Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Rand Ratinac)
Subject: Drones vs. Elementals
Date: Wed Apr 18 21:10:01 2001
Guys, a GM of mine is having a few questions when it
comes to a combat between a drone and an elemental.
He's just not sure how things would work. Here are his
latest words...

====The Engulf power says it is only effected by impact
armor and it burns right thru ballistic armor. But it
does not say how reacts with drone armor. And another
thing most electronics are temperature sensitive and
have a given operating range. (The stuff at work is
only rated at -40c to 65c and is meant for permanent
outside installation.) That is not to mention any
hydraulic fluids or lubricants or rubbers on the
tires. I would think that unless the drone had some
kind of thermal armor it would be vulnerable.

I was just looking in CC and it says on p. 98 that
fire based attacks are reduce in power by half impact
armor. Now does this include vehicle armor? It also
says if a object catches fire using object> resistance
test (p. 51 MITS) increase power by +2 per turn. I
think a drones object resistance is 8.
====
I suggested the following, but I'm no engineer (or
whatever :) ), so I could be way off...

====I'll ask the list, but here's my take. Armour is
armour. Just because it's rmour on a drone doesn't
mean much. Because a drone has vehicular armour it's
normally doubled against non-vehicular attacks (or the
power is halved, or something like that). So, because
impact armour is only half as effective as normal vs.
fire, I'd make it a straight power vs. armour test (or
halve both). And yes, even metal can catch fire if
things get hot enough, so I'd test to see if it caught
fire. However, I might increase the object resistance
for the purpose of this test, simply because it'd have
to get DAMN hot to catch fire.
====
Anyway, do any of you have anything to add? Or any
better ideas?

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

.sig Sauer

Can you SMELL what THE DOC' is COOKIN'!!!

____________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @*****.co.uk address at http://mail.yahoo.co.uk
or your free @*****.ie address at http://mail.yahoo.ie
Message no. 2
From: shadowrn@*********.com (BD)
Subject: Drones vs. Elementals
Date: Wed Apr 18 23:40:01 2001
--- Rand Ratinac <docwagon101@*****.com> wrote:
> Guys, a GM of mine is having a few questions when it
> comes to a combat between a drone and an elemental.
> He's just not sure how things would work. Here are his
> latest words...

<ker-snip>

You might want to consider the fact that the drone's carrying ammo,
including phosphorous grenades. How much does it take to 'cook off' stuff
like that? Could be nasty... :P

====-Boondocker

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices
http://auctions.yahoo.com/
Message no. 3
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Rand Ratinac)
Subject: Drones vs. Elementals
Date: Thu Apr 19 01:15:00 2001
> > Guys, a GM of mine is having a few questions when
it comes to a combat between a drone and an elemental.
He's just not sure how things would work. Here are his
latest words...
>
> <ker-snip>
>
> You might want to consider the fact that the
drone's carrying ammo, including phosphorous grenades.
How much does it take to 'cook off' stuff like that?
Could be nasty... :P
> -Boondocker

*snicker*

Yeah, I should've mentioned that. :)

The fact of the matter is I've had...interesting
experiences with the player in question and his drones
when GMing him in the past, so...I'm not entirely
sympathetic to his plight - so I'm striving hard to
remain neutral, especially as if bad things happen to
his drone, bad things are more likely to happen to my
character. ;)

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

.sig Sauer

Can you SMELL what THE DOC' is COOKIN'!!!

____________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @*****.co.uk address at http://mail.yahoo.co.uk
or your free @*****.ie address at http://mail.yahoo.ie
Message no. 4
From: shadowrn@*********.com (BD)
Subject: Drones vs. Elementals
Date: Thu Apr 19 01:45:01 2001
--- Rand Ratinac <docwagon101@*****.com> wrote:
> The fact of the matter is I've had...interesting
> experiences with the player in question and his drones
> when GMing him in the past, so...I'm not entirely
> sympathetic to his plight - so I'm striving hard to
> remain neutral, especially as if bad things happen to
> his drone, bad things are more likely to happen to my
> character. ;)

Good thing he's onlist, so he'll know how you're lookin' out for him :)
I, on the other hand, may have made a boo-boo... ignore the whole grenade
comment! There's no ammo in the drone! I take it back!

====-Boondocker

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices
http://auctions.yahoo.com/
Message no. 5
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Damion Milliken)
Subject: Drones vs. Elementals
Date: Thu Apr 19 04:45:01 2001
[Rand Ratinac] writes:

> The Engulf power says it is only effected by impact armor and it burns
> right thru ballistic armor. But it does not say how reacts with drone
> armor.

Vehicle armour acts as both Ballistic _or_ Impact, rather than acting as both
Ballistic _and_ Impact. So if someone punches a vehicle, it gets its armour
rating to defend. Likewise if someone shoots one, it also gets its armour
to defend. Thus I would think that it would act as Impact armour in this
cicumstance.

> And another thing most electronics are temperature sensitive and have a
> given operating range. (The stuff at work is only rated at -40c to 65c and
> is meant for permanent outside installation.) That is not to mention any
> hydraulic fluids or lubricants or rubbers on the tires. I would think that
> unless the drone had some kind of thermal armor it would be vulnerable.

I think that this is something that is just not covered in the SR rules. We
could be rules lawyers and say that since things like flamethrowers do not
have special effects such as this on vehicles, then neither will other
sources of flame. OTOH, the rules for engulfing do say that the victim
suffers the effects of being engulfed in the material (the least of which is
usually suffocation), implying that it is up to the GM to determine
appropriate game effects.

It would seem reasonable that the systems in any military grade drone may be
hardened to such a degree so as to be able to resist at least temporary high
temperatures before shutting down or overloading, but civilian systems would
probably not function reliably after a short time. Perhaps it may be
reasonable to give cumulative TN modifiers to Sensor and other drone
performance tests at the end of every turn that it is engulfed.

When it comes to combustible components, I think that this is already
covered by the engulfing Damage Code. What else do you think that it
represents? Also, it could be reasonably argued that the engulfing Damage
Code also represents damage and overloading of electronics and other
components, and so no TN penalties (as I suggested above) might apply for
high temperature. Seriously, it takes _significant_ heat and flame to cause
metallic components (except maybe light alloys like magnesium) to combust,
so the Damage Code cannot be burning of the structural components of the
vehicle.

> I was just looking in CC and it says on p. 98 that fire based attacks are
> reduce in power by half impact armor. Now does this include vehicle armor?

I would say so, yes, as vehicle armour acts as either Ballistic or Impact,
as appropriate. Recall that Damage Codes against vehicles are reduced by
one Damage Level and their Power is halved (rounding down). Also, it's
worth noting that the description of the flamethrower in CC indicates full
Impact armour. The description of the engulf attack may specify too (check
Critters, SR3 says full Impact).

> It also says if a object catches fire using object> resistance test (p. 51
> MITS) increase power by +2 per turn. I think a drones object resistance is
> 8.

OTOH, the drone is not being affected by a spell, which is what the Object
Reistance Table is referring too. The +2 Power for being on fire is
probably quite appropriate in any circumstance, however. I would pretty
much assume that engulfed targets would nearly automatically catch on fire,
too, providing that there was anything combustible there. The flamethrower
in CC functions in this way (there is no test, things simply catch on fire
automatically).

One other thing to consider in the circumstance (I've had a similar one
myself) is that drones are usually _considerably_ more manoeuvrable and
speedy than elementals, and thus can often just outpace their would be
engulfers.

--
Damion Milliken University of Wollongong
Unofficial Shadowrun Guru E-mail: dam01@***.edu.au
-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.12
GE d- s++:-- a24 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 Drones vs. Elementals, 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!