Shadowrun
Shadowrun General => Gear => Topic started by: daGob on <04-03-14/0233:07>
-
Okay so as far as I can tell people are pretty big fans of Wired Reflexes (which I get - they're great for your initiative) but as far as I can tell Synaptic Boosters gives the same bonus for less essence but more nuyen. Is it simply a matter of choosing which you'd rather save (essence or nuyen) or am I missing something else because as it stands I don't understand why you'd eve take Wired Reflexes.
-
It's pretty much the "would you rather lose nuyen or Essence" thing, yes. Wired Reflexes is a great way to get an extra initiative die or two if you're playing an archetype that has heavy nuyen costs (deckers and riggers come to mind).
Wireless wired reflexes can also stack with reaction enhancers, which is something synaptic boosters very pointedly cannot do. However, I don't believe I've ever actually seen anybody go this route because it is very expensive in terms of nuyen and resources and also walking around with your surgical modifications in wireless mode is a suicidally stupid thing to do.
-
I predict we are going to see this changing, and soon. This is the first edition of Shadowrun in which synaptic boosters are available for new characters AND in the core rulebook. In the past, their availability was too high and you tended to not started with so much nuyen. Wired reflexes used to be the only option, and they were definitely worth it. Now, with the boosters being in the reach of a character with priority A in resources (such as most samurai), and with alphaware rating 2 reflexes having an availability 14, we can expect to see synaptic boosters become the norm for street samurai.
That being said, the cost of synaptic boosters can still make them attractive to someone who neither needs a lot of essence nor is a combat specialist, but would like a boost to their initiative. I have a rating 1 system on a combat decker I just made, and it's certainly worth the money. The nearly 40,000 nuyen I saved by not springing for synaptic boosters allows me an additional level of cerebral boosters as well.
Also, the fact that it can be stacked with reflex boosters (something no other type of augmentation is able to do) means a new character focused on his reaction stat could spring for wired reflexes 2 and reflex boosters 2 to start with a reaction score of 9 (the cap for any metatype). It would still be a questionable choice, but some people might go for it.
-
also walking around with your surgical modifications in wireless mode is a suicidally stupid thing to do.
Only if you specifically interpret one line in a very specific way that we know for a fact is not RAI.
Lorebane: They were available for starting characters, in the core rulebook, in SR4. Also, you're mistaken regarding (a) what the augmented max is in SR5, and (b) with the belief that Wired Reflexes/Reaction Enhancers respect that when stacked. With regard to the augmented max, it's (Natural Attribute +4) in SR5, not (Natural Maximum * 1.5), which means the highest you can typically attain is 10 for Reaction. However, Wired Reflexes and Reaction Enhancers in wireless mode explicitly do not respect this limitation; thus, you can get a bonus of +6 instead of just +4, and just get a possible Reaction of 12. Thus, a character with WR3 and RE3 can have Reaction 6(12), Intuition 6, and 18+4d6 Initiative. That means the character is guaranteed 3 passes, with the range being from 22 to 42. That's in addition to 18 defense dice, or up to 24 on full defense.
-
also walking around with your surgical modifications in wireless mode is a suicidally stupid thing to do.
Only if you specifically interpret one line in a very specific way that we know for a fact is not RAI.
Could you expand on this a bit? I always just assumed that wireless 'ware risked getting bricked, but I trust your opinion. Is there another interpretation I'm missing?
-
Also, you're mistaken regarding (a) what the augmented max is in SR5, and (b) with the belief that Wired Reflexes/Reaction Enhancers respect that when stacked. With regard to the augmented max, it's (Natural Attribute +4) in SR5, not (Natural Maximum * 1.5), which means the highest you can typically attain is 10 for Reaction.
I had not been aware of this. I'm looking for it in the core rulebook now, but can't seem to track it down. Can you please point me to where it says this?
-
For me, it almost always comes down to "I have essence to spare, and I don't have nuyen to spare."
That said, mixing wired reflexes with two points of reaction booster isn't a bad move, as it ensures a second IP for less then Wired 2.
-
also walking around with your surgical modifications in wireless mode is a suicidally stupid thing to do.
Only if you specifically interpret one line in a very specific way that we know for a fact is not RAI.
Could you expand on this a bit? I always just assumed that wireless 'ware risked getting bricked, but I trust your opinion. Is there another interpretation I'm missing?
Some people read the description of what bricking does as saying that the 'ware lights on fire inside the body, which is where the "suicidal" component comes in. Without that element, slaving up to something with a Sleaze attribute or maintaining different tactical footings (wireless off when running stealth, on when you "go loud") leaves you in a pretty good footing.
Also, you're mistaken regarding (a) what the augmented max is in SR5, and (b) with the belief that Wired Reflexes/Reaction Enhancers respect that when stacked. With regard to the augmented max, it's (Natural Attribute +4) in SR5, not (Natural Maximum * 1.5), which means the highest you can typically attain is 10 for Reaction.
I had not been aware of this. I'm looking for it in the core rulebook now, but can't seem to track it down. Can you please point me to where it says this?
With regard to (a), page 94.
With regard to (b), page 455 in the Wireless entry for Wired Reflexes.
-
Yeah, just to clarify; I didn't mean suicidal as in "will literally cause the death of your character." But I put the street sam who gets his wired reflexes bricked in the same category as a decker with a bricked cyberdeck or a rigger with all of his drones blown up. That is to say, completely, thoroughly, hilariously screwed.
-
Augmented Maximum applies to Cyberware, Bioware, and specific Adept Powers + Spells that state they obey Augmented Maximum. It is ignored by any other sources and explicit exceptions, such as Cyberlimbs*, Wireless WR+RE, and drugs.
*: A GM should still bitchslap any character who grabs a 9-Agi limb with a natural agi of less than 3, no matter the downsides regarding movement rate and physical limit, which both ignore cyberlimbs as well.
Bewilderbeast: My own street sam doesn't even have bonus-initiative-dice from ware. Answer to when you really need Initiative? Use Edge.
-
Bewilderbeast: My own street sam doesn't even have bonus-initiative-dice from ware. Answer to when you really need Initiative? Use Edge.
That's a legitimate way to build a character, but the guy who spends half (!) his Essence and a considerable chunk of nuyen on Wired Reflexes 2, only to get it turned into dead weight on his nervous system by a wily enemy decker is definitely going to have some proverbial egg on his face.
Unless you and the team decker are freaking blood brothers I don't think wireless wired reflexes are a good idea.
I'm just wary of oxymorons in general, though.
-
Yeah, it's silly to do. Me, I just bought RE3 soon after chargen in Missions.
You want Initiative Dice, pay the mage so he gets a F1 Sustaining Focus and casts Increased Reflexes on you with Reagents. MUCH cheaper.
-
Yeah, just to clarify; I didn't mean suicidal as in "will literally cause the death of your character." But I put the street sam who gets his wired reflexes bricked in the same category as a decker with a bricked cyberdeck or a rigger with all of his drones blown up. That is to say, completely, thoroughly, hilariously screwed.
Eh. He's actually still got a decent level of capability, and is in a pretty good place if he's got high Intuition and Reaction.
Bewilderbeast: My own street sam doesn't even have bonus-initiative-dice from ware. Answer to when you really need Initiative? Use Edge.
That's a legitimate way to build a character, but the guy who spends half (!) his Essence and a considerable chunk of nuyen on Wired Reflexes 2, only to get it turned into dead weight on his nervous system by a wily enemy decker is definitely going to have some proverbial egg on his face.
Unless you and the team decker are freaking blood brothers I don't think wireless wired reflexes are a good idea.
I'm just wary of oxymorons in general, though.
I think you're figuring you're giving the decker more access/ability to screw with you than you actually are.
-
Yeah, it's silly to do. Me, I just bought RE3 soon after chargen in Missions.
You want Initiative Dice, pay the mage so he gets a F1 Sustaining Focus and casts Increased Reflexes on you with Reagents. MUCH cheaper.
This would depend on how much I like you, what other foci I have, and just what keeping you alive is worth to me :D
So, you best be likable, generous, and a good meat shield! (and IF you turn out to be a REALLY good meat shield, I hand out cookies with every free Heal spell!)
***
Speaking as a GM, this is something I do not allow, UNLESS that mage is an other player, or a contact made in game. Otherwise you end up in this murky grey area of contact abuse that I would rather just not get into....
-
Well if I pay you every dime (and karma) you spend, and a surplus payment can easily be negotiated... I mean, what you got to lose? You can use it on a Spirit as well. And at 8+18 soak dice, 17 attack dice and 13 defense dice (18 with full defense), I'd consider myself a decent meat shield. ^_^ Also 5 Charisma and 6 Negotiation/Etiquette for likeable. :P
And yes, I'd only do this with another player. A contact wouldn't easily dare, due to astral signature...
-
There is, of course, the slight issue that the description of Wired Reflexes is phrased in such a way that one could argue that RAW it's allowed to stack with the Increase Reflexes spell:
While Synaptic boosters "cannot be combined with any other form of Reaction or Initiative enhancement", the restriction for Wired Reflexes is that they "are incompatible with augmentations that affect Reaction or Initiative". On the magical side, while the Improved Reflexes power says "the increase cannot be combined with other technological or magical increases to Initiative", the Increase Reflexes spell doesn't say it's incompatible with anything except itself.
Does this mean Wired Reflexes and the Increase Reflexes can stack, since neither says it's incompatible with the other, or is this simply another phrasing mistake?
Yes.
Aaron in the initiative response what exactly are you saying yes to?
The first part of the question.
-
Wired are decent choices, but at the 150k for rating 2 and a whopping 3 ESS, you might as well pony up the extra cash and go for the Synaptic 2, saving you a massive 2 ESS to spend on other useful stuff like dermal plating/orthoskin/cyber eyes etc
-
On the other hand, Alpha grade Wired Reflexes Rating 1 (10R) and Used grade Reaction Enhancers 3 (11R) is a decent deal for a starting character as well; +4 REA and +1d6 Initiative Dice for 76050 nuyen and 2.725 Essence, although you do leave yourself vulnerable to hacking this way.
By comparison, Synaptic Booster Rating 1 is 0.5 Essence and 95000; it can't be detected by scanners or hacked, but you also lose out on 3 REA.
For a Rigger, I'd stick with the Reaction Enhancers on their own, purely for the added driver skills.
-
On the other hand, Alpha grade Wired Reflexes Rating 1 (10R) and Used grade Reaction Enhancers 3 (11R) is a decent deal for a starting character as well; +4 REA and +1d6 Initiative Dice for 76050 nuyen and 2.725 Essence, although you do leave yourself vulnerable to hacking this way.
By comparison, Synaptic Booster Rating 1 is 0.5 Essence and 95000; it can't be detected by scanners or hacked, but you also lose out on 3 REA.
For a Rigger, I'd stick with the Reaction Enhancers on their own, purely for the added driver skills.
+1
-
For a Rigger, I'd stick with the Reaction Enhancers on their own, purely for the added driver skills.
So true.
-
Wr1 > sb1
Sb3 > wr3
Another advantage of wr is that they are compatible with magic and drugs. Sb are not.
-
Another advantage of wr is that they are compatible with magic and drugs. Sb are not.
This is probably something I missed, but why are Synaptic Boosters not compatible with drugs and/or magic?
-
The synaptic booster cannot be combined with any other form of Reaction or Initiative enhancement.
-
The synaptic booster cannot be combined with any other form of Reaction or Initiative enhancement.
That makes sense. I've always read that line as being identical to this one:
Wired Reflexes are incompatible with augmentations that affect Reaction and Initiative.
A strict interpretation would indicate that Synaptic Boosters aren't compatible with drugs or magic, while Wired Reflexes are. However, I have always thought that drugs and magic "buffs" counted as augmentations. Your interpretation makes more sense though.
-
Yeah, that's part of the problem; the terms "augmentation" and "enhancement" are used interchangeably in the core book, with only certain items/spells having restrictions.
Wired Reflexes and Synaptic Boosters are good examples of discrepancies created as a result of this inconsistent use.
-
This is probably something I missed, but why are Synaptic Boosters not compatible with drugs and/or magic?
It's a rule-lawyer thing, and truth be told I don't see any plausible reason for it, so suspect it's just a matter of ill-phrasing.
By the way, Augmentations was stated to be solely Ware by Aaron. Magic and drugs don't count.
-
This is probably something I missed, but why are Synaptic Boosters not compatible with drugs and/or magic?
It's a rule-lawyer thing, and truth be told I don't see any plausible reason for it, so suspect it's just a matter of ill-phrasing.
By the way, Augmentations was stated to be solely Ware by Aaron. Magic and drugs don't count.
Oh, good, I missed that Aaron has provided a reading of "Augmentations"; what about enhancements, though?
-
This is probably something I missed, but why are Synaptic Boosters not compatible with drugs and/or magic?
It's a rule-lawyer thing, and truth be told I don't see any plausible reason for it, so suspect it's just a matter of ill-phrasing.
By the way, Augmentations was stated to be solely Ware by Aaron. Magic and drugs don't count.
Given the consistency (or lack thereof) of phrasing throughout the book, I'm in complete agreement.
-
in this case the book is actually pretty consistent (for once).
probably over 20 references to "augmentation"
...and iirc they all talk about cyberware or bioware (and not magic).
-
Yeah, the problem word isn't augmentation, it's enhancement. Specifically, "the synaptic booster cannot be combined with other forms of Reaction or Initiative enhancement" vs. "wired reflexes cannot be combined with augmentations that affect Reaction or Initiative." Drugs and magic obviously aren't augmentations, so they stack with wires, but "enhancement" is a little for vague, so one could read that they do not stack with boosters.
-
Changing all "enhancement" to "augmentation" shouldn't cause too much of a problem; the system has other hard-limits built in (every spell that boosts an attribute says it's stopped by the Augmented Limit, and there's the hard-cap of 5d6 initiative dice).
-
Changing all "enhancement" to "augmentation" shouldn't cause too much of a problem; the system has other hard-limits built in (every spell that boosts an attribute says it's stopped by the Augmented Limit, and there's the hard-cap of 5d6 initiative dice).
Agreed.
-
My guess is the editor was trying to stress that boosters never stack with Reaction Enhancers and used a different word to distinguish it from Wires, but yeah, I'm ruling it the same way.
-
It definitely makes sense. It'd be nice to see the errata document clarify these typos in a future update.
-
I was under the impression that wired reflexes included effectively replacing your spinal column with a fiber optic cable, or something similarly invasive. So wouldn't getting your wireless reflexes getting bricked leave you paralyzed?
-
Blue Rose
It might have been described as such in past editions (I seem to remember something similar), but in SR5 Wired Reflexes are described as follows.
This highly invasive, painful, life-changing operation adds a multitude of neural boosters and adrenaline stimulators in strategic locations throughout your body work to catapult you into a whole new world where everything around you seems to move in slow motion.
So no, it doesn't replace anything, it just adds to what's already there, at least as I read it.
-
I was under the impression that wired reflexes included effectively replacing your spinal column with a fiber optic cable, or something similarly invasive. So wouldn't getting your wireless reflexes getting bricked leave you paralyzed?
Wired Reflexes has always been described as implanted neural boosters and adrenaline stimulators.
It is Reaction Enhancers which mention replacing part of the spinal column (not the spinal cord) with superconducting material - and SR5 clarifies that as specific, isolated vertebrae.
In both cases, there is no reason to assume that the implant failing has any greater effect that removing the benefits of the implant.
...now, a move-by-wire system on the other hand, is a two part thing; putting your body into a constant state of seizure, and an expert system to harness that seizure. A particularly nit-picky player might make a case for bricking the expert system but not whatever it is that causes the seizure so that the augmented target would be stuck with the seizure.
Me... I'm all for letting a game be a game, even if the result is something that doesn't seem quite "realistic."
-
Given how a wireless Move-By-Wire system likely will function as the combination plus Skillwires, while only costing the essence of WR, I'd say that in that case bricking->paralysis is a well-deserved consequence, but I can be cold like that.
-
Given how a wireless Move-By-Wire system likely will function as the combination plus Skillwires, while only costing the essence of WR, I'd say that in that case bricking->paralysis is a well-deserved consequence, but I can be cold like that.
I don't see that as being cold, so much as being logical: There has to be some consequence, other than essence, for having so much of your bodily functions being run by machines.
-
Given how a wireless Move-By-Wire system likely will function as the combination plus Skillwires, while only costing the essence of WR, I'd say that in that case bricking->paralysis is a well-deserved consequence, but I can be cold like that.
I don't see that as being cold, so much as being logical: There has to be some consequence, other than essence, for having so much of your bodily functions being run by machines.
Simple logical consequence, particularly when the fluff for 3 editions has said that your very movements are changed once you have Move By Wire. When your unconscious movement is different, that means you have a deeper level of man-machine tie-in.
As for the enhancement/augmentation thing, if I was the editor I'd have used "enhancement" to refer to anything (drugs, magic, 'ware) that boosts something, and only used "augmentation" for 'ware. I recall 4E being a little more strict about "magic IP boosting doesn't stack with 'ware or other magic, 'ware IP boosting doesn't stack with magic or other 'ware", with drugs being ambiguous and I think should be interpreted as stacking with anything since they carry addiction as a possible consequence.
-
I agree with how drug bonuses work, Mithlas. They also don't mention they're limited by augmented limits anywhere. As you said though, they have addiction as a consequence. How much of one is largely up to the GM, but it's still a built-in function that stops them from being relied upon too heavily.
I wouldn't rule that bricking any kind of implants has an effect on the target beyond removing their ability to use it (which can already be a huge downside). Because I like hackers being able to brick stuff, but I don't want street samurai players to have yet another reason to bitch about wireless bonuses-- Especially when RAW there's no precedent for stuff like that happening. Like... Anywhere. Wireless matrix is only a decade or so years old in SR, but in that time I don't think I've read anything mentioning (in fiction or rules) a runner getting geeked because his 'ware killed him from the inside out. Runners dieing because they suddenly lose that edge at a critical moment? Sure. But unless it's biofeedback sent straight to the brain via Black IC or Black Hammer, nobody's just dropped dead (yet) from somebody crashing an internal implant.
Besides, Michael, aren't you one of the people who's against bricking having effects like that? I recall you stating before how you felt a bricked smartgun should still work as a gun just fine, but I could be misremembering.
If there's even some JackPoint rumors about that stuff happening though, I retract my statement.
-
Besides, Michael, aren't you one of the people who's against bricking having effects like that? I recall you stating before how you felt a bricked smartgun should still work as a gun just fine, but I could be misremembering.
An External smartgun, yes, and Wired Reflexes shutting down shouldn't mean you go down. But Move-by-Wire is a different beast altogether.
-
If there's even some JackPoint rumors about that stuff happening though, I retract my statement.
Plan 9 continues to be invited to JackPoint, I'm sure there's rumors of something like that somewhere. Whether there's any in-universe credibility I don't know. Does remind me of a question implied earlier: what would happen if an EMP went off in the middle of a shadowrun team? The rigger and hacker would almost certainly be down, but how bad would it hit the cybered street sam?
As to having a bricked Move By Wire, I would never have that suddenly walk you into bullets, or even stop you from running away, but it would change your game plan from "fight" to "run and get repairs".
-
To answer your EMP question:
Cyberware is left OK, as the EMP does not hurt it.
SOME gear may be fried, some not. All depends on if it is shielded or not. (some gear actually states if it is EMP shielded!)
-
To answer your EMP question:
Cyberware is left OK, as the EMP does not hurt it.
SOME gear may be fried, some not. All depends on if it is shielded or not. (some gear actually states if it is EMP shielded!)
I'm not questioning your correctness, but I would like to know the reference for cyberware continuing to work.
-
To answer your EMP question:
Cyberware is left OK, as the EMP does not hurt it.
SOME gear may be fried, some not. All depends on if it is shielded or not. (some gear actually states if it is EMP shielded!)
I'm not questioning your correctness, but I would like to know the reference for cyberware continuing to work.
Under EMP grenades in arsenal:
EMP Grenade: Th is weapon does not detonate like a normal
grenade, instead sending out a powerful electromagnetic pulse
designed to create damaging current and voltage surges in electronic
items. Th ough most electronics in 2070 are optical based,
an EMP blast can still aff ect power supplies, anything linked to an
antenna or electric cable, or older/cheaper devices with integrated
circuits, transistors, inductors, or silicon chips. Most cyberware is
also unaffected; RFID chips, however, are extremely vulnerable
to EMP attacks.
The gamemaster determines what devices are affected. Each
affected device within a 10-meter radius makes a Device Rating x
2 (3) Test; reduce the threshold by 1 for 2 meters outside of that
radius. Items that fail the test burn out, have their data erased, and
may even catch on fi re or explode from the power surge. At the
gamemaster’s discretion, even optical devices like commlinks will
lose 3 points of Signal rating as their antennae are affected.
Other then that. Page 92 and 105 of Unwired also talk about EMPS, and both barely make mention of cyberware, except to say that if your have really old tech, your could be affected.
Annndd.... That is it for EMP. For EMP in 5e, so far in the corebook it is mentioned twice, on in a piece of fluff, and the about stealth tags being resistant to EMP... and that is it.
So far, there are no EMP weapons to worry about, unless you update arsenal and the HERF gun and EMP grenades... and borth make mention that most cyber is unaffected, but might lose signal rating, thus connection the matrix for a time..
-
Ah, I figured it was an older edition thing; Thanks.
-
Ah, I figured it was an older edition thing; Thanks.
NP
-
It's not spelled out in the 5th edition rules. Instead, you have to go back to 3rd (or maybe 4th) edition to see why. The explanation is that most of the electrical components are optical, and thus don't get interrupted by magnetism.
-
It should still play havoc with the parts of your 'ware involving receiving/sending wireless signals, because they would be broadcasting/receiving in the electromagnetic spectrum and EMP could possibly short out/disable the wireless connecting bit.
So while it wouldn't necessarily entirely fry your wireless enabled smartgun, which main functions are probably controlled using optical chips, but it could fry it's wireless connection leaving you without Wireless bonuses until it's rebooted/fixed.
Unless they are going to claim matrix connection is not happening in the normal electrolmagnetic spectrum of radio waves, wireless etc...
-
It should still play havoc with the parts of your 'ware involving receiving/sending wireless signals, because they would be broadcasting/receiving in the electromagnetic spectrum and EMP could possibly short out/disable the wireless connecting bit.
So while it wouldn't necessarily entirely fry your wireless enabled smartgun, which main functions are probably controlled using optical chips, but it could fry it's wireless connection leaving you without Wireless bonuses until it's rebooted/fixed.
Unless they are going to claim matrix connection is not happening in the normal electrolmagnetic spectrum of radio waves, wireless etc...
You're starting down a dangerous road of applying science to Shadowrun. I wouldn't recommend it; that way lies madness.
-
...cannot be combined with other forms of ...
Pretty clear that you can't combine it with anything.
Not augmentations. Not magic. Not drugs. Not...
An External smartgun, yes...
Either your firearm device (with an external smartgun system accessory) is wireless OFF or it is wireless ON.
If it is wireless ON then it can be bricked.
...and you can not shoot with a bricked firearm.
iirc they even use a weapon as one of the examples of what happen when you brick a device.
you can still use it as a club (or the bayonet if it have one), but you can't use it to shoot people anymore.
-
Either your firearm device (with an external smartgun system accessory) is wireless OFF or it is wireless ON.
If it is wireless ON then it can be bricked.
Where is it stated that an accessory can't be Wireless ON if the main device isn't Wireless ON? What I see is that the firearm and the External Smartlink are two separate devices. Bricking an external smartlink should have no effect on the firearm, since it's not the same device.
-
They are still connected together physically so as a hacker once I access one I should be able to access the other.
-
Either your firearm device (with an external smartgun system accessory) is wireless OFF or it is wireless ON.
If it is wireless ON then it can be bricked.
Where is it stated that an accessory can't be Wireless ON if the main device isn't Wireless ON? What I see is that the firearm and the External Smartlink are two separate devices. Bricking an external smartlink should have no effect on the firearm, since it's not the same device.
Depends, the wireless ON accessory is still plugged into the Wireless OFF weapon, allowing you to affect the weapon and get data from it like ammo count, weapon stress, etc
Without a smartlink, a smartgun system just sends out data that isn’t received by anyone and has no effect.
Hacking the connected ON smartlink device allows you a pathway via that plug into the OFF weapon since it was connected to the ON device via direct connection.
I suppose one could argue that if someone bricked JUST the smartlink at that point the smartlink would crash and you would lose your smartgun bonuses, though I would still maybe roll for chance of jamming up the gun since the crashing smartlink could have sent out all sorts of garbage commands to the weapon (eject clip, safety on, etc..)
But this is where it gets messy because realistically the decker would just brick the gun at this point, they have the link- even though the gun is supposedly OFF to wireless since it is plugged into an ON device, the ON device is acting as that open backdoor.
-
...cannot be combined with other forms of ...
Pretty clear that you can't combine it with anything.
Not augmentations. Not magic. Not drugs. Not...
I suspect if it were clear, this thread would be shorter. Augmentation is a class of gear, encompassing both cyber- and bioware. The word enhancement, on the other hand, is used in various ways throughout the text, most commonly to describe something you add to something, not the thing itself. You have sensor enhancements, cyberarm enhancements, vision enhancements, and so on. Page 229 mentions "enhancements or bonuses" within the context of initiative, but offers nothing in the form of clarifying how one is distinguished from the other. The KISS rule would be that everything in within a class (augmentations) is subject to the same rule, so augmentations don't stack with other augmentations--the one exception being the clearly-defined wireless interaction between reaction enhancers and wires. If some form of non-augmentation initiative booster (Jazz, for example) stacks with one augmentation, the KISS reading would have it stack with them all.
It's important to note the word enhancement does not show up in the discussion about drugs, nor does it appear under the description of the Increased Reflexes spell, so there's no textual evidence to suggest those things count as enhancements as opposed to bonuses, or some other untyped form.
-
"any other form of Reaction or Initiative enhancement"
- Not just limited to Augmentations (cyberware and bioware).
"augmentations that affect Reaction or Initiative"
- Only limited to Augmentations (cyberware and bioware).
-
"any other form of Reaction or Initiative enhancement"
- Not just limited to Augmentations (cyberware and bioware).
Yes, but if I'm remembering my older rules correctly, bioware was fully compatible with drugs and magic. Cyberware and bioware wouldn't boost each other though. And that is part of what is coloring this discussion. The older rules (again, if I'm remembering them correctly) allowed it, but now with no explanation it's not allowed?
-
"any other form of Reaction or Initiative enhancement"
- Not just limited to Augmentations (cyberware and bioware).
This assumes enhancements are a category of things within the game that covers all non-augmentation ways of increasing your initiative. There is no support for this assumption in the text.
The problem with RAW arguments is that they assume the authors understand English, and technical writing in particular, RAW. They often do not. This isn't the result of any one of them somehow being illiterate; it's the result of the collaborative nature of writing RPG material not meshing well with a lax editing process.
-
Actually, it assumes that, lacking an in game definition like augmentation has, enhancements use the normal real world definition. an increase or improvement in quality, value, or extent.
Do drugs increase the value of your reaction/initiative? If so, they are an enhancement.
Collaborative writing is a pain. That's no reason for editors not to clean things up afterward. SR could really do well with setting out a standardized list of terms like Pathfinder has done. It would let the lax editing get by more easily.
-
Actually, it assumes that, lacking an in game definition like augmentation has, enhancements use the normal real world definition. an increase or improvement in quality, value, or extent.
Do drugs increase the value of your reaction/initiative? If so, they are an enhancement.
Collaborative writing is a pain. That's no reason for editors not to clean things up afterward. SR could really do well with setting out a standardized list of terms like Pathfinder has done. It would let the lax editing get by more easily.
You are missing the part on pages 229 and 230 where enhancements and bonuses are clearly mentioned as separate things. The case that drugs are bonuses, and not enhancements, is equally valid, which is to say, entirely unsupported.
And I'm entirely sympathetic to the pains of collaborative writing--it's a very hard thing to get right. I'm sure folks were under the gun to get the book out on a certain date, but it really feels like it needed one more go 'round with the editors.
-
A glossary in the back would've been really nice. ???
-
You are missing the part on pages 229 and 230 where enhancements and bonuses are clearly mentioned as separate things. The case that drugs are bonuses, and not enhancements, is equally valid, which is to say, entirely unsupported.
Not missing it, just looking at the whole picture. I would propose that something internal (like a quality) wouldn't be an enhancement, but would be a bonus. Something external would be an enhancement. Just looking at the way the term is generally used. Drugs grant bonuses, but they are not in and of themselves bonuses.
-
You are missing the part on pages 229 and 230 where enhancements and bonuses are clearly mentioned as separate things. The case that drugs are bonuses, and not enhancements, is equally valid, which is to say, entirely unsupported.
Not missing it, just looking at the whole picture. I would propose that something internal (like a quality) wouldn't be an enhancement, but would be a bonus. Something external would be an enhancement. Just looking at the way the term is generally used. Drugs grant bonuses, but they are not in and of themselves bonuses.
Which is a perfectly fine interpretation, but it's just that--an interpretation. It's not RAW.
-
See, this is why a rules dictionary is critical. It would be really handy to have for players, but I can't imagine trying to keep all the terminology straight on the writer's side is at all easy without one.
-
See, this is why a rules dictionary is critical. It would be really handy to have for players, but I can't imagine trying to keep all the terminology straight on the writer's side is at all easy without one.
Yeah, this is really my point. The editor(s) should have established a shared lexicon at an early stage in the process. It'd be great to see something like a rules dictionary show up in the Runners Companion v5.0.
-
It would be almost impossible to do at this point. The key to being useful for defined terms in a game is to define them from the get go and design the rules from the ground up with the defined terms in mind. If they were to try and start now, after the core rules are released, it would likely just add to the issue instead of fix it.
We can always cross our fingers for sixth edition though.
-
We can always cross our fingers for sixth edition though.
"Shadowrun: Fingers crossed since 1989"
-
It would be almost impossible to do at this point. The key to being useful for defined terms in a game is to define them from the get go and design the rules from the ground up with the defined terms in mind. If they were to try and start now, after the core rules are released, it would likely just add to the issue instead of fix it.
We can always cross our fingers for sixth edition though.
It would be extremely difficult to do. But they're early enough that they'd only need to errata two books to make it happen. I'm not saying it will, but I'm crossing my fingers for sooner than 6th edition.
-
It's not about the number of books, when it comes to collaborative projects, its about the number of writers. Every writer has a different style, uses words differently to mean the same things, different things, similar but not same things, etc. That's why most companies set up the standard terms before they start work on a project. Add in the Shadowrun custom of copy/paste from older editions (which had no standardized definitions) and in just compounds the issue since they didn't start with standard terms.
Honestly, it would probably be easier, faster, and cheaper to create standard terms and rewrite the book than try to errata it to fit to a newly created set of terms. That would take a good editor though (to be cheaper at least).
-
It's not about the number of books, when it comes to collaborative projects, its about the number of writers. Every writer has a different style, uses words differently to mean the same things, different things, similar but not same things, etc. That's why most companies set up the standard terms before they start work on a project. Add in the Shadowrun custom of copy/paste from older editions (which had no standardized definitions) and in just compounds the issue since they didn't start with standard terms.
Honestly, it would probably be easier, faster, and cheaper to create standard terms and rewrite the book than try to errata it to fit to a newly created set of terms. That would take a good editor though (to be cheaper at least).
This is 100% correct. My job touches on scholarly communication and it (almost) all boils down to the editor(s).
This is also why I largely think RAW arguments about Shadowrun are pointless. Without any internal consistency, there's really no point to trying to figure out RAW since the AW part is so screwed up. I think the goal ought to be "plausible/agreeable interpretation."
-
I think RAW arguments tend to make more sense when you're worried about missions games. Home games are easily tailored to taste so RAW is irrelevant and really, so is RAI.
-
Yes, but RAI still matters to those who don't want to break their head (and games) trying to find the right houserules, since RAI has a significant impact of balance that one should only steer away from after a well-informed decision.
-
RAW is quite often not RAI without consistency, but debating interpretations is pretty much the definition of a futile effort. For an example, look at how many "plausible" interpretation there are of the Bible. Roughly 41,000 denominations of Christianity from one text because they all interpret differently.
Of course, we have it a bit easier. The authors of the rules may actually tell us the intent, but that seems to come about fairly slowly with Catalyst. I argue RAW mostly because I run missions at a local store. Even if RAW isn't the intent, players should be able to play with the same rules between missions GMs whether the GM pays attention to forums or not.
I am occasionally envious of Pathfinder players with how constant and quick the support is on their forums from the main devs.
-
Yeah, Missions is the reason I argue rules as well--open play is both a blessing a curse.
-
I think RAW arguments tend to make more sense when you're worried about missions games. Home games are easily tailored to taste so RAW is irrelevant and really, so is RAI.
I find this argument problematic - simply put, you need to know how the rules are supposed to work before you go changing them to taste.
-
I think RAW arguments tend to make more sense when you're worried about missions games. Home games are easily tailored to taste so RAW is irrelevant and really, so is RAI.
I find this argument problematic - simply put, you need to know how the rules are supposed to work before you go changing them to taste.
Agreed. Too many times people go and "change" things to their liking without fully realizing the full extent of what they are changing.... and then things "break" in their games... and they come and complain here...
Changing things to suit your table's play style is fine... when you fully understand what changes you are making, but without a grounding in RAW/RAI it can be hard to exactly understand the consequences of a "house rule to simplify XXX"
-
I think RAW arguments tend to make more sense when you're worried about missions games. Home games are easily tailored to taste so RAW is irrelevant and really, so is RAI.
I find this argument problematic - simply put, you need to know how the rules are supposed to work before you go changing them to taste.
Agreed. Too many times people go and "change" things to their liking without fully realizing the full extent of what they are changing.... and then things "break" in their games... and they come and complain here...
Changing things to suit your table's play style is fine... when you fully understand what changes you are making, but without a grounding in RAW/RAI it can be hard to exactly understand the consequences of a "house rule to simplify XXX"
Chief example: People deciding to nerf something they wrongly believe to be overpowered, simply because they having done near enough looking into the balancing factors.
-
I think RAW arguments tend to make more sense when you're worried about missions games. Home games are easily tailored to taste so RAW is irrelevant and really, so is RAI.
I find this argument problematic - simply put, you need to know how the rules are supposed to work before you go changing them to taste.
Agreed. Too many times people go and "change" things to their liking without fully realizing the full extent of what they are changing.... and then things "break" in their games... and they come and complain here...
Changing things to suit your table's play style is fine... when you fully understand what changes you are making, but without a grounding in RAW/RAI it can be hard to exactly understand the consequences of a "house rule to simplify XXX"
Chief example: People deciding to nerf something they wrongly believe to be overpowered, simply because they having done near enough looking into the balancing factors.
I always find RAW to be important, as is RAI (though clearly RAI is harder to determine-- Sometimes) because if you're not going to try and use the rules as they're being stated at all, why play the game at all? Go find another system you understand and try to shoe-horn the setting into it.
Shadowrun is the setting and the system, yeah? They're made and changed at the same time. So when you houserule something, you have to think "Was this designed with the setting and the mechanics already in mind? Does my change still fit both as well?" The people working on it are supposed to know the system and setting well enough to make rules and systems that reflect both parts well and generally know them better than the average player. At least, I assume that's how it's supposed to be.