[X] My Assistant

[Yerameyahu]

That's probably not a valid point in 2070, though. Their computing resources (speed, storage, bandwidth) are unimaginably greater.

[Fortinbras]

Not to mention the fact that globalization means everyone is using citispeak anyway.
But consider super formal languages like Sperethiel, in which an incorrect emphasis changes a meaning entirely. While computing may be able to keep up with it, the human brain, mouth and tongue's ability to make the words come out like you want them to may not.
The same might be able to be said about Empathy software. Sure, the softweare can sink up with the speaker, but can you sink up with the software? Not a relevant rules question, but if I have a face rolling 20+ social dice, it's certainly something I demand her character to have put some consideration into.

[Yerameyahu]

If that's the angle you want, you should make the bonus a direct skill mod. Then, it's subject to a base-skill cap, reflecting that more skilled faces are better able to use the software suggestions. That may or may not be a good solution, but it's one option. It also makes the bonus useless to face-adepts, etc. (Good Thing™)

[noonesshowmonkey]

I'll point out a really handy feature of my house rule of Glitch on 1s and 2s for Emotion software:

If a user has exceptionally high dice pool (14 or 15 before the software), they statistically almost better off not using Emotion software at all. They can use it to get an edge, pushing themselves to much greater capabilities, but will crash and burn pretty hard from time to time. The software gives them the ability to 'turn it up to 11', but with some nasty consequences.

[Tymeaus Jalynsfe...]

If that's the angle you want, you should make the bonus a direct skill mod. Then, it's subject to a base-skill cap, reflecting that more skilled faces are better able to use the software suggestions. That may or may not be a good solution, but it's one option. It also makes the bonus useless to face-adepts, etc. (Good Thing™)

I was always partial to using the Empathy Software as an assisted Teamwork Test. Roll the dice, net hits add to the PC/NPC, no more net hits than base skill. I think that you mentioned this above. It works out pretty well in my opinion. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wobble.gif)

[Fortinbras]

I have no problem with the rules as they are. None of my players use empathy software, but that's because my players aren't really eager to read any of the books. I'm lucky enough that it's never been a problem and if any of them manage to get past the vehicle, armor and weapons section of Arsenal, I'll burn that bridge when I come to it.
Like I said, it's not really a relevant rules question, but faces should have ideas about the use and abuse of such software.

I do insist that if my players have a specialization in a field of expertise, that they consider their character's opinions and theories and idiosyncrasies about such stuff. Like have my samurai give their personal combat preferences and why. None of it has any rules consideration, Crane Style Adpets roll as many dice as Savate Adepts, but it helps round out the character.
I usually ask players a write a bit about their job, or degree or something, and then consider that their character has as many opinions on Matrix Coding/Magical Theory/Tactics as they do about office politics.

[James McMurray]

I'm on the side of "no problems with the software" too. Two PCs in our group have emotitoys: the elven Face who uses it to up her pool to 20 and the shifter physad who wouldn't have a pool without it. NPCs have them too, though not all of them. All Johnsons do, or they meet somewhere that emotitoys can't go (like the Matrix or the Astral).

[Makki]

Reading the Optimization text in UW p198, I can optimize any device for any program...
Optimize my drone for Pilot, optimize my Smartgun for MRSI software, optimize my commlink for Firewall...

[Yerameyahu]

If the GM approves, sure. I doubt you want to optimize your comm for Firewall, though. *shrug*

[Fortinbras]

Reading the Optimization text in UW p198, I can optimize any device for any program...
Optimize my drone for Pilot, optimize my Smartgun for MRSI software, optimize my commlink for Firewall...

If you consider Firewall a program, does it count towards your processor limit?

[James McMurray]

If you consider Firewall a program, does it count towards your processor limit?

Firewall is definitely a program (SR4A 217). There's nothing that says it wouldn't count, but it doesn't seem like that's what the devs intended. Since you can have a firewall as part of your OS or installed separately, maybe only the ones that run on their own should be counted?

[Tymeaus Jalynsfe...]

Firewall is definitely a program (SR4A 217). There's nothing that says it wouldn't count, but it doesn't seem like that's what the devs intended. Since you can have a firewall as part of your OS or installed separately, maybe only the ones that run on their own should be counted?

Firewall is a Device Attribute (Even though it is a program) so it does not count towards Program Limits.

[TheWanderingJewe...]

Speaking of Engineering Empathy...

http://af.reuters.com/article/southAfricaN...0110505?sp=true


Reavers anyone?

[Yerameyahu]

I'd say that System/Pilot and Firewall aren't 'real programs', even though they're software. It's just easier that way: keep them separate, no messy loopholes, etc.

[Fortinbras]

Firewall is a Device Attribute (Even though it is a program) so it does not count towards Program Limits.

Why wouldn't a Device Attribute count against Program Limits if they are, indeed, programs?

[Yerameyahu]

Because that's a mess. It's much better to decree that they're 'programs', but not Programs. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

[Fortinbras]

While I agree, I would like to arm myself against this argument when my hacker makes it a month from now when she discovers the Optimizing option. Rather than making a flat out Draconian ruling, I would like to have a valid reasoning in my corner.
Thusly, if one can rule that Firewall or System can be Optimized like a program, do they count against processor limit like a program. Why or why not?

[Yerameyahu]

I'd say yes, because then they're a running program. However, this isn't a good 'balancing' tradeoff: running program limits are a nearly-meaningless penalty.

I can't imagine, however, a tenable argument that they're programs enough to Optimize, but not enough to penalize. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif) AFAIK, they're also ineligible for Program Options. The clearest, simplest, RAW-coherent ruling is that they're 'not really Programs'. Certainly they're not Common Use, Hacking, Simsense, Sensor, etc. (as demonstrated by the Programming table).

They *are* software, so they can be created/patched using Programming tests. They're apparently *not* susceptible to Bugs, because there are no Bugs available for them; ditto for Viruses. I take this as more evidence of a categorical distinction between System/Pilot/Firewall, and everything else.

Still, 'because I said so and that's stupid' is among the best possible reasons for a GM ruling. ;D

[Tymeaus Jalynsfe...]

Why wouldn't a Device Attribute count against Program Limits if they are, indeed, programs?

Because they are alreasy accounted for with another stat/attribute. And because Firewall is purchased outside of the normal rules for Software. It is the epitmoe of a Common Use "Program" but is not statted like one for purchase purposes. Therefore it is not beholden to the rules that govern normal programs.

And because Yerameyahu's explanation makes so much more sense. They ARE SOFTWARE, they are NOT Necessarily Programs.

[KCKitsune]

While I agree, I would like to arm myself against this argument when my hacker makes it a month from now when she discovers the Optimizing option. Rather than making a flat out Draconian ruling, I would like to have a valid reasoning in my corner.
Thusly, if one can rule that Firewall or System can be Optimized like a program, do they count against processor limit like a program. Why or why not?

Think of System and Firewall as running on firmware. They are a part of the computer, but yet separate from the main computer.

[Yerameyahu]

In certain aspects, they literally are firmware. At least, I think the book calls the System's persona aspect "firmware". (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif) Certainly System includes parts of the computer that we'd call firmware today.

Looking at the other categories of Programs, I think they're all acceptable targets for Optimization. Autosofts, Tacsofts (only applies to *tests*, which a tacsoft does occasionally make), Sensor softs: the one-use limitation of Optimization makes all of these balanced enough, unless you think it should cost more than 500¥. While the argument that comms are cheap isn't really valid for high-rating programs, it's a decent little bump for cheap or Optimization-option stuff.

[KCKitsune]

I am a very big fan of clusters. Get a 'Runner with a whole lot of Alpha cyberware and cluster them together. This allows you to run a whole boatload of programs on the cluster and just have them link into the commlink. The programs don't have to run on the commlink to be used by the commlink.

Now here's a question for everyone here: When you consider what cyberware is a separate peripheral node, do you count all the different mods of a cybereye/ear? I was of the opinion that a cybereye/ear would only count once because those parts are not really a separate piece of gear (unlike a RADAR sensor or Ultrasound sensor in a cyberlimb). I then thought about how you can get them as mods for a biological eye/ear and each mod would count as it's own peripheral node.

If the answer to the above question is yes... A hacker only needs one real commlink... and a decent amount of Alphaware. The distributed computer that one can make is... insane.

[Yerameyahu]

I consider all of that to be munchkinly crap, though—even without the cherry-on-top of counting mods. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif) Nothing personal, of course; I'm not saying you're a cheater or something. It's just that clustering should have a drawback, and the device ratings of 'ware can't possibly have been intended to allow this. It's at least as abusive as the demonized emotitoy (which is primarily hated because it costs vastly less than the Empathy software and node it replaces).

Luckily, there's little need to bother: the program-limit penalty is a wrist-slap at worst.

[Dez384]

I consider all of that to be munchkinly crap, though—even without the cherry-on-top of counting mods. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif) Nothing personal, of course; I'm not saying you're a cheater or something. It's just that clustering should have a drawback, and the device ratings of 'ware can't possibly have been intended to allow this. It's at least as abusive as the demonized emotitoy (which is primarily hated because it costs vastly less than the Empathy software and node it replaces).

Luckily, there's little need to bother: the program-limit penalty is a wrist-slap at worst.

The drawback is that if you get hacked or crashed, you lose everything. Your Firewall and System are limited by the lowest rating of everything clustered, so you realistically wouldn't have ratings above 4.

[Yerameyahu]

Nah, it's all slaved behind the super-comm. Hmf.