Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Accuracy and other limits.
Dumpshock Forums > Discussion > Shadowrun
Larsenex
Greetings again.

So is there a way to raise the accuracy of a melee weapon?

For example the Combat axe is 5. What I gather from this is even if you have 'Agility 6, and Blades of 10, you will always and forever only take 5 successes with this weapon.

Is this correct?

Does accuracy or more importantly the limit on number of successes/hits ever raise up? Is there something mechanically that I am missing (no pun intended)?

Are there things we can add to melee weapons like we can to guns that increase this limit? Counterbalance or some feature? Granted I really feel that melee weapons should be more accurate but have the armor reductions in them reduced, but that is me.

What is the consensus on this?
Beta
I'm not sure how it is actually written in the rules, but I've allowed the 'customized grip' option on melee weapons in my game, raising the limit by 1.

It is an interesting dynamic that with, say, a generic club, there are some people where, no matter how skilled you are, you are not apt to hit them. Melee hasn't been a big part of my game so far, so at the moment I'm only thinking about some house rules and haven't thought them through hard nor tested them out, but the two that I'm thinking of are:

- putting a limit on dodge when in confined spaces. It is easy enough to dodge a comparatively slow weapon when you can jump backwards, but once your back is to the wall, or you are in a corner, or worse crawling through a narrow sewer pipe, there is only so much dodging that you can do .... Exactly how to set those limits I haven't figured out in a way that is fairly quick to use in play.

- Allowing an equivalent to the take aim action. Basically copy it completely and call it 'feint.' Note that because melee attacks are complex actions, it is somewhat probable that people would often use it twice in one initiative pass, to set up the next attack, which feels a bit odd -- but making it a complex action feels like it is penalizing melee unduly. I mean, you already have to deal with possibly block/parry actions, no burst fire penalties to dodge, and no add-ons that add to accuracy. It kind of feels at times that to excel at melee against nimble foes you should be built to have a large edge pool and plan to push the limit.
Sendaz
QUOTE (Betx @ May 9 2016, 11:04 AM) *
- putting a limit on dodge when in confined spaces. It is easy enough to dodge a comparatively slow weapon when you can jump backwards, but once your back is to the wall, or you are in a corner, or worse crawling through a narrow sewer pipe, there is only so much dodging that you can do .... Exactly how to set those limits I haven't figured out in a way that is fairly quick to use in play.

Well if you are using a hex map for figures, a few tables I have seen impose a -2 to dodge roll for any of adjacent hex sides that completely blocked and -1 for partially blocked sides, this does not count the front facing.

So say you are facing a ganger with your back literally against the wall, with the remains of a broken chair just to your left.

The hex side directly behind is blocked thanks to wall so is a -2, the rear left hex is partially filled with the chair bits so would impose a -1, giving you a -3 to your dodge.
This does mean if you are crawling through a pipe your dodge is knocked down by 8 ( the 4 side hexes are blocked off by the pipe wall though you can maybe still twist about in the space you are in or shuffle back a bit)

Granted this was applied as a penalty to dodge instead of a limit, but you could tweak it to taste.
Larsenex
Yea there is no 'aim' for melee weapons. I have a player who really wants to play the big troll with the combat axe. Who am I to not let me play what he wants. Reach of 4. So that reduces the amount of dice you get to defend against his attack.

It just seems that with the changes to things we could increase limits if given enough skill.

A combat axe accuracy of 5.

A Katana is 7.

A sword is 6.

The values seem pretty low given the fact you might have Agility of 5 and Blades of 6.
Tymeaus Jalynsfein
QUOTE (Larsenex @ May 9 2016, 09:50 AM) *
Yea there is no 'aim' for melee weapons. I have a player who really wants to play the big troll with the combat axe. Who am I to not let me play what he wants. Reach of 4. So that reduces the amount of dice you get to defend against his attack.

It just seems that with the changes to things we could increase limits if given enough skill.

A combat axe accuracy of 5.

A Katana is 7.

A sword is 6.

The values seem pretty low given the fact you might have Agility of 5 and Blades of 6.


To be fair, an Agility of 5 and Blades 6, and lets give a specialization for +2 Dice more is only 13 Dice.
Wtth a Limit of 5 you are still not hitting it consistently with only 13 Dice (Average of 4.3 Rolled Hits, and Bought hits of 3), though you may surge over or under consistently depending upon your dice rolling acumen. smile.gif
Mantis
I'm really disappointed they didn't go with Physical limit plus or minus for melee weapon accuracy. There are a couple of weapons that do that in Run and Gun but I think they all should have been done that way. The big troll swinging an axe (or dwarf in my last campaign) is such a staple of melee that forcing them to move on to a katana when they get more skilled is kind of slap in the face.
Tymeaus Jalynsfein
QUOTE (Mantis @ May 9 2016, 01:34 PM) *
I'm really disappointed they didn't go with Physical limit plus or minus for melee weapon accuracy. There are a couple of weapons that do that in Run and Gun but I think they all should have been done that way. The big troll swinging an axe (or dwarf in my last campaign) is such a staple of melee that forcing them to move on to a katana when they get more skilled is kind of slap in the face.


Agreed... If boggles the mind that that option was not more fully explored.
Larsenex
Cant I just house rule this and say accuracy is based on physical limit or weapon accuracy whichever is greater (melee weapons only)?
Mantis
It's your game. You can do whatever you like. smile.gif I'd look at the few examples following this in Run and Gun to get some ideas and go from there.
OrinjFlames24
A higher dice pool for your regular attack will make it easier to perform different attacks/martial art techniques. One example I can think of is the free action "multiple attacks", which allows you to split a character's attack dice pool between 2 or more attacks in one action. It also helps if you're using stuff from RG.
Medicineman
by RAW a personilzed Grip ( 100 avail 2) raises the Limit by one personalized grip can be founds in a PDF and in Hard Target
and (according to the doctrine of making SR5 a Magicrun) adepts and mages can raise the Limit with powers or Spells .

with a magical dance
Medicineman
Critias
QUOTE (Tymeaus Jalynsfein @ May 9 2016, 03:39 PM) *
Agreed... If boggles the mind that that option was not more fully explored.

Oh, it was plenty explored, playtested for a time, and advocated for heavily (by several of us). It's just...not what we got, when the arguments ended and the time for publication began. Like lots of other stuff, eventually the decision has to get made (and by someone well above any freelancer's pay grade).

It'd be an easy enough houserule, I'd think. Figure out the average Accuracy, and call that "Physical Limit." Anything lower than that is "Physical Limit - (difference)," anything better than average is "PL + (difference)," and there you go.
Tymeaus Jalynsfein
Thanks for the insight, Critias. smile.gif
Wakshaani
My personal take is that 'onboard' weapons, like bioware claws/fangs or cyberblades should be physical limit, while melee weapons work better with their ownAccuracy, a view that, I confess, took a while. Of course, I'd also knock a point or two of Accuracy off of about everything.

Because I'm a monster. smile.gif

(And would counter-balance it with weapon mods that allowed you to smooth the flow out with enough cash!)
Mantis
Critias, how are you not banging your head on the wall or screaming at the sky over this edition? So many things we players ask why wasn't this or that done only to have you (or another dev) say 'well, we advocated for it but...' . That has to be infuriating.
Wakshaani
There were a LOT of opinions and struggles. Some, he won, some he didn't. Same for each of us. Crit and I are often on the same page (And when we're not, we have enough respect for one another to take the other's views into account), but sometimes not. He's a joy to work with, however, and that gets over all kinds of humps. He's also, IMHO, the best writer we have, so any time I can be in his wake, I'm a happy camper. smile.gif
Larsenex
I apologize is this sounds stupid but I see a lot of references to RAW. What is that? Thank you all for assisting me with the accuracy problem. I still feel that melee weapons should be more accurate than guns but that is my opinion.
Sendaz
Read as Written, ie what the book says to the letter.

as Versus RAI or Read as Intended, in cases where there is question of what the wording means and some room for interpretation may be used.
Larsenex
I must say the game has gone through a lot of changes since 1rst Edition. I remember the excitement I had with 2nd edition. Now what 20+ years later an i am reigniting the RPG coals. I have played D&D, Pathfinder extensively in the years but my clique of friends just had no interest in learning shadowrun. Personally I think they like the tetrahedron dice better. I love the success system of Shadowrun and I can see why they put inherent limits on how many successes you can achieve. I remember having about 26 dice in hand to make an attack. Fun times.

There was mention of splitting your dice pool to make additional attacks. Is this new or am I just not remembering it. For example if I had Agility of 8, and long arms of 9 I would toss out 17 dice right? Am I able to split up my dice and shoot two different targets or make two attacks at the same target?
Critias
QUOTE (Mantis @ May 10 2016, 11:23 AM) *
Critias, how are you not banging your head on the wall or screaming at the sky over this edition? So many things we players ask why wasn't this or that done only to have you (or another dev) say 'well, we advocated for it but...' . That has to be infuriating.


*shrugs* It is what it is. You argue for what you can argue for, but ultimately you just have to learn to accept that at the end of the day, you're a freelancer. You don't get to write someone else's section, and you don't get the final say on the stuff you do write, because it's all the company's book, not yours. Since I was only contracted to write the intro fic (and I playtested quite a bit, don't get me wrong, but I was only assigned the opening fluff), ultimately what came out wasn't my responsibility; I shared my opinions whenever I could, and in a few places we got some good compromises out of it (I hope folks like the separate adept/magician Mentor Spirit upgrades, for instance), but...

Well, yeah. CritiasRun Fifth Edition would have several very big changes from what we got.
Iduno
QUOTE (Critias @ May 10 2016, 05:38 PM) *
Well, yeah. CritiasRun Fifth Edition would have several very big changes from what we got.


If I didn't know the trouble you'd get into (NDAs and otherwise), I'd encourage you to tell us more. As is, I'll do with imagination.
Mantis
Oh the things that could have been. Probably my biggest gripe with SR5 is we've seen enough of what could have been to make us, or me anyway, really unhappy with what we got. Feels sort of like a bait and switch. Or maybe exactly like a bait and switch.
Iduno
The way I remember hearing about SR5 was a few good ideas, some okay ideas, some confusing ones, then a realization that everything was going way too far.

Not exactly bait-and-switch, but I can see that point of view. I think a better description I've heard is something along the lines of "Everything about 4th was fixed. Usually 2 or 3 times."
FriendoftheDork
I actually like the accuracy of melee weapons, as it gives agile weapons an edge, while the brute smashing weapons retain high damage but less... accuracy. If it was all based on physical, then for no good reason Trolls would be super accurate while nimble elves would suck at it... how does that make sense assuming that strength != accuracy?

Another issue about physical limit is how you need to be strong to be able to use stealth well, as agility is not part of the limit while str is over-represented. I guess it was to balance out ag a bit as it is otherwise hands down the best stat in the game, but it does create weird situations where the weak and small "hobbit" sucks at hiding. (physical limit 3 is too low).

BTW, RAW literally stands for Rules as Written, not read as., but it is about how to interpret rules in the book, either literally and exclusively, or in a context of intention. For example, by RAW no character ever needs to use the toilet, but any sensible GM knows characters needs to go sometimes.

RAW is sometimes useful to avoid ad-hoc houserules by the GM interpret on mild "fluff" or flavor text. For example, reading about Trolls being less intelligent could result in the GM telling players they can't have a Log 5 Troll because they are "supposed to be dum and strong". RAW is clear on the matter though, setting clear limits which are supposed to be used.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Dumpshock Forums © 2001-2012