As a result of a disagreement in another thread, I sent an inquiry to info(at)shadowrunrpg.com about a couple of matters. I am including my original email, along with the official response for discussion. Both messages remain in their original state, and are not edited in content.

Great. Clears that up for future reference. Just out of curiosity, did it take them like a month give or take to answer your question? It either took me one or two months to get an answer, I can't remember.

Considering the thread in question was yesterday, I don't think it took a month. There has been much improvement at the info@shadowrun.com from what I can tell. However, as noted, these are just suggestions, not canon answers (yet anyway).

Oy.

So an adept purchases Improved Sense (Ultrasound Vision). He then buys cybereyes. According to these house rules, he loses the power even if it's not described as being visual in any way whatsoever. Another adept takes Improved Sense (Protective Covers) and describes it as a second eyelid like Spock had in Star Trek... but those get ripped out the moment he has a new set of eyes installed (but magically reappear if he has cloned replacements). Yet another adept takes Improved Sense (Thermographic) which he describes as being heat sensors near his nose, sorta like a rattlesnake... but poof, a pair of cybereyes remove that one, too.

And why limit it to cybereyes? Another adept purchases Improved Sense (Select Sound Filter), describing it as a meditative focus that allows him to hear only what he wants ot hear. He then has cyberears installed. Baloop, there goes that power. Same exact logic is in play; the adept has his natural ears replaced with cybernetic ones, thus he should be unable to use any natural hearing advantage he has (which isn't an issue under normal circumstances since no metahuman type has any natural augmented hearing ability).

Just more poorly concieved house rules to ignore, doubly so if/when they come out in the FAQ.

Please try to be a little more consistant, Funk.

If Ultrasound vision must be a Vision mod even for adepts, then Thermographic vision must be a vision mod as well.

If the GM approved the Ultrasound by ruling that Ultrasound need not be technologically based, that somehow the adept's eyes produce and recieve ultrasound, yes, he should lose that Ultrasound vision if he gets cyber eyes.

If he had ruled instead that Ultrasound as a Improved Sense is linked instead to hearing, then no, he does not lose that power.

Same thing for thermographic vision. Except that there is nothing even remotely linking thermographic vision to another sense. Themosense is by itself a seperate sense.

IMHO, the adept shouldn't lose the powers anyways. He's paid for those cybereyes with essence, and that makes them subject to all his benefits from magic. If an adept get muscle replacement and improved strength, they stack. Why should eyes be any different?

The power isn't so much in his eyes, but in his mind, at least in my opinion. Rather than just being tethered to the meat eyeballs (and magically restored when he gets new organic ones), those powers are a part of his essence(which pays for the cyber).

From a game balance perspective, I see no problem either. Really, most adepts will want the natural stuff anyways, as they get it at the highest rating and can cram in all they want in their eyes.

Doc, I'm iffy on that method of description as it makes it plausible that the Adept using the non-visual Thermovision could get around the Blind flaw.

~J

toturi: That rule would apply to all adept powers that affect your (cyber)limbs. That includes but is not limited to Killing Hands, Nimble Fingers, Improved Ability (any that deal with hand/arm movements in any degree), Smashing Blow, and Traceless Walk (for legs/feet).

Have a cyberarm but describe your Killing Hands as being chaneled through your legs? Doesn't matter. Ditto for all the other powers.

The above opinion from Shadowfaq is a specific one, there has been no blanketing that I can see. You are extrapolating from the above ruling, which is fine, but extrapolating gets more inaccurate the further you move from the point of extrapolation.

To reply:
Improved Scent is a Improved Sense ability, if Improved Scent is a cyber enhancement in a cyber nose, when adept gets his cyber nose, he loses the Improved Scent.

Also if Improved (Skill) is part of a cyber replacement, then if adept gets cyber replacement, he loses Improved (Skill).

I was touching on your extrapolations. My first sentence of the last post is accurate either way. Doesn't matter how you describe the cybernetic vision mod you're mimicking (rules-wise) with Improved Sense. You get a cybereye, you lose it. End o' story.

No, you were replying to Shev in reference to his view on why the Improved Sense powers should still work. In response, you said:

And I was running off Shev's extrapolation in that the ruling could be applied to Improved Strength and Muscle Replacement.

Dr. Funkenstein, please help me with this. My job is difficult enough trying to give advice to people who ask for it without having to contend with people who extend it beyond what was my meaning and then complain bitterly about their extensions. (By the way, this is a standard tactic during political races.)

Consider an Adept power that provides 'natural thermographic vision' to an Adept. I *interpret* this as meaning 1) the eye has cones and rods that react to a lower-frequency of light than is normal for humans and 2) the brain interprets these additional signals. If you install a cybereye with no sensors for the lower-frequency light there is nothing for the brain to 'see'. That's my *interpretation* of how the Adept Power works, and why it is lost if CyberEyes are implanted.

Can you help me? Please write up a better answer to Fortune that I can post on the online FAQ that follows my interpretation.

Thank you.

-- ShadowFaq. Post #1.

Er, is this legit? Admins, can we get a call?

~J

ookay uh what happens if the adept takes the power after he gets the cyber?

If the Adept has CyberEyes, how would taking the Adept Power change what frequencies of light the sensors in the Cybereyes can 'see'? Let's leave out getting the Thermo Vision option for the Cybereyes, lets just argue the Adept Power.

That is the subject of my third question, to which the response was basically 'He can't'.

The reason the ruling is specific to cybereyes is because the question did not mention other senses.

I would assume that if an Adept has Improved Sense: Glands-on-his-nose-that-resembles-thermographic-vision, then replacing his eyes wouldn't affect that sense, as it isn't eyes related, but is related to the glands on the nose. If these were replaced cybernetically, the the Adept would lose the magical sense.

There has been no canon ruling in regards to Improved Sense: Ultrasonic vision, or if there has, I missed it. As such, it can be ruled to work in whatever mysyical, non-technological manner you'd like, and is not strictly limited to cybereyes.

I think the problem is semantics. Doc is saying that if a sense is listed as being a cybereye mod, then by canon that sense has to exactly correspond to the Adept's eyes. I read the canon as saying that the Improved Sense Power can mimic any sense (non-tech) available through cyber (or bio). it does not state how this sense is mimiced, nor are any limitations implied other than the technical caveat.

Of course this leaves entirely aside the debate over whether an ultrasound emitter can accurately be describes as a "sense" as well... how 'bout we just leave Ultrasound Vision and Thermosense out of the thread entirely, hmm?

I didn't bring it into the thread, and was one of the people that pointed to that very lack of info in regards to UV.

Only based upon what you were complaining about in the other thread, Fortune. In that thread, I was saying the same thing you're now claiming; Improved Sense does not have to correspond exactly with the cybernetic equivalence. Just because it's normally a cybereye accessory (Thermographic Vision, Ultrasound Vision, etc.), that doesn't mean the Improved Sense mimicking its effects has to originate from his natural eyes.

But like I said earlier in this thread, if they do choose one that's focused on their eyes, then yeah, I'm completely behind having them lose it if they replace their eyes.

I just don't care for these blanket rules, that's all. I'd be just as up in arms if there was a FAQ/quasi-FAQ entry that said Killing Hands *had* to be focused on your hands and/or Partial Cyberlimbs would completely nullify it.

So adepts are mutants now? then des increased att strength make you bulkier? does strength boost turn you green and stupid? I was under the impression that adept powers were magical in nature, not variant mutant rules from the ones in critters

I don't think they were meant to be 'blanket rules' as opposed to being answers to my (in hindsight) too specific questions.

I think they can be easily extrapolated out to include (logical) sense loss for the respective cybernetic replacements, which with ears could be argued back and forth on an individual basis.

Also remember (this isn't to you Doc) that this ruling is only for full cybernetic replacement, not retinal mods, which should be totally compatable with any Adept Powers.

Doc ... I'm surprised you have no comment about the answer to question 1, and its (possible) inclusion in upcoming canon.

I will admit I like the balance advantage from this but I see a can of worms being opened by it

of course the answer to 1 opens can of worms "why the listings for eyelights and natural low light in the vis mod table?" my ruling is that retinal mod eye lights were more like skull lights

EDIT (and corrected -- dyslexia strikes again): Yes, he did, but as far as I'm concerned it's his answer that's flawed, not the way he says it.

In my opinion, that one is a better answer considering the purpose and nature of a FAQ. FAQs aren't -- shouldn't -- be a place where one semi-anonymous guy (much as I may respect him outside of such dealings) gets to throw down a bunch of house rules and thus give them a semi-official standing. They should answer the questions based upon the published material first, and offer suggestions on how to resolve situations not covered by that material without violating said material or inventing new rules second.

As far as I'm concerned, flat out saying that adepts should lose their Improved Sense because that's how the one semi-anonymous guy decided to interpret the rules is inappropriate for an official FAQ.

See, that's his job. He's specifically there to make official rulings and post them under the Official FAQ (because, as you say, the Errata is for correcting mistakes in the text itself).

>>>Insert partial threadjack here<<<

Shadowfaq: I must admit to disagreeing with a few of your rulings. I was hoping however to have an honest discussion about this with you at some point to openly share views, crunch numbers, and talk about such things like rules interpretations and similar. If you would be amenable to such please PM me with a way to contact you on a IRc channel, on MSN on AIm or on Yahoo, hell on ICQ if nothing else... and please add in good times (and relavent time zone) to get in touch.

Awaiting your reply with some anticipation

Kremlin K.O.A.

>>>We now return you to your regularly schedualed thread<<<

Still, ultimately someone has to make the ruling, and put it somewhere. You know by now that I don't agree with all of the rulings contained therein (especially called shots!), just like I don't agree with all the core rules. I do think there needs to be an official ruling on certain things (for Shadowrun: Missions and the like), even if it's only a basis for comparison when making up one's own house rule. The present location for such is the Official Shadowrun FAQ. The official rules format might change in the future (and that would be a good thing in my opinion), but as it stands, it's all we've got in the way of anything that can be considered 'official'.

Ideally if they do insist on putting them together, it'd be nice if they clearly answered the question and then clearly offered a house rule. Using my response to #1 above, something like this would be cool:

Official Answer: Normally, such as in the case of Eye Datajacks and Eye Laser Systems, the Game Effects specify if a retinal modification is only available if the user has a replacement cybereye. While this is hinted at in the description for Eye Light Systems, you'll note that the Game Effects section makes no such mention. Likewise, the Visibility Modifiers Table (p. 49, M&M) have an entry for natural Low-Light Vision modified for Eye Light Systems. It thus seems fairly clear that the original authors intended Eye Light Systems to be available as a retinal modification. Another portion of the descriptive text also goes out of its way to mention that the implant produces a very low amount of heat, which seems to reinforce that intention as well.

Unofficial Answer: Personally, I don't share that belief and if the topic came up in my game, I would alter the Game Effects for Eye Light Systems so that they included the cybereye stipulation that other similar implants have. As far as the Visibility Modifiers Table goes, the entry for natural Low-Light Vision w/ Eye Light Systems would be treated as a mistake and removed.

(Format look a little familiar?)

I'd have no problem with that (although I'd switch the responses )

Er, I'm not really sure how you could, actually. I'd say the preponderance of evidence is in Doc's corner, and thus must be the "Official" answer. On a similar vein, the famed "Option 2" for called shots in the FAQ is also an "Unofficial" answer, because there is absolutely no concrete evidence for it in the book at all.

That said, Funk, you are being rather unfair to the "Unofficial" answer. There *is* a note made in the flavor text entry for eyelights which assumes that they are exclusively a cybereye accesory. You will note that the bonuses for LL+eyelights and Natural LL+eyelights don't really "line up" well with the bonuses in the low-light/natural low-light column, which indicates to me that the eyelights were thrown in as little more than an afterthought anyway. The arguent does exist, even if it's technically not as well supported by the RAW. Simply dismissing it out of hand like that is just as dishonest as using your opinion in place of fact, which is what you objected to in the first place.

Considering we are discussing the response from a person (ShadowFAQ) who does have the capacity to give an 'official ruling' as far as canon goes, and considering his ruling is exactly opposite that which Doc wrote, I don't see how you can claim Doc's answer in any way 'official'.

As was even written in the quote (in the first post), ShadowFAQ's ruling was submitted for inclusion in the next printing of M&M.

I claim it as official in the sense that it's what is written in the book. No offense to ShadowFAQ, but after the "ruling" on Called Shots that's included on the website I refuse to consider his/their opinions any more valid than the Wizards Customer Service rulings for D&D games. Note that I am *not* dissing the ruling on Called Shots included on a more recent emailing that has been posted here btw; that one is actually pretty good, so the FAQ guy(s) may actually be improving.

Either way, though, I'm still going to rely more on what the books say than some guy who may or may not be able to make official rulings on anything and everything ever written by Fanpro. And the books say that Funk is right, whatever opinion this guy may have on the matter.

To be fair, the called shot ruling in the FAQ was made by Rob Boyle, the current Line Developer of Shadowrun (ie. The Man in charge).

The books actually can be read to say either view is right, hence the need for the question in the first place. The books are unclear on the matter, so Doc's answer is in no way 'better backed by canon' than the opposite response.

yeah well apparently ShadowFAQ is a new FAQ guy, so let's all give him a chance, kay?

Even if God Himself came down from Heaven, with angels trumpetting his coming and sinners wailing in anguish as his stare, and made the Called Shot ruling on the website I'd *still* ignore it. So you can keep your Rob Boyle, and I'll live in a world where a sammie with a hold-out *can't* use a Called Shot to destroy a main battle tank in one shot.

As for eyelights, the actual canon issue is very clear: by page 44M&M, "Unless stated otherwise, any eye modification can be purchased as a retinal modification for natural eyes or as a cyber modification for cybereyes." Further, at no less than two other places in the same book this rule was specifically invoked to ensure that noone would take an eye datajack or eye laser as a retinal modification. This condition was not met for eyelights, so therefore by canon eyelights can be a retinal modification as per the general rule on p.44. Now, should they be or were they intended to be only cybermods... that's a question that's very much up for debate. But unless it's an actual official errata I'm not going to just accept some random guy's word over what it says in my book unless he's my GM.