Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: Paul Jonathan Adam <Paul@********.DEMON.CO.UK>
Subject: Re: People as Barriers
Date: Tue, 23 May 1995 18:34:15 GMT
> >Now there's an idea, how do you handle someone trying to dodge
> >_INTO_ the path of bullets meant for someone else?
>
> Actually, I would be interested to know what you folks think about
> this. How *would* you handle someone trying to "shield" someone from
> bullets (as cover, etc.)?
>
> I know this could get messy, but like any other rules question, it
> would be nice to discuss :)

The house rule I use is that a person-as-shield is a Barrier with a
rating of (4 + half Body). If they're wearing armour, treat that as
layered with the person behind them.

So, Joe Blow has Body 4 and armour 4/2. He is standing in front of
John Doe (body 6, armour 8/4) when someone shoots at them. Joe
decides John is big and tough and is tucked close behind him. If you
specifically target Joe by shooting through John, treat John as
a barrier with rating 7 (4 + 6/2) and in addition give Joe Armour of
8/4 (his 4/2 plus half of John's 8/4).

Since every time so far the person in front has been a NPC, I
ignored rules in favour of gruesome descriptions of what autofire
was doing to the player's improvised riot shield. Come on, we've
all seen Total Recall or we wouldn't be asking this question... :-)

But this would allow you to get in front of someone and make the bad
guys shoot through you. Of course, an assault cannon loading APDS won't
care too much, but that's life.

--
When you have shot and killed a man, you have defined your attitude towards
him. You have offered a definite answer to a definite problem. For better
or for worse, you have acted decisively.
In fact, the next move is up to him.

Paul J. Adam paul@********.demon.co.uk

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about People as Barriers, 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.