

Simple and elegant. Though I admit the numbers are just a first guess stab off the top of my head. (just low enough so firing constant 3rd bursts... will cause overheating problems after 3 passes).

Ah. The strawman argument it seems. I never indicated that machine guns should suffer high recoil penalties, only that battle rifles should. If you think me wrong try shooting one while standing and see how fast you can get back on target compared to an AR and shooting out to 100 yards.

1. nato 556 as used in the SAW and M16 is not a full powered cartridge, it is an intermediate cartridge. Machine guns use full powered cartridges (7.62x51, x63, x54, 303 brit etc) Sub-Machine guns use pistol ammo, thus the sub. I'm not sure what the proper syntax would be for an intermediate cartridge, but it is not machine gun. Squad automatic weapon is as good as any, light machine gun is not.

2. The Bren LMG, MG 42 and BAR are examples of an LMG, both origionally used 7.62x63. Damage would match a battle rifle roughly.

3. As all ammo weights the same it is safe to assume traditional meanings of the words and as the LMG has a damage code more in line with Rifle damage codes instead of AR damage codes it is a crappy low end (but still full powered) cartridge.

4. Battle Rifles use full power cartridges not intermediate, thus it should be higher than an AR/AK and more in line with the other weapons that use full power cartridges. However their weight is usually half to one quarter the weight of a machine gun, thus high recoil penalties are in line.

Daylen... if you think that is a straw man then you REALLY need a lesson in logic and argumentation... I directly addressed what you said. All you're doing now is falling back on obsolete military definitions which CLEARLY are NOT what shadowrun uses. (proof positive is that AR's and LMG's have the same damage code, JUST LIKE MODERN LMGS AND ARS!!!). And for the records I *HAVE* fired a battle rifle on full auto.


I QUOTE you yet again "Light machineguns do more damage (and should really have higher damage codes) and are essentially heftier made battle rifles (at least as far as modern battle rifles are concerned)."

You outright said a LMG should have the exact same damage code as an battle rifle... when *MODERN* LMG's fire AR calibres and rounds. You even used the word *MODERN* when your use of the term in the rest of the post is *OBSOLETE*. I even went so far as to explain what differentiated a MMG from a LMG in ww2 when they still fired the heavier rounds in most everything!!

1. Do you even know the meaning of 'assault rifle'. Hint the DEFINITION includes the words 'intermediate cartirdge'. The SAW *IS* a LMG... in fact all modern US and most world LMG's fire belted intermediate cartirdges today!!! The only gun in WW2 to fire an intermediate cartridge was StG44 the first assault rifle.
1a. all forces in WW2 pretty much exclusively issued their infantry with battle rifles... and all the MG's where likewise chambered. In *MODERN* parlance... they'd be largely considered MMG's (not light... though in the day the LMG term came from the choice of barrels and whether a lighter bipod or tripod was used).
1b. If you handed a WW1 trench infantryman a M-16 from today... they would also classify it as a machine gun (same as the period BAR). Tech marched past that gun and it slowly got demoted from LMG to automatic rifle as newer and better guns evolved to fill the role.

2. Another case of you're talking out of ignorance... only the BAR fires the .30-06. The Bren fires the .303 british a much lower power round with inferior ballistics. And the MG42 the same round as the KAR98 (7.92mm, again lower power than the .30-06 despite the larger calibre).

3. I have no idea what you're talking about. Shadowrun LMG's have the EXACT SAME damage code as AR's... which exactly mirrors *MODERN* use of the words LMG and AR.

4. Once again you have no idea what you're talking about... the typical battle rifle is just under half the weight. And you've obviously never fired an M-14 on full auto... the gun is BARELY controllable with training. Even today... battle rifles are generally about 1-2lb heavier than the AR.


The modern differentiation of LIGHT MG only came out with the wide spread use of new guns firing belted intermediate cartridges.

I've pretty much assumed that the SR teminology wouls call the M249 an LMG and an M60 an MMG. Granted when the M-60 was originally introduced (after the BAR left service in the late 1950's) it was light compared to the M2 Ma'Duece.

Funny story--I got a couple of boxes blacked tipped 8mm mauser ammo (7.92) that was meant for the MG42. I shot it through my KAR98, it was a damn hot load and had bruises on my shoulder for the next couple of days. Not to go to gun-speak (namely cause I don't make my own ammo) but there are also differences in cartradges of the same calliber. This can be due to bullet shape, powder composition and the quantity of powder used.
BTW-if you ever run across soviet manufactured 8mm mauser ammo manufactured in the 50's--don't use it, it's unreliable as hell.

Black tip... I wonder if the germans used the same markings? Black tip is AP rounds (not quite APDS... but still). Generally they are hotter loads than normal ball.

If so, I'm not surprised at all that they're loaded hot. You see a similar problem with firing some new rounds in old .30-06 rifles (like some early springfields)... when the .30-06 replaced the .30-03 the cartridge was loaded with boattails and pretty much packed completely full with powder. Half century later... gun powder had advanced that they needed less to get the same performance... so we saw the 7.62x63 shortened down to the 7.62x51. Two reasons, less powder needed for same performance, and the shorter cartridge length made it more suitable to automatic weapons (the bolt didn't need to go as far back and forth). So you saw the M-14 which was nothing more than a M1garand with a full auto selector firing the shorter .308 round and a removable box mag replacing the old internal clip magazine.

So the problem is... a modern .30-06 cartridge still has the same volume as the old one... but can load more effective powder... so a hot load can damage an old gun if it's not able to withstand the higher power available in a hotloaded cartridge.

Funny you should mention the mauser. This morning on the commode I read an article that included some interesting tidbits about the 7x57 (the real mauser, not the civilian version): the Germans were changing their cartridge constantly and had no real consistency one would expect from shooting old brit or USA ammo.

Would be funny if they did considering black tip is not even a consistent indicator in US ammo (green tip 556 nato).

Don't kid yourself the old 30-06 was more powerful than the x51. The x51 is even designed for lighter bullets to match the same tragectory as the 06'. It might not be much of a difference in power, but its there.

I didn't say the old '06 was more powerful in standard loads. WW2 they started loading almost everything with those squarish M2 ball bullets. I said that improvements in powder meant that LESS powder could deliver the same results in a shorter cartridge better suited to automatic actions. So the "new" .308 was and is supposed to be equivalent in performance.


But you get some people who load '06 cartridges with MORE of the same powder and in a long barrel that still produces results. The '06 can outperform the .308 simply because it's a bigger cartridge capable of packing in more powder. These hot loads you sometimes need to watch out for in the older guns as their actions may not handle the higher pressures well.

Isn't green ring supposed to be tracer? Or am I confusing ring with tip....

Ignoring all the posts dealing with the real world, I fail to see what the big deal is. If you need to balance battle rifles out, try using law enforcement or other in-game solutions. For instance, you can always have contacts come up dry on ammo, or replacement/new BRs.

There is a reason why my gun-bunny character is using a sport rifle over a true sniper rifle. In fact, I fail to ever see a use for any of the sniper rifles since most lack portability and a hunting rifle, even a big-boy like the 950, isn't going to draw as much attention as military hardware if you're crossing borders (assuming that you're bringing it somewhere you can hunt).

The article sounds a bit off. There were lots of different caliber Mauser's made, almost all were military. Beyond superficial differences, civillian and military versions are essentially the same guns.

There's mausers that used the 7mmX57mm (generally refered to the 7mm) the 7.92X57 (8mm)mauser, 6.5 mm Swedish Mauser and a bunch of other chamberings. There's even an Anti-tank rifle version (in 13mm). Alot of this is due to the requests of the various nations using it. It is comparable to the AK-47 in terms of how many countries used it. Especially after WW1 with the loss of the patents by Mauser.

Personally, I find the 6.5 the better shooter but finding that ammo is sometimes problematic in the states.

I had tracers that were orange....

I love my 6.5 Swedish... I have an 8mm Mauser, but it is just over 100 yearrs old, I think, and it needs some TLC.

My houserule for Firearms skills is:

There is no such skill as “Automatics”; that is instead a specialisation of other skills. Skills in the Firearms Group include Pistols (Holdouts, Light Pistols, Heavy Pistols, Machine Pistols, SMGs), Longarms (SMGs, Shotguns, Assault Rifles, Battle Rifles, Sport Rifles), and Heavy Weapons (Grenade launchers, LMGs, MMGs, HMGs).

Yes, that means SMGs can be fired using either Pistols or Longarms. Knock yourselves out.

I'll admit, reading this thread has made me think I might still need to make a few case-by-case exceptions (the MGL-6, for example). Not sure yet how I'll handle things like that (Maybe allow the character to use an alternate, specified skill at a -1 or -2 DP penalty? *shrug*).

Who was it that made the house rule that only shotguns could fire SnS rounds? This is the one I use. For one thing it adds flavour in that a mundane spirit/paracritter hunter would probably take Longarms for SnS goodness as well as the ItNW DV of the PSJJ Elephant Gun ...

Nothing says "I'm Overcompensating" than .700 Nitro Express.

lol...the Nitro Express... when .50AE just isn't enough and the punt gun is too big...

Naah... Try a 2-Bore...

I even have a bayonet and sling for mine (It was made in 1943, and has all matching parts). My 8mm on the other hand is a spanish surplus weapon made from parts...

What are you getting at? The PJSS Elephant Rifle is not a shotgun and SnS always does 6S(e) regardless of the weapon's base damage unless you use additional house rules.

Dak, I think the point was that the elephant gun is one of the few non shotguns that can reasonably use the large bore round of SnS.

No Bayonet for me...

Or that fact that the elephant gun is one of the few weapons with a high enough damage code that it would be likely to penetrate a spirits ItNW, and aside from assault canons, all guns with such a high damage code are longarms.


So restated, longarms lets you use high damage weapons like the elephant gun and Barret (which through sheer Damage value are more likely to penetrate armor), and Shotguns which would allow you to use SnS under said ruling (and we all know why they are good against spirits).

Except that almost a wide burst from any weapon loaded with APDS will get through ItNW of most spirits. The rest just die to stunbolts.