There's currently an ongoing discussion on one of the german SR boards regarding the treatment of armor on cyberlimbs.
It's leading nowhere, as there simply is no definite ruling possible via the game rules and apparently it has never been errata'd or put in the FAQ.

One prominent position is: simply add it over all cyberlimbs (i.e. and up with something like +20 armor if fully cybered).
Arguments for that:
- there is no rule prohibiting it
- it's always been done that way

The other position is to either treat it like worn armor (i.e. highest +armor over all limbs counts) or average over all limbs, like it's done with physical stats
Arguments for that:
- since there is no rule, analogouos rules should be used
- the one rule regarding CL armor says: 'it is cumulative with worn armor', specifically it does not say 'it is cumulative with each other and worn armor'
- other sources of +armor would be completely negated. A lower leg replacement with +3 armor would not only be completely legal, but cost about half the nuyen and essence as orthoskin (with bioware typically being more essence conservating than cyberware) AND also have the possibility of being taken twice

By RAW: it's the sum of all of them.

That said, some people don't agree.

'By RAW' is useless in this context without a definite rule quote or official ruling.

Opinion on what the rules say in this case differ completely and there IS no rule anyone could reliably quote.

Sorry, I should have been more specific in my original post. I'm looking for one of the above, an official ruling regarding the cumulativity of cyberlimb armor (i.e. 'yes, 20 armor from 5 cyberlimbs is intended') or a specific rules/errata passage towards the same goal. Unfortunately i doubt the latter exists.

Man, ask for help and then slap it back down? Rude.

My humble answer is 'ditto Draco18s'. I think you'll find that's what everyone says around here. Some people also use house rules to change that state of affairs, but I've never really seen anyone bother exploiting it anyway.

Depending on how you esteem the FAQ, the answer given is available there, as well.

This FAQ entry pretty clearly indicates that it is additive.

Q: Does cyberlimb armor for cyber half-limbs add its entire Rating to the character’s Armor Rating in SR4A?

A: Yes. Armor enhancements to lower arm/lower leg cyberlimbs (and cyberhands/cyberfeet) apply their full Rating to the character’s Armor Rating. Gamemasters may choose to only apply the partial cyberlimb’s attributes, including armor, to tests directly involving said cyberlimb (p.343, SR4A).

The SR4A Changes Document erronously states that this was changed in SR4A, when in fact no such change was made.

Here's a post that outlines some stuff. Including rules quotes.

Here's a thread, exactly like yours.

Another post.

Developer insight 1 and 2.

Medicine Man on the topic.

Happy now?

Took me 10 minutes and a search of "+cyber +armor +stacking"

probably not all that happy, seeing how medicineman is one of the guys arguing this very topic on said german board and is of the opinion that yes, it all stacks with everything else . . which seems not to be what the threads creator wants to hear . .

2 obvious lower legs (alpha) with hydraulic jacks (6) and a combined +6 armor for .72 essence?

Someone else would have to prevent me from taking that on my Adept and thus saving up on several levels of great leap and free falling and also get the free armor, because i certainly would not be able to overcome my powergaming tendencies in the eye of such blatant discrepancies.

I didn't say it's not possible, or that I haven't seen builds for it. I said I've never seen anyone actually *do* it. I always put other stuff in my lower legs, next to the jacks. Maybe we have more willpower?

And why the hell is the problem the cyber again?
Don't play a magical active character and OMG!
It ain't broken anymore!
Cyber AIN'T broken. Magic IS broken.

I'm fine with anything definite, really. Optimally a rules errata saying "in SR4a line xyz (depending on the book version) change 'cyberlimbs armor is [...] cumulative with' into 'cyberlimbs armor is [...] cumulative and cumulative with' ".

So far all we have is opinions and interpretations. The closest thing to anything official is Frank's statement.



While in general this can be true - largely depending on your GM's approach to magic security - it looks a bit ridiculous in light of a cyber mod that for .72 Essence gives the benefits of almost 6 magic worth of adept powers! (Almost only because mystic armor also helps with astral damage.)

Can someone point me to a specific rule saying dragons aren't pink and fluffy? I mean sheep are pink and fluffy, so unless someone can find a specific rule that says "On SR4A page xyz, under the description of dragons, they are not pink and fluffy but in fact scaly," I'm not going to believe it.

Re: adepts, that has more to do with adepts being meh in general, and Mystic Armor and Great Leap being among the worst adept powers (because of how overpriced they are).

OK, let's take the analogous case to an armored limb: Does armor from a ballistic vest get averaged?

@UmaroVI

SR Corebook Chapter Friends and Foes pages 295 to 297.

Btw: He is arguing the other direction. If it is not said, it is not there. So actually you are giving him an argument to dispute your claim.
(If I assume I can do anything which is not denied in the rules, Trolls must be able to fly is the core example of this kind of argument)
@Stahlseele

Whats about making arguments which actually take into consideration what was said before?
If Cyber gives you a boni which is much higher than the once given by magic, it is really not the problem of magic, is it?

@Chinane
Yes, adepts suck unless you go cyber adept. The best way is to take latend awakening and get yourself 4 to 5 Points of ware. Now you just need the adept quality given by your GM.
Or you start as a magic 1 adept and buy up magic one by one while reducing it with ware...(Best done with karma Gen)
This is partly a problem with the magic rules (essence loss and influence on magic) and partly a problem with the cyberlimbs.

@Sengir

Well, I would stop doing that. Because if you follow this road, cyberarmor has to count towards encumbrance.
As a matter of fact, armor is still written as a subtype of cyber enhancements which then uses the "divide" rule.
Anyway, the rules are quite fucked up, since you are unable to really get a 9 in every attribute as a full cyber character, because the cyberskull will do a great job preventing this.

That analogy was already used to support the 'highest counts' variant .

If you mean _during_ karma gen, that's not possible because the essence loss is calculated in the 'finalizing' step which happens only after all karma has been spent.
We've just been there in the chummer char generator thread the other day .

@Chinane
Again, depends on your interpretation of the rules.
Even if it does not hold, just buy 2 points of magic and replace them with ware and do the rest out of chargen.
(Yes, your character won't skyrocket but with a bit of time and Karma...)

Actually we're applying a staging scale:

specifically covered by the rules >> common sense supported by analogoues rules >> common sense based on reality

So as long as he can explain WHY his dragon MUST be pink and fluffy and it doesn't contradict any rules,
plus supporting evidence is strong enough, he might actually get away with it.

Well, since i was the one who came up with the add ware/buy point/add ware method to calculate a theoretical minimum karma cost and was pointed out the flaw in my theorycrafting i double checked, as i hate being wrong .

Step9: finishing touches really doesn't leave much leeway there.

Of course you can do the process after char gen and it should be speedy enough since numbers are initially pretty low.

You didn't really answer my question. And since we are already at it: If the rules for worn armor should count for implanted armor because RAW does not forbid it, how about using the rules for Armor programs, too? Or can you provide a rule which says they don't apply?

OK, let's take the analogous case to an armored limb: Does armor from a ballistic vest get averaged with a helmet? Or does "only the highest count"?

@Draco18s
You are getting silly...

Trying to prove A stacks with A you give an example of B stacks with C...
And it is true, the same stacking is not very often in SR...

Well, ok.

If armoring up one leg gives the whole body 4 armor, why doesn't armoring up your other leg give you another 4 armor...?

I didn't find it silly, Irion. It's true that the rules *in general* are nonsense, but the example itself is fine.

@Draco

Well, because armor actually does not stack in general. (But I have to say I do not see it like this in this particular situation)
But this would be the argument.

@Yerameyahu
You can't say why is X like that and Y isn't in aspect A if the rules actually are not the same.
It gets even stranger if you than state that X should be different from Y in aspect B.
In general there should be rules which armor stacks with which and which armor does count for encumbrance rules...

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

Yes, I think his argument is that the rules should be the same. Sigh.

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

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

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

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

And again the problem with imprecise english.

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

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

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

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

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

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

@Sengir: Of course I answered your question.

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

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

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

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

Not you, Draco18s.

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

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

Bye
Thanee

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

@Yerameyahu
Thats a good solution.

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

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

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

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

I think i'd still get myself some lower legs for the adept though. Do cyberskates combine with hydraulic jacks?

I'm sorry.



Does that help?

Yes, I'm just talking about house rules.

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

i'd like retractable skimmer-discs . .

Raptor legs for me.

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

You'll just look and sound like a freak on your hover plates. Who needs to run fast, that's what vehicles are for.

Thus retractable Hover-Board-Feet!

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


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

Soccer ball! Mmmmmmmmmmmmmm, tastes like feet!

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



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

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

EDIT: Never Mind...

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

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

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

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

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