From:	"Fikouras Jani (U. of Bremen)" <jfiko@********.PHYSICS.AUTH.GR>
Subject:	Re: vehicle combat question
Date:	Sat, 16 Sep 1995 10:30:13 +0300

>
> On Fri, 15 Sep 1995, Jani Fikouras wrote:
>
> [concerning direct rigger control of a turret-fired weapon]
>
> > Well he still needs to pay pne action per remote turret to keep the
> > turret going. The rest of the riggers actions can be expended to shoot
> > with the turret.
>
> Aaaaaarrrrgh! No, he doesn't. A turret is *not* a vehicle. A
> turret is *not* a drone. It is treated as such *only* for purposes of how
> many a rigger can control.

The rigger can control remotely as many vehicles as he has ports in his remote
control deck. I don't think that the rigger has to connect his turret to the
control deck in order to use it. So why does the turret count one less to the
vehicles he can control.

> Now apply this to a turret. If you don't spend an action to
> control your turret, it would just have to make a crash test. But what
> is a turret going to crash into? Hence, the rigger does *not* spend an
> action to control a turret.

The turret doesn't have to crash, just simply if the rigger doesn't spend
a complex action to control it he doesn't get to fire with it.


--Nick


"Tonight, hell sends an Angel bearing gifts"
the Crow.