Printable Version of Topic

Posted by: ggodo May 10 2011, 10:50 PM

What're the need to haves for a Technomancer rigger? I'm terrible at figuring out how to prioritize Technomancers as is, rigging is even more confusing. Does he need complex forms? is it better than a sprite in a bot? Help me help him rebuild. Also, Longbow if you'd be kind enough to share what you're playing this summer that'd be nice to ensure we aren't double riggered. I dunno what I'd do with those drones.

Posted by: Yerameyahu May 10 2011, 10:55 PM

Well, first, god forbid you be suboptimal.

One method is threading your Command CF really high, and doing everything in Remote Control.
Good sprites can also be effective 'super-Pilots'.
Technomancers can slave drones to their bionode for hack-proof-ness (IIRC), and can (with GM approval) get a nice TacNet CF.

Standard hacker bonuses still work: PuSHeD, Sim Boosters, etc.

There are some previous threads on this, of course. Do a search for more extensive tips.

Posted by: CanRay May 10 2011, 11:39 PM

And you can have many guns flying around your head controlled by your murderthoughts.

It's not just about builds, people, it's also about Roles and "Rule Of Cool"!

Posted by: ggodo May 11 2011, 01:38 AM

So, The theme I'm getting is Sprites in bots is good, how high a rating should sprites have? The player is new to rigging, how do you play this?

Posted by: CanRay May 11 2011, 01:39 AM

Never summon anything bigger than your head.

That includes the Digital Magicians as well.

Posted by: longbowrocks May 11 2011, 05:40 AM

I was considering playing a hacker/technomancer so that you wouldn't need to artificially lower thresholds in the matrix anymore, but it sounds like you've got that covered. Instead, I'll go with my first idea:

I'm playing The Most Interesting Man in the World.
I'll seriously aim for the following using positive/negative qualities and my general build.
His blood smells like cologne.
He's a lover, not a fighter. But he's also a fighter, so don't get any ideas.
The police often question him, just because they find him interesting.
He can speak French, in Russian.
At museums, he is allowed to touch the art.
On Careers: "Find out what it is in life that you do not do well, and then don't do that thing."

These might make it into the roleplay:
He is the life of parties he never attended.
He once had an awkward moment, just to see how it felt.
On Wingmen: "It doesn't take more than one man to talk to a woman."
On Rollerblading: "No."

His main two catchphrases will make it in there as roleplay or negative qualities.

All in all, I'm going to shoot for a character with about 20 dice in both shooting and social skills, with moderate stealth aspects.

Posted by: Sengir May 11 2011, 12:13 PM

You should decide three things first, because they are not covered by RAW
- How do sprites interact with drones
- How do sprites use autosofts, and how is their Autosoft power actually used?
- Can TMs get the bonus from a Control Rig?

Apart from that, high Willpower is obviously nice to have if the player wants to jump in frequently. For a starting drone loadout, I'd suggest an up-armoured Doberman with White Knight LMG, and a Fly-Spy with sensors raised to R6 (see the Arsenal errata on that) and various vision enhancements in the camera.

Posted by: capt.pantsless May 11 2011, 01:40 PM

Or better yet, work-out some house-rules on a natural control-rig for technomancers, say a quality around 10 BP or so, to get the standard control-rig bonus without blowing any essence. If you're going to work-up houserules for Riggermancers, why not go all the way.

(Oh, and once you've done all that, write it up and publish it here!)

Posted by: Rasumichin May 11 2011, 03:44 PM

So...elven adept?

Posted by: ggodo May 12 2011, 04:41 AM

So, after reading through techno stuff again, how do you reccommend stats and skills for dronomancy?

Posted by: longbowrocks May 12 2011, 04:43 AM

Except the adept part. It's become part of my play style until all essence hugging awakened grovel before my mundane glory. (ugh, does the word have to be "mundane"? That's the sort of thing I'm talking about. Even the word "mundane" basically implies that awakened are better)

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein May 12 2011, 12:38 PM

Its just a perception thing, and perception does not always equal reality... Really, the Mundanes in the core character group that we play tend to be better than the Awakened, because they are useful in more situations, and carry less drawbacks. Of course, it is a play style thing, ans likely a Character Concept thing. When your Awakened spend every available point into making their magical natures more powerful/versatile, they tend to fall by the wayside for non-magical tasks. They are very good magically, but not so good non-magically.

If you are only comparing on the capabilities of unlimited advancement, then yes, Awakened/Emergent characters have unlimited potential. But it never really works out that way in game. Something always comes up.

Posted by: squee_nabob May 12 2011, 01:10 PM

Have resonance 6, thread to command 12. Use 1 drone remotely as the primary. Have a rating 6+ (hopefully 7 so your mage can heal the P fade) machine sprite to autonomously command another drone. I suggest Hussar's from WAR! but if you don't have a face, the 32F availability is rather hard to hit.

I would equip the Hussars with Lonestar Flash Flood Cannons, and cover them in grenades (unless you use the greande rules from WAR, in which case I would use a fully automatic grenade launcher as an option).

Posted by: longbowrocks May 12 2011, 03:02 PM

One of the things that usually gets me is that it's difficult for a mundane to max out an augmented skill, whereas if you're willing to play awakened, it's as easy as taking the adept quality for Improved Ability. There's more, but basically it's the fact that their selling feature is versatility, and they can still min-max better than a mundane on the side.

Posted by: sabs May 12 2011, 03:13 PM

reflex recorders? reflex recorder(group) are both great add ons for physical skills

Athletics: Synthcardium, and some others can get you +6 to your dp's easily.
There are tons of +logic enhancers that will give you + to your tech skill pools.
Attention-Coprocessors, so cheap, everyone should have one. +3 to all physical perception tests.

Saying that Cyber can't rack up the augments to skill dp's is.. a mistake.

Posted by: Dakka Dakka May 12 2011, 03:30 PM

I'm pretty sure Fading can't be healed magically, no matter if it is S or P.

Posted by: longbowrocks May 12 2011, 03:37 PM

I should have been more specific: weapon skills.

You can get a reflex recorder... and synch gives you a situational bonus, but it's not reliable so I don't count it. Therefore adept gets a +2 bonus that I can't.

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein May 12 2011, 04:26 PM

True, but I think that Longbowrocks is complaining that there are not a lot of SKILL Augmentations available to Mundane Characters. Outside of your Reflex Recorders and the MBW System (for Dodge) there are not any others I can think of off the top of my head. The issue he compares to is the Adepts ability to apply his Skill modifications to any Combat, Technical, Physical or vehicle skills. Hard to compete with that. Though I guess a Reflex Recorder will apply to the Combat and Physical Skills, but there is just not a lot of applicable tech to apply to skills.... It is a distinct lact of equality that he is seeing.

I agre that the vast amount of ware available will compensate the Dice Pools quite adequately, though, as most Adepts will not go in for much in the way of augmentation. In fact, I often see Strreet Sams outstripping Adepts abilities, except in a very few cases (Elemental Damage for one).

Anyways...

Posted by: DireRadiant May 12 2011, 04:37 PM

Look at p. 247 in SR4A. Chart has all the tests.

Pick the mode and style your dronomancer will specialize in, and maximize those related skills and attributes/programs/CF that you will be using.

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein May 12 2011, 04:43 PM

Fading is treated just like Drain, as far as I know. First Aid can aid, magic cannot. But I have no Quotes for that. In fact, the thing keeping Drain from being healed magically is because it is self inflicted magical damage. Fading does not fall into that category, so I see no reason that it COULDN"T be healed by magic. *shrug*

Posted by: sabs May 12 2011, 04:45 PM

It's because they cut and pasted the Drain rules for Fading and then did a search and replaced ^drain^fading

Posted by: Yerameyahu May 12 2011, 05:02 PM

As they should have. It's magic, except it's Resonance.

Posted by: X-Kalibur May 12 2011, 05:24 PM

Digital magic.

Posted by: KarmaInferno May 12 2011, 05:29 PM

Well, it's not QUITE that simple. You still have to get your base skill up first to double whatever Improved Ability rating you want to get.



-k

Posted by: Yerameyahu May 12 2011, 05:33 PM

Not like skill rating (augmented or otherwise) matters much more than attribute or DP mods. There are maybe 2 rare things it affects.

Posted by: KCKitsune May 12 2011, 07:03 PM

This is why God made grenade launchers. Sure you can't make a cold grenade, but fire is easy enough

Posted by: ggodo May 12 2011, 07:29 PM

An odd question, but one I'd like to have answered. When a sprite is in a drone, does it use Response or Command?

Posted by: Yerameyahu May 12 2011, 07:36 PM

Depends: are they Remote Controlling or Jumped In? I assume if you have a sprite in the drone as a 'super-Pilot', it makes tests just like a Pilot. There's probably no reason they can't Remote Control, though. For most sprites, Response and Command should be nearly equal, right?

Posted by: ggodo May 12 2011, 07:49 PM

They Should be straight up equal, as far as I can tell. I haven't got uwired, though. Are there advantages to having the sprite in direct control? I'm away from Book and interested in how rigging works.

Posted by: Emy May 12 2011, 08:08 PM

The difference isn't in the dicepool, it's in the action types. With remote control, whenever you want to do anything, be it a complex, simple, or free action, you need to spend a complex action to use Command. Jumped in, you take meatspace actions like a normal meatperson, so your free actions are free, you can do two simple actions in a pass, etc.

Posted by: ggodo May 12 2011, 08:12 PM

So I should always have the sprite "Jumped In?" That seemed like the best option, but I'm fuzzy on how sprites interact with drones.

Posted by: Yerameyahu May 12 2011, 08:40 PM

There are the same tradeoffs that normal characters have, but the nature of sprites could alter them. For a normal player, it can be easier to get Command higher, and you never suffer dumpshock or anything; Jumped In can be faster (esp. for the reasons Emy mentioned), but there are drawbacks. Sprites still have a condition monitor.

I'm not actually *certain* sprites can Jump In at all, but it seems pretty reasonable. If they can't, they may be able to more literally replace the Pilot, which means they use Autosofts instead of 'people skills'. See the table on p247, SR4A. I don't think this latter idea is right, though.

It's a little problematic: sprites are basically agents, and Pilots are basically agents, but there are major differences between each of these three things that makes assumptions dangerous. :/ Sprites generally have 'people skills', not autosofts, and we can't necessarily assume they count as replacing the specialized vehicle-control systems of the Pilot… and they lack Piloting skills.

Posted by: DireRadiant May 12 2011, 08:41 PM

Machine Sprites have a Command CF, that would seem to make that the expected mode of control.

This does not preclude "jumping in" though.

From fluff you could argue a Sprite doesn't have a brain to do the fancy bionuerological feedback tricks that are what "Jumping in" does.

In practical terms I'd just let a player use whatever they think is best. Choices can be fun.

Posted by: ggodo May 12 2011, 08:48 PM

I'm inclined to go with Dire Radiant and just let sprites jump in, But I honestly have no idea how sprites can do anything drone related. Is there anything in Unwired that will help/clarify?

Posted by: Stahlseele May 12 2011, 08:51 PM

Question:
Is he underpowered compared to the rest of the group, or compared to longbowrocks character? O.o
This is an important distinction to make i guess ^^

Posted by: Yerameyahu May 12 2011, 08:59 PM

The books also say that sprites barely know anything about the non-matrix world; machine sprites are the closes thing to an exception. So, they may not be any good at driving and combat.

Posted by: ggodo May 12 2011, 09:09 PM

Everyone is underpowered compared to Longbow. I fear he is broken to the point of non-functional by my lack of understanding how sprites interact with drones. The original sheet is lost to the nether, anyway, so I'm looking to rebuild him into something that works. I don't expect him to top Longbow, but aren't riggers the most terrifying archetype? He could be up there on the power scale. I also should really exert a bit more oversight on Longbow, just so I can keep track of what he's up to.

Posted by: ggodo May 12 2011, 09:18 PM

I'm now picturing the rigger as Patten training his sprites for combat with inspiring speeches.

Posted by: Yerameyahu May 12 2011, 09:41 PM

Well, you should be careful with Mr. longbowrocks. All I see are repeated threads about his fundamentally misreading the rules. Good-naturedly, of course.

Posted by: ggodo May 12 2011, 10:07 PM

Oh, I'm watching him, alright.

Posted by: Stahlseele May 12 2011, 10:08 PM

i could probably give you some idea as to what he might be up to this/next time, but that's only because i seem to keep giving him ideas *snickers*
also: yes, riggers are potentially the most devastating force you can have around. a good rigger can take over a god damn batmancarrier after all...

Posted by: longbowrocks May 13 2011, 03:31 AM

Wait, what? I;m reading this:
"Improved Ability
Cost: .5 per level (Combat skills),
.25 per level (Physical, Social, Technical, and Vehicle skills)
This power increases the rating of a specific Active skill by 1 per
level. A skill’s maximum modified rating equals its base rating x 1.5.
Improved ability must be purchased for a specific skill, not a skill group."

Posted by: longbowrocks May 13 2011, 03:42 AM

Whoa, lets not forget that none of the characters I've put on paper have been illegal. The troll was pre-errata, but I feel like that's just being behind the times since none of our group knew (including me).

Posted by: PoliteMan May 13 2011, 05:43 AM

Except that Pilots also seem to basically be a System as well, because that simplifies things immensely . Per RAW, I don't think sprites can "jump in" a drone. Isn't there a AI Quality that allows them to jump into drones, which would indicate that sprites and agents can't (don't have RC in front of me)? Of course, RAW is kinda dumb on this stuff and I don't see anything broken about it, so why not allow it? It's simpler anyway.

And yeah, be careful with riggers, especially if they can also hack (and why wouldn't they). Everything is Matrix accessible and controllable: cars on the freeway, airplanes, your toaster, that building over there. Seriously, in the future everyone still ties their own ties, because if they didn't the riggers would have choked everyone to death long ago.

Posted by: KarmaInferno May 13 2011, 07:04 AM

"base rating x 1.5"

Ergo, your base skill must be raised to double the Improved Ability rating.

If your base skill rating is 2, your maximum modified rating is 3. Which is base skill of 2 plus Improved Ability 1.

If your base skill rating is 4, your maximum modified rating is 6. Which is base skill of 4 plus Improved Ability 2.

And so on.

Note that this maximum modified rating also applies to any other direct skill boosts. (although other direct skill boosts are rare) So if you had Widget X that gave you a +2 skill modifier (as opposed to skill DICE POOL modifier), and your base skill was 4, getting Improved Ability on top of that would not actually help you any.



-k

Posted by: longbowrocks May 13 2011, 07:09 AM

Ah, I always thought skill ratings worked like attribute ratings (augmented max = 1.5 X natural max).

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein May 13 2011, 12:50 PM

Nope, though that would simplify everything, wouldn't it?

Posted by: Yerameyahu May 13 2011, 02:00 PM

PoliteMan, I fully agree: Pilot=System is the main reason I assume sprites *can't* replace them. You're also right about Piloting Origin. The quality is the only thing that lets a free AI 'jump in' or/and use autosofts. While 'sprites are special', that seems to be strong evidence that they can't do that.

If the question came up while GMing, I think I'd allow high-rating Sprites to take a Power equivalent to that as a bonus power; maybe just Machine Sprites?

In conclusion, it looks like Sprites use Command. They're still a good choice, because it means your drones are hack-proof, and you can control them (IIRC?) via the Resonance link (no wireless). If the existing Pilots are already great, you can also use cheap sprites to relay orders for you in the same way, but TacNets are tough without sensor feeds.

Posted by: DireRadiant May 13 2011, 02:13 PM

Runners Companion p. 91 for AI
"Piloting Origin
Cost: 5 or 10 BP
The AI’s origin is (or is related to) that of a drone or vehicle
pilot program. With the 5 BP version of this quality, the character
with this quality can interpret rigger signals and may “jump into”
rigged vehicles as would a rigger. The 10 BP version of this quality
is the same, except that the AI may load and directly use all autosoft
programs, using the program rating in place of its own skill."

Which would imply that' it's expected a Sprite/Agent/AI/Pilot(For a different vehicle) cannot normally "Jump in", otherwise why pay BP for the ability to do so?

Posted by: Ascalaphus May 13 2011, 03:22 PM

So which drones are nice to have?

Posted by: sabs May 13 2011, 05:01 PM

20x Centipedes 4 1K each
1 x Armadillo 12F 20K
1 x Nimrod (if you can) 18F 75K (post char gen)
1 x Crimson Samurai 10R 9.5K
3 x Micro-Tapper Bug 8 1K each
2 x Repeater Drone 6 3K each
3-5 x MCT Fly Spy 6 2K each
1 x Lockheed Optic-X 6 1.7K
2 x MCT-Nissan RotoDrone 6 2K each
2 x GM-Nissan Doberman 6 3K each

That is a nice drone setup. Lots of tools, for lots of options.

Posted by: Sengir May 13 2011, 05:04 PM

Maybe Machine Sprites have that quality built in, because their job is controlling drones.

As for using Command...well, how does a Sprite control a Roto-Drone then? Or anything else requiring a vehicle skill that can't be defaulted on?
Having the Sprite replace the Pilot (and use the Autosofts from provided by its skill) is the most hassle-free way and also works fine with fluff. You just need to decide whether a Sprite shall be allowed to use normal Autosofts.


@Ascalaphus: As written above, my suggestion is the Doberman + Armour + White Knight LMG and the FlySpy with R6 sensors and various vision enhancements. Also interesting:
- That police drone from Arsenal
- RM Wolfspinne (German Arsenal, can be found in DK's character generator)
- Stormcloud (eye in the sky)
- Larger combat drones IMO do not make much sense, of course also depends on the style of your group

Posted by: Ascalaphus May 13 2011, 05:15 PM

I'm just very interested in what other people consider to be useful drones, and why.

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein May 13 2011, 05:46 PM

Well...

Most of the drones my CyberLogician uses are there for Observational/Surveillance purposes.

FlySpys
Optic Xs
DragonFlys
Centipedes
Crawlers
Stormclouds

I use the following for Combat purposes

Rotodrones
Heimdalls
Dragonflys
LEBD-1s
Dalmations

There are also several I use from "This Old Drone," Mainly because they are fairly easy to come by, if a bit outdated.

Predators
Wanjida

Probbaly does not help a lot, but those are my choices.

Posted by: Yerameyahu May 13 2011, 06:13 PM

Sengir, that's not really Machine Sprite's job, though. They're just the closest. As for controlling a roto-drone or any other with Command… it's all Command, all the time. That's already how it works for everyone: Command does everything, regardless of any circumstances. (Yeah, it's kinda stupid-good, except for that one 'all actions are Complex' drawback.) Having the vehicle skill is another source of DP, but it's the same as any Drone without a Maneuver autosoft.

Posted by: ggodo May 13 2011, 08:34 PM

So, the consensus is Sprites Command via Command? That is their only method?

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein May 13 2011, 10:24 PM

Well (IIRC), unless a Sprite is in a Resonance Realm Chillin', or on a Remote Task, it MUST be in the same node as the Technomancer. So yes.

Posted by: ggodo May 13 2011, 10:58 PM

Awesome, glad that was hashed out.

Posted by: PoliteMan May 14 2011, 04:17 AM

I personally love Ford LEBDs. Probably the ultimate multipurpose drone: it flies, it shoots, and it has a mechanical arm for non-combat stuff.

Posted by: longbowrocks May 14 2011, 05:45 AM

And it doesn't just barely fly either. It actually has decent stats across the board.

Posted by: Sengir May 14 2011, 08:48 AM

Programs replace attributes in the Matrix (SR4A, p.226: In Matrix tests, the attribute portion of the test is replaced with a program or Matrix attribute). So if you default on a skill, you default on the program rating instead - the typical script kiddie thing, I have no clue but a program to do the job. But if a skill can't be defaulted on, the greatest program becomes useless.

And unregistered Sprites CAN be sent on a remote task, it just costs all remaining owed services. Which doesn't really matter if the Sprite was only compiled to control that drone

Posted by: Faraday May 14 2011, 08:55 AM

Make it look like an http://images.wikia.com/fallout/images/f/f9/Fo3_enclave_eyebot.pngand I'm sold.

Posted by: Stahlseele May 14 2011, 09:26 AM

That's what pimped out ride is there for, isn't it? O.o
Also, swarms of FlySpies with AntiTheft SafetyMeasures that can deal enough electrical stun damage attacks to power seattle for a week or so . .

Posted by: Sengir May 14 2011, 11:13 AM

Me too, because the only problem I have with the LEBD is that it has a (rather large, judging by the illustration) rotor. Kinda sucks if you need it indoors, hence I prefer walking drones with Gecko Tips


Another idea I had was using a Blimp mounting an internal turret with a huge sniper rifle as remote-controlled "death from above". Problem is, the Stormcloud is too small and the Zeppelin too big, so you have to mod something. But a car on a blimp frame is not exactly inconspicuous...so I'm still waiting for something lighter than air and with a Body somewhere around 8...

Posted by: Falconer May 14 2011, 03:15 PM

And if I read the rules correctly... sprites are still limited by the response of the node they're in.

So compared to the normal low-cost pilot 3 program, you're not going to get a huge increase from a sprite unless you're spending the big bucks on response upgrade chips.

Posted by: Sengir May 14 2011, 04:36 PM

Each sprite has a rating that is equivalent to the Pilot rating of an agent and determines its other Matrix attributes. A sprite’s Matrix attributes are independent of the attributes of any node in which it is running; it runs on other, inexplicable resources.
SR4A, p.240

Posted by: Falconer May 14 2011, 06:01 PM

Thank you for pointing that out, I was trying to find that.

But still it doesn't address another potential problem I see. "equivalent to the pilot rating of an AGENT"

The sprite would not replace the pilot rating of the drone as best I can tell. It would simply run in the drones node in addition to the 'drone-specific' pilot program which replaces it's OS. Otherwise it would be akin to saying a sprite in a commlink replaces the OS and system... and you couldn't crash the node w/o crashing the sprite which doesn't make sense. Nowhere can I find anywhere that a sprite can use software/autosofts loaded into the drone. Only thing I'm sure of is it can use it's own complex forms.

To be viable for a combat drone though it strikes me at a minimum you'd need a rating 6 machine sprite (command CF, then two autosoft CF's). One manuever and another gunnery autosoft. Though the use of it's diagnostics power to someone actually rigging the drone and maybe even to the drones inherent pilot OS might be usefull.

I'm sounding this out to make sure I have the right of it....

Posted by: Udoshi May 14 2011, 06:19 PM

I'm a fan of the Dragonfly. Sure, the weapons suck, but its a small easily concealable hoverdrone. In my last game, the team rather liked using Disguise skill to work it into clothing. Not because its a hidden weapon, but because our rigger had ones with good sensors.
Also, the dragonflies price makes MUCH more sense when you realize its description says it comes with Ultrasound, which cost a 1000Y (Since drone statblocks don't include sensor loadouts, the only place it can go is on its Camera, hence the huge price).

The Crimson Samurai is notably hilarious becuse its armor/body/speed ratio is such that it works with a Ram Plate out of the box, doing no damage it itself. Haven't used it in play, though.

Micro-tapper bugs from Arsenal, with some gecko tips are rather excellent for what they do. Paired with some Myomeric rope from the main book, fiberoptic cable, duct tape, and a microcamera you suddenly have a remote controllable snake cable. I would however, consider giving it a Toolkit via special machinery(like the mister fixit drone)

The LEBD-1 is excellent, though the Hawker-Siddley Mixcoatl from Milspectech deserves an honorable mention: Its like a rotodrone except better, and more expensive.

For whats its worth, during the finale of my last game, our team got a ton of use out of some heavily modified Dalmatians.(not doberman). Because they're flying urban police drones, we modified them to accept a pilot(rigger coccoon), chameleon coating and spoof chips, backed that up with some hacking to make sure they wouldn't be noticed, and used them to ferry the team around in plain sight. I mean, its just a drone going somewhere. There's no way a person could be inside, right?
The hard part was fitting the ejection seat inside.

Posted by: Yerameyahu May 14 2011, 07:50 PM

I think people assume a person couldn't be inside because a person *can't* be inside them.

Posted by: longbowrocks May 14 2011, 08:44 PM

I don't understand. The dalmatian is not a minidrone or microdrone. It's a medium drone. The rigger cocoon is a standard mod, so it fits. A person goes in the rigger cocoon. What am I missing?

Posted by: Yerameyahu May 14 2011, 08:47 PM

It's a Large drone, but it's a drone.

It's a lightweight vec-thrust surveillance drone (it also costs freaking nothing), so there's even less reason to assume it could accomodate a passenger. Unless otherwise noted, drones don't carry passengers, and there's no reason to assume they'd have any internal space for them. At best, you're duct-taping a person to the bottom.

The rigger cocoon is an armored bag/seat that fits where a seat usually does; a replacement. It doesn't create a new seat from nothing.

Posted by: longbowrocks May 14 2011, 09:33 PM

My bad, I was looking at the doberman.
As for seating:
"It consists
of a seat completely surrounded by fire-resistant ballistic cloth,
reinforced by metal plates to prevent someone from merely
sticking a sword through it, and including cushions and harnesses
to keep the rigger from rattling around."

I read this as adding a seat, since building it around a seat would create too many weak points.
If built into a vehicle, it would have to take out a seat. On a drone, I see it as looking like it does on a Tachikoma (Ghost in the Shell, not Shadowrun).

The quote on large drones mentions that they are typically not meant to have passengers, and this is the only thing I could think of that could create that implied exception. The exception is definitely intentionally implied, because the paragraph above that on medium drones says that "They are unable to carry
an adult metahuman".

The metal plates on the cocoon should give it enough structure to be riveted onto a drone. As for the question of weight, I dunno. I imagine a rigger cocoon might make up the difference between the weight of a normal metahuman, and a troll, which would be bad as per the example in your quote.

"Microdrones can only be equipped with microdrone modifications; minidrones can
only be equipped with microdrone and minidrone modifications;
all other drones and vehicles can only be equipped with
standard modifi cations"AR131
Just quoting this for the heck of it. I'm aware we're discussing whether the rigger cocoon is a specific exception.

Posted by: Yerameyahu May 14 2011, 09:49 PM

You're right: *when* "built into a vehicle, it would have to take out a seat". It replaces it, or fills a large available empty space (like in a truck). It definitely doesn't mean 'create a new space inside a no-passenger drone for an armored seat'. You can't base your reasoning on 'the general rule doesn't say I can't'. That's called a loophole.

The bit I quoted clearly explained that a Large drone could *maybe* carry someone on top or as external cargo.

(While it's not a question of structure—we're talking about a seat already—, I understand the metal plates to be armor, not structure. If you're 'riveting' seat *onto* a drone, that's external; hardly a way to "ferry the team around in plain sight".)

Tachikomas are built from the ground up to have a passenger option. They have a large empty space, and moving parts to accomodate entry. Honestly, I'm fine with attaching a chair to the top of a drone (I'll bet it flies well that way, hehe). It's just the idea that you can magically fit a whole person (plus an armored chair) *inside* a drone that's a problem. Usually, people at least have the shame to specify that the loophole is only for pixies.

Posted by: longbowrocks May 14 2011, 10:15 PM

C'mon, a drone doesn't need all those useless things like energy sources, weapons, motors, logic circuits, and internal structural supports.
Seriously though, I was talking about adding the cocoon on, not putting it inside.
Not like it needs to be inside with 20 armor, 10 structure, and 5 bonus dice against crashing and loop-the-loops.

Dang, I forgot he was trying to be unobtrusive.
As for the metal plates, I guess that would be right. When I originally saw rigger cocoons, I just skimmed over that and read it as a metal frame. On that last post, I interpreted the high structure and armor as rigidness. Oh well, you can still duct-tape it on.

That's the sort of look I was talking about though. A big passenger compartment that doesn't fit in the body, but rather just stuck on the back.

Ah well. You guys win.

Posted by: Golgoth May 15 2011, 01:39 AM

Just a quick reply on all this but... Why not have a Machine Sprite run Diagnostics on the drone that the TM is jumped in to? Unless you're hoping to have multiple drones do awesome things, then how about a couple of registered sprites run Diagnostics for the Pilot system of Drone X?

Posted by: DireRadiant May 15 2011, 06:43 AM

I ask myself, "What is a Drone?"
And look, I go find the descriptions of drones as a class of vehicle.

p. 244 SR4A, the section titled Drones. While there is a lot of more general stuff, you may be interested in the sentence,
"Drones (and only drones) are incapable of carrying passengers and
are instead fitted with an integral rigger adaptation (p. 348)."

The next sentence implies you can have passenger drones, but that's because you can turn a vehicle into a drone. But note it starts as a vehicle.

That's from the main rule book core definition of a drone, not the specific special cases that come in other books.

Posted by: Udoshi May 15 2011, 07:05 AM

While this is normally true, however, a Large Drone is a Standard Vehicle for mod distinctions, which is all you need for a Rigger Coccoon, which CAN have a person inside it.


Also, at body 4, its the size of a small tank(comparatively), Using the steel lynx for comparison. If medium drones(Steed, Orderly) and Large Drones(crashcart, from the core book, even) can carry people then you can't really point at an outdated rulebook to say 'oh no, it doesn't work like that', when newer rules quite clearly say they do. The upper size range for a body 4 drone is a small car, and even a humbug fits two. Not comfortably mind you, but it does.(also on page 102)



Gee. So the core book says drones can't have passengers, and then newer arsenal says drones CAN have passengers if they say so. Gosh, I wonder which is right. There's nothing wrong with the exception taking precedence over the general - but the rigger cocoon lets you take it a step further and apply it to other things.

On a side note, I'd recommend limiting rigger cocoon's armor on drones to that of the drone itself. it doesn't make sense that it would be tougher than the frame its mounted on - and it uses barrier rules, which are even harder.




You're not. Thats exactly how it works - plus some size/comfort considerations for the specific product involved when the GM looked it over.

Posted by: Ascalaphus May 15 2011, 10:18 AM

I do get the idea some of you are getting to hung up on that drones don't normally carry passengers. That's just because normally they don't get manual control nor seats - but on a big enough drone, you could put those in.

Posted by: Yerameyahu May 15 2011, 01:55 PM

This is exactly the kind of munchkin reasoning I was talking about. It makes sense… if you ignore everything else you know about the game. For more examples, see the whole Broken Rule thread. Don't encourage longbowrocks to cheat.

Arsenal says that drones can have passengers in exactly 3 situations: medical drones, someone literally sitting atop the drone, or someone literally carried as cargo… presumably from a hook.

Ascalaphus, I agree. I just don't agree that there *are* any drones big enough (well, maybe cargo drones, if they exist); not the Dalmatian, anyway. There's no room. It's not a question of 'aw, no captain's chair?'.

Posted by: Falconer May 15 2011, 02:38 PM

I agree, it's pure munchkinism at it's worst. It's no different than when you see someone trying to put a monster gun on miniscule weapon mount where the gun ends up much larger than the drone itself.


I don't see a problem w/ the concept... but it makes sense that every bit of space on the drone is already taken up though. At the very least it should require a large drone IMO.... and then I'd require 2 different mods to make it work... and probably hit it w/ the over-modded penalty on top as a speed/handling penalty...

Look at the 'special machinery/storage' mod... the drone itself doesn't have space available inside it, even if the 'rigger cocoon' is slapped on. At best at that point you've added a noticable external cargo 'pouch' which should be detectable by visual sensors in something as simple as a tacnet... (uses sensors to identify drones/weapons/etc... it only makes sense if the rone has a non-standard silhouette it may raise red flags).

Personally I don't see an issue w/ slapping rigger cocoon on any of the medical 'wheelchair/crashcart' drones. Another drone I wouldn't have a problem w/ a rigger slapping a cocoon in is the Ares Auxilia Mk3. It's a large cargo drone w/ armored cargo bins... It's a good way for the Rigger to protect himself while on the run w/ the rest of his team. (due to the prevalence of signal blocking paint and such... I have issues w/ people claiming radar will see through it and let them control/shoot through many walls). But like the entire vehicle mod section, you need a little bit of common sense.

Posted by: Yerameyahu May 15 2011, 02:43 PM

Ah, good point: the Auxilia is definitely a cargo drone, and certainly with space inside for passengers. I think there's also a cargo drone flier in the book, but I got the impression it carries cargo like a S-64 Skycrane (externally, underneath).

Posted by: Falconer May 15 2011, 03:22 PM

Yeah there's the Kull. But it's only a medium drone and not designed for combat (no armor whatsoever). (which to me means, no internal storage whatsoever). It carries cargo in 2 underwing hardpoints. And you'll need an airstrip for it (no VSTOL, fixed wing).
Std. Upgrades: Special Cargo (2 exterior airdrop cargo mounts), Signature Masking 1.


I'd like the drone a bit more if the nacelles were fleshed out a bit more... I have no issues w/ putting 2 dumb iron bombs on the underwing 'hardpoints' rather than droppable cargo. The thing with that one you need to be careful about is there's a lot of leeway for what you could put in an external airdrop cargo mount... case in point... why not an external gunpod... Why not carry another drone or two? (reconnaisance pod fitted w/ an iBall in an aerodynamic enclosure say).

It's the closest thing you can get to a weak 'omni-fighter' to borrow the battletech term. Thinking it over again, I think the problem is there's no indication to the size/weight constraints on the cargo.

Posted by: longbowrocks May 15 2011, 03:45 PM

Common sense tells me that the drone has a body, most likely constructed of metal plates, which have structure rating. Common sense tells me that structure rating will be less than (rating radar 4)*5=20. If anything, If anything, it would be some nuance of the rules that would put a bear trap in their path.

Posted by: Falconer May 15 2011, 04:06 PM

Longbow, I'm talking about buildings w/ signal blocking paint and faradays cages. And people claiing they're rigging while safe in a bulldog miles away from the actual run.

ECCM does not help against path loss from shielding. I'm not talking about looking inside the drone... (metal plates in case you didn't know block most radio signals). MM-wave radar allows you to 'see' the drone in nice surface detail. Cyberware scanners which can look inside things have very limited ranges in comparison.



As far as what the drone is made of... I have no idea... it may be metal... it may be made out of kevlar/ceramic plates for lightweight armor... who knows. The game never says and I make no claims. I was never talking about looking INSIDE the drone... only looking for obvious SHAPE distortions of the drone. The drone itself *HAS NO INTERNAL STORAGE*, where is the rigger cocoon going? obviously somewhere on the exterior of the drone since you've made no modification to create interior storage in addition. Why can't someone w/ a MM wave radar or a camera image the drone and red flag it when the tacnet fails to identify it.

This is why I call BS on your munchkinism example.

Posted by: Ascalaphus May 15 2011, 04:49 PM

This is one of those cases where it's tempting to resort to common sense instead of blind adherence to some reading of the rules.

Personally, I'd say that if a vehicle has free mod slots, then there's free space in the vehicle; you could put a passenger spot in that mod slot.

Some critical thinking would be required of course, but large drones would usually be, well, large enough to fit it in; with medium drones it can get trickier.

Posted by: longbowrocks May 15 2011, 04:52 PM

Ah, sorry. It looked to me like you pulled it out of context when you made the "common sense" comment.
...I JUST now saw that you meant seeing through signal blocking paint. I had drones on the mind at that point.
What's wrong with rigging from miles away? I feel like that's kind of the point. Also, I haven't seen any rules for matrix lag outside of being on the moon.

That sounds like your talking about RL. The structure mechanic is there so we don't have to do that.

If you'll look above, you'll notice that I meant "outside the drone" from the get-go.
I feel like Yerameyahu brought up better reasons why this wouldn't work (the rigger cocoon doesn't seem like it would be rigid, but rather semi-stiff from packing on incredible amounts of insulation. ie, it doesn't reflect attacks, but rather insulates against them), but looking back, I can see I made the mistake of accepting RL reasoning where the rules would suffice.

Now I kind of want to continue this argument, but I see another battle dawning on the horizon. Thus it is my duty to attend.

Posted by: Sengir May 15 2011, 06:58 PM

Hence http://forums.dumpshock.com/index.php?showtopic=34931&view=findpost&p=1068262 - the rules indeed say squat about how a sprite can interact with the drone. By RAW the sprite just has two very limited options: telling the pilot "hey, please fly over there" which is then performed autonomously by the pilot, or using his Command CF to default on the skills for ground- and watercraft.
(Same applies to agents as well)


That's another problem of "my" sprite solution - but at least a sprite can do something with his autosofts

Posted by: KarmaInferno May 15 2011, 07:07 PM

You mean like the Arachnae?





-k

Posted by: Yerameyahu May 15 2011, 07:47 PM

Kind of the exception that proves the rule, innit?

Ascalaphus, I agree that it depends on the GM and player being reasonable, but I just disagree with the assumption that mod slots = free space.

Posted by: Ascalaphus May 15 2011, 09:36 PM

*shrug* Mod slots don't exactly equate to free space, but mod slots, description, size category and picture can give you a reasonable ground to argue for or against making passenger space in a drone.

And given that we lack rules for creating drones from scratch, it's a somewhat-balanced workaround to make things not already provided.

Posted by: Udoshi May 15 2011, 09:50 PM

Its going the same place an LMG,(weapon mount, internal, fixed) 250 rounds of ammo, plus another 500 rounds in two additional belts(last two slots being Ammunition Bins).

Or we could put four Ejection seats on it.

Or the satellite dish.

Or even a Workshop. Or four workshops. Or four -facility- workshops.



Rigger cocoons aren't the only bulky system that can cause your drone to become a bag of holding. Kneejerking rules reflexes and quoting the RAW about passengers totally doesn't make sense in some cases. But if you're going to enforce it in some cases, you should do it in all cases, otherwise its a double standard.

Posted by: Udoshi May 15 2011, 09:53 PM

Or the Hachiman?

Posted by: longbowrocks May 15 2011, 09:57 PM

I suddenly want to be a rigger. Our entire party would be jockeying for position to wash my feet.

Posted by: Yerameyahu May 15 2011, 10:26 PM

Udoshi, those are great reasons *not* to allow it. I wouldn't allow the ejection seats either, or the workshop, etc., because that's equally stupid. That's the whole point. A little ammo storage is hardly room for a person+seat. There's no question of *not* enforcing common sense all the time.

Posted by: Falconer May 15 2011, 10:49 PM

I strongly disagree... look at the mod I suggested... storage compartment.... It gives a good example of how much mod space you need to create a space when none exists. For a shadowrunner w/ 4 body, armor & equipment... space to move around... you're looking at 2 maybe for a dwarf... more likely 3 space mod, just to create an interior compartment.

1 mod slot for an ejection seat doesn't necessarily include the seat. Adding ejection to the passenger seat of your corvette isn't that bad... the seat and passenger compartment are already there.

Another laughable comment... we're talking about a *4 body* vehicle... please the only non-drone vehicle I can think of with a score that low is the Dodge Scoot... When I think of a steel lynx, I think of an armored 4 wheeler w/ a gun mount where the passenger seat would be (something I could toss in the back of a pickup truck). Not something the size of a small car (which would have a body score of 8-10). Even the basic motorcycles all start w/ body scores of at least 6.


Nowhere in the rigger cocoon does it say it includes a seat or passenger compartment. It only says it armors such a space for the rigger.


Same goes for a weapon mount. a LMG is a LOT smaller than a person. Even w/ a can of a few hundred rounds of ammo it's nowhere near the size of a person. Then a basic weapon mount is *EXTERNAL* and obvious ... by the time you make it internal fixed forward... it's already taken up 3 mod space. (1 mount, +2 internal visibility). A full 3x more than a 1 slot 'rigger cocoon' modification which people are claiming is internal and non-obvious.

Then they put it on a *FLYING* drone... what's the drones lift capacity?! You're going to stuff an orc w/ equipment in it which probably ways close to as much as the drones empty weight alone...

This is what I mean by a lack of common sense... and why I call it just powergaming munchkin rules lawyering w/ no common sense. Modding something where the basics are already there the mod costs make perfect sense... modding something where no chair or space is even present is quite another.

Posted by: Yerameyahu May 15 2011, 11:21 PM

Not to quibble, but the rigger cocoon does mention a seat. That's why I think it *doesn't* fit.

Posted by: Udoshi May 16 2011, 01:26 AM

What you really should be asking is "Bridgekeeper: What... is the air-speed velocity of an unladen falcon?" Because you can do all that on a small drone. Much less a Large.

And guess what. The entertainment systems falcon - or similiarly sized drones - are small.

Posted by: DireRadiant May 16 2011, 02:19 AM

This is the classic, "The rules don't say I can not do it, so it must be ok." approach, which leads to a large rule set.

Posted by: longbowrocks May 16 2011, 03:11 AM

All this from an offhand remark about ferrying the team around in a Dalmatian.

Anyway, I guess they wouldn't have bothered to classify drones and vehicles separately if all it took to turn a vehicle into a drone was the manual steering removal mod, the rigger cocoon, and rigger adaptation. This might also explain the price differences (AFB, so don't rail on me too much if there are none).

Posted by: LurkerOutThere May 16 2011, 10:12 AM

Nothing prevents fading being healed by magic (or other means). I'm still on the fence about how I feel about this, but honestly it doesn't come up enough to be a problem in my games.

Other thoughts: There is a pretty good technokmancer equivalent of the control rig, it's available as a submersion echo.

Posted by: Udoshi May 16 2011, 12:18 PM

Immersion is actually flat out BETTER, because it adds to everything you do while jumped in, wheras control rigs only add to vehicle tests. They also stack.

Posted by: longbowrocks May 30 2011, 07:19 PM

An external turret will fit on Aerodesign Systems Condor LDSD-41.
If you really want the internal turret, and you're willing to give up on "lighter than air", you can go for an Ares Air-Supply drone, which still has improved takeoff and landing 2.

Posted by: Yerameyahu May 30 2011, 07:24 PM

Why does it need to be a turret?

Posted by: longbowrocks May 30 2011, 07:28 PM

Because turrets are sexy. I think it should at least be a flexible mount so you can shoot through windows.

*blimps don't tilt very well.

Posted by: Sengir May 30 2011, 08:07 PM

Well, I want something that looks like an advertisement blimp. So external hardpoints or lack of blimp-ness are somewhat unsatisfactory...

Posted by: longbowrocks May 30 2011, 08:12 PM

Well then, you could go with Yerameyahu's idea and sacrifice a bit. How about a LDSD-41 with an internal flexible gun mount?

Posted by: Yerameyahu May 30 2011, 08:16 PM

The book doesn't say they don't! I'm surprised to see you worrying about 'reasonable'.

Yeah, I was just suggesting a concealed non-turret mount.

Posted by: longbowrocks May 30 2011, 08:23 PM

They book doesn't say they don't what? I have the rest of today before I need to start being reasonable again.

Posted by: Yerameyahu May 30 2011, 08:27 PM

That they don't tilt well, hehe. Honestly, I'm not sure under what circumstances turrets ever matter, 'technically'. It's mostly the GM being able to say, 'no, your car can't turn that way'. Which I fully support, of course.

Posted by: Sengir May 30 2011, 08:32 PM

What Bod does that one have?

Posted by: longbowrocks May 30 2011, 08:58 PM

4

Posted by: longbowrocks May 30 2011, 08:59 PM

I'd say vehicle combat. You'd need to make a tidy driving test to pull a 360 spin and hit the cars tailing you with your forward mounted cannon.

Posted by: Yerameyahu May 30 2011, 09:04 PM

Of course, but my point is it's up to the GM. Strictly, most security drones can only fire at crotch height, and have to rotate to aim. Flying drones have to make WWI-style dive attacks. Etc.

Posted by: Stahlseele May 30 2011, 09:07 PM

Aside for those that don't have to make diving attacks, because they are vector thrust or mini helicopters or blimps O.o
Also, why would you do a 360° with your car if you want to see your enemy behind you and to hit them with your front gun?
You do a 180° and then proceed to drive backwards while shooting your followers!

Posted by: CanRay May 30 2011, 09:09 PM

Someone's been watching the new "Death Race 2000" too much.

Actually, I did that very trick in Interstate '76 Multiplayer and completely confused the hell out of the people I was playing against. I'm sure this is an old Car Wars trick as well.

Posted by: Yerameyahu May 30 2011, 09:14 PM

Oh, sorry: flying drones that have to make diving attacks have to make diving attacks. Happier? Jesus. You get the point.

Posted by: Dakka Dakka May 30 2011, 09:15 PM

Huh? According to the errataed Arsenal the Dobermann, Steel Lynx and Crimson Samurai have turrets. The Blimp drone has a flexible mount and the other armed drones are flyers with Improved Take-off and landing 2.

Posted by: Yerameyahu May 30 2011, 09:19 PM

Wow, I really mis-remembered then. I thought the ground units mostly had fixed weapon mounts. That's a lot of slots to blow, I guess it's lucky they're factory-installed.

Anyway, I'm sure there are non-turret vehicles. Those vehicles fire at a fixed height, and have to move in the right direction to 'aim' (which, honestly, should make it pretty hard to aim!). VTOL aircraft with fixed guns still have to tilt (dive attack). The *point* is that the GM decides whether or not to worry about this crap.

Posted by: Stahlseele May 30 2011, 09:19 PM

Watched the movie only one time. Also watched the OLD Death Race 2000 one time . .
i think somebody on the gaming den has something about car wars in his signature:"How to win the game: Mount Flamethrower in the rear, drive backwards!"


^^

Posted by: longbowrocks May 30 2011, 09:27 PM

I take it back. This is way more awesome, and probably worth the driving tests required every combat turn for it (threshold 2?).

Posted by: Yerameyahu May 30 2011, 09:30 PM

But you have cameras everywhere already. Obviously, sheer baddassitude is a factor, but the vehicles of the future are just as easy to drive any direction. Probably fewer gears/whatever in reverse, though.

Posted by: CanRay May 30 2011, 09:30 PM

Not to mention the passengers having to deal with Composure Tests (SR4A, Page 138). This is insane, even for Shadowrunners!

Which is, of course, why it'd work perfectly.

Posted by: Stahlseele May 30 2011, 09:31 PM

Yes, our games ware more Death Race than James Bond ^^

Posted by: longbowrocks May 30 2011, 09:34 PM

I don't know if that will help the sudden shift from front wheel drive to rear wheel drive, change in forces on your body do to maneuvers (accelerating now presses you into your belt instead of your seat back ), and reversal of left and right.

Posted by: Yerameyahu May 30 2011, 09:47 PM

It's all virtual and mental now. It's about as hard (conceptually) as it is to run forward, spin, and run backward.

Posted by: Stahlseele May 30 2011, 09:51 PM

Try it, i dare you . .

Posted by: longbowrocks May 30 2011, 10:24 PM

Good point. I forgot I would be rigging.

Posted by: Sengir May 31 2011, 03:49 PM

That means no space left for billboards (Special Machinery), let alone fancies like a satlink

Posted by: X-Kalibur May 31 2011, 05:45 PM

The best trick in I'76 is turning off your engine so they can't target you or you any form of seeking missles. God I miss that game, I need to buy it off of GOG.