[WellsIDidIt]

Then on my second Simple Action fire? So instead of getting the Usual 4 shots with my guns, I only get 2 shots this IP, but at extra damage. I see it being a fair trade off i think.

I agree it's a fair trade off, and I personally would allow it, but rules wise it doesn't work that way. It all ties down to the way Called Shot is worded: This action must be immediately followed by a Take Aim, Fire Weapon, Throw Weapon, or Melee Unarmed Attack.

Call Shot is not on the list of actions that must immediately follow a Call Shot, so you can't do them back to back by the rules.

Then again, I personally don't think calling a shot should even be an action. I think players should just be able to choose as many penalties as they want during the Fire Weapon/Throw Weapon/Melee Attack action.

[Unahim]

Negating armor is generally considered to be a worse choice than just adding to damage. This is because every 3 points of armor is worth roughly -1 DV. So taking -3 to eliminate armor would only give you an effective +1 DV, while taking a -3 for extra damage would be an effective +3 DV.

Hmmm, perhaps it'd be useful for certain scenarios involving Hardened Armour? Admittedly, I can't really come up with a mathemathically sound example of that, though, as shooting a Spirit with 8 Hardened Armour even with just a DV 5 pistol would probably benefit more from the +4 DV, especially as that would leave you 8 extra dice to score net hits with...

The main advantage is for getting burst-fire weapons through Barriers and Vehicle Armor, and other cases where you only need 1 Net Hit to drop the target if you can take Armor out of the equation.

Let's say you've got target is inside a Citymaster, and you're using an Assault Rifle loaded with Ex.Ex. ammo (7P/-2). You've got the element of surprise, and you're a freakin' mega-badass that's rolling 25 dice after Take Aim and other bonuses.

Since burst-fire doesn't count against Hardening checks you're going to need to get 8 Net Hits on the +4/-4 to penetrate the Citymaster. That's worse than 50/50 odds even with 21 dice. You could edge, but it's still a big gamble, and the target inside is going to add +18 to their armor even if you do make it, statistically eating that +4 DV and 2 more besides.

Now, lets say you take a 22 die penalty  (20 vehicle armor -2 AP, 4 more armor for the VIPs armored clothing). Statistically, you should be able to get at least one Net Hit off those remaining 3 dice, and Edge beforehand will double your Dice Pool to make it a certainty. Even assuming the minimum of 1 hit, the end result is Body vs 17P. That's game over unless the target burns edge for a HoG.

Thanks for the write up! It was very enlightening, especially with the stuff others mentioned.


Also, about called shot: I see it as you getting the benefit for aiming at a certain spot. You can only aim at 1 spot for an attack.

[WellsIDidIt]

Also, about called shot: I see it as you getting the benefit for aiming at a certain spot. You can only aim at 1 spot for an attack.

Well yes, but you can think in specifics about stacking multiple called shot options.
A -4/+4 DV  might mean aiming for the targets head.
A -Armor might mean aiming for a joint of the targets armor.
A -armor-4/+4 DV would mean aiming for the neck joint of the target.

Also keep in mind that the entirety of the Call Shot action is specifically subject to GM approval (blatantly stated in the description). So a GM is always free to say there is no weak spot, or armorless spot, or that a weapon is JB welded to the guys hand, etc.

[Unahim]

Also, about called shot: I see it as you getting the benefit for aiming at a certain spot. You can only aim at 1 spot for an attack.

Well yes, but you can think in specifics about stacking multiple called shot options.
A -4/+4 DV  might mean aiming for the targets head.
A -Armor might mean aiming for a joint of the targets armor.
A -armor-4/+4 DV would mean aiming for the neck joint of the target.

Also keep in mind that the entirety of the Call Shot action is specifically subject to GM approval (blatantly stated in the description). So a GM is always free to say there is no weak spot, or armorless spot, or that a weapon is JB welded to the guys hand, etc.

I can agree with what you're saying here in the respect that hitting the neck joint could, feasibly, sortie that effect. It just feels odd to me that you're having to spend 2 actions to target the neck joint when any other joint you only have to pick one.

I guess it works from a rules perspective, though.

[JustADude]

Also, about called shot: I see it as you getting the benefit for aiming at a certain spot. You can only aim at 1 spot for an attack.

Well yes, but you can think in specifics about stacking multiple called shot options.
A -4/+4 DV  might mean aiming for the targets head.
A -Armor might mean aiming for a joint of the targets armor.
A -armor-4/+4 DV would mean aiming for the neck joint of the target.

Also keep in mind that the entirety of the Call Shot action is specifically subject to GM approval (blatantly stated in the description). So a GM is always free to say there is no weak spot, or armorless spot, or that a weapon is JB welded to the guys hand, etc.

I can agree with what you're saying here in the respect that hitting the neck joint could, feasibly, sortie that effect. It just feels odd to me that you're having to spend 2 actions to target the neck joint when any other joint you only have to pick one.

I guess it works from a rules perspective, though.

That's why I tend to house-rule Called Shots as a non-action.

The way I run them, they're just optional Modifiers that you can declare at the time of your attack, so there are no 'actions' involved.

[WellsIDidIt]

On the other side of the fence, it kind of makes sense that aiming at a much more specific part of the body requires more time. Sure it's an abstraction,  but aiming at a 9 inch plate is a lot faster in general than aiming for the triple 20 or bullseye on a darts target. One you can probably just shoulder and shoot if you have practice, the other takes a slight moment to separate from the rest of the target.

One of the human drawbacks is that we tend to bundle things together. We tend to break humans down into head, guts, limbs. Further separation usually requires forced aiming for most people.

[Unahim]

On the other side of the fence, it kind of makes sense that aiming at a much more specific part of the body requires more time. Sure it's an abstraction,  but aiming at a 9 inch plate is a lot faster in general than aiming for the triple 20 or bullseye on a darts target. One you can probably just shoulder and shoot if you have practice, the other takes a slight moment to separate from the rest of the target.

One of the human drawbacks is that we tend to bundle things together. We tend to break humans down into head, guts, limbs. Further separation usually requires forced aiming for most people.

Sure, but we were talking about shooting at an armour join; I don't think it'd take more time to look for and shoot one on the neck rather than just look for and shoot one anywhere else. In both cases you have to spot one first, and in the first one you even already know roughly where you want to be looking.

I like Just's way of doing it, seems sensible enough.