Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: Ubiquitous <weberm@*******.net>
Subject: Re: [SR2] Overcoming Armour
Date: Fri, 9 Aug 1996 08:38:11 -0400 (EDT)
At 08:44 AM 8/9/96 +0200, Paolo wrote:

>BTW: helmets should give a +1/+2 armor. So, if I shoot a guy to the
>head, what's the armor, 6? (armor jacket+helmet), 1? (helmet only). In
>the latter case, why the armor rating is given as +1/+2 and not 1/2?

Since the head normally has 0/0 armor, wearing a helmet would provide 1/2
to the head. Now, are Trolls considered to have a point of armor, or is it
just a "free" point of body?

--
"I dyde shyte thre grete toordes." Fables of Aesop,
Caxton translation,
V15 1484
Message no. 2
From: Richard M Conroy <Richard_M_Conroy@***.ir.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [SR2] Overcoming Armour
Date: Fri, 09 Aug 96 14:39:00 PDT
:>BTW: helmets should give a +1/+2 armor. So, if I shoot a guy to the
:>head, what's the armor, 6? (armor jacket+helmet), 1? (helmet only). In
:>the latter case, why the armor rating is given as +1/+2 and not 1/2?

:Since the head normally has 0/0 armor, wearing a helmet would provide
:1/2 to the head.

I don't think so. It should provide the full 6/5 or whatever. Remember
that a helmet provides such protection to a specific part of the body
that the OVERALL body armor is raised by +1/+2. When we are
concentrating on the head only, this protective value should be much
higher. This is before we take into account such common-sense ideas like
bullets actually bouncing off Kevlar Helmets in real life(tm).

Richard.
O--------------------------------------------------------------------O
\Food for thought lies in the\Richard_M_Conroy@\Roadkill on the Info \
\depth of an inedible brick. \ccm.ir.intel.com \-rmation SuperHighway\
O-------------------------------------------------------------------O



:Now, are Trolls considered to have a point of armor, or is it just a
:"free" point of body?
Message no. 3
From: Ubiquitous <weberm@*******.net>
Subject: Re: [SR2] Overcoming Armour
Date: Fri, 9 Aug 1996 11:14:23 -0400 (EDT)
At 02:39 PM 8/9/96 PDT, you wrote:

>:>BTW, helmets should give a +1/+2 armor. So, if I shoot a guy to the
>:>head, what's the armor, 6? (armor jacket+helmet), 1? (helmet only). In
>:>the latter case, why the armor rating is given as +1/+2 and not 1/2?
>
>:Since the head normally has 0/0 armor, wearing a helmet would provide
>:1/2 to the head.
>
>I don't think so. It should provide the full 6/5 or whatever. Remember
>that a helmet provides such protection to a specific part of the body
>that the OVERALL body armor is raised by +1/+2. When we are
>concentrating on the head only, this protective value should be much
>higher. This is before we take into account such common-sense ideas like
>bullets actually bouncing off Kevlar Helmets in real life(tm).

Hmm, I forgot that standard rules treat damage staging as hitting a more
critical body part, such as the head or extremities.

What does Cybertech say about piece mail armor?

>:Now, are Trolls considered to have a point of "free" armor, or is it just a

>:"free" point of body?

--
"I dyde shyte thre grete toordes." Fables of Aesop,
Caxton translation,
V15 1484
Message no. 4
From: "Ferri Pagano" <Ferri_Pagano_at_STRM__Amsterdam1@******.com>
Subject: Re[2]: [SR2] Overcoming Armour
Date: Fri, 09 Aug 96 17:16:53 EST
---------------------------------------------------------------------


At 08:44 AM 8/9/96 +0200, Paolo wrote:

>BTW: helmets should give a +1/+2 armor. So, if I shoot a guy to the
>head, what's the armor, 6? (armor jacket+helmet), 1? (helmet only). In
>the latter case, why the armor rating is given as +1/+2 and not 1/2?

Since the head normally has 0/0 armor, wearing a helmet would provide 1/2
to the head. Now, are Trolls considered to have a point of armor, or is it
just a "free" point of body?
--------------------------------------------------
No offense, but this whole idea has got to be one of the worst I've ever
seen. Shooting at people's heads, and ignoring all armor [except for a
silly 1/2]!!!!!!!! game balance anyone????????????????????????????
btw: try shooting through a security helmet, those things are HARD, yet
you say they are only worth 1/2 points!!!!??????
by comparison, an armored jack is worth 5/3 points, what do you think an
armored jack is, a 20 cm thick steel plate ????????
<4 pages of ranting...>
ok, what this means, we ALL know a helmet protects better than 1/2, it's
stated as +1/+2 in SR just to integrate it into the system , consider it a
case of layering armor.
BTW: if you use this rule in your campaign, I'd bet a lot of people use
called shots to the head.
Ferri
Message no. 5
From: Ubiquitous <weberm@*******.net>
Subject: Re: Re[2]: [SR2] Overcoming Armour
Date: Fri, 9 Aug 1996 16:37:16 -0400 (EDT)
At 05:16 PM 8/9/96 EST, Ferri wrote:
>Ubi wrote:
>>At 08:44 AM 8/9/96 +0200, Paolo wrote:

>>>BTW: helmets should give a +1/+2 armor. So, if I shoot a guy to the
>>>head, what's the armor, 6? (armor jacket+helmet), 1? (helmet only). In
>>>the latter case, why the armor rating is given as +1/+2 and not 1/2?
>>
>>Since the head normally has 0/0 armor, wearing a helmet would provide 1/2
>>to the head. Now, are Trolls considered to have a point of armor, or is it
>>just a "free" point of body?
>
>No offense, but this whole idea has got to be one of the worst I've ever
>seen.

No problem. I'm not thin-skinned.

>Shooting at people's heads, and ignoring all armor [except for a
>silly 1/2]!!!!!!!! game balance anyone????????????????????????????

Well, that's how it would be, by the books, unless there's a rule I missed
somewhere... We all agree a person wearing nothing but a helmet would be 1/2,
correct?

><4 pages of ranting...>
>
>ok, what this means, we ALL know a helmet protects better than 1/2, it's
>stated as +1/+2 in SR just to integrate it into the system , consider it a
>case of layering armor.

I know on a "normal" shot, the helmet vals are added because you
might hit the helmet, but should the armor jacket value be included if you
are aiming at the head?

I think there are new rules in the Cybertech book, but I'll have to look.
I distinctly recall optional rules concerning skull armor...

>BTW: if you use this rule in your campaign, I'd bet a lot of people use
>called shots to the head.

Actually, no one's ever tried it. The lack of the +4(?) modifier more than
makes
up for the extra level of damage they'll get if they tried.

--
"I dyde shyte thre grete toordes." Fables of Aesop,
Caxton translation,
V15 1484
Message no. 6
From: "Gurth" <gurth@******.nl>
Subject: Re: Re[2]: [SR2] Overcoming Armour
Date: Sat, 10 Aug 1996 11:20:19 +0100
Ferri Pagano said on 17:16/ 9 Aug 96...

> No offense, but this whole idea has got to be one of the worst I've ever
> seen. Shooting at people's heads, and ignoring all armor [except for a
> silly 1/2]!!!!!!!! game balance anyone????????????????????????????

If you're so worried about game balance that you need to put 28 question
marks there, you should go back and read the damn rules. There's a +4 TN
modifier for called shots, and I for one definitely make a shot to the
head a called shot. That +4 makes it quite hard to hit, especially if you
also apply other mods, like visibility, movement, and cover.

Picture this: a dark alley, with a dumpster behind which the NPCs hide.
The PCs move in, firing their heavy pistols from 15 meters away. Base TN
5, +6 for minimal light (+4 if they've got cyberware low-light or thermo,
+2 for natural), +6 for cover, +1 for walking attackers. Chuck in a
smartlink for a -2, and you've got a TN of 16, (or 14/12 if they've got
some kind of night vision).
That of course opens up the question of "Does a called shot to the head in
this situation also use the +6 mod for cover or not?" but even if you rule
it doesn't, there's still a TN of 14 to make. Or 20 if you say the cover
mod does apply. Reduce it by 2 if the character uses a smartlink II, and
you get into the "probably managable" category of target numbers, IMHO.

Game balance is *not* something you have to worry about with FASA in my
experience -- if anything they balance things too much sometimes, just
look at the cybermancy rules for an example.

> BTW: if you use this rule in your campaign, I'd bet a lot of people use
> called shots to the head.

Actually, no, they don't. Despite having access to smartlinks II with
rangefinders and any kind of ammo they can get their hands on.

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
They'll tell you you can't have your own way.
-> 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. 7
From: "Gurth" <gurth@******.nl>
Subject: Re: Re[2]: [SR2] Overcoming Armour
Date: Sat, 10 Aug 1996 11:20:19 +0100
Ubiquitous said on 16:37/ 9 Aug 96...

> I think there are new rules in the Cybertech book, but I'll have to look.
> I distinctly recall optional rules concerning skull armor...

I believe that was really only for situations where a character has, say,
5 points of armor on his cyberskull, 2 on each of his limbs, and 8 on his
torso. You average out the ratings, except for called shots to that body
part, so against generic shots the character would get 3.5 points of
armor, rounding off to 3 (I think), while against a head shot he'd get the
full 8 points.

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
They'll tell you you can't have your own way.
-> 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. 8
From: "Gurth" <gurth@******.nl>
Subject: Re: [SR2] Overcoming Armour
Date: Sat, 10 Aug 1996 11:20:19 +0100
Richard M Conroy said on 14:39/ 9 Aug 96...

> I don't think so. It should provide the full 6/5 or whatever. Remember
> that a helmet provides such protection to a specific part of the body
> that the OVERALL body armor is raised by +1/+2. When we are
> concentrating on the head only, this protective value should be much
> higher.

I agree here, if the helmet is so flimsy it only gives 1/2 armor, I think
you'd be better off buying a troll-sized piece of body armor and cutting a
few holes in the front so you can see out of it :)

> This is before we take into account such common-sense ideas like
> bullets actually bouncing off Kevlar Helmets in real life(tm).

This is where it gets harder... Which bullets bounce off helmets and
which go through? Don't look at only the Power Level if you want any kind
of realism, I think.

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
They'll tell you you can't have your own way.
-> 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. 9
From: dbuehrer@****.org (David Buehrer)
Subject: Re: Re[2]: [SR2] Overcoming Armour
Date: Sat, 10 Aug 1996 08:44:18 -0600 (MDT)
Ubiquitous wrote:
|
|>Shooting at people's heads, and ignoring all armor [except for a
|>silly 1/2]!!!!!!!! game balance anyone????????????????????????????
|
|Well, that's how it would be, by the books, unless there's a rule I missed
|somewhere... We all agree a person wearing nothing but a helmet would be 1/2,
|correct?

With only the helmet on, yes.

And, it wouldn't be that way by the books because SRII
doesn't have called shot rules that take head shots and
helmets under consideration :)

I've noticed that FASA's armor rules reflect not only the
quality of the armor, but the amount of area covered. I
think that's why they did the helmet the way they did.
It's pretty hard but only covers an additional area that's
pretty small. To figure out the actual armor of the helmet
I would just compare it to the barrier ratings for
materials. Whatever material you think the helmet equates
to use that as it's armor rating for head shots.

-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: Ubiquitous <weberm@*******.net>
Subject: Re: [SR2] Overcoming Armour
Date: Sat, 10 Aug 1996 12:34:50 -0400 (EDT)
At 11:20 AM 8/10/96 +0100, Gurth wrote:
>Ubiquitous said on 16:37/ 9 Aug 96...

>> I think there are new rules in the Cybertech book, but I'll have to look.
>> I distinctly recall optional rules concerning skull armor...
>
>I believe that was really only for situations where a character has, say,
>5 points of armor on his cyberskull, 2 on each of his limbs, and 8 on his
>torso. You average out the ratings, except for called shots to that body
>part, so against generic shots the character would get 3.5 points of
>armor, rounding off to 3 (I think), while against a head shot he'd get the
>full 8 points.

I took a look at the rules but found nothing conclusive.

Basically, you get an average armor value by getting the average of the five
areas: arms, legs, head, chest, and back, but seems to imply you take the
area value as is and doesn't say how armor is calculated for each part.
(Cybertech p49)

--
"I dyde shyte thre grete toordes." Fables of Aesop,
Caxton translation,
V15 1484
Message no. 11
From: "Gurth" <gurth@******.nl>
Subject: Re: [SR2] Overcoming Armour
Date: Sun, 11 Aug 1996 11:18:01 +0100
Ubiquitous said on 12:34/10 Aug 96...

> I took a look at the rules but found nothing conclusive.
>
> Basically, you get an average armor value by getting the average of the five
> areas: arms, legs, head, chest, and back, but seems to imply you take the
> area value as is

That's what it seems, yes. Average out the various ratings and that's it.

> and doesn't say how armor is calculated for each part. (Cybertech p49)

Not there, but if you look on page 37 you'll see that you can buy armor
(both soft and hardened) for cyberlimbs, -torsos, and -skulls.

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
They'll tell you you can't have your own way.
-> 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. 12
From: Robert Watkins <robertdw@*******.net.au>
Subject: Re: Re[2]: [SR2] Overcoming Armour
Date: Sun, 11 Aug 96 20:02:16 +1100
>Well, that's how it would be, by the books, unless there's a rule I missed
>somewhere... We all agree a person wearing nothing but a helmet would be 1/2,
>correct?

Yah, but a person wearing an armour jacket and security helmet would be
6/5 (5/3 + 1/2)


--
* *
/_\ "A friend is someone who likes the same TV programs you do" /_\
{~._.~} "Eternal nothingness is fine if you happen {~._.~}
( Y ) to be dressed for it." -- Woody Allen ( Y )
()~*~() Robert Watkins robertdw@*******.com.au ()~*~()
(_)-(_) (_)-(_)
Message no. 13
From: Marc A Renouf <jormung@*****.umich.edu>
Subject: Re: Re[2]: [SR2] Overcoming Armour
Date: Mon, 12 Aug 1996 16:05:57 -0400 (EDT)
On Sat, 10 Aug 1996, Gurth wrote:

> Picture this: a dark alley, with a dumpster behind which the NPCs hide.
> The PCs move in, firing their heavy pistols from 15 meters away. Base TN
> 5, +6 for minimal light (+4 if they've got cyberware low-light or thermo,
> +2 for natural), +6 for cover, +1 for walking attackers. Chuck in a
> smartlink for a -2, and you've got a TN of 16, (or 14/12 if they've got
> some kind of night vision).
> That of course opens up the question of "Does a called shot to the head in
> this situation also use the +6 mod for cover or not?" but even if you rule
> it doesn't, there's still a TN of 14 to make. Or 20 if you say the cover
> mod does apply. Reduce it by 2 if the character uses a smartlink II, and
> you get into the "probably managable" category of target numbers, IMHO.

Thank you, Gurth. I'm glad I'm not the only one that sees the
obvious answer to this problem. Oh, as a side not, we take the called
shot modifier or the cover modifier, whichever is higher.

> > BTW: if you use this rule in your campaign, I'd bet a lot of people use
> > called shots to the head.
>
> Actually, no, they don't. Despite having access to smartlinks II with
> rangefinders and any kind of ammo they can get their hands on.

Agreed. My players rarely make called shots in firefights,
simply because the target numbers get ridiculous. Just like in real
life, you shoot for the torso to maximize your chances of hitting at
all. Called shots are a lot more prevalent in *unarmed* combat, but
that's another story all together.

Marc

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about [SR2] Overcoming Armour, 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!