Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: MENARD Steve <menars@***.UMONTREAL.CA>
Subject: Question about full defense
Date: Thu, 1 May 1997 22:19:17 -0400
Ok, here one that I do not think ever came up :

What's with the Full defense rule? I just read it about 10 times, and I
do not feel any closer to understanding it! Can anyone shed some light
here?


----------------------------------------------------------------------------
--- |\_/| 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 ---
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Message no. 2
From: Gurth <gurth@******.NL>
Subject: Re: Question about full defense
Date: Fri, 2 May 1997 22:15:26 +0100
MENARD Steve said on 22:19/ 1 May 97...

> What's with the Full defense rule? I just read it about 10 times, and I
> do not feel any closer to understanding it! Can anyone shed some light
> here?

I've never really understood that rule either... No Combat Pool dice to
your attack test, but only to your Body test, and you can't hit the
attacker back -- but it offers no advantages of any kind over trying a
counter-attack.

Probably the best thing to do is ignore this rule completely, or modify it
to give the target maybe a -1 TN for his/her test to account for the Full
Defense.

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
I know that that sounds dumb.
-> NERPS Project Leader & Unofficial Shadowrun Guru <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/plastic.html <-

-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version 3.1:
GAT/! d-(dpu) s:- !a>? C+(++)@ U P L E? W(++) N o? K- w+ O V? PS+ PE
Y PGP- t(+) 5++ X++ R+++>$ tv+(++) b++@ DI? D+ G(++) e h! !r(---) y?
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
Message no. 3
From: Christian Werner <i21axray@*******.RZ.UNIBW-MUENCHEN.DE>
Subject: Re: Question about full defense
Date: Fri, 2 May 1997 21:39:13 +0200
> Ok, here one that I do not think ever came up :

> What's with the Full defense rule? I just read it about 10 times,
and I
> do not feel any closer to understanding it! Can anyone shed some
light
> here?

IMHO, this rule means the following:

A Char has the choice to fight normal or to use full defense. If he
uses normal combat, he can use Combat Pool dice only for the fighting
skill, not for the Damage Resistance test.
If you choose Full Defense, the Char rolls only skill dice as normal
(without combat pool dice), but he can use Combat pool dice for the
Damage Resistance test. Furthermore the Cleanmiss-Rule is in effect,
that means, if you have more successes with your Combat-Pool than the
attacker, the attack is a clean miss.

So you can defend yourself quite good, if you do not have an
appropriate Combat Skill (hope you have a good body :) ).



Ciao Christian
Message no. 4
From: Denzil Kruse <dkruse@***.AZ05.BULL.COM>
Subject: Re: Question about full defense
Date: Fri, 2 May 1997 13:25:00 MST
>Ok, here one that I do not think ever came up :
>
> What's with the Full defense rule? I just read it about 10 times, and I
>do not feel any closer to understanding it! Can anyone shed some light
>here?

Full defense applies only to melee combat. Unlike ranged combat, melee
combat has two stages for determining damage. First, you use skill vs.
skill to determine who gets hurt (compare successes). After comparing
successes, someone gets hurt and tries to roll down the damage (damage
resistance test).

If you are on full defense, you can't use any combat pool dice for the skill
vs. skill test, but can use it for the damage resistance test. Usually,
during the damage resistance test you may still get hurt if you have more
successes than your opponent. That is, you stage down the damage, but not
all the way. If you are on full defense and your extra pool dice alone can
come up with more successes than your attacker got during the skill vs.
skill test, then you don't stage down the damage - it becomes a complete
miss. What happened is you totally dodged the melee attack.

In ranged combat, you don't have to declare full defense - the dodge always
applies even when you use some pool dice to attack.

Denzil Kruse
d.kruse@****.com
Message no. 5
From: Denzil Kruse <dkruse@***.AZ05.BULL.COM>
Subject: Re: Question about full defense
Date: Fri, 2 May 1997 13:31:00 MST
>> What's with the Full defense rule? I just read it about 10 times, and I
>> do not feel any closer to understanding it! Can anyone shed some light
>> here?
>
>I've never really understood that rule either... No Combat Pool dice to
>your attack test, but only to your Body test, and you can't hit the
>attacker back -- but it offers no advantages of any kind over trying a
>counter-attack.
>
>Probably the best thing to do is ignore this rule completely, or modify it
>to give the target maybe a -1 TN for his/her test to account for the Full
>Defense.
>
>--
>Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html

Maybe I'm intrepreting the rule wrong, but the advantage is that you can
totally dodge an attack. So if the troll with the Wallacher combat axe
sends a 12D at you with only one success, you don't have to worry about
getting 8 successes on your damage resistance test. All you have to do is
get your pool dice to roll 2 successes and the attack becomes a clean miss.

Even more useful vs. a monowhip. If a clean miss happens, then the whipper
just attacked himself.

Denzil Kruse
d.kruse@****.com
Message no. 6
From: Mike Elkins <MikeE@*********.COM>
Subject: Re: Question about full defense
Date: Fri, 2 May 1997 16:44:49 -0500
> What's with the Full defense rule? I just read
it about 10 times, and I
> do not feel any closer to understanding it! Can
anyone shed some light
> here?

I think the point of this rule was to allow you to
avoid the limitation on the number of Combat
Pool dice you can add to the success test. If
you're counter attacking you may only use as
many dice as you have points of skill, but with
full defense you may use of all of them.

Double-Domed Mike
P.S. This message was dictated using Dragon
NaturallySpeaking
Message no. 7
From: Denzil Kruse <dkruse@***.AZ05.BULL.COM>
Subject: Re: Question about full defense
Date: Fri, 2 May 1997 13:42:00 MST
>> What's with the Full defense rule? I just read it about 10 times, and I
>> do not feel any closer to understanding it! Can anyone shed some light
>> here?
>
>I've never really understood that rule either... No Combat Pool dice to
>your attack test, but only to your Body test, and you can't hit the
>attacker back -- but it offers no advantages of any kind over trying a
>counter-attack.

Another advantage just occured to me. When you are rolling your damage
resistance test, you are not dealing with your opponent's skill, or the
combat situational modifiers (friends in combat, reach modifiers) where you
TNs might be real high. But during the damage resistance test, your TNs are
the power code minus armor - which might be easier to deal with. So, it is
easier to roll successes, and therefore your pool dice may be more useful
there.

Denzil Kruse
d.kruse@****.com
Message no. 8
From: Denzil Kruse <dkruse@***.AZ05.BULL.COM>
Subject: Re: Question about full defense
Date: Fri, 2 May 1997 13:36:00 MST
>IMHO, this rule means the following:
>
>A Char has the choice to fight normal or to use full defense. If he
>uses normal combat, he can use Combat Pool dice only for the fighting
>skill, not for the Damage Resistance test.
>If you choose Full Defense, the Char rolls only skill dice as normal
>(without combat pool dice), but he can use Combat pool dice for the
>Damage Resistance test. Furthermore the Cleanmiss-Rule is in effect,
>that means, if you have more successes with your Combat-Pool than the
>attacker, the attack is a clean miss.
>
>So you can defend yourself quite good, if you do not have an
>appropriate Combat Skill (hope you have a good body :) ).
>
>Ciao Christian

I always thought that you could use combat pool dice for either the skill
test and the damage test. Under determining damage, it doesn't say either
way, so I assumed that you could.

Denzil Kruse
d.kruse@****.com
Message no. 9
From: David Buehrer <dbuehrer@****.ORG>
Subject: Re: Question about full defense
Date: Fri, 2 May 1997 15:35:38 -0600
Gurth wrote:
|
| MENARD Steve said on 22:19/ 1 May 97...
|
| > What's with the Full defense rule? I just read it about 10 times, and I
| > do not feel any closer to understanding it! Can anyone shed some light
| > here?
|
| I've never really understood that rule either... No Combat Pool dice to
| your attack test, but only to your Body test, and you can't hit the
| attacker back -- but it offers no advantages of any kind over trying a
| counter-attack.

What it's for is those characters with high Body, but squat for melee
skill. Lets say you've got a troll with body 10, melee 2, and a combat
pool of 6. If he counter attacks he can only use 4 dice. If he goes with
the full defense he can use 16 dice to resist the damage.

-David
--
/^\/^\/^\/^\/^\/^\/^\ dbuehrer@****.org /^\/^\/^\/^\/^\/^\/^\
"His thoughts tumbled in his head, making and breaking
alliances like underpants in a dryer without Cling Free."
~~~http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/1068/homepage.htm~~~~
Message no. 10
From: Gweedo The Killer Pimp <yawas@****.COM>
Subject: Re: Question about full defense
Date: Fri, 2 May 1997 22:40:02 EDT
>MENARD Steve said on 22:19/ 1 May 97...
>
>> What's with the Full defense rule? I just read it about 10 times,
>and I
>> do not feel any closer to understanding it! Can anyone shed some
>light
>> here?

I have that same problem with the buckshot rules as well. Anybody have
the rules in laymans terms?


----------
The useless fact of the day is:
The word "girl" appears in the Bible only once.
Message no. 11
From: TEGTMEBC@******.ACS.MUOHIO.EDU
Subject: Re: Question about full defense
Date: Sat, 3 May 1997 02:33:25 -0500
Gweedo wrote:
> >MENARD Steve said on 22:19/ 1 May 97...
> >
> >> What's with the Full defense rule? I just read it about 10 times,
> >and I
> >> do not feel any closer to understanding it! Can anyone shed some
> >light
> >> here?

> I have that same problem with the buckshot rules as well. Anybody have
> the rules in laymans terms?

I thought buckshot used the same rules as if it were flechette rounds
for any other gun. If that is the case, the damage code would be raised by one
level against unarmored people, but be reduced by one level if it hit armored
people. It should be somewhere in the main book, under the combat section.
(That was rather obvious wasn't it? :)) Anyway, I think it is in the section
dealing with the other types of ammunition, IIRC.

-The Immortal Mental
Message no. 12
From: Gurth <gurth@******.NL>
Subject: Re: Question about full defense
Date: Sat, 3 May 1997 11:35:12 +0100
Gweedo The Killer Pimp said on 22:40/ 2 May 97...

> I have that same problem with the buckshot rules as well. Anybody have
> the rules in laymans terms?

First of all, the shot spreads as described on page 95 of SRII. Basically,
draw a triangle with one of the points at the muzzle of the shotgun; its
base is a number of meters wide, equal to the Power Level of the shotgun;
and it's (Power x choke) high, in meters. [Note that actually it's sort of
a stepped thing like the diagram on page 95 shows, but a triangle (or
actually a cone) is both easier and more realistic.]

Now take the distance each target (in the triangle) is from the firer,
and divide that by the choke, rounding down. There's our TN and Power
Level modifiers. Then roll your Firearms skill only once, and compare
the roll against the TN for each target, like with area-effect spells.

For example, an 8S shotgun with the choke set to 6 fires its shot into a
triangle 8 meters wide at its base and 48 meters high. Let's say there are
two targets in it: one at 5 meters and one at 17 meters. Against the first
one, your TN is 4 (Short range, no modifier because 5 / 6 rounded down is
0). The second target is at Medium range for a shotgun, and since he's 17
meters away you get a -(17 / 6) = -2 modifier to the TN, making it 3.

You roll your Firearms test and get 1, 4, 5, 3, 7 and 9: you hit, the
first target is subject to 8S damage with 4 successes, and the second to
6S with 5 successes. The second target also gets an extra die for his
Resistance Test.

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
I know that that sounds dumb.
-> NERPS Project Leader & Unofficial Shadowrun Guru <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/plastic.html <-

-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version 3.1:
GAT/! d-(dpu) s:- !a>? C+(++)@ U P L E? W(++) N o? K- w+ O V? PS+ PE
Y PGP- t(+) 5++ X++ R+++>$ tv+(++) b++@ DI? D+ G(++) e h! !r(---) y?
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
Message no. 13
From: Gurth <gurth@******.NL>
Subject: Re: Question about full defense
Date: Sat, 3 May 1997 11:35:11 +0100
Denzil Kruse said on 13:31/ 2 May 97...

> Maybe I'm intrepreting the rule wrong, but the advantage is that you can
> totally dodge an attack. So if the troll with the Wallacher combat axe
> sends a 12D at you with only one success, you don't have to worry about
> getting 8 successes on your damage resistance test. All you have to do is
> get your pool dice to roll 2 successes and the attack becomes a clean miss.

*re-reads rules* You're right, there is a use for full defense...

> Even more useful vs. a monowhip. If a clean miss happens, then the whipper
> just attacked himself.

Only if he fails another Armed Combat test, but yeah, it's a possibility.

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
I know that that sounds dumb.
-> NERPS Project Leader & Unofficial Shadowrun Guru <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/plastic.html <-

-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version 3.1:
GAT/! d-(dpu) s:- !a>? C+(++)@ U P L E? W(++) N o? K- w+ O V? PS+ PE
Y PGP- t(+) 5++ X++ R+++>$ tv+(++) b++@ DI? D+ G(++) e h! !r(---) y?
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
Message no. 14
From: Jonathan Hurley <jhurley1@************.EDU>
Subject: Re: Question about full defense
Date: Sat, 3 May 1997 12:37:20 -0400
On Friday, May 02, 1997 5:15 PM, Gurth[SMTP:gurth@******.NL] wrote:
> MENARD Steve said on 22:19/ 1 May 97...
>
> > What's with the Full defense rule? I just read it about 10 times, and
I
> > do not feel any closer to understanding it! Can anyone shed some light
> > here?
>
> I've never really understood that rule either... No Combat Pool dice to
> your attack test, but only to your Body test, and you can't hit the
> attacker back -- but it offers no advantages of any kind over trying a
> counter-attack.

I used to think so too, until I realized that your body test is a
DAMAGE-RESISTANCE test. So it is body vs (power - armor), and *unaffected
by wound modifiers*!!!

Not too shabby when wounded, or when you have enough armor to make the
adjusted power of the attack less than 4, or when you have multiple
opponents on you (that +1 for enemies really stacks up.)

Or when the opponent has a monofilament whip<efg>



***********
Quicksilver
Message no. 15
From: Ray & Tamara <macey@*******.COM.AU>
Subject: Re: Question about full defense
Date: Sat, 3 May 1997 17:44:53 +1000
> Maybe I'm intrepreting the rule wrong, but the advantage is that you can
> totally dodge an attack. So if the troll with the Wallacher combat axe
> sends a 12D at you with only one success, you don't have to worry about
> getting 8 successes on your damage resistance test. All you have to do
is
> get your pool dice to roll 2 successes and the attack becomes a clean
miss.

That's not a real advantage, because if you used the normal rules as they
stand, and you got one more success than him, you would hit him, and he
would miss you. So you get a clean miss and get to hit him.

Ray.

-----------------------------------------------------
| The universe is a big place, and whatever happens,|
| You will not be missed |
-----------------------------------------------------

EMAIL: macey@*******.com.au
Message no. 16
From: Mike Hartmann <hartmann@***********.M.EUNET.DE>
Subject: Re: Question about full defense
Date: Sun, 4 May 1997 15:33:27 +0000
On 3 May 97 at 17:44, Ray & Tamara wrote:

> > Maybe I'm intrepreting the rule wrong, but the advantage is that you can
> > totally dodge an attack. So if the troll with the Wallacher combat axe
> > sends a 12D at you with only one success, you don't have to worry about
> > getting 8 successes on your damage resistance test. All you have to do
> is
> > get your pool dice to roll 2 successes and the attack becomes a clean
> miss.
>
> That's not a real advantage, because if you used the normal rules as they
> stand, and you got one more success than him, you would hit him, and he
> would miss you. So you get a clean miss and get to hit him.

But for the resistance-test you've got way lower target-numbers:

Power Lvl. - Armor-rating

as opposed to

4 + Reach-modifier + Wound-modifier + sight-modifier + any-more-
modifier

Guess where to expect more sucesses if fighting a troll with a
wallacher combat axe?

Bye Mike
Message no. 17
From: David Thompson <david.s.thompson@****.EDU>
Subject: Re: Question about full defense
Date: Sun, 4 May 1997 11:36:34 -0400
>But for the resistance-test you've got way lower target-numbers:
>
>Power Lvl. - Armor-rating
>
>as opposed to
>
>4 + Reach-modifier + Wound-modifier + sight-modifier + any-more-
>modifier
>
>Guess where to expect more sucesses if fighting a troll with a
>wallacher combat axe?
>
>Bye Mike
>
If that troll has a half decent strength, around 10 or so (not outrageous in
the least), then the TN is like 10 unless you happen to be wearing military
grade armor. I'd take my chances with the TN of 4 + wound/sight any day.
(esp. since in my game we use the Companion rule that reach never penalizes
a target number of the person with worse reach, just lowers the target
number of the person with better reach -- something that makes a lot of
sense since on a D6 changing the TN by just 1 slaughters the number of
successes.) However, if you have no skill in melee, then full defense is a
better option. If you know what you are doing, it makes almost no sense to
use full defense unless the person attacking you has no strength and is
using a wiffle bat, and you don't feel like kicking their ass.

--DT

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about Question about full defense, 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!