I don't want to say that you are wrong old dancer, but i would like to hear your reasoning for this O.o
He goes down to 0 Essence, he gets changed, all his cyber and bio gets kicked out, he is basically a completely new entity.
He starts like all other vampires with 0 Essence or something like that and then has to feed off of someone unfortunate enough to be close enough by.
Then he adheres to the usual vampire rules which say he can feed up to a certain ammount. Vampires have variable essence numbers anyway, they go both ways.
Up and down and up and down. Elevator up and down. So why should the fact that he had a maximum of 0,5 Essence in a past life be carried over to this "life"?

I mostly agree with you Stahlseele, but don't forget they can only go to max essence x 2. While they usually have a max of 6, there are ways they can lose max essence just like anyone else (Addictions, cyberware, etc), so you can't say that their max essence doesn't matter.

However, AFAIK essence drain from the power of the same name is permanent by all regards, and is considered essence loss in the same way that cyberware is (Except that you don't get to filll the hole with new toys). So, if a newly formed vampire can recover from having their essence drained by the old vampire, why wouldn't they be able to recover from the essence lost from all that old cyberware now that it is gone? Honestly because of the unique nature of their bodies and spirits, I figure even if they had delta grade implants that stuck with them (And thus lowered their max essence) but then later got rid of them, there is no reason their bodies and spirits wouldn't be able to completely recover the essence lost from the ware, pulling their max essence back up to 6.

I suppose an infected in full sunlight could function as long as they wore a full set of armour. But the visuals couldn't be optics, electronic - otherwise their eyes would be getting a full dose of sunlight.

He still retains the essence hole from his cyberware. Hence, he still retains the negative essence from said 'ware. You don't remake a character, you simply add a template.

But the cyberware is pushed out, so theres no reason for there to be said hole, unless you really just want to screw over infected characters, which is what it sounds like.

And that template includes the power of regeneration. Augmentation has less intensive healing procedures which repair essence loss, and I see no reason regen would not be able to manage this little trick so long as the vamp in question as even a single point of magic to be making his roles with.

Magic + bod, so he doesn't even need magic (But vampires start with 1 point of magic anyway)

Don't they lose regen if they have no magic? I could be wrong on this, but I thought they did. If no, then ya, so long as they have a single point in body they should continue to heal.

Just because you lose the ware doesn't mean it comes back; otherwise characters could get their ware taken out and go chomp on some immortal flower. I could see geneware since the code is rewritten entirely, but not much else.

Because being turned into a vampire doesn't totally rewrite your genes (Which by the way makes you unable to get any sort of geneware). The main differences between vampires and basically every other kind of PC are 1. The essence shuffle that vampires do naturally and 2. Regeneration power. Both of these would seem to strongly suggest that a vampire would be able to recover from 'ware essence hole.

Also, AFAIK there isn't any direct rule that says no magic = no special abilities for vampires, but I could be wrong.

If Cyberware is removed from the Body it leaves an Essencehole. Thats the Rule. I'm sorry I can't provide the exact Page in the BBB. but It can be looked up.

And the Power Regeneration does not regenerate Essence(not by RAW) !

HougH!
Medicineman

Read the rules on Infected. Specifically Runner's Companion. It explains this quite well.

- J.

In a few Days I will get the german copy, then I'll re-Read it. Thanks (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

Hough!
Medicineman

Looks down to Stahlseele
(IMG:style_emoticons/default/sarcastic.gif)

now let's just hope the german edition did not get any modifications and does not suffer from the translation too much . .
also, a "few" days, not a 'vew' days

Augmentation says: The removal of an augmentation that costs Essence results in an “Essence hole” that does not normally regenerate. However being transformed into an undead bloodsucker is not exactly what I'd call "regenerate normally", neither is a vampire's healing ability. So unless it got changed in the German ed (like the difference between cyber and bio essence holes), I would say that there is no RAW for this scenario and the GM has to decide for himself.

You can say that if you like, however your wrong. It's like saying that your ares predator can cast fireballs because the rules don't specifically state that it can't. Essence hoels do not come back without very specific curatives. Vampirism is not one of those stated curatives. If they had meant otherwise (which there isn't evidence they did) they should/would have spelled that out.

The regeneration power specifically states that it can only regenerate physical or stun damage. Last time I checked, Essence loss is not even damage, it is a loss of essence.



Yes... If the area you're reffering to is the Magic and Essence header, the problem is that that is intended to be read by people who are creating an Infected in gameplay. If you are instead referring to HMHVV I, that section is ambiguous. It does not properly cover what happens in cases when the Infected has low essence from other sources before Infection.



Emphasis added, inherent tpyographical errors included.

Emphasis added. Now, the real debate would be whether or not Regeneration is a magical or physical power. Since it requires a Magic + Body Test, I could see a strong argument for it being a magical power. On the other hand, however, since you cannot regen magical damage, I could see an argument made that it is in fact a physical power.

That's your interpretation. The rules simply state that a Vampire's essence becomes 1, not a single word on how this works with previous essence loss.

Exactly, and that is why you are totally and completely wrong Sengir, if the default and universal rules that govern Essence Holes were meant to be overruled by vamperism than the devs would have spelled that little tidbit out.

Exactly, and that is why you are totally and completely wrong Ravor, if the default and universal rules that govern vamperism were meant to be overruled by Essence Holes than the devs would have spelled that little tidbit out.


(IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)

Nice try, but the Essence Hole Rules are applied universally across the board to everything in the Sixth World, you can't say the same about vamperism or I want regen for all of my characters damnit!

Or to spell it out as simply and slowly as possible the Essence Rules are the Status Quo and if any given part isn't directly overidden by another rule then you are SOL.

This is a much more aggressive version of my belief, but I do side with Ravor (*gasp!*). The longstanding rule of Essence holes existed before Infected were playable characters, so by Law of First Mention, that rule stands and Infected have to follow it.

...which is what we are talking about: Does "essence becomes 1" override previous essence loss or not? I can see common sense reasons for both sides, but the RAW are completely ambigious.

We're not really talking about the infected character's starting essence, but about the infected character's max essence, right? So the question seems [to me] to boil down to whether the newly-infected character is the same being with the same aura as the original, or if the vamp is a new being freshly created, who happens to possess the memories, skills, and abilities of the original.

The original question was open to confusion because his pre-infection essence was 0.5 and he could infect and wake up with 1.0 essence without violating the 'max times 2) restriction.

Another variation of the question: If a near-CZ character with only 0.01 essence left gets infected and becomes a vampire, how much essence does he awake with? The rules unambiguously state that he wakes up with 1 essence and a ravenous hunger. But the rules also state that his essence can't be boosted beyond his max essence times two. If you believe that essence holes carry over, then his maximum possible essence after he feeds is 0.01 x 2 = 0.02. Which rule stands?

Frankly I'm amused enough by both options to roll dice to see what happens, lets call it an edge test threshold 2:

A full essence regened vamp who feeds and then follows the default vamp rule. you are now one of the infected... congrats I guess?

or

Keep the essence loss and make a .02 essence vamp who is always scant hours away from starving to death. A ravening beast that soon gets put down. You have escaped what some call a fate worse then death... congrats I guess?

Both make me laugh.