How does movement divided by passes work when using edge granted passes?

Example.

Mundane Crosby and Mundane Giroux get in a fight. They both have one pass. They're currently 20 meters from each other, and for the purposes of this argument, both of their speeds are 20 meters. Crosby runs up to Giroux and punches him. Giroux on his turn punches back. Pass 2, neither can normally go, but Giroux spends an edge point for an extra pass. Is Crosby now 10 meters away?

I thought you had to declare spending edge for an extra pass at the beginning of the whole combat turn, for that very reason?

See, I had thought the whole point of edge was to use it in emergencies, which are hard to plan for. I'll have to look it up.

Usually, yes. But using it to add an extra pass mid turn mucks up all the movement, as you've seen. Thats why Enhanced Reflexes (I think thats what the + IP spell is called) and drugs and turning on your wired reflexes all add the passes on the next turn.

Improved Reflexes, but I'm sure the majority of us knew what you're talking about anyway.

And as it's written on SR4a, page 145, Initiative & Edge, it says you declare your use of Edge at the beginning of the Initiative Pass.

Also, movement is per Combat Turn, not Initiative Pass (SR4a, page 149). Giroux, who spends a point of Edge for a 2nd IP gets is full movement, not half, since he didn't move during the first IP.

If you're just dying for precise movement tracking, it's probably easiest to remember that every Turn has N passes (4 is easy and usually enough), and people always move (Combat Turn total)/4 each Pass.

This is the houserule my group(s) use constantly. We found varying movement according to WHO is involved in a combat to be ludicrous. Sure, in a 1vs1 it makes sense: Bill with 3 passes can react and shoot before bob can run his full movement (regardless of bobs' # of passes), but just because there is a mage with 4 passes in the same combat fireballing someone else why would that give Bill even more time to shoot before bob can get close enough?

Assuming Bill is 16 meters away from Bob, in the first example he would be able to charge in pass 3, when the mage is involved he can't until pass 4, meaning Bob gets to shoot his 3rd pass before Bob can gut him, even if Bob is ahead of him in initiative.

The downside to always dividing movement by 4 is.. that people seem very little immobile. Having to move an entire pass seems like you are wasting a potential complex action, and makes melee even less effective. While I do adhere to the "don't bring a knife to a gunfight" philosophy that is disregarded in systems such as D&D and Warhammer, there is a difference between "gets to shoot first" and "can riddle you with 40 bullet holes before you can even strike once."

On another note, I used to like the system in Call of Cthulhu (Chaosium): Melee goes first. Then ranged. THEN movement. Next to a knife wielding cultist? He gets to maul you before you can shoot. If he's not close enough? Well, you get to shoot before he can move.

Hmm I don't have any conclusion to this, any comments?

This shouldn't change the action economy at all. You *do* move across all passes, whether you 'admit it' or not.

Yes, and we even allow changing direction etc., so that even those without passes can still DO something. But that still doesn't mean that You can charge someone before he can shoot you, IF one or both have several passes.
t

Ah, I see what you mean.

Exactly as when no Edge was spent.

Because Edge cannot increase the number of IPs, that occur during a combat turn.



This situation is impossible.

Since there is noone involved in the combat, that has more than one IP, the combat turn only has one IP.

Since you have to spend Edge at the beginning of an IP in which you normally have no action, this option never becomes available.

Bye
Thanee

As stated before, this IS possible. You can spend Edge to get an extra pass - if no one else has more than one pass then the round would naturally be extended by another initative pass. The rules does not say that you can only spend Edge to obtain an extra pass if there is anyone else with more passes than you in combat. This looks to me like a cop-out trying to avoid a fuzzy area of the rules... and movement in SR is fuzzy in itself. It even mentions off-hand that "if it is important to find out how far one moves in a single pass...(..)" when is it NOT imortant? How far you move can be important for range of gunfire, ability to attack in melee, ablity to get to cover and size of spell effects. Most other game systems are very particular about how far one can move when taking actions, and most have movement BE actions.

Based on what?



Yes you can.



And that is stated where?

In fact, it is stated, that if noone has any extra IPs, the combat round isn't even divided into IPs.



Actually, yes it does. Because it does say, that you must spend it at the beginning of an IP. That requires, that the IP has begun. An IP does not begin, if noone has an action there. Hence, you cannot spend it to increase your number of IPs above the max. number present in the fight already (or 4, which is the hard cap for IPs unless some rule specifically allows more than 4, which is only possible in the Matrix currently).

Bye
Thanee

Someone with zero initiative passes never takes actions ever. A normal, unaugmented mundane has 1 Initiative Pass. Thus, edge lets them add a 2nd initiative pass for that single combat round.

SR4a Pg 74:
"You may gain 1 extra Initiative Pass for that Combat Turn only (see Initiative and Edge, p. 145)."

Just for completeness, here's the relevant text from SRA p 145:
"Edge can be spent to get an extra Initiative Pass action. A character who only acts once a turn could, for example, spend 1 point of Edge to act during a second Initiative Pass as well. The character must declare this at the beginning of the Initiative Pass—it is not possible to buy an action in the middle of a pass. A character may only purchase 1 extra action this way in each Combat Turn."

Emphasis mine. It explicitly covers the mundane, 1 IP character gaining a second pass. I'm not sure where you came up with the idea that you can't go beyond the max number of passes presented in a combat round (or 4, whichever is less). That's never been the case in 4 editions.

It's really quite simple.

"Some characters may have magic or implants that allow them to act more than once in a Combat Turn. When this occurs, the Combat Turn is divided into Initiative Passes." And so on.

"The character must declare this at the beginning of the Initiative Pass."

The combat round only has as many IP as the highest IP combatant brings into the fray. The movement rules also make this rather clear (if the highest IP is 3, you divide movement by 3 to spread it out over the 3 IP).

If two IP 1 mundanes battle it out, there is exactly one IP. A second IP never begins, as the next round has already started by then.

There is no opportunity to spend the Edge, since you would have to do that at the beginning of the second IP, which never happens.



"A character who only acts once a turn could, for example, spend 1 point of Edge to act during a second Initiative Pass as well."

If there is no second IP, you cannot do that.

This rule is there to allow the low-IP characters to keep up somewhat with the high-IP characters. It does not allow the high-IP characters to go even faster.

It's an option for the underdogs, so to say.

Bye
Thanee

*shrug* I prefer to think that every Turn has all 5 (or 4, but only for convenience) IPs… they're just hidden. Your interpretation limits this use of Edge in a very counterintuitive way.

I see your "reasoning" there. But I disagree with it. It is not exlicitly said if you can or cannot gain 2 passes in a round where there are no one else with 2 passes, but I believe it IS allowed, as that is the most probable intent. If someone spends Edge to get an extra pass, that means that he has an extra pass.

In other words, you seem to argue that there can be no egg since there is no chicken. I beleive there can be a chicken if you get an egg.

But if it were allowed, you would have to get to the beginning of a pass where noone has an action in.

So, to make it happen, you have to change how movement works, because you would then always have passes, that noone acts in, but everyone can move in, etc.

The OPs problem only occurs, if you allow to go over that IP limit, that I think is in place for a combat round.

That interpretation only provides problems, really, that you then have to invent rules for to do away with them.



Of course. The question is, can everyone in every situation do this, or only some in some situations?



But I have some pretty solid rules evidence, too, I might add.

Bye
Thanee

Even if 'solid rules evidence' trumped 'actually good functionality', this argument still hinges on the idea that a combat contains exactly as many IPs as the highest-IP actor contributes. I've never actually seen a rule for that (nor for what 'in the combat' means, etc.). However, that still doesn't matter, because the conclusions here is so wonky.

I think it works absolutely fine that way.



Yep, that is right. It isn't really spelled-out anywhere in any precision. There are enough hints, though, that make it clear, that it can only be like that (i.e. you only have the IPs necessary to perform the highest amount of actions around). The above-quoted part, that you only get to divide the combat round when multiple IPs are present, is a very strong indicator for that. And then we have the whole movement divided by IP part.



I do understand, what you mean. It might seem a little odd, that it does not apply to everyone, but I actually don't find it that strange, if you go by the reasoning I have posted above (i.e. Edge allows you to draw even, if you are the underdog, but does not allow the souped-up sammy to go even faster; he is not the one that needs luck there, after all).

Also, it does not have any serious rules repercussions, unlike the other method.

Bye
Thanee

I've already changed how movement work in my game, or simplified it I should say by always have 4 passes of movement. It fixes the problem you mentioned while suspending the disbelief in my case. I can see the argument for only having one pass if all combatants have 1 pass, to speed things up and not having multiple passes of "I continue to run 5 meters."

Of course everyone can spend Edge to gain an extra pass, as long as they have that Edge. If it were meant only to allow underdogs to get even with the sammies, it would say so in the rules for spending edge. There is a rule that you can't spend Edge to this in the middle of an IP, as that would mess things up in THAT pass. Apart from that restriction, there seem to be nothing else.

So no.. there is no solid rules evidence. If there were, the rules would specifically say you can only spend edge to gain a pass if there is someone in combat with you that has more than you. The only good reason for this interpretation is that movement rate will always be preset. Or will it? What if mr mage with 4 passes knocks himself out with a stunball in pass 1 in a combat where everyone else has 1 pass only? Does suddenly everyone move faster (just like everyone moves suddently slower if you extend the round with a pass with Edge)? What if grunt a and b had already moved 5 meters and were still waiting to do their complex action? Or does everything stay the same and we have 3 passes each turn where the combatants can only move?

It has the serious rule repercussion of *not* letting people use a basic function of edge half the time. That's wonky. Instead, it's so much simpler, easier, and sensible for Edge to let you get an IP under *all* circumstances (up to max, of course). So, given that there's *not* solid rules evidence, why borrow trouble? 'Edge is for pulling even' is something you made up, that's all. A fine house rule, if you want to limit the power of Edge in that way.

I've a houserule I use to keep track of this insanity.

First, it EMBRACES the idea that there are four initiative passes all the time - none of this dividing by the combatants with the highest passes crap. There's always four passes, and you always divide by four.
Then, it takes that a step further, and changes all the walking/running rates to divisors of four. (Human/elf/ork goes to 8/24, dwarves to 8/20, trolls to either 12 or 16(walking)/32). Its still about the same, but now easier to do math.
Finally, the Combat Turn Time is adjusted to make it easier to think about. Continuing the trend, fractions are also dropped. Each Initiative Pass is now 1 second, making a combat turn Four seconds long.
The passes exist no matter what; each person with extra passes just gets opportunities to act in them.

Through the course of the turn, you proceed through the Initiative Score, Highest to Lowest(business as usual), then start the next phase, Repeat until done. again, unchanged.

How actual movement is handled is basically the same. On your Initiative Score/Action Phase you move your /4 movement rate right then during your turn- (we don't care if you want to shoot people before, after, or during your samurai gymnastic backflip - and you KEEP moving in subsequent passes.

So basically, the guy with one pass starts running for cover when the bullets start flying - and everyone with more than one pass can try to shoot him before he actually gets there. He moves 8 on pass 1, 8 more on pass 2, 8 more on pass 3, and by the time the turn is over he has moved his full movement rate.

The Action Types for moving are unchanged: Walking remains a Non-Action, Running is a Free, and Sprinting is a Simple.
Sprinting has a slight change: Instead of each hit adding two meters to the running rate for the turn, each hit adds half a meter to the current phases rate instead of the whole turns rate. Effectively, the 'divide by 4' trend is continued.

The benefit to getting more actions/more passes is that you can change what you're doing. The one-pass guy is stuck without a second turn, but the two-pass samurai can start running - or stop moving entirely - on their second go.


What this effectively does is
1) Cut down on Runners Powerwalking Faster Than Olympic Sprinters Syndrome, slightly
2) Makes combat turns a bit easier to grasp
3: Removes annoying fractions entirely to make things smoother.
4) Makes people with augmented reflexes actually able act/react/move faster

It you think about it, it works rather well and takes all of the argh out of the current system, while still providing a dynamic fluid combat system where people CAN intervene as the situation develops.

Exactly. Honestly, I'm not okay with 5-pass rigging anyway, so 4 passes is *always* enough for me.

Honestly, for simplicity's sake, my group has always completely ignored the "movement is by round, not pass" rules. Yeah, it makes movement over time seem a bit wonky if you pay attention, but we find that adding the extra bookkeeping detracts more fun than it adds.

Obviously not workable for tables requiring a high level of realism in their epic battles between Inspector Gadget, Zero Cool, Robocop, Gandalf, and a Lesbian-Elf-Stripper-Ninja.


~R~

There is also a rule that quite clearly states, that the Edge point must be spent at the beginning of the IP in which the action is to be gained.



From what I understand, the number of passes is set at the beginning of the combat round (where you also divide movement), so if the only combatant with multiple actions is out after 1 IP, the other IPs will still happen.

Bye
Thanee

That's what you think.

Even when you look at it from a balance perspective, it is clearly the better solution to allow that option only for those with less than the maximum of IP present in the combat. Pretty much everyone will agree, that the number of actions you can perform in one combat turn is one of the most potent abilities in combat, and that if you have fewer actions you are basically screwed, esp. if it is 1 vs. 3 or something like that.



The fluff explanation, yes. The rules part, no.

The rules say that extra IPs only happen when extra actions are available.
The rules say that movement is divided by the number of IP in the turn (and you need to know that value during the first IP already).
And the rules say, that you have to have the IP before you can spend the Edge.

Those are not made up at all.

The conclusion I am drawing here fits all of these requirements.



Ok, then what happens with movement?

Does everyone have to stand still during that extra pass?
Can you only move, if you havn't used up all your movement for the turn, yet?
Or do all combatants suddenly gain some extra movement allowance to be used during that extra IP?
If the combat turn had 3 IPs previously, do you keep the movement rate/3 per IP or is it now movement rate/4 for that last IP?

How does that fit to your view of simple and easy or 'not wonky'?

Bye
Thanee

It clearly states you can't spend Edge to get a pass within a pass. You have to spend it at the beginning of the pass you want to get another pass. It does not clearly state you can't do it unless there is another with more than 1 pass. Heck, I can't even see it has to be limited to combat, you should be able to even if you are alone shooting at a target by yourself at a range. It would be wasteful and most people would not bother to stress about it, but I can't find anything concrete in the rules that forbid it.




While I agree that most street sams and mages don't need more than 3-4 passes, I still think allowing "mundanes" to use Edge to get an edge in combat over those that lacks it.




"Combat Turns may be broken up into a series of Initiative Passes
if any characters have the ability to take extra actions in a Combat
Turn."
Every character has the option to use a point of Edge to take an extra action in a combat turn.

"If a character mixed his modes of movement during a Combat
Turn and it becomes important to know exactly how far the character
moved in a particular pass, simply divide his Movement Rate by the
number of passes in that turn."

It doesen't even say you have to divide movement among the passes in the beginning of the combat turn, it just says "if it becomes important to know exactly how far the character moved" (note the past tense).

It doesen't say you need to have an extra IP to spend Edge to gain another. This is your interpretation only. It specifies you need to declare it at the beginning of a phase. In other words, you can't decide to suddenly act in pass 2 after the street sam has acted, but before the start of pass 3 (of any). This becomes important of it is the last pass.




The rules for movement are already wonky, and not clear at all. But I can try to answer your issues:

1. The ones with movement left gets to spend that movement. Those who have used it all can't move. In fact, unless they spend Edge they can't do anything except defensive actions etc.

2. If the combat turn had 3 IPs, then those who declared movement on previous pass would have spent the movement already. The one who spent the Edge could move, up to movement/4, as long as he has enough movement left.

I do not really disagree with that. It could be clearer (one way or the other) for sure.

What I am saying mostly is, that my way of reading it (restricting it to those that have few IPs) works with everything that the rules provide.

The other way of reading it does create problems.



It is practically necessary to know your movement allowance in every IP of the combat turn. How else would you decide how far someone moves during a pass?



Well, it kinda does. The IP must be there (have begun) in order to allow the spending of Edge to act within that IP.

Now it is very well possible (since that part isn't explained in detail), that at the end of every combat round, there is one extra IP, that only really gets used in case someone wants to spend Edge.

But even if it would work that way, you would immediately run into the movement problems.



Yes, that is one of the two things it does. It does forbid to just suddenly jump into the action with an extra action phase in the middle of the pass, and it does require a pass to have a beginning, in order to allow you to spend Edge to act within that pass.



Well they do work perfectly fine if you use my method. Which is one advantage of it.



And how is that not "wonky"?

It also contradicts this part here:

"Once a mode of movement has been declared, the character moves in that mode until his next Action Phase. A character continues to move in the last mode he chose during passes in which he does not have an action. This means a character with only one action, for example, who chooses to walk or run in the first Initiative Pass will be walking or running the same throughout subsequent Initiative Passes."

And it creates the situation, where some (actually most) combatants have moved farther than they were allowed to (in retroaspect):

"If a character mixed his modes of movement during a Combat Turn and it becomes important to know exactly how far the character moved in a particular pass, simply divide his Movement Rate by the number of passes in that turn."

You did move MR/3 (MR=Movement Rate), whereas once the 4th IP is attached, the movement allowance is only MR/4 for every IP in the combat turn.

See, in order to resolve these issues you have to bend the rules quite a bit, whereas my reading "only" requires you to accept, that you cannot add an IP over the already existing number of IPs (= the number of actions the fastest combatant has), thus giving only some combatants the option to use Edge that way.

How can that not be closer to the rules? It actually works in the limits provided by them!

You don't have to play it like that if you don't like it. Noone has to. But saying it is wrong seems a little far-fetched, really.

Bye
Thanee

Like I said, the problem is baked right in:That's not okay. Besides, if you use *my* method (all combats have 4 IP always), it's at least equally non-wonky.

Our house rule on this topic is pretty easy to follow... Rather than declaring the use of Edge at the beginning of the IP you have to declare it at the beginning of the Turn. This settles all the movement wonkiness and everyone can spend edge for an extra pass (up to 4 of course). It does make it not quite the "surprise" that spending it on the IP does, but that really is more of an in-character surprise than a mechanical one anyway.

-D

*Edit*
It does require a little planning ahead too, but meh, it works for us.

Why not?

Why does that option absolutely have to work for everyone?

Why isn't a better-balanced (see above) version preferable?







Bye
Thanee

The only thing I agree with, is that your interpretation (which to me is stretching it) makes the rest of the movement system more stable. It's still a crappy system, and problems can still occurr: For example if someone with 4 passes comes into a combat where everyone before that had only 3 passes... this creates the same problem as if one of those participants spent Edge to gain a 4th pass. How would you rule that? Not allow him his 4th pass?

The house rule me and Yama uses, simply dividing turns by 4 passes by default (thus assuming there MIGHT be someone with 4 passes without revealing this metagame knowledge to the players), fixes all these problems you claim. Your interpretation IMO, stretches the rules enough to consider it a house rule in itself.

It's not 'better-balanced', Thanee. It's just unfair and inconsistent. Since when does SR care about underdogs? Especially Edge, of all things!

And no, I never said you couldn't play what you wanted. I just said it's inferior in general terms. It offers no benefits over the alternatives, and creates a weird context-dependent effect. But mainly, I meant that it's not (as you suggest) on 'solid rules ground'.

Thanee is right. Thanee's ruling also makes for a more unfun game and treats the rulebook as reverential, neither of which I care for.

I think you guys are seriously overstating the importance of allowing someone with the highest amount of IPs around (namely 3 in most cases) to gain an extra IP via Edge for one turn.

It's perfectly fine (even highly advisable) to not use rules that you consider stupid.

Bye
Thanee

I think I said, 'do what you want'. My point is that it's bad on general principles to make things work differently for different people in this way, that's all. In no way is it about 'letting the strongest guy be stronger'. You might as well rule that all uses of Edge only work if you're the underdog; it's playable, but both more complex and less consistent.

Yes, but that is not the point.

Just trying to find an explanation for how I think the rules as we have them work. I'm pretty sure that what I have posted is the closest reading to how the rules do work.

And it doesn't work differently for different characters. It is the same principle for all of them. If there is an IP you cannot act in, you can spend Edge to do so. That is the same for everyone. It's just that some can use it and some can not, depending on situation.

For all Edge options there are situations in which it makes no sense to use them, which is essentially the same (i.e. you are first in initiative, then why use Edge to act first?).

Besides, regardless of which way you use, the option isn't available to the very best, anyways. Once you hit 4 passes before Edge, you cannot gain another (normally). The difference is just at what point this occurs, not whether it generally occurs or not. That point is as dynamic as the number of IPs in a combat turn is, depending on who takes part in it. In some combats, Mr. 3 IPs will be able to use it, in others he will not be able to. Same as going first, really. Sometimes you are not first, so you can use it, other times you are first already.

Bye
Thanee

Again, this assumes that 'total IPs' equals 'IPs of the max char', instead of 4 (still ignoring 5 because screw that ). (There's no 'solid rules evidence' for this, though it's *an* interpretation.) That makes the IP total variable and dependent on the characters, and therefore bars some characters from this use of Edge (even though they would expect and want to be able to use it).

I didn't say it's unplayable, or that you shouldn't play it. I said that one should in general avoid this kind of variability and dependency, particularly when it has an obvious novel fluff ('favor the underdog'). I wasn't being sarcastic when I suggested it'd be the same as making all Edge use work only for 'underdogs': that is playable, and you could play it if you chose, but it constitutes a major and messy change to the rules.

That makes an excellent point. Why should my ability to use Edge be contingent on the stats of other PC's/NPC's? "None of them are any cooler than you, so you can't use edge to do what you want. So sorry." That just doesn't sit well with me, regardless of your interpretation.

It was actually more of a reply to "My point is that it's bad on general principles to make things work differently for different people in this way, that's all."



You keep saying that, but what is not solid about it?

The OP's case is a situation with 1 IP mundanes.

"Some characters may have magic or implants that allow them to act more than once in a Combat Turn. When this occurs, the Combat Turn is divided into Initiative Passes."

-> That combat is not divided into Initiative Passes, since noone there has such things.

"Edge can be spent to get an extra Initiative Pass action. A character who only acts once a turn could, for example, spend 1 point of Edge to act during a second Initiative Pass as well. The character must declare this at the beginning of the Initiative Pass—it is not possible to buy an action in the middle of a pass."

-> To gain a second action a second Initiative Pass must first have begun, otherwise it cannot be declared. Since there are no extra Initiative Passes (see above), this is not possible.

The rest is extrapolation from there (and from the movement rules). But this situation is completely covered in the rules.



Yeah, but as I said, that is not the point of my "underdog" explanation.

You just turn things upside down there. I am not reading the rules that way, because I think it would be a good idea to "help the underdog", but I read the rules that way, because that is what is written there, or (in the more vague parts) is a way of reading/interpreting the rules that fits all of the rules passages as they are*. And then I think of a reason why this could make sense to have the rule that way (seeing Edge as an equalizer in that particular and very important part of combat). There is absolutely no reason to expand this to other uses of Edge and no desire to do so.

* (without having to expand every combat turn to 4 IPs, which at least for one case (only mundanes with 1 IP around) is definitely not correct, and some example texts also clearly indicate otherwise ("This particular Combat Turn is three Initiative Passes long") -- So, while it is a bit vague, there are a few indicators that strongly point into one direction (and that is, that a combat has exactly as many IPs as the combatant with the highest number of actions brings into it))

Bye
Thanee

Ah. Trying to make the crazy rules make sense leads only to madness.

I really don't see where they are that crazy in this context. It's no big deal not making Edge usable that way for everyone in every situation.

Bye
Thanee

P.S. Above post has been edited quite a bit since your reply.

See, you're interpreting it as spending edge in the pass you want to act. I interpret it as spending the edge in AN initiative pass. So I'd spend it in IP1, which then creates/allows for a 2nd initiative pass. It's one of the uses of edge being declared at the beginning of the turn. It doesn't say it has to be spent specifically in the initiative pass you wish to act. Hell, as a GM, I'd say you can't do it spur of the moment.

Not to mention, why would they even bother with this rule if it was impossible to use in certain situations? Or if they intended it to be useless in these situations, why was that not mentioned? There is no mention of any limitation on the rule except that you can't use it in the middle of a pass to gain an action, so there's nothing stopping 1-action/turn characters from getting a 2nd pass by spending edge during the first pass.

While I agree that this would work (I prefer beginning of combat turn, though), it is not what it says.

"at the beginning of the Initiative Pass"



While this is not completely wrong, it does take a lot of keeping your eyes shut to read it that way.

"A character who only acts once a turn could, for example, spend 1 point of Edge to act during a second Initiative Pass as well. The character must declare this at the beginning of the Initiative Pass"

Nice try, but really... no.



Because it is still usable in most of them?



Why should it be mentioned? In almost all cases, the thoughts behind rules are not mentioned.

Bye
Thanee

Actually, I'm reading the actual words. It does not say you must spend it in the pass you wish to act. The words you're claiming simply do not exist. It says you must spend edge in the initiative pass. It does not say which is "the" pass. The pass you're acting in now? The one you want to act in? It doesn't specify. I claim it as the pass you're acting is, as you can't take turns/spend points/etc etc etc in passes you have no actions in. You interpret it the other way.

Actually, strict reading of the RAW states that *any character* can use edge to gain an extra IP, the case stated in the rules uses the 1IP mundane as an example (see Jhaiisiin's BBB quote from upthread below). Naturally, I think that the (non-VR) upper limit of 4IP/turn could not be broken by a wired-up sammie trying to gain an unprecedented 5th meat IP using edge, but apart from that it is, at least by RAW, all good.
The question of why a sammie clocking 3IP through cyber would bother blowing Edge this way is probably more pertinent anyway.



For the record, Thanee, I am with Yerameyahu on this one. I automatically split the combat round into 4IP regardless of how many IP any given participant has. You are right in that somantically the rules are written as you state them, but there is something very rules-lawyery about your position, not to mention the inellegant Schrodinger's IP situation you end up with.

Which is obviously not correct, since a 4 IP sammy or 5 IP hacker definitely cannot use it.



Yes. But it also states that he could spend one Edge to act during a second Initiative Pass, which could very well mean, that that second Initiative Pass must be around for him to be able to spend Edge to act during it. And since that is where the Edge must be spent... well, you know the rest already.



Oh, I'm quite aware of that.

It is not my intention to tell people that this is how it should be played.

My point is as simple as that the problem described in the OP's post does not really exist in the rules.

It does require a bit of rules-lawyering to explain it, though.

Bye
Thanee

Erm, we are beyond the realm of Schrodinger's IP here. The rules state that each (meat) combat turn is divided into 4IP, so there is no 5th IP for heavily wired characters to declare the use of Edge in.
As I also stated, there is a rule of diminishing returns for use of Edge in this manner. For a mundane, getting a 2nd IP is quite a big boost, but for a sammie with 3IP through cyber, I think squeezing in a 4th IP through edge would rarely if ever come up in gameplay.


Fair enough. As I stated in my post above, because I don't like your Schrodinger's IP rules lawyering (i.e. there is only a 2nd, 3rd or 4th IP in any combat round if anyone has the IP to act in them) I play 4IP per round regardless, which means I would allow a mundane to use Edge to get a 2nd IP in an all-participants 1 IP situation, but YMMV.