[Magnaric]

So, in my upcoming game I have a player who's background is a sort of paramilitary explosives specialist, and he asked about Claymore Mines. Turns out there isn't any info for them in 4E, but they did have a stat block in 2nd(3rd?) Edition. Did a little relevant research and came up with what I thought was an appropriate stat block for them for 4E, but I`d like the community`s feedback to make sure they`re reasonable, not over or under powered, I didn`t miss anything super vital, etc. Once again any feedback is extremely appreciated guys.

Claymore Mine - A tried-and-true milspec shaped charge, these anti-personnel mines have been in use for roughly a century, and while minor changes to the design have been made, largely it remains the same.

The mine uses a shaped blast to propel dozens or anti-infantry steel balls towards the enemy, not unlike an oversized shotgun. While they are military-grade and extremely deadly, they can be found by black-market military surplus dealers...for a price.

Damage: 14P(f), AP: -2, Blast: -2/meter*, Avail: 12f, Cost: 300

* Note that the blast is a directional charge, meaning that similar to a shotgun blast you place the "Place front towards enemy" text in the direction you want to ruin someone's day, and it will affect all targets in a cone up to it's maximum range. Also of note is that the mine does have a backblast, so the user will want to be at least 4 meters away when it detonates.

[martinchaen]

I'm not sure about the -2 AP; this puts it on par with assault rifles in terms of armor penetration, which even a fragmentation grenade is not. To my mind, a claymore is essentially just a slightly bigger fragmentation grenade aimed in a specific direction.

I would up the damage a little more and drop the AP.

Range seems about right, though I would likely up the cost to 500 and actually specify the angle of attack (shaped cone of 45/60/90 degrees to both sides from center of blast, for example).

[Magnaric]

Hmm, good point. The opriginal thought was that the ball bearings are designed to pierce light infantry armour, but you`re right about the assault rifle bit.

[martinchaen]

Just FYI, a real world claymore does not actually use ball bearings

If you want to be really technical, and if memory serves me right, the M18 anti-personnel mine is packed with several hundred small steel balls, comparable in size to very fine shotgun pellets (aka shot).

Even though these steel balls are fired in a comparable way to the shot used in a shotgun, they were compared to high-velocity .22s when explained to me as they have an estimated muzzle velocity of over 1000m/s. It's effectiveness as an anti-personnel mine, therefore, is more due to the wounding effect they have on the enemy, as opposed to killing them outright.

Don't get me wrong; if you're standing a couple of meters in front of a claymore when it goes off chances are you're going to be severely wounded, but these things are effective all the way out to 100m with hit probability dropping the further out you go from point-blank.

Now that I think about it, I'd probably put the damage code at 22P (f) with a +5 AP and a DV reduction of 1/m. Higher than a grenade because of the directed blast (should be about 60-90 degrees total from the blast point) and with an overall longer range, meaning they're deadly up close but can (somewhat easily) be avoided all together.

[EDIT]
Just noticed you said SR4 in your subject.

In that case, I'd put it at 15-18P (f) with an AP of +5 and a DV reduction of -1/m.

[Magnaric]

Sorry, just woke up and my brain somehow translated steel balls into ball bearings.

But yeah, that`s a really good comparison there, and the -2 AP thing was bugging me last night the more I thought about it too. I`ll be changing that to a higher damage code and more shotgun-style AP. Again, very helpful feedback, much appreciated.

[WellsIDidIt]

Don't get too bogged down in the details. Claymore commonly refers to a range of mines with a similar design and shape, not just the M-18. The M-18 uses 1/8" steel balls, but they get deformed and slightly flattened by the blast. The MON-50 has a variant that uses short rods that shatter. In 2075 who knows what a similar mine would use, but as area coverage is the main part of it's lethality, it pretty much has to be flechette based as far as SR is concerned.

WAR! has a directional mine meant to represent the Claymore (KM-18 Zweilhander). I don't speak German, but I think that means two hander.

[Kincaid]

Yeah, the literal translation is two-hander, but for RPG purposes it means greatsword.  Another word for which is (occasionally, splatbooks aside), claymore.

[HarshRhettoric]

why not a mine that accelerates a series of interleaved monofilament nets, or one that fires ball bearings out, then pulls them back with an electromagnet/capacitor setup?

[WellsIDidIt]

I believe they had a monowire grenade in WAR! as well. It wouldn't be hard to convert it to a mine version.

[Dinendae]

I believe they had a monowire grenade in WAR! as well. It wouldn't be hard to convert it to a mine version.

Yeah, that thing's just....nasty. 

[martinchaen]

If you look at the damage values, it really isn't.

8P, -4AP, -3/m isn't exactly the insta-kill I'd expect from "hundreds of meters of monofilament wound around the exploding core, lashing out in several pieces and all directions on detonation."

[Dinendae]

If you look at the damage values, it really isn't.

8P, -4AP, -3/m isn't exactly the insta-kill I'd expect from "hundreds of meters of monofilament wound around the exploding core, lashing out in several pieces and all directions on detonation."

I was thinking more along the lines of not just getting hit by the mono, but having it all around you now.

[martinchaen]

Well, you'd have to make up the rules for that, cause they're not defined in WAR!

Honestly, I find a monowire grenade to be slightly ludicrous, as to my mind the wires would end up cutting other wires. It's just too much of an impractical weapon for my taste.