Logs for ShadowRN and Associated Mailing Lists

From:	Rene Tschirley <gremlin@******.ukbf.fu-berlin.de>
Subject:	Power of Fireweapons
Date:	Tue, 7 Nov 1995 17:02:43 +0100 (MET)

Message no. 1 Hi Gurus!

I'm a SR-beginner, so please forgive me. I don't understand why the
power of a weapon (or its bullets) should increase if the fire modus
changes to automatic mode, or generally to more than one bullet per
action. Sounds not very realistic. The bullet fired from a weapon if a
bullet -- if some bullets follow or not!

The second point is, that if I fire a 3-bullet-round, I have to do
*one* check (ok, it's a +1 check) which decides if *all* or *none* of
the bullets hit the target.

I don't think that's very realistic. How would it be to decide on how
many successes I get on my check, how many bullets will hit?

Bye,
Rene

Zehntausend Leute im Eishockey-Stadion, und ich bekomme den Puck in die Fresse
___ _ _____ _ _ _
| _ \___ _ _ _// |_ _|__ __| |_ (_)_ _| |___ _ _tschirley@****.fu-berlin.de
| / -_) ' \/ -_) | |(_-</ _| ' \| | '_| / -_) || |gremlin@*****.fu-berlin.de
|_|_\___|_||_\___| |_|/__/\__|_||_|_|_| |_\___|\_, | gremlin@**.tu-berlin.de
WWW : http://fred.ukbf.fu-berlin.de/~gremlin |__/
Uni-Klinikum Benjamin Franklin, Abteilung Medizinische Statistik und Informatik

From:	Marc A Renouf <jormung@*****.umich.edu>
Subject:	Re: Power of Fireweapons
Date:	Wed, 8 Nov 1995 13:37:59 -0500 (EST)

Message no. 2 On Wed, 8 Nov 1995, Rene Tschirley wrote:

> The second point is, that if I fire a 3-bullet-round, I have to do
> *one* check (ok, it's a +1 check) which decides if *all* or *none* of
> the bullets hit the target.
> I don't think that's very realistic. How would it be to decide on how
> many successes I get on my check, how many bullets will hit?

There have been numerous schemes and house rules tossed about on
this list to deal with just that kind of problem. For my campaign, I'm
cool with assuming that all three bullets will land close enough not to
worry about it. Also, if the target rolls his or her Body resistance
well and takes only a light wound, you can explain it away by saying that
only one of the rounds hit. Or whatever you feel is appropriate. For
full-auto, on the other hand, I have a system that determines how many
bullets hit out of the total that were sent downrange. It works well and
gets around the annoyance of the "all or nothing" syndrome that plagues
fully automatic fire in SRII.

Marc

From:	gt6877c@*****.gatech.edu (S.F. Eley)
Subject:	Re: Power of Fireweapons
Date:	Wed, 8 Nov 1995 15:09:57 -0500 (EST)

Message no. 3 Marc Renous wrote:

> For full-auto, on the other hand, I have a system that determines how many
> bullets hit out of the total that were sent downrange. It works well and
> gets around the annoyance of the "all or nothing" syndrome that plagues
> fully automatic fire in SRII.

Would you mind sharing your system with us, Marc? I know there are a number
of house rules designed to deal with this.. I'm interested in "collecting"
them and perhaps collating them for a future public reference file.

In a similar vein, here's the system I use. I got it from "Igor" on
Shadowland (http://ta3.cs.uiuc.edu:8000/index.html). All credits go to him:

Igor's "Homebrew" Autofire Rules

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

New Shadowrun Autofire Rules

by Igor

Autofire:

1. Figure base target number for a single shot including all modifiers
except recoil.
2. Roll for attack, reroll any sixes
3. Determine all successes against target number
4. Take the highest success, subtract the target number from it, then add
the recoil compensation to the difference. The result is the total
number of rounds that hit (if the number is equal to or greater than
the number fired, all rounds hit). For heavy weapons, divide the
differnce by two before adding recoil compensation. Note: if the target
number equals the highest success, and would equal zero when
subtracted, one round still hits.
5. The rule applies to NPCs as well (so you Munchkins stop drooling and
start finding cover like the rest of us.

Example: Snag has an AK-97 and fires a five shot burst at a ganger. His
target number for a single shot is 5 and he has a firearms skill of 6. He
rolls (rerolling all sixes) 5, 7, 11, 4, 5, and 2. Snag has 4 successes
total against target number 5. His highest success was 11. Total hits:
11-5=6; as he only fired five rounds, all five hit, giving the target a 13S
wound, with four successes, to resist (ow!).

Another example: Occolato catches some punk in the process of reposessing
his SAAB--Occ has a Vindicator minigun and opens up on him. Target number
for single shot is 6, and the minigun fires and automatic 15 round burst.
Occ has a Firearms skill of 6 and adds in his combat pool of 6 to make sure
he hits. He rolls, getting 4, 5, 7, 9, 11, 5, 7, 7, 8, 2, 1, and 3. He has
six successes total. His highest success is 11. The rounds that hit figure
as 11-6 = 5 / 2 = 2 hits. However, Occ has Gas-vent 3, and a rating 5
gyro-mount on this, which, is added on (5 3 5)--thus, Occ has scored 13 hits
thanks to recoil compensation (and repo-man has to resist a 20D wound--it's
a shame Occ didn't wait until the guy was clear of his car before
firing....)

Multiple targets:

The rules are essentially the same using these modifications: Roll for each
target with a 2 modifier for each additional target (and lose one round in
between if not Smartlinked). For each shot fired, recoil compensation is
reduced by one, and whatever RC is left over transfers over to the next
target. Target number for the next target is increased by the number of
uncompensated rounds (double for heavy weapons) fired at the previous target
(including, if you're not Smartlinked, the round that was lost between
targets)--if you fired a a six round burst, with three rounds per target
with one point of recoil comp, one round would have been compensated, the
other two would be uncompensated, and you would suffer a 2 modifier ( 3, if
non-Smartlinked and you lost a round) when you went to the next target--this
would double for a heavy weapon ( 4 or 6). On the other hand, if you had
four points of recoil comp in the above situation, you'd still have one
point of recoil comp left over for your next target (or no recoil penalties
if you "lost" a round).

Example: Hawkeye faces down three rival mercs with his Colt Cobra and has
initiative. He fires a 9-shot burst, spread out between the three. He has a
Smartlink, which means he doesn't lose rounds between the targets. Hawkeye,
in this example, has a Firearms of 6, and he's pretty well built so he gets
an additional point of recoil comp in addition to the 3 on the gun, giving
him 4 points total. The target number is 4.

* Target one (TN=4). He rolls 4, 5, 7, 8, 5, 2. All three rounds hit.
Three rounds of comp are used, leaving one for the next target. Damage
10S.
* Target two (TN=6, 2 for additional target). He rolls 5, 5, 9, 10, 3, 7.
Again, all three hit. Damage 10S. However two rounds were uncompensated
so recoil carries over.
* Target three (TN, 2 for additional target, 2 for uncompensated
recoil from previous target). Hawk gets 7, 7, 4, 8, 10, 1. Target takes
one round at 7M and one success. Hawkeye should have used his combat
pool.

Vehicles and autofire:

Rules are exactly the same for vehicles. Just remember to divide the rounds
fired by the recoil modifier (3 for one of the rotary cannons -- Vigilant, I
believe...) before you add in the recoil comp.

The Rationale (the madness behind the method)

The way the "standard" rule works, you could blaze away on autofire and not
hit squat. This is true to an extent, but in actuality, if your first round
is properly aimed, it's going to hit: it's just the rest that fly off into
limbo once your automatic weapon starts playing jackhammer--full auto isn't
"hit-or-miss"; it's more like "hit-and-miss." When you fire a ten
round
burst, all ten rounds don't go flying off into limbo (as would happen
according to SR rules); the first few rounds will probably be on target
(provided you can hit the target in the first place), but as recoil builds
up, the muzzle begins to drift off target, compounding your aiming--that's
what this new system simulates (ie. You spray 100 rounds at an enemy at a
reasonable range--at least one round is going to hit him). Also, it does
make the game a tad more deadly for both sides, but that's Shadowrun!

Area Fire Rules

I'm trying to jazz a system similar to the one in CP2020. More to come...

Well, here they are, give them a try and let me know what you think of them
-- feedback is welcome.

Disclaimer: Due to the inherent deadliness of these rules, the author claims
no responsibility for dead Characters, sadistic GameMasters, lost Karma, or
bawling Munchkins.

Created By: Igor
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

>>>>>[ This stuff works, but I don't need any of it. ]<<<<<
- Longbow (14:12:38/10-24-56) [Folder] [Mail]

>>>>>[ That is, until they come up with a full auto compound bow...
]<<<<<
- Igor (15:13:08/10-24-56) [Folder] [Mail]

>>>>>[ I must say that those are the most realistic rules I have seen in a
while. Very practical and useful. Thanx. ]<<<<<
- Bladesinger (16:44:01/10-24-56) [Folder] [Mail]

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

Add a Comment Delete Last Comment

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

[Inside Shadowland] [The Notice Board] [Meet the Runners] [The Real World]
[Shadowtalk] [Shadowmail] [Enter the Matrix] [The Central Datastore] [Log
Out]

From:	Marc A Renouf <jormung@*****.umich.edu>
Subject:	Re: Power of Fireweapons
Date:	Wed, 8 Nov 1995 17:06:16 -0500 (EST)

Message no. 4 On Wed, 8 Nov 1995, S.F. Eley wrote:

> Example: Snag has an AK-97 and fires a five shot burst at a ganger. His
> target number for a single shot is 5 and he has a firearms skill of 6. He
> rolls (rerolling all sixes) 5, 7, 11, 4, 5, and 2. Snag has 4 successes
> total against target number 5. His highest success was 11. Total hits:
> 11-5=6; as he only fired five rounds, all five hit, giving the target a 13S
> wound, with four successes, to resist (ow!).

My system works in a similar fashion, except, Snag has only one
success with all 5 rounds, and thus the target resists 13S with only 1
success behind. Using dodge rules similar to SRI, however, allows the
target to take off successes *starting with the highest.* So if Snag's
target got a single dodge success, he'd be facing only 3 rounds (the
first has no recoil, so it comes out to 11S with one success, the 7,
behind it. Note, however, that the target can actually dodge into
*more* damage in certain situations. Drag, chummer, shoulda zigged
instead of zagged.

Marc

From:	MENARD Steve <menars@***.UMontreal.CA>
Subject:	Re: Power of Fireweapons
Date:	Wed, 8 Nov 1995 12:33:40 -0500 (EST)

Message no. 5 On Wed, 8 Nov 1995, Rene Tschirley wrote:

> Hi Gurus!
>
>
> I'm a SR-beginner, so please forgive me. I don't understand why the
> power of a weapon (or its bullets) should increase if the fire modus
> changes to automatic mode, or generally to more than one bullet per
> action. Sounds not very realistic. The bullet fired from a weapon if a
> bullet -- if some bullets follow or not!
>
> The second point is, that if I fire a 3-bullet-round, I have to do
> *one* check (ok, it's a +1 check) which decides if *all* or *none* of
> the bullets hit the target.
>
> I don't think that's very realistic. How would it be to decide on how
> many successes I get on my check, how many bullets will hit?
>
1st, I'm not a guru(at least, not on this list).

2nd, the way SR treat multi-bullet shot is to "abstract" them into a
single attack(BTW a burst is an attack at +3 T#, not +1). More realistic
ways to do it would be to fire each bullet individually, but man would
that be heavy(though dice-roller might like it), just imagine a 15-round
full-auto(as is possible with super-machinegun class weapons).

This question has been asked often on the list, and the general(if I
may say so), is that, if you don't mind the additional strain on the
rules, change them any way you like, for my part, I'll saty with what
works(for me).

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
--- |\_/| Still The One and Only Wolfbane! ---
--- |o o| " Hey! Why ya lookin' at me so weird? Ain't ya 'ver seen a ---
--- \ / decker witha horn ?" --- Scy, Troll decker with a CC ---
--- 0 Steve Menard menars@***.UMontreal.Ca ---
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

From:	"DAVE" <DROSEN@********.umd.edu>
Subject:	Re: Power of Fireweapons
Date:	Thu, 9 Nov 1995 11:34:05 EST

Message no. 6 To all who are interested in the shadowrun by email tell me if you
were contacted or if you want to be contacted to play.
Dave

From:	"Gurth" <gurth@******.nl>
Subject:	Re: Power of Fireweapons
Date:	Sat, 11 Nov 1995 11:03:52 +0100

Message no. 7 On Wed, 8 Nov 1995, Rene Tschirley wrote:

> Hi Gurus!

Where _is_ Damion anyway?

> I'm a SR-beginner, so please forgive me. I don't understand why the
> power of a weapon (or its bullets) should increase if the fire modus
> changes to automatic mode, or generally to more than one bullet per
> action. Sounds not very realistic. The bullet fired from a weapon if a
> bullet -- if some bullets follow or not!

Because FASA assumes (to make the game better playable, most likely) that
if you fire more than one bullet at the same target, all of them hit. So
the target takes, for instance, 5 rounds. 5 rounds do more damage than
just 1, so the Power and Damage Levels go up to account for this.

If you want you can go back to first-ed rules of rolling for each bullet
separately, at the base Damage per bullet. Mind you that will cause
someone to get killed with even less rounds than is the case in SR2
rules...

> The second point is, that if I fire a 3-bullet-round, I have to do
> *one* check (ok, it's a +1 check) which decides if *all* or *none* of
> the bullets hit the target.
>
> I don't think that's very realistic. How would it be to decide on how
> many successes I get on my check, how many bullets will hit?

There are various systems for that. One was posted here a few days ago,
Mark Renouf has designed one too (they're pretty similar, I gather), and
we had such a system being designed here about half a year ago as well.
I personally haven't bothered with these systems, really.

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
Too much time on my hands
-> NERPS Project Leader & Unofficial Shadowrun Guru <-

-----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------

From:	"Damion Milliken" <adm82@***.edu.au>
Subject:	Re: Power of Fireweapons
Date:	Sun, 12 Nov 1995 22:41:38 +1100 (EST)

Message no. 8 Gurth writes:

> > Hi Gurus!
>
> Where _is_ Damion anyway?

Damion is still in existence. He's just lurking. Which sucks (I won't say
exactly _what_ or _how_ it sucks - I'll just let you all use your all too
vivid imaginations...). Damion has this thing that happens to often
conflict with the 'net, it's known as university. :-( But, lucky, the summer
holidays are coming up soon <yay!>, so's if he can scrape up enough cash to
purchase a modem, he can be on for the break (the upside of uni is free 'net
access). Bet you're all thrilled to hear that now, aren't you? :-)
<Everyone reels in horror at a return to the good/bad old days of 12-15 posts
a day that were 80+ lines long and often seemed as if the enter key on
Damion's keyboard was disfunctional...>

> > I'm a SR-beginner, so please forgive me. I don't understand why the
> > power of a weapon (or its bullets) should increase if the fire modus
> > changes to automatic mode, or generally to more than one bullet per
> > action. Sounds not very realistic. The bullet fired from a weapon if a
> > bullet -- if some bullets follow or not!
>
> Because FASA assumes (to make the game better playable, most likely)

That's how I place it too. To cut down on the dice rolling and to speed up
the resolution of combat. Also, if you generalise it out over quite a lot
of circumstances, you'll find that it actually ends up that the target takes
approximately the same amount of damage from (say) 3 individual 5M rounds as
he would from a single 3 round 8S round, so it's even somewhat accurate.

> > The second point is, that if I fire a 3-bullet-round, I have to do
> > *one* check (ok, it's a +1 check) which decides if *all* or *none* of
> > the bullets hit the target.

Actually, if you ask the real-life firearms gurus on here you'll find that
very often 3 round bursts from automatic weapons do strike quite close
together - weapons are usually limited to three rounds bursts for exactly
this reason, in that after three rounds the burst strays too far off
target. Of course the problem still stands for greater than 3 round bursts
still...

> > I don't think that's very realistic. How would it be to decide on how
> > many successes I get on my check, how many bullets will hit?

This kind of approach would result in a double whammy kind of problem. In
that a success not only increases the damage done by an individual bullet
(or the burst if you're grouping the damage), but it also increases the
number of bullets that hit. (This could be solved by ruling that successes
are either assigned to increase the number of rounds hitting, or to
increasing the damage done, in a similar fashion to how succeses from a
Treat/Heal spell are divided between reducing the time for the spell to work
and increasing the effect of the spell.) Low skill people will also be
severly disadvantaged becasue they will find it numerically impossible to
hit with multiple rounds, even though theoretically they could do so if they
were lucky. It also has the problem of deciding what target number to use
for the shot. The base TN? Or the recoil modified TN? Or does the TN
increase by one (two if using a heavy weapon, three for certain vehicle
weapons etc) for every indicidual consectutive bullet? This last option
makes fairly decent sense actually, but it still has the problem that it
generates (probably) unneccessary complications in the combat process, and
it disporportionately disadvatages those with low skills.

> There are various systems for that. One was posted here a few days ago,
> Mark Renouf has designed one too (they're pretty similar, I gather), and
> we had such a system being designed here about half a year ago as well.
> I personally haven't bothered with these systems, really.

S F Eley is compiling a collection of alternative autofire systems, and he
shall (hopefully) place them on a web site someplace or another some time in
the future. Personally I'm kind of partial to the last mentioned success
allocation system described above, but with the problem of low skills solved
by introducing the fairly common ruling of extra success for high rolls
(which comes in many and varied forms itself to further complicate
matters). It's fairly fast once people have gotten used to it, and it
quitens up those "but in real life..." freaks. :-)

Well, to actually contributre something else useful to the list (other than
answering something Gurths already pretty much answered), I shall ask a
couple of questions:

This one's partially directed at Marc, since he advocates this tactic fairly
often. Friends in the melee. The rule goes along the lines that for each
friend you have who is participating in the same melee combat as you, you
are entitled to a -1 TN modification. Great for when the runners are being
swamped by knife wielding gangers or angry mobs of rioters or 20 force 1
flesh forms, or, or, or... Anyway, I have the problem that it never
starts. Think about it, we have Mr Big And Ugly Troll Who Likes To Chop
Things In Half With His Combat Axe (MBAUTWLTCTIHWHCA), who is currently
engaging 5 gangers armed with a variety of blades, clubs, broken bottles,
pool ques(sp?), fists and so on. Lets say for instance that
MBAUTWLTCTIHWHCA is going on 21 (aren't wired refelxes great?), and the
gangers are going on 12, 10, 9, 8, and 5. Come 21, and MBAUTWLTCTIHWHCA
decides to delay his action. Come 12 and ganger numer uno runs into the
fray. Combatants comprise MBAUTWLTCTIHWHCA and the ganger. <SLICE> Ganger
has no chance. Come 10 and ganger number two tries the same thing. <SLICE>
And so it continues. The gangers never _get_ to mass on the lone combatant
and make use of the friends in the melee bonus, which if they ever got,
would enable them to literally slice MBAUTWLTCTIHWHCA to ribbons (excepting
MBAUTWLTCTIHWHCAs likely huge Body of course). The only solution I could
see is if the gangers all went _exactly_ simultaneously, and managed to roll
the same initiative, and had the same reaction scores. This is
realistically unrealistic (I wonder if there's a name for that particular
usage of language...:-)) for a starters, not to mention statistically
unlikely too. What do you guys think on the problem?

<Damion realsies that it, once again, appears as if his return key had
malfunctioned and thus he could not perofrm paragraphing operations on what
he wrote...:-)>

Now, for my next trick, I'm going to ask about astral projection <Nooo! they
all yell>. Well, this one's pretty flame free I'd imagine. We all know how
cyberware reduces a persons Essence, and that Essence is merely(!) a measure
of how connected a persons spiritual/aural being is to his physical being,
right? And we all know that when a magician astrally projects he is
temporarily freeing his aura from his physical body, right? (Actually, that
brings up anotehr question which I just thought of, see below.) Well, what
happens if a magician has a cyberarm, and he astrally projects? I would
have said that since the cyberarm does not actually modify his aura, it only
slightly diconnects it from his body, then his aura would show his true,
original arm, rather than (a) a cyberarm, or (b) no arm. What do the rest of
you think?

Now, for the question I just thought of. Since when a magician astrally
projects he is taking his aura with him, then what happens if someone
attempts to target his body with a Mana spell? His body has no spiritual
side to affect, or so it would seem. I'd imagine that because of
astral-physical repercussion, and the fact that it is possible to hit the
projecting magician with Physical spells, that it is also possible to hit
the physical magician with Mana spells, and it will affect the other portion
of the interconnected halves.

Next question. To do with Magic fingers and the Line Of Sight rule that
specially accompies this particular spell. The ruling goes:

"...The fingers can reach any point the magician can see. The
casting magician can use a clairvoyance spell or even a remote-viewing
technology to get a close-up of the scene, as long as the actual location is
within his view."

Now, if you read it literally, then you can never actually use a
technological viewing device to manipulate the spell. Take an example
(it'll help claify what I mean). Say Mr Smith of the Lone Star Bomb Squad
is attempting to disarm a rather large explosive device from a goodly
distance away by using the Magic fingers spell. Lets say Mr Smith has
access to high resolution vision enhancement binoculars that happen to
process the image (rather than being optical binoculars as is requireed for
other spells). Now, Mr Smith cruises the Magic fingers on down to the
device, raises the binoculars to his eyes...and the Magic fingers spell
dissapears! The position the spell is at is no longer technically (in a
magical sense) within his LOS, because the binoculars intervene. Perhaps a
special definition of LOS is required for the use of the Magic Fingers
spell? Or perhaps that is what the portion of the description in the spell
is actually attempting to do? (Personally I just assume that that is what
it is meant to be saying, that it is possible to intervene TV screens and
such between the caster and the position of the spell - much the same as
spell can be sustained on a target even if the target is not within LOS of
the caster any more.)

Well, that's about all I have to say for myself. Hopefully this won't
re-addict me to posting, as it was mighty hard to kick the habit (gee
there's been alot of thigns that I would have liked to clarify, explain,
give rulings on, add in my opinion and so forth. And gee it's been hard not
too. :-(). Oh well, not to worry!

See yas all, and have fun!

--
Damion Milliken University of Wollongong E-mail: adm82@***.edu.au
-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.1
GE d- s++:-- a19 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------

From:	"Mark Steedman" <RSMS@***.rgu.ac.uk>
Subject:	Re: Power of Fireweapons
Date:	Mon, 13 Nov 1995 11:36:23 GMT

Message no. 9 Damion Milliken writes

[trimming mode on]

> Actually, if you ask the real-life firearms gurus on here you'll find that
> very often 3 round bursts from automatic weapons do strike quite close
> together - weapons are usually limited to three rounds bursts for exactly
> this reason, in that after three rounds the burst strays too far off
> target. Of course the problem still stands for greater than 3 round bursts
> still...
>
Yes.
Though it is noticable that SR players that know what they are doing
leave weapons on burst fire unless veihcle mounted or wearing a gyro
harness. Sure 17D from a lmg FA shot is VERY leathal but by the rules
it will not hit. I tend to agree with the FASA wrote it like this to
keep things simple, in practice its ok for SR. (if not wonderfully
realistic)

>
> This one's partially directed at Marc, since he advocates this tactic fairly
> often. Friends in the melee.

[big PC engaging 5 gangers]

> Lets say for instance that
> MBAUTWLTCTIHWHCA is going on 21 (aren't wired refelxes great?), and the
> gangers are going on 12, 10, 9, 8, and 5. Come 21, and MBAUTWLTCTIHWHCA
> decides to delay his action. Come 12 and ganger numer uno runs into the
> fray. Combatants comprise MBAUTWLTCTIHWHCA and the ganger. <SLICE> Ganger
> has no chance. Come 10 and ganger number two tries the same thing. <SLICE>
> And so it continues. The gangers never _get_ to mass on the lone combatant
> and make use of the friends in the melee bonus, which if they ever got,
The solution is actually dead easy.
in 12, ganger number 1, delay action
in 10 no2 delay
in 9 no 3 delay
in 8 no 4 delay
in 5 number 5 acts, all the others take delayed actions,
oops!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

ah gangers, 4's - 4 friends, ah pity 1's auto miss.
mr hard 4's, +4 = 8's
add the +2 reach and its still 2's vs 6's. i hope thats a BIG troll.

assuming the gangers have a moderate degree of skill, say 4+ and
combat pool, they should be able to do serious harm, that comes to
about 6 net sucesses, considering mr hard has to split his pool 5
ways, assuming plenty of armour most gangers will do 2M's
+ 6 thats 10 body required, allowing for average 12 needed and you
will still either take l's or burn karma for the poor rolls. It's
then just a matter of time.

The sensible thing for the wired goon to do is take his actions, kill
ganger 1 in 21, no 2 in 11 and hope like frag that they run or are
low enough on friends by then that his/her target numbers have come
below 6.

Mark

From:	Gallas William <gallas@**.ec-lyon.fr>
Subject:	Re: Power of Fireweapons
Date:	Mon, 13 Nov 95 16:39:05 MET

Message no. 10 > Damion Milliken:
>
> ... History of MBAUTWLTCTIHWHCA the big troll ...

This is always the same problems of rules trying to figure reality...
A round is a continuous thing in reality. So, in shadowrun, we could take this
assertion:
People acting in a same phase (i.e. Init from 1 to 10, 11 to 20, ...) act semi-
simultaneously. That means there is no signicant difference of speed between
them to consider they don't act one after the other.
So, in your exemple:
The gangers have 12,10,9,8 and 5 initiatives.
The first will fight with no modifier and the four others will get a -4 (or -3,
I do not remember...).
Of course, the first one could delay his action so to act with the others (I
think it is logical to fight with your friends when you a 3 meters tall man...).

> "...The fingers can reach any point the magician can see. The
> casting magician can use a clairvoyance spell or even a remote-viewing
> technology to get a close-up of the scene, as long as the actual location is
> within his view."

As always technology, be it for magic fingers or not, is of no use to extend
a LOS (except for the material furnished in Corporate Security Sourcebook).
I have a new idea about the earlier discussion about magic fingers spell:
I think the clairvoyance spell is only to be used to see more details of the
scene (because lockpicking a door at a 100 meters distance is impossible...)
but not to extend your LOS (and the exemple is the novel is a new exception
to the rules).

> Now, for my next trick, I'm going to ask about astral projection <Nooo! they
> all yell>. Well, this one's pretty flame free I'd imagine. We all know how
> cyberware reduces a persons Essence, and that Essence is merely(!) a measure
> of how connected a persons spiritual/aural being is to his physical being,
> right? And we all know that when a magician astrally projects he is
> temporarily freeing his aura from his physical body, right? (Actually, that
> brings up anotehr question which I just thought of, see below.) Well, what
> happens if a magician has a cyberarm, and he astrally projects? I would
> have said that since the cyberarm does not actually modify his aura, it only
> slightly diconnects it from his body, then his aura would show his true,
> original arm, rather than (a) a cyberarm, or (b) no arm. What do the rest of
> you think?

I have no real opinion about that (well... I have mine but have no proof to
sustain it) but I can give some new points:

If the aura doesn't change, it should be possible to have a spell that could
leave your body without all the cyberware you have (by giving you the appareance
of your aura, as per the paranimals power, as we stated it in the list).
Second, you would have no head if you're using a cyberskull !!!!!!!
Third, a street sam (or another) with cybereyes should be able to see you when
you use some invisibility spell because these eyes would only be a machine and
not a part of him.

Mailing List Logs for

Further Reading

Disclaimer