[Marcus Gideon]

Street Grimoire pg 105, Elemental Damage - Radiation

Radiation attacks cause Physical damage. Armor provides no dice to resist Radiation damage, unless it has an upgrade to provide Radiation resistance, which provides dice equal to its rating for the Damage Resistance Test and the following Toxin Resistance Test. Treat every Radiation attack that hits as a toxin causing Nausea (see Toxins, p. 408, SR5) with a DV equal to net hits of the attack (before the Damage Resistance roll).

Physical damage in general is soaked by Body + Armor. Armor is ignored for the Radiation damage, but the Body bonuses would still apply. As would the Bear Mentor Spirit's +2 to resist damage, since it's not armor as much as just general hardiness.

[NoxMortem]

Do defenders roll any defense test against INDIRECT AREA COMBAT spells? How is spell defense to apply? I am aware of the answer aaron gave in this thread way above but the answers there suddenly stopped with many many questions left open.

They should be treated like grenades, which means there is no defense test and the only action you can take is "RUN FOR YOUR LIFE". If spell defense is applicable, which the example on page 48 for critical glitches shows, when is it to apply. Also the fireball example tells that everyone defended by the spell defense against the fireball gets +4 on his DEFENSE test, which tere is none.

If aaron was right and everyone rolls for his own, does he roll with REA+INT or only with ANTIMAGIC. How is scatter handled?

Edit: If this still was never cleared up until now, that would be an answer as well.

[Marcus Gideon]

Do defenders roll any defense test against INDIRECT AREA COMBAT spells? How is spell defense to apply? I am aware of the answer aaron gave in this thread way above but the answers there suddenly stopped with many many questions left open.

They should be treated like grenades, which means there is no defense test and the only action you can take is "RUN FOR YOUR LIFE". If spell defense is applicable, which the example on page 48 for critical glitches shows, when is it to apply. Also the fireball example tells that everyone defended by the spell defense against the fireball gets +4 on his DEFENSE test, which tere is none.

If aaron was right and everyone rolls for his own, does he roll with REA+INT or only with ANTIMAGIC. How is scatter handled?

Edit: If this still was never cleared up until now, that would be an answer as well.

They really haven't covered this "officially" with errata or anything.

The way the Core was written, at one point they expected defense rolls for grenades and explosions. Then later on they changed their minds and took those away (except for "Run For Your Life" as you pointed out). But they never really went back and fixed up any of the other entries.

The quickest and easiest solution is to ignore Spell Defense in this regard. Indirect AOEs aren't targeting anyone, it's targeting a point in space. And the flames it produces (assuming Fireball) are non-magical and wouldn't be affected by Spell Defense anyway. The best you could hope to do is deflect the point of origin, causing some degree of Scatter. But you would only get the few Counterspell dice towards that effort, if you chose to allow it at all. But that really means that learning any amount of Counterspell turns you into a magic repellant, which sounds way too powerful IMO.

For my money, I'd say it just doesn't work. =)

[Lucean]

To not make indirect AoE immune to counterspelling, one could apply Spell Defense dice to the soak test.

[Marcus Gideon]

To not make indirect AoE immune to counterspelling, one could apply Spell Defense dice to the soak test.

Except the flames aren't magical. That's like letting them use Spell Defense against grenade shrapnel.

[SichoPhiend]

Before I chime in on a thread I was involved way back and what we came up with that seemed to make sense, I need to ask,

Since when have the effects of indirect spells been non-magical?

[Herr Brackhaus]

Since when have the effects of indirect spells been non-magical?

This. Any acid spell is a good example as magical acid dissipates after the first combat turn, unlike real, physical acid which does not. Fire and Ice seems to be exceptions in that magical fire may cause flammable materials to catch on (real, physical) fire.

[SichoPhiend]

Which is an argument for them being magical, not non-magical.  Just like their AP being based on Force instead of elemental effects AP.

[Herr Brackhaus]

Which is an argument for them being magical, not non-magical.  Just like their AP being based on Force instead of elemental effects AP.

Absolutely; that's what I was agreeing with you on

[Sternenwind]

Can an AI, with pilot origin, running themselves on a drone (DT p156 AI Vehicle Combat) profit from a RCCs Sharing function (SR5 p267)? Can it use the Autosofts (SR5 p269) running on a RCC?

[Marcus Gideon]

Can an AI, with pilot origin, running themselves on a drone (DT p156 AI Vehicle Combat) profit from a RCCs Sharing function (SR5 p267)? Can it use the Autosofts (SR5 p269) running on a RCC?

Data Trails pg 156, AI Vehicle Combat

AIs can run themselves on drones that have available program slots (see Autosofts, p. 269, SR5), or they may choose to use the Control Device action from an RCC, cyberdeck, or commlink...

Only AIs with the Pilot Origins quality may use autosofts in place of active skills, they also use their Depth in place of the Pilot rating of vehicles/ drones they are running on.

I would say that if they are Jumped Into the drone itself, then they have to use the Autosofts running locally. Since they themselves are a program running on the drone itself, that would (in my mind at least) trigger the rule about only running local programs or shared programs, not both.

If they are merely using Control Device remotely from the RCC, then they could use the Autosofts on the RCC, but they won't benefit from any of the Control Rig type bonuses (dice pools, Limits, thresholds).

[Sternenwind]

 I withdraw my question.

I found the answer i was looking for.

One caveat: if a drone is running any of its own autosofts, it cannot benefit from
the RCC’s autosofts.

thx for feedback

[NoxMortem]

How does the damage compensator in SR5 is supposed to work. Does a rating 4 compensator work like similar positve/negative quality, spell, adept power and does simply ignore its rating on both monitors OR does one have to split the rating to both monitors. e.g. A rating 4 damage compensator bioware can ignore 4-0,3-1,2-2,1-3,0-4 damage on the physical/mental monitor. The reason I ask is because the wording has significantly changed in shadowrun 5 from shadowrun 4:

SR4A(p347): The user may ignore a number of damage boxes (both Physical and Stun) equal to the compensator’s rating before determining injury modifiers.
SR5e(p 460): You ignore a number of damage boxes (your choice of Physical, Stun, or a combination of the two) equal to the compensator’s Rating before determining your injury modifiers.

If it has to be split now, why was the compensator changed from all other similar injury modification damage box ignoration rules? Availability and essence cost stayed the same while the prices was significantly reduced. If it does not have to be split and works like in 4th edition, why would someone ever choose not to apply the full rating to both monitors? If it has to be split when has one to decide how it is split? As it is bioware and therefore cloned tissue it seems not like there is a on/off switch so do I have to buy a 3-1 damage compensator? Can I choose how to split whenever I feel like?

Personally I assume it works exactly like in 4th edition but several people argue: Why wouldn't they have used the same wording if it has not changed?

[Marcus Gideon]

Yes, by that wording it has to be split up. With a Rating 4, you have 4 boxes to distribute. Like you said that can be 4/0 or 2/2 or 0/4 however you want it distributed. Obviously they thought giving you 4/4 was overpowered, so they dialed it back this edition.

[NoxMortem]

Do you have to decide how to split up when you buy the compensator?