[Medicineman]

is that a -6 Modifier ?

It's a "CRB says no" modifier. You're creating a division between attack actions and fire weapon actions, when there is no such thing.

 a fire Weapon Action with a HM weapon is a simple Action, right ?
 a Char has two simple Actions per IP, right ?
 A char can make only 1 Attack per IP, right ?

What is the Endresult ?
You can make two fire Weapons actions but only one Attack
it's as simple as that

so WHO'S making a distinction ?
Is it me or is it the BBB /CRB ?

with only one simple Dance per post
Medicineman

[UnLimiTeD]

You are indeed allowed to fire multiple times, as long as only one of those is an attack in the game rules.
Killing an innocent bird overhead may or may not count as an attack for the sessions purposes.
I guess writing the rules in a way that achieves all their goals without loopholes and unexplainable fluff was impossible with the money they expected to earn with the books.

[Novocrane]

Each simple fire weapon action says some variation on, "The character may not take any other attack actions in the same Action Phase."

'Any other attack actions' shows that the action being described is an attack action. Even into the air. Otherwise, it would say 'an attack action'.

The complex actions do not specify this, nor does the quick draw attack, afaik.

Is it different in the German edition?

[Malevolence]

I don't believe the bit about autosofts being so specific that they can be installed only on one drone at all - otherwise sharing over an RCC would be impossible.
Should this clarification find its way into an official Errata, I suspect getting a crappy RCC with Virtual Machine will be the way to go to avoid this restriction.

Ok, I'm confused here; the RCC is supposed to be able to share autosofts (such as Clearsight or Electronic Warfare) that isn't specified as being [Model] (Evasion, Maneuvering, or Stealth) or [Weapon] Targeting. Is the rule now that even Clearsight and Electronic Warfare have to be installed per drone?    If so, that means I'm going to need to go back and rebuild my rigger to account for that.

What Jack is referring to is that autosofts have an utterly unbreakable copy protection is 5E such that if you buy an autosoft for your Flyspy, you can't pull it out and put it in a second Flyspy that you "acquire", even though they are the exact same model drone. That copy of the autosoft is "registered" to the drone it was originally installed on. This is intended, per Wakshaani. If you lose the drone to a hail of bullets, the autosoft is gone. You have to re-purchase it when you get a new Flyspy.


If you install it on your RCC instead of your drone, you can share it per the RCC sharing rules. It is "registered" to your RCC, so if you later upgrade your RCC, you have to re-purchase it, but you can swap drones all day long with no penalty. Jack is saying that instead of a copy protection interpretation of the rules, he was thinking that the software itself was written in such a way that it cannot be used on more than one specific drone (not model), which would preclude the ability to share using an RCC, and is incorrect. Furthermore, his workaround is only valid so long as the "crappy RCC" you are using has a DR at least equal to the drone Pilot as the shared autosoft is run on the RCC and therefore cannot exceed its DR. It also suffers from requiring the drone to be wireless on and within range of the RCC, which for recon use may be non-optimal.


For the record, I disagree with how this is handled per RAI as the cost of gear maintenance for riggers is high enough as is. I would house rule that only one copy of the software is needed ("registered" to the persona rather than any individual device) for any number of drones/RCC.


Your question is in regards to the example of Clearsoft gaining a [Model] designation in the example given on page 127 of Rigger 5.0. Wakshaani has mentioned that the example was in error and was meant to use Maneuvering [Model]. Clearsight and EWar remain Model agnostic per Core.

[prionic6]

edit: This was written before I saw Malevolence's post. So sorry for the repetitons

The way I understood the intention described by Wakshaani in his(or her? not sure.) comments about Autosofts:

- If you want the Autosoft on the drone, you have to buy a new one for each drone. No sharing at all. No difference between Manuever, Targeting, Clearsight. They are perfectly copy protected. If your drone dies, the Autosofts die with it.

- You can also buy an Autosoft for your RCC. In that case you can share it with the drones slaved to the RCC. In the case of e.g. Clearsight, one copy is enough. For Maneuver you need one for each type of drone you have, for Targeting one for each type of weapon. If your RCC dies, the Autosofts die with it.

Is that understanding correct? Does it also apply to other Software? If a Cyberdeck dies, are all programs gone?

I have to say that while we played it the other way around until now (You buy Clearsight 6 once and are basically free to copy it to everywhere you want), that has it's fair share of problems. There is no scaling software cost for whole swarms of drones. Why not ask a Rigger contact to copy their Autosofts to your hardware? (edit: like Malevolence said, it could be registered to your persona). If Autosofts are bound to a specific device, they are just upgrades for that device. Whether adding ~8000 ¥ to the cost of an autonomous drone is too expensive is whole different question.

I would probably rule that Autosofts can at least be transferred to a different device. On the other hand, that would be a lot of paperwork if you for example transfer your Clearsight copies between some of your drones all the time to save money. Maybe add a small fee to transfer them.

[UnLimiTeD]

So I suppose you should run as many programs as possible on the RCC, with maybe 1 on your highest pilot drone in any given swarm, and install antennas on drones as that's cheaper than noise reduction plus drone softs?

[Marcus Gideon]

Did Rigger 5.0 add antennas for drones? Cus otherwise that's Headware and I don't think you can give implants to drones.

The trick to Autosofts is to either buy a few mixed drones and load them each with their own programs based solely on what you want them to do. Such as a Fly Spy with Clearsight so it can buzz around spying on people for you. Or a Roto-drone with a heavy weapon mounted, and a Targeting Autosoft so it can spray ammo downrange at a moment's notice.

Or... you get a bunch of the same drone, and share out a single copy of the Autosofts to the entire group. This saves you money in purchasing programs, but it limits your selection in drones. Instead of having 1 of each in the back of your truck, you just end up with a dozen of the same thing.

[Dinendae]

What Jack is referring to is that autosofts have an utterly unbreakable copy protection is 5E such that if you buy an autosoft for your Flyspy, you can't pull it out and put it in a second Flyspy that you "acquire", even though they are the exact same model drone. That copy of the autosoft is "registered" to the drone it was originally installed on. This is intended, per Wakshaani. If you lose the drone to a hail of bullets, the autosoft is gone. You have to re-purchase it when you get a new Flyspy.

...

Your question is in regards to the example of Clearsoft gaining a [Model] designation in the example given on page 127 of Rigger 5.0. Wakshaani has mentioned that the example was in error and was meant to use Maneuvering [Model]. Clearsight and EWar remain Model agnostic per Core.

Ah, got it. Thanks for the clarification! I agree with you on the high cost of being a rigger (referenced in the bit I cut out); since I only play Missions games, I'm going to have to keep an eye on those rules and see if they move from the current 2% to the newer 5%, once Rigger 5 becomes Missions legal. If the repair cost does increase, I'm probably going to have to scrap my Rigger; I just will not be able to afford repairs after runs where the drones get damaged.

[Dinendae]

So I suppose you should run as many programs as possible on the RCC, with maybe 1 on your highest pilot drone in any given swarm, and install antennas on drones as that's cheaper than noise reduction plus drone softs?

If I understand the first part of your question correctly, you were talking about running programs on you RCC for all your drones, while also running an autosoft on your highest rated drone while it recieves programs from the RCC, correct? If so, it is my understanding that your highest rated drone cannot run its own autosofts while at the same time running autosofts shared from the RCC; you have to stick with autosofts from one source or the other. 

[Dinendae]

Did Rigger 5.0 add antennas for drones? Cus otherwise that's Headware and I don't think you can give implants to drones.

The trick to Autosofts is to either buy a few mixed drones and load them each with their own programs based solely on what you want them to do. Such as a Fly Spy with Clearsight so it can buzz around spying on people for you. Or a Roto-drone with a heavy weapon mounted, and a Targeting Autosoft so it can spray ammo downrange at a moment's notice.

Or... you get a bunch of the same drone, and share out a single copy of the Autosofts to the entire group. This saves you money in purchasing programs, but it limits your selection in drones. Instead of having 1 of each in the back of your truck, you just end up with a dozen of the same thing.

I did a word search for antenna in Rigger 5, but didn't get any hits, so I'm guessing they don't have that option. As for drones and autosofts, I'm thinking I will have to stick to that first option, if only for the versatility of being able to select the right drone for the job. Right now I think I need to sit down and reread both the core rulebook rigger rules, as well as Rigger 5. 

[Marcus Gideon]

Right now I think I need to sit down and reread both the core rulebook rigger rules, as well as Rigger 5. 

This is the problem with SR5 in particular, although there was a library of source materials for all the older editions as well.

You can't just pick up a single book, open it to a single page, and get a clear and definitive answer to your question. You have to cross reference several sections of the book, looking both for obvious game mechanics as well as hidden lore and fluff references. And once you start adding in separate sourcebooks, now you have to cross reference those as well to find out what was hinted at, or completely overlooked, in the others you already read through.

Calculating a Rigger's dice pools requires no less than 4 sections of the Core book for a complete answer. That's not how you make a quality product.

[Dinendae]

I'm kind of dreading when the Technomancer rulebook comes out, so that I can finally remake my SRM 4 dronomancer. 

[Malevolence]

At this point, they should do one of two things:
1. Hire someone (or multiple someones) with the ability to write clear, unambiguous rules using consistent verbiage a la Pathfinder or D&D, give them unfettered access to the powers that decide such things, and have them write a series of rules summaries (The Core Cheat Sheet with general combat and skill use, as well as char gen perhaps; the Rigger Cheat Sheet with all the Vehicle, drone, and rigger rules in one place; the Matrix Cheat Sheet with all Matrix and Technomancer rules in one place; and the Magic Cheat Sheet with Astral Combat, summoning, spellcasting, initiating, etc all in one place) that includes all errata, clarifications, changes, and so forth and sell them for like $5 a pop. They would be fluff free and include coherent and useful examples. They would not include gear, spells, programs, and so forth so that they could not be used as a replacement for actually owning the core books. This sucks, but it provides a profit motive for Catalyst to fix the product. Since gear and spells, etc are not in these, there would also need to be an update to errata or something that provides clear information on all of the more vague of these (like PI-Tacs, Turn to Goo, and so on). Each of these books would likely need to be 20-50 pages
2. Put the rules (not the fluff and art) under an SRM style license so that someone (or multiple someones) can create a wiki that contains a single, well organized source with all rules, clarified and including every official comment, change, clarification, and errata from the forums, supplements, and official errata (again, like the d20pfsrd.com site). This is a big risk for them as it allows people to effectively play the system without investing in the books (and thus not paying Catalyst), but again, perhaps gear and spells, etc, themselves could be excluded so that it would only be a rules compendium. Though at least some items form each category (software, spells, gear, and so on) should be included so that they can be used in examples. This might serve to increase the audience for Shadowrun, bring many of the players that abandoned the system in frustration back into the fold, and ultimately contribute to sales of additional merchandise such as the fiction and table top game.

[revan.be]

@Above post : if only..........

[UnLimiTeD]

So I suppose you should run as many programs as possible on the RCC, with maybe 1 on your highest pilot drone in any given swarm, and install antennas on drones as that's cheaper than noise reduction plus drone softs?

If I understand the first part of your question correctly, you were talking about running programs on you RCC for all your drones, while also running an autosoft on your highest rated drone while it recieves programs from the RCC, correct? If so, it is my understanding that your highest rated drone cannot run its own autosofts while at the same time running autosofts shared from the RCC; you have to stick with autosofts from one source or the other. 

Well, we don't know what is actually RAI here, but I was interpreting the swarm autosoft that way (uses the highest of).
As for antennae, sorry, I meant the Vector Signal Filter (Data Trails, as built in module).