Haha! Epic. I disolved by 4th ED D&D books in Acid so that no-one would know what happened.

Players - Hey, let's play some 4th Ed.
Me - Ah... Ok. Oh where are the books? Oh well, Let's just play Pathfinder instead.

The only problem was that I needed a lot of acid because for Some reason WotC needed to release a new book for each feat/class/skill in the game..........

There is no 4th edition of D&D... It was just WotC pen and paper version of Everquest/WoW/<insert flavor of the month MMORPG>... and a poorly implemented version of it too. I like 3.5 edition of D&D. Yeah, it can get to be a power-gamer's dream, but if you have decent player who don't pull crap like that it can make it so that you can have the character YOU want, not some "12th level magic user" who is EXACTLY like another person's "12th level magic user".

Very Much in Agreement on this.

I dunno; I had mixed feelings about 4th. It was a nice change of pace that once you got to 5th level, all the other players weren't the mage's sidekicks. However, I could see how a mage-centric system would appeal to Shadowrun players...

Interesting take. In our last game, the magician was the Dwarven Warrior's Sidekick more than the other way around (DnD 3.5). But I do take your meaning. Hated, Hated. Hated 4th Edition, though. In good part because I despise miniatures and the rules that go with them. The fact that everyone was functionally the same sucked as well. Hated the system to the depths of its core. *shrug*

I agree calling it Dungeons & Dragons is a misnomer. It's not D&D, it's something else; a tactical board-game with some light RP elements. I didn't hate it, but I can see why others did. From what I've heard about 5th, it sounds like 4th is going to be an anomaly, and they're going back to their grognard roots.

Maybe... I did not like 5th (Participated in the Beta Testing). Hard to say why.
Probably because 3.5 works well for me, and I have all the books. I absolutely hate buying a new edition's worth of books.

To be fair, you'd have to specify which version of the 5th playtest you're talking about. There were incredibly huge differences between releases and I don't think anyone outside the designers know exactly which systems they're running with. The overall trend toward reducing numbers inflation, unnecessary rules complexity, and many of the largely irrelevant choices (see: hundreds of feats that do virtually nothing) bodes well for the edition and the brand as a whole. I love D&D3.x as much as anyone, but I find it pretty tedious sometimes.

Re: D&D4, the worst thing I can say about it is that it's tedious and requires too much bookkeeping and table management.

To swing back to SR, tedium is what destroys SR4 in my book. The primary culprit is the large number of extended tests that involve throwing gobs of dice over and over until success. By relying heavily on extended tests instead of opposed tests for a large number of systems, it pretty much codifies the idea that you'll always succeed at what you set your mind to (but you'll be bored of dice by the time you get there, see: buying anything ever). That's slow and unexciting.

SR5 solves a lot of that by bringing back time division (base time divided by successes).

An extended test of any size is rolled in one bot/dice program command. While the new system gives you a chance to fail even the simplest tasks, much less anything complex, as we have mathcrunched.

If the expected outcome is to succeed, regardless... Why are you rolling dice? Narrate and move on.

My experiences are obviously a bit different than yours, but I do understand your position.

Tedium accrues as an Edition progresses. SR5 will have the same issues over time, just like all of its predecessors did (after a certain point, new content starts to get overwhelming for some people). Core books are fairly robust by themselves, but as an edition progresses and more content is added, you gain more options. Those options by their very nature promote the tedium that you are speaking against.

Indeed...

Most dice can't run programs.



So? Isn't having a chance of failure why you use the dice in the first place?

And yet, Simple tests are exactly that... Simple.

Most phones can, though. Which millennium are you living in?

No, Extended tests are primarily used to determine the time it takes to complete the task. Simple ("Success") tests are used to determine success.

Problem: terrible system.
Solution: automate it so you don't have to see how terrible it is?

Sorry, no.



So you should have an expectation of success any time you start an extended test?

Without exception, I prefer 4th ed. rules.
Character creation was more customizable and easier.
Combat rules weren't as simultaneously complicated and nerfed.
Matrix rules were admittedly difficult, but the new rules take just as long and are every bit as convoluted.
5th ed. did not fix the melee problem and made Edge even more broken.
5th edition hates Riggers.

I'll admit 4th ed. had like 4 different versions, including anniversary and reprinted editions, but 5th ed. editing is poorly organized, cute when it should be clear and only consistent in how sloppy it is. I LOVE this game, but if there were a "Shadowfinder" spinoff that just simplified the matrix, limited magic a little and made some minor tweaks to combat - I'd totally buy it.

This is my experience with most extended tests in Shadowrun 4. Unless the time interval is crucial it's pretty much an auto pass. It definitely didn't feel right to me. That being said however it did improve my skills as a game master because it helped me re-evaluate some things. Do they really need to test here? If the test fails will it be interesting? Just why are all these extended tests happening when time is not really a factor?

The big change for me being that I started writing more runs with time crunches in them. This definitely increased tension. Had the side benefit of games not turning in to shopping sprees too.

That being said I should also state that my group did not stick with Shadowrun 4 for more than about five months.

There are pieces I definitely like/dislike from both. I will ignore comments about quality control (or lack there of) and play testing (or lack there of).

SR4A Pros:
- Build Point Character Generation
- Breadth of Source Books
- Technomancers are better than hackers in the virtual, but not the physical (at least not with a bunch of submersions)

SR4A Cons
- Stun spells are a game balance issue
- Social characters can definitely become a game balance issue

SR5 Pros
- Level 12 skills/limits
- Realignment of Active Skill (acting group, infiltration + shadowing = sneaking, etc)
- New social skills/group & limits make a face better balanced
- Armor & Damage adjustments
- Background count mechanic is much better
- Contact connection ratings 1-12, allowing more diversity
- Noise mechanic

SR5 Cons
- Price of decks
- According to fluff all decks are hacked together, but no rules to do so
- Ownership is a horrid mechanic
- Rigging has returned to SR3- mentality

Things the jury is still out on:
- Overall matrix rules for SR5. I liked SR4 and it worked very well for my group. There are definitely bad aspects to SR5 matrix, but also some good aspects.

if you consider the need to roll a bunch of dice to be "terrible". Apparently, judging by the number of people around here, a few gamers don't.
And yeah, if you find something tedious, you automate it. That's how we have been doing it for the last, what, half a thousand years?

Yes. When you start a project in your area of expertise, and you have time aplenty, you usually expect to succeed.

And further back we did essentially the same thing by making other people do it for us! *polishes his whip*

~Umi

It's not the need to roll a bunch of dice, it's the need to roll a bunch of dice ten times in a row to do one thing.



Or you build a less tedious system. It's a game, not an assembly line.

I am playing in an SR5 game now; however, if I were to take up the mantel of GM I also would revert back to SR4A. I have never been a fan of the priority system, and, I find that with this system there is a lot more edge and the basic rules have it refreshing after 8 hours of rest.

Okay, you can add "make your most burly Germanic slave roll the dice for you" to the recipes already provided.


Sure, go head. I wish you best of luck in this endeavour.

Or if you want, I can tell Gerhardt to make a less tedious system for you.

~Umi

Coming from someone who has spent at least the last 8 years learning CharOp in D&D 3.5, the last (however long it's been out) years learning D&D 4th and something close to two-ish years trying to learn Shadowrun 4th ed., things like that would be immensely helpful for newcomers like myself.

Being so used to my nerd-forums having a handbook section, it was more than a little daunting to try and figure stuff out here. I'd try my hand at it, if it weren't for the fact that I know far, far too little to say anything about it.

If I could, it'd be something like "Hacking and You - A Decker's Guide", detailing what attributes and skills you need to invest in, perhaps some pointers to useful skill specializations. Recommended gear; bio-/cyberware; other useful equipment and of course the major one; What you need to know about Comlinks (the stats, short description what the programs do etc), stuff like that.
Or maybe something like "Pornomancer? - Helpful hints on making a Face".


Ok, so that was way of topic. Ooops.

Bouncing Cactus,

Did you play Shadowrun 4th edition? If so did you find the build point system easier to understand than the priority system in Shadowrun 5th edition? (and editions prior to 4th).

Well, you can always check out the German guide for SR 101 ... the Google translation is hilarious. ^^

http://www.sr-nexus.de/bb/topic8958.html

SYL

I'm afraid that I can't be of much help, 4th edition was my introduction to Shadowrun and I have not had the opportunity to actually play it. I'm the always-the-DM-never-the-player around my parts and my friends have had limited desire to play it. From a system mastery standpoint, from what I've seen is that 5th is easier to use, but I think I prefer the build point system. Alas, I've had very little experience with 5th.

Whereas a number of players, myself included, see the character creation changes and increase of deadliness in combat to be features rather than negatives. As always, your mileage may vary.



The point build system allows a lot of creative flexibility, true. I, however, really prefer the priority system as it requires meaningful tradeoffs in character creation. The 4e point-based system made it entirely too easy to build characters whose power chart had no true lows and very, very high peaks.

Well first off, "terrible system" served many of us very well for an entire edition, but yes - there are a lot of things that become good ideas if there is no effort involved. Looking up every word I type in a dictionary as I go along would be "a terrible system", but because my computer is doing it automatically right now, I use such a system. Quantitative differences become qualitative, with enough quantity.



If you're going to criticise a system, at least check the rules. SR4A., pg.64:



So if it's a task that you should be able to complete given long enough, e.g. building the Great Wall of China, you just keep rolling. If it's a task that might not be achievable by you, e.g. repairing a car, then you use the diminishing pool. It's spelled out very clearly at the beginning of the book under Extended Tests.

And to answer the OP's question - SR4A without a doubt. It's mature, has all the holes filled in so you're not waiting on errata or supplements, is an excellent system. Some things appear broken at first glance, e.g. Possession and Direct Damage spells, but when you actually apply all the rules and keep things realistic, it works well. A lot of things in Shadowrun are features, not bugs. E.g. the eggshells armed with hammers system design is what leads to so much subterfuge and tactical play. It's one of the best systems that I've ever used.

Knasser o.O
You're back! o.o
Long time no see ^^

I basically walked when people like Ancient History and Synner who helped make SR4 what it was, were getting shafted by CGL and the embezzlement affair. There was an influx of what can only be fairly described as "loyalists" were flooding in from BattleTech forums and the whole place was starting to feel like something from the V for Vendetta movie. When CGL actually managed to retain the licence, I was so disgusted I departed. It combined with an implosion of my own game when I found a player had been cribbing my plot notes behind my back and that was it. Haven't touched Shadowrun for three years. Looked back in out of curiosity and found that people are still misunderstanding the rules.

I expected to see a big load of discussion about SR5, but the place is dead.

Yeah, SR5 has . . not been well received here from what i can gather . .
Still, nice to see you're still well ^^

The biggest discussion of SR5 has, sadly, been tracking down the misprints and outright contradictions in the rules. CGL's 'quality control' and 'editing' were essentially non-extant, and it requires fairly heavy houseruling to even be functional.

That said, it has the bones of a good system, if and when they actually errata the damn thing.

I gathered from DrZaius' PitFight thread (which I enjoyed), that the old initiative system is back - i.e. score high, keep subtracting ten until people run out of goes. I always preferred that system so that's a plus. And I don't quite get Limits in detail, but I had a house rule in SR4A that hits on a Matrix Test would get capped by Logic (to stop the idiot hackers with great software syndrome), if it is similar to that, it doesn't sound like a bad idea.

it's kinda sorty maybe a little bit like that . .
but for everything else too. and there are different limits for everything else too.
and different things interact differently with different limits. and pools are still there.
and it's basically the SR3 Damage-System again too. The Armor-System is more like it was in SR3 too.
but i think they got rid of the ballistic/impact part.

technically, this is more SR3.5 than it is $R4.5A *hides*


also, there are at least 2 ways a decker can make himself impossible to attack that i can think up from the top of my head.

Humph. I don't know why I'm acting surprised. This is the sort of thing I thought would happen when I left a few years ago.



Well there were always ways to make yourself invulnerable to hacking in SR4A. The issue was that by doing so, you made it impossible to be effective. E.g. you can turn off all wireless but you lose all sorts of capabilities, you can make your research computer entirely safe from Runners hacking it, but then it's also almost useless for your employees as well. I'm kind of tempted to get hold of this so I can take a look, but I don't really want to give CGL any money since the debacle.

No no, you can use these tricks and still have wireless going.
The only times you are vulnerable is when you attack something.
But other than that, yes, you can have your cake and eat it too.

One of these tricks has been acknowledged.
And instead of it being errataed, it is simply banned in mission play.
Because, you know, the rules are not good for (semi)official games.

The difference between D&D 3.5 charop and SR charop is immense primarily because SR has all of its options in one book. You don't need to browse through hundreds of feats that give +2 to nosepicking rolls after you've jumped looking for the one feat that will tie your build together in Complete Whatevers; you don't have to pick up spells in obscure books looking for the most optimal setup of them, etc. You just open Core, Arsenal, RC and the book pertaining to your archetype, and choose the options you want.
SR5 is even more that way right now, while it yet only have one serious book.

And really, I would personally recommend skipping most of Runners Companion. There's far too much dubious stuff in there. Another nice thing with SR vs. D&D is the comparative lack of power-creep. Arsenal and Street Magic offer cool things, but they remain for the most part, quite well balanced with core. Especially if you're using the errata for SR4 (which is all incorporated in SR4A anyway). It's great to open Street Magic or Augmentation and create a Possession mage or add a custom cyberlimb. But if you spend equal build points on just stuff from the core book, you still end up with something balanced against someone with access to the others. With D&D - not so much.

(N.b. the above assumes you are leaving out Runner's Companion which contains some real howlers).

Yeah, the Limits are pretty explicitly a solution to the massive problem 4e had with people stacking up enough circumstance bonuses and dice pools to stage up a sneeze well beyond the ability of anything to soak. In play, I like them, because you'll rarely run into them. The whole thing essentially forces players to make more rounded characters, as the ceiling for optimization is a lot lower as starting characters.

Once you get going in-game, there are ways to raise your limits, but most of them aren't practical at chargen.

I never really had such a problem with SR4A. I'm not quite sure what you mean. Can you give me an example?

Pornomancer is the most obvious problem child of the dice inflation monster of SR4.

I don't know if you should really use Dumpshock as a good benchmark for how successful or how well SR5 is. I recall coming here when I started SR4, and everyone was talking about how great SR3 was compared to 4th, so I think nostalgia goggles are always going to make the previous version look better than it may really be.

Riggers are their own archetype again. The Matrix works kind of like a combo of Astral and Matrix, with the optional security tally from Unwired. You no longer go into nodes. The Matrix is kind of like astral space with devices floating around. Deckers and Technomancers are both masters of the Matrix, but do it different enough, so they don't step on each other's toes. They added Alchemy, so you can now make potions or magical exploding items, which is pretty fun. They also nerfed direct spells, so they're not a one shot wonderfest with no drain. They made indirect spells drain reasonable, so they're now the go to spells. You don't cap as quickly as in SR4 because skills now go up to 12.

I like it. I think they addressed a lot of the shortcomings of SR4's system. But that's me, everyone else hates it.

Pornomancer build I recall well enough. It's just that binarywraith talked about staging up a sneeze to the degree that nothing could soak it. I never had any problem like that. The best I can really think of that this translates to is a gun-bunny with a light pistol against someone lightly armoured. Even then they're going to struggle to one-shot someone but quite frankly a person who is an incredibly highly trained marksman (anything skill rating 5 upwards) at short range ought to be able to kill a lightly armoured Sec Guard.

Pornomancer is really an exceptional case that doesn't really work elsewhere (a large part of its dice come from modifiers that are only available in that area like Kinesics) and it takes an absurd degree of specialisation to achieve. Basically a character that would die in short order in any reasonable game due to their hyper-focus on persuasion. Even then, it doesn't really do what it says it does. Yes, it will win any opposed social roll without modifiers. But firstly that doesn't make you able to make people do anything you want and secondly, there are always going to be lots of modifiers. Pornomancer is a thought exercise. You can build it (with Karma), but it's just going to die in an actual game. But anyway, it was the suggestion that there were "massive" problems in combat in SR4A that intrigued me. I ran the game for a long time and had no such problems. And yes - I had a min-maxed troll archer in the game along with other quite optimized characters.



Well yeah, I remember it too, but there were convincing arguments in favour of 4th to oppose the edition inertia. Anyway, I'm not using Dumpshock to guage its success. Only whether I would like it or not. There's enough factual information given here for me to know I would not. Anyway, it's so quiet here compared to how it used to be that there's not enough sample size to tell if it's popular or not either way. I'm just saying to the OP that given SR4A is a mature game with a load of supplements and all the kinks worked out, and SR5 seems its riddled with gaps and issues awaiting errata, I'd probably suggest they stick with SR4A just for that.



I can see the appeal of not capping as quickly. I dislike the sound of Alchemy because "No Magic Items" was always one of the core features of Magic in the Shadowrun setting. I.e. even things like Weapon Foci still required a magician to actually use them which was why you could have no such things as ranged weapon foci spears or guns, etc. The moment it broke from the wielding magician's aura, nada.

Matrix without nodes is weird. So I can no longer build nice layered networks for the places the team infiltrate? We used to have fun with those. Oh well, all academic to me. I appreciate you taking the time to explain, but I'm afraid some basic elements of 5th (reversions to decking for example) mean I'll stick with 4th if I run it again.



Hey, good for you. I wish you a lot of fun with it.

Peace,

K.

To be fair, SR4 did away with Matrix mazes too. So its a house rule for nested nodes to make a quasi-matrix dungeon. Technically, you can still do that with Hosts in SR5, by putting hosts within hosts, but that's not how its suppose to work by RAW. Honestly, the Matrix is already such a slog with a million extended tests in SR4, that making a virtual dungeon just means you have to add more extended tests, and for what purpose? To slow down the hacker so they have to roll even more times to open a door or get some paydata? Its an unnecessary bottleneck.

SR5 still has some Matrix bottlenecks, but almost all of them are just oppose tests now, so if you're skilled enough and got the stats, then you can blow through most of them, pretty quickly. If you're not so skilled, you'll die because GOD will converge on you before you can finish a hack.

Alchemy may not be what you think it is. Its basically casting a spell on an item. You have to be a mage or mystic to do this still, and they still have to soak drain as normal. Like wise the preparation only lasts hits in hours, and will begin to degrade hits for every hour if not used. So there is a time limit on them, they aren't magical weapons for mundanes. Like wise, there are two ways you can trigger them. One is by aura contact. The other is by the caster triggering it, which they have to have LoS to do that.

Well, power creep is present in SR4 (take FFBA, or the customized cyberlimbs you mentioned, or the nanomagics).
On the other hand, charop can be easily done in D&D on Core material: pick straight caster, get the good old broken cheese like the shapeshifting spells.


Actually, hackers still go into nodes in SR5, they're just not physical any more. And wait, you're actually listing it as a positive effect? You honestly have no problems with SR5, where an extendable baton extends the fastest if given a wireless command?


Mechanically, it's a good change. From the believability standpoint, however, omnipresent GOD is at best surprising.

Uh-huh, and it has always been there, despite not being mentioned in the last twenty years. Or they implemented a new Astral, same as they ported over the Matrix to the new foundational architecture overnight.

Its a mechanic. Its not designed to perfectly simulate real life. The idea is that with DNI, you are able to ready it so fast that it doesn't seem like anything. And in comparison that pressing a button or flicking your wrist to extend a baton seems slow in comparison. Its like how programs degrade over time in SR4, rather than have forever inflating program ratings, what ends up happening is that new programs come out that make your old programs look slow and clunky in comparison.

Honestly, all the "drama" around the wireless bonuses honestly seem like people looking for any reason to hate the new system to me. Its not even constructive criticism; it's nit picking.




Well, you have to assume the entire process is automated. Its not like you even see a demiGOD when you get hit with convergence.



Who says that Alchemy isn't something new? How do you explain the universal theory of magic in SR4 or how do you explain how grounding just magically went away? How is that any more unbelievable than someone discovering Alchemy and it becoming widely publicized and people finding out about it. Hell, it can easily be explained with rising mana levels. Do you just hate using your imagination to try and figure out why things are the way they are?

Wireless bonuses are not based on DNI, and do not require it. Had they been about DNI, I'd have zero issue with them, and I doubt anyone would.
Hell, they're only called "wireless" bonuses, too - what they require is not even just wireless connection (which'd already be retarded since apparently skinlinks and wires stopped working for signal transmission), it's connection to the Matrix (Core5, p.421). They are specifically said there not to work in dead zones, even.
How can you possibly argue your points when you don't know what you're arguing for?

There is indeed little space for constructive criticism for something making so little sense outside of purely gamist justifications.
See the examples. An implanted cyberspur extends quicker if you give the command over wireless, as opposed to DNI. As per the example in Core, assault rifles hit better because a wireless connection provides them with data for wind corrections and whatnot - and it works the same in top-secret corp labs, too. You can brick an implant, but fixing it is only described in gamemechanical terms (unlike what Cratias claimed when he threw that hysterical fit claiming that I'd accused him of lying). Etc.

Automated or not, corps are de-facto handing some of the control over their networks to an external organization. Any corp would sooner eat its heart out.

Nothing says it is, and same as price adjustments and what have you, the mechanics "have always been this way" usually.
If you read the splats for the editions before the fourth, the universal theory is an in-universe groundbreaking research, which is mentioned as such a few times.

Where is that mentioned? That'd be a revolutionary development, after all.
Why weren't the characters from the previous cycle aware of its appearance to come, if it's tied to rising mana levels?
No, I just hate half-baked fluff decisions as much as I hate half-baked crunch, and this strikes me as one - same as a worldwide switch to new foundational Matrix architecture (at all; and in relative secret; and almost overnight).

So you might not need DNI, but you still need some kind of Matrix input. And seeing how you need a free action; this can be interpreted as thinking with DNI, voice command using a subvocal mic, or some kind of hand gesture with AR gloves. While, sure the rules don't specifically say you need an input, it also doesn't say you need to breathe, but I think its a safe assumption that you need a way to get oxygen in your bloodstream to live, just as you need a way to transmit a Matrix command to a wireless device.

As for skinlinks, just because they're not in the core book, doesn't mean they'll never be back. They were ripe for player abuse anyway, so it makes sense to leave it for a later book.

And for Matrix dead zones. If you don't have your wireless bonuses, then neither does the opposition. Do you REALLY need those free actions or extra dice pool, or else your entire archetype stops working? You can't say that wireless bonuses are mandatory, while saying a moment later that they're useless and everyone will run with their wireless off all the time to avoid being hacked. You can't have it both ways, its one or the other.



Give me a page number. I don't see where it says cyberspurs have a wireless bonus. It gives wireless commands as an example to activate, but it doesn't say its a requirement, or that its faster then a muscle reflex to activate.

Also, the core book is pretty light on fluff on how to repair electronics. I don't see why you need a fluff reason for every rule. Do you think that this core book is the only book that will be released? Or do you think they'll not actually go into detail in a supplement? I like fluff as much as the next guy, but even SR4's core book was light on how every little thing worked. Are you going to hold that against SR4 as well? Example; Everything in SR4 is wireless, even cyberware, how does that work? How do you turn off wireless? Why would you turn it off? How do you turn it on? etc etc. SR4 forced you to be wireless on all the time, but many people just straight up ignored it, and suddenly are damning SR5 for actually giving you a mechanical reason for it. So would you rather have fluff telling you your cyberarm can be hacked, or would you rather at least get some bonus for it before being hacked?



You realize that GOD is a division of the Corporate Court, right? And that all corporations, big or small have to follow by the CC's rules, and only the Big 10 can make CC policies. They didn't surrender anything. Everyone was a hacker in SR4, this clearly is a large security problem. So they had GOD roll out new protocols to prevent so many security holes. Not to mention there are a lot more Matrix threats now, with AIs, free sprites, technocritters, and technomancers. Does it make sense for them to leave an open and free Matrix when a damn ocelot can break into your top secret research facility? It makes sense that corp would try to crack down on this. and close as many loopholes in the system as possible.

Of course you can say, "but there are still loopholes to exploit." Of course there are, the Big 10 need Shadowrunners still. So they probably intentionally left holes in the system. Which I assume GOD was not happy about. But corp need Shadowrunners, because they need to know what their rivals are doing. So they equip their runner's with decks or other ways to subvert security to do their job, which of course makes themselves vulnerable to those same runner's. But that's the price you gotta pay when you need your deniable assets to be deniable and you need to know what the other corps are doing.



Do you honestly think that the Magic book won't go into detail? Where in SR4's core rulebook does it talk about the importance of the universal theory of magic? After all, it's really important, right?



Did you miss Stormfront? Or all the events that led to Stormfront? I guess it makes sense that the new Matrix would catch you by surprise if you stopped buying books and weren't keeping up with the metaplot. But can you really fault CGL for that?

As for alchemy, that's how all magic is explained. Tell me, why is grounding spells gone? Give me the fluff for that. Are you really upset that they took out the ability to nuke people from astral?

And flicking an AR switch for an extendable baton is faster than flicking a physical one why, exactly? Why does flicking an AR switch require a functional Matrix uplink?

If they're back (as a replacement for wireless for getting wireless bonuses), the whole conception of wireless bonuses for exposing yourself to a hacker attack will be senseless.

I'm not sure you're following. The thing is, wireless bonuses are not for having your devices communicate with each other wirelessly. They're for them being connected to the Matrix. It takes less time to extend a baton not because you can give it a wireless order (which is ridiculous, but makes at least a modicum of sense), but because it's connected to the wider network. And that wider network is at the same time a fascist uber-controlled area, and is providing your assault rifle with the sensor data needed to shoot the owners of the sensors.

It's actually cyberholsters, p.457. My bad, but the essence of the argument stays the same.

There is a mechanic for bricking implants (which means a sammy has, what, a couple dozen health bars - so much for being rules light!). However, despite the fact that a few implants are completely internal, there is no explanation whatsover how they can be repaired without surgery; common sense does not help here, unlike in the aforementioned breathing case. Neither is there any explanation why would the implants, despite being bricked, retain some of their functionality.

By pressing a button.

You realize the Big Ten are at each others' throats constantly, right? They're surrendering part of their security to an organization affiliated with their most bitter rivals.

Same as at the start of the WMI, except maybe for the technocritters. Except if you look at their stats, they don't hold as much of a threat as it's presented.