[Stainless Steel Devil Rat]

...I also genuinely believe the SRM interpretation is more than just that, it is a hard rule change. We're adding language to the situation (preventing single shot) that simply does not exist.

So, the alternative to what SRM did (say the rules don't work together at all) is to say they work together freely, or to impose some sort of limitations (from out of the blue?) on how they work together.

Certain scenarios could work just fine where both rules freely work together.  But munchkins gonna munch, man.  Being allowed to shoot 2 targets means you're also being allowed to shoot 10 targets, since there's no limitation given.  As problematic as shooting 10 targets with an ostensibly non-fully-automatic weapon is, that's not even the biggest problem.  No, it gets downright insane when you start multiple-attacking bursts.  If nothing stops you from shooting 10 targets in SS mode, then nothing's stopping you from shooting 10 targets in SA mode.  Many SA pistols have 20+ ammo capacity, and are (under this reasoning) more capable of sending bullets downrange than a proper machine-gun "limited" to the FA firing mode is. 
It gets even more extreme at the BF level.. but it also starts simply breaking down, mechanically.  Do you split dice pools THEN split dice pools? Or split dice pools AND split dice pools (for a net result of only splitting once, in effect)? And lo, naturally one is going to Anticipate.  Which splits get refilled? Is there a timing on splitting, and if so, where does Anticipate trigger in the process?

You REALLY have to start making up/adding rules in order for the two different rules (multiple attacks and firing modes) to both exist in the same attack.  SRM took the path of least disturbance. Saying, for example, you're limited to a max # of targets in your multiple attack = your skill ranks... THAT'D be making up a rule.  Whether or not it's reasonable is a different question of "is it making up a new rule".  Saying "you use one or the other, but not both" is not making up a new rule.  It's assigning discrete bailiwicks TO those published rules.

[Shinobi Killfist]

Just make the limit 2 without autofire and for anticipation. That’s all the rule needs to change. Shooting someone twice with the same gun vs two guns is almost entirely styalistic. Their are minor perks to either choice. The requirement of it being two weapons is not balance based. If you want to soft fix the rule in missions that’s fine. But it should be based on balance not someone wanting their niche of two gun guy being supported.

[Lormyr]

All I am saying is that it reads crystal clearly to me that there is no restriction based on fire mode, and therefore limiting that, is creating rules not in place.

It's like when Mikey told me that the one example DR character's armor from multiple cyberlimbs didn't stack. Nowhere does it say that.

Now as for the rest of the argument you made, basically is this balanced, I get you, and mostly agree. I still believe the problem is just with anticipate itself. Remove that, and is not longer an issue at all.

[Stainless Steel Devil Rat]

It's not only a balance issue... the rules just don't work together very well.

Walk me through how you'd adjudicate a runner using two Uzis.. one in each hand, and each uzi doing multiple wide bursts.  Without adding any additional rules or restrictions.  (Because if we're gonna make stuff up, we may as well enter the house rules realm of discussion).

[Lormyr]

So I would do it exactly as written.

Multiple attacks on page 110 says "Whatever the case, to make multiple attacks, divide your attacking dice pool by the number of attacks made as evenly as possible.".

Wide burst on page 109 says "make a wide burst and split your dice pool between two targets"

Since we're wielding two uzis in wide burst, that means I am making 4 attacks.

Dice pool/4, or more literally, splitting my dice pool between two targets twice. Go.

I really don't see the big deal, unless/until Anticipation gets involved.

Edit: Also, to be clear in case it was lost, when I said there is no restriction firing modes above, I was specifically talking about Anticipate.

[Stainless Steel Devil Rat]

Ok, I thought having you do the math might make my point.  I'll walk you thru what I'm getting at.

Multiple attacks split dice pool evenly.

Wide burts split dice pool across two targets.

Different flavors of the same thing?  No.  Not when you combine them, at least.

Runner holds an Uzi and pop-pops a multiple attack  on two targets (SS mode).  Split dice pool "evenly".  If the dice pool is evenly divisible by the number of attacks, ok no problem.  What if it's 13 dice across 2 attacks?  Evenly is 6.5 dice per attack.  It's impossible to roll 6.5 dice, so you have to either have 2 attacks at 6 dice each (losing a die in total) or have 1 attack at 7 and one at 6 (i.e. not even).  Which is it?  It doesn't look very clear cut to me.  And that's before we really even force the two rules to try to cohabitate.

My example was multiple wide bursts.  Ok so as above, but we're now also giving half the dice pool to each target of a wide burst.  If I do 2 wide bursts with 12 dice pool, that's 4 attacks on 4 different targets that each get 6 dice.  That doubles my original dice pool even without factoring in Anticipate.  It gets downright headache inducing if you double up and try to spread X attacks across >X targets.  If the first wide burst targets gangers 1 and 2, and the 2nd wide burst targets gangers 2 and 3, how many dice are you rolling at ganger 2, across one or two attacks? Because frankly what ganger 2 suffered by all rights ought to be a narrow burst.  Narrow and Wide bursts have different -ARs and +DVs, so it matters. Ugh.

So, I expect you'd say "no, half doesn't mean half the total, it's half what you assigned after multiple attacking, obviously".  Ok, so what's the citation to support imposing that timing? How do you disprove "evenly split between two targets is total dice pool/2"?  Me... I'd say that if you put half your dice pool to EACH target of a Wide Burst, then that's pretty strong circumstantial evidence you're not supposed to be able to multiattack wide bursts.  And if you can't multiattack wide bursts, why can you multiattack ANY burst?

My point here is this:  saying "you have to split for multiple attacks, AND THEN wide bursts only split that already split pool/subpool, not the total pool" is adding in a rule.  And that's doing more than what SRM did by saying "these rules don't have very much overlap on the venn diagram".

[Xenon]

Shooting someone twice with the same gun vs two guns is almost entirely styalistic.

As I read it:

Shooting someone twice with the same gun (double tapping in the same attack action) require that you use a SA firing mode. No multiple attacks minor action. No anticipation.

Shooting someone twice with the same gun (shooting them once and then shooting them once again as two separate attacks) require that you EITHER use two separate major actions OR that you use a weapon in FA firing mode. No multiple attacks minor action in either case. No anticipation.

Shooting someone twice by using two different guns (tapping the trigger of both weapons at the same time in the same attack action and resolving them as two different attacks) require that you take the multiple attacks action and split the dice pool. Eligible for anticipation.

Walk me through how you'd adjudicate a runner using two Uzis.. one in each hand, and each uzi doing multiple wide bursts.  Without adding any additional rules or restrictions.

As I read it:

If you wish to attack with both Uzi's at the same time you take a multiple attack minor action and split the pool (and this is what you would no longer split in case of anticipation).

Then you just resolve each attack individually according to the rules that apply to that attack. In the case of a wide burst you "split your dice pool between two targets and count each as a SA-mode shot" (as there are no multiple attack minor action involved here anticipation will have no effect here).

[Michael Chandra]

I disagree with the claim that split and split again is a rule introduction, but I've already made clear what I would consider reasonable intent. I'm still fine with SRM's ruling even if I disagree with it.

[Xenon]

What if it's 13 dice across 2 attacks? 

You roll 7 dice for the attack you make with your main hand and 6 dice for the attack you do with your off-hand.

Since we're wielding two uzis in wide burst, that means I am making 4 attacks.

Ah.....
And as I see it you are making just two attacks, one wide burst attack with each weapon (two attacks = multiple attacks).
Interesting...


So in that case, what if you fire a single weapon in burst fire mode?
As I see it you are now making one narrow burst attack or one wide burst attack (one attack != multiple attacks).

With your reading would one regular wide burst attack with one single weapon also always require that you use a multiple attacks minor action...?? That unless you also spend a minor multiple attacks action you are not allowed to take the wide burst option, just the narrow burst option...?

I think perhaps this is where we might disagree?

I really don't see the big deal, unless/until Anticipation gets involved.

How would you resolve it if anticipation gets involved...?

I am hoping that you don't intend to let the player make four separate attack rolls without splitting at all as that would be pretty insane for just 4 edge. But it kinda sounds like that it?

[Lormyr]

So, I expect you'd say "no, half doesn't mean half the total, it's half what you assigned after multiple attacking, obviously".  Ok, so what's the citation to support imposing that timing? How do you disprove "evenly split between two targets is total dice pool/2"?  Me... I'd say that if you put half your dice pool to EACH target of a Wide Burst, then that's pretty strong circumstantial evidence you're not supposed to be able to multiattack wide bursts.  And if you can't multiattack wide bursts, why can you multiattack ANY burst?

My point here is this:  saying "you have to split for multiple attacks, AND THEN wide bursts only split that already split pool/subpool, not the total pool" is adding in a rule.  And that's doing more than what SRM did by saying "these rules don't have very much overlap on the venn diagram".

Ok, I see what you mean now. Yeah, those interactions and languages could use a wording adjustment to better cement whatever the intent is.

I personally read it like I described above, total dice pool/total number of targets. For me the cohabitation came in the form that a wide burst multi attack gets the SA AR penalty/DV bonus, where as another firing mode option with multi attack may not have.

Ah.....And as I see it you are making just two attacks, one wide burst attack with each weapon (two attacks = multiple attacks).
Interesting...

Where as I would say that what you are describing is taking one attack action, but each time you roll to hit and the opponent makes a defense test is a targeted attack. You took 2 attack actions, but made 4 total attacks.

With your reading would one regular wide burst attack with one single weapon also always require that you use a multiple attacks minor action...?? That unless you also spend a minor multiple attacks action you are not allowed to take the wide burst option, just the narrow burst option...?

I personally read it as a function of the firing mode itself that you may choose to target two characters with your attack rather than the standard, but you really could read that either way.

How would you resolve it if anticipation gets involved...?

I am hoping that you don't intend to let the player make four separate attack rolls without splitting at all as that would be pretty insane for just 4 edge. But it kinda sounds like that it?

Well using anticipate with the example of dual-wielding wide burst uzi's is strange, since anticipate only lasts for one attack action, it would be half wasted on the second hand? Let me go with a different example.

Player has a RPK HMG. Player is surrounded by a sea of baddies. Player uses anticipate, and shoots 25 of those baddies with a narrow burst at full dice pool, because that is what anticipate says he gets to do before he runs out of ammo. The only interpretation I may add is that you can't target more enemies than you dice pool, since you can't split what isn't there prior to recouping all the dice per target.

Now is that balanced? Hell no. But it reads very clearly to me, and I strive to run things as written. I will not penalize it just because I don't like it, that is the job of errata - to fix broken things.

[Xenon]

I strive to run things as written.

It seem as if SR6 assumes that you also use common sense (more so than perhaps other editions).


But common sense was assumed in 5th edition as well. For example if your gun was using a 3-bullet burst mode. If you use common sense it is clear that when you pull the trigger once the gun will automatically fire 3 bullets (often in less than 0.2 seconds) and that all 3 rounds will always be aimed at the same target. There is no room for multiple attacks here (unless you attack with two weapons at the same time or you spend a complex action to aim at one target, tap the trigger once and then you aim at a second target and tap the trigger a second time, but then both targets also need to be within short or medium range).

...but with a strict reading of the text (without using common sense) it is probably rules legal (in SR5) to tap the trigger just once, but still hit 3 unique targets with one bullet each by spending a multiple attacks free action and splitting the pool three ways ;-)

...same as with a strict reading of the text (without using common sense) it is probably rules legal (in SR6) to tap the trigger 10 times in a single major attack action (no matter firing mode) by spending a multiple attacks minor action and splitting the pool 10 times ;-)

[Hobbes]

The following two statements need to be reconciled, somehow.   

Multiple Attacks on p. 42 "A character can attack more than one opponent, assuming ammunition, reach, and enemy
placement allow it. "
And:
Multiple Attacks on p. 111 " This can be against multiple targets, or you could attempt two attacks against the same target."

P. 111 grants the additional ability to attack the same target multiple times, and removes the "...ammunition, reach, and enemy placement..." limits.

Multiple Attacks also explicitly lets you mix and match different weapons, skills, firing modes.  SA Grenade Launcher and a Monowhip?  Go for it.  Throw Two Grenades?  Sure.  Gets extremely dumb, very fast, even the SRM ruling. 

I don't think the problem is Anticipate, the problem is that Multiple Attacks is a hot mess.  This thread has ?4? slightly different readings on how Multiple Attacks works and I don't think any of them are wrong. 

There are any other number of good proposals in this thread as well, but that one would be mine.

I think my Errata recommendation should have been to replace the Multiple Attacks on p. 111 with a simple "see p. 42 Multiple Attacks" and a clarification that Full Auto firing mode doesn't work with Anticipation.  And remove "for other rules, see Multiple Attacks below." from p. 110 "Off Hand Attacks".  Alas, I was young and foolish when the CRB came out.  ;  )

Hobbes House Rules would be to simply remove the Multiple Attacks action completely.  Anticipate only works with Wide Burst.  Add a Rock and Roll! Edge action for Full Auto Firing Mode that turns it into a moderate AoE attack.  Add a couple Melee Edge Actions for AoEs or Muti-Target attacks.  Attacking with two weapons is a +2 AR.  Ambidexterity grants edge when Attacking with two weapons.  Just lean into the Abstraction that is inherent in 6E. 

[Xenon]

Multiple Attacks also explicitly lets you mix and match different weapons, skills, firing modes.

I don't see an issue with a character holding a firearm (such as a pistol or SMG) in one hand and a melee weapon in the other (for example a combat knife).

With a multiple attacks minor action he would then be allowed to attack with both at the same time. For example a wide burst attack with the SMG and at the same time performing a melee attack with the combat knife.

Attacking with two weapons is a +2 AR. 

Mm..... What if you are wielding two different type of weapons?
(what DV and AR value would you use in that case and what if one is set to Full Auto while the other is set to Burst Fire...)


I kinda like the idea that if you wield two weapons (or if you have two readied throwing knives or shurikens) then you are suddenly allowed to attack the same target twice (by splitting the pool and spending a multiple attacks minor action).

That the only other option if you wish to attack the same target twice (with a single weapon) is to use a firearm set to full auto (trading 6 AP for a minor action)

[Xenon]

So we have 3 readings of Single Shot, SA and Narrow Burst (using a single weapon):

• They can only be used once per major action and are not eligible for anticipation
• They can be taken multiple times against different targets assuming ammo at which point they cost both a major action and a minor action and are eligible for anticipation
• They can be taken multiple times against different targets and/or the same target multiple times assuming ammo at which point they cost both a major action and a minor action and are eligible for anticipation

And we have 4 different readings of Wide Burst (using a single weapon):

• Wide burst can only be used once per major action and is is not eligible for anticipation
• Wide burst can only be used once per major action but also cost a minor action and is eligible for anticipation
• Wide burst can be taken multiple times against different targets assuming ammo, cost both a major action and a minor action and is eligible for anticipation
• Wide burst can be taken multiple times against different targets and/or same target multiple times assuming ammo, cost both a major action and a minor action and is eligible for anticipation

We have 3 readings when it comes to Full Auto (using a single weapon)

• FA can be used to split the attack up to 10 times per major action against multiple targets and/or the same target multiple times, does not cost a minor action and is not eligible for anticipation
• FA can be used up split the attack up to 10 times per major action against multiple targets and/or the same target multiple times, does not have to cost a minor action in which case is not eligible for anticipation but you are also allowed to spend a minor action in which case it is eligible for anticipation
• FA can be taken multiple times assuming ammo against multiple targets and/or the same target multiple times, cost both a major action and a minor action and is eligible for anticipation

We have 3 readings of melee (using a single weapon):

• Melee can only be used once per major action
• Melee can be taken multiple times against multiple targets assuming placement, cost both a major action and a minor action
• Melee can be taken multiple times against multiple targets and/or same target multiple times assuming placement, cost both a major action and a minor action

When it comes to throwing weapons (I think) we have 4 different readings:

• Thrown weapons can be used more than once against multiple targets in a major action assuming that they are already readied, you can ready Agility / 2 thrown weapons and it cost a minor action if you wish to throw more than one at which point it is eligible for anticipation
• Thrown weapons can be used more than once against multiple targets and/or the same target multiple times in a major action assuming that they are already readied, you can ready Agility / 2 thrown weapons and it cost a minor action if you wish to throw more than one at which point it is eligible for anticipation
• Thrown weapons can be used more than once against multiple targets in a major action assuming that they are already readied, you can ready an unlimited amount of thrown weapons but only Agility / 2 per Ready Weapon action and it also cost a minor action if you wish to throw more than one at which point it is eligible for anticipation
• Thrown weapons can be used more than once against multiple targets and/or the same target multiple times in a major action assuming that they are already readied, you can ready an unlimited amount of thrown weapons but only Agility / 2 per Ready Weapon action and it also cost a minor action if you wish to throw more than one at which point it is eligible for anticipation

When it comes to dual wielding we have 3 different readings (I think):

• You can attack the same target once with each weapon by adding a minor action. Ranged attacks are eligible for anticipation.
• You can attack once with each weapon, either the same target twice or two different targets, by adding a minor action. Ranged attacks are eligible for anticipation.
• You can attack multiple times both same target and/or multiple targets with each weapon assuming ammo, by adding a minor action. Ranged attacks are eligible for anticipation.

Please let me know if I missed one (then I'll edit the post to include that as well).

[Lormyr]

It seem as if SR6 assumes that you also use common sense (more so than perhaps other editions).

Xenon, I don't think anything you said is wrong. To be blunt the primary reason I strive to run things as written is for consistency, especially for organized play which is just about all of my SR gaming. As just this thread itself demonstrates, "common sense" varies greatly from individual to individual.

I truly loathe when something a player has works a,b,c at this table, but x,y,z at that table.

The following two statements need to be reconciled, somehow.

I agree. It is hardly the only contradiction that needs addressed either. As I often tease, but also genuinely mean, let's get some errata for the errata's errata. Hot mess indeed.