Nope, because the example I gave would still have identical outcomes for just 3 successes on attackers side (due to the CP loss caused by the armor), because even with just 3 successes a full dodge is mechanically not possible in that particular comparison. As mentioned in the previous post: I didn't even look at the exact numbers prior to making my post with that example and it still "worked out" the way I somewhat expected.



Or lower. That's why I went with the base TN.



DRT is influenced from two sides as well.



I like the mechanic as well. I only commented on what you can expect to see happening. I guess that's what I deserve for answering to a question of someone ~sigh~

As a matter of fact I made no comment about my personal feelings in that regard. So no, his "oberservation" was not "spot on" just as yours isn't either.



Guess what: I didn't make the claim that it is a "hideous" act of metagaming. I just said it was metagaming. My sole reference on my personal feelings there was, that such metagaming doesn't necessarily lead to "good role play" and that's it. Anything beyond that is just in the imagination of you as the (not too attentive but much assuming) reader.



Ah, so the potential problem about time consuming combat mechanics can be resolved by enforcing a mechanic that's not explicitly part of the rules. How funny to hear that ~sigh~



It becomes a weakness when it's too time consuming ... and guess what, that's why it was mentioned in the first place.
That aside I still do have the feeling that players (and not the characters!) making that decision based on system familiarity instead of what the character actually knows in a specific situation amounts to a "flaw" in the system. The flawed system part there being the player himself and not the rules.



Chummer, you're just making another stupid assumption there in order to make a snide comment. I didn't say that I personally do anything like that. I commented based on observations of 15 years of SR3 gaming in particular and about 30 years of playing P&P in general ... both as player as well as GM/DM (or whatever name the system gives to the person in "charge").



Which will require the GM to strictly abide to combat sequence at all times and never making a reference to armament of opponents. In theory that works just fine ... in practice? Personal experience makes me seriously doubt that.



So you're pretty much giving them the "9" or "7" prior to soaking. Hey, you just made your own comment that you directed at me worthless. Should I congratulate on that?



I guess I'll have to introduce you to the logic function called implication there (A->B): Draw a conclusion (B) from a flawed assumption (A) and you'll have a "true" but worthless statement.

*sigh* I'm not going to bother providing. a full analysis for you, because I'm pretty sure you wouldn't accept it, no matter what the evidence. So, I'll give you a math problem. With 4 successes from a base S weapon, versus someone with body 3 and 5 combat pool... what are the odds of avoiding all damage between all-dodge, and all-soak?

Get back on topic, Cain et al.

I'll try and be clearer. I don't know how to set up a table, so forgive my clumsy formatting.

Let's say you are hit by a base S weapon with 4 successes. You can spend combat pool to dodge or soak. What are the results possible for soaking?

0-1 successes: D+ damage.
2-3 successes: D damage.
4-5 successes: S damage
6-7 successes: M damage
8-9 successes: L damage
10+ successes: No damage.

Now, let's compare it to dodging:

0-1 successes: D+ damage
2-3 successes: D damage
4 successes: S damage
5+ successes: No damage.

So, even if you fail to completely dodge, you're doing about the same as if you soaked. And if you do completely dodge, you get the best possible outcome with fewer dice.

To a certain extent, TN doesn't matter, if you don't have the dice to succeed. One of my favorite characters was a body 2 mage. It didn't matter how much armor she piled on, she just didn't have the dice to effctively soak. Dodging was always the better option, because it took fewer dice to dodge than soak. Combat pool being a limited resource, the best option was the one that used the fewest dice.

The only time it wasn't was with tanks. My troll had an effective body of 15, so he always had more than enough dice to soak. But then again, with that many dice, he never spent combat pool on soaking either. He had a frightening edge in that he could pour his entire combat pool into offense.

Power is an important factor to make that descision. Bearing in mind Dodge TNs start at 4 but most soak TNs tend to run from 6 to 18 (minus armour).

Combat Pool is a resource instead of a standing stat that has the option to be spent in the ways listed so it's certainly Not meta gaming to make the choice to use it in any way the player chooses. In fact by its very design one could almost assume its intended to be used in whatever way the player believes it benefits the character best to do so in any situation. Just like Karma or Edge in the different editions is a resource to be exploited to best benefit the character.

Mages have an advantage when it comes to Combat Pool - they don't use it to attack (unless they are forgoing spellcasting to shoot at someone for some reason), so they can spend it all on defense.

They also tended to have a lower Combat Pool, so that was something of a wash.


Well, sorta. The meta part of that decision wasn't the power or TN, it was the number of successes they got to hit you. If the player knew the other guy only got one success, they'd always try to dodge, and allocate as few combat pool dice as they could.

So, in the example I gave, even with a modified TN of 2, you'd need to roll at least 10 dice to soak all the damage. If you had Body 3, you had to spend at least 7 combat pool dice to have a chance of pulling that off. However, you only needed 5 to dodge on a good roll. Generally speaking, it takes fewer successes to dodge than soak; so if your body was low, you spent less pool dodging than soaking. Dice pool management was an essential skill, and usually the option that took fewer dice was the better one.

That only really applies if your magicians aren't taking advantage of elemental manipulations. Flinging fireballs and acid streams can burn up your combat pool, too. Which is good, since they'll need what's left of their spell pool to survive the drain in some cases.

As far as Cain's success table breakdown, the only issue I take with it is "D+ damage." That + doesn't seem to exist under the standard damage resolution
in ranged combat, staging simply stops at D, as damage is determined after all the dice are rolled. There's no increase in power, no extra boxes of damage,
all that other stuff comes from Optional Rules in other books so far as I am aware. (Cannon Companion springs to mind as the most common source).

Granted, a lot of groups use those optional rules, but the +1 or +2 power for staging over D doesn't really work in 3E due to how combat is resolved, though
extra boxes of damage (the over-damage rules) do have a knack for really wrecking somebody's day.

If magic's not an option for you, you're probably going to get shot and injured semi-regularly. Maybe not severely, but often enough that you get tired of it
real fast. If you do have some mojo-flingers available, a quickened Armor spell (or via sustaining focus) can really do wonders to helping cut down on that
damage you're soaking either way. Extra points of B/I that don't count towards mobility or layering penalties and reduce the hurt from bullets. That's handy.

A quickened Armor spell is one of those ideas that seem really neat in theory but really really bad in practice if you play it by the RAW. Read the Armor spell description if you think otherwise.

The over-damage rules are in the BBB, I just peeked and found them on p126. I wrote down D+ because I never saw a table that didn't use them. At any event, it doesn't really change the chart results. A D wound still takes you down, the over-damage just makes it harder to get back up again, and you need just as many successes to reduce the damage as listed.

I did forget that it was optional, I was just so used to it, I didn't recall it wasn't a core rule.


It can be helpful, but only if you've got the dice to back it up. If your body is low, you're still better off dodging.

For example, the body 2 mage I played. I thought I was oh-so clever, when I abused the Fashion spell to make a suit of security armor look like a biker's leather outfit. I could walk around town in full security armor, without raising an eyebrow, and I had the Armor spell to stack on top of that. Unfortunately, I still couldn't take a hit, because I couldn't stage down damage without blowing through a ton of combat pool. I eventually stopped using it, because it was more hassle than it was worth.

Really? With Intelligence and Willpower as two of the three Attributes used to calculate it, my mages tended to have a Combat Pool around 8 or so, which is not bad at all.

Indeed... it was the RARE Physically oriented individual that had more Combat Pool than my Magical Guys did.

Most of my physicals had more combat pool . .
Due to being able to simply go above and beyond the natural maximum in quickness usually.
Only Trolls were of course sadly lagging behind everybody else, but as i stated, they usually don't need it as much.

The numbers here are slightly off. The final result is correct however at 10 successes.

0 Soak Successes = D Wound, and if you're playing with over damage, you'd go one box into Overflow (assuming the weapon power is greater than 1.5 times the body of the target, which is really powerful if you think about it, since that means a heavy pistol causes it on anyone with less than a 6 body, and assuming you're playing with optional rules).
1-2 Soak Successes = D Wound
At this point, the shooter still has 2+ Net successes to stage the Damage up to D.
3-4 Soak Successes = S Wound. (Seems to be where the error is, which corrects itself at 6 successes)
Shooter has 0-1 net successes. Not enough to stage the weapon up.
5 Soak Successes = S Wound
Here the target finally has net successes compared to the shooter, but not enough to stage the weapon down.
6-7 Soak Successes = M Wound
The target has the 2 Net successes to stage the damage down one level (But not enough to stage it down twice)
8-9 Soak Successes = L Wound
The target has 4 Net successes to stage the damage down two levels at this point (But not enough to stage it down 3 times)
10 Soak Successes = No damage
The target has the 6 Net successes needed to stage the weapon down completely at this point.

There's a simple formula for figuring out how many successes are needed to soak something completely, and its (Shooter successes)+(Damage Level of weapon x2). The Damage Level of the weapon is converted into numbers. Light is 1, Moderate 2, Serious is 3, Deadly is 4.



Presumably you're talking about the glowing aspect of it. Presumably the smart mages are the ones that redesign the spell to avoid that...

Ah, so now it's time for thought-terminating clichés, where you try to cover up your own faults and by claiming my inability / unwillingness to accept "evidence".



It has been a "math problem" all along. The real problem lies somewhere else.



So you're now trying to use another selection biased example to "prove" a point against a claim I never made. And your example is one that you distinctively built for one answer: 3.125% vs. 0% in best case scenario and 0% vs. 0% on everything else.

The fun part there being that you repeatedly tried to accuse me of using (selection) biased examples while concentrating on your own examples with even stronger selection bias than mine ever had.

But in order to get a bit more out of those "odds" in your example I'll have a different look at it: Your example lacks in certain areas in order to actually use it for reasonable statistical analysis. You're giving no armor values, so subsequently it's not possible to evaluate the required TNs for soaking vs. Dodging ... although those TNs were one of the main aspects in my comment about players meta-gaming the system. Additionally you give no explicit number for Quickness although Quickness influences Combat Pool availability based on armor and thus also influences probabilities.

Let's just forget that I still haven't made any claim that there can't be situations where - due to CP size and attribute values - Dodging can / and will be the better choice and have a look at some of the probabilities, just as you were asking but with some added "bias" of my own:

1. I will only look at the situations where TN for Soaking is less or equal to TN of Dodge, because that was what I initially commented on with regards to players "meta gaming" the system in favor of soaking.
2. I will assume an armored target, because unarmored targets would face a higher soak TN than dodge for anything but the lower powered hold-outs (which don't come with a base damage level of S anyway) and subsequently wouldn't fulfill the requirements of No.1
3. Since you tried to accuse me of "fudging" the numbers to my favor I will even leave out layered armor in general and with FFBA in particular since those would further complicate things for keeping CP unaffected or decrease soaking TNs without negative effects for the target as far as CP is concerned. I'll go with the rather generic armor values of 3/0 (secure clothing), 4/2 (lined coat) and 5/3 (armored jacket). I could include a 6/4 light security armor as well but that would just repeat the pattern for higher power values.
4. Ranged weapons with a (physical) base damage level of S come with powers between 7 and 10 in various categories. Since this will cause quite a number of calculations already, I'll stick to standard ammo and just focus on those with power of 7 because the higher power codes result in the same general pattern as long as the main premise concerning TNs is still meet.
5. As previously stated the CP value of 5 means a minimum of 3.33 attribute points on Intelligence, Willpower and Quickness and a maximum of 3.66 attribute points on these which somewhat represents an "above average" situation for Shadowrun human. Now the main influential part for the probabilities there is the Quickness attribute, since it influences the actual number of CP dice while wearing armor. So I'll have a look at the probabilities with Quickness attributes of between 1 and 4 for otherwise unaugmented humans. There's no need for going up to Quickness 5 or 6 because at Quickness 4 no CP loss will occur for the armor values given in No.3 and thus the results would be identical from that point on.
6. Since d6 still have a discrete probability distribution I'll once more look at the average success rates and maybe comment on some of the probabilities for maximum success rates where needed.

So here we go (expect some rounding differences on the percentages)...

Situation I: 7S attack, 4 successes from attacker, Body 3, Quick 1, Armor 3/0; effective CP 4 (5-1 due to armor) => Complete Dodge is impossible, TN for Dodge = 4, TN for Soak = 4

• Probabilities for successes on Dodge roll: 4 = 6.25%; 3 = 25%; 2 = 37.5%; 1 = 25%; 0 = 6.25%; average success rate: 2 successes
• Probabilities for successes on DRT after Dodge: 3 = 12.5%; 2 = 37.5%; 1 = 37.5%; 0 = 12.5%; average success rate: 1.5 successes
• Probabilities for successes on direct DRT with CP: 7 = 0.78%; 6 = 5.47%; 5 = 16.41%; 4 = 27.34%; 3 = 27.34%; 2 = 16.41%; 1 = 5.46%; 0 = 0.78%; average success rate: 3.5 successes
• Damage expectations based on average success rates: S with a low tendency towards D for dodge+soak and the same on direct soak

Winner: None

Situation II: 7S attack, 4 successes from attacker, Body 3, Quick 2, Armor 3/0; effective CP 5 => Complete Dodge is possible, TN for Dodge = 4, TN for Soak = 4

• Probabilities for successes on Dodge roll: 5 = 3.125%; 4 = 15.625%; 3 = 31.25%; 2 = 31.25%; 1 = 15.625%; 0 = 3.125%; average success rate: 2.5 successes
• Probabilities for successes on DRT after Dodge: 3 = 12.5%; 2 = 37.5%; 1 = 37.5%; 0 = 12.5%; average success rate: 1.5 successes
• Probabilities for successes on direct DRT with CP: 8 = 0.39%; 7 = 3.12%; 6 = 10.94%; 5 = 21.88%; 4 = 27.34%; 3 = 21.87%; 2 = 10.93%; 1 = 3.12%; 0 = 0.39%; average success rate: 4 successes
• Damage expectations based on average success rates: plain S dodge+soak and the same on direct soak
• Chances of going completely unharmed on Dodge: 3,125%

Winner: Dodge

Situations with higher values for Quickness with otherwise unchanged values are identical to Situation II.

Situation III: 7S attack, 4 successes from attacker, Body 3, Quick 1, Armor 4/2; effective CP 3 (5-2 due to armor) => Complete Dodge is impossible, TN for Dodge = 4, TN for Soak = 3

• Probabilities for successes on Dodge roll: 3 = 12.5%; 2 = 37.5%; 1 = 37.5% 0 = 12.5%; average success rate: 1.5 successes
• Probabilities for successes on DRT after Dodge: 3 = 29.63%; 2 = 44.44%; 1 = 22.22% 0 = 3.70%; average success rate: 2 successes
• Probabilities for successes on direct DRT with CP: 6 = 8.76%; 5 = 26.34%; 4 = 32.92%; 3 = 21.95%; 2 = 8.23%; 1 = 1.65%; 0 = 0.14%; average success rate: 4 successes
• Damage expectations based on average success rates: S with a low tendency towards D for dodge+soak vs. plain S on direct soak

Winner: Direct Soak

Situation IV: 7S attack, 4 successes from attacker, Body 3, Quick 2, Armor 4/2; effective CP 4 (5-1 due to armor) => Complete Dodge is impossible, TN for Dodge = 4, TN for Soak = 3

• Probabilities for successes on Dodge roll: 4 = 6.25%; 3 = 25%; 2 = 37.5%; 1 = 25%; 0 = 6.25%; average success rate: 2 successes
• Probabilities for successes on DRT after Dodge: 3 = 29.63%; 2 = 44.44%; 1 = 22.22% 0 = 3.70%; average success rate: 2 successes
• Probabilities for successes on direct DRT with CP: 7 = 5.85%; 6 = 20.48%; 5 = 30.73%; 4 = 25.61%; 3 = 12.80%; 2 = 3.84%; 1 = 0.64%; 0 = 0.05%; average success rate: 4.66 successes
• Damage expectations based on average success rates: plain S dodge+soak vs. S with a low tendency towards M on direct soak

Winner: Direct Soak

Situation V: 7S attack, 4 successes from attacker, Body 3, Quick 3, Armor 4/2; effective CP 5 => Complete Dodge is possible, TN for Dodge = 4, TN for Soak = 3

• Probabilities for successes on Dodge roll: 5 = 3.125%; 4 = 15.625%; 3 = 31.25%; 2 = 31.25%; 1 = 15.625%; 0 = 3.125%; average success rate: 2.5 successes
• Probabilities for successes on DRT after Dodge if necessary: 3 = 29.63%; 2 = 44.44%; 1 = 22.22% 0 = 3.70%; average success rate: 2 successes
• Probabilities for successes on direct DRT with CP: 8 = 3.90%; 7 = 15.61%; 6 = 27.31%; 5 = 27.31%; 4 = 17.07%; 3 = 6.83%; 2 = 1.71%; 1 = 0.24%; 0 = 0.02%; average success rate: 5.33 successes
• Damage expectations based on average success rates: S with a low tendency towards M on dodge+soak vs. S with a very strong tendency towards M on direct soak
• Chances of going completely unharmed on Dodge: 3,125%

No clear winner: Direct Soak has on average the lower sustained damage while Dodge has a low chance of complete damage avoidance but higher sustained damage on average.

Situations with higher values for Quickness with otherwise unchanged values are identical to Situation V.

Situation VI: 7S attack, 4 successes from attacker, Body 3, Quick 1, Armor 5/3; effective CP 2 (5-3 due to armor) => Complete Dodge is impossible, TN for Dodge = 4, TN for Soak = 2

• Probabilities for successes on Dodge roll: 2 = 25%; 1 = 50%; 0 = 25%; average success rate: 1 success
• Probabilities for successes on DRT after Dodge: 3 = 57.87%; 2 = 34.72%; 1 = 6.94%; 0 = 0.46%; average success rate: 2.5
• Probabilities for successes on direct DRT with CP: 5 = 40.19% 4 = 40.19%; 3 = 16.08%; 2 = 3.21%; 1 = 0.32%; 0 = 0.01%; average success rate: 4.16 successes
• Damage expectations based on average success rates: S with a low tendency towards D for dodge+soak vs. S with a low tendency towards M on direct soak

Winner: Direct Soak

Situation VII: 7S attack, 4 successes from attacker, Body 3, Quick 2, Armor 5/3; effective CP 3 (5-2 due to armor) => Complete Dodge is impossible, TN for Dodge = 4, TN for Soak = 2

• Probabilities for successes on Dodge roll: 3 = 12.5%; 2 = 37.5%; 1 = 37.5% 0 = 12.5%; average success rate: 1.5 successes
• Probabilities for successes on DRT after Dodge: 3 = 57.87%; 2 = 34.72%; 1 = 6.94%; 0 = 0.46%; average success rate: 2.5 successes
• Probabilities for successes on direct DRT with CP: 6 = 33.49%; 5 = 40.19%; 4 = 20.09%; 3 = 5.36%; 2 = 0.80%; 1 = 0.06%; 0 = 0.002%; average success rate: 5
• Damage expectations based on average success rates: Plain S dodge+soak vs. S with a medium tendency towards M on direct soak

Winner: Direct Soak

Situation VIII: 7S attack, 4 successes from attacker, Body 3, Quick 3, Armor 5/3; effective CP 4 (5-1 due to armor) => Complete Dodge is impossible, TN for Dodge = 4, TN for Soak = 2

• Probabilities for successes on Dodge roll: 4 = 6.25%; 3 = 25%; 2 = 37.5%; 1 = 25%; 0 = 6.25%; average success rate: 2 successes
• Probabilities for successes on DRT after Dodge: 3 = 3 = 57.87%; 2 = 34.72%; 1 = 6.94%; 0 = 0.46%; average success rate: 2.5 successes
• Probabilities for successes on direct DRT with CP: 7 = 27.91%; 6 = 39.07%; 5 = 23.44%; 4 = 7.81%; 3 = 1.56%; 2 = 0.19%; 1 = 0.01%; 0 = 0.0003%; average successes: 5.83 successes
• Damage expectations based on average success rates: S with a low tendency towards M for dodge+soak vs. S with a very strong tendency towards M on direct soak

Winner: Direct Soak

Situation IX: 7S attack, 4 successes from attacker, Body 3, Quick 4, Armor 5/3; effective CP 5 => Complete Dodge is possible, TN for Dodge = 4, TN for Soak = 2

• Probabilities for successes on Dodge roll: 5 = 3.125%; 4 = 15.625%; 3 = 31.25%; 2 = 31.25%; 1 = 15.625%; 0 = 3.125%; average success rate: 2.5 successes
• Probabilities for successes on DRT after Dodge: 3 = 3 = 57.87%; 2 = 34.72%; 1 = 6.94%; 0 = 0.46%; average success rate: 2.5 successes
• Probabilities for successes on direct DRT with CP: 8 = 23.26%; 7 = 37.21%; 6 = 26.05%; 5 = 10.42%; 4 = 2.60%; 3 = 0.42%; 2 = 0.04%; 1 = 0.002%; 0 = 0.00005%; average success rate: 6.66 successes
• Damage expectations based on average success rates: S with a low tendency towards M for dodge+soak vs. S with a very strong tendency towards M on direct soak
• Chances of going completely unharmed on Dodge: 3,125%

No clear winner: Direct Soak has on average the lower sustained damage while Dodge has a low chance of complete damage avoidance but higher sustained damage on average.

Situations with higher values for Quickness with otherwise unchanged values are identical to Situation IX.

Now I could go on with further situations that further alter armor and attack powers while maintaining the limitations that this all started from (less or equal TN for soak when compared to dodge) but the pattern should be rather obvious by now.

End results for Quickness values ranging between 1 and 6 for an unaugmented human within a rather limited set of circumstances

Number of absolutely identical outcomes: 1
Number of Wins for Dodge: 5
Number of Wins for Soak: 5
Number of unclear results: 7



First, let me correct your listing of potential outcomes for a target with Body 3, truly available CP of 5 in situations where an attacker scored 4 successes on his ranged attack test with a weapon that has a S base damage level :

Direct Soak with CP:

• 0 successes: D damage with the potential of 1 point of deadlier over-damage if the power of the attack exceeds target's body (optional within optional rule) or by 1.5 - provided that this optional rule is actually used.
• 1-2 successes: D damage.
• 3-5 successes: S damage
• 6-7 successes: M damage
• 8 successes: L damage

Dodge with subsequent DRT with mixed probabilities with remaining body where necessary:

• 0 successes on Dodge: subsequent DRT with 3 body dice
  - 0 successes: D damage with the potential of 1 point of deadlier over-damage if the power of the attack exceeds target's body (optional within optional rule) or by 1.5 - provided that this optional rule is actually used.
  - 1-2 successes: D damage
  - 3 successes: S damage
  
• 1 success on Dodge: subsequent DRT with 3 body dice
  - 0-1 successes: D damage
  - 2-3 successes: S Damage
  
• 2 successes on Dodge: subsequent DRT with 3 body dice
  - 0 successes: D Damage
  - 1-3 successes: S Damage
  
• 3 successes on Dodge: subsequent DRT with 3 body dice
  - 0-2 successes: S Damage
  - 3 successes: M Damage
  
• 4 successes on Dodge and subsequent DRT with body dice
  - 0-1 successes: S Damage
  - 2-3 successes: M Damage
  
• 5 successes on Dodge: No Damage at all, no DRT required

Yes, the outcomes between pure soaking and dodge + soaking do vary at the point where a full dodge can be achieved. That has never been disputed by me. But - and that's what I've saying all along - the actually sustained damage on average conforms to the probabilities for the involved TNs for dodge and soak and the corresponding dice numbers. And players will try to meta the system based on that knowledge.



Actually the TNs are pretty much the main part that matters, because they determine the probabilities on your dice rolls both in cases where you can "succeed" to fully avoid damage and in those where you simply cannot.



The involved math certainly doesn't support the claim with regards to the underlined word.

Side note: Be aware that - despite not being totally correct there - your inference that she just didn't have the dice to effectively soak and Dodging always being the better option is quite frankly the representation of your own attempt of meta-gaming the system based on probabilities.



Actually, the "best option" is still the one that overall has the highest probability of success ... and that's still not necessarily "Dodge" even if it provides chances of full damage avoidance with fewer dice

In the interest of maintaining the peace, I'm only going to respond to one line, because the rest will make me rant.


TN's are irrelevant if you don't have enough dice.

Hypothetical case: you only have Body 1, and in a combat round, you run out of Combat Pool. We'll assume you're a mage, and you have the ability to cast a F6 Armor spell, with almost no risk of Drain. Is the Armor spell a good idea?

The answer is no. Because regardless of how much armor you can pile on, you don't have the dice to soak any wounds. The probability of success is Zero.

The bigger issue with Combat Pool is that it's limited. So, the TN is just one thing to consider, and not even the major one. The bigger thing to consider is which defense costs you the fewest dice. So, if your body is low, it's always better to dodge than soak. If you completely dodge, you're fine, and take no damage. If you don't, you're no worse off than if you had spent the dice on soaking. Even if your body is higher, the potential for a complete dodge is much better than the potential for a soak: if you fail to completely dodge, you can spend more pool on the soak. You have a better chance to hedge your bets.

The only time dodging isn't a better idea is when you have a very high body. Armor actually matters here, but the key is in having a ton of soak dice. If you stand a reasonable chance of soaking everything without spending Combat Pool, then you shouldn't spend any, and save it for later.

TN still enters into the equation.

if you can get your resistance test down to TN 2 and your dodge test is at TN 4, then every die on damage resistance is worth 5/6 of a success (in theory), while every die on the dodge test is worth 1/2 a die (in theory).

so if it takes 6 successes to soak and 4 to dodge (apparently i'm using an L damage code weapon i guess?), that would take ~7 dice to soak, and ~8 dice to dodge (again, in theory... obviously, you don't know for sure until after the fact, and it is 100% possible for you to dodge the whole thing with only 4 dice. or to fail to dodge at all, even with 12 dice).

if the dodge test was suffering from a penalty of some kind and was TN 6, then each die applied to soak tests would be worth 5 times as many dice on dodge tests (so long as the soak test remains at TN 2). at that point, soaking would be the better choice unless you only need 1/5 as many successes on the dodge test as you need for the soak test

it's also worth bearing in mind that at least one soak die comes without spending any of your combat pool at all. but basically, it's important to consider that spending dice from your combat pool on soak can potentially be better than spending them on dodging. so subtract your body attribute from the number of required dice before making your decision (provided, of course, you can figure out what the TN of your dodge and soak tests will be... which is not always the case, but if you have enough armour it's not too unlikely to expect a TN of 2).

of course, if you're just ridiculously lucky, then sure, go with whatever has the lowest required number of successes. for anyone else, it is recommended that you don't ignore TN when considering whether you should dodge or soak

Only if you have enough dice in the first place.

Let's go back to the Body 1 mage. He's shot at by a Panther Assault Cannon, which tags him-- the other guy got one success.

So, even if he had so much armor that the dodge TN was reduced to 2, he's still better off dodging. He's especially better off if he's low on Combat Pool. Let's say he only has two dice left. If he spent all of them on a soak, he'd still take a lot of damage.

But even against a TN of 4, he has a better change at a better outcome if he dodges. If both dice succeed, he takes no damage. If they don't, he's no worse off than if he had spent them on a soak.

And if you do have more than enough combat pool? You should *still* try and dodge, because if you fail, you can spend more on the soak. It's a means of hedging your bets *and* conserving combat pool.

Which will only ever occur in a rather limited number of situations (some of which have been mentioned already), but not necessarily in the ones you're referring to.



The fun part of that assumption however is: Since "I" run out of CP I can't Dodge anymore either, so there's no decision to be made between Dodge and Soak.



Just as the probability of Dodging is "Zero" right there.



So far this discussion revolved around the decision of Dodge vs. Soak (and to a lesser extend the possibility of coming out without taking damage at all). That's something that's mainly dependent on the involved TNs and requires you to have the choice in the first place. Once you don't have the choice between Dodge and Soak (no more CP available) there's nothing to discuss anymore.



Still incorrect.



Also still incorrect.



And "if not" - depending of actual stats and the resulting TNs - you just took a bigger wound than you would have taken when going for soak instead.



Since you like your own examples so much: Let's go back to that Body 1 mage (your example), let him have a CP of 5 (your example as well) and an effective armor of 12/6 (piled on armor as per your own words) coming from armor jacket 5/3 + FFBA half-body [3/0]/2 rounded down to 1/0 + armor spell 6 (with no effect on CP availability due to his Quickness of 4 (or higher)). Now we let him take a 6 shot full auto attack from an HK 227 (Base Damage 6M modified to 12D by full auto with 6 bullets) with a total of 4 successes

TN for Soak: 2
TN for Dodge: 6

Attempt for dodge:
Probability of full Dodge against 4 successes with CP of 5: 0.0128% (or "close to zero")
Average success rate for this Dodge attempt: 0.833 successes => we'll round up to 1
Average success rate on subsequent DRT with 1 die: 0.833 successs => we'll round up to 1

=> Damage result based on average success rate: D with potential for 1 point of deadlier over damage. If that rule is really utilized, we just filled the condition monitor including overflow. Our mage will instantly die next Combat Turn if nobody manages to stabilize him right after he took the bullets.

Attempt for direct soak:
Probability of complete Soak: 0%
Probability of scoring maximum number of 6 successes aginst TN 2: 33.48% (hey, that's a rather high chance I guess)
Average success rate for this Soak attempt: 5 successes

=> Damage result on maximum number of successes: S
=> Damage result on average succes rate: D with no over flow and no need for stabilizing

I do have the distinct feeling that your mage would be better off with soaking there ... unless he really wants to go for that 0.0128% chance of going unharmed.

For sake of completeness we'll have further looks at the probabilities and average damage results for just 3, 2 and 1 successes on the otherwise same attack

Attempt to dodge:

Probability of full Dodge against 3 successes with CP of 5: 0.321% (still rather close to zero)
Probability of full Dodge against 2 successes with CP of 5: 3.215% (still quite low)
Probability of full Dodge against 1 successes with CP of 5: 16.075% (this looks like a sufficiently high enough probability to really go for it)
Average success rate for this Dodge attempt: 0.833 successes => we'll round up to 1 (yes, this one is fixed)
Average success rate on subsequent DRT with 1 die: 0.833 successes => we'll round up to 1 (yes, this one is fixed as well)
=> Damage result based on average success rate against 3 successes by the attacker: D
=> Damage result based on average success rate against 2 successes by the attacker : D
=> Damage result based on average success rate against 1 success by attacker: D

Attempt to soak:
Probability of complete Soak: 0% (for all three cases)
Probability of scoring maximum number of 6 successes aginst TN 2: 33.48% (no change on all three cases)
Average success rate for this Soak attempt: 5 successes (no change either)

=> Damage result on maximum number of successes against 3 successes by attacker: S
=> Damage result on average success rate against 3 successes by attacker: S
=> Damage result on maximum number of successes against 2 successes by attacker: M
=> Damage result on average success rate against 2 successes by attacker: S
=> Damage result on maximum number of successes against 1 success by attacker: M
=> Damage result on average success rate against 1 successes by attacker: M

Now I would say that the damage results on direct soak clearly deviate from the one taken in Dodge situations when a complete Dodge wasn't achieved. And whether or not the rather low to non-existent probabilities for a successful dodge for two or more successes on attackers side really are worth it? I certainly won't answer that for you, but I do have experience with a rather large number of different players that tells me, that "always go for dodge" wasn't the most common choice.



I just provided a set of example calculations (created from your own "biased" numbers) where soaking is actually "better" despite the lowest possible Body value.

That example wasn't directed at you, and had nothing to do with dodging anyway. Note that I didn't actually draw a comparison that time?


You picked an example that favors your argument as much as possible; namely, you jacked up the dodge TN. Please note that in every example I provided, the assumption was that the dodge vs soak TN's were equal, or even lower in the case of soaking.

and yet, it still shows a clear case for a time when dodging was not the best choice. thus making it such that "always dodge" is not the right answer. there are options to be weighed. soaking may not always be the most likely way to reduce damage to zero, but it can still be a substantially better way to take less damage over the long run.

The difference is, it's always better to dodge, because you have a chance at fully avoiding damage. If you try to fully dodge and fail, you're no worse off than if you had spent the dice on soaking.

Combat pool management was a tricky thing. The important part was trying to get the most possible out of the least amount of dice. Remember, the dodge test came first, so the smart thing to do was try for a full dodge. If you held some combat pool in reserve, you could spend it after you saw how the dodge worked out. You could not do the reverse.

Glad to see my group is not the only one out there having stubborn soak vs dodge debates.
It seems bloody obvious that neither soak nor dodge should are ALWAYS better. The math behind each case is not even so complex that it justifies this much exposition, is it?

I'm sure there's as much variability in the weight of one option vs another as there is variability in campaign designs and expectations.
At higher end campaigns where everyone in the party throws 5 or 6 dice of Damage Resistance before adding combat pool, the opposition nets an average of 5 or 6 successes per attack, and armor keeps the soak TN in the 2-4 range whatever the power of the attack, yes, it would virtually ALWAYS be better to soak.
On the other hand, at a street level campaign where only "the tank" has a Body of 5+, armor is often non-existent or only significant vs pistol fire, and the enemies are of the spray-and-pray variety, abusing BF and FA but only rarely getting more than 1 net success... then it would be more sensible to throw 4 or 5 combat pool dice at a 4 or even 5 TN dodge than to attempt to soak a serious or higher wound on a TN higher than 6, even adding the same 5 combat pool dice to a body of 3 or 4.

Obviously, it shouldn't be this clear-cut, but still it isn't that hard to determine when one or the other is better... and yet I find that some of my players will always try to dodge unless heavily wounded, while others never even attempt it at all. So to curb the metagaming I decided to hide most of the NPC attack info from the players. Add armor degradation on top of this, and you have the strongest case for dodge, ever.

if you try to fully dodge and fail, you potentially *are* worse off than if you had spent the dice on soaking. that's exactly the point. if your dodge is at TN 4 and your soak is at TN 2, you're already 3 times as likely to fail on a given die. if you have anything penalizing your dodge TN, it's even worse.

you can't say "oh, that's a mitigating factor" and then in the next breath say there *are* no mitigating factors and keep credibility here. either there are situations, whether common or rare, in which it is better to soak, or there are not. it can't be one way now and suddenly change 1 second later when it doesn't suit you any more.

I've been trying to figure out exactly what it was that bothered me about Shadowrun lately. This is exactly the problem I have.

Yeah, that's something I really like to make explicit in my games. For shadowrunners, 'us' is very much the disaffected and unwanted SINless of the Barrens. You may have half a mil worth of cyberware crammed up your ass, but all that came from somewhere, and the rent in some cozy uptown gated community costs more than nuyen when you don't have the right social cred.

It actually is not always the case... Is it true sometimes? Of course, but I cannot say that it is ALWAYS the case. We have seen examples where your "Always" scenario is not true. Even if you claim they are biased, those situations do happen, at which point it is better to Soak than to Dodge. Therefore, Always is a myth.

Hmmmm... Feature, not Bug, in my opinion.

I've given exceptions earlier, like when you have so many body dice, soaking is practically a guarantee, without spending combat pool. But then again, that means you conserve even more combat pool, so you have more for later.

However, even with a higher TN, you're better off dodging. If you have more dice than attack successes, then you may as well go for it. There's a chance you'll get lucky, and you still get a soak later (which you can also add combat pool to). So, you can make the attempt to dodge-- if you succeed, you save combat pool. If you fail and have to soak, you can spend more. Dodging is a no-lose situation.

Lay it out for me then. Why exactly would runners in that situation not just get a better paying gig working for a mega?

Because the pay rates the game specifies are a hell of a lot lower than the salary a cleaner with a runner's skills would demand, and the social perks are much better too.

if i choose to pay 60 bucks for something that i could have chosen to pay 30 bucks for, i have lost an opportunity to save some money. a penny saved is a penny earned, and if your goal is to come out of a series of difficult spots with the least amount of damage, it is entirely possible that soaking, rather than dodging, will be the better choice, even if you have to spend combat pool on it. a less than 1% chance of avoiding all the damage is not that great when you could instead drastically increase your chance of decreasing a moderate wound to a light. yes, a light wound still sucks, but i'd rather have a very good chance of reducing my damage to light than a miniscule chance of decreasing it to zero and otherwise most probably only reducing it to moderate.

I don't get what you're saying.

If Ii spend combat pool to soak, I need to spend a lot of dice. If I spend combat pool to dodge, I can spend less dice if I succeed, and about the same if I fail. So, dodging is always the better choice, because of the possibility that I spend less.

Maybe they have issues with the Megas. Maybe they are a group of Government Contractors, Maybe the are Independent Contractors (you know, like all Shadowrunners are). Maybe they want to help the downtrodden, etc, etc, etc. There are many reasons that you may choose the Shadows over the SINner's lifestyle.

And yes, I agree that the published rates of pay are garbage. That is why we do not use them.

If your Dodge TN is 5 or Higher (maybe you have wound penalties) and your Soak TN is a 2, it would be beyond Stupid to choose to try and Dodge (If they are both TN 4, then it is mostly irrelevant). That is One example that would be better to soak over Dodge. There were other examples provided above that could occur in the course of the game and they distinctly show that Dodge was not the better choice. You keep saying that they were biased examples, but they do occur in game and are no less biased than your examples were. There were many times over the years I played in SR3 where the character was better served with soaking rather than dodging. It is all relative to circumstance and character build.

if you spend half as much, and get 1/4 as much, you're not getting a good deal.

*if* you dodge you'll be better off. but sometimes, your chance to actually dodge the entire attack is in the sub-1% range. sure, you *can* dodge someone who scored 5 successes on their attack roll with only 6 dice. but it's *extremely* unlikely. if you throw your 6 dice against TN 4 (which iinm isn't actually quite into <1% territory yet), you probably knock them down to only 3 successes (on average), after which you get to soak. actually dodging the entire attack is incredibly improbable, and should not be your go-to plan any more than your go-to plan for making money should be lottery tickets (unless of course you hacked the system - so sure, if you're throwing loaded dice, then dodge every time).

if you instead in that same scenario choose to spend your 6 combat pool on soak against a TN of 2, you probably used the exact same number of dice to drop the damage down to the base damage of the weapon, having knocked them down to 0 net successes (plus whatever your body would allow for, which will be the same in either case).

soaking in such a case will on average result in ~3 extra successes towards staging the damage down, which is likely worth either 3 or 6 boxes of damage, depending on break point.

now, i'll grant you that average rolls are not by any means something that always happen. i'm sure most of us here have rolled 6 successes on 6 dice vs a TN of 4 at some point (or at least rolled well enough that we could have), and i'm sure most of us have rolled 0 successes on 6 dice vs a TN of 2 (or rolled poorly enough that we would have). but you don't know those are going to happen until after the fact. over time, we can expect that you will roll more hits against TN 2 than against TN 4 by a significant margin. and this is without anything raising the TN of your dodge roll, either, which only makes your chances even worse.

it isn't just about chance to avoid all damage entirely. sometimes, you soak not with the expectation that you will take zero damage, but rather with the expectation that you will take *less* damage as a result of soaking than you would have as a result of dodging.

I get what you're saying, but the difference is, even at a higher TN dodging is a better choice.

We could go into expected values, but as you pointed out, there's a lot of variability there. But since dodge successes also reduce damage, there's no real risk in dodging first. Sure, you might roll bad, but that happens: I've lost count of the NPC soak rolls I've "oopsed" on. Dodge, too, I have a documented string of critical fumbles when GMing Shadowrun that tracks back to 1989.

If the choice is between 8 dice on soak, or 5 dice on dodge, dodging is smarter. If you don't completely dodge, you can spend the dice on soaking later. If you succeed, you saved 3 combat pool for the second shot that's coming.

If you fail to gain any successes on the Dodge, however, then you have wasted that Combat Pool completely with no benefit. Especially if the Damage Soak would have been at far easier TN.
8 Dice at TN 2 is far better than 5 Dice at TN6 and then 3 Dice at TN2. I am statistically more likely to get 8 Successes at TN2 with 8 Dice, than I am likely to completely Dodge an Attack at TN6 with 5 Dice, and if not completely Dodged then soak the remaining damage at TN2 with 3 Dice.

who said anything about spending more dice on soak than on dodge? i'm not suggesting that soak is frequently a better way to reduce damage to zero than dodging, i'm saying that it's a better way to reduce damage in general in many cases, especially in cases where you already have no reasonable expectation of dodging an attack completely. if you have a reasonable chance to dodge an attack entirely (for example, if your opponent only generated one success) then sure, go ahead and dodge. if your opponent has several hits, and your combat pool is limited, you're not likely to dodge though. if you then also have good armour, it will frequently be a better choice to soak than to dodge, because soaking will do a better job of reducing damage (whether or not it can decrease damage to zero).

Bad rolls happen all the time. I've lost count of the times I've botched. However, it's not a question of successes, but rather of outcome.



That still depends on how many dice you have to soak. If you don't have enough dice to succeed, dodging is better.

Let me try a different example, leaving combat pool out of it for a moment. This example is a bit exaggerated, but it's just for illustration. A heavily armored Body 1 mage and a body 15 naked troll are both surprised and shot in the back. The mage has so much armor that his soak TN is 2, while the troll has to soak against the full power. Who is better off?

Obviously, it's the troll. Even against the higher TN, the troll has a better chance of soaking some of that damage. The mage, however, cannot.

The difference between dodging and soaking is, soaking's effectiveness depends heavily on your Body. Dodging does not. So, at low and moderate body scores, dodging is better, because you can get a better result with fewer dice. There's a case to be made at high levels of body -- 8+-- and super high means you shouldn't bother dodging at all. Or spending combat pool, either.

So you finally admit that there are times it is better to just Soak than to Dodge. Dodging is not ALWAYS the better option. Glad we are finally on the same page.

I've said it many times: when you have troll levels of body, it's definitely better, if only because you don't have to spend combat pool to soak.

But anything much less? Dodging all the way.

*nods* Trolls may have the least ammount of Combat Pool (-1 QCK, -2 INT will do that to you), but they also have much less they actually need to worry about.
Trolls are the Kings of Combat for a REASON in the fluff god damn it . . It's just that the elf-lovers nerfed them more or less into oblivion in that regard.
Getting a Troll up to 18 Body, 10/8 Armor and and 16 STR basically made you a semit intelligent fire and forget instakill weapon against most anything else.
And yes, as of SR3, you could actually REACH THAT RACIAL IMPROVED MAXIMUM! They made that impossible as of SR4, which is another Nerf to Trolls.
Same as the nerf to STR usefullness. And the switch from variable TN to set TN and variable dice pools. Also a nerf to Trolls.
And the way higher Armor than Damage now makes the incoming Damage into stun instead of disappear is also a nerd to Trolls.
NOTHING was hit as hard as Trolls when it came to the Nerf-Hammer. Because people complained about them being too good in combat for some stupid reason.
Completely forgetting or simply ignoring the fact that combat was more or less the ONLY thing Trolls were actually ever really good at . .
So they factually simply took the only thing Trolls did well away from Trolls. This also applies to Orks on a lower scale too actually.
But because you get more points out of them than you have to pay for, they actually can do better in anything else now . .

except that instead of spending that combat pool on dodge, you *could* spend it on soak. at which point, having low body does not at all mean you're incapable of soaking. if you have the combat pool to dodge, you have the same combat pool available to soak with, potentially at a lower TN.

Yes, which is why I left it out of the example. However, with combat pool, you always want to look for how you can spend the fewest dice.

Basically, on a good dodge roll, you're more likely to achieve a better outcome with fewer dice. Soaking gives you more base dice, but you're also going to need more successes, so dodging has an advantage there. Even if soaking gives you a better TN, you've still got a better chance of a better outcome with fewer dice with a dodge.

Let's say you have a body of 2, and four Combat Pool left. You're hit with three successes from a D weapon. You've piled on the armor to the point where your soak TN is only 2. What are the outcomes?

If you score one, two, or three successes with a dodge, you've gotten exactly the same as if you had soaked. If you score 4 successes-- unlikely, perhaps, but not impossible-- you take no damage whatsoever.

But if you soak? Even if you get all successes, you're taking a Moderate. If you get a bad roll, you're taking a Serious or Deadly. Again, the odds of a bad roll are low, but not impossible, I've done it many times.

That's why TN doesn't matter so much as dice. If you don't have the dice to succeed, it doesn't matter if the TN is 2 or 20. You need to account for that when assigning combat pool. TN's don't come into it until after you've figured if you can succeed.

and if you roll less than 4 successes on your dodge, you're facing deadly damage with 2 dice and a best-case scenario of serious damage, assuming you instead managed 3 successes with your 4 dice as opposed to a more average 2 (again, assuming nothing is penalizing your dodge TN, if there is anything your average is lower). if you did roll 2 successes on your dodge (the average result, which will happen around 50% of the time), you're quite likely facing deadly damage and unconsciousness from the hit. that doesn't sound an awful lot like the greatest argument in favour of not being worse off by dodging... by soaking, i have an excellent chance of not taking deadly damage. by dodging, i have a very small chance of completely avoiding damage. yes, it is a chance, but it sure isn't a good one.

avoiding spending combat pool sounds all very well and good, but it all depends where else you're going to spend it. if you've already made the decision to assign it to defence, then a 1/16 chance to avoid all damage in exchange for ~50% chance of going from perfect health to unconsciousness (in a best case scenario) frankly sounds like a really poor decision to me when you have other options that offer a rather good chance of taking less than deadly damage.

TN is really important. 3 successes from a D weapon. What kind of D weapon? More than likely (unless you are playing games where the standard weapon of your opponents are Assault Cannon) you are talking about burst or full auto fire.

Which means you are talking about a TN of 5 or 6 to dodge.

If you are saying Body 2, CP 4, if you spend those 4 dice to dodge, (giving the benefit of the doubt and saying it is only a 3 round burst) then yes, you could roll 4 successes and dodge, but it is very unlikely. You are far more likely to get 1 - maybe 2. Whereas if you piled on the armor and gotten the TN down to 2 to soak, then those 4 dice are far more likely to yield 3 successes, (with a fair chance of getting 4).

What you are saying is that given the choice between rolling all 4 dice and having an infinitesimally small chance that you can get 4 successes and dodge the shot from your combat pool, which comes along with the very large chance that if you DON"T roll that well, you are stuck with 1 success on the dodge, and then 2 successes on the soak, yielding a Deadly wound - OR just adding those CP to soaking, and having a very good chance of getting 5 or 6 hits, which would reduce your damage to Serious, you would go with the former.

I would much rather take the Serious Wound than roll 4 dice and pray I roll four successes.

You also need to consider the fact that while nothing modifies your TN to soak (it is simply Power minus Armor), there are lots of things that modify dodge. Anything that gives you a modifier, really. Rate of fire of the enemy weapon, flashpaks, wounds, spells, etc.

Is your above example still valid when you have been hit with a Flash Pak (let's assume you have Flare Compensation), and it is a 3 round burst, and you have a light wound - which raises your dodge test from 4 to 8? Are you still better off rolling those 4 dice looking for 8's instead of adding them to your 2 Body looking for 2's? Remember that every die that you roll looking for an 8 and fail is one less die you could have rolled looking for a 2 and getting a hit.

What about when you start raising those combat pools to higher numbers, and the enemy successes higher as well? Same example as above, we'll even give you the idea that you are hit with a single shot base D weapon. Body 2. Only now raise the number of hits on the test to 6, and give yourself a combat pool of 7.

What would you rather do, roll 7 dice to dodge, on the off chance you somehow roll 7 4's on 7 dice, - but in reality probably only getting 3-4 successes, and then with the extra 2 dice in body adding 2 more hits, yielding you a deadly wound, OR dump all 7 into soak, needing 2's, and giving yourself a very good chance of rolling 8 successes, reducing the damage to Serious? The math says that the second way to go is better.

And let's add another one. I don't know about your games, but in mine we often got hit with Heavy Pistols. Not everyone carries a shotgun or sniper rifle, or fully automatic weapon - which means the base damage code was usually M, not S or D.

Use the same example, Body 2, CP 4, 3 hits on the attack test, TN of 4 to Dodge, 2 to soak. What do you do now?

You do not have enough dice to soak the damage to 0 (that would require 7, you only have 6 at best). Is it better to roll 4 dice for 4's, hoping against hope you get 4 hits, and likely getting 2, and 2 more on the soak, giving you a Moderate wound, OR just adding all 4 to the soak and getting 5 or 6 hits, reducing it to a Light wound?

If you get a bad roll, you get a bad roll. That happens regardless if you soak or dodge.

But, I will admit, my example assumed that soaking would succeed on every die. That's not likely to happen, really-- on six dice vs TN 2, you're likely to get five successes, yes? Three negate the attack in my example, the last two stage it to serious. If your numbers are correct, on an average dodge roll with these givens, you're also looking at a serious.

So, the odds say if you don't completely dodge, you'll end up in about the same place. But if you do completely dodge, you take nothing. So, there's no real risk in going for the dodge.

I see what you're trying to do, but the problem is that we could throw examples at each other all day, and not resolve anything. We can each cite many examples that favor our arguments, tweaking the numbers whichever way suits us.

So, the best way to avoid bias is to use as general of examples as we can. Come up with the overall pattern, and not edge cases. And if you do that, you see it's always better to dodge, since it takes fewer successes to dodge than soak, and even if you don't completely dodge, you can still soak. The exception, of course, is if you have so much body that you don't have to worry about dodging. (The troll I mentioned earlier? He only ever took one Light wound his whole career, and that was a AV assault cannon fired by a sniper, to the face. He just had so much Body, he could soak anything, so dodging was superfluous.)

PS: There are plenty of things that can affect the soak TN. First of all, there's the Power of the weapon to consider. If it exceeds your armor by a lot, it can go sky-high. Also, some weapons will reduce your armor-- APDS, monowhips, AV rounds, lasers, etc--, so you have to consider that as well. I've been using the example of someone with undefined amounts of armor, probably looking like the Michelin man, who can reduce any attack TN to 2. Even that doesn't work, though, and is a little unreasonable to have in practice. In practice, you're probably looking at much higher soak TN's than 2, or even 4 for that matter. However, that would also devolve into counter-examples, so it's kinda pointless.

I agree that patterns are important, but it is hard to develop said pattern given that the answer as to whether it is better to use CP to Dodge or Soak is based on:

1) Body of the target
2) CP Remaining of the target
3) TN to Dodge (which in itself has to account for wounds, ROF, etc)
4) TN to Soak (which in itself has to account for Power of the attack, Armor Rating, Ammo)
5) Base Damage of Weapon
6) Total number of successes on the Attack Test

That is an awful lot of moving parts, and I would submit to you that there isn't a pattern, simply a series of examples. I would go further to say that you can't say that it is always better to dodge, or always better to soak, but rather you have to look at each of those examples, and make the decision at the time.

I can give you a perfect example

Take one of my player's characters, who had a 6 body, a combat pool of 10, and wore an Armor Jacket with FFBA (full suit), had Kevlar Bone Lacing, and Orthoskin Level 2. This gave him a Ballistic of 9. In a given adventure, he is shot by:

1) A Heavy Pistol with Reg ammo (9M), with 3 hits, and then again with that same weapon with 4 hits. (Same Initiative Pass, as it is semiauto and it isn't like 5e where you can only have one attack per IP)
2) A Heavy Pistol with APDS ammo (9M) with 3 hits, and then again, same weapon, another 3 hits.
3) An SMG with Explosive Ammo, 6 round burst (14D) with 2 hits.
4) Having taken a light wound, he is hit from that same SMG another 6 round burst, with 4 hits

Looking at example 1, he is looking at having to get 7 hits, needing 2s. His body is likely to net him 5 or 6 hits, and so he only needs 2 more to pretty much assure he takes no damage. He can assign 4 dice to dodge (TN 4) to get those 2 hits, or he can assign 2 dice to soak (TN 2) and get the same 2 hits (maybe he has to assign a 3rd just to make sure). Either way, assigning those 2 or 3 dice to soak is better than assigning it to dodge. The second shot is similar. Needing 8 hits to reduce damage to 0, or 5 hits to dodge, (with at best 8 CP left, assuming he only assigned 2 to soak), he could allocate 8 dice to dodge, giving him 4 hits, and if he is lucky, 5, or slightly unlucky, 3. Either way, his 6 body dice will more than likely provide him with the extra successes required to reduce it to 0, but it is more efficient to assign the CP to soak, as he needs less dice to give him the requisite number of successes.

Example 2: Now we are looking at soaking with TN 4 (as APDS halves armor, round down), and Dodging with TN 4. With 10 dice, you are better throwing 6 or 7 dice at the first shot in order to dodge, and then the remaining 3-4 CP at the second shot, since your 6 body will more than likely not generate enough hits to reduce the damage from M to 0. (assuming your dodge negates the hits but does not exceed them, your 6 dice needing TN 4 will probably not generate the 4 hits necessary).


Example 3: Here, he is soaking with TN 5, and Dodging with TN 5. Here, it is clearly the better option to dodge, since he only needs 3 hits on 10 dice (which he can reasonably assume he can get) as opposed to getting 6 more dice to soak, but needing 12 hits to reduce it to 0.

Example 4: Here, he is soaking with TN 5, and Dodging with TN 6. It is extremely unlikely he is to roll 5 hits with his 10 CP, and since you are statistically twice as likely to roll 5+ on a d6 as you are a 6, it makes the most sense to dump all 10 dice into his soak roll, as you are more likely to soak than you are to dodge. Since you need to get 6 hits to reduce the damage to S and stay conscious, it is better to dump it all into soak, where you are now rolling 16 dice looking for 5s, as opposed to rolling 10 dice with half the chance of getting hits, in the unlikely event you get five 6's on them.

Now, I could come up with a Mage with a different body, armor, and CP, and run him through the same (or different examples), and what you will find is that there IS no pattern that covers most or all examples (Note by the way, I didn't use a troll with a 15 body, I used a body of 6, high for a normal person, but not out of the ordinary at all for a Samurai (even a human one).

Sometimes it is better to dodge: i.e. high power weapons, or low armor, or low body, or small number of hits on the attack test. (i.e. either the TN to dodge is lower than the TN to soak, or you have the opportunity to negate a high damage attack with only a few hits on the dodge.)

Sometimes it is better to soak: i.e. the opposite of above - low power, high armor, high body, large number of hits on the attack test. (i.e. the TN to soak is lower than the TN to dodge)

Sometimes it doesn't matter: i.e. the TN is the same, and you don't have enough dice to completely dodge the attack.