Vehicles, Drones, and Agents, For Fun and Profit Options

[Tsuul]

How would you handle putting Walker Mode on an i-Ball?

Not trying to be mean, but here's an iball with walker mode.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9jM0UlXzZAg

Using Neraph's rules, can I rip out walker mode and put back in walker mode while still gaining the bouns space?
Why didn't the manufacturer just include the space to begin with?

[Neraph]

Ok, so there seems to be a lack of actually helpfull support from this cast of characters. Thank you.

[Modular Man]

Actually, I thought about something similar to the Manservant set-up as well. Some kind of "house-keeping" drone... hehe...
Also probably good in this purpose: RC's GM Mr. Fix-It. Comes with tools 'n' 'softs. Perfect for a Rigger, both of them. As I will use them.
Plus, you could think about additional limbs for drones compared to cyberlimbs, as said in the Arsenal. There 's that mod in Augmentation that allows you to somehow fit weapons to an exchangable forearm on a cyberarm. It is just that at this the rules are so vague, you'll have to ask your GM.

Oh, and to that "puppet strings" idea... ask a mage of some Possession Tradition. If he turns the drone (e.g. "Glitch") into a vessel for some ghost (or even a Watcher, if the optional rules apply), it will be able to move around again perfectly. You even gain additional armory. Though now the ghost instead of the drone pilot is leading, of course, not to mention wards...

This post has been edited by Modular Man: Mar 19 2010, 12:54 AM

[Neraph]

Which is: It still can't move on it's own by RAW, even though it now has legs. Also keep in mind that while removing Standard Upgrades won't get you additional Slots, the rules don't state that removing them can't cost Slots.

Basically, you just wasted 2 Slots. Until you pony up the 4 additional ones to remove Limited Maneuverability.

Not to re-incite the argument that ravaged this thread, but you would not in fact have to spend the extra 4 slots to remove Limited Maneuverability because, as pointed out earlier in this thread, it does not cost any slots at all to remove stock modifications.

[KarmaInferno]

Ok, so there seems to be a lack of actually helpfull support from this cast of characters. Thank you.

There's a reason for that.

Most of the folks here count Rules As Intended to be as important if not more important as Rules As Written.

Sometime rules are written badly. Sometime combos crop up that the game designers never considered. That does not mean those situations and combos were intended part of the design.

By the strict rules, what you proposed works. So? You found a loophole. Loopholes exist in every game system.

But here's the thing. Not many folks actually respect those who are willing to abuse the hell out of those loopholes, willfully ignoring whatever RAI or common sense might have to say.

Especially when there's already tons of ways to create enormously powerful builds in Shadowrun that don't depend on questionable loopholes and rules exploits.

And nice try with that last post, but "does not PROVIDE additional modification slots" is NOT the same as "does not COST any slots". Try again. The rules are talking about removing stuff that was stock on the drone or vehicle. Not about taking stuff back off that YOU put on earlier as a modification.

Personally? I'm a huge powergamer too. But I take exceptional pride in making obscene rules monstrosities that have no grey areas or questionable abuse of loopholes to do what they do. I want to be able to slap the creation down and have not a single person who sees it be able to question even the smallest part.

This loophole dithering is just amateur hour crap.



-karma

[MortVent]

Why would you want such a monstrosity?

Keep the Faith

Kobold monks of doom!

[Mister Book]

It amuses me how much venom Jaid and Sengir have for a simple rule as presented in a book. Less QQ, more PewPew people. Just because a player figured this out doesn't mean a GM can't use it too.

That aside, I don't see a problem with that at all. Just make sure you comply with the page 107 Hidden Rule about stock mods.

Forum trolls, got to love them.

[Inpu]

A number of the ideas are pretty good, but I'll repeat what others have said: Limited Maneuverability reads that you remove its ability to move itself. This is used for launched objects and the like. It wouldn't allow a Drone to move, even if you give it a new method, until you replace the systems that push it forward.

Beyond that, I like what you put together. It's given me a few ideas.

[Yerameyahu]

Indeed. That loophole definitely isn't a loophole. 4 slots certainly makes a big difference.

I certainly wouldn't allow a Bundle discount on a custom Suite. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif) I'd also have to decide if Suites are even for Autosofts, although I'm not saying they're not.

I thought the 'senior citizen syndrome' was an unavoidable hardware feature of the Manservant? One without it would be more like a 'Disguised Manservant', a whole new drone (under the 'Rigger 4'-less rules we have to endure). (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)

[Inpu]

Totally correct, Yerameyahu. It mentions in the description that it is a hardware design to make people feel safe.

I figure that one would have to pay extra for a Manservant without the syndrome: new legs without the hardware limitation, then mod them in.

[Yerameyahu]

Right, it's called the Otomo. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif) Seriously, no doubt a non-limited version of the Manservant exists, but not in the SR4 rules. If we're using the rules.

[Neraph]

There's a reason for that.

Most of the folks here count Rules As Intended to be as important if not more important as Rules As Written.

Sometime rules are written badly. Sometime combos crop up that the game designers never considered. That does not mean those situations and combos were intended part of the design.

By the strict rules, what you proposed works. So? You found a loophole. Loopholes exist in every game system.

But here's the thing. Not many folks actually respect those who are willing to abuse the hell out of those loopholes, willfully ignoring whatever RAI or common sense might have to say.

Especially when there's already tons of ways to create enormously powerful builds in Shadowrun that don't depend on questionable loopholes and rules exploits.

And nice try with that last post, but "does not PROVIDE additional modification slots" is NOT the same as "does not COST any slots". Try again. The rules are talking about removing stuff that was stock on the drone or vehicle. Not about taking stuff back off that YOU put on earlier as a modification.

Personally? I'm a huge powergamer too. But I take exceptional pride in making obscene rules monstrosities that have no grey areas or questionable abuse of loopholes to do what they do. I want to be able to slap the creation down and have not a single person who sees it be able to question even the smallest part.

... I was talking about the iBall, if you cared to actually read. How the game considers it is that you are removing a stock modification. That does not confer any mod slot bonus, and for the purposes of mathematics, +4 from a mod and -4 from a mod are both addition - one's just adding a negative.

This loophole dithering is just amateur hour crap.

Flame some more, plz kay thanx.

Indeed. That loophole definitely isn't a loophole. 4 slots certainly makes a big difference.

Eh, Limited Maneuverability for more slots to get a new form of mobility and retain extra slots was one thing I had proposed, and I do believe it was edited out. So let's stop talking about that one.

I certainly wouldn't allow a Bundle discount on a custom Suite. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif) I'd also have to decide if Suites are even for Autosofts, although I'm not saying they're not.

Software Suites are for software, which autosofts are. It would work with skillsofts as well, except they have their own rules for being Suite'd.

I thought the 'senior citizen syndrome' was an unavoidable hardware feature of the Manservant? One without it would be more like a 'Disguised Manservant', a whole new drone (under the 'Rigger 4'-less rules we have to endure). (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)

Ok, so the Manservant has that problem... What about the MCT Housekeeper or the Saeder-Krupp Heimdrone?

[Yerameyahu]

Fine with me. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif) I'm not arguing with you, I'm addressing the couple specific points I saw/agreed with/had a comment on. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

[Falconer]

*snip*

[killfr3nzy]

Ok, I admit I only read page 1 & 3, so this may have been addressed.
Lone Star iBall - Limited Maneuverability, yet... it can move? It can move - get this - with 'limits' (rolls around on the floor). Now, this has probably been explained and/or Errata'd somewhere, but that led to a whole lot of confusion for me. Either the iBall just has a funny propulsion system and more space than average, or Limited Maneuverability doesn't completely remove a movement system.
Now, I'm not saying that it allows the 'remove, add' idea of movement systems, I'm just confused as to what happens in the above.

Moving on - how about we all drop the issues of using LM+(Walker/Track/etc) to gain slots? Neraph seems to have stopped proposing it, so how about we leave it and move on?

@Neraph - Not sure what prupose you had for every LM drone and therefore if these would work, but... You could have them carried by;
~ Another drone: Low-tech (weld an iBall to an Aztech Crawler/Lockheed Optic-X), High-tech (have a dedicated 'transport' drone class with a 'Drone Rack: Mini' and then different types of 'spy' drones so you can swap them out).
~ Vehicles: Just a large drone that people hitch a ride on, so as above.
~ RFID (Sensor) Tags: They each carry one Sensor, and are too small to be counted even as an immobile microdrone (so, smaller than a dragonfly/can lid). Stick them to a drone with their 'attatch to anything' ability, or mod the drone so they're embedded. Slave it to the Drone's Node, and you're good.
~ People!: What's better than arriving early for a meet and setting up an iBall in the corner, loaded with Facial/Weapon/Drone/Emotion Recognition and your standard suite of Thermo/LowLight etc? That same drone embedded in the back collar of your favourite Armour Vest, sitting behind armoured one-way plastic and hard-wired in, running all the time.


Now, everyone - deconstruct (my theories)!

[Yerameyahu]

If you're going to embed the drone in your clothing, that's just a camera. You can run all that software on a commlink instead. No reason to be a drone at that point. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

[Udoshi]

For the people complaining and arguing about the Iball's Limited Maneuverability, well, its entirely possible to get old, pre-arsenal iballs back. See, the iball statblock still has a Speed, Handling, Acceleration, and can't use any of it because limited maneuverability says it can't move.

So... you remove the Limited Maneuverability mod. Because its a ModificationYou don't get anything back for it, because its a listed mod/upgrade, and you can do that (its a threshold of 8, halved to 4 per the removal rules). Once the modification is removed, it stops applying. Sure, the extra modslots go away - but so does the rulestext about not being able to move under its own power.

Voila! 4th Ed iBall restored. (I know, i know, it makes no sense. Take the lack-of-wheels off to get the rolling mode back in! WHeeee, CGL! )

Cuz, you know, its kind of annoying that iballs were able to roll around freely, then along comes arsenal and OH NO CONTRADICTORY RULES. I've been annoyed at it several times, then it occured to me you could just use the rules for removing mods, and the issue goes away completely.

[Jaid]

Ok, I admit I only read page 1 & 3, so this may have been addressed.
Lone Star iBall - Limited Maneuverability, yet... it can move? It can move - get this - with 'limits' (rolls around on the floor). Now, this has probably been explained and/or Errata'd somewhere, but that led to a whole lot of confusion for me. Either the iBall just has a funny propulsion system and more space than average, or Limited Maneuverability doesn't completely remove a movement system.
Now, I'm not saying that it allows the 'remove, add' idea of movement systems, I'm just confused as to what happens in the above.

a slinky or a frisbee or a parachute can move. you can even steer a parachute, frisbees can be thrown so that they curve in different ways, and so forth. nevertheless, those devices cannot move under their own power, for the most part... a parachute will not drag you up into the sky barring the application of forces that do not originate from the parachute's engine (which it doesn't even have).

essentially, a limited maneuverability drone is a drone that has no engine, but does have the ability to steer itself to some extent once put in motion by someone else. but the fact that airplanes do exist does not mean that all gliders must be able to self-propel.

[Yerameyahu]

The original iBall wasn't crazy. It moved (weakly) by shifting internal weights. I can't imagine the game that was a problem for. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

[Neraph]

At least people are reading my thread. That's what I posted it for.

And at least the discussion has moved past a topic I dropped.

[KarmaInferno]

a slinky or a frisbee or a parachute can move. you can even steer a parachute, frisbees can be thrown so that they curve in different ways, and so forth. nevertheless, those devices cannot move under their own power, for the most part... a parachute will not drag you up into the sky barring the application of forces that do not originate from the parachute's engine (which it doesn't even have).

essentially, a limited maneuverability drone is a drone that has no engine, but does have the ability to steer itself to some extent once put in motion by someone else. but the fact that airplanes do exist does not mean that all gliders must be able to self-propel.

Yeah, many bombs these days can steer themselves to hit their target when dropped from an airplane. But they don't have any sort of engine or propulsion system.



-karma

[sabs]

The attitude I take on standard upgrades is this:

A vehicle/drone has mod slots = to it's body or 4 which ever is higher.
If a vehicle/drone has existing upgrades those use up slots.
If you want to remove upgrades to free up slots, feel free.

If a stock item has more upgrades than slots, that's because they overmoded it at the factory. If you want to free up slots, you have to take out upgrades down to open slots.

is it RAW? kinda.. but it certainly makes /way/ more sense.
Otherwise some weapons/vehicles/drones are much better than others for no good reason.
This just puts everything on an even playing field.

[Emy]

is it RAW? kinda.. but it certainly makes /way/ more sense.

By 'kinda' do you mean 'no'?

You can go ahead and admit it's a houserule. Nothing wrong with houserules, as long as you don't pretend they're RAW.

[Udoshi]

Normally, I'd agree with Sabs - basiclly, within the confines of the ruleset, the engineering team making and designing standard drone models for a corp effectively overmod the stock/standard model upgrades at the factory in. It makes sense.

Buuuuut... Overmodding as written only works -after- you use up all the slots. Its pretty stupid, but you can't overmod individual mods. Useful? Not really, but something to keep in mind for Mission characters.

[Neraph]

I always envisioned "standard mods" as a basic functioning of a vehicle/drone that mimics effects of a mod you can add to other vehicle/drones. For example, the two full mechanical arms and walker mode of the Manservant is integral to the drone itself. You can add arms and legs to other things, but the arms and legs of the Manservant are essentially a part of the drone. For how those arms and legs function, refer to the mod rules for them.