Ok, untill Allience gets more copies in I can't read Unwired. So I have a quistion about Nexi. Essentialy how are they different from comlinks? In terms of mechanics. What can they do that comlinks can't to be specific.

Also, are they mainframes like the book says or more of a cluster like the name implies?

Nexus systems are listed as anywhere between the size of a modern desktop PC up to blade servers mounted in fridge sized racks. They tend to need to be plugged in for power, although at least one example device is drone mounted and designed to be a mobile network setup.

The major thing about Nexus systems, aside from their expensive costs, is that their number of active programs or users is much higher than a commlink.

A commlink can handle 1 user, and a number of active programs equal to it's system (which is linked to it's response). A nexus's abilities are not so limited, and can handle an office of users Simmed in and using dozens of active programs. Of course, a commlink is also the size of a cell phone and doesn't require wall socket to be turned on.

Cluster systems are also described in Unwired, although they are not related to Nexus rules. Clustering rules lets you combine a few minor electronics (like implants for example) to make a larger more potent system. Last I checked, it was possible to cluster a number of Commlinks to make a more impressive system.

Just a detail: A comlink (and any other standard node) can only handle one persona, but more than one user. Only one person can get online from the comlink, but more than one person can access the comlink at the same time from outside.

Thanks, that helps a lot. But now I have another question. Is the number of users the only benefit to increasing power? What do you gain with the clusters you mentioned. Could you cluster nexi?

Question questions questions.

Increasing the number of personas is basically a non-benefit, actually. I've never heard of a situation where multiple people would even want to get online using one machine.

The real primary power of nexi (and clustering) is increased 'running program limit'/'subscription limit' (which is almost the same thing). I think the game calls this 'Processor Limit'?

Beg pardon, but while runners might not usually, matrix cafes and the SR equivalent of public library internet access are good examples and described (more or less) in the fluff.

Other than that, yes, you're mostly correct. I can think of a few specialized circumstances for runners, but they're exceptions. (example: Runners need to do a bunch of matrix work and nobody wants to burn their own commlinks. So the hacker spoofs up the Matrix ID of the nexis and everyone uses it for their work.)

Like I said. Who cares about matrix cafés and public libraries? I don't believe it, anyway: everyone has a commlink, even the poorest.

This is true, unfortunitely. The only reason for a matrix cafe in 2070's SR is to get cheap access to better stuff then you can afford (if you are really poor).

However, a single system for an office might be better need of Nexi.

Yeah, that I can see. For security and licensing reasons, units like offices and labs might use use a nexus/terminal setup for workstations.

I was looking over the Nexus rules last night, and comparing them to the one my Hacker picked up as payment for a mission, and I'm still confused by them. Or more specifically, the nexus systems for sale in the back of Unwired compared to the rules for how one determines their processor limits and personas.

SR4A p223:
"Nexi have larger processor limits (System x3)."

Unwired p50:
"Their persona limit equals System x 3."
"Nexi have a minimum processor limit of 10 and a maximum of 50."

Unwired p198:
"NeoNET Office Genie: 3 Res - 2 Sig - 4 Sys - 3 Fire - 30 Persona - 50 Processor Limit"

It doesn't really match up. The pricing on page 198 of Unwired also seems to list the costs by target numbers instead of as a multiple of the ratings. (Rating X Persona Limit X $25)

The example Nexi systems on page 50 gives Personal Limits as a multiple of System, but still lists Processor Limits as a round number between 10 and 50.
"Large Matrix Cafe: 3 Res - 3 Sig - 4 Sys - 2 Fire - 12 Persona - 20 Processor Limit"

The Unwired Errata doesn't really change any of the mechanics either.

SR4A is wrong (/simplified and superseded by Unwired). Per Unwired, you actually 'build' a nexus to order, and the cost is just the result of the multipliers. If the example systems don't match the rules, it's because they're special. Who knows what p50 is talking about. Still, persona limit should almost never matter.

One way to look at is Nexi are the key parts of hosts as well.

Want to hold a meeting with your buds in the matrix, need to find a host or set up a nexi for the meet.


They are far nicer to have for mobile teams, set up a nexi somewhere secure. Lock down the nexi with ice/sprites and you got a nice dropbox for data/msgs (vs them coming to a commlink)

And a nexi can be set up with far nastier matrix security than your commlink...

A nexus.

That's not true, though. A 'meeting' is just people connecting to any node. Any node can act as a dropbox, unless you want to run a large number of IC.

While nexi are pretty useless for PCs compared to clustered commlinks, they can be pretty valuable for GMs who want to create one big office node with a few spiders hanging about on the same System who all use the same stats and that has a few useless NPCs lurking about working on irrelevant data files as a distraction.

But if you are designing a PC, there is no real reason to get a nexus. Just build yourself some Rating 6 Responses, copy and paste your System and Firewall and cluster them.

Slightly disagree.. I could see someone working up a backpack nexus for use with their decker/rigger. I'd probably use the drone rules... 6 hours of juice on battery with the option for the same efficiency upgrades available to vehicles. In fact, I'd probably treat it as a backpack drone with limited mobility similar to the iBall. Use the special equipment mod to add the nexus to it. (using those 8 vehicle upgrade slots allows for a lot of usefull things... everything from specially shielded storage compartments, efficiency upgrades, mimetic camo... etc).


I've toyed with the idea of making a super-decker with a cyberarm fitted out with 3-4 commlinks clustered together... Chargen starting... you're looking at 2000 in parts for each response 5 chip (half cost if you build it yourself...), after play starts that's 4000 per response 6 upgrade. You can get away with signal 0 on most of them... since they're hardwired together... but one of them should probably have a reasonably good signal rating. Remember 2 commlinks clustered together is break even... so you need 3 or more to start seeing any processing enhancement. And half cost for parts mean you start with a pile of parts... and need to take time in game to assemble them. (plus the skills/contacts to actually install said equipment into your cyberarm when you're done).


Another thing which crossed my mind... it is technically possible to build a cluster of nexus. stuff 4 identical ones together you quadruple the persona limit, it doesn't say it, but you probably quadruple the subscription limit as well. System, firewall, and response stay the same... but you double your processor limit. That would make for one very scary node...

Making it a drone is just asking for abuse. There are already rules for electronic device mods.

Yes, you can cluster anything you want, but how much processor limit do you even need? 100 isn't 'scarier' than 50, because why on earth would be even need 50? I think I'd rather have multiple nodes in almost all situations.

Because you attach an agent to a persona so it's running in that node. And not transferring itself bodily to an inferior node outside of it. The agent uses the persona's ID... so cracked copies become workable. (just need a gazilion login id's which is generally doable :).

If each agent is running say 4 programs (attack/defense/analyze/utility). 50 proc limit will get you 12 agents... without degradation (100 24...) you dispatch all those agents to attack something at once... Or a fraction of them to provide node security to the 'home' node... it could get scary. The biggest advantage of the cluster node is that it centralizes defense... instead of defending 4 individual nodes you only need defend one super node... the effective price you pay is you only get half the proc limit you would otherwise... so maybe having more agents able to reinforce each other is a better technique... until someone feints one node then backdoors another.


Also, anything new has the possibility for abuse... by making it a drone you fit it into an existing modification framework which generally works reasonably well and provides a good guideline for costs. As a drone... for example things like a mini-turret backpack become possible if the GM agrees or thinks it's cool enough and the rules are well understood. Want to build sensors into it, no problem. Similarly... things like shielded smuggling compartments are covered by those rules as well. (nice to have a place to stuff a gun and ammo so it's not going to be picked up by the MAD and chem sniffer...). You want to wear it with your chameleon suit... just make sure it also has spent space on the mod as well (2000 for a bod 2 drone, and uses up a quarter of the modification space).

I'm saying, 24 agents isn't much different from 12; diminishing returns, given you've already wrecked the matrix rules.

I just don't think it's a good fit, given that it's not a vehicle (or even Piloted), and I'm not sure a drone can be a nexus (IIRC, the mobile nexus is a drone *carrying* a separate nexus). I view the mini-turret possibility as a strike against the idea, incidentally.

I also think the electronics mod mechanic (which specifically is for nexi) better deals with modifying nexi, instead of using the wrong mechanic just to model something as minor as battery life. Yes, anything can be abused; that doesn't mean embrace it.

You're talking about general rules for a 'vehicle backpack', I'm talking about the existing rules for nexi. Yes, there are mechanical reasons why it'd be 'cool' to consider your shirt, your glasses, or your shoes as drones… but that doesn't mean you'd do that.

So a smart firing platorm... and an iBall don't make for good drones either... They're both immobile and both treated as drones. Yet people find a lot of uses for them.

Yes, I thought I said that... build a special drone as a backpack and use the special equipment modification to make space in it for the nexus running off the drones power... (as opposed to the electrical outlet that a normal nexus would need). Also... you're missing something special equipment can have it's own modifications. Lets say I made a special equipment mod to a drone to install an extra commlink... you're saying that commlink couldn't have other electronics mods like say EM hardening installed seperately from the drone itself?

I didn't say that at all. The iBall and the Smart Platform are both devices with Pilots designed for this purpose (and, they're essentially 'real drones' with the movement removed). Random bits of your clothing are not, and your stated purpose was only to deal with the nexus battery. I also didn't at all say you couldn't use the real electronics mod mechanic, I said you shouldn't use the drone one.

In the same way, I don't suggest wearing iBalls if you just want sensors on your body (just use the existing sensor device rules); you do see this abuse with silly 'personal tacnet' ideas. I don't generally support the idea of wearing a Smart Platform either, nor mounting one on a vehicle (again, these have their own mechanics). Why not call everything you carry a drone? If my jacket is a drone, I could totally get vehicle armor!

I am not saying any of these are impossible situations/concepts, but instead that the rules do not adequately deal with them. If you want to make them happen, you'd need to adjust the rules, not just start 'borrowing' mechanics from totally unrelated areas.

I don't see a huge problem with the latter. Use the drone rack mod... put the Smart firing platform in it and it's an obvious weapon mount... The places where it'll work are pretty limited... like say the back of a pickup to make a 'cheap' barrens vehicle.

Like take a GAZ P-179... max out the obvious armor... put two smart firing platforms with MG's in the back on drone racks... with 180 of fire they can both face forward or back, or one to each side as needed. It's a cheap 'barrens' tank... you can pull the armament off of easily and use elsewhere as needed. Or if used against runners.. they can called shot the firing platforms and disable em independent of the cheap truck...

By the same token, if someone had a roadmaster/citymaster with a weapon mount... I wouldn't allow disabling the weaponry nearly so easily in it's turrets.

There is, in fact, an Evo Mobile Terminus drone that carries a router, and would use these rules.


I know that I have, in the past, suggested using single-persona nexus to simulate the Cyberdeck experience in the new edition. If commlinks are the pocketphones, then small nexi would be the big laptops that run out of batteries if you keep them on all the time.

I specifically mentioned the mobile nexus drone. It's a far cry from a backpack.

But Falconer, that's my point: you've specifically adjusted the rules to force those to work, and those adjustments are balance-centric (meaning there was a balance problem). I agree with your suggestions; I'm just talking about the need for them in the case of a backpack, and especially in the case of the original minor battery issue.

Udoshi basically makes my point: it's so much safer and easier just to *say* that a nexus has 'laptop-grade batteries' (= 6 hours, fine) than to add any amount of random drone messiness.

Hmm, where did i put the spreadsheet for that SR version of the Wiseman cyberware package i toyed with...

All obvious cyberlimbs (including torso and skull) crammed to the max with comlinks for clustering reasons

oh, as for your drone backpack nexi: http://www.dcauresource.com/profiles/objects/b/backpack.php

Using a nexi also limits you to 4 IPs, as the Simsense Accelerator is a commlink modification. Unless you can sweet talk your GM into letting you us it anyway.

Not sure why that would be a problem, though.
A nexus should cream a Comlink, hands down. So I would allow it.

Presumably, that's a labeling error: 'commlink' (specific handheld devices) versus 'standard node' (Matrix devices used to get online).

Even if it were a typo, if folks treat the nanohive capacity typo as cannon, I have to presume it's the same across the board. The Man tells me that's a commlink mod and only gives me the number of slots a commlink has: it's a commlink mod.
But that's a GM call, I suppose. Your game, your call.
But considering the only reason given for a PC to have a nexi is the concept that PCs can run multiple personas at once and that Agents running on personas behave exactly the same as unrestricted Agents, it means you won't be playing anything in the Matrix anyway, so it's sort of moot.

Ah, a slave to stupid-RAW scenario. Yes, such a person is screwed. *shrug* I believe that section specifically says all the commlink mods may apply to other electronics, beyond even the standard GM-can-allow-anything rule.

To quote page 196 of Unwired: "Commlinks and other electronic devices may be modified by a character without Hardware skill, using the rules for gear modification found on p. 126, Arsenal. Commlinks are considered to have 4 available modification slots." (Italics mine)

In theory a Nexus should have at least 4 modification slots too. (?)

Yes. Other electronics may be modified without a Hardware skill. This does not negate, nor is it applicable too, the fact that a commlink mod is still a commlink mod. And we have no idea how may mod slots a nexus has.

Again, it's your game so do with it what you will. Feel free to ignore or discard any rules you like. Might I suggest forgetting about fireballs on the moon.

Actually, the line about modifying electronics is listed directly under the heading "Commlink Modifications," so it kind of looks like any of the commlink mods associated matrix activities are also viable on a Nexus or any other bit of electronics you have modifed to act as a matrix interface. I fully admit it's not expressly spelled out by the rules, but I think it makes a fair amount of sense. I certainly don't see where I'm ignoring a rule.

Also, the game doesn't give a slot count for any electronics other than commlinks, even though it does expressly allow them to be modified using the rules on page 126 of Arsenal. Those rules are slot based, so in theory they should have some slot value. A nice note about what kind of slot value various sample devices should have would have been helpful. I'd give a nexus at least 4 slots, but there I am having to make an assumption which would require a GM's approval.

You are right, we can play the game how ever we are able to work out with our fellow players, most especially the GM.

I'll also reiterate that Unwired does a bad job of spelling out rules and mechanics. For example: It expressly mentions some software without ever giving a price or listing for it (VPN, Botnet linking software to be loaded into Mooks, etc), and it's attributes & pricing for Nexus systems doesn't always match it's own examples or information. If your working with Unwired rules, you kind of have to hammer things out with your GM before hand, or things can get a bit messy.

I wouldn't compare house ruling a Customized Interface or Simsense Accelerator on a Nexus with casting a Fireball on the moon though.

Fireballs on the moon are RAW. Because of the way the magic rules were written, you are to ignore the background count of the point of casting and only apply it to the location of the caster. This means that any mage with a telescope can cast fireballs on the moon.
The same goes for the capacity rating of nanohives. It's a blatant and admitted typo, but it's RAW.
Subsequently, the same goes for commlink mods. Book says they're commlink mods and doesn't say they can mod anything else. That makes them commlink mods. If you want to deviate from any of the above, you are free to do so, but it does require GM approval. Even if deviating from it is the only logical thing to do.

And no good sentence ever started with the word "actually." Statements of fact do not require modifiers.

Actually, 'actually' isn't modifying the fact. In this use, it's functionally identical to 'in fact'. It's a transition.

You've only reiterated your earlier point: stupid-RAW is stupid. What does that say about the person who follows it, even though they know better?

Grammar Nazi...

It's not a grammar thing, it's a conversational thing.
It a superfluous word which relays nothing about being said. A statement made for the sake of making a statement, such as "A mile is longer than a kilometer", needs no such modifier. It's true, the person saying it knows it's true and would like to convey that thought.
"Actually" is usually there to denote something snide or condescending or self congratulatory, such as "Actually, a kilometer is longer than a mile. " but it is always there to denote something other than what is being said. The thing that is being said is secondary to the point being made. It might as well be replaced with "Hey, stupid" or "I'm smarter than you" or "A friend of mine once told me"

That's why no good sentence ever began with the word "Actually." If it was worth saying, you wouldn't need to modify it.

And you're not modifying it. It relays one crucial thing about what's being said: tt's highlighting that the statement is relevant and linked, a correction or clarification to a point that preceded it. If people use it snidely, that's not the fault of 'actually', and it's not the fault of 'modifying'. Presumably, there's simply a correlation between correcting facts, and feeling snide. By your own explanation, they didn't add 'actually' in order to make the statement more worth saying, so it's silly to fault it for not making it more worth saying.

Feel free to denounce snideness. Just don't use a grammar/usage argument to do so. If you're going to start attacking every word or phrase that's 'not necessary' in English, you're going to be spinning your wheels for a long time.

I wasn't trying to make a grammatical pronouncement, just a tonal one. It's about what one is saying with one's writing as opposed to whether or not one's writing is correct.
But you're right; modifier is the wrong term. The word is too closely associated with grammar, which was not how I intended it. Allow me to be more clear.

Statements of fact need no qualifiers or addendum. To include them means you are trying to say something other than what is being said or you are unsure of whether the statement is factual and are trying to shore it up. If the former, the writing is poor. If the latter, the statement is irrelevant. Either way, no good sentence ever started with the word "actually."

Seems like a pet peeve more than an objective point of fact. The usage doesn't trouble me, nor does it appear to trouble anyone else. Certainly it doesn't trouble me half as much as "Act V, Sceen II," but I wouldn't derail a thread for it. Might we profitably move along?

It's not always about need. Sometimes you just WANT to be a smug know-it-all bastard.






-k

Nah, I think we had already finished the thread. A peevological addendum was appropriate at that juncture, if still silly.

Or, Karma, if the other guy was being 'wrongly' smug, it's important to point out the contrast. These phrases exist for reasons.

Would you rather it be listed "Act V, Scene ii" or "Act 5, Scene 2?"
I just go by what is in my Complete Works.

Fair enough.

Maybe he'd just prefer it were spelled 'Scene' instead of 'Sceen'.

Sweet mother of Jesus I can't believe I didn't notice that! I put that in 4 years ago and just never paid much attention to it. I feel a little ridiculous.
That's hilarious!

Anyway, it's mended.

I can take no special credit: that's the four generations of English teachers before me that notice things like that and bring them, shrieking, to my attention.

Thanks for pointing it out, anyway. I actually played the role at Shakespeare in the Park a few years back and the fact I went nearly 4 years without noticing that is hysterical!
I think it's one of those Garrison Keillor "food on the face" stories.