[Gareth]

Handling tests are not for any kind of normal operations.

Though the vehicle rules do state that, it seems at odds with everything else in the rules,

When I'm rolling most skills the "bar" for rolling seems a lot lower - I roll for firing a gun in "normal" operations for example, I don't "only" roll persuasion when my life is on the line...

But a "typical" car (Americar, Handling 4 on-road) at "typical" driving speeds (70mph (apx. 95mpr), speed interval 20mpr (+4 difficulty) needs eight hits if they need to avoid an obstacle... Typically a 24 dice pool needed,

Even a decent Pilot program (Manoeuvre 6, Pilot 1 for the Americar - and that assumes you went out and bought after-market modifications because the software sure isn't included! - weird in a setting in which most people rely on the pilot to get around) doesn't stand a chance - it can't even succeed if every dice is a six (without edge, but we've discussed that elsewhere and IIRC the conclusion was that pilots don't get to use edge)!

No-one can get these levels of success without being one of the best drivers on the planet.

---

So I guess the question is, if emergency breaking doesn't warrant a handling check, what does? What is the threshold for needing to pick up dice for a driving check?

[Michael Chandra]

Hold it, +4 difficulty? Passing 4 speed intervals means -4 dice, not +4 difficulty. So 15 base dice would mean 52.74% at said -4 dice threshold 4 test.

And again, that threshold of Handling is for tricky things, e.g. "make a hairpin turn at high speeds, jump over the still-under-construction bridge". There is no way merely trying to avoid an obstacle at 70 mph counts as that kind of complexicity. So instead, we apply the next part of the rules: "Gamemasters can increase or decrease that threshold based on the difficulty of the attempted maneuver." Merely avoiding an obstacle? Sure, are you breaking or swerving? The break I'd potentially put at threshold 2 (if you failed the initial Perception test to see it coming) but no crash test involved, just a ramming, if you fail. With the swerve sure the threshold is 1, but failure would mean you crash. (Would be 0 if you had passed the Perception test, really.)

I am not just making this up, this LITERALLY is how the rules go: Tricky things, GM can adjust threshold. And GridGuide is a thing, so your car doesn't even NEED its Pilot program if you're letting GridGuide drive: Then GridGuide will make the decision, and GridGuide has access to all the cameras so the car ahead of you already spotted the running guy, meaning your car already started breaking and moving to the side to prevent a collision, while the cars behind you did exactly the same since GridGuide controlled them.

And yes, maybe the best driver in the world can't handle a complex stunt with a crappy car. GET HER A DECENT CAR THEN.

[Serbitar]

Why are we again defending bad rules? We don't have to defend them. Bad rules happen. No problem (well, maybe not in the number we have in SR6l. Just acknowledge that they are bad and fix them.

To the point at hand: You can't just increase the threshold for when driving test are required to that level. You have to have it on the level where other skill test are required or THIS is bad rules design.

Again, please don't defend obviously bad rules.

[Gareth]

Hold it, +4 difficulty? Passing 4 speed intervals means -4 dice, not +4 difficulty. So 15 base dice would mean 52.74% at said -4 dice threshold 4 test.

My mistake - you are correct here of the dice reduction,

But I'd note that 15D is a big dice pool,

"Gamemasters can increase or decrease that threshold based on the difficulty of the attempted maneuver."

Guidelines?

What is a -2 difficulty test? A +2 difficulty test? (the game rules don't typically set a difficulty like this - they set a difficulty for the thing you're trying to do, and modify it according to your equipment, this is 180 degrees in opposition to that - the rules don't offer much advice)

And yes, maybe the best driver in the world can't handle a complex stunt with a crappy car. GET HER A DECENT CAR THEN.

What constitutes a "complex stunt"?

I mean, there are stunt drivers who can do incredible things in crappy cars,

And GridGuide is a thing

A thing that does what, mechanically?

Does it count as Pilot 6 with Manoeuvre 6 in these situations? How does it apply?

I can see that it'd negate the need for some checks, but what does it do in emergency situations? Or do we revert to the onboard pilot in those situations?

I mean, a stock americar gets 1D for handling checks (0D if going over 15mph!), so it isn't achieving much (you're not even going to get one success (enough for a task described as "no more difficult than walking or talking", P.36) on most rolls - how's that for a brochure - "Drive an Americar off the lot today - Disclaimer: Americars successfully leave the lot no more than one time in three!")... I certainly doubt it'd save your life,

A Westwind (is that a "decent car"?) is better for sure, but not that much so (4D piloting (so likely one success), Handling 2, Speed Interval 30),

GET HER A DECENT CAR THEN

I get the feeling that I'm antagonizing you - not my intention, these are genuine questions, I apologise if that is the case however.

[penllawen]

Why are we again defending bad rules? We don't have to defend them. Bad rules happen. No problem (well, maybe not in the number we have in SR6l. Just acknowledge that they are bad and fix them.

+1

Can't fix problems if we refuse to acknowledge them.

[Kirklins]

Even having to hit the breaks to avoid hitting someone hardly is worthy of a Handling test.

Except the example on page 199 of Bunny the rigger driving the Americar has exactly one handling test:

She’s still not moving fast, but she also is not in a
machine built for chases, so it’s going to resist her aggressive
style of driving. When a pedestrian unexpectedly
enters the street ahead of her, she has to make a
Handling test to avoid them.

Examples aren't rules, supposedly, but when they're used in the rulebook they're supposed to clarify rules. And so some of us are kinda frustrated because there's a handling test for tapping the brakes and dodging a pedestrian while going 28 (33.6 kph or just over 20 mph).

[Kirklins]

After thought, I'd like to recommend a house rule or errata that makes the handling test an extended test. No cumulative glitches or other issues. I'm afb so may be misremembering (or recalling other systems), but iirc there are built in penalties if an extended test gets interrupted.

Also, handling is not "I missed the pedestrian" . It's" Did I lose control while avoiding the drekhead?"

I think this makes a minimal but effective change, but before I throw it in the houserule topic I'd like remarks.

[Typhus]

I think a simpler fix might be to just double the speed intervals.   Cuts the penalty in half, making it actually possible to drive.  Then GMs can use the rules at times when they don't want to kill your character.

[skalchemist]

I feel like Handling as a flat threshold is the root of the issue being discussed in this thread.

If you look at the table on page 36 of standard difficulty Thresholds and the accompanying text, its pretty easy to figure out what an appropriate Threshold would be for Handling tests ignoring the Handling stat of the vehicle, right?  Something like...

1 - changing lanes on a highway in high traffic at speed
2 - taking a dangerous corner above the speed limit for that corner
3 - most routine fancy driving beyond what an average driver would do; professional driver stunts
4 - professional racing level
5 - things only possible for true professionals
etc.

Your definitions might differ slightly from mine, but the table is a pretty straightforward guide. 

So, then, why have a flat threshold as part of the vehicle stats?  It seems to me it would make more sense to have the Handling stat be a modification to the base threshold of the maneuver.  For example, a Toyota Gopher might have +2 Handling, while a Mitsubishi Nightsky might have -2 Handling.   

EDIT: on pg 200 it does say "Gamemasters can increase or decrease that threshold based on the difficulty of the attempted maneuver." My instinct as a GM would be to "increase or decrease" to whatever the table on page 36 would suggest is the right Threshold given the nature of the maneuver and the nature of the vehicle and essentially ignore the Handling stat.  So that's technically RAW, I guess.  But I think my point above still stands that the idea of a flat Threshold for Handling seems weird when considering the normal way difficult is set for other tests in the game.

[Serbitar]

And all this hassle just to (partially) avoid modifiers, because of, well, Edge.
If Handling was a dice pool modifiers things would be easier.

Also,if you make 2+2 dice the standard for NPCs you should be aware that anything they can do is a cakewalk for PCs.
Scaling challenges from NPCs and mundane every day tasks to runner challenges within these boundaries is very hard.

[Ghost Rigger]

I brought this up in the previous thread, but 6e driving rules seem purpose-built to actively punish the players for driving anything other than the most nimble vehicle with the highest speed interval available. This is a slap in the face to everyone who ever has, is or wants to play a van rigger.

Also, handling is not "I missed the pedestrian" . It's" Did I lose control while avoiding the drekhead?"

That is highly debatable. If the pedestrian in question is a cybered-up troll or an important wage slave, a hit and run would have serious consequences (though for entirely different reasons and in entirely different timeframes). On the other hand, if the pedestrian is a particularly frail SINless meth addict, the best thing to might be to just run him over and not risk losing control during a chase.

[Kirklins]

Just to close a loop, I'm withdrawing my suggestion for a house rule. I forgot that extended tests use declining dice.

Conceptually it was clean (with the non-declining dice I was remembering). The handling is the attempt to recover from doing something drastic. The high dice-pool rigger likely does this in a single roll. Mr. Wageslave would roll desperately hoping not to glitch while slowing down over several rounds, eventually & probably making the goal even if starting with 2+2. (Biggest flaw is that there's a guaranteed crash by the car's pilot at even 55 mph. As I said, conceptual.)

At this point I'm leaning toward Skalchemist's "change the threshold as the rules say you can" along with Michael Chandra's point that while the example is evading the idiot, the text says it's for extreme and extraordinary maneuvers.

[Shinobi Killfist]

Handwaving tests is how pretty much all the off scene scene travel happens. But if it’s part of the story chances are you are making tests. Now some of it shouldn’t induce a crash. Like the follow someone discreetly example. You fail you are spotted you don’t drive into a tree. But that doesn’t mean tests won’t come up every few runs. It’s not like I never have the street sam with a 2 charisma and 2 con have to talk his way out of things. Same shit can happen to the mage driving his Americar. He gets harassed by the local go gang, it’s shitty weather and grid guide in unavailable, a hacker blows out his pilot and he suddenly has to grab the controls.

You never make tests is the answer you have when you’ve totally given up on a rigging section existing and don’t want anyone in any vehicle outside of a behind the scenes excuses to get you from point a to point b. If you actually want rigging, driving in the game you need to have a functional system for when you do make tests.

  And yeah I don’t make the street sam roll his etiquette to buy some soy-caf in the morning but I do make him roll con when he gets pulled over and his sin looks questionable. So I also make non driving specialists make rolls here and there at driving. 

[Mustakrakish]

I as GM will just decide the DC for my players as we do on million other rolls. I don't think I need the rules to tell me how hard a test is. I can decide it by myself, especially when I need to keep the pacing of the game, I am not going to consult the book in the middle of a car chase.

[Michael Chandra]

I as GM will just decide the DC for my players as we do on million other rolls. I don't think I need the rules to tell me how hard a test is. I can decide it by myself, especially when I need to keep the pacing of the game, I am not going to consult the book in the middle of a car chase.

I agree. While as a crunch GM I loved the whole 'base threshold, additional modifier' table SR5 had, it's not something easily memorised so in the end I'd probably still make up a number.