Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: NightRain <nightrain@***.BRISNET.ORG.AU>
Subject: Rigger 2 Questions
Date: Fri, 7 Nov 1997 09:50:33 +1000
I finally got my mitts on a copy of Rigger 2. I've read through it once,
and I'm now re-reading it again, to clear up the details. But I have some
questions that I could find no answers to.

1) They mention that stress points can be reduced by giving a maintenance
overhaul and spending 50¥ for each point they want to lose. But how long
does it take? They never mention this anywhere that I have found. Anyone
have the answer or any ideas?

2) In the description of Control Pool, it makes no mention of the fact that
you need a VCR to get a control pool. It says that it equals your reaction
plus and bonuses from your VCR, but not that you have to have one. Some
tests mention that you can only spend control pool points on that
particular test if you have a VCR, but others don't mention anything. Is
this deliberate or an oversight, or have I missed something somewhere?

3) I think (though I am not sure I have the right person) that J. Keith
Henry had written up some rules for subsystem damage, instead of using the
condition monitor. Any chance you could repost it in it's full, unabridged
and complete form?

Thanks,

NightRain.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
|The universe is a big place, and whatever happens, you will not be missed|
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

EMAIL : nightrain@***.brisnet.org.au
: macey@***.brisnet.org.au
ICQ : 2587947
Message no. 2
From: Barbie <barbie@**********.COM>
Subject: Re: Rigger 2 Questions
Date: Fri, 7 Nov 1997 01:58:15 -0500
At 06-Nov-97 wrote NightRain:



>1) They mention that stress points can be reduced by giving a maintenanc=
e
>overhaul and spending 50¥ for each point they want to lose. But how l=
ong
>does it take? They never mention this anywhere that I have found. Anyo=
ne
>have the answer or any ideas?

No, haven`t found it.
Since this is supposed to be a minor overhaul I would say that the base t=
ime
is stress points in hours with a TN# of 2 plus stress points.


>2) In the description of Control Pool, it makes no mention of the fact t=
hat
>you need a VCR to get a control pool. It says that it equals your react=
ion
>plus and bonuses from your VCR, but not that you have to have one. Some=

>tests mention that you can only spend control pool points on that
>particular test if you have a VCR, but others don't mention anything. I=
s
>this deliberate or an oversight, or have I missed something somewhere?

Just a little further on the page under _The vehicle control rig_

A Vehicle control rig gives the rigger a control pool,.....




-- =


Barbie
---------------------------------------------------------------
Evil Overlord advice #50:

My main computers will have their own special operating system
that will be completely incompatible with standard IBM and
Macintosh powerbooks.

http://www.amigaworld.com/barbie
FAQ keeper of SR_D, the german Shadowrun mailing list.
Amiga RC5 Team effort member.
---------------------------------------------------------------
Message no. 3
From: David Buehrer <dbuehrer@******.CARL.ORG>
Subject: Re: Rigger 2 Questions
Date: Fri, 7 Nov 1997 08:44:18 -0700
NightRain wrote:
/
/ 1) They mention that stress points can be reduced by giving a maintenance
/ overhaul and spending 50¥ for each point they want to lose. But how long
/ does it take? They never mention this anywhere that I have found. Anyone
/ have the answer or any ideas?

I'd guess at an hour per point.

/ 2) In the description of Control Pool, it makes no mention of the fact that
/ you need a VCR to get a control pool. It says that it equals your reaction
/ plus and bonuses from your VCR, but not that you have to have one.

Uh... ?

/ 3) I think (though I am not sure I have the right person) that J. Keith
/ Henry had written up some rules for subsystem damage, instead of using the
/ condition monitor. Any chance you could repost it in it's full, unabridged
/ and complete form?

That was me. I've sent a copy to Nightrain directly.

-David
--
"Creativity is allowing yourself to make mistakes. Art is knowing
which ones to keep."
--
http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/1068/homepage.htm
Message no. 4
From: Jon Szeto <JonSzeto@***.COM>
Subject: Re: Rigger 2 Questions
Date: Fri, 7 Nov 1997 11:06:21 -0500
In a message dated 97-11-07 02:39:50 EST, NightRain writes:

> 1) They mention that stress points can be reduced by giving a maintenance
> overhaul and spending 50¥ for each point they want to lose. But how long
> does it take? They never mention this anywhere that I have found. Anyone
> have the answer or any ideas?

I'd say overhaul time spends eight work hours times the number of Stress
Points, divided by the number of successes. While it doesn't take as much
gruntwork to fix stress, it takes a lot of time looking for the hidden signs
indicative of stress. YMMV.

> 2) In the description of Control Pool, it makes no mention of the fact
that
> you need a VCR to get a control pool. It says that it equals your
reaction
> plus and bonuses from your VCR, but not that you have to have one. Some
> tests mention that you can only spend control pool points on that
> particular test if you have a VCR, but others don't mention anything. Is
> this deliberate or an oversight, or have I missed something somewhere?

You must have a VCR to have a Control Pool.

-- Jon
Message no. 5
From: NightRain <nightrain@***.BRISNET.ORG.AU>
Subject: Re: Rigger 2 Questions
Date: Sat, 8 Nov 1997 09:12:31 +1000
Jon Szeto wrote:
>> 1) They mention that stress points can be reduced by giving a
maintenance
>> overhaul and spending 50¥ for each point they want to lose. But how
long
>> does it take? They never mention this anywhere that I have found.
Anyone
>> have the answer or any ideas?
>
>I'd say overhaul time spends eight work hours times the number of Stress
>Points, divided by the number of successes. While it doesn't take as much
>gruntwork to fix stress, it takes a lot of time looking for the hidden
signs
>indicative of stress. YMMV.

Well, I guess that's how I'll work it then, as you are in the position to
know best :)

NightRain.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
|The universe is a big place, and whatever happens, you will not be missed|
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

EMAIL : nightrain@***.brisnet.org.au
: macey@***.brisnet.org.au
ICQ : 2587947
Message no. 6
From: NightRain <nightrain@***.BRISNET.ORG.AU>
Subject: Re: Rigger 2 Questions
Date: Sat, 8 Nov 1997 16:45:06 +1000
David wrote:
>/ 2) In the description of Control Pool, it makes no mention of the fact
that
>/ you need a VCR to get a control pool. It says that it equals your
reaction
>/ plus and bonuses from your VCR, but not that you have to have one.
>Uh... ?

Well put.

NightRain.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
|The universe is a big place, and whatever happens, you will not be missed|
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

EMAIL : nightrain@***.brisnet.org.au
: macey@***.brisnet.org.au
ICQ : 2587947
Message no. 7
From: Zebulin Magby <zebulingod@*****.COM>
Subject: Rigger 2 Questions
Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 14:15:40 -0700
Just going through my Rigger 2 again and I noticed something odd. In
the vehicle cutomization area in the back, several of the "upgrades"
are harder to accomplish if you have better handling. (Example: CMC's
TN# is 10-Handling, Autonav is 8-Handling...) Just wondering why this
is. I would have thought that the better handling you had, the easier
it would be for some of these things. Anyone have any ideas or thoughts?


Zebulin
_________________________________________________________
DO YOU YAHOO!?
Get your free @*****.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
Message no. 8
From: Lady Jestyr <jestyr@*******.COM.AU>
Subject: Re: Rigger 2 Questions
Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 08:32:52 +1000
>Just going through my Rigger 2 again and I noticed something odd. In
>the vehicle cutomization area in the back, several of the "upgrades"
>are harder to accomplish if you have better handling. (Example: CMC's
>TN# is 10-Handling, Autonav is 8-Handling...) Just wondering why this
>is. I would have thought that the better handling you had, the easier
>it would be for some of these things. Anyone have any ideas or thoughts?

I'd imagine that it's that way because the better your handling is, the
more precisely the steering is adjusted, etc, the more effort you have to
put in when modifying the car to make sure you don't wreck the handling.

Lady Jestyr

- In the force if Yoda's so strong, then construct a sentence -
- with words in the proper order why can't he? -
- jestyr@*******.com.au URL: http://www.geocities.com/~jestyr -
Message no. 9
From: "D. Ghost" <dghost@****.COM>
Subject: Re: Rigger 2 Questions
Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 18:42:56 -0500
On Sun, 18 Oct 1998 08:32:52 +1000 Lady Jestyr <jestyr@*******.COM.AU>
writes:
>>Just going through my Rigger 2 again and I noticed something odd. In
>>the vehicle cutomization area in the back, several of the "upgrades"
>>are harder to accomplish if you have better handling. (Example: CMC's
>>TN# is 10-Handling, Autonav is 8-Handling...) Just wondering why this
>>is. I would have thought that the better handling you had, the easier
>>it would be for some of these things. Anyone have any ideas or
>thoughts?

>I'd imagine that it's that way because the better your handling is, the
>more precisely the steering is adjusted, etc, the more effort you have
to
>put in when modifying the car to make sure you don't wreck the handling.

Well that and you probably have to duplicate the quality of the original
handling.

With Autonav the T# is probably due the requirements of a system that can
handle the really good handling ratings. (ie, if you have Drive-by-Wire
driving your handling down 1, you need to set up the autonav to be able
to interface with the Drive-By-Wire and generally be able to detect and
respond to the more sensitive controls.)

On that note, how about applying a modifier to driving tests equal to
+7-Handling-Driver's Skill. This cannot reduce the target number (Ie,
the modifier is never less than +0)

Why, you ask?

Because as it stands, the more responsive a vehicle is, the easier it is
handle even if you (In "real" life) are not skilled enough to handle it.


This means, your average person (Skill 3) driving a Westwind (Handling 3)
has a +1 modifier (+7-3-3=+1) but on a Suzuki Aurora Racing Bike has a
modifier of +1 (+7-2-3=+2).

I think it's appropriate for it to require a professional (Skill rating
5, see SR3 page 98) driver to take full advantage (ie, suffer no penalty)
of a racing bike.

Instead of the above formula, you can replace Driver's skill with
Reaction. I would reccomend using the lower of the two.

--
D. Ghost
(aka Pixel, Tantrum, RuPixel)
"Coffee without caffeine is like sex without the spanking." -- Cupid

___________________________________________________________________
You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail.
Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com
or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]
Message no. 10
From: Micheal Feeney <Starrngr@***.COM>
Subject: Re: Rigger 2 Questions
Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 00:45:55 EDT
In a message dated 98-10-17 17:13:13 EDT, you write:

<< (Example: CMC's
TN# is 10-Handling, Autonav is 8-Handling...) Just wondering why this
is. I would have thought that the better handling you had, the easier
it would be for some of these things. Anyone have any ideas or thoughts?
>>

Thats easy... The better handling of a system, the closer the tolerances,
etc, and the more work you have to do to get the system to integrate (both
space wise and functionality).
Message no. 11
From: "L.X.R." <AlexR@***.DE>
Subject: Rigger 2 Questions
Date: Sun, 1 Nov 1998 14:28:31 +0100
I just bought Rigger 2 and I really like it. In my opinion it clears up many
questions however it also created new ones. Here are some of my questions. I
would be very pleased if you could help me a little bit:

I. Vehicle Skills and Defaulting [p. 12,R2]
Is the half-modifier rule still valid in SR3? (halving the TN modifiers in
the default table on p.85,SR3)

II. There are lots of concentrations and specializations mentioned in
R2(Eletronic Warfare Concentration, Non-Matrix Programming Spec, Vehicle
Stealth Spec, Vehicle Tactis Spec,...). How do I handle them in SR3? Am I
allowed to default (e.g. Stealth -> Vehicle Stealth Spec,) if
I want to use that skill or must I have that specific specialization?

III. When does the Vehicle Stealth Spec (VSS) apply? Hiding is a vehicle
action during vehicle combat and the rigger uses his Driving Skill (p.
144,SR3) to make that action. So what is the VSS good for?

IV. Performing standard actions during combat (p. 134,SR3): What's the
modifier for a VCR? a) -VCR Rating b) -(VCR Rating x 2) (I guess b) )
Does the "Stressful situation" modifier apply? What happens if the autonav
is turned on? Does the rigger just loose the extra dice or is the TN also
modified (see Vehicle Actions, p. 141 f, SR3)?

V. Flux Rating p. 137, SR3: "...round down to the nearest half, instead of
the of to the nearest whole number."? I don't get that. So what is the
corresponding range of, for example, a Flux Rating of 5.5 ?

VI. ECM/ECCM (p. 138, SR3): Do I have to make an ECM/ECCM Test every time
the opponent makes a sensor test (to detect, aim or lock on) or just when I
switch on these devices and the result is then valid for the whole encounter
(If not, there would be alot of dice rolling during combat if each side uses
sensor-enhanced gunnery and missle combat!)?

VII. Missile Combat (p. 59 f, R2): Indirect Fire (p.60) "The spotter rolls a
number of dice....plus half the Sensor Rating of the missile"? What's the
Sensor Rating of the missile? The sensor rating of the firing vehicle
probably. I didn't get the Indirect Fire rules anyway. I try to explain as I
understand missile/indirect fire combat. Please correct me if I'm wrong:

There are two ways to fire a missile. Either direct with a successful lock
of the attacker (continuous or fire-and-forget) or indirect with a target
designator. If I fire the missile direct it's always an Area-Effekt attack
and I use the Vehicle Sensor Only row on the Area-Effect TN Table. The
attack does not scatter (BTW am I allowed to use combat pool dice for this
direct attack?).
If I make the attack with a helping target designator, first the spotter
makes an indirect fire test. If the spooter fails I can still make an
area-effect attack (I again use the Vehicle Sensor Only row to determine the
target number). If the spotter makes successfull target lock and can
maintain the lock until the end of the turn when the missile strikes the
attacker makes a Missile Attack Test (TN is the modified signature of the
target). Finally the attacker rolls for scatter. If the spotter cannot
maintain the lock the TN for the Missile Attack Test is calculated as if the
spotter had used a Radar Designator and the attacker rolls for scatter.

Maybe it's because of my bad english or it's because I'm stupid anyway I am
very confused!
Message no. 12
From: Brian Wong <rook@*****.INFINEX.COM>
Subject: Re: Rigger 2 Questions
Date: Mon, 2 Nov 1998 13:41:54 -0800
Hello;

In the back of your SR3 book it has a section on how to deal with all
the old books. It states that anytime Rigger 2 and SR3 differ; use SR3. It
then goes on to discuss several other points between the two books.

--
Rook ¿Õ ¿ë ±â WebRPG Town Hall Magistrate
townhall.webrpg.com <0){{{{><
__ Super WebRing http://orion.supersoldiers.com/heroes/webring.html
/.)\ http://www.infinex.com/~rook/SH/SHlinks.html Super Hero Links
\(@/ http://www.infinex.com/~rook/SH/ Super Hero RPG Site
Message no. 13
From: K in the Shadows <Ereskanti@***.COM>
Subject: Re: Rigger 2 Questions
Date: Tue, 3 Nov 1998 01:53:33 EST
In a message dated 11/2/1998 3:16:01 PM US Eastern Standard Time, AlexR@***.DE
writes:

> I just bought Rigger 2 and I really like it. In my opinion it clears up many
> questions however it also created new ones. Here are some of my questions.
I
> would be very pleased if you could help me a little bit:

You are not alone in those feelings....

> I. Vehicle Skills and Defaulting [p. 12,R2]
> Is the half-modifier rule still valid in SR3? (halving the TN modifiers in
> the default table on p.85,SR3)

I would most definitely say yes, as the rules in SR3, if they do change a
previous ruling or addendum said rules in some manner do have a priority.

> II. There are lots of concentrations and specializations mentioned in
> R2(Eletronic Warfare Concentration, Non-Matrix Programming Spec, Vehicle
> Stealth Spec, Vehicle Tactis Spec,...). How do I handle them in SR3? Am I
> allowed to default (e.g. Stealth -> Vehicle Stealth Spec,) if
> I want to use that skill or must I have that specific specialization?

Ewww, ick. I would handle them just like the "specializations" in SR3
personally. I still have a personal problem with the Stealth to Vehicle
Stealth thing.

> III. When does the Vehicle Stealth Spec (VSS) apply? Hiding is a vehicle
> action during vehicle combat and the rigger uses his Driving Skill (p.
> 144,SR3) to make that action. So what is the VSS good for?

During the positioning phase.

> IV. Performing standard actions during combat (p. 134,SR3): What's the
> modifier for a VCR? a) -VCR Rating b) -(VCR Rating x 2) (I guess b) )
> Does the "Stressful situation" modifier apply? What happens if the autonav
> is turned on? Does the rigger just loose the extra dice or is the TN also
> modified (see Vehicle Actions, p. 141 f, SR3)?

Modifier is, as per SR3, Rating x 1 if in a non-stressed situation, and rating
x 2 in a stressed/combative one. Please note, that the Autopilot gives bonus
dice in non-stressed/non-combative situations, while in it increases the
handling target number by it's rating in stressed/combative ones. The dice
are not reduced in the latter event.

> V. Flux Rating p. 137, SR3: "...round down to the nearest half, instead of
> the of to the nearest whole number."? I don't get that. So what is the
> corresponding range of, for example, a Flux Rating of 5.5 ?

How do you wind up with a fractional flux rating anyway? I must have missed
this one.

> VI. ECM/ECCM (p. 138, SR3): Do I have to make an ECM/ECCM Test every time
> the opponent makes a sensor test (to detect, aim or lock on) or just when I
> switch on these devices and the result is then valid for the whole
encounter
> (If not, there would be alot of dice rolling during combat if each side
uses
> sensor-enhanced gunnery and missle combat!)?

You make the test whenever the GM says to do so. If you wind up with a rigger
heavy adventure (VERY RARE), then the actions you are questioning would come
more often IMO (as it would get more players involved potentially).

> VII. Missile Combat (p. 59 f, R2): Indirect Fire (p.60) "The spotter rolls
a
> number of dice....plus half the Sensor Rating of the missile"? What's the
> Sensor Rating of the missile? The sensor rating of the firing vehicle
> probably. I didn't get the Indirect Fire rules anyway. I try to explain as
I
> understand missile/indirect fire combat. Please correct me if I'm wrong:

IF the missile listed does not have a sensor rating, then it has no additional
dice to add.

> There are two ways to fire a missile. Either direct with a successful lock
> of the attacker (continuous or fire-and-forget) or indirect with a target
> designator. If I fire the missile direct it's always an Area-Effekt attack
> and I use the Vehicle Sensor Only row on the Area-Effect TN Table. The
> attack does not scatter (BTW am I allowed to use combat pool dice for this
> direct attack?).
> If I make the attack with a helping target designator, first the spotter
> makes an indirect fire test. If the spooter fails I can still make an
> area-effect attack (I again use the Vehicle Sensor Only row to determine
the
> target number). If the spotter makes successfull target lock and can
> maintain the lock until the end of the turn when the missile strikes the
> attacker makes a Missile Attack Test (TN is the modified signature of the
> target). Finally the attacker rolls for scatter. If the spotter cannot
> maintain the lock the TN for the Missile Attack Test is calculated as if
the
> spotter had used a Radar Designator and the attacker rolls for scatter.
>
> Maybe it's because of my bad english or it's because I'm stupid anyway I am
> very confused!

I doubt you are stupid, as those are really good questions. Maybe Mike B. or
Jon Szeto will get involved with this latter paragraph. It's late for me, and
I'm not really wanting to get that detailed.

Sorry

-K
Message no. 14
From: Gurth <gurth@******.NL>
Subject: Re: Rigger 2 Questions
Date: Tue, 3 Nov 1998 11:00:32 +0100
According to L.X.R., at 14:28 on 1 Nov 98, the word on the street was...

> I. Vehicle Skills and Defaulting [p. 12,R2]
> Is the half-modifier rule still valid in SR3? (halving the TN modifiers in
> the default table on p.85,SR3)

I'd say it is, just in slightly modified form.

> II. There are lots of concentrations and specializations mentioned in
> R2(Eletronic Warfare Concentration, Non-Matrix Programming Spec, Vehicle
> Stealth Spec, Vehicle Tactis Spec,...). How do I handle them in SR3? Am I
> allowed to default (e.g. Stealth -> Vehicle Stealth Spec,) if
> I want to use that skill or must I have that specific specialization?

The whole point of defaulting in Shadowrun is that you can use skills you
don't have that way, so I would say you're allowed to default if you want
to use a specialization like Stealth (Vehicles) but you only have the
general Stealth skill.

> III. When does the Vehicle Stealth Spec (VSS) apply? Hiding is a vehicle
> action during vehicle combat and the rigger uses his Driving Skill (p.
> 144,SR3) to make that action. So what is the VSS good for?

The way I see it, "hiding" during combat is intended to get you away from
the opponent, while the Vehicle Stealth specialization is used for things
like tailing people outside of combat.

> IV. Performing standard actions during combat (p. 134,SR3): What's the
> modifier for a VCR? a) -VCR Rating b) -(VCR Rating x 2) (I guess b) )

The modifier in combat situations is twice the VCR rating.

> Does the "Stressful situation" modifier apply?

SR3 says combat is a stressful situation (in the explanation for Stressful
Situations on page 134), but I would apply it based on what exactly is
going on -- if you're doing "normal" combat driving I most likely wouldn't
apply one, but if your car if carrying a bomb that goes off when the car
gets banged around, a modifier would be added.

> What happens if the autonav is turned on?

That does not seem to matter for normal driving; for special situations,
like ramming or hiding, refer to the appropriate sections of Rigger 2
and/or SR3.

> Does the rigger just loose the extra dice or is the TN also modified
> (see Vehicle Actions, p. 141 f, SR3)?

You don't lose dice for having an active autopilot; only the TN is
modified (whether it goes up or down depends on what you're trying to do
with your vehicle).

> V. Flux Rating p. 137, SR3: "...round down to the nearest half, instead of
> the of to the nearest whole number."? I don't get that. So what is the
> corresponding range of, for example, a Flux Rating of 5.5 ?

That one puzzles me as well. Perhaps it's the average of the range for
Flux 5 and Flux 6? (Jon, if you're reading this, could you help out?)

> VI. ECM/ECCM (p. 138, SR3): Do I have to make an ECM/ECCM Test every time
> the opponent makes a sensor test (to detect, aim or lock on) or just when I
> switch on these devices and the result is then valid for the whole encounter
> (If not, there would be alot of dice rolling during combat if each side uses
> sensor-enhanced gunnery and missle combat!)?

I think the fastest way to do this is to make one ECM test at the moment
the ECM is switched on, and write down the results. Then, every time
sensors are encountered, compare the sensors' rolls with the ones written
down for the ECM. (With some players you might have to make this test
outside of their field of vision, to prevent them from switching the ECM
on and off until they get rolls they're satisfied with.)

> VII. Missile Combat (p. 59 f, R2): Indirect Fire (p.60) "The spotter rolls a
> number of dice....plus half the Sensor Rating of the missile"? What's the
> Sensor Rating of the missile? The sensor rating of the firing vehicle
> probably.

Probably, yes.

> I didn't get the Indirect Fire rules anyway. I try to explain as I
> understand missile/indirect fire combat. Please correct me if I'm
> wrong:
>
> There are two ways to fire a missile. Either direct with a successful lock
> of the attacker (continuous or fire-and-forget) or indirect with a target
> designator. If I fire the missile direct it's always an Area-Effekt attack
> and I use the Vehicle Sensor Only row on the Area-Effect TN Table. The
> attack does not scatter

Where do you get the idea that it's always an area-effect attack if you
fire the missile direct? I can't find that in Rigger 2 myself.

> (BTW am I allowed to use combat pool dice for this direct attack?).

I don't think so, as it does not say so in Rigger 2 when it sums up which
dice to roll.

> If I make the attack with a helping target designator, first the spotter
> makes an indirect fire test. If the spooter fails I can still make an
> area-effect attack (I again use the Vehicle Sensor Only row to determine the
> target number). If the spotter makes successfull target lock and can
> maintain the lock until the end of the turn when the missile strikes the
> attacker makes a Missile Attack Test (TN is the modified signature of the
> target). Finally the attacker rolls for scatter. If the spotter cannot
> maintain the lock the TN for the Missile Attack Test is calculated as if the
> spotter had used a Radar Designator and the attacker rolls for scatter.

That looks like you've got it right to me.

> Maybe it's because of my bad english or it's because I'm stupid anyway I am
> very confused!

What bad English?

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
Perjury does not include lying if lying is the
only sensible way to get you out of trouble.
-> NERPS Project Leader * ShadowRN GridSec * Unofficial Shadowrun Guru <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/plastic.html <-
-> The New Character Mortuary: http://www.electricferret.com/mortuary/ <-

GC3.1: GAT/! d-(dpu) s:- !a>? C+(++)@ U 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
Message no. 15
From: Jon Szeto <JonSzeto@***.COM>
Subject: Re: Rigger 2 Questions
Date: Wed, 4 Nov 1998 08:20:58 EST
In a message dated 11/2/1998 3:16:01 PM US Eastern Standard Time, AlexR@***.DE
writes:

> I. Vehicle Skills and Defaulting [p. 12,R2]
> Is the half-modifier rule still valid in SR3? (halving the TN modifiers in
> the default table on p.85,SR3)

Yes. The statement is buried in the description of the VCR in the Street Gear
chapter, on p. 301 of SR3.

> V. Flux Rating p. 137, SR3: "...round down to the nearest half, instead of
> the of to the nearest whole number."? I don't get that. So what is the
> corresponding range of, for example, a Flux Rating of 5.5 ?

In the Situational Range Modifiers Table, one of the listed conditions is
"ECCM in use," which applies a negative modifier equal to the ECCM Rating,
divided by 2 (ECCM/2). Normally, by SR rules of division, whenever you
divide something by something else, you round down the result to the
nearest whole number.

What I had meant, when I said round down to the nearest half, was that when
you divide the ECCM by 2, don't round down the result. So if you were using
Rating 3 ECCM, on the Range Modifiers Table it would provide a modifier of
-1.5.

(There may have been other modifiers which got cut during first editing that
also depended on other Ratings divided by half, which was why the quote
appeared at the beginning of the section, instead of inside the Table Key
Notes right after the paragraph describing ECCM. But I'd have to go look at
my first draft notes, which are ZIPped and stored offline somewhere.)

After you total up all the modifiers and add/substract them to the Flux
Rating, THEN you round the result down to the nearest whole, as per normal
SR rounding rules. So, say you were using the above-mentioned ECCM 3, while
trying to do a sensor sweep with your Sensors operating at Flux 6. If there
are no other applicable modifiers present, your modified Flux, for the
purposes of determining your Sensor's Range, is 6 - 1.5, or 4.5, which
rounds down to 4. So your sensor range, which normally operates up to 12 km
(the appropriate range for Flux 6), drops down to 6 km when you turn your
ECCM on.

The reason behind this rounding by halves, as well as some of the half-
modifiers also found on that table, is that depending on the combination,
some modifiers may have an effect, while others may not. To use the previous
example, say you were doing your sensor sweep on a hot and humid day (-0.5
modifier). If you weren't using ECCM, your modified Flux would be 5.5,
which rounds down to 5 (which drops your range from 12 to 9 km). On the
other hand, if you were using ECCM (-1.5), the total modifier would be
-2 (-1.5 plus -0.5), so your modified Flux would still be 4. In summary,
while humidity had an effect when the ECCM was turned off, it did NOT have
an effect when it was on.

Note that these half-modifiers only apply for the purposes of determining
transmitter (Sensors, ECM, and ED) range. They don't apply when trying to
resolve electronic warfare (such as MIJI).

-- Jon

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about Rigger 2 Questions, you may also be interested in:

Disclaimer

These messages were posted a long time ago on a mailing list far, far away. The copyright to their contents probably lies with the original authors of the individual messages, but since they were published in an electronic forum that anyone could subscribe to, and the logs were available to subscribers and most likely non-subscribers as well, it's felt that re-publishing them here is a kind of public service.

Thwap!