Grappled & Ranged Attacks: Martial Arts vs. Tactical Shooting vs. Technical Grappling

[DouglasCole]

Originally Posted by vicky_molokh

Oh, I don't think TG is not generous enough. I don't know precisely where the most reasonable 'enough' lies. I'm just seeing that grappled ranged attacks are treated rather differently between B/MA, TS, and TG, and I wonder how they can be reconciled.

As FAQ-keeper, you of all should know there are many options in the various books that not only cannot be reconciled, but they're not supposed to be. The GM picks the rule appropriate to his game-world and the expectations of his players, and runs with it. If "can't shoot while grappled" is the right feel, than that's the operative rule. If "can shoot, but only at the guy grappling you" is right, that's operative. If he wants to say "you may shoot, but at the usual DX penalty for being grappled" then that's what it is.

[vicky_molokh]

Originally Posted by DouglasCole

As FAQ-keeper, you of all should know there are many options in the various books that not only cannot be reconciled, but they're not supposed to be. The GM picks the rule appropriate to his game-world and the expectations of his players, and runs with it. If "can't shoot while grappled" is the right feel, than that's the operative rule. If "can shoot, but only at the guy grappling you" is right, that's operative. If he wants to say "you may shoot, but at the usual DX penalty for being grappled" then that's what it is.

The situation is that we used to have separate books dealing with non-overlapping stuff. E.g. techbooks dealing with equipment, MA mostly dealing with combat (and a bit of equipment), Social Engineering dealing with social interaction etc. But as time goes by, overlaps appear, sometimes in unexpected places (e.g. HT and LT armour modifications, Technical Grappling and Tactical Shooting, or Supers and Transhuman Space [sic]).

Books also used to follow the 'when in conflict, use the latest', but this gets tricky when contradiction is only partial.

I'm fully expecting that once the questions will subside, there'll be grounds for adding a separate section to the oFAQ.