Logs for ShadowRN and Associated Mailing Lists

From:	zebulingod@*******.net (zebulingod)
Subject:	Drone and Final Instructions
Date:	Sun, 14 Mar 2004 00:45:58 -0800

Message no. 1 My player has an issue with the following scenario:

A rigger (Init 36) secretly activates a drone, giving a "Doomsday" order,
knowing she's (probably) about to die. The drone, a Wandjina loaded with
7.62cm aerial rockets, has been told that, on receiving this order, it is to
proceed to fire said ordnance at grid coordinates which follow that message.

The rigger acts on Phase 36, issuing that order with the coordinates.

On Phase 27, she is killed by the group's gun-bunny.

After flying for five minutes, the drone arrives and fires at said
coordinates.

The rockets hit the target they were aimed at (a piece of ground which had,
until very recently contained a GMC MPUV and runners) and explode, in this
case harmlessly.

--

That all being said, the player is upset, to the point where he may not play
for awhile, because he feels that the drone shouldn't have been able to do
that. (I think he's saying that only because he didn't think of it first,
and he's upset that the rigger got one over on him, even though it didn't
actually do anything more than blister the paint on his precious vehicle.)
He says that, if he'd tried something like that, I would have made the drone
crash or something, as soon as the network died.

This situation has never come up before.

My point is this: A tomahawk missile is given instructions to fly to a grid
coordinate and detonate. That's today. A drone in 2061 is more intelligent
than that tomahawk missile. Even if the network goes down, it should be able
to carry out its final instructions.

What say you all? Is the player just being whiney or am I a bad GM?

Zebulin Magby

"Per Ardua ad Astra"

From:	gurth@******.nl (Gurth)
Subject:	Drone and Final Instructions
Date:	Sun, 14 Mar 2004 10:14:38 +0100

Message no. 2 According to zebulingod, on Sunday 14 March 2004 09:45 the word on the
street was...

First, a hint: don't use two dashes on a line to separate paragraphs. Some
mailers mistake them for sigdashes :) Now, let's copy-and-paste what I'm
trying to reply to...

> My point is this: A tomahawk missile is given instructions to fly to a
> grid coordinate and detonate. That's today. A drone in 2061 is more
> intelligent than that tomahawk missile. Even if the network goes down, it
> should be able to carry out its final instructions.
>
> What say you all? Is the player just being whiney or am I a bad GM?

I'd handle it the same way you did: the drone received instructions, and
will attempt to carry them out regardless of whether there is a network
for it to receive orders through or not. Unless, of course, as a safety
precaution drones are programmed to stop what they're doing when the
network disappears -- but that's not nearly as interesting for a game as
having them go on is :)

(BTW, IMHO the difference between an SR drone and a modern-day cruise
missile is that the missile's sole purpose is to fly to a set of
coordinates and blow up, whereas a drone is designed to do whatever it is
the controller wants it to.)

--
Gurth@******.nl - Stone Age: http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
Could it be more truth than fable?
-> Probably NAGEE Editor * ShadowRN GridSec * Triangle Virtuoso <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://plastic.dumpshock.com <-

GC3.12: GAT/! d- s:- !a>? C++(---) UL+ P(+) L++ E W--(++) N o? K w(--)
O V? PS+ PE@ Y PGP- t- 5++ X(+) R+++$ tv+(++) b++@ DI- D+ G+ e h! !r y?
Incubated into the First Church of the Sqooshy Ball, 21-05-1998

From:	maxnoel_fr@*****.fr (Max Noel)
Subject:	Drone and Final Instructions
Date:	Sun, 14 Mar 2004 14:01:52 +0100

Message no. 3 >> My point is this: A tomahawk missile is given instructions to fly to a
>> grid coordinate and detonate. That's today. A drone in 2061 is more
>> intelligent than that tomahawk missile. Even if the network goes
>> down, it
>> should be able to carry out its final instructions.
>>
>> What say you all? Is the player just being whiney or am I a bad GM?
>
> I'd handle it the same way you did: the drone received instructions,
> and
> will attempt to carry them out regardless of whether there is a network
> for it to receive orders through or not. Unless, of course, as a safety
> precaution drones are programmed to stop what they're doing when the
> network disappears -- but that's not nearly as interesting for a game
> as
> having them go on is :)

That's more or less what I would have done too. That's IMO the biggest
problem in the Shadowrun vehicle/drone rules: that weird relationship
between the drone network's initiative and the rigger's. It's full of
holes. A while ago I had written house rules on vehicles and
initiative. (lemme dig out the file...)
If you're interested, here goes... (as usual, C&C are welcome)

Wild_Cat's updated vehicle initiative rules -- for use with Shadowrun,
3rd edition.
v1.0 -- 13/03/2003

Vehicles under direct control, metahuman pilots

Standard SR3 rules seem to be OK here. However, here are a couple of
clarifications:
- Initiative boosters: VCRs and datajacks (virtual dashboard) are the
only "pure" reaction/initiative boosters whose bonuses apply when
driving a vehicle. Other than that, you're stuck with your physical,
unaugmented initiative. Wired/boosted reflexes, reaction enhancers,
synaptic accelerators, spells, the Increased Initiative adept power and
all the rest... None of these apply as long as you're behind the wheel.
However, your reaction is calculated using your modified Intelligence
(always) and Quickness (except when rigging or using the V-dashboard)
ratings. For example, a non-rigger character with a Quickness of 4(7),
an Intelligence of 6(7) and a datajack would have an initiative of
7+1D6 when driving a vehicle with manual controls, and 6+1D6 with the
virtual dashboard.

- The Other Guys In The Vehicle (TM): As stated in SR3, TOGITV(TM)
cannot act before the vehicle's driver during a turn's first pass (no
matter who or what the vehicle's pilot is: characters in an
out-of-control vehicle can't act at all during the first pass of a
turn, aside from moving -- better put someone behind the wheel fast,
chummers!). Of course, this only applies to characters in the physical
plane. Astrally projecting mages, jacked-in deckers and other riggers
are not affected; they're not in their meat bodies after all...

Remote control networks and secondary-mode drones

Okay, that's where the changes actually begin. Captain's Chair mode
can be the source of some major headaches, most of which can be solved
by separating the drone nework's initiative from the "Captain"'s.
That's quite logical as all you do is issuing orders to the network
(you don't really have an influence on how they're carried out), and it
also solves other problems (for example, this way a RC network can
continue to operate even when no one's jacked in the deck...).

In a RC network, actions are synchronized by the remote-control deck.
Thus, a network has a reaction of (Deck Rating), and an initiative of
(Deck Rating) + 2D6. Only roll once for the entire network, ALL the
secondary-mode drones act simultaneously. For simplicity's sake, damage
to the drones does not modify their initiative: they STILL act at the
same pass as the others. Nevertheless, signal degradation (MIJI, etc.)
does affect the network's initiative in the standard SR3 fashion (see
Rigger 3, Sensors & Electronic Warfare). So does physical damage to the
RC deck, although to which extent it does is left to the gamemaster's
appreciation.

A character jacked in a RC deck in the Captain's Chair mode uses his
physical, unaugmented initiative (only Intelligence boosters apply).
Orders he issues take effect at (just before) the network's next
action.
If the character is equipped with a RAS override, he may activate it
with a free action and synchronize himself with the network. For all
intents and purposes, he now has the *exact same* initiative score as
the network, and acts just before it does, meaning that any orders he
issues take effect immediately. This initiative score is not altered by
the character's wounds (once again to keep things simple); however his
wound modifiers apply to the drones' comprehension tests. If the
character de-activates his RAS override or attempts to act in the
physical world, he immediately reverts to his physical unaugmented
initiative until the end of the turn.
(optional) A rigger character, when activating his VCR's RAS override,
may choose to use his rigging reaction and initiative instead of
synching with the network. Standard rigging initiative modifiers apply.
Jacking in or out of a drone (i.e. switching to/out of primary mode) is
still a complex action.

Independent drones (a/k/a "tertiary mode")

The terms "independent drones" and "tertiary mode" refer to drones
that are either not affiliated to an RC network (on the subscriber list
but not under direct control) or not part of a RC network at all.
Whenever a drone loses contact with his network, it automatically
switches to tertiary mode.

When in tertiary mode, drones will either carry out the last order
they were given, find a safe place and enter standby mode, or anything
their programming tells them to do. They may even take direct voice
orders. These "emergency routines" can be modified with a Computer
(Programming) roll (TN and base time depending on the programming's
complexity), but they require physical access to the drone and that the
drone be powered down. Default factory setting on most drones is "carry
out last order, then find a safe place and enter standy mode").
Anyway, while they're still better than autonavs, don't expect
tertiary-mode drones to be nearly as powerful as primary- or
secondary-mode drones. They're on their own, not coordinated, and
there's only so much a pilot program can do... On the bright side,
they're immune to MIJI.

Drones in tertiary mode have a reaction of (Pilot + Sensors) / 2, and
an initiative of ((Pilot + Sensors) / 2) + 1D6, rounded down. All
modifiers apply.

Autonav-driven vehicles

Autonav programs can to some extent drive a vehicle by themselves. An
rating 1 Autonav can't do much aside from following the road and trying
not to crash into other vehicles, but a rating 4 autonav may be able to
actually go from point A to point B without your need, given a detailed
enough map. However, even a rating 1 drone pilot will outperform the
best autonav: going from point A to point B given a detailed enough map
is only a very small part of its programming.
In combat, the main difference between a drone and an autonav-driven
vehicle is that the latter is nothing more than a target. The drone can
warn you of what's happening, evade attacks, find and use alternate
routes (on- or off-road) in an attempt to shake its pursuers and create
maps of the area it's in, all of this in real-time. Oh, it can
counter-attack, too. And you ain't seen true horror until you've seen
an FDDM in action. Whereas the autonav... Well, best-case scenario it
will flash a message on the dashboard saying "Warning: structural
damage occured, source unknown. Please contact a mechanic to repair as
soon as possible."

A vehicle driven solely by its autonav program is capable of exactly
four actions: Accelerate, Decelerate, Turn and Hold Actions. An autonav
does not know it's in combat and will not attempt to do anything
combat-related. It will drive as normally as possible, below the speed
limits (though the program can be hacked to ignore them with a Computer
(Programming) (6) roll, base time of (Autonav Rating) hours), following
all the traffic rules and it will try to avoid colliding with anything.
It will stick to its pre-planned route; when it is not possible, it
will stop (or park, or keep going straight, whichever is the least
dangerous *in a non-combat situation*) and wait for further
instructions.
It has reaction and initiative equal to (Autonav Rating). Nope, no
initiative die. All modifiers apply. If its initiative drops to (or
below) zero, the vehicle will crash at the end of the turn. If a
character can take the controls before this happens, he may prevent the
crash with a crash test as per standard SR3 rules.

Short version:
- Primary-mode drones, normal vehicles: as per SR3 rules
- Drone networks (secondary mode): REA = RC Deck Rating, INIT = RC Deck
Rating + 2D6, drone damage mods don't apply, MIJI mods do
- Captain in his chair: standard REA and INIT, can synchronize to the
network's with a RAS override; riggers can use their rigging REA and
INIT when synched
- Tertiary-mode drones: REA = (Pilot + Sensors) / 2, INIT = ((Pilot +
Sensors)/2) + 1D6
- Autonav: REA = INIT = (Rating). Crash at the end of turn if <= 0

-- Wild_Cat
maxnoel_fr@*****.fr -- ICQ #85274019
"Look at you hacker... A pathetic creature of meat and bone, panting
and sweating as you run through my corridors... How can you challenge a
perfect, immortal machine?"

From:	westiex@********.net (Craig West)
Subject:	Drone and Final Instructions
Date:	Sun, 14 Mar 2004 23:18:26 +1000

Message no. 4 > My point is this: A tomahawk missile is given instructions to fly to a
> grid coordinate and detonate. That's today. A drone in 2061 is more
> intelligent than that tomahawk missile. Even if the network goes down, it
> should be able to carry out its final instructions.
>
> What say you all? Is the player just being whiney or am I a bad GM?

I'd handle it the same way you did: the drone received instructions, and
will attempt to carry them out regardless of whether there is a network
for it to receive orders through or not. Unless, of course, as a safety
precaution drones are programmed to stop what they're doing when the
network disappears -- but that's not nearly as interesting for a game as
having them go on is :)

(BTW, IMHO the difference between an SR drone and a modern-day cruise
missile is that the missile's sole purpose is to fly to a set of
coordinates and blow up, whereas a drone is designed to do whatever it is
the controller wants it to.)
<end quote>

Lets compare the two

Drone - go to cordinates XY and execute programming
Tomahawk - go to cordinates XY and execute programming (IE detonate warhead
when its triggered)

The difference between the two is that the drone is more versitile of the
two and can carry out multiple instructions one after another. It also has
the intelligence to carry out any instructions given its programming set,
such as move to coordinates XY and attack anything that moves (according to
its sensor and the input levels given).

Now, from what I understand of the rules, a rigger can be either in
overwatch mode, which is receiving data and controlling all drones currently
in use (even if at a penalty), or said rigger can go to control a particular
drone. As far as the drone in concern knew, the rigger had simply gone onto
controlling a different drone. It did not receive any countermanding orders,
which I think is the difference.

From:	shane@**************.freeserve.co.uk (Shane Mclean)
Subject:	Drone and Final Instructions
Date:	Sun, 14 Mar 2004 13:32:44 -0000

Message no. 5 >From Gurth:
> (BTW, IMHO the difference between an SR drone and a modern-day cruise
> missile is that the missile's sole purpose is to fly to a set of
> coordinates and blow up, whereas a drone is designed to do whatever it is
> the controller wants it to.)

Granted modern day drones are less sophiticated than SR ones*, but the
British army's current recon drone (Phoenix) will carry on it's last
programmed instruction if it loses it's signal (most of the time - sometimes
it just falls out of the sky), whilst trying to reestablish contact, so SR
drones doing that, and even having conringencies for signal loss, is not
unreasonable. Its all about how sophisticated its dogbrain is, I guess. I
also agree with Zebulin and would have had the drone act like that too.

*= my entry for the obvious statement award 2004....

Shane

From:	ra002585@**.unicamp.br (Bira)
Subject:	Drone and Final Instructions
Date:	Mon, 15 Mar 2004 02:02:47 -0300

Message no. 6 zebulingod wrote:

> My point is this: A tomahawk missile is given instructions to fly to a grid
> coordinate and detonate. That's today. A drone in 2061 is more intelligent
> than that tomahawk missile. Even if the network goes down, it should be able
> to carry out its final instructions.
>
> What say you all? Is the player just being whiney or am I a bad GM?

Your reasoning is correct. I think it even says somewhere that a Pilot 3
drone has the same ability to understand commands as your average metahuman.

You'd have to use the drone's Pilot rating for all tests involved in
flying to the spot and firing the missiles accurately, since it's
operating on its own. Flying there shouldn't be a problem unless there
was some extraordinary obstacle along the way, tough.

Of course, your playes also should be able to do this, and have the same
chance to succeed as any NPC.

--
Bira
http://http://www.shadowlandbr.hpg.com.br/10ki
http://compexplicita.blogspot.com

From:	gurth@******.nl (Gurth)
Subject:	Drone and Final Instructions
Date:	Mon, 15 Mar 2004 10:55:42 +0100

Message no. 7 According to Craig West, on Sunday 14 March 2004 14:18 the word on the
street was...

> Drone - go to cordinates XY and execute programming
> Tomahawk - go to cordinates XY and execute programming (IE detonate
> warhead when its triggered)

Not exactly a very good comparison, is it? By those standards, a bicycle
and a car are the exact same thing, too:

Bicycle - Has wheels, can transports people and goods
Car - Has wheels, can transports people and goods

:)

> The difference between the two is that the drone is more versitile of
> the two and can carry out multiple instructions one after another. It
> also has the intelligence to carry out any instructions given its
> programming set

Which was my point exactly...

--
Gurth@******.nl - Stone Age: http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
Those who ignore history are doomed to keep liking crappy dance
covers of great songs.
-> Probably NAGEE Editor * ShadowRN GridSec * Triangle Virtuoso <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://plastic.dumpshock.com <-

GC3.12: GAT/! d- s:- !a>? C++(---) UL+ P(+) L++ E W--(++) N o? K w(--)
O V? PS+ PE@ Y PGP- t- 5++ X(+) R+++$ tv+(++) b++@ DI- D+ G+ e h! !r y?
Incubated into the First Church of the Sqooshy Ball, 21-05-1998

From:	loneeagle@********.co.uk (Lone Eagle)
Subject:	Drone and Final Instructions
Date:	Mon, 15 Mar 2004 21:00:16 +0000

Message no. 8 At 08:45 AM 3/14/2004, Zebulin wrote:
><Snip>
>than that tomahawk missile. Even if the network goes down, it should be able
>to carry out its final instructions.
>
>What say you all? Is the player just being whiney or am I a bad GM?

A drone issued commands as precise as that on Captain's Chair mode should
fire everything it has using its Pilot(+Sharpshooter Autosoft if
applicable) at the target location. If the rigger was "in the machine"
that's a different matter but your implication is not that the rigger was
"in the machine".
Drone pilots are designed to follow far more complex instructions than that
for the most part, I bet your 'gun bunny' never complained when the rigger
set a Condor to scope out a site for 36 hours...

--
Lone Eagle
"Hold up lads, I got an idea."

www.wyrmtalk.co.uk - Please be patient, this site is under construction

-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.12
GE d++(---) s++: a->? C++(+) US++ P! L E? W++ N o? K? w+ O! M- V? PS+ PE-()
Y PGP? t+@ 5++ X- R+>+++$>* tv b+++ DI++++ D+ G++ e+ h r* y+>+++++
-----END GEEK CODE BLOCK-----

GCC0.2: y75>?.uk[NN] G87 S@:@@[SR] B+++ f+ RM(RR) rm++ rr++ l++(--) m- w
s+(+++) GM+++(-) A GS+(-) h++ LA+++ CG--- F c+

Mailing List Logs for

Further Reading

Disclaimer