Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: Caric <caric@********.COM>
Subject: Lights, camera, simple actions...
Date: Mon, 12 May 1997 12:10:05 -0700
| Personally for such guns I say that firing teh burst only takes a simple
| action but that only one burst can be fired in the phase (and for the
next
| 10 combat phases so the Pc doesn't just delay actiosn and shoots again).

IIRC you must have a full complex action to delay and a free action to
delay it.
Am I wrong on this? It may just be our house rule.

-Caric

"Still Bangkoks pissin' rain..."
Message no. 2
From: The Digital Mage <mn3rge@****.AC.UK>
Subject: Re: Lights, camera, simple actions...
Date: Tue, 13 May 1997 09:54:17 +0100
On Mon, 12 May 1997, Caric wrote:

> IIRC you must have a full complex action to delay and a free action to
> delay it.
> Am I wrong on this? It may just be our house rule.
Well it takes a Free action to delay an action, but I don't see why you
couldn't delay just a Simple action. i.e. Shoot with first simple action,
use your Free action to delay your second Simple action.

Besides in my game a free action is not required to delay an action, or
call a shot etc, they're only needed for separate actions (e.g.
activate cyberware) rather than modifications to other actions. It tends
to keep book keeping down and things run more smoothly.


The Digital Mage aka Grant Erswell - mn3rge@****.ac.uk
"Sadder still to watch it die, than never to have known it"
-Rush, Losing It
Message no. 3
From: Caric <caric@********.COM>
Subject: Re: Lights, camera, simple actions...
Date: Tue, 13 May 1997 08:59:56 -0700
| > IIRC you must have a full complex action to delay and a free action to
| > delay it.
| > Am I wrong on this? It may just be our house rule.
| Well it takes a Free action to delay an action, but I don't see why you
| couldn't delay just a Simple action. i.e. Shoot with first simple action,
| use your Free action to delay your second Simple action.
|
| Besides in my game a free action is not required to delay an action, or
| call a shot etc, they're only needed for separate actions (e.g.
| activate cyberware) rather than modifications to other actions. It tends
| to keep book keeping down and things run more smoothly.

Do you allow two called shots in one complex action then?

-Caric


Word to the wise... Never anger a dragon, for you are crunchy, and would
be good with brie!!!

-Karl Teranssen av Drakkar
Message no. 4
From: The Digital Mage <mn3rge@****.AC.UK>
Subject: Re: Lights, camera, simple actions...
Date: Tue, 13 May 1997 18:17:18 +0100
On Tue, 13 May 1997, Caric wrote:

> Do you allow two called shots in one complex action then?
Yes! Its just easier tahn keeping track of those free actions - its easier
to remember that the free action has been spent or not when its used for a
separate action i.e. ejecting a clip, dropping prone etc.



The Digital Mage aka Grant Erswell - mn3rge@****.ac.uk
"Sadder still to watch it die, than never to have known it"
-Rush, Losing It
Message no. 5
From: Caric <caric@********.COM>
Subject: Re: Lights, camera, simple actions...
Date: Tue, 13 May 1997 10:20:53 -0700
| > Do you allow two called shots in one complex action then?
| Yes! Its just easier tahn keeping track of those free actions - its
easier
| to remember that the free action has been spent or not when its used for
a
| separate action i.e. ejecting a clip, dropping prone etc.

That's cool I can see where it would make life easier.

-Caric


Word to the wise... Never anger a dragon, for you are crunchy, and would
be good with brie!!!

-Karl Teranssen av Drakkar
Message no. 6
From: "MARTIN E. GOTTHARD" <s457033@*******.GU.EDU.AU>
Subject: Re: Lights, camera, simple actions...
Date: Wed, 14 May 1997 23:59:05 +1000
> > Do you allow two called shots in one complex action then?
>
> Yes! Its just easier tahn keeping track of those free actions - its easier
> to remember that the free action has been spent or not when its used for a
> separate action i.e. ejecting a clip, dropping prone etc.
>
We assume that called shots take a free action, and generally we only allow
called shots on the first simple of any action. The second shot is
assumed to be more hurried.

If you wanted to get really nasty, you could state that calling a shot in
istelf takes a simple, requiring a complex to achieve a shot in one action.
So, if you want to aim up a called shot the procedure is as follows;

-Call the shot (ie, tire/windscreen/head/pupil of left eye, etc)
-Aim up (max. Int/2 simple actions)
-Shoot.

This means that the firer has to declare what he's aiming at before he
starts to aim. If he/she doesn't want to call the shot, he can aim up
and fire as normal, bascially hoping to hit _something_ on the target.
This declaration also means that the target has to stay in view while
aiming up.

Marty
Message no. 7
From: Caric <caric@********.COM>
Subject: Re: Lights, camera, simple actions...
Date: Wed, 14 May 1997 09:58:42 -0700
| If you wanted to get really nasty, you could state that calling a shot in
| istelf takes a simple, requiring a complex to achieve a shot in one
action.
| So, if you want to aim up a called shot the procedure is as follows;
|
| -Call the shot (ie, tire/windscreen/head/pupil of left eye, etc)
| -Aim up (max. Int/2 simple actions)
| -Shoot.

Isn't the limit to how long you can aim yuor skill/2?

-Caric


Word to the wise... Never anger a dragon, for you are crunchy, and would
be good with brie!!!

-Karl Teranssen av Drakkar
Message no. 8
From: "MARTIN E. GOTTHARD" <s457033@*******.GU.EDU.AU>
Subject: Re: Lights, camera, simple actions...
Date: Thu, 15 May 1997 20:21:34 +1000
> | If you wanted to get really nasty, you could state that calling a shot in
> | istelf takes a simple, requiring a complex to achieve a shot in one
> action.
> | So, if you want to aim up a called shot the procedure is as follows;
> |
> | -Call the shot (ie, tire/windscreen/head/pupil of left eye, etc)
> | -Aim up (max. Int/2 simple actions)
> | -Shoot.
>
> Isn't the limit to how long you can aim yuor skill/2?
>
Thought it was Int/2..... Skill/2 makes sense though, too. Perhaps use
the lowest of the possible ratings?

Marty
Message no. 9
From: Caric <caric@********.COM>
Subject: Re: Lights, camera, simple actions...
Date: Thu, 15 May 1997 08:52:04 -0700
| > | -Call the shot (ie, tire/windscreen/head/pupil of left eye, etc)
| > | -Aim up (max. Int/2 simple actions)
| > | -Shoot.
| >
| > Isn't the limit to how long you can aim yuor skill/2?
| >
| Thought it was Int/2..... Skill/2 makes sense though, too. Perhaps use
| the lowest of the possible ratings?

Yeah the int/2 made some sense to me as well so I looked it up and
according to The BBB on page 82 it does say that a character can aim for up
to one half his/her skill with the weapon.


-Caric


Word to the wise... Never anger a dragon, for you are crunchy, and would
be good with brie!!!

-Karl Teranssen av Drakkar
Message no. 10
From: Gurth <gurth@******.NL>
Subject: Re: Lights, camera, simple actions...
Date: Fri, 16 May 1997 12:03:15 +0100
MARTIN E. GOTTHARD said on 20:21/15 May 97...

> > Isn't the limit to how long you can aim yuor skill/2?
> >
> Thought it was Int/2..... Skill/2 makes sense though, too. Perhaps use
> the lowest of the possible ratings?

It's one-half the skill (SRII p.82). Using the lesser of Intelligence and
the skill does sound like a good house rule, though.

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
In another place, in another time, I'd be driving trucks
-> NERPS Project Leader & Unofficial Shadowrun Guru <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/plastic.html <-

-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version 3.1:
GAT/! d-(dpu) s:- !a>? C+(++)@ U 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?
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about Lights, camera, simple actions..., 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!