Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Gurth)
Subject: D100 (was Re: Contradictions)
Date: Sat Dec 1 06:40:04 2001
According to Derek Hyde, on Fri, 30 Nov 2001 the word on the street was...

> I've actually just ran into that issue....the way I'm handling it is
> that each "1" on the TN I'm making equal to 10 percent, so the average
> task by someone with a skill of 6 in something is next to impossible to
> screw up as the book labels a level 6 skill as being innate then I'm
> varying it from there. You have a base percentage for each attribute
> and then you add on about 15% per level of skill (a level 6 skill at 15%
> per skill would be 90% plus the basic percentage for the attribute BUT
> I'm charging 10% per TN

That way, someone will skill 6 and a TN of 4 will have a 50% chance of
success (plus whatever modifier the attribute gives).

> The only thing I'm really hanging up on is how to handle the pool dice
> cause you're not going to add extra rolls of the percentile dice you're
> just going to add a little to the chance of success

You could have each pool die add 15% as well -- because that's basically
what they do under normal rules: each die gives you one extra die that may
succeed, so with your numbers that means it should increase the chance by
15%.

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
"I know you're expecting me to take that as good news," Randy says.
-> NAGEE Editor * ShadowRN GridSec * Triangle Virtuoso <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://plastic.dumpshock.com <-

GC3.12: GAT/! d-(dpu) s:- !a>? C+@ UL P L++ E W-(++) N o? K w+(--) O V?
PS+ PE(-)(+) Y PGP- t@ 5++ X(+) R+++(-)>$ tv+ b++@ DI- D+ G+ e h! !r y?
Incubated into the First Church of the Sqooshy Ball, 21-05-1998
Message no. 2
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Rand Ratinac)
Subject: D100 (was Re: Contradictions)
Date: Mon Dec 3 00:05:01 2001
<snipt!(TM)>
> That way, someone will skill 6 and a TN of 4 will
have a 50% chance of success (plus whatever modifier
the attribute gives).
<snipt!(TM)>
> Gurth@******.nl -

Does this strike anyone else as a problem?

Think about it - skill 6, target number 4. In Derek's
percentile system, you've got a 50% chance of success.
On average, you'll succeed half the time. In the SR d6
rules, your average roll will give you 3 successes,
which will, if staging is applicable, stage up once.
You will, on average, ALWAYS succeed.

Big difference there.

====Doc'
(aka Mr. Freaky Big, Super-Dynamic Troll of Tomorrow, aka Doc'booner, aka Doc' Vader)

.sig Sauer

If you SMELL what the DOC' is COOKING!!!

________________________________________________________________
Nokia 5510 looks weird sounds great.
Go to http://uk.promotions.yahoo.com/nokia/ discover and win it!
The competition ends 16 th of December 2001.
Message no. 3
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Gurth)
Subject: D100 (was Re: Contradictions)
Date: Mon Dec 3 05:45:05 2001
According to Rand Ratinac, on Mon, 03 Dec 2001 the word on the street was...

> > That way, someone will skill 6 and a TN of 4 will
> > have a 50% chance of success (plus whatever modifier
> > the attribute gives).
>
> Does this strike anyone else as a problem?

That was what I was implying, yes.

> Think about it - skill 6, target number 4. In Derek's
> percentile system, you've got a 50% chance of success.
> On average, you'll succeed half the time. In the SR d6
> rules, your average roll will give you 3 successes,
> which will, if staging is applicable, stage up once.
> You will, on average, ALWAYS succeed.

Precisely. Perhaps the easiest way to turn SR into a percentile system is
to create a table setting TN against dice used, giving the percentage
chance of rolling a single success, and then looking in that every time
someone makes a skill test. The drawback is that this will take longer to
work out, because you have to look in a table for every test.

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
"I know you're expecting me to take that as good news," Randy says.
-> NAGEE Editor * ShadowRN GridSec * Triangle Virtuoso <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://plastic.dumpshock.com <-

GC3.12: GAT/! d-(dpu) s:- !a>? C+@ UL P L++ E W-(++) N o? K w+(--) O V?
PS+ PE(-)(+) Y PGP- t@ 5++ X(+) R+++(-)>$ tv+ b++@ DI- D+ G+ e h! !r y?
Incubated into the First Church of the Sqooshy Ball, 21-05-1998
Message no. 4
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Derek Hyde)
Subject: D100 (was Re: Contradictions)
Date: Mon Dec 3 05:55:01 2001
> <snipt!(TM)>
> > That way, someone will skill 6 and a TN of 4 will
> have a 50% chance of success (plus whatever modifier
> the attribute gives).
> <snipt!(TM)>
> > Gurth@******.nl -
>
> Does this strike anyone else as a problem?
>
> Think about it - skill 6, target number 4. In Derek's
> percentile system, you've got a 50% chance of success.
> On average, you'll succeed half the time. In the SR d6
> rules, your average roll will give you 3 successes,
> which will, if staging is applicable, stage up once.
> You will, on average, ALWAYS succeed.
>
> Big difference there.

No no....that was Gurth's statement of what it would be PRE attribute
score added in...if you've got a skill at 6 than you mst likely have the
attribute at a 6 as well and therefore add another 40% to it so it's now
a 90% chance of success
I've got it setup so that no matter what there's a percentage for the
attribute that doesn't quite stack up to it being a skill so if you have
to default you're not going to come off better for those of us that use
3s or 4s for most skills but may have a 6 in the attribute. I am trying
to get away from the fact that for some people defaulting to the
attribute is a pretty thing because they've got a lot more dice there
than they do in the skill (case in point the groups street sam, he's got
every quickness boosting piece of cyber and bioware that he can get so
he's got a quickness that's like a 13 or 14 or something, he'd much
rather default to the attribute than use his SMG skill which is a 3)
Message no. 5
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Rand Ratinac)
Subject: D100 (was Re: Contradictions)
Date: Mon Dec 3 21:15:01 2001
<snipt!(TM)>
> No no....that was Gurth's statement of what it would
be PRE attribute score added in...if you've got a
skill at 6 than you mst likely have the attribute at a
6 as well and therefore add another 40% to it so it's
now a 90% chance of success I've got it setup so that
no matter what there's a percentage for the attribute
that doesn't quite stack up to it being a skill so if
you have to default you're not going to come off
better for those of us that use 3s or 4s for most
skills but may have a 6 in the attribute. I am trying
to get away from the fact that for some people
defaulting to the attribute is a pretty thing because
they've got a lot more dice there than they do in the
skill (case in point the groups street sam, he's got
every quickness boosting piece of cyber and bioware
that he can get so he's got a quickness that's like a
13 or 14 or something, he'd much rather default to the
attribute than use his SMG skill which is a 3)

Oh, sorry, missed that bit. That looks better, but
still...

So how do you calculate how much an attribute is
worth? There's no flat percentage, I take it (as 6
doesn't exactly go into 40 :) ). Also, how do you
determine staging etc. - basically, how GOOD a success is?

====Doc'
(aka Mr. Freaky Big, Super-Dynamic Troll of Tomorrow, aka Doc'booner, aka Doc' Vader)

.sig Sauer

If you SMELL what the DOC' is COOKING!!!

________________________________________________________________
Nokia 5510 looks weird sounds great.
Go to http://uk.promotions.yahoo.com/nokia/ discover and win it!
The competition ends 16 th of December 2001.
Message no. 6
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Derek Hyde)
Subject: D100 (was Re: Contradictions)
Date: Mon Dec 3 21:25:01 2001
> Oh, sorry, missed that bit. That looks better, but
> still...
>
> So how do you calculate how much an attribute is
> worth? There's no flat percentage, I take it (as 6
> doesn't exactly go into 40 :) ). Also, how do you
> determine staging etc. - basically, how GOOD a success is?
I'm working that issue at the moment...basically the way I'm thinking is
that if you beat the TN by more than 25% you get an extra success and
another for every 15 past that....01 being a critical success and 100
being a critical failure
Message no. 7
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Rand Ratinac)
Subject: D100 (was Re: Contradictions)
Date: Mon Dec 3 22:00:01 2001
--- Derek Hyde <dhyde@*********.net> wrote:
> > Oh, sorry, missed that bit. That looks better, but
still...
> >
> > So how do you calculate how much an attribute is
worth? There's no flat percentage, I take it (as 6
doesn't exactly go into 40 :) ). Also, how do you
determine staging etc. - basically, how GOOD a success
is?
>
> I'm working that issue at the moment...basically the
way I'm thinking is that if you beat the TN by more
than 25% you get an extra success and another for
every 15 past that....01 being a critical success and
100 being a critical failure

So with that target number of 90%, 90-66 would get you
one success, 65-51 would get you two, 50-36 would be
3, 35-21 would be 4, 20-6 would be 5 and 5-1 would be
6? Hmmm...could work. You'd better check a bunch more
examples to make sure. :)

====Doc'
(aka Mr. Freaky Big, Super-Dynamic Troll of Tomorrow, aka Doc'booner, aka Doc' Vader)

.sig Sauer

If you SMELL what the DOC' is COOKING!!!

________________________________________________________________
Nokia 5510 looks weird sounds great.
Go to http://uk.promotions.yahoo.com/nokia/ discover and win it!
The competition ends 16 th of December 2001.
Message no. 8
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Lars Wagner Hansen)
Subject: D100 (was Re: Contradictions)
Date: Tue Dec 4 16:50:01 2001
From: "Rand Ratinac" <docwagon101@*****.com>
>
> Think about it - skill 6, target number 4. In Derek's
> percentile system, you've got a 50% chance of success.
> On average, you'll succeed half the time. In the SR d6
> rules, your average roll will give you 3 successes,
> which will, if staging is applicable, stage up once.
> You will, on average, ALWAYS succeed.

Nope in vanilla SR, there is the following chances of getting successes vs. a T#
of 4:
6 successes: 1.56%
5 successes: 9.38%
4 successes: 23.44%
3 successes: 31.25%
2 successes: 23.44%
1 succes: 9.38%
0 successes: 1.56%

If you accumulate the successes you get the following results:
6 successes: 1.56%
5 or more successes: 10.94%
4 or more successes: 34.38%
3 or more successes: 65.63%
2 or more successes: 89.06%
1 or more successes: 98.44%

> Big difference there.

Ditto.

Disclaimer: I just love to be a nit-picker!

Lars
--
Lars Wagner Hansen, Jagtvej 11, 4180 Sorø
l-hansen@*****.tele.dk http://home4.inet.tele.dk/l-hansen
--
SRGC v0.22 SR1 SR2++ SR3+++ h+ b+++ B--- UB++ IE+ RN LST W++ dk sa++ ma+
sh++ ad++++ ri mc rk-- m- (e-- o t-- d-) gm+ M- P-
--
Main Rule of Usenet: Never argue with idiots. They drag you down to
their level, then beat you with experience.
Message no. 9
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Derek Hyde)
Subject: D100 (was Re: Contradictions)
Date: Tue Dec 4 17:20:01 2001
> Nope in vanilla SR, there is the following chances of getting
successes
> vs. a T#
> of 4:
> 6 successes: 1.56%
> 5 successes: 9.38%
> 4 successes: 23.44%
> 3 successes: 31.25%
> 2 successes: 23.44%
> 1 succes: 9.38%
> 0 successes: 1.56%
>
> If you accumulate the successes you get the following results:
> 6 successes: 1.56%
> 5 or more successes: 10.94%
> 4 or more successes: 34.38%
> 3 or more successes: 65.63%
> 2 or more successes: 89.06%
> 1 or more successes: 98.44%
>
> > Big difference there.

Ok just for clarification I do not use the number of successes for
anything other than whether or not they dodge damage and how observant
they are. Otherwise if you do it you've done it, if you didn't try to
go for flair you won't have gone for flair, if you didn't go for a more
deadly shot you didn't try for it. In my opinion there's no such thing
as "you shot him SO well that a gun that normally did (L) damage now is
doing (S) or (D) damage. That's just plain BS. The only time that it
WOULD work like that is with a mage casting a permanent spell. Damage
is damage and since I allow the use of an anatomy skill to drop the TN
and up the damage if they're trying to wound them more effectively then
there's no point in letting them add more damage for more successes,
just as I don't agree with combat pool when attacking, there's no such
thing as "blind luck" when it comes to attacking, unless of course we're
talking about spray and pray (aka. blind suppressive fire). I agree
with it when it's for dodging but then again we're also going into ways
to make the characters more detailed and a little more realistic (such
as the cost of Titanium Bone Lacing which is 2.25 when an entire
cyberlimb is only a 1....the bones are laced with it not replaced with
it so why should it cost you MORE humanity than having an entire limb
replaced?)
Message no. 10
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Danyeal De La Luna)
Subject: D100 (was Re: Contradictions)
Date: Wed Dec 5 01:45:01 2001
>Ok just for clarification I do not use the number of successes for
>anything other than whether or not they dodge damage and how observant
>they are. Otherwise if you do it you've done it, if you didn't try to
>go for flair you won't have gone for flair, if you didn't go for a more
>deadly shot you didn't try for it. In my opinion there's no such thing
>as "you shot him SO well that a gun that normally did (L) damage now is
>doing (S) or (D) damage. That's just plain BS.

I disagree. If a well placed shot, or a lucky shot from a bb gun hits
someone in the right spot, and weapon that normally does a light stun can
suddenly kill. A .22 caliber pistol is the equivalent to a light hold out,
but if I put it right up to your head or heart, it WILL kill you. If a major
artery is hit, like the femoral or carotid, it can destroy the limb, and
even kill...since the femoral artery can come "unglued" or unanchored and
slip into the abdomen..and without immediate medical help, the person will
bleed to death in a few short hours...or less. I staged up damage level
means that the "normal" damage has been increased due to either good
placement or a "complicating factor". Most of the time, aiming isn't
something that people are doing, the are shooting "center mass" or just
hosing an area, sometimes the sprayed shot hit something vital.
>The only time that it WOULD work like that is with a mage casting a
permanent >spell. Damage
>is damage and since I allow the use of an anatomy skill to drop the TN
>and up the damage if they're trying to wound them more effectively then
>there's no point in letting them add more damage for more successes,
>just as I don't agree with combat pool when attacking, there's no such
>thing as "blind luck" when it comes to attacking, unless of course we're
>talking about spray and pray (aka. blind suppressive fire).

See the above comment. You aren't very familiar with real life combat, are
you?

>I agree with it when it's for dodging but then again we're also going
intoways
>to make the characters more detailed and a little more realistic (such
>as the cost of Titanium Bone Lacing which is 2.25 when an entire
>cyberlimb is only a 1....the bones are laced with it not replaced with
>it so why should it cost you MORE humanity than having an entire limb
>replaced?)

Ok, that one is a good question, and I think it has something to do with the
incredible amount of invasive surgery it would require...and the fact that
it is such a huge advantage, that you need to limit it a bit.


Lunatec
Message no. 11
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Rand Ratinac)
Subject: D100 (was Re: Contradictions)
Date: Wed Dec 5 03:30:01 2001
<snipt!(TM)>
> Nope in vanilla SR, there is the following chances
of getting successes vs. a T#
> of 4:
> 6 successes: 1.56%
> 5 successes: 9.38%
> 4 successes: 23.44%
> 3 successes: 31.25%
> 2 successes: 23.44%
> 1 succes: 9.38%
> 0 successes: 1.56%
<snipt!(TM)>
> Lars

Dude, I said on AVERAGE. An average roll on a single
d6 will give you 4 or above half the time. So with six
dice, that's 6 x 0.5 = 3 rolls of 4 or above. On
average. ;)

Moot point, anyway.

====Doc'
(aka Mr. Freaky Big, Super-Dynamic Troll of Tomorrow, aka Doc'booner, aka Doc' Vader)

.sig Sauer

If you SMELL what the DOC' is COOKING!!!

________________________________________________________________
Nokia 5510 looks weird sounds great.
Go to http://uk.promotions.yahoo.com/nokia/ discover and win it!
The competition ends 16 th of December 2001.
Message no. 12
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Scott Harrison)
Subject: D100 (was Re: Contradictions)
Date: Wed Dec 5 05:35:00 2001
On Wednesday, December 5, 2001, at 09:32 , Rand Ratinac wrote:

>
> Dude, I said on AVERAGE. An average roll on a single
> d6 will give you 4 or above half the time. So with six
> dice, that's 6 x 0.5 = 3 rolls of 4 or above. On
> average. ;)
>
> Moot point, anyway.
>

Nope. The chance to roll AT LEAST 3 successes of TN 4 on 6 dice is
65.625%.
The math is not as simple as it looks since it is really the sum of
chances, blah, blah, blah. I have code that does all this (including a
primitive Java applet) on my homepage (www.mithrandir.com -- following
Software and Shadowrun and use the tn.java link).

--Scott
Message no. 13
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Rand Ratinac)
Subject: D100 (was Re: Contradictions)
Date: Wed Dec 5 06:20:00 2001
<snipt!(TM)>
> Nope. The chance to roll AT LEAST 3 successes of TN
4 on 6 dice is 65.625%. The math is not as simple as
it looks since it is really the sum of chances, blah,
blah, blah. I have code that does all this (including
a primitive Java applet) on my homepage
(www.mithrandir.com -- following Software and
Shadowrun and use the tn.java link).
> --Scott

Blah blah, yadda yadda. :)

Actually, that reinforces my original point even more.
But, like Derek said, that wasn't figuring attribute
modifiers into it.

====Doc'
(aka Mr. Freaky Big, Super-Dynamic Troll of Tomorrow, aka Doc'booner, aka Doc' Vader)

.sig Sauer

If you SMELL what the DOC' is COOKING!!!

________________________________________________________________
Nokia 5510 looks weird sounds great.
Go to http://uk.promotions.yahoo.com/nokia/ discover and win it!
The competition ends 16 th of December 2001.
Message no. 14
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Damion Milliken)
Subject: D100 (was Re: Contradictions)
Date: Wed Dec 5 07:40:01 2001
Scott Harrison writes:

> The math is not as simple as it looks since it is really the sum of
> chances, blah, blah, blah. I have code that does all this (including a
> primitive Java applet) on my homepage (www.mithrandir.com -- following
> Software and Shadowrun and use the tn.java link).

Hey, this looks quite similar to
http://www.pvv.ntnu.no/~bcd/SR/dicerollcalc.html

And at least with a few checks, seems to generate the same probabilities
;-). I guess that's a good sign :-).

Scott, would it be possible to modify your program to spit out a large table
of the percentage chance to generate one OR MORE successes with X number of
dice vs TN Y? So something that looks a little like:

Dice TN
2 3 4 5 6/7 8 9 . . .
1 83% 67% 50% 33% 17% 14% 11%
2 97% 89% 75% 56% 31% 26% 21%
3
4 and so on?
5
.
.
.

--
Damion Milliken University of Wollongong
Unofficial Shadowrun Guru E-mail: dam01@***.edu.au
-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.12
GE d- s++:-- a25 C++ US++>+++ P+ L+>++ E- W+ N++ o@ K- w+(--) O-@ M--
V- PS+ PE- Y+ PGP-@>++ t+ 5 X+>+++ R++ !tv(--) b+ DI+++@ D G+
e++>++++$ h- r++>+++ y->+++
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
Message no. 15
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Damion Milliken)
Subject: D100 (was Re: Contradictions)
Date: Wed Dec 5 07:50:01 2001
Derek Hyde writes:

> Ok just for clarification I do not use the number of successes for
> anything other than whether or not they dodge damage and how observant
> they are.
>
> <Snip large discussion of other major differences between how Derek's SR
> game runs and how the rules are actually written.>

Well, in that case then, we wouldn't expect:

(a) You to be particularly concerned about number of successes in
your D100 conversion.
(b) Your D100 conversion to actually attempt to replicate the _SR_
system.

So it's bordering on somewhat of a moot point, then, isn't it? ;-)

> such as the cost of Titanium Bone Lacing which is 2.25 when an entire
> cyberlimb is only a 1....the bones are laced with it not replaced with it
> so why should it cost you MORE humanity than having an entire limb
> replaced?

Well, going with the old SRII "aural template" theory (only one of the many
possible explanations, mind you ;-)), it might be explainable because it
involves a fairly dramatic change to your _entire_ skeletal system, which is
a pretty large deviation from what you _should_ be. OTOH, replacing an arm
with, well, an arm, isn't such a serious change, even if the new one _is_
cyber, so perhaps it wouldn't cost as much Essence.

OTOH, with the SR3 "neural connections" theory, there is absolutely no
sensible reason why things like Dermal Plating, Bone Lacing, unretractable
razors/spurs, and a whole host of other cyber should cost _any_ Essence at
all. And it seems rather odd, in this theory, that datajacks (a direct
_brain_ interface, for crying out loud!) only cost 0.2 Essence.

Oh well, I guess that we can't have everyting :-).

--
Damion Milliken University of Wollongong
Unofficial Shadowrun Guru E-mail: dam01@***.edu.au
-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.12
GE d- s++:-- a25 C++ US++>+++ P+ L+>++ E- W+ N++ o@ K- w+(--) O-@ M--
V- PS+ PE- Y+ PGP-@>++ t+ 5 X+>+++ R++ !tv(--) b+ DI+++@ D G+
e++>++++$ h- r++>+++ y->+++
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
Message no. 16
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Scott Harrison)
Subject: D100 (was Re: Contradictions)
Date: Wed Dec 5 10:05:01 2001
On Wednesday, December 5, 2001, at 01:39 , Damion Milliken wrote:

> Scott, would it be possible to modify your program to spit out a large
> table
> of the percentage chance to generate one OR MORE successes with X
> number of
> dice vs TN Y? So something that looks a little like:
>
> Dice TN
> 2 3 4 5 6/7 8 9 . . .
> 1 83% 67% 50% 33% 17% 14% 11%
> 2 97% 89% 75% 56% 31% 26% 21%
> 3
> 4 and so on?
> 5
> .
> .
> .

I have loaded a PDF of a table onto my web page. Comments welcome.

--Scott
Message no. 17
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Graht)
Subject: D100 (was Re: Contradictions)
Date: Wed Dec 5 11:10:01 2001
At 04:07 PM 12/5/2001 +0100, Scott Harrison wrote:

>On Wednesday, December 5, 2001, at 01:39 , Damion Milliken wrote:
>
>>Scott, would it be possible to modify your program to spit out a large table
>>of the percentage chance to generate one OR MORE successes with X number of
>>dice vs TN Y? So something that looks a little like:
>>
>>Dice TN
>> 2 3 4 5 6/7 8 9 . . .
>>1 83% 67% 50% 33% 17% 14% 11%
>>2 97% 89% 75% 56% 31% 26% 21%
>>3
>>4 and so on?
>>5
>>.
>>.
>>.
>
>I have loaded a PDF of a table onto my web page. Comments welcome.

Of course the next question is, what is the URL of your web page? ;)

To Life,
-Graht
ShadowRN Assistant Fearless Leader II
--
Message no. 18
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Damion Milliken)
Subject: D100 (was Re: Contradictions)
Date: Wed Dec 5 12:25:00 2001
Graht writes:

> Of course the next question is, what is the URL of your web page? ;)

That would have been in the previous email ;-). Try http://www.mithrandir.com

--
Damion Milliken University of Wollongong
Unofficial Shadowrun Guru E-mail: dam01@***.edu.au
-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.12
GE d- s++:-- a25 C++ US++>+++ P+ L+>++ E- W+ N++ o@ K- w+(--) O-@ M--
V- PS+ PE- Y+ PGP-@>++ t+ 5 X+>+++ R++ !tv(--) b+ DI+++@ D G+
e++>++++$ h- r++>+++ y->+++
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
Message no. 19
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Damion Milliken)
Subject: D100 (was Re: Contradictions)
Date: Wed Dec 5 12:35:05 2001
Scott Harrison writes:

> I have loaded a PDF of a table onto my web page. Comments welcome.

Unfortunately, your site appears to be down :-(. (It doesn't respond to a
ping, and I can ping www.redhat.com, so I'm pretty sure it's not just my
link.) I'll check again tomorrow.

--
Damion Milliken University of Wollongong
Unofficial Shadowrun Guru E-mail: dam01@***.edu.au
-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.12
GE d- s++:-- a25 C++ US++>+++ P+ L+>++ E- W+ N++ o@ K- w+(--) O-@ M--
V- PS+ PE- Y+ PGP-@>++ t+ 5 X+>+++ R++ !tv(--) b+ DI+++@ D G+
e++>++++$ h- r++>+++ y->+++
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
Message no. 20
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Lars Wagner Hansen)
Subject: D100 (was Re: Contradictions)
Date: Wed Dec 5 15:20:07 2001
From: "Rand Ratinac" <docwagon101@*****.com>
> Dude, I said on AVERAGE. An average roll on a single
> d6 will give you 4 or above half the time. So with six
> dice, that's 6 x 0.5 = 3 rolls of 4 or above. On
> average. ;)

Dude yourself.

You obviously don't know squat about statistics.

Lars
--
Lars Wagner Hansen, Jagtvej 11, 4180 Sorø
l-hansen@*****.tele.dk http://home4.inet.tele.dk/l-hansen
--
SRGC v0.22 SR1 SR2++ SR3+++ h+ b+++ B--- UB++ IE+ RN LST W++ dk sa++ ma+
sh++ ad++++ ri mc rk-- m- (e-- o t-- d-) gm+ M- P-
--
Main Rule of Usenet: Never argue with idiots. They drag you down to
their level, then beat you with experience.
Message no. 21
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Martin Murray)
Subject: D100 (was Re: Contradictions
Date: Wed Dec 5 15:55:01 2001
Forgive me while I drop out of digest mode and applaud Lunatec for his
statement about the elegance of the D6 system. SR is one of the few games
that has a consistent feel to the rules within each segment of the game
(Magic, Combat, Decking and so on), its easy to teach newcomers and easy to
remember when you haven't played in an age.

I'd take his statements a step or two further though, and I stand ready for
the inevitable ridicule.

I genuinely worry about players and GMs who get a little too lost in the
details, too focused on the rules, playing the numbers and watching their
margins. It makes me think of four or five Wall Street bankers sitting
around a table talking about a merger, not four or five guys having fun and
chilling out.

Believe me, there is nothing more satisfying than getting to the stage with
a regular group where you don't actually need your dice until half way
through a session or better yet, you forget your dice and no one notices. I
don't advocate this "dice-lite" approach for everyone, I agree that there
are times where you simply have to roll the bones, but I'm sure the more
mature (and I don't mean that in a patronising way) players and GMs here
understand what I'm talking about.

So, please look beyond the dice, if you stare hard enough at the rules it's
pretty easy to poke holes in them; indeed you can do this for just about any
game system. If you want accuracy you'd need a degree in Physics to play not
a few friends and some imagination.

I'll retire now and don my Nomex suit and Asbestos gloves.

Sidethink
Message no. 22
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Derek Hyde)
Subject: D100 (was Re: Contradictions)
Date: Wed Dec 5 17:20:01 2001
> <snipt!(TM)>
> > Nope. The chance to roll AT LEAST 3 successes of TN
> 4 on 6 dice is 65.625%. The math is not as simple as
> it looks since it is really the sum of chances, blah,
> blah, blah. I have code that does all this (including
> a primitive Java applet) on my homepage
> (www.mithrandir.com -- following Software and
> Shadowrun and use the tn.java link).
> > --Scott
>
> Blah blah, yadda yadda. :)
>
> Actually, that reinforces my original point even more.
> But, like Derek said, that wasn't figuring attribute
> modifiers into it.

Which was also someone else's point on here too....why doesn't the
attribute come into more play with this other than how much it costs you
to get the skill? That's why I incorporated the attribute as a base
score so it's part of the overall ability...that and so that when you
default you see a HUGE drop and not just a little one if you've got a
high attribute
Message no. 23
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Derek Hyde)
Subject: D100 (was Re: Contradictions)
Date: Wed Dec 5 17:25:01 2001
> >Ok just for clarification I do not use the number of successes for
> >anything other than whether or not they dodge damage and how
observant
> >they are. Otherwise if you do it you've done it, if you didn't try
to
> >go for flair you won't have gone for flair, if you didn't go for a
more
> >deadly shot you didn't try for it. In my opinion there's no such
thing
> >as "you shot him SO well that a gun that normally did (L) damage now
is
> >doing (S) or (D) damage. That's just plain BS.
>
> I disagree. If a well placed shot, or a lucky shot from a bb gun hits
> someone in the right spot, and weapon that normally does a light stun
can
> suddenly kill. A .22 caliber pistol is the equivalent to a light hold
out,
> but if I put it right up to your head or heart, it WILL kill you.

Oh but that's not true...remember the whole Butafuco thing a few years
ago? Amy Fisher put a gun to her lover's (Joey Butafuco) wife's temple
and pulled the trigger and she's more than just alive...and that was a
.22 magnum, you can get shot in the heart and if you're given proper
medical attention fast enough you can survive it.

>If a major artery is hit, like the femoral or carotid, it can destroy
the >limb, and even kill...since the femoral artery can come "unglued"
or >unanchored and
> slip into the abdomen..and without immediate medical help, the person
will
> bleed to death in a few short hours...or less. I staged up damage
level
> means that the "normal" damage has been increased due to either good
> placement or a "complicating factor". Most of the time, aiming isn't
> something that people are doing, the are shooting "center mass" or
just
> hosing an area, sometimes the sprayed shot hit something vital.

And that's the problem because if you're not aiming unless you're a god
with your gun and just miraculously can hit things you're not going to
hit often and chances are that you're not going to get lucky and get one
of those "miracle shots" off that seriously screws the person up

> >The only time that it WOULD work like that is with a mage casting a
> permanent >spell. Damage
> >is damage and since I allow the use of an anatomy skill to drop the
TN
> >and up the damage if they're trying to wound them more effectively
then
> >there's no point in letting them add more damage for more successes,
> >just as I don't agree with combat pool when attacking, there's no
such
> >thing as "blind luck" when it comes to attacking, unless of course
we're
> >talking about spray and pray (aka. blind suppressive fire).
>
> See the above comment. You aren't very familiar with real life combat,
are
> you?

Um yeah I am, I'm in the military and have been fired around as a matter
of fact in our basic training they do an exercise where you and your
"battle buddy" fire LIVE AMMO as cover fire past each other you as you
both bound your ways up a hill to simulate pinning down a target which
you take out with a grenade at the objective. It trains you to realize
that if you're not aiming at something you're sure as hell not going to
hit it and that if they're not aiming AT you then you're extremely
unlikely (barring a weapon malfunction or other things of that nature)
that you'll be hit...you ever been under live fire?
Message no. 24
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Derek Hyde)
Subject: D100 (was Re: Contradictions
Date: Wed Dec 5 17:25:07 2001
> Forgive me while I drop out of digest mode and applaud Lunatec for his
> statement about the elegance of the D6 system. SR is one of the few
games
> that has a consistent feel to the rules within each segment of the
game
> (Magic, Combat, Decking and so on), its easy to teach newcomers and
easy
> to
> remember when you haven't played in an age.
>
> I'd take his statements a step or two further though, and I stand
ready
> for
> the inevitable ridicule.
>
> I genuinely worry about players and GMs who get a little too lost in
the
> details, too focused on the rules, playing the numbers and watching
their
> margins. It makes me think of four or five Wall Street bankers sitting
> around a table talking about a merger, not four or five guys having
fun
> and
> chilling out.
>
> Believe me, there is nothing more satisfying than getting to the stage
> with
> a regular group where you don't actually need your dice until half way
> through a session or better yet, you forget your dice and no one
notices.
> I
> don't advocate this "dice-lite" approach for everyone, I agree that
there
> are times where you simply have to roll the bones, but I'm sure the
more
> mature (and I don't mean that in a patronising way) players and GMs
here
> understand what I'm talking about.
>
> So, please look beyond the dice, if you stare hard enough at the rules
> it's
> pretty easy to poke holes in them; indeed you can do this for just
about
> any
> game system. If you want accuracy you'd need a degree in Physics to
play
> not
> a few friends and some imagination.
>
> I'll retire now and don my Nomex suit and Asbestos gloves.
>
> Sidethink
>
I agree with you completely but the reasoning behind trying to change it
is as someone else said, it's kinda dumb to have to roll like 10 or 12
dice at a time (depending on how much combat pool is used) to make ONE
check and then having different situations where you add all the dice
and others where each test is separate and they don't add together at
all is kind of stupid as far as I can see and is VERY confusing for a
new player because I've spent about 90% of my time asking people how
they've rolled a 72 and it's because they'd get a couple 10's a 12 , an
amazing 21, and then a bunch of 5's and they'd just add stuff up because
they know that its how you do initiative and they'd figure that it's how
you do all of them
Message no. 25
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Bira)
Subject: D100 (was Re: Contradictions)
Date: Wed Dec 5 19:55:01 2001
On Wed, 5 Dec 2001 16:16:38 -0600
"Derek Hyde" <dhyde@*********.net> wrote:

> Oh but that's not true...remember the whole Butafuco thing a few years
> ago? Amy Fisher put a gun to her lover's (Joey Butafuco) wife's temple
> and pulled the trigger and she's more than just alive...and that was a
> .22 magnum, you can get shot in the heart and if you're given proper
> medical attention fast enough you can survive it.

Uhh... Isn't this the definition of a "Deadly Wound"? Characters
in SR can survive Deadly Wounds if they get proper medical attention
fast enough.

> And that's the problem because if you're not aiming unless you're a god
> with your gun and just miraculously can hit things you're not going to
> hit often and chances are that you're not going to get lucky and get one
> of those "miracle shots" off that seriously screws the person up

Actually, there seems to be a fair chance of hitting something
important when you shoot someone in the torso. It's not guaranteed to
kill in one shot, but it doesn't take a miracle to do real damage.

--
Bira -- SysOp da Shadowland.BR
http://www.shadowland.com.br
Redator de Shadowrun da RPG em Revista
http://www.rpgemrevista.f2s.com
Message no. 26
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Derek Hyde)
Subject: D100 (was Re: Contradictions)
Date: Wed Dec 5 20:15:01 2001
> > Oh but that's not true...remember the whole Butafuco thing a few
years
> > ago? Amy Fisher put a gun to her lover's (Joey Butafuco) wife's
temple
> > and pulled the trigger and she's more than just alive...and that was
a
> > .22 magnum, you can get shot in the heart and if you're given proper
> > medical attention fast enough you can survive it.
>
> Uhh... Isn't this the definition of a "Deadly Wound"?
Characters
> in SR can survive Deadly Wounds if they get proper medical attention
> fast enough.
>
> > And that's the problem because if you're not aiming unless you're a
god
> > with your gun and just miraculously can hit things you're not going
to
> > hit often and chances are that you're not going to get lucky and get
one
> > of those "miracle shots" off that seriously screws the person up
>
> Actually, there seems to be a fair chance of hitting something
> important when you shoot someone in the torso. It's not guaranteed to
> kill in one shot, but it doesn't take a miracle to do real damage.
But that's also my point....Deadly damage INSTANTLY drops someone to
"dead" and they're not able to move or do anything, we had some druggies
start shooting at each other over some screwed up deal in our barracks
(reality) and one guy got a 9mm in the gut, one guy got a .25 in the
chest, and one guy got a .44 Mag in the balls, the only person that
dropped instantly was the one that got the nut shot and that's only
cause the gun knocked him off his feet and then he was still trying to
get a hold of his gun so he could try and tag the guy that shot him
(only 1 person out of the 4 that were involved wasn't hit) but the point
is that while the guy with the shot to the chest was in the worst shape
(is still in ICU over 2 1/2 months later) the guy that got it in the gut
spent a month in the hospital and the guy that got his sack blown off
bled to death while at the hospital the only person that would have died
instantly is the guy that didn't get shot cause the guy with the .44 Mag
missed his head by about 3" but the guy now needs hearing aids to be
able to hear clearly at all out of that ear.
Just because you're critically wounded doesn't mean that you're dead.
It is possible for you to die from a .22 Mag but it's not going to be an
immediate thing...that's why I think that staging up the damage is a
crock. You'll have some MAJOR damage done by it because it's going to
ricochet off of every bone it hits BUT it's not going to instantly kill
you and that's my point. The only way that a gun is going to INSTANTLY
kill you is if you blow the heart or the brain stem or cause an
unrepairable amount of damage to the brain. Hence I let a moderate or
higher head shot instantly kill the person on common sense grounds but I
don't EVER stage up damage....which brings me to another thought that
makes no sense to me...if you're shooting someone with a fully auto SMG
that does 7M per round then why wouldn't the FA damage be 10 times that
instead of 16D? I'm sure that 10 rounds at 7M would be MUCH more
effective than one round at 16D because of the massive trauma that would
be caused and all of the damage from the individual rounds would do a
total of 30 blocks of damage as opposed to 10 blocks...anyone see my
point? The system overpowers a single shot in letting you stage it up
because of stupid luck BUT doesn't treat a fully auto weapon NEARLY as
effectively as it could be. Trust me I've fired a 7.62mm Machinegun and
if you put the first round in the target as long as you don't move
you'll put the last round in the target because of the weight of the
weapon. Anyone see why I don't let staging up occur? If it's going to
undercut the heavy firepower I'm sure as he!! Not gonna let it overpower
the light stuff.
Message no. 27
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Rand Ratinac)
Subject: D100 (was Re: Contradictions)
Date: Wed Dec 5 20:25:01 2001
> Dude yourself.
>
> You obviously don't know squat about statistics.
> Lars

Done my level best to forget all I ever knew about it,
actually. :)

Yeah, yeah, I get what you're saying. I need to add
the change of getting 3 successes, plus the chance of
getting 4 successes, plus the chance of getting 5
successes, plus the chance of getting 6 successes. Am
I getting there? :)

====Doc'
(aka Mr. Freaky Big, Super-Dynamic Troll of Tomorrow, aka Doc'booner, aka Doc' Vader)

.sig Sauer

If you SMELL what the DOC' is COOKING!!!

________________________________________________________________
Nokia 5510 looks weird sounds great.
Go to http://uk.promotions.yahoo.com/nokia/ discover and win it!
The competition ends 16 th of December 2001.
Message no. 28
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Derek Hyde)
Subject: D100 (was Re: Contradictions)
Date: Wed Dec 5 20:30:02 2001
> > Dude yourself.
> >
> > You obviously don't know squat about statistics.
> > Lars
>
> Done my level best to forget all I ever knew about it,
> actually. :)
>
> Yeah, yeah, I get what you're saying. I need to add
> the change of getting 3 successes, plus the chance of
> getting 4 successes, plus the chance of getting 5
> successes, plus the chance of getting 6 successes. Am
> I getting there? :)
I dunno I always thought that everything was a 50/50 shot....you either
made it or you were up the proverbial creek that smells like fecal
matter without a paddle
Message no. 29
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Iridios)
Subject: D100 (was Re: Contradictions)
Date: Wed Dec 5 20:50:02 2001
Derek Hyde wrote:

> > Uhh... Isn't this the definition of a "Deadly Wound"?
> > Characters in SR can survive Deadly Wounds if they get proper
> > medical attention fast enough.
> >

> But that's also my point....Deadly damage INSTANTLY drops someone to
> "dead" and they're not able to move or do anything...

No, IMO, deadly damage represents a mortal wound, one that will cause
death without treatment. The speed of death from a mortal wound does
depend on the wound. Only by filling the overflow box will a character
be "dead" from a wound.


> ..., we had some druggies
> start shooting at each other over some screwed up deal in our barracks
> (reality) and one guy got a 9mm in the gut, one guy got a .25 in the
> chest, and one guy got a .44 Mag in the balls, the only person that
> dropped instantly was the one that got the nut shot and that's only
> cause the gun knocked him off his feet and then he was still trying to
> get a hold of his gun so he could try and tag the guy that shot him
> (only 1 person out of the 4 that were involved wasn't hit) but the point
> is that while the guy with the shot to the chest was in the worst shape
> (is still in ICU over 2 1/2 months later) the guy that got it in the gut
> spent a month in the hospital and the guy that got his sack blown off
> bled to death while at the hospital the only person that would have died
> instantly is the guy that didn't get shot cause the guy with the .44 Mag
> missed his head by about 3" but the guy now needs hearing aids to be
> able to hear clearly at all out of that ear.

Tell me something, did the guy who was gutshot fall down and become
unable to act? Or did he remain standing and firing at his foes? Same
goes for the chest shot, he didn't keep on walking after that did he?
If they did continue to act, then they recieved, IMC, the equivalent of
a serious wound. If they dropped and stayed down till medics arrived,
they recieved deadly wounds.

Remember, deadly wounds are wounds that will cause death if untreated,
not necessarily cause instant death. What I want to know is how the
nutshot fellow managed to bleed to death while at the hospital? Did no
one attend to him? Did they leave him on the table and say to him,
"You're just SOL."


> ....which brings me to another thought that
> makes no sense to me...if you're shooting someone with a fully auto SMG
> that does 7M per round then why wouldn't the FA damage be 10 times that
> instead of 16D? I'm sure that 10 rounds at 7M would be MUCH more
> effective than one round at 16D because of the massive trauma that would
> be caused and all of the damage from the individual rounds would do a
> total of 30 blocks of damage as opposed to 10 blocks...anyone see my
> point?

One round at 16D would be approximately equal to 25mm autocannon round,
or thereabouts. Are you saying 16D is easily survivable? And then you
need to take into account, that not every round of a FA burst is going
to hit the target, and of those that do, not every round will hit
something vital. Some rounds will pass through fleshy parts. So FA
burst damage accounts for missed or low effect rounds while accounting
for the damage of multiple, rapid succession hits.


The system overpowers a single shot in letting you stage it up
> because of stupid luck BUT doesn't treat a fully auto weapon NEARLY as
> effectively as it could be. Trust me I've fired a 7.62mm Machinegun and
> if you put the first round in the target as long as you don't move
> you'll put the last round in the target because of the weight of the
> weapon.

Unless the machinegun is hard mounted to compensate for all recoil, not
everyone is going to be able to put every round into a vital area of the
target.

--
Iridios
--
From:The Top 100 Things I'd Do
If I Ever Became An Evil Overlord
(http://www.eviloverlord.com/lists/overlord.html)

Any data file of crucial importance will be padded to 1.45Mb in
size.

Used Without Permission
Message no. 30
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Rand Ratinac)
Subject: D100 (was Re: Contradictions)
Date: Wed Dec 5 21:00:01 2001
<snipt!(TM)>
> I dunno I always thought that everything was a 50/50
shot....you either made it or you were up the
proverbial creek that smells like fecal matter without
a paddle

Heh heh heh...as they say, some...err...things are
more equal than others...:)

====Doc'
(aka Mr. Freaky Big, Super-Dynamic Troll of Tomorrow, aka Doc'booner, aka Doc' Vader)

.sig Sauer

If you SMELL what the DOC' is COOKING!!!

________________________________________________________________
Nokia 5510 looks weird sounds great.
Go to http://uk.promotions.yahoo.com/nokia/ discover and win it!
The competition ends 16 th of December 2001.
Message no. 31
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Derek Hyde)
Subject: D100 (was Re: Contradictions)
Date: Wed Dec 5 21:15:01 2001
> > But that's also my point....Deadly damage INSTANTLY drops someone to
> > "dead" and they're not able to move or do anything...
>
> No, IMO, deadly damage represents a mortal wound, one that will cause
> death without treatment. The speed of death from a mortal wound does
> depend on the wound. Only by filling the overflow box will a
character
> be "dead" from a wound.

Ok so you're saying that they're not supposed to pass out and stuff when
they hit deadly physical damage? They're still conscious? That's what
I'm
getting at...deadly according to the rules is when it is out and over.

>
>
> > ..., we had some druggies
> > start shooting at each other over some screwed up deal in our
barracks
> > (reality) and one guy got a 9mm in the gut, one guy got a .25 in the
> > chest, and one guy got a .44 Mag in the balls, the only person that
> > dropped instantly was the one that got the nut shot and that's only
> > cause the gun knocked him off his feet and then he was still trying
to
> > get a hold of his gun so he could try and tag the guy that shot him
> > (only 1 person out of the 4 that were involved wasn't hit) but the
point
> > is that while the guy with the shot to the chest was in the worst
shape
> > (is still in ICU over 2 1/2 months later) the guy that got it in the
gut
> > spent a month in the hospital and the guy that got his sack blown
off
> > bled to death while at the hospital the only person that would have
died
> > instantly is the guy that didn't get shot cause the guy with the .44
Mag
> > missed his head by about 3" but the guy now needs hearing aids to be
> > able to hear clearly at all out of that ear.
>
> Tell me something, did the guy who was gutshot fall down and become
> unable to act? Or did he remain standing and firing at his foes?
Same
> goes for the chest shot, he didn't keep on walking after that did he?
> If they did continue to act, then they recieved, IMC, the equivalent
of
> a serious wound. If they dropped and stayed down till medics arrived,
> they recieved deadly wounds.


The guy that got gutshot stayed up until a guy dragged him into a room
out of the hall where it was going on, the guy that got it in the chest
stumbled down the stairs before he dropped down to the ground, and the
guy that bled to death I don't know why he did, they don't tell us these
things (especially since he wasn't in the military)

>
> Remember, deadly wounds are wounds that will cause death if untreated,
> not necessarily cause instant death. What I want to know is how the
> nutshot fellow managed to bleed to death while at the hospital? Did
no
> one attend to him? Did they leave him on the table and say to him,
> "You're just SOL."
>
>
> > ....which brings me to another thought that
> > makes no sense to me...if you're shooting someone with a fully auto
SMG
> > that does 7M per round then why wouldn't the FA damage be 10 times
that
> > instead of 16D? I'm sure that 10 rounds at 7M would be MUCH more
> > effective than one round at 16D because of the massive trauma that
would
> > be caused and all of the damage from the individual rounds would do
a
> > total of 30 blocks of damage as opposed to 10 blocks...anyone see my
> > point?
>
> One round at 16D would be approximately equal to 25mm autocannon
round,
> or thereabouts. Are you saying 16D is easily survivable? And then
you
> need to take into account, that not every round of a FA burst is going
> to hit the target, and of those that do, not every round will hit
> something vital. Some rounds will pass through fleshy parts. So FA
> burst damage accounts for missed or low effect rounds while accounting
> for the damage of multiple, rapid succession hits.

No I'm not saying that a 25mm round would be survivable...that's my
point...it's got the big stuff underpowered and the small stuff
overpowered...I said that once and I defiantly mean it...there's no way
that you're surviving it and I use a common sense rule on that....unless
something stops the round before it hits you you're DEAD especially
since a 25mm round is basically a 1" round and is most likely an HE
round moving at such a velocity that you're not even going to have the
time to attempt dodging...they'd drop one round and it'd be either a hit
or a miss and that's all there is to it.

>
>
> The system overpowers a single shot in letting you stage it up
> > because of stupid luck BUT doesn't treat a fully auto weapon NEARLY
as
> > effectively as it could be. Trust me I've fired a 7.62mm Machinegun
and
> > if you put the first round in the target as long as you don't move
> > you'll put the last round in the target because of the weight of the
> > weapon.
>
> Unless the machinegun is hard mounted to compensate for all recoil,
not
> everyone is going to be able to put every round into a vital area of
the
> target.

Who said vital area? I said in the target...
You aim for the middle and make the middle hamburger and they die of
shock, massive trauma, and bloodloss
>
> --
> Iridios
> --
> From:The Top 100 Things I'd Do
> If I Ever Became An Evil Overlord
> (http://www.eviloverlord.com/lists/overlord.html)
>
> Any data file of crucial importance will be padded to 1.45Mb in
> size.
>
> Used Without Permission
Message no. 32
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Iridios)
Subject: D100 (was Re: Contradictions)
Date: Wed Dec 5 22:00:02 2001
Derek Hyde wrote:
>
> > > But that's also my point....Deadly damage INSTANTLY drops someone to
> > > "dead" and they're not able to move or do anything...
> >
> > No, IMO, deadly damage represents a mortal wound, one that will cause
> > death without treatment. The speed of death from a mortal wound does
> > depend on the wound. Only by filling the overflow box will a
> character
> > be "dead" from a wound.
>
> Ok so you're saying that they're not supposed to pass out and stuff when
> they hit deadly physical damage? They're still conscious? That's what
> I'm
> getting at...deadly according to the rules is when it is out and over.

A character may still be conscious after taking a deadly wound, just
unable to act due to extreme amounts of pain and damage. There are
rules that allow characters to continue to operate after taking a deadly
wound, some bioware, at least one "drug", and I thought some sort of
willpower based rule. But for most people/characters, reaching the
deadly wound level will take you out of the action.

>
> >
> >
> > > ..., we had some druggies
> > > start shooting at each other over some screwed up deal in our
> barracks
> > > (reality) and one guy got a 9mm in the gut, one guy got a .25 in the
> > > chest, and one guy got a .44 Mag in the balls, the only person that
> > > dropped instantly was the one that got the nut shot and that's only
> > > cause the gun knocked him off his feet and then he was still trying
> to
> > > get a hold of his gun so he could try and tag the guy that shot him
> > > (only 1 person out of the 4 that were involved wasn't hit) but the
> point
> > > is that while the guy with the shot to the chest was in the worst
> shape
> > > (is still in ICU over 2 1/2 months later) the guy that got it in the
> gut
> > > spent a month in the hospital and the guy that got his sack blown
> off
> > > bled to death while at the hospital the only person that would have
> died
> > > instantly is the guy that didn't get shot cause the guy with the .44
> Mag
> > > missed his head by about 3" but the guy now needs hearing aids to be
> > > able to hear clearly at all out of that ear.
> >
> > Tell me something, did the guy who was gutshot fall down and become
> > unable to act? Or did he remain standing and firing at his foes?
> Same
> > goes for the chest shot, he didn't keep on walking after that did he?
> > If they did continue to act, then they recieved, IMC, the equivalent
> of
> > a serious wound. If they dropped and stayed down till medics arrived,
> > they recieved deadly wounds.
>
> The guy that got gutshot stayed up until a guy dragged him into a room
> out of the hall where it was going on, the guy that got it in the chest
> stumbled down the stairs before he dropped down to the ground, and the
> guy that bled to death I don't know why he did, they don't tell us these
> things (especially since he wasn't in the military)
>
> >
> > Remember, deadly wounds are wounds that will cause death if untreated,
> > not necessarily cause instant death. What I want to know is how the
> > nutshot fellow managed to bleed to death while at the hospital? Did
> no
> > one attend to him? Did they leave him on the table and say to him,
> > "You're just SOL."
> >
> >
> > > ....which brings me to another thought that
> > > makes no sense to me...if you're shooting someone with a fully auto
> SMG
> > > that does 7M per round then why wouldn't the FA damage be 10 times
> that
> > > instead of 16D? I'm sure that 10 rounds at 7M would be MUCH more
> > > effective than one round at 16D because of the massive trauma that
> would
> > > be caused and all of the damage from the individual rounds would do
> a
> > > total of 30 blocks of damage as opposed to 10 blocks...anyone see my
> > > point?
> >
> > One round at 16D would be approximately equal to 25mm autocannon
> round,
> > or thereabouts. Are you saying 16D is easily survivable? And then
> you
> > need to take into account, that not every round of a FA burst is going
> > to hit the target, and of those that do, not every round will hit
> > something vital. Some rounds will pass through fleshy parts. So FA
> > burst damage accounts for missed or low effect rounds while accounting
> > for the damage of multiple, rapid succession hits.
>
> No I'm not saying that a 25mm round would be survivable...that's my
> point...it's got the big stuff underpowered and the small stuff
> overpowered...I said that once and I defiantly mean it...there's no way
> that you're surviving it and I use a common sense rule on that....unless
> something stops the round before it hits you you're DEAD especially

How would 16D from an autocannon be underpowered. IMO, ballistic armor
doesn't apply, and dermal armor wouldn't provide much protection, if
any. A human at cybered max gets, maybe, 9 dice to roll 16's. Out of
50 rolls, I get 3 single successes. No roll was capable of staging
damage down. A human would have to have a body of 17 to not die
instantly. I wouldn't call that underpowered.

As for 16D from a FA burst. Ballistic armor applies, but has little
effect. And dermal armor helps as above. The same human from above may
have a 10D (ballistic rating 6) burst to resist with 9 dice. I rolled 7
double successes in 50 rolls, enough to stage from deadly to serious.
But the majority are deadly, and a human would need a body of 11 to not
die instantly. It's still powerful, but like you said, a machinegun
turns the middle into hamburger.


--
Iridios
--
From:The Top 100 Things I'd Do
If I Ever Became An Evil Overlord
(http://www.eviloverlord.com/lists/overlord.html)

My noble half-brother whose throne I usurped will be killed, not
kept anonymously imprisoned in a forgotten cell of my dungeon.

Used Without Permission
Message no. 33
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Bira)
Subject: D100 (was Re: Contradictions)
Date: Wed Dec 5 23:40:11 2001
On Wed, 5 Dec 2001 19:18:06 -0600
"Derek Hyde" <dhyde@*********.net> wrote:

> But that's also my point....Deadly damage INSTANTLY drops someone to
> "dead" and they're not able to move or do anything,

Actually, if you decide to use an optional rule from "Man &
Machine", they just might. I don't remember it exactly, but it involves
Willpower tests to remain functional even after receiving a Deadly wound.
If they fail their stabilization tests, they're still dying, but can
take actions at a large penalty (+4TN/-4 Init).

> Just because you're critically wounded doesn't mean that you're dead.
> It is possible for you to die from a .22 Mag but it's not going to be an
> immediate thing...that's why I think that staging up the damage is a
> crock.

I usually interpret "critically wounded but not dead" as a
Serious wound. Under official rules, there's no way to die from a
Serious wound alone, but I think it would be pretty easy to make up a
house rule where you continue to take damage over time if you don't
receive proper medical care.

If you institute this rule and still stage up damage, you can
have a wider range of results - people can die from Serious wounds (or
even smaller ones) after some time if they're not treated sucessfully.



>I'm sure that 10 rounds at 7M would be MUCH more
> effective than one round at 16D because of the massive trauma that would
> be caused and all of the damage from the individual rounds would do a
> total of 30 blocks of damage as opposed to 10 blocks...anyone see my
> point?

I do, but I don't think the SR damage system works this way. The
"blocks" in the condition monitor aren't linear like the "hit points"
of other games such as GURPS or Fallout (a computer game that has pretty
mean full-auto fire; there's also a paper version, free for download).

>The system overpowers a single shot in letting you stage it up
> because of stupid luck BUT doesn't treat a fully auto weapon NEARLY as
> effectively as it could be. Trust me I've fired a 7.62mm Machinegun and
> if you put the first round in the target as long as you don't move
> you'll put the last round in the target because of the weight of the
> weapon. Anyone see why I don't let staging up occur? If it's going to
> undercut the heavy firepower I'm sure as he!! Not gonna let it overpower
> the light stuff.

Anyone who can get their hands in heavy firepower in SR probably
also can install sixty different kinds of recoil compensation in the big
guns... If you have an appropriate budget, it's not too hard to negate
recoil completly with gas vents, shock pads, tripods, bipods, etc. RL
machineguns all seem to have at least two of those.


--
Bira -- SysOp da Shadowland.BR
http://www.shadowland.com.br
Redator de Shadowrun da RPG em Revista
http://www.rpgemrevista.f2s.com
Message no. 34
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Damion Milliken)
Subject: D100 (was Re: Contradictions)
Date: Thu Dec 6 04:20:01 2001
Derek Hyde writes:

> But that's also my point....Deadly damage INSTANTLY drops someone to
> "dead" and they're not able to move or do anything,
>
> <Snip humourous "druggies" example.>
>
> Just because you're critically wounded doesn't mean that you're dead.

Yeah, the SR rules are rather lacking in this point, I feel. It's possible
to get shot for a Serious wound (pretty bad, likely what those guys were
facing, I'd imagine), and then just wander off like nothing really happened.
Sure, you've got a +3 TN modifier, but you could conceivably live out the
entire rest of your life with that wound. It's a little odd that you
wouldn't, like, bleed to death or anything.

The house rule that Boondocker inadvertantly used regarding "gaining a box
of damage every Body Turns" would be a good addition to resolve this sort of
problem, I think.

A parallel concern, I think, is that different people's tolerance for pain,
and capabilities for action under massive system shock are probably
different. As the rules are written, nobody passes out until they suffer a
Deadly wound. And then characters are allowed to attempt to remain concious
even then. The conciousness rules could probably do with starting much
lower, so that it was possible to pass out from a Serious, or even Moderate
wound, if you were unlucky or sucky.

> which brings me to another thought that makes no sense to me...if you're
> shooting someone with a fully auto SMG that does 7M per round then why
> wouldn't the FA damage be 10 times that instead of 16D? I'm sure that 10
> rounds at 7M would be MUCH more effective than one round at 16D because of
> the massive trauma that would be caused and all of the damage from the
> individual rounds would do a total of 30 blocks of damage as opposed to 10
> blocks...anyone see my point?

Ever play SR1? 1st Edition SR? I guess not, from your comment here. Anyway,
back in SR1, if you shot someone with a burst of 10 bullets, you rolled for
each and evry bullet, both attacker and defender. Suffice to say, combat
with any amount of even burst fire weapons took forever. And then some.

Statistically speaking, more or less, on the average (you get the idea ;-)),
if you shoot someone for 3 x 7M in SR, they'll probably take about the same
damage as if you shoot them for 1 x 10S. In the former case, they'll
possibly (as an example) take 3 Light wounds. In the latter, a single
Moderate. In other words, the same result.

This, I believe, is why the burst fire and fully auto fire modifiers were
introduced. They _significantly_ cut down on the dice rolling required, and
they (usually, more or less, etc) generated about the same result.

Of course, it's easy enough to think up examples (usually involving
characters with rather high/low Body/armour, or vice-versa combinations)
where this approximation doesn't work extremely well. But on the whole, over
the average of the spectrum of commonly encountered statistics, it does seem
to work pretty well.

If you liked, it'd be easy enough to resolve each bullet individually. But I
think the hassle isn't quite worth it. The BF/FA modifiers give a fair
approximation in most circumstances, at a fraction of the time required for
combat resolution.

> The system overpowers a single shot in letting you stage it up
> because of stupid luck BUT doesn't treat a fully auto weapon NEARLY as
> effectively as it could be. Trust me I've fired a 7.62mm Machinegun and
> if you put the first round in the target as long as you don't move
> you'll put the last round in the target because of the weight of the
> weapon. Anyone see why I don't let staging up occur? If it's going to
> undercut the heavy firepower I'm sure as he!! Not gonna let it overpower
> the light stuff.

I think that you'r going a little overboard, here, but it probably depends
upon what is the "norm" for statistics in your game. If, for example, most
people have 9/9 armour (or something high), then the BF/FA approximation is
probably going to make single shots really sucky, as the target will nearly
always need 2's to resist. Unless the firer gets an awfully huge amount of
successes, then targets are usually unharmed. OTOH, firing a long burst can
dramatically increase your effective Power, and thus the target may suddenly
need 6's, and might get rather whacked. If this were instead resolved bullet
by bullet, then the target would not be hurt. Likewise, if your characters
tend to have sucky armour ratings, then a staged single shot is
significantly more effective than a long burst. The TN for the target to
resist a long burst is really high no matter what, but the TN to resist a
single shot is also very high. This would make it ineffective to fire
bursts, as you wouldn't be getting your "money's" worth of damage out of
them.

I guess it depends a bit on how your game progresses. I've had no problem
with the approximations, except for a few rare instances.

--
Damion Milliken University of Wollongong
Unofficial Shadowrun Guru E-mail: dam01@***.edu.au
-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.12
GE d- s++:-- a25 C++ US++>+++ P+ L+>++ E- W+ N++ o@ K- w+(--) O-@ M--
V- PS+ PE- Y+ PGP-@>++ t+ 5 X+>+++ R++ !tv(--) b+ DI+++@ D G+
e++>++++$ h- r++>+++ y->+++
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
Message no. 35
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Damion Milliken)
Subject: D100 (was Re: Contradictions)
Date: Thu Dec 6 04:20:05 2001
Iridios writes:

> Remember, deadly wounds are wounds that will cause death if untreated,
> not necessarily cause instant death. What I want to know is how the
> nutshot fellow managed to bleed to death while at the hospital? Did no
> one attend to him? Did they leave him on the table and say to him,
> "You're just SOL."

They were probably all standing around laughing so much at this guy getting
shot in the nuts that they forgot to treat him ... <evil GM grin> At least
that's how it'd probably go in my SR game ;-).

--
Damion Milliken University of Wollongong
Unofficial Shadowrun Guru E-mail: dam01@***.edu.au
-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.12
GE d- s++:-- a25 C++ US++>+++ P+ L+>++ E- W+ N++ o@ K- w+(--) O-@ M--
V- PS+ PE- Y+ PGP-@>++ t+ 5 X+>+++ R++ !tv(--) b+ DI+++@ D G+
e++>++++$ h- r++>+++ y->+++
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
Message no. 36
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Damion Milliken)
Subject: D100 (was Re: Contradictions)
Date: Thu Dec 6 04:30:01 2001
Derek Hyde writes:

> No I'm not saying that a 25mm round would be survivable...that's my
> point...it's got the big stuff underpowered and the small stuff
> overpowered...I said that once and I defiantly mean it...there's no way
> that you're surviving it and I use a common sense rule on that....unless
> something stops the round before it hits you you're DEAD especially
> since a 25mm round is basically a 1" round and is most likely an HE
> round moving at such a velocity that you're not even going to have the
> time to attempt dodging...they'd drop one round and it'd be either a hit
> or a miss and that's all there is to it.

Well, many of the modifying conditions that you just placed upon the
situation may not be justified. HE, in SR, modifies the Power of the attack.
At the 16D end of the spectrum, an EX-Explosive round would make the Power
18D. This is a _huge_ statistical difference, rolling 18's is about twice as
difficult as rolling 16's (all those stat's monsters like Lars can probably
give a much better explanation ;-)). So, yes, by making it an HE round you
do considerably increase the damage in SR. As for the velocity, I really
don't think that dodging is possible for _any_ bullet if you assume that the
target has to get out of the way before the _bullet_ hits them! Someone
hozing you down with subsonic SMG ammo isn't going to be any easier to dodge
than someone shooting you with multi-mach armour piercing munitions. Humans
just can't react that fast.

Dodging, in SR, (I think ;-)) represents moving out of line of fire of the
attacker at appropriately timed moments. Not dodging the incoming projectile
after it has left the firer. That might be feasible if it's a throwing
knife. But (maybe you can actually tell me here?) I think it's a little
ridiculous for bullets, even "slow" ones.

Comparing a 10 round burst from a 7M SMG to, say an 18D single shot from an
assault cannon is probably fairly justified, don't you think? If you get hit
by all the rounds in the burst, you're probably dead. If you get hit by the
single big round from the cannon, you're probably dead. You're only not dead
if you're some sort of regenerating freak, are armoured to probably more
than the rules legally allow, are as hard as a dragon, or can just about
literally dodge your tits off. Well, OK, for the dodging thing, you're much
more likely to survive the single 18D attack, because the lead hose from the
SMG is giving you a +3 to your dodge TN. That makes autofire especially
effective in SR, don't you think?

--
Damion Milliken University of Wollongong
Unofficial Shadowrun Guru E-mail: dam01@***.edu.au
-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.12
GE d- s++:-- a25 C++ US++>+++ P+ L+>++ E- W+ N++ o@ K- w+(--) O-@ M--
V- PS+ PE- Y+ PGP-@>++ t+ 5 X+>+++ R++ !tv(--) b+ DI+++@ D G+
e++>++++$ h- r++>+++ y->+++
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
Message no. 37
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Scott Harrison)
Subject: D100 (was Re: Contradictions)
Date: Thu Dec 6 04:35:01 2001
On Wednesday, December 5, 2001, at 06:36 , Damion Milliken wrote:

> Scott Harrison writes:
>
>> I have loaded a PDF of a table onto my web page. Comments welcome.
>
> Unfortunately, your site appears to be down :-(. (It doesn't respond
> to a
> ping, and I can ping www.redhat.com, so I'm pretty sure it's not just my
> link.) I'll check again tomorrow.
>

Yes, just after I was able to post this message, my ISP or line
provider had some sort of problem and my server here was taken off the
air, and I did not get back online until an hour or so ago. And
unfortunately I have not set up mithrandir.com to be mirrored on my
American server yet. But eventually that should happen, and
interruptions like the one I just had should be minimized. Anyway, the
site should be up again since I can actually send this email.

--Scott
Message no. 38
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Damion Milliken)
Subject: D100 (was Re: Contradictions)
Date: Thu Dec 6 04:40:04 2001
Scott Harrison writes:

> Yes, just after I was able to post this message, my ISP or line
> provider had some sort of problem and my server here was taken off the
> air, and I did not get back online until an hour or so ago. And
> unfortunately I have not set up mithrandir.com to be mirrored on my
> American server yet. But eventually that should happen, and
> interruptions like the one I just had should be minimized. Anyway, the
> site should be up again since I can actually send this email.

Where is the pdf file? I can't find it under "Gaming/SR" or
"Software/SR".

--
Damion Milliken University of Wollongong
Unofficial Shadowrun Guru E-mail: dam01@***.edu.au
-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.12
GE d- s++:-- a25 C++ US++>+++ P+ L+>++ E- W+ N++ o@ K- w+(--) O-@ M--
V- PS+ PE- Y+ PGP-@>++ t+ 5 X+>+++ R++ !tv(--) b+ DI+++@ D G+
e++>++++$ h- r++>+++ y->+++
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
Message no. 39
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Scott Harrison)
Subject: D100 (was Re: Contradictions)
Date: Thu Dec 6 05:00:01 2001
On Thursday, December 6, 2001, at 10:41 , Damion Milliken wrote:

>
> Where is the pdf file? I can't find it under "Gaming/SR" or
> "Software/SR".
>

Towards the bottom of Software/SR, the last entry in the last table.

--Scott
Message no. 40
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Damion Milliken)
Subject: D100 (was Re: Contradictions)
Date: Thu Dec 6 05:15:01 2001
Scott Harrison writes:

> Towards the bottom of Software/SR, the last entry in the last table.

Aha! Did you update the time/date stamp on the page? My proxy didn't want to
recognise it :-(. Anyway, it looks good. Was it difficult to make? Would it
be possible to get a table of TN vs Number of dice, with the percentages in
the table being "chance of success", where "chance of success" is the
probability of getting "1 ... number of dice" successes? ie, _any_ number of
successes? With the table as it is, I can see that the chance for 1 success
vs TN 2 when rolling 2 dice is 97.22%, and the chance of 2 successes is
69.44%. But what's the chance of _at_least_1_success_, ie 1 OR 2 successes?
It's got to be a bit more than 97.22%, I'd assume, but how much more?

--
Damion Milliken University of Wollongong
Unofficial Shadowrun Guru E-mail: dam01@***.edu.au
-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.12
GE d- s++:-- a25 C++ US++>+++ P+ L+>++ E- W+ N++ o@ K- w+(--) O-@ M--
V- PS+ PE- Y+ PGP-@>++ t+ 5 X+>+++ R++ !tv(--) b+ DI+++@ D G+
e++>++++$ h- r++>+++ y->+++
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
Message no. 41
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Scott Harrison)
Subject: D100 (was Re: Contradictions)
Date: Thu Dec 6 05:50:01 2001
On Thursday, December 6, 2001, at 11:17 , Damion Milliken wrote:

> Scott Harrison writes:
>
>> Towards the bottom of Software/SR, the last entry in the last table.
>
> Aha! Did you update the time/date stamp on the page? My proxy didn't
> want to
> recognise it :-(. Anyway, it looks good. Was it difficult to make?
> Would it
> be possible to get a table of TN vs Number of dice, with the
> percentages in
> the table being "chance of success", where "chance of success" is
the
> probability of getting "1 ... number of dice" successes? ie, _any_
> number of
> successes? With the table as it is, I can see that the chance for 1
> success
> vs TN 2 when rolling 2 dice is 97.22%, and the chance of 2 successes is
> 69.44%. But what's the chance of _at_least_1_success_, ie 1 OR 2
> successes?
> It's got to be a bit more than 97.22%, I'd assume, but how much more?
>

I updated the HTML file - and therefore, the timestamp in the filesystem
was changed. I do not include any information in the file about when it
was last updated. I have no idea what mechanism your proxy cache is
using the deal with this page though.

It was not too difficult to make. Basically I coded up most of it, and
then did a little formatting to make it look better and fit on the pages
more cleanly.

I am not sure I understand what you are asking for. However, the table
shows the chance to get AT LEAST x number of successes. Therefore, for
2 dice, at TN 2 there is a 97.22% chance for AT LEAST one success. At
at TN 3 there is a 44.44% chance for AT LEAST 2 successes. I would
think that showing the chance for AT LEAST x number of successes is the
best thing to show since showing the chance for an exact number of
successes is not very useful in most cases we would encounter gaming.

--Scott
Message no. 42
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Gurth)
Subject: D100 (was Re: Contradictions)
Date: Thu Dec 6 05:55:05 2001
According to Derek Hyde, on Wed, 05 Dec 2001 the word on the street was...

> Oh but that's not true...remember the whole Butafuco thing a few years
> ago? Amy Fisher put a gun to her lover's (Joey Butafuco) wife's temple
> and pulled the trigger and she's more than just alive...and that was a
> .22 magnum

I can't remember the exact line, but there's this bit in the novel
Cryptonomicon where one of the main characters gets instruction in how to
shoot himself through the head as an ultimate method of avoiding capture,
because it's amazing how many people do this wrong and live. And this is
true -- not that I've ever tried it, but killing someone by putting a gun
to their temple is a lot more difficult than it looks. I once saw someone
on TV who'd blinded himself by doing it wrong...

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
"I know you're expecting me to take that as good news," Randy says.
-> NAGEE Editor * ShadowRN GridSec * Triangle Virtuoso <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://plastic.dumpshock.com <-

GC3.12: GAT/! d-(dpu) s:- !a>? C+@ UL P L++ E W-(++) N o? K w+(--) O V?
PS+ PE(-)(+) Y PGP- t@ 5++ X(+) R+++(-)>$ tv+ b++@ DI- D+ G+ e h! !r y?
Incubated into the First Church of the Sqooshy Ball, 21-05-1998
Message no. 43
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Damion Milliken)
Subject: D100 (was Re: Contradictions)
Date: Thu Dec 6 06:05:02 2001
Scott Harrison writes:

> I am not sure I understand what you are asking for. However, the table
> shows the chance to get AT LEAST x number of successes. Therefore, for
> 2 dice, at TN 2 there is a 97.22% chance for AT LEAST one success. At
> at TN 3 there is a 44.44% chance for AT LEAST 2 successes. I would
> think that showing the chance for AT LEAST x number of successes is the
> best thing to show since showing the chance for an exact number of
> successes is not very useful in most cases we would encounter gaming.

Ah! I think I was misinterpreting the table, actually. What I was trying to
get at is I'm looking for a table that has the first line of each set of
data in the pdf file, the "at least 1 success" line. So that instead of the
vertical "axis" being "minimum number of successes", it's "number
of dice".
Basically, the "other" dimension of the three variables "dice",
"successes",
and "probability", if that makes any sense ;-). So it could be extended to
produce a series of table (like what you have), but each table would be
called "minimum number of successes: 1", then "...: 2", then
"...: 3", and
so on.

Does that make any more sense? :-)

--
Damion Milliken University of Wollongong
Unofficial Shadowrun Guru E-mail: dam01@***.edu.au
-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.12
GE d- s++:-- a25 C++ US++>+++ P+ L+>++ E- W+ N++ o@ K- w+(--) O-@ M--
V- PS+ PE- Y+ PGP-@>++ t+ 5 X+>+++ R++ !tv(--) b+ DI+++@ D G+
e++>++++$ h- r++>+++ y->+++
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
Message no. 44
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Scott Harrison)
Subject: D100 (was Re: Contradictions)
Date: Thu Dec 6 06:05:11 2001
Hi,

And for those of you still interested in using D100, there is an
interesting thing you can do with the table I generated. This may not
be exactly what people are looking for but it works for determining the
number of successes using a D100 vice D6.

You need to know the number of dice the person wants to roll and
the TN.

For example, if the player is rolling 3 dice against a TN of 5 you
would look at the appropriate column in my chart and see values like:
70.37%
25.93%
3.704%
When the person rolls the D100 you compare it to the chart. In
this case, if the person rolled 01 - 03 they would have 3 successes. If
they rolled 04 - 25 they would have 2 successes. If they rolled 26 - 70
they would have 1 success. And if they rolled 71 - 00 they would have
no successes.

Now assuming you want to roll an open ended roll and are only
interested in the top ONE value, you can check the Number of Dice and
the percentages in the ROW for the first row. For example, rolling 6 SR
dice on an open ended test using D100, getting a 21 on the D100 means
the SR roll would have been 11 (because TN 11 is 29.03% and TN 12 is
15.55%). Had the D100 roll been 12 the SR roll would be a 14.

--Scott
Message no. 45
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Derek Hyde)
Subject: D100 (was Re: Contradictions)
Date: Thu Dec 6 10:15:01 2001
> A character may still be conscious after taking a deadly wound, just
> unable to act due to extreme amounts of pain and damage. There are
> rules that allow characters to continue to operate after taking a
deadly
> wound, some bioware, at least one "drug", and I thought some sort of
> willpower based rule. But for most people/characters, reaching the
> deadly wound level will take you out of the action.

Ok I'm not going to keep fighting it. You're apparently treating it as
a deadly wound is ANY wound that will kill them eventually and I treat
it as a wound that kills them on the spot

> How would 16D from an autocannon be underpowered. IMO, ballistic
armor
> doesn't apply, and dermal armor wouldn't provide much protection, if
> any. A human at cybered max gets, maybe, 9 dice to roll 16's. Out of
> 50 rolls, I get 3 single successes. No roll was capable of staging
> damage down. A human would have to have a body of 17 to not die
> instantly. I wouldn't call that underpowered.

However the problem is that the rules DON'T say that the armor doesn't
apply SO it's got the same chance of being survived as the FA blast and
as I already said. You're not gonna block, dodge, or survive a 1" High
Explosive round, even a grazing shot will kill you and that's how I say
it's underpowered.

>
> As for 16D from a FA burst. Ballistic armor applies, but has little
> effect. And dermal armor helps as above. The same human from above
may
> have a 10D (ballistic rating 6) burst to resist with 9 dice. I rolled
7
> double successes in 50 rolls, enough to stage from deadly to serious.
> But the majority are deadly, and a human would need a body of 11 to
not
> die instantly. It's still powerful, but like you said, a machinegun
> turns the middle into hamburger.

That's my exact point....but you're looking at it from the wrong
standpoint, that's the damage from an Ingram Smartgun, now step up and
look at the damage of an assault rifle "carbine" 7S to begin with and
then it becomes the SAME DAMAGE and does 16D even though it's a much
more powerful round!
Then we'll look at the spas-22 shotgun, it does 10S to begin with and
then does a burst which moves the damage to 12D? that's a change of 4
blocks of damage however EACH ROUND would normally do 6 blocks for
itself so basically it's saying that every round past the first is so
screwed up that it's not going to hit you NEARLY as hard? That just
doesn't make any sense at all. My point is that the damage isn't
realistic, if you get hit with 3 shotshells you're dead, your whole body
would be hamburger and you'd never move again. It's stupid that a
bigger weapon can't do any more damage than a smaller weapon that's
firing the same number of rounds, maybe I'm the only person running a
game where the players all want a good level of realism but you've got
to see what I'm getting at even if you do like the way the rules work.
My biggest problem is that an Ingram is supposed to be a 9mm correct? An
assault rifle is going to be at least a .308 with about 2 to 3 times the
powder behind it, and they're doing the same damage when pumped fully
auto into someone.
Message no. 46
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Derek Hyde)
Subject: D100 (was Re: Contradictions)
Date: Thu Dec 6 10:20:01 2001
> Actually, if you decide to use an optional rule from "Man &
> Machine", they just might. I don't remember it exactly, but it
involves
> Willpower tests to remain functional even after receiving a Deadly
wound.
> If they fail their stabilization tests, they're still dying, but can
> take actions at a large penalty (+4TN/-4 Init).
>
> > Just because you're critically wounded doesn't mean that you're
dead.
> > It is possible for you to die from a .22 Mag but it's not going to
be an
> > immediate thing...that's why I think that staging up the damage is a
> > crock.
>
> I usually interpret "critically wounded but not dead" as a
> Serious wound. Under official rules, there's no way to die from a
> Serious wound alone, but I think it would be pretty easy to make up a
> house rule where you continue to take damage over time if you don't
> receive proper medical care.
>
> If you institute this rule and still stage up damage, you can
> have a wider range of results - people can die from Serious wounds (or
> even smaller ones) after some time if they're not treated sucessfully.


> >I'm sure that 10 rounds at 7M would be MUCH more
> > effective than one round at 16D because of the massive trauma that
would
> > be caused and all of the damage from the individual rounds would do
a
> > total of 30 blocks of damage as opposed to 10 blocks...anyone see my
> > point?
>
> I do, but I don't think the SR damage system works this way.
The
> "blocks" in the condition monitor aren't linear like the "hit
points"
> of other games such as GURPS or Fallout (a computer game that has
pretty
> mean full-auto fire; there's also a paper version, free for download).
>
> >The system overpowers a single shot in letting you stage it up
> > because of stupid luck BUT doesn't treat a fully auto weapon NEARLY
as
> > effectively as it could be. Trust me I've fired a 7.62mm Machinegun
and
> > if you put the first round in the target as long as you don't move
> > you'll put the last round in the target because of the weight of the
> > weapon. Anyone see why I don't let staging up occur? If it's going
to
> > undercut the heavy firepower I'm sure as he!! Not gonna let it
overpower
> > the light stuff.
>
> Anyone who can get their hands in heavy firepower in SR
probably
> also can install sixty different kinds of recoil compensation in the
big
> guns... If you have an appropriate budget, it's not too hard to negate
> recoil completly with gas vents, shock pads, tripods, bipods, etc. RL
> machineguns all seem to have at least two of those.
Right but I'm talking about an M60 or an M240B these are military issue
things, I'm talking about firing them either "from the hip" or supported
with your own hand, at most the built in bipod. The only thing they've
got to control recoil essentially is the fact that they weigh nearly
10lbs and they're too heavy to go jumping all around
Message no. 47
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Derek Hyde)
Subject: D100 (was Re: Contradictions)
Date: Thu Dec 6 10:30:01 2001
> > No I'm not saying that a 25mm round would be survivable...that's my
> > point...it's got the big stuff underpowered and the small stuff
> > overpowered...I said that once and I defiantly mean it...there's no
way
> > that you're surviving it and I use a common sense rule on
that....unless
> > something stops the round before it hits you you're DEAD especially
> > since a 25mm round is basically a 1" round and is most likely an HE
> > round moving at such a velocity that you're not even going to have
the
> > time to attempt dodging...they'd drop one round and it'd be either a
hit
> > or a miss and that's all there is to it.
>
> Well, many of the modifying conditions that you just placed upon the
> situation may not be justified. HE, in SR, modifies the Power of the
> attack.
And this was another complaint that was brought up, if you shoot someone
in real life with a round that'll explode when it hits them they've got
a REALLY good chance of being dead on the spot, the explosive broadheads
for the bow..remember rambo where he tagged the guy at the waterfall
with it? Ok...that's the point, according to the game you just add a
little more damage, that's just ODD

> At the 16D end of the spectrum, an EX-Explosive round would make the
Power
> 18D. This is a _huge_ statistical difference, rolling 18's is about
twice
> as
> difficult as rolling 16's (all those stat's monsters like Lars can
> probably
> give a much better explanation ;-)). So, yes, by making it an HE round
you
> do considerably increase the damage in SR. As for the velocity, I
really
> don't think that dodging is possible for _any_ bullet if you assume
that
> the
> target has to get out of the way before the _bullet_ hits them!
Someone
> hozing you down with subsonic SMG ammo isn't going to be any easier to
> dodge
> than someone shooting you with multi-mach armour piercing munitions.
> Humans
> just can't react that fast.
Right which is why I take into consideration the wired reflexes and such
as well as move by wire (specifically that one), I've read books that
had the MBW in it as well as actually thought it out and it's more than
capable of getting your heap out of the way of rounds PROVIDED you
realize that they're being fired.
>
> Dodging, in SR, (I think ;-)) represents moving out of line of fire of
the
> attacker at appropriately timed moments. Not dodging the incoming
> projectile
> after it has left the firer. That might be feasible if it's a throwing
> knife. But (maybe you can actually tell me here?) I think it's a
little
> ridiculous for bullets, even "slow" ones.
>
> Comparing a 10 round burst from a 7M SMG to, say an 18D single shot
from
> an
> assault cannon is probably fairly justified, don't you think? If you
get
> hit
> by all the rounds in the burst, you're probably dead. If you get hit
by
> the
> single big round from the cannon, you're probably dead. You're only
not
> dead
> if you're some sort of regenerating freak, are armoured to probably
more
> than the rules legally allow, are as hard as a dragon, or can just
about
> literally dodge your tits off. Well, OK, for the dodging thing, you're
> much
> more likely to survive the single 18D attack, because the lead hose
from
> the
> SMG is giving you a +3 to your dodge TN. That makes autofire
especially
> effective in SR, don't you think?
Message no. 48
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Derek Hyde)
Subject: D100 (was Re: Contradictions)
Date: Thu Dec 6 10:35:00 2001
> I can't remember the exact line, but there's this bit in the novel
> Cryptonomicon where one of the main characters gets instruction in how
to
> shoot himself through the head as an ultimate method of avoiding
capture,
> because it's amazing how many people do this wrong and live. And this
is
> true -- not that I've ever tried it, but killing someone by putting a
gun
> to their temple is a lot more difficult than it looks. I once saw
someone
> on TV who'd blinded himself by doing it wrong...
know someone that tried it with a 10ga shotgun and he blew his face off
instead of doing anything else....took his eyes and peeled the skin off
but he lived....now he's got the name of "dumba$$"
Message no. 49
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Bira)
Subject: D100 (was Re: Contradictions)
Date: Thu Dec 6 11:50:05 2001
On Thursday 06 December 2001 13:18, Derek Hyde wrote:

> Right but I'm talking about an M60 or an M240B these are military
> issue things, I'm talking about firing them either "from the hip" or
> supported with your own hand, at most the built in bipod. The only
> thing they've got to control recoil essentially is the fact that they
> weigh nearly 10lbs and they're too heavy to go jumping all around

I may not remember this correctly but I did see somewhere that you're
usually not expected to hit much of anything with a big machine gun if
you fire it from the hip outside of target practice.

--
Bira -- Sysop da Shadowland.BR
http://www.shadowlandbr.hpg.com.br
Redator de Shadowrun da RPG em Revista
http://www.rpgemrevista.f2s.com
Message no. 50
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Scott Harrison)
Subject: D100 (was Re: Contradictions)
Date: Thu Dec 6 14:20:04 2001
On Thursday, December 6, 2001, at 12:04 , Damion Milliken wrote:

>
> Ah! I think I was misinterpreting the table, actually. What I was
> trying to
> get at is I'm looking for a table that has the first line of each set of
> data in the pdf file, the "at least 1 success" line. So that instead of
> the
> vertical "axis" being "minimum number of successes", it's
"number of
> dice".
> Basically, the "other" dimension of the three variables "dice",
> "successes",
> and "probability", if that makes any sense ;-). So it could be extended
> to
> produce a series of table (like what you have), but each table would be
> called "minimum number of successes: 1", then "...: 2", then
"...: 3",
> and
> so on.
>
> Does that make any more sense? :-)

I have made a new PDF and added it to the page. This one is the same
type of data except the group of dice and axis of success are now
interchanged.

--Scott
Message no. 51
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Rand Ratinac)
Subject: D100 (was Re: Contradictions)
Date: Thu Dec 6 20:25:00 2001
<snipt!(TM)>
> And this was another complaint that was brought up,
if you shoot someone in real life with a round that'll
explode when it hits them they've got a REALLY good
chance of being dead on the spot, the explosive
broadheads for the bow..remember rambo where he tagged
the guy at the waterfall with it? Ok...that's the
point, according to the game you just add a little
more damage, that's just ODD
<snipt!(TM)>

This one is explained in flavour text somewhere, Derek
- can't remember where, though. Basically, "explosive
ammo" is a cool misnomer. The amount of explosive that
can be packed into a regular bullet is very small -
all it does is cause the bullet to break apart,
resulting in (to quote) "a really impressive
fragmentation". Basically it's like a hollow point on
'roids. It's not like a grenade. IIRC, those
"explosive broadheads" Rambo had were actually arrows
with the explosive heads from RPG ammo attached.
Grenades, in other words, big, hefty things with a lot
of explosives packed in them.

====Doc'
(aka Mr. Freaky Big, Super-Dynamic Troll of Tomorrow, aka Doc'booner, aka Doc' Vader)

.sig Sauer

If you SMELL what the DOC' is COOKING!!!

________________________________________________________________
Nokia 5510 looks weird sounds great.
Go to http://uk.promotions.yahoo.com/nokia/ discover and win it!
The competition ends 16 th of December 2001.
Message no. 52
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Gurth)
Subject: D100 (was Re: Contradictions)
Date: Fri Dec 7 06:40:04 2001
According to Derek Hyde, on Thu, 06 Dec 2001 the word on the street was...

> Ok I'm not going to keep fighting it. You're apparently treating it as
> a deadly wound is ANY wound that will kill them eventually and I treat
> it as a wound that kills them on the spot

The thing is that, in that case, you've got it wrong :) The SR rules make
it quite clear that a Deadly wound doesn't instantly kill you -- why else
would there be overflow boxes?

> My biggest problem is that an Ingram is supposed to be a 9mm correct?

No, it's supposed to be a submachine gun -- what its caliber is, FASA
purposely didn't say, most likely at least partly in order to avoid these
kinds of complications :)

> An assault rifle is going to be at least a .308 with about 2 to 3 times
> the powder behind it, and they're doing the same damage when pumped fully
> auto into someone.

I think that, if you want this level of realism, you are playing the wrong
game, or at least using the wrong set of rules to get it. My suggestion
would be adapting Phoenix Command to the SR setting (though you'd have to
invent a working, SR-like magic system for it), which will let you figure
out exactly how much damage that AK-97 _really_ does, and what organs get
punctured on the way through the target's body :)

<GridSec>
BTW, Derek, could you please trim your posts a bit? You quote very large
amounts of text that you don't really reply to, so for ease of reading and
downloading, it would help if you could trim it down to only the necessary
lines and paragraphs. Thanks :)
</GridSec>

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
"I know you're expecting me to take that as good news," Randy says.
-> NAGEE Editor * ShadowRN GridSec * Triangle Virtuoso <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://plastic.dumpshock.com <-

GC3.12: GAT/! d-(dpu) s:- !a>? C+@ UL P L++ E W-(++) N o? K w+(--) O V?
PS+ PE(-)(+) Y PGP- t@ 5++ X(+) R+++(-)>$ tv+ b++@ DI- D+ G+ e h! !r y?
Incubated into the First Church of the Sqooshy Ball, 21-05-1998
Message no. 53
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Gurth)
Subject: D100 (was Re: Contradictions)
Date: Fri Dec 7 06:40:19 2001
According to Rand Ratinac, on Fri, 07 Dec 2001 the word on the street was...

> This one is explained in flavour text somewhere, Derek
> - can't remember where, though. Basically, "explosive
> ammo" is a cool misnomer. The amount of explosive that
> can be packed into a regular bullet is very small -
> all it does is cause the bullet to break apart,
> resulting in (to quote) "a really impressive
> fragmentation". Basically it's like a hollow point on
> 'roids. It's not like a grenade.

The 25 mm rounds Derek is talking about, are, though. But small arms
explosive rounds are just like what Fields of Fire (the book you're
referring to, on the EX Explosives page) talks about.

> IIRC, those
> "explosive broadheads" Rambo had were actually arrows
> with the explosive heads from RPG ammo attached.

LOL! I'd like to see anyone try to shoot an arrow with an RPG warhead
screwed onto it :)

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
"I know you're expecting me to take that as good news," Randy says.
-> NAGEE Editor * ShadowRN GridSec * Triangle Virtuoso <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://plastic.dumpshock.com <-

GC3.12: GAT/! d-(dpu) s:- !a>? C+@ UL P L++ E W-(++) N o? K w+(--) O V?
PS+ PE(-)(+) Y PGP- t@ 5++ X(+) R+++(-)>$ tv+ b++@ DI- D+ G+ e h! !r y?
Incubated into the First Church of the Sqooshy Ball, 21-05-1998
Message no. 54
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Rand Ratinac)
Subject: D100 (was Re: Contradictions)
Date: Fri Dec 7 23:20:01 2001
> > IIRC, those "explosive broadheads" Rambo had were
actually arrows with the explosive heads from RPG ammo
attached.
>
> LOL! I'd like to see anyone try to shoot an arrow
with an RPG warhead screwed onto it :)
> Gurth@******.nl -

Well, I SAID IIRC...and it HAS been years since I saw
the flick...so I guess I don't RC. ;)

====Doc'
(aka Mr. Freaky Big, Super-Dynamic Troll of Tomorrow, aka Doc'booner, aka Doc' Vader)

.sig Sauer

If you SMELL what the DOC' is COOKING!!!

________________________________________________________________
Nokia 5510 looks weird sounds great.
Go to http://uk.promotions.yahoo.com/nokia/ discover and win it!
The competition ends 16 th of December 2001.
Message no. 55
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Gurth)
Subject: D100 (was Re: Contradictions)
Date: Sat Dec 8 07:35:05 2001
According to Rand Ratinac, on Sat, 08 Dec 2001 the word on the street was...

> > LOL! I'd like to see anyone try to shoot an arrow
> > with an RPG warhead screwed onto it :)
>
> Well, I SAID IIRC...and it HAS been years since I saw
> the flick...so I guess I don't RC. ;)

Watch some Afghanistan footage, you'll see plenty of people walking around
with RPG rounds, and quickly realize that putting one of those onto an
arrow will most likely make it fly not very far :)

The main thing I remember about those explosive arrows in Rambo II (it was
in that one, right?) was that the explosion seemed rather large and
gasoline-y for such a small grenade on an arrow tip...

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
"I know you're expecting me to take that as good news," Randy says.
-> NAGEE Editor * ShadowRN GridSec * Triangle Virtuoso <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://plastic.dumpshock.com <-

GC3.12: GAT/! d-(dpu) s:- !a>? C+@ UL P L++ E W-(++) N o? K w+(--) O V?
PS+ PE(-)(+) Y PGP- t@ 5++ X(+) R+++(-)>$ tv+ b++@ DI- D+ G+ e h! !r y?
Incubated into the First Church of the Sqooshy Ball, 21-05-1998
Message no. 56
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Derek Hyde)
Subject: D100 (was Re: Contradictions)
Date: Sat Dec 8 12:25:01 2001
> -----Original Message-----
> From: shadowrn-admin@*********.com
[mailto:shadowrn-admin@*********.com]
> On Behalf Of Gurth
> Sent: Saturday, December 08, 2001 5:32 AM
> To: shadowrn@*********.com
> Subject: Re: D100 (was Re: Contradictions)
>
> According to Rand Ratinac, on Sat, 08 Dec 2001 the word on the street
> was...
>
> > > LOL! I'd like to see anyone try to shoot an arrow
> > > with an RPG warhead screwed onto it :)
> >
> > Well, I SAID IIRC...and it HAS been years since I saw
> > the flick...so I guess I don't RC. ;)
>
> Watch some Afghanistan footage, you'll see plenty of people walking
around
> with RPG rounds, and quickly realize that putting one of those onto an
> arrow will most likely make it fly not very far :)
>
> The main thing I remember about those explosive arrows in Rambo II (it
was
> in that one, right?) was that the explosion seemed rather large and
> gasoline-y for such a small grenade on an arrow tip...
Very true but the point was that you'd STILL get quite a an actual
explosion and if it was inside the person well....unless you hit
something near the edge the person's dead....that's our whole problem,
the rounds don't go BOOM they go pfft and then they (correct me if I'm
wrong, not that I need to say it since you all will anyway) stage the
damage and power up just like a regular explosive bullet would. That's
just not likely...you can take an aluminum arrowshaft and fill it with
blackpowder and superglue a percussion cap onto the end and when you
shoot someone that whole thing is going BOOM and even without a
broadhead or a target point it'll still go into flesh unless you're
shooting a bow with low draw weight (directly causing the arrow to fly
slower)
Message no. 57
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Rand Ratinac)
Subject: D100 (was Re: Contradictions)
Date: Sat Dec 8 20:25:01 2001
<snipt(TM)>
> Watch some Afghanistan footage, you'll see plenty of
people walking around with RPG rounds, and quickly
realize that putting one of those onto an arrow will
most likely make it fly not very far :)
>
> The main thing I remember about those explosive
arrows in Rambo II (it was in that one, right?) was
that the explosion seemed rather large and gasoline-y
for such a small grenade on an arrow tip...
> Gurth@******.nl -

Which is Hollywood for you, and which is probably why
I thought it was an RPG round. ;)

====Doc'
(aka Mr. Freaky Big, Super-Dynamic Troll of Tomorrow, aka Doc'booner, aka Doc' Vader)

.sig Sauer

If you SMELL what the DOC' is COOKING!!!

________________________________________________________________
Nokia 5510 looks weird sounds great.
Go to http://uk.promotions.yahoo.com/nokia/ discover and win it!
The competition ends 16 th of December 2001.
Message no. 58
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Damion Milliken)
Subject: D100 (was Re: Contradictions)
Date: Mon Dec 10 06:55:01 2001
Scott Harrison writes:

> I have made a new PDF and added it to the page. This one is the same
> type of data except the group of dice and axis of success are now
> interchanged.

Great. That'll be really handy! Thanks!

--
Damion Milliken University of Wollongong
Unofficial Shadowrun Guru E-mail: dam01@***.edu.au
-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.12
GE d- s++:-- a25 C++ US++>+++ P+ L+>++ E- W+ N++ o@ K- w+(--) O-@ M--
V- PS+ PE- Y+ PGP-@>++ t+ 5 X+>+++ R++ !tv(--) b+ DI+++@ D G+
e++>++++$ h- r++>+++ y->+++
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about D100 (was Re: Contradictions), you may also be interested in:

Disclaimer

These messages were posted a long time ago on a mailing list far, far away. The copyright to their contents probably lies with the original authors of the individual messages, but since they were published in an electronic forum that anyone could subscribe to, and the logs were available to subscribers and most likely non-subscribers as well, it's felt that re-publishing them here is a kind of public service.

Thwap!