Passengers in Vehicles, Passengers Options

[CanRay]

OK folks, wondering if I'm just blind, but I just picked up "Arsenal" (Excellent buy! Love it!), but cannot find any listings for number of passengers on any of the vehicles. And I just went through the main rulebook, same.

I'm sure I'm just missing it, hopefully someone can set me straight!

And, to CGL, you've done a fine job! Please keep up the good work! (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif)

[Tarantula]

Nope, they don't exist. GM Discretion for all of them.

[Calabim]

Wow for something that I have been told many times is not needed it sure seems to come up alot. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/ohplease.gif)

[CanRay]

OK, works for me.

I mean, it is all relative with all the body types in Shadowrun anyhow. You can fit a lot of Gnomes into a Jackrabbit, whereas one Troll has a hard time shoehorning himself into it!

[Tarantula]

I think that was the idea behind it, yeah.

[Jhaiisiin]

But that's... silly. At least indicating the number of entry points and seats would be useful. I understand streamlining, but there is so much that was left out it's not streamlined, it's incomplete.

[Larme]

But that's... silly. At least indicating the number of entry points and seats would be useful. I understand streamlining, but there is so much that was left out it's not streamlined, it's incomplete.

You don't want to do any work? Post a list of vehicles where it isn't instantly obvious how many entry points it should have, and I'm sure people on here will help you out.

For instance:

Nissan jackrabbit: seats 2, 2 doors.

Ford Americar: seats 5, 4 doors.

GMC Bulldog: Seats between 2 and 14 (with up to 3 4-person bench seats and two front seats) in just about whatever configuration you want. Has two front doors, one sliding side door, and a back door.

See, it's easy.

[Tarantula]

See, it's easy.

Then why didn't the developers do it?

[CanRay]

Because then we'd get five Trolls trying to cram into a Ford Americar because "It says so right here!!!".

Better for it to be "GM discression all the way", that way, no arguements.

Otherwise, it's the "GM Plot Device Of Retribution!!!". Mine, is a Highway Snowplow.

I'd say the Jackrabbit has a drekky backseat as well (Designed for Gnomes, apparently, 'cause even Dwarves are too big!), but that's just because I've been crammed into the back of so many two-door sub-compacts. Again, GM Discression!

[Fortune]

Then why didn't the developers do it?

Space.

[CanRay]

Space.

I don't know... I still have yet to go through the Space rules. But they seem cool.

[Larme]

Space.

I concur! (IMG:style_emoticons/default/spin.gif)

Instead of giving us another Rigger 3, with 50% shit that we'll never use like submarines, they gave us a packed to the brim hardcover smorgasbord of goodness. That meant that they needed to cut the non-essential fluff stuff in order for the book to not cost $80 (IMG:style_emoticons/default/nyahnyah.gif)

[Dr Funfrock]

You don't want to do any work? Post a list of vehicles where it isn't instantly obvious how many entry points it should have, and I'm sure people on here will help you out.

You've listed the easy and obvious ones (admittedly useful).

Personally I'd really appreciate knowing how many people can fit into a Banshee (and how much cargo, for that matter).

[vladski]

I don't yet have Arsenal, but I think it's a shame that entry points were left out, if my understanding is correct. On the other hand, If you played Shadowrun 3, you can dig up your old Rigger 3 book and use that to probably fill in at least some of hte blanks.

I know, I know. A new system shouldn't have to rely on old edition books, but let's face it, things like the number of doors aren't really necessary to the game, and the information for at least some of this IS out there. And honestly, we Shadowrunners have been going back to the old SR1 and SR2 books for this or that long before SR4 ever came out. It doesn't mean the newer books aren't good, they jsut provide different things than the older ones. Think of the goodness that is both The Seattle Source Book and New Seattle!

The old info out of books that are no longer published and basically out of circulation, you can find most of this stuff in PDF form as a torrent somewhere. Of course, downloading any of that would be wrong. Don't do that. It's bad. You need to give your hard earned nuyen to Ebay sellers for rare, hard to find paper copies where no one gets rich except for the middle men.

Vlad

[CanRay]

As I've said a few times over the years, "Fluff doesn't change with the new systems."

[Larme]

Personally I'd really appreciate knowing how many people can fit into a Banshee (and how much cargo, for that matter).

First of all, why? You don't need to know how many doors the banshee has, because when it arrives the campaign is over (IMG:style_emoticons/default/nyahnyah.gif)

Second of all, the Banshee seats a pilot and a copilot. It's a scout craft, so it has very little cargo room. It has one entrance: the canopy. See, easy! Admittedly, it isn't canon. Another GM could decide that the Banshee is less like a fighter and more like a helicopter, and has a whole bunch of space on board. But it really just comes down to a snap judgment where you fill in the blanks. I'm sick of people saying "I paid for a system, and I don't want to have to fill anything in mysef." We didn't pay for a system that lists everything down to the last detail. That would have cost about 3x more than we paid, since it would have required a separate book for guns, one for vehicles, and another one of miscellaneous junk a la SoTA. Instead, we got all of that stuffed into one book for 1/3 the price, and we have to be a little creative with it.

[Tarantula]

The problem is when the players view is contrary to the GMs. Not having a space listing can cause unnessisary conflict between GM and players down the road, when the players think that their bulldog can hold upwards of 14 people, but the GM thinks it holds 7 (like most mini-vans).

[Larme]

The problem is when the players view is contrary to the GMs. Not having a space listing can cause unnessisary conflict between GM and players down the road, when the players think that their bulldog can hold upwards of 14 people, but the GM thinks it holds 7 (like most mini-vans).

If they're going to fight about that, they're doomed. The conversation should be literally "I think it holds 14." "Really? I thought it was more like 7." "But look at how high its body is, I think it's gotta be a pretty big van." "Ok, sure that works."

The problem is when GMs have a "no you can't" attitude towards their players. They want the world to work exactly as they feel like it should, and input from their players doesn't matter. If a player wants to do something, the GM's default position is that they can't. That is what leads to conflicts. If a GM accommodates the players when they want things that are perfectly reasonable, there are no issues. And if the players don't throw tantrums over being denied small things, there are no issues. The only way that a lack of tiny details in canon can lead to problems is when the players, the GM, or both are not reasonable human beings, in which case they are likely to have bigger problems in their life than a smooth RPG session.

[Dr Funfrock]

First of all, why? You don't need to know how many doors the banshee has, because when it arrives the campaign is over (IMG:style_emoticons/default/nyahnyah.gif)

Second of all, the Banshee seats a pilot and a copilot. It's a scout craft, so it has very little cargo room. It has one entrance: the canopy. See, easy! Admittedly, it isn't canon. Another GM could decide that the Banshee is less like a fighter and more like a helicopter, and has a whole bunch of space on board. But it really just comes down to a snap judgment where you fill in the blanks. I'm sick of people saying "I paid for a system, and I don't want to have to fill anything in mysef." We didn't pay for a system that lists everything down to the last detail. That would have cost about 3x more than we paid, since it would have required a separate book for guns, one for vehicles, and another one of miscellaneous junk a la SoTA. Instead, we got all of that stuffed into one book for 1/3 the price, and we have to be a little creative with it.

Hmm. I see your point, in terms of the GM filling in the spaces, and as a GM who regularly designs his own games I have no objection to this in practice. In principle, I just find it kind of annoying. It's been pointed out that a lot of this information can be found in old 3rd ed books, which is great if you happen to be sitting on a giant pile of gold and can buy out of print books at will, but some of us are basically limited to the fourth edition material (because I don't know about you but I'm not so fond of buying an entire book of redundant rules for one piece of useful data).

Actually this is, I think, what I find so annoying about it. All the old 3rd ed players are sitting there going "cool, updated stats for the Banshee, time to bring it back into my games", 4th ed players are going "this Banshee thing keeps getting mentioned in relation smugglers and stuff, what the heck is it?" Given that T-Birds in general are so fundamental to many aspects of the setting, such as the border hoppers in Denver, I'd really appreciate just some kind of basic rundown on what to expect from them. Sure, with a bus or a van I can extrapolate from modern designs. With LAVs I have no frame of reference, no real starting point.

[Larme]

This is really a problem for vehicles in the BBB, they gave them only a micro-blurb. If you read the BBB, you can't get a picture of what a Banshee is, you have to even create your own mental image of it... I will agree that that's a problem for people who don't come from 3rd ed. Although they are pretty ultra rare, only showing up when you manage to present a serious threat to a well equipped military force. I think the only reason they show up in the BBB is that they were included as almost a joke in the 3rd ed BBB... Like "here's your dinky runnermobile. And just for fun, here's the several million nuyen military "light scout" LAV which your heaviest weapons can't even touch." 3rd ed was full of junk like that, where they first presented the options available to Shadowrunners, then pulled down their pants and mooned you with things you could never have. Fun for them, waste of pages for us (IMG:style_emoticons/default/nyahnyah.gif)

[Wesley Street]

The T-Bird (or any LAV) is the Shadowrun equivalent of the D&D Dragonlance. Once you've got one, the game is pretty much over because you can mow down or outrace anyone. I've seen tiny little drawings of military LAVs in Rigger 3 but I have no idea what the smuggler equivalent would look like. I assume something similar minus the mil-spec armaments. A physical illustration from Catalyst in a future release would be appreciated.

[Tarantula]

Not really. At least in SR3, T-birds had about the same travel distance as a car on a tank of fuel. Around 200-300 miles if I remember correctly. That severely restricts their usefulness to runners.

[CanRay]

Not really. At least in SR3, T-birds had about the same travel distance as a car on a tank of fuel. Around 200-300 miles if I remember correctly. That severely restricts their usefulness to runners.

I don't know, screaming down the skyscraper-filled streets at super-sonic speeds, breaking windows for blocks around sounds like it could be useful as a distraction...

[Cabral]

I would place a Banshee as having room for pilot/copilot and a small tactical squad plus gear (including nonstandard gear). It strikes me as a hybrid between a light attack vehicle and a small APV.

Entry Points: 4: 2 for pilot/copilot and two large bay side doors. Additional cargo in rear may or may not have separate rear ramp.

Not really. At least in SR3, T-birds had about the same travel distance as a car on a tank of fuel. Around 200-300 miles if I remember correctly. That severely restricts their usefulness to runners.

Fuel economy was disproportionately the suck in SR3.

[Jhaiisiin]

The problem comes from what's being described above here. It's completely handwavy. If a player goes out to get a vehicle that he knows will seat his chummers because he feels it has 4 seats, then awesome. Then the GM says, nope, it has 2 seats, and a tiny ass back seat that can barely fit a dwarf. Hooray, so player looks for an appropriate vehicle, except that at a glance, he has no way of knowing what holds how many HUMANS (I'll use that baseline, because there have always been rules on reducing or increasing seat sizes for the other races, so don't give me that "but it says it can seat 4" bulldrek... a player doing that is being abusive of the rules) it can hold. Space? It would have taken that much more space to put in a column labled Seating? Funny, they had the room width wise in previous books, I fail to see how this would have been a problem this time.

Key example: Larme, I'd call the Jackrabit a 2 entry, 4 seat vehicle due to a small back seat. Same vehicle, and in SR4, 2 different versions. If you were the GM, I'd have to go find another car, and each time, I'd have to bug you to make a decision on seating, access and capacity. Would you *really* want a player bugging you for that info each and every time they wanted to get a vehicle? I wouldn't.

Irregardless, I'll start statting up the missing info and pass it by my GM. I'm in the process of designing a rigger, so it's going to become important for me to know, dev's-thinking-it's-unimportant be damned.