No, a few are saying that. The ones I've been replying to, by and large, have been saying that's not the case.


I mentioned two in my next to last post in the thread, as well as a few others. I personally don't see the point in camouflage clothing in Shadowrun. If there were rules for wartime skirmishes and the like, sure, it plays a part when dealing with long ranges or large groups of people wearing the same camouflaged uniforms. But in close combat? What exactly is it supposed to do and how is it helping you sneak past a guard?

Ruthenium, sure. It's a weak form of technological invisibility. But camouflage, whether a military uniform or a business suit, just isn't going to do squat for you when it comes to Infiltration and the like. Wearing a suit or uniform appropriate to what you're doing -- a suit or janitorial uniform when sneaking into an office building, fatigues when trying to blend in at a military base, hunting gear when out in the wilderness -- is going to be far more beneficial. Wearing fatigues painted blue and gray "urban camouflage" while stomping around inside Horizon's plush office building is going to do jack squat.

I think Bodak quoted a price for thread that changes colour, it's called Second Skin, and it ain't cheap. Glad that you aren't arguing that commlinks and other electronic devices should come for free as well.

Basically it comes down to this: if you want functionality, you gotta pay for it. If you want a fluffy technicolour dreamcoat that gives you no camouflage bonus but changes colour at your whim, the GM might throw it into your lifestyle costs if you have a sufficiently high lifestyle in his/her judgement; if not, he can quote you a price on it.

Case in point.


Second Skin isn't a "thread that changes color." It's an outfit, and one specifically described as being made out of very specific materials and not the various materials mentioned in the general rule. The rule that you're erroneously referencing specifically states that Second Skin requires Ruthenium Polymers to gain the effect. Ruthenium Polymers is a specific rule above and beyond the general rule. It's not a synonym.

For the sake of this ongoing arguement, I'm going to point you all towards Attitude 160: Color Changing Clothing.

It is PRECISELY this, effectively being half-strength ruthenium polymer for 175 nuyen. You do have to pay for what you want. But its nowhere near as expensive as a full polymer+sensor suite coating like the second skin or a dermal sheath option has.

They do, however, stack.

Oh, god. There is no way they stack. I don't care if 'Attitude' specifically says they do. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif)

Good points but I think camo would still be useful in some situations like maybe staking out or sneaking up on a corp compound from some near by woods or some thing. In that case the right camouflage could help hide a 'Runner from any patrols or sentries that might be on the look out.

If I was houseruling, I'd just eliminate the specific Camouflage and Chameleon Suits, give any clothing with appropriate static coloration/patterning to get the +2 bonus, and the +4 to any Ruthenium Polymer type adaptive cloaking capable suits.



-k

Sorry, I'm not seeing it. Could you tell me what the post number is?


It seems like there are a couple of options: fix the broken rules, or just bitch that the rules are broken. You've been complaining that the rule is broken, so I proposed fixing the rule, and your response to that is that we don't need the rules at all. Are you allergic to constructive solutions? It's so dumpshock: you can find 100 people to bitch the weapons rules are broken, but only 2 people who will design a new weapon.


Shadowrun visibility exists beyond "close combat" ranges. Perhaps ranges are different in the games in which you play, but I often encounter situations where the opposition is more than a few - or a few dozen - meters away. And camouflage is helpful for concealment sometimes even at relatively close ranges, particularly in conditions of weak lighting. Camouflage clothing in Shadowrun is a logical inclusion, useful and necessary.


The advanced ruthenium system, though, can't possibly work; it's a logical impossibility. If any inclusion is absurd, it's that of the "tape a picture of what's behind me to my face" ruthenium invisibility cloak. I let people use it, because they like it, and it's in the rules, but clearly it's completely impossible.


It's a question of what's appropriate to the situation. If the only situations you're ever in take place inside Horizon's plush office building, then by all means urban camouflage will be a positive detriment. But if you're hiding in a ditch while an automated convoy you're about to hijack goes by, it's a necessity. If you're traversing the ice field that surrounds the mining camp where you're going to taint the orichalcum they've discovered, it's a necessity. If you're sneaking through the jungle to overtake the wild basilisk whose gall bladder you just have to have, it's a necessity. Camouflage exists in Shadowrun for the same reasons it exists in the real world, and the world of Shadowrun is as broad as the real world, so those same reasons apply to it. Not every run - at some tables, at least - takes place in an office building, or even in a city. Not every encounter is at close range.

Shadowrun should include camouflage, and it should have working rules to reflect its use. I've proposed a general outline of some: would you like to help develop them into a working replacement for Shadowrun's broken camouflage rules? If you'd just like to fight about shit and complain, that's cool; I was just thinking it'd be cool if one of these conversations ended in something productive.

Ruthenium is much weaker than it used to be (SR3), I think to reflect that it's apparently so objectionably impossible. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/nyahnyah.gif) Perception is basically the best pool, so +4 against that is minor, and I'd say reasonable for background-accurate clothing at all times. 'Invisibility' would be a vastly larger bonus (/enemy penalty).

I agree with that, and with the +2 KarmaInferno mentioned for anything color-appropriate. I'm not sure if I feel that's enough in either case, but I'd want to actually playtest it before I could make that guess; while I can pretty easily ballpark the effect of things in SR3, I'm really not there yet with SR4. In the meantime, +2 / +4 make sense to me. The only question then is the cost of the various things that are available, and they're all pretty fine in the book as written, right?

Nope, its possible

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PD83dqSfC0Y...feature=related

http://www.giantginkgo.com/archives/000113.php

http://www.howstuffworks.com/invisibility-cloak.htm

it's not to the point cloaking suits yet but the possibility is there.

Both these solutions illustrate the problem: the observer's position must be fixed in order for this "projection of what's behind" method [optical camouflage] to work, because of parallax. These systems are perfect illustrations of why advanced ruthenium invisibility cloaks are impossible.


There are multiple solutions here: the carbon nanotube and metamaterials solutions don't work at all like ruthenium, and the other is just another example of optical camouflage, which then falls afoul of the problems mentioned above. In short, if those videos moved the camera, the illusion would break down entirely: most of the videos mention this in the explanatory text.

*shrug* We'd have to do actual tests of visual spot times or something to see how realistic, but I'm happy giving it the (minor) +4 bonus. Presumably, the magic of ruthenium allows multiple viewpoints.

That's what I'm thinking ,the suit uses cameras the size of this one or maybe smaller placed all over the suit and the ruthenium projects the images.

I think part of the difficulty I have with 2 and 4 is that my expectations for how high Perception should be aren't realistic. When you think about it, 4 dice is the difference between a Veteran and someone who is Untrained. That's a pretty big deal.

A really realistic camouflage system would also need to take into account varying efficacy at varying distances, but that level of accuracy is better left, in my experience, to GM fiat at the moment. Shadowrun ain't no wargame.


The size of the cameras isn't the issue. Let me see if I can explain the problem. [I've tried before, and I sucked, so forgive me in advance if I do that again.]

• Whip out your smartphone.*
• Open your camera app.
• Close one eye.
• Fiddle with the zoom, the distance between your eye and the camera, etc., until you can line up what's on the screen with real life, like "seeing through" the phone, like the phone is a window.
• Awesome. Now, move your head.

See how it doesn't work anymore? It's like that 3d street art: it only works if you're standing in exactly the right place. Also:

• Close one eye again.
• Get everything lined up.
• Awesome, now, open the other eye.

Doesn't work, again, because of parallax. This time, because it's about stereoscopic vision, the effect is much more pronounced at close range, but it doesn't matter: just the fact that it can only work in one position - on a direct line down the barrel of the camera - makes optical camouflage effectively useless.

*A digital camera will also work. Or your imagination. A sketch is fine, too.

I still think it'd be partially effective, just as static camouflage doesn't make you *invisible*. I'm also okay assuming some kind of magic hologram (=multiple viewpoints) effect; 'ruthenium' is literally handwavium, always has been.

As for the 'actual DP vs. what the book calls average' argument… I don't feel like arguing it yet again. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif) The fact is, people get Perception pools well above 10 easily; it's a reality we have to deal with.

http://forums.dumpshock.com/index.php?s=&a...t&p=1123261


Actually, I've mostly been arguing that the color/pattern-shifting actually is a base rule in the game. Or was until Attitude, apparently. For whatever asinine reason, people -- a large number of people -- have been saying its not.

And yes, one of my suggestions was to get rid of the camouflage bonuses altogether. They're so minor as to be negligible in most situations you find yourself in during the game. For those outlier situations where it might come in handy, they can have a rule where a bonus is gained. Sort like the special rules for being in space or in the desert. It's a niche benefit. Camouflage fatigues don't do shit for you when sneaking past a guard lighting conditions be damned, yet by the rules they give you a hefty bonus no matter the situation. Well, aside from having the wrong environmental pattern. Which, mysteriously, doesn't apply if you're wearing a neon orange jumpsuit with flashing lights.


No more than you're allergic to reading comprehension.


Yes, because I never, ever offer up house rules or advice. Ever. Not in a million, billion years would I do such a thing.


Fine, you don't like my suggestion. So fucking what? How does that not make it a suggested fix?

You're absolutely right. You're clearly very constructive. Sorry to have troubled you.

If you're going to send PMs, it's polite to allow yourself to receive them, as well. So I'll just put this here, instead:


No, I just don't think the conversation is worth having. It'd be a waste of my time. You're in this to butt heads with dudes, from what I can tell, and that's totally cool, but I'm not really interested. I blew you off, and if that was rude, I apologize, but, seriously, where's that conversation going to go that's not just a mirror of practically every thread here? Not worth it to me.

Can we be done with this now?

I know what your saying ,and I agree with it but I see the suit projecting every thing within 360 degrees of it at the proper perspectives onto it's surface and thus avoiding the parallax problems. The way I see it working is that each micro camera projects what it sees to the other side of the suit depending on how the wearer is positioned with all of the cameras and the controlling software working together to display every thing correctly. I'm not really that great explaining in writing/type so I hope you I've made things clear enough for you to understand my view point. Any ways if you think about with all the other stuff in Shadowrun that's totally BS debating something like this is kinda silly.

You know the "Ignore User" feature, don't you?

Seriously, Scratch, please stop PMing me. All you're really doing is confirming my perception of you. I'm here to talk about Shadowrun, not to, whatever, "dish out harassment." (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wobble.gif) C'mon, man, I've asked politely a couple times now. Can we just move on?

You know what, I don't? I haven't used the new board software that much [or clearly, that well!]. What do you recommend?

What I'm seeing is just a technical problem to be solved. Ruthenium is just a stupid name, it has nothing to do with what Ruthenium really does (it makes possibly coloured complexes, what they were looking for was rare earths, which are really used to create colours in display technology).
So, let's stick with the stupid name, and apply creativity to fixing the magic-tech:

You want a fix for parallaxing? Use 3-dimensional liquid crystals that actually look different from different angles. At present, you can only do this from a fixed viewpoint, but it all gets so simple once you figure out the future magic-tech. And bam, you're back in SR3-world where RuPo was actually situationally better than invisibility.

And that's not even looking at negative refractive index materials...

Now we do arrive at a point where simply colouring clothing just won't cut it - you need a defined surface structure, hence, it's a complicated mod.

Now the really important question is how to get around the problem of different vision modes without increasing complexity even more: In SR3 there was a funny suit mod that served as thermal insulation and worked against IR vision. It was ridiculously expensive and also crap. However, I'd still want my chameleon suit to do the same... Is there still something like that?

I don't see any reason this would be impossible, or at least by the standard as we apply it to Shadowrun. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif) If you take away the ruthenium part of it, and provide an entirely different type of solution, then there's no reason it can't work, whether through metamaterials or nanotubes or 3d liquid crystals. Most of these solutions would be much more practical on a surface whose relative shape the computer can know, so things that don't change shape [like cars and buildings] or things that change shape in a manner that's easily predictable [like armor suits] would be relatively simple, while complex shapes that change quickly [like flexible clothing] would be much more difficult [though not conceptually impossible]. Shadowrun made this same shift once before, technologically, from ruthenium polymers only working on hard materials to being able to use it on cloaks and whatnot.


Yep! Thermal Damping, p327, SR4a.