[JimmyCrisis]

Stealth and Decryption neither give you an sleaze/attack rating nor are they on the list of cyber programs that a rigger can use on their RCC.

They state that they add +1 to your Sleaze/Attack rating (respectively), which if you don't have one, can't add to it.

Still, it would be cool to have "cyberdeck upgrade" rules, if only so the decker can piecemeal into a better deck instead of replacing the whole thing at outrageous expense (which will never occur, given the price)

[Namikaze]

Stealth and Decryption neither give you an sleaze/attack rating nor are they on the list of cyber programs that a rigger can use on their RCC.

That list isn't exhaustive.  It's just the programs that a rigger is most likely to benefit from using.

[Csjarrat]

Stealth and Decryption neither give you an sleaze/attack rating nor are they on the list of cyber programs that a rigger can use on their RCC.

They state that they add +1 to your Sleaze/Attack rating (respectively), which if you don't have one, can't add to it.

Still, it would be cool to have "cyberdeck upgrade" rules, if only so the decker can piecemeal into a better deck instead of replacing the whole thing at outrageous expense (which will never occur, given the price)

0+1=1 in my book?

[JimmyCrisis]

If you don't have a rating, you don't get to start at 0, you just don't have it.

It would be like trying to install air intakes and a NOx booster to a horse-drawn carriage.  There's no engine to boost, so there's no effect from the boosting.

[Csjarrat]

Nah, that's not right
 Aaron has stated you can hack from commlinks using edge to push the limit. No attack or sleaze on that so no difference here.

[JimmyCrisis]

Nah, that's not right
 Aaron has stated you can hack from commlinks using edge to push the limit. No attack or sleaze on that so no difference here.

Truely?   Post the link?

[Elektrycerze3]

Title: Re: [SR5] Rules Clarifications and FAQ
Post by: Aaron on August 13, 2013, 10:39:29 PM
Quote from: ZeConster on August 13, 2013, 09:43:13 PM
Are you allowed to take Attack or Sleaze actions with commlinks if you spend Edge on the dice roll to Push the Limit?

By the rules, yes. If your GM agrees with Ricochet (who says s/he believes that this is utterly ridiculous, a legitimate viewpoint), you might not be able to do it this way. Me, I see it as pushing your limits by writing one-shot code on the fly to make the non-decking device bend to your will for just the tiniest moment, so it's cool with me.

Can't give you an exact page. Open the "Rules Clarifications and FAQ", hit "Print" and use Ctrl+F if you don't believe.

[Elektrycerze3]

And to further support Csjarrat's position:

Title: Re: [SR5] Rules Clarifications and FAQ
Post by: Aaron on August 13, 2013, 05:06:43 PM
Quote from: Ryo on August 12, 2013, 01:14:03 AM
Getting this back on topic by actually asking a question for the FAQ....

Running Silent says that you resist being spotted with Logic + Sleaze. So does running silent count as a Sleaze action, and thus start your overwatch score?

Also, only cyberdecks have a Sleaze attribute, so how do commlinks and other devices that are running silent resist being spotted?

No, a defense test isn't an action.

They add their Sleaze attribute of zero to the dice pool. =i)

[JimmyCrisis]

So, the guy you're talking about, Aaron, is a freelancer.  I took this from his sig:

Signature:
Shadowrun Resources: http://pavao.org/shadowrun
I like to answer questions, but my answers are not official and don't necessarily reflect the opinions of Catalyst Game Labs or its employees. I might even be wrong.

So, this guy doesn't speak for Catalyst, making him... what?

[Elektrycerze3]

Making him the only "official" guy who answers our rules questions =P Most people on this forums usually heed his words in all conflicting issues - there are no other clarifications whatsoever.

Also there was one post in that thread which is sometimes interpreted as Aaron saying that his answers are official... Can't look it up at the moment.
I think that is the one:

1. Is your answers are "official" answers from the SR5 developer group?

They're as official as I can make them. I worked on the book and on the rules committee that came up with the rules before the book was written. I'm working on the Shadowrun FAQ that will be released once Line Developer Jason M. Hardy has a chance to look it over. Those answers I'm not 100% certain about I vet with Jason and the folks who work on Shadowrun. I never post an answer that I think might be contradicted in a future update. Other than that, you get what you pay for.

You can safely disregard his words, but we have no other source of clarifications.

[Namikaze]

The majority of what Aaron has stated has ended up being fact later down the line.

[Elektrycerze3]

The majority of what Aaron has stated has ended up being fact later down the line.

http://youtu.be/IRoh62wRgkc

=))