Except that the math doesn't work for 4e, is horribly broken in Pathfinder, and barely works in 3.5 if you remember to give non-casters nice things at the right times. In Shadowrun, the math is a bit more accessible. The actual game is, in fact, crunch. That's what I pay for in my 'rule'book, because I can sit around and play story time in Shadowrunland without any rulebook at all. If Sams look unbalanced (and while I agree that they seem fucked compared to Awakened), then you should be able to prove it given identical constraints. Quoting 'Rule Zero' is absolutely useless - rule zero is fucking free.

You're right, and by the way, the Sprawl Ganger has a Used Cyberarm.

In fairness, the sample characters have a number of nonexistent or unavailable-at-chargen things.

It does keep up consistency with page 451, however.

Yes, the most likely explanation is that the passage indicating you can take used ware is correct, and the other passage is a copypasta error (especially given it seems to indicate Used ware doesn't exist). I guess we'll see when the errata comes out.

Yeah, the most likely explanation is that Hardy doesn't know jack nor shit about the rules he was in charge of developing. That's kind of sad, but seems true.

P. 451:
"
All accessories and add-ons must be of the same
grade as the implant to which they are added.
"
While Device Rating does not directly translate to Cyberware grade, there is an analogue between the two ratings, and grades of 'ware translate over to particular device ratings.

Keep in mind, I'm of the opinion that the deck cost is separate, and not tied in with the normal cyberware rules except for the fact that it is implanted, physically.

If you want to say it's considered a part of the cyberware, to the point that its cost is affected by the cyberware's grade, then you're going to have to take both the flowers AND the fertilizer. Either it's separate (it's own cost and device rating) or it's combined (total cost x grade adjustment, appropriate device rating for the grade of cyberware). Cherry picking when the rules do and don't apply to your character (as a player) as per the reading I'm against distills to "poking in with the eleventh finger and hoping for the best."

so are you also of the opinion that a standard implanted commlink or cyberdeck has a device rating of 2, regardless of what type you install?

because, funny story, the implanted commlink description mentions *explicitly* that they typically only use device rating 5 or better commlinks because having a low rating commlink in your head is deemed too much of a security risk.

so, uhh... do tell... do you presume that nobody considers getting an implanted commlink unless it's *deltaware* at minimum? and, given that's the low end, do you then speculate that there are... well, i guess, epsilon-grade (honestly, the fourth beyond standard should be delta, but they skipped gamma for some reason) implanted commlinks (but no other type of 'ware) available on the market?

device rating is not cyberware grade. they are not the same thing at all.

and even if they were, you have a general rule vs a specific rule.

As I just stated in my previous post, I believe that an implanted cyberdeck should be considered apart from the implant except, of course, for the location where it happens to be and essence cost for that implantation. As such, the implant's reduced nuyen cost from reduced grade would not affect the deck's rating in the least.

For those arguing that a Used-Grade Cyberdeck Implant means reducing the cost of the cyberdeck itself, I have been posing that the logical extension of their argument is not simply a lower cost, but a lowered capacity for the deck itself, or else that it would not work due to needing an implant of consummate grade to the device rating of the deck implanted.

Please pay attention to such distinctions as progressing another's argument to display the faults in the logic. Also, go back and read my previous post. I specifically pointed out that I do not approve of cherry picking only the convenient times when rules apply.

And yes, you do have general rule vs specific rule. You also have specific rule vs other specific rule (Overall Deck rules vs. Deck Implantation). See above what my stance is (I'll give another hint to make sure you understand, it's the last sentence of the previous, 3-sentence paragraph).

your argument of "logical extension" does not follow logic.

there is absolutely nothing in the rules that indicates device rating and cyberware grade are the same thing. there is nothing in the rules to suggest that this particular general rule overrides a specific rule. we have an already-existing canon example of why that rule doesn't make any sense whatsoever.

but frankly, it's not an unreasonable assumption. i'm not convinced it's terribly *balanced* or anything, but you don't go walking into a cyberware clinic with a fannypack model of a cyberdeck and ask them to just stuff it into the cyberdeck-shaped hole in their cranium that all humans are born with. you would need specialized cyberware versions.

now, that kinda breaks things a little, leastways unless and until other kinds of used equipment get rules for them. being able to just buy a cyberdeck for slightly over 75% of the cost is not a good thing from a rules perspective. but it's not an illogical assumption at all that it would exist (having lower availability on the high-end ones seems a bit sketchy though... i doubt there's more used fairlight excalibur implanted cyberdecks on the market than there are new ones...)

but yeah, your argument is absurd. it requires that we assume that in a rule describing how cyberware grade, we ignore the fact that it's specifically talking about cyberware grades and assume that what they really meant was device rating. which is nonsense.

i wouldn't allow used implanted cyberdecks if i was GMing. but it wouldn't be because it doesn't make sense, and it certainly wouldn't be based on trying to convince myself that i'm following the rules because i randomly substitute different words whenever i feel like it into the rules to make them fit the interpretation i want them to.

it would be because i don't think it's a good rule, so i just wouldn't use it. you don't need to go trying to make up some completely ridiculous argument and then claim that the rules say something that they don't say if you don't want to use a rule. just don't use the rule. if you need to make up some ridiculous BS to get your players to respect your judgment as a GM, then you've got bigger problems than implanted cyberdecks.

Actually it is not absolutely useless. It is a reminder that it is worse than that. You need to expend effort to apply it.

My point was that it was absurd to begin with. I also was pointing out that, going with the absurd, it leads to several potential downsides and contentious readings of the rules.

they're only contentious to you. i haven't seen a single other person even once imply that device rating and cyberware grade are the same thing.

like i said, i wouldn't allow it in my games because i don't think it's good for gameplay to have it. the idea of a used implanted cyberdeck being cheaper is not absurd at all, it actually makes a great deal of sense. would *you* pay full price for a second-hand implanted prosthetic to be installed into you? probably not. if you're paying as much as you would for a brand new one, you would want to get a brand new one.

I'm confused by what you mean here.

Would you pay full price for a used laptop? How about a used TV? Probably not. But then... how much would you pay for a used GUN? Some schools of thought favor used guns over new for collections, as a used gun both has history and has been proven. So, how much value would you have for used furniture? The better the make and design of the furniture, and the better it holds up over time, the more value it retains/grows.

So... you probably wouldn't pay so much money for a 4 year old used Dell that's running Windows Vista. How much would you pay for a custom-built, state-of-the-art laptop that can run as fast as a server, enormous storage capacity, little to no heat issues, Triple Boot for Hackintosh (latest Mac OS hacked to work on non-std architecture), Windows 7 or 8, and Linux, but it's in a somewhat beat up shell with the keyboard replaced? THAT is where I take issue with the Used argument for a cyberdeck. The deck, a high-rating, high-demand, high-cost item, with no performance degradation, and a kind-of-used shell? Why WOULDN'T you be forced to pay full price for the deck? The shell is the only problematic part, and if that's your biggest damage, then we can gut the implant, put it in a new standard shell, and sell it full price.

If the deck is performing to spec or better, then there's no reason to give a discount on it. If you want the Deck used, to the point that it affects the price, then you should also not only expect, but GET performance issues from it. Heck, I'd gut it in a heart beat just for the extra nuyen.

very few things have greater value after use than before. even collectibles have greater value if they haven't been used, generally speaking. for some things a used old model can be of greater value than a new model, even if it has never been used, but that has nothing to do with new vs used, it has to do with the older model being more desirable and no longer being produced as a general rule (or in some cases, the history attached to an item increases it's value, etc).

exceptions to the rule are all very well and good, but they're exceptions. there is absolutely nothing about a used cranial cyberdeck that leads me to believe it is one of those things that gains value through use. in fact, given that your brain is not the same as the person it was previously in, it's previous record of perfect functionality doesn't even mean anything (if it did in fact have said record of perfect functionality to begin with, that is... i mean, it's used cyberware, and most people tend to be quite attached to their cyberware when they're alive... i consider the fact that the former owner is probably no longer alive to be a much stronger indicator that the cyberdeck was not as good as the former owner had hoped than being any indication of proven superior performance, personally).

reconditioning being done is also something that should be obvious. it's cyberware. you *have* to clean it up and remove all traces of the former person who had it, or else it's probably going to kill or cause a nasty infection to your customer. all used cyberware is reconditioned. all used cyberware is also cheaper than new, even though performance has not degraded (essence cost has, but then, essence cost has degraded in the exact same way for the cyberdeck). in real life, reconditioned parts or equipment are also still not as valuable as new.

it makes a lot of sense for a used implanted cyberdeck to be cheaper. far more sense than it would ever make for it to retain it's full value. it's only when viewed through the lens of "is this good for the game" that i think it shouldn't work like that.

And even then, it would not bother me in the least. Tables will vary, though.

You can get all kinds of computer items as lightly used(usuallt this means they have been used as show models in the store or have bee nrepaired as part of warranty) for cheaper then new ones with no performance issues what so ever.

That's where we differ. I don't see a cyberdeck as JUST a computer, or laptop. It's not TRULY ubiquitous; it's in the hands of an elite few with the skill and/or the money to use it (and, for some, put it together). It's also bleeding edge tech for the time. And, if we say that the components are the most important part of it, then it's less cost effective to sell a "used cyberdeck implant" than to take that used implant, rip out the guts, and turn them into just another non-implanted cyberdeck. As per fluff, used/unintended components cobbled together to make a cyberdeck are somewhat standard, and as such you could sell such a thing for full market value. By the argument of "Used reduces the price," you basically ENSURE that none will be found as part of Used Cyberware implants, unless performance is degraded accordingly. This is not "gently used" or "reconditioned." It is a fully-functional cyberdeck, harvested from a used implant that reduces its market value, put into a new, standard-or-better grade implant or normal cyberdeck shell, and sold for at least full market price.



This might be so for most computer items, but that would be the equivalent of commlinks. Cyberdecks are, by their nature (according to fluff), often cobbled-together from spare components and salvage. For runners, their standard grade cyberdeck is "spare parts and glue." That's the equivalent of buying a couple used laptops cheap ($100-200 each), combining the components and reconfiguring the architecture and programming, and then calling it a new, better laptop with higher capabilities (worth ~$2 000), because, at that point, it IS. And, as I stated above, if you have a "Used Implanted Cyberdeck," you stand to make much more money off of it by harvesting the cyberdeck parts, plugging it in to a Standard Implant or regular cyberdeck shell, and ordering some mojitos.

Except that in world, there are PRODUCTION MODELS of cyberdecks (Look at them, they are right there in the book). As such, you can get used ones. *shrug*
Now, any Hacker worth his salt probably made his own 'Deck that emulates those production models, but that is beside the point.

Speaking of, what are the rules like for putting together your own stuff?

Because we can say that. But we also like to believe any hacker worth his salt is writing his own code, and we saw how that worked in 4e...

Indeed, it worked out well... my Elite Hacker Wrote MOST of his programs (Including ALL of his Hacking Programs), and essentially built all of his Hardware.

Unfortunately, the B/R rules are cmopletely based upon GM Fiat (Since it all depends upon the GM's interpretation of the difficulty and interval required).



So, you can do it, and it will net you a savings, but it is all up to the GM. You also need to consult the Extended Test Intervals Table (Page 48, as indicated above) to determine the interval between rolls. I would consider Hardware/Software Rolls taking intervals from Average to Mammoth time frames, depending upon project. Apparently, from the example on page 146, fixing a sabotaged vehicle is an Average Interval (30 Minute Interval), even though the repair is deemed Hard (with a Threshold of 18). *shrug*

Of course, I assume it is 1/2 Cost in materials to do your own stuff (Hardware), but I could not find any verification of such. Obviously, Programs would not cost you anything but Time (and the tools required, of course).

It's likely that the rules went through a number of iterations before settling on the final product. It's forgivable to recall something incorrectly when it's sort of a niche question that's been changed several times.

-Wired_SR_AEGIS

If that's the case, then he shouldn't be taking questions on the ruleset before refreshing his memory on it, neh?

it means you have to think about how to fix somebody elses mistakes.

Sure, it never hurts to refresh on something prior to fielding questions on it. That, of course, is not a guarantee of total recall, mind you. But it's not a bad habit to get into.

-Wired_SR_AEGIS

Honestly I'm at a bit of an impasse. On one hand I'm happy that devs are here, they seem like nice people. On the other hand they shouldn't be treated like they're speaking "ex cathedra" or anything. On any friggin messageboard, their opinion counts as much as anyone else's, which is to say, there's no official word from anybody no matter who they are. On the gripping hand, nothing matters much until errata is posted...

Precisely why I said - it's not official until published. Even if it's just a PDF. I don't expect anyone associated with the project to be able to give me a concrete ruling unless they've had time to review the material and discuss with others exactly what the intent was. Especially since it obviously went through a number of changes. Hell, as is I wouldn't be surprised if the listed cyberware costs were for trolls back when they had to pay 50% more.