[acolyte99]

About the subquestion:
In SR4 the Motorcycle Gyro Stabilization Modification was published in Arsenal and not contained in the core rulebook. It will probably be the same with SR5. This modification allowed the bike to stay upright, when your body went limp because you were in VR (or dead).
By the way in SR4 driving in VR was not the same as being jumped in. You could "remote-control" your vehicle (and even do that if you were in it; you didn't have to be remote) while in VR. Think of your persona being in a VR "room" full of control interfaces for the vehicle that you can move with your thoughts. It's not being the vehicle (jumped-in), but better than having only a steering wheel and a few pedals.
I think this kind of VR-control is still there in SR5 page 256:

Remote control is the result of the Control Device action (p. 238),

as one of the four ways to steer a vehicle.

[Csjarrat]

About the subquestion:
In SR4 the Motorcycle Gyro Stabilization Modification was published in Arsenal and not contained in the core rulebook. It will probably be the same with SR5. This modification allowed the bike to stay upright, when your body went limp because you were in VR (or dead).
By the way in SR4 driving in VR was not the same as being jumped in. You could "remote-control" your vehicle (and even do that if you were in it; you didn't have to be remote) while in VR. Think of your persona being in a VR "room" full of control interfaces for the vehicle that you can move with your thoughts. It's not being the vehicle (jumped-in), but better than having only a steering wheel and a few pedals.
I think this kind of VR-control is still there in SR5 page 256:

Remote control is the result of the Control Device action (p. 238),

as one of the four ways to steer a vehicle.

yeah this is why i'm asking. none of the vehicle section mentions anything about bikes not having/needing gyroscopes in this edition, it mentions that a pilot will quite happily take over/drive a vehicle if the driver cannot, with no mention that this doesnt apply to bikes. so by RAW, i should be able to pilot the bike in VR, but wanted to clarify that.

[Aaron]

Am I correct in thinking that a Physical Barrier spell is extremely unlikely to stop bullets because bullets are a penetrating attack and will only do one damage to he barrier created if they have a DV greater than the armor of the barrier reduced by AP with the rest going through to hit the intend target?
It strikes me as odd that the barrier created by a Physical Barrier spell seems to be the only one with armor equal to structure. All the example barriers had double the structure in armor.

Physical Barrier is being discussed in errata, at least last I checked.

Q: Which specialization applies to cyber guns?

Whichever one you can get your GM to agree on.

So - did we ever get any clarification from Gen Con... Did players get to take a defense test [of some sort] against grenades and indirect LOS (A) spells?

Yes we did: there's no defense test against grenades, indirect LOS (A) spells, and other "zones of damage." The defense against these attacks is to take precautions against them. This is really really really true, and been confirmed by multiple sources inside the company. So unless there's been a meeting somewhere to which I wasn't privy, you really really honestly and truly don't get to make a defense test against grenades or indirect LOS (A) spells.

Very well. Then can we please get an explanation as to how counterspelling is meant to be used against area spells? The text goes out of its way to describe how you can give the bonus to multiple people, but counterspelling only adds to defense tests, and area spells like Fireball have no such tests.

Spell defense dice are rolled against Indirect Combat spells the same way they're rolled against other spells with no defense test: you roll them as a dice pool of their own.

(Additionally, the spellcasting example on page 283 has an unidentified defense test being made in it against a Blast spell, and the counterspelling example on page 295 specifically uses a fireball as the example of group counterspelling. This section has left me very confused.)

Please mention this in the errata thread.

Does that mean Sprawl Wilds Ashes needs to be errata'd, since it says the blanket of Military Grade Jammers blocks wireless communications, resulting in only infrared LOS and cables as possible communication measures?

No, because the specific case in the adventure overrides the general rule. The jammers aren't just there to add noise, they're deliberately cutting off wireless communications.

Q: How far does a character need to move to be considered running for the purposes of A) making a running jump, and B) making a charging attack?

About two or three meters. Maybe less if she's got something to push off of.

Q: please can you clarify the options for driving a vehicle for non-riggers?

Let me ask about this one.

Sub question: if you can drive in VR as a non-rigger, can you ride a bike in VR or does your limp body fall off everytime you make a turn?

If by bike you mean bicycle, the bike would slow to a halt. If you mean VR, you'd be controlling something that's carrying a limp body, yes. Not impossible, but not easy--kinda like riding with a drunk passenger who's passed out.

[Csjarrat]

Obviously I mean a motorbike. Thanks, will wait on the answer to the first question

[T-Hatchet]

Thank you I had failed to find anything on Physical Barrier spell in my search (I am suspecting spelling mistakes from my dyslexia to be the cause)

[Xenon]

to me it looks like you have the option of driving...

Auto pilot = Giving commands to the autopilot (while physically in the vehicle or via remote -or from within the matrix)
Manual operation = Old school manual driving (while in the meat and physically at the driver seat in the vehicle).
Remote control = AR, cold-sim, hot-sim (either physically in the vehicle or via remote)
Rigger control (*)= Jumped In (either physically in the vehicle or via remote)

I'd say that the "normal" way of driving a vehicle is via autopilot or remote control (while physically in the vehicle) via augmented reality.
The "normal" way of driving as a rigger would be jumped in (but in SR5 there are no rigger cocoons yet afik; high risk for whiplash)

The "normal" way of driving a bike that you are sitting on would be augmented reality (until we get more options).
(Or manual operation if you equipped the vehicle with that)


(*) Rigger control require control rig, owner or 3 marks on the vehicle, rigger interface in the vehicle and that you are jumped in.

[martinchaen]

Q: Does Noise Reduction (such as that offered by a wireless Datajack) affect the Noise Rating (not including distance) that prevents wireless functionality in gear with a device rating?
Example: Character A has a Datajack (+1 NR) and an Ares Alpha (smartgun system with a DR of 2); which Noise Rating will exceed the smartgun system in this case, 3 or 4?

[Tyburn]

...
Spell defense dice are rolled against Indirect Combat spells the same way they're rolled against other spells with no defense test: you roll them as a dice pool of their own.
...

So how does that play out in the case of an area effect that hits multiple targets who are all receiving spell defense? Each defender would roll their spell defense individually and reduce the hits of the caster? What happens if one or more of the defenders get enough hits to reduce the net hits of the caster before the 3 hit threshold for having the spell not scatter?

i.e. Caster casts a force 5 fireball at goon A and B and gets 4 hits. Goon A is a mage and puts up spell defense on himself and Goon B and devotes 6 dice to the effort. Both goon A and B roll well on their spell defense and score 3 and 2 hits respectively. The caster now has only 2 (or 1?) net hits and his fireball scatters either 1d6 (or 2d6?) meters off target and deals 5 damage to goon A and B depending on whether or not they're still in the blast radius? What would happen if the Goons only get 1 and 2 hits respectively? Does the fireball land on target and deal F+3 damage or does it scatter 1d6 m and deal F damage?

If the spell defense dice only reduce the damage of the spell and do not cause the spell to scatter if they reduce the casters hits below 3 why not just say the spell defense dice are added to the damage resistance test instead for indirect area spells?

Follow up question regarding spells that don't allow tests:

Direct spells allow a defense test (typically either body or willpower) but no damage resistance test. p170 of SR5 states that wound modifiers don't apply to this defense test but do other "general" negative pool modifiers like the -1 for electricity damage or the effects of a confusion spell apply? Normally they wouldn't apply to a damage resistance test, but this is a defense test.

[Michael Chandra]

Spell Defense vs Areas are only rolled once, hits apply to all protected. Still, the question is fair: Does it reduce the damage or reduce the hits?

[Tyburn]

Spell Defense vs Areas are only rolled once, hits apply to all protected. Still, the question is fair: Does it reduce the damage or reduce the hits?

Alright, so in the case of area indirect spells, spell defense roll is made by the counterspelling mage vs the caster as it was done in SR4 as opposed to adding to a defense roll on the part of the recipient? In the case of spells that have a defense test (all other spells?) the spell defense dice are added to the defense pool of the defender. Not exactly clean, but it's workable.

[Michael Chandra]

Not exactly. Vs an area direct spell it'd also apply as single roll rather than combined with other defense dice.

[martinchaen]

Q: How are items with a "+ X" Availability Rating handled for the purpose of Availability Tests?

As the rules on page 418 only state that you make an opposed test of Negotiation + Charisma (Social) vs Availability Rating, I see three possible scenarios:
1. Value as stated for item (example; 6 for Thermographic vision enhancement)
2. Sum of Availability Ratings of base item + new item (example; 6 for Contacts, +6 for Thermographic vision, for a total of 12)
3. Sum of Availability Ratings of base item + all existing and new enhancements (example; as 2. above, but with an additional +4 for existing Low-light vision enhancement for a total of 16)

[Xenon]

As far as I can tell there are not rules to upgrade your existing imaging device with additional enhancements.
I would say you have to buy a new imaging device.
- This time factory modified with the correct vision enhancements.

[Tyburn]

Not exactly. Vs an area direct spell it'd also apply as single roll rather than combined with other defense dice.

Alright, so for area direct spells the casting mage is facing 2 "defense" rolls (1 by the counterspelling mage and 1 by the target) and no damage resistance roll.

But if that's the case, why not just have the counterspelling mage roll spell defense dice against the caster of the spell and in all cases independent of any rolls the target they're protecting would need to make? It seems like it would completely avoid any "special case" scenarios. It would be more or less consistent with how it worked in SR4 with the exception that the counterspelling mage now has a maximum pool of spell defense dice per combat turn.

[Noble Drake]

Not exactly. Vs an area direct spell it'd also apply as single roll rather than combined with other defense dice.

Alright, so for area direct spells the casting mage is facing 2 "defense" rolls (1 by the counterspelling mage and 1 by the target) and no damage resistance roll.

But if that's the case, why not just have the counterspelling mage roll spell defense dice against the caster of the spell and in all cases independent of any rolls the target they're protecting would need to make? It seems like it would completely avoid any "special case" scenarios. It would be more or less consistent with how it worked in SR4 with the exception that the counterspelling mage now has a maximum pool of spell defense dice per combat turn.

Probably because of the way that everyone targeted getting to add in Edge would work out in the spell, and because it creates a situation where the spell manifests a harmful effect in an area but some people don't feel it as much or at all... while the counterspelling as a single roll could result in the spell not actually manifesting (the difference between a bunch of unharmed people standing in the crater a powerball spell just created, and a counterspelling mage having completely stopped a powerball spell).