The problem with dual wielding weapons is that you really can't aim them in an appropriate manner. Just hit them with some truly ginormous to hit penalty which represents you crapping all over Using Firearms 101.

Using Firearms 101 doesn't involve you having a limited simsense rig helping you aim.

~J

Currently the penalty is +2 to each weapon. However, as you're aware, with ambidexterity, that can be reduced to 0. So are you suggesting that the initial penalty be increased, or that the ambidexterity bonus be decreased?

That the ability for ambidexterity to offset the entire penalty be decreased, whether by increasing the initial penalty or decreasing the ambidexterity offset (or possibly eliminating its applicability to ranged combat).

I first need to figure out what's happening to two-weapon combat in melee, but my initial inclination is to cut Ambidexterity down into two levels, costing 3 and 6 points respectively, that each offer -1 to the penalty.

~J

Am I missing the point here? Ambidexterity isn't a problem, why tamper with it? Anyone spending 8 points on an edge should expect a solid bonus, it's nice and balanced.

And from my understanding of the 'limited simsense', it's limited in that it can only read, not write. Ie: it's used to figure out where the gun is pointed so the crosshairs in your eye is focused on whatever the gun is pointed at. It doesn't aim the gun for you. That's why Smartlinks can't be used to fire 2 weapons at once. You only have 1 set of crosshairs in your eyes (and your eyes can only focus on 1 object at a time).

That's why it should be possible to use the Smartlink while wielding 2 weapons if you're only aiming with 1, and using the other to lay some suppressive fire.

But using 2 SmartLinks doesn't make sense. The cross-hairs would be 3-dimensional, requiring 2 eyes to focus on a per-object basis. The best you could hope for is if you're shooting at the same target, and personally, I don't think it's unbalancing to allow the smartlink bonus when pointing 2 weapons at the same target. Ambidexterity is still pretty much 8 points to get a -2TN. Nothing unbalanced there.

if using two smartlinks doesn't make sense, then neither does ambidexterity. if ambidexterity makes sense, then two smartlinks make sense.

Ronin, ambidex doesn't give any bonuses. It only offsets a negative modifier. There is a huge difference.

mfb, you're right, ambidexterity really shouldn't be a factor in firearm usage. Doesn't take someone ambidextrous to shot at the same target with 2 guns, that just takes practice. And shooting at different targets is a perception problem, not an ambidextrous problem. Might make more sense to use a rule like this:

If shooting at the same target with 2 weapons, you suffer a -2 for each weapon. Every 2 levels of lowest skill rating in the firearms being used, can reduce that penalty by 1 per-weapon, requiring a skill of 8 to offset the negatives entirely.

If shooting at seperate targets, you recieve a -6 to the secondary target. By concentrating less on the primary target you can reduce the penalty to the secondary target as you increase the penalty on the primary up to a -3 on each target. The maximum anyone can raise/lower the penalty is by 1 for every 2 levels of lowest skill rating in the weapons being used.

That kinda ruling would make the most sense I think.... if you're going for more realism anyways.

Shall we put this in perspective, we've talked about how much extra damage can be done with dual firearms. Yes. It's certailnly more effective than using one of the same firearm in the hands of a skilled user.

Let's define skilled user though. First of all, we'll assume this gunbunny has a quickness of 6 let's go with Ambidexterity at full, which costs us 8 bp. We'll need a relative firearm skill for it, so we choose pistols at 6. That's up to 14 points (expensive), not including the high quickness. This allows a character to fire more rapidly, with no negative penalties, other than stacking recoil.

Now, I'd say that the damage from an assault rifle burst or autofire would equal or exceed the damage of two pistols, as well as having a much better range among other things, and being able to use smartlinks, lasersights, scopes, whatever. We'll still take a skill in pistols, for a side-arm, but when we want to kill a whole bunch of people we bring the assault rifle.

So 6 + 6 Bp for Assault rifles and pistols at 6, or 6 + 8 for being restricted to pistols, but carrying two when you need to lay into some-one in combat.

So I don't think it's really a balance issue, although I would like to add that using dual SMG's should some-how be more difficult than two pistols.

Firing two pistols will generally cause more damage than a single assault rifle in my experience (due to how quickly it wears down the target's combat pool). If you applied burst fire rules to dual-wielding pistols, that would solve the problem, however.

8) Grenades vanish into thin air

Take a grenade. Throw and/or shoot it at a target. Get no successes, but don't botch.

What happens to the grenade?

~J

Here's a suggestion (going along with yours): since we're using the explosives-stage-based-on-Power rules, we make 1 success subtract the base amount of scatter, and no successes be, as you say, flat Scatter. If that results in excessively tight grenade placement, switch to +1d6 Scatter on a miss.

Thoughts?

~J

What's wrong with the current scatter rules? I really like them.

Isn't a failed unbotched roll play you that you just throw, and don't reduce the scatter be enough?

If you get 8 scatter an 1 success, you are close, but not exact... therefore the power gets reduced. the direction is random so it is realistic.

How is this failing? You can't really increase or decrease the power of the grenade based on a throw, only by where it lands. How well you throw depends on successes.

Does anyone else think nades are broken?

Have you ever seen an adept with the "throwing mastery" power throwing 'nades at people, doing dmg for the hit itself and then explode? What happens to the scatter?

Peace!

Crossfire

P.S. What about grenade dmg? Using the optional Fields of fire rules or standard dmg rules depending on successes? What does 3rd edition says about it?

I'm not sure what I'd do with that. I guess we should probably have rules for it—my inclination is to insist that all successes go to damage, so the grenade will get full scatter afterwards. Though I don't think it makes sense, I could be open to a compelling argument that the adept should be able to declare before throwing how many successes go where.

Edit: wow, Moon-Hawk is generous

As for damage, the official SR3R rule for staging explosives is the formerly optional SR3 rule that dice equal to 1/2 Power at target's location are rolled against TN 4 for staging up. That still leaves the question of whether the staging should act like melee, ranged, or a third way—my inclination is to use ranged staging.

~J

Moon-Hawk's ruling makes sense to me, except I'd split the dice before the roll. If the adept focuses on hitting the target hard with the grenade, then there is the risk of completely overpowering and throwing too early so that it bounces a lot. If the adept primarily focuses on getting the timing right, that's less dice on the impact damage.

I could see the argument there, though I'm not sure I buy it—anyway, with that argument I would require at least that the character arm the grenade in one pass and hold it armed until their next pass, since it doesn't go off until the end of that [term for one person's action which I don't have time to look up now and have forgotten].

~J

Would that be hold the throw action for a pass or potentially lose an entire action holding? If there's a potential loss of action, then I'd spend the free or simple to arm and use any potentially lost actions aiming to make the TN easier.

If you could get a version of air-timed thrown grenades...

One would have to arm the grenade with either a Free or Simple action during their previous combat phase, then hold the grenade (not the action) until their next phase. No actions would be lost (except whatever it takes to arm the grenade), you'd just be stuck holding this armed grenade. Woe betide you if something causes you to lose your next phase.

~J

And if you get one success? I'll have to double-check, but I think what you're describing is what happens by canon if you get one success, not zero.

~J

...having not yet made it through the entire thread, has there been any change made as to which skills cover the following weapons?

FN AAL GyroJet [CC]
Ares Super Squirt [M&M]
Ares Cascade Rifle [M&M]
Dart Pistols [M&M]
Dart Rifles [M&M]
Splat Guns [M&M
Net Guns [M&M]
Shiawase Blazer [CC]
Flame Throwers [CC]
Cigarette Mini Rocket [S-2064]
Executive Defender [S-2064]
"Screech" Rifle [S-2064]
Integrated Grenade Launcher/Assault Rifle (e.g. Ares Alpha [CC], Colt M22-A2 [BBB])

The following skill rules have been agreed upon:

- Laser weapons skill is in the Firearms category
- Bracers and gun canes use pistols skill
- Rifles and assault rifles use the same skill
- Eye-guns, cyberguns, etc. use Ranged Cyber-implant Combat
- Blowgun is under Projectile Weapons

I don't think that that covers most of the specific weapons you brought up, so if you'd like to bring up a suggested ruling, you're welcome to.

SotA:64 isn't in the list of considered books. Other than that, I don't think we've made any changes—the Gyrojet sorta got forgotten about during our discussion of appropriate skill inclusion. I'm still debating sticking it under Pistols, but whate'er. Note that although none of it has changed, some of it will have to change—primarily because several things on that list say "acts like shotgun with choke n", while shotguns no longer have chokes or do any of the things that are being referred to.

~J

...omitting the SOTA 2064 weapons since they are fairly unique, I would see it thus:

Pistols skill: Dart Pistol, Super Squirt, FN-AAL Gyrojet, Splat Gun and Net Gun (pistol variety)

Rifles Skill: Dart Rifle, Net Rifle, Splat rifle

Assault Rifles Skill: Ares Cascade Rifle (since it can also fire BF & FA), GLs integrated in ARs by "factory design" (e.g Ares Alpha, Colt M22-A2)

The only odd ones that I find hard to place are the "flamethrower" types.

...comment?

If anything, I'd move the Super Squirt, Splat Gun, Splat Rile, and Cascade Rifle out into Splash Weapons. Assault Rifles and Rifles have been merged.

~J

...that's good to know about ARs & rifles, makes much more sense than grouping ARs with SMGs as done in SR4.

I forgot there was a Splash Weapons skill/category. Does this still include splash grenades and other Chemtech application systems as well?

Splash grenades are throwing weapons. IIRC the big things that are in splash weapons are the flamethrowers.

~J

I suspect that one of us is misinterpreting the applicable rules. Under the current rules as I read them, it does require skill to throw or launch grenades, because if you miss the grenade enters a totally undefined state. What's your reading?

~J

Kagetenshi, despite your claims, I see no indication in the SR3 rules on page 118 that a success is needed to throw the grenade. The first part states only "note the number of successes rolled" and the second uses them in "the attacker reduces the scatter distance by 2 meters per success for standard grenades, 4 meters per success for aerodynamic grenades and grenade launchers."

This seems to clearly state that 0 successes is full scatter roll.

Fair enough; I'd interpreted that differently. So then the only problem I could see with that is that it gives Grenadelinked weapons a very good shot even with no successes—does anyone think that's a problem? If not, we can move on.

~J

Cannon Companion p32. Reduces scatter on launched grenades to 1d6.

~J

This thread, and the other SR3R threads are being moved over to Community Projects. The original Shadowrun 3rd Revised thread will remain in the Shadowrun forum. They're getting quite a lot of traffic and are sticking to the top of the Shadowrun forum, but would be more appropriately placed in Community Projects.

You could also make a first scatter roll to determine where the no success rolled grenade actually hit, then a second scatter roll to see where it "scattered".

(repost, plus added ideas)

As for the "I can pull the trigger 10 times in 3 seconds" thing, why not just put that discussion over into the Ranged Combat section? That seems to me like a problem with shooting guns, not a problem with the system dictating movement and reaction.


Why not give every firearm a maximum rate of fire, expressed in bullets per combat turn? Even "semi-automatic" weapons would have a ROF greater than 1 per turn, allowing people to get the empirical results of being able to fire a handgun several times in a 3-second period (though maybe SA weapons would require a Quickness test to fire multiple bullets in a single action?)

This way, everyone would be able to fire the same number of bullets in the same amount of time, getting rid of that silliness where a sam can unload an automatic weapon faster than a mundane. But, since the sams get more actions, he can switch targets between his actions, aiming at a number of targets in a round while the mundane would face either stiff penalties or switching over to suppressive fire to even target the same number of people.

The gun's contribution to recoil suppression, btw, could also be handled on a per turn basis, though perhaps a Str contribution would make more sense on a per init pass basis?

FWIW, the current modifiers reflect the "very small modifiers" philosophy. IIRC, a STR of 5 gives you one point, 11 gives you a second point, and 17 gives you a third point.

~J

I used the 'firing a gun' example just because we all know it's a simple action. Another example would be flipping a light switch. A juiced person should be able to flip the light switch more often than a not juiced person, IMO.

In regards to guns and recoil... The current recoil compensation system has a plus in being simple. All recoil comp works the same, there's not some that work action to action or combat turn to combat turn. That's a good thing, let's keep things simple, apply the same rule to all.

Strength and recoil... Strength is such an underused stat and reaction and body are so overused, I would show preference for strength, primarily for game balance reasons.