NEWS

Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
1
Character creation and critique / Re: 6E Ork Phys Adept
« Last post by dougansf on Today at 11:14:56 »
Why not use Qi Foci to stack Critical Strike?

Given that Critical Strike infinitely ranks, Could get multiple Critical Foci and just keep ramping up that DV bonus.

That's the plan. Same with Combat Sense, Mystic Armor, Rapid Healing.
I wanted to have one at start to get his DV up so he can live long enough to afford them.
2
Character creation and critique / Re: 6E Ork Phys Adept
« Last post by markelphoenix on Today at 11:03:50 »
Why not use Qi Foci to stack Critical Strike?

Given that Critical Strike infinitely ranks, Could get multiple Critical Foci and just keep ramping up that DV bonus.
3
Rules and such / Re: 6e: Specializations for Exotic Weapons
« Last post by Banshee on Today at 11:00:01 »
Purely based on what discussed during development since I didn't do the skill chapter so I have no real input on intent ....

It's option 2 ... similar weapon types that don't fit into the other combat skills can be covered under exotic as a "group" specialization. Only truly unique and/or exotic weapons require a specific weapon specialization.
4
Improved Ability (any combat skill) is a mechanical trap, don't take it.  It costs 1 PP to increase 1 skill by one dice, or you could get Improved Agility for 1 PP.

Good point. I'll save Combat Skill for after the Attributes are taken care of.

It's not totally bad... Improved Ability stacks when you're already at +4 Agility.  More +Agility won't...
5
Rules and such / Re: Anticipation... again :-)
« Last post by 0B on Today at 10:58:47 »
Apologies for the lack of clarity. I'm not writing rules, I'm making a forum post, but it is important that you understand what I'm saying. I'll be more formal.

Re-clarifying

Shadowrun (SR) books suffer from a lack of clarity in rules, fluff, and guidelines. This makes it difficult to determine the line between rules, fluff, and guidelines. I define game rules as "instructions governing how to play", rulings as "ways of interpreting these rules," fluff as "text that enhances the plot or tone of the book," and guidelines as "advice that aids the GM in creating rulings."

I define the rulings in the Shadowrun Missions (SRM) FAQ as "SRM rules" because they are rules within the context of a SRM game: they are not meant to be adjusted within official SRM games.

There are cases where SR materials can be clear. The SRM rules show concise and direct language. I use them as an example on how to create a rule that is understandable and has clear meaning.

There are cases where SR materials are not clear, but this serves its purpose. For example, the guideline cited previously on p. 36. Being unclear is fine in a guideline since it is intended to aid interpretation, rather than be clear direction.

There are cases where SR materials are not clear, to the extent that this no longer serves its purpose. This is the case with time tables. Time tables are also a case of SR assuming that the GM has game-mastered or at least played RPGs before, which is a sin committed by many RPGs. It's also bad design.

There are cases where SR materials appear to be clear, but do not match the RAI at all. For example, the rule for GelWeave states:

For GelWeave, the armor can resist up to the rating of the GelWeave in incoming damage against each attack. However, the gel becomes rigid when absorbing more than a small hit (1 DV) each round, and reduces Agility, Reaction, and meters of movement by (DV resisted – 1) for three combat turns. These reductions are cumulative across combat rounds, and the duration for all reductions is three rounds after the latest hit. If Reaction or Agility is reduced to 0, the wearer gains
the Immobilized status


This rule seemed clear to me. The GelWeave rating is the amount of damage (DV) resisted. The penalty is DV resisted - 1. Therefore, if GelWeave only resists 1 damage, the penalty will be 0. GelWeave rating 1 will only resist 1 damage, and therefore, will never incur penalties. I later learned that this does NOT match author intent.

And then, there is anticipation.

Getting the Train back on Target

Anticipation (Multiple Attacks, Ranged Attack): You played this combat like a game of chess, using each strike to direct your opponents to a particular spot. Now they’re there, and you can attack without even looking at them, since you’re firing at a spot, not a person. When performing this Multiple Attack, roll your full dice pool for each target. Cost: 4 Edge

This seemed like one of the times where SR writing blended fluff and rules well. The first two sentences are fluff, and they also provide guidelines for retconning why this works within the game world fiction. The subject and last sentence are as clear as they can be. When making a multiple attack that is also a ranged attack, you roll your full dice pool against each target. So, if you have 20 dice and split your attack between two targets, each target faces 29 dice, for a total of 40 dice rolled. If you split it among four targets, each target faces 20 dice, for a total of 80 dice rolled.

Caveats: If you are using a main weapon and an off-hand weapon as part of this, only your main weapon gets the benefit per p. 100: it would be 18 dice total or 30 dice total (12+6, or 12+12+3+3). A GM could make a ruling that cannot even use anticipation if your off-hand is part of the attack, so it only applies if you make multiple attacks with your main hand weapon. If you have Ambidextrous, you do not take this penalty.

You say Firing Modes play into this, but they seem equally clear:

BF: You’ve got a fancy gun that pumps out multiple rounds with a single trigger pull. You can fire four rounds in an attack. You can shoot a narrow burst, which decreases the Attack Rating by 4 and increases damage by 2, or make a wide burst and split your dice pool between two targets and count each as a SA-mode shot.

So with a wide burst, you split dice between two targets, and treat each as a SA-mode shot. This is where we enter confusion: should this count as a multiple attack? If you take this section alone, the answer should be "no" because Multiple Attack is the name of a specific Minor Action, and nothing in this states you must do this. However, if you read the entire section, you see FA:

This mode allows multiple attacks without using the Multiple Attack Minor Action.

You could interpret this to be the 'exception that proves the rule:' Because FA specifically allows multiple attacks without using the Multiple Attack Minor Action, the others do not allow it. (IE, "No parking on Sunday" means that you can park every other day of the week. This is the interpretation of 'exception that proves the rule' that courts of law in the US use.) You might be able to interpret this to mean when you make a wide burst with BF, you are using the Multiple Attack minor action, and therefore, must use that minor action in conjunction with the wide burst.

Personally, I'd make a ruling that that is too much of a stretch: you should evaluate BF on its own.

However, I don't think you need either mode to exploit anticipation. This is the rule for "Multiple Attack:"

A character can attack more than one opponent, assuming ammunition, reach, and enemy placement allow it. Split your dice pool evenly among all targets, or if you are using two different forms of attack, use half the dice pool for each, rounded down. This action must be used in conjunction with an Attack Major Action.

The restrictions here are based on ammo, reach, and enemy placement. There is NO restriction on how fast it takes for you to aim and fire your weapon, or on which firing mode you use. You could use a strict SS or SA weapon with this. Take the FN P93 Praetor, for example. It has a SA mode and a clip of 50, allowing you to make 25 SA attacks before you need to reload. This would normally not be a good idea, since you round down for multiple attacks; no 6E character will have a dice pool of 25. However, let's say you use Anticipation, you have a dice pool of 5, and you have Ambidextrous.

You use a major action and a minor action to do multiple attacks. Since you have ambidextrous, you can use edge actions with an off-hand weapon as well. You wield two FN P93 Praetors, and have enough ammo to make 25 attacks with each one. That's 50 attacks, with 5 dice each, for a total of 250 dice and base 250 DV (With the +1 from SA). Your face who used Agility as a dump stat isn't looking too shabby now, are they? (Granted, the attacks might not all hit, and the first time you glitch, your now-irritated GM will probably make your gun explode, halting the attack).

I reject the excuse of "English Language" because there are instances even within SR materials where authors use language in a way that is clear, or in a way where the vagueness best serves their purpose. I don't even think firing mode plays into this as much: we can use a normal SA/SS attack with the normal rules for multiple attack and achieve ridiculous results.
6
Character creation and critique / Re: 6E Ork Phys Adept
« Last post by dougansf on Today at 10:47:09 »
I would prioritize Iron Limbs and Kick to increase your unarmed DV.  Or go with Precise Strikes to increase your Katana DV.  You're a combat character without much of a secondary to offer, you should be able to drop a Mook with each Major Action.

Yup, those are my first two picks for advancement.

Quote
I'd also think hard about two Attribute Boost powers.  You're giving up attack actions to activate those powers, and taking Drain.

Admittedly, it's only 1 drain for each, no matter how many hits he gets. 12 dice to resist 1 strain feels pretty safe.
The action economy is a big concern though, which is why I prioritized getting 2 Major actions.

Quote
Improved Ability (any combat skill) is a mechanical trap, don't take it.  It costs 1 PP to increase 1 skill by one dice, or you could get Improved Agility for 1 PP.

Good point. I'll save Combat Skill for after the Attributes are taken care of.

Quote
For 7 PP I'd go with Improved Reflexes 2, Improved Agility 3, Critical Strike 2, Killing Hands (Shark).  If you really want some of the Utility powers pick them up with Foci.

I'm torn on the use of Qi Foci.
You can only have up to your MAG (6) in foci bound to you at one time, but a max rating of 5*MAG in total Force (30).
Qi Foci only provide 1 power each, and they're pretty low Force (1PP=F4).
The 3 utility Powers he has currently would take up 3 Foci, but only 6 Force, and only one of those is ranked.

I figure it's best to save Foci for Ranked powers. Especially since the GM allows upgrading of gear over time.

And, of course, you never want Danger Sense and Combat Sense to get turned off.
7
Character creation and critique / Re: 6E Ork Phys Adept
« Last post by Hobbes on Today at 10:04:02 »
I would prioritize Iron Limbs and Kick to increase your unarmed DV.  Or go with Precise Strikes to increase your Katana DV.  You're a combat character without much of a secondary to offer, you should be able to drop a Mook with each Major Action.

I'd also think hard about two Attribute Boost powers.  You're giving up attack actions to activate those powers, and taking Drain. 

Improved Ability (any combat skill) is a mechanical trap, don't take it.  It costs 1 PP to increase 1 skill by one dice, or you could get Improved Agility for 1 PP.

For 7 PP I'd go with Improved Reflexes 2, Improved Agility 3, Critical Strike 2, Killing Hands (Shark).  If you really want some of the Utility powers pick them up with Foci.
8
Rules and such / Re: 6e: Specializations for Exotic Weapons
« Last post by Michael Chandra on Today at 02:55:22 »
Option 1: Launchers needs errata to clarify it's always 1 weapon explicitly.
Option 2: Near-identical weapons should be treated the same. So Dart Pistols, Whips, Wirewhips, Launchers, Flamethrowers, Garrotes, etc. In most cases we only have one weapon of the type.

I lean towards #2 but official clarification would be nice
9
Rules and such / Re: Anticipation... again :-)
« Last post by Michael Chandra on Today at 02:52:09 »
I must admit I have no idea what exactly the point you're trying to make is and what Anticipation has to do with training times, given how one is guidelines and the other is meant to be descriptive.

Training times are guidelines. They're explicitly stated to be so. People went BERSERK on them. Literally. They repeatedly argued they proved SR6 was crap, which is of course nonsense given how they're advice in a limited word count section which suffices for any table also following other guidelines in the book. So why would CGL risk producing downtime guidelines, when those same people would just blow up at those? Sounds like a waste of cash to hire writers and an editor just to get people to go 'SEE SR6 SUCKS they're even trying to dictate downtime now!'. MAYBE if people had applied common sense instead of flame tactics... But instead they ruined things for all of us.

Anticipation, meanwhile, suffers from the fact that English is a shitty language. Most of all, it suffers from Firing Modes. There are multiple ways to parse those, which led to various ways of Anticipation, which causes the problem.
I know how I parse those rules. And under that parsing, which uses the absence of a statement in its logic and as such is tough to follow and not everyone agrees with it, it works out just fine except if a player really insists on trying to break the system. But it needs a single extra support statement to be explicit, and the way SRM parses the rules instead might be a way I disagree with, but it does a small sacrifice to prevent a greater excess.

One last note: you said SRM guidelines. But you quote a hard rule instead. That's not a guideline. If you want to continue the debate, I'm going to need a glossary first, because it seems you're interpreting specific words differently and falling over those, making it impossible to figure out what exactly your point is supposed to be. You turning my response about downtime into a big rant about Anticipation is perfect evidence of that.
10
Character creation and critique / Re: 6E Ork Phys Adept
« Last post by dougansf on Today at 00:52:38 »
What's the rating for Stealth?

Stealth is 4, thanks for catching that. I've fixed it now.

Quote
Given your Initiative, why are you bothering with Cram?

It gets him to that 5d6 and 5th Minor Action. Considering his reliance on Attribute Boost (Major Action) that could prove vital. It was also a way to let me not take Improved Reflexes 4 at chargen.

Quote
How did you spend your karma?

20 to buy 4 Skill specs
5 Karma with In Debt gave me 25K nuyen to burn.
11 on Initiation
14 on Marital Arts
Qualities broke even.

Quote
I personally think that Metatype C is the sweet spot, as getting +2 adjustment points from Metatype B isn't enough to justify the higher priority cost. I would consider going Skills B and Metatype C. Then, you can buy your Edge back up to 3 with 25 karma. Unless you're picking up four rating 1 skills, four (4) skill points is going to be worth more than 25 karma.

Good point, thanks. Heck, just raising Stealth to 5 is 25 karma saved.
I used the Adjustment points to up MAG and BOD. I usually try to start with 4 Edge, because you never know if you're going to get more.

Quote
I'll need to revisit Firing Squad to form an opinion on the martial arts selection.

The big benefit here is that I bought two Styles that allow me to purchase all the Techniques. The two free techniques are good too.
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10