Noted the usual hyperbolic statement arguments spinning off into uselessness so I'll ignore those (ie best/worst without clear shared criteria for judging)

I am the GM for the game that started this thread and some relevant info is in the game flavour. I am explicitly not running a green mohawk game (they can be fun but this isn't one of them) so I am using the karma rules since it encourages more rounded characters (I know the difference between encourages and enforces, no trolling ).

One of the big changes for SR4 was attributes as part of the dice pool rather and not attributes changing the karma cost of raising linked skills. The profound simplification of defaulting makes this totally worth it (in my humble opinion of course). For core decking skills (skills required, not just useful like hardware) the attributes are irrelevant. I actively wanted script kiddies to be relevant to the game, too, so I wanted a way to make it the attribute relevant but leave room for the clueless but moderately effective. Previously this karma cost linkage between skills and attributes balanced this easily but that went away with SR4.

Script kiddies in my game are Agent wranglers: they load up software, point it in a direction, and watch the show. They can be dumb as troll posts and they have an effect where their personal talent is irrelevant (that analogy is unexpectedly holding up ). They can completely replace low to mid level hackers but start flailing against high level hackers.

I wanted hackers to have an explicit reason to be smart: I acknowledge this was a thematic decision. We tenatively went with a dice cap of program x2 on skill + logic (mods like full VR applied after cap) for both simplicity and effectiveness at acheiving the goals described.

I am greatly curious about other ways to acheive a similar theme and I am amused by alternate themes (green mohawk can be fun, I enjoyed A-Team too) but those are separate discussions.

SIDE NOTE: am I the only one who read the augmented attribute maximums? If you have a reaction of 2 the highest you can jack your reaction to is 3. Even if you base it off of racial max it is still max +3 (+4 if your racial max is raised). A reaction 1 character can't be jacked to reaction 9, just reaction 2 or 4 depending upon whether you cap by current or max.

That's not how augmented maximums work. The augmented maximum is 1.5 times the natural maximum, it has nothing to do with what you're starting out with. So for a human with a reaction of 1, their natural maximum is still 6, so their augmented maximum is 9.

Sounds good. Have you had any issues with your chosen option? Dice caps can make hacking relatively cheaper (because the highest ratings are needed), but having mods post-cap means you're unlikely to have people frustrated with their low cap.

Uses of Hardware-
Modify a sim module to be hot-sim, you can't do it without hardware. If you can do this, your hacker is better. That's one way having hardware makes you a better hacker. Unless your team is going to trust the retarded troll that has to go ask a buddy to make his sim module "work good" every time he gets a new one. (which given the level of paranoia most people play with, can be a frequent or infrequent occurrence, my players frequently ditch their commlinks) Yeah, he can buy one but he's spending 250 nuyen to do something that someone that knows what they're doing could have done in a few hours and he had to spend the time tracking down someone to make the illegal modifications for him.

You can build a commlink with a better response and signal with hardware, better than the commercially available ones and this takes a few days. The best available for a commercial commlink is 4 and 5 respectively, while a player can build one with 6's. I think most shadowrunners have at least a few days of downtime between runs. (again, my players frequently carry burner commlinks that they can ditch quickly if they are detected)
Now it depends on how you read the rules, but that commercial commlink might be upgradeable to 6 and 7 respectively, (using hardware again), but your player built one can go to 8 and 8. The upgrading rules are a bit fuzzy, so you might rule that you can buy any commlink you want and upgrade it however you like. Then yeah, hardware is less useful.

That's two ways that hardware makes you better as a hacker. Are they essential? No. Does it help you in your chosen specialization and save you money? Yeah. It gives you other uses in being able to get around maglocks and other hardware. It lets you repair and improve your drones. Unless you manage to never have them get damaged at all during your runs. And if that's the case, I wouldn't be so worried about combat skills.

Software

You can code better firewalls and better systems code than is commercially available. The best commercially available is 3 and 4 respectively. Even if you get custom software, which is more expensive for each of these, you're limited to rating 6. But the coding rules in the core don't limit you to 6, so you can theoretically code a rating 10 firewall (which I think they elaborate on in unwired), using the core rules. That makes you a better hacker. That will take a year or two unless you take steps to get your coding pool up, so it might not work in your game world. But it's still a possibility and the best in world hackers that have been operating for several years, undoubtedly have coded their own if they were smart enough to do so.

You can code better hacking programs (again, what you can buy is capped and what you can make isn't). With 10 dice (logic 4, software 4, spec. hacking programs) you can code a hacking 8 program in six months versus never for Herpa Derp. This might seem like a long time, but you can do other some other things in this time period and unless your team goes on runs like it's going out of style that's what, maybe 4 or 5 jobs? So make it 7 months to make up for time you're actively hacking for your team.

You're going to end up being a better hacker than Herpa Derp because you've got a better program, which better logic let you get.

You can't use a Rating 10 Firewall or System software without a commlink with 10 Response, IIRC; also, you can simply buy custom commlinks (who doesn't know a fixer?). The rolls he has to make to locate such a rare item would compare favorably, I believe, to the rolls for building the hardware/software yourself (for coding Exploit 10, for example, you need to get 20 hits on an extended text, with an interval of 1 month)

Herp Derp, meanwhile, is actually getting work while you're sitting in a darkened cubicle building your commlink and program suite from scratch. That work is paying him money, which he then uses to simply buy hardware/software equivalent to what you've been slaving over. And unlike your theoretical "smart" hacker, Herp Derp has actually be shadowrunning.

You recall incorrectly: Firewall is uncapped.

All characters shadowrun the exact same amount, because it's determined by the GM. You can't compare that.

I see that as a possible simplistic interpretation of the rule but it does not seem self-consistent. I'll provide an example.

Str 5 human gets muscle replacement 4 for a total of strength 9. If he then uses karma to raise his natural strength from 5 to 6 the muscle augmentation becomes less effective. This is not an impossible interpretation, just very weird.

A self-consistent interpretation of the rule is that the maximum augmentation available is a bonus of 0.5 x the racial max. This is compatible with the way it was described (ie you can seriously jack up an attribute 1 character) but doesn't result in the bizarre scenario of augments degrading as you improve your base attribute.

An extreme interpretation is that the maximum augment benefit is 0.5x current attribute which is pretty limiting on implant effectiveness does have a certain amount of logic to it: if a str6 human can only get +3 from top quality implants despite having a literally ideal physical frame for strength why can the same benefit apply to his str1 beanpole friend with the frame of a six-year-old? Or in the cap at 9 no matter what scenario why can his friend be jacked all the way up to 9 (presuming there was a compatible +8 implant combo available).

I have gone with what I see as the middle ground: max bonus of racial max x 0.5. This motivates characters to improve their preferred stats to max for the best synergy of man & machine. It also lets implants be very useful for low-attribute characters as a way to 'catch up fast' (ie str1 becomes str4, better than average but still noticeably less than his buddy the bodybuilder with the same implants).

I acknowledge this is my interpretation of what is written, but I think it has some merit. Although I am interested in other ideas please avoid statements that boil down to "but then my min/max build won't work" or "I can interpret the rule differently so you're wrong".

Except, I explicitly factored in time out from coding for going on runs. And you don't need to build everything from scratch. Just the most important ones, i.e. Stealth, Exploit, and Spoof. And as was stated, he can't buy software equivalent to what the smart hacker writes himself.

We only just started using it as part of an attempt to both streamline hacking and improve the comfort level for the programmers/engineers in our game group.

The one session we've tried it at so far was positive but the secondary hacker (primary drone rigger) wants to tweak his build a little, understandably so.

I'll ping back once we've had a chance to test it out more thoroughly.

The Metatype Attribute Table on page 81 of SR4A makes the situation clear; the augmented maximum for a human is 9. It has nothing to do with what they start out with naturally. I don't really see how this is open to interpretation; it's kind of black and white on the table. A human can't get their strength above 6 by natural means, and can't push it beyond 9 by any means. Whether they start out with Strength 1 or Strength 6, the limits remain the same.

You have 3 months of downtime between runs? I mean, unless you optimized purely for Software (in which case, why isn't this guy working for a corp?), you're probably looking at around 10 dice or so for this test. 10 dice, to get 20 hits for your rating 10 stealth program, with an interval of 1 month. Let's say you get an average of 3 hits per test; that's 7 months. For one program. You could rush the job, but then you increase your chance of glitching (glitches now occur with 1s AND 2s), and glitches undo your work, so it wouldn't be much of an improvement.

Now, lets say you pick up an Encephalon or something, or maybe pick up a specialization in hacking programs. So you're hanging around 12 dice. That's an average of 4 hits per test, so you're down to "only" 5 months, on average, per program. What game are you playing in that has 5 months of downtime between runs? Even if you just take a week here or there, that's still 5 months of in-game time before you're seeing any sort of benefit.

And who says that Herpa Derp can't buy programs? You think he didn't spend some of those 40 points he saved on contacts?

Although I think the rest of the debate between the two of you is spiralling into personality conflict and general uselessness I think this point is worth clarifying.
Where do you get this from? Firewall is explicitly specified as software, usually included as part of system (SR4A page 221). System is explicitly capped by Response (SR4A page 222). Software in general is capped by system (SR4A page 222). I am not aware of an exception made for firewall and all example characters have firewalls no higher than the Response & System of their commlinks. If you are aware of an exception other that "wouldn't that be nice" I'd love to know the book & page #.

I see where you're coming from and, as I acknowledged, it is the simplest way to interpret the rules as written. I presented an alternate but still consistent interpretation which you do not like. We will agree to disagree.

Your interpretation directly contradicts both the text in the book and the table. You're free to use it in your own games, of course, but it's a House Rule, not an interpretation of the rules in the book.

There are several examples in Unwired of Firewall > System/Response (Peripheral, Standard, and Nexus). And Firewall (together with System) aren't 'really' software.

In SR4A, p221-2, it describes the rules for the Matrix Attributes. System has explicit rules for base Response limits, but Firewall has no such rules.

While I do appreciate your comments regarding the rest, HaxDBeheader, I think I've been nothing but objective, patient, and polite.

Regarding the "all characters shadowrun the exact same amount" part, that's a profoundly simplistic interpretation. In the groups I've both run and played in downtime was negotiate amongst the players. If the hacker wanted 5 months of downtime that was costing 5 months of lifestyle and idleness from the other runners they would be very tempted to say "we'll NPC the hacker for a couple runs". Two months is the longest downtime I've every seen from a group that wasn't one or two runs away from retiring to a private island.

That said, this might be a gaming style difference: if your runners aren't hungry for cash/time then extended downtime is not an issue. Nothing inherently wrong with it, just not my experience.

Easy... the Logic 1 Hacker is NOT Smarter than the Logic 5 Hacker. More Points in Chargen does not equal to Smarter in play. Sorry, your logic fails me here.

That's a possible ruling, but my point is that it's unfair to suddenly decide that one character is suddenly gaining tons of karma and cash, just because the other claimed some downtime. The value of downtime skills depends almost entirely on the GM's generosity, which varies between groups. He can't argue that self-coding is worthless just because it's worthless at his table.

Ditto, TJ: why is there 'no point' in playing a 'suboptimal' (read: different) character?

Again, your timing is off. You can code a Rating 10 Hacking Program in increments as low as 3.5 Days, though I generally use the 1 Week (40 Hours) as a baseline for software programming, for the character's I play. So, that is 4-5 rolls MAX at Threshold 20, on bought/average with 16 Dice (which is very easy to gain, considering you can get up to 5 extra dice for a Programming Suite). I have actually seen it hit in 3 rolls more than a few times, and occasionally on 2 rolls (Really damned lucky). The point is, you can do a LOT of things with your softwware and options, if you can program them yourself. Things that Herp A Derp would envy, if only he could comprehend them.

And as Yerameyahu pointed out, your team runs exactly as often as your team runs. You cannot compare individual members of the team as seperate for that purpose.

You forgot, TJ: he already banned Unwired, the Matrix sourcebook.

Ahhh... I must have missed that little tidbit of information. But I think you are right. Thanks for the heads up.

That is far from accurate; you've called me a liar, your opinions are not backed by objective facts, and your position is generally "there couldn't possibly be anything wrong with the rules, because they're the rules".

Ah, Unwired page 48 I presume is what you are referring to. You will note that in the peripheral nodes discussion they explicitly say that peripherals are not normal and are explicitly exempted from the rule that normally limits System by Response (right side of the page, just above the "sample peripheral nodes" table). Since these are explicitly called out as exceptions to the normal rules they cannot be used to interpret normal rules.

Unwired page 50 mentions that Nexi are also explicitly exempt from the "response caps system" rules and thus not good measuring sticks for this scenario.

Unwired page 50 also contains an example standard node (Civic/MSP Wireless Access Point) that might be a basis for your rationale since it has a system capped by response as normal but a firewall 2 higher than either. I suspect that this is also an exceptional device rather than a normal option since the "business/retail terminal" on the same table violates the explicit "response caps system" rule.

Unwired page 69 has commlinks for a spider rigger and a security consultant that break the rules by having systems higher than responsea but even then the firewalls are the same as system. These are almost certainly errors (frequent occurrence with example NPCs) due to the blatant rule-breaks on system vs response.

So, in summary the only supporting device that is neither called out as an explicit exception to the rules nor explicitly breaks them is the Civic/MSP Wireless Access Point. That device is suspect by both description (Civic / MatrixServiceProvider WAP) and association with another explicit rule-breaking device in the same table.

I can see how a casual read of Unwired would lead to the impression that commlink Firewall is not limited by system but a detailed double-check turns up weak evidence at best. I would be very pleased to discover the contrary if you know of anything else: when I play my characters are always maxing out firewall to minimize enemy hacker problems. A mage with a Response2/Signal4/System2/Firewall6 commlink would be much cheaper. Everything I've seen so far indicates that a Firewall 6 is only possible with a System 6 and thus a Response 6.

If this discussion continues it should be moved to a separate thread, though. Be sure to link from and to here for easy flow.

Well... In actuality, Firewall IS uncapped from Response. THE ONLY Matrix Attribute that is so limited is System. And again, MANY of the example Nodes in Unwired are showing a Firewall higher than System/Response. The Matrix Attributes are all Attrributes, not Programs, per se. System and Firewall may be "Programs" but they are not PROGRAMS.

It is not a position that "there couldn't possibly be anything wrong with the rules, because they're the rules" so much as that they are the RULES, and if you dislike them, there are OPTIONAL RULES to address what you do not like. You continue to argue that the book is wrong, and that is the disconnect. They have explained WHY they chose to go the route they did with Hacking. They then provided Options in the Advanced Book (Unwired) for those that would prefer a different take on the issue. It is you that continues to tout the rules as Broken, even when others have pointed out the areas where you are mistaken. Not sure where to go from here, actually.

Hero Lab shows firewall as being upgradable but limited to 2 higher than the system, IIRC.

JonathanC, I said you were lying, not that you're a liar. And you were: deliberate falsehoods to support your position.

You can do what you want, HaxDBeheader, but I'm just telling you what I understand the consensus to be. Your position requires the assumption that the matrix stats for various nodes are riddled with errors, which is indeed a possibility. *shrug* I rate that as a less likely explanation. In addition, many of those examples have (as I said) Firewall > System, so the nexus proviso doesn't make sense as an argument against them; it's not a question of Response capping System, but System capping Firewall.

Incidentally, this exact question is answer in the FAQ (as I have relayed). I should've mentioned it before, but some people dislike the FAQ.

Except, again, you did not actually read what I wrote. I was proposing a month and a half between runs. I said a rating 8 program and with 10 dice. Increased chance of glitch is not that big a deal, you glitch 1/6 of the time on your check and it sets you back one interval on average. So if you rush the job, you cut the time in half and add 2 weeks to the test. But I wasn't even suggesting that you rush it.

If you're runners go out and pull a job every week, then it's true that no skill that is used in downtime will be useful. Just because your runners perform more high stakes corporate crime in a month than most crime syndicates do in a year doesn't mean everyone does. It all depends upon your game. And everyone needs downtime. To heal. To learn new skills. To track down expensive gear. To have their arm cut off and have a shiny new metal one put in its place. Just waiting for the next job to come in. To enjoy the money they risk their lives for on a yearly, monthly, weekly, daily, hourly (take your pick) basis.

And again, I did not say that Herpa Derp couldn't buy programs, just that a hacker that had written his own would be better than him in the long run. Herpa Derp doesn't have any growth potential in his specialization.

I've addressed your first comment in the message posted just before this. I beleive there is pretty good evidence that you are mistaken although I would be happier if you were not

As for your second paragraph, your final sentance is a good summary of my opinion. They seem to be talking past each other rather than to each other. Contentious concepts are not clearly defined so staw men can easily arise. Some things that are gaming style preferences are not identified as such so personal taste becomes a point to argue over (innately unresolvable argument). Spiraling into uselessness.

*shrug* My position is eminently reasonable: the book does things one way, it works fine, and has fluff rationale behind it. There is also another way, equally valid, not morally superior (hehe), and fully a matter of personal taste, which is available from Optional Rules.

His position is that the book is wrong and broken, that the numerous people who disagree are stupid, and that skills he values are the only thing anyone values.

The general principle of "can break the rules" means that it is not a good measure of the rules even by extrapolation so nodes not limiting firewall by system is irrelevant.

It does not require any matrix nodes stats to be in error other than the ones that I explicitly called out (4 instances spread over the entire book Unwired). Of those 4 instances, 3 of them are clearly and explicitly in error with the direct rules from SR4A page 222 regarding system <= response.

On the other hand, if we go to example characters using commlinks of which there is a huge variety in both the core and unwired a general patter is quite clear: Firewall <= System <= Response. Even for hackers/riggers who would want as large a firewall as possible they cap their firewall at their system.

To clarify, I do not see this as an adversarial discussion I am merely uncertain where you have derived your position from. For now I will presume this discussion has hit an impasse and shelve it. Thanks for your input & happy running.

Do note the FAQ reference I edited in. Again, some people like the FAQ, others don't. But I'm just explaining that this isn't 'my' position, it's the prevailing and uncontroversial one I've heard on Dumpshock for years. You should certainly use whatever rules you prefer for your own game, because there is no RPG police to stop you.

I don't agree that 'System ignores Response-capping' invalidates the 'Firewall ignores System-capping', but whatever. Examples + SR4A rules + FAQ + public opinion = truth, for me, but to each his own.

If there was an explanation of "why" by the developers, I must have missed it.

Interesting. That would be cool. Curious where it came from if accurate but cool either way. Hmmm, isn't there a commlink/program mod that lets you exceed system by 2? Wonder if that's what it is from. I'll have to check. I'll try to start another thread on the topic when I get a chance.

This is, as you might say, a lie.

1. It does not necessarily "work fine", because it creates a disparity between builds. Playing a smart hacker is objectively, demonstrably inferior to playing a dumb one.

2. I *do* value the Logic-based skills (Chemistry, in particular, is a favorite), but that doesn't mean that they give an objective, mechanical advantage when hacking (they don't, unless you use the option rules in Unwired, and even then the benefit of having a high Logic is questionable).

3. I have no idea why you insist on framing this in terms of what is morally superior. Do you really believe that you are morally superior for defending a bad ruleset that happened to make it into print?

4. I have never called anyone stupid; when the namecalling ("liar") began in this thread, you were the one who started it.

FAQ? Cool, I must have missed that edit. I'll go dig through it. As I said earlier I'm just interested in clarity and have no strong investment in either position.

Note: I have a similar opinion of the evidence chain that you do but my understanding of examples and rules both say firewall is limited by system. I am not familiar with either the FAQ or public opinion as I just joined the board (playing since 1st edition was brand new, took hiatus from 2001-2009). I have read a few threads on it over the years but never in enough depth to be able to gauge 'public opinion'.

Regardless, thanks for feedback.

I mentioned it a good 3+ times.
Again, combat skills don't give an "objective, mechanical advantage when hacking" either.

I'm saying neither is superior (morally or otherwise). You're the one repeatedly saying how wrong it is that script kiddies exist, how unacceptable the book's take on the matrix is, etc.

Again, I didn't call you "a liar". I said you were lying, and you were. I felt your argumentation has implied that the various people who disagree lack mental capacity, so I'm sorry if saying so bothered you.

I never said that they did. But qualities do, and so does more starting money....both things that Herpa Derp has in spades over any intelligent Hacker.


When have I said that it was morally wrong that script kiddies exist? I said that it is unbalanced that they are the only type of hacker supported by the rules. "Smart" hackers are just pressing buttons as well, so basically all Hackers are script kiddies, which is quite a contrast to how Deckers used to work.



There, you did it again. You're calling me a liar, and then lying about not calling me a liar.


You don't get to "feel" about an argument: there's what I said, and then there's the bullshit that you claim that I said. This falls into the latter category.

The single most important question for any game, IMHO.

JonathanC, you *repeatedly* said that getting combat skills made 'Herpa' a 'better' character than a high-Logic hacker having Logic-skills.

You said that it's 'not okay' for Logic not to be involved in hacking. You also frequently argued that script kiddies were wrong, that their rules were broken and bad, that they were replacing people with mere money (with the implication that this is bad, for some reason), etc. (Script kiddie means 'no Logic hacker', here.)

!! You just called *me* a liar! Someone alert the police. If you're just dying to, we can go back and examine the false points you presented, but I doubt it's worth our effort.

I do, and I did. I'm sorry if I slandered you. You're right, though: what you said (and how, and how repeatedly despite facts) speaks for itself.

--
Indeed. Under the existing rules, you can be equally good at hacking, and choose to have Logic or not. And if you don't like it, you can use the Optional Rules. Nothing requires concluding that the default rules are broken or wrong for every player at every table.

More useful to the group, because he had more points to put into hacking-related qualities, AND more points for combat survivability, which would make him less of a burden on the group when things got hairy.



How does this relate to moral wrongness again? This is a rules argument that sort of crosses over into a flavor argument ("what is a hacker like?"). I fail to see how this equates to any sort of moral crusade on my part.


Even if I was mistaken about the rules (and please, feel free to go back and find one of these "false points"), lying requires intent. You have *repeatedly* lied about calling me a liar; it is accurate for me to call you a liar then, because you are intentionally lying. Unless you wish to claim that you are ignorant of the meaning of the word liar, in which case I will gladly apologize, as I was unaware of your ignorance.

OK, found it explicitly called out in the FAQ on Catalyst's website. Cool. My group will be happy we don't have to buy maxed commlinks to have good security. Would still need a high system to run a good Encrypt program but that is less important than outright commlink hijacking because of a bad firewall.
Thanks for the link in PM (http://www.shadowrun4.com/game-resources/frequently-asked-questions/)

Right, but apparently while combat is useful to the group (which is different from your repeated 'good at *hacking*' argument), none of the Logic-skills are useful to the group. This is simply false, as different posters have attested. It may be true for *your table*.

The flavor is clearly given in the book, so it's not that the flavor is wrong. It's that you just don't agree. Instead, you've said that it's not okay, unfair, etc. that the script kiddie doesn't have to pay for Logic. That's not an objective argument. That's saying you don't think it's right.

Aha, but if I *thought* it was true that you were lying, then I wasn't lying about you lying, by your standard of intent. So then you're being inaccurate (but, assuming you believe it, *not* lying about me lying about you lying—just mistaken). Okay, hang on and I'll dig up the relevant points.

--
Okay, you said:Each of these is false. It's well over a couple hundred, it doesn't cost the ability to be useful at non-computer tasks, there's no reason he's worse (esp. *much* worse) at hacking/Matrix tasks, and self-coded software is better than storebought in several ways. Because each of these points had already been addressed at least once, I assumed your intent.

They are not as useful as combat skills; this is an objective truth. You may not necessarily need to make a Chemistry test to brew your own toxins; you could just buy them instead. But there really isn't a substitute for being able to dodge bullets and shoot back when (not if) the run goes pear-shaped.


What does this have to do with morality? Pointing out the inconsistency of intelligence going from a benefit to a liability for people who work with computers isn't a moral crusade.


You would need to demonstrate a clear reason for the belief that I was lying. Simply thinking that I was wrong is insufficient.


The amount depends on what is being built.

Sure it does. Points that you spend on Logic (which is useless to the specific role of hacking, and to combat) are points that cannot be spent on things that benefit other areas.


As I have explained repeatedly, he is worse because he has fewer points with which to make himself better. He chucked 40 points into something that has nothing to do with his ability to hack, while Herpa Derp put his points into Qualities and skills that make him a better hacker.


Software containing the optional benefits listed in Unwired can be bought with money, so your assertion is false.

As I said, the points had already been covered and they were wrong. If you were simply mistaken, I apologize again for slandering you. I can see this is an extremely sensitive spot, for some reason.

You just did it again, it's astonishing: why is combat important when it helps your argument, but only hacking is important when *that* helps your argument?

As for the rest, I'm not going to re-rehash.

You're trying to make this more complex than it needs to be. Hacking and combat specialties are essential to Shadowrunning (so are some other specialties, like magic). Crafting is not. Crafting is a nice bit of frosting on the Shadowrunner cake. Comparing someone who is good at both hacking and combat to someone who is good at hacking, useless in combat, and spends 2 months of downtime building commlinks as a hobby isn't much of a comparison.

And First Aid, Medicine, free Know skills, and everything else that Logic can do. Combat is nice, but it's not necessarily the whole game, and it doesn't make the hacker a better hacker. Logic skills, on the other hand, are much more related to hacking (as the book quotes I provided note). You have no reason to discount them, or to claim that spending extra BP in combat makes script kiddie 'better' than the smart hacker (who, in turn, hasn't 'wasted' his points). They're merely different characters who are good at different things. Nothing is 'broken' here, especially since you can choose to play either way.

Neither does Logic, which is what you seem to have so much trouble understanding. None of the kills you've listed have anything to do with hacking. If you're letting people hack with their First Aid skill, you're doing it wrong.

And neither does combat have anything to do with hacking, see? Except, as I said (and the book says), hardware and software are *related* to hacking. Certainly more than combat.

And actually, either hacker can probably do a nice job on First Aid by rigging the medkit… So it does have something to do with it.

Contradicting yourself in the same sentence. Nice.

We've already covered this: There is nothing you gain by investing in hardware/software skills that you could not gain simply by spending money. Comparatively, the points spent on qualities cannot be replaced by money, and the points spent on combat give you a benefit outside of hacking that is far more useful in general play than the ability to waste downtime so save some cred.

How about "the ability to get past a maglock with Keypad and Anti-Tamper?"