[RHat]

Not until it's in the Errata it isn't.  The rules are written, not distributed through hear-say on some forum.

The intent of the writers is relevant.

[FasterN8]

Page 7 and only about 7 houserules listed so far!   I'm exaggerating of course. (at least I think I am :/ )  I really wish there was a houserule subforum. 

Who wants to read a new houserule?   

I've talked to several people who wish there were something more creative than bricking for Hackers to do, so I decided to come up with some interesting alternatives.  Let me know what you think.

JudasGun: Complex Action, 2 Marks, Target: Enemy Smartgun
Test: Hacking + Intuition [Sleaze] vs Logic + Firewall 
This subversion projects the firing arc of the weapon into the AR display of its target enabling more effective defensive action. Hits versus the target smartgun become a bonus to defense against any attacks made by the compromised smartgun.  If you have 3 marks on the target Smartgun, this action only requires a simple action.

ARO Distraction:  Complex Action, 1 Mark, Targets: AR equipped enemies
Test: Hacking + Logic [Data Processing] vs Intuition + Firewall
This action utilizes all the best tricks of ARO spammers out there... all at the same time.  Visual and audio distractions flood AR displays as the targets firewalls are overwhelmed with seemingly legitimate ARO display requests.  Net hits become a visibility modifier until the target reboots or takes the Full Matrix Defense Action which clears their display.  This exploit may be used against multiple targets simultaneously.  If you have only a single target or you have 2 marks on all the targets, this action only requires a simple action.

Cycle Matrix ID: Complex Action, Owner, Target: Device
Test: Electronic Warfare + Logic [Data Processing] vs Willpower + Firewall
Typically used by Riggers whose drones are under attack by a Decker, this action scrambles the Matrix ID of the device momentarily in order to throw off marks.  If your net hits achieve a threshold equal to the number of marks on the device, the all marks (from that persona) are erased without rebooting.

[Noble Drake]

Michael, unless Bull has a page reference or Errata, he stated an opinion, not a rule.

That is a shortsighted view to hold.

Bull's statement clarifies that the rules not listing initiation or submersion on the Additional Purchases & Restrictions table on page 98, and the text on the same page only referring to the Character Advancement section on page 103 in the specific context of raising attributes and skills - the rules effectively not saying "you are allowed to initiate or submerge at character creation" - means that you cannot do those things.

[DigitalZombie]

@FasterN8 well Ive updated my houserules on page 2, so there are a lot now:)
I think your first 2 matrix trix are cool, Im likely gonna use those myself as for the third, Im not sure you should roll against the opponents firewall. Wouldnt it more fitting to roll against his attack/sleaze (whatever was used to put on the last mark)? I dunno it seems to be pretty powerful.

Not until it's in the Errata it isn't.  The rules are written, not distributed through hear-say on some forum.

I agree, although I also agree with the others that initiaton/submerging isnt allowed at char gen. Its nice of Bull to mention his opinion on the matter, but that doesnt make it RAW, he might even disagree with other developers and be the minority regarding those opinions.
I personally wouldnt have a problem with a rigger technomancer submerging to get the ability to jump in his drones at char gen.

[Michael Chandra]

Bull doesn't state his opinion. Claiming that when he makes such a statement it is merely an opinion is rather a rude thing to say. He can be wrong, yes. But he is not presenting an opinion as a fact. The only opinion he presented on the matter was that he'd allow it at his games.

If you don't like the rule, change it. But don't mix up statements and opinions, and don't try to dodge out of a rule.

[FasterN8]

@FasterN8 well I've updated my houserules on page 2, so there are a lot now:)
I think your first 2 matrix trix are cool, I'm likely gonna use those myself as for the third, I'm not sure you should roll against the opponents firewall. Wouldn't it more fitting to roll against his attack/sleaze (whatever was used to put on the last mark)? I dunno it seems to be pretty powerful.

It may very well be too powerful, but that's why I've got you guys to sanity check it for me.  I just wanted some ways for the Rigger to be able to protect himself against the Ddecker, although with the very high damage potential of DataSpike, I'm not sure if any of these things will offer any advantage over simply bricking your opponents electronics.

The reasoning for the Firewall defense was that the mark (after it's placed) represents a certain amount of authority to do stuff on the target device/icon.  Revoking those permissions seemed like it would be defended by the Firewall, but I could go with another interpretation too.

Here's another one for the Rigger, but it's pretty labor intensive since he has to constantly work on it to keep his guys hidden.

Hide Networks: Complex Action, 2 Marks, Target: Allies PAN
Test: Electronic Warfare + Logic [Data Processing]
The Rigger uses the processing of his RCC to redirect and obfuscate the Matrix connection of himself and his team.  Hits on the test become the Sleaze attribute of the Target for defense tests until the next combat turn.  PANs hidden in this way take up a drone slot.

[Lobo]

@Faster,

I like ARO distraction - may put that in my game

For Judasgun, my only "problem" with using it from a balance standpoint is that (as you said in your last post) it is just worse than bricking the gun.

If I already have 2 marks on the target, then if I attack it, odds are with the extra +4 DV (not to mention any other programs I am running to increase damage), I can simply brick the gun and be done with it.

I do like that it is a Sleaze action, and will allow deckers who specialize in Sleaze over Attack a different option.

The only other problem you will run into is someone (like the mage in my game) who refuses to interact with AR - then it won't help them at all - although that's just their problem

[FasterN8]

@Faster,

I like ARO distraction - may put that in my game

For Judasgun, my only "problem" with using it from a balance standpoint is that (as you said in your last post) it is just worse than bricking the gun.

If I already have 2 marks on the target, then if I attack it, odds are with the extra +4 DV (not to mention any other programs I am running to increase damage), I can simply brick the gun and be done with it.

Yeah that's true.  The redeeming feature of JudasGun is that the effect is not immediately apparent to the shooter. So while the enemy may just switch to a backup if you brick his gun, he'll continue to use his "JudasGun", but after a while may start to wonder why everyone he shots is SO jumpy when he's about to pull the trigger.

Plus you can compromise the guards guns before the fight begins.

[DMK]

I've been giving some thought as to what I'd do should I end up running SR5 (which I'm considering doing; probably a Missions adventure as a one-shot.)

A few things come to mind:

1) Technomancer: Priority A: Resonance Skill Group @ 5, 7 Complex Forms. Priority B: Resonance Skill Group @4, 5 Complex Forms. Priority C: 3 Complex Forms

2) Aspected Magician: Priority B: Magic 6, One Magical Skill Group @ 6; Priority C: Magic 4, One Magical Skill Group @ 4. Priority D: Magic 2, One Magical Skill Group @ 2.

3) Magical Adepts: Go with the Missions Hot Patch, basically.

4) Change the Program Submersion so that you get [Submersion Grade] programs, and allow you to buy the Submersion twice (for (2x [Submersion Grade]) programs.

[Bach_The_Fox]

Considering a house rule for reagents, wanted to get some input on its fairness and any unintended consequences.

Rule: When used for Spellcasting, Reagents may only increase the limit of a spell  by double the force.

Reasoning: Casting and sustaining level 1 spells (particularly  w/Spell Foci, but also with Focused Concentration) using reagents to up the limit is not appropriately costed. It's trivial in terms of nuyen, karma, and drain to get bonuses that Street Sams or Adepts would have to expend half of their resources for. Additionally, the only limit to how many different types of bonuses they can get is also limited only by the spells he chooses to learn and sustain, without the limiting factor of essence or power points. This rule allows mages to continue to do this, but forces them to cast them at moderate forces to get good bonuses, which increases the risk of drain and how many they can have sustained at once.

I think if this limit was in the main book, no one would have batted an eye.

[incrdbil]

I agree that reagent limits are practical. One force 14 Fireball resisted as if it were a force 4 convinced me of that.

[RHat]

I agree that reagent limits are practical. One force 14 Fireball resisted as if it were a force 4 convinced me of that.

Don't reagents just change the limit, having no effect on other force-dependent aspects (IE, the base damage or radius of a Fireball)?

[Bach_The_Fox]

I agree that reagent limits are practical. One force 14 Fireball resisted as if it were a force 4 convinced me of that.

Don't reagents just change the limit, having no effect on other force-dependent aspects (IE, the base damage or radius of a Fireball)?

Yup, they're fine in combat. The hassle of having them ready while you're casting is also a (minor) limiting factor.

He could mean the guy just got 10 successes; easily possible with Edge.

[RHat]

I agree that reagent limits are practical. One force 14 Fireball resisted as if it were a force 4 convinced me of that.

Don't reagents just change the limit, having no effect on other force-dependent aspects (IE, the base damage or radius of a Fireball)?

Yup, they're fine in combat. The hassle of having them ready while you're casting is also a (minor) limiting factor.

He could mean the guy just got 10 successes; easily possible with Edge.

If Edge was involved, Reagents wouldn't be.  And a Force 4 Fireball with 10 successes is a LOT less powerful than a Force 14 Fireball with the same.  DV 21 AP -14 versus DV 11 AP -4, having effect over 14 meters instead of 4, and a big difference to the chances for ignition for anything caught inside.

[Bach_The_Fox]

I agree that reagent limits are practical. One force 14 Fireball resisted as if it were a force 4 convinced me of that.

Don't reagents just change the limit, having no effect on other force-dependent aspects (IE, the base damage or radius of a Fireball)?

Yup, they're fine in combat. The hassle of having them ready while you're casting is also a (minor) limiting factor.

He could mean the guy just got 10 successes; easily possible with Edge.

If Edge was involved, Reagents wouldn't be.  And a Force 4 Fireball with 10 successes is a LOT less powerful than a Force 14 Fireball with the same.  DV 21 AP -14 versus DV 11 AP -4, having effect over 14 meters instead of 4, and a big difference to the chances for ignition for anything caught inside.

Ah, there isn't a head smack emote nor brain fart one. We'll go with