Zen Shooter01
Aug 21 2005, 12:29 AM
I don't have my PDF yet. So I am working only from what has appeared on these boards. But I do have to give in to the temptation to say this.
Armor, generally, reduces damage to stun. If I recall correctly, a lined coat has a ballistic of 6, and a Predator a damage code of 5P (-1AP). So let's say the shooter shoots and inflicts four boxes of damage. Because the DV does not exceed the modified armor value, the damage done is stun.
This totally disregards the fact that armor does not cover the entire body. The SR3 system accounted for this lack of total coverage by making it possible to kill a person wearing a lined coat with a heavy pistol. SR4, apparently, does not.
If combat magic still ignores armor and still does killing damage, then magic has gained a big jump-up in killpower over firearms.
It also seems to me that this will create an arms race, where everybody will be forced to carry SMGs and autoshotguns just to overcome common armors.
I understand that the stun condition monitor probably still overflows into the physical condition monitor, but the chances of inflicting 20 or so boxes of damage with anything less than a sustained barrage of pistol fire are, at best, vanishingly small.
Again, I only have the SR4 information I have seen on these boards.
Ellery
Aug 21 2005, 12:36 AM
There may still be called shots for bypassing armor.
Clyde
Aug 21 2005, 12:42 AM
If I remember right from Tisoz's posting, Armor converts damage to stun if Net Hits plus damage is less than the armor rating. Thus, if you score some nice extra hits with that Predator you will do physical damage - representing shooting into an unarmored area or something. On the other hand, if you have a weak shot with only one net hit, then it's pretty fair to say you hit him where it doesn't count as much.
Rolemodel
Aug 21 2005, 12:45 AM
Good point, Ellery.
With any luck, it will be a bit better balanced than in the previous edition. I.E, on one hand, a called shot w/ an SL-2 was a +2 TN, w/ no armor against power, and on the other, it was a +4 to TN, merely for a wound level.
-RM
"I haven't figured out how to say 'FUCK YOU' politely."
Cochise
Aug 21 2005, 12:47 AM
QUOTE |
There may still be called shots for bypassing armor. |
I hope not ...
SR3 didn't know armor bypassing except for special situations ... and those situations either created even more absurdness (e.g. chemical attacks) than the idea of an armor vest also protecting the head of a person in an abstract damage system (general rules on called shots) or involved mechanics that made it useless under most circumstances to go for that armor bypassing (melee) ...
Ellery
Aug 21 2005, 12:50 AM
No, chances are it will be even less balanced, though it may be imbalanced for everyone rather than biasedly imbalanced towards smartlink-users. If anyone else is interested in why, I'll explain. If not, just consider what happens to combat as described by Bull when you try to pick a penalty for calling a shot.
Nerbert
Aug 21 2005, 12:58 AM
I've generally found that called shots in increase damage are senseless. In combat you're trying to do the most damage possible. Taking a called shot means that you're sacrificing the best shot for something else. Wether a shot happens to hit a sensitive area is best modeled by the amount of damage done. I think that called shots should be used only for effect, bypassing armor, knockdown, etc.
Backgammon
Aug 21 2005, 01:29 AM
Stun damage is still damage. Get 10 boxes (or whatever), and you're pretty much just as dead as if that was physical. Differance is if you still win, you don't have a huge hospital bill to pay. Now, I don't know how much sense it makes for people to pass out from bruises rather than bleed out and trauma and stuff, but in game terms, getting shot is still no good.
Modesitt
Aug 21 2005, 02:00 AM
QUOTE |
I think that called shots should be used only for effect, bypassing armor, knockdown, etc. |
One of these is not like the others.
An effect is typically something dramatic, like shooting a gun out of someones hand or shooting someone in the leg to slow them down or shooting the GIANT MACHINE OF DOOM! at the one weakpoint that you just figured out, etc. In essence, things that might not necessarily be covered strictly by just 'dealing more damage'.
As far as I can see, SR4 is very much embracing the concept that damaging someone armored involves aiming where there is less or no armor. There's no reason for 'called shots' to bypass armor because that's what you're already doing when you roll an attack.
Sabosect
Aug 21 2005, 02:01 AM
Actually, taking a Called Shot is used primarily to give up the best area to hit for a better shot that can potentially do more damage. A called shot to the head is the best, and most frequent, example. In other cases, it has other effects you consider more desireable, such as disarming someone you intend to take hostage or keeping a vow of not killing people by shooting them in the limbs.
mfb
Aug 21 2005, 02:03 AM
eh. i've never viewed "unconsciousness" to necessarily mean actual lights-out. if you get hurt bad enough, shock can keep you from doing much more than lying on the floor and groaning--same effect as unconsciousness in game terms. that's plenty realistic.
Nerbert
Aug 21 2005, 02:36 AM
QUOTE (Sabosect) |
Actually, taking a Called Shot is used primarily to give up the best area to hit for a better shot that can potentially do more damage. A called shot to the head is the best, and most frequent, example. In other cases, it has other effects you consider more desireable, such as disarming someone you intend to take hostage or keeping a vow of not killing people by shooting them in the limbs. |
But isn't "a better shot that can potentially do more damage" already the best place to hit? You're can't give up the best place to shoot someone for a better place to shoot them. Now, its true that you ought to be able to aim for someone's head in order to kill them almost instantly, but its almost impossible to model consistently with a balanced combat dice system.
If all called shots bypass armor, and potentially do more damage, then why do anything except called shots?
Sabosect
Aug 21 2005, 02:39 AM
Statistically, the best place to shoot someone is in the torso. However, that's also the place most likely to have armor. A shot to the head is preferred, but you have to take time to aim and in most cases people don't have the time necessary. In the long run, it's often more worthwhile to shoot for the bigger area than the smaller because you simply hit more often.
Pretty much, a case of ease over lethality.
Nerbert
Aug 21 2005, 02:47 AM
Right, and the way in which to balance the difficulty and the lethality is a problem which I am sure has plagued the mind of many a game developer. In my experiences called shots for extra damage always tend to be unbalanced.
Sabosect
Aug 21 2005, 03:00 AM
That's why you use modifiers. Attach a positive one to the TN or a negative one to the attacker's roll. In this case, I would say a mod of -2 dice.
Nerbert
Aug 21 2005, 03:05 AM
Obviously you use modifiers. But how much modifier is enough? What specific benefit do you get for the modifier?
Sabosect
Aug 21 2005, 03:09 AM
The benefit with a modifier is that it becomes harder to hit. However, as weapon skill goes up, modifiers get fewer and fewer returns. You need a mod that makes a large difference to low gun skill. I think SR3 used +4 to TN or something like that. However, you don't want one too big to represent the fact that skilled gunshooters can hit specific targets with greater ease.
Gort
Aug 21 2005, 03:17 AM
Also, what about a couple of EX rounds? You'll exceed a lined coat in no time.
FrostyNSO
Aug 21 2005, 03:50 AM
QUOTE (Gort) |
Also, what about a couple of EX rounds? You'll exceed a lined coat in no time. |
To hearken back to SR3 (it was sooooooo long ago!), here is a quote from our old group:
"A T-250 with EX...The poor man's assault cannon."
hahnsoo
Aug 21 2005, 07:30 AM
QUOTE (mfb) |
eh. i've never viewed "unconsciousness" to necessarily mean actual lights-out. if you get hurt bad enough, shock can keep you from doing much more than lying on the floor and groaning--same effect as unconsciousness in game terms. that's plenty realistic. |
Especially with the new "Dead Man's Trigger" rule...
*gets shot with a hail of SMG bullets*
*With last dying breath, pull pin on IPE Offensive grenade*
"See you in hell, bastards..."
hahnsoo
Aug 21 2005, 07:36 AM
Called Shots (for both Ranged and Melee attacks) do the following:
1) Bypass Armor - Variable dice pool penalty equal to the target's armor. If the target has 6 points of armor, then you get a -6 penalty to bypass it. It's all or nothing, but I'd probably house rule this somehow in my group (maybe allow a "half Armor bypass" called shot roll as well, to target a faceplate or codpiece or other less-armored area).
2) Target a vital area - -1 to -4 dice pool penalty. The number of dice you withhold becomes the the increase in DV of the attack. I don't see why anyone would NOT call a shot (except because of a lack of Free Action) using this option, since increasing the DV directly amounts to free automatic successes on the combat test. Then again, if you have a small dice pool to roll, then you would risk your opponent completely dodging your attack on the opponent's Reaction test.
3) Knock something out of a target's grasp - -4 dice pool penalty, and DV has to exceed the target's Strength.
4) Other effects (knock opponent over a ledge, shoot out a tire, temporarily blind opponent, etc.) - GM sets dice pool penalty for this one.
SL James
Aug 21 2005, 08:11 AM
QUOTE (hahnsoo @ Aug 21 2005, 01:36 AM) |
Called Shots (for both Ranged and Melee attacks) do the following: 1) Bypass Armor - Variable dice pool penalty equal to the target's armor. If the target has 6 points of armor, then you get a -6 penalty to bypass it. It's all or nothing, but I'd probably house rule this somehow in my group (maybe allow a "half Armor bypass" called shot roll as well, to target a faceplate or codpiece or other less-armored area).
...
3) Knock something out of a target's grasp - -4 dice pool penalty, and DV has to exceed the target's Strength. |
It's easier to shoot a matchstick out of a person's hand than it is to shoot someone with an armor jacket in the face?
Cripes.
hahnsoo
Aug 21 2005, 11:06 AM
QUOTE (SL James) |
It's easier to shoot a matchstick out of a person's hand than it is to shoot someone with an armor jacket in the face? |
Well, if you shoot someone's arm or hand, they ain't gonna be holding onto a matchstick anymore, right? (Reminds me of Jack Black's character's demise in "The Jackal")
It's an abstract system, of course. Remember that bypassing armor doesn't just apply a penalty to your combat test, it also applies a penalty to the opponent's damage resistance test. While it is an all-or-nothing affair, there's nothing that says you can't house-rule (yay! Using it as a verb!) a "half armor/half-penalty" called shot version.
nezumi
Aug 21 2005, 12:14 PM
I actually saw this as the reverse problem. Imagine your troll is wandering through with an armor jacket. He gets hit with the predator and takes 2 boxes of stun. He's pretty tough though, so he can stage down damage reasonably easily.
Now, rather than risk taking another box of stun and getting a penalty, it would almost make more sense for him to take off his jacket and put on an armored vest, so hopefully the next shot will cause physical, not stun damage, since he can take another two boxes there without penalty.
mintcar
Aug 21 2005, 12:22 PM
That would be one hell of a meta-gaming offence.
I wont allow called shots, I never have. I will use the rules for when a player wants to accomplish something specific only, like shooting this and that for effect, not to bypass armor or increase damage. or... Actually the rules for bypassing armor seem fairly usable now, so I might use them. Good for darts and other things that need to hit were there´s no armor.
hahnsoo
Aug 21 2005, 12:26 PM
Bleh, I just read the part about having to take 3 boxes first before starting to get wound penalties. I think we're going to house-rule it so that either it's an incremental progression (1, 2, 3, 4, etc.) or that the wound penalties take effect on any damage (i.e. you round UP damage boxes/3 instead of down)
Zen Shooter01
Aug 21 2005, 01:58 PM
Hahnsoo: Christ, are you sure those are the called shot rules?
I simply shoot, rolling a dice pool of 9, where statistically I can expect 3 hits, inflicting 8 damage with my Predator. My target with armor 6, body 3, rolls 8 dice to resist (remember my Predator has -1AP). Statistically, he can expect about 2 hits, and so the math is on my side - I can expect to do 6 damage.
But if I call a shot to the face to bypass my opponent's armor and, I reason, kill the crap out of him by blowing his brains out, I take a -6 penalty, roll 3 dice, expect 1 hit, do 6 damage; my opponent rolls Body 3, can expect 1 hit, and takes 5 damage.
Mathmatically, the called shot is for suckers.
hobgoblin
Aug 21 2005, 02:30 PM
thing is that with a bypass armor called shot your not aiming for the head specificaly, but rather your aiming for any spot with no armor.
want to blow someones brains out. take -4 on the dice and get 4 DV up front. then your aiming specificaly for any spot that allows for more damage to be done.
thing is that even the called shot rules are abstract, your not aiming for a specific part of the body. rather you aim for any part that may allow the change that you try to get with the called shot.
still, the bypass armor called shot may be overkill...
mmu1
Aug 21 2005, 03:16 PM
I think the "target a vital area" rules are just Goddamn awful. As long as you have enough dice that you don't think your target will be able to dodge you (and they won't be able to, most of the time, just rolling Reaction - especially with the cumulative -1 penalty for dodging more than one attack), you can do it, and you give up one die for an effect that'll take the enemy three dice on the damage resistance test to negate.
I wonder whether you can use this in conjunction with burst fire or fire from a shotgun, because IIRC that gives penalties to dodge so massive, it's effectively not possible. Someone please tell me it specifically says you can't?
blakkie
Aug 21 2005, 03:49 PM
QUOTE (mmu1) |
I think the "target a vital area" rules are just Goddamn awful. As long as you have enough dice that you don't think your target will be able to dodge you (and they won't be able to, most of the time, just rolling Reaction - especially with the cumulative -1 penalty for dodging more than one attack), you can do it, and you give up one die for an effect that'll take the enemy three dice on the damage resistance test to negate.
I wonder whether you can use this in conjunction with burst fire from a shotgun, because IIRC that gives penalties to dodge so massive, it's effectively not possible. Someone please tell me it specifically says you can't? |
I certainly hope you can't make a called shot with a scattered shot.
Zen Shooter01
Aug 21 2005, 08:29 PM
hobgoblin:
Targeting the face was just an example. I know that the rules are more abstract than that.
It doesn't change the fact that called shots are a bad choice.
Sabosect
Aug 21 2005, 11:00 PM
Agreed. Looking at that, I can't help but shake my head and wonder what they were thinking. I'm not even sure how to logically implement it, and I sure as hell know it's not worth the effort to change.
I don't think many people are going to be making Called Shots in SR4.
Ellery
Aug 21 2005, 11:02 PM
I'd think that everyone would use the DV increasing option unless they ran up against a very good dodger.
Rotbart van Dainig
Aug 21 2005, 11:21 PM
Can somebody confirm that layering is effectively gone?
hahnsoo
Aug 21 2005, 11:35 PM
QUOTE (Rotbart van Dainig @ Aug 21 2005, 06:21 PM) |
Can somebody confirm that layering is effectively gone? |
It's gone. You can still use Helmets and Shields, though.
Zen Shooter01
Aug 21 2005, 11:40 PM
Are helmets separate from security armor? As I recall, in SR3 security armor was always assumed to include a helmet, and that annoyed me because it was an exception to the rule.
blakkie
Aug 21 2005, 11:46 PM
QUOTE (Zen Shooter01) |
Are helmets separate from security armor? As I recall, in SR3 security armor was always assumed to include a helmet, and that annoyed me because it was an exception to the rule. |
Er, wasn't the Helmet a separate item that added additional protection? There was only 2 grades of Helmet, Security and Hardened Military, instead of the 3 Security Armor Suit grades and 3 Hardened Military Suit grades.
Rotbart van Dainig
Aug 21 2005, 11:59 PM
Thx... well, thats a sad solution, but a solution one can easily change.
ShadowGhost
Aug 22 2005, 05:28 PM
QUOTE (mmu1 @ Aug 21 2005, 03:16 PM) |
I wonder whether you can use this in conjunction with burst fire from a shotgun, because IIRC that gives penalties to dodge so massive, it's effectively not possible. Someone please tell me it specifically says you can't? |
We don't allow called shots with shotgun (buck)shot, or allow smartlinks of any kind to stack with (buck)shot spread bonus TN modifiers.
I don't know if it's cannon or not... but it sure makes sense.
Our gaming group breaks up after the next session (everyone goes back to university/college), but we're all talking about getting SR4 for when we next play again.
mmu1
Aug 22 2005, 05:33 PM
QUOTE (ShadowGhost) |
We don't allow called shots with shotgun (buck)shot, or allow smartlinks of any kind to stack with (buck)shot spread bonus TN modifiers.
I don't know if it's cannon or not... but it sure makes sense. |
I'm talking about SR4 - just want to know whether the rule specifically prohibit called shots with wide burst or shotguns on wide choke settings.
Shadow_Prophet
Aug 22 2005, 05:56 PM
My rule of thumb as a GM was, and I warned my players about this, if they start making called shots so would I. Only seems fair afterall. And with that warning I can not remember a single time my players tried a called shot. So no called shot rules or whatnot wouldn't bother me, or my players.
BitBasher
Aug 22 2005, 05:57 PM
QUOTE (Shadow_Prophet) |
My rule of thumb as a GM was, and I warned my players about this, if they start making called shots so would I. Only seems fair afterall. And with that warning I can not remember a single time my players tried a called shot. So no called shot rules or whatnot wouldn't bother me, or my players. |
That's about verbatim what happened in my game.
Darkness
Aug 22 2005, 06:04 PM
QUOTE (hahnsoo @ Aug 21 2005, 02:26 PM) |
Bleh, I just read the part about having to take 3 boxes first before starting to get wound penalties. I think we're going to house-rule it so that either it's an incremental progression (1, 2, 3, 4, etc.) or that the wound penalties take effect on any damage (i.e. you round UP damage boxes/3 instead of down) |
Check out the
Character Sheet again. You start getting wound penalties from the first box. Penalties increase on every third step after the first (-2 on 4, -3 on 7, etc.).
It's already as you would have ruled it. Unless i'm seriously mistaken that is.
blakkie
Aug 22 2005, 06:06 PM
QUOTE (Darkness) |
QUOTE (hahnsoo @ Aug 21 2005, 02:26 PM) | Bleh, I just read the part about having to take 3 boxes first before starting to get wound penalties. I think we're going to house-rule it so that either it's an incremental progression (1, 2, 3, 4, etc.) or that the wound penalties take effect on any damage (i.e. you round UP damage boxes/3 instead of down) |
Check out the Character Sheet again. You start getting wound penalties from the first box. Penalties increase on every third step after the first (-2 on 4, -3 on 7, etc.). It's already as you would have ruled it. |
No, it is the 3rd box. Notice that the -1 is in the 3rd box to get marked for damage, not the first one in the top left.
Darkness
Aug 22 2005, 06:09 PM
I interpreted it as standing for the entire row, and that it just had been placed there for better readability.
blakkie
Aug 22 2005, 06:16 PM
QUOTE (Darkness) |
I interpreted it as standing for the entire row, and that it just had been placed there for better readability. |
Well i'm not basing this on the character sheet, this is based on other stuff posted here by people with the book. I'm just pointing out the correct way to intepret the sheet. I can see the source of confusion though.
Darkness
Aug 22 2005, 06:23 PM
Indeed. So, what hahnsoo said is how it is written in the book then? It's not clear to me if he has one, or read it in a thread. I would appreciate a confirmation or a denial.
hahnsoo
Aug 22 2005, 07:14 PM
QUOTE (Darkness) |
Indeed. So, what hahnsoo said is how it is written in the book then? It's not clear to me if he has one, or read it in a thread. I would appreciate a confirmation or a denial. |
I have an SR4 book (which is why I've been fielding questions left and right all day for the past three days). All of the combat examples I've seen for wound penalties of any sort start at the third box. The rules are on page 153 and 154 and seem to concur with the wound penalties occuring every three boxes, or dividing the boxes by 3 and rounding down.
Darkness
Aug 22 2005, 07:18 PM
Thanks. And mea maxima culpa, that i didn't got it right, that you actually had a book. No offense meant.
tisoz
Aug 22 2005, 08:06 PM
QUOTE (hahnsoo @ Aug 21 2005, 05:35 PM) |
QUOTE (Rotbart van Dainig @ Aug 21 2005, 06:21 PM) | Can somebody confirm that layering is effectively gone? |
It's gone. You can still use Helmets and Shields, though.
|
You can layer, but only the highest value applies. So something with 6/2 layered with something 4/4 will give 6/4 protection.
Layering is going to be important because of the armor degradation that will happen. Sure you started out with a 6/4 piece of armor, but shot at twice and it is now a 3/4 piece of crap. Armor B/R is going to get some use as well as having spare armor at home for when you don't have time to repair.