Shadowrun

Catalyst Game Labs => Errata => Topic started by: jim1701 on <04-10-14/0123:59>

Title: Run and Gun Errata
Post by: jim1701 on <04-10-14/0123:59>
The value for recoil compensation is not applied consistently.  It appears that up until pg. 40 the values are positive the same as in the core rule book.  However, beginning with shotguns it lists a negative number for RC.  At first I thought this meant that the weapons were just really bad at recoil but that does not appear to be the case according the weapons' descriptions.  Some clarification would be helpful.  Thanks. 
Title: Re: Run and Gun Errata
Post by: Agonar on <04-10-14/0137:54>
Page 50, Weapon Accessories.  Under Advanced safety system (modification), second column, second paragraph

Quote
you need an Armorer took kit

Presumably, it should be a tool kit
Title: Re: Run and Gun Errata
Post by: jim1701 on <04-10-14/0216:35>
Slings are in the recoil compensation compatibility table on pg. 53 but the item description on pg. 52 does not mention offering any recoil compensation.
Title: Re: Run and Gun Errata
Post by: jim1701 on <04-10-14/0233:43>
The terms smartlink and smartgun seem to be used interchangeably throughout the book.  I believe all smartlink references should be replaced with smartgun. 
Title: Re: Run and Gun Errata
Post by: Triskavanski on <04-10-14/0240:30>
The Polymer Coating seems to get worse the more covered you are. its a -(Rating), +2 Full, +1 mostly full +0 half.
Title: Re: Run and Gun Errata
Post by: jim1701 on <04-10-14/0312:20>
It does not state what range brackets the Harpoon/Javelin and the Urban Tribe Tomahawk uses on pg. 25.  The other thrown weapons all refer to one of the various thrown weapons in the core rule book.  Also, the Harpoon/Javelin refers to rules that allows it to be used as a melee weapon but no such rules exist for the tomahawk.  Is this intended or an oversight?
Title: Re: Run and Gun Errata
Post by: jim1701 on <04-10-14/1047:16>
There are several modifications from Gun H(e)aven 3 that are missing from Run and Gun. 

Electronic Firing
Trigger Removal
Metahuman Customization

Also I've seen the question asked if the powered slide mounts in GH3 are the same as the slide mounts in Run and Gun.  They appear to be functionally the same but clarification would be good.
Title: Re: Run and Gun Errata
Post by: Kincaid on <04-10-14/1618:53>
Skinlink is listed on the table on page 87, but there are no accompanying rules.
The Shadow Block example on 126 revolves around someone trying to Dodge a bullet.  This cannot be done.
Hi-C ammo is mentioned under Ricochet Shot, but there are no accompanying rules.
The Ares Thunderstruck has an availability of 12 on page 45 and an availability of 24 on page 207.
Title: Re: Run and Gun Errata
Post by: Kincaid on <04-10-14/1624:59>
The Polymer Coating seems to get worse the more covered you are. its a -(Rating), +2 Full, +1 mostly full +0 half.

I assume they mean you're adding a negative number (based on coverage) to a negative number (based on rating).
Title: Re: Run and Gun Errata
Post by: jim1701 on <04-10-14/1657:06>
The Polymer Coating seems to get worse the more covered you are. its a -(Rating), +2 Full, +1 mostly full +0 half.

I assume they mean you're adding a negative number (based on coverage) to a negative number (based on rating).

It appears to me to be backwards too.  Given anyone trying to perceive me would start with a -Rating penalty I would think +0 would be for Full, +1 for mostly full and +2 for half since these latter modifiers would be reducing the initial penalty.  Either that or it should have been - 2 / -1 / -0.
Title: Re: Run and Gun Errata
Post by: JackVII on <04-10-14/1702:53>
Yeah, I think it is supposed to basically mean:

Full: -(Rating+2)
Mostly Full: -(Rating+1)
Half: -(Rating)
Title: Re: Run and Gun Errata
Post by: SlowDeck on <04-10-14/1716:05>
The underbarrel weight is missing values from the table on page 54, but has values in the table on page 209.
Title: Re: Run and Gun Errata
Post by: RHat on <04-10-14/1722:13>
The HVAR and Vindicator are missing any special rules related to their high rate of fire, which seems like an omission.

And I'd like to take a moment to submit the vehicle repair costs for Errata as well - clearly intentional, but it seems like a mistake all the same, particularly since they'll result in riggers having to spend the entire run payout just on materials for fixing their stuff.
Title: Re: Run and Gun Errata
Post by: SlowDeck on <04-10-14/1727:48>
The HVAR and Vindicator are missing any special rules related to their high rate of fire, which seems like an omission.

And I'd like to take a moment to submit the vehicle repair costs for Errata as well - clearly intentional, but it seems like a mistake all the same, particularly since they'll result in riggers having to spend the entire run payout just on materials for fixing their stuff.

And that's for extremely cheap equipment. If they have anything of value, they may need the payout of multiple runs just to fix the damage from one run.
Title: Re: Run and Gun Errata
Post by: JackVII on <04-10-14/1731:00>
And I'd like to take a moment to submit the vehicle repair costs for Errata as well - clearly intentional, but it seems like a mistake all the same, particularly since they'll result in riggers having to spend the entire run payout just on materials for fixing their stuff.
Seconded.

An F6 Air spirit using elemental attack with one net success against an Ares Venture causes, on average, 200,000 nuyen worth of damage (5 points of damage).

Even on the lower end of the scale, a single one-net hit attack by an AK-97 on a Ford Americar causes 9,600 nuyen worth of damage. (6 points of damage)

Both calculations are for parts only.
Title: Re: Run and Gun Errata
Post by: jim1701 on <04-10-14/1838:54>
Ruthenium Polymer coating as described in Run and Gun has a completely different effect than the description of the Chameleon Suit (SR5 pg 437) which is also supposed to be coated in Ruthenium Polymer.  This may be intentional but warrants clarification at the very least.
Title: Re: Run and Gun Errata
Post by: Michael Chandra on <04-10-14/1940:43>
The Terracotta Arms AM-47 has several issues, unfortunately. It says it's "provided with [...] underbarrel weight, [...] safe target system with an extended barrel for increased range." Its statblock, however, does not include these three.

- Extended Barrel is never specified, so likely was cut out of the rules. Unsure whether it was taken into account in its price though.
- Underbarrel weight no longer has any benefit for a non-FA weapon, so it's understandable it was cut. This means the 1(3) RC likely includes 1 inherent RC.
- Safe Target System not being listed is kinda a big deal, especially since it's not clear what version it comes with if any.
Title: Re: Run and Gun Errata
Post by: jim1701 on <04-10-14/2123:20>
PI-Tac Level I on pg 105 has an availability of 18F yet the description describes it as available to civilians. 

PI-Tac Level II and Level III Combat Mode on pg 105.  In both cases it lists Armed Combat as one of the skills a player can choose to boost but no such skill exists.  It should be replaced with the Blades and Clubs skills. 
Title: Re: Run and Gun Errata
Post by: ProfGast on <04-10-14/2208:50>
Ruthenium Polymer coating as described in Run and Gun has a completely different effect than the description of the Chameleon Suit (SR5 pg 437) which is also supposed to be coated in Ruthenium Polymer.  This may be intentional but warrants clarification at the very least.
By the same token, Ruthenium Polymer Coating is listed simply putting a penalty to perception tests.

The Second Skin bodysuit has a Ruthenium Polymer coating 4 as a feature…
and a wireless bonus that says "As Ruthenium Polymer Coating"

Ruthenium Polymer Coating has no listed Wireless bonus. (page 86)
Title: Re: Run and Gun Errata
Post by: ProfGast on <04-10-14/2223:39>
Page 48: Ares Lancer MP Laser table calls it the "Archon" in the flavor text while describing power consumption and range.

Page 33: Again the gun table Savalette Guardian is listed as having a "Smartlink" in its standard upgrades, vs the Onotari Arms Violator's "internal smartgun."  The flavor texts also refer to "an integrated smartgun link" in the Savalette text and simply "a smartlink" in the Onotari's flavor text.   SR5 specifies "smartgun system" in weapon accessories and "Smartlink" in vision enhancements.

Smartgun/Smartlink confusion: HK Urban Combat (p36), Ares HVAR(p37), HK xm30(p37), Nissan Optimum II (p38), Mossberg (p41)refer to it as "smartlink"

AM-47 (p38), Barret (p40), Spas-24(p41), Nemesis (p43) all refer to it as a "smartgun"


Form Fitting Body Armor (p65) mentions a basic piece "shirt" vs a full suit but only stats for a full suit are included (may be intentional!)
Title: Re: Run and Gun Errata
Post by: Kincaid on <04-10-14/2244:39>
It remains unclear what, if anything, Second Skin stacks with.

Arnis de mano (p. 129) does not appear on the list of skills on page 135.  I assume it would be a specialization of blades and clubs.
Title: Re: Run and Gun Errata
Post by: Redwulfe on <04-10-14/2353:09>
Not sure if I'm missing something but the pair grenade lists it as -2/m on the blast but does no damage to reduce and has no blast radius mentioned.

Red
Title: Re: Run and Gun Errata
Post by: Michael Chandra on <04-11-14/0631:00>
Not sure if I'm missing something but the pair grenade lists it as -2/m on the blast but does no damage to reduce and has no blast radius mentioned.

Red
Its description notes it has the same range as a High-Explosive Grenade, though.
Title: Re: Run and Gun Errata
Post by: Cronstintein on <04-11-14/0806:35>
No clear mechanics are given for either gel packs or skin link.

I'm also curious as to why you would put things like auto picker in your armor.  Is this turning pockets into a mechanic? Do you get a concealability bonus?
Title: Re: Run and Gun Errata
Post by: ImaginalDisc on <04-11-14/0832:34>
I. . .don't want to buy this book.

It's taken a long time to write and release, and it's got so many errors. How can I use a book for reference that is so error prone?
Title: Re: Run and Gun Errata
Post by: Kincaid on <04-11-14/0846:59>
I. . .don't want to buy this book.

It's taken a long time to write and release, and it's got so many errors. How can I use a book for reference that is so error prone?

Despite my gripes, I don't regret buying it (But seriously Catalyst, I'm offering my proofing skills for free on the next one as a one-time deal).  There's a ton of stuff in there I'll use and most of the stuff that's ill-defined can be pretty easily sorted out in a home game.  Even if you're Missions-centric, there are a lot of appealing options and gear for any combat-enthusiast.  I'm a sucker for stuff like the grenade-cam and hard-shell briefcase.  My characters generally veer towards the "mundane or adept with a gun," and all of them now have new things to buy or chargen overhauls to endure.
Title: Re: Run and Gun Errata
Post by: Rahz on <04-11-14/1133:45>
Melee Hardening is also another modification that was mentioned in Gun H(e)aven that is not included in Run & Gun. 

Overall I like the content of the book even though most of it is just edition updates on older stuff.  The stats/rules for most of the stuff seems in line with SR5 but the typos, smartlink/gun issues, omissions and other editorial messes are rather disappointing to say the least. 
Title: Re: Run and Gun Errata
Post by: JackVII on <04-11-14/1151:24>
Melee Hardening is also another modification that was mentioned in Gun H(e)aven that is not included in Run & Gun. 
Good point, you would think it would be in there just to explain the fluff associated with the Gun Kata discipline.

Also, did I miss a chakram item listing somewhere? There's an entire fighting discipline dedicated to it, so...
Title: Re: Run and Gun Errata
Post by: JackVII on <04-11-14/1233:16>
After the initial Preview #1 release, we brought up the question about whether the Executive Suite/Heritage/Nightshade/Moonsilver/Second Skin lines of armored clothing were supposed to have a Zoe header allowing Second Skin to actually be able to use the Custom Fit (stack) property. The headers are all still listed by their line names rather than manufacturer.
Title: Re: Run and Gun Errata
Post by: ProfGast on <04-11-14/1323:45>
Melee Hardening is also another modification that was mentioned in Gun H(e)aven that is not included in Run & Gun. 
To be perfectly fair, Run & Gun doesn't seem to recognize Gun H(e)aven as a book at all for 5th, seeing as none of the guns, rules or modifications are featured in the tables in the back.  Given that Gun H(e)aven has a weird place as a crossover supplement. it may not be factored in and the melee hardening is simply a 4th edition leftover for the people who use the supplement for 4th edition.
Title: Re: Run and Gun Errata
Post by: MagusRogue on <04-11-14/1331:35>
pg. 42 - my fav gun in any edition, GE Vindicator, has alot of stuff wrong. one, under standard upgrades, its missing the smartgun system. Also, under Ammo, its missing the 100 (belt) option mentioned in the text.

As an aside, i hope there's no special rules for hypervelocity and minigun rules. previous editions made them so hard to use that you would never ever use one hand-held because the recoil would just be obscene. tho i think the HVAR should have gone the Vindicator's route and be given a high AP (or any) to count the massive amount of bullets tossed out.
Title: Re: Run and Gun Errata
Post by: MagusRogue on <04-11-14/1335:20>
pg. 40 - The Barrett 122 in its text says it has a suppressor, but doesn't have one in its standard upgrades
Title: Re: Run and Gun Errata
Post by: MagusRogue on <04-11-14/1340:23>
in the Killshots and More chapter, there's several options for AV and AV Assault Cannon ammo, yet there is no such ammo in either the core rules or run n gun.

pg. 116: Flame On: Totally missing descriptive text.

pg. 117: That Hit The Spot: Totally missing descriptive text.

As an aside, im not sure if they were ever in previous editions or not, but am I the only one missing Dragonsbreath shotgun shells? I know we have flares, but thats not quite what I want.
Title: Re: Run and Gun Errata
Post by: MagusRogue on <04-11-14/1345:31>
pg. 53, Underbarrel Chainsaw, it mentions chainsaws do double damage to objects and barriers, but under the actual chainsaw rules, this is omitted. Aside, the chainsaw text says messing up with one is likely to hurt yourself, but again no rules to suppliment this. thinking a glitch knicks ya and a critical glitch lobs off your leg.
Title: Re: Run and Gun Errata
Post by: MagusRogue on <04-11-14/1354:49>
pg. 51-54: the following mods do not list what slots they take up: Flashlight, Weapon Commlink, and Weapon Personality. We're also missing mechanical benefits/drawbacks for a safe target system, and does having a weapon personality actually do anything other than making the weapon annoyin?
Title: Re: Run and Gun Errata
Post by: MagusRogue on <04-11-14/1412:37>
the demolitions chapter, especially the table on pg. 190, is confusing. it doesnt describe alot of the charges used.

Det Cord low and high yield should be tabbed over to see that those belong as det cord.

table items missing on 193: Commercial, Binary, Foam, Plastic.

cooked explosives missing from pg. 190; nitro, tnt, dynamite.

sooooo........... whats the rating of tnt? nitro?
Title: Re: Run and Gun Errata
Post by: Csjarrat on <04-12-14/0730:39>
Pg 52-3 weapon accessories; foregrip is stated to attach to the barrel even though multiple weapon pictures in SR5 books clearly show it as occupying the underbarrel area.
also there is no listed incompatibility with underbarrel weapons like shotguns/grenades etc. the foregrip would clearly need to be shot through so can we errata this please?
it makes much more sense that the foregrip would use the underbarrel slot, preventing use of underbarrel weapons; as in real life and pretty much every computer game that features these options too.
Title: Re: Run and Gun Errata
Post by: firebug on <04-12-14/0753:12>
Speaking of explosives...  There doesn't seem to be listed anywhere what the damage or rating for dynamite is.  Shame, I was hoping I could throw a stick of dynamite at someone like I was playing Fallout: New Vegas or something.
Title: Re: Run and Gun Errata
Post by: Carnage on <04-12-14/1255:15>
Pg. 58: Argentum Coat has different stats than in the list on page 211

Pg. 104: "Dunkelzhan" when it should say "Dunkelzahn"

Pg. 54: "flare" when it should probably say "flair"
Title: Re: Run and Gun Errata
Post by: Cronstintein on <04-12-14/1327:13>
The example text in the martial arts section has a bouncer with multiple techniques but no martial art style which is illegal under the RAW.
Title: Re: Run and Gun Errata
Post by: Michael Chandra on <04-12-14/1825:22>
Pg. 58: Argentum Coat has different stats than in the list on page 211
On page 211, the Argentum entry seems to be a copy-paste of the Ulysses entry.

The example text in the martial arts section has a bouncer with multiple techniques but no martial art style which is illegal under the RAW.
His Martial Arts isn't named, but it isn't stated that he doesn't have one, so it's not a violation of RAW. Judging from his techniques, he's a practioner of Knight Errant Tactical.
Title: Re: Run and Gun Errata
Post by: FangHamhands on <04-12-14/1920:01>
It does say " He does not get the + 2 specialization bonus because he has not learned a specific style" which I took to mean he doesn't have a Martial Art.
Title: Re: Run and Gun Errata
Post by: JackVII on <04-12-14/1944:43>
It does say " He does not get the + 2 specialization bonus because he has not learned a specific style" which I took to mean he doesn't have a Martial Art.
I asked a question in the R&G rules questions thread in the Rules sub that may touch on this. There is apparently a difference between learning a martial art and specializing in it. I don't think it is a particularly clear distinction, but it may be that they intended to write "specialized" there rather than "learned" (and/or confusion on the part of the devs where the left hand isn't talking to the right).

ETA: Here is a link (http://forums.shadowruntabletop.com/index.php?topic=16026.msg282289#msg282289) to that Q&A. Given what it says in the part you have quoted, I'm still not entirely sure what RAI was as the book is saying one thing in an example and one of the freelancers is saying another.
Title: Re: Run and Gun Errata
Post by: Cronstintein on <04-13-14/1449:55>
I wonder if maybe they originally planned to have techniques learnable without a style and that's why it's a little garbled.
Title: Re: Run and Gun Errata
Post by: Giabralter on <04-14-14/0015:03>
It does say " He does not get the + 2 specialization bonus because he has not learned a specific style" which I took to mean he doesn't have a Martial Art.
I asked a question in the R&G rules questions thread in the Rules sub that may touch on this. There is apparently a difference between learning a martial art and specializing in it. I don't think it is a particularly clear distinction, but it may be that they intended to write "specialized" there rather than "learned" (and/or confusion on the part of the devs where the left hand isn't talking to the right).

ETA: Here is a link (http://forums.shadowruntabletop.com/index.php?topic=16026.msg282289#msg282289) to that Q&A. Given what it says in the part you have quoted, I'm still not entirely sure what RAI was as the book is saying one thing in an example and one of the freelancers is saying another.

I see the confusion. You're right, it should be style specialization to match where Ryu has a Counter Strike specialization to show where the extra dice are coming from for the skill test.
Title: Re: Run and Gun Errata
Post by: ProfGast on <04-14-14/0222:21>
It remains unclear what, if anything, Second Skin stacks with..
After some digging in Arsenal and a second look at the organization of Run and Gun: Zoé owns Executive Suite, Heritage, Moonsilver/Nightshade AND Second Skin.

As such, Second Skin stacks with appropriately custom fit suits of Zoé.

The book just doesn't do a good job of showing that.  The only other manufacturesr who has multiple lines like Zoe shown is Shiawase and Ares.  Vashon Island (Shiawase) has the Aces High, Steampunk, Synergist and Sleeping Tiger lines, and Ares has the Globetrotter/Wild Hunt, Industrious, Big Game Hunter and Rapid Transit lines.

Also from Arsenal, the "Nissan Optimum II" (pg38) probably should be the "Nitama Optimum II."  Though I suppose Nissan may have acquired the rights?
Title: Re: Run and Gun Errata
Post by: Kincaid on <04-14-14/1034:40>
It remains unclear what, if anything, Second Skin stacks with..
After some digging in Arsenal and a second look at the organization of Run and Gun: Zoé owns Executive Suite, Heritage, Moonsilver/Nightshade AND Second Skin.

As such, Second Skin stacks with appropriately custom fit suits of Zoé.

The book just doesn't do a good job of showing that.  The only other manufacturesr who has multiple lines like Zoe shown is Shiawase and Ares.  Vashon Island (Shiawase) has the Aces High, Steampunk, Synergist and Sleeping Tiger lines, and Ares has the Globetrotter/Wild Hunt, Industrious, Big Game Hunter and Rapid Transit lines.

Also from Arsenal, the "Nissan Optimum II" (pg38) probably should be the "Nitama Optimum II."  Though I suppose Nissan may have acquired the rights?

Thanks for doing the digging--this is very handy.
Title: Re: Run and Gun Errata
Post by: mjack on <04-15-14/1900:59>
Pg. 20: Cougar Fineblades are more expensive with worse attributes and at higher avaiability than a Combat Knife (Core Rulebook, Pg. 423).

Pg. 25: All throwing weapons are only listed with Accuracy for Throwing Weapons. Which values are used when wielding an Harpoon or Cavalier Arms Urban Tribe Tomahawk in melee … or ain't this possible at all?

Pg. 30 (Fichetti Executive Action) and Pg. 33 (Savalette Guardian): What again was the idea behind pistols with BF Mode for a Complex Action when this is identical to a SA Burst? Ok, makes some sense when used with an Aimed Burst action (Pg. 119). But, the Double-Tap action (Pg. 120) for SA Mode has the same benefit of DV +1 while consuming one round less.

Title: Re: Run and Gun Errata
Post by: BaronAtomy on <04-16-14/1825:19>
The stats for underbarrel weapon modifications (Accuracy, DV, AP, RC, reload type/size, and any potential slots that they might also possess.  The chainsaw/flamethrower's stats can be extrapolated from their availability/cost on the table. 

  Additionally, the flashlight entry reads "Unless you’re directly in its path, in which case you see it to well.", 'to' should be 'too' for grammatical pedantry. 

  Is it just me, or could we have significantly reduced/simplified the martial arts techniques that simply add a bonus die to common moves?  Similar with the 'Ammo Whammy'; why not just have one 'knucklebreaker' entry with different DV ratings for the different ammo types that can be used?

  The shadowtalk on the Forearm Guards mentions what sounds like cyberweapon installations (specifically 'pop-out blades', 'hold-out guns', and 'commlinks'), but there doesn't seem to be any other indication of being able to install other weaponry into armor in 5E that I'm aware of.
Title: Re: Run and Gun Errata
Post by: BaronAtomy on <04-16-14/1859:05>
Additionally, we are lacking gyrojet ammo prices and variants (including the lauded 'jelly rockets').  Also, as a bit of a real-life gyrojet nerd, why do we never get a rifle variant?  And 6mm rockets? Vintage rockets were 12-13mm.  Additionally, why special rules underwater but not for space/low-grav/null-grav environments?  Sorry, that's less errata than random ponderings, but the ammo mechanics one I stand by. :)
Title: Re: Run and Gun Errata
Post by: firebug on <04-16-14/1908:32>
Similarly lacking flamethrower ammo prices.  And size/description so you can know how much is actually possible to bring with you.
Title: Re: Run and Gun Errata
Post by: BaronAtomy on <04-16-14/1927:50>
Lassos, chakrams, and some other martial arts weaponry mentioned in relevant Styles and elsewhere in the book don't seem to exist.
Title: Re: Run and Gun Errata
Post by: Carnage on <04-17-14/0827:30>
Pg. 122: Any mention of (p. 170 SR5) should be (p. 168 SR5)

Seriously, this is basic editor stuff, though boring and grueling to do.
Title: Re: Run and Gun Errata
Post by: firebug on <04-18-14/1833:16>
On page 34, the PPSK-4 Collapsible Machine Pistol has no rules for the benefit gained by it's unique folding capabilities.  Without this, you're just left with a mediocre MP that can't take any accessories and has an exceedingly high availability rating.  That accessories thing really hurts since it means it can't take a gas vent "accessory".

Related, the book doesn't reference any of the accessories in the core book either, does it?  Stating which ones are officially "modifications".  The mods/accessories in the book also often don't say what spot they take up...  Does a weapon commlink take up a spot?  Does weapon personality take up a slot?  How?
Title: Re: Run and Gun Errata
Post by: SlowDeck on <04-18-14/1909:18>
Can I note that, as humorous as the part about quick-draw holsters not firing the gun for you is, the critical glitch rules in the main book actually make that text wrong?
Title: Re: Run and Gun Errata
Post by: BigNeonWolf on <04-19-14/1644:09>
Noticed a discrepancy between the main entry and the summary table regarding the ARES THUNDERSTRUCK GAUSS RIFLE. In the main entry it has an availability of 12F, while in the summary states 24F. I'm assuming it's 24F.
Title: Re: Run and Gun Errata
Post by: Triskavanski on <04-20-14/1026:21>
On page 34, the PPSK-4 Collapsible Machine Pistol has no rules for the benefit gained by it's unique folding capabilities.  Without this, you're just left with a mediocre MP that can't take any accessories and has an exceedingly high availability rating.  That accessories thing really hurts since it means it can't take a gas vent "accessory".

Related, the book doesn't reference any of the accessories in the core book either, does it?  Stating which ones are officially "modifications".  The mods/accessories in the book also often don't say what spot they take up...  Does a weapon commlink take up a spot?  Does weapon personality take up a slot?  How?

In terms of accessories and such, they need to be more specific in /what/ accessories that means. Because by RAW, things like holdout pistols cannot take spare clips, holsters or anything of that sort.
Title: Re: Run and Gun Errata
Post by: KarmaInferno on <04-24-14/1807:34>
The Static Shaft option for Stick n Shock arrows on page 24 has a cost of Ratingx25¥ on the chart, but no mention of any rating is mentioned anywhere else.
Title: Re: Run and Gun Errata
Post by: Michael Chandra on <04-24-14/1815:46>
(It's indeed extremely strange the other arrows don't have a Rating in the cost, where the SR5 core arrows do. I can understand for the Incendiary and the SnS, but not the others.)
Title: Re: Run and Gun Errata
Post by: Namikaze on <04-24-14/1934:56>
The reason none of the others do is because they are arrowheads not arrows.  The arrows themselves in the core rulebook use Ratings, and then you apply the arrowhead to the arrow.  The static shaft is also an arrow, essentially.

Core book arrow: arrow shaft with no special head
R&G static shaft: arrow shaft with no special head
R&G arrowheads: applicable to all arrow shafts
Title: Re: Run and Gun Errata
Post by: WellsIDidIt on <04-25-14/1822:33>
Progressive Recoil on page 110 indicates that natural RC is 1 + Str/2.
SR 5 has it as 1 + Str/3 on page 175.
Title: Re: Run and Gun Errata
Post by: panopticon on <04-26-14/0540:20>
The ares 'one' monosword (p.19) seems underpowered and underpriced when compared to the monowhip or monochainsaw. As presented it is equivalent to a katana.
Title: Re: Run and Gun Errata
Post by: Serin_Marst on <04-28-14/2159:33>
Worse than a katana, really.  But that has as much to do with the katana being overstatted as it does with the monosword being understatted.

A couple more that I haven't seen mentioned:

The table on pg. 87 says trodes take up 1 capacity, the core rule book indicates they take up 2.

Pulseweave's rules say it has a number of charges equal to its rating; it doesn't have a rating.
Title: Re: Run and Gun Errata
Post by: Michael Chandra on <04-29-14/0612:08>
Worse than a katana, really.  But that has as much to do with the katana being overstatted as it does with the monosword being understatted.
((The Katana is pretty much the only two-handed 1-Reach weapon, so a price is paid for its stats.))
Title: Re: Run and Gun Errata
Post by: frankhlane on <04-29-14/0658:54>
I'm going to have to +1 the fact that this product does not seem to have been well edited and several sections needed to be fleshed out further than they were.  Are we purchasing products or are we pre-ordering betas?  Because if this is the final result and we won't get an updated version without buying it again, it seems like maybe we got pwned.
Title: Re: Run and Gun Errata
Post by: martinchaen on <04-29-14/0905:12>
frankhlane
My personal recommendation and opinion only; chill.

If a digital product is updated and you bought it through DriveThruRPG or Battlecorps, you'll be able to download an updated copy from the respective store when the updated product is available. If you bought a paper product, you won't get an updated product in print, but can download errata documents just like everyone else.
Title: Re: Run and Gun Errata
Post by: frankhlane on <04-29-14/1108:50>
frankhlane
My personal recommendation and opinion only; chill.

If a digital product is updated and you bought it through DriveThruRPG or Battlecorps, you'll be able to download an updated copy from the respective store when the updated product is available. If you bought a paper product, you won't get an updated product in print, but can download errata documents just like everyone else.

It'd be great if wanting products to be finished and of high quality didn't warrant being told to "chill".
Title: Re: Run and Gun Errata
Post by: Csjarrat on <04-29-14/1154:51>
frankhlane
My personal recommendation and opinion only; chill.

If a digital product is updated and you bought it through DriveThruRPG or Battlecorps, you'll be able to download an updated copy from the respective store when the updated product is available. If you bought a paper product, you won't get an updated product in print, but can download errata documents just like everyone else.

It'd be great if wanting products to be finished and of high quality didn't warrant being told to "chill".
pretty much everyone here agrees with you, tempers do run high with these sorts of things however and Martin is just saying that you will get fixes for your products at no cost further down the line.
i know it sucks and i wish they'd bloody well check this stuff before posting it but lets avoid another flame/blame war for everyones sake
Title: Re: Run and Gun Errata
Post by: martinchaen on <04-29-14/1215:03>
<znip> Martin is just saying that you will get fixes for your products at no cost further down the line.
i know it sucks and i wish they'd bloody well check this stuff before posting it but lets avoid another flame/blame war for everyones sake
QFT.
Title: Re: Run and Gun Errata
Post by: Namikaze on <04-29-14/1404:49>
Not to mention that this is an Errata thread - not an opinion one.  Use this thread (http://forums.shadowruntabletop.com/index.php?topic=16007.0) for opinions about Run & Gun.
Title: Re: Run and Gun Errata
Post by: frankhlane on <04-30-14/0708:39>
Not to mention that this is an Errata thread - not an opinion one.  Use this thread (http://forums.shadowruntabletop.com/index.php?topic=16007.0) for opinions about Run & Gun.

Done.
Title: Re: Run and Gun Errata
Post by: SlowDeck on <05-01-14/0107:22>
Piece of errata...

Page 31. The Nitama Sporter is mentioned as having a small internal magazine in the write-up. But the actual statblock has it having a clip, and one rated at 18 rounds. Which one is accurate?
Title: Re: Run and Gun Errata
Post by: Calak on <05-04-14/0724:32>
Run and Gun errata
No prices or stats for (Anti-Vehicle) Assault cannon rounds though they are mentioned as a specific ammo type on the table labeled 'called shots by ammo type' on page 118,

same goes for Gauss cannon rounds, Hi-C rounds, And Gyroget rounds.

Unless i am wrong and someone can give me a page No.?
Title: Re: Run and Gun Errata
Post by: Michael Chandra on <05-04-14/1541:20>
((You're right, they're not listed. However, in the case of AV rounds and Hi-C rounds, that isn't necessarily an error, since they may be in future books. Just like how Background Count is already named in SR5, it means the info is central in the right place.

As for the others, their costs are missing but can be derived. With Gauss Rifles, they're kinda Assault Cannons so likely their rounds cost the same. For Gyrojet rounds, normal ones are likely Regular in costs, Gyrojet Plus is Explosive so +1/-1, Gyrojet Taser is Stick'n'Shock and Gyrojet Tracker = Tracker, and that determines both their damage and cost. But it's indeed missing in explanation.))
Title: Re: Run and Gun Errata
Post by: Furious Trope on <05-08-14/1902:18>
The Shadow Block example on 126 revolves around someone trying to Dodge a bullet.  This cannot be done.

The dodge interrupt action (Pg 168, SR5), unlike block and parry, doesn't specify "melee" as the kind of attack it can be used against. Therefore, it can be used against both melee and ranged attacks.

Think of it less as trying to be Neo in the Matrix and more flipping around to make the shooter mis-predict where you're going to be.
Title: Re: Run and Gun Errata
Post by: martinchaen on <05-08-14/2046:16>
Furious Trope
Check the Active Defenses section later on in the book. It is very clear that Dodge cannot be used against ranged attacks, only melee and ramming attacks.
Title: Re: Run and Gun Errata
Post by: Michael Chandra on <05-09-14/0458:19>
The dodge interrupt action (Pg 168, SR5), unlike block and parry, doesn't specify "melee" as the kind of attack it can be used against.
((It's stated to be against Melee on multiple different occasions in the book. The reason it's not listed everywhere as against melee, is because it can also be used against Ramming. But in Ranged vs Melee, it only works against melee. Page 188 and 191, as well as 203.))
Title: Re: Run and Gun Errata
Post by: mjack on <05-09-14/1814:27>
Pg. 119: The Brain Blaster combat action is not explicitly said to lose the -5 Defensive modifier of a Long Burst for the benefit of the +2 DV modifier as it is described for the Aimed Burst combat action. I suppose both actions are meant to work similar.

Title: Re: Run and Gun Errata
Post by: Calak on <05-12-14/0452:30>
ON PAGE 24. there is stats and pricing for the 'static shaft' in the table for 'arrow heads'
there is no mention of weather this item can be used in combination with arrow heads (as its name and price implies it is a arrow shaft)
there is also no description write up for said item,

Urban tribe tomahawk says in its description it is balanced for throwing. there is no reference what rules to use for throwing range dispite the fact it is labeled under throwing weapons. (i have noticed both knives and shurakin use different ranges which is why i am posting this)
Title: Re: Run and Gun Errata
Post by: Kincaid on <05-12-14/0906:43>
ON PAGE 24. there is stats and pricing for the 'static shaft' in the table for 'arrow heads'
there is no mention of weather this item can be used in combination with arrow heads (as its name and price implies it is a arrow shaft)
there is also no description write up for said item,

Urban tribe tomahawk says in its description it is balanced for throwing. there is no reference what rules to use for throwing range dispite the fact it is labeled under throwing weapons. (i have noticed both knives and shurakin use different ranges which is why i am posting this)

I think we can safely assume that something called "shaft" is a shaft.
Title: Re: Run and Gun Errata
Post by: Agonar on <05-12-14/1003:24>
PI-Tac Level I on pg 105 has an availability of 18F yet the description describes it as available to civilians. 

To expound upon this.  The fluff and description all seem to indicate that this should be R instead of F
Quote
PI-Tac units are now available to civilians—once said civilian has passed a background check and been issued a permit

Quote
comes in three levels of sophistication. Strictly speaking, only the most basic level is legally available for civilian use.

The 18F seems like it should be a 12R for the Level 1 model, but I suppose any number would work, as long as it was R instead of F to support the description of the model's availability.
Title: Re: Run and Gun Errata
Post by: RiggerBob on <05-14-14/1057:32>
ON PAGE 24. there is stats and pricing for the 'static shaft' in the table for 'arrow heads'
there is no mention of weather this item can be used in combination with arrow heads (as its name and price implies it is a arrow shaft)
there is also no description write up for said item,

Quote from: R&G, p.24
The Stick ‘n’ Shock head is only a small portion of this latest archery  innovation.  Bowmen  who  want  to  gain  the  full potential  of  these  heads  need  to  combine  them with Static Shafts, an Ares innovation that fills the shaft with a powder that builds a charge during flight.
Title: Re: Run and Gun Errata
Post by: fenrir4life on <05-17-14/1936:05>
p. 139: Knucklebreaker
Lists as "close combat only", but there are no fighting styles that grant it for Called Shot: Disarm.  Chakram Fighting, Kyujutsu, and The Cowboy Way grant it for Blast Out Of Hand.
Also, the wording is unusual- unlike most modifiers that affect one of two maneuvers, depending on style, the text on Knucklebreaker appears to be a relic of an earlier model where techniques were not restricted by style.
At the risk of further editorializing, I can see this being difficult to correct without either removing techniques from a handful of styles or breaking the "6 techniques per style" rule.
Title: Re: Run and Gun Errata
Post by: Namikaze on <05-17-14/1948:28>
I see your point, Fenrir4Life, but I disagree with how hard it would be to fix the issue.  Just remove the "Close Combat Only" text.  Blast Out of Hands is described on page 111.  Basically, if you're using the Blast Out of Hands Called Shot, you get to apply the Knucklebreaker bonus.
Title: Re: Run and Gun Errata
Post by: fenrir4life on <05-17-14/2012:21>
Well, clearly, it was never Close Combat Only, but the solution you are suggesting would make it Ranged Only... which, if that's what they want to do with it, fine, but there's plenty of justification for it with called shot: disarm, especially in Krav Maga and its Corporate and NAN equivalents.
Title: Re: Run and Gun Errata
Post by: Agonar on <05-20-14/0036:13>
Page 133, Okichitaw lists as one of Techniques available Hard Technique (Parry)
No Hard Technique listed in the Techniques.
There is Opposing Force on Page 139, which in the fluff says "It can also be termed as the Strong or Hard technique."

Either the title of the Technique needs to change, or the listing under Okichitaw needs to be changed to reflect the actual name of the Technique
Title: Re: Run and Gun Errata
Post by: Agonar on <05-20-14/0122:14>
Pg. 30 (Fichetti Executive Action) and Pg. 33 (Savalette Guardian): What again was the idea behind pistols with BF Mode for a Complex Action when this is identical to a SA Burst? Ok, makes some sense when used with an Aimed Burst action (Pg. 119). But, the Double-Tap action (Pg. 120) for SA Mode has the same benefit of DV +1 while consuming one round less.

Pretty Sure BF as a Complex should be removed/Ignored, as it seems to be a Copy Paste error from SR4, where SA weapons did not have a Semi-Auto Burst Mode, so they gave BF mode as a Complex.
Title: Re: Run and Gun Errata
Post by: RelentlessImp on <05-23-14/2146:24>
Please make the wording on Custom Fit (Stack) clearer; the way it is now, "Custom Fit by the same maker for the same person", the "same maker" can be read to mean either the same manufacturer, or the same person who did the Custom Fit on both sets.
Title: Re: Run and Gun Errata
Post by: SlowDeck on <05-23-14/2149:44>
Please make the wording on Custom Fit (Stack) clearer; the way it is now, "Custom Fit by the same maker for the same person", the "same maker" can be read to mean either the same manufacturer, or the same person who did the Custom Fit on both sets.

I disagree that this errata is necessary; please see this post (http://forums.shadowruntabletop.com/index.php?topic=16612.msg293957#msg293957) for details and discussion.
Title: Re: Run and Gun Errata
Post by: RelentlessImp on <05-23-14/2151:21>
Please make the wording on Custom Fit (Stack) clearer; the way it is now, "Custom Fit by the same maker for the same person", the "same maker" can be read to mean either the same manufacturer, or the same person who did the Custom Fit on both sets.

I disagree that this errata is necessary; please see this post (http://forums.shadowruntabletop.com/index.php?topic=16612.msg293957#msg293957) for details and discussion.

And please see this one (http://forums.shadowruntabletop.com/index.php?topic=16612.msg293960#msg293960) for a reason as to why it's not as clear as SlowDeck makes it seem.
Title: Re: Run and Gun Errata
Post by: Kincaid on <05-23-14/2203:50>
Please make the wording on Custom Fit (Stack) clearer; the way it is now, "Custom Fit by the same maker for the same person", the "same maker" can be read to mean either the same manufacturer, or the same person who did the Custom Fit on both sets.

I disagree that this errata is necessary; please see this post (http://forums.shadowruntabletop.com/index.php?topic=16612.msg293957#msg293957) for details and discussion.

And please see this one (http://forums.shadowruntabletop.com/index.php?topic=16612.msg293960#msg293960) for a reason as to why it's not as clear as SlowDeck makes it seem.

The entire chapter is organized around different makers of high-fashion armor.  There's absolutely no mention of a tailor making anything from scratch (and how could he, given the branding of the item?).  I'm with SlowDeck on this one.
Title: Re: Run and Gun Errata
Post by: martinchaen on <05-23-14/2212:30>
We could, as previously mentioned in this thread, use a clarification on which lines belong to Zoe, as they currently break the mold in R&G.
Title: Re: Run and Gun Errata
Post by: Kincaid on <05-23-14/2216:05>
We could, as previously mentioned in this thread, use a clarification on which lines belong to Zoe, as they currently break the mold in R&G.

I could have sword this got answered somewhere.  It's Executive, Heritage, Moonsilver, and Second Skin.
Title: Re: Run and Gun Errata
Post by: martinchaen on <05-23-14/2218:24>
Reference? I mean, it's not a stretch to house rule, as both the fluff from R&G and SR4's Arsenal have 3 of those four listed as Zoe brands, but someone is bound to argue it.
Title: Re: Run and Gun Errata
Post by: Kincaid on <05-23-14/2221:03>
I was just going off of Arsenal.  Since who owns what is largely a flavor issue, I figure going back an edition is perfectly fine.
Title: Re: Run and Gun Errata
Post by: RelentlessImp on <05-23-14/2226:50>
Reference? I mean, it's not a stretch to house rule, as both the fluff from R&G and SR4's Arsenal have 3 of those four listed as Zoe brands, but someone is bound to argue it.

It should be pretty obvious in the text - every section is prefaced by a blurb on the company (Vashon Island, Zoe, Ares Victory) which then goes into details about specific armor types, and is ended by the preface for the next company. Some consistency on the company names being on the tables would be nice, though.
Title: Re: Run and Gun Errata
Post by: SlowDeck on <05-23-14/2233:32>
Please make the wording on Custom Fit (Stack) clearer; the way it is now, "Custom Fit by the same maker for the same person", the "same maker" can be read to mean either the same manufacturer, or the same person who did the Custom Fit on both sets.

I disagree that this errata is necessary; please see this post (http://forums.shadowruntabletop.com/index.php?topic=16612.msg293957#msg293957) for details and discussion.

And please see this one (http://forums.shadowruntabletop.com/index.php?topic=16612.msg293960#msg293960) for a reason as to why it's not as clear as SlowDeck makes it seem.

The entire chapter is organized around different makers of high-fashion armor.  There's absolutely no mention of a tailor making anything from scratch (and how could he, given the branding of the item?).  I'm with SlowDeck on this one.

I was going to go into a long bit, but you covered what I was going to say. And said it better.
Title: Re: Run and Gun Errata
Post by: RelentlessImp on <05-23-14/2258:17>
Please make the wording on Custom Fit (Stack) clearer; the way it is now, "Custom Fit by the same maker for the same person", the "same maker" can be read to mean either the same manufacturer, or the same person who did the Custom Fit on both sets.

I disagree that this errata is necessary; please see this post (http://forums.shadowruntabletop.com/index.php?topic=16612.msg293957#msg293957) for details and discussion.

And please see this one (http://forums.shadowruntabletop.com/index.php?topic=16612.msg293960#msg293960) for a reason as to why it's not as clear as SlowDeck makes it seem.

The entire chapter is organized around different makers of high-fashion armor.  There's absolutely no mention of a tailor making anything from scratch (and how could he, given the branding of the item?).  I'm with SlowDeck on this one.

I was going to go into a long bit, but you covered what I was going to say. And said it better.

A bigger problem with your interpretation is this: You can re-fit a piece of armor with an Armorer + Logic test. Custom Fit (Stacked) says it has to be Custom Fit by the same maker for the same person. So, if you get a new piece of 'ware that boosts one of your Physical Attributes, and you have the Custom Fit item re-fit for your shiny new attributes, does that mean the Custom Fit (Stack) no longer works with it? Because it's no longer Custom Fit by the same maker for the same person - it's just Custom Fit for the same person and would necessitate buying the armor a second time.
Title: Re: Run and Gun Errata
Post by: SlowDeck on <05-23-14/2303:33>
Please make the wording on Custom Fit (Stack) clearer; the way it is now, "Custom Fit by the same maker for the same person", the "same maker" can be read to mean either the same manufacturer, or the same person who did the Custom Fit on both sets.

I disagree that this errata is necessary; please see this post (http://forums.shadowruntabletop.com/index.php?topic=16612.msg293957#msg293957) for details and discussion.

And please see this one (http://forums.shadowruntabletop.com/index.php?topic=16612.msg293960#msg293960) for a reason as to why it's not as clear as SlowDeck makes it seem.

The entire chapter is organized around different makers of high-fashion armor.  There's absolutely no mention of a tailor making anything from scratch (and how could he, given the branding of the item?).  I'm with SlowDeck on this one.

I was going to go into a long bit, but you covered what I was going to say. And said it better.

A bigger problem with your interpretation is this: You can re-fit a piece of armor with an Armorer + Logic test. Custom Fit (Stacked) says it has to be Custom Fit by the same maker for the same person. So, if you get a new piece of 'ware that boosts one of your Physical Attributes, and you have the Custom Fit item re-fit for your shiny new attributes, does that mean the Custom Fit (Stack) no longer works with it? Because it's no longer Custom Fit by the same maker for the same person - it's just Custom Fit for the same person.

Actually, it doesn't say that; it says that the armor must by the same maker for the same person and must be custom fit. Custom Fit itself specifies the rules on how to custom fit, but does not specify the maker and the person who alter it must be the same.

The problem is the grammar of the sentence is archaic, so it plays a bit of merry havoc on those who are highly educated but used to using modern grammatical forms only. Interestingly, the reason why it became archaic is that it could cause some confusion among those who didn't make study of the language a life-long pursuit. Which, basically, was most people.
Title: Re: Run and Gun Errata
Post by: RelentlessImp on <05-23-14/2308:48>
Please make the wording on Custom Fit (Stack) clearer; the way it is now, "Custom Fit by the same maker for the same person", the "same maker" can be read to mean either the same manufacturer, or the same person who did the Custom Fit on both sets.

I disagree that this errata is necessary; please see this post (http://forums.shadowruntabletop.com/index.php?topic=16612.msg293957#msg293957) for details and discussion.

And please see this one (http://forums.shadowruntabletop.com/index.php?topic=16612.msg293960#msg293960) for a reason as to why it's not as clear as SlowDeck makes it seem.

The entire chapter is organized around different makers of high-fashion armor.  There's absolutely no mention of a tailor making anything from scratch (and how could he, given the branding of the item?).  I'm with SlowDeck on this one.

I was going to go into a long bit, but you covered what I was going to say. And said it better.

A bigger problem with your interpretation is this: You can re-fit a piece of armor with an Armorer + Logic test. Custom Fit (Stacked) says it has to be Custom Fit by the same maker for the same person. So, if you get a new piece of 'ware that boosts one of your Physical Attributes, and you have the Custom Fit item re-fit for your shiny new attributes, does that mean the Custom Fit (Stack) no longer works with it? Because it's no longer Custom Fit by the same maker for the same person - it's just Custom Fit for the same person.

Actually, it doesn't say that; it says that the armor must by the same maker for the same person and must be custom fit. Custom Fit itself specifies the rules on how to custom fit, but does not specify the maker and the person who alter it must be the same.

The problem is the grammar of the sentence is archaic, so it plays a bit of merry havoc on those who are highly educated but used to using modern grammatical forms only. Interestingly, the reason why it became archaic is that it could cause some confusion among those who didn't make study of the language a life-long pursuit. Which, basically, was most people.

But Custom Fit (stack), by its grammatical structure (and your interpretation), does indicate that (A) Your Custom Fit (stack) armor and the Armored Clothing must come from the same manufacturer, and (B) The Custom Fit (Stack) item needs to be Custom Fitted by the manufacturer. So yes, some errata that clears up the grammar would be needed, since you yourself admit that it's misleading, don't you think?
Title: Re: Run and Gun Errata
Post by: SlowDeck on <05-23-14/2318:15>
Please make the wording on Custom Fit (Stack) clearer; the way it is now, "Custom Fit by the same maker for the same person", the "same maker" can be read to mean either the same manufacturer, or the same person who did the Custom Fit on both sets.

I disagree that this errata is necessary; please see this post (http://forums.shadowruntabletop.com/index.php?topic=16612.msg293957#msg293957) for details and discussion.

And please see this one (http://forums.shadowruntabletop.com/index.php?topic=16612.msg293960#msg293960) for a reason as to why it's not as clear as SlowDeck makes it seem.

The entire chapter is organized around different makers of high-fashion armor.  There's absolutely no mention of a tailor making anything from scratch (and how could he, given the branding of the item?).  I'm with SlowDeck on this one.

I was going to go into a long bit, but you covered what I was going to say. And said it better.

A bigger problem with your interpretation is this: You can re-fit a piece of armor with an Armorer + Logic test. Custom Fit (Stacked) says it has to be Custom Fit by the same maker for the same person. So, if you get a new piece of 'ware that boosts one of your Physical Attributes, and you have the Custom Fit item re-fit for your shiny new attributes, does that mean the Custom Fit (Stack) no longer works with it? Because it's no longer Custom Fit by the same maker for the same person - it's just Custom Fit for the same person.

Actually, it doesn't say that; it says that the armor must by the same maker for the same person and must be custom fit. Custom Fit itself specifies the rules on how to custom fit, but does not specify the maker and the person who alter it must be the same.

The problem is the grammar of the sentence is archaic, so it plays a bit of merry havoc on those who are highly educated but used to using modern grammatical forms only. Interestingly, the reason why it became archaic is that it could cause some confusion among those who didn't make study of the language a life-long pursuit. Which, basically, was most people.

But Custom Fit (stack), by its grammatical structure (and your interpretation), does indicate that (A) Your Custom Fit (stack) armor and the Armored Clothing must come from the same manufacturer, and (B) The Custom Fit (Stack) item needs to be Custom Fitted by the manufacturer. So yes, some errata that clears up the grammar would be needed, since you yourself admit that it's misleading, don't you think?

Nope. The text is clear in-context. Here's the important part of Custom Fit:

"The refit process requires an Armorer
shop and an Armorer + Logic [Mental] (10, 1 hour) Extended Test.
The owner can also use their Contacts to help them get the job
done, requiring loss of the armor for one week and a payment of
25 percent of the initial armor cost."

Emphasis mine.

It indicates that it is the owner, not the maker, that is doing the custom fitting... or, if not them, someone they hire. Now, note this key bit at the beginning of Custom Fit (Stack):

"This characteristic employs all the Custom Fit rules"

The bit about it stacking with other Custom Fit items is in addition to the rules of Custom Fit. However, the rules of Custom Fit assume it is the owner, not the maker, who is doing the modification. By obeying the same rules, Custom Fit (Stack) can only make logical sense if the manufacturer is not necessarily the one who makes the alterations.
Title: Re: Run and Gun Errata
Post by: Namikaze on <05-24-14/0211:09>
This is an errata thread.  Discussion should be taken to one of the aforementioned threads.
Title: Re: Run and Gun Errata
Post by: tequila on <06-11-14/1704:59>

Quote from: p120, Flechette Suppressive Fire
These attacks function similar to Enhanced Suppression (see above) and prevents targets from using the Drop Prone action to avoid the attack and suffers no loss of width, quite the opposite

This sentence is seems confusing and is possibly poorly phrased.

"quite the opposite"
This seems completely out of place in the sentence.

"and prevents targets from using the Drop Prone action to avoid the attack "
Not sure this is necessary since the sentence refers to Enhances Suppression which already has this quality.

Suggested replacement: "These attacks function similar to Enhanced Suppression (see above) and suffers no loss of width."



Title: Re: Run and Gun Errata
Post by: Kiirnodel on <06-17-14/0407:00>

Quote from: p120, Flechette Suppressive Fire
These attacks function similar to Enhanced Suppression (see above) and prevents targets from using the Drop Prone action to avoid the attack and suffers no loss of width, quite the opposite

This sentence is seems confusing and is possibly poorly phrased.

"quite the opposite"
This seems completely out of place in the sentence.

"and prevents targets from using the Drop Prone action to avoid the attack "
Not sure this is necessary since the sentence refers to Enhances Suppression which already has this quality.

Suggested replacement: "These attacks function similar to Enhanced Suppression (see above) and suffers no loss of width."

Read the next sentence. It goes on to say that the flechette suppressive fire attack in fact widens the area of the suppressive fire, hence the "quite the opposite"
Title: Re: Run and Gun Errata
Post by: KarmaInferno on <06-25-14/1544:40>
It's Errata to me:

There is no real good reason a sledgehammer would have less reach than a combat axe.

Equality for hammers! You know it's right!

:)


-k
Title: Re: Run and Gun Errata
Post by: Oo Koo on <07-16-14/0929:10>
Comparing the ammo prices in the main book and Run & Gun, should the R&G ammo prices also be listed per 10 shots or are they supposed to be generally ten times more expensive than the ammo in the main book?
Title: Re: Run and Gun Errata
Post by: mrdred on <01-02-15/2147:20>
Piece of errata...

Page 31. The Nitama Sporter is mentioned as having a small internal magazine in the write-up. But the actual statblock has it having a clip, and one rated at 18 rounds. Which one is accurate?

Late to the party, as usual.  The sporter has a clip of 18 on page 31, but a 5-round magazine in the table on page 205.  I'd guess the latter is correct.
Title: Re: Run and Gun Errata
Post by: Medicineman on <01-03-15/0424:49>
If the devs are consistent than its a 5 round internal mag for the Sportster

HougH!
Medicineman
Title: Re: Run and Gun Errata
Post by: ikarinokami on <03-01-15/1403:58>
Counter strike example has Ryu using agility + unarmed. it should be reaction + unarmed.
Title: Re: Run and Gun Errata
Post by: gradivus on <03-05-15/0329:44>
Improved range finder (accessory): Laser range
finders are standard equipment on smartlinks, but if
you have the scratch you can make its range calculation
functions even better. It combines three technologies—
microwave, laser, and radar—to give you an extremely
accurate calculation of range. The effect of this is to
reduce range modifiers by 1. This only can be used in
weapons that have a smartlink; it can be positioned in
any slot besides the one that has the smartlink. This bonus
cannot be combined with any bonuses from image
magnification on the weapon.

If the RAI is that the improved rangefinder does not stack with any image magnification, the 'on the weapon' need to be removed as RAW would allow vision magnification in a cybereye/glasses/helmet/etc. to stack.
Title: Re: Run and Gun Errata
Post by: Prime Mover on <06-30-15/1709:50>
All this time and still no update on the use of Gatling & HV weapons in 5th edition.   :(
Title: Knockdown
Post by: demion on <09-02-15/1020:29>
In Run&Gun it states on page 110: "Knockdown (P.195, SR5): If a character takes a number of damage boxes EQUAL TO or greater than their Physical limit, they are automatically knocked prone."

On page 195 in the core rulebook it states: "If a character takes a number of boxes of damage from a single attack that EXCEED his Physical limit, then the attack automatically knocks him down."

Well... whats correct now? The Run&Gun Errata doesn't cover this.
Title: Re: Knockdown
Post by: ikarinokami on <09-03-15/2002:25>
In Run&Gun it states on page 110: "Knockdown (P.195, SR5): If a character takes a number of damage boxes EQUAL TO or greater than their Physical limit, they are automatically knocked prone."

On page 195 in the core rulebook it states: "If a character takes a number of boxes of damage from a single attack that EXCEED his Physical limit, then the attack automatically knocks him down."

Well... whats correct now? The Run&Gun Errata doesn't cover this.

I would go with core rule book, because the R&G is supposed to be quoting the core rule book. I would assume that's just a transcription error.
Title: Re: Run and Gun Errata
Post by: Sternenwind on <03-02-16/0729:22>
Run&Gun p.:141

SWEEP (CLOSE COMBAT ONLY)
Martial Art techniques allow more control over how the opponent falls when the character knocks him off his feet (Knockdown, p. 194, SR5). He may choose to inflict damage as if it were a normal melee attack. Damage type from a sweep is always Stun.

There is a Effect Knockdown (SR5p194) and a Called Shot names Knockdown (SR5p195).
Title: Re: Run and Gun Errata
Post by: demion on <03-03-16/0705:47>
There is a Effect Knockdown (SR5p194) and a Called Shot names Knockdown (SR5p195).

I am fairly sure it's about the Called Shot Knockdown, because the Effect Knockdown is no attack itself.

Edit: So yes the reference should be changed to p. 195.
Title: Re: Run and Gun Errata
Post by: Lucean on <03-03-16/0909:38>
That's why the reference Sternenwind talks about is wrong and should be corrected. Nothing more.
Title: Re: Run and Gun Errata
Post by: Sphinx on <06-01-16/1504:29>
Everywhere, change “Counter Strike” to “Counterstrike”
Everywhere, change “Hammer Fist” to “Hammerfist”
Everywhere, change “magic user” to “magic-user” (hyphenated compound)
Everywhere, change “net success” to “net hit” and “net successes” to “net hits”
Everywhere, change “Stick 'n' Shock” to “Stick-n-Shock”
Everywhere, change “Thunderstrike” to “Thunder Strike”
Page 2 (Table of Contents), change “Trafalger” to “Trafalgar”
Page 3 (Table of Contents), change “Protecting the Principle” to “Protecting the Principal
Page 18 (Highland Forge Claymore), hyphenate “extra-long”
Page 19 (Victorinox Memory Blade), change “jockey’s” to “jockeys” (no apostrophe)
Page 19 (Ares One Monosword), change “Ares” to “Ares’” (possessive)
Page 20 (Garrote), change “targets” to “target’s” (possessive)
Page 20 (Garrote), change “and initial” to “an initial”
Page 22 (Improvised Melee Weapons), hyphenate “snapped-off”
Page 24 (Harpoon/Javelin), change “further” to “farther”
Page 26 (Ares Screech), change “its classified” to “it’s classified”
Page 26 (Ares Screech), change “other then” to “other than”
Page 26 (Nemesis Arms Suruchin), change “wasn’t” to “weren’t”
Page 27 (Trafalgar Gun Cane), change “Trafalger” to “Trafalgar”
Page 27 (Net Guns), hyphenate “normal-sized”
Page 29 (Tiffani-Defiance Protector), change “geckogrip” to “gecko grip” and add it to the stat block
Page 31 (Nitama Sporter), the description calls out recoil compensation, but the stats do not support it
Page 33 (Onotari Arms), change “smartlink” to “smartgun system”
Page 33 (Heavy Pistols), change “Smartlink” to “Smartgun”
Page 36 (HK Urban Combat), change “smartlink” to “smartgun system”
Page 36 (Submachine Guns), change “Smartlink” to “Smartgun”
Page 37 (Ares HVAR), change “smartlink” to “smartgun system”
Page 37 (Ares HVAR), change “effective is” to “effective in”
Page 37 (Assault Rifles), change “Smartlink” to “Smartgun”
Page 38 (Nissan Optimum II), change “getting a long” to “getting long”
Page 38 (Nissan Optimum II), change “troop’s” to “troops’” (plural possessive)
Page 38 (Nissan Optimum II), hyphenate “close-quarter”
Page 38 (Nissan Optimum II), change “back up” to “backup”
Page 38 (Sniper Rifles), add “safe target system” to the standard upgrades for Terracotta Arms AM-47
Page 39 (Pioneer 60), change “léonization” to “leónization” (accent on the O)
Page 40 (Barret Model 122), change “shooter” to “shooters” (plural)
Page 40 (Auto-Assault 16), change “fully-auto capable” to “full-auto-capable”
Page 41 (Shotguns), change “Smartlink” to “Smartgun”
Page 44 (Ultimax MMG), change “militaries and mercenaries units” to “military and mercenary units”
Page 45 (Ultimax HMG-2), change “sub par” to “subpar”
Page 45 (Ares Thunderstruck), change “there fair share” to “their fair share”
Page 46 (Onotari Arms Ballista MML), change “backpack and launcher set up” to “backpack-and-launcher setup”
Page 48 (Ares Lancer), change “Archon” to “Lancer”
Page 50 (Weapon Accessories), change “One top” to “On top”
Page 50 (Advanced Safety System), change “advance” to “advanced”
Page 50 (Advanced Safety System), change “maglock card reader, system” to “card-reader maglock system”
Page 50 (Immobilizer), change “took kit” to “toolkit”
Page 51 (Flashlight), change “to well” to “too well”
Page 51 (Flashlight), change “infrared vision” and “infravision” to “thermographic vision”
Page 52 (Sling), change “and old belt” to “an old belt”
Page 54 (Accessories and Modifications Table), use sentence case consistently in the item column
Page 55 (Tracker), change “wasn’t” to “weren’t”
Page 65 (Form-Fitting Body Armor), change “its highly” to “it’s highly”
Page 66 (Hardened Mil-Spec Battle Armor), change “listed below” to “listed above.”
Page 79 (The Great Blue Mystery), change “sit their” to “sit there”
Page 85 (Ruthenium Polymer Coating), change “if purely” to “is purely”
Page 85 (Gel Packs), change “flare” to “flair”
Page 93 (Know the Job), hyphenate “Cross-training”
Page 96 (Offense and Defense), change “teams” to “team’s”
Page 97 (The Military), change “military unite” to “military unit”
Page 97 (Shadowrunners), change “enables” to “enable)
Page 97 (Shadowrunners), change “play books” to “playbooks”
Page 98 (Fighting the Chaos), change “awfully to predict” to “awfully hard to predict”
Page 98 (Fighting the Chaos), change “Bonsai” to “Banzai”
Page 98 (Combat Maneuver Tests), change “teamwork skill” to “teamwork test
Page 101 (Marching Fire), change “towards a objective” to “toward an objective”
Page 104 (Pneumatic Ram), change “heave” to “heavy”
Page 104 (Shock Ram), change “It’s a shock ram is designed” to “A shock ram is designed”
Page 104 (Shock Ram), change “penetrates” to “penetrate”
Page 105 (PI-Tac), change “big/game hunters” to “big-game hunters”
Page 113 (Genitals), change “Nauseous” to “Nauseated”
Page 113 (Gut), change “Nauseous” to “Nauseated”
Page 117 (Through and Through), hyphenate “hostage-situation-specific”
Page 118 (Up the Ante), change “some times” to “sometimes”
Page 119 (Ballestra), change “over commits” to “overcommits”
Page 119 (Clinch), change “visa versa” to “vice versa”
Page 120 (Flechette Suppressive Fire), change “prevents” to “prevent”
Page 125 (Protecting the Principal), change “Principle” to “Principal”
Page 126 (Shadow Block), change “this net hits” to “the net hits”
Page 126 (Combat Edge), change “hail-mary” to “Hail Mary”
Page 128 (It’s All About …), change “Martial arts styles” to “Martial art styles”
Page 128 (Arnis de Mano), change “Arnis De Mano” to “Arnis de Mano” … twice
Page 129 (Boxing), change “till” to “until” or “’til”
Page 129 (Capoeira), change “practitioner’s” to “practitioners’” (plural possessive)
Page 131 (Jujitsu), change “Jutitsu” to “Jujitsu”
Page 131 (Jujitsu), change “Brazillian” to “Brazilian”
Page 135 (Martial Art Styles), add “Chakram Fighting” to the Exotic Ranged and Melee Weapon lists
Page 135 (Martial Art Styels), add “Gun Kata” to the Clubs list
Page 141 (Thunder Strike), change “upper cut” to “uppercut”
Page 142 (Counterstrike), change “looks like” to “look like”
Page 142 (Example), change “Kipup” to “Kip-Up”
Page 142 (Example), change “Ryu’s now has” to “Ryu now has”
Page 144 (Staying Alive), throughout this chapter, remove spaces around degree symbols (°).
Page 144, hyphenate “blood-spattered”
Page 149 (Killing Frost), hyphenate “thirty-hour”
Page 150 (Injury Modifiers), change “effected” to “affected”
Page 151 (Pollution, Mild), hyphenate “sixty-hour”
Page 152 (Radiation, Moderate), hyphenate “sealed-up”
Page 153 (Radiation, Deadly), change “resume” to “résumé” (with accents)
Page 153 (Radiation, Deadly), change “affect” to “effect”
Page 155 (Cermak Blast Region), change “Citizen’s” to “Citizens’” (plural possessive)
Page 155 (Yucatán), change “Yucatan” to “Yucatán (accent on the second A) … three times
Page 156 (Beneath the Seas), hyphenate “man-eater”
Page 157 (Troubles in the Deep), change “SCUBA” to “scuba”
Page 157 (Troubles in the Deep), change “relative equipment” to “relevant equipment”
Page 159 (Spells Beneath the Waves), hyphenate “Single-target” … three times
Page 161 (Above the Skies), change “counts be” to “counts as”
Page 165 (Decompression), change “represents” to “affects the body like”
Page 166 (Low Earth Orbit), hyphenate “fastest-growing”
Page 166 (Low Earth Orbit), use the trademark glyph in “SpaceWheat™”
Page 168 (Magic), change “astral projecting” to “astrally projecting”
Page 187 (Car Bombs), change “so ignition” to “an ignition”
Page 187 (Car Bombs), change “confirm the presence of” to “authenticate”
Page 190 (Supplies and Equipment table), choose title case or sentence case for the left column
Page 194 (Linear Cutting Charge), change “can also be use,” to “can also be used,”
Page 198 (Hostile Extraction), change “compliment” to “complement”
Title: Re: Run and Gun Errata
Post by: Orudeon on <11-04-16/0029:43>
Perhaps I shouldn't necro this

Previously mentioned by Sphinx:
Page 38 (Sniper Rifles), add “safe target system” to the standard upgrades for Terracotta Arms AM-47

Previously mentioned by Michael Chandra:
The Terracotta Arms AM-47 has several issues, unfortunately. It says it's "provided with [...] underbarrel weight, [...] safe target system with an extended barrel for increased range." Its statblock, however, does not include these three.

- Extended Barrel is never specified, so likely was cut out of the rules. Unsure whether it was taken into account in its price though.
- Underbarrel weight no longer has any benefit for a non-FA weapon, so it's understandable it was cut. This means the 1(3) RC likely includes 1 inherent RC.
- Safe Target System not being listed is kinda a big deal, especially since it's not clear what version it comes with if any.

The longbarrel modification seems like it'd be the easiest, or baking in the benefit from Improved Rangefinder (whatever it is that reduces range penalty by one). The improved rangefinder makes more sense to me since the Longbarrel from Hard Targets 1) is several books later 2) adds bonus accuracy and bonus to finding the weapon (conceal mod) 3) doubles the cost of the weapon for some reason

But an IRF also makes the scope's vision magnification redundant since page 178 doesn't really specify how vision mag reduces range modifiers (I believe) and the CRB errata thread has not (yet) addressed anything on page 178. I guess you'd still want a scope in the first place, though. It'd be weird to not have vision mag on a sniper rifle.

Safe Target System would probably be up to the buyer to specify.

Also... where are AV rounds? Hero Lab says they appear in Run and Gun but I can't find them
Title: Re: Run and Gun Errata
Post by: Orudeon on <11-12-16/2214:22>
I guess I'm necroing this again.

It's sort of weird that mini-grenades have the same damage codes/radii as full-size grenades. I would imagine that the AP on a mini-frag grenade would be the same as a full frag grenade, but closer to half the damage (consequently, radius) as a full grenade. Are those damage codes gonna be looked at or are they working as intended?
Title: Re: Run and Gun Errata
Post by: Patrick Goodman on <11-13-16/0134:52>
I can't imagine that they won't get reviewed. Smaller weapons are going to have a smaller charge, after all.
Title: Re: Run and Gun Errata
Post by: Sterling on <11-14-16/0256:01>
Also... where are AV rounds? Hero Lab says they appear in Run and Gun but I can't find them

This at least I can help with.  AV rounds (and other missing rounds) are detailed on p.2 of the existing Run & Gun Errata.
Title: Re: Run and Gun Errata
Post by: Chummer 5 is Alive on <04-04-17/2202:10>
Responsive Interface Gear is listed as consuming capacity for the helmet and worn armour and costs 2500¥. Is this cost separate for each item, ie a total cost of 5000¥? If the cost is for a complete set, is it possible to buy, for example, two helmets and have them sync up to the armour, or vice-versa? If so, how much would the second item cost?
Title: Re: Run and Gun Errata
Post by: Kiirnodel on <04-04-17/2347:33>
I've always assumed that it was one cost, which must then take up space in both a set of armor and helmet in order to work. But the wording does let in that gap that it has to be bought and installed in each (armor and helmet). While it is possible that the intent was for it to cost 5,000 I don't think it does because of the way it is listed on the Customizations chart.

Now, the cost and installation (as well as the description) does imply pretty strongly that you buy one "RIG" and install the parts into each of the armor and helmet. You definitely need both parts for it to work. Replacing just one part of that set-up isn't really in the rules, and it would definitely be in house-rule territory to allow someone to have two different helmets sync to the same armor set.

Personally, I would call it 1,500+ to be able to have more than one set up.
Title: Re: Run and Gun Errata
Post by: Yozzy on <10-26-17/1424:58>
I was looking through the explosives section, and I noticed the following items, starting from the chart on p.190 which wasn't addressed by the current errata:

* Anti-Removal Modifications is missing from the Accessories chart.
* Electrical and optical should be removed from the Accessories chart, as those are detonators.
* Redundant Power Supply has no mention of Device Ratings (i.e. no reason to differentiate from 50¥ to 500¥).

* Electrical detonator has no ratings listed
* Optical detonators

* Gunpowder is missing from the explosives chart.
* Binary explosives are missing a description.

I also was hoping for some clarification on the Nanoprint scanners, as they have no description or rules. From what I gather, this is a biometric device of some kind only partially described under optical detonator rules. The only analogous thing I can find is the nanoscanner from Chrome Flesh, but that was a device specifically meant for detecting nanoware.
Title: Re: Run and Gun Errata
Post by: Chummer 5 is Alive on <12-06-17/0304:34>
Wording on Bull's-Eye Double-Tap/Burst states “The attack results in an AP increase equal to the base weapon AP multiplied by the number of bullets in the burst with a maximum modifier of x3.”

To confirm, does this result in a total AP of x4, ie a total of -28 AP ((-6 * 3) + -6 + -4) for the Barret Model 122?
Title: Re: Run and Gun Errata
Post by: Kiirnodel on <12-06-17/0444:20>
Wording on Bull's-Eye Double-Tap/Burst states “The attack results in an AP increase equal to the base weapon AP multiplied by the number of bullets in the burst with a maximum modifier of x3.”

To confirm, does this result in a total AP of x4, ie a total of -28 AP ((-6 * 3) + -6 + -4) for the Barret Model 122?

The bonus is that the AP is being multiplied. The Weapon's AP is being multiplied by 3, not multiplied by 3 and added to itself again. That isn't how multiplication works.
Title: Re: Run and Gun Errata
Post by: Beta on <12-06-17/0845:09>
Wording on Bull's-Eye Double-Tap/Burst states “The attack results in an AP increase equal to the base weapon AP multiplied by the number of bullets in the burst with a maximum modifier of x3.”

To confirm, does this result in a total AP of x4, ie a total of -28 AP ((-6 * 3) + -6 + -4) for the Barret Model 122?

The bonus is that the AP is being multiplied. The Weapon's AP is being multiplied by 3, not multiplied by 3 and added to itself again. That isn't how multiplication works.

But it is how the wording works.  It states that the AP is increase is equal to the multiplication, not that the new AP is equal to the multiplication, or that the AP is increased to equal the multiplication.  Pretty sure they meant for  the new AP is meant to be AP*(#of bullets, max 3), but that isn't actually what is written.
Title: Re: Run and Gun Errata
Post by: Neojudas on <12-28-17/1638:52>
Quote
P. 86, RESPONSIVE INTERFACE GEAR STATS
Change the clause reading “takes up 2 Capacity slots in the armor and 1 Capacity slot in the helmet” to “takes up 4 Ca- pacity slots in the armor and 2 Capacity slots in the helmet.”
my question is why was this doubled at all?  What was the reasoning for it?