For that matter your wanting us to believe that a line weapon passes through PC armor, bone, muscle and back out the other side of armor and then many other PCs (assuming they are standing behind the first target) but penetrating a interior wall is completely impossible?That's not how line weapons work.
A line is an area of effect. The flame thrower does not hit Bob, Bill, Agent 21 and agent 24 and shoot THROUGH all of them (if they did that, they'd be dead). The fire is 5 feet wide and although they all occupy 5 foot squares they don't actually fill the squares: there's room between them and the napalm passes through and around those spaces to the people behind them.
A line weapon is not a line area of effect, although it shares some rules with them.
This weapon fires a projectile in a straight line that pierces through multiple creatures or obstacles. When attacking with such a weapon, make a single attack roll and compare it to the relevant Armor Class of all creatures and objects in a line extending to the weapon’s listed range increment. Roll damage only once. The weapon hits all targets with an AC equal to or lower than the attack roll. However, if an attack fails to damage a creature or obstacle hit in the line (typically due to damage reduction or hardness), the path is stopped and the attack doesn’t damage creatures farther away. A line weapon can’t damage targets beyond its listed range. If you score a critical hit, that effect applies only to the first target hit in the line, and you roll the critical damage separately. If multiple creatures are equally close, you choose which one takes the effects of the critical hit. A line weapon doesn’t benefit from feats or abilities that increase the damage of a single attack (such as the operative’s trick attack).
A line AOE does fill the entire space, and does not roll an attack - everyone is automatically hit if they are in that space, and rolls a reflex to limit that damage. A line weapon, by contrast, fires a smaller projectile that can miss entirely, but has a chance to hit everyone in that line area.
For that matter your wanting us to believe that a line weapon passes through PC armor, bone, muscle and back out the other side of armor and then many other PCs (assuming they are standing behind the first target) but penetrating a interior wall is completely impossible?That's not how line weapons work.
A line is an area of effect. The flame thrower does not hit Bob, Bill, Agent 21 and agent 24 and shoot THROUGH all of them (if they did that, they'd be dead). The fire is 5 feet wide and although they all occupy 5 foot squares they don't actually fill the squares: there's room between them and the napalm passes through and around those spaces to the people behind them.
Thats a good personal description of how you imagine a flame thrower would work however id like to offer the first line of text from the line special weapon property.
"This weapon fires a projectile in a straight line that pierces through multiple creatures or obstacles."
"This weapon fires a projectile in a straight line that pierces through multiple creatures or obstacles."
Its descriptive. Like if someone says that they went through the offensive line it doesn't mean there's now chunks of football player all over the field.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
"This weapon fires a projectile in a straight line that pierces through multiple creatures or obstacles."Its descriptive. Like if someone says that they went through the offensive line it doesn't mean there's now chunks of football player all over the field.
Right, if it actually punched holes through things, there would need to be a rule that it is stopped if it does zero damage due to hardness or DR, or that it can also pass through obstacles, like walls.
Hey, wait a minute!
This weapon fires a projectile in a straight line that pierces through multiple creatures or obstacles. When attacking with such a weapon, make a single attack roll and compare it to the relevant Armor Class of all creatures and objects in a line extending to the weapon’s listed range increment. Roll damage only once. The weapon hits all targets with an AC equal to or lower than the attack roll. However, if an attack fails to damage a creature or obstacle hit in the line (typically due to damage reduction or hardness), the path is stopped and the attack doesn’t damage creatures farther away. A line weapon can’t damage targets beyond its listed range. If you score a critical hit, that effect applies only to the first target hit in the line, and you roll the critical damage separately. If multiple creatures are equally close, you choose which one takes the effects of the critical hit. A line weapon doesn’t benefit from feats or abilities that increase the damage of a single attack (such as the operative’s trick attack).
Well, "obstacle" is vague, maybe they just meant a boulder of crate that fits in a 5' square, not an actual wall.
A low obstacle (i.e., a wall half your height) provides cover, but only to creatures within 30 feet (six squares). The attacker ignores the cover if he’s closer to the obstacle than his target is.
Huh! Next thing you know people will tell me that real rifle rounds can go through lots of wall materials and damage people on the other side.
To those arguing against object penetration for line weapons. What is the entire point of mentioning obstacles then or including rules that determine if said colorful wording fluff obstacles stop the shot or not then?
To make sure they go through the things they re supposed to go through: multiple sentient beings, overturned tables, etc.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
To make sure they go through the things they re supposed to go through: multiple sentient beings, overturned tables, etc.
So now you have conceded the fact that they DO indeed go through objects like overturned tables but couldn't possibly go through a surface thicker eh? Im sorry the rules make no such distinction. The rules DO however offer a mechanic to represent the effectiveness of a thickness of a substance to stop damage and that is Hardness and even offer rules to increase hardness for each inch of thickness.
so.. apparently these shots do indeed penetrate objects after all and walls are indeed objects by the rules.
To make sure they go through the things they re supposed to go through: multiple sentient beings, overturned tables, etc.So now you have conceded the fact that they DO indeed go through objects like overturned tables but couldn't possibly go through a surface thicker eh? Im sorry the rules make no such distinction. The rules DO however offer a mechanic to represent the effectiveness of a thickness of a substance to stop damage and that is Hardness and even offer rules to increase hardness for each inch of thickness.
so.. apparently these shots do indeed penetrate objects after all and walls are indeed objects by the rules.
No.
Not stopping at cover ( the overturned table) is not the same as going through it the way you ve been using that phrase.
|
This is ultimately what GMs are for. The minutia of extreme examples covered in this thread can't possibly be written in their entirety. And rules need to be sufficiently future proofed.
That's why you see language such as "typically due to damage reduction or hardness".
That word "typically" is important. It leaves room for GMs to explain what "typically" means in their world.
It will differ from GM to GM. But that's fine. That's how the game is meant to be played and run.
Most GMs might agree, "Tables? No problem". Others might expand that to, "Walls? Sure!". But few would probably say, "Fifty feet of stone? Nothing says you can't" and fewer still would allow you to chew through their custom made Abadaran Vault encounter.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Which is fine, GM fiat and all that.
But we have rules about lines behave, and they encompass all line weapons. Whether a person argues that it doesn't make sense for a flamethrower line weapon to burn through a rock is immaterial. If I can get enough damage or a way to bypass hardness, rules say I can do it.
But it matters a great deal when comparing how you decide between competing interpretations of rules.
The rules do NOT say that line weapons go straight through all obstacles when they surpass their hardness including walls. It just says that the line passes through obstacles. They mean creatures and things that provide cover (not total cover)
It is not house rules, home brew, fiat to read the rules that way.
General rules of the game: you need line of effect to make attack rolls
Line rules: Lines are straight lines between you and point B
Line weapon rules: line weapons are not stopped by hitting one creature (the way a single attack would be), the line isn't stopped by hitting cover. Line weapons are also stopped if they hit something that they can't overcome the DR to.
Its an extra imposition on how lines normally work. Thats it.
Every conceivable mechanism of rules interpretation points this way.
1) It has raw backing (raw can be read that way. I think raw points heavily that way)
2) RAI. Do you really think they wanted to let people shoot through the entire asteroid from the door?
3) It avoids a slew of rules contradictions between lines of effect.
4(3b?)) it avoids Schrodinger line of effect. Say you're firing a weapon that does 2d6+1 damage against a hardness 10 wall o rock. DO you have line of effect or not? You can't make the attack roll without line of effect, but you can't get line of effect unless your attack does enough damage to get through the wall even vie the HKTB interpretation
5) It keeps the weapon useful without over powering it (shooting multiple people is always good)
6) doesn't break encounters by letting you mow down the dungeon from the door.
The only way to keep justifying the hot knife through butter interpretation is to keep claiming that there's no interpretation required to hold the position. People that have been around the rules forums for a while know that those sorts of arguments have a bad track record. Once you use a better method of comparing competing ideas the hot knife through butter interpretation goes out the window.
Actually, there is one thing that came up that I can't answer. Line of effect. Do you need line of effect to each potential target in the weapon's line?
Yes. You need line of effect.
so.. apparently these shots do indeed penetrate objects after all and walls are indeed objects by the rules.
Got a rules citation for that? Insofar as I'm aware, walls are not objects. They are structures.
Add the levels to those so we can see how those stack up?
Sure.
LVL - RNG - WEAPON
02 - 020 - Flame pistol
02 - 025 - Flame rifle
02 - 030 - Nova rifle, red star
02 - 030 - Stormcaller, sheet
03 - 020 - Anacite ion cannon, static
03 - 030 - Burner, ifrit-class
03 - 030 - Freeze ray, hiemal
03 - 060 - Rail cannon, tactical
03 - 060 - Sonic bolter, light
03 - 040 - Storm coil, live
04 - 030 - Acid lancer, corroder-class
04 - 040 - Cathode cannon, tactical
05 - 020 - Lightning pistol, sheet
06 - 040 - Disintegrator cannon, liquidator
06 - 040 - Plasma rifle, red star
07 - 040 - Burner, salamander-class
07 - 020 - Flame pistol, blaze
07 - 030 - Freeze ray, algid
07 - 060 - Nova rifle, yellow star
07 - 020 - Plasma pistol, red star
07 - 060 - Storm coil, jolt
07 - 040 - Stormcaller, ribbon
08 - 045 - Anacite ion cannon, aurora
08 - 060 - Cathode cannon, advanced
08 - 030 - Lightning pistol, ribbon
08 - 080 - Sonic bolter, heavy
09 - 030 - Acid lancer, melter-class
10 - 060 - Frailty cannon, murder-class
10 - 040 - Plasma rifle, yellow star
11 - 050 - Burner, hellhound-class
11 - 040 - Disintegrator cannon, decimator
11 - 030 - Flame pistol, inferno
11 - 040 - Freeze ray, glacial
11 - 080 - Nova rifle, white star
11 - 060 - Zero cannon, tactical
12 - 060 - Cathode cannon, elite
12 - 030 - Lightning pistol, rocket
12 - 025 - Plasma pistol, yellow star
12 - 080 - Rail cannon, advanced
12 - 080 - Sonic bolter, assault
13 - 075 - Anacite ion cannon, storm
13 - 060 - Stormcaller, rocket
14 - 050 - Acid lancer, liquefier-class
14 - 060 - Zero cannon, advanced
15 - 100 - Cathode cannon, paragon
15 - 060 - Frailty cannon, massacre-class
15 - 030 - Plasma pistol, white star
15 - 060 - Plasma rifle, white star
16 - 060 - Burner, firedrake-class
16 - 040 - Disintegrator cannon, executioner
16 - 040 - Freeze ray, isothermal
16 - 080 - Rail cannon, elite
17 - 030 - Flame pistol, solar flare
17 - 040 - Lightning pistol, smooth-channel
18 - 100 - Anacite ion cannon, tempest
18 - 120 - Cathode cannon, shockstorm
18 - 090 - Sonic bolter, devastator
18 - 060 - Stormcaller, smooth-channel
18 - 080 - Zero cannon, elite
19 - 050 - Acid lancer, disintegrator-class
19 - 080 - Frailty cannon, extinction-class
19 - 040 - Plasma pistol, blue star
19 - 100 - Rail cannon, paragon
20 - 075 - Burner, phoenix-class
20 - 040 - Disintegrator cannon, eradicator
20 - 050 - Freeze ray, hypothermic
20 - 100 - Plasma rifle, blue star
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
so.. apparently these shots do indeed penetrate objects after all and walls are indeed objects by the rules.Got a rules citation for that? Insofar as I'm aware, walls are not objects. They ares structures.
They are also obstacles.
A low obstacle (i.e., a wall half your height) provides cover, but only to creatures within 30 feet (six squares). The attacker ignores the cover if he’s closer to the obstacle than his target is.
Line weapons state that they overcome obstacles.
Actually, there is one thing that came up that I can't answer. Line of effect. Do you need line of effect to each potential target in the weapon's line?
You do not.
If a weapon, spell, ability, or item requires an attack roll and has a range measured in feet, it normally requires that you (or whoever or whatever is using the ability) have a line of effect to the target to be effective (subject to GM discretion). A line of effect is a straight, unblocked path that indicates what an attack or ability can affect. A line of effect is blocked by a solid barrier that can stop the effect in question (such as a wall, for most effects), but it is not blocked by purely visual restrictions (such as smoke or darkness). You cannot have line of effect that exceeds planetary range, unless otherwise indicated.
You must have a clear line of effect to any creature or object you wish to target or to any space in which you wish to create an effect without an area. For effects with an area, you must have a clear line of effect to the point of origin of the effect. An effect that is a burst, cone, cylinder, or emanation affects only an area, creature, or object within line of effect from its origin (a spherical burst’s center point, a cone-shaped burst’s starting point, the center point of a cylinder’s circle, or an emanation’s point of origin). For definitions of these specific terms, see Area on page 268.
As noted in the Line weapon description, they are one of the exceptions to the normal LOE rules. A wall (which is an obstacle) is not capable of stopping a line weapon if it rolls high enough on damage to beat its hardness. Line weapons have a clear line of effect because they make their own by breaking through, just like a phasing shot has line of effect because it phases through.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
so.. apparently these shots do indeed penetrate objects after all and walls are indeed objects by the rules.Got a rules citation for that? Insofar as I'm aware, walls are not objects. They are structures.
Add the levels to those so we can see how those stack up?Sure.
** spoiler omitted **...
Actually I do.
Pg 274 under the section were abilities and spell effects on large vehicles.
"For the purposes of abilities and spells, exceptionally large vehicles are not considered objects; instead, their various component parts (bulkheads, consoles, walls, etc.) are considered objects."
In addition pg 409 refers to doors and wall in many places when explaining how to break or damage objects
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Thanks Vexies.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
so.. apparently these shots do indeed penetrate objects after all and walls are indeed objects by the rules.Got a rules citation for that? Insofar as I'm aware, walls are not objects. They are structures.
That's some fine Aristotelian chicanery you've got there. ;)
Add the levels to those so we can see how those stack up?Sure.
** spoiler omitted **...
Thanks for adding those. It looks like most of the ones that do serious* damage at serious* range are pretty high level. Even if the FAQ comes out and clearly states that line weapons punch through any obstacle they're able to damage and ignore cover and concealment to objects and creatures along the line, I think they still wouldn't be the hands-down choice you fear.
*I did not clearly define any criteria for these descriptors.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
That's some fine Aristotelian chicanery you've got there. ;)so.. apparently these shots do indeed penetrate objects after all and walls are indeed objects by the rules.Got a rules citation for that? Insofar as I'm aware, walls are not objects. They are structures.
Touche. I was further highlighting my point that the developers may not consider walls to be obstacles in the same sense as many other people in this thread seem to be.
Line weapons state that they overcome obstacles.
Which you interpret to be all obstacles, via passing through them like they're not there, as opposed to some obstacles like other characters and tables which they overcome by not stopping the line.
Which you interpret to be all obstacles, via passing through them like they're not there, as opposed to some obstacles like other characters and tables which they overcome by not stopping the line.
Line weapons state that they overcome obstacles.
Yes, I interpret exceptions not listed as not being listed.
Which you interpret to be all obstacles, via passing through them like they're not there, as opposed to some obstacles like other characters and tables which they overcome by not stopping the line.
Line weapons state that they overcome obstacles.
Not all obstacles; just the ones which they're able to damage, like it says in the book.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Not all obstacles; just the ones which they're able to damage, like it says in the book.Which you interpret to be all obstacles, via passing through them like they're not there, as opposed to some obstacles like other characters and tables which they overcome by not stopping the line.
Line weapons state that they overcome obstacles.
Which has you attacking things you don't have line of effect to, like the book says you can't do. So which part of the rules are you going to insist is absolutely right at the exclusion of the other?
If the book is giving you a serious, game breaking contradiction between your interpretation and other rules you probably read it wrong somewhere. The book isn't perfectly clear, english isn't a precise language and the gods know people are less than perfect readers (especially when they're trying to read for a mechanical advantage)
It is not possible to meaningully insist that you are following the one true raw when following the one true raw will get you different answers depending on which raw you look at.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So which part of the rules are you going to insist is absolutely right at the exclusion of the other?
Glad you asked!
Specific. Beats. General.
Generally walls stop line of effect (though even that part suggests they don't always). The line rule says exactly how far they go and exactly under what circumstances they stop.
Whether targets along that line get cover bonuses or concealment are good points for debate, but whether or not walls stop the line is clear: only if it can't beat hardness.
So which part of the rules are you going to insist is absolutely right at the exclusion of the other?Glad you asked!
Specific. Beats. General.
.
And how are you ordering them? Above I laid out how to nest the rules from general to specific to account for all of the rules, without contradiction, and without a flame thrower shooting through the asteroid.
General rules of the game: you need line of effect to make attack rolls
Line rules: Lines are straight lines between you and point B and you affect everything in the line
Line weapon rules: line weapons are not stopped by hitting one creature (the way a single attack would be), the line isn't stopped by hitting cover. Line weapons are also stopped if they hit something that they can't overcome the DR to (normal lines aren't)
Your interpretation is not the same thing as the raw. If your interpretation winds up at abject sillyness (and we are at abject silliness) or brokeness re think it, it doesn't have to be right just because you interpreted it.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Its pointless to debate further. There has been ample support with the appropriate rules cited to show this works and is a completely valid reading of the rules. It is quite clear however that no amount of discussion beyond a dev coming in and saying yes that is intended or no its not is going to convince some. We have reached the point where both sides are firmly entrenched in their opinions so hit the big ole FAQ button and lets hope some of these questions get addressed at some point.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
...
And how are you ordering them? ...
General rules of the game: you need line of effect to make attack rollsLine rules: Lines are straight lines between you and point B and you affect everything in the line
Line weapon rules: line weapons are not stopped by hitting one creature (the way a single attack would be), the line isn't stopped by hitting cover. Line weapons are also stopped if they hit something that they can't overcome the DR to (normal lines aren't)
Your interpretation is not the same thing as the raw. If your interpretation winds up at abject sillyness (and we are at abject silliness) or brokeness re think it, it doesn't have to be right just because you interpreted it.
Single attacks aren't stopped by hitting one creature, nor are they stopped by hitting cover. They only target a single... erm, target, which may get an AC bonus from cover.
Not gonna shock you here, but I think your reading is the one that results in silliness. (Hope we're all still enjoying the debate, though!)
Let's talk about a wooden table. By your reading, if Iseph is crouched behind an overturned butcher's-block table (6 inch thick) when the advanced-rail-cannon-wielding security robot shoots down that line, that rail cannon will do 3d12+12(-5 for hardness) to that table and then deal 3d12+12 to Iseph, assuming the attack roll hit their KAC.
If we expand that table to make a wooden wall (6 inch think, hardness 5, 60HP, just like the table), by your reading, the rail cannon shot does 3d12+12 damage to the wall (again, minus 5 for hardness), but stops there. Because the wood is wider, the shot can't penetrate it.
To me, that's a much sillier reading.
Its pointless to debate further. There has been ample support with the appropriate rules cited to show this works and is a completely valid reading of the rules. It is quite clear however that no amount of discussion beyond a dev coming in and saying yes that is intended or no its not is going to convince some. We have reached the point where both sides are firmly entrenched in their opinions so hit the big ole FAQ button and lets hope some of these questions get addressed at some point.
Yeah, I hit the button, though the wording in that post was not the most faithful to the actual question.
Do we think they usually read through the thread to see where the confusion is, or do they usually narrowly answer a specific question where people hit the FAQ button?
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
Its pointless to debate further. There has been ample support with the appropriate rules cited to show this works and is a completely valid reading of the rules. It is quite clear however that no amount of discussion beyond a dev coming in and saying yes that is intended or no its not is going to convince some. We have reached the point where both sides are firmly entrenched in their opinions so hit the big ole FAQ button and lets hope some of these questions get addressed at some point.Yeah, I hit the button, though the wording in that post was not the most faithful to the actual question.
Do we think they usually read through the thread to see where the confusion is, or do they usually narrowly answer a specific question where people hit the FAQ button?
Yeah I would hit the FAQ button on the Original Post to be honest or perhaps start one stating the real question. In my mind it doesnt ignore cover or concealment at all. the question is now does it interact with obstacles and it what ways / circumstances does it pass through them other than whats already stated by the rules. If anyone has any ides how to word or have a better idea of what questions we are looking for answers feel free. However its a topic worthy of some explanation for sure.
Its pointless to debate further. There has been ample support with the appropriate rules cited to show this works and is a completely valid reading of the rules. It is quite clear however that no amount of discussion beyond a dev coming in and saying yes that is intended or no its not is going to convince some. We have reached the point where both sides are firmly entrenched in their opinions so hit the big ole FAQ button and lets hope some of these questions get addressed at some point.
Being A valid reading of the rules does not preclude it from being wrong.
Single attacks aren't stopped by hitting one creature, nor are they stopped by hitting cover. They only target a single... erm, target, which may get an AC bonus from cover.
Not gonna shock you here, but I think your reading is the one that results in silliness. (Hope we're all still enjoying the debate, though!)
Let's talk about a wooden table. By your reading, if Iseph is crouched behind an overturned butcher's-block table (6 inch thick) when the advanced-rail-cannon-wielding security robot shoots down that line, that rail cannon will do 3d12+12(-5 for hardness) to that table and then deal 3d12+12 to Iseph, assuming the attack roll hit their KAC.
If we expand that table to make a wooden wall (6 inch think, hardness 5, 60HP, just like the table), by your reading, the rail cannon shot does 3d12+12 damage to the wall (again, minus 5 for hardness), but stops there. Because the wood is wider, the shot can't penetrate it.
To me, that's a much sillier reading.
Sillier than a flame thrower shooting through 60 feet of solid rock? Or even wood?
Shooting at Ipseth behind a table grants him a +4 cover bonus, because he table will stop SOME of the bullets, as well as the fact that you can't see all of ipseth to aim at him but he does have his feet and a bit of his mowhawk sticking out (which is why you can target him with spells)
The overturned table is different than a wall natively and mechanically. RoboBot can aim at ipseth behind the table in a tight spread: its 2 feet high 5 feet wide the number of places ipseths vital organs can be is pretty small. A 5 by 5 walls greater surface area means twice as many places for ipseth to be standing which would require twice as many bullets to do enough damage to cut through it: something fairly well modeled by shooting the wall twice to destroy it. (or once to turn it into cover and then once to destroy it along with hitting ipseth)
TableL provides cover on first hit. Probably gone on second.
Wall total cover on first hit, cover on second hit, gone after on the third.
If you don't find that explanation perfect thats fine, but pretending that its sillier than a flame thrower shooting through 60 feet of rock is a non starter for any attempt at a legitimate comparison.
Shooting at Ipseth behind a table grants him a +4 cover bonus, because he table will stop SOME of the bullets,
This is silly, we know from reality that tables (and cars, with the exception of engine blocks) can't stop bullets, just like walls do stop flame throwers.
Of course, we can't build longarms that do more than 1d8 damage or flamethrowers that do more than similar damage, so maybe the latter would be different if we could.
Shooting at Ipseth behind a table grants him a +4 cover bonus, because he table will stop SOME of the bullets,This is silly, we know from reality that tables (and cars, with the exception of engine blocks) can't stop bullets, just like walls do stop flame throwers.
Of course, we can't build longarms that do more than 1d8 damage or flamethrowers that do more than similar damage, so maybe the latter would be different if we could.
Actually Depleted Uranium rounds can go through engine blocks which I would wager approach adamantine rounds in function.
Im not sure why im still commenting on this hamster wheel but here goes lol. there seems to be a lot of hyberbole going on. No one is saying you can shoot through 60ft of rock unless the penetration granted it the ability to do that.
Currently there are no such rules or stats for material anywhere near that thick. We do know the Hardness of a few inches of steel and stone and its already to the point of being able to block most if not all of the weapons in this category save the most powerful without really good rolls.
Why are there no stats for 60ft of stone? because its pretty obvious any thing smaller than a starship weapon isn't going to scratch it. If you need a way to use in game existing rules to reinforce your point (which I agree with to a degree) then its a simple matter of extrapolating how much hardness 60ft of stone would be and... imagine that your whole concern vanishes away.
The whole counter argument to this not only ignores a whole host of obvious rules it introduces even more GM fiat than necessary to use the rules as we believe them to be written.
A overturned table doesn't provide +4 cover because it stops some of the shots.. that doesn't even make sense with the VAST majority of weapons. There usage shows how many shots are expended. It provides that bonus because it makes it harder to hit your target unobstructed by that table. However if you wanted to you could just as well shoot the darn table and guess what for the vast majority of weapons the shots going to stop dead right there but yes they can shoot through them and do as Xenocrat pointed out. When a wall takes damage pieces fall off, holes appear. In the case of a gun shooting .... bullet holes appear lol but in the world of Starfinder you would have us believe all substances simply absorb the shot unless it completely destroys it and then boom next shot the target is naked.
Why are there no stats for 60ft of stone?
Because you didn't look for them.
................. Hardness.HP/inch of thickness
Stone or concrete 15 15
So 60 feet of stone still has 15 hardness and 15*12*60= 10,800 hit points. Hardness is based on the substance, not its bulk or thickness. HP is what changes with thickness, which is why I'm saying that having something ignore HP and ONLY go with hardness is silly.
(i thought it was hardness 10. its 15. The flame thrower will still work just requires a slightly bigger one)
No one is saying you can shoot through 60ft of rock unless the penetration granted it the ability to do that.
That is in fact what people are arguing because thats what they're arguing the line rules let them do.
The whole counter argument to this not only ignores a whole host of obvious rules it introduces even more GM fiat than necessary to use the rules as we believe them to be written.
Interpreting a rule differently than you is not ignoring it. Point to a single rule i've ignored. ONE.
It provides that bonus because it makes it harder to hit your target unobstructed by that table.
That would be concealment. If something worked like fog thats the mechanic it would use.
Its possible to use action movie physics without descending into video game glitch physics. In action movies tables, sofas, and grabbing the bad guy to use as a meat shield provide a +4 cover bonus and block bullets.
However if you wanted to you could just as well shoot the darn table and guess what for the vast majority of weapons the shots going to stop dead right there but yes they can shoot through them
Not by the mechanics of the game.
If you shoot a normal weapon at the table to get it out of the way and your bullet hits the table (because you rolled higher than a 1...) you damage the table and your bullet functionally stops there (because you attacked something and hit it, your attack doesn't get to hit anything else). If someone is holding a hostage you don't particularly care about (or your mystic has breath of life level healing) you can't just ignore the +4 cover bonus and shoot through them: they still block the bullet
What a line weapon does is let you attack the table (or hostage. if you're mean) AND the guy behind it at the same time : you can describe it as the hail of bullets bursting through the table and the guy behind it or other bullets getting rid of the table to clear the way for the next ones. The mechanics are the same.
Thats all a line weapon does. Its pretty powerful and useful without being game breaking. its a mook killer and it does that very well.
but in the world of Starfinder you would have us believe all substances simply absorb the shot unless it completely destroys it and then boom next shot the target is naked.
Right. That would be just as silly as someone with 100 hit points fighting as well at one hit point as 100....
Its also not how i suggested handling walls.
If you shoot a normal weapon at the table to get it out of the way and your bullet hits the table (because you rolled higher than a 1...) you damage the table and your bullet functionally stops there (because you attacked something and hit it, your attack doesn't get to hit anything else). If someone is holding a hostage you don't particularly care about (or your mystic has breath of life level healing) you can't just ignore the +4 cover bonus and shoot through them: they still block the bullet
I'm no longer sure we all have the same book.
If you shoot a normal weapon at the table to get it out of the way and your bullet hits the table (because you rolled higher than a 1...) you damage the table and your bullet functionally stops there (because you attacked something and hit it, your attack doesn't get to hit anything else). If someone is holding a hostage you don't particularly care about (or your mystic has breath of life level healing) you can't just ignore the +4 cover bonus and shoot through them: they still block the bulletI'm no longer sure we all have the same book.
What are you looking at that says you can take a normal (non line) weapon, use it to damage a table, and then have the bullet or strike hit the person behind it?
As far as the rules of this non-simulation are concerned, it doesn’t matter what the weapon is. The line weapon rules are basically “This is a gun. It fires a munition. The munition behaves in this specific way.” I get that you want a flamethrower to not fire through a thing.
Its not a matter of want. The words simply do not say what you think they do without affirming the consequent. The line stops if it hits something it hits but doesn't damage does NOT mean that the line ONLY stops if it hits something it doesn't damage.
I am more than willing to point out where raw has gone borked. This is not such an instance. The thing causing the problem is something that people area reading into the doughnut hole.
As far as the rules of this non-simulation are concerned, it doesn’t matter what the weapon is. The line weapon rules are basically “This is a gun. It fires a munition. The munition behaves in this specific way.” I get that you want a flamethrower to not fire through a thing.
Its not a matter of want. The words simply do not say what you think they do without affirming the consequent. The line stops if it hits something it hits but doesn't damage does NOT mean that the line ONLY stops if it hits something it doesn't damage.
I am more than willing to point out where raw has gone borked. This is not such an instance. The thing causing the problem is something that people area reading into the doughnut hole.
Its more than clear that you don't agree and that most of us in this thread don't agree with your assessment either. For your own table you have your interpretation and you have well documented the reasons for it here. I and others in this thread have our own and have done the same. To me it seems pretty cut and dry but its clear until we get a FAQ response we will just have to agree to disagree. Neither way of playing it is game breaking. I just wish the mechanics in many areas were a bit better explained. A simple example in many cases would be all that's needed to clarify a lot of misconceptions. Im really hoping to see some FAQ love in the near future as there are quite a few of these types of questions that would be great to have some insight on.
What are you looking at that says you can take a normal (non line) weapon, use it to damage a table, and then have the bullet or strike hit the person behind it?If you shoot a normal weapon at the table to get it out of the way and your bullet hits the table (because you rolled higher than a 1...) you damage the table and your bullet functionally stops there (because you attacked something and hit it, your attack doesn't get to hit anything else). If someone is holding a hostage you don't particularly care about (or your mystic has breath of life level healing) you can't just ignore the +4 cover bonus and shoot through them: they still block the bulletI'm no longer sure we all have the same book.
Starfinder CRB, right under the "Line" weapon property.
What book are you reading that says if you miss a target that has cover, you damage the cover?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
As far as the rules of this non-simulation are concerned, it doesn’t matter what the weapon is. The line weapon rules are basically “This is a gun. It fires a munition. The munition behaves in this specific way.” I get that you want a flamethrower to not fire through a thing.
Its not a matter of want. The words simply do not say what you think they do without affirming the consequent. The line stops if it hits something it hits but doesn't damage does NOT mean that the line ONLY stops if it hits something it doesn't damage.
I am more than willing to point out where raw has gone borked. This is not such an instance. The thing causing the problem is something that people area reading into the doughnut hole.
You're right: the line also stops at the end of its first range increment.
What are you looking at that says you can take a normal (non line) weapon, use it to damage a table, and then have the bullet or strike hit the person behind it?If you shoot a normal weapon at the table to get it out of the way and your bullet hits the table (because you rolled higher than a 1...) you damage the table and your bullet functionally stops there (because you attacked something and hit it, your attack doesn't get to hit anything else). If someone is holding a hostage you don't particularly care about (or your mystic has breath of life level healing) you can't just ignore the +4 cover bonus and shoot through them: they still block the bulletI'm no longer sure we all have the same book.Starfinder CRB, right under the "Line" weapon property.
What book are you reading that says if you miss a target that has cover, you damage the cover?
You misread something that i was very clear about in my post. I said you were deliberately shooting at the table to get it out of the way.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
What are you looking at that says you can take a normal (non line) weapon, use it to damage a table, and then have the bullet or strike hit the person behind it?If you shoot a normal weapon at the table to get it out of the way and your bullet hits the table (because you rolled higher than a 1...) you damage the table and your bullet functionally stops there (because you attacked something and hit it, your attack doesn't get to hit anything else). If someone is holding a hostage you don't particularly care about (or your mystic has breath of life level healing) you can't just ignore the +4 cover bonus and shoot through them: they still block the bulletI'm no longer sure we all have the same book.Starfinder CRB, right under the "Line" weapon property.
What book are you reading that says if you miss a target that has cover, you damage the cover?
You misread and/or misunderstood what he was saying. The example he gave was with a normal weapon, not one with the line property.
If I am wielding such a weapon, I can attack the target hiding behind the cover. Or I can attack the cover itself, in the hopes of destroying it and removing it as an obstacle. I cannot do both (at least, not in the same action).
A line weapon lets me attack both in the same action. And that's all it does. It does not let me shoot through walls or ignore line of effect/total cover.
Pretty sure that's the point BigNorseWolf was trying to make. (Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong BNW.)
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
as much as I WANT to out of habbit nope you got the point :)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
walls are obstacles...it is in fact their intended purpose and only functions in some cases.
....the twisted logic of this argument is getting to me
walls are obstacles...it is in fact their intended purpose and only functions in some cases.
....the twisted logic of this argument is getting to me
No, but if walls are obstacles, RD and BNW will be bound by law to let flame pistols shoot through adamantium mountains.
No, but if walls are obstacles, RD and BNW will be bound by law to let flame pistols shoot through adamantium mountains.walls are obstacles...it is in fact their intended purpose and only functions in some cases.
....the twisted logic of this argument is getting to me
If they had the range and could beat the hardness, yes, we would.
If they had the range and could beat the hardness, yes, we would.No, but if walls are obstacles, RD and BNW will be bound by law to let flame pistols shoot through adamantium mountains.walls are obstacles...it is in fact their intended purpose and only functions in some cases.
....the twisted logic of this argument is getting to me
IF you completely ignore that the scaling hardness of the material due to the thickness of the mountain would completely negate the possibility of it penetrating except in cases that dont even exist in game then yes they would.