Catalyst Game Labs > Errata

[SR6] Hack & Slash

(1/5) > >>

I have a feeling there will be a lot in this book.

Pg.30, Subvert Infrastructure
The header says the roll is Electronics + Logic vs Willpower + Firewall , but the action text says Electronics + Intuition vs. Intuition + Firewall or 2x Firewall.

Huh, not the case in the german version, guess Pegasus press caught that one...
Oh boy, if the original is worsely edited than the translation, prepare for a rough ride  ::)

(Seriously, why even write the test into the description a second time? That just invites editing fuckups...)

My guess is copy/pasting draft into an actual layout, with little to no editing passes

Custom Cyberdecks, Core Slots Pg 35

"Note how many core slots are taken up by all of your cyberdeck’s components, because this reduces how many wireless (and wired) devices you can connect to your deck’s PAN. "

PANs can support unlimited numbers of personal devices.  pg 173 CRB:  " ... the Matrix is built around the Personal Area Network (PAN). These are networks composed of a commlink and/or a deck, connected to any number of personal devices, along with the potential for a small number of devices slaved for remote operation."

The Hack & Slash author is definitely referring to personal devices counting against the device limit, not devices slaved for remote operation, because later on pg 37 they say " If you want a built-in accessory such as a trid projector, printer, sensor, or other gadget,  . . . built-in devices have the advantage of not counting against the device limit or core slots of a cyberdeck."

Pg 47, Virtual Horizon

"The only Matrix action you take directly against any devices or icons “inside” a host while you’re on the outside is Matrix Perception. All inside devices are considered to be running silent using the Host Rating + Sleaze of the host as the opposed dice pool."

Honestly not sure if this is an error or not; Matrix Perception resistance is Willpower + Sleaze, using Willpower of the Spider.  Host Rating isn't used defensively anywhere in the rules.  I think this is a carryover from 5e.  If it's not an error: why is the author creating a special case for something as ordinary as a perception test?


[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

Go to full version