When the concept of capital-A Accuracy was first announced, people were quick to point out that the need for a high Limit on an attack test does not exactly align with the need for highly accurate shots: A samurai hosing a hallway with his dual machine pistols needs a high Limit to beat a target diving for cover in the opposed test. On the other extreme, a sniper firing at an unaware target 200 meters away is fine with a Limit of 1, since the target does not get to dodge.

The practical consequence can be seen by simply looking at the weapon tables in the core book: Machine pistols, SMGs, and assault rifles should have very different accuracy, yet they end up in the same (capital) Accuracy range.

So my house rule idea is to limit the number of hits on an attack test not by something called "Accuracy", but by something indicating how "agile" the weapon is and how easy it is to track a target actively trying to evade -- because hitting somebody who actively tries to evade is what you actually need the high Limit for. First problem: The "something indicating", I can't think of a decent name that's not already taken. Wieldyness? Non-bulk?

The second problem obviously is the numbers. My reference points would be:
- Sniper rifles, assault cannons and similarly bulky weapons could go as low as 1. Enough for hitting an unaware target, a running target would need some time to take aim (-> spend appropriate actions), snap shots from the hip at close targets are pure luck
- The standard carbine should clock in at 5, same as now
- Pistols without cumbersome accessories would be the top end here, so around 8. Basically "no penalty"
- Smartlinks and actions to increase the Limit work as before. Spending actions represents compensating for the unwieldy weapon, and having a crosshair without having to look down the sights increases movement options.

You can call it "Encumbrance", because that's what it really is. How encumbering is the weapon. A holdout pistol is light and fast, and a Panther assault cannon is a heavy monster that most people can't use without a gyro harness.

That makes far too much sense!

(In other words, I like it)

Silencer might lower wieldiness?

Honestly, I don't see the need for this. It'd fuck with game balance, and I've never felt the Accuracy system to be much of a problem. The thing to keep in mind here is that while a smartlinked Fichetti Security 600 and a smartlinked Yamaha Raiden might have the same accuracy, the Raiden can hit at 100 meters with no issues, while the Fichetti has trouble at 50, and anything beyond that is impossible.

Yeah, that's the step you're missing, Sengir.

Those weapons -do- have similar accuracy profiles... within their ideal ranges. The ranges, however, are vastly different.

That is what I like about it -- tool for the job. Want the hit something hundreds of metres away? You want a sniper rifle for the range. Want to bit someone in a fast moving, close range environment? That is no longer the tool for the job

What are those "ideal ranges" you are talking about?

All weapons work best on short ranges and progressively worse on longer ranges -- and in most engagements, the modifier will be -1 at most. Taking a sniper rifle into a block raid totally works, because it's so accurate...

Limiting snipers to Accuracy 1 would mean you could never one-shot anyone with it. Net hits are needed to take a target down successfully (unless Im missing something from SR5).

What could be useful is to introduce a seperate factor: Bulk.

Bulk: Bulk makes a weapon slower or less wieldy.

Suggestion 1: Bulk is a penalty applied to the user's initative score. The smaller the weapon, the faster it is to use against an enemy. Sniper rifles will have high bulk, assault cannons even more so, thus would be less effective in a straight up firefight. In a ambush situation bulky weapons have less drawback as you can fire first anyway. Issue: Losing actions is always bad unless the combat is already over, so maybe limit this penalty so that it never reduces initative lower than the closest 10. Example: Bob rolls initative for a 24 total. His weapon bulk is 5, yet his initative stays at 21 which is the minmum not to lose actions. It does however mean that Bill with initative 22 gets to act before him.

Suggestion 2: Bulk is a bonus applied to the defenders Defense roll, to simulate it being harder to track the target with a longer weapon. The penalty is reduced by 1 per range band beyond the first.

None of these rules are necessary, but could help avoid the sniper rifle being favored weapon when clearing houses, and give some extra boost to light pistols etc.

The difference being that the sniper rifle is capable of reaching out to hit the long range targets as well as being used short range. In exchange for being much, much harder to conceal than the light pistol you can keep in your pocket and whip out to deal with a punk at three meters.

It's really unlikely you'll see a sniper rifle being the tool of choice for room clearing anyway, when shotguns have spread and SMGs and Assault Rifles have autofire.

It's true shotguns have spread with flechette and may improve the final chance to hit, but against armored foes having armor piercing instead of armor boosting effect might still be better. Ares Desert Strike 14P AP -5 with EX ammo vs Enfield 15P AP +4 with flechette ammo is slightly superior except against unarmored targets, and the Accuracy is a factor when used by Shadowrunners with large dice pools. I've yet to play-test the importance of Burst firing vs SA burst, so not sure how important it will be unless engaging multiple targets - I guess the Enfield shotgun has an advantage there, unless you need to take out the guards and not the Target in an extraction run.

The sniper is still more flexible due to range, and probably better against spirits with ItNW. For normal people the hefty price of snipers and high availability means that shotguns and SMGs will be the go-to guns for room clearing anyway.

Don't forget the legality code as well.

A sniper rifle is hard to hide and a cop that sees one is -very- likely to make the check to notice they shouldn't have it.

Sorry for the delayed responses, had to get on a plane on short notice.


The idea is that most things which increase Accuracy would also increase "not-bulk". So for most runners, 1=3 due to Smartlink, plus a sniper can always spend various aiming actions to increase the limit, reflecting that aiming takes time.

At the end of the day, most of the time snipers will still have fewer net hits than before -- but does this really change much? From my experience, one-hit kills are still rare despite the upped damage in SR 5, only two-hit kills became more guaranteed.


Regarding the name, the problem is that the number has to go up as the bulk/size/weight go down, but positive terms like "agility" or "handling" already are taken for other stats. Hence the "non-bulk" and other neologisms

There were some good arguments above on why snipers in CQB are not such an issue. Reducing hits further does matter a lot IMO: while it makes it easier to dodge (desired) it also reduces damage by quite bit. Using aim and smartlink to give you accuracy 4 means potentially 16-18 damage. Thats enough to damage anyone, but could as you say fail to take down some street sammies. Make that a few hits more and its a oneshot kill.

How about 'Handling' for it's name?
It applies well to vehicles so why not for weapons? Can call it Weapon Handling if you don't want to confuse it with Vehicle Handling on paper.
And no, the Rigger can not hook his Katana up to his RCC for added Martial Arts Mayhem....
well... maybe if the Wireless is ON.....
hmmm... still no.
maybe.
sheesh...

Something bulky and hard to swing/readjust or turn to target a fresh body/(the weapons equivalent of steers like a truck with one flat) will have a poor handling score while something lightweight /just lines right up/ (the weapon equivalent of excellent turning ability) has a high handling score.

Actually less about snipers in CQB and more about snipers in general.

The poor concealment of snipers can be an issue, but it depends heavily on the game -- if you are doing the stereotypical corp lab B&E concealing weapons is not really an issue, the corpsec won't give balaclava-clad figures sneaking through the corridors after hours a pass just because they don't have visible weapons. If your team is clearing out a claustrophobic bug hive in an official function, their weapons are fine with everybody. And of course there is the old fix to sniper rifles being hard to obtain, get something classified as hunting rifle

And even in games where concealment and legality is enforced (which are rare in my experience, because it pretty much hoses cyberware), snipers are just one example. You also have the amazingly accurate machine pistols and SMGs, which otherwise would be totally useless. Or the full-sized Ares Alpha as the weapon of choice for pretty much everything.


Well, you can spend more than one action for aiming, and I really don't think OHK shots are frequent enough that the loss of usable hits would have a noticeable effect.

But if this is a concern, how about a quick fix: The limit only applies if the defender gets his dodge test, because if the target it just standing there having a smoke, it does not matter much how easy it is to train your weapon on the target.

Gotta get to and from the site somehow. If your GM is giving you a pass on hauling heavy weapons through the streets, that's fine, but at that level of Pink Mohawk you should be less concerned about sniper rifles in CQB than Panther Cannons.

On the way back simply hide it under the hogtied exec and the briefcase with the biohazard labels, I assure you the weapons will not be your problem in a police checkpoint