Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: To bike or not to bike
Dumpshock Forums > Discussion > Shadowrun
Pages: 1, 2, 3
fool
I recently started a thread about bicycles and someone said it was poll worthy so I'm throwing up a poll.
Arguments for bikes being part of the canon. They are far better for stealth, they can't be tracked by grid guide, they can go far more places, in urban areas they can often be faster than motor vehicles, they're cheaper, they're more eco-freindly.
Arguments against. They can't go superfast, other vehicles do the same things, and (my favorite) riding a bike will get you shot at just for the hell of it.
b1ffov3rfl0w
Also, "added to the canon" makes it sound like bicycles have magically disappeared between now and 2070, which is a silly idea. I mean, people are using revolvers, eyeglasses, and frickin katanas, plus, while the whole dressing-up-as-a-movie-Indian thing seems to have gone out of style with the 2060s, there's probably still a lot of that.

Heck, I vote for sticking Bicycling into the Athletics Skill Group and for adding Wall Riding as an Adept power.
Stahlseele
i voted for "yes and they should have other muscle powered vehicles, like hover boards, skate boards, etc." just because i can and i happen to be a loon who finds that funny as hell and would love to see something like that in his games . . allthough . . the hover-boards would probably get waayy too much quotes from back to the future ^^
fool
Sorry I mis voted, I meant to do the third option.
Wall riding would be pretty darn cool. Gecko tires?
or the one where you can go over liquids, tree branches etc.
The possible add ons are immense.
Some time ago, I had a thread discussing whether or not to make things like these there own skills. The general consensus at the time seemed to be not. But to use things like gymnastics for tricks, running for better speed. The biggest problem for me with this is that bicycles, skateboards and (presumably) hover boards do require their own skills rather than being a generalized ability.
raverbane
Mountain Bike + Movement&Guard equal a VERY effiecent mode of transport
Stahlseele
technically you COULD just add those skills as specializations for athletics . . or make them bound to agility . .
damit, now i'm tempted to try and figure out a way to build a hover-board and i don't even like SR4 <.< . .
Larme
omfg. You call this a poll? The choices are a) you're right and I agree with you, b) I'm a retard who clicked the obviously stupid answer, and c) I really really agree with you lots, way to go!!

How about a poll which is, you know, accurate. Designed to elicit peoples' actual opinions, and not to suggest to them what the right answer is. This poll will not tell us anything about peoples' views. Anyone with a rudimentary knowledge of experimental psychology and polling will tell you that if you slant the answers to your poll, it's garbage.
fool
Don't forget concealment if you're trying to be ultra stealthy.
But you can use those options with any form of transportation.

An Idea I had last night was a personalized zeppelin, say the size of a dining room table with a recumbent seat hanging underneath it, using pedal powered propellers for propulsion. silly.gif

Stahlseele
hmm . . can a mini-blimp-drone be made to carry such weight? if so, there you go . . add some dikote . . no, wait, not dikote, ruthenium polymers all around and solar-cells on top and you're good ^^
b1ffov3rfl0w
QUOTE (Larme @ Apr 6 2008, 05:43 PM) *
omfg. You call this a poll? The choices are a) you're right and I agree with you, b) I'm a retard who clicked the obviously stupid answer, and c) I really really agree with you lots, way to go!!


Should it be changed to "no, because riding a muscle-powered bike is for wusses and people will shoot at them for fun"? I don't think that this is a place where people are going to answer the way you want them to just because that's what you want -- if anything, the opposite happens because of all the contrarian Germans who respond irrationally to innocent comments like this one.

QUOTE
How about a poll which is, you know, accurate. Designed to elicit peoples' actual opinions, and not to suggest to them what the right answer is. This poll will not tell us anything about peoples' views. Anyone with a rudimentary knowledge of experimental psychology and polling will tell you that if you slant the answers to your poll, it's garbage.


Really, a poll that allows respondents to self-select is garbage too.

For the mini-blimp thing, it would be way too small unless you also had ducted fans or something. Check out:
http://www.cloudhopper.org/
http://www.clusterballoon.org/
The solar cell part is good, though -- isn't the blimp drone solar-powered?
raverbane
QUOTE (fool @ Apr 6 2008, 05:43 PM) *
Don't forget concealment if you're trying to be ultra stealthy.
But you can use those options with any form of transportation.

An Idea I had last night was a personalized zeppelin, say the size of a dining room table with a recumbent seat hanging underneath it, using pedal powered propellers for propulsion. silly.gif


That works great in rural and feral city areas. But, unless your GM is nice and lets Guard protect you from auto accidents. Bicycle + Concealment in a city enviroment = death.. hehe
Fortune
QUOTE (Larme @ Apr 7 2008, 07:43 AM) *
omfg. You call this a poll? The choices are a) you're right and I agree with you, b) I'm a retard who clicked the obviously stupid answer, and c) I really really agree with you lots, way to go!!

How about a poll which is, you know, accurate. Designed to elicit peoples' actual opinions, and not to suggest to them what the right answer is. This poll will not tell us anything about peoples' views. Anyone with a rudimentary knowledge of experimental psychology and polling will tell you that if you slant the answers to your poll, it's garbage.


Egads! Unreal! Amazing! Impossible! eek.gif biggrin.gif

For once, I agree with you whole-heartedly. I really want an option for "I don't care".
Cthulhudreams
The problem with forum polls is that the poll originator never has any sort of background in that sort of thing nyahnyah.gif
Kyoto Kid
...why of course I said yes to all muscle powered vehicles. How else are my kids going to get around? Well ,Violet usually just hacks a JohnnyCab™ when she needs one as she isn't all that athletic.
Larme
QUOTE (b1ffov3rfl0w @ Apr 6 2008, 06:04 PM) *
Should it be changed to "no, because riding a muscle-powered bike is for wusses and people will shoot at them for fun"? I don't think that this is a place where people are going to answer the way you want them to just because that's what you want -- if anything, the opposite happens because of all the contrarian Germans who respond irrationally to innocent comments like this one.


Nice! You managed to bring racism into your response grinbig.gif

And no, I'm not suggesting that the poll be changed to do the exact thing I was criticizing, only in favor of my own side. I'm suggesting that it be, you know, a poll. Like: "Should there be official rules for human powered bicycles in Shadowrun?" a) Yes. b) No. c) Not sure.

That way, we'd be asking what peoples' opinions are, without implicitly (or in this case, explicitly) suggesting to them what the 'right' answer is. That way, we could look at the results, and have some valid data about what people think, rather than what we'll have from this poll, which is nothing.

QUOTE
Really, a poll that allows respondents to self-select is garbage too.


I think you might be misunderstanding the term self-select. Self selection is not the problem where respondents are allowed to choose their own responses without being led by the questions. Getting accurate reports without leading the respondents is the point of a poll. Self selection is when only respondents that are part of a certain subset of the population comprise the sample. If that happens, you don't have a representative sample, and your poll is invalid. You don't prevent self selection by using leading questions to make people give the answer you want. I don't really see how we could have a self selection problem on Dumpshock. A neutral poll that doesn't lead the respondents should get a pretty good sample of the Dumpshock population, and thus be a pretty valid representation of what people on Dumpshock think.
Tarantula
QUOTE (raverbane @ Apr 6 2008, 04:21 PM) *
That works great in rural and feral city areas. But, unless your GM is nice and lets Guard protect you from auto accidents. Bicycle + Concealment in a city enviroment = death.. hehe


SR4, 288, "The Guard power gives the critter the ability to prevent normal environmental accidents and hazards (both natural and those induced by the Accident power)"

You mean, unless your GM is mean and doesn't let Guard protect you from auto accidents, right?
Tunnel Rat
QUOTE (Tarantula @ Apr 6 2008, 08:12 PM) *
SR4, 288, "The Guard power gives the critter the ability to prevent normal environmental accidents and hazards (both natural and those induced by the Accident power)"

You mean, unless your GM is mean and doesn't let Guard protect you from auto accidents, right?


I would not call that 'mean'. It prevents "normal environmental accidents and hazards". It would not prevent non environmental accidents. So accident wouldn't protect you from being struck because the driver couldn't see you. Unless you consider driving into an invisible bicycle rider a 'normal environmental accident'. In which case, I must ask where you live that you have invisible bicyclists!
Tarantula
QUOTE (Tunnel Rat @ Apr 6 2008, 07:25 PM) *
I would not call that 'mean'. It prevents "normal environmental accidents and hazards". It would not prevent non environmental accidents. So accident wouldn't protect you from being struck because the driver couldn't see you. Unless you consider driving into an invisible bicycle rider a 'normal environmental accident'. In which case, I must ask where you live that you have invisible bicyclists!


I'd consider getting in a car accident a "normal environmental accident" for a city. It makes no mention of circumstances. Whether you would have had an accident because your brakes should have failed, the road was icy, or that trucker didn't remember to take his long haul, it prevents it. Period.
Chibu
There is absolutely NO need to EVER print rules for a bike in a shadowrun book. Yes, there are bikes. Yes there are skateboards, yes there are roller skates. I've been on runs with people who use all of them. In fact, I suggest referring to the Sunroof article, as the point is the same. Does the character want a bike? They can have one. In fact, they don't even need to pay for one. I'm sure thousands of people still ride bikes in the city. Does the character have a silenced gun? Yes? Well, then go shoot the chain off a bike and it's yours forever.

As for hoverboards... Of course you can have one. Take two out of date Microskimmers, mess with the wiring so that they have an on/off switch. and then glue a piece of plywood (or sheet metal) or whatever the hell macroplast is nyahnyah.gif on top of them and you have yourself a fancy hoverboard for only 11K! In fact, get that internal R/C deck and you can control it with your mind!
Kremlin KOA
QUOTE (Larme @ Apr 7 2008, 06:43 AM) *
omfg. You call this a poll? The choices are a) you're right and I agree with you, b) I'm a retard who clicked the obviously stupid answer, and c) I really really agree with you lots, way to go!!

How about a poll which is, you know, accurate. Designed to elicit peoples' actual opinions, and not to suggest to them what the right answer is. This poll will not tell us anything about peoples' views. Anyone with a rudimentary knowledge of experimental psychology and polling will tell you that if you slant the answers to your poll, it's garbage.


So you are trying to suggest he misrepresented your POV in the second option?

QUOTE (Larme @ Apr 6 2008, 02:44 PM) *
NO! NONE FOR YOU! mad.gif

Erm, sorry. I really don't care if your character rides a bike. But something about human powered cycles just says "wuss" to me, while simultaneously saying "ESPN-2." I'd rather not see them crop up in Shadowrun, because I fear them becoming too common. Shadowrun is about big growling choppers, and futuristic racing bikes that leave neon streaks as afterimages in your eyes! Skates are ok, because you look less dorky when skating than when pedaling a bike...


funny it seems similar enough to option 2
Kremlin KOA
QUOTE (Tunnel Rat @ Apr 7 2008, 10:25 AM) *
I would not call that 'mean'. It prevents "normal environmental accidents and hazards". It would not prevent non environmental accidents. So accident wouldn't protect you from being struck because the driver couldn't see you. Unless you consider driving into an invisible bicycle rider a 'normal environmental accident'. In which case, I must ask where you live that you have invisible bicyclists!


FOr a city, 'Normal environmental accidents' would include vehicle collisions. The fact that the accident is being aided by magic is irrelavent as this also stops the fragging accident power. So a power that makes you harder to notice would not negate it
Larme
QUOTE (Kremlin KOA @ Apr 6 2008, 08:46 PM) *
So you are trying to suggest he misrepresented your POV in the second option?


I'm not one of those people who thinks that every argument disagreeing with my position is an attack on me. It isn't personal. It's just a matter of descriptive statistics. A poll that leads the respondent is invalid. That's all.

And for the record, "NO! NONE FOR YOU!" was a joke. That's why I apologized for it in the next sententce wink.gif If you read my other posts, instead of taking my less serious posts seriously, you'd understand that I'm not against allowing bikes in the game, I'm just not terribly excited about it. But my only position on this thread is that when you make a poll, it should be an actual poll, and not an a) I'm right, and b) you're wrong kind of thing.
Tunnel Rat
QUOTE (Tarantula @ Apr 6 2008, 08:31 PM) *
I'd consider getting in a car accident a "normal environmental accident" for a city. It makes no mention of circumstances. Whether you would have had an accident because your brakes should have failed, the road was icy, or that trucker didn't remember to take his long haul, it prevents it. Period.


Yes, it does mention circumstances. If there are no 'circumstances' then why bother mentioning the words 'normal' or 'environmental' at all? The word 'accident' would cover everything regardless of circumstance, and would mean that as long as it was an 'accident', the power prevented it. The addition of those two words means that there are circumstances in which the power will not protect you.

QUOTE (Kremlin KOA @ Apr 6 2008, 08:49 PM) *
FOr a city, 'Normal environmental accidents' would include vehicle collisions. The fact that the accident is being aided by magic is irrelavent as this also stops the fragging accident power. So a power that makes you harder to notice would not negate it


The accident power causes accidents. Since the guard power prevents accidents, it is only logical that the two would cancel one another out. This, however, isn't an example of a normal accident, nor one that is caused by the environment. This is the example of an accident caused by carelessness and stupidity on your part. If you cause the accident, directly or indirectly, that hardly qualifies as an environmental accident.
b1ffov3rfl0w
QUOTE (Larme @ Apr 6 2008, 07:59 PM) *
Nice! You managed to bring racism into your response grinbig.gif


Germans are so easy to *get* with that.

QUOTE
And no, I'm not suggesting that the poll be changed to do the exact thing I was criticizing, only in favor of my own side. I'm suggesting that it be, you know, a poll. Like: "Should there be official rules for human powered bicycles in Shadowrun?" a) Yes. b) No. c) Not sure.

That way, we'd be asking what peoples' opinions are, without implicitly (or in this case, explicitly) suggesting to them what the 'right' answer is. That way, we could look at the results, and have some valid data about what people think, rather than what we'll have from this poll, which is nothing.

I think you might be misunderstanding the term self-select. Self selection is not the problem where respondents are allowed to choose their own responses without being led by the questions. Getting accurate reports without leading the respondents is the point of a poll. Self selection is when only respondents that are part of a certain subset of the population comprise the sample. If that happens, you don't have a representative sample, and your poll is invalid. You don't prevent self selection by using leading questions to make people give the answer you want. I don't really see how we could have a self selection problem on Dumpshock. A neutral poll that doesn't lead the respondents should get a pretty good sample of the Dumpshock population, and thus be a pretty valid representation of what people on Dumpshock think.



Any online poll is inherently affected by self-selection, in that only people who are (a) using that website and (b) care enough about the topic to respond are being polled.

That said, I'll agree with you that the choices were too specific. "Yes some rules would be great" and "no the rules would not be useful" are fine choices and we don't need them to be "Yes bikes rule and are the best thing ever" and "No, I think bikes suck and I have an ugly face and big butt and my butt smells and I like to kiss my own butt" but hey, whatever.

Anyway es tut mir Leid wenn ich die Deutschen beleidigen habe, aber ich denk dass unsere Sprachluecke einen fehlender Sinn für Humor ... um, yeah, you guys's English is way, way better than my German.
Tarantula
QUOTE (Tunnel Rat @ Apr 6 2008, 08:39 PM) *
The accident power causes accidents. Since the guard power prevents accidents, it is only logical that the two would cancel one another out. This, however, isn't an example of a normal accident, nor one that is caused by the environment. This is the example of an accident caused by carelessness and stupidity on your part. If you cause the accident, directly or indirectly, that hardly qualifies as an environmental accident.


The environment of a city involves cars. Those cars can have accidents. If you have a spirit guarding you, they won't happen to you. It doesn't matter if you step out into the highway, or if you're just driving along as normal and are extra cautious. Either way, the power will protect you.

Just the same, just because you are invisible, or concealed, doesn't make the power not work.
Larme
QUOTE (b1ffov3rfl0w @ Apr 6 2008, 11:10 PM) *
Any online poll is inherently affected by self-selection, in that only people who are (a) using that website and (b) care enough about the topic to respond are being polled.


I wouldn't put it that way. If we're trying to get a representative sample of the entire population, then we FAIL. Even a representative sample of Shadowrun gamers might be pushing it. But I don't think that's anyone's goal with a Dumpshock poll. All a Dumpshock poll can do is get a sample of the Dumpshock population. And as such, it can give valid statistics on how people on Dumpshock feel on an issue, as long as it asks questions in a reasonable way. I wouldn't worry about self selection among the Dumpshock population because all it takes is like 5 seconds to vote in a poll, it isn't like a thread where you actually have to read a bunch of stuff and think up a response before answering. It doesn't actually require caring.

QUOTE
That said, I'll agree with you that the choices were too specific. "Yes some rules would be great" and "no the rules would not be useful" are fine choices and we don't need them to be "Yes bikes rule and are the best thing ever" and "No, I think bikes suck and I have an ugly face and big butt and my butt smells and I like to kiss my own butt" but hey, whatever.


rotfl.gif Yes, that's exactly what I'm saying.
quentra
How does a hoverboard count as 'muscle-powered transportation?'
Stahlseele
'cause the board only hovers, you still have to overcome inertia and steer it with body-motion
DocTaotsu
I vote for the 4th option. I don't really care? Bikes are pretty damn good for getting around urban enviroments. And a bikes cheaper and still a bit smaller than the other personal transportation options.

Does it require stats and a place in the BBB, Arsenal, or RC? Uhm... not really?

Hoverboards, skateboards with smart tires, these are all wonderful bits of cyberpunk flavor but I really don't think they need to be stated all to hell.
DocTaotsu
QUOTE (Chibu @ Apr 6 2008, 09:43 PM) *
In fact, they don't even need to pay for one. I'm sure thousands of people still ride bikes in the city. Does the character have a silenced gun? Yes? Well, then go shoot the chain off a bike and it's yours forever.


Well until it's RFID tags trip a LS response wink.gif.
ornot
QUOTE (DocTaotsu @ Apr 7 2008, 08:43 AM) *
I vote for the 4th option. I don't really care? Bikes are pretty damn good for getting around urban enviroments. And a bikes cheaper and still a bit smaller than the other personal transportation options.

Does it require stats and a place in the BBB, Arsenal, or RC? Uhm... not really?

Hoverboards, skateboards with smart tires, these are all wonderful bits of cyberpunk flavor but I really don't think they need to be stated all to hell.


+1

If you absolutely must have stats then give them the same as the roller blades I seem to remember seeing in Arsenal. IIRC they increase your movement rate.
Pendaric
I should stop reading the forum on my day off. I want those minutes back, damn it.
Ye GADs how can a simple poll end up in so much bickering? Just let it go.
Sigh,
well at least my down load will be finished soon.

HOUSE RULE BIKES! SKATES, SKATE BOARDS, HOVER BOARDS ETC

You have a brain and part of the game is you get to use it. Yay!
Right? ohplease.gif
b1ffov3rfl0w
QUOTE (Pendaric @ Apr 7 2008, 12:09 PM) *
I should stop reading the forum on my day off. I want those minutes back, damn it.
Ye GADs how can a simple poll end up in so much bickering? Just let it go.
Sigh,
well at least my down load will be finished soon.

HOUSE RULE BIKES! SKATES, SKATE BOARDS, HOVER BOARDS ETC

You have a brain and part of the game is you get to use it. Yay!
Right? ohplease.gif


The thing is, why house rule it yourself, in isolation, and then either (a) introduce it into your game or (b) playtest it, when you can get suggestions and feedback from a bunch of other people who are also interested in the same thing?

And of course Dumpshock is a bunch of other people who are interested in the same thing (broadly, Shadowrun, and in this thread, either bikes or saying "shut up about bikes already, I don't care about them but I will continue to read this thread for some reason wobble.gif ").


fool
A few comments on polling.
First I'll agree that this would be considered a push poll (see I do know a bit about polling.) However, I couldn't come up with a reasonable argument against having some canon rules for MPV's other than that they would take up valuable space in books. Not that there aren't plenty of other things that do that. It's just a matter of what you like as to whether or not it's a wste of space.
Second, for the record, a self-selecting poll is where only people who want to answer the questions are asked. A standard example of this is standing on a street corner and asking people the question. Only people interested will stop to answer the question. This begs the question spin.gif of whether or not all polls are self selecting, since only willing participants can answer the poll. This means, however, that all polls on the internet are inherently self selecting and therefore not scientifically valid. That of course doesn't mean that they aren't valuable.
Third, I didn't mean for the no answer to be insulting to anyone who answered that way, and apologize if anyone was offended.
Now back to our regularly scheduled thread.
Fourth If you don't care, don't vote, skip the thread and move on.
the comment on concealment was meant tongue in cheek (we need an emoticon for that.) I would definitely say that guard power could protect you from normal accidents, whether or not being invis. is a normal condition is debatable. I'm thinking yes, for flavor, ala the Harry Potter Bus (can't remember the name of it.) And I'm thinking no for game balance.
Sponge
QUOTE (Tunnel Rat @ Apr 6 2008, 08:25 PM) *
In which case, I must ask where you live that you have invisible bicyclists!


No invisible cyclists around here, but plenty of blind drivers wink.gif

BTW I am SO giving my next character a bicycle to get around grinbig.gif
fool
Also, having gone back and looked at the answers on the poll one was yes they're useful and the other was no they're useless. I don't think that actually qualifies as push polling.
Tunnel Rat
QUOTE (Tarantula @ Apr 6 2008, 10:47 PM) *
The environment of a city involves cars. Those cars can have accidents. If you have a spirit guarding you, they won't happen to you. It doesn't matter if you step out into the highway, or if you're just driving along as normal and are extra cautious. Either way, the power will protect you.

Just the same, just because you are invisible, or concealed, doesn't make the power not work.


I have two points here.

1. The guard power does not interfere with free will. If the driver INTENDS to run you down, that would not be an accident. It would not matter why the driver intends to drive through you, even if the reason was because he didn't know you were there.

2. The guard power protects you from accidents, but not yourself. The more reckless you are, the harder it will be for the guard power to protect you. For instance, if you were to go driving down the street in your car wearing a blindfold, the guard power wouldn't stop you from wrecking. It would stop you from glitching, but you could still get into a wreck.
Larme
There's no rule that you have to conduct a scientifically valid poll on Dumpshock. But I would assume that if you do a poll, you want to know peoples' honest opinions. You don't have to phrase the questions in an elaborate way. The elaborate discussion part is what the thread is for. There doesn't need to be an argument in each question, in fact, there shouldn't be. So failure to think of a reason to exclude bikes is not a valid reason for giving a slanted response option. That is, if you want to know everyone's honest opinion. If you're just conducting a poll to grandstand, to make fun of the other side, or to "prove" how wrong the other side is with suggestive responses, then it's just a troll, and you don't need to post it. What is wrong with "Yes," "No," and "I don't know?"
Larme
QUOTE (Tunnel Rat @ Apr 7 2008, 04:53 PM) *
1. The guard power does not interfere with free will. If the driver INTENDS to run you down, that would not be an accident. It would not matter why the driver intends to drive through you, even if the reason was because he didn't know you were there.


He can't intend to kill someone without meaning to. So if he doesn't know someone is there, and just keeps driving, he doesn't intend them to die, and thus it is an accident. You're right the Guard won't interfere with free will, of course. If the guy says "I am driving forward now, no matter what gets in my way!" then it would do nothing, even if he ran over a person he didn't see. His reckless driving would have the express intent or running stuff over, so you couldn't prevent that. But if someone is just not paying attention, they do not intend to run anything over, then anything they do run over is an accident and would be prevented by Guard.

QUOTE
2. The guard power protects you from accidents, but not yourself. The more reckless you are, the harder it will be for the guard power to protect you. For instance, if you were to go driving down the street in your car wearing a blindfold, the guard power wouldn't stop you from wrecking. It would stop you from glitching, but you could still get into a wreck.


I pretty much agree there. When you drive blindfolded, it's hard to say that a crash is accidental. If Guard prevented that, it really would be the ultimate power. You can suddenly accomplish amazing feats by not trying, without a roll. Guard prevents ordinary accidents, but it doesn't allow you to magically do difficult things without rolling. While failing a dice roll is certainly not purposeful, it does not qualify as an accident nyahnyah.gif Guard would keep unwary motorists from accidentally running down a cyclist, but it would not prevent a crazy cyclist from failing his test and crashing.
Fortune
QUOTE (fool @ Apr 8 2008, 06:01 AM) *
Fourth If you don't care, don't vote, skip the thread and move on.


'I don't care' is a perfectly valid response to the question at hand. It does not have to mean, or even imply that the person does not care about the subject matter, or is not interested in discussion on the topic. it only means that the person does not care if these things are included in the books.
b1ffov3rfl0w
QUOTE (Larme @ Apr 7 2008, 06:04 PM) *
He can't intend to kill someone without meaning to. So if he doesn't know someone is there, and just keeps driving, he doesn't intend them to die, and thus it is an accident.


Plus, of course, if he doesn't know you're there, he doesn't intend to run you down. He intends to drive through that apparently unoccupied space, and running you down is accidental to that.

Maybe some people are confusing Concealment with Alienation? Because making you the Invisible Pedestrian is pretty explicitly what that power was about.
Tunnel Rat
QUOTE (Larme @ Apr 7 2008, 05:04 PM) *
He can't intend to kill someone without meaning to. So if he doesn't know someone is there, and just keeps driving, he doesn't intend them to die, and thus it is an accident. You're right the Guard won't interfere with free will, of course. If the guy says "I am driving forward now, no matter what gets in my way!" then it would do nothing, even if he ran over a person he didn't see. His reckless driving would have the express intent or running stuff over, so you couldn't prevent that. But if someone is just not paying attention, they do not intend to run anything over, then anything they do run over is an accident and would be prevented by Guard.


While the driver might not intend to hit anyone, the guard power should still not be able to do anything about it. Why does it matter what the driver's exact intentions are? As long as he has intentions, the guard power should not be able to interfere. What you're doing is looking at every situation, divining 'exact intentions', and then allowing the guard power to interfere with free will if they don't 'intend' to be reckless or 'intend' to cause harm.

The driver is making a choice of his own free will. It doesn't matter that he's making that choice in ignorance. A choice is a choice is a choice. The guard power can not interfere with the choices of others, period.
Tarantula
QUOTE (Larme @ Apr 7 2008, 03:04 PM) *
I pretty much agree there. When you drive blindfolded, it's hard to say that a crash is accidental. If Guard prevented that, it really would be the ultimate power. You can suddenly accomplish amazing feats by not trying, without a roll. Guard prevents ordinary accidents, but it doesn't allow you to magically do difficult things without rolling. While failing a dice roll is certainly not purposeful, it does not qualify as an accident nyahnyah.gif Guard would keep unwary motorists from accidentally running down a cyclist, but it would not prevent a crazy cyclist from failing his test and crashing.


I disagree, just because you are blindfolded doesn't make crashing any less of an accident. However, the guard power could be as simple as "the blindfold slips off your head." Or, "you stall the engine and stop inches away from a bus."

I do think that everytime an accident or glitch is prevented, it expends a service.
Kyoto Kid
QUOTE (Sponge @ Apr 7 2008, 12:37 PM) *
No invisible cyclists around here, but plenty of blind drivers wink.gif

...actually there are a lot of invisible cyclists where I live, particularly after the sun goes down. I've nearly hit or been hit by a few myself and I ride a bike (with a powerful halogen headlight & LED taillight).

And these same cyclists wonder why many motorists loathe us so much.

...apologies for the mini rant. Just tired of being stereotyped with the rest of the imbeciles.
Lyonheart
QUOTE (fool @ Apr 6 2008, 04:26 PM) *
I recently started a thread about bicycles and someone said it was poll worthy so I'm throwing up a poll.
Arguments for bikes being part of the canon. They are far better for stealth, they can't be tracked by grid guide, they can go far more places, in urban areas they can often be faster than motor vehicles, they're cheaper, they're more eco-freindly.
Arguments against. They can't go superfast, other vehicles do the same things, and (my favorite) riding a bike will get you shot at just for the hell of it.


You need rules for this... Why? It's a bike, you bike on it, there arn't shadowrun stats for hairbrushes ether but you don't assume they do not exist.
Kyoto Kid
...but what if someone hacks your wireless Horizon Stylist-2000 hairbrush and suddenly you end up with a 'fro just before that big date at Matchsticks with the hot babe you met the other night? grinbig.gif
DocTaotsu
Ah but you could probably calculate it's device rating and upgrade it's firewall... ;p

WearzManySkins
@KK
Do you ride a Bent?

WMS
Fortune
QUOTE (WearzManySkins @ Apr 8 2008, 11:05 AM) *
Do you ride a Bent?


Only immediately after an accident, before he gets around to having it straightened out. wink.gif
masterofm
No, no, a thousand times no. Leave it up to a GM to stat bikes and decide what skill to use, and do you know why? I would rather see many other things get fixed then have people spend time on something like this (matrix rules anyone?)

Would it be nice to have? Yes. Is it a total waste of time when there is much more important game balance issues? Yes. I would just rather see other things get done. Sorry.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Dumpshock Forums © 2001-2012