Hoooooo boy, have we got a case of fluff vs. rules here.
First the Fluff. Let's say we start with the Head Radar cyberware description from Augmentation. Here, it says that the Radar cyberware, which I generally think of as the Samurai's best friend, is good for "detecting motion, even as slight as breathing." It also says that it uses Ultrasound rules, and, checking the Ultrasound description, I found no exemptions from general Sensor rules. Naturally the UWB radar from Arsenal says it is the same as the cyberware Radar, but it also says that it has a Signal Rating of 2. I can't find any other interpretation for this signal rating than to serve as the Sensor rating, just like with regular Vehicle Radar. This Signal Rating is not to be confused with the Device Rating, which goes from 1-4 and determines how much material the UWB can see through. So, what we have is a device with an apparently unalterable Sensor rating of 2.
Now comes the Signature Table (p171 SR4a). See, finding things with sensors is a variably difficult task. For instance, using a sensor to spot a Microdrone nets you a -6 to the dice pool. Now, here's where it gets interesting. Attempting to spot humans gets you a -3 to the dice pool. Same with non-micro-drones and even electrical vehicles. So this means that UWB allows you to try and spot people, through walls with your Perception + Sensor rating - 3 or just Perception skill -1. I suppose there might be some perception modifiers to add there and a low threshold to contend with, but this potentially means that a character needs a Perception skill of 4 to somewhat reliably use UWB to see a guard charging down an adjacent hallway. Not exactly "even as slight as breathing" level clarity. To make matters even cloudier, Ultrasound and the Radar cyberware don't have ratings at all, even though both describe themselves as Sensors or admit be being reliant on sensors.
So, who wants to tackle this mess?
Full Version: Wallhack vs. the Signature Table
Is the test a Perception + Intuition roll? Where does sensor rating come in?
QUOTE (DireRadiant @ Jul 14 2010, 10:32 PM) 
Is the test a Perception + Intuition roll? Where does sensor rating come in?
Radar is a sensor, and so is Ultrasound according to the description.
There are separate rules for spotting things with Sensors, as detailed in the Gunnery section of Vehicle combat. It's a Sensor vs. Signature thing. Biz gets even deeper into dumb when you think about motion sensors having a -3 penalty to see people and the fact that the average vehicle with its piddly sensor rating of 1 and pilot rating of 3 has 0 dice to notice that a pedestrian has walked out in front of it when it's running on autopilot.
That's vehicle combat, where the character is using sensors mounted on the vehicle and presumably viewing the data on a display of some sort. Cyber sensors integrate directly into your sensorium.
I now see the relevant fluff. Vehicle sensors are designed to spot vehicles. Car is still going to cream that pedestrian, however security and other sensors get no bonuses and brook no penalties.
Still, would the UWB sensor have this problem? It's not a particularly big sensor like the regular radar sensor which is 250% of the capacity, so maybe it's not a vehicle sensor in the strictest sense. The radar cyberware should be a straight up Perception test though... once we figure out its signal rating...
Still, would the UWB sensor have this problem? It's not a particularly big sensor like the regular radar sensor which is 250% of the capacity, so maybe it's not a vehicle sensor in the strictest sense. The radar cyberware should be a straight up Perception test though... once we figure out its signal rating...
QUOTE (Saint Sithney @ Jul 15 2010, 07:27 AM)
Hoooooo boy, have we got a case of fluff vs. rules here.
First the Fluff. Let's say we start with the Head Radar cyberware description from Augmentation. Here, it says that the Radar cyberware, which I generally think of as the Samurai's best friend, is good for "detecting motion, even as slight as breathing." It also says that it uses Ultrasound rules, and, checking the Ultrasound description, I found no exemptions from general Sensor rules. Naturally the UWB radar from Arsenal says it is the same as the cyberware Radar, but it also says that it has a Signal Rating of 2. I can't find any other interpretation for this signal rating than to serve as the Sensor rating, just like with regular Vehicle Radar. This Signal Rating is not to be confused with the Device Rating, which goes from 1-4 and determines how much material the UWB can see through. So, what we have is a device with an apparently unalterable Sensor rating of 2.
First the Fluff. Let's say we start with the Head Radar cyberware description from Augmentation. Here, it says that the Radar cyberware, which I generally think of as the Samurai's best friend, is good for "detecting motion, even as slight as breathing." It also says that it uses Ultrasound rules, and, checking the Ultrasound description, I found no exemptions from general Sensor rules. Naturally the UWB radar from Arsenal says it is the same as the cyberware Radar, but it also says that it has a Signal Rating of 2. I can't find any other interpretation for this signal rating than to serve as the Sensor rating, just like with regular Vehicle Radar. This Signal Rating is not to be confused with the Device Rating, which goes from 1-4 and determines how much material the UWB can see through. So, what we have is a device with an apparently unalterable Sensor rating of 2.
The signal rating provides the sensor range. See the table in the section on sensor packs.
QUOTE (Saint Sithney @ Jul 15 2010, 02:01 AM)
Radar is a sensor, and so is Ultrasound according to the description.
There are separate rules for spotting things with Sensors, as detailed in the Gunnery section of Vehicle combat. It's a Sensor vs. Signature thing. Biz gets even deeper into dumb when you think about motion sensors having a -3 penalty to see people and the fact that the average vehicle with its piddly sensor rating of 1 and pilot rating of 3 has 0 dice to notice that a pedestrian has walked out in front of it when it's running on autopilot.
There are separate rules for spotting things with Sensors, as detailed in the Gunnery section of Vehicle combat. It's a Sensor vs. Signature thing. Biz gets even deeper into dumb when you think about motion sensors having a -3 penalty to see people and the fact that the average vehicle with its piddly sensor rating of 1 and pilot rating of 3 has 0 dice to notice that a pedestrian has walked out in front of it when it's running on autopilot.
My eye is a visual sensor. I still use a perception + intuition test.
See cameras as sensors.
If you want to apply vehicle and device sensor rules to a person, then you are welcome to do so, but don't be surprised by the results.
QUOTE (Saint Sithney @ Jul 15 2010, 01:27 AM)
Naturally the UWB radar from Arsenal says it is the same as the cyberware Radar, but it also says that it has a Signal Rating of 2. I can't find any other interpretation for this signal rating than to serve as the Sensor rating, just like with regular Vehicle Radar. This Signal Rating is not to be confused with the Device Rating, which goes from 1-4 and determines how much material the UWB can see through. So, what we have is a device with an apparently unalterable Sensor rating of 2.
Well. I'd personally just try to put the bits you're quoting into context. For the headware radar:
QUOTE (Aug 37)
Radar sensor cyberware has an effective Signal rating of 2 for determining the sensor's range. Radar sensors are vulnerable to jammers and jamming.
Emphasis mine. For the UWB radar:
QUOTE (Aug 60)
Ultrawideband radar sensors have a Signal rating of 2 and are vulnerable to jamming.
Now, the UWB text fails here, but does refer us back to the better implant text. The logical conclusion? If a Signal rating suddenly becomes important for range and ECM/ECCM purposes, it has a Signal of 2. If those situations don't arise, nothing to see here.
This doesn't resolve the issue of blind autopilots, which I heartily agree is just stupid.
Blind autopilots?
For any body-integrated sensors, I use Perception + Intuition. For standalones, Perception + Sensor (or whatever the normal rule is). Possibly, this should be Perception + Intuition + Sensor, but that's probably insane.
Perception is one of the easiest things to stack huge positive mods to, as well. You can probably walk out of chargen with a 12 DP without trying.
Finally, it may be that the UWB is sensitive enough for heartbeats, but not necessarily great at finding them, or pulling them out of the background, etc. *shrug* Test it, and house rule if your game needs it.
For any body-integrated sensors, I use Perception + Intuition. For standalones, Perception + Sensor (or whatever the normal rule is). Possibly, this should be Perception + Intuition + Sensor, but that's probably insane.
Perception is one of the easiest things to stack huge positive mods to, as well. You can probably walk out of chargen with a 12 DP without trying.
Finally, it may be that the UWB is sensitive enough for heartbeats, but not necessarily great at finding them, or pulling them out of the background, etc. *shrug* Test it, and house rule if your game needs it.
One could use the sensor test rules for radar only, and have normal Perception pools for drones at Pilot+Clearsight, using the same modifiers metahumans do. The published Sensor rating would become the rating of the Clearsight soft the vehicle comes with. The basic sensor setup would be a camera-based all-around motion detection system (4 camera minimum), the rest of the sensor capacity as per The Precious would be open for toy´s.
To me, Signature rules only really make sense for radar (and, in some cases, thermal), and I always kind of assumed they were for vehicular weapons (like guided missiles, etc.). It *is* odd now that you mention it, and anything that odd must be incorrect. My group never had this problem because we unconsciously ignored the problem, using proper logical Perception tests.
So. Most drones are blind. What's the easiest way to fix this? Pilot + Sensor + Clearsight? I'm fine with drones being less Perceptive than people; it's hard to teach machines to spot things we easily notice, even (perhaps) in 2070. However, a motion sensor should easily detect motion, a radar system (today) doesn't have too much trouble finding pings, etc.
My group never had this problem because we unconsciously ignored the problem, using proper logical Perception tests.So. Most drones are blind. What's the easiest way to fix this? Pilot + Sensor + Clearsight? I'm fine with drones being less Perceptive than people; it's hard to teach machines to spot things we easily notice, even (perhaps) in 2070. However, a motion sensor should easily detect motion, a radar system (today) doesn't have too much trouble finding pings, etc.
The only thing more messed up than the Matrix rules in Shadowrun 4, are the Sensor rules.
QUOTE (Yerameyahu @ Jul 15 2010, 09:52 PM)
To me, Signature rules only really make sense for radar (and, in some cases, thermal), and I always kind of assumed they were for vehicular weapons (like guided missiles, etc.). It *is* odd now that you mention it, and anything that odd must be incorrect. My group never had this problem because we unconsciously ignored the problem, using proper logical Perception tests.
So. Most drones are blind. What's the easiest way to fix this? Pilot + Sensor + Clearsight? I'm fine with drones being less Perceptive than people; it's hard to teach machines to spot things we easily notice, even (perhaps) in 2070. However, a motion sensor should easily detect motion, a radar system (today) doesn't have too much trouble finding pings, etc.
My group never had this problem because we unconsciously ignored the problem, using proper logical Perception tests.So. Most drones are blind. What's the easiest way to fix this? Pilot + Sensor + Clearsight? I'm fine with drones being less Perceptive than people; it's hard to teach machines to spot things we easily notice, even (perhaps) in 2070. However, a motion sensor should easily detect motion, a radar system (today) doesn't have too much trouble finding pings, etc.
Pilot + Clearsight + Vision Enhancement on the cameras.
I mean, it's not horrible. Computers *aren't* that great at all sensor feeds (yet). But, things should have improved a lot in 2070, and it's obvious that a company wouldn't produce blind drones, especially when they're wasting money on (useless) sensors. So, we need a little fix.
Does adding Pilot as a bonus imbalance drones/vehicles?
What about metahumans using handheld or vehicle-mounted sensors—should they get a bonus? For metahumans, I usually prefer the cyber-eye approach: it's just a camera, but we ignore it and use Perception + Intuition (+ Enhancements). Obviously, this doesn't always work, because some sensors have no 'human sense' analog.
Ryu: oh, just take the Sensor rating out, and make it the same as metahumans? That's fine with me, if the balance works. Remember that non-visual/non-aural sensors are the primary problem, though. Radar and motion sensors don't have 'enhancement ratings'. We could invent them, though.
Does adding Pilot as a bonus imbalance drones/vehicles?
What about metahumans using handheld or vehicle-mounted sensors—should they get a bonus? For metahumans, I usually prefer the cyber-eye approach: it's just a camera, but we ignore it and use Perception + Intuition (+ Enhancements). Obviously, this doesn't always work, because some sensors have no 'human sense' analog.
Ryu: oh, just take the Sensor rating out, and make it the same as metahumans? That's fine with me, if the balance works. Remember that non-visual/non-aural sensors are the primary problem, though. Radar and motion sensors don't have 'enhancement ratings'. We could invent them, though.
QUOTE
The Sensor package rating should be used for most situations and
is equal to the average rating of all the sensors in a package (rounded
up). Sensors that do not possess ratings are treated as if they had a rating
equal to the package’s rating for this purpose only.
is equal to the average rating of all the sensors in a package (rounded
up). Sensors that do not possess ratings are treated as if they had a rating
equal to the package’s rating for this purpose only.
anyone brave willing to translate this into english?
When you're trying to upgrade your sensor package rating.
Say you put in:
Camera R6
Cyber Scanners R6
MAD R3 (highest it goes)
Vision Enhancment R6
Vision Magnification
LRF
Radio Signal Scanner R6
Motion Sensor
Atmosphere Sensor R3
What would the rating of the sensor package be?
(6+6+6+6+3+3)/6 = 5
I simply don't use the 'Sensor' shorthand average, though. We just pick the relevant sensor for the specific task. The Radio Scanner is almost never relevant for the same test as the Camera. The 'Sensor' rating is the same as Professional Rating, and you should use it the same way: *only* for off-the-cuff, I-don't-care ballpark estimates.
I simply don't use the 'Sensor' shorthand average, though. We just pick the relevant sensor for the specific task. The Radio Scanner is almost never relevant for the same test as the Camera.
The 'Sensor' rating is the same as Professional Rating, and you should use it the same way: *only* for off-the-cuff, I-don't-care ballpark estimates.
It should be balanced. As I said, the Sensor Rating could be reassigned.
Start with a Pilot of 1, a Sensor of 1, and Vision Enhancement 3. DP of 5, not perfect.
Pilot 4, Clearsight 4, VE 3. DP of 11, workable for combat drones.
As an additional change I would disregard the published Pilot ratings and use the Sample Device rating table instead. With a proper Pilot 3, Clearsight 1, and the proper cameras for the job, you get a DP 7 minimum up to a DP 13 maximum. Metahumans can go higher, so there is a place for riggers, too.
Start with a Pilot of 1, a Sensor of 1, and Vision Enhancement 3. DP of 5, not perfect.
Pilot 4, Clearsight 4, VE 3. DP of 11, workable for combat drones.
As an additional change I would disregard the published Pilot ratings and use the Sample Device rating table instead. With a proper Pilot 3, Clearsight 1, and the proper cameras for the job, you get a DP 7 minimum up to a DP 13 maximum. Metahumans can go higher, so there is a place for riggers, too.
Right, but what about motion detectors, radar, etc.?
Unrelated note: even if I were using the Sensor Rating stat (which I never do), I wouldn't count 'tool-like' sensors (cyber scanner, etc.). As opposed to 'sense-providing' sensors (audio, video, olfactory, e-sense, etc.), 'tool-like' sensors are used for specific tasks: 'scan this box for metal'. *shrug*
Unrelated note: even if I were using the Sensor Rating stat (which I never do), I wouldn't count 'tool-like' sensors (cyber scanner, etc.). As opposed to 'sense-providing' sensors (audio, video, olfactory, e-sense, etc.), 'tool-like' sensors are used for specific tasks: 'scan this box for metal'. *shrug*
QUOTE (Yerameyahu @ Jul 15 2010, 08:39 PM)
(6+6+6+6+3+3)/6 = 5
I simply don't use the 'Sensor' shorthand average, though. We just pick the relevant sensor for the specific task. The Radio Scanner is almost never relevant for the same test as the Camera. The 'Sensor' rating is the same as Professional Rating, and you should use it the same way: *only* for off-the-cuff, I-don't-care ballpark estimates.
I simply don't use the 'Sensor' shorthand average, though. We just pick the relevant sensor for the specific task. The Radio Scanner is almost never relevant for the same test as the Camera.
The 'Sensor' rating is the same as Professional Rating, and you should use it the same way: *only* for off-the-cuff, I-don't-care ballpark estimates.Except that the 'sensor' rating is involved in most rigged in drone tests.
sensors+perception
sensors+gunnery
sensors+clearsight
Right, you use the *relevant* one. Camera, usually. Sometimes Microphone, sometimes Radar, etc. Just replace every instance of "Sensor" with "[Relevant sensor]".
QUOTE (Yerameyahu @ Jul 15 2010, 10:48 PM)
Right, but what about motion detectors, radar, etc.?
Unrelated note: even if I were using the Sensor Rating stat (which I never do), I wouldn't count 'tool-like' sensors (cyber scanner, etc.). As opposed to 'sense-providing' sensors (audio, video, olfactory, e-sense, etc.), 'tool-like' sensors are used for specific tasks: 'scan this box for metal'. *shrug*
Unrelated note: even if I were using the Sensor Rating stat (which I never do), I wouldn't count 'tool-like' sensors (cyber scanner, etc.). As opposed to 'sense-providing' sensors (audio, video, olfactory, e-sense, etc.), 'tool-like' sensors are used for specific tasks: 'scan this box for metal'. *shrug*
Everything that has a rating can add that. Motion Detection should IMO be vision-based once the software is smart enough. So there should IMO be no distinct motion detectors.
Oh, I see. That's worth testing. +6 to everything might be too good, but playtesting to find out.
The value of various kinds of motion sensors is still good (photosensitive, audio, pressure, etc.). Standard vehicle ones in SR4 are ultrasound/infrared, which is nice in the dark, etc.
The value of various kinds of motion sensors is still good (photosensitive, audio, pressure, etc.). Standard vehicle ones in SR4 are ultrasound/infrared, which is nice in the dark, etc.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.