[Erling]

Sammy and Adept are fighting each other.

Sammy has 14 dice for ranged attack test, Adept has 12+4 dice for defense test (12 for attributes, 4 for good cover). Both have quite adequate chances for success (even taking into account different firing modes which can reduce Adept's dice pool, but for simplicity let's assume Sammy uses SS weapon), and Adept really benefits from cover.

Eventually Adept gets fully hidden behind cover (hunkers down, moves towards a larger piece of cover or something like that). And what happens then?
Sammy gets -6 modifier for the total of 8 dice.
Adept is now considered unaware of attack. He can still benefit from cover modifier (his defense pool will be 4 dice). It's equal to -12 modifier for defense test.
And let's not forget that on a tie Sammy will hit Adept as well (rule from p. 190).
Damage reduction is ludicrous: 1 box of damage for SS/SA.
The only case when Adept can benefir from full cover is hiding behind a really really strong cover, Reinforced Material of higher (depends on Sammy's weapon DV, AP and net hits).

Does anyone else think it's not OK? Maybe I've missed something?

[Xenon]

Yes, turning your back against the shooter is a bad idea when you have 12 dice to avoid getting hit... Go out there and dodge bullets will ya! 

For even more protection the adept can run (free; -2 to hit him, +2 to defend) in combination with hit the dirt (interrupt; another +2 to defend), take cover (simple; another +2 or +4 to defend) or sprint (complex; another -2 to hit him).

If you are going behind full cover you need a way to still see your attacker (maybe an augmented reality overlay image feed from your long range sniper drone or the camera feed from your own smartgun -that btw also let you return fire around corners without having to take the blind fire modifier).

An alternative to cover if you want your opponent to get the blind fire modifier is to cast an invisibility spell (complex [or simple for reckless]; -6 to hit him) or maybe have the decker turn off the lights while you activate thermographic vision vision enhancement, ultrasound sensor headware or astral perception...

[martinchaen]

Yep! Being fully behind cover (and thus unaware of an attack) sucks.

I'd argue that this is purely because of the ridiculous Penetrating Weapons rule. If you instead use the rules for barrier damage resistance, this becomes much less of an issue.

Say the Samurai is firing an Ares Alpha with APDS at a target hidden behind a brick wall. Using the Penetrating Weapons rule, the DV inflicted upon the target (if he hits) is automatically 11-1= 10DV + net hits, with the full AP of -6.

If you discard the entire Penetrating Weapons section of the Barriers rules and instead use the Shooting Through Barriers paragraph, the brick wall would resist the 11DV + net hits with Structure 10 + Armor (16-6), or 20 dice, for 5 hits (using the buying hits rules). In order for the round to pass through the brick wall and hit the target on the other side, the DV would have to be 11; this means the Samurai would have to achieve 5 net hits with his Ares Alpha (11+5 net hits = 16DV, 16DV - 5 DV Resisted = 11, which exceeds the modified AV of the wall (16-6)).

Using this alternative, at least to my mind, greatly improves the usefulness of APDS ammo and high AP weapons, if you're consistently firing guns at targets behind walls. Yes, the Penetrating Weapons rule also takes AV of the material into consideration, but as long as you can beat the material AV with your modified DV, you're golden. An Ares Alpha with APDS can chew through everything up to concrete and metal beams with a few lucky hits (11+5-1=15, if using SA).

[Reaver]

And, what does a FMJ, made from 80 years ago do to a brick nowadays???

Of those two rules you quote,  I see them doing very different things.... 1 rule is putting a small hole In the barrier,  but it holds firm, and continues to provide cover.

The other blows a 1 meter wide hole. Thus no cover bonus, and other bad things if a support wall....

[martinchaen]

Reaver
Not quite; the rule I reference is not Destroying Barriers, but Shooting Through Barriers. Quite a large difference, I agree; the Penetrating Weapons rule just doesn't make sense to me when we already have a Shooting Through Barriers rule, just two paragraphs or so prior to the Penetrating Weapons section.

And a modern day 7.62 FMJ going through a brick wall will still lose some momentum and potentially fragment, which is kind of my point. A 1DV loss does not accurately represent this concept, to my mind.

[Xenon]

Your example against someone hiding behind a tree (but not using rules for Penetration Weapons) require only 2 hits from the attacker (not net hits) to create a 1 square meter hole(!)

From a single bullet.......

[martinchaen]

Who are you addressing, Xenon? Because the rule you're quoting is not what I referenced at all.

Let's revise, shall we?

SR5 p197 lists three options. Shooting Through Barriers, Destroying Barriers, and Penetrating Weapons (and Body Barriers, but lets leave that alone for now).

Shooting Through Barriers is what I propose using for... well, shooting through a barrier, instead of the Penetrating Weapons section which just seems contradictory; this would simply mean that the barrier would absorb X damage, and the rest carried through to the intended target. It would NOT mean that the shot automatically gained the benefit of the Destroying Barriers rule.

I never indicated that I thought the rules for Destroying Barriers should be used for the damage the barrier takes, and you could have simply asked if that was what I mean instead of jumping to conclusions, neh?

Finally, the Destroying Barriers rules allow you to do just that with a single bullet, if you so choose, because it places the emphasis on "intent". If I intend to shoot the tree to destroy it, I can, at least from a crazy rules-lawyerist perspective, create a 1m² hole with a single bullet. But I think you and I both agree that that is a preposterous suggestion, and neither of us actually suggest that that is how we would be running the game.

Sound about right?

To summarize;
I feel the Penetrating Weapons section of the Barriers rules are superfluous as far as shooting THROUGH a barrier is concerned.
I think the the Shooting Through Barriers section of the Barriers rules work just fine on their own.
For the purposes of Destroying Barriers, one uses the rules for Destroying Barriers as written.

The alternative, which you have at least indirectly submitted, is that I have no way to cause a large hole in a pane of plastiboard or glass by shooting it with my pistol or even shotgun, as the bullet would just inflict 1P damage on it and otherwise remain whole. Is that what you are suggesting?

Let's face it; these rules are ambiguous and largely abstracted. There are going to be some weird stuff happening, but I really don't believe the Penetrating Weapons rules part belongs and can easily be removed with little to no mechanical difference.

[Ryo]

You aren't reading the rules correctly, martin.

Shooting Through Barriers specifies that all unresisted damage is dealt to the structure, and you only do damage to the target behind the barrier if your attack exceeds the Structure Rating of the barrier. If you do more damage to a barrier than its Structure Rating, you are inherently destroying the barrier, and punch a 1m x 1m x 10cm hole in it. Shooting Through Barriers also directly references Penetration Weapons, so you can't just ignore that section when it comes to shooting through a barrier.

Using your example of an Ares Alpha loaded with APDS with 5 net hits, That's 16 DV, -6 AP against Structure 10, Modified armor 10. Your modified DV is greater than its modified Armor, so you deal the full 16 DV to the barrier. It gets 5 hits on damage resistance, reducing the damage to 11. It then takes 10 Structure damage, which creates a 1 meter hole. The remaining 1 DV transfers to the target behind the barrier and probably does nothing.

Penetration Weapons is a lot more realistic, considering that the vast majority of things you could hide behind totally won't stop bullets. It only applies if the modified DV of the attack is greater than the armor rating of what you're hiding behind, so if your enemy is firing armor piercing rounds at you, you better be ducking behind a huge block of concrete, because anything less will barely slow it down. That seems pretty realistic to me.

[Xenon]

I never indicated that I thought the rules for Destroying Barriers should be used for the damage the barrier takes...

When you hit the barrier you will damage it
(no matter if your intent is to hit a target behind the barrier or not).
Either the attack will use Destroying Barriers Rule or it will use Penetration Weapons Rules.

According to table Damaging Barriers on p. 198 you use Destroying Barriers Rules (standard DV or double base DV) for everything except Projectiles and bullets that use Penetration Weapons Rules.

You suggest that Projectiles and bullets does not use Penetration Weapons Rules.

Ergo...?

[Malevolence]

I think that the main problem with the penetrating weapon rules is that "bulletproof" materials don't stop much in the way of bullets. Some examples:

Ballistic Glass (armor 6): Light pistols have a base DV starting at 6P, with a minimum of 1 net hit makes 7P DV, which penetrates the bulletproof glass and does 6P to the original target. This is, aside from hold out pistols, the lightest weapon available.
Armored Glass or Kevlar wallboard (Armor 12): A powerful heavy pistol (9P and -1 AP) with with 3 net hits (12P DV) will blow through the barrier depositing 11P DV (still with -1 AP) to the target. three net hits is not uncommon, especially in the case of the kevlar wallboard where the target gets no defense roll (unaware of attack) or at best is -6 (cannot see attacker) without specific circumstances that might allow him to get around that.
Brick or plascrete (Armor 16): Here, it gets a little more effective - it is highly likely to stop pistols (unless loaded with APDS), but Assault rifles (which are quite common) can blow through it easily. The Ares Alpha or Yamaha Raiden only needs 4 hits to penetrate with normal ammo.

This is with NORMAL ammo. Adding APDS into the mix makes concrete a mere 4 hits to penetrate with an assault rifle. That's almost 4 inches of concrete with an only slightly above average roll for many PCs (after accounting for -6 for blind fire against an unopposed defense, assuming a DP of 15 for 5 stat, 6 skill, 2 specialization, and 2 smartlink).

I think that the barrier should reduce the damage by more than one based on the AP of the round and the armor or body of the barrier. So weapons that are powerful would still be largely unaffected by weak barriers, but the more powerful materials would have a significant effect on the damage. Maybe something like the damage is reduced by 50% - 5% per point that the DV exceeds the modified Armor. Or maybe subtract half the body of the barrier from the damage going through with each point of AP reducing the effect by 5% (so an AP of -10 would incur no penalty). I'm spitballing, but you should get the idea.

[Ryo]

Yes, but "bulletproof" materials would really be better described as "bullet resistant." Ballistic glass will not stop large rounds. An Assault Rifle totally will punch a hole in Kevlar. And Armor Piercing rounds? Forget about it.

The only thing I think is missing from the Penetration Weapons rules is something that takes the thickness of the material into account. As written, 10 centimeters of hardwood is just as easy to pierce as 1 meter of it, and that's nonsensical. Either Armor needs to increase with thickness, or Structure should do more to stop the bullet.

[Malevolence]

Yes, but "bulletproof" materials would really be better described as "bullet resistant." Ballistic glass will not stop large rounds. An Assault Rifle totally will punch a hole in Kevlar. And Armor Piercing rounds? Forget about it.

Ballistic glass won't stop ANY bullets (well, okay, flechette rounds, gel rounds, and hollow points, maybe). Even hold out pistols start at 6P, which with a single hit will penetrate it. There are simply no firearms that ballistic glass will stop, and at a mere -1 to DV, it won't even slow them down. You might as well have regular glass. Considering flechette rounds, a regular glass window will stop bullets (2+5  becomes an effective 7 armor, so a single hit becomes 7P DV, which does not exceed the armor), so it's a little broken the other way too, I suppose.

The only thing I think is missing from the Penetration Weapons rules is something that takes the thickness of the material into account. As written, 10 centimeters of hardwood is just as easy to pierce as 1 meter of it, and that's nonsensical. Either Armor needs to increase with thickness, or Structure should do more to stop the bullet.

Increasing the thickness should increase the structure (per p 197 "Every square meter (of about 10 centimeters thickness) of material has a number of box- es equal to the Structure rating of the barrier"), but yeah, it does nothing for the armor meaning a bullet that can pierce 3 inches of concrete can just as easily pierce 20 feet of it. It enters into house-rule territory, but I think I would at least repeat the test for every 10 centimeters of thickness.  So, every 10 centimeters reduces the DV by 1 and if the DV ever drops below the modified AV  before exiting the barrier, the bullet is stopped. Of course, does that mean that the ballistic glass that is less than 1" thick only has a Structure of 1?

[adzling]

Just bin the whole section on cover, as pointed out it's completely unrealistic & unworkable.

I don't know what I would use in it's place, but the existing rules are worse than knowledgable GM handwaving it.

[Lucean]

purvue, just as a sidenote:
You just have to reach the modified armor with your DV, now.
So a Yamaha Raiden with 11P AP-2 needs 3 hits against Armor 16, not 4 and with 6P weapons you just aren't allowed to glitch against Armor 6 barriers.
This is also important with Hardened Armor and the conversion of Physical damage to Stun damage.

[Erling]

Yes, turning your back against the shooter is a bad idea when you have 12 dice to avoid getting hit... Go out there and dodge bullets will ya! 

To be honest, taking full cover in not turning your back against shooter, it's what it is - taking cover. Also in SR5 there's no penalty for being outflanked of shot from the rear as long as you're already engaged in combat, i.e. you know you can be shot. Attacker won't even have positive modifer, as Character Has Superior Position is a melee combat mod.

...in combination with hit the dirt (interrupt; another +2 to defend)

1. Rule from p. 168 mentions that Hit the Dirt is only used when caught in suppressive fire. 2. Why do you think it provides additional +2?

...take cover (simple; another +2 or +4 to defend)

Why do you think that Take Cover action will provide additional bonus? Adept is already fully covered, and that's why he at least can roll 4 dice.

If you are going behind full cover you need a way to still see your attacker (maybe an augmented reality overlay image feed from your long range sniper drone or the camera feed from your own smartgun -that btw also let you return fire around corners without having to take the blind fire modifier).

An alternative to cover if you want your opponent to get the blind fire modifier is to cast an invisibility spell (complex [or simple for reckless]; -6 to hit him) or maybe have the decker turn off the lights while you activate thermographic vision vision enhancement, ultrasound sensor headware or astral perception...

It's always good to have variants, but, however, that doesn't negate the fact full cover itself is screwed

"It's good idea to have a cover, it gives me +4 for my defense. I've already dodged three attacks. But those Renraku guards are outnumbering us, so I'll better move behind that concrete wall. Wow, now I have full cover, and I'm certainly not gonna be hi.." - BANG! Runner's brain is blasted.

In fact, SR5 is only system I know which makes full cover a worse option than drowing yourself straight and standing uncovered.
Hell, even SR4A, if I recall correctly, gave -6 to the attacker and +4 to the defender WITHOUT making defender unaware of attack and WITHOUT taking away from him his normal defense dice pool (though it was only Reaction-based in SR4A, it was fair enough).
More than that, SS/SA is a favourable option for shooting fully covered enemies, as you will have only -1 damage box mod! You don't even have to spray bullets and pray for hitting the guy behind the wall (it's even a worse option, as you'll have more severe negative damage mod) - as long as you have idea he's somewhere there you can just pull the trigger and get him.