design puzzles: screened internal compartments

[whswhs]

One of my prospective players wants his character to have an AI bodyguard in a cybershell that contains a built-in military grade weapon. To avoid having the bodyguard destroyed or confiscated, he would like the space that holds the weapon be shielded against scanning. I'm not sure how to do this.

It sounds like Obscure, against a particular kind of Scanning Sense, but not extended beyond the body, but focused on a comparatively small space within the body. What would be a suitable limitation for that? Could you handle it like Limited for DR? A really simplified calculation makes me think that maybe each -1 to SM for the space would be -10% to the cost of the Obscure; would that work?

Or is there some better way to hide objects or structures inside a cybershell body?

Bill Stoddard

[Crakkerjakk]

Originally Posted by whswhs

One of my prospective players wants his character to have an AI bodyguard in a cybershell that contains a built-in military grade weapon. To avoid having the bodyguard destroyed or confiscated, he would like the space that holds the weapon be shielded against scanning. I'm not sure how to do this.

It sounds like Obscure, against a particular kind of Scanning Sense, but not extended beyond the body, but focused on a comparatively small space within the body. What would be a suitable limitation for that? Could you handle it like Limited for DR? A really simplified calculation makes me think that maybe each -1 to SM for the space would be -10% to the cost of the Obscure; would that work?

Or is there some better way to hide objects or structures inside a cybershell body?

Bill Stoddard

How about Resistance (Scanning)?

[Bookman]

I think I would do it like this:

Payload for the compartment itself; 1 point is probably sufficient. This is sufficient, I think, for the ordinary concealment of the weapon.

Obscure with the following modifiers: Stealthy, +100%, to represent passive protection from scanning, No Range, -30%, functionally equivalent to Melee Attack or Touch Based, Payload Only, -50%).

I could see lowering the limitation on Obscure, but only affecting a small internal area is much, much, less of an advantage than full-blown Obscure.

So, with ten levels of obscure, the power would look like:

Sealed Compartment: Payload (Cargo 1), Obscure 10 (Stealthy, +100%; No Range, -30%, Obscure Only Affects Objects inside Payload, -50%) [25]

(Under multiplicative modifiers this would cost only [9].)

[lachimba]

Payload with cosmic enhancement?


although really that should give you a pocket dimension that you can recall the items out of, but I think the price would be about the same still.

[Phil Masters]

To be honest, I'd probably end up defining this as a perk ("State-of-the-art shielding on Payload"). If the character wanted, say, a briefcase with this sort of shielding on it, you'd presumably end up digging out or improvising a cash price and a rule treatment; think of this as an Accessory version of that if it helps.

It's possible to overdo attempts to generate precise point-evaluated treatments of essentially trivial stuff, and the result usually ends up far more expensive than the benefit really justifies. Frankly, if you charge more than a point for this, any sensible player will drop the idea of spending points on it and buy a removable shielding liner for the payload compartment with cash instead, so you might as well cut to the chase and call it a perk.

[Bookman]

Originally Posted by Phil Masters

To be honest, I'd probably end up defining this as a perk ("State-of-the-art shielding on Payload"). If the character wanted, say, a briefcase with this sort of shielding on it, you'd presumably end up digging out or improvising a cash price and a rule treatment; think of this as an Accessory version of that if it helps.

I don't disagree if the level of obscure is equivalent to mundane countermeasures available with cash. One level of Payload is essentially that same perk.

It's possible to overdo attempts to generate precise point-evaluated treatments of essentially trivial stuff, and the result usually ends up far more expensive than the benefit really justifies. Frankly, if you charge more than a point for this, any sensible player will drop the idea of spending points on it and buy a removable shielding liner for the payload compartment with cash instead, so you might as well cut to the chase and call it a perk.

I don't know the setting, and I don't know how much extra benefit -- if any -- a -10 to detection rolls would be over conventional equipment. I use multiplicative modifiers in all my own work; I find the costs that they generate much more fair. If the best "off the shelf" passive scan blocking material were say, -4 or so, then paying [8] points (over the 1 point payload perk) to get to -10 to scans doesn't seem unreasonable to me. Also, if a GM wanted to make the ability worth the points, he or she could rule that the points of obscure stack with the best commonly available scan-blocking tech -- that would certainly be worth some amount of points more than a perk.

I dare say that you know the THS setting better than me, however, and can offer good advice about making this ability fit those assumptions. :)

When people post questions about "How would you build x?" I'll always chime in with whatever first occurs to me, just as a starting point for the discussion. Sometimes a bad build can lead to a better one.

[whswhs]

Originally Posted by Phil Masters

It's possible to overdo attempts to generate precise point-evaluated treatments of essentially trivial stuff, and the result usually ends up far more expensive than the benefit really justifies. Frankly, if you charge more than a point for this, any sensible player will drop the idea of spending points on it and buy a removable shielding liner for the payload compartment with cash instead, so you might as well cut to the chase and call it a perk.

I would have thought that, too. But the player is strongly opposed to having the weapon treated as Payload; I've explained the options for having a weapon that you can snap into place, and for some reason he actively dislikes them, and wants what amounts to an Innate Attack, even though it will cost points. So efficient design doesnt seem to be an issue for him; he has a specific concept that he wants and is willing to pay for, if he can possibly budget the points.

Bill Stoddard

[Phil Masters]

Originally Posted by Bookman

I don't disagree if the level of obscure is equivalent to mundane countermeasures available with cash. One level of Payload is essentially that same perk.

Bill hasn't indicated that this shielding is anything really exceptional in the setting. We appear to be talking about a robotic body with some good scan shielding built in. If it's genuinely better than anything that any other characters could acquire for any amount of ready money - well, I'd require a good explanation for how on earth this came to pass, and then charge an Unusual Background for it.

Originally Posted by Bookman

If the best "off the shelf" passive scan blocking material were say, -4 or so, then paying [8] points (over the 1 point payload perk) to get to -10 to scans doesn't seem unreasonable to me.

This level of superiority in shielding - against all the possible forms of scan (and let's face it, any self-respecting high-tech hard SF setting will have multiple formidable search technologies available) would suggest a 10 point UB to me. Plus the perk. But we have no reason to assume that the character has access to this sort of magic uber-tech.

Originally Posted by whswhs

I would have thought that, too. But the player is strongly opposed to having the weapon treated as Payload; I've explained the options for having a weapon that you can snap into place, and for some reason he actively dislikes them, and wants what amounts to an Innate Attack, even though it will cost points. So efficient design doesnt seem to be an issue for him; he has a specific concept that he wants and is willing to pay for, if he can possibly budget the points.

I'd still classify it as a perk, frankly. If the player is really masochistically dedicated to spending more points than a reasonable GM is suggesting, call it Resistance (Scanning Technology) and price it accordingly - without crunching the numbers, I think we'd be looking at the 1-3 point range here.

[whswhs]

Originally Posted by Phil Masters

I'd still classify it as a perk, frankly. If the player is really masochistically dedicated to spending more points than a reasonable GM is suggesting, call it Resistance (Scanning Technology) and price it accordingly - without crunching the numbers, I think we'd be looking at the 1-3 point range here.

That's an interesting way to do it. Do you think Resistance to Scanning Technology is a legitimate kind of Resistance? I had thought that Resistance was more aimed at "Someone harms/changes/controls me" than at "Someone perceives me." But if the latter's legitimate, it would seem to work pretty well.

What level of generality do you think it would be at?

I think I could then offer the player a choice of +3 or +8 versus scanning; I don't think total immunity to scanning is appropriate in this particular setting.

Bill Stoddard

[Phil Masters]

Originally Posted by whswhs

That's an interesting way to do it. Do you think Resistance to Scanning Technology is a legitimate kind of Resistance? I had thought that Resistance was more aimed at "Someone harms/changes/controls me" than at "Someone perceives me." But if the latter's legitimate, it would seem to work pretty well.

As written, Resistance is mostly a defence - against circumstances and pathogens as well as malice, mind - but the way it gets extended to mental effects in the last paragraph of the description, and the way it's used on things like the standard demon character sheet in Magic, leaves me thinking that there's some precedent for treating it as a generic "Avoiding Some Kind Of Inconvenience" effect. (And it's less hassle than trying to apply, say, Chameleon to the task. Which real pedants might attempt.)

Originally Posted by whswhs

What level of generality do you think it would be at?

I think I could then offer the player a choice of +3 or +8 versus scanning; I don't think total immunity to scanning is appropriate in this particular setting.

"All commonly known technological internal scanning methods": On a fairly strict reading of the letter of the rules, "Common" probably fits best. (So that's 7 points for +8 or 5 for +3.) Though I'd regard "Occasional" as giving a fairer cost (5 or 3 points.) I'd still be just as happy with a 1-point perk, if this is a set of well-documented countermeasures, mind.

And mind you, a cybershell discovered to possess and use this advantage could be in line for a world of trouble in a game I ran. Smuggling undocumented military-grade small arms onto, say, a civilian spacecraft could be considered a mere skip and a jump from "conspiracy to attempt mass murder" - or just prima facie evidence of intent to endanger life, if the cops were feeling kind that day.