[KarmaInferno]

The only difference when applying percentage modifiers is if you add the modifiers together before applying them (as the rules state you should) or apply them separately. It does not matter what order you apply modifiers either. Examples:

50% and 10%

Add together prior to applying: 100 - (50%+10%) = 100 - 60% = 100 - 60 = 40
50% first: 100 - 50% - 10% = 100 - 50 - 10% = 50 - 10% = 50 - 5 = 45
10% first: 100 - 10% - 50% = 100 - 10 - 50% = 90 - 50% = 90 - 45 = 45

Apologies. I was trying to express that the first example, adding modifiers together before multiplying, made no sense to me. Even if it's the "book way".

The second and third examples are what make sense to me.

i'm tired. Don't mind me.



-k

[Mäx]

Out of curiosity, where do the rules say you should add modifiers that way? I went looking for it the other day to confirm the rule, and I couldn't find it.

Only discounts that have a rule on how to combine  them are the discounts for initation cost(SM page 50) and submersion cost(Unwired page 140), latter being a copy-paste of the former with few changed words.

[FastJack]

It's also the general rule of thumb when calculating Essence loss when you have multiple modifiers.

[Siegerich]

So if we put that rule general and apply it to this case, it would be 10% + 50% = 60% total cost reduction, right?

Bad design in my eyes. Though it is easier to calculate, as soon as someone finds too many or strong discounts to combine, the world is doomed. Just two examples of adding cost reduction versus multiplying cost reduction:

50%+50% = 100% => its free
50% * 50% = 25% => costs only one fourth

50% +50% +50% => screwed
50% * 50% *50% = 12,5% => costs only one eighth

On one hand, I don't know of any discounts adding up so extreme, quite the opposite, there are only few discounts in the rules adding up at all. Then on the other hand, why didn't they just avoid all adding discounts?

[FastJack]

They kept the discounts few and below a certain amount. As to why didn't they avoid it? It's because players want benefits!

[Bradd]

It's also the general rule of thumb when calculating Essence loss when you have multiple modifiers.

I'm looking for a source for this guideline. Rule, FAQ, forum post?

[FastJack]

I know it's been tossed around here on the boards a bit, but I can't remember where. I couldn't find anything in the FAQ or books regarding it.

[Daishi]

So if we put that rule general and apply it to this case, it would be 10% + 50% = 60% total cost reduction, right?

Bad design in my eyes. Though it is easier to calculate, as soon as someone finds too many or strong discounts to combine, the world is doomed. Just two examples of adding cost reduction versus multiplying cost reduction:

Two totally irrelevant examples. Most discounts are 10%, and there's only a few. The most you can do is Delta, Biocompatibility, Adapsin, Cyberware Suite. 1 - (0.5 + 0.1 + 0.1 + 0.1) = 0.2 multiplier. Powerful, rare, but not mechanically breaking. Also, easy to figure out the essence costs of cyberware you're thinking of putting into the build. A modifier of 0.3645 is significantly more cumbersome to work with.

[Trench]

Initiation and Submersion dont cost essence.

Augmentation page 32 provides an example where essence cost  mods are multiplied.

"x 0.8 for alphaware grade x 1.2 for the second-hand"


The entry for Adapsin says the  reducion  is in addition to other reductions. It also says to round normally, but doesnt say how many decimal places to keep.

[Mirikon]

I would round to two decimal places, myself, as the listings go to two decimal places. Wouldn't go more than three, though.