Rigging bikes Options

[_Pax._]

Yet another simple question then: Where is the game balance issue that makes it necessary to use a different "crunch" when compared to a normally rigged car?

A car is generally ENCLOSED, precluding the likelihood of a passenger or operator simply falling out/off. Motorcycles, not so much.

A typical car isn't likely to spontaneously fall over when unattended, or trying to turn while in motion. The motorcycle is.

...

You know, little things like physics.

Rule of cool is nice and all - but it needs to be reasonably believable. Something as simple as a safety harness (read: "seat belt"), or an enclosed windshell (I wish more cycles offered those, and/or that it was an official modification in Arsenal), or remote-activatable Gecko Pads on the passenger-contact surfaces. You know, "describe WHY you don't fall off all the time" ....?

[Cochise]

A car is generally ENCLOSED, precluding the likelihood of a passenger or operator simply falling out/off. Motorcycles, not so much.

And that is of relevance for gameplay and crunch in what way? Give me a good reason as to why this fact should technically (from ingame perspective) and mechanically (from off-play perspective) have impact on how rigged bikes are treated by crunch.

The mere fact that a car is enclosed whereas the bike isn't rises the question if there actually is a necessity to mechanically "gimp" rigged bikes even further beyond the point where attacks against its rider are much easier than against the driver of a car.

A typical car isn't likely to spontaneously fall over when unattended, or trying to turn while in motion. The motorcycle is.

I guess you don't have that much experience with motorcycles then ... because they actually are pretty stable when "unattended" (and that even at rather low speeds). And while turning surely involves ...

...

You know, little things like physics.

... physical interaction on the driver's behalf I still have to ask again: Why do you and others insist on applying the VR pool modifier against something that is integral part of the task (driving the bike) and thus would be a design goal from the very beginning when trying to built a rigger adaption (and was functional throughout the 2050ies and 2060ies, but suddenly becomes invalid in the 2070ies again?) instead of limiting it to just the stuff that is not part of said task (like firing a hand-held weapon or doing fancy sword play / jousting)?
Where is the actual need for gimping gameplay in that particular case? I so do hope that "realism" is not your answer there ...

Rule of cool is nice and all - but it needs to be reasonably believable.

And where the hell is it unreasonable or unbelievable that a rigger adapted motorcycle does neither actually shut down nor heavily restrict physical movement of the driver in regards to the task at hand, but instead just hinders forms of movement that don't fit the bill? In SR you're playing in an environment where computertech is capable of reading all output of your motor cortex and overwrite it on various levels (think skill wires and the like) and suddenly your suspension of disbelief stops when it comes to a similarly precise supression / allowance of physcial movement for driving a motorcycle while experiencing VR-mode?

Something as simple as a safety harness (read: "seat belt"), or an enclosed windshell (I wish more cycles offered those, and/or that it was an official modification in Arsenal), or remote-activatable Gecko Pads on the passenger-contact surfaces. You know, "describe WHY you don't fall off all the time" ....?

All pretty much unnecessary (and to a certain extend even counter-productive or even harmful for the purpose of driving a motorcycle) ... particularly in light of what RAS originally was supposed to be.

[yesferatu]

I made up a go-ganger a while ago and I believe it made better sense to actually drive the vehicle.
Someone might want to refresh my math, but aren't you actually better off in the meat than jumped into a motorcycle?

e.g. Human w/ Assumed best ware, Attributes & Skills at augmented max.
Meat: Wired Reflexes/Synaptic Boosters (3)
Initiative: (9 Reaction + 6 Intuition + 3) = 18 (4IPs)
Driving: (Reaction: 9 + Pilot Ground 6) = 15
Attack: (Agility 9 + Gunnery 6) = 15

Matrix: VCR w/ Hot Sim
Initiative = (6 Response + 6 Intuition +2) 14 (3IPs)
Driving: (Response: 6 + Maneuver Ground 6) (+2VR/-1 Threshold) = 14
Attack: (Response 6 + Gunnery 6) (+2VR/-1 Threshold) 14

I'm sure I screwed up the math there, but it looks like a driver vs. a rigger has more dice on everything, can operate pretty well out of the matrix, and has more IPs. Am I missing something?

[bannockburn]

Lowered thresholds, and an additional +2 dice on VR rigging, thanks to the VCR.
Especially the thresholds can make a big difference when doing intricate maneuvers.

Also, you can add Simsense Booster, Response Enhancer, and Simsense Accelerators for more IP and reaction in VR.

[yesferatu]

Although...is that +2 from the hot sim & another +2 from the VCR - or is that the same bonus?
I thought VCRs just allowed a rigger to jump in via VR.

[bannockburn]

The control rig provides a +2 dice pool bonus on all Vehicle skill tests while the rigger is “jumped into” a vehicle/drone via full virtual reality.

This is additional to, and distinct from the +2 dice from hot-sim VR.

Also:

Characters who are driving a vehicle through virtual reality (whether they are directly jacked in to the vehicle or piloting it remotely), receive a –1 threshold modifier to all Vehicle Tests.

[_Pax._]

I'm sure I screwed up the math there, but it looks like a driver vs. a rigger has more dice on everything, can operate pretty well out of the matrix, and has more IPs. Am I missing something?

Yeah.

Going hot-sim VR, with a VCR implanted, means you get +4 dice and -1 threshold - whether you're in/on the vehicle, or not. It also gives you 3, 4, or even 5 IPs, without any other initiative-ware at all.

Compared to just +1 dice for driving in non-remote AR.

...

Meanwhile, I have an image in my head, now, of a go-gang with a couple well-armored vans/minibusses, each one carrying 3+ bike-riggers who completely remote-pilot their bikes. The guys ON the bikes? Gunners, nothing more; their entire purpose is to shoot stuff. Name the vans, or their drivers, thinks like "Mother" and "Auntie"; the bikes are grouped up as "Mother's Boys", or "the Nephews", and so on. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif) Jury rig some "launch racks" that can deploy/retrieve the bikes even while the van is in motion .... now, THAT is "rule of cool", IMO.

[_Pax._]

And that is of relevance for gameplay and crunch in what way? Give me a good reason as to why this fact should technically (from ingame perspective) and mechanically (from off-play perspective) have impact on how rigged bikes are treated by crunch.

Gameplay should model what would be expected of reality, given the presuppositions of the setting. That's why.

If you take a motorcycle, set it up for remote control but DON'T give it any innate means of staying upright .... when the sole occupant/operator goes completely limp, they fall off and the bike crashes. Immediately. Despite whatever the remote-control system tries to do.

Do the same with a car, and that is not the case.

Mechanics should reflect that reality. That's why the bike needs a gyroscopic stabiliser. (Not to mention, that stabiliser is useful even when NOT rigging the bike.)

As for falling off - again, simple descriptive elements, like "strapped in", or "gecko adhesion pads", to explain why the driver goes completely limp, but doesn't fall off.

The mere fact that a car is enclosed whereas the bike isn't rises the question if there actually is a necessity to mechanically "gimp" rigged bikes even further beyond the point where attacks against its rider are much easier than against the driver of a car.

Sure. For example, unless the motorcycle came with a windshell or equivalent? I wouldn't allow the Passenger Protection modification. For starters.

I guess you don't have that much experience with motorcycles then ... because they actually are pretty stable when "unattended"

Riiiight. When's the last time you saw a 2-wheel cycle stand completely upright, with no-one sitting on it or touching any part of it, and no kickstand or other object for the bike to lean against?

... didn't think so.

Why do you and others insist on applying the VR pool modifier against something that is integral part of the task (driving the bike) [...] instead of limiting it to just the stuff that is not part of said task (like firing a hand-held weapon or doing fancy sword play / jousting)?
Where is the actual need for gimping gameplay in that particular case? I so do hope that "realism" is not your answer there ...

If you're rigging via VR, then moving yoru hands and feet is not part of the task of driving the bike. You are in fact receiving almost zero sensory input from any of your five senses, that originate in "meatspace". A -6 die pool penalty is huge. It negates, and then some, anything but longshot tests for the vast majority of metahumanity, for anything ... even simple perception. If you're in VR, and someone SETS YOU ON FIRE ... you're not guaranteed to know that fact, unless you have a biomonitor that starts shrieking an alarm at you in VRspace.

And noone's "gimping gameplay". FFS. Just install the whole damned package, make sure your GM agrees that a cycle rigger-adaptation package includes some means of easily securing the rider to the bike (clips, a seatbelt, gecko adhesion pads, whatever), and go.

If you want to be awake, aware, and alert? Don't go VR, don't get a control rig; save your money (and essence), and just drive the bike via AR (which gives a +1 DP bonus).

[...] and thus would be a design goal from the very beginning when trying to built a rigger adaption (and was functional throughout the 2050ies and 2060ies, but suddenly becomes invalid in the 2070ies again?)

It's still there. The Gyroscopic Stabilisation that used to be found only in the more-expensive Rigger Adaptation package for motorcycles, is now available separately, and even comes as standard equipment on some bikes that aren't rigger-adapted.

Nothing has been "taken away" from rigger-adapted bikes. The features of that adaptation have simply been changed to be a la carte.

And where the hell is it unreasonable or unbelievable that a rigger adapted motorcycle does neither actually shut down nor heavily restrict physical movement of the driver in regards to the task at hand, [...]

VR shuts your senses and motor skills down. -6 penalty.

[...] but instead just hinders forms of movement that don't fit the bill?

Fine, so my hacker's Reality Filter is "1950's gangster shootout"; firing SMGs "fits the bill" for that VR environment. Doe she get 5 meatspace passes atno VR penalty, if he's using an SMG in a firefight?

No?

Well, why not? It's the same justification you want applied to a cycle-rigger.

[bannockburn]

Meanwhile, I have an image in my head, now, of a go-gang with a couple well-armored vans/minibusses, each one carrying 3+ bike-riggers who completely remote-pilot their bikes. The guys ON the bikes? Gunners, nothing more; their entire purpose is to shoot stuff. Name the vans, or their drivers, thinks like "Mother" and "Auntie"; the bikes are grouped up as "Mother's Boys", or "the Nephews", and so on. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif) Jury rig some "launch racks" that can deploy/retrieve the bikes even while the van is in motion .... now, THAT is "rule of cool", IMO.

This is awesome.
Yoink! ^^

[_Pax._]

^_^ You're welcome!

[_Pax._]

Initiative = (6 Response + 6 Intuition +2) 14 (3IPs)

By the way .... since you assumed "best ware" for the non-VR pilot ... Simsense Accelerator and ... bugger, I forget the other one .... but they each add +1 pass, and together are explicitly given an exception allowing for five full passes.

Also, you can get Response Enhancers for a commlink or vehicle, to boost initiative. Their Availability is 4 times Rating, so +3 from that is doable right out of the gate. And as Bannockburn reminded me (downthread, this is an edit) ... for the same 20-Availability cap as the Wires 3, they can go all the way to +5.

Then there's a Reality Filter, which can give +1 response within any node where it reigns supreme - like, your own node(s). TRON: Legacy lightcycle races, anyone?



So:

Meatspace
Initiative: (9 Reaction + 6 Intuition + 3) = 18 (4IPs)
Driving: (Reaction: 9 + Pilot Ground 6) = 15
Attack: (Agility 9 + Gunnery 6) = 15

VRspace
Initiative: (6 Response + 6 Intuition +2 VR + 5 Enhancers +1 Filter) = 20 (5IPs)
Driving: (Response: 6 + Maneuver Ground 6 +2 VR +2 Control Rig) = 16, and -1 Threshold
Attack: (Response 6 + Gunnery 6 +2 VR +2 Control Rig) = 16

Overall? Maxxed-VR rigging gives:

Initiative: +2 die pool, and +1 IP
Driving: +1 die pool, and -1 Threshold
Attack: +1 die pool

The advantage is clearly, albeit not overwhelmingly, in favor of the hot-VR rigger.

BUT WAIT ... it can get better than that, even. Specialise your Vehicle skills, and your Gunnery skill, in "Remote Operation". That's worth +2 dice on those rolls, and now:

Initiative: +2 die pool, and +1 IP
Driving: +3 die pool, and -1 Threshold
Attack: +3 die pool

Clear, undeniable advantage for the (very specialised) hot-VR rigger. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif) And the best part? Those numbers are the same whether he's rigging a bike, or a truck, or even a TANK; it's all "ground vehicle".

And later, Response could go above 6. It'd be expensive as all hell, but it could. A Renraku Suterusu, with Response boosted to 10 (!!!), would add 4 dice to all three of those categories ... though admittedly, at 40F for the 'link and another 40F for the response chip, and a net price of nearly a quarter-million nuyen, that's not exactly something to plan on.

Still, more reasonably, you could get a Singularity Battle Buddy, which has Response 7 to start (for 17,000¥, and availability 24F - rough, but not completely unachievable).

You can also nudge the Enhancers up by 1 too, for one more die of Initiative.

[bannockburn]

Sorry, the -1 threshold doesn't count for attacks, only vehicle tests.
Also, you can safely assume +6 matrix reaction from Response Enhancers, and an additional +1 from customized interface. After all, Synaptic Boosters or Wired Reflexes aren't available at 3 at start, too (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)
The thing you're looking for is called Simsense Booster, btw.

[_Pax._]

Sorry, the -1 threshold doesn't count for attacks, only vehicle tests.

So edited.

Also, you can safely assume +6 matrix reaction from Response Enhancers, and an additional +1 from customized interface. After all, Synaptic Boosters or Wired Reflexes aren't available at 3 at start, too (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

Hadn't thought of that. Still, if I kept it to 20, it'd be achievable with a Restricted Gear quality .... which could also the Synaptics or Wires. So, +5 instead of +3. 2 more dice .... I'll edit that in, too.

The thing you're looking for is called Simsense Booster, btw.

AHA, yes, yes indeed. And I know either the booster or the accelerator takes Restricted Gear as well. So there's an opportunity cost, in blowing two RGs on the gear, but if it's your schtick, go for it, right?

[Cochise]

Gameplay should model what would be expected of reality, given the presuppositions of the setting. That's why.

As a general basis: Fine ...

If you take a motorcycle, set it up for remote control but DON'T give it any innate means of staying upright ....

That's drone control without a "driver" ... which happened to require a gyro stabilization in earlier editions (and I could see such a requirement for SR4 as well), but has nothing to do with the rigged version we're talking here.

when the sole occupant/operator goes completely limp, they fall off and the bike crashes. Immediately. Despite whatever the remote-control system tries to do.

Wrong on various accounts:

1. You're still ignoring the fact that a rigging driver doesn't necessarily completely go limb (I'll just remention RAS functiontionality and its purpose again)
2. No, if in the real world a driver goes "limb", the bike by no means "immeadiatly" crashes ... Trust me, 25 years of motocycling here.
3. A (theoretical) remote-control system (which we're still not talking) very conveniently can compensate for such an occurance, unless the surrounding hinders the most basic action: The mere act of accelerating automatically lifts a motorcycle into a very stable upright position.


Do the same with a car, and that is not the case.

Not a satisfactory answer to the questions, sorry.

Mechanics should reflect that reality.

A "reality" that is rather ill-perceived by you.

That's why the bike needs a gyroscopic stabiliser.

No, it doesn't ... not for directly rigged driving, at least as long as you're not die hard on applying the (questionable) dice pool modifer and assumption that a rigger adaption for a bike will totally block all movement of the driver.

(Not to mention, that stabiliser is useful even when NOT rigging the bike.)

Non-issue here ...

As for falling off - again, simple descriptive elements, like "strapped in", or "gecko adhesion pads", to explain why the driver goes completely limp, but doesn't fall off.

Still counter-productive to the act of driving that motorcycle and still potentially more harmful to the driver. A technical solution for rigging should always aim for using the driver's body in exactly that manner it operates the bike under normal conditions ... and the driver still doesn't have to go totally limb.

Riiiight. When's the last time you saw a 2-wheel cycle stand completely upright, with no-one sitting on it or touching any part of it, and no kickstand or other object for the bike to lean against?

... didn't think so.

Okay, so here you decide going into an agressive stance towards me. Fine ... So I suggest that you start working on your reading comprehension, since I nowhere stated that a bike in standstill wouldn't fall to the ground. I spoke about a very satisfactory "unattended" stability when moving at comparatively low speeds or higher. A moving bike just with base throttle will - unless colliding with an object - travel rather long distances in a straight line without falling down ... even without a driver.

If you're rigging via VR, then moving yoru hands and feet is not part of the task of driving the bike.

Since your body movement (including maintaining grip) is integral part of steering, it sure as hell is part of the task of driving the bike even under VR, if someone were to try to invent such a means of transportation.

You are in fact receiving almost zero sensory input from any of your five senses, that originate in "meatspace".

In fact it's just your conscience that isn't aware of the sensory input. Your body on a subconcious level still is and any implant or technology aiming to provide rigged bike riding will and must operate on that sensory input ... Maybe it's again time to reiterate that in previous editions the rigger adaption for bikes was more expensive? Or that the original VCR was directly linked to the relevant parts of the brain that would provide the required input?

A -6 die pool penalty is huge. It negates, and then some, anything but longshot tests for the vast majority of metahumanity, for anything ... even simple perception. If you're in VR, and someone SETS YOU ON FIRE ... you're not guaranteed to know that fact, unless you have a biomonitor that starts shrieking an alarm at you in VRspace.

Something that continues to assume that this -6 modifier (including the limbness) actually applies. Something that I tried tellung you is not an actual necessity, not even by "RAW".

And noone's "gimping gameplay".

So I guess I'm imangining the proposals of two piloting tests per round or your technical requirements that are beyond what "RAW" truely demands, just to fulfill a level of "realism" that is heavily poluted by incorrect assumptions concering motorcycles?

FFS. Just install the whole damned package, make sure your GM agrees that a cycle rigger-adaptation package includes some means of easily securing the rider to the bike (clips, a seatbelt, gecko adhesion pads, whatever), and go.

Why would "I" install such a "damned" package or try to make sure the GM agrees on including stuff that I deem unnecessary, because I see the involved tech being able to make use of the rigging driver's body in a way that makes all that stuff obsolete and simply use the normal pools without negative modifiers?
Coming from previous editions I'd even be seriously pissed if a GM were to try to impose such restrictions on my (combat) biking rigger.

If you want to be awake, aware, and alert? Don't go VR, don't get a control rig; save your money (and essence), and just drive the bike via AR (which gives a +1 DP bonus).

See, "I'm" not even close to wanting to be "awake", just not as "sleepy" as people seem to think that a bike rigging driver "must" be, just because they interpret VR-mode (and the associated "limbness") in a too literal way ... based on what they deem "realistic", yet has no real connection to the realities of driving a bike.
As for being "aware" and "alert": That will be more than enough covered by the sensory input provided by the bike sensors while "assuming the body".

It's still there.

Quite obviously not ... Otherwise you and others wouldn't demand stuff that wasn't and still isn't a true requirement to making it work with the game universe's context.

The Gyroscopic Stabilisation that used to be found only in the more-expensive Rigger Adaptation package for motorcycles, is now available separately, and even comes as standard equipment on some bikes that aren't rigger-adapted.

~laughs~ Flipping through my good old Rigger 3 I can tell you: gyroscopic stabilisation was availible as a seprate upgrade that was only required if the bike was to be used as drone (a.k.a without the rigger sitting on it). Rigger adaption (the thing need to "assume the body") was something entirely different. So I have to say it again: Obviously the 2050ies and 60ies tech could do things that have been lost in the 2070ies ... at least as far as you and others are concerned when demanding the prerequisites mentioned in this thread.


Nothing has been "taken away" from rigger-adapted bikes.

Is that so? Then I guess I can start rigging a SR4 motorbike without your wind shell, without geckotape or seat-belts and ofc without the suggested house rule of two piloting tests per turn and without a -6 pool modifier for driving related tests?

The features of that adaptation have simply been changed to be a la carte.

Really? I don't get that impression going by what you and others demand here.

VR shuts your senses and motor skills down. -6 penalty.

And that's the point that I'm still arguing against, because that is an overly literal interpretation of a (quite obviously "streamlined") info concerning the purpose and effects of RAS in context of where and what for it is used. 1st od 3rd Ed. Deckers under RAS still typing, riggers on bikes not going totally limb, etc. Interpretating the involved technology as being that "incomplete" is heavily going against what you claimed to be important: Believability ... in context of all availible simsense technology that can be found in the SR universe.

Fine, so my hacker's Reality Filter is "1950's gangster shootout"; firing SMGs "fits the bill" for that VR environment. Doe she get 5 meatspace passes atno VR penalty, if he's using an SMG in a firefight?

No?

Again more of an inflamatory approach instead of discussion, so: Stupid comparison stays stupid ...

Well, why not? It's the same justification you want applied to a cycle-rigger.


Actually: No again ... just as with typing on cyberdecks ...

[_Pax._]

(I'll just remention RAS functiontionality and its purpose again)

Welcome to 4th edition. RAS doesn't work like it did in 1E, 2E, and whatever. Things change .... adapt, or die, chummer.

Since your body movement (including maintaining grip) is integral part of steering, [...]

No it's not, not when rigging the bike via VR. At that point, you could chop the rider's arms off, and the bike wouldn't care. (Sudden loss of consciousness due to massive blood loss on the rider's part not withstanding).

Seriously: a vehicle with Rigger Adaptation, any such vehicle? The hands-on control systems are not necessary. You can even have them REMOVED entirely.

[...] any implant or technology aiming to provide rigged bike riding will and must operate on that sensory input [...]

No, it doesn't. When operating a vehicle via VR, it doesn't matter if you're even on the vehicle in question. There is precisely zero difference to operating that motorcycle via VR if you're ON it, versus if you're sitting on your living room couch (aside from concerns about Mutual Signal Range in the latter case). The VR-controlled motorcycle does not need a rider's movements to operate; that's a large part of what the gyroscope is for.

[...] in previous editions the rigger adaption for bikes was more expensive?

.... and maybe it's time for me to reiterate that what 4E has done, really, is un-bundle the Motorcycle Gyro from the Rigger Adaptation package ...?

Something that continues to assume that this -6 modifier (including the limbness) actually applies.

Cite me a rules passage that exempts motorcycle riding from that penalty.

Oh wait, you can't. Because there isn't one.

So I guess I'm imangining the proposals of two piloting tests per round [...]

Yes, you are - if you think that was for "driving a bike via rigging". That came up from the idea of the Rigger being a biodrone, rigging their own boty in order to drive the bike. One piloting test for the biodrone, then, one piloting test fo the bike (THROUGH the biodrone). And it was not really a serious suggestion.

[...] or your technical requirements that are beyond what "RAW" truely demands, just to fulfill a level of "realism" that is heavily poluted by incorrect assumptions concering motorcycles?

What technical requirements?

I assume that a Motorcycle adapted for rigger operation, already includes some means of rider-retention despite the effects of RAS. Electronically-controled gecko pads at appropriate places, that switch on when the rider goes into VR piloting, and switch off when she comes back out into meatspace.

Why would "I" install such a "damned" package or try to make sure the GM agrees on including stuff that I deem unnecessary, [...]

BEcause if you're neither the author of the rulebooks, nor the GM of that game, you don't get to make the final call on what is or isn't necessary. That's why.

[...] previous editions [...]

Are irrelevant.

See, "I'm" not even close to wanting to be "awake", just not as "sleepy" as people seem to think that a bike rigging driver "must" be, [...]

VR is VR.

Going into VR means, being unaware and inactive in "meatspace".

That's 4E. Either adapt ... or go back to 3E, 2E, whatever.

[Cochise]

Welcome to 4th edition. RAS doesn't work like it did in 1E, 2E, and whatever. Things change .... adapt, or die, chummer.

Very "convenient" and again rather inpolite way of saying: Yes, I'm taking things so literal to make stuff that has no impact on game balance suck, just because I want to adhere what I think RAW says. You could have saved both my and your time by answering my original question:

So tell me - since my remarks on RAS in general and previous editions obviously were ignored - what is in terms of game play the problem with rigged bikes without stuff like gyros or house ruled secondary piloting tests? Is that overly literal interpretation of RAS really that strong, that a more or less unprotected bike rider suddenly becomes of serious threat to the game instead of simply going by the "rule of cool"?

with a plain and simple "Yes" ~sigh~

No it's not, not when rigging the bike via VR.

You were the one that brought "realism" into the equation. Any level of "realism" demands that the driver is part of the steering action ... even while going into VR-Mode. So you're contradicting your own requirements. Be my guest with that.

Seriously: a vehicle with Rigger Adaptation, any such vehicle? The hands-on control systems are not necessary. You can even have them REMOVED entirely.

You could ... and then (and just then) I could see an argument for requiring certain forms of strapping the driver onto the bike. However, since driving a bike doesn't just involve "hands-on" control, but constantly makes use of body weight for purposes of steering (something where a gyro in combination with a strapped on, but otherwise "limb" body would get into serious trouble *hence my reference to counter-productvity and even harmfulness towards the driver*), that's just not the whole story there. Get yourself a motorbike and actually try driving it.

No, it doesn't. When operating a vehicle via VR, it doesn't matter if you're even on the vehicle in question. There is precisely zero difference to operating that motorcycle via VR if you're ON it, versus if you're sitting on your living room couch (aside from concerns about Mutual Signal Range in the latter case). The VR-controlled motorcycle does not need a rider's movements to operate; that's a large part of what the gyroscope is for.

So much for your claims of "realism" and "believability". Oh, and there sure as hell are differences between a bike being rigged directly and being remote controlled as drone: A) the body and B) the necessity of a gyro for one while not being necessary for the other (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

.... and maybe it's time for me to reiterate that what 4E has done, really, is un-bundle the Motorcycle Gyro from the Rigger Adaptation package ...?

So again I have to question your reading comprehension: How can 4E "unbundle" something that was not "bundled" to begin with?

Cite me a rules passage that exempts motorcycle riding from that penalty.

Cite me one, that says that RAS in all cases and without exception will shut down all movement (there's already the precedence that you can actually move/act with said modifier, so movement actually isn't restricted) and then provide a passage that says that RAS cannot work on different levels of supression, depending on the intended form of simsense interaction.

Oh wait, you can't. Because there isn't one.

~yawn~ Can you do better?

Yes, you are - if you think that was for "driving a bike via rigging". That came up from the idea of the Rigger being a biodrone, rigging their own boty in order to drive the bike. One piloting test for the biodrone, then, one piloting test fo the bike (THROUGH the biodrone). And it was not really a serious suggestion.

And why was that particular suggestion brought up? Beats me, if it wasn't to circumvent all those requirements that you and others (including ther person who made that suggestion) deem necessary.

What technical requirements?

You demand a gyro and some form of strapping onto the bike. Those are technical requirements, ne c'est pas?

I assume that a Motorcycle adapted for rigger operation, already includes some means of rider-retention despite the effects of RAS. Electronically-controled gecko pads at appropriate places, that switch on when the rider goes into VR piloting, and switch off when she comes back out into meatspace.

While I still assume that all that stuff simply isn't necessary.

BEcause if you're neither the author of the rulebooks, nor the GM of that game, you don't get to make the final call on what is or isn't necessary. That's why.

I get the final call on who I will play with. But that part is irrelevant to this discussion, just as you mentioning this in the first place.

Are irrelevant.

And that's just ignorant ... But hey, thankfully I don't have to play with you, right?

VR is VR.

Or maybe not?

Going into VR means, being unaware and inactive in "meatspace".

You are aware of the difference between conscious and subconscious perception and effects? I forget, you simply ignore it, for the sake of what you deem "realistic" and "RAW", right?

That's 4E. Either adapt ... or go back to 3E, 2E, whatever.

I guess ignorance is truely bliss

[DeathStrobe]

There is no problem with being able to control your meat body while in VR, because there are rules for it. The -6 to physical actions while in VR doesn't mean you can't grip a handle or clinch your thighs or even shift your wait, it means you're blind (and deaf) to the real world. Your body doesn't have to go completely limp while rigging. The rules are fine and totally allow the rigging of motorcycles. All your meat body is doing is holding on, while the bike does everything else. Gripping and holding on is a non-test, unless its something extreme, like maybe a crash test. I don't see the problem.

[WhiskeyJohnny]

There is no problem with being able to control your meat body while in VR, because there are rules for it. The -6 to physical actions while in VR doesn't mean you can't grip a handle or clinch your thighs or even shift your wait, it means you're blind (and deaf) to the real world. Your body doesn't have to go completely limp while rigging. The rules are fine and totally allow the rigging of motorcycles. All your meat body is doing is holding on, while the bike does everything else. Gripping and holding on is a non-test, unless its something extreme, like maybe a crash test. I don't see the problem.

That's not really the case, with most motorcycles (especially fast ones). There's quite a bit of body movement necessary for turning, even at low speeds, and in addition to operating the controls. Correct body positioning, either contrary to the lean of the bike (counterweighting it with your bodymass) or with the lean of the bike (getting a 'knee down' or even an elbow at higher lean angles), is pretty crucial to getting the bike turned. Just holding on wouldn't really cut it.

[yesferatu]

Honestly, the only solution I see for VR piloting WHILE on the bike is a rigger cocoon.
Even if we rule you *can* hang on...your meat body is still a target.
I could see VRing inside tank or bulldog, but motorcycles are almost entirely risk with very little reward.

[_Pax._]

Very "convenient" [...]

So. You want to handwave away the current RAW, and cast aspersions at anyone who doesn't dothe same? No, sorry, that doesn't fly with me.

Any level of "realism" demands that the driver is part of the steering action ... even while going into VR-Mode.

How many times have you controlled a motorcycle while immersed in a full-sensorium Virtual Reality environment?

How many motorcycles have you seen, which were adapted for control by such means - and further, control in such a way that it doesn't matter if the driver is even on the same continent as the motorcycle?

...

I thought as much.

See, what you're refusing to let go of is this: how motorcycles are controlled in real life, right now, with hands-on controls? Does not dictate how a VR control system would work.

The two may both be fruit, and may both grow on trees. But one's red, and the other's orange.

So much for your claims of "realism" and "believability". Oh, and there sure as hell are differences between a bike being rigged directly and being remote controlled as drone: A) the body and B) the necessity of a gyro for one while not being necessary for the other (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

The Gyro is necessary in both cases. and the presence or absence of a body on that cycle, doesn't change how it is operated. There's no change in die pools, thresholds, or anything of the sort.

[...] and then provide a passage that says that RAS cannot work on different levels of supression, depending on the intended form of simsense interaction.

"That which is not specified, does not exist".

And why was that particular suggestion brought up?

An idle thought spawned from a flahs of creativity?

That's where my "Mother" / "Auntie" go-gang idea came from, after all.

You demand a gyro and some form of strapping onto the bike. Those are technical requirements, ne c'est pas?

The rules demand the Gyro.

I only suggest that, countering people's questions regarding "wouldn't you just fall off", that there are easy, simple, logical, setting- and crunch-compliant ways to HANDWAVE THAY WORRY AWAY.

"He doesn't fall because any rigger-adaptation for a bike, or any craft you ride OURSIDE of really, includes ways to keep you ON it, even if you go into full VR."

That's it. That's all.

Mostly since then, you've been whining about "but it makes me put a GYRO in there! waaah! I never had to do that in older editions, ten and twenty years ago! Change sucks ... waaaaaah!"

::sigh::

But hey, thankfully I don't have to play with you, right?

Feh, you don't even have to worry about it. After this nonsense thread, you're on my "actively avoid" list.

VR is VR.

Or maybe not?

Nope. No maybes. It is what it is, and it is nothing else.

[bannockburn]

Not to pour oil on the flames, but, let's consider this from a factual RAW point of view then.

Firstly, I find it strange that you, Pax, demand that physics need to be obeyed, then stating that RL doesn't have anything to do with the issue at hand. But that's beside the point.

Secondly, and more importantly:
Nowhere in the core rulebook does it say that motorcycles aren't riggable without modifications. In fact, we all know that vehicle rules are woefully underrepresented in the current edition. However, we have one mention of the rigger adaption:

When added to a vehicle, this “black box” allows a character with a control rig (p.338) to rig the vehicle (Rigging and Drones, p.244), either through a direct fiberoptic cable or wireless link.

Note, 'a vehicle' does not preclude or state special requirements for a bike. Armed with this knowledge, I proceed first to the Control Rig cyberware, which again does not mention bikes at all. Look it up, it's on p. 338.
From there, back to p. 244, where the Rigger Adaption so helpfully leads us. Again, nothing about bikes, at all. Nothing much about rigging vehicles, too, but you can jump into a drone, so let's look there.
P. 245, that is.
Again, no mention of different kind of vehicles needing different requirements.

pp. 225-226 is the next stop, it describes VR.

Perceiving the VR Matrix in its full glory overwhelms the physical senses. Any action taken in the physical world while in VR suffers a –6 dice pool penalty.

Emphasis mine.
Now this is some actual information we can work with. It says on the one hand, that the hacker's senses are overwhelmed, and on the other, that any physical action suffers a -6 modifier.

Now we can conclude that it is
a) Not impossible, but rather inconvenient, to rig a bike, according to the rules presented in the core book, on grounds of VCRs netting you a smooth -4 to your vehicle tests, or
b) That you can rig a bike just fine, with the thought that the rigger's senses are overwhelmed, but those are actually being replaced by the vehicle's sensors. Furthermore, he doesn't go limp, since there is no mention of that.

But let's go a bit further and take a look at Arsenal, where the Motorcycle Gyro Stabilization is mentioned, which, btw, was never included in any rigging a bike requirements, ever.

Thanks to technology, your bike no longer crashes to the ground when you forget to employ the kickstand. With motorcycle gyro stabilization, the bike will stay upright in all but the worst conditions. In cases where a Handling failure may bring about a motorcycle crash, add 2 to the vehicle’s Handling to represent the gyro stabilization’s assistance in keeping the rider upright.

Again, no mention of being a requirement for rigging a bike. At all. It is helpful if you make a crash test, and it is helpful if you want to use the thing as a drone, but neither do you need it for rigging, nor for actually using it as a drone.
For that, you only need the Rigger Adaption, which is again described, with different, expanded wording, on p. 142

This upgrade installs a basic black box to allow a rigger to control a vehicle and to “jump” into it if required. While this is a common modification, that doesn’t mean that it is any less complicated. A datajack must be installed to allow fiberoptic communication, followed by a Signal 1 wireless system so a rigger can control the vehicle wirelessly from the driver seat, a basic sensor network so a jumped-in rigger can sense the area around the vehicle, and a control system interface to allow the rigger’s black box to control the vehicle. All off-the-shelf drones come already equipped with a rigger adaptation.

Again, there's no special mention of additional systems required for rigging a bike. More importantly, there's the mention of 'a basic sensor network, so a jumped-in rigger can sense the area around the vehicle' (perhaps overriding the overwhelmed VR senses?) and a 'control system interface'. What exact nature this interface is, is left open, but I think you can safely rule this as a system that allows a bike rigger to actually rig his bike without having more problems than without the rig.


Edit: Actually, I found something new to me, while reading up on Hot Sim. You only receive +2 to Matrix tests. So, the VCR replaces the matrix bonus with a +2 bonus to vehicle tests, instead.

[yesferatu]

--->>>>>Edit: Actually, I found something new to me, while reading up on Hot Sim. You only receive +2 to Matrix tests. So, the VCR replaces the matrix bonus with a +2 bonus to vehicle tests, instead.

So is a VCR an either/or +2/+2 or both +4?

[bannockburn]

A VCR gives +2 to vehicle tests, while jumped in (i.e. in VR, cold or hot) and is a requirement for actually jumping into a vehicle instead of manually or remote controlling it.
Hot Sim VR by itself gives +2 to matrix tests, the VCR adding another +2 on top, so the bonus is, in the first case, +2, but for vehicle tests while jumped in, it is +4
Would you, e.g. try to sniff out another drone's connection while rigging your vehicle and be forced to make a maneuver or crash test, the Electronic Warfare+Scan would be at a +2, for being a matrix test, while the crash test would be Vehicle Skill+Response+Handling+4 for being a vehicle test done while jumped in (but also its threshold would be reduced by 1).

Edit: Corrected the examples.

[DeathStrobe]

A VCR gives +2 to vehicle tests, while jumped in (i.e. in VR, cold or hot) and is a requirement for actually jumping into a vehicle instead of manually or remote controlling it.
Hot Sim VR by itself gives +2 to matrix tests, but vehicle tests aren't matrix tests, so the bonus is, in both cases, +2.
Would you, e.g. try to sniff out another drone's connection while rigging your vehicle and be forced to make a maneuver or crash test, the Electronic Warfare+Scan would be at a +2, for being a matrix test, while the crash test would be Vehicle Skill+Response+Handling+2 for being a vehicle test (but also its threshold would be reduced by 1).

Rigging is a Matrix test...

Hot sim benefits the rigger as much as the hacker. All actions by a rigger who has jumped into a drone (or other device) are considered Matrix actions, and receive the benefit of the +2 bonus due to hot sim VR use.

Also, while I'm thinking about it, the rigger will know the location of his own meat body because he'll be aware of his body pressing down on the vehicle. So he'll be able to figure out how to shift his body weight based off the sensors of the bike.

[bannockburn]

See? I knew that and then I got confused again (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)
Thanks.