I agree about the first few lines there ( in fact it seems like you agree with me). Except that sensor targeting being an option for riggers (jumped in). The core rules does not say it is optional for riggers, and the faq (sigh) says it is NOT optional, which you have every right to ignore just as you can ignore the core rules.

I agree it is some of the most complex and annoying rules in this game.

Having issues finding it, but when you upgrade the sensors on your own, the new sensor rating is the average of all rated sensors: I.E., you get a R6 Camera, a R6 Microphone, and a R6 Radio Signal Scanner, your Sensor is now 6. GM is suggested to tweak thinks, like if you have a R5 Microphone and R5 Camera with all the sensor options, that'd probably be a 6 or 7.

What you *should* do, though, is just use the best *relevant* sensors in every case. Your Radio Signal Scanner won't be part of a Gunnery test, your Camera won't be part of hearing that car around the corner, etc.

'Sensor' is a big (ham-handed) attempt to avoid some of this complexity, yes, but there's limits to how much complexity you can avoid.

I have a character concept (AC Pilot) who has a Walking Mode car that he pilots and he would be using the vehicle to Active Sensor Lock On to aid his Gunnery dicepools. If the vehicle doesn't get any hits, then he doesn't get a bonus, but he'd still be using his dicepool.


Signature is a combination of a number of factors, including (from the text on sensor targeting) emissions. That's why electric vehicles and metahumans have a sensor penalty - because they give off so few emissions.


Or, use Sensor like in the book, modified with whatever situationals you have. It streamlines the base, and you still get the Visual/Audio Enhancements.

I know Signature is a combination, but I'm saying it's a very bad one.

Um, yes? Except that doesn't solve the exact problem we're talking about here (upgrade rules), and it keeps the whole problem of nonsense sensors (RSS helping your hearing, etc.). That's exactly 'ham-handed oversimplification'.

Once again re-affirming that the FAQ is poorly written and edited.

Also it doesn't take into account Older Cars. Those without Sensors, Gridguide, and mechanical-only control systems(I refer to the manual control override in arsenal). For cars without sensors and with Manual weapon mounts, you would use Agility for Gunnery, because its agi-linked.

Unless you're using the FAQ, in which case you go 'haha you can't pull the trigger since its not like being on foot at ALL. As long as you're on this skateboard, by god, you gotta use its sensors to shoot stuff'


Arsenal Errata. Average all Rated Sensors, round up, unrated sensors automatically upgraded to new Sensor. Note: Round up is not round half up, which makes a difference when dealing with lower-than-6-max-rating-sensors like ultrawideband.

Um. What? How are you jumped-into a car with no sensors, gridguide, or electronic control systems? The table on 271 refers only to Jumped-In, Autonomous, and Remote Control. Manual control is not mentioned. The FAQ quoted is *also* talking only about Jumped-In. Based on this, I assumed Friend meant 'jumped-in' when he said "riggers"… "(jumped in)".

I don't think anyone is saying manual controls or manual mounted weapons must use sensors.

Its an inconsistency because two things(response, sensor) can replace the default,(agility)

they will allow Command to replace Sensor but not Response to supersede it in the same way.

That was even less clear. What you are talking about, and who to?

For Remote Control (and nothing else), Command replaces basically everything (ugh), but that's got nothing to do with Response or Sensor. For Jumped-In, you can replace Agility with Response or Sensor, your choice. That's all just fine. There's no inconsistency, just an option in one case.

Manual control and Autonomous *are* two other things, but not what the person you quoted was talking about. Are you saying the problem lies in one or both of them? If so, I agree: Autonomous has to somehow derive a DP from Response, Sensor, Pilot, and Targeting, each of which has a good claim to be involved. Manual control is clearly Agility (mounted weapon), but you can easily see how Sensor could be allowed (some kind of HUD; maybe just Active Targeting?)… definitely some lack of clarity there.

The point I'm getting it is that rules for replacement effects, and specifically, double-replacement effects aren't the same across the board. That's the lack of consistency.

It's not an inconsistency... the rules are very clear that response replaces for all tests involving three attributes, and sensor replaces for all tests involving agility. There is no option to do response + gunnery.

And manual control HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH RIGGING. A vehicle CANNOT be rigged unless it includes a rigger adaptation (only comes standard on drones... for vehicles it's a modification... meaning most stock vehicles can only be remote-controlled, drone pilot program, or manual control). This thread has by and large only dealt with rigging and to a lesser extent autopilots.

Manual control is reaction + skill +- handling in most cases... or agility + gunnery.

The rules for vehicle perception are the same... the pilot MAY use Intuition + perception if he's simply using his own senses (looking in an actual rear view mirror... etc.). He only needs to use sensor + perception if he's using the vehicle sensors. A rigger in a cocoon is in no position to use his natural senses like a normal driver though. Even if he did just sit in the driver seat... he's in full VR with the large penalty to his natural senses to contend with, compared to his sensors with his hot VR bonuses.

Same goes for targetting... if you're jumped in you percieve the world through the vehicles sensors... you must either be doing it passively or actively... there is no other option. The FAQ makes perfect sense, Bobby did a really good job on it before retiring from freelancing.


Quite frankly: my biggest issue with the vehicle rules is that vehicles really should have the same stats as characters... str/bod/AGI/rea... it would make more sense to have some big lumbering vehicle with negative handling... but equipped with a fast reacting gun turret with high agility... Or that a plane with a fixed forward only gun like most classic fighter gunfights would add it's handling to it's gun attack rolls. Intuition/sensor are analogues as well... and really the only mental stat with a good analog. Or something like a tow truck/tug boat/heavy lift craft with a lot of strength but not a lot of body (instead of the cludge... assume str == bod).

Yeah I was being pretty specific about that.

Still don't understand what Udoshi is on about. Falconer seems to have gotten it though.

Actually manually fired missiles still must use sensors. You need to lock the target using non-jumped in complex action using the sensors... (though you can use the missiles sensor rating if it's better than your vehicles). If you don't do that step, you have an overpriced rocket on your hands.

No, that's not what the rules say:

"A drone controlled in this manner acts on the rigger’s Initiative—
the rigger and the drone are treated as a single unit. Any tests are
made using the rigger’s skills and the drone’s attributes (substituting
Response for Agility and Reaction and Sensor for Intuition)."

That's Response for Agility. So any test that starts out "Agility+Gunnery", should by rights and per the RAW become "Response+Gunnery".

Unless Sensor targeting is used... which it must, according to the FAQ. Response instead of Agility still applies to other uses of Agility, such as Close combat skills, Infiltration tests etc. At least that is one interpreation. Just like the one saying Sensor targeting is just if you want to nerf yourself deliberately for no good reason, in which case you would have to ignore the FAQ as wrong on this point.

Right. That's my point. When you substitute Command in there....

So you're forced to use sensor targeting.
It goes Agiity+Gunnery -> Sensor+gunnery -> Command+gunnery

IE software magically overrides forced sensor usage.
But jumped in rigging, which is basically the same thing....

Agiity+ Gunnery -> Sensor+gunnery -> response+gunnery

Doesn't work somehow. Software is able to replace sensor in one circumstance(command), but not in another(VR). If you listen to the new faq, that is.

Ignoring the FAQ as wrong is the baseline, AFAIK. The rules very clearly say that it's Response+Gunnery for 'normal' targeting, and Sensor+Gunnery for Passive Sensor targeting. That's the choice you have. Active Sensor targeting is separate… I'm not even sure you can't use *either* option along with Active Sensor targeting.

OH, *that's* what Udoshi is talking about. Well, first, you're not forced to use Sensor (see above). Second, Command is BS in general, so this is no place to start worrying about it. None of the Command DPs make any sense.

The FAQ is in direct contradiction of the Rulebook. Not merely clarifying a vaguely worded passage", but directly and explicitly stating the opposite of the pubished rules.

That goes well beyond the authority of a FAQ, and as such, that particular question-and-answer should be considered null and void. Such a drastic change belongs in an errata, not a mere FAQ.

Also: sensor targeting is not a nerf, if you use it on the right targets. Like, say ... large vehicles.

No Pax & Yera, the FAQ is in direct agreement with the BBB. Look at the chart on page 247. If anything, the BBB is in conflict with itself.

A rigger literally 'sees' through the drones sensors... it makes perfect sense that he's forced to use their sensor rating to aim. (and the rules do allow to only use one sensor instead of the entire suite... but even then use a poor quality camera don't complain when the results aren't good).

There are only *two* entries where the FAQ is in direct contradiction to the published RAW. I'll defend the author on that score because me and the other rules lawyers went through that thing with a fine tooth comb when it first came out. Again, we could only fine *two* cases where it was in direct contradiction with the rules (splitting dice pools... where it attempts to create a new mechanic, and a mystic adepts magic rating... which the book makes abundantly clear is equal to his total magic, not only his PP spent on spellcasting). You may disagree, the book has a lot of grey area which the FAQ did a yeomans job to clarify without contradicting any published rules.

We've been over that, Falconer. That *exact* point… twice. The RAW very explicitly says, when Jumped-In, Response+G is the standard DP, and Sensor+G is the Passive Sensor option. The table is, at best, an incomplete cheat-sheet.

I'm the first person to say that all uses of any sensors should use Sensor (or a Sensor test)—in fact, I've said it multiple times in this thread. But that's not the RAW.

I know what the RAW says... it says two *DIFFERENT* things. It's in contradiction with itself... locally we've always just gone with the table and it's worked without issue. Even the 3rd printing didn't fix any of this.


Quite frankly... response is more problematic... riggers toss large numbers of dice. And drones with their built in RC=body and propensity to mount MG's (due to the advantage it gives with their 200rd belted ammo bins) tend to tear things apart. It's been our experience that the +2(control rig)/(+2hot) offset by the -3 sensor penalty isn't really all that bad. Especially once the +2 smartgun... and then sensor+skill kick in.. by that point the rigger is *STILL* rolling as many or more dice than the street sam in most cases. So I don't see the balance problem people keep arguing for above with riggers somehow feeling cheated. Especially when they can get even more dice by using the 'active targeting' rules. Even a Full auto only weapon like a HMG can fire as a simple action (by a jumped-in rigger or drone autopilot) provided it only fires a 6rd burst (simple action) 10rd bursts are complex... 6rd's are simple. Unless the gun is hyper-velocity modified... or BF for 3rd bursts... you're only getting 1 shot out of the MG anyhow per pass so what you do with your extra actions matter.

3 Pages and still no clear and unified consensus. I bet the last thread about the same topic had the same outcome too.

Here is a summary though:

1. Drones use Targeting+Pilot, unless Sensor targeting is used, in which case it is Targeting+Sensor
2. Jumped in Riggers use Gunnery+Response, unless Sensor targeting is used, in which case it is Gunnery+Sensor
3. Phyiscallly using a weapon mount use Gunnery+Agility.

Oh no... I just realized another possible interpretation:

Passive Targeting adds Signature modifiers to the attack roll (as explicitly stated). Active targeting does note state this explicitly, so maybe the Signature modifiers only applies to the Sensor test to lock on? After that, you get net hits in bonus dice AND don't have to worry about signature anymore.. which would really make that simple action worthwhile.

What do you think? Too bad there are no good examples of rigging a drone in the rules, complete with relevant modifers for shooting.

Anyone remember how it worked in previous editions? Apart from wireless vehicles rigging worked mostly in the same way, right?

I'm a bit tempted to only keep Sensor for sensor tests, and always use Response instead of Agility for jumped in riggers, and always targeting+pilot for drones. When you shoot a gun you don't use Firearms+Intuiition after all, even if you must see the target. Accuracy != Perception. This would be a house rule of course.

What is a drone's response anyway? Same as Pilot? Uses Device ratings from matrix chapter, which is 3 or 4 per default?

How exactly is "but you can also do x" a contradiction?

Yes.


I think so. You get the Signature Penalty to lock on, but not to fire.


Response is equal to Device Rating, except if specifically modified differently. Generally, pilot is equal to all those. I think standard vehicles/drones DR is 3, security DR is 4, and military is 5+.

Falconer, of course it says two different things: you have two different options (exactly, Sengir). And if Response is problematic, that's because we're not talking about balance, we're talking about RAW. There are many possible balance tweaks.

Oh well... here's my take out of this section. Your milage may vary based on your own preferences and playstyle, just how I'd handle all this as GM. I like to mediate the extremes because it's one thing shadowrun doesn't handle well... EG: if I need to pack ludicrous weapons just to threaten the grossly overarmored troll/drone... woe to the rest of the team when they're pointed at them.

1. drones only get pilot + autosoft. Though the book only allows for agent/pilots/autosofts up to rating 4... I could see shaving a 5 for an actual device rating 5 military equipment (NB: I'm also a fan of SOTA rules... so unless you have some kind of support subscription... that'll degrade down to 4 in 2 months). Sensor targetting isn't an option... though I might be generous and allow it to lock targets for a few extra dice. Especially in confusing situations the drones doggy-brain can get confused... shoot him... what meatbag boss, they all look alike to me. Reflected in an actual sensor+clearsight test+signature.

2. jumped-in riggers only get sensor targeting. (basically finding the RAW in contradiction with itself... I pick the lesser of two evils to avoid power creep). They can do active or passive as much as they like. In any case, signature applies. Might apply this to remote-control as well... since I've seen a few who like to run optomized rating 9 command software... (hotsim +2 offset by signature -3... excepting for other medium and large vehicles... seems a good way to avoid splattering NPC's/players gratuitiously while still being in good shape to hurt other vechicles... especially at the upper end of the armor scale).

3. Correct physically using a mount physically...
3a. Not all mounts can be directly aimed manually... remote control only turrets I wouldn't allow this for (flex or full turret). Fixed forward I'd allow this only for the pilot... since he aims by pointing the nose like a classic dogfighter.

So… why do drones not use Sensor/Signature, but Jumped-In riggers do? I think I understand that you're basing everything off 'balance' (and I love balance as much as the next guy), but that's just not cool. Messy, inconsistent rules for balance reasons is a bad thing.

If you want Sensor to matter, commit to it mattering for any and all uses of sensors (here, shooting for Autonomous, Jump-In, and Remote Control, *and* Manual Control if you're aiming with sensors). It doesn't have to be Sensor+Y, though that's the simplest. You could also do 'X+Y (X limited by Sensor)' (great for balance concerns, because you always use the weakest stat); or require a separate Sensor test before all actions that would use it (shooting is really the only one I can think of, but at least it'd be consistent); etc. (In that last one, you'd want to alert Lock-On somehow, perhaps removing it, or making it obligatory, I dunno).

1) Do you consciously ignore the tables in the Wireless section and in Arsenal, or did you just not happen to remember that you can get Pilots up to R6?

2) So let's ignore the other rules because you have had players run Milspec programs?

3) I... don't really understand what you're trying to say.

Yes I like to view everything with a view towards balance and limiting the extremes when given discretion. You make that sound like a bad thing... you like to try and break the games you're in? The biggest thing for me tends to be internal consistency... once something is decided stick with it for both players and NPC's.


For some reason yes I was under a misimpression... thought agents only went up to 4... but they go up to 6. It's autosofts which are limited to 4... when I was thinking they both were. (current game I'm a player in is very magic heavy... drones rarely come up except as opposition... or occasionally a crew served vehicle).

And no, I'm not 'ignoring' the rules... the rules state that when figures aren't given... go with the device rating of the equipment. Milspec is DR5... so if I don't have a figure for the pilot or software ratings handy yes, I just go with the device ratings. Rather than wasting stupid amounts of time looking up rules to quibble about maybe all of 1 die at the end of the day.


Neraph: look at the mod rules for adding turrets... it's possible to add remote control ONLY turrets (as well as manual only turrets). Think of the HMMWVV's with robotic mounts and no ring mount like you'd normally use to see with room for a guy to stand in and manually point the gun on it's ring rail/pintle. Then I don't see allowing agilty+gunnery to work... as the gunner isn't aiming/moving the gun... the electronics are and he's controlling the electronics.

Hehe, total logic fail. I said that balance to the exclusion of consistency is bad (it is); I did *not* say 'balance is bad'. You may have noticed me say, in the very next clause, that I love balance as much as the next guy.

Re: remote turrets, you're arguing against a position no one has taken. By definition, remote turrets must be fired remotely (using sensors, if only a smartlink), not manually.

And this is part of the crux of the issue. You can have weapon mounts that are BOTH manual AND remote, and any rules/dice pool option you come up with has to be consistent across the board.

That's the easiest thing: manual uses manual, remote uses remote.

As a side note, I've never understood why the rules have you use Gunnery for mounted, manual weapons. How is it not only different skill to use a gun the instant it's on a pintle (but not a tripod), but also that *same* skill for anything (pistol, MG, grenade launcher) on a pintle? At least for rigging it halfway (maybe less than halfway ) makes sense to have a Gunnery skill. It's as bad as 'Command does everything'.

There is only a conflict in the rules if you assume that the table lists ALL of the possible dice pool and actions that a rigger may use.

If you take the position that the table only lists some of the more common actions and their associated dice pools, then the conflict vanishes. Under this position, there are other actions possible that simply aren't listed in the table.

I don't know about anyone else, but the name of the table might be a clue as to which of the above is more likely.




-k

Common means everyone has it, Karma, Just like Common Sense.

That's nonsense. In any case, tables are strictly subordinate to text, always.

On the positive side, it avoids Automatics covering even more stuff

And if you want to feed trolls, collect food for the homeless in the Barrens

The exact text is:

If a character improves the ratings of all of the individual
components in a sensor package, the overall Sensor rating of the
vehicle should also be improved accordingly.
Arsenal, 105

The main problem with interpreting this text is that the "standard vehicle sensor package" (same book/page, a few paragraphs up) does not specify the individual ratings of the sensors. We could assume that the individual ratings (some of the equipment listed doesn't have ratings anyway) match the sensor rating of the vehicle, but that's just never spelled out in the text. Unless, I'm using an old source or missed something in the FAQ, if that's the case, someone cite me a reference so I can bring it to my group

That's a pretty easy, painless assumption to make. A bigger 'standard package' problem is for drones, which probably do not have the standard set at all. Some examples clearly don't, like some of the tiny spy ones. Still, pretty surmountable with a brief glance from the GM.

I feel like any runner is going to immediately replace *all* the sensors in any vehicle/drone he gets, anyway.

Which can cause headaches between the runners and the GM.

"I removed all of the possible spyware and tracking devices from all my electronics, vehicles, and hardware."

"Allright. Roll me a series of hardware, computer, armorer, and software tests, with moderate thresholds."

"B-b-but... my character should just *know* to do that!"

No. That's not a problem at all. That's absolutely typical for SR4 gameplay. But I wasn't talking about anything you mentioned; I meant replacing all the sensors with better ones/the ones the PC wants.

Right. They just usually want to do it for free, with zero skill, and have no problems.

Balanced characters; they come in handy a lot more often then powergamers would like.

Fixed that for you. *sigh*

The differences twixt the two matter only to the powergamer. Most rightly consider the two groups to be one and the same, but we're venturing far off topic.

I am a powergamer. I care about balance, both within a single character and between characters in a group. Your words, sir, are personally insulting to me.

He's just goofing around, like always. It's not even relevant.

Fuck you, I'm a dragon.

http://www.shadowrun4.com/wp-content/uploa..._errata_132.pdf

I know, easy to forget that CGL used to do errata once upon a time

Nice. But again, never really an issue to begin with.

Sine the Errata has been cited, here's what it has to say:

p. 105 Individual Sensors and Sensor Tests
Replace the current text with the following text:

"Each vehicle and drone has a Sensor rating that acts as an abstract composite of all of the sensors in the vehicle combined. This rating represents the fact that only a combined array of 4 or more sensors can provide effective multidirectional maneuvering, tactical solutions, and spatial awareness to a vehicle.

Individual sensors in an off-the-lot vehicle’s sensor package have a default rating equal to the vehicle’s base Sensor rating. This Sensor 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 vehicle’s default Sensor rating.

Under certain circumstances, a gamemaster may decide that certain vehicle sensors may not apply, or that only one specific type of sensor is relevant to the situation at hand. Some sensors might just not be suitable for the given task, may be pointing into the wrong direction, and so on. Alternately, the character may elect to use only one sensor for a particular job (such as taping a nearby conversation with a camera or audio mike). In these cases consider the applicable sensor to have the same rating as the vehicle’s Sensor rating, though if the character has previously modified the sensor package, the individual sensor may use its own rating (if higher.)

If a character improves the ratings of all of the individual components in a sensor package, the overall Sensor rating of the vehicle should also be improved accordingly. For the purpose of improvement, sensors that do not have a rating are considered to be automatically upgraded, when all the remaining sensors in a package are improved to a higher rating."