 Essence Holes, Bioware vs. Cyberware |
  |
 Jul 31 2007, 07:02 PM
Post
#101
|
|
|
Cybernetic Blood Mage  Group: Members Posts: 3,472 Joined: 11-March 06 From: Northeastern Wyoming Member No.: 8,361  |
Oops, for some reason I got Cellular Repair mixed up with Revitalization, mela cupa on that.
Although I've yet to see a good "Uber Mage" built within the average campaign timeframe, how much Karma was the Mage build on? |
 |
 
|
|
Jul 31 2007, 07:10 PM
Post
#102
|
|||
|
Prime Runner Group: Banned Posts: 3,732 Joined: 1-September 05 From: Prague, Czech Republic Member No.: 7,665 |
It's written as a hole that is factored at the end of your Essence calculation, but Synner has said that it means a hole at the beginning of the Essence calculation. So it's supposed to be a lot less broken than it is written. It's mostly just really complicated and unnecessarily screws people who want to switch from a bioware focus to a cyberware focus. --- The only actual difference (assuming that the wording ever gets fixed) is that your cyberware and bioware subtotals individually never go down instead of the normal rules (and my draft) where it is simply that your Essence total never goes up. All the stuff about subtracting Essence holes from things is actually smoke and mirrors - according to the way Synner says it was supposed to work, none of that actually happens - which is just as well because as you've noted that would be totally broken. nothing gets subtracted, you just do the same thing you've always done with overall Essence and do it twice: once for your Cyberware subtotal and once for your Bioware subtotal. I still don't have anything good to say about it, and we all admit that what ended up in the rule book actually says something that's much, much worse in terms of complexity and in terms of game breaking. But what was supposed to go in there was merely complicated and mildly player-hosing. It wasn't supposed to be nearly as bad as the actual text in the book. -Frank |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Jul 31 2007, 07:17 PM
Post
#103
|
|
|
Midnight Toker Group: Members Posts: 7,686 Joined: 4-July 04 From: Zombie Drop Bear Santa's Workshop Member No.: 6,456 |
Cellular Repair actually means that there is no longer any reason to persecute Vampires at all. What was once a permanent cumulative injury has been reduced to little more than a light playful spanking. With the low availability and relatively low cost, of the procedure, Vampires are going to become much more popular amongst the upper class.
|
|
|
|
|
Jul 31 2007, 07:26 PM
Post
#104
|
|
|
Cybernetic Blood Mage Group: Members Posts: 3,472 Joined: 11-March 06 From: Northeastern Wyoming Member No.: 8,361 |
I'm not so sure that something which is both addictive and costs between 15,000-120,000 :nuyen: with 1-8 weeks of "rehab" involved with fixing the damage from each "dose" is going to be popular anytime soon, even among the elite who can afford the monitary costs.
|
|
|
|
|
Jul 31 2007, 07:36 PM
Post
#105
|
|||
|
Hoppelhäschen 5000 Group: Members Posts: 5,807 Joined: 3-January 04 Member No.: 5,951 |
Of course - to sue them for compensation. :P |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Jul 31 2007, 08:00 PM
Post
#106
|
|||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 829 Joined: 26-February 02 Member No.: 770 |
Why would you bother recalculating when you remove something? Since X + Y/2 > (X-n) + (Y-m)/2 under all circumstances, and essence doesn't return, you'd only need to recalculate on those occasions when you add an implant. Frex: you have wired reflexes and cats' eyes. When you remove the wired reflexes, your essence will remain the same, and the size of the hole is meaningless. Later you get a datajack and enhanced articulation <- only at this point, would you need to recalculate using the base rules to see if your essence loss increased. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Aug 1 2007, 12:54 AM
Post
#107
|
|||||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 349 Joined: 16-January 05 Member No.: 6,984 |
And even then only if the cost of the new implants exceeds the size of the hole. |
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
Aug 1 2007, 07:56 AM
Post
#108
|
|||||
|
Runner Group: Members Posts: 3,314 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Lisbon, Cidade do Pecado Member No.: 185 |
The difference is only ever when you add implants. Removing implants has no impact in any of the systems discussed. When you've got a couple of implants the difference is indeed minor, however, things change when you've got half a dozen cyberware implants and as much bioware, though it's a question of perspective. When you have 12 different cyberimplants and 5 bioware implants, and you remove something to put something new in, this means adding all those implants up to get the subtotals, comparing the two subtotals, halving the smaller, adding the two together to get total Essence loss and comparing the impact of that on your current Essence rating to see if it goes down. (ie. regardless of whether it actually does have an impact or not you go through these steps for every implant added) With the (corrected) Augmentation writeup, if your new implant doesn't exceed the Essence hole you had jotted down (in place of the implant you removed on your list) you just subtract the new implant's cost from the Essence hole (reducing it), jot the new value down, and you're done. (ie. meaning you don't require the additions/recalculation/comparisons steps unless the implant exceeds the existing Essence hole). Even accounting-wise it should have been simple, since you just take out the "removed" implant from your cyberware or bioware implant list/column and replace the descriptor with "Essence hole" and leave the essence cost of that line as it stood (ie. there's no actual 5th value to manage). When you add something, you add that to the bottom of the list and reduce the value of the Essence hole entry (or remove it entirely if it is exceeded). |
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
Aug 1 2007, 08:56 AM
Post
#109
|
|
|
Runner Group: Members Posts: 2,598 Joined: 15-March 03 From: Hong Kong Member No.: 4,253 |
So the RAW now tracks your essence by the 'high water mark' of the essence lost by a type of implant? (Using 'essence hole' as the term for discussing things seems to be part of the problem)
So a Sam who starts with 4 essence in cyber and 1 essence in bio looks like: Cyber Current total 4 High Water mark 4 Bio Current total 1 High Water mark 1 Actual Essence 1.5 (6 - (4+ (1/2)) --------- Later on, the Sam gets 1 more point of bioware: Cyber Current total 4 High Water mark 4 Bio Current total 2 High Water mark 2 Actual Essence 1.0 (6 - (4 + (2/2)) ----- After hitting it big, the Sam wants to swap out his wires for stuff that won't set of the airport sensors (he switches out wired-2 for synaptic-2) Cyber Current total 1 High Water mark 4 Bio Current total 3 High Water mark 3 Actual Essence .5 (6- (4 + (3/2)) --- If I understand correctly, you are supposed to calculate essence loss based on the two 'high water marks' rather than the current total. This means that the above sam can never get more that 3.999 essence worth of bioware, since his cyber 'high watermark' of 4 will always take 4 essence away in the calculation. |
|
|
|
|
Aug 1 2007, 01:38 PM
Post
#110
|
|
|
Runner Group: Members Posts: 3,314 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Lisbon, Cidade do Pecado Member No.: 185 |
Correct.
This results in the limitation several people are complaining about - ie. there's a limit to switching from cyber to bio after you hit a certain point. Step 1 Let's see the "complicated" bookkeeping on this (changes to the character sheet in yellow, my notes in orange). Bob the Street Sam's implants look something like this: Cyber Cyberlimb (arm): 1.0 Cyberlimb (arm): 1.0 Cybereyes rating 3 (various mods): 0.4 Cyberears rating 3 (various mods): 0.4 Skillwires 3: 0.6 Cyberware subtotal: 3.4 Bio Chemical Gland: 0.3 Exhalation Spray: 0.1 Orthoskin rating 2: 0.5 Ortho. Electroshock Mod: 0.25 Synaptic boosters 2: 1 Bioware subtotal: 2.15 Essence loss total: (3.4+(2.15/2 or 1.08) 4.48 Essence rating: 1.52 Step 2 During a fight Sam is hit hard and using the Heavy damage rules from Augmentation the gamemaster rules one of his cyberlimbs is torn to shreds. Sam's street doc removes it after the run after which Bob's sheet looks something like this: Cyber Cyberlimb (arm): 1.0 Essence hole: 1.0 Cybereyes rating 3 (various mods): 0.4 Cyberears rating 3 (various mods): 0.4 Skillwires 3: 0.6 Cyberware subtotal: 3.4 (no changes except the notation where the cyberarm used to be) Bio Chemical Gland: 0.3 Exhalation Spray: 0.1 Orthoskin rating 2: 0.5 Ortho. Electroshock Mod: 0.25 Synaptic boosters 2: 1 Bioware subtotal: 2.15 Essence loss total: (3.4+(2.15/2 or 1.08) 4.48 Essence rating: 1.52 (no changes) Step 3 A few weeks later Bob's Grandad bites the farm and he comes into a lot of cash and decides to get an alphaware arm to replace the one he lost. Coming out of surgery his sheet now looks like this: Cyber Cyberlimb (arm): 1.0 Essence hole: 0.2 (previous 1.0-0.8 of the new cyberlimb) Cybereyes rating 3 (various mods): 0.4 Cyberears rating 3 (various mods): 0.4 Skillwires 3: 0.6 Cyberlimb (arm) alphaware: 0.8 Cyberware subtotal: 3.4 (still hasn't changed despite the addition of the cyberlimb above) Bio Chemical Gland: 0.3 Exhalation Spray: 0.1 Orthoskin rating 2: 0.5 Ortho. Electroshock Mod: 0.25 Synaptic boosters 2: 1 Bioware subtotal: 2.15 Essence loss total: (3.4+(2.15/2 or 1.08) 4.48 Essence rating: 1.52 (still no changes and no recalculations needed) Step 4 A month later, Bob gets an implanted Biomonitor (just in case). This is what he looks like now. Cyber Cyberlimb (arm): 1.0 Cybereyes rating 3 (various mods): 0.4 Cyberears rating 3 (various mods): 0.4 Skillwires 3: 0.6 Cyberlimb (arm) alphaware: 0.8 Biomonitor: 0.3 (Biomonitor has been added and the Essence hole exceed so recalculation is now in order) Cyberware subtotal: 3.5 (subtotal increases by 0.1) Bio Chemical Gland: 0.3 Exhalation Spray: 0.1 Orthoskin rating 2: 0.5 Ortho. Electroshock Mod: 0.25 Synaptic boosters 2: 1 Bioware subtotal: 2.15 Essence loss total: (3.5+(2.15/2 or 1.08) 4.58 (recalculation is finally called for because the essence hole has been exceeded. The increase is only 0.1) Essence rating: 1.42 (drops 0.1) For those that don't like this approach, feel free to use Frank's variant from currently posted in the Augmentation Errata thread and consider it a Tweaking the Rules variant. For the record, while playtest feedback was a factor in our decision it wasn't the only one. The converting heavy bio/cyber was another, as was the fact that this makes it just a just little bit harder for mages to augment (because they can't "convert" their generic Essence loss from cyberware to bioware as easily). There were others. We will definitely be addressing the writeup in errata, if you feel very strongly against this version (as posted here rather than as printed), I suggest you mail your thoughts in to myself or Rob and we'll take that feedback under advisement when hammering out the errata. [edit: have I mentioned I hate emoticons when trying to write up stats. That 8 always screws me up] |
|
|
|
|
Aug 1 2007, 02:16 PM
Post
#111
|
|
|
Technomancer Group: Retired Admins Posts: 4,638 Joined: 2-October 02 From: Champaign, IL Member No.: 3,374 |
Thanks, Synner. That clears up a lot of my own personal confusion.
|
|
|
|
|
Aug 1 2007, 02:59 PM
Post
#112
|
|||
|
Cybernetic Blood Mage Group: Members Posts: 3,472 Joined: 11-March 06 From: Northeastern Wyoming Member No.: 8,361 |
Aye, that's why I've started using ( 1 ) for all of my numbers. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Aug 1 2007, 03:07 PM
Post
#113
|
|
|
Midnight Toker Group: Members Posts: 7,686 Joined: 4-July 04 From: Zombie Drop Bear Santa's Workshop Member No.: 6,456 |
I just make sure that the box marked Enable emoticons? under the text box in the section marked Post Options is unchecked when I have 8) issues.
|
|
|
|
|
Aug 1 2007, 03:11 PM
Post
#114
|
|||
|
Runner Group: Members Posts: 3,314 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Lisbon, Cidade do Pecado Member No.: 185 |
Yeah, but when you've edited the post above as many times as I have, you just want to get it over with and forget small details like that. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Aug 1 2007, 04:25 PM
Post
#115
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 160 Joined: 26-February 02 Member No.: 282 |
Shouldn't half of 2,15 be 1,075 instead of 1,8 ?
Not that it changes the underlying point. |
|
|
|
|
Aug 1 2007, 04:32 PM
Post
#116
|
|||||||||
|
Prime Runner Group: Banned Posts: 3,732 Joined: 1-September 05 From: Prague, Czech Republic Member No.: 7,665 |
No. But Synner's clarification of what they meant with the RAW works like that. The RAW still says a bunch of crazy crap, which is why this particular thread is in its fifth page.
It's really hard to follow your example because at no time do you say where this "or 1.8" comes from. Seriously, what the heck is that? But in any case, you've actually very amply demonstrated why this isn't a worthwhile thing to do. You actually are making a running tally of the total Essence cost the whole time anyway. All you're doing is maintaining three separate high water marks instead of only 1. That and you're throwing in two sets of subtraction (subtracting the cost of the new ware from the size of the Essence hole, and subtracting the Essence hole from the Essence cost of the implants before you can add the remainder to the total Essence cost). And while you've got these two extra subtraction steps, you still have to do the same amount of addition! Your total Essence cost is still just "all the implants added together" - so no real advantage is sustained. See you're doing this:
When you could just be doing this:
Because either way you have to add in that .8 at the end. It's just that this way you are also subtracting the hole in and out. -Frank |
||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||
|
Aug 1 2007, 05:15 PM
Post
#117
|
|||
|
Runner Group: Members Posts: 3,314 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Lisbon, Cidade do Pecado Member No.: 185 |
My bad. We normally round to the closest decimal - fixing through out now. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Aug 1 2007, 05:20 PM
Post
#118
|
|
|
Cybernetic Blood Mage Group: Members Posts: 3,472 Joined: 11-March 06 From: Northeastern Wyoming Member No.: 8,361 |
I thought that in Fourth Edition, everything was rounded towards the character's favor, in which case 2.15 would become 1.07?
|
|
|
|
|
Aug 1 2007, 05:46 PM
Post
#119
|
|||
|
Prime Runner Group: Banned Posts: 3,732 Joined: 1-September 05 From: Prague, Czech Republic Member No.: 7,665 |
Essence costs don't round. It should be 1.075. Long ago Essence costs used to round to the nearest .05 but in 4th edition there is no reason to believe that they round to anything. .075 is just .075. -Frank |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Aug 1 2007, 05:49 PM
Post
#120
|
|||||||||||||||||||
|
Runner Group: Members Posts: 3,314 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Lisbon, Cidade do Pecado Member No.: 185 |
Seriously, I forgot a 0 after the decimal point and copypasted most of the lists making it wrong through-out. Fixed now, I hope.
True. Basically what I called a "sideboard mechanic" a few posts back.
Actually it's only one set of subtractions. You never subtract the essence hole from the Essence cost of implants.
As long as the implant cost does not exceed the Essence hole you don't need to recalculate the total Essence loss which you would if you had a single/generic Essence hole. Even if it does exceed the Essence hole, the calculation is just the same as you would do it from the BBB.
Yes. But doing it the second way forces you to also add up all the cyber and bioware costs to get the new subtotals and calculate the new overall Essence loss total (largest + half smallest), then factor in generic Essence hole every time you get an implant - regardless of whether its going to have an effect or not. Whereas with the current method, you only have to do this when Essence holes are exceeded and the recalculations themselves are straight out of the BBB.
Guidelines are to round to the nearest 0.01 in official examples in SR4, though there's nothing binding in the BBB either way. |
||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||
|
Aug 1 2007, 06:21 PM
Post
#121
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 829 Joined: 26-February 02 Member No.: 770 |
Err...no, actually.
While you would keep a 'high water mark' of essence loss recorded, and would have to recalculate total essence cost (high + half low) each time you add an implant, the size or type of the essence hole is, by the old rules, completely unimportant. The new way forces you to recalculate everything every time you add OR remove something, then double-check to make sure you didn't just commit suicide. All this seems to do is add a lot of bookkeeping (which will all have to be double-checked by the GM) to no particular gain, but a significant new limitation to upgrades. |
|
|
|
|
Aug 1 2007, 06:25 PM
Post
#122
|
|
|
Cybernetic Blood Mage Group: Members Posts: 3,472 Joined: 11-March 06 From: Northeastern Wyoming Member No.: 8,361 |
No, the way Synner is clarifying it here, you only recalulate when you implant something new, in which case these rules are basically reintroducing the old BioIndex.
I'm still happily ignoring them though. :cyber: |
|
|
|
|
Aug 1 2007, 06:30 PM
Post
#123
|
|||
|
Technomancer Group: Retired Admins Posts: 4,638 Joined: 2-October 02 From: Champaign, IL Member No.: 3,374 |
Not quite, unless I'm misunderstanding you (or Synner). You only recalculate when you implant something new which has a cost greater than the magnitude of the available essence hole. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Aug 1 2007, 06:34 PM
Post
#124
|
|
|
Cybernetic Blood Mage Group: Members Posts: 3,472 Joined: 11-March 06 From: Northeastern Wyoming Member No.: 8,361 |
Yeah, that's what I meant although it appearenently didn't come out that way. :cyber:
|
|
|
|
|
Aug 1 2007, 06:35 PM
Post
#125
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 829 Joined: 26-February 02 Member No.: 770 |
But it's still 2 additional things to track, plus the repeatedly-mentioned "death-by-upgrade."
Pointless, unless you believe sammies were overpowered. |
|
|
|
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 3rd October 2025 - 06:01 AM |
Topps, Inc has sole ownership of the names, logo, artwork, marks, photographs, sounds, audio, video and/or any proprietary material used in connection with the game Shadowrun. Topps, Inc has granted permission to the Dumpshock Forums to use such names, logos, artwork, marks and/or any proprietary materials for promotional and informational purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not affiliated with the Dumpshock Forums in any official capacity whatsoever.