Actually, it is not a contravention of my position (with absolutely no mental gymnastics required). I always supported that a Production Drone could bend/break those rules. The fact that there is a Body 1 Mini-Drone (Lone-Star I-Ball) with a weapon was the example I used previously. You can DESIGN anything with a Weapon. You CANNOT MODIFY anything with a Weapon. See the Difference?

Oh yeah.

Begging the Question.

I totally forgot.

Thanks for the correct terminology, Draco18s, I could not actually remember it. Been a long couple of weeks.

Didn't even come to mind until you pointed it out.
But yeah, a lot of times I know there's a logical error but be unable to determine which one.

But yeah. Makes me wish I could turn politics into a game show. Have some guy with a big switchboard of logical fallacies and pushing the button makes a giant sign appear over the speaker's head pointing out the fallacy (and what kind).

Ah la http://xkcd.com/285/

Just because you do not like it, does not mean it is objectively wrong. And certainly does not mean one should tell people they are wrong, or are not following the rules, even when they are following the Rules As Written.

Say you don't like it. Say you think it's a bad rule. Say you think it should still be "round down" like in the core book.

Don't say "no, you're wrong - that's not how the rules work". Because whether you like it or not, whether you agree with it or not, it is how the rules work.


That claim had been made in the context of "SR4A was published after Arsenal, so it must be more correct". I proved that Arsenal had been updated to reflect SR4A's publication, and so the foundation of "Arsenal is out of date and incorrect" was false.






That's a damned lie. Your first post on the subject was, and I directly quote:

Emphasis mine, of course.

That's not you saying anything even remotely close to "I think the Body minimums from SR4A are what should be followed, regardless of what Arsenal says". That's you objectively saying that "by the rules", implicitly all of them, the minimum body is 3+.

Oh, and when I pointed out Arsenal's wording? Your response wasn't "I prefer the version in the core book for body minimums", no, it was:


You were not arguing on opinion, Tymaeus. You were arguing that I was objectively wrong by the rules as written.

And pay attention to that bit where you said "Note that the SR4A book is the most recent, and as such has the correct ruling."

My posting that page is not "begging the question", it's directly addressing the root of the dispute itself.

Even just tahing the 1-2-3 stream of my claim (the SR4A rule is meant to be used "unless you own Arsenal".), and Draco's challenge of it? The text I circled says precisely and exactly that: "the rules in this book [arsenal] supercede those in the SR4A book". Still not begging the question.

Why not? I mean honestly, this "WHY" Question can be asked for a lot of rules in the books. And some are really stupid...


I do not disagree with you here on the basis. Just stating that some writers want to add crazy stuff and tend to move "restricting" rules out of the way...
That you should NEVER drop restriction if you go into details is true. I totally agree with you.

1) Runner's Companion was updated recently.
2) Thus it must have all the correct rules.
3) Fame is still listed as being 5-15 points, but the text says that "Global Fame" is 20.
4) The rule is contains a typo.
5) Ergo statement 2 is false.
QED: just because it was updated recently doesn't mean that the typo is not a typo.

Flipside, just because you don't like it, doesn't make it a typo. Didn't do so prior to SR4A, and still doesn't do so now.

Typos and misswordings are rules too. Thats the major issue with RAW.
The best example is, that the long bursts are considered for armor penetration...

That is the reason nobody uses RAW.

I don't like it? Where'd I type that?

What other justification do you have for claiming that Arsenal is wrong?

(1) Main book says "<version A>";
(2) Supplement says "Instead of <version A>, use <version B>";
(3) ... ???? [/underpands gnomes]
(4) Ergo, the part of <version B> that is not identical to it's counterpart in <version A> must perforce be a typographical error.



Explain step 3 to me. Explain to me how we get from 2 to 4. And don't you try and beg the question by saying "the proof that it's an error, is that I claim someone made an error". Objective, corroboratable is required.

Step 3 works like this:

A does not match B, ergo either A or B is wrong.

At which point we have to resort to more complex logic.

Such as finding a drone (that does not have a weapon mount) and a body of 1 or 2 and seeing if it is logical that a weapon mount could be modded in. The Lockheed Optic-X serves wonderfully for this purpose (body 2, classified as "small" rather than a "minidrone" or "microdrone" which are explicitly stated as to be unable to hold weapon mounts).



(A rough size estimate of a body 2 drone can be achieved by looking in Arsenal, a "pet falcon drone" that "looks and moves like a real falcon" is a small class, body 2 drone)

Is it logical for this drone to have a weapon mount? Lets look at the description of a weapon mount (ignoring the body limits, as that would beg the question).



So a weapon mount can hold a light machine gun.

Is it logical for a fold-up stealth drone to have on its form a light machine gun and still maintain it's two primary features (aka "stealth" and "fold up")?

No, not really.

Ergo Arsenal is wrong.

The problem is, B explicitly and directly says it replaces A.




No. More like, "Ergo I don't like this rule because it does / allows things I personally find distasteful."

Missed this until just now:


Perilously close to a straw man, there.

Body does not univeraally equate to size. It also has to do with the strength of the materials something is made of. Take, for example, the MQ-1 Predator (found in This Old Drone): it's a Medium drone that has a Body of only 2.

Now, take a look at this photo of a real MQ-1 Predator drone:



Does that look like it's the size of a falcon? No, of course not - unless you've got some godawfully huge birds where you live.

Size is denoted by Class (Micro, Mini, Small, Medium, Large), not Body.





And while I'm ad it ... let's put that "only for drones that were designed and prototyped with them" nonsense regarding Body 2 drones with Weapon Mounts to rest, too: Modified GMC Sandal. Sure, the lising in Arsenal comes with a weaponmount "standard". But, guess what, that's actually an aftermarket modification. Putting a weaponmount into a Body 2 drone. Go figure.

Yes, it replaces, but it also makes a significant change: "Round down" to "round up" adding whole new classes of drones to accepting weapon mounts.



You are correct, that is true. However, if we are to assume that the strength of materials, even used in large quantities (such as the case of a MQ-1 Predator) are not very strong then how do you justify the drone's usage of a heavy weapon?
(A LMG is still a heavy weapon, suffering the same recoil drawbacks as MMGs and Panther cannons, as well as using the same skill when wielded by a metahuman).



Nice red herring you have there.



And I chose a body 2 drone of "small" class in order to use an example, as there are no special rules on small drones with regards to weapon mounts. I also chose body 2, as that is the body that is under question (I am unable to locate any body 1 small or medium drones). Making it a perfect example.



You mean the Chariot?
It is very well possible that the author of that fluff and crunch was using the incorrect rule of "round up" rather than "round down." We can't tell.
In any case, the rules are always regarded as "what players can do" and the fluff of the Chariot is that it was rebuilt to be a combat drone, as in, someone went to a lot of work redesigning the drone to accept the weapon mount. Here's the quote, "some ingenious shadow mechanics devised plans on how to rebuild parts of the now plentiful drone."

Note two things, one the use of the word "rebuilt" and the second they used PARTS. It was designed to look like the chariot, but serve a different purpose. It wasn't simply taking a working drone and spending six hours in a shop mounting a weapon.

But you are objectively wrong now _Pax_. Apparently you are incapable of reading an entire post; you know, the one where I indicated I was wrong (Used the words FACT instead of Opinion) and apologized for the confusion. Sometimes what gets written is not exactly what I remember thinking, and I admitted that. So, you win, your penis is bigger than mine is. Congratulations.

Soes not change the FACT that I think it is wrong.

And your posting the page IS Begging the Question. You cannot argue from the Point that is called into Question. You need outside proof. Which you have still not provided. Draco18s Challenged you to PROVE that Arsenal is NOT WRONG. Not make a supposition, but PROVE IT. You have yet to do so.

And that is what we call a Burden of Proof.

I made my claim, I backed it up, and admit that there are potential problems that can be attributed back to the very point I am making ("Arsenal is wrong").

You can get that upgraded you know. Unless you have a Body score of 2.

Ba da dum ch

Heh... Awesome...

Indeed... I don't know about you, but I am perfectly okay with any potential problems resulting from Arsenal being wrong (In that you round down instead of up).

Tough luck. The change can be as significant or insignificant as the developers want it to be.

You're always free to houserule it however you like in your home campaign - but someone following what has actually been published, is not failing to follow or understand the rules.


I don't have to justify it, when discussing the rules as written. If I were to run a game, and make a house rule - which would only apply to my own games, of course, and wouldn't make anyone not in those games "wrong" if they didn't adhere to them - anyway, I would probably limit Small drones to pistols (including machine pistols), and medium drones to non-heavy weapons. I would then be amenable to making the occasional exception, either for larger or smaller limits, based on the fluff (and maybe images) of a specific model. I'm more likely to let a tracked vehicle handle larger, heavier weapons than a walker or flier, for example.


No, not a red herring at all. You suggested that "Body 2 = <specific size>". Patently, that is not universally true.


As I just said, your problem is that you then tried to tie that "body 2" to a specific physical size. "Small drone" is a range of sizes, to start with. The Sandal is also a Small drone, and I doubt it's as small as a falcon - especially not since it's cited as eing able to carry "up to 10 standard delivery packages". Even not knowing what "standard" means in that sense, I'm pretty sure it's more than "10 business class envelopes". Reasonably, I'd guess it to be similar to the flat-rate Priority Mail boxes available in the U.S. - and ten of those is quite a fair volume of cargo.


Yes; apologies for the misnaming.


The rule is not incorrect.


That fluff describes finding the plans for modifying[/b drones on the matrix.

QUOTE

Note two things, one the use of the word "rebuilt" and the second they used PARTS. It was designed to look like the chariot, but serve a different purpose. It wasn't simply taking a working drone and spending six hours in a shop mounting a weapon.

"Various other plans on how to turn harmless service drones
into fierce weapons can be found in the Matrix, so with a little bit
of searching on the black market you should be able to find exactly
what you need for any given infiltration job, or do the modifications
yourself (see Visibility, p. 147)."

QUOTE (Draco18s @ Apr 30 2012, 04:01 PM)

I made my claim, I backed it up, [...]

"Because I said so" is [b]not proof.






And in return, I challenge both you and him to prove it IS wrong.

Which you are both manifestly incapable of doing, other than repeating what amounts to nothing more than "because I say so".

Here' s the problem.
I will preface this post with the comment that I don't actually have an opinion on whether Arsenal is 'right or wrong' here. I don't particularly find it to be unbalancing either way. Whatever.

But 'right' and 'wrong' are subjective. They are based on a given person's beliefs about the subject at hand. As such, they vary from person to person, which makes them imprecise.

Pax isn't arguing right or wrong. He's discussing the legality or the rules as written.

As I said, a discussion about how right or wrong a rule is would be an interesting discussion. But this thread is titled, "Min-maxing for odd things". Min-maxing is inherantly a subject that requires rules-as-written, not rules-as-they-should-be.

"Right and wrong" is a whole different conversation. Seriously.



-k

Ahh, I knew it was in there somewhere, but I couldn't find it. I checked just about everywhere but there.

Even more so, it's big brother the Reaper is a large drone and is stil only body 2.

Seriously guys? You're still at it?

Just agree to disagree already. It's not like you're playing a goddamn campaign together. I know we're theory-crafting how to min/max for odd things, but I gotta say min/maxing for petty and senseless bickering is probably the oddest choice I've seen yet.

~Umidori

+1 from me

Thanks everyone.

Leave modding to the mods please.

No, actually DireRadiant, they're right. I should have just laughed at them and dropped the subject pages ago. And I don't think they're out of line for finally (and reasonably politely) expressing exasperation with the ongoing back-and-forth.



My apologies to everyone (except certain parties whose identities should be stupendously obvious) for my part in continuing this mess. Sometimes I find it difficult to let go of something; my inner Rules Lawyer gets it's teeth into something and just hangs on, "victory or death" style. I won't continue the argument any longer.

In other news, and back to the OP, I found out how to make a character hold their breath for 5 hours without any implants at all: Oxygenated Flourocarbons and R5 Oxyrush. Granted, it only initially lasts a week, but it's also renewable.

Thanks for posting on topic, Neraph

You reminded me of my aqua-human: 24 dice for swimming with a doubled base swimming rate and doubled meter per hits.
And yes, he does look like a beaver-frog-fish mutant

Why go without implants?
With the internal Bomb . . err, Air-Tank, you can get many more hours out of that.
Of course, you could probably simply get a set of gills and call it a day too x.x . .

Currently working on a pretty tricky character conversion, just to see if I can do it. Will post my build when I'm done, but I'm actually finding this guy oddly playable as I go, although some of his more unusual qualities are hard to find rules to represent. I think, once I reveal who it is, folks might find it as amusing as I currently am. For now though, I need sleep - and to stop staying up all through the night.

~Umidori

I once had a character that had every single piece of cyber-weaponry built into his Body.
Another character did a combination of voice-stuff to try and get his cyber to replicat the ares sonic screech rifle.

Gills only work underwater. Neraph's trick works on dry land, when the nerve-gas bomb has gone off ...

And it's inexpensive (-ish, 7k ) and costs no Essence. That was kinda the point.

Okay, min-maxing. Makign this a functional character would be very very hard,BUT:

Bog standard Ork, with dead average stats - exept for Body, which is 8. Get Changeling (2), and pick up Shiva Arms.

Next, get Dermal Sheath (2), alpha grade.

Then - this is the important part - cut off both legs and all four arms, and buy alpha-grade Obvious cyberlimbs for each, matching the Body 8 / Agility 3 / Strength 5 of the character. And, each with Enhanced Armor (2).

Finally, buy and wear an Armor Jacket, Form Fitting Body Armor (Full Suit), a standard Helmet, and the entire Securetech PPP line (except the helmet).



No armor encumbrance, and an astounding 31/29 armor rating (on a Body of 8 ) ... and six extra boxes for the Physical Condition Monitor (for a total of 18).



^_^ I know I could get more soak dice out of other builds ... and granted, affording all that requires the "Born Rich" quality, the Shiva arms require Class II SURGE, and after all that you're down to 121BP for the rest of the character (1 of which can be spent on gear, adding to the current 4,900 nuyen unspent).

But come on, THIRTY ONE ballistic and TWENTY NINE Impact armor ...!!

(And, a sudden urge for me to slightly tweak the rules for cyberlimb armor. Just a wee tiny bit.)

Spiderman's enemy, Dr. Orktapus?

LOL - maybe for the downside of that SURGE, take Cephalapoid Skull ...!!

And he falls to the first Magician with Stun Bolt because he cannot resist it.

At that point, I'd be prone to giving him object resistance.

I did say he was not a playable character, right?






No, that comes after he has enough money to upgrade to Deltaware, and add the Obvious Torso and Obvious Cyberskull. And upgrade all then-eight pieces with a full 4 points of armor. 32/32 naked, oh yeah!

It's really nothing new that those are drek. It's even been adressed in Damian's Character Sheet already for a couple of years.

Keeping in mind that buying all of that cybeer armor is VERY nuyen costly.
And you still can't resist spells, social manipulation, or most drugs and diseases.

Alternatively, he could do the same build with a meta-type that has innate magical resistances, and if the player has a reasonable GM (who's had a mind altering spell cast on him, so he'd ever accept such an abomination in his game), it wouldn't be unreasonable to rule that most toxins and drugs wouldn't enter his blood stream, having little actual blood left.

AKA, "this build is only overpowered if you stop using RAW and instead start making minor house rules in the build's favor."

It may not be new in general, but, it's a new discovery for me.






Yes, I noted the expense of it already. But, you know what? You've prompted me to tweak and revise it somewhat:

Unnamed Hero (Fomori)
B 8, A 3, R 3, S 6, C 2, I 2, L 2, W 5, E 2, Ess 0.15, Init 5, IP 1
Condition Monitor boxes (Physical/Stun): 18/11
Armor (Ballistic/Impact): 36/36
Skills:
Knowledge Skills: English N
Metatype Abilities: Enhanced Senses: Thermographic Vision
Qualities: Arcane Arrester, Biocompatibility (Cyberware), Changeling (Class II SURGE), Critter Spook, Mood Hair, Ogre Stomach, Shiva Arms
Cyberware:
. . Cyber Arm (Obvious) (Extra Arm) with Cyberlimb Agility (3), Cyberlimb Body (8 ), Cyberlimb Strength (6), Enhanced Armor +2/+2 (2)
. . . . Spurs
. . Cyber Arm (Obvious) (Extra Arm) with Cyberlimb Agility (3), Cyberlimb Body (8 ), Cyberlimb Strength (6), Enhanced Armor +2/+2 (2)
. . . . Spurs
. . Cyber Arm (Obvious) (Main Hand) with Cyberlimb Agility (3), Cyberlimb Body (8 ), Cyberlimb Strength (6), Enhanced Armor +2/+2 (2)
. . . . Spurs
. . Cyber Arm (Obvious) (Off Hand) with Cyberlimb Agility (3), Cyberlimb Body (8 ), Cyberlimb Strength (6), Enhanced Armor +2/+2 (2)
. . . . Spurs
. . Cyber Leg (Synthetic) with Cyberlimb Agility (3), Cyberlimb Body (8 ), Cyberlimb Strength (6), Enhanced Armor +2/+2 (2)
. . Cyber Leg (Synthetic) with Cyberlimb Agility (3), Cyberlimb Body (8 ), Cyberlimb Strength (6), Enhanced Armor +2/+2 (2)
. . Dermal Plating (1)
Gear:
. . Form-Fitting Full-Body Suit
. . Moonsilver Shawl/Scarf/Stole
. . Riot Control Armor with Fire Resistance, Nonconductivity (1), Shock Frills
. . SecureTech Forearm Guards
. . SecureTech Leg and Arm Casings
. . SecureTech Shin Guards
. . SecureTech Vitals Protector
Weapons:
. . Attack of Will (vs. Spirits) [DV 2P vs. I]
. . Spurs [Blades, DV 6P vs. I, Reach 1]
. . Spurs [Blades, DV 6P vs. I, Reach 1]
. . Spurs [Blades, DV 6P vs. I, Reach 1]
. . Spurs [Blades, DV 6P vs. I, Reach 1]
. . Unarmed Strike [Unarmed, DV 3S vs. I, Reach 1]

No, it's not a complete build; I never intend to play it, so I'm not that interested in completing the build. Heck, I haven't even added the combat skill to use those spurs yet!

But there's only 254/400 build points used, and 194K out of a potential 250K (300K if we go back to Born Rich). Turns out "Biocompatibility: Cyberware" was a better way to go, than Alpha Grade for all those limbs. Meanwhile, he's got a serviceable Will of 5, and Arcane Arrester, to help with spells. Socially he'll be challenged, but even if this wasn't supposed to be a one-dimensional munchkiny min/max ... where's the fun in a character with no weaknesses at all?

That one is dead.
6 Limbs == 6 Essence.
Dermal Plating 1 == 0.5 Essence?
Essence == -0,5. Dead.

6,5*0,9 is 5,85 essence
Still has 0,15 essence left just as his stat block lists.

... ehem:



Biocompatibility reduces the essence cost of either Cyberware or Bioware (depending which you get) by 10%, including during character creation. So it's:

6 Limbs == 5.4 Essence.
Dermal Plating 1 == 0.45 Essence.
Essence == 0.15, "not dead yet!"