[Shinobi Killfist]

To me, that´s a bigger concern than the "Armor is worthless"-hubbub (it´s two sides of the same coin, though): It´s almost impossible to reliably one-shot a standard metahuman goon - even in an ambush, even if the target wears no armor, even when blasting out your accumulated edge, even if it´s a shriveled up Body 1 office drone. That´s neither fun nor realistic and it´s a big problem for running stealth situations properly.

My problem with that is even many aware targets should be dealt with with ease.  If I have a silenced pistol loaded with stick and shock and the janitor spots me, unless he was former special forces placed there to be a foil a PC should normally take them out in one move.

That's fair. Since house rules are already being bandied about, I'll reiterate one I plan on using:

Allowing a "one shot one kill" attack against an unaware opponent. No defense roll, but against a threshold instead.  Meet it and DV and CMs be damned, you disabled the guy!

[Moonshine Fox]

Hold-Out/Light: 2P (but different attack ratings)
Heavy: 3P/4P (varying attack ratings and mods)
Uzi: 3P (Both SA and BF modes, attack ratings slightly worse than pistol)

Alright, time to fire up the ‘ol mathSPU and crunch some numbers.

Stabby McRazerface wants to stab wanna-be ganger Lucky Eyes over some chicken, but Lucky draws his trusty uzi first and fires a shot. Gonna declare that hit/defense rolls are a wash as not important to this example.

In 5th an uzi does 7P. Average non-enhanced baseline bodies for physical oriented runners is 4. Average ‘not drawing attention to myself’ armor is 5, throw in a helmet and vitals kit as an additional 3 for a total of 8. 12 soak total with an average of 4 successes, lowering the damage to 3 boxes.

From what we know of sixth edition so far, Uzi damage is base 3P. Same body of 4 is 1.3 average soak successes, bringing damage to 2 boxes.

Overall math works the damage out to be roughly the same, with armor providing you more flexible tactical advantage, rather than just pure soak. It may lead to some oddly thought out appearances, but overall mechanics doesn’t seem to be that different for our armored runners. Super armored up tanks might not be as good, but the thought of a runner looking like they’re doing vehicular cosplay during a run always struck me as way to memorable to sec teams.

[Michael Chandra]

Do you know what we call distinctive brute force runners?

Omega Dawn bait.

[Moonshine Fox]

To me, that´s a bigger concern than the "Armor is worthless"-hubbub (it´s two sides of the same coin, though): It´s almost impossible to reliably one-shot a standard metahuman goon - even in an ambush, even if the target wears no armor, even when blasting out your accumulated edge, even if it´s a shriveled up Body 1 office drone. That´s neither fun nor realistic and it´s a big problem for running stealth situations properly.

That's fair. Since house rules are already being bandied about, I'll reiterate one I plan on using that's aimed right at this phenomenon:

Allowing a "one shot one kill" attack against an unaware opponent. No defense roll, but against a threshold instead (maybe linking threshold to Professional Rating, which automatically means the rule can't be used on PCs nor on "named" opposition...).  Meet it and DV and CMs be damned, you disabled the guy!

 That’s not a bad idea. I personally always figured your average wage slave is going to get shot once and then cower on the ground in front of you letting you do whatever afterward.

 Actually I tend to play most mooks the same way. I ain’t paid enough to fight to the death 

[Stainless Steel Devil Rat]

Yeah, there is the 2nd order benefit of being able to wear non-min/max'd armor to blend in with your surroundings and still be tactically relevant.

Not to mention the additional "benefit" of being able to dress in skimpy/open-chested clothing that artwork so often depicts! Look at the Better Than Bad artwork currently scrolling on the forum!  Mage chica has a bare-skinned abdomen and ganger troll dude is wearing a mini-vest that leaves his chest all impressively bare.  One way to look at the armor issue is to recognize that the mechanics are finally matching the artwork!

[Michael Chandra]

Cinematic playstyle fits execution rules imo. But I'm guessing it might get your team Notoriety.

[Stainless Steel Devil Rat]

To me, that´s a bigger concern than the "Armor is worthless"-hubbub (it´s two sides of the same coin, though): It´s almost impossible to reliably one-shot a standard metahuman goon - even in an ambush, even if the target wears no armor, even when blasting out your accumulated edge, even if it´s a shriveled up Body 1 office drone. That´s neither fun nor realistic and it´s a big problem for running stealth situations properly.

That's fair. Since house rules are already being bandied about, I'll reiterate one I plan on using that's aimed right at this phenomenon:

Allowing a "one shot one kill" attack against an unaware opponent. No defense roll, but against a threshold instead (maybe linking threshold to Professional Rating, which automatically means the rule can't be used on PCs nor on "named" opposition...).  Meet it and DV and CMs be damned, you disabled the guy!

 That’s not a bad idea. I personally always figured your average wage slave is going to get shot once and then cower on the ground in front of you letting you do whatever afterward.

 Actually I tend to play most mooks the same way. I ain’t paid enough to fight to the death 

There's also the Professional Rating mechanic, and 6e does have its version of the "Mowing them Down" rule from 5e. If the GM wants to let you disable the Janitor with one attack, it can still happen anytime she likes.

[adzling]

Yeah, there is the 2nd order benefit of being able to wear non-min/max'd armor to blend in with your surroundings and still be tactically relevant.

Not to mention the additional "benefit" of being able to dress in skimpy/open-chested clothing that artwork so often depicts! Look at the Better Than Bad artwork currently scrolling on the forum!  Mage chica has a bare-skinned abdomen and ganger troll dude is wearing a mini-vest that leaves his chest all impressively bare.  One way to look at the armor issue is to recognize that the mechanics are finally matching the artwork!

This is the core of the problem with 6e, it's all pink mohawk now.

[Stainless Steel Devil Rat]

Yeah, there is the 2nd order benefit of being able to wear non-min/max'd armor to blend in with your surroundings and still be tactically relevant.

Not to mention the additional "benefit" of being able to dress in skimpy/open-chested clothing that artwork so often depicts! Look at the Better Than Bad artwork currently scrolling on the forum!  Mage chica has a bare-skinned abdomen and ganger troll dude is wearing a mini-vest that leaves his chest all impressively bare.  One way to look at the armor issue is to recognize that the mechanics are finally matching the artwork!

This is the core of the problem with 6e, it's all pink mohawk now.

Well the first thing I said in your quote is actually a huge benefit to black trenchcoat.

[Ghost Rigger]

At this point, everything to be said about 6e has already been said and I want to move on to criticizing the damage control that's been going on. Criticisms have been at best dismissed, and there is no sign that changes will be made to the final product. It is clear that information on 6e was put out not to receive feedback, but to drum up hype. Unfortunately, several of the changes they implemented threw the baby out with the bathwater (boy, does that exact phrase get used often in this conversation) and criticism all they're getting. CG has the chance to backpedal, address the criticisms they've received and put out a final product that the player base will actually like. But I'm not confident that they'll take it.

Alright, time to fire up the ‘ol mathSPU and crunch some numbers.

Stabby McRazerface wants to stab wanna-be ganger Lucky Eyes over some chicken, but Lucky draws his trusty uzi first and fires a shot. Gonna declare that hit/defense rolls are a wash as not important to this example.

In 5th an uzi does 7P. Average non-enhanced baseline bodies for physical oriented runners is 4. Average ‘not drawing attention to myself’ armor is 5, throw in a helmet and vitals kit as an additional 3 for a total of 8. 12 soak total with an average of 4 successes, lowering the damage to 3 boxes.

From what we know of sixth edition so far, Uzi damage is base 3P. Same body of 4 is 1.3 average soak successes, bringing damage to 2 boxes.

Overall math works the damage out to be roughly the same, with armor providing you more flexible tactical advantage, rather than just pure soak. It may lead to some oddly thought out appearances, but overall mechanics doesn’t seem to be that different for our armored runners. Super armored up tanks might not be as good, but the thought of a runner looking like they’re doing vehicular cosplay during a run always struck me as way to memorable to sec teams.

I don't know what kind of Shadowrun you play, but in the circles I've played in 'not drawing attention to myself' armor is 12, plus 2 for a helmet, so you should be looking at 6 successes for your 5e example. Now let's bring in the rifle and shotgun numbers and see how much has changed there.

[Stainless Steel Devil Rat]

I don't know what kind of Shadowrun you play, but in the circles I've played in 'not drawing attention to myself' armor is 12, plus 2 for a helmet, so you should be looking at 6 successes for your 5e example. Now let's bring in the rifle and shotgun numbers and see how much has changed there.

From 5e Armor Jacket (which I assume is the foundation of your 12 armor):

"It offers good
protection without catching too much attention. But
don’t think of wearing one to a dinner party."

The way I've always treated it when I GM is if any place has a dress code, Armor Jackets don't satisfy it.  Nor are wageslaves walking around inside a corp compound wearing armor jackets. And helmets (and of course shields) ALWAYS attract attention.  If you're obscuring your face, you're obviously up to no good. Think of walking into any place of business wearing a ski mask in real life.  It's the same thing, only armored.

YMMV.

[Ghost Rigger]

If I have to go somewhere nice and be visible there, I'll put on my Executive Suit and get 12 armor anyways, then put on a ballistics mask when bullets start flying. If it's somewhere I'm in trouble if anyone sees me no matter what I'm wearing, I'll be wearing FBA with helmet for even more armor. You're underestimating how much armor any competent player is going to be wearing at any given time, while also ignoring that lowering DV values has skewed lethality for targets that should be very easy to take out.

[Michael Chandra]

I don't know what kind of Shadowrun you play, but in the circles I've played in 'not drawing attention to myself' armor is 12, plus 2 for a helmet, so you should be looking at 6 successes for your 5e example. Now let's bring in the rifle and shotgun numbers and see how much has changed there.

From 5e Armor Jacket (which I assume is the foundation of your 12 armor):

"It offers good
protection without catching too much attention. But
don’t think of wearing one to a dinner party."

The way I've always treated it when I GM is if any place has a dress code, Armor Jackets don't satisfy it.  Nor are wageslaves walking around inside a corp compound wearing armor jackets. And helmets (and of course shields) ALWAYS attract attention.  If you're obscuring your face, you're obviously up to no good. Think of walking into any place of business wearing a ski mask in real life.  It's the same thing, only armored.

YMMV.

That's why I took a Ballistic Mask and added Fashion Gas Mask to it. No social penalties. It included a Voice Warper for being extra dramatic, and went well with my Berwick Suit collection (1 for each type of armor mod) and my neat Ares Briefcase (Shield). Also Lapel Daggers and Mortimer of London Sword Cane.

(I was basically playing The Transporter, movie-style. Was fun.)

[adzling]

Yeah, there is the 2nd order benefit of being able to wear non-min/max'd armor to blend in with your surroundings and still be tactically relevant.

Not to mention the additional "benefit" of being able to dress in skimpy/open-chested clothing that artwork so often depicts! Look at the Better Than Bad artwork currently scrolling on the forum!  Mage chica has a bare-skinned abdomen and ganger troll dude is wearing a mini-vest that leaves his chest all impressively bare.  One way to look at the armor issue is to recognize that the mechanics are finally matching the artwork!

This is the core of the problem with 6e, it's all pink mohawk now.

Well the first thing I said in your quote is actually a huge benefit to black trenchcoat.

Not really at all Stainless, armored business suits, gowns, vests and clothing accomplish that in 5e and all prior editions.

The change from armor rules reflecting reality (they stop / reduce incoming damage) to armor being D&D AC (harder to hit, but do not reduce or affect damage) is a poor design choice imho.
It's actually worse than D&D because, as has been said ad nauseam, it doesn't even affect your chance to hit (attack and defense rating do not determine if you hit or not, but rather how much edge you gain or don't gain).

So, to turn back to my prior posts that have only been met with "but 6e is awesome!" nonsense srun has now effectively determined that a bikini is materially similar to an armored jacket and helmet in a firefight.
That's fine for pink mohawk games but wholly unsuitable for a game that has grounding in realistic in world responses, i.e. black trenchcoat.

That's a problem that's very simple to state, seemingly impossible to refute (I have seen no logical refutations of this point yet) and wholesales moves 6e from a shadowrun that lets you determine your own playstyle (pink vs. trench) instead forcing you squarely into pink mohawk.

There are other changes that reinforce this, melee weapons not factoring strength, the weapon damage codes themselves remove granularity and difference between weapons effectively meaning we all will use one type of light pistol, one type of smg, etc. as it's the clearly superior one.

There are other, similar, bone-headed over simplifications that this approach to tossing out all the detail and replacing it with edge that are even crazier.

Having said all that IF you like Pink Mohawk I think 6e will be awesome for your table.

It's just not what I like to play and not what srun historically has been.

[Moonshine Fox]

Alright, time to fire up the ‘ol mathSPU and crunch some numbers.

Stabby McRazerface wants to stab wanna-be ganger Lucky Eyes over some chicken, but Lucky draws his trusty uzi first and fires a shot. Gonna declare that hit/defense rolls are a wash as not important to this example.

In 5th an uzi does 7P. Average non-enhanced baseline bodies for physical oriented runners is 4. Average ‘not drawing attention to myself’ armor is 5, throw in a helmet and vitals kit as an additional 3 for a total of 8. 12 soak total with an average of 4 successes, lowering the damage to 3 boxes.

From what we know of sixth edition so far, Uzi damage is base 3P. Same body of 4 is 1.3 average soak successes, bringing damage to 2 boxes.

Overall math works the damage out to be roughly the same, with armor providing you more flexible tactical advantage, rather than just pure soak. It may lead to some oddly thought out appearances, but overall mechanics doesn’t seem to be that different for our armored runners. Super armored up tanks might not be as good, but the thought of a runner looking like they’re doing vehicular cosplay during a run always struck me as way to memorable to sec teams.

I don't know what kind of Shadowrun you play, but in the circles I've played in 'not drawing attention to myself' armor is 12, plus 2 for a helmet, so you should be looking at 6 successes for your 5e example. Now let's bring in the rifle and shotgun numbers and see how much has changed there.

And this kids is why you shouldn’t get second hand mathSPUs! Sometimes they glitch and you pull up number files from several editions ago (3rd ed armored jacket 5/3 rating). So to recrunch my numbers, that’s 16 soak with armored jacket (12) and helmet (+2) with a Bod of 4. That works out to 5.3 soak on the roll bringing it down to 1 box damage. Leads to a tradeoff between a bit more soak vs tactical flexibility.

Yeah, there is the 2nd order benefit of being able to wear non-min/max'd armor to blend in with your surroundings and still be tactically relevant.

This is the core of the problem with 6e, it's all pink mohawk now.

It can encourage and enhance all types of play, pink mohawk, black trench-coat, and mirror shades alike. Your pink mohawk players can wear the crazy outfits so often depicted in cyberpunk art without worry. Your black trench-coat players can focus more on blending in situationally and could very well be more encouraged to use a lot of cover, just like real combat. And finally your mirror shades players have their usual mix of the other two drawing from benefits of both.