It's a nice sentiment, but it a) depends on a highly subjective definition of 'overpowered' and b) isn't feasible. I have yet to meet a P&P RPG where creating overpowered characters through loopholes isn't possible.
Besides, it's really not necessary, if the problems aren't ultra-pervasive. While it might be fun to create such characters (I've had a lot of fun with the Mach 1 runner in SR3 straight up from character creation), I've yet to meet a person who actually insists on having fun _playing_ these kinds of characters.
To pick up an earlier example, the trollwalls aren't actually that bad, and it's a GM's / group's prerogative to just say 'no' or handle the case in another way.


Which wouldn't make them overpowered by definition
I like RIFTS in that regard. Insanely powerful characters, but there is always a bigger fish.


However, i digress. The point being is technomancers at the current state are more viable and a lot more common as PCs than otaku were in 3rd edition and I think this is a good thing. Even as someone who isn't interested in creating one for play in the slightest and as someone who liked the otaku concept a lot better.
Yes, there are inherent problems with the TM rules (overthreading springs to mind), but there are also a lot of inherent problems with other character 'classes'. Overcast stunbolts with little to no drain, anyone? Pornomancer? The rules can be gamed everywhere.
The technomancers aren't the root of the problem, but they are less liked by old players such as myself and I suspect that part of it is because they're the 'new kids on the block'.

These underlying problems however have absolutely no bearing in how TMs will work in SR5. Positing that the rules should be rewritten is, ultimately, a redundant statement, because they need to be rewritten anyways. It will probably not only be the matrix chapter that will be rewritten like this. Old problems may or may not disappear.
And they will make new mistakes for people to wail and gnash their teeth about. The cycle continues with each new edition

I just wanna add that I was very generic in my answers. I haven't a clue if Technomancers are OP or not (compared to hackers/deckers).


Still beeing very generic here but, even if filling every possible loopholes isn't feasible, when one is identified and easily solved, it should just be done.

Some cannot be solved. The rules doesn't allow it they way their built.

(exemple: Gamemaster: while you're watching the sun declining, standing near the ravine, talking with NPC, suddenly, a hiddeous grin appears on his face! He's a traitor. He tries to backstab you and and push you. Roll surprise!
PC: Critical failure.
GM: the pain of iron piercing your back runs through your body when you start falling
Pc: Peuh, so What? I'm a DD3.5 level 15 Barbarian. I will survive this for sure, who cares!)<=can't be solved without modifying DD3.5 in depth.

But when they are, they should.


Aside from that, I have nothing against Technomancer. And I don't like a guy soaking with ease modern assault riffles. Because it dumbs down the way I like to play (be smart, use cover and so on). And yes I can handle it at my table well

Again, specific case where I still think the rules are fundamentally broken.
Specifically that a starting points techno is going to be gimped in every way possible, but throw some karma at them and they turn into unstoppable matrix gods. This occurs no where else in the rules (except magic being uncapped, but I believe that takes significantly more karma).



I have not once made a suggestion on how to fix them. I have no ideas. And I don't care, it's not MY JOB to fix them. So your point is meaningless.

OK. I finally managed to chew through these 9 pages, so a few comments from me.

1) Some of the things mentioned in the OP sounds OK, some parts I'll withhold judgement on until I see what they've done in details.
With respects to VR, I have to say that I would so wish that VR would be toned down so that it would be something you can use in select places, or something that it takes a while getting in and out of, so that you don't want to use it during the run, but only for stuff happening before the run. It may be an integral part of SR history, but as someone who only got into the game in version 4a, I quite frankly LOATHE VR. The idea is cool enough, but as it effectively removes anyone going into it from their immediate location, and deposits them in another world, I'm sick of it. In D&D terms I'd compare it with having a party in a dungeon, and then have the wizard suddenly teleport to a jungle or different plane for some reason. It's just utterly annoying IMO.
I can't say I'm particular thrilled with the thought of "re-introducing" the "cyberdeck". Do we really need to add yet another type of gear for the hacker/Decker/whatever? IMO the 4a comlinks worked fine. Hacking from a distance takes a penalty? I agree with the idea, but I'm not sure about the implementation. I much prefer the Hackers to be along on the run with the rest of the team, rather than have them sit on their couch back home and play support in VR from 15 miles away.
Simplification of the Matrix rules would be good. I'll await the final version of the rules, until I make up my mind on whether they've made it simpler, or just screwed it up in a new way. Personally I'm sort of hoping for a decent interplay between skills, abilities, and gear/program ratings.
Doing away with the extended tests isn't necessarily a good thing IMO. But again, let's see the implementation before saying if it's a good or bad thing. Personally I'd like Spoofing and AR hacking to become easier, so as to make it simpler to use during a run. For VR and pre-run hacking I have no problem with extended tests.

2) As someone who only started playing the game in version 4a, having a "decker" and "technomancer" being referred to as "hackers" as a blanket term, isn't really an issue. I can follow some of the arguements for maintaining the "Decker" designation, but honestly, in today's world, the word "Hacker" just makes more intuitive sense and sparks more recognition than "Decker".

3) Technomancers need some tweaking, along with some of the hacking rules, but the TM isn't inherrently "broken" IMO, though you can do some broken things with him in some situations. Implementing the 1-10 ratings from WAR! might level the playing field a bit though, as a Stealth 10 Technomancer then becomes a bit less idiotic in comparison to the Rating 6 Stealth program.
On a personal level I'd prefer to see a bigger difference between the Decker/Hacker and the Technomancer. I'd make the Technomancer the supreme AR hacker, and then let the Decker be better at VR hacking. That way you could have a choice between what you'd prefer to specialize in.
In this respect I'd prefer to see the Karma sink reduced a bit for the Technomancer, because you need an IMO stupid amount of Karma, before the Technomancer can catch up with the Decker/Hacker. Reducing the amount of programs required to hack might also aleviate the problem a bit.

Anyway, we'll see what happens when 5th ed rolls around and we can see the new rules in detail.

As it stands, it's actually balanced due to a generalist/specialist dichotomy - it's far easier and more efficient to build and progress a hacker that can do more than just Matrix stuff than it is for a Technomancer, so they have to be more powerful in the Matrix.

The change in the rules structure of the Matrix, however, will bring about some serious changes in this dynamic - due to the need for both attributes and skills, and the diminished dice pool bonuses from gear, SR5 deckers are going to need to be built and progressed in a radically different fashion than the current mundane hackers are. Further, technomancers are going to have to see a lot of changes to be functional in the new rules as well.



Splitting the party is just part of how Shadowrun works. GMing the game is in no small part about knowing how and when to crosscut between different things that are happening at the same time. Personally, I'd actually like to see VR become more advantageous over AR, because at present there's often precious little reason to take the risks involved in VR.

As for decks, giving deckers their own equipment allows for the addition of mods and such that only they have access to. Also, it opens up the idea of a wider set of node "grades" than just peripheral, standard, and nexus - it may be that operating from a higher grade node confers some sort of bonus against lower grade ones, or something; similarly, things like program limits and such may work differently on better classes of device.



As someone who enjoys technomancers, I would absolutely, positively, without reservation HATE that. Way I see it, they should be completely at home in the Matrix no matter the form. That, and it completely misses the design function of AR, which is to make it a lot more viable to have the Matrix specialist with you; deckers should not be excluded from that. There are a lot of possible ways to differentiate the two, but this is not a good one.