Magic versus Chrome, Adept trumps Cyber? Options

[Mäx]

Really? Do you have a page reference for that? Seems like I completely overlooked that.

Page 31 of the catalysts street magic, in the tweaking the rules section.
Otherwise page 1 of the sm errata.

[Grinder]

Thanks. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

(Even though tweaking the rules is somehting my GM doesn't like too much, I'm afraid.)

[Smokeskin]

Page 31 of the catalysts street magic, in the tweaking the rules section.
Otherwise page 1 of the sm errata.

The point remains - if you tweak your rules to make adepts overpowered, they will become overpowered.

[Tymeaus Jalynsfe...]

What I meant was, if you throw them 1 point of powers every initiation without having them buy magic, that sounds like something that would get out of hand.

And since Initiation is still capped at the Magic Rating, you will have to raise magic eventually to continue to initiate... (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wobble.gif)
That, and the loss of your Metamagical Technique... (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smokin.gif)

[Mäx]

The point remains - if you tweak your rules to make adepts overpowered, they will become overpowered.

except they arent overpowered.

[Irion]

RAW:
Pure adepts: Not overpowered.
Cyber adepts: overpowered.

[Doc Byte]

Cyber adepts: overpowered.

Did you ever meet a Vampire-Ki-Ad? Makes the cyber adept look lame.

[Irion]

If you do not give him any ware, he is not.
If you do, he has this mega stupid rule not even to loose magic. So thats mega cheap play.

[Tymeaus Jalynsfe...]

If you do not give him any ware, he is not.
If you do, he has this mega stupid rule not even to loose magic. So thats mega cheap play.

Sorry, but if an adept adds 'ware, he loses magic... he cannot avoid it (I am interested in your interpretation of this Mega Stupid Rule that you believe exists though... this might be why you believe what you do)... the biggest advantage is that an Adept has unlimited advancement capabilities... that is his biggest advantage, of course; and it is horribly Karma Intensive, but that s okay, it should be... (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wobble.gif)

[Irion]

He was talking about vampires as an ki-adept.
Vampires do not lose magic if they are getting ware. (And they may even get more ware due to them having more essence)


Well, adepts with cyberware are good, if they do not lose a lot of Karma for buying back Magic (latent awakening or low magic attribute).
If you get your ware with a magic rating of 7, well it sucks.

[Smokeskin]

except they arent overpowered.

Ok. That ends this thread then.

[Grinder]

Yep. It's a good example of posting the same opinion back and forth and adding nothing to an ongoing discussion. Not directed at you alone, though. If one doesn't have to add anything to a topic, better post nothing instead of re-posting the same one-liner opinion again and again.

[Traul]

He was talking about vampires as an ki-adept.
Vampires do not lose magic if they are getting ware. (And they may even get more ware due to them having more essence)


Well, adepts with cyberware are good, if they do not lose a lot of Karma for buying back Magic (latent awakening or low magic attribute).
If you get your ware with a magic rating of 7, well it sucks.

You do know that vampires can only get Deltaware, don't you?

[sabs]

Not to mention that Vampires are part of the RC that I wish we could get rid of as "not well thought out for player characters"

[Doc Byte]

I've created (just for testing the rules) an escaped-clone-uninfectious-vampire-ki-adept-runaway out of some research laboratory with no memories of his life prior to this Green War attack blowing up his "home".

[Grinder]

And you came to which conclusion?....

[CanRay]

And you came to which conclusion?....

Other than GreenWar should be careful about what Labratory Test Animals they let out of their cages, that is. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/nyahnyah.gif)

[darthmord]

Actually no the Cyberware suites use the same (multiplicative) model. The game is 100% consistent on which you should use and I don't know where this contradicting opinion comes from. With regards to which is simpler, well IMO multiplying is just intuitively obvious so it's far more complicated (for me) to first add up all the multipliers.

And honestly this is how things work in real life too. If the store has a half off sale and in addition you have a coupon for 50% off they are not going to give you the thing for free. You're going to be paying 25% of the base. Similarly the sales tax will be multiplied against the discounted price, if it was additive you would pay the tax of the full, original price.

Funny, the book clubs I've been a member of over the years have always added the discount rates together before applying them to the base price.

Back when I worked at Waldenbooks, the usual discount fare was 25% on certain things and club members got an additional 10%. If you added the discount amounts on the reciept, they came to 35% of the original price.

So yes, even businesses do follow this.

Mathmatically, if I have a base value with a series of modifiers, the modifiers are added together before being applied to the base value.

X * (A+B+C) = Total

Back when Implant Surgery was still able to affect the Essence used (SR1 & SR2), this was the method of determining the discount. Which made it all the more important to get an excellent surgeon to implant your Beta grade stuff. Getting the good stuff was only one part.

But back to your example. The source of the discount is different than the source of the tax. The rules regarding the tax are in regards to the final sale price at the time of checkout. That tax does not care what the original price was. It only cares about the final sales price.

Thus your tax example falls short showing what you intend.

As for the 50% off coupon, those are typically restricted with verbiage that states it cannot be combined with any other offer or that it only applies to the subtotal on that item/shopping cart.

The rules for such things within SR4(A) do not come with those stipulations. Thus it is perfectly reasonable to follow established precendent (from earlier editions no less) and go with price modifiers being addditive before being multiplied against the base price.

[Mäx]

The rules for such things within SR4(A) do not come with those stipulations. Thus it is perfectly reasonable to follow established precendent (from earlier editions no less) and go with price modifiers being addditive before being multiplied against the base price.

Or by the precendent set by every other think in the rules that you can get % based discounts/bonuses (ie. vehicle mods and intiation/submersion karma price discounts)

[Ascalaphus]

You could really read it both ways. They all say they modify the Essence Cost, not the Modified Essence Cost or something like that. It also cuts down on the really weird fractions (< 0.005) that might otherwise crop up.