Author Topic: Questions about Matrix and grenades  (Read 321 times)

marfish

  • Newb
  • *
  • Posts: 22
Questions about Matrix and grenades
« on: (06:22:27/07-30-17) »
I have been studying the rules these few days.My friends and I have encounter some disagreement, which translated into questions as following:

1. Could persona(or the device that it's in) be a part of PAN (as master or slave)?
2. Can I directly attack (e.g. Data Spike) the device if it's slaved (being a part of PAN, without an individual icon)?

3. For the grenades with Motion Sensor, the rule says "This method uses the standard Ranged Attack rules...", but what happen if someone decided to throw such grenade at one's feet (Or 'half meter away from them')? Would it Scatter if the thrower get less then 3 hits? Or would every in the potential effective range get a chance to defend?

Jack_Spade

  • Prime Runner
  • *****
  • Posts: 6014
Re: Questions about Matrix and grenades
« Reply #1 on: (07:04:46/07-30-17) »
1. The intent of the rules is that a persona's device can be the master of a PAN (even though there is a badly phrased passage in the rules that seems to contradict that)
2. Yes - the icons can still be targeted individually
3. Scatter rules are in effect: 3 hits are enough for an exact hit on the ground. There is no defense against grenades (even though there is an artifact from an earlier version in the rule book that seems to imply so). R&G clarified that and gives you the option to run away from a grenade with an interrupt action instead of defense.
talk think matrix

To strive, to seek, to find and not to yield
Revenant Kynos Isaint Rex

marfish

  • Newb
  • *
  • Posts: 22
Re: Questions about Matrix and grenades
« Reply #2 on: (07:21:35/07-30-17) »
1. The intent of the rules is that a persona's device can be the master of a PAN (even though there is a badly phrased passage in the rules that seems to contradict that)
2. Yes - the icons can still be targeted individually
3. Scatter rules are in effect: 3 hits are enough for an exact hit on the ground. There is no defense against grenades (even though there is an artifact from an earlier version in the rule book that seems to imply so). R&G clarified that and gives you the option to run away from a grenade with an interrupt action instead of defense.

 ;D Thank you for spell that out clearly

Novocrane

  • Ace Runner
  • ****
  • Posts: 2225
Re: Questions about Matrix and grenades
« Reply #3 on: (10:16:36/08-01-17) »
Quote
There is no defense against grenades (even though there is an artifact from an earlier version in the rule book that seems to imply so)
It's not an artefact. There are situations in which grenades use standard attack rules.

Jack_Spade

  • Prime Runner
  • *****
  • Posts: 6014
Re: Questions about Matrix and grenades
« Reply #4 on: (10:17:51/08-01-17) »
And what would those situations be?
talk think matrix

To strive, to seek, to find and not to yield
Revenant Kynos Isaint Rex

Novocrane

  • Ace Runner
  • ****
  • Posts: 2225
Re: Questions about Matrix and grenades
« Reply #5 on: (10:26:57/08-01-17) »
When you're using a grenade trigger type that's not the one you're referring to. There are three.

Jack_Spade

  • Prime Runner
  • *****
  • Posts: 6014
Re: Questions about Matrix and grenades
« Reply #6 on: (15:50:37/08-01-17) »
If you mean the motion sensor rules:

"Motion Sensor: Grenades using a motion sensor are extremely dangerous. Once armed (about a second after the sensor is activated) the grenade explodes after
any sudden stop or change in direction, meaning hitting the wall, floor, or target. This method uses the standard Ranged Attack rules but adds an extra step if it misses
the target (no net hits on the attack roll)"

There is absolutely zero reason to target anything else than the ground the target is on.

The (imho) artifact about defending reads:
"TARGETED BY AN AREA-EFFECT ATTACK
Dodging explosions is not as easy as it seems in the movies. Apply a –2 modifier when trying to defend against weapons like spells, grenades, rockets, or missiles with a blast or area effect."

Those two rules don't fit together: In one case you are dodging the grenade hitting you in the other they talk about dodging the explosion even though there is no explosion at your position if the grenade attack misses you.

That's why I say, this is an artifact of a previous rule version.
talk think matrix

To strive, to seek, to find and not to yield
Revenant Kynos Isaint Rex

Officerzan

  • Newb
  • *
  • Posts: 41
Re: Questions about Matrix and grenades
« Reply #7 on: (21:02:35/08-03-17) »
This has long been debated, but figured I'd finally log just to summarize and add my two nuyen.

I am on the side that, regardless of RAI and what Bull says for his Missions, RAW is that you get a defense roll. I will explain why below, but before I get there, please note that this topic is so heavily debated that it really falls under the purview of your GM. There really is no right nor wrong answer and the devs have pretty much refused to comment. The only official FAQ about grenades comes from a 4th edition FAQ saying that hitting the ground is easy but any moving target (even in the blast) should always be opposed which only lead to confusion as 4th edition was pretty straight forward on the subject of grenades and defending.

Quote from: Pg 190 SR5 CRB
TARGETED BY AN AREA-EFFECT ATTACK
Dodging explosions is not as easy as it seems in the movies. Apply a –2 modifier when trying to defend against weapons like spells, grenades, rockets, or missiles with a blast or area effect.
This is one of the strongest and yet one of the most argued "proofs" of a defense roll. However, the rule survived an errata and second printing. This is not some leftover artifact, it is there for a reason.

Quote from: Pg  205 SR5 CRB
DAMAGE AND PASSENGERS
*snip*
     The exceptions to this rule are ramming, suppressive fire, and area-effect weapon attacks like grenades and rockets—these attacks affect both passengers and vehicles.
     If an attack is made against passengers, make a normal Attack Test, but the passengers are always considered to be under Good Cover (this is in addition to the +3 modifier for being inside a moving vehicle; additionally, the Blind Fire modifier may apply to the attacker as the situation dictates). Passengers attempting to defend against an attack inside a vehicle suffer a –2 dice pool modifier to their Defense Test, since their movements are limited to the interior of the vehicle.
*snip*
So right there, we are told that all AoE attacks (including grenades) are against both the vehicle and the passengers. We are then told that the attacks are made as normal, but that passengers are always considered in Good Cover AND receive a +3 modifier to defense. While less applicable to a grenade going through an open window due to chunky salsa effect and obviously being a situation where the GM deems a defense roll impossible, it further supports the notion that AoE are defended against normally as no where does this section split the distinction between AoE attacks and other options other than to say AoE attacks target both passengers and the vehicle instead of one or the other.

Quote from: Pg 283 SR5 CRB Combat Spells, Indirect
The test is like that for grenades (p. 181): a Spellcasting + Magic [Force] (3) Test with scatter of 2D6 meters. Unlike grenades, you get to add your net hits on this test to the Damage Value of the spell, but only if you beat the threshold; otherwise the spell still detonates, but the hits are used to reduce scatter by one meter per hit..
Quote from: Pg 283 SR5 CRB Indirect Combat Spell Example Sidebar
This is an Indirect Combat spell, so its damage will be equal to Force 7 + Rikki’s net hits. Ganger 1 is a little out of it and only gets 2 hits. The second ganger is quicker with 4 hits. The three net hits make the total damage hitting the first ganger 10, while the second must attempt to absorb 8 points of damage.
Clearly, this section shows that Indirect Combat spells are like grenades with the test to hit, and unlike grenades as they get bonus damage from net hits. This is the only distinctions made. Then we get an in-game example of two gangers making defense rolls.

Quote from: Pg 310 SR5 CRB
MISSILE PARRY
Cost: 0.25 PP per level
Activation: Interrupt Action (–5 from Initiative Score)
You can catch slow-moving projectiles such as arrows, thrown knives, grenades, or shuriken out of the air. When using this power, add +1 die per level to your defense pool against the attacker’s ranged attack test. If you generate net hits, you pluck the missile out of the air. You need to have at least one empty hand to use Missile Party.

Quote from: Pg 173 SR5 CRB
RANGED COMBAT
Ranged combat is determined with an Opposed Test between the attacker’s Weapon Skill + Agility [Accuracy] vs. the defender’s Reaction + Intuition.
Net hits are applied to the weapons DV or used to reduce scatter in the case of thrown weapons and launched weapons[color].
Again, no distinction made. ALL ranged attacks are opposed tests.

Quote from: Pg 172 SR5 CRB
COMBAT RESOLUTION
     Shadowrun includes four types of combat: ranged combat (p. 173), melee combat (p. 184), astral combat (p. 315), and cybercombat (p. 226). All combat, whether it involves firearms, knives, astral attacks, or attack programs, is resolved in essentially the same manner.
    Combat is handled as an Opposed Test between the attacker and defender. The exact skills and attributes used depend on the type of combat, method of attack, and style of defense, as described in each section.
There are only four types of combat. Grenades fall under ranged and therefore follow the rules for ranged attacks. And before the good old, "But you target the ground, not the people!" argument comes around...

Quote from: Pg 182 SR5 CRB
BLAST EFFECTS
Grenades, rockets, and missiles are area-effect weapons, meaning that their blast affects a given area and any targets within it. The farther away the target is from the explosive’s final location—the blast point—the less damage it takes, because distance reduces the effect of an explosive’s blast.
There you have it. All within the radius of the blast are...targets of the attack.

The other defense I have seen about the "no defense roll" side is that Run&Gun added two defense options to grenades, so obviously you can't defend normally," to which I say....what?...
The benefit of Run For Your Life/Dive On Grenade is that you get to immediately run and eliminate damage with distance without any roll to do so for 5 initiative.
The benefit of Right Back At Ya! is that for 10 initiative and two tests, you get to eliminate 100% of the blast (also protecting your allies) AND make your attacker possibly suffer it instead.
Neither of those additional options eliminate the benefits of just rolling defense, but give more options other than, "dodge or die."


So, in closing, there are multiple places in the book that support or explicitly address that there is indeed a defense roll for AoE attacks and at least one actual example of how it is done in game. However, as far as I can tell, not one explicitly saying there isn't. Whether or not that is what was intended is unknown, but makes it pretty clear to me. You can form your own opinion and go from there. Again, it will vary from GM to GM.

  • Omae
  • ***
  • Posts: 715
Re: Questions about Matrix and grenades
« Reply #8 on: (23:01:57/08-03-17) »
[announcer voice]
Aaaand the crowd goes silent
[/voice]

*Mic drop*
Yeah, TMs got thrown in the cell with Bubba the Love Troll and sandpaper for lube.
there is autosofts for everything  8)

Jack_Spade

  • Prime Runner
  • *****
  • Posts: 6014
Re: Questions about Matrix and grenades
« Reply #9 on: (10:25:22/08-04-17) »
A well reasoned opinion. Let me try my hand at a similar response:

1) Quote from: Pg 190 SR5 CRB
Errors surviving errata is sadly common and a quick peek into the errata thread will show as such

2) Quote from: Pg  205 SR5 CRB
Quote
"Attacks must specifically target either the passengers (in which case, the vehicle is unaffected) or the vehicle
itself (in which case, the passengers are not affected). The exceptions to this rule are ramming, full-automatic
bursts and area-effect weapon attacks like grenades and rockets—these attacks affect both passengers and
vehicles.
{Paragraph End}
If an attack is made against passengers, make a normal Attack Test, but the passengers are always considered to be under Good Cover (this is in addition to the +3 modifier for being inside a moving vehicle; additionally, the Blind Fire modifier may apply to the attacker as the situation dictates).
"
The way you quoted this is not entirely candid. The mention of grenades is part of the first paragraph that mentions attacks having to be targeted unless they are exceptions like grenades. You are fitting two parts together that are clearly separate.

3) Quotes from Spell Section: The first doesn't give any qualifying information on the question, the second is an example which are on multiple occasions wrong since they were created before the final rules version was implemented. Point in fact: this very example talks about damage being equal to F+Net Hits when the real damage is F+Net Hits -3 to pinpoint the attack.

4) This is a bad example. For one thing it is a special rule that isn't applicable to the general case. For the other catching a grenade with a motion detector will detonate it - and since you catch it, you won't be able to dodge the explosion.

5) Attacking the ground/barriers will avoid the need for a REA+INT test since those are immobile. This is in line with the fact that you can only attack one target at a time with a melee or ranged attack unless you use the multi attack option. Everyone else inside the blast radius will still get hit

6) Same thing, you attack a spot on the ground or wall

7) I'd grant you that one if SR wasn't terrible about using consistent language in its rules. "targets" has no meaning beyond its own natural semantics.
Once you are in a cloud of expanding shrapnel there is nothing left to dodge. You certainly won't be able to outrun a super sonic blast wave. You may be able to avoid being hit by a grenade, but you certainly can't move out of the way of an explosion.
The only defense you get is the one provided by a barrier behind which you can take cover. That is where I incidentally see the -2 from the defense chapter being used: After you dive for cover/run for your life.

Why am I so adamant about the no evading an explosion?

Because this creates some terrible unlogical situations: Two guys with no movement left in their round stand next to a lobbed grenade that explodes at the end of their combat phase. The grenade landed with exactly 3 hits so there is no scatter.
One is a Joe Average who has no defense hits and takes the full brunt of the grenade.
The other is Twitchy Street Sam with 6 hits in his defense test. He evades the blast completely - somehow - despite neither of the two being able to move even one more meter in the combat round.
talk think matrix

To strive, to seek, to find and not to yield
Revenant Kynos Isaint Rex

Officerzan

  • Newb
  • *
  • Posts: 41
Re: Questions about Matrix and grenades
« Reply #10 on: (13:15:18/08-04-17) »
As I said before, there is no concrete right or wrong on this topic and to argue such is foolish. This board alone is filled with this exact topic argued for pages with no side giving up. Not to mention Reddit, DumpShock, GiTP, and various other Misc boards for other companies. I have no interest in doing that. I refuse to argue points as we will be here forever. I'll stick with my "this is why I feel this way" approach instead and just give you an example of how combat would run in my campaign. If you want to play differently, that's up to you. However, it would be nice to see a defense for "no defense for AoE" that actually uses quotes from the books and examples that don't take place in an empty void with statues instead of just the usual, "Your opinion is wrong," approach. Lead with the carrot, not the stick.

I will say though, your damage for spells is incorrect. It has never been DV=F+NH-3. You are confusing what Net Hits are on a threshold test. Net hits are only what exceed the threshold. The example is wrong because it uses net hits after defense for damage. It is not wrong in the steps taken. Just, as you did, the writer confused hits and net hits.
"Unlike grenades, you get to add your net hits on THIS test to the Damage Value of the spell, but only if you beat the threshold; otherwise the spell still detonates, but the hits are used to reduce scatter by one meter per hit."
Emphasis mine.


Example of combat in my campaigns:

Scene - Steel Plant Warehouse, Adept (in the open), Mr Troll (behind partial cover from plywood that covers 25% of him), Mage(behind Good Cover from steel plates shipping out that covers 60% of him), Bob (hurt next to the adept), Bob's Drone, 14 meters away), and Scaredy-Cat (a few meters from impact) are currently having a standoff with a nasty group of gangers going after the same package.
GM: One of the gangers lobs a grenade in your direction Adept. *rolls dice* It's looks to be a good throw and you'll all be caught in the blast.
Scaredy Cat: I want to Run For My Life and book it as far away as I can!
GM: Okay, with how much movement you have left, you'll be able to get out of the blast assuming it doesn't scatter.
Adept: Am I within reach?
GM: Yes, the grenade is going to be within reach of your character if you'd like to use your Parry Missle power. Everyone roll defense. Don't forget the -2 penalty for this being a grenade nor your cover bonuses Mr. Troll and Mage. Bob, if Adept fails, you'll be too close to the blast to defend, however, go ahead and roll for your drone. Again, remember the with -2 penalty.
Bob: Shoot...Save me Adept!
Adept: You can count on me! *rolls dice* Yes, I rolled 5 hits!
GM: You catch the grenade! Unfortunately it was a motion sensor grenade and it goes off in your hand. I'm going to say that your defense roll doesn't count against the blast. Sorry, you are range zero and Bob is at 1m. Go ahead and roll your damage resistance.
Adept: Damn! sorry Bob.
GM: Okay, let's start with Mr. Troll.
Mr Troll: I got 4 hits.
GM: Okay, you barely get behind the barrier in time. Unfortunately the plywood didn't hold up completely to the blast. Your cover is gone and you still need to resist 6P. You get to add +5 so this should be no problem for you. How about you Mage?
Mage: I rolled 5, lucky I have that higher limit!
GM: You see the adept reach for the grenade and immediately duck and plug your ears. You take no damage and your barrier holds as metal shards spark off of the plating. Bob, how about your drone?
Bob (now knowing what it takes to defend): Psh, easily made that roll.
GM: Cool, then your drone is able to avoid taking any shrapnel thanks to a quick dip. Dare I ask...Adept and Bob how'd your toons do?
Adept: I thought I was a goner! I had to use a point of edge, but I'm alive! With...one overflow though...Mage'll need to hurry. Maybe we should surrender?
Bob looking up from the CharGen section of his book: Completely MISTified!


Were this a Fireball example, ranges, damage, barriers, and the like would be a tad different due to the spell and elemental damage rules. However, as for the defense and attack roll. The spell would be at F+1 DV from the Net Hit on the threshold test. The defense tests would have had no effect on the DV.


Edit to add:
Just to add to that fireball part. Pg 294 and 295 SR5 CRB (Counterspelling) also supports defense tests as it states when a spell is cast the dice are added to the defense tests of everyone you are covering. Then, in the example given uses a fireball being defended against by the group.
« Last Edit: (09:33:36/08-06-17) by Officerzan »