Shadowrun Play > Gamemasters' Lounge

Optional rule inquiry - streamlining armor & soak rolls

(1/12) > >>

voydangel:

--- Quote from: SR4A pg.75 "Optional Rules Block" ---To cut down on dice rolling during combat, you could drop Damage
Resistance Tests entirely, reducing combat to a single Opposed Test. In this
case, Armor would deduct directly from the attack’s DV.

--- End quote ---

Has anyone used this under the current rules set? How has it affected your game? I really like the concept, but it seems to me that with the amount of armor that can be stacked under current RAW you would have a very large amount of shots that just harmlessly bounce off of people. Does anyone have any other house rules that are similar to this that they find actually work well? And finally, does anyone else find it annoying/unbalancing that a starting standard PC can easily net about 14/10 (plus or minus 3 to 5 for body rating) armor? How do you streamline the excessive dice rolling (20+ dice on a soak roll)? Do you house rule armor stacking?

All comments welcome.

And yes, this topic is inspired by a few other threads, I just didn't want to threadjack. ;)

Chaemera:
Yeah. . . before I used that option, I'd have to implement a couple house rules (HR) along these lines:

1. No armor is considered cumulative except the "Outfit Components" (within a single clothing line), helmets and shields.
2. The SecureTech PPP System is considered a "Component Outfit" (PPP segments are cumulative with one another).

Note that due to HR1, PPP wouldn't stack with, say, an armor jacket, only with other PPP, per HR2.

I don't even know if that would resolve the issue better than just buying hits.

My theory, if a DP>16, buy the hits.

Nomad Zophiel:
So the streamlined version would be:
To-hit=Agi+Weapon skill vs Rea (+dodge for full defense)
DV=Base DV+net hits above-AP-armor?
That makes armor VERY powerful, three to four times as powerful.

Under normal circumstances, armor 15-16 is good for -5DV rolling and -4DV buying. Add 2 each for Reaction and Body and you've pretty much sucked up the base damage from a burst as-is (call it -9DV). Change that from -9 to -20 and combat is going to get VERY long against weapons while remaining painfully short against spells. In fact, this would put spellcasting off by a large enough margin to make it unbalancing, even if Counterspelling is treated like armor. Remember that after the base DV is accounted for, something like 10% of the initial shooty dice pool will translate to increased damage.

On the other hand, if one or both sides want to buy successes, that's great by me.
I'd even be ok with something like this: (normal dice pool modifiers on both sides apply and either or both sides may elect to buy hits)
Single opposed test of Attribute+ability+modifiers vs Rea+Armor+Body. Damage=DV +/- net hits.

You could abbreviate it even farther if you really wanted to:
Simple test Attribute+Ability-(Rea+Armor+body). If the number is positive, the attacker rolls and Damage=DV+net hits. If the number is negative, the defender rolls and damage=DV-net hits.

The second one penalizes the use of Edge, since dice are just plain cancelled so use the more normal combat  rules or option 1 when Edge is spent.

Chaemera:

--- Quote from: nomadzophiel on ---So the streamlined version would be:
To-hit=Agi+Weapon skill vs Rea (+dodge for full defense)
DV=Base DV+net hits above-AP-armor?
That makes armor VERY powerful, three to four times as powerful.

Under normal circumstances, armor 15-16 is good for -5DV rolling and -4DV buying. Add 2 each for Reaction and Body and you've pretty much sucked up the base damage from a burst as-is (call it -9DV). Change that from -9 to -20 and combat is going to get VERY long against weapons while remaining painfully short against spells. In fact, this would put spellcasting off by a large enough margin to make it unbalancing, even if Counterspelling is treated like armor. Remember that after the base DV is accounted for, something like 10% of the initial shooty dice pool will translate to increased damage.

--- End quote ---

This is why I said I would only even consider the optional rule IF you add in the other house rules I mentioned. Namely, get rid of all instances where armor adds up except for helmets and shields. Heck, turn shields into what they really are, a modifier to your Reaction roll, shields help avoid, not absorb, hits.

Now, the best armor in the game gives you 18/16, yeah, it's still massive, but it's Availability 20F, 30kĄ armor, it should be beast to take him down. APDS in a Barrett Model 121 will still reduce that 18 to 10 and with DV 9P + Net hits, the punk in the armor will be hurting in the morning.

That being said, buying hits is still the more consistent, more elegant solution, though I'm starting to think "armor subtracts directly from damage" seems a bit more realistic, if not mechanics-friendly. After all, a guy in military grade heavy armor should safely ignore anything short of anti-vehicle and high armor-penetration. DV - (Modified Armor Rating) reflects that better than DV - Hits.(Modified Armor Rating + Body). Does definitely make it a less lethal game, though.

The_Gun_Nut:
There are still a ton of options, many inexpensive, that either cut armor in half or negate it altogether.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page