[Hobbes]

So... change your stress test to 5e, same basic group.  Does the outcome change materially?  Dude with Grenades still kills everything doesn't he? Or at least does so much damage that clean up is a foregone conclusion.  So why wasn't that happening at your 5e table? 

Well speaking strictly for myself, switching our stress test to 5e would have been a world of difference. Primarily to your point, the elite Aztec PR8 NPCs I used would have all been in light hardened milspec, so would have been flat immune to grenades without chunky salsa help. Revenant would have also been ludicrously more effective given the rules for MysAds in 5e vs. 6e, and Sovereign would have had several more spells including combat ones.

All that aside in a more general sense though, it would have changed even for average runners average opposition. Same base damage for the grenade (with slightly different rules for diminishing damage based on distance from ground zero), vastly different average soak pools. 6e, average HTR has soak total around 7. 5e, average HTR has soak total around 24 (body 5, full body armor 15, helmet 2, ware 2). Average difference of 6 is a big deal for grenades doing the same damage.

Well, if you put the 6e goons in Hardened armor they'd have lasted longer.  Milspec/Hardened armor just isn't printed for 6e yet.  : )   I would argue very strongly that using grenades, especially indoors, in 5e would have turned anything without Hardened Armor (Milspec, or ItNW or whatever) would be pounded to goo.  Might have taken a second or occasional third grenade if they're real spread out, but they'd all still be down in a single turn.  This is generally what happens with a table of well built 'runners.  "Reasonable" opposition tends to go away almost immediately.  Unless the GM throws out something stupid, Alter Boy, dozen force 10+ spirits, couple of panzers, Dragons and Juggernauts... 

Yes Chunky Salsa rules are a pain.  Yes I'm glad they're gone.  Still made 5e Grenades every bit as mechanically effective as 6e Grenades, IMO anyway.

My last bit, mostly for Missions play as I think stuff like this can be worked out at a table.  "Jeff, knock off the grenade spam please, we get it."  I feel the social aspect of the game is strong enough that unpopular tactics (Grenade spam, monowhip weapon foci, 5e Rigger SWARM rules, Pornomancers, possession traditions, high grade initiate mages, ect.) will restrain themselves most of the time and not disrupt the table for the other players/GM. 

That's been my experience as a Missions GM and player.  Players with mechanically strong characters get a feel for the GM/table, and play for fun.  We have a mix of high karma and no karma characters at any given table, and 99% of the time everyone has a good time.  Problem players will always be problem players, GMs will have to deal with them.

Missions can identify the unbalancing / unfun mechanics and put some rules around them in the Mission FAQ.  Did it for 5e.  I'm sure it'll be done again for 6e.  For grenades in 6e Heat may work, raising the availability may be the way to go, or just putting chemsniffers everywhere.  Just something there to enforce the social contract for the borderline cases.  "If you do X, Y bad thing will happen so lets find another option..." 

I'm all for mechanical changes to the way grenades work in 6e to bring them in line with other options.  But Pepper Punch Grenades, AoE spells, Spirits, Multiple Gun Bunnies using Anticipate.... I think even if you took explosive grenades out, 6 well built runners will chew up a lot of NPCs real fast. 

In general, nerfing "The best option" quickly becomes a game of whack-a-mole as there is always a best option.  I prefer to have several "Best options".

[Lormyr]

I'm all for mechanical changes to the way grenades work in 6e to bring them in line with other options.  But Pepper Punch Grenades, AoE spells, Spirits, Multiple Gun Bunnies using Anticipate.... I think even if you took explosive grenades out, 6 well built runners will chew up a lot of NPCs real fast.

You had numerous fair points, but this portion right here is what I will focus on for rebuttal since it is central to what burns my ass about grenades most: all of those things except for the aoe have an opposed roll to land the effect (and in the case of SR, a second roll to determine just how potently said effect landed). Aoe should be no exception to this.

Non-aoe attack: to hit roll vs. defense roll. if successful, follow with damage resistance test to determine magnitude of the success.

Non-aoe spells: spellcasting roll vs. resistance roll. in some cases, follow with damage resistance test to determine magnitude of the success. in cases where damage is not the result of success, the first opposed roll alone is sufficient to determine magnitude of effect.

Anything that just gets to affect you is poor design to me, and there is no counter argument that can be made to alter my mind on that particular point. Spirits, anticipation, and several other things are very strong, but you know what they all have that aoe does not? A chance to just "miss" you.

[Hobbes]

5e and 6e both have an all or nothing kind of option of getting out of the blast radius as a reaction to the attack.  But the mechanics in either edition are not the best.  Requires Edge (5th) or not to have moved (6th) and possibly a lucky guess or a minor action.  There is a degree of Defender Agency, but its not as automatic or straightforward as a standard Defense test.

Grenade attacks have a threshold, and (for the most part) thresholds and opposed tests are not to be mixed.  And I see the point, why is hitting a 2 foot circle suddenly harder when there is a ninja in the blast radius?

The opposed test can certainly be handwaived as diving for cover, rolling, or whatever.  But I don't think it would have changed the outcome much in your stress test.  I doubt an optimized combat character built around grenade throwing (or launching) is going to miss all that often. 

And what exactly does that test look like?  Like a Firearms test?  Attacker Net Hits stage up, Defender Net hits and no damage?  Is there a separate test to determine grenade placement?  How is damage drop off from distance determined?  I think you're asking for a non-trivial re-write that won't happen.  Nerfing Grenade damage ?  50/50 shot at this point.  Couple paragraph re-write of launcher and throwing rules... seems unlikely.   

Find out who's writing the combat options book and bribe them to add a sidebar of optional explosive attack rules  ; )

And my go to argument absurdum take:  If grenades are lowered in damage output (through whatever mechanics) to be comparable kill count to an Anticipate bait gun bunny, are Shadowrunners now just running around with Grenade launchers 'cause they're no big deal?

[Lormyr]

5e and 6e both have an all or nothing kind of option of getting out of the blast radius as a reaction to the attack.  But the mechanics in either edition are not the best.

I would go so far as to say bad options.

Grenade attacks have a threshold, and (for the most part) thresholds and opposed tests are not to be mixed.  And I see the point, why is hitting a 2 foot circle suddenly harder when there is a ninja in the blast radius?

But the threshold is so easily hit as to might as well not exist. When was the last time you saw a grenade based character that missed with one? The answer for me is never.

The opposed test can certainly be handwaived as diving for cover, rolling, or whatever.  But I don't think it would have changed the outcome much in your stress test.  I doubt an optimized combat character built around grenade throwing (or launching) is going to miss all that often.

I agree with your specific example, but that is still a poor reason to have any affect that basically autolands and it is on the defense to somehow find a way to mitigate. Specifically, in every edition of shadowrun I have played (5 and 6) the top end of physical defense is much higher than the top end of physical attack pool potential, so if it would not be difficult to make some characters difficult to hit with grenades if that was the design goal.

And what exactly does that test look like?  Like a Firearms test?  Attacker Net Hits stage up, Defender Net hits and no damage?  Is there a separate test to determine grenade placement?  How is damage drop off from distance determined?  I think you're asking for a non-trivial re-write that won't happen.

I also suspect a balanced re-write won't happen, and that is if the design team/powers that be other than Banshee are even listening or care. That said, the balanced approach would be easy: attack roll vs. defense roll. Defender wins, he manages to dive for cover out of the explosion radius. Attacker wins, everyone in said radius that failed eat some base damage. What should those specifics look like? For 6e, 5-6P in a 6-8m radius (not reduction for distance, why hassle with that?) would be leave grenades strong (top end weapon damage with potential for several enemies hit at once) without being ludicrously unbalanced.

Aoe indirect spells need the same treatment as far as attack vs. defense.

And my go to argument absurdum take:  If grenades are lowered in damage output (through whatever mechanics) to be comparable kill count to an Anticipate bait gun bunny, are Shadowrunners now just running around with Grenade launchers 'cause they're no big deal?

I don't much care for anticipate either, but I have no strong issue with it entirely because it can be avoided entirely with a successful defense test - not only partially (and poorly) avoided through highly gimmicky action expenditure. I also think we both know that players/characters that are going to go HAM with explosives are going to do it regardless so long as they remain a strong option. The rules I listed above still leave them very competitive (I'd still say better) with anticipate, primarily as they are money reliant and not semi-limited intangible source reliant.

[Hobbes]

I also suspect a balanced re-write won't happen, and that is if the design team/powers that be other than Banshee are even listening or care. That said, the balanced approach would be easy: attack roll vs. defense roll. Defender wins, he manages to dive for cover out of the explosion radius. Attacker wins, everyone in said radius that failed eat some base damage. What should those specifics look like? For 6e, 5-6P in a 6-8m radius (not reduction for distance, why hassle with that?) would be leave grenades strong (top end weapon damage with potential for several enemies hit at once) without being ludicrously unbalanced.

My minor quibbles on using movement to avoid Grenades is, shouldn't that option be available for Avoiding spells too, especially the visible ones?  I think creating totally separate mechanics for AoE Explosives and another for AoE spells will frustrate players too.  "If you can dodge a wrench, you can dodge a Grenade, but not a Fireball."  (Admittedly, we already have totally separate mechanics for all those things....) And then then you've got to reconcile with movement rates... "Oh I'm two meters short?  Jim toss a grenade behind me."  Shadowrun has never handled tactical movement well in any edition, IMO. 

FWIW I'd totally vote for Lormyr's AoE Attack Avoidance for 7th Edition or as an add on in a source book for 6th.

[Finstersang]

1) The only time someone gets hit with the Ground Zero damage is if they are literally standing on the grenade or its in their pocket.  Otherwise, they get the benefit of the doubt as close range.
2) The Avoid Incoming minor action is not affected by dodge penalties; 1 hit equals 1 meter moved.
3) Both the Avoid Incoming and Hit the Dirt minor actions have the following extra bit: "This action gives you X auto hits on a damage resistance test against blast effects (e.g. grenades)."  I'm thinking X is 2, maybe 3.

Really good take on this. A few of my own cents to add here:

1) Well spotted, and it begs the question: Was 5th Edition´s System of just measuring the individual distances to the point of impact really that bad? Right now, Ground Zero hits are almost impossible, and dodging (or scattering) out of the 3-Meter Zone is very likely as well. Almost all Grenade Damage is happening in that last bracket anyways.

2) Throwing these extra Dodge penalties for Avoid Incoming out of the Window is a good idea for simplicity alone. I´d also allow (a least for the PCs) to choose the direction of Avoid Incoming after scatter has been determined, as long as you can properly see the angle of the attack and as long as you don´t glitch on the test. I you roll badly on your attack roll, the point of impact shold be further away from the target, and if you roll well on an Avoid Incoming test, that should take yourself further away from the impact zone - that outcome shouldn´t be twisted around by an ill-fated scatter roll*. Irony of fate can be fun, but not when it leads to TPKs.

3) I think Hit the dirt already has this effect, although well hidden by the editing gremlins. Don´t have the CRB with me right now, but I think it´s listed with the description of explosive attacks. It can be negated with an Airburst Link, though.

To a add another point:

4) What I really don´t like is that armor and cover have next to no impact on the outcome of a grenade attack (and especially a frag granade attack): The Edge earned from a standard ranged or melee attack can be used for the defense test and also for rerolling hits of the opposition, which gives you a higher chance to avoid the damage entirely (and it´s pretty much the same with the Edge you deny for your opponents). With the Edge earned because of a good defense rating against an AOE attack, you will likely only be able to reroll one or two dice on your soak test, which has much less of an impact. In reality, it´s the other way around: One of the main purposes of combat armor is to protect against shrapnell. And cover should help here as well, for obvious reasons.

Because of this, I added a houserule that Fragmentation Grenades (and Rockets) are resisted with the full defense rating instead of just body. This also fixes another issue I have with 6th Edition´s grenades: High-Explosive Grenades are supposed to be the better choice against armored targets, but RAW they are just strictly worse Frag Grenades (besides managing collateral damage).

*Dumb question: Can you reroll (an opponents?) scatter dice with Edge ?

[Hobbes]

*Dumb question: Can you reroll (an opponents?) scatter dice with Edge ?

Arguably anyone can spend edge to force re-rolls, so NPCs throwing grenades should be scattering all over the place till all the PCs run out of Edge.

Also the 5 Edge/Player's call action could completely mitigate a grenade attack.  Freak gust of wind, jammed launcher, dud grenade, they threw the pin not the grenade (really happens, ask any DI) whatever lulzy thing comes to mind.

Not perfect solutions, but are options. 

[Lormyr]

My minor quibbles on using movement to avoid Grenades is, shouldn't that option be available for Avoiding spells too, especially the visible ones?  I think creating totally separate mechanics for AoE Explosives and another for AoE spells will frustrate players too.  "If you can dodge a wrench, you can dodge a Grenade, but not a Fireball."  (Admittedly, we already have totally separate mechanics for all those things....) And then then you've got to reconcile with movement rates... "Oh I'm two meters short?  Jim toss a grenade behind me."  Shadowrun has never handled tactical movement well in any edition, IMO. 

FWIW I'd totally vote for Lormyr's AoE Attack Avoidance for 7th Edition or as an add on in a source book for 6th.

The movement issue is exceptionally punitive to melee characters, especially in 6e where any advantage whatsoever that melee might have had (superior damage in some cases in 5e, for example) is completely gone in favor of ranged.

It was available in 5e with indirect aoe with run for your life. Less useful in 6e. Overall I agree with you.

And thanks for the vote of confidence on the aoe re-balancing!

[skalchemist]

3) I think Hit the dirt already has this effect, although well hidden by the editing gremlins. Don´t have the CRB with me right now, but I think it´s listed with the description of explosive attacks. It can be negated with an Airburst Link, though.

I'll be danged, you're right!  Its buried just above the scatter diagram on page 113. 

[Hobbes]

The movement issue is exceptionally punitive to melee characters, especially in 6e where any advantage whatsoever that melee might have had (superior damage in some cases in 5e, for example) is completely gone in favor of ranged.

I have issues with 6e movement rules.  Mainly that my superhuman cyborg is outrun at a typical high school track meet.   

[BeCareful]

I have issues with 6e movement rules.  Mainly that my superhuman cyborg is outrun at a typical high school track meet.   

However you plan to deal with this, please avoid the use of grenades.