[Jobe00]

I need an official answer so I can point it out to the guys at Lonewolf Development. I already know the answer is yes, but I got into an argument with their head coder who would not listen to me.

Augment versions of Commlinks and Cyberdecks can have all the same mods as the standard versions, correct? Specifically, can they have Electronic Accessories (Biomonitor and Hot Sim Module for augment commlinks which would only cost 150 NuYen more since Sim Modules standard), Data Trails Device Modifications, and Personal Integrated Tactical Networks from Run & Gun.

I don't see Commlink Dongles being possible other than Attack or Stealth Dongles.

[Kiirnodel]

That discussion has come up in the past on the Hero Lab forums.

If I recall correctly, the argument that he has is that modifications require you to open up the device and play with the electronic "guts" which is arguably very hard to do with an implanted device.

On the other hand, however, you could conceivably make all of those modifications and then implant the device.

My best suggestion for a counter-argument is this: The rules never explicitly disallow this action, if an action has potential table-variation the program should allow the broadest application of a rule and leave more restrictive applications to individual judgment. If it could be possible, but some games might not allow it, Hero Lab should allow the user to do it, and let the games that don't allow it to simply not do it.

[ShadowcatX]

My best suggestion for a counter-argument is this: The rules never explicitly disallow this action.

That is a flawed argument. The rules never explicitly say you can't turn off the sun with a flick of a switch.

[忍]

That's a poor argument. SR5 has no game mechanics regarding interacting with the sun. (Yes allergy exists, but it's not something you do to the sun.) There are however rules regarding what you can and can't do with commlinks and cyberdecks. In the absence of one particular rule (implants and add-ons),  it's logical to say that there isn't any inhibition against it occurring.

[Reaver]

It is, but you will have to do a bit better then "The rules never explicitly disallow this action." to convince them that it is possible.

Keep in mind I am not saying one way of the other. (because personally I don't have an issue with it as long as the link or deck was modified BEFORE implantation. After implantation, there is not much you can do unless you want to go back "under the knife" in my opinion)

And keep in mind, people here have argued some pretty stupid things over the years.... like someone with no arms and legs and "run just as fast as someone with legs" or "because gravity is never mentioned, it doesn't exist in SR and thus he could fly".

If you are looking to change a mind over at Lonewolf, you will need a better argument than "Well it doesn't say, there-for it is"

But I do wish you luck. you may find the answer in an older book that may help support your cause.

[Kiirnodel]

I'm not saying there should be a specific ruling one way or another either.

What I'm saying is that when a rule is arguable, a program like Hero Lab shouldn't make a final arbitration that is the most restrictive. It should allow for different groups to be able to make their own decisions about how the rule should or should not be applied. The "least restrictive environment" allows for all groups to follow the rules however they decide and be happy.

If group A decides that implanted commlinks cannot be modified, they are happy no matter which way the program works

If group B decides that they can be modified, then they are unhappy if the program doesn't allow the modification.

Allowing the modification is the only way to make the program usable for everyone. It isn't the job of Hero Lab to make a ruling for a rule that isn't clearly stated. At best, if the developers think that it "shouldn't work that way" they can implement it with a warning: Essentially telling the user "hey, watch out. You added a modification to an implanted commlink, are you sure you can do that?"

[Kiirnodel]

My best suggestion for a counter-argument is this: The rules never explicitly disallow this action.

That is a flawed argument. The rules never explicitly say you can't turn off the sun with a flick of a switch.

1. There are rules for modifying devices.
2. Commlinks are devices (and can be modified)
3. Implanted commlinks are still commlinks.
4. Implanted commlinks can be modified.

There is no rule that denies statement 4. There isn't anything that calls out that implanted commlinks are an exception to the rule that commlinks can be modified using the normal device modification rules.
Applying a restriction in this manner is applying a rule that doesn't exist.