Of course, if I demand that all my riggers create pages of detailed contingency instructions every time they want to use a drone, just in case they loose contact, no one will play one.

I would say, in the case that the drone looses contact the AI takes over. At that time, a test is rolled. It should be the drone's pilot rating, + some stat from the rigger representing his ability to give it clever instructions. Software, maybe? Could be Logic+Software+Pilot, it doesn't matter if we use two or three things, since it's not opposed anyway. This represents the myriad instructions the rigger would've given the drone previously. If the test goes well, the drone AI follows a course of action which the rigger finds desirable. (which may or may not work, but at least it's what the rigger wants it to try) If the test goes poorly, the drone defaults to a less-than-optimal solution. Failure indicates shutdown.
Thoughts?

Yes, signal jamming mostly though the occasional geek the rigger by spell and ASIST backlash in SR3

...yes, Violet (#92) had one of her Stormclouds go out of range of her commlink. Fortunately she told it to follow a specific car and then report back when the vehicle reached it's destination. With a Pilot 4 + Command test, it managed to carry out the instructions.

Yeah! There you go.

I still think it might be cool to give the commanding rigger a teamwork test to represent how well he gave it instructions. Logic+Software (or something better than software?), hits add dice on the Drone's test.

Ultimately, the drone has to make a decision, but it seems like if the rigger knows what he's doing and gives it good instructions it should be a little bit better off that the rigger who simply uses the factory defaults.

Actually: I would suggest that under normal conditions a single 'created once, used repetively' set of instructions is a much more elegant solution.

Then limit it to a set number of 'if/than' instructions, with the implied complexity being represented by the 'pilot program' or the rigger's skill check one way or another.

I find it odd that the writers put the pre-scripted commands into the book but then failed to follow up with any real mechanics for employing them, leading to questions like this.



Part of the problem is 'what was the drone doing when it lost signal'? Seriously.

'Go forth and find the widget and report back to me' is a pre-scripted command line. Lost signal? Doesn't matter, the drone was autopiloting anyway.

Rigger riding the drone or controlling it actively? Drone has no instructions to follow as it was essentially getting its commands in real time up until the signal was lost.

Despite funcitoning LIKE mental attributes, a Drone does not have an AI, it won't create it's own motivation. We could assume that Drones come pre-programed with 'lost signal commands', like returning to point of last signal recieved instructions, but what Shadowrunner uses anything stock anyway?

P. 213

"Pilot programs represent a special type of OS—a system
with specialized functions featuring semi-autonomous decision-
making algorithms. Pilot is for devices that must be able
to assess situations, make decisions, adapt, and ultimately func
tion independently of a (meta)human operator for extended
periods. Th e higher the Pilot rating, the “smarter� it is."

I don't find it too difficult to believe the Pilot program has a chance of figuring out what the Jumped In Rigger was attempting to do when contact is lost and proceeding accordingly.

Jumped In rigger was shooting at someone? Keep shooting.

Jumped In Rigger was following someone? Keep following.

Jumped In Rigger was going somewhere? Keep going there.

Obviously as it gets more complex and extended the less likely the Pilot will be handle it. And in the end, unless there's a glitch or critical glitch on the roll, the Drone will simply attempt to get back into signal range.

sounds suspiciously like semi autonomous knowbots from the SR3 Matrix O.o
And weren't those rumored to be the most likely source for one or two AI's ?

Yes. My PC snuck a Fly-Spy onto the target's vehicle, but didn't give it good commands, so after the target vehicle moves 400 meters, its signal can't reach the PC's comlink, unless the PC keeps moving to Shadow the vehicle. PC lost the target, then sent a host of other Fly-Spies with orders to spread out and search for Fly-Spy #1 (fortunately, programming these ones a bit more carefully.)

I'd say it also depends on the drone. A Fly-Spy and a Stormcloud have the same Pilot rating, but the Fly-Spy's hardware is so miniturized that it may get full Pilot rating only for things within its usual type of mission, and penalties when doing anything non-standard.

Sure, there are lots of devices in the area which *can* act as wireless relays, but there's no reason for them to do so, since their owners probably would not have them on the "rebroadcast any encrypted signals that you may happen to receive regardless of source" setting. Is your comlink on that setting, and if so, were you within 400m of my fly-spy and within your comlink's broadcast radius of my PC? If so, let me know! (West Oakland, October 6th, 2066)

How would that work? How could it not find a matrix connection within 400 meters? All devices form mesh networks automatically, you can't stop that, it's part of how they are. If nothing else, the vehicle it is on would have a better transmitter.

BBB p206 refers to a "wireless mesh network", which is robust in major urban areas, not so much in the open ocean, and not so much underground, so a boat that goes to sea or anyone in a tunnel can leave the network, also possibly anyone in thick hilly forest, depending on where there's devices that auto-repeat. BBB does not distinguish between wireless signals that are designed to be relayed - presumably they have an advanced version of packet header info - and signals that are not coded that way, eg if for some reason you're using an analog-signal walkie-talkie, or a simple beacon.

BBB in a few other places is clear that old-school technology still exists here and there. There are reasons not to drive a 1999 Beetle around 20X6 Seattle but it's still *possible* (until someone responds to the GridGuide complaint and stops you).

BBB in several parts of the subsequent fluff is fairly clear that the practices of ordinary civilians and the practices of shadowrunners tend to diverge, and that there are several ways of opting out of the mesh, such as turning your device's antenna off, or putting it in hidden mode so it receives but does not automatically transmit. There's a bit more on that under "Turning It Off" on p.304.

The driver operating the vehicle in question was definitely the kind of person who would set their vehicle's electronics to not automatically relay signals.

The fly-spy was set to AOD (activate on demand) and burst transmission so that the driver would not notice it if she, or her comlink's agent, or her vehicle's autopilot happened to run a Scan for nearby broadcasters. Finding the fly-spy involves broadcasting the activation signal, reaching the fly-spy with that signal, and hearing its response.