Shadowrun
Shadowrun Play => Rules and such => Topic started by: Adder on <02-08-15/1930:21>
-
There doesn't appear to be an actual rule on this (unless I missed it).
How do people typically house rule this, if at all? For D&D it's historically been something like -4 to attack.
-
There's a called shot that lets you split damage, can't recall off the top of my head if it's core or Run & Gun though, might possibly be a Martial Arts technique.
-
Scytheknight is right. CRB p. 196 "Splitting the Damage"
-
the answer is on page 186 of the core rulebook, in the sidebar called "changing damage types"
if the weapon is not designed for non lethal it's a called shot. otherwise, you can use it with no penalties ( if infer the latter). so a bat would get no penalties but sword would, as in the example.
-
Thanks for the references everyone.
This turned out to be harder than parse than I expected. I believe this is the correct interpretation of the rules?
Dealing Stun damage with a lethal melee weapon as an improvised weapon (p.186 Changing Damage Types)
** If opponent is unarmored, attacker can use weapon as a club (Clubs skill, Accuracy 3)
** Blades lose all Reach when used as such (must hit with pommel)
Dealing Stun damage with a lethal weapon as a Called Shot (p. 196)
** Must Call a Shot (free action) to "Split the Damage" which gives a -4 penalty
** Target must have armor that is > AP of the attack
** Final damage is split evenly between Physical and Stun tracks (odd remainder goes to Stun)
^If the total DV is less than the target's modified armor, it only does the half to Stun damage
-
Dealing Stun damage with a lethal melee weapon as an improvised weapon (p.186 Changing Damage Types)
** If opponent is unarmored, attacker can use weapon as a club (Clubs skill, Accuracy 3)
** Blades lose all Reach when used as such (must hit with pommel)
i disagree with the bold part, you should still be able to hit with the flat of the blade, and in the rapier's case smack him with the blade instead of thrusting it into his face.
but just my .02
-
I actually don't like how this works, currently.....
First of all, way more weapons don't do stun dmg natively anymore (which I'm ok with in a way, a baseball bat is actually a pretty deadly weapon, but even a "sap" does Physical dmg now?!? C'mon)
Secondly, if you're trying to knock someone out without killing them, it doesn't seem to me like "splitting the difference" actually helps with that. Assuming stun and phsyical tracks are of similar size (usual) you just wind up knocking them out about the same time you they start dying, but it takes twice as long.
The most reliable way to do stun dmg is just to keep the dmg value below the armor.....unless with split the dmg does it count the whole dmg, or just half for beating armor? If it's just half, then an lot of the time you WILL wind up doing all stun dmg. That's a decent rules questions, actually.
-
Yeah I actually am not a fan of the rules for how to convert physical damage to stun. I think that the idea was focused on guns, rather than melee weapons which would explain some of the quirkiness. For melee weapons, I'd just cut the DV in half, assume 0 AP, and then use the relevant melee skill with a small penalty (-2 probably).
-
Keep on mind most mooks have a single damage track; splitting the damage with a sap migtht mean you knock em out but leave a nasty gash in the back of their head.
-
In the past I've let the player choose one of the two following:
1. You dont have to roll your full pool. This can help reduce damage so the attack might be stun.
2. Roll a normal melee attack, but the damage is 1/2 normal and stun.
Option 2 is just way easier to deliberate.
-
I like some of these house rules, especially for melee, which should be easier to deal nonlethal damage with a melee attack then a gunshot.
-
Keep on mind most mooks have a single damage track; splitting the damage with a sap migtht mean you knock em out but leave a nasty gash in the back of their head.
Obviously not the case we are talking about.
-
Yeah I actually am not a fan of the rules for how to convert physical damage to stun. I think that the idea was focused on guns, rather than melee weapons which would explain some of the quirkiness. For melee weapons, I'd just cut the DV in half, assume 0 AP, and then use the relevant melee skill with a small penalty (-2 probably).
When would you do the halving?
And yes, I certainly agree to losing AP when using it to deal Stun damage.
The next problem that could arise is that Swords are not meant to be used with their flat side. They chance to break could be increased.
-
When would you do the halving?
Right off the bat (pun intended). Something that normally has (STR + 2)P damage gets calculated out. Let's say it gives 7P damage. This would in turn translate to 3.5S damage, which gets rounded up to 4S.
The next problem that could arise is that Swords are not meant to be used with their flat side. They chance to break could be increased.
True, I think on a critical glitch they should receive damage to their AP or Reach value (a topic covered in Run & Gun.
-
True, I think on a critical glitch they should receive damage to their AP or Reach value (a topic covered in Run & Gun.
Do critical glitches happen often enough to invent rules centered around them? I don't think so, especially when it comes to combat. I prefer rules to use for actual characters, not Joe Average.
-
True, I think on a critical glitch they should receive damage to their AP or Reach value (a topic covered in Run & Gun.
Do critical glitches happen often enough to invent rules centered around them? I don't think so, especially when it comes to combat. I prefer rules to use for actual characters, not Joe Average.
You know, weapon breaking isn't exactly new. It has an action called Break Weapon, and it's in Run & Gun on page 111. Additionally, weren't you just the one that suggested this whole thing?
The next problem that could arise is that Swords are not meant to be used with their flat side. They chance to break could be increased.
Oh yeah. You did. So what is with the snark?
-
I took the comment more as a feeling that critical glitches for high dice characters are so rare they didn't really represent a reasonable chance of the weapon getting damaged. It's a bit like the chance of glitching throwing grenades, it's there for balance, but with any decent dice pool it'll be vanishingly rare that you blow yourself up. If everyone had 3-6 throwing dice you'd see far fewer comments on grenade power.
-
Thank's Darzil. Something happening on glitches is ok, but critical glitches should be in the realm of hearsay for combat characters.
-
Except that averages totally ignore player luck. I know people who have stopped playing TRPGs altogether because they can't seem to roll any success, even when I handed them cheat dice (dice without 1s). Amazing to watch, actually. Kinda blew my mind, watching someone roll 12 dice, 6 of them cheaters, and come up with a critical glitch (highest was a lone 3). So never discount player luck when rolling dice.
-
Except that averages totally ignore player luck. I know people who have stopped playing TRPGs altogether because they can't seem to roll any success, even when I handed them cheat dice (dice without 1s). Amazing to watch, actually. Kinda blew my mind, watching someone roll 12 dice, 6 of them cheaters, and come up with a critical glitch (highest was a lone 3). So never discount player luck when rolling dice.
Presumably not in SR5, where you'd have needed 7 1's to critically glitch. To have had one of the dice without 1's come up 1 would have taken more than bad luck !
-
I totally missed that change! I've still been playing 1/2 or more = glitch. My players are going to be thrilled.
-
I totally missed that change! I've still been playing 1/2 or more = glitch. My players are going to be thrilled.
It is more than half. He was speaking to your example of 12 dice which would require seven one's to glitch.
-
I totally missed that change! I've still been playing 1/2 or more = glitch. My players are going to be thrilled.
It is half or more. He was speaking to your example of 12 dice which would require seven one's to glitch.
More than half.
pg 45 "If more than half the dice you rolled show a one, then you’ve got problems. This is called a glitch."
-
Yeah I looked it up after I saw this. Neat.
-
Yeah, that particular episode was several years ago. Still quite memorable, though.
-
Those really bad rolls do have a way of sticking with you. I had a major NPC die unexpectedly in 4th edition on a soak roll due to rolling 0 successes out of 30 some dice. Goodbye cyberzombie!
-
Those really bad rolls do have a way of sticking with you. I had a major NPC die unexpectedly in 4th edition on a soak roll due to rolling 0 successes out of 30 some dice. Goodbye cyberzombie!
Oh yes! The big bad of a Superhero campaign I was part of many years ago had a forcefield none of us could get through. My musclebound idiot character charged anyway! Cue the big bad, who was faster, rolling a critical miss, roll on critical failure result, one random power stops working, rolls amongst his (many) powers, forcefield. My character, two critical hits . . .
-
Right off the bat (pun intended). Something that normally has (STR + 2)P damage gets calculated out. Let's say it gives 7P damage. This would in turn translate to 3.5S damage, which gets rounded up to 4S.
The next problem that could arise is that Swords are not meant to be used with their flat side. They chance to break could be increased.
True, I think on a critical glitch they should receive damage to their AP or Reach value (a topic covered in Run & Gun.
I agree that the stun damage rules are ridiculously complicated and weird. Even for shooting someone, it doesn't make a whole lot of sense. I simply cannot imagine how shooting someone could result in stun damage. I'd rather just have them shoot someone in the foot and roleplay the incapacitation if that was necessary.
My players have a habit of pistol whipping every surrendered enemy or civilian senseless before progressing, which is good practice but feels a bit lame. They basically say "I whack him in the head until you tell me he won't get up anymore in the next ten minutes".
What I want is to instill some (small) fear of repercussions from excessive blunt force head trauma, since you certainly could not knock a hundred people unconscious without risking one of them dying from the injury.
To that end, my proposed house rules:
1. No more ranged-weapon called-shot stun damage. I'm not even going to consider unusual cases like a beer bottle or a crate until it comes up.
2. When meleeing someone, declare a stun attack. -2 penalty if it's conceivable you could prevent it from being lethal (e.g. clubs), -4 if it's clearly pushing the limits of the weapon (knives, katanas).
3. After the declaration, you can choose to subtract any amount of additional dice from the attack.
4. After the declaration, you can choose to neglect all overflow damage from net hits.
5. Total damage is halved and turned into Stun.
6. Glitches result in halved Physical damage.
7. Critical Glitches result in full physical damage with normal net hit damage overflow (disregarding your earlier choice) and the weapon is damaged in the attempt.
-
Well, it's easy to figure shooting dmg changed to stun dmg if you've ever seen the bruise someone gets after being shot in a bullet proof vest. :)
But generally, your house rules seem fine.
-
Well, it's easy to figure shooting dmg changed to stun dmg if you've ever seen the bruise someone gets after being shot in a bullet proof vest. :)
Sure, I've no doubt that being stunned from a bullet is a real thing. But the will-it-or-won't-it-penetrate mechanic already exists in the form of the regular damage resistance test (if modified DV < modified armor, damage is Stun). I guess maybe a weird scenario where the enemy has just an armored vest on and you are intentionally shooting the vest would be the case they're trying to address in the rules, but that feels way less common than "I have a guard that I want to incapacitate, how many times do I need to punch him in the face to KO them?"
-
Even for shooting someone, it doesn't make a whole lot of sense. I simply cannot imagine how shooting someone could result in stun damage.
Even when the character uses gel rounds or other incapacitating rounds? That are specifically designed for stun damage? I agree that using lethal rounds means no stun capability, that's why stun rounds were designed. And this is just about firearms, not melee weapons. Just wanted that clear.
-
Even for shooting someone, it doesn't make a whole lot of sense. I simply cannot imagine how shooting someone could result in stun damage.
Even when the character uses gel rounds or other incapacitating rounds? That are specifically designed for stun damage? I agree that using lethal rounds means no stun capability, that's why stun rounds were designed. And this is just about firearms, not melee weapons. Just wanted that clear.
What Adder means is that when you use a normal bullet against a normal person, it will shred them. This type of thing makes it hard to picture using regular bullets to intentionally deal stun damage. The rules for splitting the damage seem like an attempt to make the armor take the brunt of the bullet's force, and the rules for splitting the damage start to fall apart with melee weapons. Adder has suggested some house rules to make using bullets for stun damage a little more logical, while keeping melee weapons in mind as well.
-
Yep, thanks for clarifying Namikaze before I could get to this. In the context of the discussion, I was referring only to regular, lethal bullets. I apologize if it sounded like I was referring to all projectiles.