[Trillinon]

In my efforts to finally come to grips with the rules, I'm rereading the core rulebook, taking notes like I'm in college again. I figured, while I was at it, I'd take notes on anything I thought could use another look by the errata team. Anything that tripped me up, or has confused my players, or could just be improved without a massive effort.

I'll post these as I go along. I can't promise that I'll complete the whole book, though.


Chapter: Shadowrun Concepts

SUCCESS TESTS CHART
Shouldn't this be on the page with Success Tests? That's where I'd look for it.

OPPOSED TESTS

• The example of an opposed test shows an example where both opponents are using the same skill. It should also provide an example of two different skills, as that is the more common case.
• Who wins ties?

EXTENDED TESTS

• The extended test thresholds don't scale in the same manner as the success test thresholds. In the past, it was always the simple test threshold times three. Probably intentional, but who wants to remember two patterns?
• In the following line: "To simulate this, with each successive roll on an Extended test, players should remove one die from their dice pool. Eventually they’ll have no dice left, and the test will be over." The word should implies that this isn't mandatory, or that there are situations where this isn't true.
• The page feels jumbled. The small bit about Extended Tests & Glitches is at the bottom of the next column.
• The note on rounding is just hanging out at the bottom of the Extended Tests page. There has to be a better place for it.
• The Task names for Extended Tests Intervals (in the chart) aren't very useful. Examples might be better. I know they haven't changed since previous editions, but they could be rethought. Also, I think the 30 minute and 10 minute intervals should be merged into a 15 minute interval to match the progression of Overwatch Score. Here's a rough example of what could be done:

Examples	Interval
Picking a lock, building a dice tower	1 combat turn
Setting up equipment, writing an email	1 minute
Cooking a meal, assembling furniture	15 minutes
Researching a subject, eating a jawbreaker	1 hour
Building or Repairing a vehicle or drone, cleaning the garage	1 day
Writing simple software, remodeling a house	1 week
Building a house, writing a novel, writing complex software	1 month

[Reaver]

There are times when the extended test pool can be refreshed with resting.

Such as when their isn't a strict time limit.

For example: Bob the rigger got is car shot up on the last run and decides to fix it himself. But, Bob doesn't have an other job coming up for a couple of weeks. After the GM has set the interval, Bob gets started, as rolls his dice pool, noting his successes And subtracting a die each at each interval. After 5 rolls, Bob has fixed half the damage to the car when a buddy asks for his help.... Bob goes and helps his buddy, gets a good night's sleep and starts again the next day. (Due to the rest, his pool has refreshed).

However, if Bob needed his car in 3 days, he might not have enough time to take a break to refresh his dice pool.... in which case the damage to the car was beyond his ability to fix in such a limited time (but he probably does fix some of the damage.... just not all).


Overwatch only applies to matrix actions. And then only for illegal matrix actions like Sleaze or Attack.

[忍]

Examples	Interval
Writing simple software	1 week
writing complex software	1 month

I think this may be a bit of an exaggeration. Coding can be vary in length based on what it is you're making. Something like a common program would have a day interval in my mind.

[Trillinon]

There are times when the extended test pool can be refreshed with resting.

Such as when their isn't a strict time limit.

For example: Bob the rigger got is car shot up on the last run and decides to fix it himself. But, Bob doesn't have an other job coming up for a couple of weeks. After the GM has set the interval, Bob gets started, as rolls his dice pool, noting his successes And subtracting a die each at each interval. After 5 rolls, Bob has fixed half the damage to the car when a buddy asks for his help.... Bob goes and helps his buddy, gets a good night's sleep and starts again the next day. (Due to the rest, his pool has refreshed).

However, if Bob needed his car in 3 days, he might not have enough time to take a break to refresh his dice pool.... in which case the damage to the car was beyond his ability to fix in such a limited time (but he probably does fix some of the damage.... just not all).

Do you have a reference for that? It doesn't say anything about that in the description of Extended Tests.

Overwatch only applies to matrix actions. And then only for illegal matrix actions like Sleaze or Attack.

That is correct. What I'm saying is, because 15 minutes is a time period used for tracking Overwatch score in the matrix, lets have other time periods within the mechanics also use 15 minutes. 10 and 30 minute intervals are both
close enough that we could merge them into a single 15 minute interval, making the game just a little simpler and more consistent.

I think this may be a bit of an exaggeration. Coding can be vary in length based on what it is you're making. Something like a common program would have a day interval in my mind.

Sure. It varies. The stuff I work on tends toward the kind of thing that would take a team a few months. But individual features would be measured in days. Either way, it's just an example to convey my thinking on how to describe intervals.

[PiXeL01]

It's noted here and there that Defenders wins ties

[jim1701]

It's noted here and there that Defenders wins ties

Except for touch attacks IIRC.

[Trillinon]

It's noted here and there that Defenders wins ties

That's not entirely true. In an attack, a tie is a grazing hit.

My point isn't that I don't know the rule, but that the section on opposed tests doesn't describe the rule, and it seems to me that it should.

[Kiirnodel]

Trillinon is right, it doesn't really declare what happens on ties. At the very least it could make a comment like "See individual uses for what happens when one wins, loses, or ties during an opposed test.

But then again, you could just take the term "tie" at face value. There are a couple of instances where it specifically says who wins and who loses on a tie, but otherwise it could just be that nobody won. For example, when I'm running Matrix related tests (specifically Attack/Sleaze actions), on a tie, nothing happens. The enemy didn't win, so they don't get the advantage, and the character didn't win either so they don't get what they were trying to do. There are a lot of cases where ties can totally be a third option between one side winning and the other.

[Quatar]

The way I always understand it:

Opposed tests means two people roll. One is the attacker, one is the defender. No matter if it's an actual attack, can work in social rolls too, or anything, it's just a terminology. I just can't think of any better ones right now.
The attacker is the one who actively attempts to do something. The defender is the one who reacts to this attempt (and usually tries to work against it and prevent it).

Hits the defender rolls, are subtracted from the hits of the attacker. The result are the net hits.
On a tie both parties rolled the same number. Net hits are therefore 0.

In almost every case you fail what you were trying if you don't get at least 1 net hit. So you failed to do what you wanted to do. Or the defender won the roll.

There are some corner cases, the actual attack has been mentioned. But even here you failed. You wanted to shoot him in the face. You didn't. You manage to graze his earlobe or something. With certain ammo, that still does something, but that's a property of the ammo really. If you're using regular bullets or APDS, nothing happens. The attack you tried to do failed.

TL;DR: Ties go to the defender unless otherwise stated.

[Trillinon]

The way I always understand it:

Opposed tests means two people roll. One is the attacker, one is the defender. No matter if it's an actual attack, can work in social rolls too, or anything, it's just a terminology. I just can't think of any better ones right now.
The attacker is the one who actively attempts to do something. The defender is the one who reacts to this attempt (and usually tries to work against it and prevent it).

Hits the defender rolls, are subtracted from the hits of the attacker. The result are the net hits.
On a tie both parties rolled the same number. Net hits are therefore 0.

In almost every case you fail what you were trying if you don't get at least 1 net hit. So you failed to do what you wanted to do. Or the defender won the roll.

There are some corner cases, the actual attack has been mentioned. But even here you failed. You wanted to shoot him in the face. You didn't. You manage to graze his earlobe or something. With certain ammo, that still does something, but that's a property of the ammo really. If you're using regular bullets or APDS, nothing happens. The attack you tried to do failed.

TL;DR: Ties go to the defender unless otherwise stated.

That could be a rational ruling, based on the majority of circumstances. Of course, there isn't always a clear attacking character. In a tug of war, a tie would likely mean that neither side moved.

It's worth noting that Shadowrun Anarchy is clear on this, and is the opposite. The acting character always wins ties. The defending character's roll essentially sets the Threshold for the acting character. The acting character has to meet or exceed.

Either would be fine rulings for SR5.