Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: David Buehrer <dbuehrer@****.ORG>
Subject: Re: Staging Damage (was Question: Rule of Six)
Date: Wed, 16 Oct 1996 11:14:24 -0600
Troy Stevenson wrote:
|
[snip: example using bullets]
|
| First, I thought both opponents rolled, compared their successes, and
|THEN the damage was staged up or down.

For missile combat the attacker roles and then stages the
damage up. Then the target makes a Body test vs the attack
and stages the damage down.

There are overflow rules in Fields of Fire that I can't
quite remember right now. From what you said so far it
wouldn't suprise me if your GM has misread those too.

For a melee attack the attacker and defender compare
success. If the attacker has more successes then the extra
success are used to stage the damage of the attack. If the
defender has more successes then the attack fails.

-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. 2
From: Gurth <gurth@******.NL>
Subject: Re: Staging Damage (was Question: Rule of Six)
Date: Thu, 17 Oct 1996 13:09:59 +0100
David Buehrer said on 11:14/16 Oct 96...

> | First, I thought both opponents rolled, compared their successes, and
> |THEN the damage was staged up or down.
>
> For missile combat the attacker roles and then stages the
> damage up. Then the target makes a Body test vs the attack
> and stages the damage down.

No, Troy is right. First the attacker rolls, then the target rolls, and
the successes are compared. Only then is damage staged up or down
accordingly. This goes for both melee and ranged combat.

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
"Apestaartje"?!?
-> 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: Loki <loki@*******.COM>
Subject: Re: Staging Damage (was Question: Rule of Six)
Date: Thu, 17 Oct 1996 11:53:25 -0700
> | First, I thought both opponents rolled, compared their successes, and
> |THEN the damage was staged up or down.
>
> For missile combat the attacker roles and then stages the
> damage up. Then the target makes a Body test vs the attack
> and stages the damage down.

Bzzzzt! Wrong! SRII page 91. It clearly explains that first the attacker
rolls his success test, then the defender rolls his test. Under the next
section titled Determine Outcome of Attack it says - "Compare the successes
generated by the attacker and the target. If the attacker's successes
exceeded that target's, the attacker can raise the damage of the weapon
upward...If the attacker's successes equal the targets, the weapon does its
base damage level...If the target's success exceed the attacker's, the
target can reduce the weapon's base damage downward."

There are slight nuances between this way listed in the rules and how you
described it, but they're significant changes. Mainly if you stage damage
and then have the target resist it, the attacker sometimes has a success
that ends up not counting.

@>-,--'--- Loki

CLARKE'S THIRD LAW:
Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.

*********************************************
Poisoned Elves
http://www.netzone.com/~loki/
*********************************************
Message no. 4
From: David Buehrer <dbuehrer@******.CARL.ORG>
Subject: Re: Staging Damage (was Question: Rule of Six)
Date: Thu, 17 Oct 1996 13:13:11 -0600
Loki wrote:
|
|> | First, I thought both opponents rolled, compared their successes, and
|> |THEN the damage was staged up or down.
|>
|> For missile combat the attacker roles and then stages the
|> damage up. Then the target makes a Body test vs the attack
|> and stages the damage down.
|
|Bzzzzt! Wrong! SRII page 91. It clearly explains that first the attacker

[snip]

Yeah, Gurth allready pointed out my error. But thanks for
quoting the exact rule for me. I must have been a little
fuzzed out when I wrote that. :)

-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. 5
From: Loki <loki@*******.COM>
Subject: Re: Staging Damage (was Question: Rule of Six)
Date: Thu, 17 Oct 1996 12:31:28 -0700
> |Bzzzzt! Wrong! SRII page 91. It clearly explains that first the attacker
>
> [snip]
>
> Yeah, Gurth allready pointed out my error. But thanks for
> quoting the exact rule for me. I must have been a little
> fuzzed out when I wrote that. :)
>
> -David

No problem. Just keeping you sharp. GM courtesy. ;o)

@>-,--'--- Loki

CLARKE'S THIRD LAW:
Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.

*********************************************
Poisoned Elves
http://www.netzone.com/~loki/
*********************************************

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about Staging Damage (was Question: Rule of Six), 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!