Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: Shaun Hall <Hard.master@********.ATT.NET>
Subject: Stun Damage Question
Date: Sun, 7 Sep 1997 18:41:15 -0700
----------
: From: Shaun Hall <Hard.master@********.att.net>
: To: shadowrun@********.itribe.net
: Subject: Stun Damage Question
: Date: Sunday, September 07, 1997 11:10 AM
:
: A question came up in a game. One of our characters had fired his
: weapon (loaded with stun rounds) at an opponent. The base damage code for
: the weapon was (S) stun and he generated 10 net successes. According to
one
: interpretation of the rules the maximum damage that this attack could
: generate was a deadly stun. The passage sited said that the maximum
damage
: a weapon could generate was deadly. My view on this subject is that the
: above passage in fact refers to PHYSICAL damage. The way I see it is that
: the condition monitor (although shown as two separate monitors connected
by
: a continuation line) is a single thing with twenty boxes. In short I'm
: thinking that you should be able to stage at least some sorts of stun
: damage not only up to deadly, but also into the physical damage tract.
: By the same token a 200+ KG troll with a strength of 10 armed with a
: baseball bat could only do a deadly stun with a single attack. I'd like
to
: challenge anyone who supports the claim that you can only do deadly stun
: with such a weapon. You start with no fatigue, illness or discomfort, and
: let me (a simple human) hit you with a baseball bat. If all I manage to
do
: is knock you out, then I'll buy your interpretation.
: As I see it stun rounds (rubber or gel) are high velocity projectiles
: designed for low penetration. Under normal circumstances they will most
: likely strike a torso or leg. If instead such a round struck someone in
the
: eye, kidney, throat, or groin they would at the very least cause physical
: damage, and possibly death. It seems only natural to me that it should be
: possible to stage stun damage beyond deadly into the physical damage
range.
: Now it wouldn't be an easy thing to do to kill someone with such a round.
: At the very least you would need eight more successes to kill with a stun
: round than with a conventional round. I don't think that would destroy
game
: balance.
: By the same token it is quite possible to kill someone with a single
: blow from a blunt weapon, but not in shadowrun. This seems a bit strange
to
: me. A single well placed blow to the kidneys by a quarterstaff will
result
: in death in the real world, but not in shadowrun. A baseball bat can
break
: ribs, an arm, or even fracture a skull in the real world, but not in
: shadowrun.
: Is this apparent discrepancy just a rule convention, an effort to
: balance play, or just something that they never really thought about when
: they wrote the rules. I feel that the rules are somewhat unclear on this
: point. The person with whom I disagree thinks that they intend for the
: rules to be read as he reads them. Perhaps he's right. I know that you
have
: to sacrifice realism in any game mechanics system in order to keep the
game
: playable. I just don't think that this is one of those cases.
: What do you think should you be able to stage damage from a stun
weapon
: into the physical range?
:

: Shaun
:
Message no. 2
From: Justin Pinnow <vanyel@*******.NET>
Subject: Re: Stun Damage Question
Date: Sun, 7 Sep 1997 09:45:53 -0400
> : From: Shaun Hall <Hard.master@********.att.net>
> : Date: Sunday, September 07, 1997 11:10 AM

> : What do you think should you be able to stage damage from a stun
> weapon
> : into the physical range?

The BBB states that Stun Damage carries over into the Physical Damage
condition monitor when it exceeds 10 boxes. Thus, if you take a
Light/Deadly Stun wound, you have taken 11 boxes of Stun Damage (Light
Wound + Deadly = 11 boxes). That means you have filled your Stun Damage
condition montitor (10 boxes) and have 1 box of Physical Damage to boot.

This is a basic rule, since it's in the BBB, so it's not a variant rule,
optional rule, or house rule. Of course, you could make a house rule that
changes this.

> : Shaun

Justin :)
Message no. 3
From: Kim Christiansen <kimc@**********.COM>
Subject: Re: Stun Damage Question
Date: Sun, 7 Sep 1997 11:22:58 +0100
> From: Shaun Hall
> Subject: Stun Damage Question
>
> : A question came up in a game. One of our characters had fired his
> : weapon (loaded with stun rounds) at an opponent. The base damage code
for
> : the weapon was (S) stun and he generated 10 net successes. According to
> one
> : interpretation of the rules the maximum damage that this attack could
> : generate was a deadly stun. The passage sited said that the maximum
> damage
> : a weapon could generate was deadly. My view on this subject is that the
> : above passage in fact refers to PHYSICAL damage. The way I see it is
that
> : the condition monitor (although shown as two separate monitors connected
> by
> : a continuation line) is a single thing with twenty boxes. In short I'm
> : thinking that you should be able to stage at least some sorts of stun
> : damage not only up to deadly, but also into the physical damage tract.

...cut some pertinent argument and facts here...

> : What do you think should you be able to stage damage from a stun
> weapon
> : into the physical range?
> :
>
> : Shaun
> :

A small calrification of the point (I'm the GM here and made the ruling)

NPC1 has moderate stun done to him, ouch!
PC1 then rips him with a burst of gel rounds with 10 net successes!
PC1 does DEADLY STUN to NPC1, and the damage flows over into a MODERATE
physical wound.
here is trhe problem, the guy had 10 net successes! Does this in actuality
mean that the damage of the stun weapon can be staged over deadly? Would
those ten net successes have continued to stage the damage on the physical
column?
HELP!

kim

"How am I supposed to know, I'm making this up as I go along!"
-famous archeologist and pre-shadow runner from the 1930's
Message no. 4
From: Pilgrim <jade@***.NET>
Subject: Re: Stun Damage Question
Date: Sun, 7 Sep 1997 14:18:29 +1000
On Sun, 7 Sep 1997 11:22:58 +0100 Kim wrote:

> A small calrification of the point (I'm the GM here and made the ruling)
>
> NPC1 has moderate stun done to him, ouch!
> PC1 then rips him with a burst of gel rounds with 10 net successes!
> PC1 does DEADLY STUN to NPC1, and the damage flows over into a MODERATE
> physical wound.
> here is trhe problem, the guy had 10 net successes! Does this in actuality
> mean that the damage of the stun weapon can be staged over deadly? Would
> those ten net successes have continued to stage the damage on the physical
> column?
> HELP!
>
> kim
>
> "How am I supposed to know, I'm making this up as I go along!"
> -famous archeologist and pre-shadow runner from the 1930's
>

Hope this helps. On page 111 SRII, under exceeding the condition
monitor, it states that any damage that exceeds 10 boxes of damage on
the stun monitor then gets applied to the physical condition monitor.
For example a character already has a Serious Stun wound (6 boxes)
then gets hit with another S stun wound (another 6 boxes) the remaining
2 boxes get applied to the physical condition monitor.

In your situation, the NPC already started with moderate Stun damage
(3-5 boxes) and took another 10 boxes worth of damage so not only would
he be unconcious but he would be moderatley wounded on the physical side
as well. In SRC there are rules for deadlier over damage rules that are
based upon the over damage rules in FOF. The deadlier over damage rules
run like this; if the power of the attack is 1.5 times higher than the
body of the resisting individual, then apply an additional point of
damage for every two additional success after deadly.

As I said earlier, I hope this helps. If you have any questions, please
feel free to ask or email me. I'm sure the rest of the list can fill in
anything I may have missed.

Pilgrim
Message no. 5
From: Gurth <gurth@******.NL>
Subject: Re: Stun Damage Question
Date: Sun, 7 Sep 1997 21:32:27 +0100
Kim Christiansen said on 11:22/ 7 Sep 97...

> NPC1 has moderate stun done to him, ouch!
> PC1 then rips him with a burst of gel rounds with 10 net successes!
> PC1 does DEADLY STUN to NPC1, and the damage flows over into a MODERATE
> physical wound.
> here is trhe problem, the guy had 10 net successes! Does this in actuality
> mean that the damage of the stun weapon can be staged over deadly? Would
> those ten net successes have continued to stage the damage on the physical
> column?
> HELP!

Per SRII rules, damage will not stage over Deadly -- a Panther cannon with
20 net successes will only do Deadly damage, for example. The same goes
for Stun damage, no matter how many successes it won't go over Deadly
Stun.

Fields of Fire gives an optional rule that allows damage to be staged over
Deadly, but it only really applies to high-powered weapons against
low-Body targets.

Under my house rule, damage levels are as follows:

Light (1 box)
Moderate (3 boxes)
Serious (6 boxes)
Deadly (10 boxes)
Deadly + Light (11 boxes)
Deadly + Moderate (13 boxes)
Deadly + Serious (16 boxes)
Double Deadly (20 boxes)
Double Deadly + Light (21 boxes)
...and so on.

Taking a typical 10S Stun taser as an example, if it gets 10 net
successes, the damage taken is 20 boxes, enough to fill up both Stun and
Physical tracks on an unwounded person, and taking someone with a Moderate
Stun wound (like in your example) up to 3 boxes Overflow.

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
Well, I have no opinion about that, and I have no opinion about me...
-> 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. 6
From: Shaun Hall <Hard.master@********.ATT.NET>
Subject: Re: Stun Damage Question
Date: Mon, 8 Sep 1997 01:25:33 -0700
: Per SRII rules, damage will not stage over Deadly -- a Panther cannon
with
: 20 net successes will only do Deadly damage, for example. The same goes
: for Stun damage, no matter how many successes it won't go over Deadly
: Stun.
:
: Fields of Fire gives an optional rule that allows damage to be staged
over
: Deadly, but it only really applies to high-powered weapons against
: low-Body targets.
:
: Under my house rule, damage levels are as follows:
:
: Light (1 box)
: Moderate (3 boxes)
: Serious (6 boxes)
: Deadly (10 boxes)
: Deadly + Light (11 boxes)
: Deadly + Moderate (13 boxes)
: Deadly + Serious (16 boxes)
: Double Deadly (20 boxes)
: Double Deadly + Light (21 boxes)
: ...and so on.
:
: Taking a typical 10S Stun taser as an example, if it gets 10 net
: successes, the damage taken is 20 boxes, enough to fill up both Stun and
: Physical tracks on an unwounded person, and taking someone with a
Moderate
: Stun wound (like in your example) up to 3 boxes Overflow.

Ah, at least you understand the nature of my (and Kim's) question. I,
of course, agree with your house rule. My opinion is that the game
designers elected to treat stun and physical damage as more or less the
same as an oversight when instead stun damage should continue to stage
upward through the physical damage track. The game statement that no single
attack can do more that deadly damage should instead read no single attack
can do more than deadly physical damage. I see this as an oversight while
Kim sees this choice as a deliberate act.
Regardless of which is correct I'm lobbying for a house rule similar to
the one that you employ.

Shaun
Message no. 7
From: Tim Cooper <z-i-m@****.COM>
Subject: Re: Stun Damage Question
Date: Sun, 7 Sep 1997 18:44:27 EDT
On Sun, 7 Sep 1997 21:32:27 +0100 Gurth <gurth@******.NL> writes:
>Taking a typical 10S Stun taser as an example, if it gets 10 net
>successes, the damage taken is 20 boxes, enough to fill up both Stun and
>Physical tracks on an unwounded person, and taking someone with a
Moderate
>Stun wound (like in your example) up to 3 boxes Overflow.

... and, quite appropriatly, into simulated cardiac arrest.

~Tim
Message no. 8
From: Tim Cooper <z-i-m@****.COM>
Subject: Re: Stun Damage Question
Date: Sun, 7 Sep 1997 18:44:26 EDT
On Sun, 7 Sep 1997 11:22:58 +0100 Kim Christiansen <kimc@**********.COM>
writes:

>NPC1 has moderate stun done to him, ouch!
>PC1 then rips him with a burst of gel rounds with 10 net successes!
>PC1 does DEADLY STUN to NPC1, and the damage flows over into a MODERATE
>physical wound.
>here is trhe problem, the guy had 10 net successes! Does this in
actuality
>mean that the damage of the stun weapon can be staged over deadly? Would
>those ten net successes have continued to stage the damage on the
physical
>column?
>HELP!

Sure why not.
Once you hit deadly stun, just take the extra successes and stage some
damage up on the physical side.. this of course makes those deadly stun
attacks with lots of successes pretty dangerous, but as an earlier post
mentioned, a "stun" weapon can kill IRL fairly easily.

~Tim
~Tim
Message no. 9
From: Kim Christiansen <kimc@**********.COM>
Subject: Re: Stun Damage Question
Date: Sun, 7 Sep 1997 19:56:15 +0100
> From: Shaun Hall
> Subject: Re: Stun Damage Question
> Date: Mon, 8 Sep 1997 01:25:33 -0700
>
> : Per SRII rules, damage will not stage over Deadly -- a Panther cannon
> with
> : 20 net successes will only do Deadly damage, for example. The same goes
> : for Stun damage, no matter how many successes it won't go over Deadly
> : Stun.
...cut nice house rules...
> The game statement that no single
> attack can do more that deadly damage should instead read no single attack
> can do more than deadly physical damage. I see this as an oversight while
> Kim sees this choice as a deliberate act.
>
> Shaun

Well, looks like all of the list members are in agreement, realism over
FASA's all mighty game balance. The logic of a deadly wound from stun is a
good one I agree. But, the BBB clearly states that no single attack can do
over deadly damage. There are rules for this in how to apply physical damage
in both SRC & FoF, but there is a slight inconsistency in the rules on stun
damage. Gurth's house rules would seem to take care of that.........mostly.

Gurth, I hope you don't mind if rip off part of your house rules and adapt
them to our game???

Kim

"How am I supposed to know, I'm making this up as I go along!"
-famous archeologist and pre-shadow runner from the 1930's

----------
Message no. 10
From: Gurth <gurth@******.NL>
Subject: Re: Stun Damage Question
Date: Mon, 8 Sep 1997 11:52:57 +0100
Shaun Hall said on 1:25/ 8 Sep 97...

> Ah, at least you understand the nature of my (and Kim's) question. I,
> of course, agree with your house rule. My opinion is that the game
> designers elected to treat stun and physical damage as more or less the
> same as an oversight when instead stun damage should continue to stage
> upward through the physical damage track. The game statement that no single
> attack can do more that deadly damage should instead read no single attack
> can do more than deadly physical damage. I see this as an oversight while
> Kim sees this choice as a deliberate act.

I think Kim is right, although I of course have no idea what the FASA
designers thought at the time. At any rate SRII states that no attack can
do more than Deadly damage, and this is regardless of whether the damage
is Stun or physical. My house rule applies to both Stun and physical
damage -- a 10S physical attack with 10 successes _will_ cause 20 boxes of
physical damage in my game, instantly killing most people except for very
tough trolls, and certain critters such as dragons.

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
Well, I have no opinion about that, and I have no opinion about me...
-> 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. 11
From: Gurth <gurth@******.NL>
Subject: Re: Stun Damage Question
Date: Mon, 8 Sep 1997 11:52:56 +0100
Kim Christiansen said on 19:56/ 7 Sep 97...

> Gurth, I hope you don't mind if rip off part of your house rules and adapt
> them to our game???

I wouldn't have posted them if I'd mind, would I?

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
Well, I have no opinion about that, and I have no opinion about me...
-> 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: Alacrity Fitzhugh <harmonix@**.NET>
Subject: Re: Stun Damage Question
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 1997 20:13:19 -0700
----------
> From: Kim Christiansen <kimc@**********.COM>
> To: SHADOWRN@********.ITRIBE.NET
> Subject: Re: Stun Damage Question
> Date: Sunday, September 07, 1997 11:56 AM
>

[snip]

>
> Gurth, I hope you don't mind if rip off part of your house rules and
adapt
> them to our game???
>
> Kim

If you do, be sure you axe the optional overdamage rules from FoF...

-----------------------------------------------------------
Alacrity Fitzhugh (aka Chuck Stevens)
harmonix@**.net

I know I'm right.
The voices in my head tell me so.
-----------------------------------------------------------

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about Stun Damage Question, 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!