Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Saeviomagy" data-source="post: 2128600" data-attributes="member: 5890">I much preferred regular tests - then you could have a guard "see something, but not sure what" on a single success, all the way up to "yep, I definately saw X, the shadowrunner, heading towards the secret room". With an open test, you just get this binary thing...The rigging rules were a mess. Maneuver scores, screwing up the initiative of everyone in the vehicle, ECM rules, sensor assisted-gunnery rules, MIJI rules...It was a mess unless all you wanted to do was drive a car in a non-combat situation.It's kinda not - it's almost at the same level as adding a protocol emulation unit to a decker - now he can rig too.Besides - personally I never saw a PC decker. They were always "A guy who does X and also decks". And making a rigger-decker was by far the most popular choice, for good reasons (the requirements for both were basically identical - good computer skill, high mental stats, not much else needed).My response as a GM would be "you can't - you need to have a success on a test before you can buy successes on it". Then we'd look at the karma rules for open tests, and realise that karma ONLY LETS YOU REROLL ONE DIE ON AN OPEN TEST. Ouch. Change that rule for starters.Actually, deckers already could be wireless if they were good enough to hack satellite networks, and given the bandwidth supposedly available over a rigger's network, they could also just have a drone jacked in, and deck through that if you paid close attention.It was all there, it just depended on how much of it your GM understood.</blockquote>

Verification