Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Shooting at passengers
Dumpshock Forums > Discussion > Shadowrun
Pages: 1, 2
Luca
I'm a bit confused by SR3 page 149.
It seems that Armor or Body (whicever is higher) acts like an added armor...but what about hardened armor of the vehicle?

here the piece:
"...subtract either the vehicle's Armor or Body Rating, whichever is higher, from the Power of the attack, but do not reduce the weapon's damage level..."
Does it refer to the fact that power must not be halved and damage level not staged down by one level like for normal weapon vs vehicles rules?

furthermore:
"...because vehicle armor is considered hardened armor, passengers cannot be harmed by a weapon if the vehicle's Body or Armor rating is greater than he weapon's unmodified Power..."
first of all in normal vehicle rules a weapon does not hit if hits halved power is smaller than teh armor, NOT the body and the armor.
Secondly must I halve the Power of the weapon or not?

A further question by my players:
once they hit the driver, the glass is already broken, so further hits should be easier or not?
nezumi
1) Correct. You do NOT halve the damage and you don't stage the damage down. You only apply the armor or body of the vehicle as though it's a wall you're shooting through.

2) This is a bit more curious. I hadn't notice the 'or body' part. I'd say if the power of the attack is not greater than twice the armor or twice the body, it doesn't go through. But the power of the attack is never actually divided by two.

Effectively, it's a two step deal.
1) Does the round penetrate? Determine this normally, EXCEPT you count body if it's higher than armor.

2) Treat like shooting through barriers, with the barrier rating equal to the armor or the body, whichever is higher.

As for the last question, I'd say it'd depend on the type of weapon. A standard bullet will likely leave a neat hole, but won't shatter. If it's a shotgun with spread, or something with way too much power, it'll break the windshield, and it no longer counts as armor.
Wounded Ronin
I believe SR3 says that the windows are considered broken once the vehicle has M damage. However, I think that that would only make spellcasting or gas attacks against passengers available when they might not have been before, since windows don't have separate statistics.

Also, to shoot at the passengers requires a +4 called shot anyway, which makes life a lot harder.

Bottom line is shoot the vehicle, not the passengers.
Arethusa
QUOTE (Wounded Ronin)
Bottom line is shoot the vehicle, not the passengers.

Remember, kids: everything in Shadowrun is backwards.
Trax
And if you are shooting at a vehicle, use AV or APDS ammunition.
Austere Emancipator
APDS will be of no use whatsoever. In SR, saboted tungsten carbide projectiles do not penetrate any armor on a vehicle any better than basic FMJ ammunition -- instead, you need bullets with solid bronze cores, which cause any vehicles hit to implode.
Wounded Ronin
Yes, APDS dosen't count vs. vehicles. AV ammo, the bane of my existence, magically does work against them.

Sigh, it's so silly...
Trax
Whoops, my mistake. For some reason I thought it did.
Wounded Ronin
It's still really silly, though, that you can load any old handgun with the right cartridge and it will destroy a vehicle.

It reminds me of a bad action movie with exploding cars.

It's, like, something Tom Clancy would write into a novel if one day he went on crack. Normally, he keeps it a little bit toned down, with heartbeat sensors that tell you where everyone in the next room is, or with magical strobe lights that make you fall unconscious. But if he got just a little bit more fantastical and crazy, I can see him deciding that there's this ammo that makes vehicles die as well. I see it as being two or three steps above magical strobe lights that make you fall unconscious.
weblife
If the exact wording is something like "treat vehicle armor as a barrier when firing though", then remember that a barriers effective rating is doubled vs. bullets.

I guess that explains why they do not mention the vehicle armor being doubled, because the barrier rules will do that too.

EDIT: And the TN modifier to shoot a passenger in a car is +8, because of course the target is completely hidden behind opague windows.

Anything less and they are just asking for a magical attack.
Wounded Ronin
QUOTE (weblife)

EDIT: And the TN modifier to shoot a passenger in a car is +8, because of course the target is completely hidden behind opague windows.

Anything less and they are just asking for a magical attack.

I agree. I've even seen someone complain about that, claiming that tinted windows would prevent driving at night. But, it seems pretty clear to me that opaque windows in the SR world are standard issue. In any case, it makes the game more challenging, so I think it's definitely something that the characters should encounter regularly.
nezumi
I don't see too many problems with this as it stands. If you're shooting at someone behind opaqued windows it SHOULD be almost impossible to hit 'em, all told. That's why in most movies, when people are shooting at a car, they use full auto. Suppressive fire, as long as the bullets are tough enough to penetrate, you happily ignore that +8.
Arethusa
In real life, when you want to stop a car, you shoot the driver. Driver's in the same damn place, opaque windows or not. Only in bad movies do people shoot the car (or, oh oh oh, the gas tank!).
Luca
anyone knos what are tehrules for ahhhotingat the gas tank and then doing a decent damage?
(in any case I know that in great part of the models the gas tank is not visible because is too armoured or too concealed).
Critias
Most SR vehicle are electric.
noname_hero
Regarding APDS vs. vehicles: I thought it *is* better than normal ammo. We've always played it that APDS ammo suffers the same penalties as normal ammo but *does* halve the vehicle's armor, so firing 7S LMG loaded with APDS works against vehicles with armor 5 (or lower). The LMG does 3M damage, reduced by (halved) armor to 1M. A burst from said LMG would cause 5S damage, reduced by floor(5/2)=2 points of armor to 3S.

Are we misunderstanding the rules?
Critias
QUOTE
Are we misunderstanding the rules?


Yup. APDS gets no special affect, at all, against vehicles (according to canon). Normal armor penetration ability doesn't impress the magical aura of damage resistance that surrounds trucks, drones, and street bikes.
Austere Emancipator
QUOTE (SR3 @ page 279, under AMMUNITION/APDS Rounds)
Treat APDS as normal ammo against vehicles and drones.
Luca
QUOTE (Critias @ May 10 2005, 02:34 AM)
Most SR vehicle are electric.

No.
Just to take cars in R3R page 163-172 as a sample it is easy to notice that only 8 out of 41 cars use some kind of electric energy instead than fuels.
Therefore the damaging ofteh fuel tank must have some important rule to determine if the car catches fire or explode or not.
Austere Emancipator
I'd assume car fuel tanks in the 2060s would be self-sealing, non-conductive (both electricity and heat) and made of materials that minimize friction, pressure and sharp impact heat-up and the possibility of sparks. Thus fuel fires would only occur with massive incendiary attacks (when the whole car is on fire anyway) or rupturing the fuel tank together with some kind of incendiary attack (i.e. large caliber incendiary round).

I wouldn't bother making up rules for it unless you like making up rules for everything and also assume that cars have not become any safer in 60 years.
toturi
QUOTE (Austere Emancipator)
I'd assume car fuel tanks in the 2060s would be self-sealing, non-conductive (both electricity and heat) and made of materials that minimize friction, pressure and sharp impact heat-up and the possibility of sparks. Thus fuel fires would only occur with massive incendiary attacks (when the whole car is on fire anyway) or rupturing the fuel tank together with some kind of incendiary attack (i.e. large caliber incendiary round).

I wouldn't bother making up rules for it unless you like making up rules for everything and also assume that cars have not become any safer in 60 years.

Unless hit by an elemental attack.
Austere Emancipator
Depends on just how fucked up you want the Fireball-spell to be in your game. Also, you might say a Fireball powerful enough to cause the non-heat conductive fuel tank to rupture because of heat-up pressure through the vehicle hull counts as a "massive incendiary attack".
Edward
Driving behind most cares from 10 meters behind you have a nice view of the fuel tank under the bumper. A shot there would be tactically efficient if you donít mind a chance of fire and the probability that you wonít get one (and no explosion). Ether way I would expect them to run out of fuel in les than a kilometre.

In SR this is not likely to change. How many people in commuters cars are worried about somebody trying a stunt like that. And those that are worried (shadow runners) will buy the cares that donít have that issue.

For attacking the driver directly I would tend to use suppressive fire in the drivers seat position utilising the firing threw a barrier rules this feels like the appropriate way to attack the driver given what Arethusa said. So what is the barrier rating of a windshield as a function of body and armour?

Edward
Austere Emancipator
There are plenty of other safety issues with fuel tanks in cars aside from people shooting at them. Self-sealing, non-conductive fuel tanks would make cars much safer in all kinds of accidents. The tech to do this (with smart plastics -- kevlar/polyurethane covering has been around for quite some time, but it's a bit more expensive and is more bulky and heavy) is just about ready today, it should be really cheap in 60 years.
Edward
How do you do self sealing, I can see how it would be possible for a small bullet hole but a crash will crack the tank wide open as likely as anything else, you cant reseal that.

Also remember this formula and the fact that it is supposed to be cyberpunk.

Cost of implementing safety feature >< probability of incident * probability of legal loosing lawsuit * cost of payout.

Other factors can be added in including increased ales du to safety awards but most of those only apply for very expensive cars. I think teat in SR most corps will not bother with safety features they donít have to on consumer vehicles.

Edward
weblife
Well, one way to make the tank safer, would be to add wafers or fibers that release the fuel in only one direction. That way, even if the tank is ruptured, its only the cracked wafers/fibers that spill their fuel.

I too believe that a simple gastank, ala today, would be hard to find in 2065..
The Other DSE
I don't have a copy of R3R, but how many vehicles are actually petrochem? I seem to remember somewhere that many vehicles in SR have switched over to fuel cells...

If that's correct, how safe are those? I understand that they're using hydrogen, which is somewhat flammable (that's sarcasm by the way), but how is it stored?

nezumi
QUOTE (Arethusa)
In real life, when you want to stop a car, you shoot the driver. Driver's in the same damn place, opaque windows or not. Only in bad movies do people shoot the car (or, oh oh oh, the gas tank!).

I was under the impression that the +8 arises when you know approximately where the guy is, but not precisely, which I think would apply in this case. It's a small target (2 feet) and you're not quiet sure if you're aiming for his chest or his left ear. This is even more true in the 2060's where riggers don't have to sit upright and look over the dashboard.

Keep in mind though, the biggest threats are riggers, and riggers don't get to dodge or use their pool to soak if you're shooting approximately where their body should be. You've just gotta hit them, and they're pretty much tanked.

Don't forget when shooting the gas tank, it has to mix with enough air or its useless. Put a match in a barrel full of liquid gas and nothing else, and the match will extinguish every time.
Austere Emancipator
Very thin, light layers of certain kinds of flexible plastics would minimize leakage even if the rigid fuel tank (although self-sealing in its own right) is ruptured. It's not even too incredible to have such a layer inside the rigid tank, contracting as the fuel is consumed to reduce or completely get rid of ullage and thus fuel tank explosions.
Frater Inominatus
I personally don't understand these rules. A 9mm round will penetrate a car door with enough force to kill you. Actually, most rounds above 9mm will pass through the entire car, engine compartment not withstanding, and kill someone on the other side. The only safe place is behind the wheels or the block. Granted most vehicles in SR are armored.
But then I never understood the barrier rules either. An AK has enough power to penetrate brick, stucco, 16 layers of drywall, or doors, all with enough power to kill someone on the other side. In SR simply standing on the other side of a wall protects you from all but the most powerful of weapons.

F.I.
Critias
And, while protecting you, giving you an extra +8 TN versus anyone shooting at you!
weblife
In SR most walls tend to be the reinforced walls of corporate holdings..

A normal wall or those plastic instant houses in teh barrens are easy to shoot through. Only the visibility modifier is the problem, which is fair enough.
Austere Emancipator
Brick wall = Barrier Rating 4, 5 or 6 (Average through Heavy Material). Assault Rifle = 8M. Damage Code through a brick wall = 2M, 3M or 4M.
Wounded Ronin
QUOTE (Frater Inominatus)
I personally don't understand these rules. A 9mm round will penetrate a car door with enough force to kill you. Actually, most rounds above 9mm will pass through the entire car, engine compartment not withstanding, and kill someone on the other side. The only safe place is behind the wheels or the block. Granted most vehicles in SR are armored.
But then I never understood the barrier rules either. An AK has enough power to penetrate brick, stucco, 16 layers of drywall, or doors, all with enough power to kill someone on the other side. In SR simply standing on the other side of a wall protects you from all but the most powerful of weapons.

F.I.

That's also because the SS damage codes for SMGs and assault rifles are borked.
BitBasher
QUOTE
I personally don't understand these rules. A 9mm round will penetrate a car door with enough force to kill you.
In my experience no, it won't I've shot many cars both older and newer out in the desert here and with the exception of Saturns and other tupperware cars without actual metal panels a 9 mm nor a .40 will penetrate the doors reliably at all.

QUOTE
Actually, most rounds above 9mm will pass through the entire car, engine compartment not withstanding, and kill someone on the other side.
No they won't at all in my experience, unless you're shooting through the windows. Especially not with a hollowpoint or appropriate round that you'd be loading to shoot at human targets.,
Wounded Ronin
Oh, incidentally, I know a guy who shot a hard drive with a .44 magnum. The hard drive blocked the magnum cartridge.
Austere Emancipator
You wouldn't happen to know exactly what cartridge that was? (Maker, bullet type, bullet weight.) Although the design of the HD and the exact spot it was hit in likely affect the outcome a lot more. Hard drives do tend to have rather thick metal covers and plenty of metal bits inside as well, and the sandwhich-like construction with several thin (and thus flexible) metal layers will probably help.
Wounded Ronin
QUOTE (Austere Emancipator)
You wouldn't happen to know exactly what cartridge that was? (Maker, bullet type, bullet weight.) Although the design of the HD and the exact spot it was hit in likely affect the outcome a lot more. Hard drives do tend to have rather thick metal covers and plenty of metal bits inside as well, and the sandwhich-like construction with several thin (and thus flexible) metal layers will probably help.

No, he never told me those details.
Nikoli
Early self-sealing tech was around in WWI, it involved a 3 layer fuel tank, outer-layer, un-galvanized rubber, then an inner layer. The rubber expands when exposed to the fuel and seals the hole for a while, though it's not a permanent fix as most petrol fuels will eat a good number of materials.
wagnern
QUOTE (The Other DSE)
I don't have a copy of R3R, but how many vehicles are actually petrochem? I seem to remember somewhere that many vehicles in SR have switched over to fuel cells...

If that's correct, how safe are those? I understand that they're using hydrogen, which is somewhat flammable (that's sarcasm by the way), but how is it stored?

Fuel cells can also be made to use hidrocarbons, the advantage is that the slower reaction increases the reversability of the reaction and thus the efficency.

As far as storage of H2 goes, either it is in compressed tanks, or physickly bonded in a carrier medum. In a compressed tank the disadvantages are 1: even compressed, a gass takes up a very large volume compared to a liquid and not much fuel can be stored, and 2: It dosent' matter if the gass is flamable or explosive, a ruptured tank of compressed gass is quite explosive. Physickly bonded to a carrier medium means the H2 is bonded to a liquid carrier medium untill released. This is much higher tech, but a lot safer and more can be stored. I may be mistaken, but I beleave this is a tech we currently don't have and are trying to develope.
The Other DSE
An amusing aside, hard drive disks aren't actually metal all the way through any more. They now deposit magnetic material on plastic disks.... it's cheaper that way.

How do I know this? Check out the worst hard drive crash ever:

http://www.astro.ufl.edu/~ken/crash/

Back on topic: Even assuming that an AK could "easily" penetrate a wall, wouldn't your aim be thrown off something fierce anyways?

I mean, it may not make a difference if your target is right up against the wall, but if they're even a meter or so away?

Arethusa
Yes and no. Depending on the material and luck (or lack thereof), the bullet may be deflect a lot or not much at all.
Frater Inominatus
QUOTE (BitBasher)
In my experience no, it won't I've shot many cars both older and newer out in the desert here and with the exception of Saturns and other tupperware cars without actual metal panels a 9 mm nor a .40 will penetrate the doors reliably at all.

Then our experience differ greatly. In my experience as a body guard, I have seen the effects of various caliber rounds on vehicles, walls, door, steel plate, etc. ad nauseum. With anything more than 9mm there is very little"cover." An Ak will put lethal rounds through brick and block. A .40 cal. will blow through both doors of a vehicle. Think about it, a door is what, 30 thousandths aluminum? No way that will absorb the kind of Mo in a bullet.
Consider the complaint of soldiers in Iraq. They need armor for their HUMVEEs because the door panels won't stop a bullet.
Respectfully,
F.I.
Frater Inominatus
QUOTE (The Other DSE)
Back on topic: Even assuming that an AK could "easily" penetrate a wall, wouldn't your aim be thrown off something fierce anyways?

I mean, it may not make a difference if your target is right up against the wall, but if they're even a meter or so away?

Absolutely, which should translate in higher TNs to hit rather than major reductions in weapon damage. But if you are firing blind through a wall, chances are you don't care about anything on the other side, right? So why not go full auto and rake the room?
Austere Emancipator
QUOTE (Frater Inominatus)
They need armor for their HUMVEEs because the door panels won't stop a bullet.

Those bullets are at the very least 7.62mm 123gr FMJs traveling at ~2300fps, which is not really comparable to a 9mm 124gr JHP traveling at ~1200fps or even a 10.9mm 240gr JHP traveling at ~1400fps. If only OpFor had the decency to only arm themselves with handguns...
Wounded Ronin
If it were Shadowrun, they would, since handguns would have the almighty 9M damage code. They would be, like, better than assault rifles in SA mode.
Frater Inominatus
Yes, and how many players arm their characters with 9mm? Few if any. Most are walking the streets with Ruger Superwarhawks, or Thunderbolts, which are high caliber, high power weapons.
Austere Emancipator
QUOTE (Frater Inominatus)
Absolutely, which should translate in higher TNs to hit rather than major reductions in weapon damage.

The protection provided by walls against many firearms in SR might be slightly higher than what happens IRL, but the differences aren't that great.

A FMJ fired from an AK-47 through a single brick wall will most likely be significantly deformed, possibly fragmented, and moving much slower than it was before hitting the wall. As a result, it will cause a much shallower wound, enough so that the likelihood of a quickly incapacitating wound is reduced significantly. 8M -> 4M or 3M is not completely ridiculous.

A lighter, faster FMJ will fare much worse. According to FM 3-06.11 COMBINED ARMS OPERATIONS IN URBAN TERRAIN, a brick veneer or a 2-inch thick, non-reinforced concrete wall will protect you against 5.56x45mm FMJs fired at less than 50 meters. The FM also states that the same rounds might not fully penetrate a car body, and thus a car can be considered cover gainst it. Meanwhile assault rifles will penetrate building materials like this in SR.
Austere Emancipator
QUOTE (Frater Inominatus)
Yes, and how many players arm their characters with 9mm?

I was commenting on your discussion with BitBasher, about penetration of car doors with current handguns, which I assume your comment about the HMMWVs in Iraq was related to.

QUOTE (Frater Inominatus)
Most are walking the streets with Ruger Superwarhawks, or Thunderbolts, which are high caliber, high power weapons.

Which is why I included the 10.9mm 240gr JHP at 1400 fps. wink.gif
Frater Inominatus
QUOTE (Austere Emancipator)
A FMJ fired from an AK-47 through a single brick wall will most likely be significantly deformed, possibly fragmented, and moving much slower than it was before hitting the wall. As a result, it will cause a much shallower wound, enough so that the likelihood of a quickly incapacitating wound is reduced significantly. 8M -> 4M or 3M is not completely ridiculous.

I take your point. I suppose, thinking about it, my problem isn't as much with the damage code as the fact that most PCs can shrug off that kind of damage without breaking a sweat. A fact that I find implausible, even in my gaming.
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