Reaction Enhancer ruling in FAQ, ...Do you follow it? Options

[Steak and Spirit...]

Poll to determine how rebellious the Shadowrun Community is, when it comes to rulings on Frequently Asked Questioned. For clarification, Reaction Enhancers have worked with other means of increasing Initiative previously. Now, however, it is determined that despite BBB text stating otherwise, they are not compatible with Wired Reflexes, or the Synaptic Booster.

Additionally, they used to be compatible w/ Adept Powers/Magic, as they did not increase Initiative Passes, only reaction - Was this move, a move for the better?

[psykotisk_overle...]

I just ignore the ruling. The book says it's compatible with other boosters, and therefore it is IMC.

Edit: And it does defy historic canon, which is where my vote went.

[Butterblume]

[Steak and Spirit...]

Yeah. I really wish FanPro gave some clarification as to how they arrived at the conclusions that they did.

[Rotbart van Dain...]

As always, the FAQ conflicts with the RAW in some points.
RAW wins.

[Leehouse]

I don't have any experience with previous editions, but I assumed this prior to anything in the Faq. I say they don't stack because Wired Reflexes specifically doesn't combine with any other initiative boosting effects, Reaction enhancers do so they can work with various drugs, or bioware that boosts reaction but Wired Reflexes doesn't

[Eryk the Red]

I null-voted, because I actually don't see what the big deal is. All this means is that the bonuses to Initiative from reaction enhancers and wired reflexes aren't cumulative. Which just doesn't seem significant to me. It's not like past editions where your initiative was directly related to the number of actions you got.

It has no appreciable effect on my game, so I haven't bothered to really decide to embrace or reject the rule. If it comes up, I imagine I'll just go with the flow.

[Clyde]

SR4 page 54 "If something in these rules doesn't quite fit or make sense to you, feelf ree to change it. If you come up with a game mechanic that you think works better - go for it!"

I can ignore or change a rule in the printed book that I don't care for, so I'm sure hell not going to be bound by some lousy FAQ!

[MaxHunter]

It is not a big deal anyway, the RE cost lotsa nuyen!!!

I usually tend to follow canon, though, just this little rebellion (and increased the drain of some mind bending and direct combat spells)

Cheers

Max

[Glyph]

I don't really agree with it, but it's not as relevant with the hard cap to augmented Reaction. You can't start out with Reaction of 9 if you follow the FAQ (unless you really splurge on a synaptic accelerator, or are an adept), but once you hard max your Reaction and upgrade to wired relexes/synaptic accelerator: 3, you'll be as good as you can get anyways. I would probably allow it - the FAQ is hardly binding - but it only makes a difference to starting sammies oriented towards speed.

[nathanross]

While I know this was a huge problem in SR3 (Dwarfs with reaction 19, not to mention what a smart night elf could do), I think the fact that reaction is no longer a derived attribute and already capped at 9 makes the ruling pointless and stupid.

[Crakkerjakk]

I agree with Ross. The FAQ ruling doesn't make sense, and is unnecessary due to the cap.

[Kyoto Kid]

...I voted Null on this as well and agree with the arguments concerning attribute caps.

In SR3 it was much more of an issue since characters could have obscenely high Reactions.

Case in point an elf sammie in one of my campaigns who had a 19 reaction +3d6 (yielding an average initiative result of 29 - 30). Even a well planned ambush (6 TN) could be foiled just by the sheer number of dice he could throw. It took a fully chromed out Cyberzombie to finally beat him.

[Steak and Spirit...]

IIRC, Elf Samurai capped at 21 + 3d6 Reaction out of Chargen.

As far as the ruling, from what I can tell, it seems the biggest impact is in the short-term, when character's are looking to hit the ground running out of chargen, rather than later on, after they've managed to grab Synaptic 3's and raise Reaction.

It seems like it was a hasty, flippant ruling. Does anyone have an inside source on how the ruling was derived? I may be mistaken, but from the character sheets I've seen posted, I think most players were under the impression there was no compatibility issue. Is that the case? I know I was surprised.

[Kyoto Kid]

[Steak and Spirit...]

Ahhh. Right. Certainly an understandable trade-off. :)

[Seven-7]

(edited and removed, god damn co-workers.)

[Jérémie]

It wasn't compatible from the start:

[Crakkerjakk]

Ahem

[Jérémie]

And we should take the most restrictive, not the other one. It has no sense for the ReacEnh to list every other one, so the give a global rule. But the WiredRef are pretty clear, although one can argue Reaction isn't Initiative per se. So the FAQ does its job as clarifying it. And as always, if a GM disagree with a ruling (from the book, the errata, the FAQ, whatever), he can change it. He's in charge, not the books. Nor the power hungry players, by the way ;)

[Crakkerjakk]

I take the "initiative enhancement" phrase to mean something that gives you more initiative passes. Since synaptic booster has the same phrase as wired reflexes. And since I don't know of any other cyber/bioware ways of increasing one's reaction/initiative. The only way for the phrase in the Reaction Enhancers section to make sense was if the phrase for wired reflexes and synaptic boosters meant bonus IPs. And since they haven't changed this in the errata, I'll stick to mostly ignoring the FAQ when it contradicts the book.

But I do agree. Everyone should play the game in whatever way allows them to have the most fun.

[FrankTrollman]

Reaction Enhancers are no different from any other direct stat enhancer. Wired Reflexes are. If Wired Reflexes can be used with a Superthyroid or Muscle Replacement, they should be usable with a Reaction Enhancer.

-Frank

[Steak and Spirit...]