Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: anders@**********.com (Anders Swenson)
Subject: Oh, look, a new rule is needed!
Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2003 08:46:09 -0800
> simply due to the tendency of assault rifle rounds to penetrate internal
walls. <

Well, and how do we account for this?
--Anders
Message no. 2
From: cmd_jackryan@***.de (Phillip Gawlowski)
Subject: Oh, look, a new rule is needed!
Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2003 18:03:29 +0100
On Mon, 10 Mar 2003 08:46:09 -0800, Anders Swenson <anders@**********.com>
wrote:

>> simply due to the tendency of assault rifle rounds to penetrate internal
> walls. <
>
> Well, and how do we account for this?
> --Anders
>

Like doors.
Just bigger :-)


--
Phillip Gawlowski
GameMaster and GeneralIdiot
Message no. 3
From: lordmountainlion@***.rr.com (Scott Peterson)
Subject: Oh, look, a new rule is needed!
Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2003 13:04:03 -0700
> > simply due to the tendency of assault rifle rounds to penetrate internal
> walls. <
>
> Well, and how do we account for this?
> --Anders
>
Tarrot Firearm Catalog has a wonderfull ruleset I developed for just this.

Scott.
Message no. 4
From: jzealey@***.edu.au (James Zealey)
Subject: Oh, look, a new rule is needed!
Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2003 09:08:57 +1100
> Re: Oh, look, a new rule is needed!
> From:
> Phillip Gawlowski <cmd_jackryan@***.de>
>
> On Mon, 10 Mar 2003 08:46:09 -0800, Anders Swenson
> <anders@**********.com> wrote:
>
>>> simply due to the tendency of assault rifle rounds to penetrate internal
>>
>> walls. <
>>
>> Well, and how do we account for this?
>> --Anders
>>
>
> Like doors.
> Just bigger :-)
>
>

Except that we can't really account for that without a real overhaul of
weapon damage codes - currently the way the game mechanics work, a heavy
pistol round is more likely to penetrate a wall than an assault rifle
round (and explosive rounds are even MORE likely to penetrate...). Of
course, that's probably why hardly any 'runners carry assault rifles,
yet every single one carries a heavy pistol.
Message no. 5
From: maxnoel_fr@*****.fr (Max Noel)
Subject: Oh, look, a new rule is needed!
Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2003 23:16:06 +0100
At 09:08 11/03/2003 +1100, James Zealey wrote:

><nitpick mode engaged>
>Except that we can't really account for that without a real overhaul of
>weapon damage codes - currently the way the game mechanics work, a heavy
>pistol round is more likely to penetrate a wall than an assault rifle
>round (and explosive rounds are even MORE likely to penetrate...). Of
>course, that's probably why hardly any 'runners carry assault rifles, yet
>every single one carries a heavy pistol.

No, explosive rounds are more likely to *damage* walls and such,
but they're less likely to pass through them. According to SR3 (around pg.
115), barriers resist damage from explosive ammo using half their (real)
rating, but they have an effective rating equal to Barrier Rating * 2
against them.

--
Wild_Cat


maxnoel_fr@*****.fr -- ICQ #85274019
GCC0.2 y83.fr G99 SCP/F:Eh[SR] B+ f=(++) RR(RM) RM+ RR++ L-(=) M--- w=
s+(-):-(+) GM+:=(+):-:PF h+ p=>+ LA=(-) mf- w=>+ C+(++) CG= OG+ F+ c! K
"Look at you hacker... A pathetic creature of meat and bone, panting and
sweating as you run through my corridors... How can you challenge a
perfect, immortal machine?"

___________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!? -- Une adresse @*****.fr gratuite et en français !
Yahoo! Mail : http://fr.mail.yahoo.com
Message no. 6
From: lordmountainlion@***.rr.com (Scott Peterson)
Subject: Oh, look, a new rule is needed!
Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2003 16:08:30 -0700
>
> Except that we can't really account for that without a real overhaul of
> weapon damage codes - currently the way the game mechanics work, a heavy
> pistol round is more likely to penetrate a wall than an assault rifle
> round (and explosive rounds are even MORE likely to penetrate...). Of
> course, that's probably why hardly any 'runners carry assault rifles,
> yet every single one carries a heavy pistol.
>
>
> Im overhauling the Tarrot firearms catalog. Anypone want in on helping
with it email privately. lordmountainlion@***.rr.com we will get a working
ruels inside a week and then finalize it with the new ammo tables.

Scott
Message no. 7
From: SteveG@***********.co.za (Steve Garrard)
Subject: Oh, look, a new rule is needed!
Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2003 10:10:34 +0200
Anders Swenson wrote:
> > simply due to the tendency of assault rifle rounds to penetrate
> > internal
> walls. <
>
> Well, and how do we account for this?
> --Anders

Using the normal barrier rules from SR3. The only thing missing if you're
aiming for realism is a rule for stray bullets (the biggest problem when
this is a concern).

As for heavy pistols having a higher chance of penetrating a wall (as
someone mentioned), yes that holds true, and logically speaking makes sense,
as a .50 caliber Predator slug is much denser than, say, a .223 slug. This
is the reason why said spec ops and SWAT teams generally carry a 9mm
sidearm, not a magnum.

The only thing really missing from the rulebooks is muzzle velocity. If you
fire a .223 M-16 round and a .50 Predator round at the same wooden wall at
10 feet, the former will punch a nice neat hole in it while the latter will
probably blow open an orifice the size of your hand. However, at 500 feet,
the M-16 is still going to punch the same nice neat hole while the Predator
is either going to fall short or struggle to punch the same nice neat hole.


Slayer

"Beware my wrath, for you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup."
- Unknown Dragon


**********************************************************************
This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and
intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they
are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify
the system manager.

This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept by
MIMEsweeper for the presence of computer viruses.

www.mimesweeper.com
**********************************************************************
Message no. 8
From: lordmountainlion@***.rr.com (Scott Peterson)
Subject: Oh, look, a new rule is needed!
Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2003 02:38:28 -0700
From: "Steve Garrard" <SteveG@***********.co.za>

>
> Using the normal barrier rules from SR3. The only thing missing if you're
> aiming for realism is a rule for stray bullets (the biggest problem when
> this is a concern).
>
TFA has a ruel system built into for this. quick easy and effecient.

" RF: Ricochet Factor; If the gamemaster wishes he/she may roll one six
sided die to determine if a ricochet occurs. A roll equal to or below
the listed number indicates a ricochet has occurred. It is up to the
GM to determine the results. I add it in for fun and realism myself. I
do not let this slow down the game play or allow it to becometo much
of a burden on me the game master. Its for fun, and to add a little
flavor to certain situations."

> As for heavy pistols having a higher chance of penetrating a wall (as
> someone mentioned), yes that holds true, and logically speaking makes
sense,
> as a .50 caliber Predator slug is much denser than, say, a .223 slug. This
> is the reason why said spec ops and SWAT teams generally carry a 9mm
> sidearm, not a magnum.

You guys are focussing on the weapons and ammunition. One thing no one has
brought up is training. Special teams spend inordinant ammounts of time on
the firing range. Two in the head one in the chest stuff. Strays from
pistols are low chance. And training prevents all but the worst fuck ups
from shout guns and full auto smg's. The HK seiries weapoons have the so
called 'navy' trigger group with specific bursts usuable right out of the
box. RARELY do swat and the like use full auto. Between egal, aim point,
laser and assorted other gadjets, strays are really rare. What th medica
reports as strays are the shots used on the hostage takers as they grab
hostages and fate connects the dots.

Scott
Message no. 9
From: gurth@******.nl (Gurth)
Subject: Oh, look, a new rule is needed!
Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2003 11:41:41 +0100
According to Anders Swenson, on Monday 10 March 2003 17:46 the word on the
street was...

> > simply due to the tendency of assault rifle rounds to penetrate
> > internal walls.
>
> Well, and how do we account for this?

By using the barrier rules, I would assume... If the Power Level of the
weapon exceeds the Barrier Rating of the wall, the round will penetrate
and might hit someone on the other side (who gets the Barrier Rating as
additional armor).

As for how to determine if someone gets hit... well, you could write up
fairly complex rules for that, or you could leave it up to the GM. Maybe
the easiest way to do it would be to use the suppression fire rules from
Fields of Fire, because these don't depend on the attacking character
rolling a test, but instead use the number of bullets as the number of
dice rolled.

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
Monster zonder waarde
-> Probably NAGEE Editor * ShadowRN GridSec * Triangle Virtuoso <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://plastic.dumpshock.com <-

GC3.12: GAT/! d- 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. 10
From: gurth@******.nl (Gurth)
Subject: Oh, look, a new rule is needed!
Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2003 11:45:46 +0100
According to Scott Peterson, on Tuesday 11 March 2003 10:38 the word on the
street was...

> Between egal, aim point, laser and assorted other gadjets, strays
> are really rare.

For, as you yourself pointed out, SWAT teams who spend lots of time on
firing ranges and in kill houses. Shadowrunners don't have that luxury
(though many of them do have skills of 5+) and so should be more likely to
produce stray rounds, especially if they're likely to use full-autofire.

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
Monster zonder waarde
-> Probably NAGEE Editor * ShadowRN GridSec * Triangle Virtuoso <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://plastic.dumpshock.com <-

GC3.12: GAT/! d- 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. 11
From: silvercat@***********.org (Jonathan Hurley)
Subject: Oh, look, a new rule is needed!
Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2003 10:45:54 -0500
-----Original Message-----
From: shadowrn-bounces@*****.dumpshock.com
[mailto:shadowrn-bounces@*****.dumpshock.com] On Behalf Of James Zealey
Sent: 2003-March-10 17:09
To: shadowrn@*****.dumpshock.com
Subject: Re: Oh, look, a new rule is needed!

> Re: Oh, look, a new rule is needed!
> From:
> Phillip Gawlowski <cmd_jackryan@***.de>
>
> On Mon, 10 Mar 2003 08:46:09 -0800, Anders Swenson
> <anders@**********.com> wrote:
>
>>> simply due to the tendency of assault rifle rounds to penetrate
internal
>>
>> walls. <
>>
>> Well, and how do we account for this?
>> --Anders
>>
>
> Like doors.
> Just bigger :-)
>
>

Except that we can't really account for that without a real overhaul of
weapon damage codes - currently the way the game mechanics work, a heavy

pistol round is more likely to penetrate a wall than an assault rifle
round (and explosive rounds are even MORE likely to penetrate...). Of
course, that's probably why hardly any 'runners carry assault rifles,
yet every single one carries a heavy pistol.

----------------------
Well, I could tout my own weapon damage mods here - they got published
in the Plastic Warriors House Rules compilation (probably has my college
address jhurley1@************.edu). I have a slightly more up-to-date
version on my hard drive that also includes ammo notes. (Revised since I
got Cannon Companion, anyway).

I could email that privately, or some kind soul could provide me a place
to store it on the web.

"I suppose this is what I get for letting rednecks play with
anti-matter; they just don't know when to say 'Okay, that's 'nough!'
Instead, it's always 'Hey' y'all! Watch this!'"
When the Devil Dances, John Ringo

Ian Argent
silvercat@***********.org
Message no. 12
From: me@******.net (Hexren)
Subject: Oh, look, a new rule is needed!
Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2003 17:41:51 +0100
JH> -----Original Message-----
JH> From: shadowrn-bounces@*****.dumpshock.com
JH> [mailto:shadowrn-bounces@*****.dumpshock.com] On Behalf Of James Zealey
JH> Sent: 2003-March-10 17:09
JH> To: shadowrn@*****.dumpshock.com
JH> Subject: Re: Oh, look, a new rule is needed!

>> Re: Oh, look, a new rule is needed!
>> From:
>> Phillip Gawlowski <cmd_jackryan@***.de>
>>
>> On Mon, 10 Mar 2003 08:46:09 -0800, Anders Swenson
>> <anders@**********.com> wrote:
>>
>>>> simply due to the tendency of assault rifle rounds to penetrate
JH> internal
>>>
>>> walls. <
>>>
>>> Well, and how do we account for this?
>>> --Anders
>>>
>>
>> Like doors.
>> Just bigger :-)
>>
>>

JH> Except that we can't really account for that without a real overhaul of
JH> weapon damage codes - currently the way the game mechanics work, a heavy

JH> pistol round is more likely to penetrate a wall than an assault rifle
JH> round (and explosive rounds are even MORE likely to penetrate...). Of
JH> course, that's probably why hardly any 'runners carry assault rifles,
JH> yet every single one carries a heavy pistol.

JH> ----------------------
JH> Well, I could tout my own weapon damage mods here - they got published
JH> in the Plastic Warriors House Rules compilation (probably has my college
JH> address jhurley1@************.edu). I have a slightly more up-to-date
JH> version on my hard drive that also includes ammo notes. (Revised since I
JH> got Cannon Companion, anyway).

JH> I could email that privately, or some kind soul could provide me a place
JH> to store it on the web.

JH> "I suppose this is what I get for letting rednecks play with
JH> anti-matter; they just don't know when to say 'Okay, that's 'nough!'
JH> Instead, it's always 'Hey' y'all! Watch this!'"
JH> When the Devil Dances, John Ringo

JH> Ian Argent
JH> silvercat@***********.org



---------------------------------------------

Email it to me@******.net I will up it to my webspace.

Greetz
Hexren
Message no. 13
From: jzealey@***.edu.au (James Zealey)
Subject: Oh, look, a new rule is needed!
Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2003 09:22:24 +1100
Jonathan Hurley <silvercat@***********.org> wrote:

> Well, I could tout my own weapon damage mods here - they got published
> in the Plastic Warriors House Rules compilation (probably has my college
> address jhurley1@************.edu). I have a slightly more up-to-date
> version on my hard drive that also includes ammo notes. (Revised since I
> got Cannon Companion, anyway).
>
> I could email that privately, or some kind soul could provide me a place
> to store it on the web.
>
Hey - you beat me to the toutin'

Our group already has some rules - thanks to Damion Milliken - which
work quite well. They're at:

http://nosferatu.dhs.org/sr/

Also - since we're talking about catching a stray bullet during a
firefight, people might want to check out Atomik War, a supplement by
Atomik Vortex. It used to be free. It had a specific rule which
basically ran that during a firefight, characters may be hit by stray
fire. Depending on the size of the firefight, every character involved
must make a dodge test each turn or take some damage. It then had a
table which listed various amounts of lead flying (ie - 10 to 50 bullets
were fired this turn, 50 to 100 bullets or one explosion, 100-200
bullets or two or more explosions... etc) and a number of dodge test
target numbers. Failing a dodge test netted you some minimal amount of
damage (approximately the same amount as being hit by a low-end pistol
round IIRC).
Message no. 14
From: jzealey@***.edu.au (James Zealey)
Subject: Oh, look, a new rule is needed!
Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2003 09:35:24 +1100
> Steve Garrard <SteveG@***********.co.za>
>
> As for heavy pistols having a higher chance of penetrating a wall (as
> someone mentioned), yes that holds true, and logically speaking makes sense,
> as a .50 caliber Predator slug is much denser than, say, a .223 slug. This
> is the reason why said spec ops and SWAT teams generally carry a 9mm
> sidearm, not a magnum.
>

It's not denser unless it's made of a different material. It may be more
massive (ie - has more mass).

Next up: see http://www.firearmstactical.com/hwfe.htm

To wit: Penetration and Calibre have an inverse relationship. As calibre
goes up, penetration goes down, assuming muzzle velocity stays (more
-or-less) constant.

> The only thing really missing from the rulebooks is muzzle velocity. If you
> fire a .223 M-16 round and a .50 Predator round at the same wooden wall at
> 10 feet, the former will punch a nice neat hole in it while the latter will
> probably blow open an orifice the size of your hand.

Which just demonstrates my point - if it's blowing a large hole, then
it's penetrating very badly, and it's dumping a lot of energy into the
wall to destroy it. Chances are the .223 barely slowed down.

> However, at 500 feet,
> the M-16 is still going to punch the same nice neat hole while the Predator
> is either going to fall short or struggle to punch the same nice neat hole.
>

A higher muzzle velocity also increases penetration significantly.

So - do you agree with me that the power of a round (which SHOULD
indicate the amount of penetration that the round has, as it determines
it's ability to ignore armour and walls) should be higher for an assault
rifle than a heavy pistol?
Message no. 15
From: loneeagle@********.co.uk (Lone Eagle)
Subject: Oh, look, a new rule is needed!
Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2003 23:28:14 +0000
At 10:35 PM 11/3/2003, James wrote:
>A higher muzzle velocity also increases penetration significantly.
>
>So - do you agree with me that the power of a round (which SHOULD indicate
>the amount of penetration that the round has, as it determines it's
>ability to ignore armour and walls) should be higher for an assault rifle
>than a heavy pistol?

I have to say I never thought about it much until now, I wouldn't boost ARs
though, first reflection on my part suggests this.

Rather than racking every weapon up to compensate for heavy pistols I'd
shift heavy pistols down...

Make them maybe 6M (or increase the damage level of both so that a light
pistol was 6M and a heavy racked up a 6S)...

It might work, I think I'll have to think about it some more.


--
Lone Eagle
"Hold up lads, I got an idea."

www.wyrmtalk.co.uk - Please be patient, this site is under construction

-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.12
GE d++(---) s++: a->? 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-----

GCC0.2: y75>?.uk[NN] G87 S@:@@[SR] B+++ f+ RM(RR) rm++ rr++ l++(--) m- w
s+(+++) GM+++(-) A GS+(-) h++ LA+++ CG--- F c+
Message no. 16
From: DamionMilliken@*****.com.au (Damion Milliken)
Subject: Oh, look, a new rule is needed!
Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2003 10:56:27 +1100
Lone Eagle writes:

> Rather than racking every weapon up to compensate for heavy pistols I'd
> shift heavy pistols down...
>
> Make them maybe 6M (or increase the damage level of both so that a light
> pistol was 6M and a heavy racked up a 6S)...
>
> It might work, I think I'll have to think about it some more.

Yeah, there are two approaches. The basic problem (more or less) is that
Heavy Pistols are overpowered. Taking other weapons up to make them
commensurate with Heavy Pistols produces things like 12M Assault Rifles and
such... This works, but only for those people who like a _really_ deadly
game. What we did was what you suggested: take Heavy Pistols down. They now
run at 5S or 6S. Wth a couple of tweaks to other weapons, things look good.
Having characters/players actually want to pack a Assault Rifle over a burst
fire Heavy Pistol was a refreshing change ;-).

--
Damion Milliken E-Mail: DamionMilliken@*****.com.au
---------------+----------------------------------+-----------------------
ICQ: 177734389 | MSN: DamionMilliken@*****.com.au | AIM/Y!: DamionMilliken
---------------+----------------------------------+-----------------------
Message no. 17
From: ValeuJ@*************.navy.mil (Valeu John EMFA)
Subject: Oh, look, a new rule is needed!
Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2003 00:34:50 -0800
>> Rather than racking every weapon up to compensate for heavy pistols I'd
>> shift heavy pistols down...
>>
>> Make them maybe 6M (or increase the damage level of both so that a light
>> pistol was 6M and a heavy racked up a 6S)...
>>
>> It might work, I think I'll have to think about it some more.
>
>Yeah, there are two approaches. The basic problem (more or less) is that
>Heavy Pistols are overpowered. Taking other weapons up to make them
>commensurate with Heavy Pistols produces things like 12M Assault Rifles and
>such... This works, but only for those people who like a _really_ deadly
>game. What we did was what you suggested: take Heavy Pistols down. They now
>run at 5S or 6S. Wth a couple of tweaks to other weapons, things look good.
>Having characters/players actually want to pack a Assault Rifle over a
burst
>fire Heavy Pistol was a refreshing change ;-).

Do you have an updated table for guys like me?
What else besides the heavy pistols did you modify and by how much?
I think I'll use that for this new game.

============="TimeKeeper, the next time I'm using the car for cover in a firefight,
DON'T
DRIVE OFF WITH IT!!!"
Message no. 18
From: DamionMilliken@*****.com.au (Damion Milliken)
Subject: Oh, look, a new rule is needed!
Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2003 12:05:12 +1100
Valeu John EMFA writes:

> Do you have an updated table for guys like me?
> What else besides the heavy pistols did you modify and by how much?
> I think I'll use that for this new game.


There's a copy of the House Rules, and a completely re-written Firearms
Table available at http://nosferatu.dhs.org/sr.

--
Damion Milliken E-Mail: DamionMilliken@*****.com.au
---------------+----------------------------------+-----------------------
ICQ: 177734389 | MSN: DamionMilliken@*****.com.au | AIM/Y!: DamionMilliken
---------------+----------------------------------+-----------------------
Message no. 19
From: silvercat@***********.org (Jonathan Hurley)
Subject: Oh, look, a new rule is needed!
Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2003 20:06:04 -0500
-----Original Message-----
From: shadowrn-bounces@*****.dumpshock.com
[mailto:shadowrn-bounces@*****.dumpshock.com] On Behalf Of Valeu John
EMFA
Sent: 2003-March-12 03:35
To: 'Shadowrun Discussion'
Subject: RE: Oh, look, a new rule is needed!

>> Rather than racking every weapon up to compensate for heavy pistols
I'd
>> shift heavy pistols down...
>>
>> Make them maybe 6M (or increase the damage level of both so that a
light
>> pistol was 6M and a heavy racked up a 6S)...
>>
>> It might work, I think I'll have to think about it some more.
>
>Yeah, there are two approaches. The basic problem (more or less) is
that
>Heavy Pistols are overpowered. Taking other weapons up to make them
>commensurate with Heavy Pistols produces things like 12M Assault Rifles
and
>such... This works, but only for those people who like a _really_
deadly
>game. What we did was what you suggested: take Heavy Pistols down. They
now
>run at 5S or 6S. Wth a couple of tweaks to other weapons, things look
good.
>Having characters/players actually want to pack a Assault Rifle over a
burst
>fire Heavy Pistol was a refreshing change ;-).

Do you have an updated table for guys like me?
What else besides the heavy pistols did you modify and by how much?
I think I'll use that for this new game.

============="TimeKeeper, the next time I'm using the car for cover in a firefight,
DON'T
DRIVE OFF WITH IT!!!"
-----------------------------------

As I mentioned earlier, I did this for my own game some time ago. Set
your font proportional, or this won't work


Weapon Class Approximate ammo sizes Base Damage Code
Holdout
(Clip-Fed) .22 short - .32 cal and equivalent
4L
(Break Action) .44 Mag / 10mm (Heavy Pistol Ammunition)
4M
Machine Pistol 7-9 mm, .38 - .45 cal and equivalent 6M
Light Pistol 7-9 mm, .38 - .45 cal and equivalent 6M
Sub-Machine gun 7-9 mm, .38 - .45 cal and equivalent 7M
Heavy Pistol 10 mm and up / .44 Mag and up
8M
Assault Rifle 4-6 mm rifle
10M
Light Machine Gun 4-6 mm rifle
10M
Sport Rifle 7-9 mm rifle
11M
Sniping Rifle 7-9 mm rifle
12M
Medium Machine Gun 7-9 mm rifle
11M
Heavy Machine Gun 10-15 mm / .50 BMG
14S
Shotgun Shotgun Ammunition
8S
Note that in real life there are many larger frame weapons that use
smaller ammo, typically target or training weapons, or varmit guns.
These would use the range table appropriate for the frame type, and the
damage rating of the base ammunition type, gaining a small increase in
power over their base ammunition type depending on the barrel length
Also, there are published weapons, especially in the SMG class, where
different weapons in the class have different damage codes. Use the
above damage codes as examples of the lower end of the range.

"I suppose this is what I get for letting rednecks play with
anti-matter; they just don't know when to say 'Okay, that's 'nough!'
Instead, it's always 'Hey' y'all! Watch this!'"
When the Devil Dances, John Ringo

Ian Argent
silvercat@***********.org
Message no. 20
From: me@******.net (Hexren)
Subject: Oh, look, a new rule is needed!
Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2003 02:47:34 +0100
JH> Well, I could tout my own weapon damage mods here - they got published
JH> in the Plastic Warriors House Rules compilation (probably has my college
JH> address jhurley1@************.edu). I have a slightly more up-to-date
JH> version on my hard drive that also includes ammo notes. (Revised since I
JH> got Cannon Companion, anyway).

JH> I could email that privately, or some kind soul could provide me a place
JH> to store it on the web.

JH> "I suppose this is what I get for letting rednecks play with
JH> anti-matter; they just don't know when to say 'Okay, that's 'nough!'
JH> Instead, it's always 'Hey' y'all! Watch this!'"
JH> When the Devil Dances, John Ringo

JH> Ian Argent
JH> silvercat@***********.org



---------------------------------------------

I uploaded the File to
www.hexren.net/srlist/

theres only that one file in there...


Greetz
Hexren
Message no. 21
From: gurth@******.nl (Gurth)
Subject: Oh, look, a new rule is needed!
Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2003 10:47:10 +0100
According to Lone Eagle, on Wednesday 12 March 2003 00:28 the word on the
street was...

> Rather than racking every weapon up to compensate for heavy pistols I'd
> shift heavy pistols down...

Which is exactly what I did in my game six or seven years ago, and it's
worked fine ever since.

> Make them maybe 6M (or increase the damage level of both so that a light
> pistol was 6M and a heavy racked up a 6S)...

All I do is subtract 3 from the Power Level of any heavy pistol, and leave
it at that. It puts them on the same level as SMGs, which works well
because I view heavy pistols as using the same kind of ammo as SMGs, with
light pistols firing smaller-caliber or lesser-powered rounds. Others
disagree, and will say that a light pistol and an SMG fire roughly the
same kind of ammo while heavy pistols fire the big stuff (.44 Magnum and
up) -- but please, nobody try to convince me that this is the "right"
interpretation :) We've done that far too many times before, and since
there is no "official" rule, we're all right :)

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
Monster zonder waarde
-> Probably NAGEE Editor * ShadowRN GridSec * Triangle Virtuoso <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://plastic.dumpshock.com <-

GC3.12: GAT/! d- 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. 22
From: nightgyr@*********.com.au (GreyWolf)
Subject: Oh, look, a new rule is needed!
Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2003 21:39:18 +1100
> > Make them maybe 6M (or increase the damage level of both so that a light
> > pistol was 6M and a heavy racked up a 6S)...
>
> All I do is subtract 3 from the Power Level of any heavy pistol, and leave
> it at that. It puts them on the same level as SMGs, which works well
> because I view heavy pistols as using the same kind of ammo as SMGs, with
> light pistols firing smaller-caliber or lesser-powered rounds. Others
> disagree, and will say that a light pistol and an SMG fire roughly the
> same kind of ammo while heavy pistols fire the big stuff (.44 Magnum and
> up) -- but please, nobody try to convince me that this is the "right"
> interpretation :) We've done that far too many times before, and since
> there is no "official" rule, we're all right :)

Personally, I tried to change light pistols. I have increased their
concealability by 2 for all light pistols (not machine pistols), and
increased power of light pistols by 2 (including machine pistols) so they
are able to hurt a bit.

Now I read these comments though, I wonder why I didnt think or it myself. I
might stop increasing the power of light pistols and just decrease the power
of heavies. Hmmm....

It will make some players scream, and armour that much more powerful, so I'd
like to know how youve found things there Gurth? Does decreasing power of
HP's make armour overbalancing (including the armour spell and hardened
armour).

GreyWolf
Message no. 23
From: SteveG@***********.co.za (Steve Garrard)
Subject: Oh, look, a new rule is needed!
Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2003 12:53:05 +0200
James Zealey wrote:
> > Steve Garrard <SteveG@***********.co.za>
> >
> > As for heavy pistols having a higher chance of penetrating
> a wall (as
> > someone mentioned), yes that holds true, and logically
> speaking makes
> > sense, as a .50 caliber Predator slug is much denser than,
> say, a .223
> > slug. This is the reason why said spec ops and SWAT teams generally
> > carry a 9mm sidearm, not a magnum.
> >
>
> It's not denser unless it's made of a different material. It
> may be more
> massive (ie - has more mass).

Thanks, that's what I meant. Wasn't thinking as the time :)

>
> Next up: see http://www.firearmstactical.com/hwfe.htm
>
> To wit: Penetration and Calibre have an inverse relationship.
> As calibre
> goes up, penetration goes down, assuming muzzle velocity stays (more
> -or-less) constant.
>
> > The only thing really missing from the rulebooks is muzzle
> velocity.
> > If you fire a .223 M-16 round and a .50 Predator round at the same
> > wooden wall at 10 feet, the former will punch a nice neat
> hole in it
> > while the latter will probably blow open an orifice the
> size of your
> > hand.
>
> Which just demonstrates my point - if it's blowing a large hole, then
> it's penetrating very badly, and it's dumping a lot of energy
> into the
> wall to destroy it. Chances are the .223 barely slowed down.
>
> > However, at 500 feet,
> > the M-16 is still going to punch the same nice neat hole while the
> > Predator is either going to fall short or struggle to punch
> the same
> > nice neat hole.
> >
>
> A higher muzzle velocity also increases penetration significantly.
>
> So - do you agree with me that the power of a round (which SHOULD
> indicate the amount of penetration that the round has, as it
> determines
> it's ability to ignore armour and walls) should be higher for
> an assault
> rifle than a heavy pistol?

Absolutely, yes. However, larger caliber rounds will still tend to do more
damage to flesh at close range than an assault rifle round due to its energy
dispersion. Using the wooden wall example above, punching a large hole in a
person is much more debilitating than a small neat hole. The assault rifle
round may penetrate, and even have enough energy left to damage something or
someone behind the target, but it won't hurt the original target as much, so
to speak.


Slayer

"Beware my wrath, for you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup."
- Unknown Dragon


**********************************************************************
This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and
intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they
are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify
the system manager.

This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept by
MIMEsweeper for the presence of computer viruses.

www.mimesweeper.com
**********************************************************************
Message no. 24
From: korishinzo@*****.com (Ice Heart)
Subject: Oh, look, a new rule is needed!
Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2003 04:00:10 -0800 (PST)
[SNIPped a few bits here and there]

> Which just demonstrates my point - if it's blowing a large hole,
> then it's penetrating very badly, and it's dumping a lot of energy
> into the wall to destroy it. Chances are the .223 barely slowed
> down.

> > However, at 500 feet, the M-16 is still going to punch the same
> > nice neat hole while the Predator is either going to fall short
> > or struggle to punch the same nice neat hole.

> A higher muzzle velocity also increases penetration significantly.
>
> So - do you agree with me that the power of a round (which SHOULD
> indicate the amount of penetration that the round has, as it
> determines it's ability to ignore armour and walls) should be
> higher for an assault rifle than a heavy pistol?

No. You actually pointed out why up above. If a round zips through
a body, making a very small hole, and dropping a proportionally small
amount of kinetic energy, it will not actually do much damage. Not
in comparison to a round that slams into a person and drops most of
its kinetic energy into their body. So long as a firearm's Power
remains an abstraction of caliber, penetration, and muzzle velocity
(all at once), the damage codes are reasonable. If you break apart
Power into three ratings, you make a complex system harder to use.
Personally, I respond to questions about muzzle velocity and caliber
with some piece of extemporaneous blather I make up on the spot.

"Oh, he was using x type of load and y caliber rounds, and guess
what? They hurt."

Why do I approach it this way? Simple. Stopping power and
penetration power are IC concepts, roleplaying flavor. 9M is a game
mechanic, and applies to a wide array of different combinations of
round and muzzle velocity (and any other variable you care to drag
in). Characters know that at close range, a Heavy Pistol is once of
their absolute best choices. They also know that they are not happy
if their opponent is 80 meters away with an Assault Rifle, and all
they have is that Heavy Pistol. Remember, in the interest of the
story and common sense, the GM can cover a lot with good flavor text.
Nuff said.

======Korishinzo
--Gamemaster


__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Web Hosting - establish your business online
http://webhosting.yahoo.com
Message no. 25
From: gurth@******.nl (Gurth)
Subject: Oh, look, a new rule is needed!
Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2003 19:09:51 +0100
According to GreyWolf, on Wednesday 12 March 2003 11:39 the word on the
street was...

> It will make some players scream, and armour that much more powerful, so
> I'd like to know how youve found things there Gurth? Does decreasing
> power of HP's make armour overbalancing (including the armour spell and
> hardened armour).

Not really, IME. It does mean heavy pistols are less likely to cause damage
against an armored opponent, of course, but I don't really see this as too
much of a drawback. If the players complain, remind them that this cuts
both ways: they won't have as much to fear from NPCs armed with heavy
pistols either :)

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
Monster zonder waarde
-> Probably NAGEE Editor * ShadowRN GridSec * Triangle Virtuoso <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://plastic.dumpshock.com <-

GC3.12: GAT/! d- 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. 26
From: renouf@********.com (Marc Renouf)
Subject: Oh, look, a new rule is needed!
Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2003 14:49:38 -0500 (EST)
On Mon, 10 Mar 2003, Anders Swenson wrote:

> > simply due to the tendency of assault rifle rounds to penetrate internal
> walls. <
>
> Well, and how do we account for this?

No new rule necessary. This is already dealt with in "firing
through barriers" in the basic rules.

Marc Renouf (ShadowRN GridSec - "Bad Cop" Division)

Other ShadowRN-related addresses and links:
Mark Imbriaco <mark@*********.com> List Owner
Adam Jury <adamj@*********.com> Assistant List Administrator
DVixen <dvixen@*********.com> Keeper of the FAQs
Gurth <gurth@******.nl> GridSec Enforcer Division
David Buehrer <graht@******.net> GridSec "Nice Guy" Division
ShadowRN FAQ <http://hlair.dumpshock.com/faqindex.php3>;
Message no. 27
From: aestus_preliator@*****.com (Michael Johnson)
Subject: Oh, look, a new rule is needed!
Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2003 16:01:07 -0800 (PST)
---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment

Ice Heart <korishinzo@*****.com> took the words out of my head:
No. You actually pointed out why up above. If a round zips through
a body, making a very small hole, and dropping a proportionally small
amount of kinetic energy, it will not actually do much damage. Not
in comparison to a round that slams into a person and drops most of
its kinetic energy into their body. So long as a firearm's Power
remains an abstraction of caliber, penetration, and muzzle velocity
(all at once), the damage codes are reasonable. If you break apart
Power into three ratings, you make a complex system harder to use.
Personally, I respond to questions about muzzle velocity and caliber
with some piece of extemporaneous blather I make up on the spot.

"Oh, he was using x type of load and y caliber rounds, and guess
what? They hurt."

Why do I approach it this way? Simple. Stopping power and
penetration power are IC concepts, roleplaying flavor. 9M is a game
mechanic, and applies to a wide array of different combinations of
round and muzzle velocity (and any other variable you care to drag
in). Characters know that at close range, a Heavy Pistol is once of
their absolute best choices. They also know that they are not happy
if their opponent is 80 meters away with an Assault Rifle, and all
they have is that Heavy Pistol. Remember, in the interest of the
story and common sense, the GM can cover a lot with good flavor text.
Nuff said.

======Korishinzo
--Gamemaster

Yes, exactly! Game mechanics approximate the real world, and flavor text just illustrates
it. IMHO, the Shadowrun game system needs very little tweaking as far as combat goes. It
is a smooth, well-thought-out system. No major problems (read: problems that can't be
smoothed over by a liberal coating of flavor text).

p.s. Your "extemporaneous blather" isn't fooling anyone. We all know you know
what you're talking about ;).



---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Web Hosting - establish your business online
---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://warthog.dumpshock.com/pipermail/shadowrn/attachments/dd99b449/attachment.htm

---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment--
Message no. 28
From: docwagon101@*****.com (Rand Ratinac)
Subject: Oh, look, a new rule is needed!
Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2003 00:23:12 +0000 (GMT)
> > It will make some players scream, and armour that
much more powerful, so I'd like to know how youve
found things there Gurth? Does decreasing power of
HP's make armour overbalancing (including the armour
spell and hardened armour).
>
> Not really, IME. It does mean heavy pistols are less
likely to cause damage against an armored opponent, of
course, but I don't really see this as too much of a
drawback. If the players complain, remind them that
this cuts both ways: they won't have as much to fear
from NPCs armed with heavy pistols either :)
> Gurth@******.nl -

Except that in my experience, pistols of any kind are
most often used by shadowrunners - of the opposition,
only cops regularly use pistols, and they can be armed
with Ruger Thunderbolts (and I've never met a GM who's
happy for such an item to fall into the hands of
his/her players) (can we say 8D or 9D damage code
using your rules???). The vast majority of
shadowrunner opposition are armed with SMGs or heavier
weapons, and wear armour jackets or better armour. So
that puts the players in the unenviable position of
either toting around larger weapons, which most GMs
will use to cause you problems (Ooo! It's a big gun!
Ooo, it's illegal! Ooo, how many authority figures can
I sick on the schlub carrying it? ;) ), or use pistols
which (as Kori just pointed out) have crappy range,
and will be less than effective against most opponents.

====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!!!

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Everything you'll ever need on one web page
from News and Sport to Email and Music Charts
http://uk.my.yahoo.com
Message no. 29
From: DamionMilliken@*****.com.au (Damion Milliken)
Subject: Oh, look, a new rule is needed!
Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2003 11:38:31 +1100
Doc' writes:

> Except that in my experience, pistols of any kind are
> most often used by shadowrunners - ...
> The vast majority of
> shadowrunner opposition are armed with SMGs or heavier
> weapons, and wear armour jackets or better armour. So
> that puts the players in the unenviable position of
> either toting around larger weapons, which most GMs
> will use to cause you problems (Ooo! It's a big gun!
> Ooo, it's illegal! Ooo, how many authority figures can
> I sick on the schlub carrying it? ;) ), or use pistols
> which (as Kori just pointed out) have crappy range,
> and will be less than effective against most opponents.

Er, isn't that about true, though? And realistic? And all?

Pistols do have crappy range, and they are less effective against any sort
of armour...

Anyway, isn't shadowrunning usually about _not_ getting caught... If you
don't get caught, it doesn't matter if you're packing an Assault Cannon, and
Assault Rifle, a Pistol, or a barbie doll for a weapon. You don't need to
use it.

--
Damion Milliken E-Mail: DamionMilliken@*****.com.au
---------------+----------------------------------+-----------------------
ICQ: 177734389 | MSN: DamionMilliken@*****.com.au | AIM/Y!: DamionMilliken
---------------+----------------------------------+-----------------------
Message no. 30
From: docwagon101@*****.com (Rand Ratinac)
Subject: Oh, look, a new rule is needed!
Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2003 07:51:44 +0000 (GMT)
<snipt!(TM)>
> Er, isn't that about true, though? And realistic?
And all?
>
> Pistols do have crappy range, and they are less
effective against any sort of armour...

Which is all very well and good, except in a GAME
where just about everyone you come up against is
ARMOURED.

> Anyway, isn't shadowrunning usually about _not_
getting caught... If you don't get caught, it doesn't
matter if you're packing an Assault Cannon, and
Assault Rifle, a Pistol, or a barbie doll for a
weapon. You don't need to use it.
> Damion Milliken E-Mail:

Mmmm...bullshit. :) Sorry, Damion, but while that's
all well and good in theory, I don't think it's very
realistic, considering that we're involved in a
roleplaying game. Maybe in your games it's possible,
but I've yet to play in a game where there was not
SOME level of combat, no matter WHAT the players do.
Try playing just about any of the written modules, and
you'll see what I mean - in at least two or three
situations in every adventure your options will always
boil down to either fight, surrender, or run away. And
sometimes the latter two aren't options.

====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!!!

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Everything you'll ever need on one web page
from News and Sport to Email and Music Charts
http://uk.my.yahoo.com
Message no. 31
From: gurth@******.nl (Gurth)
Subject: Oh, look, a new rule is needed!
Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2003 11:17:41 +0100
According to Rand Ratinac, on Thursday 13 March 2003 01:23 the word on the
street was...

> Except that in my experience, pistols of any kind are
> most often used by shadowrunners - of the opposition,
> only cops regularly use pistols, and they can be armed
> with Ruger Thunderbolts (and I've never met a GM who's
> happy for such an item to fall into the hands of
> his/her players)

I wouldn't have a problem with it... My players learned long ago that some
thing aren't smart to do, such as taking on Lone Star head-on. If someone
wants a Ruger Thunderbolt, fine by me. If they can get their hands on a
Panther cannon, they can go right ahead as far as I'm concerned -- but
they shouldn't expect to be able to use either without drawing unwanted
attention under most circumstances.

> (can we say 8D or 9D damage code using your rules???).

You could, but it'd be inaccurate :) Using _my_ house rules, a burst from a
Thunderbolt will cause 9S damage, against 12S when using BTB rules.
Remember that I am not the one proposing that heavy pistols should be
changed to 6S, but rather I said that I've been using 6M for years now,
and am quite happy with it.

> The vast majority of
> shadowrunner opposition are armed with SMGs or heavier
> weapons, and wear armour jackets or better armour.

True, but so do most PCs. If they're relying on pistols as their main
weapons when they can expect to be getting into firefights, they deserve
whatever they're going to get.

> So
> that puts the players in the unenviable position of
> either toting around larger weapons, which most GMs
> will use to cause you problems (Ooo! It's a big gun!
> Ooo, it's illegal! Ooo, how many authority figures can
> I sick on the schlub carrying it? ;) )

IMHO that should only happen if they're stupid about it, like by carrying
one openly (going through a weapons scanner would count as "open" here :)

> or use pistols
> which (as Kori just pointed out) have crappy range,
> and will be less than effective against most opponents.

So just keep using them as they are. Jeesh, why do people always try to
make someone else see the Error of their Ways when it's just a matter of
personal preference? :)

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
Monster zonder waarde
-> Probably NAGEE Editor * ShadowRN GridSec * Triangle Virtuoso <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://plastic.dumpshock.com <-

GC3.12: GAT/! d- 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. 32
From: DamionMilliken@*****.com.au (Damion Milliken)
Subject: Oh, look, a new rule is needed!
Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2003 22:52:31 +1100
Doc' writes:

> Mmmm...bullshit. :) Sorry, Damion, but while that's
> all well and good in theory, I don't think it's very
> realistic, considering that we're involved in a
> roleplaying game. Maybe in your games it's possible,
> but I've yet to play in a game where there was not
> SOME level of combat, no matter WHAT the players do.
> Try playing just about any of the written modules, and
> you'll see what I mean - in at least two or three
> situations in every adventure your options will always
> boil down to either fight, surrender, or run away. And
> sometimes the latter two aren't options.

I don't know about other GMs, but if my players come up with a good enough
plan to get through without a fight, I let them. It's usually my players who
are itching for a fight, not me.

I agree that some modules are configured so that a fight may be the only
option, but in most cases, that is fairly obvious prior to the encounter,
and it's not too difficult for the characters to come prepared.

Besides, most of my players also subscribe to the "Scott's Hummer" theory...
;-)

--
Damion Milliken E-Mail: DamionMilliken@*****.com.au
---------------+----------------------------------+-----------------------
ICQ: 177734389 | MSN: DamionMilliken@*****.com.au | AIM/Y!: DamionMilliken
---------------+----------------------------------+-----------------------
Message no. 33
From: cmd_jackryan@***.de (Phillip Gawlowski)
Subject: Oh, look, a new rule is needed!
Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2003 14:12:33 +0100
On Wed, 12 Mar 2003 10:47:10 +0100, Gurth <gurth@******.nl> wrote:

<snip>

> All I do is subtract 3 from the Power Level of any heavy pistol, and
> leave it at that. It puts them on the same level as SMGs, which works
> well because I view heavy pistols as using the same kind of ammo as SMGs,
> with light pistols firing smaller-caliber or lesser-powered rounds.

Not right. The ammuniton for the actual series of the H&K USP and UMP
weapons,
can fire the same 9mm ammunition (9mm x 19), or .40 S&W or .45 AUTO.
(according to www.heckler-koch.de, intro can not be skipped, just in case).

Hence both weapon-types should use the same damage codes, if you are going
for realism.

Of course, for other manufacturers, it can be different.

But, an assault rifle is firing smaller rounds (5.54 mm NATO) with a lot
more powder.

That is where the higher TN's come into play, I think.

The power level reflects the "manstopping power" of a weapon.

IMHO, SR3 and CC underestimate the effect of ammunitions on a target, but,
alas it is numbers
for playability, not realism.

> Others disagree, and will say that a light pistol and an SMG fire roughly
> the same kind of ammo while heavy pistols fire the big stuff (.44 Magnum
> and up)

Nope, they fire the same :-)

> -- but please, nobody try to convince me that this is the "right"
> interpretation :) We've done that far too many times before, and since
> there is no "official" rule, we're all right :)

Hell, it works fine for you, so...
...and I guess that the standard rules will work for my group, too.
I convince them tha a fire fight is a very stupid situation to get into.

--
Phillip Gawlowski
GameMaster and GeneralIdiot
Message no. 34
From: gurth@******.nl (Gurth)
Subject: Oh, look, a new rule is needed!
Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2003 19:27:38 +0100
According to Phillip Gawlowski, on Thursday 13 March 2003 14:12 the word on
the street was...

> Not right. The ammuniton for the actual series of the H&K USP and UMP
> weapons,
> can fire the same 9mm ammunition (9mm x 19), or .40 S&W or .45 AUTO.
> (according to www.heckler-koch.de, intro can not be skipped, just in
> case).
>
> Hence both weapon-types should use the same damage codes, if you are
> going for realism.

I don't _quite_ understand what you're trying to prove here... On the one
hand you say I'm wrong, on the other you seem to be agreeing with me...

> The power level reflects the "manstopping power" of a weapon.

The problem is that the Power Level represents _both_ stopping power and
armor-piercing ability. This should be quite obvious: it's the TN to
resist the damage, so a higher Power Level clearly means higher stopping
power. But the Power Level is also reduced by armor and Barrier Ratings,
so the higher the Power Level, the more armor it can penetrate.

If you want to be realistic, SR needs an extra number in its Damage Code:
one to indicate AP ability, the other to represent stopping power. So, you
could make Damage Codes look like this: 4-6M. The first number (4) is
subtracted from the target's Armor Rating, and the resulting number (if
positive) is then subtracted from the second (6) to find the Power Level
of the attack, against which a Body Test is rolled as normal.

But until something like this is implemented, everyone who claims that
Power Level is AP ability is right, and everyone who claims Power Level
reflects stopping power is also right...

> > Others disagree, and will say that a light pistol and an SMG fire
> > roughly the same kind of ammo while heavy pistols fire the big stuff
> > (.44 Magnum and up)
>
> Nope, they fire the same :-)

Which "they" are you talking about (light pistols and SMGs, heavy pistols
and SMGs, or light pistols and heavy pistols)?

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
Monster zonder waarde
-> Probably NAGEE Editor * ShadowRN GridSec * Triangle Virtuoso <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://plastic.dumpshock.com <-

GC3.12: GAT/! d- 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. 35
From: docwagon101@*****.com (Rand Ratinac)
Subject: Oh, look, a new rule is needed!
Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2003 05:32:14 +0000 (GMT)
<snipt!(TM)>
> So just keep using them as they are. Jeesh, why do
people always try to make someone else see the Error
of their Ways when it's just a matter of personal
preference? :)
> Gurth@******.nl -

I'm not. I'm trying to point out why it's not a good
option for all people. I wouldn't have said anything
if one of my GMs hadn't started considering 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!!!

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Everything you'll ever need on one web page
from News and Sport to Email and Music Charts
http://uk.my.yahoo.com
Message no. 36
From: docwagon101@*****.com (Rand Ratinac)
Subject: Oh, look, a new rule is needed!
Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2003 05:42:32 +0000 (GMT)
> I don't know about other GMs, but if my players come
up with a good enough plan to get through without a
fight, I let them. It's usually my players who are
itching for a fight, not me.
>
> I agree that some modules are configured so that a
fight may be the only option, but in most cases, that
is fairly obvious prior to the encounter, and it's not
too difficult for the characters to come prepared.
>
> Besides, most of my players also subscribe to the
"Scott's Hummer" theory... ;-)
> Damion Milliken E-Mail:

Which are all just things I wish you guys would point
out when you start talking about rule changes. Like I
said to Gurth, the only reason I weighed in here is
because I saw one of my GMs considering your
suggestions. Which isn't a problem in and of itself,
but the fact of the matter is, we are 99.9% certain to
face combat at least a time or two in any of him games
and he starts getting itchy whenever he sees anyone
carrying anything heavier than a heavy pistol (or
sometimes an SMG). Neither of which I'm complaining
about, but if he takes your advice and neuters the
heavy pistol, things will quickly become messy for us
poor schlub players. If you'd said, "I think the rules
for HPs are unrealistic - oh, but my guys have a
shitload of other weapons, which they get to carry
around on occasion without getting in trouble for, so
it doesn't matter if I wuss HPs up" or something
similar ( :) ), I wouldn't be worried.

====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!!!

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Everything you'll ever need on one web page
from News and Sport to Email and Music Charts
http://uk.my.yahoo.com
Message no. 37
From: lordmountainlion@***.rr.com (Scott Peterson)
Subject: Oh, look, a new rule is needed!
Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2003 23:15:44 -0700
From: "Rand Ratinac" <docwagon101@*****.com>

> > I agree that some modules are configured so that a
> fight may be the only option, but in most cases, that
> is fairly obvious prior to the encounter, and it's not
> too difficult for the characters to come prepared.

I still say the right weapon system, right ammunition, right execution will
handel everything. Thouhgt life tends to screw up the best laid op plan.
As Murphy always says.

> > Besides, most of my players also subscribe to the
> "Scott's Hummer" theory... ;-)
> > Damion Milliken

Wow thanks for elevating me story to a Shadowrun List Theory!!!!!! I love
that feeling, nice and warm fuzzies. For those aware of janna's (my fiance)
situation, shes out of the hospital again after a bout of hemoraging. You
prayer types please pass some energy her way.

Scott 'Wow Theory Status' Peterson
Message no. 38
From: nightgyr@*********.com.au (GreyWolf)
Subject: Oh, look, a new rule is needed!
Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2003 19:20:11 +1100
First out, I am guessing here that Doc' is referring to myself when he talks
about "one of his GM's"... and for the benefit of any other player on the
list worried about their GM's comments in this or any other conversation, I
now post the following :)

> Which are all just things I wish you guys would point
> out when you start talking about rule changes. Like I
> said to Gurth, the only reason I weighed in here is
> because I saw one of my GMs considering your
> suggestions. Which isn't a problem in and of itself,

I was asking a question, nothing more. If Gm's or players arent allowed to
discuss things on this list without their players/GM's becoming paranoid,
why are we all here?

> but the fact of the matter is, we are 99.9% certain to
> face combat at least a time or two in any of him games
> and he starts getting itchy whenever he sees anyone
> carrying anything heavier than a heavy pistol (or
> sometimes an SMG).

???

Maybe I do, but only because the players insist on using the heavy
underbarrel grenade launchers indoors at close range.. and so forth and
REALLY dont like losing characters (to the point where they might decide to
dump the whole game and leave me without a group).

I dont mind SMG's in fact... but since noone has ever bought one I dont know
how you'd figure I feel one way or another about them.

Id be a whole lot more relaxed if the group kept to some semblance of sanity
and/or normality when they go on runs, but getting sensitive about what they
are packing is an allergic reaction to what they do with said weapons
conbined with the fact that they dont tend to like it when they dont realise
that their psychotic actions in SR arent viewed quite as leniently as they
may be in a DnD game for example.

I note a certain event where unconcious guards had heads removed so a rather
offensive 'sign' could be written on the wall in 'red', or where 'someone'
didnt realise that blowing up a 'sinless children's playground with 50kg of
HiX wouldnt make them sexy-guy #1 with the chica minding them at the
time....... et al.

Need I say more?

Besides - what do you mean by "itchy"?

> Neither of which I'm complaining
> about, but if he takes your advice and neuters the
> heavy pistol, things will quickly become messy for us
> poor schlub players. If you'd said, "I think the rules
> for HPs are unrealistic - oh, but my guys have a
> shitload of other weapons, which they get to carry
> around on occasion without getting in trouble for, so
> it doesn't matter if I wuss HPs up" or something
> similar ( :) ), I wouldn't be worried.

See above points about "discussions" :)

GreyWolf
Message no. 39
From: docwagon101@*****.com (Rand Ratinac)
Subject: Oh, look, a new rule is needed!
Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2003 08:56:16 +0000 (GMT)
> I was asking a question, nothing more. If Gm's or
players arent allowed to discuss things on this list
without their players/GM's becoming paranoid, why are
we all here?
> GreyWolf

*sigh*

All I'm trying to say is that whenever anyone
advocates changes to the game rules, it'd be nice to
hear WHY it works for them. I know that I've tried
rules suggestions I've seen here in the past with
DISASTROUS results, simply because my games are
nothing like the ones where the house rules were
developed. When that happens to you enough times, you
tend to get a little paranoid. And remember, man, this
is SHADOWRUN we're talking here. ;)

And yes, most of the group are nutbags, but that
doesn't help those of us who AREN'T insane when you
have to crack down. ;)

====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!!!

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Everything you'll ever need on one web page
from News and Sport to Email and Music Charts
http://uk.my.yahoo.com
Message no. 40
From: ShadowRN@********.demon.co.uk (Paul J. Adam)
Subject: Oh, look, a new rule is needed!
Date: Sat, 15 Mar 2003 02:01:06 +0000
In article <000901c2e9f1$264d8580$c600f218@***.rr.com>, Scott Peterson
<lordmountainlion@***.rr.com> writes
>I still say the right weapon system, right ammunition, right execution will
>handel everything.

I disagree... the best-trained shooter tends to win unless the enemy
explicitly attacks their plan.

Ammunition isn't _that_ important compared to who's firing it. One hit
with bad ammo is worth any number of misses with good ammo.

Trouble is, you don't know what the best weapon systems, best ammunition
and best execution were until _after_ the battle.


Short-term, train the hell out of your people and make sure they know
how to react. If they're in an overt defence with tank support, fine,
enemy tanks are targets. If they're doing a covert infiltration, enemy
tanks are "Mission Blown" and you concentrate on extracting alive with
your data.


--
Paul J. Adam
Message no. 41
From: cmd_jackryan@***.de (Phillip Gawlowski)
Subject: Oh, look, a new rule is needed!
Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2003 12:44:36 +0100
Once again a far from being on time reply (I'm having to work for
University right now :-( )

On Thu, 13 Mar 2003 19:27:38 +0100, Gurth <gurth@******.nl> wrote:

>> Not right. The ammuniton for the actual series of the H&K USP and UMP
>> weapons,
>> can fire the same 9mm ammunition (9mm x 19), or .40 S&W or .45 AUTO.
>> (according to www.heckler-koch.de, intro can not be skipped, just in
>> case).
>>
>> Hence both weapon-types should use the same damage codes, if you are
>> going for realism.
>
> I don't _quite_ understand what you're trying to prove here... On the one
> hand you say I'm wrong, on the other you seem to be agreeing with me...

A misunderstanding, I wasn'
t clear enough: I was referring to Light Pistols and SMG, and you were
referring to SMG and heavy pistols.

> The problem is that the Power Level represents _both_ stopping power and
> armor-piercing ability. This should be quite obvious: it's the TN to
> resist the damage, so a higher Power Level clearly means higher stopping
> power. But the Power Level is also reduced by armor and Barrier Ratings,
> so the higher the Power Level, the more armor it can penetrate.

Yeah, I forgot about this one. It is possible to reflect that in the types
of ammunition
used, introducing a truck load full of additional rules. Not good. Not at
all.

> If you want to be realistic, SR needs an extra number in its Damage Code:
> one to indicate AP ability, the other to represent stopping power. So,
> you could make Damage Codes look like this: 4-6M. The first number (4) is
> subtracted from the target's Armor Rating, and the resulting number (if
> positive) is then subtracted from the second (6) to find the Power Level
> of the attack, against which a Body Test is rolled as normal.

Which would be a better improvement over the normal rules. CC could have
introduced
stuff like that, but, alas, it didn't. Maybe in SR4 this will be added. But
until now, we have
to live with it.
I'm considering using your above example for my group. As soon as I have
worked out
something and tested it, I will submit it to the list.

> But until something like this is implemented, everyone who claims that
> Power Level is AP ability is right, and everyone who claims Power Level
> reflects stopping power is also right...

Yeah. Depending on the point of view, this could be a good thing.
Or not.
Hrmph, I love such stuff.

>> Nope, they fire the same :-)
>
> Which "they" are you talking about (light pistols and SMGs, heavy pistols
> and SMGs, or light pistols and heavy pistols)?

SMGs and Light pistols. At least, for the UMP SMG series and USP Light
Pistol series
of Heckler & Koch this would be true. (or not, depending on the version you
order *sigh*).

--
Phillip Gawlowski
GameMaster and GeneralIdiot
Message no. 42
From: SteveG@***********.co.za (Steve Garrard)
Subject: Oh, look, a new rule is needed!
Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2003 14:35:56 +0200
Phillip Gawlowski wrote:
> [snip]
>
> >> Nope, they fire the same :-)
> >
> > Which "they" are you talking about (light pistols and SMGs, heavy
> > pistols
> > and SMGs, or light pistols and heavy pistols)?
>
> SMGs and Light pistols. At least, for the UMP SMG series and
> USP Light
> Pistol series
> of Heckler & Koch this would be true. (or not, depending on
> the version you
> order *sigh*).

As a general rule, you are correct. The majority of SMGs and light pistols
fire 9mm rounds. However, to make a sweeping statement about ALL SMGs and
light pistols firing the same ammunition would be inaccurate at best.
Besides, as per SR3 rules, this is irrelevant, since ammo swapping rules
state that all firearms of the same category can share ammo. A terrible rule
IMO given the varying calibers used in the different categories, but I
suppose it was designed to simplify the process for those players who don't
know/care about ballistics et al.


Slayer

"Beware my wrath, for you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup."
- Unknown Dragon


**********************************************************************
This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and
intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they
are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify
the system manager.

This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept by
MIMEsweeper for the presence of computer viruses.

www.mimesweeper.com
**********************************************************************
Message no. 43
From: cmd_jackryan@***.de (Phillip Gawlowski)
Subject: Oh, look, a new rule is needed!
Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2003 14:22:58 +0100
On Mon, 17 Mar 2003 14:35:56 +0200, Steve Garrard <SteveG@****
systems.co.za> wrote:

> Phillip Gawlowski wrote:
>> [snip]
>>
>> >> Nope, they fire the same :-)
>> >
>> > Which "they" are you talking about (light pistols and SMGs, heavy
>
>> pistols
>> > and SMGs, or light pistols and heavy pistols)?
>>
>> SMGs and Light pistols. At least, for the UMP SMG series and USP Light
>> Pistol series
>> of Heckler & Koch this would be true. (or not, depending on the version
>> you order *sigh*).
>
> As a general rule, you are correct. The majority of SMGs and light
> pistols
> fire 9mm rounds. However, to make a sweeping statement about ALL SMGs and
> light pistols firing the same ammunition would be inaccurate at best.

That's why I stated that it is true for H&K (AFAIK, of course), and
mentioned it would
be different for others. But that was in an earlier mail.

> Besides, as per SR3 rules, this is irrelevant, since ammo swapping rules
> state that all firearms of the same category can share ammo.

Help me there: Would Light Pistols and SMGs be the same category?
But I didn't suggest to swap Amoo between different weapons.

> A terrible rule
> IMO given the varying calibers used in the different categories, but I
> suppose it was designed to simplify the process for those players who
> don't
> know/care about ballistics et al.

Besides, it would slow down the game considerably, I think.
Think about: calculating TN's for various calibers would drive at least me
nuts.


--
Phillip Gawlowski
GameMaster and GeneralIdiot
Message no. 44
From: gurth@******.nl (Gurth)
Subject: Oh, look, a new rule is needed!
Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2003 19:27:18 +0100
According to Phillip Gawlowski, on Monday 17 March 2003 12:44 the word on
the street was...

> > If you want to be realistic, SR needs an extra number in its Damage
> > Code: one to indicate AP ability, the other to represent stopping
> > power.
>
> Which would be a better improvement over the normal rules. CC could have
> introduced
> stuff like that, but, alas, it didn't. Maybe in SR4 this will be added.

Don't count on it. The main problem it would create is that it makes all
weapons (and, indeed, _anything_ that causes damage) from previous
editions hard to use. This because you can't simply say "Use half the old
Power Level as the AP rating, and the other half as the new Power Level"
because if you do, you might as well not make this change at all...

> >> Nope, they fire the same :-)
> >
> > Which "they" are you talking about (light pistols and SMGs, heavy
> > pistols and SMGs, or light pistols and heavy pistols)?
>
> SMGs and Light pistols. At least, for the UMP SMG series and USP Light
> Pistol series
> of Heckler & Koch this would be true. (or not, depending on the version
> you order *sigh*).

I maintain that you cannot make statements like this about SR, for the
simple reason that you don't _know_ what (equivalents to) modern calibers
are used by SR weapons. Two (or perhaps three) are actually mentioned in
SR books, and that's about it -- and with those, you need to keep in mind
that at least two are by Michael Stackpole (in the short stories in the
SR1 main rules and Elven Fire), who is well-known (notorious?) for not
necessarily conforming to SR as the rules make it.

Thus, if I say that typical heavy pistols are 9x19 mm weapons and so are
SMGs, I'm right. But you are also right if you say that light pistols and
SMGs use 9x19 mm while heavy pistols fire something heavier. In our own
games, anyway; in anyone else's game, saying things like that will lead to
discussions like the one we're having right now...

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
"Als Michael Jackson een auto was, had hij heel Halfords leeggekocht"
-- Ruud de Wild
-> Probably NAGEE Editor * ShadowRN GridSec * Triangle Virtuoso <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://plastic.dumpshock.com <-

GC3.12: GAT/! d- 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

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about Oh, look, a new rule is needed!, 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!