[IronSight]

I have two questions regarding using ranged attacks while engaged in melee combat

1) Attacker in Melee Combat (SR4 Core 20th, pg150)
If the attacker is attempting to conduct a ranged attack while engaged
in melee combat, or if he is aware of another character trying to block
his attack within two meters of him, the attack suffers a –3 modifier. 
I don't really understand what the second part means.

2) Is there any penalty for a character "shooting into melee"? I'm used to playing dnd and wanted to know if the same type of rule applies.
From a realistic perspective I can see why there would be a penalty.  It seems like it would be difficult to shoot at a guy who is brawling or sword-fighting
with 1 or more people in such a close proximity.

[The Wyrm Ouroboros]

1) Attacker in Melee Combat (SR4 Core 20th, pg150)
If the attacker is attempting to conduct a ranged attack while engaged
in melee combat, or if he is aware of another character trying to block
his attack within two meters of him, the attack suffers a –3 modifier. 
I don't really understand what the second part means.

If you're involved in close combat, or you are about to become involved in close combat, unless you're trained to steady nerves of steel, you tend to flinch.  If you're not aware of someone trying to stop your attack (i.e. Draco the Troll Drake Adept coming down on you like a ton of bricks but from behind), no problem.  The moment you become aware, though, your brain is going 'oh crap', and you tend to flinch away, spoiling your aim (i.e. -3 dice pool).

2) Is there any penalty for a character "shooting into melee"? I'm used to playing dnd and wanted to know if the same type of rule applies.
From a realistic perspective I can see why there would be a penalty.  It seems like it would be difficult to shoot at a guy who is brawling or sword-fighting
with 1 or more people in such a close proximity.

The GM always has the option to apply 'cover modifiers' and the like for the individual you're targeting - though with the understanding that if you miss, there's a good-to-inevitable chance that you're going to hit the guy who's inadvertently giving your target cover.

[UmaroVI]

Ouroboros's answers are correct; one additional note is that if you are firing at someone at point blank range, you get +2 to hit (which partly cancels the -3). So if someone is meleeing you, and you shoot a third party, -3. If you shoot the person meleeing you, -1.

[The Wyrm Ouroboros]

<irony>Of course I'm right.  I'm always right.  If people would only understand that ...</irony> 

[IronSight]

Ok, that makes more sense now. Thanks for the help guys.

[Shango]

Wouldn't a smart link prevent hitting the wrong person when shooting into melee?
I know it did in earlier editions of the game.

-Erich

[Novocrane]

That would be the military grade smartlink, in SR4. (see War!)

[Shadowjack]

Actually, from Arsenal there is a firearm accessory called "Safe Target System" which prevents you from shooting an ally.

[Novocrane]

It won't let you fire into melee, though.

If the gun is pointed at or within a radius of 1 meter of a target marked as ”safe,” the system engages the gun’s safety and prevents or holds fire.

Good for poor shooters, but not for firing at someone choking another runner.

[Shadowjack]

Hehe nice catch

[Mirikon]

Indeed. If intel says that the opposition uses a safe target system on their guns, a melee combatant is going to be in heaven. Grab a mook, use them as a shield until you are in melee range of another mook, and so on. Remember, the targets don't necessarily have to be conscious or alive for them to still be considered 'safe'.

[Aryeonos]

Indeed. If intel says that the opposition uses a safe target system on their guns, a melee combatant is going to be in heaven. Grab a mook, use them as a shield until you are in melee range of another mook, and so on. Remember, the targets don't necessarily have to be conscious or alive for them to still be considered 'safe'.

Where are the rules regarding moving with a grappled target, or the chance of them getting hit instead of you? As for safe target, I think alive and conscious would give them good reason not to disable their safe target systems, though I always thought the only person who got safe chipped was the guy they were protecting.

[Mirikon]

If the system is designed so that, say, security at the casino can fire at bad guys without hitting other guards or casino staff (or so that the bad guys can't steal a guard's gun, and then go trigger happy on the other guards), then using a hostage is fair game. As for the rules, they'd be under the subdual rules, I reckon, but I must mention this is only working with the Safe Target System. And it doesn't mention that the safe target system can be easily turned off, meaning unless someone hacks the gun, like in the fiction in Twilight Horizon, you're in trouble.

[Aryeonos]

I'd like to find out what the test and threshold is for disabling things like safe target and smart weapons. It hasn't really come up for me yet.

[Mirikon]

After hacking the gun, I expect it would be less turning off the Safe Target System, and more using an Edit program/form to alter the settings of the system, in the same way a legitimate user would add or delete safe target parameters.