Aphaware, Adapsin, Biocompatability, How do they stack? Options

[Dakka Dakka]

Is it
essence cost*0,8*0,9*0,9=essence cost*0,648 or
essence cost*(1 - 0,2 - 0,1 - 0,1)=essence cost*0,6?

[DuctShuiTengu]

Alphaware is 80%, not 90, so those numbers would be .648 or .6

And I tend to go with the former interpretation, though this does result in the odd quirk that secondhand alphaware is the same price as regular stuff for essence cost * .96

[Dakka Dakka]

woops, corrected.

[Mäx]

essence cost*(1 - 0,2 - 0,1 - 0,1)=essence cost*0,6?

This is the right one.
And bewore anyone points to cyber-suites in AUG, the errata should fix those essence cost.

[DuctShuiTengu]

This is the right one.
And bewore anyone points to cyber-suites in AUG, the errata should fix those essence cost.

Would this apply to cost multipliers as well? Going back to the second-hand alphaware above, you end up with one of the following:

CODE

Essence Cost             Price
Base * 0.96 (0.8 * 1.2)   Base * 1.0 (2 * .5)
Base * 1 (1 - .2 + .2)    Base * 1.5 (1 + 1 - .5)

[Alexand]

Just noting aside from the numbers, that while Alpha-ware & Biocompatability stack from char-gen, Adapsin does not (check out it's description).

Post char-gen however that restriction goes away.

Now what's off with the Cyberware suites?

[Mäx]

Just noting aside from the numbers, that while Alpha-ware & Biocompatability stack from char-gen, Adapsin does not (check out it's description).

Post char-gen however that restriction goes away.

Now what's off with the Cyberware suites?

Their essence cost is calculated with the firs method in the OP even though the second method is the correct one.
Or at least that how it is in the first printing of AUG, haven't seen the second printing.

[DuctShuiTengu]

Their essence cost is calculated with the firs method in the OP even though the second method is the correct one.
Or at least that how it is in the first printing of AUG, haven't seen the second printing.

Could I get a citation for this? I haven't been able to find where it says one way or the other on this subject, and would really like to know what I missed as I like the wares for my characters.

[tsuyoshikentsu]

I would too. I could use another 0.048 Essence, even if I do lose my secondhand alpha trick.

[Da9iel]

The rule of thumb is 10% + 10% + 10% = 30% = x0.7. It's not 10% of 10% of 10% or x0.9 x0.9 x0.9. You can find an example of this in Street Magic when they discuss the reductions to Initiation costs.

That question was already covered in the original Augmention thread.

It indeed simply adds up, to 30%.

I was unable to find that original coverage. Synner, however says the cybersuites are wrong which indicates that adding reductions is correct.

Those suites are incorrectly stated and need to be fixed in errata, the basic formulas used "a series of multiples" and we simply didn't catch it.

All these were in the Augmentation Q&A Thread started by Synner when Augmentation first came out.

[crizh]

from char-gen, Adapsin does not (check out it's description).

Post char-gen however that restriction goes away.

I'm verging on starting to ignore that. It's been some time since Augmentation was published and the timeline has moved on significantly. Adapsin is no longer the newest treatment on the market and ought to be allowed in char-gen, assuming you can hit the availability....

The OP here, I suspect, is referencing a Suite I proposed in another thread for a full body replacement. It included Adapsin as the very first item installed, it seemed reasonable to me that if you purchased Adapsin as part of a suite that it would apply to all the components of said suite.

[Stahlseele]

Adapsin Treatment as a part of the Suite . . why the fuck has nobody else thought of that yet? O.o

[Rotbart van Dain...]

Let's see:

First and foremost, Cybersuites only include Cyberware - and Adapsin isn't.

Then, Adapsin is a treatment that takes months - and only affects Cyberware implanted afterwards.

[Falconer]

I'm w/ Rotbart...

I'm also not sure on the additive point, and I ask the poster to link the post or it didn't happen.

You can get into real silliness like say delta, adapsin, biocompatibility. And as more is published you can hit a point where things go negative... installing gives you essence.

I'd say multiplicative is correct. It scales nicely. And it also produces diminishing returns for overspecialization. (while simply adding has the opposite problem... returns get bigger the more 'discounts' you get). It ends up being a stacking problem.

[Rotbart van Dain...]

I'm also not sure on the additive point, and I ask the poster to link the post or it didn't happen.

You need to improve you Search-Fu, young one. Then you are allowed to follow the path of Backlinks in Quotes.

I'd say multiplicative is correct.

It isn't.

[Falconer]

Rotbart:

My point is this, it is the responsibility of the person making the assertion to back it up. If he's going to assert Synner said something, then he should provide the link. If you are... you provide it. I honestly don't care enough about it to spend the time necessary, especially when I don't have even a fuzzy idea of when, in which thread, etc. Synner allegedly said this.


I gave my reasons why I thought multiplicative was correct (game balance, and stacking mechanics). I haven't seen any reason given why addititive is outside a vague reference to something someone allegedly said which hasn't shown up in any errata. And until it does show up in an errata any answer is unofficial which means it's firmly in the GM's court how he chooses to apply it.

PS: I just double checked... augmentation has been out for ages... why no errata to date for it?!

[Zurai]

especially when I don't have even a fuzzy idea of when, in which thread, etc. Synner allegedly said this.

He already told you exactly which thread it was in.

All these were in the Augmentation Q&A Thread started by Synner when Augmentation first came out.

It took me all of 5 seconds to find the thread with that info.

It then only took me a couple minutes of scanning (discounting the time spent reading posts I knew weren't involved in this discussion) to find the quoted post.

[Rotbart van Dain...]

My point is this,[...]

..that you can't click on the arrow icon in the quotes' headers.

You've proven that one fairly well. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/nyahnyah.gif)

And until it does show up in an errata any answer is unofficial which means it's firmly in the GM's court how he chooses to apply it.

It's in the GM's court to choose pretty much anything - including if he wants to have players.

I just double checked... augmentation has been out for ages... why no errata to date for it?!

Because CGL are lazy bastards, of course, claiming that they'll compile & release errata when the books go for reprint.

[Mäx]

PS: I just double checked... augmentation has been out for ages... why no errata to date for it?!

This should answer you question.

*scratches head*

There's an Augmentation errata, because we did reprint the book with corrections early in '08. Marked as second printing on p. 3.

However, it looks like it never made it to the site, and I have an awesomely complex email chain discussing parts of the errata ... so in order to put an errata up, I gotta:

* Dig up the actual errata file.
* Add in the changes we made during the email chain.
* Verify that SR4A hasn't further impacted it.

Will get added to the TODO list. After "Finish Seattle or die."

[crizh]

Let's see:

First and foremost, Cybersuites only include Cyberware - and Adapsin isn't.

Then, Adapsin is a treatment that takes months - and only affects Cyberware implanted afterwards.

You know that hadn't even occurred to me.

I'd still sell it as part of the suite but it wouldn't count mechanically.

I don't see any reason not to include Bioware suites under the same umbrella as Cyberware suites, the same efficiencies ought to apply, but it is definitely a house rule.

It only takes one month for the Adapsin Treatment. I imagine anybody planning on having a full body replacement done is going to block at least a couple of months out of their calendar.

[HappyDaze]

I don't see any reason not to include Bioware suites under the same umbrella as Cyberware suites, the same efficiencies ought to apply, but it is definitely a house rule.

Bioware should not get any added reduction in Essence Cost - it is already tailored to blend with the whole body in a way that cyberware is not (hence the higher base Essence Costs on cyber).

[crizh]

Bioware should not get any added reduction in Essence Cost - it is already tailored to blend with the whole body in a way that cyberware is not (hence the higher base Essence Costs on cyber).

By that logic you shouldn't allow people to buy Alpha Grade Bioware.

[HappyDaze]

Whatever.