Shadowrun
Shadowrun Play => Rules and such => Topic started by: Kincaid on <04-10-14/1912:57>
-
Errata goes here http://forums.shadowruntabletop.com/index.php?topic=16009.0
How do Gel Packs count in terms of encumbrance? Do they add to the base armor or are they considered a +2 armor modification?
Can we get some clarification on the internal/integral issue? Specifically, does the integral smartlink in the Ares Predator take up the internal slot? Does the top-mounted laser sight on the Browning Max-Power take up its top slot? If yes, how are the slots on the HK Urban Combat allocated? If no, can I add an additional Shock Pad to the already-integrated one on the PJSS Model 55?
From whom does the team leader transfer initiative points using a level II P-Tac? His own initiative? Another team member's?
-
Can skill points be spent in character generation in lieu of karma for martial arts specializations (just like normal specializations)?
-
Lemme see if I can answer your questions.
Gel Packs probably count as armor modifications, same as helmets and shields. Thus, they're kinda useless for low-STR characters, but their drawback would make putting it on one a bad idea anyways.
I'm certain standard upgrades do not take up slots; looking at weapon stats and comparing them with that in mind makes a lot of otherwise pointless options make sense (like "why does this gun with a smartgun cost more than this other equal gun and a smartgun accessory?).
Adding an additional shock pad would do nothing; there's no reason to think they would stack with eachother. Also, funnily enough, the chart on page 53 actually specifies that a shock pad does not stack with itself. So there you go.
They explain the initiative transfer more clearly in Level III P-Tac. The team leader can transfer from themselves to any other member. There's no rules about what action that is or when it happens, but it's implied it can be done once per turn (again based on Level III's rules) and I'd say it's probably done when initiative is rolled as a non-action.
Martial Arts specializations are more like Qualities. 7 Karma to learn an art, 4 karma to learn another technique. Spending skillpoints on them would have to be a houserule, and honestly, a rip off. 7 Karma is the same price a specialization, but after that, you're much better off increasing a skill beyond 2 (because at that point it costs more than 4 Karma to do that).
-
And at the same time they are not qualities too. ^^
So they don't count on your 25 karma it would seem.
-
Anybody know the stats of the Kraken that attacks all shadowrunners that fail Deep Sea Diving tests?
-
Lemme see if I can answer your questions.
Gel Packs probably count as armor modifications, same as helmets and shields. Thus, they're kinda useless for low-STR characters, but their drawback would make putting it on one a bad idea anyways.
You're thinking Armor Accessories. And Gel Packs don't sound as one, they state they increase the armor rating of the armor.
-
It seems odd that they'd leave an armor+ mod so poorly defined.
-
How does the Gun Kata (Kip Up) work? Gun Kata is linked to Firearms and Kip Up specifies a Close Combat Attack. If my character makes his check, does he get to stand and fire his gun at someone within melee range as a Standard Action? Would he get his specialization dice to the Agility + Gymnastics roll and/or the attack roll?
-
How does the Gun Kata (Kip Up) work? Gun Kata is linked to Firearms and Kip Up specifies a Close Combat Attack. If my character makes his check, does he get to stand and fire his gun at someone within melee range as a Standard Action? Would he get his specialization dice to the Agility + Gymnastics roll and/or the attack roll?
In Gun Kata, it says "Additionally, the gun is used as both a ranged and melee weapon. . . . Guns used with Gun Kata have to be custom designed for impact and tricked with melee accessories."
It doesn't say that it's use of Kip-up is different from normal, and with melee weapon use, I read this as. . Kip up and smack your target with the gun.
Edited; I guess nothing in kip-up disqualifies you shooting your target, since firing is a simple, and you would still have a simple, but I wouldn't apply any martial arts dice to the shot, and I would apply the firing at melee range penalty.
-
Didn't see anything about this, but HV and Miniguns no longer double the number of bullets (and recoil) they produce now? If so, that is perhaps my favorite change. it makes the Vindicator now a useful weapon without a metric ton of RC. :)
-
Not sure if this thread is actually going to be used by the Devs, but if we're using it as something of a continuation of the FAQ thread then...
Touch-Only Attack (p.124): Some confusion on stun weapons. The second paragraph goes into detail concerning shock gloves and stun batons. Specifically, it states that if the weapons are used in touch-only attacks, net hits do not increase DV. Does that mean you can use them without the +2 touch-only attack bonus and can increase the DV? Punching with stun gloves, etc.
-
also, is there actually a mechanical benefit to having a safety system? does it negate friendly fire, for instance. RAI one would think, but there are no mechanics to what the thing actually does.
Also does Custom Fit (Stacked) follow encumberance rules, since they were made to go together?
-
Not sure if this thread is actually going to be used by the Devs, but if we're using it as something of a continuation of the FAQ thread then...
Touch-Only Attack (p.124): Some confusion on stun weapons. The second paragraph goes into detail concerning shock gloves and stun batons. Specifically, it states that if the weapons are used in touch-only attacks, net hits do not increase DV. Does that mean you can use them without the +2 touch-only attack bonus and can increase the DV? Punching with stun gloves, etc.
I hope so, there is no rule stopping tasers from scaling from net hits as far as I can tell it would be lame to only inflict that on melee.(hell the rule that net hits don't add for touch attacks is already lame) Still no answer on how touch attacks work with indirect combat spells(boo!)
Some of these things are silly. So IAIJUTSU lets you draw your sword and attack as a simple action, but as soon as your sword is drawn you go back to it being a complex action to just attack? Same with Kip-Up apparently I can spring to my feet from prone and punch you in the face as a simple action, but if I decide to just punch you in the face its now a complex action? Were they planning on changing melee to a simple action and then forgot to or something? I think they should, but wherever they end up on that it seems silly that adding actions to a maneuver makes it a smaller action. The actual phrasing is If successful, the character can then attack with the weapon as a Simple Action instead of a Complex Action. It makes me wonder if I can combine it with a free action multiple attacks?
-
And at the same time they are not qualities too. ^^
So they don't count on your 25 karma it would seem.
There is also that weirdly priced quality that lets you take a maneuver without the martial art for 7 points. Or you could learn the martial art for 7 points and get 1 maneuver free and have it 1 not count against your qualities and 2 make you trained in martial arts which opens up a decent variety of tricks for free. I guess if you already have a martial art and need a maneuver from a different martial art and can't wait until after the game starts it is sort of worth it. Outside of that a lame quality.
-
Not sure if this thread is actually going to be used by the Devs, but if we're using it as something of a continuation of the FAQ thread then...
Touch-Only Attack (p.124): Some confusion on stun weapons. The second paragraph goes into detail concerning shock gloves and stun batons. Specifically, it states that if the weapons are used in touch-only attacks, net hits do not increase DV. Does that mean you can use them without the +2 touch-only attack bonus and can increase the DV? Punching with stun gloves, etc.
I hope so, there is no rule stopping tasers from scaling from net hits as far as I can tell it would be lame to only inflict that on melee.(hell the rule that net hits don't add for touch attacks is already lame) Still no answer on how touch attacks work with indirect combat spells(boo!)
Some of these things are silly. So IAIJUTSU lets you draw your sword and attack as a simple action, but as soon as your sword is drawn you go back to it being a complex action to just attack? Same with Kip-Up apparently I can spring to my feet from prone and punch you in the face as a simple action, but if I decide to just punch you in the face its now a complex action? Were they planning on changing melee to a simple action and then forgot to or something? I think they should, but wherever they end up on that it seems silly that adding actions to a maneuver makes it a smaller action. The actual phrasing is If successful, the character can then attack with the weapon as a Simple Action instead of a Complex Action. It makes me wonder if I can combine it with a free action multiple attacks?
I would think both of these are due to the fact that they are surprise attacks? Iaijutsu in particular strikes me as something where it makes sense that it is a simple action.
From Wiki (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iaijutsu), emphasis mine ;
"Purpose[edit]
Iaijutsu is a combative sword-drawing art but not necessarily an aggressive art because iaijutsu is also a counterattack-oriented art. Iaijutsu technique may be used aggressively to wage a premeditated surprise attack against an unsuspecting enemy.[2]:14,50 The formulation of iaijutsu as a component system of classical bujutsu was made less for the dynamic situations of the battlefield than for the relatively static applications of the warrior's daily life off the field of battle.[2]:52"
-
That doesn't really explain it. Also, Iaijutsu doesn't require the enemy to be unaware or anything. Shinobi's gripe is thus:
Swinging your already-drawn sword to attack a foe: Complex Action
Using Iaijutsu to draw your sword and then do the above: Simple Action
If it was "You may draw your weapon in the same action as you attack with it as a Complex Action", then it would make sense, because it's just shortening the time to draw a blade and that makes sense. What doesn't make sense is that the moment after you've made your Iaijutsu swing, your next swing suddenly takes about twice as long, for no reason, in addition to the first strike even including an extra action. It's not unreasonable to ask "If I can unsheathe and swing my sword as a simple action, why can I not just swing it as a simple action?"
I can say why it's written that way; it's based off the already weird Quick Draw action on page 165, which lets you draw a weapon and attack with it as a simple action, including melee weapons, but they have to be small, so usually it only works with knives. Iaijutsu is just the technique to do it with a weapon of any size as long as it has a sheathe of some kind.
It's saying "you take a simple action to draw it, and if you succeed on this test, you can still attack that turn". The rules are just dumb; instead of shortening the action it takes to attack with something called QUICK DRAW they should have made it a shorter action to draw the weapon. 'Cause they didn't weird stuff like this happens.
-
Really, the dumb rule at the center off ALL of this is melee attacking being a complex. Change it to a Simple, literally all problems solved.
-
Can someone walk me through this?
Martial arts styles may also be selected as specializations for the normal cost of 7 Karma—selecting that specialization provides a +2 bonus when using that technique.
This seems to be the standard way to get a Martial Art Style, spend 7 karma, etc. Let's say I took Knight Errant Tactical and picked up Barbed Hooks, one of the styles techniques.
The character is quick to strike out at opponents as they move within his space. The technique provides a +1 die bonus to Interception Interrupt Action tests.
Does that mean the character actually has a +3 DP bonus to using the Interception Interrupt Action (+1 from the technique, +2 from the style specialization)? Or am I misunderstanding this and you would have to spend 14 karma (7 to learn the style and 7 to specialize in it) to gain the +3 DP?
-
ETA: Answered in the post by Gibraltar below this one. Leaving it up in case anyone else is confused.
Another question:
In the Red Box on p. 136 dealing with Cybernetics and Martial Arts, it states that skillwires "cannot allow the use of martial arts techniques without the character first learning the style and techniques separately."
OK, I'm down with that, skillsoft normally aren't available for specializations in SR5. But here's the rub, if martial arts styles are purchased as specializations to a Combat Skill of some type, how is it handled if all your ranks for that combat skill are being provided through skillwires? Can you buy the specialization independent of having ranks in the base skill anyway and only have use of it if the appropriate skillsoft is slotted? Or, do you have to purchase 1 rank of the base skill in order to pick up the martial arts style specialization first before being able to use martial arts styles in conjunction with skillwires (even though the rules basically state that skillwires overwrite your own skills)?
This also may be me misunderstanding the rules. Is learning a martial arts style distinct from having a specialization in it? In other words, would one need to spend 14 karma to both learn and specialize in a martial arts style?
Answer: Learning a Martial Arts Style is different than gaining a Martial Arts Style Specialty.
-
Can someone walk me through this?
Martial arts styles may also be selected as specializations for the normal cost of 7 Karma—selecting that specialization provides a +2 bonus when using that technique.
This seems to be the standard way to get a Martial Art Style, spend 7 karma, etc. Let's say I took Knight Errant Tactical and picked up Barbed Hooks, one of the styles techniques.
The character is quick to strike out at opponents as they move within his space. The technique provides a +1 die bonus to Interception Interrupt Action tests.
Does that mean the character actually has a +3 DP bonus to using the Interception Interrupt Action (+1 from the technique, +2 from the style specialization)? Or am I misunderstanding this and you would have to spend 14 karma (7 to learn the style and 7 to specialize in it) to gain the +3 DP?
It's the latter. So you'd have the specialization with the skill AND the Martial Art with the Technique. And if you take the same technique from two different martial arts, you can increase the technique bonus to +2 (So your total bonus is +4).
-
It's the latter. So you'd have the specialization with the skill AND the Martial Art with the Technique. And if you take the same technique from two different martial arts, you can increase the technique bonus to +2 (So your total bonus is +4).
Thanks for the answer.
-
And just in case you hadn't seen it, the list of which Style applies to which skill is on page 135.
So for my Adept Kensei, I'm taking Blades 6 for 6 Skill Points, the Kenjutsu Martial Art Style with the Iaijutsu Technique for 7 Karma, and the Finishing Move Technique for an additional 5 Karma.
At this point in character generation, I could choose to take either the Swords or Kenjutsu specializations by spending 1 Skill Point or 7 Karma, respectively, but as far as I can tell the end results are mostly the same; both would give +2 dice on the Iaijutsu Quick-Draw test with a Katana, and both would add the +2 dice pool modifier to attacks made using Finishing Move. The Specialization, thus, is an inferior choice from a cost effectiveness point of view, as the Swords specialization only costs 1 Skill Point. The Kenjutsu specialization would be a good follow-up specializaiton for a swordmaster as it would allow for an additional +2 to Kenjutsu techniques (and who doesn't want more dice when attacking multiple foes, or for quick-drawn and finishing move, for instance).
Does the above mesh with your perception of the Martial Art rules?
-
That doesn't really explain it. Also, Iaijutsu doesn't require the enemy to be unaware or anything. Shinobi's gripe is thus:
Swinging your already-drawn sword to attack a foe: Complex Action
Using Iaijutsu to draw your sword and then do the above: Simple Action
If it was "You may draw your weapon in the same action as you attack with it as a Complex Action", then it would make sense, because it's just shortening the time to draw a blade and that makes sense. What doesn't make sense is that the moment after you've made your Iaijutsu swing, your next swing suddenly takes about twice as long, for no reason, in addition to the first strike even including an extra action. It's not unreasonable to ask "If I can unsheathe and swing my sword as a simple action, why can I not just swing it as a simple action?"
I can say why it's written that way; it's based off the already weird Quick Draw action on page 165, which lets you draw a weapon and attack with it as a simple action, including melee weapons, but they have to be small, so usually it only works with knives. Iaijutsu is just the technique to do it with a weapon of any size as long as it has a sheathe of some kind.
It's saying "you take a simple action to draw it, and if you succeed on this test, you can still attack that turn". The rules are just dumb; instead of shortening the action it takes to attack with something called QUICK DRAW they should have made it a shorter action to draw the weapon. 'Cause they didn't weird stuff like this happens.
Exactly. Why they went with these lame quick draw rules I'll never get. I'd of made a 2 thresholds modified by the concealability of the item. Meet threshold 1 it's a free action to draw, meet threshold 2 it doesn't take a action at all to draw so you can them combine it with things like the multiple attack free action. You wouldn't need a martial art maneuver to pull off quick drawing anything though the maneuver might exist to reduce the threshold.
I wouldn't mind melee as a simple action on top of that.
-
Okay, let me see if I have the Martial Art thing correct.
My adept has Unarmed Combat at 7. They cannot use any of the Actions listed as 'requires Martial Arts training.'
Now for 7 Karma I can get Unarmed Combat (52 Blocks) 7 and I can choose one of the Techniques listed under 52 Blocks, lets say Kick Attack.
Now when they attack someone in melee they roll 7 dice to attack but 7+2 = 9 dice if they chose to use a Kick Attack.
Also they can now use any of the Actions that are listed as 'requires Martial Arts training'.
Correct so far?
-
I don't know about the specializations, but, you're at least mistaken about the last part. "Requires Martial Arts training" essentially means that action is a martial arts technique (and should probably only be mentioned later on in the book). You need to learn each one individually.
-
<sigh>
You are right about the second part.
I even knew that when I went back and reread that part the other day. Apparently in the interim my brain decided that it wasn't going to remember it.
-
I believe you are mistaken about specializing in the technique to double up on the +2 bonuses. My understanding is your martial arts style is acting as a specialization already. So any time you're using a technique from a style, you would get the bonus but it would not stack with other specializations.
-
I believe you are mistaken about specializing in the technique to double up on the +2 bonuses. My understanding is your martial arts style is acting as a specialization already. So any time you're using a technique from a style, you would get the bonus but it would not stack with other specializations.
That doesn't seem at all correct. You can buy a specialization for 7 Karma, and, alternatively, you can buy access to a style and one maneuver for 7 Karma.
-
That doesn't seem at all correct. You can buy a specialization for 7 Karma, and, alternatively, you can buy access to a style and one maneuver for 7 Karma.
Some of the writing unnecessarily confuses this issue. In the full page example on p. 142 in the Called Shot (Blast Out Of Hands) section, it states:
"He does not get the + 2 specialization bonus because he has not learned a specific style"
"Learned" not "specialized". My guess is it is supposed to be specialized, but who knows... I put it in the R&G errata thread.
-
Q: How does reach interact with the Counterstrike/Riposte interrupt action? The reach differential is normally applied as a modifier to a defender's pool. Is it applied to the defender's attack roll in this case?
-
I believe you are mistaken about specializing in the technique to double up on the +2 bonuses. My understanding is your martial arts style is acting as a specialization already. So any time you're using a technique from a style, you would get the bonus but it would not stack with other specializations.
That doesn't seem at all correct. You can buy a specialization for 7 Karma, and, alternatively, you can buy access to a style and one maneuver for 7 Karma.
5e book for unarmed combat pg132: "Specializations: Blocking, Cyber Implants, Subduing Combat, or by specific Martial Art"
R&G pg 128: "Martial arts styles may
also be selected as specializations for the normal cost
of 7 Karma—selecting that specialization provides a +2
bonus when using that technique"
Pretty sure my interpretation is correct.
-
According to one of the freelancers, the interpretation is incorrect. Apparently, learning a martial art style and specializing ina martial art style are different things. The text is definitely not clear about this and there are examples in the book that seems to combine the two.
-
Can you point me to the contradiction? I appreciate and welcome anyone official clarifying rules but he's still human and quite able to misinterpret things (possibly the post he was replying to in this case) like anyone else. In his example he talked about grabbing the technique from two separate styles to get the technique +1 twice, not martial art+ spec+ technique which would have been+5 in your example.
Edit: Just to add one more piece of evidence for my case pg 135
"Each style can be used as a skill specialization. Some of
these styles can be a specialization for a combination of skills.
The gamemaster determines if it is allowable for that skill.
Examples: Chakram Fighting can be applied to both the
Exotic Ranged and Melee Weapon skill; Gun Kata can be
applied to both firearms and clubs."
Which lends itself to the interpretation that the style itself acts as a specialization. Also note that the karma costs and training times for MA styles match specialization exactly.
The only things that don't match up with my interpretation are the examples themselves, which I feel are wrong in a couple ways. 1. The bouncer doesn't have a style at all. 2. Ryu applies a specialization bonus for counterstrike but not the knock down sweep. So the question is, do we follow the rule block or the examples? I don't think this is the first time this has come up in 5e...
-
I'm not disagreeing with you. Just relaying what one of the freelancers, presumably someone who worked on the book, explained. While we have had some examples of freelancers being incorrect in the end, most of them (progressive recoil, repair costs) have been dead on.
Gibraltar indicated that of the two options I listed, the later was correct, which would indicate it takes 14 karma to gain both the style and a specialization in the style (implying that they are different things).
I personally prefer the interpretation that martial arts styles exist outside the skill structure. The martial arts styles are pretty limited, after all.
-
5e book for unarmed combat pg132: "Specializations: Blocking, Cyber Implants, Subduing Combat, or by specific Martial Art"
R&G pg 128: "Martial arts styles may also be selected as specializations for the normal cost of 7 Karma—selecting that specialization provides a +2 bonus when using that technique"
Pretty sure my interpretation is correct.
The way I read it, you can pick a Martial Art style for 7 karma which includes the style and one technique (for instance, Wudang Sword and Finishing Move). You could further Specialize in the style (in this case, Wudang Sword is a Blades specialization) to gain a +2 dice pool for all techniques granted by the Martial Art.
In the example I used, presuming an Agility 3 and Blades (Wudang Sword) 3 (+2) and the Wudang Sword Martial art with the Finishing Move technique, you could declare a Finishing Move Complex Action and roll Agility 3 + Blades 3 + Wudang Sword Specialization 2 for a total of 8 dice on the first attack, and if the first attack hit you would roll an additional +2 as per the Finishing Move attack.
If you additionally specialized in Swords, you would roll Agility 3 + Blades 3 + Swords 2 + Wudang Sword +2 for a total of 10 dice on the first attack, and 12 on the second. Finishing move is a bad example for grabbing multiple styles with the same technique, because as per page 128 you can only ever get a +2 bonus or a total reduction of modifiers of 2.
-
Actually the way I'm looking at it, getting a MA style for a character that might regularly do melee isn't a bad investment.
Say a katana wielding character.
Spends 7 karma to get a kenjutsu MA style.
Now he gets +2 for all his sword attacks (as if he had taken a sword spec).
Also he gets to pick a technique. Iajutsu and Finishing move both look good so lets say he grabs both, costing him another 5 karma.
And just for completeness sake we'll use each of the skills once:
Iajutsu : Weaponskill + reaction (3) test. <- the specialization would be applied to his weapon skill here, don't add it twice!
Finishing Move: Makes a normal attack Weaponskill + Agility vs Rea + Int. <-the spec would be applied here as well since it's included in the weapon skill assuming he's using a sword.
The idea of taking spec: swords then spec: wudang sword seems weird to me. Doesn't really feel like RAI or RAW especially when that last section I quoted on pg 135 specifically says the MA is acting as a specialization for that skill. Would you let a player specialize twice for the same roll generally? Small pistols and silenced pistols or some similar drek? Doesn't seem right.
EDIT: Note that if you allow spec stacking you could conceivably grab blades, kenjutsu, pentjak-silat and wudang and get +8 on every sword roll...
-
Cronstintein
Except the rules specifically allow Martial Art styles to be taken as specializations, but do not require it.
To my mind, specializing in Blades (Swords) means you know how to use the sword in general combat, and gives you a +2 dice to all rolls using Swords. Specializing in Blades (Wudang Sword), however, only grants you a +2 dice pool modifier to all Wudang Sword techniques, and as far as I can tell do not grant you the modifier on all attacks made with swords.
Thus, Specializing in Swords AND Wudang Sword/Kenjutsu would give you a +2 dice pool modifier to all attacks made with swords, AND an additional +2 modifier to all Wudang Sword/Kenjutsu techniques.
Also note that p128 specifically precludes the same techniques from different styles from granting more than a +2 bonus or a total modifier reduction of 2.
-
Where do you see taking a MA style as anything other than a specialization described on 128 (7 karma, 1 month training time, "as a specialization") and 135 "as a specialization".
On 135 it specifically says you can use your style as a spec for the weapon used in the style (ie: wudang swords includes a blade specialization). So why would you ever combine blade spec + wudang spec?
At no point does it refer to having two different levels of a MA style (spec'd vs non-spec'd). And in the block text it talks about taking the style and 5 techniques as the max you can do at chargen for 27 karma. (7 + 5+5+5+5) at no point mentioning an additional option of spec'ing again. Which would be 7+7+(4 x addional techniques).
At this point I feel like Don Quixote tilting at wind-mills but until someone shows me some rule text that confirms your alternate view, I'm holding fast.
-
Martial arts styles may also be selected as specializations for the normal cost of 7 Karma—selecting that specialization provides a +2 bonus when using that technique.
Emphasis mine.
Buying a new style costs 7 Karma, and when you buy that style you may then choose a technique to go with it. Buying additional techniques costs 5 Karma. At character creation, you can buy up to 5 total techniques, in a single style, which costs 27 Karma. You can only buy one style at character creation.
This implies that buying a style is not the same as buying a specialization.
Each style can be used as a skill specialization.
At no point is it stated that a style MUST be bought as a specialization. There is a clear precedent in the core rules for allowing skills to be specialized in, and this is followed up on in R&G on page 135; there is, however, no precedent for giving a specialization additional benefits, such as what you're suggesting, but spending 7 karma to get a style, a technique, AND a +2 to all techniques for that style.
As I read it, you buy the style for 7 karma and get a free technique, and you may then buy further techniques from the same style for an additional 5 karma, and/or choose to specialize in the style for the relevant combat skill for an additional 7 karma for the +2 dice pool modifier.
To my mind, you're weighting the table on p135 as implying the ONLY way a Martial Art style can be taken, when both it and the rules on page 128 clearly state CAN and MAY when referring to Martial Art styles as specializations. Add to that the fact that one of the freelancers do not agree with your interpretation, and I'm fairly confident in my view.
-
So does that mean you can buy a Martial Art without having any of the Close Combat group skills?
-
Has anyone come up with a way of explaining how Universal Mirror Metal can be used defensively? Presumably, you can force people trying to hack you PAN into taking a Noise penalty, but does this hurt your own wireless or is it a one-way thing, like the description implies?
-
Has anyone come up with a way of explaining how Universal Mirror Metal can be used defensively? Presumably, you can force people trying to hack you PAN into taking a Noise penalty, but does this hurt your own wireless or is it a one-way thing, like the description implies?
It definitely hurts your own wireless, hence the "was intended to jam up technomancers". I don't see the point of it. The only reason I could see is if you use Aaron's ruling of "noise can't prevent wireless transmissions" so you'd load yourself up with noise as a Street Sam and still be fully capable of using your commlink to communicate but give anyone trying to hack your gear like a -10. That, however, doesn't make any amount of sense.
-
My interpretation of those two paragraphs on page 128 where it speaks of specializing and then buying is:
the second paragraph is then going into a deeper description of what it means when you are specializing in a martial art. Ie: you are buying it for 7 karma and getting 1 of 6 techniques along with it.
However, I'm willing to admit it is somewhat ambiguous and you might be right that they do have MA spec and then buying the MA style separately. I think it was a very bad decision to give these the EXACT same costs/time as specialization if they are, in fact, separate purchases.
[EDIT:
the corollary is that we now have this nebulous Martial Arts Style entity that doesn't really fit anywhere in the character sheet. It's not a skill, it's not a quality, wth is it? Also there's still no reason to pick up a sword spec as the MA style can act as that spec for no additional cost. The only difference is now you have an option to purchase a MA spec that will give you +2 on at most 5 techniques. The MA spec in this version is not a great value proposition generally unless you've heavily invested in MA techniques.
Martial arts styles may also be selected as specializations for the normal cost of 7 Karma—selecting that specialization provides a +2 bonus when using that technique
This is actually a really badly written sentence (and basically the whole cause of this debate) as it's equating a style to a technique which are clearly two different mechanical entities. Are you sub-speccing in a technique or are you speccing in the style, giving +2 to all techniques for that style.
]
Admittedly you are getting a bit of a bargain if you are getting a weapon spec + technique at 7 karma. It would certainly make non-MA melee weapon specs less appealing (though I think it does this with either interpretation by a varying degree).
For the record I think your emphasis of "can" and "may" is somewhat misguided, as this whole block is describing options for character generation. How else would that be written? You MUST use your martial arts style as a specialization in the appropriate weapon? Obviously "can" is the natural phrasing here. I '"may" purchase a martial art style at chargen as an unarmed specialization' is obviously describing an option I have. I must purchase? Doesn't make sense as taking a style is in itself optional.
~~~~~
Regarding the mirror stuff on the armor. I never liked how you couldn't jam a commlink with noise but I guess that would be one use for it (although dumb, fluff-wise). If you wrap your sam in mirror then he will lose his wireless bonuses due to noise anyway so I'm not sure how to really use this stuff tbh.
-
I'm going to guess that the Specialization Martial Arts no longer exists, and is replaced with Specializations for each separate Martial Arts, giving you a +2 on any technique of the style you Specialized in.
-
I'm going to guess that the Specialization Martial Arts no longer exists, and is replaced with Specializations for each separate Martial Arts, giving you a +2 on any technique of the style you Specialized in.
This is my working assumption as well. The line in the BBB was essentially a placeholder.
-
I believe you are mistaken about specializing in the technique to double up on the +2 bonuses. My understanding is your martial arts style is acting as a specialization already. So any time you're using a technique from a style, you would get the bonus but it would not stack with other specializations.
That doesn't seem at all correct. You can buy a specialization for 7 Karma, and, alternatively, you can buy access to a style and one maneuver for 7 Karma.
5e book for unarmed combat pg132: "Specializations: Blocking, Cyber Implants, Subduing Combat, or by specific Martial Art"
R&G pg 128: "Martial arts styles may
also be selected as specializations for the normal cost
of 7 Karma—selecting that specialization provides a +2
bonus when using that technique"
Pretty sure my interpretation is correct.
Well, the text you cited doesn't provide evidence for your interpretation over mine. It simply states that you can have a specialization in a specific Martial Art style, which is an element of both our interpretations.
My interpretation of those two paragraphs on page 128 where it speaks of specializing and then buying is:
the second paragraph is then going into a deeper description of what it means when you are specializing in a martial art. Ie: you are buying it for 7 karma and getting 1 of 6 techniques along with it.
Your interpretation appears to be contrary to the text, which treats buying the style and buying the specialization as two separate things.
-
So does that mean you can buy a Martial Art without having any of the Close Combat group skills?
Presumably, gun kata, parkour, and kyujutsu (possibly others) would require no investment in close combat skills.
-
Q: How does reach interact with the Counterstrike/Riposte interrupt action? The reach differential is normally applied as a modifier to a defender's pool. Is it applied to the defender's attack roll in this case?
Since counterstrike/riposte are interrupt actions, I would apply the reach modifier to the attacker using those techniques. That puts greater risk/reward with using them.
-
Except the rules specifically allow Martial Art styles to be taken as specializations, but do not require it.
To my mind, specializing in Blades (Swords) means you know how to use the sword in general combat, and gives you a +2 dice to all rolls using Swords. Specializing in Blades (Wudang Sword), however, only grants you a +2 dice pool modifier to all Wudang Sword techniques, and as far as I can tell do not grant you the modifier on all attacks made with swords.
Thus, Specializing in Swords AND Wudang Sword/Kenjutsu would give you a +2 dice pool modifier to all attacks made with swords, AND an additional +2 modifier to all Wudang Sword/Kenjutsu techniques.
Also note that p128 specifically precludes the same techniques from different styles from granting more than a +2 bonus or a total modifier reduction of 2.
This is the correct interpretation. Existing characters can already have a specialization of a martial arts prior to Run and Gun. Now a GM could be lenient and allow all armed attacks with a specialization in Wudang Sword the bonus, but that would be up to the GM how broadly he wants the specialization to be applied.
So does that mean you can buy a Martial Art without having any of the Close Combat group skills?
Yes. Some Techniques change combat modifiers, some apply to skills other than close combat, such as gymnastics.
-
Is purchasing a martial art enough to use it as a specialization described on pg 135?
Or do you also/instead need a specialization in a MA style?
[Edit: and thanks Giabralter for helping to clear some of this up]
-
Is purchasing a martial art enough to use it as a specialization described on pg 135?
Or do you also/instead need a specialization in a MA style?
[Edit: and thanks Giabralter for helping to clear some of this up]
Purchasing the martial art style only gives you a technique (this may give you a bonus depending on the technique) not the +2 skill specialization bonus.
As for your other question in a different section, you can technically get the martial art skill specialization and the quality "One Trick Pony" in a technique related to that martial art and earn the +2 bonus for that technique.
-
This is the correct interpretation. Existing characters can already have a specialization of a martial arts prior to Run and Gun. Now a GM could be lenient and allow all armed attacks with a specialization in Wudang Sword the bonus, but that would be up to the GM how broadly he wants the specialization to be applied.
Thanks for the clarification.
Personally, I do find martinchaen's interpretation on when the specialization applies to be unreasonably narrow, though - if you're fighting in the style of that Martial Art, it would be effecting how you're fighting and how you execute a strike or a block or whatever else regardless of whether or not you're executing what is mechanically considered a Technique.
Of course, my text solution to this problem would inflate all the Martial Art entries by a couple of lines, which would add up pretty quick in an already large section.
-
How do the socks work? Are they a generic +2 armor (like a helmet) that add an additional +2 for called shots to feet/ankles/lower legs or do they just add their bonus of +2 for those called shots?
-
As they're written now, I think they're really thick socks that are a generic +2 armor, with an extra bonus on called shots to those directions. They're a bit silly like that, but then again, so is getting armor from forearm guards when you get shot in the chest.
-
or Cyberfeet armor ;)
with an booted Dance
Medicineman
-
or Cyberfeet armor ;)
with an booted Dance
Medicineman
Yeah, it seems like rehasing the armor in partial cyberlimbs issue.
-
Okay, okay, okay, I think the way Martial Arts works has made it through my thick skull.*
Let's say my Physical Adept as saved up her Karma for a rainy day and it is pouring outside.**
She spends 7 Karma and gets Karate. Since she bought a Martial Art style she gets a technique and she chooses Kick.
Where I was going wrong before was I thought that Karate was now a Specialization of her Unarmed Combat.
What I should do is write the Martial Arts and techniques she knows somewhere separate from her skills.
So she has:
Skills Martial Arts
Unarmed 7 Karate- Kick
She spends 5 more Karma and gets the Counter Strike technique
so now it's
Skills Martial Arts
Unarmed 7 Karate- Kick, Counter Strike
One of the (many) things confusing me was the reference that you could take a Martial Art as a Specialization. This confused me because I thought it already was.
So the adept decides to be really good at Karate and spends 7 Karma to specialize in it. So now we have:
Skills Martial Arts
Unarmed (Karate) 7 (+2) Karate- Kick, Counter Strike
and she gets +2 for all her Karate techniques.
She decides to spend the rest of her saved Karma to get Quarterstaff Fighting since she carries around a telescoping staff.
So she spends 7 Karma and get's the style and one technique. She now has:
Skills Martial Arts
Unarmed (Karate) 7 (+2) Karate- Kick, Counter Strike
Quarterstaff Fighting - Multiple Opponent Combat
She then goes to test out some of her new abilities on the shaman.
Is this right?
Is it close?
Please tell me it's at least close.
*'think' is the key word in that sentence.
** Actually it's a water elemental that the practical joker shaman summoned.
-
@FangHamhands: That is correct based on the feedback we have received.
I think the only outstanding question is whether the MA Style specialization bonus applies to all attacks made with the linked skill or only to performing techniques with that style. It seems like they would be imminently superior if they were considered a standard specialization, particularly for styles that may apply across different skills.
-
@FangHamhands: That is correct based on the feedback we have received.
I think the only outstanding question is whether the MA Style specialization bonus applies to all attacks made with the linked skill or only to performing techniques with that style. It seems like they would be imminently superior if they were considered a standard specialization, particularly for styles that may apply across different skills.
We had feedback? O_O I just made a guts-interpretation myself.
I'd guess it only applies to the techniques, since otherwise you get the overpowered specialization that Missions has originally forbidden due to rules-vagueness and abuse. "No, see, it's all Boxing!"
-
Gibraltar replied to a few threads. They are listed as a freelancer, although I am unsure if Gibraltar worked on R&G or not. But it's at least a bit more than us random sacks opinion on things, LOL.
I think the way I would rule it is that the specialization applies whenever the technique applies. So, if you have a tech that lets you reduce the Called Shot (Leg) penalty by one, you also would roll two additional dice whenever you make a called shot (Leg) attack (assuming the skill is appropriate to the style, so no Dim Mak with a sniper rifle).
-
Yeah that's a toughie. I mean rationally if you're trained in boxing all of your punches would be better. But you do make ma specs inherently better than the generic version with that ruling.
Alternatively, your ma skill spec is very situational if it only applies during the technique and you're looking at a huge karma investment to get fully spec'd (7 for the art, 7 for the ma spec, 7 for weapon spec, +5 per technique).
-
And even if you do take the strict interpretation (which, to me, has logical issues I can't reconcile), it's ludicrously easy to get the bonus at basically all times - for example, you could take the Kick technique and have the bonus to all of your attacks.
-
Gibraltar replied to a few threads. They are listed as a freelancer, although I am unsure if Gibraltar worked on R&G or not. But it's at least a bit more than us random sacks opinion on things, LOL.
I think the way I would rule it is that the specialization applies whenever the technique applies. So, if you have a tech that lets you reduce the Called Shot (Leg) penalty by one, you also would roll two additional dice whenever you make a called shot (Leg) attack (assuming the skill is appropriate to the style, so no Dim Mak with a sniper rifle).
Random Opinion is Can Ray's Job ;-)
And you are correct again on the ruling. The specialization applies whenever the technique applies.
Kick is a specific action to get a bonus to reach, so it would only apply for the use of that technique.
-
Kick is a specific action to get a bonus to reach, so it would only apply for the use of that technique.
Of course, but what would happen, inevitably, is that the player would never not use that technique.
-
Of course, but what would happen, inevitably, is that the player would never not use that technique.
That is certainly a risk, and it was the same risk when martial arts were introduced in 4th edition. Ultimately, this is a much better and more well-rounded system than 4th edition, as it gives lots more options. The thing is, the technique can only be used in places where its use is feasible. Kicking someone to get the +1 Reach isn't applicable when the opponent grapples you, clinches you, throws you, reverses you, you're fighting in tight spaces, etc.
-
Of course, but what would happen, inevitably, is that the player would never not use that technique.
That is certainly a risk, and it was the same risk when martial arts were introduced in 4th edition. Ultimately, this is a much better and more well-rounded system than 4th edition, as it gives lots more options. The thing is, the technique can only be used in places where its use is feasible. Kicking someone to get the +1 Reach isn't applicable when the opponent grapples you, clinches you, throws you, reverses you, you're fighting in tight spaces, etc.
You know, other than kick techniques specifically intended for those kinds of scenarios? And even then: Specialization in Muay Thai, grab Kick and Clinch, and there you go.
Besides that, it's not at all like you can't easily get specializations for other skills that cover everything, like Pistols (Semi-Auto) or Pilot Ground (Wheeled). So, I frankly don't see the balance argument on this one.
-
You know, other than kick techniques specifically intended for those kinds of scenarios? And even then: Specialization in Muay Thai, grab Kick and Clinch, and there you go.
There's two points here, and it may simply boil down to an "agree to disagree" situation. Point one: if one is taking Muay Thai just for the fact that one can Kick and Clinch, then that's akin to twinking. Point two: Kick and Clinch are two separate techniques that are useful in different situations. Your original argument was that if you took Kick, that'd be all you do. By your own admission, the solution is to take two techniques, in a specific martial art.
Besides that, it's not at all like you can't easily get specializations for other skills that cover everything, like Pistols (Semi-Auto) or Pilot Ground (Wheeled). So, I frankly don't see the balance argument on this one.
I'm not sure I understand.
-
1: Actually, the original contention (though not stated in full) was that it is pretty easy to get to a point, at least for some martial arts, where you get to have the specialty all the time.
2: The point is to establish that it isn't actually broken to have the specialty applied basically all the time, or at very least no less broken than the other occasions where that's possible.
-
Yeah that's a toughie. I mean rationally if you're trained in boxing all of your punches would be better. But you do make ma specs inherently better than the generic version with that ruling.
Alternatively, your ma skill spec is very situational if it only applies during the technique and you're looking at a huge karma investment to get fully spec'd (7 for the art, 7 for the ma spec, 7 for weapon spec, +5 per technique).
Wouldn't work, would it? I don't think you can ever get a bonus from more than one specialization, even if they overlap. I'd have to check the book to be sure.
-
Wouldn't work, would it? I don't think you can ever get a bonus from more than one specialization, even if they overlap. I'd have to check the book to be sure.
Correct. It's buried in the second paragraph under Specializations, p. 129, SR5:
"Characters can have multiple specializations within the same skill, but one applies at a time. For example, a character with the Blades skill who specializes in Axes and Parrying would only receive a +2 dice bonus to tests when parrying with an axe."
-
Fringe
Thanks for digging that up, but aaw, that's a bit of a bummer; I guess that means it's easier/better (at least from an optimization standpoint) to specialize in the weapon you'll be using 9 times out of 10 as opposed to the Martial Art style.
For my own Adept, that would be Swords instead of Kenjutsu, as every attack with the sword would get +2, whereas only the Kenjutsu techniques would receive the specialization benefit from a Kenjutsu specialization.
So yes, very situational.
-
Muay Thai's kick-while-clinching is covered under Ti Khao. Using a Kick technique while clinching would be counterproductive since reach bonuses are negated in a clinch.
-
Since they don't stack, for weapon arts I think you're much better off just grabbing the weapon spec since the techniques generally use that skill in them anyway. For unarmed I'm not sure it's as clear cut.
Does anyone think it would be unbalanced to just allow the +2 to generic striking if you've got the ma spec? This would make that silliness with kick type techniques unnecessary.
-
What is the point of the Burst Fire mode on the Savalette guardian being a complex action...if
it is already a complex action to fire a SA weapon in a burst? What is the difference that makes
this something that exists?
Also: what would be the damage of the Travalgar gun cane in melee(wielded by a martial artist
using Bartitsu)?
-
Yeah that burst fire mode is strange. Can you do a long burst? (Normally a complex action with a bf weapon) If so, then that's the only improvement I see.
Otherwise it's pointless as a complex sa burst is the same as a simple bf short burst.
-
I'm betting it's copy & paste laziness. I suppose the only benefit would be is you can use it for an Aimed Burst. Yay?
-
What is the point of the Burst Fire mode on the Savalette guardian being a complex action...if
it is already a complex action to fire a SA weapon in a burst? What is the difference that makes
this something that exists?
Presumably, it still gives you the option of firing a Long Burst.
-
What is the point of the Burst Fire mode on the Savalette guardian being a complex action...if
it is already a complex action to fire a SA weapon in a burst? What is the difference that makes
this something that exists?
Presumably, it still gives you the option of firing a Long Burst.
I'd disagree. That goes against the Simple + Simple = Complex basic equation that governs the BF rules. If doing X is a Complex Action, you can't also do 2X as a Complex Action.
-
What is the point of the Burst Fire mode on the Savalette guardian being a complex action...if
it is already a complex action to fire a SA weapon in a burst? What is the difference that makes
this something that exists?
Presumably, it still gives you the option of firing a Long Burst.
I'd disagree. That goes against the Simple + Simple = Complex basic equation that governs the BF rules. If doing X is a Complex Action, you can't also do 2X as a Complex Action.
That equation is implied but it isn't an explicit rule. Without access to the long (6 round) burst there isn't really any point to having the BF mode. BF has two fire modes and due to a special rule both fire modes are complex actions. That is my take anyway.
-
I think the reality is that there isn't any point to the gun because of sloppy editing. Sadly, this seems like a much more likely scenario than allowing the doubling of a Complex Action.
-
I agree about the problem with the bad editing. However, it is not just the one gun. By my count there are three pistols with BF capability that mentions this special rule. The Beretta 201T light pistol in the core rulebook, the Fichetti Executive Action light pistol and the Savalette Guardian heavy pistol in Run in Gun.
The only BF pistols I can see that don't have that rule appended to them is the Walther Palm Pistol (which only has 2 bullets) and the Ares Viper Slivergun for which I got nothing.
-
One thing I am wondering...
Capsule rounds mention they can be loaded with any liquid. Does this include liquid explosives? And what would the damage be for a liquid explosive in a capsule round?
-
One thing I am wondering...
Capsule rounds mention they can be loaded with any liquid. Does this include liquid explosives? And what would the damage be for a liquid explosive in a capsule round?
I don't know anything about liquid explosives, but 1) if you need a detonator for them, how would you use one, and 2) if they would just blow up when the bullet hits, wouldn't they also just blow up in the gun when you pulled the trigger?
-
Liquid explosives require a detonator, so bullets are out. If you want exploding bullets (and who doesn't?), just go ex-ex.
-
One thing I am wondering...
Capsule rounds mention they can be loaded with any liquid. Does this include liquid explosives? And what would the damage be for a liquid explosive in a capsule round?
I don't know anything about liquid explosives, but 1) if you need a detonator for them, how would you use one, and 2) if they would just blow up when the bullet hits, wouldn't they also just blow up in the gun when you pulled the trigger?
1) Impact-detonated liquids, like nitroglycerin and some of its derivatives, or oxygen-reactive liquids.
2) The same way capsule rounds are prevented from unleashing their liquid on the user of the gun; the bullets don't use traditional explosives. The fluff states they're basically paintball rounds, which utilize compressed gases for propelling. This means that any reaction will just generate or unleash a lot of gas that propels the round forward, rather than the controlled explosion that gunpowder generates. That's also why the rules state that capsule rounds use light pistol ranges no matter what; compressed gas doesn't have the oomph for propelling things quite like explosives do.
Liquid explosives require a detonator, so bullets are out. If you want exploding bullets (and who doesn't?), just go ex-ex.
Ah! I must have misread that part. Okay, they're out.
Ex-ex is better anyway ^^ More range ;)
-
and the Ares Viper Slivergun for which I got nothing.
That one has always been BF capable heavy pistol, so its one in this edition too.
-
I don't dispute it's BF capability. It is just the only BF capable pistol (not machine pistol) that does not require a complex action to fire a burst. That was the sole point of my comment.
-
I think the reality is that there isn't any point to the gun because of sloppy editing. Sadly, this seems like a much more likely scenario than allowing the doubling of a Complex Action.
Yeah, seems like a victim to a rule-change without the item being changed with the times.
-
I don't know why you would assume the interpretation that makes the weapon useless. If anything, I'd assume the opposite lacking further evidence.
Along with the fact that a strict reading of the rule "burst fire on this weapon requires a complex action" would include long and short bursts as they both fall under the category of "burst fire".
To me the limitation is designed so that you can't both ready and burst the weapon on the same turn, which would be impinging on automatics.
-
I don't know why you would assume the interpretation that makes the weapon useless. If anything, I'd assume the opposite lacking further evidence.
Because it's exactly what the thing did in SR4, with likely an almost-identical description. So the most plausible explanation, while making it useless yes, is that they simply screwed up (and would have noted "both Burst-Fire and Long Burst require a Complex Action in BF mode" otherwise), like they did at a few more spots. Conversion errors are extremely plausible, after all.
And technically, BF as weapon mode allows both yes, but BF is stated as being 1 burst and LB being two short bursts combined, so there can be masssive arguments about that phrasing there.
-
Q: What action is required to reload the under-barrel weapon accessories (i.e. bola launcher, flamethrower, grapple gun, grenade launcher)?
-
Since they don't stack, for weapon arts I think you're much better off just grabbing the weapon spec since the techniques generally use that skill in them anyway. For unarmed I'm not sure it's as clear cut.
Does anyone think it would be unbalanced to just allow the +2 to generic striking if you've got the ma spec? This would make that silliness with kick type techniques unnecessary.
In some limited situations, the martial art is a good buy for the weapon. Consider two weapon style attack.
-
Q: What action is required to reload the under-barrel weapon accessories (i.e. bola launcher, flamethrower, grapple gun, grenade launcher)?
A quick look at the Reloading Weapons table on page 163 shows that all reloads are Complex Actions except for clips and bows. A look at Gun H(e)aven 3, which had the first 5th edition flamethrower, says that it takes clips, so that would be Simple. A look at the Run & Gun underbarrel flamethrower indicates that you can choose the one from Gun H(e)aven 3 or Run & Gun - both of which take clips. So a flamethrower would be a Simple Action to reload.
The grenade launcher stats that I've seen also indicate they are loaded with clips or internal magazines. Clip-based grenade launchers include the Ares Alpha, ArmTech MGL-12, and HK XM30. The magazine-based ones have been the Ares Antioch-2, and the cyberimplant microgrenade launcher (which can take clips with an external port). The only weapons with underbarrel grenade launchers already included with the design are the Alpha and the HK XM30. And both of those are using clips. So I'd go with a clip for the underbarrel grenade launcher, which means it's a Simple Action.
Bolas have only a few rules, most of which involve throwing the bolas, rather than launching them. But to load the bolas into an underbarrel launcher probably wouldn't be much different than loading them into a grenade launcher. Personally, I'd consider the underbarrel bola launcher to be a 1(m) ammunition capacity. Because it'd be an internal magazine reload, Complex Action.
Grapple gun - I'd say the same for the bola launcher. Treat is as 1(m) capacity, therefore Complex Action. This is especially true for the grapple gun, as it makes no sense to have multiple grapples able to be easily fired from one gun (unless it was a specially-designed grapple launcher).
-
Whats the range on a Caliver Arms urban tribe tomahawk? Didn't see any listed, and there is no reference in the Main rule book for a throwing axe.
-
Whats the range on a Caliver Arms urban tribe tomahawk? Didn't see any listed, and there is no reference in the Main rule book for a throwing axe.
Also, no rules on using it in melee combat. Accuracy for melee weapons is usually a stated number rather than based on STR.
-
Wow, that didn't even register, but you are right.
Was wondeing the same thing for say a throwing knife. Circumstance might make you fight with one...
-
We had a topic about that once, my own opinion is that throwing knives are horribly unfit for melee combat. Same for a shuriken, and pretty much any other throwing weapon.
-
We had a topic about that once, my own opinion is that throwing knives are horribly unfit for melee combat. Same for a shuriken, and pretty much any other throwing weapon.
However, a tactical tomahawk is supposed to be for both melee and throwing...
-
Correct, that one is actually believable as melee, so can use some stats. As for its range, I'd assume it's the same as other Throwing Weapons, such as throwing knives (not the specific shuriken range).
-
Okay, so I'm unclear the if ordering of benefits on Sharpshooter and Strive for Excellence has been clarified already but does the halving of the penalty for called shots from Strive for Excellence come before or after Sharpshooter reduces the penalty by a static 2? I think it's before since coming after would nullify the effects of Sharpshooter itself (-1 + (2/2)= 0) but I'm not sure of the developer intentions on the part of what should happen here.
-
As GM I wouldn't allow you to take both. One forces you to make Called Shots unless not an option, the other penalizes non-CalledShots. So their penalties don't combine properly.
You're wrong on the nullifying part, by the way, it still works on higher penalties like that.
-
What skill(s) do I use to fire the XM30? If each mode uses a separate skill, what skill do I use for the carbine mode?
-
(( Carbine uses SMG ranges, so Automatics? ))
-
What skill(s) do I use to fire the XM30? If each mode uses a separate skill, what skill do I use for the carbine mode?
Exactly the reason I removed the Automatics skill from my games. Longarms covers all two-handed firearms that aren't otherwise classified as Heavy Weapons. Makes these situations easy. :)
-
I think firing it depends on configuration. So, off the top of my head... Automatics, Longarms, and Heavy Weapons.
-
it does say you need to use the automatics skill to change the mode, regardless of what mode you change from or into, and it is classified as an assault rifle. I
-
Even if it's classified as an AR, that doesn't mean all its weapon modes use Automatics. I wouldn't let a player use Automatics to fire an Alpha's Grenade Launcher, for example. And the Automatics skill is used to reconfigure it, that doesn't mean it's used for all its firing modes, simply that it's required to understand how the thing is put together. So it's still an open question, and I wonder what the SR5 answer will be.
-
As a follow-up to my question--what specialization do I use with the carbine?
-
I also question the Automatics + Agility test to reconfigure the XM30; seems to me like that should be an Armorer test.
-
I'd go with the SMG specialization for a carbine, personally.
I know it's not exactly the same, but it seems closest.
-
Carbines are typically a stlightly shorter slightly lighter assult rifle. I would rule that it's an AR not a SMG
-
I also question the Automatics + Agility test to reconfigure the XM30; seems to me like that should be an Armorer test.
I agree. Since my table doesn't have the Automatics skill, I'm already working with Armorer. But it seems like it should have been Armorer to begin with.
-
There's a good case to be made for Armorer, but the item that sets precedent (the SM-5) rolls Firearms (?? Let's assume they mean Longarms) + Logic.
-
Which I ALSO think should be Armorer... :)
-
Why? It makes sense to me that how good you are at using a firearm helps determine how easily you can take it apart and put it together again, more so than how good you are at creating/repairing them (I doubt most of those people in series and films that practice this over and over to minimize the time needed to do so know the Armorer skill). If you make it require Armorer (rather than houseruling it in as an alternative), you're basically forcing people to take a secondary skill if they want to use the SM-5.
-
Taking a firearm apart and putting it back together again is precisely what the Armorer skill IS, though. Taking away from that core functionality of the Armorer skill by making anyone who's a good shot with a rifle also good at servicing said rifle is like saying "Oh, you can drive? You must also know how to service your car" to my mind.
For me the difference between Armorer and any Firearm skill is exactly the same as that between the Engineering skill group and the Piloting skills; one does not equate the other, and by allowing the primary skills (Piloting, Firearms) to overlap with the secondaries (Mechanic, Armorer) you water down the usefulness of the latter.
And yes; I firmly believe that anyone who wants to use something like an SM-5 or the XM30 SHOULD have a degree of knowledge in firearms maintenance, represented in this case by, you guessed it, Armorer.
-
Eh... I think basic maintenance of a firearm (field stripping to clean) would be covered under whatever applicable firearm skill covers it. I've always seen Armorer as being more in-depth than that. With that said, something as complicated as the XM30, depending on exactly how difficult the interchangeable bits are, should probably be covered under the Armorer skill.
-
I disagree, JackVII. As someone who's fired over 20,000 rounds during training alone from my service weapon, I can vouch for the fact that the skill of shooting a rifle is not equal to the skill of maintaining it; they are two separate things completely.
There are already few enough uses for the armorer skill. To my mind, if you want to make a character that is supposed to have a military or otherwise professional gun-slinger background, you better take at least ONE rank of Armorer, if not more.
Same thing with deckers, as you can be the world's best hacker but if you don't know how your tech works (represented in-game by the Hardware skill) you're taking a risk; no amount of coding is going to bring that bricked piece of electronics back to life.
To my mind, the Street Sam claiming that "Because I know how to fire my assault rifle, I also know how to maintain and/or repair it" is exactly the same as the rigger claiming that "Because I know how to drive my vehicle, I also know how to maintain and/or repair it" or the decker claiming that "Because I know how to use my deck to break into places I'm not authorized, I also know how to maintain and/or repair it".
Almost every active skill that uses a piece of equipment has an equivalent technical skill that is used to repair it. Taking away from those skills when they're already weak further reduces the need for players to take them, which further encourages the kind of min/maxing a lot of people are complaining about. If we want more breadth of skill assignments, we'll have to come up with more uses for the lesser-picked skills instead of making skills that are already very good (Automatics, anyone?) even better.
-
Basic gun maintenance is on a different scale than car maintenance, though.
-
Speaking as a veteran, ZeConster, I wholeheartedly disagree.
I'd much rather my car break down on me than my service weapon, and making sure my service weapon does not fail during a critical moment requires more than just "basic gun maintenance".
To my mind, basic gun maintenance is oiling the weapon. Basic car maintenance is making sure the car has sufficient oil levels.
Changing the oil on a car would, at least at my table, be covered by the Automotive Mechanic skill, just like replacing the firing pin on a machine gun would be an Armorer test.
Again, to my mind, unless mounted on a rail system, swapping the unberbarrel weapon on an XM30 should be an Armorer test, just like assembling and disassembling an SM-5. My opinion only, not RAW.
-
It may be because I have 0 experience with either, but "remove a gun module and click in another" seems like a less daunting task to me than "change a tire" or "go through 15 steps to change your oil without fucking it up".
-
That's assuming it's plug and play; my experience with modular weapon systems is that this is not the case.
Of course, I'm speaking from a real life background; shadowrun tech may be different for all I know. I'm just not in favour of making Automatics in particular an even more useful skill.
-
I'm also a veteran, martinchaen, as well as a firearm owner. Just to make sure you understand you're not the only one with relevant first-hand real world experience. I know the importance of firearms maintenance and I do think it goes along hand-in-hand with learning to shoot. I really haven't met many civilian firearm owners who also don't care for their firearms after firing them at the range. According to the book, you can use active skills as substitutes for knowledge skills, so the skill appears to contain more than just the capability to perform the basic task but covers a broad swath of information.
When I field stripped an M16A2 to clean it, I tend to think of that as falling under the Firearms skill as basic maintenance. When the company armorer had to replace the hammer spring on my rifle after I noticed the firing pin leaving indents in the primer pocket without the round actually going downrange, I consider that the Armorer skill.
That's just me though and, like I said, I think the rifle in question should be changed using an Armorer skill check.
-
No worries, JackVII, merely speaking from my own experience and voicing my opinion; also, thank you for your service.
Looking at the SR5 universe, and given that guns are as ubiquitous as phones, and I don't think it's a stretch to think that the two skills should be used for different things. I'm merely advocating making Armorer more applicable as Automatics is already powerful and enough of a "must take" as it is.
-
You too, man. I do agree about Armorer being not all that great. Like for instance, weapon modifications. Not only do you have to have Armorer to actually affect the mod, you pretty much need the relevant weapon knowledge skill to figure out if you can even do the modification in the first place. Seems like you should be able to use the Armorer skill to do that...
-
Trying to figure out what the Ruthenium Polymer Coating is Availability 16F, and cost = Rating x 5,000¥, when most of the gear it is on costs far less than that an doesn't even have a restricted availability. It also seems serious change in the rules from most of the gear mods in SR5 that just give a limit bonus, and a wireless die pool modifier. I expected something closer the Chameleon suit, which says in its description that it has a smart ruthenium polymer coating supported by a sensor suite.
-
Trying to figure out what the Ruthenium Polymer Coating is Availability 16F, and cost = Rating x 5,000¥, when most of the gear it is on costs far less than that an doesn't even have a restricted availability. It also seems serious change in the rules from most of the gear mods in SR5 that just give a limit bonus, and a wireless die pool modifier. I expected something closer the Chameleon suit, which says in its description that it has a smart ruthenium polymer coating supported by a sensor suite.
It's weird, but at least the Sleeping Tiger flavor text makes it clear that the suit is a loss leader for the company for other purposes.
-
As I understand, Sleeping Tiger is a loss leader used for ruthenium coating itself.
-
As I understand, Sleeping Tiger is a loss leader used for ruthenium coating itself.
Exactly. Shiawase is selling you the Sleeping Tiger at a loss so it can outfit its guards with something even better.
-
I can strip a gun to clean it, I cannot build a gun.
I can change the oil on my car I cannot rebuild the engine.
If you ask a service person to build or modify a gun I am not sure how many can do that, I politely disagree that field stripping is Armorer and I fell you on the lets take something other than combat skills, however the cases above are extremely different.
YMMV
-
Lynx,
Then in my opinion, you have the Armorer and Automotive Mechanic skills at Rating 1 :D
Cheers,
Martin
-
As GM I wouldn't allow you to take both. One forces you to make Called Shots unless not an option, the other penalizes non-CalledShots. So their penalties don't combine properly.
You're wrong on the nullifying part, by the way, it still works on higher penalties like that.
Wait, I thought the -1 penalty was for regular shooting actions but reduces the called shot penalty by 2. Called shots aren't shots by themselves but modifiers for regular shooting actions, no? So it's a net +1 for making a called shot and -1 for non-called shots.
The point on nullification is that if the penalty modifier of 2 from sharpshooter is applied before the halving of the penalty from Strive For Excellence it would just halve the value of the reduction and create a net neutral change in the dice modifier which results in a nullification of the benefit of taking Sharpshooter with Strive For Excellence.
Example: I go for the ankle (-8 modifier) and sharpshooter reduces the modifier by 2 (-6) then Strive for Excellence halves the modifier (-3) but I take a -1 modifier when I go to take the shot due to Sharpshooter's penalty to regular shooting actions so I wind up with a net -4 altogether. This results in the same modifier I would have had with Strive For Excellence alone, nullifying the benefit of having Sharpshooter with it. The other way around (Sharpshooter being applied AFTER Strive For Excellence) would have a net +1 to the roll.
Maybe I am reading it the wrong way, it's not explicit on where the penalty comes in on as Called Shots modify regular shooting actions (?) but are not shooting actions in and of themselves.
-
This has probably been asked before. If so, I apologize.
But, can you load a minigun with gel rounds?
-
Wait, I thought the -1 penalty was for regular shooting actions but reduces the called shot penalty by 2. Called shots aren't shots by themselves but modifiers for regular shooting actions, no? So it's a net +1 for making a called shot and -1 for non-called shots.
All other ranged attack actions. So no, 2 less penalty on called shots, 1 more penalty on all non-called shots. And that doesn't combine with not being allowed to do non-called-shots.
-
Wait, I thought the -1 penalty was for regular shooting actions but reduces the called shot penalty by 2. Called shots aren't shots by themselves but modifiers for regular shooting actions, no? So it's a net +1 for making a called shot and -1 for non-called shots.
All other ranged attack actions. So no, 2 less penalty on called shots, 1 more penalty on all non-called shots. And that doesn't combine with not being allowed to do non-called-shots.
Ah, so the bonuses from both positive qualities officially don't stack?
-
Wait, I thought the -1 penalty was for regular shooting actions but reduces the called shot penalty by 2. Called shots aren't shots by themselves but modifiers for regular shooting actions, no? So it's a net +1 for making a called shot and -1 for non-called shots.
All other ranged attack actions. So no, 2 less penalty on called shots, 1 more penalty on all non-called shots. And that doesn't combine with not being allowed to do non-called-shots.
Ah, so the bonuses from both positive qualities officially don't stack?
You use the word "official" like that's a thing around here :D
-
Question about inconsistency for Ruthenium Polymer coating:
TLDR:
In SR5, Chameleon suit gives +2 for Sneaking Limit and +2 Dice for test if Wireless (p.437)
In R&G, Ruthenium Polymer coating gives -(Rating) modifier to be spotted (p.86)
Which is it?
Bonus points: The text in R&G speaks of modifiers, depending on body coverage "The effectiveness is based on the Rating of the sensor suite and the extent of the suit’s coverage. The base modifier to a Perception Test to spot the wearer is –(Rating), adjusted by the extent of the suit; full +2, almost full +1, half +0."
The "+" is what irks me as the modifier is a "-". If I have Rating 4 coating, then having full armor coverage, should not add 2 back to that roll. It should either stay at -4 or get another -2.
-
Question about inconsistency for Ruthenium Polymer coating:
TLDR:
In SR5, Chameleon suit gives +2 for Sneaking Limit and +2 Dice for test if Wireless (p.437)
In R&G, Ruthenium Polymer coating gives -(Rating) modifier to be spotted (p.86)
Which is it?
Bonus points: The text in R&G speaks of modifiers, depending on body coverage "The effectiveness is based on the Rating of the sensor suite and the extent of the suit’s coverage. The base modifier to a Perception Test to spot the wearer is –(Rating), adjusted by the extent of the suit; full +2, almost full +1, half +0."
The "+" is what irks me as the modifier is a "-". If I have Rating 4 coating, then having full armor coverage, should not add 2 back to that roll. It should either stay at -4 or get another -2.
The Chameleon Suit only has the coating as fluff, strictly speaking, so it has its own unique rules. However, as a houserule, it wouldn't be unreasonable to completely replace it with the Run & Gun rules.
The phrasing is awkward. The +2, +1, etc means this:
If you have a fullbody suit, then they get a "-(Rating+2)" penalty. It means you add that number to the effective rating of the modification.
-
Wait, I thought the -1 penalty was for regular shooting actions but reduces the called shot penalty by 2. Called shots aren't shots by themselves but modifiers for regular shooting actions, no? So it's a net +1 for making a called shot and -1 for non-called shots.
All other ranged attack actions. So no, 2 less penalty on called shots, 1 more penalty on all non-called shots. And that doesn't combine with not being allowed to do non-called-shots.
Ah, so the bonuses from both positive qualities officially don't stack?
No, the negative sides of the two don't stack. And because of that, I as GM wouldn't allow someone to take both, since they'd get a freebie on one of the two downsides.