[Xenon]

wait what?
Are you saying that you are allowed to attack more than one target in one major action if you use one single weapon set to single shot mode...?

That doesn't make sense. Why would you ever use (pre Seattle) Full Auto in that case?? ;-)

[Stainless Steel Devil Rat]

wait what?
Are you saying that you are allowed to attack more than one target in one major action if you use one single weapon set to single shot mode...?

If you spend the multiple attacks minor action in addition to the major action to make the attack.. yes, that's what I'm saying.  Again, bursts are a different thing where you don't use multiple attacks with them.

That doesn't make sense. Why would you ever use (pre Seattle) Full Auto in that case?? ;-)

pre wave 3/seattle edition errata, multiple attacks and anticipation and firing modes were all written in such a way that the only way to rationalize their use together was the way SRM did.  Full auto (pre Seattle) was virtually never worth using.  That's why we were allowed to rewrite it to use another mechanic that's already used elsewhere: indirect combat area spells.

[Typhus]

To make sure I understand...

The only scenario possible to make multiple attacks is SS mode, and only with one gun (or weapon).  Correct?

If so, what sentence or combination of sentences in the new printing are supposed to illuminate that?  Because I obviously got it very wrong, and the book seems to specify multiple weapons being in play.  Is that text an oversight?

What am I missing here?

(Not trying to argue, just understand.  I may need to teach it to somebody at some point.  Thanks for the extra explanations.)

Also, I'm not seeing anything about Throwing weapons working differently.  At least not with a word search for 'Thrown','Throwing' or 'Shuriken'.  Seems to need a Major to throw a single one, best I can tell.  Is that also true?

[Xenon]

Scenario
You aim two burst firing weapons against one target. You pull both triggers.

With my reading:
You add a multiple attack minor action, split the pool and resolve them as two individual narrow burst.

With your reading:
Not possible to ever pull both triggers at once (no matter firing mode).

however, with your reading you can instead aim one of your firearms at one of your targets, pull the trigger once, then aim at the second target with the same pistol and pull the trigger a second time. But only if you first also spend a minor action to switch from burst firing mode to single shot mode. Please correct me if I got anything wrong here.

With your reading, what would you say is the advantage of using two pistols compared to just one?

[Finstersang]

I feel like there are multiple confounded issues. As I understand, there is only a very limited number of benefits to wielding two Firearms at once:

• The obvious ones: Versatility, more Ammo, redundancy.
• The option to attack two targets at once with a split dice pool and an additional minor action, i.e. aiming two guns at two different targets. However: Attacking multiple targets in one attack is also possible when attacking with one burst fire weapon. Apparently, this cannot be combined, so you can´t do a dual-wield SMG two-target burst fire attack to hit 4 targets at once (not that this would actually be a statistically viable option, let alone realism). In some fringe cases, the GM may allow this option for other reasons. A cinema classic would be a shot through a target that also hits an enemy behind. That´s deep in the GM fiat zone, though.
• Apparently, there is no additional option anymore/yet(?) for attacking the same target with two different firearms at the same time. The option to use both weapons against the same target (again, with a split dice pool and an additional minor action) is now officially gone, if it was ever RAI anyways. Why that is, is beyond me. It wasn´t a very powerfull option anyways, unless you attack a target with a really bad defense pool. I´m curious how that new option in Double Clutch will turn out.
• Yes, you can still use 2 Major actions to first shoot with one hand and then with the second hand, but since you might just as well shoot the same weapon twice, that´s not a real benefit. UNLESS the new RAI is also that you can only attack once per turn with each weapon. In that case, many Streetsam builds will want to go for dual-wielding. Pretty sure that´s not the case, but I might be mistaken here

In Melee, the number of weapons doesn´t play much of a role as well: If you wield two Swords, you may split your dice pool to attack one target with one Sword and a second target with the other, but you can do the same with just one Sword. However there are Martial Arts Techniques and Edge Options in Firing Line that require two melee weapons. Throwing Weapons are a bit of a special breed: As long as you have enough Shuriken or Throwing Knifes ready, you may split your dice pool over multiple targets; possibly even more than 2, although the math gets really disadvantagous anyways.

Did I get everything right?

[Stainless Steel Devil Rat]

EDIT:
Nuked old post, too much information made for too much confusion.

New post:

You can attack multiple targets via the multiple attacks action with one weapon or multiple weapons.  It doesn't matter which. But, what you can't do (barring house rules, the rule from double clutch, or waiting for the FAQ) is use multiple weapons on one target. The advantage of having 2 weapons instead of 1, since 1 can attack multiple people anyway, lies in areas other than making multiple attacks.  Most prominently: being able to have different damage/ammo types on tap. But there are others, too.

Don't combine multiple attacks with BF wide bursts or FA (or, ghost forbid, blast attacks).  However, it doesn't offend RAI to combine multiple attacks with SA bursts or BF Narrow bursts, under the condition that they target separate targets still.  When an official FAQ is published, that will have the room that errata did not to explain why that's ok but wide bursts/FA multiple attacks is not.

If you want to model using two weapons on one target in the meantime until an official FAQ can go live, I suggest looking at the link-firing action from Double Clutch, which is itself basically letting you form a modified grunt group out of your multiple weapons.  (+1 AR and +1DV for the 2nd/subsequent weapon, or +2 DV if that weapon had 5+DV on its own)

[Finstersang]

With all due respect to your tireless work, but that SS-only restriction makes absolutely no sense and will just lead to more and more unnecessary confusion down the line.

I can understand why attacking 4 targets with 2 SMGs is not allowed; it´s confusing, unrealistic and mechanically unviable anyways. I can also understand putting the kibosh on attacking the same target with two different weapons at the same time with a split dice pool (although you probably overestimate how powerfull this actually is. With 6th Edition Damage Codes, it´s usually better to use the full dice pool and pump more net hits into additional damage). That´s just streamlining. Fine and dandy.

But if a duel-wielding Street Sam points his two Ares Predator at two different targets and declares "I wanna go BLAM BLAM at both of them at the same time" (translation: two semiautomatic attacks, each with +1 Damage, -2 AR, and a split dice pool), why should I, as a GM need say "No you can only do one BLAM with each weapon"? That will only lead to more questions and arguments, and even more so if the Streetsam has to put both Weapons in a different Firing Mode first. (Side Note: I suppose you can still make a Single Shot Attack in SA mode and don´t have to switch into a seperate Single Shot mode that magically prevents your finger from bending a second time, right? RIGHT?! ) And even more so if it turns out that the same action doesn´t even require two weapons in the first place:

However, with your reading you can instead aim one of your firearms at one of your targets, pull the trigger once, then aim at the second target with the same pistol and pull the trigger a second time. But only if you first also spend a minor action to switch from burst firing mode to single shot mode. Please correct me if I got anything wrong here.

I highlighted the real issue here - Xenon is talking about two attacks with the same (non-BF) weapon. If that is actually RAI, even the slight benefit of being able to shoot at two different targets with two different weapons would be gone, and one benefit of BF firing would be diminished as well.

[Stainless Steel Devil Rat]

But if a duel-wielding Street Sam points his two Ares Predator at two different targets and declares "I wanna go BLAM BLAM at both of them at the same time" (translation: two semiautomatic attacks, each with +1 Damage, -2 AR, and a split dice pool), why should I, as a GM need say "No you can only do one BLAM with each weapon"? That will only lead to more questions and arguments, and even more so if the Streetsam has to put both Weapons in a different Firing Mode first. (Side Note: I suppose you can still make a Single Shot Attack in SA mode and don´t have to switch into a seperate Single Shot mode that magically prevents your finger from bending a second time, right? RIGHT?! ) And even more so if it turns out that the same action doesn´t even require two weapons in the first place:

Maybe I should try again: (edit: I realize I was hardly an easy read in the last post.  you helped me realize I needed to boil it down. significantly.  thanks

If you want to use two SA bursts or two BF Narrow Bursts on two different targets, by all means do so.  That's not in conflict with the spirit/RAI, even though we couldn't make that explicitly allowable while still preventing problems with multiple attacks and wide bursts, in the space we had to work with. And we DO plan to explicitly say so in a future FAQ where we can take all the space we need.

However, with your reading you can instead aim one of your firearms at one of your targets, pull the trigger once, then aim at the second target with the same pistol and pull the trigger a second time. But only if you first also spend a minor action to switch from burst firing mode to single shot mode. Please correct me if I got anything wrong here.

I highlighted the real issue here - Xenon is talking about two attacks with the same (non-BF) weapon. If that is actually RAI, even the slight benefit of being able to shoot at two different targets with two different weapons would be gone, and one benefit of BF firing would be diminished as well.

Yes that's the RAI and the RAW.  As mentioned above, the advantage of holding two weapons simultaneously lies in areas other than being able to attack twice.  If you want to attack twice, you may do so with one weapon (subject to the usual caveats involving multiple attacks: gm says targets are close enough together, etc).

[Typhus]

I totally get why doubling DVs on a target is a bad thing.  Makes sense.  The double clutch rule sounds like a good fix. 

[Finstersang]

But if a duel-wielding Street Sam points his two Ares Predator at two different targets and declares "I wanna go BLAM BLAM at both of them at the same time" (translation: two semiautomatic attacks, each with +1 Damage, -2 AR, and a split dice pool), why should I, as a GM need say "No you can only do one BLAM with each weapon"? That will only lead to more questions and arguments, and even more so if the Streetsam has to put both Weapons in a different Firing Mode first. (Side Note: I suppose you can still make a Single Shot Attack in SA mode and don´t have to switch into a seperate Single Shot mode that magically prevents your finger from bending a second time, right? RIGHT?! ) And even more so if it turns out that the same action doesn´t even require two weapons in the first place:

Maybe I should try again: (edit: I realize I was hardly an easy read in the last post.  you helped me realize I needed to boil it down. significantly.  thanks

If you want to use two SA bursts or two BF Narrow Bursts on two different targets, by all means do so.  That's not in conflict with the spirit/RAI, even though we couldn't make that explicitly allowable while still preventing problems with multiple attacks and wide bursts, in the space we had to work with. And we DO plan to explicitly say so in a future FAQ where we can take all the space we need.

Ah, thanks for the clarification. That´s also what i got from the actual RAW, btw. It´s just that this SS-only thing kept popping up here 

However, with your reading you can instead aim one of your firearms at one of your targets, pull the trigger once, then aim at the second target with the same pistol and pull the trigger a second time. But only if you first also spend a minor action to switch from burst firing mode to single shot mode. Please correct me if I got anything wrong here.

I highlighted the real issue here - Xenon is talking about two attacks with the same (non-BF) weapon. If that is actually RAI, even the slight benefit of being able to shoot at two different targets with two different weapons would be gone, and one benefit of BF firing would be diminished as well.

Yes that's the RAI and the RAW.  As mentioned above, the advantage of holding two weapons simultaneously lies in areas other than being able to attack twice.  If you want to attack twice, you may do so with one weapon (subject to the usual caveats involving multiple attacks: gm says targets are close enough together, etc).

I can get on board with that, although I´ll probably have some houserules in place for when a player really wants to go down on the ol Akimbo style. The double clutch ruling might be a quick fix for that. It´s a pretty strong option TBH, maybe I just allow it with the Ambitextrous Quality (or treat the whole attack as offhanded if the shooter is not ambidextrous).   

The only thing that still doesn´t sit right here (but maybe I still haven´t got everything right): Is it really now RAI that I you can use the Multiple Attacks option for two attacks with just one SS-only weapon like the Ruger Super Warhawk? Because that still feels a bit off, given that these weapons explicitly don´t allow you to pull the trigger twice in the same attack against one target - because that´s what constitutes a SA attack

Or is this just the  GM fiat thing where you shoot one(!) bullet through 2 targets?

[Stainless Steel Devil Rat]

You're absolutely right in that being able to make two attacks on one target runs afoul of the burst fire rules... why indeed make a SA attack if you could instead just fire twice for full DV each time?

You could go down the rabbit hole of "two attacks firing one bullet each at the same target translates into a single SA burst", but we didn't have room for that in errataing the relevant rules.  I wouldn't call you wrong in adjudicating two-guns-on-one-target that way.  Only issue is when 2 SSs becomes SA, and 2 SAs become a narrow BF, what do 2 narrow BFs become?


When it comes to guns that are solely SS firing mode making multiple attacks: we're still talking about guns that fire way faster than 18th century muzzle loaders.  Even the slowest revolvers have a potential cyclical rate sufficient for at least 2 aimed shots in a 3 second combat round.  Sure, a proper semi-automatic could fire off a steady pop-pop-pop of bullets over the course of a combat round, but rate of fire is just one of many factors that the multi-attack action reserves to GM discretion/approval for the number of targets possible on that attack.  And of course once you add in rule of cool/hollywood physics, fanning the hammer could provide a rationale for a BUNCH of SS multi attacks.  Heck, the Ruger Redhawk revolver actually gains the BF firing mode from fanning the hammer!

[Xenon]

So far the most consistent seem to be to not allow multiple attacks at all.

Unless you wield two weapons. And if you attack the same target with both weapons, to not treat it as a multi attack and instead just treat it as a slightly more powerful single attack.

And not only for firearms. Melee too. And readied throwing weapons.

I totally get why doubling DVs on a target is a bad thing.  Makes sense.  The double clutch rule sounds like a good fix.

With lower base damage values, a lot of the total damage now typically come from net hits.

By splitting the attacker's dice pool (but not the defender's) you will on average always reduce the damage part originating from net hits by half, and them some (there is also no Unaware of Attack in this edition that prevent the defender from taking a defense test as we had in previous edition).


Say your weapon have a base DV of 3 and you on average get 6 hits while the defender on average get 3. Say soak will on average remove 1.

With one weapon you end up with 3+6-3-1 = 5 boxes of damage. With two weapon attacking the same target twice end up with 3+3-3-1 + 3+3-3-1 = 4 boxes of damage. Plus you spend twice the amount of ammo and an additional minor action. Plus that you increase risk of glitch and that the defender will successfully avoid one or even both of the attacks.


It is basically only useful if the defender have very low defense pool (so you don't risk missing the attack and that your net hits will not be reduced a lot more than half) and/or if if the attack itself deal a lot of damage (narrow burst + explosive ammo might prove problematic, for example).

The only thing that still doesn´t sit right here (but maybe I still haven´t got everything right): Is it really now RAI that I you can use the Multiple Attacks option for two attacks with just one SS-only weapon like the Ruger Super Warhawk? Because that still feels a bit off, given that these weapons explicitly don´t allow you to pull the trigger twice in the same attack against one target - because that´s what constitutes a SA attack

Agree.

I guess the difference is that with this mode you cannot double tap each target, you can only fire one bullet at each target.

But if you have the time to realign and fire off a second round at a second target with your Ruger Redhawk during one major action (or even a 3rd target and a 4th, there is really no upper limit here is there???) then it suddenly will become hard to argue why you can only fire one single bullet at one target. Surely if you rule that you can fire a single shot weapon more than once you would also have more than enough time to pull the trigger a second time... Not sure this is a can of worms I am willing to open ;-)

...in a 3 second combat round.

I know a combat round in SR6 is still supposed to be 3 seconds, but a combat round in SR6 is more akin to the initiative pass concept we had in SR5 (which are typically shorter than 3 seconds).

Unless we allow you to fire single shot weapons multiple times per major action, i guess ;-)

[Finstersang]

IMO there should be a kind of sanity check in place to determine if a Multi-Attack is feasible. And the RAW kinda suggests that as well (Well, ACKCHUYALLY the RAW only explicitly mentions "ammunition, reach, and enemy placement", but come on, people  )

However, I have nothing against keeping the bar for that check quite low:

• Melee Attacks: Overall Check, except for fringe cases like syringes, slap patches and the like.
• Dual Wielding: Check. If that means that dual wielding enables an attack option that you wouldn´t have with one weapon alone, so be it.
• BF and FA Mode Firing: Obviously Check, that´s RAW and part of their appeal.
• SA Mode Firing: Seems tricky to balance without stepping on BFs toes, but then again, a split BF attack also offers bonus damage and and doesn´t require a Minor action. I´d allow 2 or even 3 Attacks. 
  
• Shooting through a target: GM call, but overall a check from me. Could be tied to using APDS Ammo, which is *checks the new book to see if I missed something* still absolute shite
• Shotgun Flechettes: Yeah, makes sense as well if the targets are in close proximity. It would also add some utility to Flechettes, which *checks the new book again* are still even worse than APDS and make no sense at all

But one weapon with Single Shot Mode only? Well, that´s where I´d draw the line unless other reasonable factors enable it. There is a reason why these weapons only have that mode available, and it´s not just a balancing. These weapons are supposed to be so clunky that you can´t properly shoot them in a rapid succession. The Ruger Redhawk mentions Hammer-fanning, but that´s why it also has SA/BF listed in its stats. That´s not the case with the Ruger Super Warhawk.

(Side Note: At one of my tables, I actually enabled Hammer-Fanning for the RSW as well, but it requires a bit of gun modding and a homebrew martial Arts technique that can be learned as a part of the Cowboy fighting style. It´s currently used by a player who build a Dark Tower-style Gunslinger Adept  )

[Michael Chandra]

You're absolutely right in that being able to make two attacks on one target runs afoul of the burst fire rules... why indeed make a SA attack if you could instead just fire twice for full DV each time?

You could go down the rabbit hole of "two attacks firing one bullet each at the same target translates into a single SA burst", but we didn't have room for that in errataing the relevant rules.  I wouldn't call you wrong in adjudicating two-guns-on-one-target that way.  Only issue is when 2 SSs becomes SA, and 2 SAs become a narrow BF, what do 2 narrow BFs become?


When it comes to guns that are solely SS firing mode making multiple attacks: we're still talking about guns that fire way faster than 18th century muzzle loaders.  Even the slowest revolvers have a potential cyclical rate sufficient for at least 2 aimed shots in a 3 second combat round.  Sure, a proper semi-automatic could fire off a steady pop-pop-pop of bullets over the course of a combat round, but rate of fire is just one of many factors that the multi-attack action reserves to GM discretion/approval for the number of targets possible on that attack.  And of course once you add in rule of cool/hollywood physics, fanning the hammer could provide a rationale for a BUNCH of SS multi attacks.  Heck, the Ruger Redhawk revolver actually gains the BF firing mode from fanning the hammer!

I mean if I scored 41 Initiative in SR5 (had a player roll that once thanks to a massive Increase Reflexes spell), I could fire 5 6-round FA Bursts and not suffer any recoil, or fire 5 SS attacks. Being able to fire 2 or 4 in the same time in SR6 doesn't seem that big a deal.

[Finstersang]

And 4th Edition was even more bonkers, with fixed Initiative Passes and the possibility of making 2 shots per pass