Made me think about the idea of partial rigging... basically, the vehicle gains the "reflexes" of the rigger, but is still being manually piloted by him. This would mostly be applicable in lean-steered vehicles like motorcycles or airboards, or in cases where the rigger wants to do something other than drive but is not using the manual controls. Would this be unbalancing? I think you could make a serious case for limited "autonomic" responses via partial rigging. It is a weird idea, looking at it, and I'm not sure I'm expressing myself very clearly either.

I think I understand what you're saying. For instance: suppose you wanted to shoot from the back of your bike. You could use partial rigging kind of like how neurohelmets work in Battletech. You still inhabit and control your body (no RAS cutout) and are able to aim and fire handheld weapons, but the bike handles better by taking subconcious cues from your connection. It would read your sense of balance, for instance, and possibly your will to go faster or slow down.

Essentially, it would be less like becoming the bike and more like the bike becoming a part of you, controlled with the unconcious ease of a limb.

You're basically thinking of a datajack link. I might consider increasing the bonus to +2 per level of VCR with no added initiative dice, or +1 +VCR level (again, no added initiative dice), but nothing more.

~J

What system is used for combat biker and similar sports?

The rules make bike combat almost imposable but it is supposed to be a sport.

Edward

Combat Biking...a sport for guys and gals sans VCR.

A decent reaction/initiative booster, a 4+ in Bike, and you can munch and crunch...even without rigging.

As for the partial rigging...we have often switched off the RAS override for our riggers or deckers in past games. Sure it frags with their concentration, but being able to fire off wisecracks (and the occasional Predator round) while you're busy "elsewhere" can be a real lifesaver...

:: nods :: I'm not talking about just disabling the RAS, though. Hasaku understood, and I think I agree with Kage pretty much... the advantage is that you can multitask while driving as a rigger, the downside is that you lose some of your rigger perks, and probably can only issue extremely rudimentary commands to your drone network. It'd basically be automatic vehicle empathy, cumulative with the edge if you have it.... so in theory partial rigging could allow superior handling, which would be accurate, with the loss of some of your speed... it'd probably be easier to do something else while driving like this too... Overall, how would you model it?

Well there's so many ways to model it depending on exactly where you want the trade-off to fall between vehicle ability and extra-vehicular ability. Before we just go plopping lines down randomly, give us some benchmarks. Some maximums or minimums for vehicle and non-vehicle ability, and we can try to find a good compromise.
Otherwise, everyone will just have their own idea about how much mind should be left for the vehicle and how much should go elsewhere, and we'll all be trying to come to a common decision about an uncommon idea.

:: nods :: I want a consensus, because really, you've already heard my opinion... I'd like to get a codified system built that could serve as a house standard.

So...for the vehicle side of it:
we keep the -VCR level to handling tests.
I'd say we'd have to drop the control pool. Control pool is only for full immersion.
Initiative...still undecited.

For the physical side of it:
We can take other actions. Of course one action per turn must still be dedicated to controlling the vehicle. Nothing's gonna change that.
Combat pool...I'd say somewhere between none to half. Not full.
Initiative...still not sure what to base it off of.

Can we agree on this much, so far?

As for initiative, that's where it really gets tricky. They're not going full rigging speed, since they're not fully rigging, and there's no reason a VCR should give them any kind of bonus to physical actions. Similarly, there's no way they could be going faster than their normal physical reactions, except I could see the vehicle control not counting against them so much.
But would the VCR interfere with their physical reactions?
Maybe use normal physical reaction, one pass has to be used for vehicle control as normal. Maybe say that only one pass can be used for vehicle control, and that no other vehicle tests can be made (except for crash tests). That way someone with MBW4 and a VCR1 (nevermind how) can't take extra vehicle actions when partial rigging. I could also definitely see a penalty to initiative, if it's felt necessary.

Honestly, I really don't see the problem with letting a rigger tone down their VCR and just use it for a small edge. If you've spent 5 essence on a VCR3 and all you want to use it for is -3 handling, with no control pool or super rigger speed, who am I to complain?

So how 'bout this:
Normal physical initiative.
Vehicle:
1 complex action dedicated to controlling the vehicle or make a crash test as usual. The only exception here is that it is exactly 1 complex action, instead of at least 1.
No control pool.
No sensors.
Physical:
Half combat pool.

Sound playable? Not horribly unbalanced?

So basically this would be like a trode unit for rigging?
Methinks this a promising avenue of thought and that similar penalties and limitations would be appropriate here.

Not at all. you'd still need a full hot link, perhaps even more so... this is just rules for partial or extremely limited immersion, or piloting a vehicle that requires some physical input while still rigging it.

<bump>
I really would like to get some rules sketched out..?

I would say just use the rules for driveing by datajack, with the handling mod from the VCR. I have a character with pretty much the same problem. He has an open-cockpit aircraft, and likes to be 'awake' when he's flying in it.

I really think that init boost should be good for *something* though. Maybe let him have extra driving actions for any extra init passes he would have had if he were in the machine?

maybe, but I kinda like Kage's suggestion, which would be useful... there's so many ways to handle it... we need to do some play testing.

Hang on... Doesn't the VCR function by translating the rigger's movement impluses into vechile movement? I remember that being the main reason for the RAS, or am I wrong here?

:: laughs :: I seriously hope you're wrong, otherwise we've just screwed a buncha riggers.

the only vehicle this applies to is motorcycles, which can drive themselves if they have a gyro installed. I rule that the VCR can make the rigger hand on if he's riding a vehicle that requires it, like a motorcycle. He's still fully rigging he just doesn't fall off.

Simple, Not complicated.

I agree with simple not complex. Why not use Datajack rules but give an extra +1 reaction bonus per level of VCR (no extra dice). Remove the control pool, apply a +2 target mod to all actions preformed other than vehicle control, require a complex action per combat turn to control the vehicle and call that good?

:: nods :: seconded.

Essentially what I suggested.

~J

this sounds right and we've got a fair consensus.