Shadowrun
Shadowrun Play => Rules and such => Topic started by: SavarWallk on <03-03-14/2232:02>
-
pg. 461 Standard weapon mounts may hold any assault rifle or smaller-sized weapon and 250 rounds of ammo.
pg. 428 and also because of its under barrel grenade launcher
now it shows a 42(c) and the grenade launcher as a 8(c)
so how much ammo/grenades can I have on my Nissan Doberman ?
250 rounds of ammo and the clip of grenades ?
-
It never states it has to be the same kind of ammo for all 250 rounds of ammo. By the book, I'd say you can mix and match what you have stored and feeding into the weapon.
-
would I need two different autosofts one for the rifle and one for the grenade launcher ? I would assume so
-
Treat the Autosofts as a skill for the weapon. I think by default, the grenade launcher uses Heavy Weapons, while the Alpha uses Automatics. This might not be correct though - I've changed my skills for my table.
-
I'd rule it (and I'd emphasize that this is "ruling" territory) that the underbarrel launcher counts as part of the weapon. Thus, as the Autosoft is taken for the weapon (and not even for the class of weapon, but quite specifically for the Ares Alpha) and not for the weapon skill, it covers both functions.
-
RHat's ruling is perfectly reasonable. I think you should talk it over with your GM, find out if he treats them as separate or not. Then buy the Autosofts accordingly.
-
autosofts cover a specific weapon so will cover any accessories/features that weapon is supplied with as standard, such as underbarrel grenade launchers.
as for the question on ammo and mounts, honestly, the rules are non-existent for how it works.
the 250 round thing was always for belt-feed guns like LMG's in previous editions and it seems very "off" to me that a weapon mount auto-magically makes any gun from a revolver to a shotgun into a belt fed machine of death.
it is likely to stay very vague until the rigger splat book comes out, so i'd advise clearing up this issue with your GM before it becomes an issue.
i know in my games the 250 round capacity will be for belt-fed weapons only, so would maybe plan to use high capacity weapons like the shiawase arms monsoon from GH3 (stores 120 rounds before needs to reload) or take an LMG
-
I can sorta see the way it works for revolvers; the cylinder is swapped out for something that uses the same rotation to carry a round into the chamber, seal it, and rotate that one out to bring the next one in (or maybe it only works with caseless rounds). Shotguns would be pretty similar, with the other side of the belt ejecting (and probably coming to pieces as it flies out) along with the shell.
-
I can sorta see the way it works for revolvers; the cylinder is swapped out for something that uses the same rotation to carry a round into the chamber, seal it, and rotate that one out to bring the next one in (or maybe it only works with caseless rounds). Shotguns would be pretty similar, with the other side of the belt ejecting (and probably coming to pieces as it flies out) along with the shell.
yeah, i mean its feasible, its just funky. and there are no explicit rules for it like in other editions.
its a GM's call either way, so to the OP: check with your GM.
-
I can sorta see the way it works for revolvers; the cylinder is swapped out for something that uses the same rotation to carry a round into the chamber, seal it, and rotate that one out to bring the next one in (or maybe it only works with caseless rounds). Shotguns would be pretty similar, with the other side of the belt ejecting (and probably coming to pieces as it flies out) along with the shell.
It definitely makes sense that the weapons would be modified as they're put into the mount. One can assume it's not intended for you to be able to just pop the gun out of your vehicle or drone and start firing it normally.
The ammo also doesn't say it becomes the new magazine size. I think it's that you can have it "holding" that much ammo to draw from when it reloads? Though if that were the case, Rhat's example wouldn't be as relevant and it'd be a weird ruling to decide how many bullets the drone can reload into a cylinder in a single phase. A strict RAW reading though says it's just holding the ammo, and doesn't change the magazine at all.
Though that makes me wonder what action it is to reload a mounted weapon. Especially if it's an internal mount, unless you've got like a hatch that opens for you to pop another clip in.
-
The mount doesn't change the firing mode of the weapons, just the ammo capacity. If you slap a pump action shotgun into the drone, it already has to have a mechanism in place to pump the shotgun. All the mount does is increase the ammunition it can hold. That's not really hard. The only reason ammo is so limited normally is because of the space and weight limitations us puny humans have when holding a firearm.
-
The mount doesn't change the firing mode of the weapons, just the ammo capacity. If you slap a pump action shotgun into the drone, it already has to have a mechanism in place to pump the shotgun. All the mount does is increase the ammunition it can hold. That's not really hard. The only reason ammo is so limited normally is because of the space and weight limitations us puny humans have when holding a firearm.
i'm not so sure mate, unless your drone has arms, then we're off into GM fiat territory. there's nothing in the rules that say a weapon mount will pump your shotgun for you, though likewise it doesn't say that it doesn't do it for you.
If we're talking that the drone is magically turned into a belt fed weapon of doom for revolvers and pump actions, then it would also apply to the vintage cap and ball muzzle loading rifle in GH3 too; which frankly, is a bizarre concept and require too many mechanical arms to contemplate.
i think the safest thing to do in these situations is to use common sense until the rigger splat books come out or the issue is cleared up in errata.
we can establish a trend based on previous editions and extrapolate from that,
after all, why were extended clip (100 drum) modifications so popular in 4th (as well as with the dual clip feed mod), if the system clearly wanted you to just put your revolver in a weapon mount and have it turn into a belt fed equivalent?
like i said before, check with the GM, its his game world, he'll tell you how they work in his game.
in my personal opinion, i would enforce the old ruling in the absence of any new ones; 250 rounds are held for belt fed weapons only.
hth
SR5 pg 462-463 for reference, emphasis mine.
Vehicles may be equipped with a
number of weapon mounts equal to their unaugmented
Body ÷ 3 (round down). Standard weapon mounts may
hold any assault rifle or smaller-sized weapon and 250
rounds of ammo. Heavy weapon mounts count as two
weapon mounts and can hold any weapon and up to 500 rounds of belted ammo or up to Body rockets/missiles.
All weapon mounts are operated remotely and can
target a ninety-degree arc of fire (horizontal and vertical).
Manual operation can be added, but only for vehicles,
not drones, and at extra cost.
-
i'm not so sure mate, unless your drone has arms, then we're off into GM fiat territory.
Yeah, no. Not unless your drone also has to have arms to "pull the trigger."
When you put a weapon into a weapon mount, it's taken for granted that the weapon mount is designed to operate the weapon. It's not hard. These are things that you can do today fairly easily.
i think the safest thing to do in these situations is to use common sense
That works if the GM has any common sense when it comes to these things.
If we're talking that the drone is magically turned into a belt fed weapon of doom for revolvers and pump actions, then it would also apply to the vintage cap and ball muzzle loading rifle in GH3 too
It's not magic. Just for your information, there was a way to turn the Colt Revolving Rifle into a belt fed weapon on a turret. It was a design that tried to replace the gatling gun at one point. Unfortunately, barrels at the time could not handle the heat and leather belts were problematic with percussion caps (who'd have thought), so it failed in application, but the actual mechanics behind it were extremely simple and could easily be done with modern electronics. Especially in a mounted weapon.
As for the Vintage rifle, maybe you're forgetting this:
VINTAGE
The weapon is not compatible with modern electronics. This can be the result of outdated manufacturing, physical
age, or bad design. Physical upgrades are possible, but adding them requires additional work that costs twice the
normal listed amount.
I'm pretty sure a remote operated drone turret counts as modern electronics.
-
i'm not so sure mate, unless your drone has arms, then we're off into GM fiat territory.
Yeah, no. Not unless your drone also has to have arms to "pull the trigger."
When you put a weapon into a weapon mount, it's taken for granted that the weapon mount is designed to operate the weapon. It's not hard. These are things that you can do today fairly easily.
i think the safest thing to do in these situations is to use common sense
That works if the GM has any common sense when it comes to these things.
If we're talking that the drone is magically turned into a belt fed weapon of doom for revolvers and pump actions, then it would also apply to the vintage cap and ball muzzle loading rifle in GH3 too
It's not magic. Just for your information, there was a way to turn the Colt Revolving Rifle into a belt fed weapon on a turret. It was a design that tried to replace the gatling gun at one point. Unfortunately, barrels at the time could not handle the heat and leather belts were problematic with percussion caps (who'd have thought), so it failed in application, but the actual mechanics behind it were extremely simple and could easily be done with modern electronics. Especially in a mounted weapon.
As for the Vintage rifle, maybe you're forgetting this:
VINTAGE
The weapon is not compatible with modern electronics. This can be the result of outdated manufacturing, physical
age, or bad design. Physical upgrades are possible, but adding them requires additional work that costs twice the
normal listed amount.
I'm pretty sure a remote operated drone turret counts as modern electronics.
I've always seen a weapon mount as just that, a bracket or bracing mechanism to strap a weapon into.
in the shadowrun world, this includes a power feed and linkage to the sensors and ammo bins.
they have a small range of fire made capable by some servos (5 deg i think in sr4 for fixed mounts and apparently 90 deg in sr5).
In lieu of a rule that says the mounting procedure for a weapon into a mount also converts this weapon into a belt-fed weapon, then i'm not playing it as such.
There are plenty of high capacity weapons and a couple of belt feeders that will work fine in my campaigns.
You're obviously entirely free to come to your own opinion and rules for your table, but as i said earlier, i find it a bit funky and don't like it.
-
For what it's worth, I don't think there's any value in getting into another debate about the semantics and physics of Shadowrun.
My two cents though: the drone should have control over the firing and loading mechanisms of the weapon, which would likely include an electronic capability to cause a shotgun (the example being used) to rack a new load.
-
It doesn't have to be belt fed. It's possible to make box magazines at that high of capacity just as easily. They have remote turrets now that can make use of 5,000 round box magazines for AR-15 style weapon. No conversion is necessary, it just hooks into the magazine well just like a normal magazine. It uses a series of chutes that allow each well (500 round wells) to feed relatively free of jamming issues. That design also allows multiple ammo types to be kept on hand.
But yes, it makes sense for SR tech to be worse than modern day tech. SR mounts cannot be just straps for the weapon to slide into. It has to be integral to the body of the vehicle. Otherwise, it wouldn't make sense for the vehicles body to act as recoil comp. A gun just blazing away strapped to the outside would bounce around like crazy. Generally, if you're mounting a weapon like this into a turret or on a fixed vehicle mount, it's going to involve stripping off the stock and handrails for the mount and doing basic modifications to make the weapon stable in the mount. Higher ammo capacity is just another extension to that.
Keep in mind that in the case of an internal magazine fed weapon, most turret modification for high capacity is more like a box magazine than a belt. It cuts off the normal magazine supply and pressures the rounds so that when the action goes back, a new round is forced in. All that it is needed after that, for bolt-action or pump weapons, is a piston that electronically drives the action. This is so simple that most kids create something similar with childhood toys. Seriously, if you've ever created anything that goes back and forth, that's the complexity of it. It's not uncommon for turrets to have a similar system even on automatic weapons to aid in an attempt to remotely clear jams. It's amazing how often just working the action a few times will clear things.
The only real loading type that would require belt feed is the cylinder, which is possible with 150 year old tech.
But then again, yes, common sense tells us that it's funky for SR to be better than modern day tech.
-
It doesn't have to be belt fed. It's possible to make box magazines at that high of capacity just as easily. They have remote turrets now that can make use of 5,000 round box magazines for AR-15 style weapon. No conversion is necessary, it just hooks into the magazine well just like a normal magazine. It uses a series of chutes that allow each well (500 round wells) to feed relatively free of jamming issues. That design also allows multiple ammo types to be kept on hand.
But yes, it makes sense for SR tech to be worse than modern day tech. SR mounts cannot be just straps for the weapon to slide into. It has to be integral to the body of the vehicle. Otherwise, it wouldn't make sense for the vehicles body to act as recoil comp. A gun just blazing away strapped to the outside would bounce around like crazy. Generally, if you're mounting a weapon like this into a turret or on a fixed vehicle mount, it's going to involve stripping off the stock and handrails for the mount and doing basic modifications to make the weapon stable in the mount. Higher ammo capacity is just another extension to that.
Keep in mind that in the case of an internal magazine fed weapon, most turret modification for high capacity is more like a box magazine than a belt. It cuts off the normal magazine supply and pressures the rounds so that when the action goes back, a new round is forced in. All that it is needed after that, for bolt-action or pump weapons, is a piston that electronically drives the action. This is so simple that most kids create something similar with childhood toys. Seriously, if you've ever created anything that goes back and forth, that's the complexity of it. It's not uncommon for turrets to have a similar system even on automatic weapons to aid in an attempt to remotely clear jams. It's amazing how often just working the action a few times will clear things.
The only real loading type that would require belt feed is the cylinder, which is possible with 150 year old tech.
But then again, yes, common sense tells us that it's funky for SR to be better than modern day tech.
not all of us are experienced military engineers so keep your sneers to yourself thanks.
-
Not a military engineer, I just take the time to look into things before I claim how they should work.
-
Knowing how these things work in real life isn't the same as knowing how they balance and work in a game, though. Sometimes you take the reality bit a little too far, Wells.
-
If it can work realistically without upsetting balance, then there isn't a balance issue. Balance isn't hard to determine.
-
That's fine. Make a suggestion. Don't lay on the patronizing, vaguely-insulting techno-babble.
-
Care to show any shred of proof for a 5000 round magazine for an assault rifle type weapon turret, WellsIDidIt? A short google search reveals no such thing, except for airsoft guns, and in my years in the military I never saw or heard anything remotely (hah!) like what you're describing.
Personally, I think game balance and realism have to contend on this one, with game balance winning out.
The fact that there is a difference between belted and not, as well as the absence of any mention of it in the rules, indicates to me that the weapon clip size (if it has a clip) of a mounted weapon is not modified. However, it does seems prudent that a drone has the capability to reload itself, so it doesn't have to come back to it's handler every time it runs out of ammo.
I'll also run this by our group, so thanks for bringing this up. My ruling suggestion would be:
1. Weapons installed in a mount do not have any of their stats changed at all, but the mount holds up to 250 rounds/500 rounds/BOD rockets or missiles that can be used for reloading with an appropriate action as per the Reloading Weapons table on page 163
2. Weapons installed in a heavy mount that have belt feed capabilities in their stats can use the full 500 round belt, without any need for reloading
I think the above provides several benefits in terms of game balance:
1. Machine guns are the best option for suppressive fire platforms (as they rightly should be)
2. Non-heavy weapons in heavy weapon mounts have more ammunition available to them, allowing for extended operations (and a possible ammo store for character use as well if the drek really hits the fan...)
3. Provides tactical choice for end users, further augmented by options probably coming in Run & Gun
Makes sense to me, so that's what I'll go with.
-
Both Military Technology and Popular Science had articles on it back when Samsung Techwin first announced that it was developing the SGR-A1. Given the Popular Science article was more about the technology of the robot rather than the weapon system, but both made mentions of it. The original conception of the SGR-A1 and even the Super aEgis II used a high capacity box magazine weapon rather than a belt fed weapon as it helped filter out other issues in the design before adding the issues of a belt to the design.
Due to the weight of the high capacity magazines, they were deemed pretty much unusable by anything but a stationary line of fire turret (5,000 5.56mm rounds is hovering at the 75 kg. mark before adding in the 9 kg. weight of the magazine).
Neither design that implemented the drum was ever fielded. Belt fed weapons are much easier to use for militaries, as they allow for quicker reloading and are more manageable. Then again, combat drones are near as prevalent in real life as they are in SR either.
Honestly, if you can envision a metal box holding a group of magazines (or clips if you prefer that term), with a selector at the top that switches to the next magazine each time one runs dry, you're there.
Looking at your rule suggestion, you're pretty much doing the same thing, except you're making it take an action to switch chutes (or magazines if that picture is easier) rather than letting the device do it automatically.
While manually reloading by the drone, magazine by magazine, may be a feasible design for something like the PROTECTOR super light drones, where the gun is pretty much installed in a harness without removing any hardware, I would hazard a guess that most drone guns would remove enough hardware to reload, and remove spent cartridges in branch cases, while firing.
Add in that in the past, it has worked in this way where the mounts ammunition can be freely used by the weapon (Rigger 3 and Arsenal ammunition bins), and that the tech would actually take up more room by reloading inside the mount as opposed to a forced loading system, I'm pretty sure it's intentional for the weapon to be able to feed from it's 250 round supply without issue.
-
Right... little bit of a difference between a rotodrone carrying an Ares Alpha and an Aegis turrent, wouldn't you say?
-
Principle is the same, only a smaller scale being used. Remember the rotodrone is getting 250 (or 500) rounds in that set up (5% or 10% of what's possible today), putting the weight issue out of the picture (3.75/7.5 kg assuming it's not using caseless).
Design wise the setup should be pretty similar from a robotics standpoint and from a combat standpoint. After all, it's the design of future robotic sentries, and that what drones are an expansion of.
-
Indeed, but the "reloading" would still need to take place; represented in this case by, you guessed it, an appropriate action as per the reloading mechanism of the original weapon!
Tadaa :)
Call it an automatic action or a voluntary, intentional action by the drone pilot, but mechanically the "reload" still has to happen. That takes a little bit of time; since a drone has Pilot Rating x 2 + 4d6 initiative (averaging 6 + 14 = 22 (http://anydice.com/program/3602) for a Pilot 3 drone) it's very likely that it will get 2 or 3 Action Phases, which means that a simple action represents a time span of 3 seconds / 2 action phases / 2 simple actions = 0.75 seconds or 3 seconds / 3 action phases / 2 simple actions = 0.5 seconds. Sounds reasonable to me...
-
The current design can swap chutes mid-firing without missing a round. So, no, it doesn't really need enough time to signify an action. Especially when you consider that an action turns that "while still firing" into a 1.5 second gap using your example (mounted weapons are a complex action to fire).
-
Game balance, my friend. Gotta give heavy weapons some for of advantage over assault rifles, at least until Run & Gun comes out with methods of converting weapons to belt feed.
-
Heavy weapons are already balanced friend. They don't need anything more from weapon mounts of all places.
-
I disagree with that statement, based on how many characters I've seen created on this forum carrying Ares Alpha or similar weapons, compared to how many I've seen using LMGs.
And with that, I've said what I need. Carry on.
-
I cannot believe the amount of effort people are putting into finding ways to mount unsuitable weapons into drones. Yes, it is possible to create an auto-loading mechanism for a revolver, a pump action shotgun, or even a muzzle loader. The question to ask is why bother slapping together some kludge to convert such weapons to semi/full auto when better choices already exist?
True common sense dictates that riggers mount existing semi-auto or full auto weapons and use high capacity drum magazines for anything that is not already belt fed.
-
No such thing as "true" common sense, Shogun ;)
I do agree with you, though; I wouldn't mount anything less than an LMG on a drone for my own sake at least. Not like it'll be any less obvious than one with an AR mounted, and they're both likely to be fairly illegal in terms of where you'd have to bring them.
The way I see it, drones are either all out attack (in which case you'd put a belt fed LMG or heavier with 500 rounds on it), or recon (i.e. no weapons at all, because the drone isn't big enough to support one). I just don't see a reliable way of dragging around drones with highly illegal (F type, no, not the Jag...) weapon mounts in a city like Seattle, unless you're touring the Barrens.
-
No such thing as "true" common sense, Shogun ;)
I do agree with you, though; I wouldn't mount anything less than an LMG on a drone for my own sake at least. Not like it'll be any less obvious than one with an AR mounted, and they're both likely to be fairly illegal in terms of where you'd have to bring them.
The way I see it, drones are either all out attack (in which case you'd put a belt fed LMG or heavier with 500 rounds on it), or recon (i.e. no weapons at all, because the drone isn't big enough to support one). I just don't see a reliable way of dragging around drones with highly illegal (F type, no, not the Jag...) weapon mounts in a city like Seattle, unless you're touring the Barrens.
Would point out that a weapon mount can be used to mount just about anything. Need to listen in to that conversation on the 44th floor? Directional mic mounted on a rotodrone. Want some high end footage of that new complex being built? Camera on a weapon mount. If it can operate a gun, (and, according to some, reload a revolver), it easily mount and use just about any other piece of gear.
Personally, I love some people's ideas of just what constitutes a drone mounted weapon as well and have basically given up trying to figure out their reason behind some of the silly things I have read or seen.