Cyberlimbs and Armor, add, use highest or use average? Options

[Yerameyahu]

Yes, I think his argument is that the rules should be the same. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif) Sigh.

[Draco18s]

The same thing for attributes.
What for example happens if I cast an increase attribute spell(agility) on a guy with a general agility 5(dividing through 5 here) a natural agility 4 and a cyberarm with agility 9...
What needs to be my force and is the cyberarm affected...

Actually that one's pretty clear cut to me:
The spell targets him not his arm thus you're looking at the 5.

As for "is the arm effected" I would say "no" on principle of "magic and tech don't get along" (as well as "you're targetting him not his arm) and while your spell raises the guy's overall agility, it might not make him any better at shooting a gun* or picking a lock.

That said, I don't see it coming up in play at all, because the Increase [Attribute] spells are poorly worded in any case.

*Arguable if you only use the "arm" AGL for shooting or not. There's entire arguments for and against it.

[Chinane]

Actually that one's pretty clear cut to me:
The spell targets him not his arm thus you're looking at the 5.

And again the problem with imprecise english.

Does the spell target him EXCLUDING his arm (agi 4) or INCLUDING his arm (agi 5 )?

Words can carry a lot of precision as long as the right words for the job are used.

[Draco18s]

And again the problem with imprecise english.

Does the spell target him EXCLUDING his arm (agi 4) or INCLUDING his arm (agi 5 )?

Words can carry a lot of precision as long as the right words for the job are used.

Including his arm. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/indifferent.gif)
English isn't even ambiguous here, there are NO spells that target only the meat body of someone and not their cyber.
(The only two exceptions, due to being holdovers from prior editions, are Turn to Goo and it's sister spell Turn to Stone)

[Chinane]

Yes, I think his argument is that the rules should be the same. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif) Sigh.

My argument was to decide on an analogy to use (ARMOR in one case, CYBERLIMB treatment in the other case) in the absence of a specific rule.

The averaging ruls is obviously the result of applying the cyberlimb treatment analogy from attributes to armor.
The 'highest counts' rules is the result of applying the analogy via the armor attribute to the rules for worn armor.

Both can only work as a one-way street, from an area where a rule is lacking to an analogous area where a rule exists.

@Sengir: Of course I answered your question.

Let's take an example from real life: You stumble upon a melon and have no idea what to do with it. Yet you're familiar with pears, know that both share the property of being fruit and therefore via analogous treatment deduct that you might be able to slice up and eat that melon. You also notice it shares properties with another object you know, a soccer ball. Therefore you conclude that you might be able to apply the rule of 'it rolls' to a melon.

Your conclusion translates to: 'Since i can use those two analogies on a melon it automatically concludes that i can slice up and eat a soccer ball.'

Makes your provoking question look quite a bit less clever now, huh?

[Chinane]

Including his arm. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/indifferent.gif)
English isn't even ambiguous here, there are NO spells that target only the meat body of someone and not their cyber.

The ambiguity i was referring to was in your specific words, not in the RAW. As in: watch how you say something.
Which someone quite clearly did NOT do when writing down the cyberlimb rules, else we'd not be having this discussion.

[Yerameyahu]

Not you, Draco18s. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

[Thanee]

A reasonable limit for half limbs is, that only one-half the maximum amount of armor can be installed into them.

Anything that is not a full or half limb can't have any armor at all (not sure, if that is actually a rule, or also made up).

Bye
Thanee

[Yerameyahu]

Focusing on half-limbs ignores half the problem, though. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif) I'd limit all limbs to 2 armor (1 for halves, 0 for quarters), full stacking. That's as good as a helmet (better, with encumbrance, etc.), per limb.

[Irion]

@Yerameyahu
Thats a good solution.

Divide the attributes (not armor) by 5 (ignore the head) and everything is working. The head does not get any attributes.
(Maybe you need to tweak the torso a bit...)

[Yerameyahu]

The head is not a limb, that goes without saying. Stupid cyberskull (it counts as a half-limb; 2 armor). (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif) I prefer that the torso have no Attribs either; the fifth 'limb' is your natural body's Attribs. The torso may get armor (hell, maybe even it can have extra; 4?). That gives us a borg max of 14 armor, which is still tons (Binky who? (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif) ).

[Chinane]

Focusing on half-limbs ignores half the problem, though. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif) I'd limit all limbs to 2 armor (1 for halves, 0 for quarters), full stacking. That's as good as a helmet (better, with encumbrance, etc.), per limb.

I was thinking along those lines lately too, i.e. treat cyberlimbs as armor modificators similar to helmets and with a comparable bonus.

Unfortunately that moves our discussion squarely into the realm of houserules and there i was hoping on some clarification by CGL beyond what Frank (whose standing there seems to have suffered a bit) stated. Based on experience the necessity to house rule will most likely remain, though (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif) .

I think i'd still get myself some lower legs for the adept though. Do cyberskates combine with hydraulic jacks? (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)

[Draco18s]

The ambiguity i was referring to was in your specific words, not in the RAW. As in: watch how you say something.
Which someone quite clearly did NOT do when writing down the cyberlimb rules, else we'd not be having this discussion.

I'm sorry.

Actually that one's pretty clear cut to me:
The spell targets him not his arm thus you're looking at the 5.

Does that help?

[Yerameyahu]

Yes, I'm just talking about house rules. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

Personally, I do Monkey Feet with my jumping jacks, but I can see how some people like skates.

[Stahlseele]

i'd like retractable skimmer-discs . .

[Draco18s]

Raptor legs for me. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/cyber.gif)

[Stahlseele]

Well, those definitely are nifty, but i'd like to not look like a freak without replacing my lower legs every time, thank you very much ^^

[Yerameyahu]

You'll just look and sound like a freak on your hover plates. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif) Who needs to run fast, that's what vehicles are for.

[Stahlseele]

Thus retractable Hover-Board-Feet!

[Sengir]

My argument was to decide on an analogy to use (ARMOR in one case, CYBERLIMB treatment in the other case) in the absence of a specific rule.

And that is your fallacy: Before deciding on an analogy, you should ask if an analogy has to be used. By RAW the answer is rather clear, there is nothing like "treat this as worn armor".

Your conclusion translates to: 'Since i can use those two analogies on a melon it automatically concludes that i can slice up and eat a soccer ball.'

And unless you have any previous knowledge telling you that soccer balls are inedible, that's a totally valid conclusion. Thus if you insist on using analogies, you should provide some previous knowledge (ie. page references) why treating armor vests analogously to cyber attributes is not a valid conclusion, else it is totally valid.

[CanRay]

Soccer ball! Mmmmmmmmmmmmmm, tastes like feet!

[Chinane]

And that is your fallacy: Before deciding on an analogy, you should ask if an analogy has to be used. By RAW the answer is rather clear, there is nothing like "treat this as worn armor".

Which is why that was ONE of the suggested approaches to the rule vacuum. There is nothing like 'treat this as worn armor' because there is nothing. Period.

And unless you have any previous knowledge telling you that soccer balls are inedible, that's a totally valid conclusion. Thus if you insist on using analogies, you should provide some previous knowledge (ie. page references) why treating armor vests analogously to cyber attributes is not a valid conclusion, else it is totally valid.

I think you should have invested a little bit of karma into the reading comprehension skill and less into pointless provocations.

I explicitely stated that both the pear and ball are objects you know.
Which was the whole point of the exercise in creating a similar scenario like the one we're faced with regarding cyberlimb armor rules, in the hopes you'd then understand it.

[Tymeaus Jalynsfe...]

EDIT: Never Mind...

[Mäx]

Whats so complicated about cyberlimb armor, the rules clearly state that it's cumulative with worn armor(in other words it adds to worn armor).
If you have 2 limbs with armor, both of them are cumulative with worn armor.

[Irion]

@Mäx
From a rule point of view:
One source of augmentation (be it magical or technological) won't stack with itself.
Twice muscle augmentation: The higher one counts.
Twice orthoskin: The higher one counts.
Two sets of armor: The higher one counts.

So if you just follow the general rules, there are two possibilities for Cyberarmor:
1. It is treated like the other enhancements and only a proportion is applyed.
2. It is treated like other augmentations in the book and the highest raiting is applyed.

This are the two possible interpretations if you do not look at ANYTHING outside the rules.
This is the reason this discussion is coming up so often. Everybody reading the rules for the first time and really trying to play by what is written will end up with this interpretation.
It might just be bad wording. But this is enough.
(And if you start looking at the essence costs or the final possible armor, this is more than enough to convince anybody that his interpretation has to be true. Well it is not that good, but the other way would just be over the top)

Like Yerameyahu two little changes and maybe saying it stacks with itself and everything is set.
Because +2 would just bring them in line with all the other +armor stuff. (Maybe even increase capacity costs...)