Logs for ShadowRN and Associated Mailing Lists

From:	jjvanp@*****.com (Jan Jaap van Poelgeest)
Subject:	staging up grenades & rebounds
Date:	Tue, 30 Nov 2004 06:22:31 -0800 (PST)

Message no. 1 Shiro's post had me thinking & though I'm sure it's
come up before I was wondering what a post regarding
solutions for staging up grenade damage & rebound
calculation would do.

As it is I can see a number of possibilities:

1). Use throwing skill/STR successes to stage. This
just seems wrong, however, as this aspect of the skill
should be concerned with the actual placement of the
grenade, while the grenade itself is what causes the
damage.

2). I think this might be Gurth's solution: give
explosives a certain number of dice (dependent on
what?) that are rolled against TN4 once they explode
to stage the damage. This makes grenades capable of
inflicting the deadly damage we know they can do, yet
doesn't rely on the "topspin given to the grenade by
its masterful thrower" to let this happen; the
physics of the situation are not dependent on
character skills.

3). Stage according to how many blast "rebounds" of
the shockwave hit the intended victim: for every X
number of rebounds the damage stages up. I like this
solution because it's ostensibly simple and seems to
tie together the notion that more salsa = increased
deadliness (as with spicy nachos).

4). Alternatively, for every X power that the salsa
effect increases the damage, the damage level gets
staged. I'd find it difficult to settle on a
reasonable number, though.

Finally, on blast wave rebounds:

I believe a bit of a discussion has been held about
this already, with the "domed room inflicting infinite
damage" example showing were the rules might be
lacking.

It might therefore be prudent to limit blast rebounds
to the nearest surfaces with sufficient Object
Resistance to reflect the blast in the 4 compass
directions (possibly aligned so as to inflict the
maximum amount of damage). The underlying reasoning
here is that any resultant staging and increase in
damage power represent the aggregate effect of the
bazillion other blast wave rebounds.

One can make grenades even more deadly by using the
nearest blast wave reflecting surface classifiable as
"the ceiling", or if the grenade is supposed to
explode in mid-air, the closest two vertical-plane
surfaces for purposes of calculating blast wave
rebound. This seems needless, however, unless the
grenade is being thrown at something beneath a
concrete parapet or somesuch, though even then one
could argue that the physics of a grenade explosion
work primarily on the horizontal plane.

Alternatively, if one wishes to play grenades closer
to how FASA probably wanted them to work, consider the
increase in damage from the rebound to be calculated
from a single line on the horizontal plane that
encompasses all the rebounds. I.E: from the impact
point a line is drawn to the closest wall, then back
to the thing currently resisting damage. The blast
wave line must continue in the direction that it was
going once it strikes the resisting thing, however, so
the closest surface to the resisting thing in that
particular direction is then used for the next
rebound, back to the resisting thing, until the blast
wave runs out. An angled surface would still be
presumed to bounce the line straight back.

Alternatively, to reduce complications, find the
distance between resisting thing and closest wall
(opposite the incoming blast direction) and simply
bounce the power of the initial blast wave that hits
the thing back and forth through this distance until
it runs out.

As an additional rule, one might argue that armor
provides living targets with an Object Resistance,
thereby negating blast wave rebound damage increases
after a while, as the blast wave effectively rebounds
off the resisting thing's armor (which, incidentally,
could make a grenade thrown into a crowd with some
conveniently spaced trolls in it incredibly deadly :).

Since rebound damage will have to be calculated
anyway, I think staging options 3 and 4 are quite
workable, though they do mean that a
non-D-damage-level grenade in the open will never kill
a person, which in turn seems odd.

Any thoughts? Apologies if the whole rebound thing's
too obsessive with detail.

Cheers,

Jan Jaap

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Meet the all-new My Yahoo! - Try it today!
http://my.yahoo.com

From:	gurth@******.nl (Gurth)
Subject:	staging up grenades & rebounds
Date:	Tue, 30 Nov 2004 15:41:12 +0100

Message no. 2 According to Jan Jaap van Poelgeest, on Tuesday 30 November 2004 15:22 the
word on the street was...

> 1). Use throwing skill/STR successes to stage. This
> just seems wrong, however, as this aspect of the skill
> should be concerned with the actual placement of the
> grenade, while the grenade itself is what causes the
> damage.

You could use both the regular method and this one: use successes to reduce
scatter, and any leftover ones stage the damage up.

> 2). I think this might be Gurth's solution: give
> explosives a certain number of dice (dependent on
> what?) that are rolled against TN4 once they explode
> to stage the damage.

That's the optional rule from SR3 that I quoted (and in fact dates from
Fields of Fire); the number of dice is one-half the Power level.

One thing you will have to ask yourself is whether you _want_ grenades to
be capable of instant death. There is a good reason SR's grenades cause a
base of Serious damage, instead of Deadly, and it's very likely the fact
that FASA wanted them to be at least somewhat survivable, rather than
being firefight-ending weapons.

--
Gurth@******.nl - Stone Age: http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
Kemen (keemde, h gekeemd): het spelen van computerspelletjes
-> Possibly NAGEE Editor & ShadowRN GridSec * Triangle Virtuoso <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Site: 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

From:	jjvanp@*****.com (Jan Jaap van Poelgeest)
Subject:	staging up grenades & rebounds
Date:	Wed, 1 Dec 2004 03:52:57 -0800 (PST)

Message no. 3 --- Gurth <gurth@******.nl> wrote:

> > 1). Use throwing skill/STR successes to stage.
> This
> > just seems wrong, however, as this aspect of the
> skill
> > should be concerned with the actual placement of
> the
> > grenade, while the grenade itself is what causes
> the
> > damage.
>
> You could use both the regular method and this one:
> use successes to reduce
> scatter, and any leftover ones stage the damage up.

This might be able of representing "cooking" quite
well and it could eliminate the need for
distinguishing between booby-traps and well-boiled
grenades. Still, read on...

> One thing you will have to ask yourself is whether
> you _want_ grenades to
> be capable of instant death. There is a good reason
> SR's grenades cause a
> base of Serious damage, instead of Deadly, and it's
> very likely the fact
> that FASA wanted them to be at least somewhat
> survivable, rather than
> being firefight-ending weapons.

Perhaps a grenade should be capable of ending a
firefight held in confined quarters, whereas in an
open area they're more survivable. This seems a
strange rule of thumb to base a staging model on,
though. That being said, the above staging rule
doesn't allow for such a distinction, as throwing TN's
are the same whether inside or out in the open.

I guess I just like the notion of linking the amount
of rebound that affects the damage resistee (or the
Power increase that thereby results) to the damage
staging: it connects the amount of shrapnel&shockwave
that bounces into the resistee to the deadliness of
the grenade. One could even say that the scatter of a
grenade in fact incorporates the process of cooking;
if it scatters a lot it wasn't appropriately cooked
for exploding when landing on that location. Thus, on
this account of grenade damage the power of the
grenade determines its capability to kill, while the
skill of throwing a grenade is also accurately
represented and useful. Useful, since being able to
more precisely place the grenade results in an ability
to make it more deadly, while a grenade accidentally
placed in a good location will retain its deadliness
too.

All this talk reminds me of a
character-deadliness-concept; consider a sammie with a
high initiative, capable of dual-wielding two
pistol-sized micro-grenade launchers that fire as a SA
(IDHMBWM, but I thought these are mentioned
somewhere... they're plausible, anyway). That's 4
grenades placed (more or less accurately) in a single
initiative pass. Highly likely to make life difficult
for anyone, whether out in the open or inside.
Thankfully it's not very stealthy, or combat would
just turn into a "who launches lots of grenades
first".

Cheers,

Jan Jaap

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - Helps protect you from nasty viruses.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail

From:	davek@***.lonestar.org (David Kettler)
Subject:	staging up grenades & rebounds
Date:	Thu, 2 Dec 2004 01:45:58 +0000

Message no. 4 On Wed, Dec 01, 2004 at 03:52:57AM -0800, Jan Jaap van Poelgeest wrote:
>
> --- Gurth <gurth@******.nl> wrote:
>
> > > 1). Use throwing skill/STR successes to stage.
> > This
> > > just seems wrong, however, as this aspect of the
> > skill
> > > should be concerned with the actual placement of
> > the
> > > grenade, while the grenade itself is what causes
> > the
> > > damage.
> >
> > You could use both the regular method and this one:
> > use successes to reduce
> > scatter, and any leftover ones stage the damage up.
>
> This might be able of representing "cooking" quite
> well and it could eliminate the need for
> distinguishing between booby-traps and well-boiled
> grenades. Still, read on...
>
>
> > One thing you will have to ask yourself is whether
> > you _want_ grenades to
> > be capable of instant death. There is a good reason
> > SR's grenades cause a
> > base of Serious damage, instead of Deadly, and it's
> > very likely the fact
> > that FASA wanted them to be at least somewhat
> > survivable, rather than
> > being firefight-ending weapons.
>
> Perhaps a grenade should be capable of ending a
> firefight held in confined quarters, whereas in an
> open area they're more survivable. This seems a
> strange rule of thumb to base a staging model on,
> though. That being said, the above staging rule
> doesn't allow for such a distinction, as throwing TN's
> are the same whether inside or out in the open.
>

You know, this discussion of cooking and what not makes me wonder how air-timed
mini-grenades would fit into it. Aren't they effectively automatically cooked?

Also, this touches on a point that has always bothered me: Under the standard Shadowrun
rules it is impossible to hold a grenade for a while and then release it for the purpose
of making it more difficult to pick up and toss back. Really, for a character with high
quickness it isn't actually that hard to toss a standard grenade back. In real life you
could in theory just hold on to the grenade for a little while and make it way more
difficult. Of course, if you're going to include that sort of thing there has to be some
risk of blowing yourself up by accident. That is, after all, the danger.

--
Dave Kettler
davek@***.lonestar.org
http://davek.freeshell.org/
SDF Public Access UNIX System - http://sdf.lonestar.org

From:	gurth@******.nl (Gurth)
Subject:	staging up grenades & rebounds
Date:	Thu, 2 Dec 2004 13:01:38 +0100

Message no. 5 According to David Kettler, on Thursday 02 December 2004 02:45 the word on
the street was...

> Also, this touches on a point that has always bothered me: Under the
> standard Shadowrun rules it is impossible to hold a grenade for a while
> and then release it for the purpose of making it more difficult to pick
> up and toss back. Really, for a character with high quickness it isn't
> actually that hard to toss a standard grenade back. In real life you
> could in theory just hold on to the grenade for a little while and make
> it way more difficult. Of course, if you're going to include that sort
> of thing there has to be some risk of blowing yourself up by accident.
> That is, after all, the danger.

Simple solution: when a PC readies a grenade, ask for how many initiative
passes the delay is set (because this is adjustable in SR), charging a
Simple Action to adjust the timer if required (that is, if the delay is
something other than what the player has declared as the "standard" for
his or her grenades). From this point on the PC can do four things: hold
on to the grenade without activating it, throw the grenade, cook it off,
or put it away again. Once thrown or starting to cook it off, you simply
count initiative passes and have it explode at the appropriate time.

The potential danger here is that someone rolls a high enough initiative
that sufficient initiative passes occur before the character gets another
action in which to actually throw the grenade.

--
Gurth@******.nl - Stone Age: http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
Kemen (keemde, h gekeemd): het spelen van computerspelletjes
-> Possibly NAGEE Editor & ShadowRN GridSec * Triangle Virtuoso <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Site: 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

From:	maxnoel_fr@*****.fr (Max Noel)
Subject:	staging up grenades & rebounds
Date:	Thu, 2 Dec 2004 14:15:27 +0000

Message no. 6 On Dec 2, 2004, at 01:45, David Kettler wrote:

> Also, this touches on a point that has always bothered me: Under the
> standard Shadowrun rules it is impossible to hold a grenade for a
> while and then release it for the purpose of making it more difficult
> to pick up and toss back. Really, for a character with high quickness
> it isn't actually that hard to toss a standard grenade back. In real
> life you could in theory just hold on to the grenade for a little
> while and make it way more difficult. Of course, if you're going to
> include that sort of thing there has to be some risk of blowing
> yourself up by accident. That is, after all, the danger.

Most people I've played with (including myself) almost exclusively use
grenades that detonate on impact. It's a way of solving the problem, I
guess...

-- Wild_Cat
maxnoel_fr at yahoo dot fr -- ICQ #85274019
"Look at you hacker... A pathetic creature of meat and bone, panting
and sweating as you run through my corridors... How can you challenge a
perfect, immortal machine?"

From:	jjvanp@*****.com (Jan Jaap van Poelgeest)
Subject:	staging up grenades & rebounds
Date:	Thu, 2 Dec 2004 06:33:52 -0800 (PST)

Message no. 7 > The potential danger here is that someone rolls a
> high enough initiative
> that sufficient initiative passes occur before the
> character gets another
> action in which to actually throw the grenade.

CIIW, but couldn't the character just start cooking
the grenade (free action?), then hold the throwing
action until whenever they please? This is besides the
fact that cooking is an unnecessary consideration
within the context of the explosion's timing in the
initiative system, except for throws that are banked
off walls, since grenades can be set to impact
detonation (i.e.: if you can make a grenade land
somewhere without bouncing, it can be made to explode
when it hits that place). Just read Max Noel's mention
of this, too.

As I consider it currently, given that there are
impact grenades that eliminate the need for cooking
when there is a direct throwing line, cooking a
grenade is only useful for making the grenade explode
at a different point within the vertical plane,
thereby inflicting more damage within its potential
radius as the shrapnel can suffuse the area better.
The cooker is aiming for a point behind the point
where the grenade will actually explode, or makes the
throw "curve vertically" so as to have the grenade
explode in mid-air as it falls towards its landing
point.

On this analysis, a well-cooked grenade might in fact
inflict more damage than a normal one (add "cooking
skill check" successes to damage staging?). Or allow
banked shots to explode upon impact. A convenient
measure for "cooking skill" seems to be the Throwing
(grenades) specialization, thereby allowing GM's who
are bothered about this type of detail in their
campaign (it's not as if SR combat takes way too long
already) to construct a game mechanic (or use the
existing SR3 grenade rules, as they add throwing skill
successes to grenade damage staging) in order to
simulate this intricacy of grenade combat.

The way I'd run grenades&explosives is letting
Throwing Skill determine placement by only reducing
scatter, then let the total Power increase from
rebound (which is calculated using one "rebound line"
only) determine the damage level staging (either by
means of rolling a number of dice equal to power
increase/2 vs. TN(4), or standard ratio between
increase and staging level).

In addition, I'd give the player a choice of being
able to cook the grenade, thereby allowing (leftover)
throwing skill successes to stage the grenade damage
up (in addition to rebound damage). The risk with
cooking a grenade would be that it gives opponents a
chance to throw it back (I realise that seems to
contradict my previous analysis of how cooking
increases damage, but it's an abstract combat system,
so what the hey.. besides, they might be able to catch
it in mid-air, or hit it back with their baseball bats
or..or...).

Banked shots:

Option I:

A shot banked off another surface will involve a
scatter situation for every bounce the grenade makes,
thus requiring more successes from the thrower in
order to be accurate, as one would expect it to.

Option II:

A +2 to the TN for every surface the shot banks off,
one success means the grenade scatters from the
intended point of impact, no successes has it scatter
from the first surface it banks off.

Banked shots are necessarily made with cooked
grenades.

Throwing back:

I suppose any character with an available action that
has a non-impact-exploding grenade's "explosion point"
within a meter of them could make a Willpower (4)
check, then a Quickness (5-ish?) test to be able to
throw a grenade (QUI Successes*STR)meters away, then
scatter, reduced by successes on QUI (allow the
character to throw the grenade away even if the
Willpower check is failed, but let the direction of
the throw be determined by the scatter diagram :).
Damage from the explosion is determined by the
grenade's power level+rebound (and, IMC, staging
resulting from rebound).

Cheers,

Jan Jaap

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Take Yahoo! Mail with you! Get it on your mobile phone.
http://mobile.yahoo.com/maildemo

From:	korishinzo@*****.com (Ice Heart)
Subject:	staging up grenades & rebounds
Date:	Thu, 2 Dec 2004 08:18:43 -0800 (PST)

Message no. 8 > Most people I've played with (including myself) almost exclusively
> use grenades that detonate on impact. It's a way of solving the
> problem, I guess...

Ooo, bad bad bad idea. :>

At least in my games. When grenades are launched or thrown, I take
into account the approximate 'clutter' in the environment. I try to
always have a grasp of various visibility and projectile impediments
a given terrain contains, both for calculating available cover, and
because my house rules for dodging depend on that detail.
Obfuscation and cover are rated by the TN penalty the attacker would
incur in the situation (meaning anything over a +8/blindfire is
typically ignored). With grenades and launch weapons, we calculate
this as cover/clutter +1. This means that even in an empty lot,
there is an inherent difficulty to putting a launched/thrown weapon
right where you want. (This +1 does NOT modify the TN of the attack,
instead it effects premature impact/scatter. Read on.)
Every point of cover/clutter that the attacker must contend with
raises the success threshold of the attack. So, if you are firing a
grenade launcher at a target in an empty lot, you need 1 success to
put the grenade where you intend. In a cluttered old factory
buidling, you might well need 3 or 4. In a dense forest, you could
easily need 6 successes to fire the grenade or rocket through all
cover/clutter. The difference between attack successes and attack
threshold equals the number of bounces. Suppose you fire a grenade
in the factory (3 points of clutter) and garner only 2 successes.
The grenade makes a scatter test on its way to the target, because it
hit something (NOTE: this is why impact detonated grenades are a Bad
Idea TM). With air-timed grenades, the detonation still occurs when
the projectile has gone the programmed distance, but may not be on
target anymore. In a recent battle in a heavily wooded area, a PC
fired his Ares Alpha mini-grenade launcher at a target 12 meters
away. The grenade hit a tree at 4 meters, bounced straight back, and
blew up 4 meters BEHIND him. The grenade travels farther before
bouncing when a higher number of successes are scored. In the
factory example above, the attacker needed 3 successes and got 2.
The grenade traveled 2/3 of the distance to the target before
bouncing. This also plays into how we handle timed detonation and
cooking. My house rules state that all standard grenades have a
stock timer of 5 seconds. Changing the timer between 1 and 10
seconds is a Simple Action. Altering to impact detonated, or
increments over/under the 1-10 seconds, requires a Complex Action
(Demolitions). This is handy for those booby traps: hit the trip
wire, grenade arms and detonates in 2/10 of a second. My house rules
further state that grenade throwing requires 1 second per range
category the grenade passes through. That is, a second passes during
release and short range, another during medium, another during long,
and TWO more during extreme. Seconds are loosely linked to Passes.
I've never had a combat without at least two passes per turn, and
rarely more than 3 (without riggers), so 1 to 1.5 seconds per Pass.
Launched grenades are slightly faster, passing through short range in
negligable time, and requiring one second per range category after.
Stock launch grenades are set up to remain inert for a certain range,
then arm as impact detonated. This too can be changed by a
Demolitions roll.
So, if you want a grenade to detonate without landing somewhere in
its medium range, you count three seconds and throw. I require a
free action per second so counted, approximating the effort of
keeping track in the chaos of battle, unless the character posseses
something like a retinal clock, perfect time edge, or the like.
Yes, skilled users can bank grenades.
One success on the throwing test is burned to choose the scatter
direction, and the rest are used to offset scatter distance as
desired. So, a sammie could score 5 successes on a bounced grenade
toss, and thus choose scatter direction, while still reducing scatter
by 4 successes. I apply a +2 TN penalty per bounce purposely
attempted, and unintended bounces due to clutter cannot be controlled
with successes.
This got long. I had not realized how many little house rules
variations grenades how spawned in my games. Well, other math may
vary. These work well for me. I have seen everything from
characters who become grenade scientists, to adepts whose specialty
becomes snagging grenades out to the air and tossing them back.
Nerves of steal, anyone? :>

======Korishinzo
--explosives in SR have always been too abstracted to be realistic

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com

From:	marc.renouf@******.com (Renouf, Marc A)
Subject:	staging up grenades & rebounds
Date:	Thu, 2 Dec 2004 11:51:51 -0500

Message no. 9 This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand
this format, some or all of this message may not be legible.

---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment
> -----Original Message-----
> From: korishinzo@*****.com [mailto:korishinzo@*****.com]
> Sent: Thursday, December 02, 2004 11:19 AM
>
> Ooo, bad bad bad idea. :>
>
> At least in my games. When grenades are launched or thrown,
> I take into account the approximate 'clutter' in the
> environment.

[SNIP]

> Every point of cover/clutter that the attacker must contend with
> raises the success threshold of the attack. So, if you are
> firing a grenade launcher at a target in an empty lot, you
> need 1 success to put the grenade where you intend. In a
> cluttered old factory buidling, you might well need 3 or 4.
> In a dense forest, you could easily need 6 successes to fire
> the grenade or rocket through all cover/clutter.

Why the extra layer of complication, Kori? Why not just work it to
be exactly the same as everything else and increase the target number rather
than the number of successes? If you want some kind of model for how far
the grenade gets before it explodes, simply determine how much of the
clutter target number mod the thrower missed by. Example: the PC is
throwing a grenade in an environment that the GM determines is heavy
clutter/cover (+6). In addition to the clutter/cover, there's light smoke
drifting through the area (+2) and the thrower is Lightly Wounded (+1). The
intended target is at Medium range given the Thrower's Strength (base TN 5).
So the final target number would be 5 + 1 + 2 + 6 = 14. the player rolls
his Thrown Weapons skill of 4 and dumps the maximum allowable Combat Pool
dice (total of 8 dice). He gets a roll of 1,1,3,4,5,5,8,11. This would
indicate a miss. It's also 3 less that the total target number needed to
hit, which is half of the total clutter/cover rating, which means that the
grenade makes it about half way to the target before striking a target and
deviating.
Easy, and more importantly consistent with the rest of the published
rules.

> This also plays into how we handle timed
> detonation and cooking. My house rules state that all
> standard grenades have a stock timer of 5 seconds. Changing
> the timer between 1 and 10 seconds is a Simple Action.

Actually, that may even be a canon rule, but I'd have to check.

> Yes, skilled users can bank grenades.
> One success on the throwing test is burned to choose the
> scatter direction, and the rest are used to offset scatter
> distance as desired. So, a sammie could score 5 successes on
> a bounced grenade toss, and thus choose scatter direction,
> while still reducing scatter by 4 successes. I apply a +2 TN
> penalty per bounce purposely attempted, and unintended
> bounces due to clutter cannot be controlled with successes.

I do a similar thing, but rule that each radical direction change
that the grenade must go through is essentially a "called shot" (and thus a
+4 TN modifier). That way, you can compare the results of the thrower's die
roll to the target number and figure out which called shot the grenade
failed to make, thus calculating scatter from there. I have had players
flub up trying to get cute with their grenade use. One was trying to bounce
a grenade through a doorway, but rolled abysmally and actually missed the
first bounce. The doorway was only 5 meters away and the scatter came right
back at him ... 5 meters. I ruled that instead of bouncing off the opened
door and into the room, the grenade had hit the corner formed by the edge of
the door and the doorjamb perfectly, and had bounced right back at him.
Needless to say, the end result was unpleasant.

Marc

---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://warthog.dumpshock.com/pipermail/shadowrn/attachments/9ac92c86/attachment.htm

---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment--

From:	korishinzo@*****.com (Ice Heart)
Subject:	staging up grenades & rebounds
Date:	Thu, 2 Dec 2004 10:02:19 -0800 (PST)

Message no. 10 [SNIP]
> Easy, and more importantly consistent with the rest of the
> published rules.

*grin* Because my rules were not developed in a sit-down house rules
session. They evolved haphazardly over the course of many many games
and multiple editions. My players trust me to be objectively fair
about rules (and a cold hearted bitch about everything else), so they
don't care as long as they do better than the bad guys at least 1% of
the time.

That said, I'll probably test your variation and use it. I've
actually co-opted a larger number of your house rules into mine. :)
The exception is dodging. I like my dodging rules better than any I
have seen.

> > Yes, skilled users can bank grenades.
> > One success on the throwing test is burned to choose the
> > scatter direction, and the rest are used to offset scatter
> > distance as desired. So, a sammie could score 5 successes on
> > a bounced grenade toss, and thus choose scatter direction,
> > while still reducing scatter by 4 successes. I apply a +2 TN
> > penalty per bounce purposely attempted, and unintended
> > bounces due to clutter cannot be controlled with successes.

> I do a similar thing, but rule that each radical direction change
> that the grenade must go through is essentially a "called shot"
> (and thus a +4 TN modifier). That way, you can compare the results
> of the thrower's die roll to the target number and figure out which
> called shot the grenade failed to make, thus calculating scatter
> from there. I have had players flub up trying to get cute with
> their grenade use. One was trying to bounce a grenade through a
> doorway, but rolled abysmally and actually missed the first
> bounce. The doorway was only 5 meters away and the scatter
> came right back at him ... 5 meters. I ruled that instead of
> bouncing off the opened door and into the room, the grenade had hit
> the corner formed by the edge of the door and the doorjamb
> perfectly, and had bounced right back at him. Needless to say, the
> end result was unpleasant.

LOL... very similar sort of affair to my player with the
mini-grenades in the forest. >>thunk<<... >>thud<<...
"Drek!!!"...
>>boom<<

======Korishinzo
--glad to stea... errr, borrow... other people's rules :)

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Meet the all-new My Yahoo! - Try it today!
http://my.yahoo.com

From:	jjvanp@*****.com (Jan Jaap van Poelgeest)
Subject:	staging up grenades & rebounds
Date:	Thu, 2 Dec 2004 13:44:37 -0800 (PST)

Message no. 11 > The exception is dodging. I like my dodging rules
> better than any I
> have seen.

But do you like them enough to do a comprehensive
write-up so other people can gawk astonished at your
greatness? :-D

Cheers,

Jan Jaap

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Read only the mail you want - Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail

From:	gurth@******.nl (Gurth)
Subject:	staging up grenades & rebounds
Date:	Fri, 3 Dec 2004 13:51:27 +0100

Message no. 12 According to Jan Jaap van Poelgeest, on Thursday 02 December 2004 15:33 the
word on the street was...

> CIIW, but couldn't the character just start cooking
> the grenade (free action?), then hold the throwing
> action until whenever they please?

Which is exactly what cooking off a grenade is... You activate the fuse,
then hold onto the grenade for a while before throwing it. One reason to
do this is to prevent the enemy throwing or kicking it back ("tikkie trug,
Jaap!" -- sorry :) or into a grenade sump.

> This is besides the
> fact that cooking is an unnecessary consideration
> within the context of the explosion's timing in the
> initiative system, except for throws that are banked
> off walls, since grenades can be set to impact
> detonation

Only if you set the grenade for that -- if you don't want to do this for
some reason, you can still cook them off if you want to.

> I suppose any character with an available action that
> has a non-impact-exploding grenade's "explosion point"
> within a meter of them could make a Willpower (4)
> check, then a Quickness (5-ish?) test to be able to
> throw a grenade (QUI Successes*STR)meters away, then
> scatter, reduced by successes on QUI

Or you could simply allow any character within about a meter of the grenade
to pick it up and do with it what they will. You don't require all sorts
of Quickness tests to pick up a fallen gun or computer chip, so why make
one for a grenade that's on the ground?

--
Gurth@******.nl - Stone Age: http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
Kemen (keemde, h gekeemd): het spelen van computerspelletjes
-> Possibly NAGEE Editor & ShadowRN GridSec * Triangle Virtuoso <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Site: 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

From:	jjvanp@*****.com (Jan Jaap van Poelgeest)
Subject:	staging up grenades & rebounds
Date:	Sat, 4 Dec 2004 13:47:52 -0800 (PST)

Message no. 13 > > CIIW, but couldn't the character just start
> cooking
> > the grenade (free action?), then hold the throwing
> > action until whenever they please?
>
> Which is exactly what cooking off a grenade is...
> You activate the fuse,
> then hold onto the grenade for a while before
> throwing it. One reason to
> do this is to prevent the enemy throwing or kicking
> it back ("tikkie trug,
> Jaap!" -- sorry :) or into a grenade sump.

This I realise, but as you presented it there'd be a
risk of too many initiative passes passing before the
character would get his/her/its throwing action. I
didn't quite get this, as as far as I know the held
action could be used at any time, thereby preventing a
grenade from ever exploding in one's hand unless this
was a wanted effect (or the grenade's timers are set
in a false manner i.e: boobytrapped).

> > This is besides the
> > fact that cooking is an unnecessary consideration
> > within the context of the explosion's timing in
> the
> > initiative system, except for throws that are
> banked
> > off walls, since grenades can be set to impact
> > detonation
>
> Only if you set the grenade for that -- if you don't
> want to do this for
> some reason, you can still cook them off if you want
> to.

That's being silly! Why'd I ever cook a grenade just
for the sake of cooking it? :)

> Or you could simply allow any character within about
> a meter of the grenade
> to pick it up and do with it what they will. You
> don't require all sorts
> of Quickness tests to pick up a fallen gun or
> computer chip, so why make
> one for a grenade that's on the ground?

Well, the grenade might in fact be in mid-air or
skittering along the ground at high speed when the
character attempts to throw/kick/hit/whatever it back.
The rule I suggested is basically an abstraction of
all such "difficult to catch" grenade situations,
i.e.: situations where the character is attempting to
throw the grenade back in the same initiative phase
(i.e.: same round of actions) as it was thrown. Maybe
I wouldn't demand a willpower check if the character
had Throwing (grenades), but I imagine you'd need
pretty good nerves to get into a mindset where you'd
want to touch something which you know is about to
explode. If the grenade were totally stationary near
to a character I'd definitely agree with your
suggestion and allow them to do as they'd please,
though.

Cheers,

Jan Jaap

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The all-new My Yahoo! - Get yours free!
http://my.yahoo.com

From:	gurth@******.nl (Gurth)
Subject:	staging up grenades & rebounds
Date:	Sun, 5 Dec 2004 11:06:00 +0100

Message no. 14 According to Jan Jaap van Poelgeest, on Saturday 04 December 2004 22:47 the
word on the street was...

> This I realise, but as you presented it there'd be a
> risk of too many initiative passes passing before the
> character would get his/her/its throwing action. I
> didn't quite get this, as as far as I know the held
> action could be used at any time

Who said anything about a held action? If you have one, then yes, you can
use it to throw the grenade. However, this is not always the case; you
would need to set the timer high enough for you to have at least one more
action in order to hold your action so as to throw the grenade later on.
Something like this:

Turn 1: You roll 9 for Initiative
Turn 1, pass 1:
You use your action to set the timer for 2 passes
Other people do stuff
Turn 1, pass 2:
Characters with Initiative 11+ do more stuff
Turn 2: You roll 8 for Initiative
Turn 2, pass 1:
You get another action and use it to throw the grenade
Grenade explodes at the end of the pass

But you run the risk of this happening:

Turn 1: You roll 9 for Initiative
Turn 1, pass 1:
You use your action to set the timer for 2 passes
Other people do stuff
Turn 1, pass 2:
Characters with Initiative 11+ do more stuff
Turn 1, pass 3:
Characters with Initiative 21+ do yet more stuff
Grenade explodes in your hand at the end of the pass

> > Only if you set the grenade for that -- if you don't want to do this
> > for some reason, you can still cook them off if you want to.
>
> That's being silly! Why'd I ever cook a grenade just
> for the sake of cooking it? :)

Not for the sake of it, of course. But there can be any number of reasons
why you might want to do this even if you have impact-detonated grenades.
One I can think of is to do it because you don't have any actions to spend
on changing the delay (don't say "If you can cook it off you also have the
time to change it" because if you need to set it for a certain number of
initiative passes, that's not necessarily true -- you may not get another
action for several passes).

> The rule I suggested is basically an abstraction of
> all such "difficult to catch" grenade situations,

IMHO you were adding too many dice rolls. SR combat is already slow enough
that it doesn't need any more that aren't really necessary :)

--
Gurth@******.nl - Stone Age: http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
Kemen (keemde, h gekeemd): het spelen van computerspelletjes
-> Possibly NAGEE Editor & ShadowRN GridSec * Triangle Virtuoso <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Site: 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

From:	jjvanp@*****.com (Jan Jaap van Poelgeest)
Subject:	staging up grenades & rebounds
Date:	Sun, 5 Dec 2004 05:50:26 -0800 (PST)

Message no. 15 > > This I realise, but as you presented it there'd be
> a
> > risk of too many initiative passes passing before
> the
> > character would get his/her/its throwing action. I
> > didn't quite get this, as as far as I know the
> held
> > action could be used at any time
>
> Who said anything about a held action? If you have
> one, then yes, you can
> use it to throw the grenade. However, this is not
> always the case; you
> would need to set the timer high enough for you to
> have at least one more
> action in order to hold your action so as to throw
> the grenade later on.
> Something like this:

I think you're making things needlessly complicated in
this particular case: "Throw Weapon" is a simple
action, while "set grenade timer" can't really be more
than a simple action. I'm imagining a "timer-scroll
button" with optional digital display, or a metal
twist dial with clearly marked options around it,
which when pressed primes. Such a set-up wouldn't
warrant calling the setting of a grenade's timing &
priming it a complex action, unless you're trying to
do something with it that requires a Demolitions
check.

Thus, while it is possible that one might still run a
risk when wanting to "Drop weapon" [Free Action],
"Grab grenade"[Simple Action? If not consider the
previously dropped weapon to have been fired once],
"set timer&prime it" [Simple Action] and then intend
to throw the grenade later, I will soon explain why
this is not risky (or perhaps one wants to change the
timer delay for&prime 2 grenades with the intent of
throwing them both on the next Initiative Pass).

> Turn 1: You roll 9 for Initiative
> Turn 1, pass 1:
> You use your action to set the timer for 2 passes
> Other people do stuff
> Turn 1, pass 2:
> Characters with Initiative 11+ do more stuff
> Turn 2: You roll 8 for Initiative
> Turn 2, pass 1:
> You get another action and use it to throw the
> grenade
> Grenade explodes at the end of the pass
> But you run the risk of this happening:
>
> Turn 1: You roll 9 for Initiative
> Turn 1, pass 1:
> You use your action to set the timer for 2 passes
> Other people do stuff
> Turn 1, pass 2:
> Characters with Initiative 11+ do more stuff
> Turn 1, pass 3:
> Characters with Initiative 21+ do yet more stuff
> Grenade explodes in your hand at the end of the
> pass

The problem here is that you conceive grenades as
being timed relative to *all* Initiative Passes,
whereas in fact they are timed relative to the Combat
Phases of the character that has primed the grenade
i.e.: to the initiative passes of that character alone
(see rules on page 118 SR3). Thus, any grenade priming
that goes on can always compensate for the "grenade
exploding in hand" problem *unless* the character is
somehow denied freedom of action on the next
(Initiative pass that they are capable of
acting)/(Combat Phase) through being wounded, say, or
incapacitated by means of magic.

Given that anyone priming a grenade will know how many
actions they have left on their Combat Phase within
this Initiative Pass and how many Combat Phases they
have remaining in the Combat Turn (now this *is* SR
metaphysics :), they will have to set the timer to
being higher than 2, unless they are suicidal. This is
so since the grenade will explode at the "end of the
next Initiative Pass of a Combat Turn if the character
has no more Combat Phases left within that Combat Turn
(p118, SR3)" and otherwise it will explode "in the
next Combat Phase of the character making the grenade
attack (ibid. ;)". Thus, since a character is
anticipating survival into the next Combat Turn in
order to throw the primed grenade(s) (characters who
wish the grenade to explode whilst in their possession
can make their own calculations), the grenade(s) will
never explode in their hand as the timer will simply
be set to at least "2", thereby leaving the character
the chance to throw it (they can always choose/be
forced to by others not to, though).

IMLAWO* in order to make your account cohere with SR3
rules, I think you'd have to reconceive either grenade
timing, so as to break with the official rules, or
rewrite the initiative system (which would be a good
idea if it is thereby improved :).

*: In My Lowly And Worthless Opinion

>
> > > Only if you set the grenade for that -- if you
> don't want to do this
> > > for some reason, you can still cook them off if
> you want to.
> >
> > That's being silly! Why'd I ever cook a grenade
> just
> > for the sake of cooking it? :)
>
> Not for the sake of it, of course. But there can be
> any number of reasons
> why you might want to do this even if you have
> impact-detonated grenades.
> One I can think of is to do it because you don't
> have any actions to spend
> on changing the delay (don't say "If you can cook it
> off you also have the
> time to change it" because if you need to set it for
> a certain number of
> initiative passes, that's not necessarily true --
> you may not get another
> action for several passes).

I'm not sure I understand your argument for BBQ-ing
grenades here (i.e: cooking for its own sake), but I
think it is based on the misconception of grenade
timing that I've pointed out. On second thought,
perhaps you intend to demonstrate a hypothetical
situation where the delay is set to X whereas you need
it to be Y, thus necessitating the cooking off of the
grenade for a while by means of priming it, then
holding one's throwing action.
Since the grenade's explosion is timed to one's own
Combat Phases, however, there is no point in holding a
throwing action to cook the grenade, as one might as
well change the timing/delay to "impact" and then
throw it on one's next Combat Phase (though, yes, you
*could*; the result is the same, except that holding a
primed grenade is a good reason for any opponent who
notices to start shooting at you). Note that this
counterargument assumes that setting the
delay/timing+priming is a Simple Action (priming is
pretty much a Free Action as it is included in the
"Throw Grenade" action).

> > The rule I suggested is basically an abstraction
> of
> > all such "difficult to catch" grenade situations,
>
> IMHO you were adding too many dice rolls. SR combat
> is already slow enough
> that it doesn't need any more that aren't really
> necessary :)

I just figured it'd be handy to have some rules
covering grenades that are "thrown" back within the
same Initiative Pass as that they've been thrown
(after which they are considered stationary). I just
tried to represent the chaotic nature of such a
situation by inserting quite a few dice rolls that
seemed to make some sense. YMMV, of course, and should
if it means you're having more fun playing SR that way
:-D.

Cheers,

Jan Jaap

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - 250MB free storage. Do more. Manage less.
http://info.mail.yahoo.com/mail_250

From:	gurth@******.nl (Gurth)
Subject:	staging up grenades & rebounds
Date:	Mon, 6 Dec 2004 11:12:53 +0100

Message no. 16 According to Jan Jaap van Poelgeest, on Sunday 05 December 2004 14:50 the
word on the street was...

> I think you're making things needlessly complicated in
> this particular case: "Throw Weapon" is a simple
> action

It is? *checks* Yes, it is :/ I've always made it a Complex Action, which
is probably why we're having much of this discussion :)

> Thus, while it is possible that one might still run a
> risk when wanting to "Drop weapon" [Free Action],
> "Grab grenade"[Simple Action? If not consider the
> previously dropped weapon to have been fired once],

"Ready Weapon" is a Simple Action, so taking a grenade out would be, too.

> The problem here is that you conceive grenades as
> being timed relative to *all* Initiative Passes,

I don't conceive of them like that, it was what I _suggested_ to do when
someone asked about cooking off grenades, and wanted an element of risk in
having the grenade possibly detonate early.

> I'm not sure I understand your argument for BBQ-ing
> grenades here (i.e: cooking for its own sake), but I
> think it is based on the misconception of grenade
> timing that I've pointed out.

Again: not misconception, but deliberate choice.

--
Gurth@******.nl - Stone Age: http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
Kemen (keemde, h gekeemd): het spelen van computerspelletjes
-> Possibly NAGEE Editor & ShadowRN GridSec * Triangle Virtuoso <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Site: 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

From:	jjvanp@*****.com (Jan Jaap van Poelgeest)
Subject:	staging up grenades & rebounds
Date:	Mon, 6 Dec 2004 02:32:50 -0800 (PST)

Message no. 17 > > The problem here is that you conceive grenades as
> > being timed relative to *all* Initiative Passes,
>
> I don't conceive of them like that, it was what I
> _suggested_ to do when
> someone asked about cooking off grenades, and wanted
> an element of risk in
> having the grenade possibly detonate early.

My bad, I read you as presenting this element of
danger with cooking as being part of the standard
rules, but instead you reconceived grenade explosion
timing in order to insert this danger. It's not a bad
idea, but it would mean that a character's sense of
timing is relative to the quickest person
participating in that Combat Turn. Instead the
standard rules conceive a character's sense of timing
to be based upon the own actions relative to all
Combat Turns within which one participates. Both are
plausible options.

Cheers,

Jan Jaap

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The all-new My Yahoo! - What will yours do?
http://my.yahoo.com

From:	u.alberton@*****.com (Bira)
Subject:	staging up grenades & rebounds
Date:	Mon, 6 Dec 2004 08:47:46 -0200

Message no. 18 On Sun, 5 Dec 2004 11:06:00 +0100, Gurth <gurth@******.nl> wrote:

> But you run the risk of this happening:
>
> Turn 1: You roll 9 for Initiative
> Turn 1, pass 1:
> You use your action to set the timer for 2 passes
> Other people do stuff
> Turn 1, pass 2:
> Characters with Initiative 11+ do more stuff
> Turn 1, pass 3:
> Characters with Initiative 21+ do yet more stuff
> Grenade explodes in your hand at the end of the pass

Or you could go the X-Com route and say a timed grenade doesn't
explode until you've thrown it or otherwhise released it, even if the
programmed time has already passed. They'd probably have a switch of
mechanical catch the character presses down while holding the weapon.

This way, the thrower is protected from flukes like the one above, and
still has a chance of benefitting from the timer.

--
Bira
http://compexplicita.blogspot.com

From:	gurth@******.nl (Gurth)
Subject:	staging up grenades & rebounds
Date:	Mon, 6 Dec 2004 11:59:17 +0100

Message no. 19 According to Bira, on Monday 06 December 2004 11:47 the word on the street
was...

> Or you could go the X-Com route and say a timed grenade doesn't
> explode until you've thrown it or otherwhise released it, even if the
> programmed time has already passed. They'd probably have a switch of
> mechanical catch the character presses down while holding the weapon.

Uhh... This whole thread is about intentionally activating the grenade and
holding on to it for a few seconds _before_ you throw it :) That's what's
known as "cooking off" a grenade: you pull the pin and release the lever,
thereby activating the timer, and then wait for a second or two before
throwing it (since RL grenades tend to have a 4- to 5-second delay).

--
Gurth@******.nl - Stone Age: http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
Kemen (keemde, h gekeemd): het spelen van computerspelletjes
-> Possibly NAGEE Editor & ShadowRN GridSec * Triangle Virtuoso <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Site: 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

From:	u.alberton@*****.com (Bira)
Subject:	staging up grenades & rebounds
Date:	Mon, 6 Dec 2004 09:03:09 -0200

Message no. 20 > Uhh... This whole thread is about intentionally activating the grenade and
> holding on to it for a few seconds _before_ you throw it :) That's what's
> known as "cooking off" a grenade: you pull the pin and release the lever,
> thereby activating the timer, and then wait for a second or two before
> throwing it (since RL grenades tend to have a 4- to 5-second delay).

Well, okay then.

--
Bira
http://compexplicita.blogspot.com

Mailing List Logs for

Further Reading

Disclaimer