[FasterN8]

In my opinion, the fact that there are no less than 8 fire modes (SS, SA, SA Burst, Simple BF, Complex BF, Simple FA, Complex FA, and Suppressive Fire, not counting multiple attacks) seems somewhat excessive and needlessly complex.

I do however think that the errata on Progressive Recoil more accurately (heh) reflects real world physics. Make of that what you will.

Well, I agree that it's probably more complex than it needs to be. 

And 1 second may very well be sufficient time to recover from that much recoil in the real world, I don't have testing data to prove it one way or another, but for our purposes as players of shadowrun, I would humbly submit that we should be more concerned with the mechanical game balance than getting the system to most accurately reflect real world physics.

[martinchaen]

FasterN8
Real world physics or game balance is up to the designers, or to GMs to house rule

I'm happy that the game mechanics now reflect real world physics, and this change does not unbalance the game, at least not in my view. If everything has a price, then the people who pay for Recoil Compensation should be rewarded for it.

Depending on the game you play, Progressive Recoil might never have been a rule that saw much use anyway; if it is, and it does, then each GM is free to make a judgement call just like they always have been. Unless you play missions, of course...

*coughs* Michael *coughs*. Sorry

[Kanly]

BF and FA capable weapons have their limitiations. You can't use a silencer because of the Gas Vent, there is almost no way to conceal a tripod or gyro harness and any weapon bigger than a SMG.

Personally I don't have a problem with automatic combat weapons being a lot more dangerous than sidearms.

[Xenon]

You're missing one very important thing.  That 6 round burst has 6 times the recoil of the individual shots, so even though you have more time to compensate, you're putting 6 times as much mass downrange at the same velocity, so you have a LOT more recoil to compensate for.

You have not fired a fully automatic rifle, have you?

If you press the trigger on an assault rifle and fire off... let's say 8 bullets and then you clock the time it take to stabilize the weapon to get your iron sights on target again. Then you fire off... lets say 24 bullets and clock the time it take to stabilize the weapon to get your iron sights on target again. The time you need to stabilize the weapon between bursts will roughly be the same. It does not take x3 as long time to stabilize the weapon even if you fired off x3 as many bullets.

The FA burst character takes 2 burst shots each having a duration of .5 seconds each, leaving 1 second between shots. 

We are still comparing SA burst (3 bullets) with FA simple action short burst (6 bullets), yes?

Using your numbers:

FA simple action 6 bullet burst
time in seconds, action
0.00 start of first action phase, start to fire first burst
0.50 done fire first burst
1.50 end of first action phase, does not fire in second action phase
3.00 end of second action phase, start of third action phase, start to fire second burst
3.50 done fire second burst
4.50 end of third phase, start of fourth action phase, does not fire in fourth action phase
6.00 end of fourth action phase, start of fifth action phase, start to fire third burst

SA Burst
time in seconds, action
0.00 start of first complex action, fire first bullet
0.50 fire second bullet
1.00 fire third bullet
1.50 start of second complex action, fire fourth bullet
2.00 fire fifth bullet
2.50 fire sixth bullet
3.00 start of third complex action, fire seventh bullet


Using your numbers, there are 2.50 seconds between the last bullet of the first burst and the first bullet of the second burst and 0.50 seconds between bullets when using SA burst. In this example we have x5 as long time to recover between bursts when using simple action 6 bullet FA compared to using complex action 3 bullet SA Burst...

[Michael Chandra]

You can't use a silencer because of the Gas Vent

Except that currently that limitation does not exist. And even then, an Ares Alpha requires but a Shock Pad and any 1-RC modification from Run&Gun, or just a 4-Strength character, to be able to fire 6-round bursts for 7 IPs while silenced. And BF-weapons have no problem firing silenced whatsoever since they only need a total of 3 RC, which is a stock/shockpad and your natural RC.

[Kanly]

You can't use a silencer because of the Gas Vent

Except that currently that limitation does not exist. And even then, an Ares Alpha requires but a Shock Pad and any 1-RC modification from Run&Gun, or just a 4-Strength character, to be able to fire 6-round bursts for 7 IPs while silenced. And BF-weapons have no problem firing silenced whatsoever since they only need a total of 3 RC, which is a stock/shockpad and your natural RC.

You're right. To be frank, I'm probably not overly concerned with this issue because I think characters etc. being shot at should take cover behind something actually protective - engine block of a car or concrete etc. I don't have a problem with out-in-the-open targets being cut down by controlled automatic fire. Actually continuos firing is still impossible.

This is not to say there can't be balance issues. I like the realism-argument Xenon and martinchaen brought up. I agree with it. But I wouldn't want to discount Michael's concerns before giving them thought.

So Michael, you see these changes as potentially game-breaking?

[Xenon]

Except that currently that limitation does not exist.

Sure it does. Both are barrel mounted. Most weapons can only fit one barrel mounted accessory....

You might argue that you can use one if the gasvent is integral (but iirc a few editions back Ingram Smartgun had to choose between using the integral silencer or the integral gasvent; depending on situation). after all gasvent work by expanding the excess gas to compensate for recoil while the sound and flash suppressor work by containing the excess gas to limit sound and flash signature (you probably also need to use subsonic ammo). Having a sound suppressor would be rather pointless if you still let out the gas (and the noise) with a gasvent system...

I havn't read anything in sr5 that made it OK to use both at the same time.
(then again, i havn't read anything in sr5 that prevent it, either)


As I said earlier, there are a few special weapons that have custom recoil attachments.
FN P93 Praetor, Ares Alpha and Yamaha Raiden comes to mind.
Also possible that you might be able to use a sound suppressor and gas vent at the same time for Ingram Smartgun (depending on your GM). And depending on your reading it might be possible to attach a sound suppressor if the weapon is listed with an internal gasvent system (but that would be some rather shady interpretation of the written text if you ask me).

[Michael Chandra]

So Michael, you see these changes as potentially game-breaking?

With defense pools now being two-statted, the importance of burst fire has massively increased since it has a great impact on hitting chances now. Gone are the days of "I'm going to hit anyway so no need for a wide burst." Combine that with no more two bursts per round, as was in SR4, and an extra point of natural RC at the very least, and we end up with that getting enough RC to keep firing massive amounts of rounds has both become quite doable and really important to get. Not to mention that it would mean Vehicles do not have to worry about RC ever, rather than after a bunch of IPs.

So personally I think it's not game-breaking, but it does make Automatics game-defining. When Recoil isn't a long-term risk, there's no reason not to throw as many bullets as you can at your opponent. That also means you won't have to sit down and stop firing for an IP while someone with an SA weapon can keep going if they invested in some RC. That has quite the big impact on the game balance. Take, for example, that even the biggest baddest longarm does less average damage than an Ares Alpha. The balancing factor there was that the Alpha would have to stop firing after 3 IPs. Now, that is gone.

Basically, your scenario, of taking cover and such, is exactly the problem I have: The harder it is to hit, the bigger the impact of being able to keep spraying bullets is. When your enemy is behind cover and has 12+ defense dice even without that, the only reason NOT to get an Alpha and use FA-bursts was that you'd only be able to do that for 1 IP, or 3 IPs of BF-bursts. Now an Alpha can keep firing for 7 IPs without concern, 14 if you are either wireless or start by firing and use 2 Simple Actions (second of IP 7, first of IP 8 ) to change the clip. Which means that FA-firing is now THE way to go in combat, period. All other tactical options are removed by the way recoil resets.

[FasterN8]

@ Xenon
Keep it an apples to apples comparison and you'll see what I meant in my last post.  Both characters get 2 IPs per turn, both fire on every IP.  That gives you the FA burst character putting out 12 bullets per combat turn with no progressive recoil due to the simple action reset, while the SA burst character is putting out only 6 per turn and will have completely debilitating progressive recoil by the the second combat turn.

Real world physics aside, the mechanical balance considerations are well laid out by Michael here.  By making the FA burst free from progressive recoil, they've effectively removed the "everything has a cost" philosophy from firing modes.  I think that's unfortunate.

Progressive recoil as we understood it before made for some hard choices in combat, and that's a good thing because it forces the characters into making a tradeoff.  And overall, it made combat a bit less lethal, since characters were more inclined to use 3 round bursts to manage their recoil.  With this errata, the FA burst rules the roost and since almost every FA weapon can do at least 5 FA bursts before reloading, that means at least 10 IPs worth of FA bursts before there needs to be any pause in the shooting. (as Michael laid out with the clip-changing technique)

In my opinion, progressive recoil has just gone from being a broadly applied limiter on the aggression of a firefight, to a narrowly applied and therefore unfair disadvantage for adepts using pistols.

[Kudzu]

Take, for example, that even the biggest baddest longarm does less average damage than an Ares Alpha. The balancing factor there was that the Alpha would have to stop firing after 3 IPs. Now, that is gone.

And if damage was the only factor you'd have a point, but that big bad longarm can start doing it's lower-average damage from three times the range. There's more to balance than just damage-- cost, range, legality, concealalbility, fire modes, ammo count, and more all need to be factored in before you can start claiming how over or under powered a particular weapon class is... and even then, just as in real life, some things are just going to be better than others.

[RHat]

Take, for example, that even the biggest baddest longarm does less average damage than an Ares Alpha. The balancing factor there was that the Alpha would have to stop firing after 3 IPs. Now, that is gone.

And if damage was the only factor you'd have a point, but that big bad longarm can start doing it's lower-average damage from three times the range. There's more to balance than just damage-- cost, range, legality, concealalbility, fire modes, ammo count, and more all need to be factored in before you can start claiming how over or under powered a particular weapon class is... and even then, just as in real life, some things are just going to be better than others.

Yes, but at Shadowrun's engagement ranges, that doesn't often matter - certainly not often enough to be a balancing factor.

Automatics already has enough going for it - if it's also the most powerful choice, balance simply cannot exist.  Also, you realize that ammo count and firing modes are already part of the analysis here (it's part of how their damage is better), that Automatics as a skill easily trumps Longarms for concealability (the options ranging from 0 to 6 versus 6 to ,  Longarms typically cost more...  Basically, the sole advantage Longarms simply isn't relevant, and that's a problem.

[martinchaen]

What's more important, game balance or some semblance of realism?

In the real world, the majority of insurgent troops use automatic weapons. Why? Because they are cheap, devastatingly powerful, reliably accurate, and easily available.

The same is true of armed forces across the world. Snipers are force multipliers, heavy weapons specialists are just that, specialists, and weapons such as shotguns and pistols are relegated to backup or fit for purpose tasks.

Automatics SHOULD be prevalent as a solid option in Shadowrun because automatic weapons ARE powerful. There's a reason they are as ubiquitous as they are: they work. True story.

Some of you seem to think game balance is an issue if a skill or item is of less value than another at face value or by the numbers, but not all things are objective. You seem to forget or wilfully ignore the real and imagined world repercussions of forcing an issue in the name of game balance.

What is gained by making longarms something they are not? Perceived justification for choosing said skill? Come on.

The majority of shadowrunners would likely be skilled in automatics for the exact same reason soldiers, gangbangers, police, and pretty much every armed group you can think of are; versatility, damage output, reliability, and cost effectiveness.

Sniper rifles, pistols, shotguns, and other exotics are less prevalent for a reason. You can try to make them something they are not all day long, but the designers of shadowrun clearly follow real world logic in this particular instance.

As a former soldier, I value the specialized skills of heavy weapons experts and snipers, but they are the select few, not the vast majority. Until we radically change armed conflict doctrine, this will remain the case.

And that one time you absolutely, positively have to geek every m********** in the room from a mile away, you'll be glad for the highly specialized skill of your own character or that of your teammate. End of line for me.

[All4BigGuns]

What's more important, game balance or some semblance of realism?

In the real world, the majority of insurgent troops use automatic weapons. Why? Because they are cheap, devastatingly powerful, reliably accurate, and easily available.

The same is true of armed forces across the world. Snipers are force multipliers, heavy weapons specialists are just that, specialists, and weapons such as shotguns and pistols are relegated to backup or fit for purpose tasks.

Automatics SHOULD be prevalent as a solid option in Shadowrun because automatic weapons ARE powerful. There's a reason they are as ubiquitous as they are: they work. True story.

Some of you seem to think game balance is an issue if a skill or item is of less value than another at face value or by the numbers, but not all things are objective. You seem to forget or wilfully ignore the real and imagined world repercussions of forcing an issue in the name of game balance.

What is gained by making longarms something they are not? Perceived justification for choosing said skill? Come on.

The majority of shadowrunners would likely be skilled in automatics for the exact same reason soldiers, gangbangers, police, and pretty much every armed group you can think of are; versatility, damage output, reliability, and cost effectiveness.

Sniper rifles, pistols, shotguns, and other exotics are less prevalent for a reason. You can try to make them something they are not all day long, but the designers of shadowrun clearly follow real world logic in this particular instance.

As a former soldier, I value the specialized skills of heavy weapons experts and snipers, but they are the select few, not the vast majority. Until we radically change armed conflict doctrine, this will remain the case.

And that one time you absolutely, positively have to geek every m********** in the room from a mile away, you'll be glad for the highly specialized skill of your own character or that of your teammate. End of line for me.

+1 (No wait, +10,000).

[firebug]

I totally agree, martinchaen, and while "magic exists hurr durr" would be a bad counterpoint to "how about focusing on the realism", there is certainly something that can be said.  Cinematic atmosphere, cool-factor...  All of these things are definitely relevant to a roleplaying game.  Dual-wielding is a great example of what I'm talking about...  It's totally unrealistic, and in real life, nobody could ever hope to hit someone, let alone make solid use of them.  Katanas aren't just the best swords around either, but in 5th edition they are, because of Rule of Cool.

"Prevalent" does not imply a total domination of preference.  I don't think it's really that unreasonable to ask for pistols and longarms to feel like they're more than just the shit you use when automatics are taken from you (which because of the concealability of machine pistols and SMGs, is unlikely).  Like making melee more viable in 5th edition.  Or would you just say "swords and clubs are pointless and worse than guns, so I don't care if nobody ever uses them"?

Asking for it to feel like you're not just making a bad decision by going for a bit of style in a roleplaying game is dumb, especially in a game like Shadowrun where over-the-top Pink Mohawk action movie stories can exist alongside the most subtle Black Trenchcoat story you can come up with.  Yeah, it's a playstyle choice.  But the choice has got to at least be there you know?

[Michael Chandra]

There's more to balance than just damage-- cost, range, legality, concealalbility, fire modes, ammo count, and more all need to be factored in before you can start claiming how over or under powered a particular weapon class is...

Cost: >10x as much.
Range: Nearly all gunfights happen within 50m, which is optimal range for both. And even then, with a Take Aim action and Vision Magnification, an Alpha can be used to snipe from 350m without substantial penalty.
Legality: Both Forbidden.
Availability: Alpha has lower.
Concealability: Alpha has better concealability.
Fire Modes: Alpha has more options.*
Ammo count: Alpha has more options.*

And yes, I already took all of that into account. Hiven how the Alpha wins on everything but range, and range has a neglectable effect once you get into the big-gun area, I did not see the point in mentioning the obvious.

Next time, please ask me if I took things into account, rather than blindly claim I did not. Even ignoring that everyone can see the Alpha wins on nearly everything you mentioned, making assumptions just makes an ass out of you.

*: Note that the Alpha already wins in average damage with mere Burst Fire, and in Burst Fire it can fire just as often. With FA-bursts added for 7 IPs, the Alpha won't run into any reloading problems for at least 7 IPs. And any fight lasting that long gives you enough time to reload.