Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Number Ten)
Subject: Rules Question: integrating melee/ranged combat.
Date: Tue Aug 20 19:30:01 2002
I'm a bit puzzled about how melee and ranged combat are
supposed to work -together-.

Let me lay out a hypothetical situation. Corp goon A
is behind an overturned desk, pouring fire from his assault rifle
into a team of shadowrunners. Shadowrunner B vaults over the desk and
engages him hand-to-hand.

Goon A rolled a 24 on his initiative, B rolled a 21.

Initiative pass 1:
On a 24, goon A fires at the shadowrunners.
On a 21, B vaults over the desk and attacks.
Both A and B roll unarmed combat or armed combat or whatever. Does A get
a penalty for having an unwieldy ranged weapon in his hands? It's common
sense, but is nowhere in the rules.

Initiative pass 2:
Can goon A fire at B, even though B is engaging him hand-to-hand?
If so, does he get a penalty to hit B, who is dancing about with a katana?

--Number 10





====number_10_ox@**********.com

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
HotJobs - Search Thousands of New Jobs
http://www.hotjobs.com
Message no. 2
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Damion Milliken)
Subject: Rules Question: integrating melee/ranged combat.
Date: Tue Aug 20 20:00:01 2002
Number Ten writes:

> I'm a bit puzzled about how melee and ranged combat are
> supposed to work -together-.

You're not the only one ;-).

> Let me lay out a hypothetical situation. Corp goon A
> is behind an overturned desk, pouring fire from his assault rifle
> into a team of shadowrunners. Shadowrunner B vaults over the desk and
> engages him hand-to-hand.
>
> Goon A rolled a 24 on his initiative, B rolled a 21.
>
> Initiative pass 1:
> On a 24, goon A fires at the shadowrunners.
> On a 21, B vaults over the desk and attacks.
> Both A and B roll unarmed combat or armed combat or whatever. Does A get
> a penalty for having an unwieldy ranged weapon in his hands? It's common
> sense, but is nowhere in the rules.

As far as I know, the SR rules do not in any way directly limit Goon A.

However, if you note, the description for the skill Unarmed Combat
specifically mentions that it is "based solely on the use of the individual's
own body". It could be argued, therefore, that Goon A could not roll Unarmed
Combat in response to Runner B's melee attack on him, as he was holding a
weapon in his hands at the time.

This, incidently, is the approach that I take. Goon A can use his Free
Action (everyone gets a Free Action on any Phase in which another character
acts, as long as they have already acted themselves - in this case, Goon A
acted on 24, so he could take a Free Action at 21 when attacked in melee by
Runner B) to drop his weapon and thus use his Unarmed Combat skill. Before
anyone yells at me that Free Actions taken in another character's Phase
occur last - I already know this, but make an exception for this
circumstance.

A slightly more official way of looking at it might be to consider whether
Goon A has a melee skill that is appropriate to the weapon that he has in
his hands. The weapon being an Assault Rifle, it would seem reasonable to
approximate it to either a Club (if used for blunt bashing), or an Edged
Weapon (if equipped with a bayonett). If he has the right skill, then he
could counterattack with the Assault Rifle (he could also default). Note,
however, that it could be argued that since a Ready Weapon Simple Action was
not spent to prepare the weapon for melee combat, that it could not be used
for such (presumably, Goon A already spent a Ready Weapon Simple Action to
prepare the Assault Rifle for ranged combat). I don't agree with this, and
allow the Assault Rifle to be used for melee combat. However, I _do_ require
that a Ready Weapon Simple Action be spent to prepare the weapon for ranged
combat use again, if it was used for melee combat.

> Initiative pass 2:
> Can goon A fire at B, even though B is engaging him hand-to-hand?
> If so, does he get a penalty to hit B, who is dancing about with a katana?

This one, however, does have a clear cut answer in the rules. You'll note in
the Ranged Combat Modifiers that there is an "Attacker in melee combat"
modifier of "+2 per opponent". So, yes, Goon A has a +2 modifier to shoot at
_anyone_, due to Runner B's prancing about with a katana in his immediate
vicinity.

--
Damion Milliken University of Wollongong
Unofficial Shadowrun Guru E-mail: dam01@***.edu.au
-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.12
GE d- s++:-- a26 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------
Message no. 3
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Max Noel)
Subject: Rules Question: integrating melee/ranged combat.
Date: Tue Aug 20 20:05:01 2002
--======4B5D19======Content-Type: text/plain; x-avg-checked=avg-ok-1978186D;
charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

At 16:34 20/08/2002 -0700, Number Ten wrote:

>Initiative pass 1:
>On a 24, goon A fires at the shadowrunners.
>On a 21, B vaults over the desk and attacks.
> Both A and B roll unarmed combat or armed combat or whatever. Does A get
>a penalty for having an unwieldy ranged weapon in his hands? It's common
>sense, but is nowhere in the rules.

Well, an easy and elegant way to resolve the situation is to have
A roll the Clubs skill instead of Hand-to-Hand (default to HtH if he
doesn't have it => +2), since he doesn't have time to drop his big weapon
(I assume AR-sized weapon; anything smaller can probably be dropped with a
free action without getting in the way afterwards) and is in fact using it
to defend himself. If the weapon is REALLY big, use a "unwieldy melee
weapon" modifier to the test.

>Initiative pass 2:
>Can goon A fire at B, even though B is engaging him hand-to-hand?
>If so, does he get a penalty to hit B, who is dancing about with a katana?

Well, I don't think there's an official ruling for this, so here's
how I would treat it. Goon A uses a simple action and rolls Quickness (TN =
B's Edged Weapons skill + Reach). If he succeeds, he successfully
"disengages" from the melee fight and he can use his 2nd simple action to
fire at B. I'd give "point blank" range a base TN of 2.

But then again, it's just my 2 cents.

-- Wild_Cat

maxnoel_fr@*****.fr
ICQ UIN: 85274019
-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.12
GAT d-(+) s++: a---?@ C++(++++)>$ !U L+ E- W++@ N w+(++@) !O M- PS(+) PE
Y(+) PGP++ t 5 X R+(+++>$) tv+ b++(+++) DI+@ D++ G e(+++>$) h! r y
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------

--======4B5D19======Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-avgÎrt;
x-avg-checked=avg-ok-1978186D
Content-Disposition: inline


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.380 / Virus Database: 213 - Release Date: 24/07/2002

--======4B5D19=======--

___________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!? -- Une adresse @*****.fr gratuite et en français !
Yahoo! Mail : http://fr.mail.yahoo.com
Message no. 4
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Markus Widmer)
Subject: AW: Rules Question: integrating melee/ranged combat.
Date: Wed Aug 21 04:20:01 2002
<snip>
> You'll
> note in
> the Ranged Combat Modifiers that there is an "Attacker in melee
> combat"
> modifier of "+2 per opponent". So, yes, Goon A has a +2 modifier to
> shoot at
> _anyone_, due to Runner B's prancing about with a katana in his
> immediate
> vicinity.

Is there any method to resolve whether a character shooting into
melee combat actually the wrong guy?

Markus
Message no. 5
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Gurth)
Subject: Rules Question: integrating melee/ranged combat.
Date: Wed Aug 21 04:55:06 2002
According to Max Noel, on Wed, 21 Aug 2002 the word on the street was...

> Well, an easy and elegant way to resolve the situation is to
> have A roll the Clubs skill instead of Hand-to-Hand (default to HtH if he
> doesn't have it => +2), since he doesn't have time to drop his big weapon

But what if goon A decides to kick shadowrunner B? He's not using his
rifle, but is making a melee attack, so he should be using Unarmed Combat
skill...

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
Huh?
-> 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. 6
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Max Noel)
Subject: Rules Question: integrating melee/ranged combat.
Date: Wed Aug 21 07:05:01 2002
--======nD17E4======Content-Type: text/plain; x-avg-checked=avg-ok-5E955ECF;
charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

At 10:50 21/08/2002 +0200, Gurth wrote:

>According to Max Noel, on Wed, 21 Aug 2002 the word on the street was...
>
> > Well, an easy and elegant way to resolve the situation is to
> > have A roll the Clubs skill instead of Hand-to-Hand (default to HtH if he
> > doesn't have it => +2), since he doesn't have time to drop his big weapon
>
>But what if goon A decides to kick shadowrunner B? He's not using his
>rifle, but is making a melee attack, so he should be using Unarmed Combat
>skill...

Well, that would be if A had the initiative. Here, B is the
attacker. A is defending himself and thus has no access to martial arts
maneuvers. Besides, defending yourself from a katana attack with your feet
is kinda awkward...


-- Wild_Cat

maxnoel_fr@*****.fr
ICQ UIN: 85274019
-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.12
GAT d-(+) s++: a---?@ C++(++++)>$ !U L+ E- W++@ N w+(++@) !O M- PS(+) PE
Y(+) PGP++ t 5 X R+(+++>$) tv+ b++(+++) DI+@ D++ G e(+++>$) h! r y
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------

--======nD17E4======Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-avgÎrt;
x-avg-checked=avg-ok-5E955ECF
Content-Disposition: inline


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.380 / Virus Database: 213 - Release Date: 24/07/2002

--======nD17E4=======--

___________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!? -- Une adresse @*****.fr gratuite et en français !
Yahoo! Mail : http://fr.mail.yahoo.com
Message no. 7
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Bill Gatchell)
Subject: Rules Question: integrating melee/ranged combat
Date: Wed Aug 21 13:10:01 2002
I would have to say that the GM at this point should put himself on the
receiving end of an HtH attack. On one hand will I just try and make a snap
shot at this lunatic with the blade? Maybe taking him out completely? OR
will I try to match my HtH techniques with someone who seems to be so
confident in his HtH abilities that he ACTUALLY carries/uses a sword?

GM's use some common sense and make a call and assign a penalty or bonus.

"Never bring a knife to a gunfight."


_________________________________________________________________
Join the world’s largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail.
http://www.hotmail.com
Message no. 8
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Gurth)
Subject: Rules Question: integrating melee/ranged combat.
Date: Wed Aug 21 13:20:01 2002
According to Max Noel, on Wed, 21 Aug 2002 the word on the street was...

> Well, that would be if A had the initiative. Here, B is the
> attacker. A is defending himself and thus has no access to martial arts
> maneuvers. Besides, defending yourself from a katana attack with your
> feet is kinda awkward...

It depends on what you call a martial arts maneuver, I suppose. Doing some
fancy Bruce Lee kick would be, IMO, but I wouldn't call just any old kick
at the opponents legs a martial arts move...

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
Huh?
-> 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. 9
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Lone Eagle)
Subject: Rules Question: integrating melee/ranged combat
Date: Thu Aug 22 04:10:02 2002
>From: "Bill Gatchell" <b_gatchell@*******.com>
>"Never bring a knife to a gunfight."

Unless you're really really good with it, but make sure you bring a gun as
well!

Shoot the mage first, when you've done that look for anyone carrying a
sword.

_________________________________________________________________
MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos:
http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx
Message no. 10
From: dam01@***.edu.au (Damion Milliken)
Subject: Rules Question: integrating melee/ranged combat.
Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2002 13:19:27 +1000
Markus Widmer writes:

> Is there any method to resolve whether a character shooting into
> melee combat actually the wrong guy?

There isn't, but Marc Renouf has a good house rule regarding accidently
firing _through_ cover which could easily be applied. It's at
http://www-personal.umich.edu/~jormung/shadowrun/rules.html

Basically, the rule says that if you're shooting a target that has cover 6,
and you only miss the TN by half the cover (3 here), then you still hit them
through the cover. So, to adapt, you might be able to say "the melee is
thick, fast and furious, firing into it gives a +4 TN modifier due to
obscuration of the target". Then, if the firer misses the final TN by half
the modifier (ie, 2 now), then they hit someone else.

--
Damion Milliken University of Wollongong
Unofficial Shadowrun Guru E-mail: dam01@***.edu.au
-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.12
GE d- s++:-- a26 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------
Message no. 11
From: dam01@***.edu.au (Damion Milliken)
Subject: Rules Question: integrating melee/ranged combat.
Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2002 13:22:32 +1000
Gurth writes:

> > Well, an easy and elegant way to resolve the situation is to
> > have A roll the Clubs skill instead of Hand-to-Hand (default to HtH if he
> > doesn't have it => +2), since he doesn't have time to drop his big weapon
>
> But what if goon A decides to kick shadowrunner B? He's not using his
> rifle, but is making a melee attack, so he should be using Unarmed Combat
> skill...

It might be fair to apply the "character has superior position" modifer to
runner B, then, seeing as Goon A has only his feet with which to
counterattack, which must surely put him at a loss. So, while Goon A might
not suffer a modifier, runner B will receive a -1 TN bonus.

--
Damion Milliken University of Wollongong
Unofficial Shadowrun Guru E-mail: dam01@***.edu.au
-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.12
GE d- s++:-- a26 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------
Message no. 12
From: dam01@***.edu.au (Damion Milliken)
Subject: Rules Question: integrating melee/ranged combat.
Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2002 13:25:09 +1000
Max Noel writes:

> Well, that would be if A had the initiative. Here, B is the
> attacker. A is defending himself and thus has no access to martial arts
> maneuvers. Besides, defending yourself from a katana attack with your feet
> is kinda awkward...

Are you sure that characters defending themselves have no access to martial
arts maneouvres? I'm pretty sure that some of them are rather defensive in
nature, actually.

Of course, it will be a little difficult to defend properly against a katana
attack with only your bare hands and feet. But this is somewhat accounted
for in the reach modifier that the attacker receives. It's easier to attack
with a katana (by -1 TN), so the attacker gets more succeses, which makes it
harder to defend against unless you've something with a bit of length to it,
too.

--
Damion Milliken University of Wollongong
Unofficial Shadowrun Guru E-mail: dam01@***.edu.au
-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.12
GE d- s++:-- a26 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------
Message no. 13
From: maxnoel_fr@*****.fr (Max Noel)
Subject: Rules Question: integrating melee/ranged combat.
Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2002 15:08:42 +0200
---------------------- multipart/mixed attachment
At 13:25 27/08/2002 +1000, Damion Milliken wrote:

>Are you sure that characters defending themselves have no access to martial
>arts maneouvres? I'm pretty sure that some of them are rather defensive in
>nature, actually.

I can't check right now (CC belongs to another guy in my group)
but IIRC the defender just rolls unarmed combat (or whatever martial art
he's using) + combat pool. No manoeuvers allowed. But it'd be better if
someone who has access to CC can check that.

-- Wild_Cat


maxnoel_fr@*****.fr
ICQ UIN: 85274019
-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.12
GAT d-(+) s++: a---?@ C++(++++)>$ !U L+ E- W++@ N w+(++@) !O M- PS(+) PE
Y(+) PGP++ t 5 X R+(+++>$) tv+ b++(+++) DI+@ D++ G e(+++>$) h! r y
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------

---------------------- multipart/mixed attachment

---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.380 / Virus Database: 213 - Release Date: 24/07/2002

---------------------- multipart/mixed attachment--

___________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!? -- Une adresse @*****.fr gratuite et en français !
Yahoo! Mail : http://fr.mail.yahoo.com
Message no. 14
From: psycho@*********.co.nz (Keith Duthie)
Subject: Rules Question: integrating melee/ranged combat.
Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2002 02:10:02 +1200 (NZST)
On Tue, 27 Aug 2002, Max Noel wrote:

> I can't check right now (CC belongs to another guy in my group)
> but IIRC the defender just rolls unarmed combat (or whatever martial art
> he's using) + combat pool. No manoeuvers allowed. But it'd be better if
> someone who has access to CC can check that.

I'm surprised nobody else has responded to this yet.

"A combat maneuver only modifies a character's attack or defense test; it
is not a test..." p91 CC.

This implies that a maneuver can be used for defense. And the fact that
some maneuvers are, according to the book, usable with any combat option,
you can even use full defense with many of them.

--
Who messed with my anti-paranoia shot?
http://users.albatross.co.nz/~psycho/ O- -><-
Message no. 15
From: maxnoel_fr@*****.fr (Max Noel)
Subject: Rules Question: integrating melee/ranged combat.
Date: Wed, 28 Aug 2002 17:17:02 +0200
---------------------- multipart/mixed attachment
At 02:10 29/08/2002 +1200, Keith Duthie wrote:

>"A combat maneuver only modifies a character's attack or defense test; it
>is not a test..." p91 CC.

I stand corrected. Thanks for the info.


-- Wild_Cat

---------------------- multipart/mixed attachment

---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.380 / Virus Database: 213 - Release Date: 24/07/2002

---------------------- multipart/mixed attachment--

___________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!? -- Une adresse @*****.fr gratuite et en français !
Yahoo! Mail : http://fr.mail.yahoo.com

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about Rules Question: integrating melee/ranged combat., 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!