[Banshee]

Something simple based on coverage of the armor. 1 auto soak for vests. 2 auto soak for coats. 3 auto soak for full clothing. 1 bonus auto soak for head coverage. Bump damage accordingly. End result for people in armor  is the prett much the same as 6eis displaying. But your gun actually has a chance of taking out someone who isn’t armored in one shot. So no rocket tag but your armor does something and your attacks don’t seem pathetic without a massive pool.

kind of wanted to stay out of this conversation because I didn't really have anything to add that wasn't already said, but ...

this is exactly the system I suggested and playtested but got shot down

[Shinobi Killfist]

Something simple based on coverage of the armor. 1 auto soak for vests. 2 auto soak for coats. 3 auto soak for full clothing. 1 bonus auto soak for head coverage. Bump damage accordingly. End result for people in armor  is the prett much the same as 6eis displaying. But your gun actually has a chance of taking out someone who isn’t armored in one shot. So no rocket tag but your armor does something and your attacks don’t seem pathetic without a massive pool.

kind of wanted to stay out of this conversation because I didn't really have anything to add that wasn't already said, but ...

this is exactly the system I suggested and playtested but got shot down

Too bad my group faded out of playtesting in 5e. We would of added at least one more voice for this.

[Michael Chandra]

Something simple based on coverage of the armor. 1 auto soak for vests. 2 auto soak for coats. 3 auto soak for full clothing. 1 bonus auto soak for head coverage. Bump damage accordingly. End result for people in armor  is the prett much the same as 6eis displaying. But your gun actually has a chance of taking out someone who isn’t armored in one shot. So no rocket tag but your armor does something and your attacks don’t seem pathetic without a massive pool.

kind of wanted to stay out of this conversation because I didn't really have anything to add that wasn't already said, but ...

this is exactly the system I suggested and playtested but got shot down

Would make a nice optional houserule, dunno what to do with weapon damage though... Boost all with 3? But then again, given how people complain about lethality already, not sure if it'd be a good idea.

[Shinobi Killfist]

If you upped damage by 3 and armor auto soaked 3 you’d literally be in the same exact spot. But narratively armor did something and weapons would feel deadlier.

[Lormyr]

A general aside: There's been a lot of discussion of game balance when it comes to player builds vs. what a GM needs to do to challenge them. There are many different play styles and preferences. All of them are valid. The golden rule for everyone having fun is know your audience.

Some players optimize builds in the hopes the GM will rise to the "challenge" of challenging them. Some players optimize because the act of optimizing is an integral part of their fun, and have no preference from there how hard or little of a challenge they receive so long as the game is fun (I fall into this category). Combats don't have to be any harder or easier than your group enjoys. Likewise, if you are the sort of GM that can't enjoy running a game without challenging your players, also totally fine. Host for players who only optimize a little, don't optimize at all, or are content not doing so to be part of the game.

And as far as how resilient out the gate, using Missions standards you can come out the door with heavy mil spec (restricted gear) with R6 grey mana integration as a gnome with body 4, intuition 5, logic 6, willpower 6 who is damn near immune to anything another starting runner could hope to throw at it (23H armor and +10 dice vs. magic in addition to the standard resistance roll for the spell in question), and "fights" by casually walking up to enemies and pulling the pin on a held grenade that can't hurt him so there is zero chance of missing the target area.

Now is that smart? Probably not. My point is that both players and GMs knowing their audience is more valuable what can or cannot be done with characters.

Street sams will easily reach 6 or 9 more soak depending on bioware vs cyberware, with armor and soak ware.

And should, if not even more. Combat is that archetype's function. They should be the most resilient vs. mundane attacks.

At the point armor truly becomes more relavent as fashion then to soak the simulationist  break is just too high.

For sure. I feel the same way about the nonsensical str not effecting melee weapons issue.

some would say it's functionally irrelevant.

Unless the actual Edge-use chart comes to differ the one I have seen, this is my stance on the matter.

I do have my hopes about each of these.  1: If you're getting outnumbered 2 or 3 to one, you SHOULD be in a world of trouble... so I'm provisionally ok with this still.

If our game was based upon realistic (to our reality) standards, I couldn't agree more. But despite being more of a cyberpunk setting, it is still very much high fantasy in power levels in my opinion and experience. So when that is taken into consideration, it is hard for me to not disagree.

In 6e: Soak pools are TINY in comparison, but DVs are also somewhat lower... just not AS reduced from 5e as soak pools were.

I think most folks get that. The concern (or mine at least) is that from what I have seen so far, the numbers have not been reduced in balanced proportion to one another.

But being incapable of taking out the ganger in leather or instantly subdue the wage slave you are extracting makes you seem pathetic not a cybered up combat monster or magically powered martial artist.

I hadn't even considered that, but very much this ^.

kind of wanted to stay out of this conversation because I didn't really have anything to add that wasn't already said, but ...

this is exactly the system I suggested and playtested but got shot down

That is quite disconcerting. Just remember that time you knew what the audience wanted more than the person calling the shots. Then take their job!? Now we're shadowrunning in real life!

Would make a nice optional houserule, dunno what to do with weapon damage though... Boost all with 3? But then again, given how people complain about lethality already, not sure if it'd be a good idea.

I personally don't mind things being more lethal. I'd just like them to retain some ammount of common sense. When I wear armor, it will help to stop me from being injured. When the troll bodybuilder wields the hammer, it will hit strike much harder than the pareplegic gnome. . .

[adzling]

pity

Something simple based on coverage of the armor. 1 auto soak for vests. 2 auto soak for coats. 3 auto soak for full clothing. 1 bonus auto soak for head coverage. Bump damage accordingly. End result for people in armor  is the prett much the same as 6eis displaying. But your gun actually has a chance of taking out someone who isn’t armored in one shot. So no rocket tag but your armor does something and your attacks don’t seem pathetic without a massive pool.

kind of wanted to stay out of this conversation because I didn't really have anything to add that wasn't already said, but ...

this is exactly the system I suggested and playtested but got shot down

[Marcus]

Something simple based on coverage of the armor. 1 auto soak for vests. 2 auto soak for coats. 3 auto soak for full clothing. 1 bonus auto soak for head coverage. Bump damage accordingly. End result for people in armor  is the prett much the same as 6eis displaying. But your gun actually has a chance of taking out someone who isn’t armored in one shot. So no rocket tag but your armor does something and your attacks don’t seem pathetic without a massive pool.

kind of wanted to stay out of this conversation because I didn't really have anything to add that wasn't already said, but ...

this is exactly the system I suggested and playtested but got shot down

Well send whoever shot you down and let us have crack at them. To me that suggestion is reasonable. It’s way less soak then 5e but At least armor has meaning.

The soak with body thing maybe the trend in the industry See Scion 2.0 but SR armor has always been important and it would be tragic for that to no longer be the case.

Even if lot only had one auto soak it would still be better then what is currently been released.

[Shinobi Killfist]

Bump all ranged damage by 3 do the armor as I suggested. Add 1/2 strength round down to melee weapon damage.

[adzling]

Bump all ranged damage by 3 do the armor as I suggested. Add 1/2 strength round down to melee weapon damage.

that would certainly seem sensible given what's been released publicly so far.

I guess we'll have to wait for release to see if that's workable...

[kyoto kid]

Even without a dodge you need a 24 dice pool to do it on average. Maybe less with a called shot. Again you could have had the same soak end result with armor.

Something simple based on coverage of the armor. 1 auto soak for vests. 2 auto soak for coats. 3 auto soak for full clothing. 1 bonus auto soak for head coverage. Bump damage accordingly. End result for people in armor  is the prett much the same as 6eis displaying. But your gun actually has a chance of taking out someone who isn’t armored in one shot. So no rocket tag but your armor does something and your attacks don’t seem pathetic without a massive pool.

...+1

[kyoto kid]

pity

Something simple based on coverage of the armor. 1 auto soak for vests. 2 auto soak for coats. 3 auto soak for full clothing. 1 bonus auto soak for head coverage. Bump damage accordingly. End result for people in armor  is the prett much the same as 6eis displaying. But your gun actually has a chance of taking out someone who isn’t armored in one shot. So no rocket tag but your armor does something and your attacks don’t seem pathetic without a massive pool.

kind of wanted to stay out of this conversation because I didn't really have anything to add that wasn't already said, but ...

this is exactly the system I suggested and playtested but got shot down

...agreed.

[Finstersang]

I´ve thought about another way to make armor relevant: Add further uses for Edge that cohere with Armor, offering positive effects at a (potentially) better ratio than the standard Edge uses for soak tests.

Example:

• 1 Edge: Replace your Body with your Armor rating for the Soak roll
• 2 Edge: Convert lethal damage up to your Armor rating/2 into Stun damage
• 3 Edge: Add your Armor Rating to the soak roll
• 4 Edge: Add Armor rating/2 as automatik hits to the soak roll

These examples are a bit of a shot in the dark, as I have to see how the ratings will turn out across the board. What´s important here is that the effects should be noticeably better than the standard Edge Effects as long as your armor rating is high enough.

While this approach might not look as elegant as a damage reduction/adjustment at a first glance, I think it has some appeals on its own:

• Less invasive: It stays within the "edgy" design philosophy of SR6 and can easily be patched on. It´s an addition, not a complete remodeling. Thus, this approach may even be a good official fix that can be implemented (f.i. in the upcoming combat rulebook?) without looking too much like backpedaling. Admitting that an idea didn´t work isn´t Catalyst´s pretty much any game developers  strong suit these days
• Narrative play: Using Edge in this way offers an opportunity to describe those lucky moments where the bullet goes straight in the padding, bounces of the helmet etc. Out of Edge, and you are out of luck - the attack goes all the way through, or the shooter even scores a vital shot. If you can outmaneuver and "out-edge" the tanky Troll, you can line up the good shots that ignore armor.
• Tough decisions: AFAWK, you can use Edge (including that one point of Edge you may have earned for a good defense rating) only once per Attack: Either for the defense test or for the soak test. But this is mostly a no-brainer: Of course, you will want to use the Edge on the defense test - that way, you increase your chance of not only reducing the damage, but even negating it entirely. However, with these additional Edge uses, it´s an actual choice whether you use edge in hope to dodge the attack entirely or if you rather want to rely on armor, which offers a better ratio.

[Marcus]

These trend to always try to depend on edge is not a good idea, it's gonna slow things down, if every roll we have stop and have edge discussion. Soak is soak, keep it simple.

[Stainless Steel Devil Rat]

You've got some neat ideas Finstersang.  But when you see 6e stats you'll see you haven't picked a good tree to bark up.

Remember, Armor Rating isn't a thing anymore.  Armor provides a bonus to Defense Rating.  And the way things are scaled, only at the edges of the bell curve will Body NOT be the biggest contribution to DR... so only on the fringes would replacing Body with the DR bonus from armor be advantageous.

Now a similar idea to what you're contemplating would be to soak with DR instead of Body, it'd be essentially your 3 edge soak idea.  But: if you don't increase weapon DVs, it gets way too hard to hurt anyone who's got the edge to spend.  If you do increase weapon DVs, you murderize everyone who can't spend the edge.  In other words: it'll unbalance the DV to soak pool dynamic that basically works as-is.  (not to mention, such a change would make spending edge on anything BUT a soak roll a mistake)

I also like the basic idea of getting some auto-soak from armor.  But as Banshee said, it was explicitly ruled out by the powers that be. My assumption is the reasoning was it would also upset the DV to Soak Pool balance. But I wasn't part of playtest so I have absolutely no idea.

[adzling]

I also like the basic idea of getting some auto-soak from armor.  But as Banshee said, it was explicitly ruled out by the powers that be. My assumption is the reasoning was it would also upset the DV to Soak Pool balance. But I wasn't part of playtest so I have absolutely no idea.

I could think of some less generous ideas as to why it was rejected Stainless, I'd wager those ideas are more accurate than what you posit above.