Hello, for once I play a game where one of the player is a Rigger. He is new to the game, and although I'm not, I haven't used the Rigger or vehicle rules much at all. So I would like som clarification on dice pools, restrictions, drawbacks etc.

1. If a drone with targeting autosoft fires at a metahuman(say, a doberman with a LMG), does it suffer a -3 penalty to shots because of the signature table? So with targeting 4 and pilot 4 that means only 5 dice?

2. Can said drone even shoot at obvious humanoid targets without first succeeding a sensor+clearsight test (again at -3)? Are they considered Incompetent at "Perception?"

3. The above assumes that the rigger uses Command program to order drones to attack targets. What action is there to jump into a drone, and when jumped in does the rigger use Gunnery+Pilot (-3 signature, +2 for Rigger implant, +2 for hot Sim)? Can the gun or drone be installed with Smartlink for extra +2 dice either with or without the rigger jumping in?

4. What are the legality of armed drones? Can the rigger simply purchase a fake Licence for the gun installed (if Restricted) and have the drones fly around Seattle with him?

That's it for now.

1) Yes and no. There are three ways drones can shoot at things: like normal; and then aided by sensors, which is further divided into active and passive sensor targeting (SR4A page 171, Drones and Gunnery, Sensor Targeting, Passive Targeting, Active Targeting). When targeting with active or passive sensors, you do suffer the signature table modifiers - however, while simply targeting as stated in Drones and Gunnery, you do not.

2) Yes, no. They can still default on "perception": a Clearsight + Sensor Test with no Clearsight autosoft would be a Sensor -1 Test.

3) "You 'jump into' a drone via full VR. This requires a subscription to the drone, vehicle, or device and takes a Simple Action." (SR4A, page 245, Jumping In, emphasis mine). Again, there are three different ways of firing weapons with drones, so it depends on if the rigger is simply shooting or using passive/active targeting to help. Yes, drones can use smartlinks; however, the weapon must have a smartgun system and the sensors of the drone must have a smartlink on them.

4) I'd say the worse legality of all items involved. A GM-Nissan Rotor-drone with a White Knight would be a forbidden drone. Not sure where I picked it up, but when I create gear I use the highest availability and the highest restriction rating of the new item. Yes, a rigger could simply get a fake license for a gun-drone, but as soon as you use it in any not-legal manner, the law no longer cares about your license. It's the same as having a Concealed Carry license and then robbing someone - your license won't protect you against the Armed Robbery charge, nor will it drop the Armed Robbery to simply a Robbery charge. Also, see the third paragraph of Legality, page 313, SR4A.


EDIT: Accidentally posted half-complete. Finishing up now.

I'm AFB, so I can't speak towards the signature table.

For 2, they're not considered Incompetent (which is a specific level of unskilledness that requires a negative quality to obtain). Their Sensor rating is the equivalent of their Intuiton, and the Clearsight autosoft serves as their Perception skill. They don't need to roll for obvious things. They don't, however, suffer the -2 DP in the event they do not have the Clearsight autosoft. They just roll Sensor in those instances.

For 3, a drone's weaponry can be a smartweapon. If the rigger's got a smartlink, then they get the bonus.

For 4, some drones that have weapon mounts are legal (though Restricted). You also, though, have to consider the weapon being installed in said drone. Likely you'd need a permit for it as well.

Edit: Neraph answered them all much more better.

1) yes(partial), and yes.
If attacking with pilot + gunnery the mods do not apply... the drone's doggy brain pilot must still detected the target using a sensor test though which does include the modifiers! For many cases the threshold for this test is 0... so if there's more than 4 dice you can 4:1 it or force the roll for fun. (issue command to subscribed drone... shoot that person... what person boss... I only see static on radar!) No different than relaying a target to a street sam with lousy perception... shoot that guy in the crowd... which guy boss I don't see him.

3) Control rig applies to Vehicle Skills (p128) while jumped in... so gunnery is on the list as are all the piloting skills. Smartlink is grey area... rules aren't clear (what is a targeting autosoft if not a smartlink program!). Most people say yes it is allowed.
See page 247 chart... most tests while jumped in are Sensor or Response (of the drone not your commlink, p245) + skill.
So yes, since you're targetting off sensors, passive targetting (-3 person), +2 (rig) +2(hotsim), net +1... then sensor (rules allow you to use only a single sensor or the sensor suite rating as appropriate), + gunnery + mods (specialization, smartgun, laser, tracers, poor visibility... which sensors might bypass... fog hah... too bad I'm using radar)
While jumped in... though actions take their normal time, so you can fire the gun as a simple action... so you could simple (sensor lock)... roll sensors... add net successes to future gunnery rolls. Next pass you could fire twice using 2 simple actions...


Remote-control doesn't use the control rig and think of it like playing a video game with mouse/keyboard/joystick. You're driving the drone using your control program directly. In this case, it's Control + gunnery... but everything you do through remote control takes a complex action... so you can only fire once... even if the firing would normally be simple.




4) The drone has it's normal availability excepting any modifications changing it. The weapon has it's own availability, there is no combined availability. The weapon itself is grey... the default light weapon mount only is supposed to take 2 minutes to mount or unmount a normal weapon (which implies that it's sort of like a benchrest vice with some kind of handgrip to me, into which any handheld weapon LMG or smaller can be fit into). So you should be able to mount/unmount the LMG as needed when legality issues arise... you did remember a smugglers compartment on your bulldog no?

I reread that part again just now. There is nothing about "normal" vs aided by sensors in the Drones and Gunnery section. All it says is this:

Drones and Gunnery
Drones attack using their Pilot + Targeting autosoft rating (see p. 246).
Drones must have an autosoft appropriate to the weapon they are
wielding in order to attack.

Then it goes into detail about using sensors. I can't find any rule saying they can detect and shoot people normally. You can "lock on target, which may give you a dicepool bonus, but generally not enough to compensate for the penalty. In other words, there would be very little reason to use these sensors if there was any choise in the matter. And what else but sensors can a drone use to detect anything?

About the "incompetence" I merely meant that they might need to make a test for obvious persons. From the text:

To detect a person, critter, or vehicle with sensors, the character/
vehicle must make a successful Sensor + Perception Test (Sensor
+ Clearsight autosoft in the case of drones).

Now it seems to me that it says you must do the test just to detect anyone, it then tells that IF someone tries to hide this is opposed by their stealth skill etc. An ordinary drone without Clearsight must be blind, as it has 0 dice to detect metahumans or other drones. A Doberman with ClearSight 3 has 3 dice... not exactly a sure shot.

Availability: I just noticed that weapon mounts has availability F. This should make them all illegal, except the Doberman that comes with it already and still is legal (sigh). Wouldn't that mean it's not allowed for private persons to own a Nissan rotor drone with mounted SMG? Since the weapon mount itself is illegal.

Falconer, you say the Signature modifiers does not apply when using pilot+gunnery. Sounds nice for Riggers, but where does it say that? If you're not using your own eyes it seems to me you use the sensors.

Have fun trying to untangle the Sensor/Signature rules, and the whole 'blind vehicles' problem (and that's without weak jamming, which basically kills 95% of vehicle sensors). That's Gordian Knot you'll want to just cut—GM house rules to the rescue.

Nooo! The Power of RAW compels you!

That's for adding a weapon mount to something. It's one thing to own a security drone, which one would expect to have a weapon mount. It's another to start adding them to your Chrysler-Nissan Jackrabbit. Just like it's fine to own a light pistol, but when you start replacing the parts with ceramics/plastics, it becomes illegal.

Yet the Morrissey Elan, which is fully-ceramic by default, is entirely legal! Yay!

(Just like weapons with integral silencers tend to be legal, while silencers as addons are illegal. Whee!)

I ignore a lot of the legality stuff for reasons like that. It's about as good as you can expect for a base system -- that is, it covers most stuff, and leaves glaring holes that have to be ignored or wallpapered over.

Uhm, how much clearer do you want it than "Drones attack using their Pilot + Targeting autosoft rating"? This means exactly what it says, neither sensors nor the penile length of the operator or anything else are factored into normal Gunnery...

The things about substituting the Sensor rating for Pilot is under a different heading, hence a different option.


A weapon mount as an aftermarket mod is treated differently than one that comes with the drone. IRL, you will often encounter such regulations in the context of weapons and other dangerous items...for instance, many places in the states allow you to own a full-auto weapon (it just costs an arm and a leg), but modding a weapon to automatic fire yourself will make the ATF and a bunch of other three-letter-agencies go medieval.

I never said it's not clear that Drones use Pilot+Targeting for shooting. The one rule does not contradict the other. They also say that in melee combat you roll melee skill + agility to attack. That does not rule out circumstantial modifiers either. The only reason why they even wrote it is to make it clear that drones use Pilot instead of Agility and Targeting instead of the relevant Firearms skill.

Why not call a spade a spade and admit you house ruled it? Or do you suddenly claim that drones can choose not to be affected by stuff like range penalties? Because it doesn't say that either. Neither sensors nor penile length nor range nor blind fire nor recoil nor smartlink nor attacker running nor multiple targets....

The sidebar on p. 247 says that no matter what mode the drone is in (rigged, remote controlled or independent):

All such rigging dice pools are subject, as always, to appropriate modifiers,
which are in turn described in the preceding rules and relevant sections of other
chapters. Notably Vehicle Combat (p. 157), in the Combat chapter, describes the
various threshold and dice pool modifiers that apply to piloting and maneuvering,
attack and defense, as well as basic sensor and targeting tests for both unaugmented
drivers and riggers. Of particular importance are the Vehicle Test Threshold
Table (p. 168) and the Terrain Test Table (p. 169).

And from the SR4 FAQ:
Does a rigger who has jumped-into a drone use his own Agility for Gunnery Tests?

No. Since the rigger is viewing the action through the drone’s sensors, he must use sensor targeting (p. 247, SR4A), so the rigger will roll Gunnery + Sensor for attack tests.

Note he must use Sensor targeting, which list 2 options: Passive or Active, and both applies Signature modifiers. Thus a drone with jumped in Rigger with Gunnery 4, Sensor 4, rigger +2, hot sim +2, smartlink +2 (grey area I admit) shooting at a methuman will have 11 Dice. Not great, but not too bad either. The drone by itself will have a very limited dice pool. If the rigger must use the sensor targeting, then surely so must the drone.

Maybe they did this to avoid Riggers being OP. Maybe drones and vehicles are meant to be fighting other vehicles. Maybe they messed up and it requires house rules. But closing the eyes and ignoring the table does not make it RAW.

There are two rules under two different headings. One says "Drones attack using their Pilot + Targeting", the other says "Characters can use the vehicle’s Sensor Attribute to help with Gunnery" (emphasis mine). If that is not sufficiently clear to you then I'm afraid nobody will be able to help you. My sympathies.

You see this kinda schizophrenic legality in real life too.

Usually it's because a manufacturer with large amounts of money has the right conversations with the right politicians.

Sometimes it's because of weird stupid laws that get passed because some politician wants to get more votes in his next election, rather than getting passed because the law might actually accomplish anything.

Case in point: the now-retired Assault Weapons Ban. Which was a joke, regardless if you were for or against gun control. It was entirely created to get votes as it's pretty safe as a politician to go after "scary automatic rifles" as a target, to make it look like you're accomplishing something.

The only problem is, A) full-auto weapons are ALREADY heavily regulated and not really part of the ban, and B) it restricted weapons based largely on how scary they looked, not on how they actually mechanically functioned. Which of course the manufacturers quickly picked up on, so you saw new weapons pop up that were mechanically the same as the previous version but had the needed cosmetic changes to make them legal. One was legal, the other not, because one had, say, a differently shaped handle - somehow having a "pistol grip" makes rifles more dangerous. Or a folding stock. Or a vertical foregrip. And so on.



-k

Yeah. I made the mistake of trying to explain that to one of my players. I've got Vegas as an open carry state, where you can carry non-automatic pistols openly and legally. He had a hard time understanding why he couldn't carry one under his suit jacket legally. It wasn't because he wanted to conceal it, but because it looks downright goofy slapping some brown leather to your hip when you're in an Italian 3-piece.

1. A drone is not a character.

2. Drone do not use gunnery, as you have pointed out already. They MUST use the Sensor attribute.

3. Characters using a vehicle CAN use sensor to help with gunnery, which is useful if they are sitting in the drivers seat of a vehicle instead of having to physically operate a weapons mount.

4. The faq spells out clearly a rigger must use Sensor attribute when jumped into a vehicle or done.

Wait, are you saying that the Signature table only applies to vehicles and not drones?

Ideally, something like Signature (broken into different sensors, unfortunately) would apply to absolutely any use of any sensor. :/

1. Yes, it is since it has a dog brained AI in it.
2. No, they do not use the gunnery skill, they use a targeting autosoft+pilot. They do not need to use the sensors for this test but if they wish they can use sensory based gunnery test on the target. This of course is optional, and iirc makes the shot a complex action.
3. See 2.
4. Yep.

PS:Drones are a subset of vehicles BTW.

Well well, I'm still not convinced it is RAW, but if no one else see it, it does not matter.

So drones can magically shoot without being affected by their sensor's "visibility modifiers", while a jumped into rigger in the same drone must use sensor targeting and suffers a -3, which is compensated for with a Rig and using hot sim.

If the drone chooses to use Sensor targeting, does that override visibility modifiers? Will improved invisibility still fool it, or does can the emissions from a human be detected anyway? Is there really any reason why a drone would use sensor targeting?

Yeah, it makes zero sense if you actually go by what the book seems to say.

It doesn't help that the rules are split between two sections. People are concentrating on the Combat chapter, page 247 (as referenced in the FAQ quoted above) gives a chart showing exactly what skills are used for various tasks depending on whether it's an autonomous drone, remote-controlled or jumped-in.Drones use sensor for perception and that's it. A jumped-in rigger is the only time it's used for gunney.

What annoys me is that it's not spelled out exactly why you'd use active sensor targetting. You spend a simple action, make a roll to log on... then what? Seriously, what is the benefit you get from that instead of just making normal attacks?

In my own game, I have my rigger use Reaction for both maneuvering and gunnery, whether in meatspace or VR. It just makes sense to me. (I also lower the threshold for most maneuvers. The idea that a fully competent driver of 8 dice cannot default to success on passing or merging in light traffic is... beyond ridiculous.)

I would agree with this. The solution is probably just to change the Signature table to something a little more reasonable.

Regarding the Smartlink+Drone issue, everyone is basically forgetting about drone sensor packages. If you put a Smartlink on the drone camera, and a smartgun on the drone's weapon, then suddenly you have both halves to the whole and you're good to go. I also strongly recommend vision enhancement 3.

Where the issue crops up is with the prerequisite Image Link - technically you need one to use a smartlink, and prior to 4A it wasn't a problem to have both because imagelinks basically cost nothing. 4A introduced camera capacity, which messed everything up because its just deadweight in a valuable accessory slot.
Most GM's I know either just waive the imagelink requirement(a drone shouldn't need it because its already hardlinked), or make it not count towards capacity(a smartlink is an upgrade of an existing thing, so it shouldn't count double) just to maintain consistency with how it was before.

Well at least some others than me think the rules are not as clear as some may have it be, or that at least that the rules are wonky.

Agreed about maneuvers ... SR vehicle rules assumes that driving a car in 50 MpH requires tons of test just to accelerate, and that an average driver (2 dice) will have no chance at actually succeeding, which is in contrary to the rules for skill levels (0 skill = average unproffessional user).




I don't think vision enhancement works, as it adds dice to (visual) Perception tests. Drones make Clearsight+Sensor tests. However, a rigger watching through a drone's camera should get the bonus on his visual perception tests. If it also works when jumped in is a matter of debate, after all why would the Rigger suffer Signature penalties if he could just watch and shoot through the camera? My point here is of course that the rules don't make sense.

This is the bit that gets me: cameras are sensors. Signature affects sensors. That *should* be the end of the story, but SR4 just doesn't work that way. Sensors in general are one of the messier (yet fundamental) areas of the rules, to me. RAW (maybe?), you can velcro a microcam to your head and feed it to your brain with trodes, and it functions exactly like normal sight; that doesn't make sense. Even if that isn't that case (and I'd hope not), how often are your players making Sensor tests to use their various gear? How do Perception mods/thresholds ('Nearby', 'Quiet') interact with Signature ('Metahuman', 'Large Vehicle'), and why is Signature the same for thermal, radar, acoustic, and visual sensors?

(emphasis mine)

That's a minuscule benefit (best case), especially given Signature, etc. That's the issue, to me: the benefit should match the cost, etc. And in what sense is all targeting *not* 'active sensor targeting'? It's all just nonsense.

Again, no. Firing a mounted weapon is Agility+Gunnery, a jumped-in rigger replaces Agility with the Response of the Drone.

Yes, the compiled table at the end of the Matrix chapter assumes you use sensor targeting.

Did you miss the part I quoted from the FAQ, or are you just willfully ignoring it?
Here is it again:

"Does a rigger who has jumped-into a drone use his own Agility for Gunnery Tests?

No. Since the rigger is viewing the action through the drone’s sensors, he must use sensor targeting (p. 247, SR4A), so the rigger will roll Gunnery + Sensor for attack tests."

Notice the word "must." Appareantly, drones must not use it's own sensors. It's magic!

Many people ignore whole sections of the FAQ.

There's a lot in there that's considered by quite a few folks to be wonky or even flat out wrong.




-k

Just like RAW When the rules are unclear though, like in this case, I think the FAQ is a good starting point though. Or just admit you're making a house rule because the rules are wonky or flat out wrong.

Except, you know, they're not ...


(Source: SR4A page 247.)

That's an example of it being unclear, as already noted. Those are not the only possible pools for those same actions, per the RAW. Bleh.

.... I honestly cannot find any applicable alternate pools for those actions. Throw me some references, please?

This whole thing reminds me of how annoyed I am that you can't improve the Sensor attribute of a drone/vehicle in a hard-mechanics way. The only thing I've ever really seen regarding raising that attribute is under the confusingly named Improved Sensor Array upgrade, but even there it is only mentioned as a possible GM-caveat.

Seriously, there is no vehicle attribute more important than Sensor...

Full concurrence here, Speed Wraith.

The table does not in any way contradict the FAQ. It contradicts Sengir, who claims Riggers use Response instead of Sensor. The table simply lists the base dice pool, unmodified by circumstance. Note it does not list the Rigger's Control Rig bonus either.

I am obviously not the only one who thinks these rules are unclear, why is it so dangerous to admit that? Sure, you have an interpretation, but that's just a possible one.

Again, it's already been said: Gunnery's Agility, therefore Response. Sensor is only used (i.e., Sensor+Gunnery) if you're using what's for-some-reason called Passive Sensor Targeting. That is a specific, alternative option in the RAW:

This is not a good situation.

What page, what book, please?

The book. SR4a. 245 and 170. These have both already been referenced in this thread (Neraph, Sengir, yourself, Inu, etc.).

Okay, now I see it - on 245, anyway; there's nothing I've noticed on 170 (but I could even be looking tOO hard). That certainly is odd, and I apologise for missing the wee little bit of text previously.

I still find it a relatively simple matter to resolve while wearing my GM's hat: when text and a table contradict each other, the text is the superior source.

Think of the difference between Active sonar, and Passive sonar.

That's not it at all, though. You can active target with passive sensors (… cameras) and passive target with active sensors (radar). My point is more that there should be zero distinction between 'non-sensor targeting' and 'passive sensor targeting' (i.e., if you use sensors, like a camera, it's sensor targeting); and that 'active sensor targeting' should actually be called something that makes sense, like 'lock-on targeting' or 'computer-assisted targeted'.

I agree, but I think that was the point: the table is not the one good source, it's just 'some common tests/DPs'.

This all makes perfect sense to me... the book limit on pilot&clearsight/targetting is generally limited to '4' each. The -3 sensor would wipe out nearly half the pool. In this case, a top-end drone is throwing all of 8 dice... 10 if smartlinks are allowed.

Compare that to the number of dice a good rigger can generate (and how cheap it is to upgrade sensor especially on smaller drones). Like I said, the bigger problem is if the drone can actually identify the target to shoot it (make the sensor+clearsight+sensormods) to start with (especially if the target is good at hiding). And even then there's more mods available... rather than using the full suite... pick out an individual sensor... like say the rating 6 camera with visibility enhancement +3....

Riggers have that nifty +4 built into everything they do with the vehicle skills and +2 into many others (like ewar rolls including hotsimmed sensor+perception checks). Plus again... if camera is used... there's an easy +3 available to offset the -3 against meatbags. Other sensors like say a radar are going to have a lot more trouble.

Some of this is also a good reason to call in the indirect rules... especially if you can field targeting mites.





Actually it's a big benefit... look at what a normal character needs to do to get a similar bonus... 'take aim'... 3 consecutive simple actions during which the target cannot leave LOS. That's for only a single shot.

A sensor lock on only takes a SINGLE simple action... and lasts until the target breaks LOS/lock. Some guided weapons like missiles require a sensor lock-on to fire properly or they turn into grossly overpriced rockets.

If I'm already jumped into the drone... yeah I could just fire 2 bursts... or I could actually lock the target for an extra +2 dice (remember sensors is a valid specialization of perception!... +2 against that -3 isn't so bad now). I could alternatively simple, lock target (make sensor roll... yay bonus dice)... take aim... extra +1... fire. In the case of larger vehicles there's a bonus to the sensor check remember making it that much more important.

Recently had a fight where the pilot-adept... (not rigger) was having a hell of a time shooting the target... (more like bullets from the HMG firing anti-vehicle (-6) rounds were bouncing off armor). The sensor lockon and called shot for damage and wide burst were needed to get past that 20 vehicle armor. (plus edge). Far from a one shot attack at that.

None of that made sense, Falconer. It seems like you're trying to justify a mess by saying 'at least it imposes balance', but I couldn't even figure that part out. Are you saying uses of sensors (not necessarily Sensor) should or should not be subject to Signature?

Why would you compare to Take Aim? Being better than another bad choice doesn't make it a good one.

As for active targeting: huh? You add the *hits* as a DP, so that's like adding (Sensor+Perception)/9 hits, in exchange for wasting a whole turn (Gunnery being a Complex action, your Simple is coming from a whole new turn). Even your own figures (+2?) are exactly in line with what I said: a minuscule benefit at best (if you're maybe fighting a giant vehicle instead of a person?)

Yes, if the weapon *requires* a lock… you want a lock. … So?

I'm more than fine with 'lock-on targeting' existing. I just think it should be called something that makes sense, and it should do something worthwhile. It should be at *least* as good as a smartlink, and usually a lot better. That's the point of 'locking on': it's (supposed to be) awesome.

(People are making Called Shot for damage with a Wide Burst? No wonder your game is having issues. )

Yeah I know... generally the wide burst for damage is disallowed at player scale...

GM relented in this case because he realized that otherwise it was going to take a rediculously lucky dice roll to manage to get the rounds to do anything. People don't realize exactly how effective 20 armor is at stopping even a HMG. Makes a great case for getting a laser or gauss...


And yes I'm saying sensor should be subject to signature. The rules are abstract. There's no reason to try and hammer them into reality... lets face it reality is... my glasses give me +3 offseting my 'impaired vision' -3 so long as I'm wearing them. Not that they'll ever give me +3 MORE enhancements. I'm simply pointing out that there's a lot of dice out there on both the + and - sides so even a -3 isn't so severe in that context. Until you got guys in chameleon suits and concealment and actively hiding. (if they're not actively hiding 4 dice is good for making the threshhold 0 or 1 test).

This is really a separate issue, but I wanna use it as an example of what I meant: you don't wanna use bad rules to serve balance. Instead, fix the problem, if there is one. To me, *tank* armor ignoring HMG is a feature, not a problem to be GM-cheated.

But, aside from that: okay, thanks for clarifying that. Yeah, it is amusing that vision enhancement, in this example, is offset by the signature of metahumans. That's a problem with Signature itself, though. AFAIK, the reason metahumans are -3 Signature is because they're made of meat and colder than a running gasoline engine… and the Signature table is seemingly based on radar/thermal. Whoops! So for visual Signature, it probably shouldn't be -3 to begin with.

20 armor is NOT a tank... 20 armor is almost any vehicle with a *CHEAP* maxed out armor modification (min 10 body). Got news... armored cars, trucks (think Brinks), and even APC's aren't bulletproof when hit by a .50cal firing armor piercing rounds (even .50 ball will tear through armored trucks/cars).

30+ armor is a tank. Look at the actual tanks in the book and realize they're tossing over 60 dice to resist damage.


But what I also didn't mention was the vehicle was crew served... one of the other players was playing RIO (radio intercept officer) and 'aiding' by locking targets for the 2 guys manning guns... so hence why I say it's not a waste... his aid was giving each of the others an extra 2-3 dice... or ~+1 damage. And it's also not a waste again the case of many of the single-shot weapons. The final bit is it doesn't always need a complex action to fire, you can fire a long burst (6rds) as a simple action... even with a full-auto only weapon. Someone jumped-in doesn't need a complex for most weapon fire, and again someone piloting a vehicle the old school way (reaction + skill), is using (agility + gunnery) and normal firing times, so has enough time to lock and then fire. There was some debate if a rigger could use an agent as a 'copilot' to run ewar and targetting systems while the rigger drove.

However cheap it is, it's certainly not common. I was saying that's not a typical amount of armor, nor one you should expect to beat with a machine gun in SR4. Whether that's realistic is irrelevant. In SR4, that's a 'tank' to me. Specifically, an Ares Citymaster, the biggest bad in the core book *or* Arsenal.

Even if it all worked as you said, you're describing just about the rarest, best-case situation I can think of. I'm not sure that having a sensor officer even works, but let's say okay. The point is that beating armor that you can't otherwise beat via some weird rules jankery isn't balance, and certainly not an argument for active targeting, especially given what a small DP bonus it is anyway.

Gunnery is Complex. But again, it's a tiny bonus so who cares? As you said a couple times: "an extra 2-3 dice... or ~+1 damage". As *I* said, that's nothing: "minuscule". To make it even slightly worthwhile, you need runner-grade sensors (take a look at the list Sensor ratings of vehicles) and runner-grade Perception (I'm not saying John Q can't do it, I'm saying veteran military barely can).

I've pointed this out many, many many times before, but it bears restating

COMMON ROLLS FOR RIGGERS IS ONLY THE COMMON ROLLS

It IGNORES a bunch of useful rules like Evasive Driving, Active and Passive sensor targeting, and Jumped-In Rigging attributes! In fact, it ASSUMES you are using Sensor Targeting on the table when it is not in fact a requirement that you do so!

I strongly suggest learning to read the rules and going over what is mandatory and what is optional before going 'derp its not on the table', because rigging is the most complex and annoying ruleset in the game to get the basics down. All the matrix crap is terrible.

Honestly, there should probably be separate "regular" vehicle armor, which should be closer rules-wise to worn body armor, and actual hardened armor, which is the stuff that bounces all but the heaviest weapons that military armored vehicles use.

I might do that for my home games.



-k

That's a remarkably good idea.