Shadowrun
Shadowrun Play => Rules and such => Topic started by: Marcus on <08-24-17/2335:43>
-
So any thoughts on what the melee damage rating for a bow with melee hardening should be?
I had been using Gun Stock which if I recall correctly is S+3(S), but I figured someone might have a better idea.
-
Out of the available options, I would go with the Staff damage code, honestly, since that would be closest to a bow, I think.
-
i do like that idea better.
-
+1 on the staff idea.
-
I agree with Staff, but I would probably give it the improvised weapon penalty (Accuracy 3). I think that actually makes the stats the same as the Gun Stock in Run & Gun. I might give it a circumstance bonus of +1 Accuracy (4 total), but it definitely shouldn't have the full 6 Accuracy of a normal staff. Bows just aren't designed to hit like a staff, and while melee hardening might make it be able to be used as a melee weapon without damaging itself, it doesn't make it any better designed to be used as one.
-
While I like that idea, Kiirnodel, I can also easily see a clubs specialization of melee bow, giving the same accuracy as a staff (witness the tv show Arrow) because advanced training, but only after melee hardening on the bow, and I think it should be a long bow style, rather than a compound bow. I can see a compound being more like a club, while a longbow is more like a staff.
-
Whether or not an object can be used as a weapon doesn't change the fact that it isn't as effective as a weapon actually designed to be used in melee. Remember, melee hardening just makes it capable of being used to hit people without damaging itself. It doesn't make it more accurate, or more effective as a melee weapon. It is still an improvised melee weapon.
-
I agree with Staff, but I would probably give it the improvised weapon penalty (Accuracy 3). I think that actually makes the stats the same as the Gun Stock in Run & Gun. I might give it a circumstance bonus of +1 Accuracy (4 total), but it definitely shouldn't have the full 6 Accuracy of a normal staff. Bows just aren't designed to hit like a staff, and while melee hardening might make it be able to be used as a melee weapon without damaging itself, it doesn't make it any better designed to be used as one.
Agreed, I was gonna do 4, but i'll see what it looks like at 3.
-
Accuracy 3 is a hard road. A wage slave has a solid chance to get 3 hits on defense. That' works when something is supposed to be unusually clunky or maybe dies over the top damage but if Phil in accounting can parry 1/3 of your attacks it feels weird. I'd go 4.
-
3 hits is average for a dice pool of 9. The average wageslave is likely to have at most 3's in their attributes. So they would have maybe 5 or 6 dice to defend, so not nearly as likely. Getting lucky on the roll is a perfectly valid reason for some schmuck to manage to dodge.
And don't forget there are ways to increase the accuracy, they still apply to the improvised use of the weapon, because you're planning to attempt to use it in melee.
-
If you think a average person dodging roughly 1/3rd of the hits is fine for getting lucky I guess it works for you. To me it looks like almost any other option would be better which defeats the purpose of paying for melee hardening. To me improvised weapons are bows before hardened for melee. Now that it's built to deal with it it's not that awkward.
-
I'm gonna stick with 4. It seems reasonable to me. 3 pushes to 5 and 15 pool just isn't that interesting.
-
The only thing I'll add, Shinobi Killfist, is that melee hardening doesn't make the weapon designed to be used in melee. It only makes it capable of taking a beating without breaking. The improvement is meant for firearms, but it even calls out that using the gun in Gun Kata it is still an improvised melee weapon.
I'm a seasoned archer myself, and I've swung around a fair share of long sticks (albeit not in the same sort of environment as the archery). And while I never would have tried to hit someone with one of my bows (because they aren't melee hardened), even if I wasn't worried about breaking it I can tell you it would be awkward and not nearly as accurate as a straight-up staff.
In action sequences like in Arrow, Oliver uses his bow to hit people fairly infrequently. Usually as part of some other maneuver, or "surprise" I still have this stick I can hit you with. There are plenty of times where he doesn't even bother using the bow and just punches with the hand holding the bow instead too.
Also, we forgot about reach, so those wageslave would only have at most 4 dice to defend (-2 from reach).
-
Agreed. Using a bow as a melee weapon, whether hardened or not, would be an improvised weapon using the Clubs skill. I'd give it a 3 accuracy and a staff's melee damage.
Melee Hardening means you can hit someone with the bow and it won't break. It does not make a bow anything other than an improvised melee weapon (a category that also includes pistol-whipping and rifle butt stocks, IIRC).
Now, you could design a bow from the ground up to be manufactured as both a ranged and melee weapon, but it would be rare, expensive, and distinctive.
-
I'm not arguing the logic of it as who knows what melee hardening means in a 60+ years in future setting. But yes I doubt it would be as good as a staff. But I'm not sure it would be improvised either. It is improved to be able to be used in melee to some degree.
Mainly though, with the god awful mechanics of accuracy 3 on its own and that this is something a player is paying extra for. I doubt the player is buying this so once a campaign he may decide to hit someone with a bow. They probably actually want to use the thing they bought and went out of their way to modify the weapon for. It's like the absolute idiocy of missle mastery. Players take that power to throw improvised weapons keeping them accuracy 3 negates why people spent a power point.
-
There are options to do many, many things in Shadowrun. When you deliberately go outside the realms of the established options for 'this shit would be cool', or whatever, then yes, you pay more for that, and you aren't going to be on the same level as someone paying less for a more basic option. When you take things that are distinctly not designed to be weapons and use them as such, you suffer from lower accuracy. Of course, for most people when you're in the situation where you're using improvised weapons you're so far in the shit that anything is a step up. So no, no sympathy for people who deliberately dive into the shit because they think shit is cool.
-
There is a middle ground between as good as a weapon designed for it and the absolutely useless range that is improvised weapons.
-
There is a middle ground between as good as a weapon designed for it and the absolutely useless range that is improvised weapons.
Yeah, it's called not using a bow as a primary melee weapon. ;D
-
There is a middle ground between as good as a weapon designed for it and the absolutely useless range that is improvised weapons.
Yeah, it's called not using a bow as a primary melee weapon. ;D
#TRUTH
Seriously, Shinobi, Improvised weapons are like that because they are NOT actual weapons, and they are really only good in a bar brawl or similar, where the most armor someone might have is an armor jacket or similar. And even then, you can do called shots to hit unarmored areas (i.e. clocking someone over the head with a pool cue or stabbing them in the throat with a broken bottle). Called shots reduce the dice pool directly, so even if you reduced a 15 dice pool to 7 for a called shot to the neck, you're not losing much with an accuracy of 3. Remember, Improvised Weapons are supposed to be desperation weapons.
There are ranged weapons that are also designed to be used in melee. They have these things called bayonets, or other features specifically designed for melee. Now, if you want a bow that is functional as a bow, but also is designed and balanced to be used in melee effectively, that is certainly a worthwhile endeavor, but it would have to be a special design, just like trying to make a sword that can be used to attack at range would be a special design.
Yes, scenes like you see in Arrow are cool, and no one who grew up in the 90s can deny that Gambit's card tricks are badass. But in Arrow, attacks with the bow are almost always as a 'get out of my face' thing, or to set up attacks with actual weapons (like fists and feet). And Gambit's power is controlling kinetic energy, which is why his cards fly like they do, and why they go boom. Neither of which remotely suggest that a Shadowrun character should be as effective using a bow in melee as someone using an actual melee weapon.
-
There is a middle ground between as good as a weapon designed for it and the absolutely useless range that is improvised weapons.
Yeah, it's called not using a bow as a primary melee weapon. ;D
Lol. Then melee hardening just shouldn't be in the game. But, they did put it in it should actually be somewhat useful. Not amazing, or as good as a full weapon but not useless either.
-
There is a middle ground between as good as a weapon designed for it and the absolutely useless range that is improvised weapons.
Yeah, it's called not using a bow as a primary melee weapon. ;D
Lol. Then melee hardening just shouldn't be in the game. But, they did put it in it should actually be somewhat useful. Not amazing, or as good as a full weapon but not useless either.
It is somewhat useful, Shinobi. It allows you to go 'oh shit, not the face' with your ranged weapon and still have a working ranged weapon afterwards. That is exactly what improvised weapons are for. Melee Hardening simply turns it from an improvised weapon to an improvised weapon that won't break when you hit a troll upside the head with it.
Now, as we've said, you want a bow that is actually designed to be used in melee, good on you. there are a couple ways you can do something like that (I'm partial to adding blades onto the bow and making it some kind of sick bat'leth bow thing, myself). But that would NOT be a standard weapon with a piddly 500 nuyen. Hell, even the description of the melee hardening says "such as when the firearm is used as an improvised melee weapon".
Quit whining about how something that would look cool isn't practical, and either invest in a custom weapon, or suck up the accuracy penalty and focus on called shots.
-
Accuracy 4 paired with staff damage is hardly a strong weapon. It's just not useless and I'm happy with that.
That character will be much better off shoot someone, and the penalty for shooting someone at point blank really isn't a big deal,
so in the long run more this is more of an asethic choice then an optimal one. Thus making it not useless is good in that sense.
-
You start letting people whine their way into perks, and that's a slippery slope to go down. There's clear rules on the issue, and overturning them because someone wants to reenact a TV show is a bad idea. There are other, better ways to improve the accuracy, and they are actually legal under the rules, they just cost more than 500 nuyen. Giving in to whining is a bad move as a parent, it is a bad move as a teacher, and it is a bad move as a GM.
-
While the discussion has valid points, I think most of you are missing mine: melee hardening + skill training gives better accuracy. Note: must include training to get better accuracy. Heck, just make it an Exotic Melee Skill: Melee Bow, with, oh, every 3 ranks of skill giving +1 accuracy. That means a character not only spends money, but also invests karma in doing the cool stuff with the trick bow.
-
And when everyone else with a weapons skill whines about wanting more accuracy because of their skills? Gotta keep your rulings consistent, or you're playing favorites and things get nasty.
-
You start letting people whine their way into perks, and that's a slippery slope to go down. There's clear rules on the issue, and overturning them because someone wants to reenact a TV show is a bad idea. There are other, better ways to improve the accuracy, and they are actually legal under the rules, they just cost more than 500 nuyen. Giving in to whining is a bad move as a parent, it is a bad move as a teacher, and it is a bad move as a GM.
I don't accept your premise, we aren't talking about a "perk" here. A question was asked and an answer was needed. What we are talking about is something that is undefined in the rules, from a straight effectiveness perspective the character would be much better off putting xp into other things, but if a player wants some breadth of over depth I'm not one to argue with them, melee hardening is in the rules, and I don't see a reason it couldn't be used on a bow. What that does is not defined in RAW, one of the jobs of a GM is answer those questions. I have my answer, if the Devs want to make an official choices that's fine with me, and I'll revisit the topic then.
-
And when everyone else with a weapons skill whines about wanting more accuracy because of their skills? Gotta keep your rulings consistent, or you're playing favorites and things get nasty.
Sure, they can have an accuracy bonus, as long as it is an Exotic Weapon skill. Would it be more palatable at 6 ranks = +1 accuracy? I can work with that as well.
-
You start letting people whine their way into perks, and that's a slippery slope to go down. There's clear rules on the issue, and overturning them because someone wants to reenact a TV show is a bad idea. There are other, better ways to improve the accuracy, and they are actually legal under the rules, they just cost more than 500 nuyen. Giving in to whining is a bad move as a parent, it is a bad move as a teacher, and it is a bad move as a GM.
Who the bleep said anyone was whining? No one said there player was whining for more. It was a question on what people thought it should be ruled as. People answered, some people disagree with you.
-
Mirikon is arguing for a) system consistency (i.e. you remain consistent with the standard rules) and b) game consistency (i.e. you remain consistent with your long-term rulings as applied to your game). He argues that giving a specific Improvised Melee Weapon (because it's designed as a ranged weapon, and is not from the beginning designed as a melee weapon) a higher Accuracy specifically because the Player wants to do Bow-Fu is an error in judgement -- that giving a bonus or perk (1 Accuracy above the original thought) only because of that is a bad decision. I agree with this point of view - listen to the arguments one way or the other, make an informed decision based upon the rules and how your item would best fit in. IMO, the best way to do this is to decide how you would rule it if it were in the hands of an NPC.
That said, I disagree with 3 being the appropriate Accuracy for a bow used as an improvised melee weapon; it should be a 4.
Melee weapons, those that were made for combat, have an average Accuracy of 5. Improvised weapons — items that can be used, however awkwardly, to inflict damage but are not designed for combat, such as a golf club or frying pan—usually have an accuracy of 4. Random objects used as weapons that are very unwieldy or heavy (like a chair, barstool, or refrigerator) generally have an Accuracy of 3.
IMO, a bow fits into the second category - an item that is awkward, but can be used to inflict damage, therefore ACC 4. This should be able to be improved by standard in-game methods, or an outright one-shot expensive bow that in this case is designed from the get-go for melee combat.
Shinobi has been arguing that 'Melee Hardening' means that the bow is designed from the get-go to be a melee weapon. In this, by RAW as well as RAI (as by very strict RAW you can't apply Melee Hardening to anything but a firearm) he is wrong; melee hardening does not mean that it was designed as a melee weapon, only that it can be used in melee combat without doing damage to the weapon's standard functionality - because being used as a melee weapon when it isn't designed for it can damage or break your gun (which will consequently lower your Accuracy by 1.)
Melee Hardening
Strongly favored by practitioners of the Gun Kata martial art and helpful for anyone who is rough on their firearms, melee hardening reinforces the firearm’s mechanical and electrical components to protect them from damage from hard impacts, such as when the firearm is used as an improvised melee weapon.
'... such as when the firearm is used as an improvised melee weapon.' This is simple reinforcement, not redesign; you're still using the weapon as an IMW.
Finally, Spooky and Marcus are arguing that a skill-rank-based bonus to the accuracy of a weapon (or the improvised melee weapon, in this case) is entirely reasonable; IMO, it is not. This is because of the simple fact that there is so much effort that is put into increasing Limits (adept enhancements, spells, item add-ons), that unless this is applied to all skills (which is a particularly bad idea), this simply becomes a favoritism issue - not to mention makes those above-mentioned enhancements, spells, add-ons, etc. functionally useless.
Limits are part of the system's balance sculpting -- you may be great, but if you have crap tools, or your body isn't up to it, or whatever, you can only go so far unless you get really lucky, i.e. use Edge. This makes things thematically interesting - how does the gun-bunny act when they have to leave their favorite toys at home and use 'sub-standard' items, that sort of thing. Making it so that the gun-bunny makes their weapon more accurate simply because of their skill (which is what Accuracy is, after all, limiting) is self-defeating, no matter what the point is at which the skill gains the bonus.
The solution to most of these is, simply, to have the player search for a person with an Armorer skill of 9+ who is willing to design and build for them a bow that is not only made to shoot arrows into people, but also balanced to whack trolls over the head. Done right, this becomes an interesting personal downtime project / pseudo-adventure. If you want to make it more interesting, involve the other players, you make it so that the character's Hattori Hanzo is somewhere that will require the entire team to enable the player to get face time with the fellow - in prison, in a remote location, deep in a corporation, in another country, in a wasteland, or whatever. One of my GMs had my Hattori Hanzo recently shipped off to Yomi Island, because he pissed off the wrong people by refusing to make a weapon for them, and boy wasn't that an interesting series of adventures.
TL;DR: 4, or talk to the guys at Victorinox into making a staff-bow out of memory materials.
-
That really wasn't my argument so I guess I should have bee clearer. I think I expressly stated it shouldnt be as good as a weapon designed for melee. My point is the intent is that it could be used in melee and people who buy this see it as option they want to use. So choosing a accuracy that is too low goes against that entire intent. There is some discretion in what a GM assigns for a improvised weapon. Melee hardening if a miracle happens and you hit it won't be damaged isn't a big selling point Imo.(honestly the entire idea that your pistol gets jacked up on someone's skull seems off to me in the first place). So you should pick a accuracy that while not as good as the melee weapon it closest emulates but not as bad as accuracy 3 seems appropriate. I'd go with 4 as suggested in your post. Heck I think hardliner glove are in 5e those are still a better option for most characters designed around this at accuracy 4 so I don't think you are breaking things.
-
The solution to most of these is, simply, to have the player search for a person with an Armorer skill of 9+ who is willing to design and build for them a bow that is not only made to shoot arrows into people, but also balanced to whack trolls over the head. Done right, this becomes an interesting personal downtime project / pseudo-adventure. If you want to make it more interesting, involve the other players, you make it so that the character's Hattori Hanzo is somewhere that will require the entire team to enable the player to get face time with the fellow - in prison, in a remote location, deep in a corporation, in another country, in a wasteland, or whatever. One of my GMs had my Hattori Hanzo recently shipped off to Yomi Island, because he pissed off the wrong people by refusing to make a weapon for them, and boy wasn't that an interesting series of adventures.
TL;DR: 4, or talk to the guys at Victorinox into making a staff-bow out of memory materials.
I like this just b/c it's fun, it's dramatic and it includes Hattori Hanzo. For the time being I'm satisfied with 4, making bow Excalibur can come later should this actually go anywhere.
-
That really wasn't my argument so I guess I should have bee clearer. I think I expressly stated it shouldnt be as good as a weapon designed for melee. My point is the intent is that it could be used in melee and people who buy this see it as option they want to use. So choosing a accuracy that is too low goes against that entire intent.
This is exactly what I and, to a lesser extent, Mirikon are talking about - and for all practical purposes what you said. Certainly a bow can be used as a staff/club in melee; so can the stock of a gun, or the barrel of a pistol, or a chair, a bar stool, a pool cue, a pool ball, a beer bottle, a table, the bar itself (well, sort of), etc. etc. etc. And you can use your bow, gun-stock, pistol-barrel, chair, bar stool, pool cue/ball, beer bottle, table, etc. etc. etc. as a melee weapon however often you want. Do so with a non-melee-hardened weapon and you risk damaging your weapon, said risk being something that should increase with the frequency of your use. If, however, you have melee hardening as an option, you should have access to the description, and what it does for you; if not, then your GM certainly should, and if someone is buying melee hardening because of the misguided belief that it changes the item from an improvised weapon into a standard weapon, then the player is mistaken and the GM should explain things to them.
If your argument is not that buying melee hardening turns the weapon into a designed-for-melee weapon, but exactly what you said above - that the player thinks that it does - then this is an issue with the GM not explaining to them that it only prevents the weapon from getting damaged when used as an improvised weapon, not that it improves its use, balance, etc. the way increasing its Accuracy would mean. Choosing an accuracy appropriate for the improvised melee weapon, i.e. melee-hardened bow, is immaterial in regards as to how the player thinks it should be, just because their 'entire intent' is to use their non-melee-designed bow, gun-butt, pistol-barrel, cue stick, cue ball, etc. as a melee weapon.
Like I said - 'how would I rule this for an NPC?' is not generally a bad yardstick to start out with.
There is a middle ground between as good as a weapon designed for it and the absolutely useless range that is improvised weapons.
Note that the 4 you're now agreeing to is the 'absolutely useless range that is improvised weapons,' as I quoted above.
I like this just b/c it's fun, it's dramatic and it includes Hattori Hanzo. For the time being I'm satisfied with 4, making bow Excalibur can come later should this actually go anywhere.
Thanks. ;)
-
I was arguing against accuracy 3 improvised as that's useless, that was the initial number thrown out on the first page of this thread and that is what I was arguing against. Accuracy 4 is one category of improvised but it's also telescoping staff and a couple other less accurate melee weapons. And again I never said it would be a standard weapon or the player thinks it's a standard weapon. How many times do I have to say it wouldn't be treated as a weapon specifically designed for combat. But yes if a player sees a option I suspect they think it's supposed to be useable. And the GM shouldn't go out of his way to ham string it. And there is a gap between the player thinks it should be useable and as good as a weapon designed for combat.
-
Lol. Then melee hardening just shouldn't be in the game. But, they did put it in it should actually be somewhat useful. Not amazing, or as good as a full weapon but not useless either.
Melee Hardening is NOT about turning something into a melee weapon. It IS for helping a usually delicate and intricate firearm survive when forced into melee.
As for accuracy, the only way accuracy 3 is worthless against mooks is if you are in a empty void with no action, modifiers, etc. And for prime runners you should pick up a sword or spend edge.
End of Line. Edit To Add: forgot I'm new to posting here. That's not meant as insulting, just my way of dropping out of a post haha.
-
@Wyrm
I actually think that a skill rank accuracy bonus (I'm liking +1 per 6 ranks, personally) is appropriate. Why, you ask? Simple. People IRL get better and more accurate with weapons they practice with. I have been both an NRA and NAA trainer; I have seen accuracy improve on my training grounds. While I realize that higher skill ranks mean a larger dice pool, therefore an increased chance of hitting, I can also see the difference between my shooting skill and that of, say, an active duty Marine scout/sniper. Give us both a rifle that can hit targets at .75 mile, and I'm probably going to need a target about two feet across to mark my 5 round group. The Marine will probably need only half that, and for comparison's sake I would estimate that my skill is about 4, and the Marine is probably about 8 or 9. This fact of life is why I think that an accuracy bonus for skill is appropriate. Now, it can be argued that SR is a game and doesn't have to correlate to life, but because it does correlate quite well, I stand by my argument. You, of course, are free to disagree with me. Not a problem. And thank you for your opinion.
-
Spooky, you're confusing skill rating with accuracy. Give the same gun with the same hardware/software accuracy mods (including things like implanted smartlinks) to a novice and a trained marksman, and they'll have the same accuracy. That is a representation of the physical weapon.
The reason an active duty Marine scout sniper will hit the target more often and closer together than you isn't because of the gun suddenly getting more accurate, but because their skill level is higher than yours.
-
Right, the gun doesn't become more accurate in the hands of a well-trained individual, they are simply able to fire it better and with more consistent results.
With the same gun in hand, if one person gets better groupings on target practice than another it is because they are more skilled. In Shadowrun game terms this equates to them having more dice and are able to more regularly hit the threshold of the target. It isn't because the gun has better accuracy in their hands.
My only caveat is that I do agree somewhat that much more training should potentially allow a person to mitigate the effects of low accuracy. An example springs to mind (I can't remember the source) of a highly trained operative taking a trainee's gun and firing another perfect grouping, handing it back to the guy and saying something like "your sight isn't calibrated right, it pulls to the left."
-
Isnt that the take aim action wich is limited by skill/2?
-
Yeah, that'd be things like Take Aim, which are dependent on skill, not the weapon.