Cool. Actually I've read that stuff already, it just deals with Hacking (but thanks for the link as I wanted to reread it anyway). What I'm talking about is an across the board unification, because in my mind there are more than just one inconsistency with the base mechanic.

Well in truth an opposed roll is nothing more than a dynamic threshold which is equal to the number of hits the other person generated. I'm cool with keeping opposed rolls.

Great stuff, and I completely agree...

Mostly it's in related equipment sections. If you bust out a physical lockpick, you roll attribute + skill + lockpick rating, but if you bust out a maglock passkey or retinal duplicator you roll device rating alone.

Which means that passkeys are essentially worthless. The passkey rolls no more than 6 dice at the outside, and needs to roll more successes than the lock does (ties go to the lock, and since the dicepools are so small - there are a lot of ties).

-Frank

Not "broken" per se, but inconsistent.
I see some case where it is just Attribute + Skill vs. (threshold), some cases where it is Attribute + Skill +/- environmental modifiers, one success needed; some cases where it is attribute + Skill + equipment vs. (threshold); some cases where it is attribute + Skill + equipment, one success needed.

Then looking through charts we see that in some cases the modifiers are to threshold and in other cases the modifiers are to the dice pool. I would prefer to have either a set threshold and modified dice pool or a set dice pool and modified threshold and have that for everything across the board. Right now, to keep SR distinct from nWoD I would prefer to put the emphasis on thresholds with keeping a fixed dice pool and then modifying thresholds as the situation deems.

Basically I wanted to know if anyone else saw this as a problem as well and what (if any) steps others have taken to alleviate the issue.

For lots of things, yes. For the Maglock Passkey, not by itself. The intention of the Maglock Passkey really is that it functions without interaction - a lock bypassing method for the non-technically inclined. So if it just limited successes on a Logic + Hacking test, it wouldn't be doing its job (not that it is currently doing that job with how infrequently it works), and it would be far too expensive besides.

What should probably happen is that the maglock passkey should be really cheap (say 100 ) per rating point, and then allow people to get pilots and hacking autosofts for their maglock passkeys.

But for things like Keycard Copiers, using its rating to limit successes works a lot better than having its rating work in opposed tests. In fact, there shouldn't even be an opposed test - if someone wants to take a rating 1 Keycard Copier and spend eight hours making a duplicate keycard, it should just work until the system computers notice that employee #3756790-1 is in two places at once.

-Frank

I meant broken as in "This is the Rule" and then later breaking that rule.

Nowhere that I've seen allows you to roll Attribute + Skill + Equipment rating. Occasionally equipment rating is used in place of a skill or attribute, but never in addition to.

1 success needed is a threshold of 1. Success tests all allow for modifiers to the dice pool. So there is no inconsistency there.

The problems one might see with moving all modifier to threshold instead of dice pool is that there is a limit on threshold reduction (you can only take it down to a threshold of 1, no matter what bonuses you have) and that in opposed tests there is no threshold. The problems one might see in having all modifiers apply to dice pools is that using thresholds creates a need for more successes. some circumstances call for more skill than others, some tasks are more difficult is ways that die pool reductions don't adequetly reflect.

Really, using both isn't that cumbersome. At least the Target number to get a success is always the same.

I don't see a problem with the limit of theshold reduction, right now we have a limit of dice pool bonus (no more than skill x1.5)....

And as I said before, an opposed test is little more than a dynamic threshold equal to the hits the opponent rolls.

Actually it would essentially be adding and subtracting successes to each side before comparing results. It would be precisely as easy and unified as moving the dice pool around before rolling, with the exception that it would become more granular (in that adding one hit is the equivalent of adding 3 dice), but gain mystery. As such, it's a good idea for some tests.

Perception test modifiers I would like to handle in terms of modifiers to the palming tests and net hits of the perceivers rather than dice pool modifiers to the perception tests. If nothing else just so that players wouldn't twig to the fact that something especially obvious or obscure was going on around them.

-Frank

The added "mystery" is one benefit I'm really seeing here. Instead of telling the player, roll X + Y - Z (where Z is some modifier that the player shouldn't really be aware of, but by the rules it applies), I can simply say roll X + Y and then compare to the secret threshold. Which as stated by Frank for perception tests is preferable.