I have a question on gaming ethics for you. Again, my players should hit "back" on their browser right about now.

Thanks for input.

If the player gets a chance to free his character of the addiction it's ok imo.

That is a tough one. Did the character agree to the flaws and use the extra points? Then yes, go ahead. But hit him for the essence (delta grade to be fair).

The player built his character and freely chose "Scorched" and "Mysterious Cyberware" as Flaws. He got the points for them and spent them on stuff.

The cranial 'deck is Epsilon-grade and it costs 0 Essence.

I'd have to agree with jray. I would at least take away the essence of delta-grade cyberdeck.

Don't see a problem with switching out the flaws.

Yeah. I'd hit him for the essence loss as well. As far as the addiction 'flaw' goes, I'm pretty sure if you're hooked to a substance as a flaw you have to buy it off with Karma as oppossed to using the addiction rules. I could be wrong on that though, it's been awhile sense I read the addiction flaw. He may have to overcome it using the addiction rules as well as buying it off. Effectively he'd be hooked in two ways, once by the flaw and then once more by the substance values.

The reason I'd tag him for the essence loss is because presumably he'd have access to the deck after he found out about it and the Agent bailed.

If you decide to give him a different flaw though he should still be hooked just off the addiction values from the substance rules.

If I got a hot cranial cyber-deck in exchange for a long haul addiction, I wouldn't bitch. That's the plan, right?
Once the Agent is gone, the deck belongs to the character, but he's got a harsh addiction. Hell yea, I'd consider the character to be coming out way ahead.

Swap it for "Borrowed time" as the addiction rules are very deadly on players. However, the change of flaws should be at the players choice, not the Gm's expect in certian situations. BTW, I am a big ffan of 0-essence plot devices like this, but I rarely let them into PC hands.

if your player gets pissed, he should go back to d&d. especially since he made this character with those flaws. basically he gave you the leeway to do it.

the only thing you are obligated to do is, as grinder said, allow him a means to kick the habit. you might also look into another flaw, such as amnesia, say the agent didn't want the character to remember anything, so it attempted to wipe his memory to keep him from seeking revenge.

i'd also hit him for some essence. the amount could be small, but you don't get mysterious cyberware and have essence6. i'd also let him get checked out by a doctor for his habit and maybe get scanned. then give him the option to have surgery for a useable pieceo f cyber since the "flaw" portion of the cyber has played it's part and is being replaced with the addiction or whatever.

do what you feel you need to do to advance the plot, but don't make it an absolute. if he wants to get the deck out, or use it as it is, allow it to happen. make it hard if you must, but don't say "no, because i said so."

i'm sure you'll both enjoy wherever it leads.

Actually, I should have mentioned this as it's pretty damned important: the Agent will completely burn the deck on the way out. No zero-essence cranial deck for this PC. It will be scrap.

there you go.

i'd make something indicative of that process, maybe drop his intelligence by a oint. that's easy enough for the player to deal with, he just needs an extra 12 karma and it's over with.

who knows. but in answer to the first question, i'd say you're fine. and if he does get pissed, too bad. it's a game.

I like the idea of amnesia too. I've never seen it picked up in game before.

*Imagines telling said player, "By the way, you now have a four point amnesia flaw, hand over your character sheet. Here's a blank one, as you start to remember your skills you can fill that one out."*

sounds like if the agent is plotting against the character, it's more along the lines of an advanced SK. If it can plot against a character, that's border line sentience. I'd say leave him addicted, but not with the flaw that he has to buy his way out of with karma. He did take the flaws, so he gets the points, but make them in mental flaws, such as amnesia, or combine a few, like uncouth (he begins to act erratically) and jack itch, or a severe phobia, megalomaina, OCD, something to that effect. And make him work off the addiction in game with role playing and some rolls to see if he can beat it. If not, he ends up a burned out junkie.

it's just that mysterios cyber flaw doesn't make a character unplaable, and a drug addiction that he needs to buy off with 40-odd karma does. So give him something in it's place that he can roleplay with, and have him go to rehab for the drugs, or whatever.

Don't give him the deck. Have it burn out. Also, give it the essence rating of all the sessence the player has left minus 0.1, or 1 if he has more than one point left.

Also, I like the idea of a mixed addicition/amnesia flaw, especially taking his character sheet.

fistandantilus3.0: Those are all excellent points, thanks for bringing them up. You're right, an Agent isn't nearly advanced enough to do this. An SK who's one small "X-factor" away from becoming an AI is more appropriate.

I also like the creative use of psychological and behavioural Flaws...

I'm just glad you didn't call me 'Fist'

Another thought I was having btw, a fragmented personality. Could be a total pain in the hoop, or a lot of fun, depending on how it's done.

Are you planning on not letting them access the cyber still? Could be an interesting way for the character to develop into a decker, especially in SR4 with the augmented reality. Assuming you cross over of course.

Actually, he's already a decker--with his own, fully functional cranial cyberdeck no less.

I feel that you as the GM is doing something that is, while canonically correct, is min-maxing in an opposite sense. You are taking 2 Flaws and using them together in a manner to screw a player. Perhaps it is not your intention, but story wise it reads that way to me. Yes, you did not choose those Flaws. Yes, it is your job as a GM to choose how those Flaws manifest.

But does those 2 Flaws have to be related? Looking at the list for psychotropic conditioning, while there is an entry for positive conditioning, I read that as an open-ended catch-all that the authors decided to put in. You could just as easily could have made the Scorch Flaw a positive conditioning to resist interrogation or other attempts to make the PC do things against his will. Just like you could have just followed canon and chose to use cranial bomb for the mysterious cyberware(0 essense).

Unless your player has used his backstory to deliberately min-max his Edges and other abilities far out of proportion to what they are supposed to do, I think you might want to reconsider your interpretation of Scorched and Mysterious Cyberware. If not, you are only making your job harder down the road. Any player of yours would see that you pulled this type of thing before and think that it should perfectly fine if they do it.

Hmmm, I like this plot idea.

I think you have to give him essence loss, deltaware, but still. As long as it's burning out when the SK leaves, that sounds good. fistandantilus3.0's sudjestions for psycological disorders sounds good. I think it likely should be a simmilar effect to getting burned by Black IC, probably psycotropic, just because it's causing addiction. You could have it burn out via a small kink bomb designed to only destroy the headware (I think I remember a similar example given in cybertech.)

Cool idea. Morty like.

I like it better with the player not knowing about the cyberware. Makes it more... oh, I dunno, mysterious! Other wise they can just walk into a street docs and get a scan. Kinda takes the thrill out of it. And yeah, I think a cranial bomb as a myst cyber is kinda weak. Not as creative as this flaw should be (IMO). And let's remember that this is a flaw, it's supposed to be hard on the character!

The description of Mysterious Cyberware simply says that the character has a mysterious piece of cyber that he is not aware of. It does not give the GM any excuse to give the PC any non-canon cyber. That the GM already has a blank check to do as he pleases is not a good enough reason to me. It might be a Flaw but it should be a Flaw consumate with the BP it gives.

I have to agree with Toturi and not only that if you are going to burn out the cyberware then he gets the points for free becuase you as DM have set up a plot device that divested him of his flaw. Sounds harsh, well you were the one that for months was abusing the character. For a three point flaw you are taking 72 hours a week that is more that any Day Job and has no nuyen reward. And on top of this you are gonna 'give' him and addiction in trade. I call you in excessive PC bashing.

I'm not saying it should be some 'look-what-I-pulled-outta-my-butt' cyber, just something more interesting than a cranial bomb. Like a fingertip compartment they don't knwo of holding some hot paydata, or something like Maria Mercurial had. Or an articulated arm they don't know about and can't control. Ideally, something that you can use for a plot device, although that can become the enemy flaw pretty easily. Just think about the why and how of how it got there.

re: cranial cyberdeck with no essence:

It seems to me that most essense loss is due to the neurological connections, not the device itself (example: cranial bomb has no essence cost, even though it's implanted), so if they cyberdeck has not neurological connections (i.e. it's just run to the datajack, but not able to be mentally controlled), then it should have little to no essense cost.

If you choose to make the cyberdeck into a host node for an SK who's two cards short of being an AI, then you may want to give him random 'slowdowns' on decking, when the bandwidth is boing eaten by the SK boring through the matrix.

Something like init is reduced to +1d6 instead of +5d6. You don't know why. Or give him one simple action instead of two during an IC combat.

I can't avoid thinking of Doyt Haban from Schlock Mercenary...

My argument is that if nobody gets me pizza, I'm going to start cracking skulls.

Well, it doesn't sound like you are adhering to the severity.
Perhaps the SK has a cellular link and a phone, so it makes regular status reports. Also, why have it ever burn out, this sounds like hte makings of a great enemy, especially if he can't get rid of it.

Nikoli: I don't understand--how is consolidating a 3-point Flaw and a 1-point Flaw into a 4-point Flaw "not respecting the severity"?

You're wanting to force him into an addiction. Those are deadly by the rules and very tough to shake.

No, I'm suggesting that one possible conclusion to these Flaws would be an addiction. As fistandantilus3.0, northern lights and Mortax have pointed out, there are other alternatives. I'm just trying to have a discussion.

I'm not sure if it's worth repeating, but I haven't done anything yet with this character. This is an idea I have for something I may possibly implement at some point in the future. Nothing is carved in stone.

You could have gone with a piece of canon cyberware. But somehow you decided to use a non-canon cyberware. You could give him a cyberware he did not know of (and deduct the appropriate essense) and still fulfill the Flaw condition. You did not need go out of the book to find that piece of mysterious cyberware. While you may have respected the severity of each Flaw in and of themselves, you are maximising the synergy of the Flaws together. Put this in another way, with the synergy the Flaws have together are they worth 4 BPs? If your player took a Moderate Common Allergy, would he suffer as much?

I am not arguing that you have the leeway to determine how the Flaw/s would play out. I am arguing that you are punishing the player out of proportion to the Flaw/s taken. If this is how you use your discretion, then do not blame your players if they decide to squeeze every drop of BP without letting you have any explicit leeway to play with.

toturi, please go back and re-read my previous posts. For what I hope is the last time:

1) I am not "going with" anything, nor have I "done" anything or "decided" anything.

2) I could not give him canon cyberware, unless you're suggesting an alpha-grade router for 0.04 essence. Please re-read my description of the character.

3) I am not looking to screw this PC. My players and I--who have been gaming together for a decade--do not see our relationship as adversarial. We work together to tell compelling stories.

I don't mean to sound condescending, but please go back and read what I've already said. I've already had to repeat myself several times and it's getting boring.

1) Alright, then replace all instances of my mentioning that you have already done or are going to do with that you are suggesting you are thinking about doing and are asking our opinion about doing. Does that satisfy you?

2) Why can you not give canon cyberware? I do not see any reason that you may not.

Yes, that satisfies me. It's not helpful for people to attack me for being an "unfair GM" or some such nonsense when I haven't even done anything yet.

Quoted from my post of July 21 2005, at 10:49 PM:

As long as everyone is on board with it, cool. Could you make his other cyberware alpha, beta, or delta grade and have enough room for an alpha grade deck?

Well, you have a good point. Since nothing has been done and it's still theoretical at this point, any flames, perceived or intended are apologized for from me.
Like I originally said, i like the deck idea, it's the addiction idea I dislike.

If he has so much cyber, does he have a cyberlimb by any chance? And does that cyberlimb have spare ECUs?

I say keep the SK in his head and just make it an enemy when the player finds out what it is. Having a rogue SK in your head that's got it in for you is so much cooler than the whole garden variety mobster or dragon that wants your butt because the SK can't kill you. Make it so that it might kill the PC if he takes out the SK, but also make it so it might kill the SK too! That way the SK and the PC have to be creative about how they work against each other - no deathtraps or Thor shots allowed. Plus, imagine what his friends will say.

The best plot devices let you learn about a character by forcing him to make choices. Will he try to come to an understanding with the SK? What if it wants something he can offer? What if that something is pretty awful? Maybe the SK offers to make him a deal - a risky process by which the character steals access to a nova hot host and the SK tries to download into it thereby freeing them of each other. Can he trust it?

And what does the SK want? Why is it an enemy? Is it trying to control the PC to have a body of his own? Why? Given that in the Matrix it has an existence in which it is just shy of divine power (SK's are pretty darned powerful after all) and in the meat world it's a SINless criminal . . . . Maybe the SK would rather have the PC hooked up to long term life support for the next few years. This guy could go to sleep and wake up in fourth edition - how's that for a fragging shock?

How much Essence does said character have? It is less than 1, he should have gotten the mystorous cyberware.

Should that flaw b harsh?Yes, it should be, nearly all flaws are. They should be. You shouldn't have flaws that are easy on characters, "Flaws" that areeasy on characters shouldn't be worth points.