Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: AR Initiative passes
Dumpshock Forums > Discussion > Shadowrun
Pages: 1, 2, 3, 4
booklord
QUOTE (GrinderTheTroll)
Sorry if this has been asserted already, this thread is getting large.

What about RAW mention of AR adding dice pool penalties to non-AR tests? Yes you can move quickly in AR with Wired 3, but you're going be suffering penalties inthe real-world depending on what's cluterring up your visual field.

I can see this type of thing helping to balance out the extra Matrix actions provided for heavy-IP boosts.

I enforce a distraction penalty on any defensive actions taken while the character is busy working in AR. However if the character takes a physical action I assume he minimizes all of his AR windows (free action) so he isn't cluttered.

From book examples, I think if the character is in hidden mode, you'd actually have to hack his commlink to throw any distractions at him.
Butterblume
QUOTE (duck1123)
It seems like lately, many people on this board have been debating back and forth on whether Wired Reflexes and other similar physical initiative enhancers carry over into Augmented Reality or not. There are some good arguments on both sides, mostly following the lines that, on one hand, it is perfectly reasonable that speeding up physical actions should speed up physically interacting with the matrix, and on the other hand, allowing a jacked-up street sam to go faster than a "speed of thought" VR hacker is unbalancing, and doesn't mesh well with the fluff text description of the two relevant technologies.

I just quoted that from another thread because it neatly sums up how things stand right now wink.gif.

Until something official comes up in the future, which most likely won't be before Unwired, I don't think this one will be resolved.
But, there is also the off-chance that the upcoming equipment book might change something. Or not biggrin.gif.
Shrike30
QUOTE (deek)
There really isn't going to be closure on this until the game developers chime in officially...

I just sent off an email to Rob. With any luck, we'll have an answer soon.
GrinderTheTroll
QUOTE (booklord)
QUOTE (GrinderTheTroll @ Jul 25 2006, 06:54 PM)
Sorry if this has been asserted already, this thread is getting large.

What about RAW mention of AR adding dice pool penalties to non-AR tests?  Yes you can move quickly in AR with Wired 3, but you're going be suffering penalties inthe real-world depending on what's cluterring up your visual field.

I can see this type of thing helping to balance out the extra Matrix actions provided for heavy-IP boosts.

I enforce a distraction penalty on any defensive actions taken while the character is busy working in AR. However if the character takes a physical action I assume he minimizes all of his AR windows (free action) so he isn't cluttered.

From book examples, I think if the character is in hidden mode, you'd actually have to hack his commlink to throw any distractions at him.

Right, which means they aren't using AR if they're in Hidden Mode. Although I wouldn't assume all AR windows are closed, they might be getting feeds from other useful sources.

My point is, they make a choice about the non-Combat related AR, else they suffer penalties.
deek
QUOTE (Rotbart van Dainig)
QUOTE (deek)
Well, it is seamlessly integrated, but for everyone, not just hackers.

The matrix since Matrix always was - you did notice the 'action' part, did you?


Yes, but "hacking" actions are not the only matrix actions. I have players that are not "hackers" that use their AR all the time, searching public directories, accessing maps or ordering food off virtual menus.

And, I don't disallow non-hacking-built characters from going VR and defaulting on actions...

QUOTE (Rotbart van Dainig)
QUOTE (deek)
So, AR is integrated seamlessly, its just that unlike a few that interpreted extra IPs in the physical giving an AR advantage, VR is where you get total immersion...you take the heightened risk of going VR but with it comes the advantages of extra IPs, potentially better initiative and extra dice...

VR gives you those things for free.
But that doesn't mean that a Combat Hacker is unbalancing when he uses the additional passes he paid for in AR while supporting his team on site.


I wouldn't call it for free...you are risking damage to yourself, potential addiction to the VR signals, penalties on all your physical actions while in VR...I don't subscribe to the mindset of "money solves all your problems"...wired reflexes already give a character huge advantages in the physical world...and in my games, with my interpretations of the rules, they don't cross into the matrix...even in AR...

Just a quick question...have you played in campaigns using both sets of rules, kinda a compare and contrast? I have not...I have only run games using the AR = 1IP max rule.
hobgoblin
QUOTE (deek @ Jul 25 2006, 08:40 PM)
Until then, some of us are going to limit AR to the one IP that we think is right and the rest of you are going to allow multiple IPs in AR (which you think is right), and basically stop using VR unless you are probing a target for weakness (as most will not want to wait a day in AR before making a check).

and i think noone have a problem with what others do in their games.

its when they come onto this board, and present their interpetation as if its canon "law" that the debate gets heated up...
deek
QUOTE (hobgoblin)
QUOTE (deek @ Jul 25 2006, 08:40 PM)
Until then, some of us are going to limit AR to the one IP that we think is right and the rest of you are going to allow multiple IPs in AR (which you think is right), and basically stop using VR unless you are probing a target for weakness (as most will not want to wait a day in AR before making a check).

and i think noone have a problem with what others do in their games.

its when they come onto this board, and present their interpetation as if its canon "law" that the debate gets heated up...

Very true...very true...

I must admit, that every now and then, I read a post and think that I have an argument that will sway a fellow runners opinion...but I have yet to find anyone that I have swayed on this board:)

I think I need to stop trying to persuade...I do enjoy a good debate though, which is why I continue coming back!

Luckily, I don't think this debate has gotten too heated up thus far...(with my gauge of heated up being the legendary Citymaster-Long Shot discussion!).
Rotbart van Dainig
QUOTE (deek)
Yes, but "hacking" actions are not the only matrix actions.

...
Action! With a big A and a big bang. When the fit hits the shan and the hacker is where the rubber meets the road.
The kind of situation you don't want to lie around helplessly or take yourself too much time.

QUOTE (deek)
I wouldn't call it for free...you are risking damage to yourself, potential addiction to the VR signals, penalties on all your physical actions while in VR...

Increased reflexes have their own penalites, too... and they cost essence/magic - far more valuable.

QUOTE (deek)
Just a quick question...have you played in campaigns using both sets of rules, kinda a compare and contrast?  I have not...I have only run games using the AR = 1IP max rule.

Been there, done that, didn't like it - that's what my character did in SR3, hacking with an implanted phone in tortoise mode.
hobgoblin
QUOTE (deek)
Luckily, I don't think this debate has gotten too heated up thus far...(with my gauge of heated up being the legendary Citymaster-Long Shot discussion!).

oh, that isnt bad. get some of the resident gun enthusiasts started on gun control, woho silly.gif

but maybe i missed the brunt of the long shot debate...
Butterblume
QUOTE (deek)
I must admit, that every now and then, I read a post and think that I have an argument that will sway a fellow runners opinion...but I have yet to find anyone that I have swayed on this board:)

I even was swayed by arguments a few times... I mention it just to show that a discussion might change something, sometimes. Well, not by your arguments, still, it could happen biggrin.gif.
deek
QUOTE (Rotbart van Dainig)
QUOTE (deek)
Yes, but "hacking" actions are not the only matrix actions.

...
Action! With a big A and a big bang. When the fit hits the shan and the hacker is where the rubber meets the road.
The kind of situation you don't want to lie around helplessly or take yourself too much time.

The worst case scenario I can see a hacker being in is a big gun fight and being attacked via the matrix...simultaneously...say, being subscribed to 4 nodes with attacking IC in each and being a target in a gun fight...I don't care how many IPs you have...you are screwed regardless! Plain and simple. You can only act in one realm per IP...so even if you get 4IPs in AR, you are in trouble...right?

In any other case where you have stuff hitting the fan in either the real world or the matrix, it simply takes a free action to switch modes (back to AR if needing physical actions)...in my games players basically always roll a physical inititive and a matrix initiative (magic as well, if it will be needed) and we just integrate everything together. So, a player could have different initiative orders in a given IP depending on "how" he is acting (matrix, physical or astral).

QUOTE (Rotbart van Dainig)
QUOTE (deek)
I wouldn't call it for free...you are risking damage to yourself, potential addiction to the VR signals, penalties on all your physical actions while in VR...

Increased reflexes have their own penalites, too... and they cost essence/magic - far more valuable.

What penalties are you referring to besides magic/essence? The magic/essence vs. cyber/bioware is a balancing factor...just the same as I think AR vs VR balances each other...

Magic/essence is far more valuable to awakened characters...but no one else. So, to a mundane, essence is just a capacity, nothing more, and therefore, not "that" important. But hacking, on the other hand, is available to EVERYONE, as you can default on those skills only need the programs to attempt these actions...those extra IPs you are giving to AR users are much more valuable, in my opinion, seeing that that effectively means that CVR is completely useless and HVR is pretty much worthless as well. But, if that is cool in your games, play on!

QUOTE (Rotbart van Dainig)
QUOTE (deek)
Just a quick question...have you played in campaigns using both sets of rules, kinda a compare and contrast?  I have not...I have only run games using the AR = 1IP max rule.

Been there, done that, didn't like it - that's what my character did in SR3, hacking with an implanted phone in tortoise mode.

Didn't play any SR3. I played SR1 many years ago and have recently started runnign SR4 games...so I don't have a solid comparison to share. I still can think of a situation where a player is lacking when AR = 1IP max. I have been trying to run scenarios in my head and just can't find one where that ruins an event or makes a player weak. Only when I start thinking up worst-case scenarios do I "break the system", and at that point, even a player with 8IPs, is in trouble!
deek
QUOTE (Butterblume)
QUOTE (deek)
I must admit, that every now and then, I read a post and think that I have an argument that will sway a fellow runners opinion...but I have yet to find anyone that I have swayed on this board:)

I even was swayed by arguments a few times... I mention it just to show that a discussion might change something, sometimes. Well, not by your arguments, still, it could happen biggrin.gif.

Yeah, I have, too. And I have brought some houserules that I think make a lot of sense into my games, even if they contradicted the RAW...so above all, if my players are having fun and things make sense or are really there to make the game flow better, I am all for it!

I guess the thing is, I am not arguing rules theory in this debate, I'm basically defending how I have interpreted the rules and the way I currently run my games for my players...granted, we (in my gaming group) all joke about having "crazy" AR multiple IPs, but we have all come to agree that the 1IP for AR is the best way to do it and is the only way it makes sense to even have CVR and HVR...

Being ultra-competitive doesn't help the issue, but when I feel like I have an argument that is decently supported, I have a tendency to try and sway the other side...oh well...some people just can't be swayed:)

hobgoblin
and there isnt a reason to sway them either...
Rotbart van Dainig
QUOTE (deek)
The worst case scenario I can see a hacker being in is a big gun fight and being attacked via the matrix...simultaneously...say, being subscribed to 4 nodes with attacking IC in each and being a target in a gun fight...I don't care how many IPs you have...you are screwed regardless!  Plain and simple.  You can only act in one realm per IP...so even if you get 4IPs in AR, you are in trouble...right?

Yeah - now imagine you'd have to switch modes or have fewer IPs in each realm, being completely helpless in the other. Wait, lett me guess - you are dead. wink.gif

QUOTE (deek)
in my games players basically always roll a physical inititive and a matrix initiative (magic as well, if it will be needed) and we just integrate everything together.  So, a player could have different initiative orders in a given IP depending on "how" he is acting (matrix, physical or astral).

That's exactly the kind of confusing overhead SR4 tried to avoid.

QUOTE (deek)
Magic/essence is far more valuable to awakened characters...but no one else.  So, to a mundane, essence is just a capacity, nothing more, and therefore, not "that" important.

'Just'? Adepts use magic just as capacity, too.

QUOTE (deek)
But hacking, on the other hand, is available to EVERYONE, as you can default on those skills only need the programs to attempt these actions...those extra IPs you are giving to AR users are much more valuable, in my opinion, seeing that that effectively means that CVR is completely useless and HVR is pretty much worthless as well.

CVR reduces thresholds in vehicle combat, HVR adds dice for matrix tests, both reduce the ammount required for real hacking to 1/24.

QUOTE (deek)
Didn't play any SR3.  I played SR1 many years ago and have recently started runnign SR4 games...so I don't have a solid comparison to share.  I still can think of a situation where a player is lacking when AR = 1IP max.  I have been trying to run scenarios in my head and just can't find one where that ruins an event or makes a player weak.  Only when I start thinking up worst-case scenarios do I "break the system", and at that point, even a player with 8IPs, is in trouble!

Believe me - every Combat Hacker will hate that ruling if he knows otherwise.
X-Kalibur
QUOTE (Shrike30)
QUOTE (deek @ Jul 25 2006, 11:40 AM)
There really isn't going to be closure on this until the game developers chime in officially...

I just sent off an email to Rob. With any luck, we'll have an answer soon.

I'm definitely looking forward to an official stance on this one.
Samaels Ghost
How does Improved Reflexes the Power factor into this? What about all those poor Hacker Adepts that spend their hard earned power points?

As for getting more than you paid for, there are plenty of combos out there that benefit a character with a split archetype. Combat Hackers benefit from the above arguement (IPs). Hermetics that focus on technical skills get their Logic to everything making Cerebral Boosters very powerful. Elven Shaman-faces are a force to reckon with. There are plenty of ways that a character can have an edge over several different aspects of the game world at a time with minimal expenditure. For example: What can't you do with guns?
Badguy? I shoot him.
Interrogation? I shoot his kneecap.
Door locked? I shoot it.
Guards heard me "unlocking" door? I shoot them.
They have Hell Hounds? I shoot them.
Spirits too? I shoot their materalized forms with stick 'n shock.
No car? I shoot a taxi driver.
There. An example of how minimal BP can solve many problems.

As for the fluff of implants, I do agree that the fluff doesn't match the rules. Wired according the the definition above (can't remember who, they quoted Cybertechnology) doesn't look like it would help with hacking, but is magic the same way? Do adepts have to pick whether they use their Improved Reflexes mentally or physically? There's another archetyoe you're letting down: the hacking adept.
Samaels Ghost
QUOTE (X-Kalibur)
QUOTE (Shrike30 @ Jul 25 2006, 02:34 PM)
QUOTE (deek @ Jul 25 2006, 11:40 AM)
There really isn't going to be closure on this until the game developers chime in officially...

I just sent off an email to Rob. With any luck, we'll have an answer soon.

I'm definitely looking forward to an official stance on this one.

I e-mailed him last week and haven't heard back yet.
Shrike30
Do not dash my hopes and dreams! nyahnyah.gif
deek
QUOTE (hobgoblin)
and there isnt a reason to sway them either...

True, there isn't a reason...
deek
QUOTE (Rotbart van Dainig)
QUOTE (deek)
The worst case scenario I can see a hacker being in is a big gun fight and being attacked via the matrix...simultaneously...say, being subscribed to 4 nodes with attacking IC in each and being a target in a gun fight...I don't care how many IPs you have...you are screwed regardless!  Plain and simple.  You can only act in one realm per IP...so even if you get 4IPs in AR, you are in trouble...right?

Yeah - now imagine you'd have to switch modes or have fewer IPs in each realm, being completely helpless in the other. Wait, lett me guess - you are dead. wink.gif

Switching modes is a free action though, so I am not worried about that. Even if we go with AR getting multiple IPs, in this situation, with WR3, you may get 3IPs in the matrix and physical, but you still have to split them...no way around that...I would look at the player and wonder why he put himself in a position to get ganked like that...no rules or extra IPs are going to save him there.

QUOTE (Rotbart van Dainig)
QUOTE (deek)
in my games players basically always roll a physical inititive and a matrix initiative (magic as well, if it will be needed) and we just integrate everything together.  So, a player could have different initiative orders in a given IP depending on "how" he is acting (matrix, physical or astral).

That's exactly the kind of confusing overhead SR4 tried to avoid.

Well, confusing is a perception...my players and I find it very simple and it just flows...honestly, I am the one tracking everything, the players just act...but, I can see how it can sound confusing...

QUOTE (Rotbart van Dainig)
QUOTE (deek)
Magic/essence is far more valuable to awakened characters...but no one else.  So, to a mundane, essence is just a capacity, nothing more, and therefore, not "that" important.

'Just'? Adepts use magic just as capacity, too.

I do admit, my campaigns have never been big into magic, so I have a biased view and most of my players reallly don't us magic, and therefore there's not a lot in our games.

QUOTE (Rotbart van Dainig)
QUOTE (deek)
But hacking, on the other hand, is available to EVERYONE, as you can default on those skills only need the programs to attempt these actions...those extra IPs you are giving to AR users are much more valuable, in my opinion, seeing that that effectively means that CVR is completely useless and HVR is pretty much worthless as well.

CVR reduces thresholds in vehicle combat, HVR adds dice for matrix tests, both reduce the ammount required for real hacking to 1/24.

True, but trying to do anything in the physical world while in CVR or HVR gives you a -4 penalty, -6 to perception tests...so if I could get multiple IPs in AR, I would very rarely go virtual...

QUOTE (Rotbart van Dainig)
QUOTE (deek)
Didn't play any SR3.  I played SR1 many years ago and have recently started runnign SR4 games...so I don't have a solid comparison to share.  I still can think of a situation where a player is lacking when AR = 1IP max.  I have been trying to run scenarios in my head and just can't find one where that ruins an event or makes a player weak.  Only when I start thinking up worst-case scenarios do I "break the system", and at that point, even a player with 8IPs, is in trouble!

Believe me - every Combat Hacker will hate that ruling if he knows otherwise.

So far no complaints...and one of my players chooses not to go HVR and has limited himself to CVR...I guess it depends on the GM and player's mindset...it hasn't held anyone back.
Rotbart van Dainig
QUOTE (deek)
Even if we go with AR getting multiple IPs, in this situation, with WR3, you may get 3IPs in the matrix and physical, but you still have to split them...no way around that...I would look at the player and wonder why he put himself in a position to get ganked like that...no rules or extra IPs are going to save him there.

You are still evading the problem - though even you admit that you would like to have more IPs in AR.

QUOTE (deek)
Well, confusing is a perception...my players and I find it very simple and it just flows...honestly, I am the one tracking everything, the players just act...but, I can see how it can sound confusing...

Keeping 3 scores just in case of, instead of one score is unnecessary overhead.

QUOTE (deek)
I do admit, my campaigns have never been big into magic, so I have a biased view and most of my players reallly don't us magic, and therefore there's not a lot in our games.

Great.
Your posts become more and more hypocrite - you try to argue about things you have to admit you don't use, then you say it's no big deal to have multiple passes in AR, just to explain why it's crucial that VR remains fastest so AR does not break the game.
Make up your mind.

QUOTE (deek)
True, but trying to do anything in the physical world while in CVR or HVR gives you a -4 penalty, -6 to perception tests...so if I could get multiple IPs in AR, I would very rarely go virtual...

You don't do things in the real world while going virtual - you lie around dribbling.
Of course that's nothing to be desired in a firefight, so indeed you rarely would.

QUOTE (deek)
So far no complaints...and one of my players chooses not to go HVR and has limited himself to CVR...I guess it depends on the GM and player's mindset...it hasn't held anyone back.

Does the player even know and tried anything beside your houserule?
deek
QUOTE (Rotbart van Dainig)
QUOTE (deek)
Even if we go with AR getting multiple IPs, in this situation, with WR3, you may get 3IPs in the matrix and physical, but you still have to split them...no way around that...I would look at the player and wonder why he put himself in a position to get ganked like that...no rules or extra IPs are going to save him there.

You are still evading the problem - though even you admit that you would like to have more IPs in AR.

I am not evading the problem, though. If a hacker had say 3 IPs in the physical, using AR, in the above situation (in my games at least), he would be allowed to act in the matrix or the physical in IP 1 with no penalties, but for IP 2 and 3, he would be limited to physical actions only. Or, as a free action, he could jump into HVR and then choose to act in the matrix OR physical (albeit with a -4 penalty) and choose to act in either environment each pass. In your games, you are allowing players to sidestep the -4 penalty and be immune to Black IC...and not because the RAW says you can, but because you are taking advantage of a vague ruling that opens the door to WR potentially allowing multiple IPs in AR. That is the only difference between the way we are choosing to play.

I think anyone, including myself, would say yes to more IPs. So, while we are at it, I would also like for bullets to bypass NPC armor, characters to start out with 800 BPs and have no caps on attributes and skills:) Those would all be nice...but isn't really conducive to a balanced game, IMO.

QUOTE (Rotbart van Dainig)
QUOTE (deek)
Well, confusing is a perception...my players and I find it very simple and it just flows...honestly, I am the one tracking everything, the players just act...but, I can see how it can sound confusing...

Keeping 3 scores just in case of, instead of one score is unnecessary overhead.

Honestly, unless someone is actively needing to act in multiple environments, only one score is rolled...I don't see how there is anyway around it, because not everyone is going to restrict themselves to just the physical or just the matrix or just astral in every combat scenario...do you also allow WR bonus IPs to effect astral combat?

QUOTE (Rotbart van Dainig)
QUOTE (deek)
I do admit, my campaigns have never been big into magic, so I have a biased view and most of my players really don't use magic, and therefore there's not a lot in our games.

Great.
Your posts become more and more hypocrite - you try to argue about things you have to admit you don't use, then you say it's no big deal to have multiple passes in AR, just to explain why it's crucial that VR remains fastest so AR does not break the game.
Make up your mind.

I am sorry you feel that way, but I am just trying to give you my perspective, as it may help you to understand where I might be coming from. We are not debating who is right or wrong, we are simply stating how we perceive the rules and recently how we actually play in our own games. I didn't say I never used magic, simply that my players aren't all mystics or adepts...I have never had more than one player in our group use magic, therefore, essence/magic costs are not as big a deal as you seemed to be portraying.

I never said that multiple passes in AR was a "big deal" for everyone in every game, I think that it disrupts balance and underscores the capabilities of CVR and HVR, but I also realize that if you (or your GM) allows everyone to get multiple passes in AR, then that is how you are going to play. Doesn't effect my games, does it?

I was actually trying to accept your point of view and conceptualize how that would actually work during my games. Minus the fact that I think it is too big of an advantage for players to avoid Black attacks and act in the matrix and physical world multiple times each combat turn with no penalties, I can't say that going that route completely ruins a game. I think it becomes a bit unbalanced, but, oh well, right? It just seems to me that VR completely gets undermined and it just doesn't seem like that was intended in the RAW...why even have anything but a small sidebar on CVR, HVR or Black IC, if AR was the main place to hack? Why even have CVR and HVR give bonus IPs, why not have a better commlink or some other add-on device control how many IPs a hacker gets, instead of just being in a different environment?

QUOTE (Rotbart van Dainig)
QUOTE (deek)
True, but trying to do anything in the physical world while in CVR or HVR gives you a -4 penalty, -6 to perception tests...so if I could get multiple IPs in AR, I would very rarely go virtual...

You don't do things in the real world while going virtual - you lie around dribbling.
Of course that's nothing to be desired in a firefight, so indeed you rarely would.

I disagree. And even in your games that hackers are all cybered up, a -4 penalty while in VR is not a huge deal, is it? With smartlinks, specializations, cyberware etc., -4 to your die pool is normally not going to make you ineffective in a firefight.

The whole point of the -6 perception and -4 for actions while virtual proves that one is going to do things in the real world while going virtual. Its not the best way to do things, but when you are pressed, why not? And again, seeing you can take a free action to flip back to AR (and take regular actions with no penalty), this really only is an issue when you are being attacked in the real world AND the matrix. Any other time, you are mainly acting in one or the other...

QUOTE (Rotbart van Dainig)
QUOTE (deek)
So far no complaints...and one of my players chooses not to go HVR and has limited himself to CVR...I guess it depends on the GM and player's mindset...it hasn't held anyone back.

Does the player even know and tried anything beside your houserule?

Houserule? That is somewhat of a bold statement, as there hasn't been a definitive ruling on where WR are allowed to enchance IPs for AR in the first place. At this point, both ways are "houserules".

And as I said, I have brought up the idea of multiple IPs in AR to my group, and they all laughed and agreed it was unbalanced and didn't make any sense, undermining the need to go into CVR or HVR very often. These aren't solo adventures that I am running, our gaming group consists of six of us, with two focused hackers and one hybrid hacker...and while they all agreed that it would be cool to be able to do so much in AR with no risk, they just didn't feel it was right to do so...

And had a player in the group been the one to bring this up, our group would have discussed it, as we do with all ideas or houserules that have an effect in our games.
Rotbart van Dainig
QUOTE (deek)
I think anyone, including myself, would say yes to more IPs.  So, while we are at it, I would also like for bullets to bypass NPC armor, characters to start out with 800 BPs and have no caps on attributes and skills:)  Those would all be nice...but isn't really conducive to a balanced game, IMO.

Those things aren't linked in any way except the try of making multiple AR ations look gamebreaking - which they aren't.

QUOTE (deek)
We are not debating who is right or wrong, we are simply stating how we perceive the rules and recently how we actually play in our own games.

Perception is judgement.

QUOTE (deek)
It just seems to me that VR completely gets undermined and it just doesn't seem like that was intended in the RAW...

On the contrary - boosting the use of AR is certainly an important thing in SR4.

QUOTE (deek)
I disagree.

Disagree all you like, that's how RAS OVerride is described. The meatbody goes idle while the spirit roams free... one can try doing otherwise, but the penalties mean you won't do very much.

QUOTE (deek)
Houserule?  That is somewhat of a bold statement, as there hasn't been a definitive ruling on where WR are allowed to enchance IPs for AR in the first place.

It's the truth - your interpretation lacks the ruling in the book, which states that Physical Initative is used.
Wiseman
QUOTE
And as I said, I have brought up the idea of multiple IPs in AR to my group, and they all laughed and agreed it was unbalanced and didn't make any sense, undermining the need to go into CVR or HVR very often. These aren't solo adventures that I am running, our gaming group consists of six of us, with two focused hackers and one hybrid hacker...and while they all agreed that it would be cool to be able to do so much in AR with no risk, they just didn't feel it was right to do so...


My group said the same thing, and these guys are long experienced gamers who a good sense of "fair and balanced play".

Arguing/Debating with Danzig is futile as he reads words like regular/normal/standard to mean anything but any of those webster definitions.

The whole basis for arguing to allow WR to stack IP's with AR is one misunderstood paragraph under AR initiative.

Yet the reasoning and arguement against it is the dozen odd references to VR's superiority in speed at the risk of safety, the implicit rules as written in regards to two wholly different environments, and most of all simple game balance.

You can't come into the forums arguing I interperted one small rule and so I'm arguing with RAW on my side. RAW is the whole book, not one paragraph, and the whole book of RAW says it can't be done. Read the rest of it and stop focusing on the one part that a lack of mastery with the english language allows you to read "I pwn all your base" when applied to your un-regular, munchkined out, abnormal, and modified beyond the standard meat body speeds.

Play the game as you like, but every player at my table who bought the book laughs at any attempt at such non-sense at its not what RAW allows.

Quoting and trying to punch wholes in 12 arguements against it must be easy when you don't offer any evidence other than the AR paragraph, and then dismiss outright any challenge to the specific wording as the language is used (and has been used for longer than role-playing games have been around).

My challenge to prove AR and WR IP's stack by using examples in any clearer language hasn't been provided, nor has any other implied rule been given that bolster's AR and WR IP stacking. In fact its been outright ignored in favor of nitpicking any arguement to the contrary of one misread paragraph.





Rotbart van Dainig
QUOTE (Wiseman)
My group said the same thing, and these guys are long experienced gamers who a good sense of "fair and balanced play".

Sorry to tell you, but you and your group are no official authority on game balance - because there is none.

QUOTE (Wiseman)
Arguing/Debating with Danzig is futile as he reads words like regular/normal/standard to mean anything but any of those webster definitions.

Before trying to criticize someones reading comprehension - make sure you get at least their name right. wink.gif

QUOTE (Wiseman)
The whole basis for arguing to allow WR to stack IP's with AR is one misunderstood paragraph under AR initiative.

There is no uncertainty or misunderstanding, even if you try to claim so.
Proof through claim doesn't work, especially if the rules are that straight forward.
BlueRondo
QUOTE
My challenge to prove AR and WR IP's stack by using examples in any clearer language hasn't been provided, nor has any other implied rule been given that bolster's AR and WR IP stacking.


I don't know if this addresses your challenge, but earlier I explained that the reference to the original initiative rules "(see Initiative, p. 132)" indicates that the rules from the entire section , including extra initiative passes from WR, apply. Furthermore, the book says to use these rules "as normal," which indicates that no special rules outside of those found in the initiative section on p. 132 apply. Ruling that only 1 IP can be used per combat turn for AR actions is a special rule not mentioned in the original initiative section, so using such a rule would not be using the rules "as normal."
deek
QUOTE (Rotbart van Dainig)
QUOTE (deek)
I think anyone, including myself, would say yes to more IPs.  So, while we are at it, I would also like for bullets to bypass NPC armor, characters to start out with 800 BPs and have no caps on attributes and skills:)  Those would all be nice...but isn't really conducive to a balanced game, IMO.

Those things aren't linked in any way except the try of making multiple AR ations look gamebreaking - which they aren't.

They ARE linked though, because they are all attempting to get an advantage where there isn't one explicitly stated. If you can just "say" WR gives you additional IPs in AR, as it is clear that statement does not currently appear in any book, then you can start pulling other game advantages out of the air. You can at least agree with me that getting additional IPs in AR is an advantage, can't you?

QUOTE (Rotbart van Dainig)
QUOTE (deek)
We are not debating who is right or wrong, we are simply stating how we perceive the rules and recently how we actually play in our own games.

Perception is judgement.

True, I won't deny that. But seriously, I get the feeling that if I "joined" your group for a few sessions and that is what the rule was, I would play and not say a thing. But, if you "joined" ours, you would constantly be disrupting our game trying to get your interpretation of the rule in our game...I certainly could be wrong, but you seem set on that AR receive multiple IPs due to WR and that anything other than that is wrong.

QUOTE (Rotbart van Dainig)
QUOTE (deek)
It just seems to me that VR completely gets undermined and it just doesn't seem like that was intended in the RAW...

On the contrary - boosting the use of AR is certainly an important thing in SR4.

It is important because it makes WR even more powerful and while not completely game breaking, it certainly changes several aspects of the game, if you are limiting AR to 1 IP. Its important because it is a big change and advantage to charcter wanting to make matrix and physical actions in the same combat turn...how does giving that sort of speed in AR enchance VR? It does nothing but detract...at least with HVR you get extra dice, but CVR? Tell me any character in your games that would ever go CVR if you get extra IPs in AR.

QUOTE (Rotbart van Dainig)
QUOTE (deek)
I disagree.

Disagree all you like, that's how RAS OVerride is described. The meatbody goes idle while the spirit roams free... one can try doing otherwise, but the penalties mean you won't do very much.

Goes idle, yes. But you can concentrate on your physical body and act...I don't see how you easily can introduce multiple passes to AR but then feel that a -4 die pool reduces a character to nothing during gameplay. And we are talking about VR, not astral projection, right?

QUOTE (Rotbart van Dainig)
QUOTE (deek)
Houserule?  That is somewhat of a bold statement, as there hasn't been a definitive ruling on where WR are allowed to enchance IPs for AR in the first place.

It's the truth - your interpretation lacks the ruling in the book, which states that Physical Initative is used.

On page 230, under Augmented Initiative, it says: "If you're using AR, you're acting at regular meat-body speeds - use your physical Reaction and Initiative as normal".

And this is where the debate starts with what does "regular meat-body", "physical Reaction and Initiative" all come into play, which has been debated already. That is all you have to stand on for your argument, and nowhere does it state that AR gets multiple IPs due to WR. There is nothing saying that "regular meat-body" speeds includes any cyberware. I don't see how that sentence even implies that any modified attributes are in scope...

I, like most of us in the AR = 1IP camp, have yet to see a single page reference stating the claim to WR adding bonus IPs to AR...
X-Kalibur
QUOTE
I, like most of us in the AR = 1IP camp, have yet to see a single page reference stating the claim to WR adding bonus IPs to AR...


Stop being a dick about it, we managed to keep this civilized for awhile. There are no rules stating it goes either way, except that for AR initiative it refers you to the combat section which does imply for it that WR would with it.

There are equally valid points on all sides, let's wait and see if we can't get a real errata for it.
Rotbart van Dainig
QUOTE (deek)
They ARE linked though, because they are all attempting to get an advantage where there isn't one explicitly stated.

It is stated - normal physical initative is the augmented value.
To limit AR to 1IP+E, it would have to say 'natural'.

QUOTE (deek)
But, if you "joined" ours, you would constantly be disrupting our game trying to get your interpretation of the rule in our game...I certainly could be wrong, but you seem set on that AR receive multiple IPs due to WR and that anything other than that is wrong.

Your perception is a bit off here - rulings agreed by the majority in advance are how games work, so if I would have to play with your group it would be the way you play, no big fuss.

QUOTE (deek)
Tell me any character in your games that would ever go CVR if you get extra IPs in AR.

I don't have to look very far - it's what my character always does when he tries to enter systems not on the fly or meets people online.
deek
QUOTE (X-Kalibur)
QUOTE
I, like most of us in the AR = 1IP camp, have yet to see a single page reference stating the claim to WR adding bonus IPs to AR...


Stop being a dick about it, we managed to keep this civilized for awhile. There are no rules stating it goes either way, except that for AR initiative it refers you to the combat section which does imply for it that WR would with it.

There are equally valid points on all sides, let's wait and see if we can't get a real errata for it.

I didn't mean to have any tone but a civil one...and besides continuing to drill on the same issue (which is the purpose of a separate topic), I don't see how I can be singled out as being anything but civil.

I will also state that nowhere in the rules is there a single page reference supporting my claim of AR is limited to 1IP per combat turn...I believe I have mentioned on several occaisions that both "sides" are using a house rule and we both have valid points...at this point, I think both RvD and myself are being entertained by this debate and I am sure that, because there are valid points on both sides, this is helpful to other GMs and players that are on the fence...

My apologies for coming off any other way.

hobgoblin
ok, i do belive this thread have gone into the silly zone.

people, back to your corners and wait for the errata. and if the topic comes up in a diffrent thread before that, politely point out that there is two diffrent interpetations floating around and leave it at that...
2bit
I agree with deek on almost all counts... yes you can perform physical actions while in VR, but the penalties for doing so would turn routine physical combat into something like walking a tightrope in a dense fog while completely pissed. But if something has to be done, well, the possibility is there.

And I dunno where the complaint about hacker Adepts being left out in the cold came from. The Improved Reflexes power has exactly the same effect as Wired Reflexes does on hacking, AR, and matrix actions (which is to say, none in my book). They can wear trodes or nanopaste like everyone else and access the matrix via DNI without suffering any penalties for it. They're on equal footing with everyone else. Really, folks. It's like youre looking for any argument to put deek on the defensive.

The difference between controlling your persona in AR and controlling your persona in VR should be night and day; like issuing commands to drones from captain's chair view and jumping into one. The hacker that jumps into VR opens himself up to a world of pain. He risks shock, addiction, even death, by riding Hot. On top of that, he's making himself as defenseless as a sleeping newborn IRL. All this he puts on the line to gain 2 IPs, +1 initiative, and 2 dice.

For 6 BPs worth of cash and 3 essence at character creation, a hacker gains all the speed of Hot Sim, but must sacrifice those 2 extra dice in exchange for immunity to matrix shock, addiction, and death. He can freely keep tabs on his real world surroundings, and may even split his actions between the two worlds.

This sounds like a complete no-brainer to me. NOT securing physical reflex enhancements puts you, and thus your team, at unnecessary risk. Will you die for 2 extra dice? That's the only question at hand here.

Combat is where this really matters, of course. Crossing cyberswords in AR right away removes the possibility of ultimate loss. The AR hacker with wires is very close in combat effectiveness to a hacker going balls to the wall, risking everything in Hot VR. That just isn't right. If you want to play, you've got to ante up.

AR hacking should be like a higher level interface. There's a degree of seperation you have from your persona which needs to be respected in the rules. Maybe an AR user should be limited to issuing commands, just like you would command a drone or agent. The system should be set up so that when you want something done right, you need to jump in there and do it yourself.

edit: god, i write slow. i started this post like 8 replies ago....
deek
QUOTE (Rotbart van Dainig)
QUOTE (deek)
They ARE linked though, because they are all attempting to get an advantage where there isn't one explicitly stated.

It is stated - normal physical initative is the augmented value.
To limit AR to 1IP+E, it would have to say 'natural'.

The only place I can find (doing a search on a PDF) "physical initiative" is under Cold Sim, page 229 (normal physical initiative is not found at all). And that brings us back to the statement: "When operating with cold sim full-VR, you use your Matrix Initiative rather than your physical Initiative. Matrix Initiative equals your Response + Intuition, and you receive an extra IP (for a total of two)."

And then we go round and round about the parenthetical implication. If we remove that added information, one could make a case that CVR simply adds an IP to your "physical initiative", so if you had WR2, getting you 3IPs in AR, you probably should get 4IPs in CVR. Luckily, there are several references to a hard cap limit of 4IPs per combat turn, or else we would also have several debates on how a WR3 hacker going HVR could/could not have 6IPs.

Who knows?

QUOTE (Rotbart van Dainig)
QUOTE (deek)
But, if you "joined" ours, you would constantly be disrupting our game trying to get your interpretation of the rule in our game...I certainly could be wrong, but you seem set on that AR receive multiple IPs due to WR and that anything other than that is wrong.

Your perception is a bit off here - rulings agreed by the majority in advance are how games work, so if I would have to play with your group it would be the way you play, no big fuss.

Well, it is no longer, as you cleared that up for me...you had me leaning toward labeling you as a "trouble player", but at this point, it just seems that you have a clear stance on the topic and you are not willing to budge:) As am I...

QUOTE (Rotbart van Dainig)
QUOTE (deek)
Tell me any character in your games that would ever go CVR if you get extra IPs in AR.

I don't have to look very far - it's what my character always does when he tries to enter systems not on the fly or meets people online.

And I think that is where I see the imbalance, based on your rules, the "not on the fly" system entry is the only place where a multiple IP AR user would NEED to go VR...everything else is just roleplaying. But you obviously don't see a problem with greatly limited VR use in your games, so I shouldn't make it my problem, too.
deek
QUOTE (hobgoblin)
ok, i do belive this thread have gone into the silly zone.

people, back to your corners and wait for the errata. and if the topic comes up in a diffrent thread before that, politely point out that there is two diffrent interpetations floating around and leave it at that...

Eh...perhaps...I enjoy the debate, and honestly (like in other debates I have followed in other threads, but not as actively participated in) have learned a lot from RvD's comments. Granted, a lot of it has set me even firmer in my interpretations of the RAW, but still, he has brought up excellent points and forced me to think through my side even more thoroughly...which all that really does is make my game better for my players and me.

I certainly don't plan on discussing this topic outside of this thread...so while I believe I have said everything I could to possibly support the point of view I have (against RvD), I am still open to exchange ideas with him on the topic...as long as it stays civil, of course:)

The funny thing probably is, no matter what the errata says, those playing in the "right" will probably have a day or two of glory and the rest will just houserule and continue playing the way they have grown accustomed to...I am sure I will spread a small smile if the errata backs up the 1IP in AR camp...but that is about all it will do:)
X-Kalibur
At this point, I don't think most of us are concerned about being right or wrong, but are genuinely interested in what was intended. Plus, that way when it comes up we can without a doubt tell people what the intention was and the "other" interpretation.
ethinos
I don't understand all the fighting. The rules are simple.

"Initiative is now a derived attribute. (Reaction + Intuition)." Pg. 52

"If you are using augmented reality, you are acting at regular meat body speeds-use your Reaction and Initiative as normal (see Initiative, pg. 132)" Pg. 230

In SR4, Initiative and Initiative Passes have been clearly defined as separate entities. No longer is Initiative 2d6+10. Initiative is simply an attribute derived from Reaction and Intuition. Initiative passes are distinctly separate from the initiative attribute. You can have a high initiative now and no extra passes, or a low initiative and several passes.

No where on pg. 230, under Augmented Initiative does it say Initiative Passes of any kind applies and carries over to Matrix work. It says to use your Reaction and Initiative as normal. Passes are not a part of Initiative. Initiative as stated is simply Reaction + Intuition.
Wiseman
QUOTE
I don't know if this addresses your challenge, but earlier I explained that the reference to the original initiative rules "(see Initiative, p. 132)" indicates that the rules from the entire section , including extra initiative passes from WR, apply. Furthermore, the book says to use these rules "as normal," which indicates that no special rules outside of those found in the initiative section on p. 132 apply. Ruling that only 1 IP can be used per combat turn for AR actions is a special rule not mentioned in the original initiative section, so using such a rule would not be using the rules "as normal."


Not being nasty. Just asking for more than one paragraph to reinforce your contention.

And please tell me you just didn't say the same point yet again...."as normal"

since normal is normal for every standard and regular person, not Wired/cybered up people (who are definitively not normal), I don't see your point (again again or again)

As for the entire section, you are correct, but also included in that section is what happens when "Switching Initiative", as would apply when switching between Matrix and Physical actions. again, I don't see your point.

I've said plenty of times I respect everyones opinion, but I felt it necessary to ask for some other supporting evidence as its easy to attempt to punch holes in the numerous references to why AR doesn't stack with WR IP's, while offering nothing more substantial than a dispute to what the meaning of the words Normal, Standard, and Regular mean.

Look in a dictionary, its perfectly clear what they Intended, and the terminology and nominclature they used follows right in line with this intent.

Under the interpertation of normal as a wired super fast shadow criminal, I'd simply like to see more evidence to support it.

You haven't offered any.

If some say, then why didn't they just say "unmodified", then I ask why didn't they just say "modified, wired-body, not regular" or some other descriptive text. They didn't, and worse they never allude to it anywhere else.

But they do directly and consistently imply the exact opposite.

I'm all for awaiting eratta, I think were all well past the point of being convinced for whatever reason. But I don't disagree just because its "unclear", I disagree because between balance, descriptive text, and the intuitive nature of the system, I simply cannot see any arguement (other than how someone might define normal) to back it up.

Asking you to provide it isn't being nasty, its asking you to carry your ball down the field instead of trying to stop me from carrying mine.

In the end I enjoy talking about it regardless, It helps to prepare for my games. Don't take it personal, I sure don't. But I honestly am awaiting that "supporting evidence".
Samaels Ghost
Normal. This a book full of rules for use by shadowrunners. Most runners are augmented by cyber and magic. Considering who the rules are intended to be used for, namely shadowrunners and the players who make them, it is more than appropriate to refer to normal as augmented.

The difference of opinion here seems to branch from what normal refers to, not what it means. One side thinks it refers to normal initiative rules. One thinks it is describing "normal" people using the rules. From each point of view those involved are correct. So which is it? Normal rules or Normal people?
Samaels Ghost
As far as IPs go, AR IPs are not explictly stated. Astral IPs and VR IPs are stated in black and white because they are special cases. You get exactly how much they say you can get if you go VR. You get exactly how much every other mage gets when projecting. However, since AR lacks such blatant clairification and (depending on what you think "normal" is refering to) the only bit of clairification given is the page number for how initiative works any other time of the day. There is no reason not to clairfy AR IPs if they were indeed intended to be limited to 1 per pass. There is plenty of precedence for making such a clairification. Astral and VR init passages make note of where they differ from the rules as per page 132. AR actually goes so far as to say it works exactly like page 132. This includes augmentation.
BlueRondo
QUOTE
As for the entire section, you are correct, but also included in that section is what happens when "Switching Initiative", as would apply when switching between Matrix and Physical actions.


AR uses physical initiative, therefore no initiative switching takes place when one uses AR. The fact that it's a "matrix action" is irrelevant to initiative or IPs.

Switching between action types does not necessarily affect initiative in any way. There are "magic actions" listed in the book (p. 168), and many of those use, dare I say, "normal" physical initiative rules. Likewise, AR employs "normal" physical initiative rules despite the fact that it involves matrix actions.

Arguing that matrix actions and physical actions are somehow incompatible or work on different initiative systems, I feel, goes against SR4's attempts at streamlining gameplay (I think this point was brought up earlier.)

EDIT: I would say that the organization of the Actions Table (p. 349), or the lack thereof, is an indicator that there is no special distinction between "matrix actions" and "physical actions." Actions are listed by whether they are Free, Simple or Complex, with no regard to whether they are physical, magic, matrix, and even astral actions.

Oh, and one more thing:

QUOTE
In SR4, Initiative and Initiative Passes have been clearly defined as separate entities. No longer is Initiative 2d6+10. Initiative is simply an attribute derived from Reaction and Intuition. Initiative passes are distinctly separate from the initiative attribute.


That is not exactly correct. Yes, the Initiative attribute and initiative passes are separate, independent identities. However, the term "initiative" does not solely refer to a character's initiative attribute. To quote the book:

QUOTE
INITIATIVE

Initiative determines the order in which characters act,
as well as how oft en they act during a single Combat Turn.
Initiative is based on two factors: Initiative Score and Initiative
Passes.


(If you're wondering, that definition is on page 132 - the same page that the book refers to for treating AR actions.)
Wiseman
QUOTE
Switching between action types does not necessarily affect initiative in any way. There are "magic actions" listed in the book (p. 168), and many of those use, dare I say, "normal" physical initiative rules. Likewise, AR employs "normal" physical initiative rules despite the fact that it involves matrix actions.

Arguing that matrix actions and physical actions are somehow incompatible or work on different initiative systems, I feel, goes against SR4's attempts at streamlining gameplay (I think this point was brought up earlier.)


except that under cybercombat matrix actions are listed as seperate or concurrent. AR actions ARE Matrix actions. They're in the matrix section. Both matrix combat and all matrix actions are defined in a seperate and wholly different part of the book. Just like astral.

Tell you what, just refer back to the original post in the thread.

wobble.gif
BlueRondo
QUOTE
except that under cybercombat matrix actions are listed as seperate or concurrent.


To quote exactly what the book says:

QUOTE
Cybercombat can take place separately from, or concurrent, with actions in the real world.


This is simply describing where cybercombat takes place. It conveys the fact that cybercombat occurs in the matrix, which is indeed a separate world from reality where events play out concurrently to events in the real world. However, this is simply fluff text - it says nothing on how matrix and physical actions should be treated with regards to initiative. The part where the developers explain what this fluff text means in terms of initiative immediately follows:

QUOTE
MATRIX INITIATIVE
If cybercombat is occurring at the same time as RL combat, Matrix combat Initiative and actions should be integrated with the RL action.


So in fluff terms, yes, matrix and physical actions are separate and concurrent. But in game terms, matrix and physical actions belong to a single, integrated initiative system.

QUOTE
AR actions ARE Matrix actions. They're in the matrix section. Both matrix combat and all matrix actions are defined in a seperate and wholly different part of the book. Just like astral.


I absolutely agree that AR actions are matrix actions. I simply don't think using a "matrix" action warrants any sort of change in initiative.
Samaels Ghost
Just like casting spells are Magic actions yet use the same physical init. Same with AR actions, according to RAW.
2bit
This is really giving me a headache. Or maybe I've already had too much coffee this morning...

Is a Matrix user supposed to keep track of two seperate initiatives in combat? If not, and I suspect not, then an AR user gets his Wires if applicable. Using AR doesn't slow down a user's body, and taking away those bonuses goes against the spirit of the rule allowing AR users to freely choose between interacting with the physical world or the augmented world.

Speed of thought issues aside, if we take a look at how the astral plane is set up, and recognize how SR has made the astral and digital worlds more and more similar in this edition, we can see that the same situation is present with regard to dual natured entities. An astrally perceiving character retains all his physical initiative boosting enhancements, even if that means he acts as fast or faster than an astrally projecting magician moving at the speed of thought (or spirit or whatever).

What I think the silent majority believes is the crux of the AR issue is how little an AR user risks in cybercombat. An astrally perceiving character still risks his life when engaged in astral combat. He lacks the mobility of a projecting character, but may turn off his perceptions and become immune to further attack. Conversely, an AR user risks neither life nor mental health, unlike a VR user, and the difference in combat effectiveness between a wired AR user and a VR user is negligible.

AR users get full reflex boosted initiative. But they need to be nerfed in cybercombat cyber.gif
deek
QUOTE (2bit)
This is really giving me a headache.  Or maybe I've already had too much coffee this morning...

Is a Matrix user supposed to keep track of two seperate initiatives in combat?  If not, and I suspect not, then an AR user gets his Wires if applicable.  Using AR doesn't slow down a user's body, and taking away those bonuses goes against the spirit of the rule allowing AR users to freely choose between interacting with the physical world or the augmented world. 

I think you have to. You have different initiative rolls, Reaction + Intuition in physical and System + Intuition in the Matrix. They are integrated, meaning that in a combat scenario, a roll of 18, regardless of whether it is a matrix, physical or astral roll, go at the same time. I think the key here is that the actions are integrated together for resolution, not that you use one roll for everything, otherwise you wouldn't have different attributes making up your initiative!

An AR user still gets to freely choose to interact in either world, its just that in the first pass (again, assuming 1IP max for AR) is the only time you get to choose...the rest of your initiative passes must be physical, unless you use an action to switch out of AR mode, and then you have to wait until next turn for the extra VR IPs due to the fact that you just got more.

QUOTE (2bit)
Speed of thought issues aside, if we take a look at how the astral plane is set up, and recognize how SR has made the astral and digital worlds more and more similar in this edition, we can see that the same situation is present with regard to dual natured entities.  An astrally perceiving character retains all his physical initiative boosting enhancements, even if that means he acts as fast or faster than an astrally projecting magician moving at the speed of thought (or spirit or whatever).

I am not wholly up to speed on the astral, but it sounds like you are saying that additional IPs in the physical carry over to astral, correct?

QUOTE (2bit)
What I think the silent majority believes is the crux of the AR issue is how little an AR user risks in cybercombat.  An astrally perceiving character still risks his life when engaged in astral combat.  He lacks the mobility of a projecting character, but may turn off his perceptions and become immune to further attack.  Conversely, an AR user risks neither life nor mental health, unlike a VR user, and the difference in combat effectiveness between a wired AR user and a VR user is negligible. 

I think there are two cruxes...one (little to no risk in AR) is what you just mentioned and the other is the seemingly intended nature that as you move from AR to CVR to HVR, you get more IPs/bonuses and exchange that for your own safety. So:

AR --> CVR --> HVR

As you move left to right, you gain speed, but increase your risk. This seems to flow correctly and natural. But when you factor in WR IPs in AR, you end up making AR not just the safest, but also the fastest, so the above diagram stays the same for risk, but now the speed looks like:

CVR --> HVR --> AR (left to right as speed increases, as AR could get you 4IPs in the matrix if equipped with WR3).

But you do touch on a good point...if AR is supposed to be the fastest, it should also be the most dangerous, as that just makes sense. Unfortunately, I don't see how this is possible, because of the widespread use of AR by everyday people...so EVERYTHING in the setting points to AR being used by everyone and extremely safe!

QUOTE (2bit)
AR users get full reflex boosted initiative.  But they need to be nerfed in cybercombat  cyber.gif

Yeah, but then you need to work out a new set of rules to handle that...I agree with the concept and I think it would work, but it doesn't seem to be the way we were intended to play, ya know?

I mean, everything seems to fall in line with the RAW once you put a 1IP cap on AR. Nothing else needs to be added in the way of rules or limits or anything, it just all falls into place and seems quite balanced...

Does anyone think there would have been any arguments about AR if the book had simply stated AR had a maximum of 1IP per combat turn? Would we have had a ton of people thinking it was unfair that AR was slower than CVR/HVR given the relatively safe nature of AR in comparison?
ethinos
I believe the definition of "initiative" on page 132, is describing the initiative phase, not someone's physical (meat body) initiative.

Look at the stock character sheet. Those stats are your phyical attributes of your meat body. Notice that it has a box labeled Initiative. Notice that the box for Passes is separate and not even next to the Initiative box. When they mention to use physical Reaction and Initiative, they are referring to the stats on the sheet.

And considering that on page 230, that they go out of their way to mention that VR grants extra passes, the lack of mentioning any extra passes in augmented reality indicates that they don't intend you to have any at all.

They say to use the physical Reaction and Initiative. By saying those two items (and only those two items) are used, excludes using ANY other physical attritributes or modifiers towards Matrix Initiative. Including extra passes awarded for cyberware, bioware, or even drugs like Jazz/Cram.

Also, after reading through Matrix, and even the rigging sections, the only way hackers or riggers can get extra passes is to go VR; hot sim for the most actions.

AR is the new tortoise hacking. Safe but horribly slow. It allows the hacker to be marginally effective and present with the rest of the crew, but to go all out still means being a motionless target.

Jazzed reflexes are a result of improving response time from the brain to the body. The brain is what holds back matrix actions. Only improving the immersion will increase matrix passes.

Lastly, everything on 228 and 229 describes VR as being lightning fast compared to AR. Also, it mentions that for Cold or Hot Sim, you use your Matrix Initiative instead of physical Initiative and then interestingly calls your Matrix Initiative (Response + Intuition). After that they mention separately that you get an extra pass for a total of two (or three for hot sim). Indicating that without VR, you are stuck at one.
hobgoblin
QUOTE
And considering that on page 230, that they go out of their way to mention that VR grants extra passes, the lack of mentioning any extra passes in augmented reality indicates that they don't intend you to have any at all.


or they didnt think it was worth talking about as one was to use the physical initative and IP's anyways...
ethinos
They say physical initiative (the definition of which is Reaction + Intuition, on pg. 52). They don't say anything about additional passes from cyber, bioware, or drugs.

Rules tell you what you can and can't do. You don't use the gray area to modify the rules to your favor.
deek
QUOTE (ethinos)
AR is the new tortoise hacking. Safe but horribly slow. It allows the hacker to be marginally effective and present with the rest of the crew, but to go all out still means being a motionless target.

Slow. I guess that depends on the way you are playing...1IP per combat turn is the norm for beginning characters in my games...as not everyone jumps on WR right off the bat...but I could see how more experienced players are going to make WR a prerequisite to almost any chargen. Its slower, but unless all the enemies and players are getting multiple IPs and you are always stuck at one, then yeah, that is slow:)

I still disagree with the motionless target aspect...you are suffering a -6 perception and -4 to physical actions while in VR and concentrating on the physical. This is more of a problem if you are by yourself, but with teammates around, as long as you don't decide to go virtual standing out in the open when there is a gunfight brewing...I think you will be safe...plus, a free action allows you to jump back to AR...you get a free action in additon to two standards or one complex every IP you are in...so if you are in VR and you are getting beat on, you simply take a free action and defend yourself!

QUOTE (ethinos)
Rules tell you what you can and can't do. You don't use the gray area to modify the rules to your favor.

Well, some of us don't:)
2bit
QUOTE (deek)
I think you have to. You have different initiative rolls, Reaction + Intuition in physical and System + Intuition in the Matrix. They are integrated, meaning that in a combat scenario, a roll of 18, regardless of whether it is a matrix, physical or astral roll, go at the same time. I think the key here is that the actions are integrated together for resolution, not that you use one roll for everything, otherwise you wouldn't have different attributes making up your initiative!

I would almost agree with you about different initiative rolls if it weren't for this on pg. 230 regarding VR users and initiative:
QUOTE (BBB)
If you want to interact with the physical world rather than the VR matrix, you need to either go offline or concentrate on your meat body and spend a turn using physical Initiative...

This tells us a Virtual user doesn't roll both physical initiative and Matrix initiative. If they choose to interact with the meat world, they have to use physical initiative for an entire turn. If a VR user doesn't have two initiatives, I can't accept an AR user having two initiatives. And since a well coordinated Shadowrun team should all be using AR by default to communicate and share data with each other, then shadowrunners would have two initiatives by default. Since they don't make it a point anywhere to mention a character having two initiative scores in the same combat turn, I can't accept that it would be the normal situation for a shadowrunner on the job. There are, however, many mentions of characters sacrificing initiative when switching modes or perceptions (like the passage quoted above). Thus I would conclude a character at any one time has only one initiative score. The only reason to label initiative "matrix" or "physical" or "astral" is because of the attributes used to calculate it, ie. when you're virtual you use Response instead of Reaction.

QUOTE (deek)
I am not wholly up to speed on the astral, but it sounds like you are saying that additional IPs in the physical carry over to astral, correct?
Correct, if you're astrally perceiving and you have WR3 or the Adept power Improved Reflexes 3, you have 4 IPs. Astrally projecting magicians have 3. But there are so many more things you can do with projecting that simply can't be accomplished with astral perception alone, that combat speed isn't an overpowering factor like it is in the Matrix.

QUOTE (deek)
Does anyone think there would have been any arguments about AR if the book had simply stated AR had a maximum of 1IP per combat turn? Would we have had a ton of people thinking it was unfair that AR was slower than CVR/HVR given the relatively safe nature of AR in comparison?
I wouldn't, but yeah, I don't think there's a solution to please everybody. Limiting AR passes to 1 per turn basically says the interface is too slow to keep up with you, which may not jive with people.

PS. I'm pretty sure the word "physical" means "physical world" or "physical plane" and is not meant to imply "natural" or "unaugmented". A WR2 user's "meat body speed" is a lot faster than someone else's may be.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Dumpshock Forums © 2001-2012