This is a scenario that happened in a session I GM'd. I have to explain the background to illustrate why this question would come up.
- worth mentioning, I planned the scenario for them to do some swashbuckling ... not flagrant ribaldry like the scoundrel women chose to do
- I also just made a judgement call to keep the adventure going, but I'd like to know the real answer

• the two women were tasked with a live capture of a foppish ISB agent at a social event
• I was broadsided when they decided to drug his drink with glitterstim, put on heavy charms, abscond with him to a nearby room and knock him out cold
• hilariously, their attempt to to just knock him out cold with a heavy object failed
• So, the one liplocked the bewildered target and the other shot the ISB agent in the back repeatedly with a stun-setting pistol

so, target is in physical skin contact with a distracting ally. Colleague shoots the target with the stun point blank range which hits without needing to roll.

Does this stun energy transfer to the distracting ally in the same way a taser's electricity would?

22 minutes ago, thinkbomb said:

This is a scenario that happened in a session I GM'd. I have to explain the background to illustrate why this question would come up.
- worth mentioning, I planned the scenario for them to do some swashbuckling ... not flagrant ribaldry like the scoundrel women chose to do
- I also just made a judgement call to keep the adventure going, but I'd like to know the real answer

• the two women were tasked with a live capture of a foppish ISB agent at a social event
• I was broadsided when they decided to drug his drink with glitterstim, put on heavy charms, abscond with him to a nearby room and knock him out cold
• hilariously, their attempt to to just knock him out cold with a heavy object failed
• So, the one liplocked the bewildered target and the other shot the ISB agent in the back repeatedly with a stun-setting pistol

so, target is in physical skin contact with a distracting ally. Colleague shoots the target with the stun point blank range which hits without needing to roll.

Does this stun energy transfer to the distracting ally in the same way a taser's electricity would?

Well they are in engaged range which upgrades the check and per RAW a despair can hit an ally in that situation so if they got a despair yes they would be effected.

15 hours ago, Daeglan said:

Well they are in engaged range which upgrades the check and per RAW a despair can hit an ally in that situation so if they got a despair yes they would be effected.

cool, thanks!

I definitely would have directed any threats rolled into Strain damage to the ally kissing the target. Could have easily pushed it off as the agent being a great kisser and it sent tingles down her whole body.

This is the same game where you can use an exploding grenade in melee combat and be safe so long as you don't activate Blast. So, sure, just do whatever gets the feelz.

20 hours ago, Varlie said:

I definitely would have directed any threats rolled into Strain damage to the ally kissing the target. Could have easily pushed it off as the agent being a great kisser and it sent tingles down her whole body.

You try to push the Hutt over the cliff... *Rolls despair*... But gently caress it's shoulder, eliciting a deep purr of pleasure.

Agreed, the threats and advantage tell you all you need to know for how the situation plays out. No matter how odd.

On 3/6/2020 at 7:23 AM, HappyDaze said:

This is the same game where you can use an exploding grenade in melee combat and be safe so long as you don't activate Blast. So, sure, just do whatever gets the feelz.

I house rule engaged targets get hit regardless.

1 hour ago, CloudyLemonade92 said:

I house rule engaged targets get hit regardless.

Since that all that activating Blast does, what is the point of spending Advantage/Triumph to activate Blast with your house rule?

20 hours ago, HappyDaze said:

Since that all that activating Blast does, what is the point of spending Advantage/Triumph to activate Blast with your house rule?

On a miss.

To me, and my players. It really doesn't make much sense when they throw a grenade into a bunch of enemies and only one gets affected. Much like GMs discretion when it comes to Thermal Detonators, I rule it similar with all grenade to engaged targets.

On a failed check, they can activate blast. It's a buff to grenades. Which I think is needed in the game.

28 minutes ago, CloudyLemonade92 said:

It's a buff to grenades. Which I think is needed in the game.

Have you ever seen a PCs made specifically to maximize grenade use? If so, I don't think you'd think it's needed.

2 hours ago, HappyDaze said:

Have you ever seen a PCs made specifically to maximize grenade use? If so, I don't think you'd think it's needed.

Thanks for the input, however, none of my PC's are doing that. So I think my home rule works just fine.

1 hour ago, CloudyLemonade92 said:

Thanks for the input, however, none of my PC's are doing that. So I think my home rule works just fine.

Which is setting your self up for abuse....

If it helps wounds arent real damage. That is reserved for crits....

1 hour ago, Daeglan said:

Which is setting your self up for abuse....

I dont think so.

3 hours ago, CloudyLemonade92 said:

I dont think so.

So what are you gonna do when one of your players decides to do the demolitionist?

Firstly, knowing my players preferences, I'd be very surprised.

Second, I would do nothing differently. We've found it to work better and feel more rewarding and realistic. Plus, grenades cost. Someone dedicated to the role is going to rack up quite a bill, especially for the more powerful nades. They're one time use, and you cant carry an unlimited number.

Edit - writing things in a less irritated fashion.