IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> Partial Rigging, okay, it's a weird idea...but...
Zenmaxer
post Sep 30 2004, 12:33 AM
Post #1


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 241
Joined: 20-September 04
Member No.: 6,682



Made me think about the idea of partial rigging... basically, the vehicle gains the "reflexes" of the rigger, but is still being manually piloted by him. This would mostly be applicable in lean-steered vehicles like motorcycles or airboards, or in cases where the rigger wants to do something other than drive but is not using the manual controls. Would this be unbalancing? I think you could make a serious case for limited "autonomic" responses via partial rigging. It is a weird idea, looking at it, and I'm not sure I'm expressing myself very clearly either.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Hasaku
post Sep 30 2004, 01:17 AM
Post #2


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 282
Joined: 26-February 02
Member No.: 197



I think I understand what you're saying. For instance: suppose you wanted to shoot from the back of your bike. You could use partial rigging kind of like how neurohelmets work in Battletech. You still inhabit and control your body (no RAS cutout) and are able to aim and fire handheld weapons, but the bike handles better by taking subconcious cues from your connection. It would read your sense of balance, for instance, and possibly your will to go faster or slow down.

Essentially, it would be less like becoming the bike and more like the bike becoming a part of you, controlled with the unconcious ease of a limb.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Kagetenshi
post Sep 30 2004, 02:21 AM
Post #3


Manus Celer Dei
**********

Group: Dumpshocked
Posts: 17,006
Joined: 30-December 02
From: Boston
Member No.: 3,802



You're basically thinking of a datajack link. I might consider increasing the bonus to +2 per level of VCR with no added initiative dice, or +1 +VCR level (again, no added initiative dice), but nothing more.

~J
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Edward
post Sep 30 2004, 06:39 AM
Post #4


Neophyte Runner
*****

Group: Members
Posts: 2,073
Joined: 23-August 04
Member No.: 6,587



What system is used for combat biker and similar sports?

The rules make bike combat almost imposable but it is supposed to be a sport.

Edward
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
wargear
post Sep 30 2004, 07:20 AM
Post #5


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 219
Joined: 26-April 02
From: Emerald City, Oz
Member No.: 2,648



Combat Biking...a sport for guys and gals sans VCR.

A decent reaction/initiative booster, a 4+ in Bike, and you can munch and crunch...even without rigging.

As for the partial rigging...we have often switched off the RAS override for our riggers or deckers in past games. Sure it frags with their concentration, but being able to fire off wisecracks (and the occasional Predator round) while you're busy "elsewhere" can be a real lifesaver...
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Zenmaxer
post Sep 30 2004, 02:19 PM
Post #6


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 241
Joined: 20-September 04
Member No.: 6,682



:: nods :: I'm not talking about just disabling the RAS, though. Hasaku understood, and I think I agree with Kage pretty much... the advantage is that you can multitask while driving as a rigger, the downside is that you lose some of your rigger perks, and probably can only issue extremely rudimentary commands to your drone network. It'd basically be automatic vehicle empathy, cumulative with the edge if you have it.... so in theory partial rigging could allow superior handling, which would be accurate, with the loss of some of your speed... it'd probably be easier to do something else while driving like this too... Overall, how would you model it?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Moon-Hawk
post Sep 30 2004, 02:31 PM
Post #7


Genuine Artificial Intelligence
********

Group: Members
Posts: 4,019
Joined: 12-June 03
Member No.: 4,715



Well there's so many ways to model it depending on exactly where you want the trade-off to fall between vehicle ability and extra-vehicular ability. Before we just go plopping lines down randomly, give us some benchmarks. Some maximums or minimums for vehicle and non-vehicle ability, and we can try to find a good compromise.
Otherwise, everyone will just have their own idea about how much mind should be left for the vehicle and how much should go elsewhere, and we'll all be trying to come to a common decision about an uncommon idea.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Zenmaxer
post Sep 30 2004, 02:49 PM
Post #8


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 241
Joined: 20-September 04
Member No.: 6,682



:: nods :: I want a consensus, because really, you've already heard my opinion... I'd like to get a codified system built that could serve as a house standard.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Moon-Hawk
post Sep 30 2004, 02:54 PM
Post #9


Genuine Artificial Intelligence
********

Group: Members
Posts: 4,019
Joined: 12-June 03
Member No.: 4,715



So...for the vehicle side of it:
we keep the -VCR level to handling tests.
I'd say we'd have to drop the control pool. Control pool is only for full immersion.
Initiative...still undecited.

For the physical side of it:
We can take other actions. Of course one action per turn must still be dedicated to controlling the vehicle. Nothing's gonna change that.
Combat pool...I'd say somewhere between none to half. Not full.
Initiative...still not sure what to base it off of.

Can we agree on this much, so far?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Moon-Hawk
post Sep 30 2004, 03:05 PM
Post #10


Genuine Artificial Intelligence
********

Group: Members
Posts: 4,019
Joined: 12-June 03
Member No.: 4,715



As for initiative, that's where it really gets tricky. They're not going full rigging speed, since they're not fully rigging, and there's no reason a VCR should give them any kind of bonus to physical actions. Similarly, there's no way they could be going faster than their normal physical reactions, except I could see the vehicle control not counting against them so much.
But would the VCR interfere with their physical reactions?
Maybe use normal physical reaction, one pass has to be used for vehicle control as normal. Maybe say that only one pass can be used for vehicle control, and that no other vehicle tests can be made (except for crash tests). That way someone with MBW4 and a VCR1 (nevermind how) can't take extra vehicle actions when partial rigging. I could also definitely see a penalty to initiative, if it's felt necessary.

Honestly, I really don't see the problem with letting a rigger tone down their VCR and just use it for a small edge. If you've spent 5 essence on a VCR3 and all you want to use it for is -3 handling, with no control pool or super rigger speed, who am I to complain?

So how 'bout this:
Normal physical initiative.
Vehicle:
1 complex action dedicated to controlling the vehicle or make a crash test as usual. The only exception here is that it is exactly 1 complex action, instead of at least 1.
No control pool.
No sensors.
Physical:
Half combat pool.

Sound playable? Not horribly unbalanced?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
SpeedFreak
post Sep 30 2004, 11:45 PM
Post #11


Target
*

Group: Members
Posts: 50
Joined: 9-September 04
Member No.: 6,646



So basically this would be like a trode unit for rigging?
Methinks this a promising avenue of thought and that similar penalties and limitations would be appropriate here.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Zenmaxer
post Oct 1 2004, 12:10 AM
Post #12


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 241
Joined: 20-September 04
Member No.: 6,682



Not at all. you'd still need a full hot link, perhaps even more so... this is just rules for partial or extremely limited immersion, or piloting a vehicle that requires some physical input while still rigging it.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Zenmaxer
post Oct 1 2004, 11:59 PM
Post #13


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 241
Joined: 20-September 04
Member No.: 6,682



<bump>
I really would like to get some rules sketched out..?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Thistledown
post Oct 2 2004, 06:09 PM
Post #14


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 236
Joined: 14-March 04
From: Cal Poly: SLO
Member No.: 6,155



I would say just use the rules for driveing by datajack, with the handling mod from the VCR. I have a character with pretty much the same problem. He has an open-cockpit aircraft, and likes to be 'awake' when he's flying in it.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Eyeless Blond
post Oct 2 2004, 06:19 PM
Post #15


Decker on the Threshold
******

Group: Dumpshocked
Posts: 2,922
Joined: 14-March 04
Member No.: 6,156



I really think that init boost should be good for *something* though. Maybe let him have extra driving actions for any extra init passes he would have had if he were in the machine?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Zenmaxer
post Oct 3 2004, 01:42 PM
Post #16


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 241
Joined: 20-September 04
Member No.: 6,682



maybe, but I kinda like Kage's suggestion, which would be useful... there's so many ways to handle it... we need to do some play testing.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Tal
post Oct 4 2004, 12:32 AM
Post #17


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 187
Joined: 30-April 04
Member No.: 6,294



Hang on... Doesn't the VCR function by translating the rigger's movement impluses into vechile movement? I remember that being the main reason for the RAS, or am I wrong here?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Zenmaxer
post Oct 4 2004, 02:31 PM
Post #18


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 241
Joined: 20-September 04
Member No.: 6,682



:: laughs :: I seriously hope you're wrong, otherwise we've just screwed a buncha riggers.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
BitBasher
post Oct 4 2004, 03:41 PM
Post #19


Traumatizing players since 1992
******

Group: Dumpshocked
Posts: 3,282
Joined: 26-February 02
From: Las Vegas, NV
Member No.: 220



the only vehicle this applies to is motorcycles, which can drive themselves if they have a gyro installed. I rule that the VCR can make the rigger hand on if he's riding a vehicle that requires it, like a motorcycle. He's still fully rigging he just doesn't fall off.

Simple, Not complicated.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
twofalls
post Oct 4 2004, 06:00 PM
Post #20


Target
*

Group: Members
Posts: 47
Joined: 3-October 04
Member No.: 6,723



I agree with simple not complex. Why not use Datajack rules but give an extra +1 reaction bonus per level of VCR (no extra dice). Remove the control pool, apply a +2 target mod to all actions preformed other than vehicle control, require a complex action per combat turn to control the vehicle and call that good?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Zenmaxer
post Oct 4 2004, 06:12 PM
Post #21


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 241
Joined: 20-September 04
Member No.: 6,682



:: nods :: seconded.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Kagetenshi
post Oct 4 2004, 06:24 PM
Post #22


Manus Celer Dei
**********

Group: Dumpshocked
Posts: 17,006
Joined: 30-December 02
From: Boston
Member No.: 3,802



Essentially what I suggested.

~J
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
twofalls
post Oct 4 2004, 06:37 PM
Post #23


Target
*

Group: Members
Posts: 47
Joined: 3-October 04
Member No.: 6,723



QUOTE (Kagetenshi)
Essentially what I suggested.

~J

<Nods to Kagetenshi> :)

And allow combat pool for actions outside of rigging. I think we can all agree that while +2 doesn't stop the action, it sure puts a crimp in those success tests.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Zenmaxer
post Oct 4 2004, 07:02 PM
Post #24


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 241
Joined: 20-September 04
Member No.: 6,682



this sounds right and we've got a fair consensus.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

Reply to this topicStart new topic

 



RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 27th April 2024 - 05:04 AM

Topps, Inc has sole ownership of the names, logo, artwork, marks, photographs, sounds, audio, video and/or any proprietary material used in connection with the game Shadowrun. Topps, Inc has granted permission to the Dumpshock Forums to use such names, logos, artwork, marks and/or any proprietary materials for promotional and informational purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not affiliated with the Dumpshock Forums in any official capacity whatsoever.