Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: stevet78@*****.com (Steve Thompson)
Subject: Vehicle Armor v nonAV ammo?
Date: Sun, 4 Apr 2004 19:28:04 -0700 (PDT)
---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment
During a recent game, a knowledgable player and I squared off against one another on this
topic. Please help.

"How does Vehicular Armor work against non-AV ammunition?"

We are both drawing from p149 in SR3. But our confusion lies in whether you deduct
vehicle armor off the Power of the attack before comparing to see if it's higher or lower.

For example, a large van with Body 4 and Armor 3 comes around the corner. I have my Ares
Alpha out and fire off a burst. I'm doing 11S with an 8M base. Do you....

a) Reduce 8M by half and lower the Damage Level, making it 4L, then compare that against
3 points of vehicle armor. The base damage is higher, therefore the attack can do damage.
Now you adjust for the burst, making it 7M, rolling the van's Body + Control Pool for a
damage resistance test.

b) Reduce 8M by half and lower the Damage Level, making it 4L, then compare that against
3 points of vehicle armor. The base damage is higher, therefore the attack can do damage.
Now you adjust for the burst, making it 7M, subtract the armor (3 points) to make it a
4M, rolling the van's Body + Control Pool for a damage resistance test.

c) Reduce 8M by half and lower the Damage Level, making it 4L, then subtract the
vehicle's armor off it, making it 1L. Now compare that against the vehicle's armor of 3,
the attack isn't higher, so it does nothing but spark and the van needs no damage
resistance test.



---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Small Business $15K Web Design Giveaway - Enter today
---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://warthog.dumpshock.com/pipermail/shadowrn/attachments/cace21fe/attachment.htm

---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment--
Message no. 2
From: zebulingod@*******.net (zebulingod)
Subject: Vehicle Armor v nonAV ammo?
Date: Sun, 4 Apr 2004 21:51:41 -0700
Steve Thompson wrote on Sunday, April 04, 2004 7:28 PM,
>
> During a recent game, a knowledgable player and I squared off
> against one another on this topic. Please help.
>
> "How does Vehicular Armor work against non-AV ammunition?"
>
> We are both drawing from p149 in SR3. But our confusion lies
> in whether you deduct vehicle armor off the Power of the
> attack before comparing to see if it's higher or lower.
>
> For example, a large van with Body 4 and Armor 3 comes around
> the corner. I have my Ares Alpha out and fire off a burst.
> I'm doing 11S with an 8M base. Do you....
>
> a) Reduce 8M by half and lower the Damage Level, making it
> 4L, then compare that against 3 points of vehicle armor. The
> base damage is higher, therefore the attack can do damage.
> Now you adjust for the burst, making it 7M, rolling the van's
> Body + Control Pool for a damage resistance test.
>
> b) Reduce 8M by half and lower the Damage Level, making it
> 4L, then compare that against 3 points of vehicle armor. The
> base damage is higher, therefore the attack can do damage.
> Now you adjust for the burst, making it 7M, subtract the
> armor (3 points) to make it a 4M, rolling the van's Body +
> Control Pool for a damage resistance test.
>
> c) Reduce 8M by half and lower the Damage Level, making it
> 4L, then subtract the vehicle's armor off it, making it 1L.
> Now compare that against the vehicle's armor of 3, the attack
> isn't higher, so it does nothing but spark and the van needs
> no damage resistance test.
>

I think it's B, but I don't have my book handy.

Zebulin

"Per Ardua ad Astra"
Message no. 3
From: gurth@******.nl (Gurth)
Subject: Vehicle Armor v nonAV ammo?
Date: Mon, 5 Apr 2004 11:05:02 +0200
According to Steve Thompson, on Monday 05 April 2004 04:28 the word on the
street was...

> We are both drawing from p149 in SR3. But our confusion lies in whether
> you deduct vehicle armor off the Power of the attack before comparing to
> see if it's higher or lower.
>
> For example, a large van with Body 4 and Armor 3 comes around the
> corner. I have my Ares Alpha out and fire off a burst. I'm doing 11S
> with an 8M base. Do you....

d) Determine that the base Power of 8, divided by 2, is 4, so the modified
Power exceeds the armor rating; this means the attack can damage the
vehicle. Now take the 11S from the burst, and adjust that to account for
firing at a vehicle, making it 5M. The vehicle rolls against that.

--
Gurth@******.nl - Stone Age: http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
Those who ignore history are doomed to keep liking crappy dance
covers of great songs.
-> Probably NAGEE Editor * ShadowRN GridSec * Triangle Virtuoso <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://plastic.dumpshock.com <-

GC3.12: GAT/! d- s:- !a>? C++(---) UL+ P(+) L++ E W--(++) N o? K w(--)
O V? PS+ PE@ Y PGP- t- 5++ X(+) R+++$ tv+(++) b++@ DI- D+ G+ e h! !r y?
Incubated into the First Church of the Sqooshy Ball, 21-05-1998
Message no. 4
From: docwagon101@*****.com (Rand Ratinac)
Subject: Vehicle Armor v nonAV ammo?
Date: Mon, 5 Apr 2004 14:42:34 +0100 (BST)
<snip>
> > For example, a large van with Body 4 and Armor 3
comes around
> > the corner. I have my Ares Alpha out and fire off
a burst.
> > I'm doing 11S with an 8M base. Do you....

You do 2M damage.

Step 1 - Halve the base power and compare to armour -
4 is greater than three, so the van doesn't bounce
your attack.

Step 2 - Go back to the base damage code, add the
burst effects. 11S.

Step 3 - Apply vehicle effects (lower damage code by 1
level, halve power). 5M.

Step 4 - Reduce for vehicular armour. 5 - 3 = 2M.

And that's your final damage code. Before making the
attack and damage resistance rolls, of course.

If the weapon isn't burst or FA, you start with Step 2
and just compare the reduced power at Step 3 to see if
it bounces or not.

====Doc'
(aka Mr. Freaky Big, Super-Dynamic Troll of Tomorrow, aka Doc'booner, aka Doc' Vader)

.sig Sauer

If you SMELL what the DOC' is COOKING!!!





___________________________________________________________
WIN FREE WORLDWIDE FLIGHTS - nominate a cafe in the Yahoo! Mail Internet Cafe Awards
www.yahoo.co.uk/internetcafes
Message no. 5
From: loneeagle@********.co.uk (Lone Eagle)
Subject: Vehicle Armor v nonAV ammo?
Date: Mon, 05 Apr 2004 17:35:34 +0100
At 03:28 AM 4/5/2004, Steve wrote:
>For example, a large van with Body 4 and Armor 3 comes around the
>corner. I have my Ares Alpha out and fire off a burst. I'm doing 11S
>with an 8M base. Do you....
>
>a) Reduce 8M by half and lower the Damage Level, making it 4L, then
>compare that against 3 points of vehicle armor. The base damage is
>higher, therefore the attack can do damage. Now you adjust for the burst,
>making it 7M, rolling the van's Body + Control Pool for a damage
>resistance test.

In this one you're ignoring the armour, an armour 0 vehicle would be taking
the same damage.

>b) Reduce 8M by half and lower the Damage Level, making it 4L, then
>compare that against 3 points of vehicle armor. The base damage is
>higher, therefore the attack can do damage. Now you adjust for the burst,
>making it 7M, subtract the armor (3 points) to make it a 4M, rolling the
>van's Body + Control Pool for a damage resistance test.

That's the right one. To make it easier (or perhaps more confusing) half
the base power, reduce the damage level and then subtract the vehicle's
armour, if the power you're left with is >0 then the attack can damage the
vehicle so modify it for bursts...etc.

>c) Reduce 8M by half and lower the Damage Level, making it 4L, then
>subtract the vehicle's armor off it, making it 1L. Now compare that
>against the vehicle's armor of 3, the attack isn't higher, so it does
>nothing but spark and the van needs no damage resistance test.

In this one you're accounting for the vehicle's armour twice.


--
Lone Eagle
"Hold up lads, I got an idea."

www.wyrmtalk.co.uk - Please be patient, this site is under construction

-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.12
GE d++(---) s++: a->? C++(+) US++ P! L E? W++ N o? K? w+ O! M- V? PS+ PE-()
Y PGP? t+@ 5++ X- R+>+++$>* tv b+++ DI++++ D+ G++ e+ h r* y+>+++++
-----END GEEK CODE BLOCK-----

GCC0.2: y75>?.uk[NN] G87 S@:@@[SR] B+++ f+ RM(RR) rm++ rr++ l++(--) m- w
s+(+++) GM+++(-) A GS+(-) h++ LA+++ CG--- F c+
Message no. 6
From: maxnoel_fr@*****.fr (Max Noel)
Subject: Vehicle Armor v nonAV ammo?
Date: Mon, 5 Apr 2004 18:48:24 +0200
> That's the right one. To make it easier (or perhaps more confusing)
> half the base power, reduce the damage level and then subtract the
> vehicle's armour, if the power you're left with is >0 then the attack
> can damage the vehicle so modify it for bursts...etc.

That rule is just so weird. Sometimes I wonder if Shadowrun isn't just
4 different systems rolled into one game (though with 3e they did a
terrific job of unifying magic).
In my group we handle vehicle armor more or less the same way as
Immunity to Normal Weapons. That is, vehicle armor is doubled, then
substracted from the augmented Power of the attack, and damage level is
reduced by one before adjusting. L weapons don't damage vehicles.
Also, vehicles' Body dice are doubled, vehicle armor is maxed at a
rating equal to twice their (original) Body (i.e. a van can have up to
8 points of armor), and most importantly, "magic bronze" anti-vehicle
ammo doesn't exist.
It seems to make vehicle combat a bit less binary (under normal rules
it's either "No, that attack can't damage me at all" or "No matter how
well I roll, my vehicle is toast").

-- 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?"
Message no. 7
From: loneeagle@********.co.uk (Lone Eagle)
Subject: Vehicle Armor v nonAV ammo?
Date: Mon, 05 Apr 2004 17:52:17 +0100
At 02:42 PM 4/5/2004, Doc' wrote:
>You do 2M damage.
><snip the steps>

Argh! that's right.
Ignore my later posting which suggests B... It seemed right at the time...
:-(


--
Lone Eagle
"Hold up lads, I got an idea."

www.wyrmtalk.co.uk - Please be patient, this site is under construction

-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.12
GE d++(---) s++: a->? C++(+) US++ P! L E? W++ N o? K? w+ O! M- V? PS+ PE-()
Y PGP? t+@ 5++ X- R+>+++$>* tv b+++ DI++++ D+ G++ e+ h r* y+>+++++
-----END GEEK CODE BLOCK-----

GCC0.2: y75>?.uk[NN] G87 S@:@@[SR] B+++ f+ RM(RR) rm++ rr++ l++(--) m- w
s+(+++) GM+++(-) A GS+(-) h++ LA+++ CG--- F c+
Message no. 8
From: gurth@******.nl (Gurth)
Subject: Vehicle Armor v nonAV ammo?
Date: Mon, 5 Apr 2004 20:39:48 +0200
According to Max Noel, on Monday 05 April 2004 18:48 the word on the street
was...

> That rule is just so weird. Sometimes I wonder if Shadowrun isn't just
> 4 different systems rolled into one game (though with 3e they did a
> terrific job of unifying magic).

The problem is that this is a rule that had to be added on later, to make
vehicles tougher than people. Another way to do it would have been to
assign huge Body ratings to vehicles, but that has the drawback that
rolling lots of successes just is not made all that much easier once the
target number becomes reasonably high, even if you're rolling lots of
dice. As such, FASA(/Jon Szeto?) opted for reducing the damage inflicted
on vehicles -- which, in fact, was also the rule in SR1, but got dropped
in SRII, only to be reinstated in Rigger 2.

--
Gurth@******.nl - Stone Age: http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
Those who ignore history are doomed to keep liking crappy dance
covers of great songs.
-> Probably NAGEE Editor * ShadowRN GridSec * Triangle Virtuoso <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://plastic.dumpshock.com <-

GC3.12: GAT/! d- s:- !a>? C++(---) UL+ P(+) L++ E W--(++) N o? K w(--)
O V? PS+ PE@ Y PGP- t- 5++ X(+) R+++$ tv+(++) b++@ DI- D+ G+ e h! !r y?
Incubated into the First Church of the Sqooshy Ball, 21-05-1998
Message no. 9
From: pixelonpicnic@*******.com (Niels Sønderborg)
Subject: Vehicle Armor v nonAV ammo?
Date: Thu, 08 Apr 2004 18:38:16 +0200
I have understood this way...

With the attack in question (A burst from an Ares Alpha) I would say it
would do 4M.

First you take the base power of the weapon and divide that by 2 and then
reduce damage by 1, leaving us with a base of 4L.

Then compare that to the armor of 3 of the weapon to determing if you are
able to damage the vehicle in question. Since 4-3 is 1, then yes you are
able to damage the vehicle.

Apply the burst modifications and you get ... 4M!

Now if you only were firing SA, then the vehicle should resist with body
against 2L, since in Shadowrun 2 is the lowest target number possible.

_________________________________________________________________
Få alle de nye og sjove ikoner med MSN Messenger http://www.msn.dk/messenger

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about Vehicle Armor v nonAV ammo?, 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!