I know this goes back to the basic problem of 'what is split', but it's hard to imagine either kind of arm is meant to give its bonus to an infinite number of *separate* attacks. When a melee attack is *one* action using all the arms (i.e., normally), it totally makes sense to get the bonus (even +6).

Shadowrun 4: Now you too can have your +6 Cyber-Arms of Grappling!

Well, ultimately, yes, this goes back to the poorly thought out multiple actions rules.

Right, swords have those advantages (also Off-Hand Training), Unarmed has Shock Hand/Shock Glove, Disarm immunity, and can get up to +3 DV rather than +2 DV out of Martial Arts. I didn't say they were equivalent, I said neither was in general better.

God, sooo true.

Hmm, use of X6 shiva arms (Nartaki Changeling with shiva arms)

Mountainclimbing made easy
Shopping made easy
No need to drop loot while carrying guns
Reloading goes faster with a few extra hands
Supressive fire with X6 Sliver guns modified for full auto...(those poor, poor ghouls)
X6 Mono Whips for an inventive suicide...
Setae Changeling power - BE spider man (LOT more grip with a total of 8 limbs)
You have HOW many cyberclaws?
Daddy Longlegs? (Extended cyberlimbs on ALL limbs)
Wrestling is suddenly made easy
You need no longer use rope for bondage games
You will give lonestar a bit of a headache when they try to cuff you and are short on handcuffs
Dress up as an insect spirit for halloween
Id give a +1 bonus for all melee tests for each additional weapon (after the first) a character is holding to a total dicepool - but also increase the risk for glitching.

I have a Spider like character (Changeling Class III Human) based upon the 6 Arms, 2 Legs concept. He turned out fairly well, even if he can't really socialize a whole lot with society. Guess that is why he is sinless. The split-pool combat thingy is a bit whacked, though. The character relies upon his fangs and poison, rather than multi armed guns/swords of death. It was so much easier.

Make a ScorpionCharacter.
Have him walk on the 6 arms and use his 2 legs as his stinger for kick attacks with reach bonus *munchkinsnicker*

By that logic, merely having 6 optimized cyberarms gives you +6 to your optimized activity even if only one arm is actually attacking, and the others are engaged in other things. It makes no sense. If you interpret so loosely the text for the Evo Kali optimization stating "when the modified arm is wielding a bladed weapon", then there's nothing stopping you from getting Evo Kali optimized legs as well, as long as you have a similarly optimized arm which is wielding the weapon....

I don't want to get any further into a pointless argument about what "wielding" means. If you don't think it works like that, just use Ultimate Champion which is 100% clear about how it works.

And, of course, shouldn't.

I think I'll be making a four armed Naritaki physad pistol gunslinger. I tried to squeeze out a six armed character but it doesn't seem to work to pay for the surge characteristics and 25 points worth of ambidexterity. Even if it's legal by the rules thats a lot of points.

My Gm and I agree that specialization should usually add to the skill pool before splitting as per the faq. We're debating allowing the character to have a custom specialization in "Multi-Gun Mojo" which applies only when firing more then one gun at a time, and allowing that "special" specialization to apply post split.

Most other modifiers are going to be considered "dice pool modifiers" we will apply them after. None of us have the supplement with tracer ammo or red dot sights so we won't be worrying about them. My character should start with a Reflex Recorder and possibly Sync. She will also be running a rating 2 tacnet to make up for the loss of a smart gun bonus. (networked to her four droned smart guns via a skin link. Another potential rules stretch but both my Gm and I think it's a cool idea)

Starting out I'm going to be shooting for a pool of around 16 before splitting with post split modifiers around +3-6. Then if the character last long enough I'll be looking to add Adept Centering and item Attunement Meta-Magic.

If you're paying cash and slots for drone guns with upgraded sensors, that seems like enough expense despite the silliness, yeah.

Tracer Rounds are in the core Rulebook

This is added before the split, it's an actual increase to the skill, same as adept improved ability.

Yeah, 5x Ambidexterity is not worth it - you're better off sucking up the -2 penalty, and going for Adept Centering as fast as possible.

Which explains why I couldn't find them in Arsenal, thanks. Reading the description though still they only apply for full-auto weapons firing bursts so not useful for my character concept.



So if a bonus is listed as a "dice pool bonus" it's different from "dice pool modifier"? I was reading those two terms as synonymous. I was figuring only items that said something like skill or stat bonus's were applied pre-split.

As comparison "dice pool bonus" is used for all the optimized cyberlimbs as well as tacnets. To me all post split modifiers.

They're not even really terms; that would assume the writers used them intentionally, instead of just making a mess. It mostly depends on how much you want to favor yourself. But, that's not directly relevant to Reflex Recorder: it specifically increases the *skill* directly.

SR4A changed the description of reflex recorders. It's now a skill modifier.

Hm my paper sourcebook specifically lists it as a pool bonus but now I see my 20th anniversary pdf calls a it skill bonus. I actually usually chose to go with the later rules so I guess I loss that one.

As far as the importance of terms goes, I do believe the writers intended for them to mean something. The question is weather they did it clearly and consistently. Game writing is difficult and like most endeavors far easier to criticize then perform. I know I've never had much success with it, so I tend to give the writers the benefit of the doubt.

Hehe, but we have mountains of evidence that (even if they intended to) they didn't use the terms consistently or logically.

It would have been nice for the developers to make a glossary of game terms, to use those terms when they should be used, and to not use the terms when they shouldn't be used. The Other Game did a pretty good job of defining game terms, either in the glossary or in the beginning of the rulebook, and I think that removed quite a bit of the ambiguity. Outside of RPGs, there are numerous examples of glossaries that help a reader understand the material by clearly defining terms that mean something different in a specific context, such as US Immigration Laws.

It's mostly that they use them sloppily (or fail to use them when they should); the terms do exist, after all.

Well, also, the consequence of multiple authors doing things separately and no index of terms is that not everyone was on the same page about what is a term and what isn't; see for example Unarmed Combat != unarmed combat.

Oh yeah I love the bonus to REA of wired reflexes. I hate though that the same description makes reaction enhancers initiative enhancers and by logic extension anything that increases REA or INT as well.

It is weird that by RAW, you can be quicker with wired reflexes and Reaction Enhancers that with the much more advanced MBW. Not that anyone plays it like that.

MBW also stacks with RE. It is Synaptic Boosters that refuse to stack with other things.

True, but that is not what I am talking about. Contrary to Wired Reflexes the MBW raises the REA attribute. The text from Wired Reflexes is not unambiguously an attribute increase. As such you could get REA 6(9) from Reaction Enhancers and still get a +3 bonus from Wired Reflexes III throwing 9+3 dice on any test involving REA. The best you can do with an MBW (and possibly Reaction Enhancers) is 1(9).

You think "a bonus of +1 to Reaction" is not unambiguously an attribute increase?

Heh. That way lies madness. There's a slim (but present) difference between mixing up terms, and not planning for active misinterpretation.

I think you're trying WAY too hard to view the phrase "bonus of +1 to Reaction" as some kind of keyword shorthand for "dice pool bonus of +1 for Reaction-linked tests," just because the word 'attribute' isn't included.

I guess we'll have to refer to you from now on as 'the Dumpshock poster named Dakka Dakka' instead of simply 'Dakka Dakka', in case you get the latter confused with 'the Dumpshock poster talking about firing automatic weapons in burst mode'.

I said it is not unambiguous. The text does not refer to a increase in the attribute or an augmented attribute. Instead it is a bonus. Combined with the rule on p. 61, saying that unless it is clearly one of the other types anything should be considered a dice pool modifier, the text could be interpreted as not increasing the attribute but providing a dice pool modifier. This would then lead to the higher dice pool of WR and REA Enchancers.

I really wish the authors would clearly define all the terms in the book and not make a piece of 'ware that increases reaction an initiative enhancement in the text about another piece of 'ware. This makes it totally unclear what an Initiative Enhancement even is.

Emphasis mine.

Oh come on. This is like saying muscle toner doesn't raise your agility. Augmentation is THE book that goes out of its way to make distinctions between Dice Pool Bonuses, Linked-Skill Bonuses(pushed/qualia), and raising your stats directly like other ware does.