Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Shadowrun 4 Errata
Dumpshock Forums > Discussion > Shadowrun
Pages: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9
Ghost_dk
page 116

the phrase on vertical jumps should read "as high as she can" not "as far as she can
Milo Simpkin
QUOTE (Toshiaki)
* I don't think that there are any Willpower boosting cyber/bio, but I figure there's always drugs, or failing that, the Increase Willpower spell.

Active Pain Editor gives a +1 to Willpower.

It might also be nice if they gave some kind of scale to the vehicles. How many people can it seat etc? Okay, I just have to go and look at my earlier SR books, but for a newbie?
blakkie
...wrong thread..
Snoof
The spirits statline indicates that spirits have a Reaction of their Force times a multiplier, from x2 for an Earth spirit to x4 for an Air spirit. Surely this is a mistake.Does a manifested Force 4 Air spirit really have a reaction of 16 and a manifested Initiative of 20?

Snoof
Rotbart van Dainig
Fake SINs rate 1 to 6 and are subject to an opposed Test when used, but no stats for Verification Systems given.

Assuming a rating from 1 to 6 would it make virtually impossible to actually live (rent an appartement, get a bank account, let the appartment buy groceries) with even the best Fake availabe, as SINs are used about ten times a day at least.

A simple fix for this would change the opposed test into a treshold test for the Scanner - Scanner (Fake SIN).

Or, as there are no Verification Systems ratings given - just reduce it to a Test where the SIN has to score a hit.
Rotbart van Dainig
QUOTE (p. 162 SENSOR TESTS)
To detect a person, critter, or vehicle with sensors, the character/vehicle must make a successful Sensor + Perception Test (Sensor + Pilot in the case of drones).

vs
QUOTE (p. 239 Drones and Sensors)
When observing through a drone, a rigger rolls Sensor (rather than Intuition) + Perception. Drones operating on their own simply roll Sensor + Clearsight autosoft (or just Sensor if they don’t have the autosoft ).

Now, which one is rigth? wink.gif

The second one would result in Drones being unable to spot Humans.
sapphire_wyvern
Page 164 says:

QUOTE

Force
Spells, spirits, and magic items (foci) have an attribute
known as Force. This measures the magical power of the object,
spell, or being. Force is measured on the same scale as metahuman
attributes (natural 1 to 6). For spells and foci, this is often
their only attribute.


On page 195, in the "Simplifying Spell Drain" sidebar:
QUOTE
If she decides to cast it at Force 7, her DV would
be 6 (+1 per 2 points)—and the Drain would be
Physical as the Force exceeds her Magic.


What is the real maximum Force for spells, spirits and foci? I think an actual maximum Force of 6 would be disappointing; knocking someone out with a Stunbolt would become very difficult and powerful initiates would never need (or be able to) overcast.

EDIT: I'm not asking questions because I want to know (although I do). I'm asking questions because *the book raises them and doesn't answer them*. This is, in my opinion, a candidate for Errata.
sapphire_wyvern
Page 213 says that:
QUOTE
A System program is limited by the Response rating of the
device it is on; a System run on a device with a lower Response
rating functions at the Response rating instead.


Page 212 says that:
QUOTE
Response may be affected if you run too many programs.
For every x number of programs you have actively running,
where x = System rating, your Response is reduced by 1. So if
you’re running 10 programs with a System 5, your Response
will be reduced by 2.


There needs to be some sort of limit to the recursion implied here.

Say you have System 3, Response 3, and are running 4 programs.

This causes you to lose one Response. (Now at Response 2)

This then causes you to lose one System. (Now at System 2)

This then means that you are now running *twice* as many programs as you have System, so you lose another Response.

You now have Response 1, and therefore System 1.

You are now running 4 times as many programs as you have System, but you're at Response 1 and System 1, and you can hardly get any worse!

It's all a bit over the top. What are the actual rules on overloading degradation? The limits to the recursion, if it occurs at all, need to be clearer.

EDIT: I'm not asking questions because I want to know (although I do). I'm asking questions because *the book raises them and doesn't answer them*. This is, in my opinion, a candidate for Errata.
Elve
QUOTE (sapphire_wyvern)
On page 195, in the "Simplifying Spell Drain" sidebar:
QUOTE
If she decides to cast it at Force 7, her DV would
be 6 (+1 per 2 points)—and the Drain would be
Physical as the Force exceeds her Magic.


This is indeed the only mentioned Force of more than 6...
hahnsoo
QUOTE (sapphire_wyvern @ Sep 12 2005, 06:53 AM)
Page 164 says:
QUOTE
Force
Spells, spirits, and magic items (foci) have an attribute known as Force. This measures the magical power of the object, spell, or being. Force is measured on the same scale as metahuman attributes (natural 1 to 6). For spells and foci, this is often their only attribute.


On page 195, in the "Simplifying Spell Drain" sidebar:
QUOTE
If she decides to cast it at Force 7, her DV would be 6 (+1 per 2 points)—and the Drain would be Physical as the Force exceeds her Magic.


What is the real maximum Force for spells, spirits and foci? I think an actual maximum Force of 6 would be disappointing; knocking someone out with a Stunbolt would become very difficult and powerful initiates would never need (or be able to) overcast.

The maximum force is twice the Magic Attribute, in most cases. The 1 to 6 part is a bit misleading, as it refers to "natural" metahuman values. However, remember that Trolls can get a "natural" value of 10 or higher in Strength.
QUOTE
<snip> It's all a bit over the top. What are the actual caps on overloading degradation? The limits to the recursion need to be clearer.
There is no "recursion". You simply lower the response and system (and thus program limits) by a virtual reduction, rather than an actual reduction. When Response is lowered (and thus System is lowered), you are still "counting up" using the original System value.

Don't post questions in the Errata thread... post actual Errata and not "things in need of clarification".
Cochise
QUOTE (hahnsoo)
Don't post questions in the Errata thread... post actual Errata and not "things in need of clarification".

*erm* "Things that need a clarification" also qualify for Errata wink.gif
hahnsoo
QUOTE (Cochise)
QUOTE (hahnsoo)
Don't post questions in the Errata thread... post actual Errata and not "things in need of clarification".

*erm* "Things that need a clarification" also qualify for Errata wink.gif

Yes, but only after they've been clarified, not as a question... if you start a post with a question, you are essentially clogging up the next few responses in the thread just to discuss that question and potential answers. It would be much better to discuss it in a forum thread first, THEN post it as finalized Errata later (especially after Bull or Synner or Adam or other bigwigs have weighed in on it) than to clog up the thread.
Cochise
QUOTE (hahnsoo)
It would be much better to discuss it in a forum thread first, THEN post it as finalized Errata later (especially after Bull or Synner or Adam or other bigwigs have weighed in on it) than to clog up the thread.

It's just not "our" task to "finalize" any Errata wink.gif
The only problem with "asking" a question is: Someone might unnecessarily feel the urge to actually answer it or make a claim that questions should not be asked ... thus cloging up the thread ... just as it happens right now biggrin.gif
Rotbart van Dainig
QUOTE (p. 255)
If a fake print is used, make an Opposed Test between the duplicate and the maglock rating; if the fake wins, the maglock accepts it.

vs.
QUOTE (p. 333)
Make an Opposed Test between the retinal duplication rating and the retinal scanner rating.

as for p. 326 Biometric Reader (per reader) wheras p. 319 Biometric Reader has a DR of 3.
Nikoli
Is Gunnery in the skill chart by accident, as there is no text concerning the skill in the "rules" portion of the skills section.
Elldren
QUOTE (Nikoli)
Is Gunnery in the skill chart by accident, as there is no text concerning the skill in the "rules" portion of the skills section.

Text is on pg. 125. Gunnery is a Vehicle skill, not a Combat skill
sapphire_wyvern
Typo!

Page 183: Assensing Table

On the "3 hits" entry:

A general diganosis for any maladies....

Should be diagnosis for any maladies.
sapphire_wyvern
Not really errata but could be cleaned up for future printing: the last sentence of the Improved Ability power description is redundant (simply repeats pricing information given at the head of the description, just like every other power).

Possibly errata: The description for the Cat Mentor Spirit says:

QUOTE
Unless the Cat magician makes a Willpower + Charisma (3) Test, she cannot make an attack that will incapacitate her target (ie., a Combat spell must be cast with a Force/damage level that will not disable).


This looks like a hangover from SR3, when you chose a base damage level to cast a spell at, as well as a Force. It could just be redundant, tautologous language in SR4. I recommend cleaning it up anyway by deleting "/damage level " from the sentence.
Namergon
p. 232 Matrix Combat summary

Defense is still listed as Response + Stealth, instead of Response + Firewall.

The errata fixed this bug on p.230 Matrix Attacks, but it escaped vigilance in this summary. wink.gif
sapphire_wyvern
Page 227:
QUOTE
Data Bombs may be attached to icons that are also protected
by Encrypt or Scramble programs.


There's no such Scramble programs mentioned in SR4.

Additionally, the list of tasks that require Spoof (page 227) fails to include one of its most useful applications: sending falsified instructions to agents & drones (page 224). The Technomancer Complex Form version can also do it to Sprites (page 235).

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Page 228:
QUOTE
If you concentrate, you can still perceive through your meat
senses while in VR, but it’s very distracting and you suffer a –6
Perception Test dice pool modifier.


Page 230:
QUOTE
If you want to interact with the physical
world rather than the VR Matrix, you need to either go offline or
concentrate on your meat body and spend a turn using physical
Initiative (with a hefty –4 dice pool modifier because you’re still
bombarded with VR signals).


Contradiction!
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Page 232:
QUOTE
Implants and Resonance
As with Magic, cyberware and bioware limit Resonance. To
determine the severity of this impediment, take any reductions
from Essence due to cyberware and/or bioware implants (see p.
62) and round up to the nearest whole number. This amount is
deducted from the technomancer’s Resonance.


All questions of whether Technomancers should suffer Resonance loss from technology aside, I'm pretty sure that they are supposed to have their Resonance maximum reduced by Essence loss as well. wink.gif They should be consistent with the magic user rules, neh?

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Page 235:
QUOTE
Sprites must remain with the technomancer. If the technomancer
leaves them behind in a node or loses online access,
the sprite fades away until the technomancer calls them back.
Sprites can be temporarily dismissed at any time and called
back at a later point (within that 8-hour period); both requiring
a Simple Action.


Later that same page in the "Sprite-Technomancer Link" section:
QUOTE
If a technomancer loses his connection to the Matrix,
however, he loses contact with his sprites. In this case, the
sprites continue to operate. If the technomancer comes back
online, he must make a Resonance + Intuition (3) Test to regain
the mental link to the sprite.


Another contradiction!
kigmatzomat
p.245, "Toxin Protection" table on the upper left side.
7th entry down is a "Nephritic screen."

No such piece of bioware exists in the SR4 book; PDF search shows this table as the only use of the word "nephritic."
Shadow_Prophet
QUOTE (sapphire_wyvern)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Page 228:
QUOTE
If you concentrate, you can still perceive through your meat
senses while in VR, but it’s very distracting and you suffer a –6
Perception Test dice pool modifier.


Page 230:
QUOTE
If you want to interact with the physical
world rather than the VR Matrix, you need to either go offline or
concentrate on your meat body and spend a turn using physical
Initiative (with a hefty –4 dice pool modifier because you’re still
bombarded with VR signals).


Contradiction!
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Actualy thats not really a contradiction. One is a perception modifier. The other is a general dice pool modifier applied to anything other than perception. That -6 dice pool penalty to perception isn't going to affect say, you running. It is going to affect if you notice that tree you're about to run into.
Rob Boyle
Hey all -- thanks for the errata notes so far. We did our best to catch all the mistakes we could find, but putting together a rulebook is a complicated and detailed task, and it's inevitable that we miss things. There's nothing like having a few hundred extra sets of eyes for editing purposes, though, so please continue to post anything you find, and we'll make appropriate changes for future printings and updated PDFs.

While I'm here, I'd like to ask anyone that has a spare moment to turn a critical eye towards the Sample Characters in particular. If we have mistakes with these, I'd rather catch them all early on so we don't have to keep double-checking and re-calculating them later. So if you have a chance, please check the numbers and post anything you find here -- by this coming Sunday if at all possible. Thanks!
coolgrafix
QUOTE (Rob Boyle)
While I'm here, I'd like to ask anyone that has a spare moment to turn a critical eye towards the Sample Characters in particular. If we have mistakes with these, I'd rather catch them all early on so we don't have to keep double-checking and re-calculating them later. So if you have a chance, please check the numbers and post anything you find here -- by this coming Sunday if at all possible. Thanks!

Rob, some considerable analysis was done here:

Character Analysis Thread
blakkie
Recoil Example, page 143 is less than instructive on how recoil works. As is the rest of the recoil text, but if you change the example at least there is one place in the book that explains it:

http://forums.dumpshock.com/index.php?showtopic=9987
Shadow_Prophet
QUOTE (Rob Boyle)
Hey all -- thanks for the errata notes so far. We did our best to catch all the mistakes we could find, but putting together a rulebook is a complicated and detailed task, and it's inevitable that we miss things. There's nothing like having a few hundred extra sets of eyes for editing purposes, though, so please continue to post anything you find, and we'll make appropriate changes for future printings and updated PDFs.

While I'm here, I'd like to ask anyone that has a spare moment to turn a critical eye towards the Sample Characters in particular. If we have mistakes with these, I'd rather catch them all early on so we don't have to keep double-checking and re-calculating them later. So if you have a chance, please check the numbers and post anything you find here -- by this coming Sunday if at all possible. Thanks!

I don't know if this has been noted elsewhere but...

The Covert-Ops Spec, Hacker, and Technomancer all have rating 4 fake sins (infact the hacker has 4 of them!). All of which are availabilty 16! Something you can't get out of cg. Max is rating 3 as the availability code for a fake sin is rating x 4.
Dashifen
Weapons Specialist has a fragmentation rocket which is also availability 16, IIRC.
Rotbart van Dainig
If Headware Transceivers are limited to Signal 2 like stated in The Wireless World chapter, in fact any Sample Character or Grunt with an implanted Commlink is off.
Ranneko
Any uses of Resonance leave a Matrix signature on anything
they aff ect; this signature is only detectable by other Resonance
beings (technomancers and sprites) with a Matrix Perception
(3) Test. This Matrix astral signature is a digital “fingerprint”

Surely that should be just a plain, Matrix signature.
Fortune
QUOTE (Ranneko)
This Matrix astral signature is a digital “fingerprint”

Surely that should be just a plain, Matrix signature.

Freudian slip! biggrin.gif
bclements
Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar wink.gif
Kagetenshi
But in the case of the SPNKR, you've got one majorly explosive cigar.

~J
Larsine
Here are the errattas that I've found so far. I've tried not to mention things that are already mentioned in this threat, but who knows:

P.58: Interval: The text in column 1 (1 Combat Turn, 1 minute, 1 hour, 1 day, 1 week or 1 month), does not correspond with the intervals in the table (1 Combat Turn, 1 Minute, 10 Minutes, 30 Minutes, 1 Hour, 1 Day, 1 week, 1 Month).

P.86: Complex Forms: ...is equal toyour character's...

P.97: Occult Investigator: No rating for his Audio Enhancement or Select Sound Filter

P.106: Using Skills: ...place, orunderstand what...

P.110: Skill Groups: All Biotech skills use Logic, so there is no need for the Usually part.

P.110: Skill Groups: Half the Stealth skills use Intuition, the other half Agility, so why use Usually Intuition?

P.121: Using Con, Intimidation, Leadership, and Negotiation: Example: Guard has no skill, so he should be defaulting and thus have -1 dice pool, for a total of 2 dice.

P.121: Using Etiquette: ...from Enemy to Hostile, Hostile to Neutral... does not correspond with the table on P.122
P.121: Etiquette and Glitches: ...Neutral to Suspicious, Suspicious to Hostile... does not correspond with the table on P.122
P.122: Social Situation: The hostility/suspicion levels does not correspond with the two uses on P.121

P.121: Example: Harmful -4, does not correspond with table on P.122
P.122: Table: Harmful to NPC -3, does not correspond with example on P.121

P.124: Hardware: To create something a plan, the proper... Maybe it's just me, but I just don't get this, what plan?

P.129: Language Skills: simply make one test to see how well they understand each other during this period, On page 130: Example: Ashley makes two tests within minutes?

P.138: Full Defense: ...Characters may goon full defense...

P.143: Wide Bursts: Example: With his next Simple Action, Slinger’s facing a lot of recoil, so he goes for a wide burst. The extra –3 recoil reduces his dice pool to 4: 4 (Automatics) +5 (Agility) -2 (recoil first burst) +2 (RC) -3 (other) -3 (recoil second burst) = dice pool 3

P.144: Not Enough Bullets: ...applied by 1 (one bullet short) or (2 bullets short)... Should be ...applied by 1 (one bullet short) or by 2 (2 bullets short)...

P.146: Grenade Damage Table: Gas Chemicals need a - under Blast

P.149: Melee Weapons Table: Spur listed with reach -, on page 337 spurs are listed with reach 1.

P.168: "The Force of a lodge must be at least equal to the skill rating being learned or the force of a spell being cast (in the case of Ritual Spellcasting) or learned." Spells are not learned at a specific force.

P.180: Binding: Ritual materials cost 500 per force, on page 340 they cost 1500 per force.

P.187: Attribute Boost: What is the max increase you can gain. What type of action to activate?

P.189: Initiation: ...Magical Adept... should be Mystic Adept

P.198: Range: ...caster’s Force x Magic... The caste does not have a force, so it should be spells’s Force x Magic

P.200: Decrease [Attribute]: ...If a Physical attribute or Initiative is reduced to 0... Initiative cannot be reduced directly as the spell can't affect special attributes

P.203: Levitate: ...spell’s Magic x net Spellcasting... must either be caster's Magic or spell's Force


P.204: Physical Barrier: ...equal to the caster’s Force.... Caster's Magic or spell's Force

Thats how far I have read until now.

Lars
hahnsoo
QUOTE (Larsine)
P.124: Hardware: To create something a plan, the proper... Maybe it's just me, but I just don't get this, what plan?

It's just an awkward sentence. If you throw an extra comma in there: "To create something, a plan, the proper materials, and time are still needed"...
Then it makes more sense, although the original sentence is technically correct. Or, rewrite it as the following:
"To create something, you need a plan, the proper materials, and time."
Rotbart van Dainig
QUOTE (SR4 p. 245)
Gear Protects Against: Protection:
Gas Mask Inhalation Immunity
vs
QUOTE (SR4 p. 327)
Gas Mask: Completely covers the user’s face and filters out toxic substances. It provides a bonus of +2 on toxic resistance tests against gas substances (see Toxic Substances, p. 245).
walkir
QUOTE ("p. 341")
Weapon mounts: Vehicles may be equipped with a number of weapon mounts equal to their Body +3 (round down)


EDIT: My mistake, mixed up a "divided by" with a "plus".
Mr. Unpronounceable
From another thread...

need for clarification:

Pg 335, under cyberlimbs, second paragraph: "Cyberlimbs cannot hold any bioware"

Does this include a ban on bioware inside cyberskulls and cybertorsos (both of which presumably still contain original organs)?

edit: prevailing opinion in the other thread seems to be 'no bio allowed' (doesn't make sense to me, though - limbs are replacements, but torso and skull are sheaths, basically)
coolgrafix
Ok, now I'm going to be very fragging surprised if a torso or head is considered a limb. =)
apple
Plastic bones: 8F
Bone Density: 12

=> same bonus (unarmed damage, injury resistance), but different legal handling?

SYL
Nikoli
Pg. 226
When dealing hands-on with communications technology,
make tests using Electronic Warfare + Logic. When utilizing
programs, use Electronic Warfare + program rating.

Later that same page
Make a Decrypt + Response (Encryption rating x 2, 1 Combat Turn) Extended Test to break
the encryption.

Should that not be Electronic warfare+Decrypt, unles relying on the software to do the cracking?
Rotbart van Dainig
QUOTE (p. 326: Radio Signal Scanner)
Treat the scanner as if it were a Sniffer program (see p. 227) equal to its rating; see p. 225 for rules on detecting and intercepting wireless signals.

To actually be a Scanner, it would require to be treaded as a Scan program as well.
Rotbart van Dainig
QUOTE (p. 157 Shooting Through Barriers)
Against melee attacks with blunt weapons such as fists, clubs, or similar items, a barrier maintains its normal rating. Against melee attacks with edged weapons, such as swords and the like, the barrier has twice its normal rating.

Should it really be easier to punch through a table than to stab a sword through it?
This looks like a leftover of SR3 concerning damaging barrieres, too.
Shadow_Prophet
QUOTE (Rotbart van Dainig @ Sep 22 2005, 04:42 AM)
QUOTE (p. 157 Shooting Through Barriers)
Against melee attacks with blunt weapons such as fists, clubs, or similar items, a barrier maintains its normal rating. Against melee attacks with edged weapons, such as swords and the like, the barrier has twice its normal rating.

Should it really be easier to punch through a table than to stab a sword through it?
This looks like a leftover of SR3 concerning damaging barrieres, too.

Well in general....yes. Its far easier to put a sledge hammer through a brick wall than it is to stab a katana through it. Though please go out and try to stab a katana through a nice brick wall and compare it to the damage a sledgehammer would do to said wall. The katana, even IF it goes through is going to do squat to the wall structuraly. The sledge is going to cause a good amount of damage.

EDIT: I'll also point to the section in the book entitled "The Abstract Nature of Rules" where it states that the rules will not nessicarily reflect reality 100% 100% of the time and a few other things which make it so that this part doesn't need to be erattad(sp?)
Rotbart van Dainig
That rule, as stated in the tile of the quote, does not cover damaging barrieres.
It does cover damaging whats behind them.

In fact, when damaging barrieres, there is made no difference between different kinds of melee attacks.
So, considering an abstract ruleset, this seems to be a misplaced leftover.
Shadow_Prophet
QUOTE (Rotbart van Dainig @ Sep 22 2005, 08:26 AM)
That rule does not cover damaging barrieres.
It does cover damaging whats behind them.

In fact, when damaging barrieres, there is made no difference between different kinds of melee attacks.
So, considering an abstract ruleset, this seems to a misplaced leftover.

Ahhh right right, my mistake. Still think its slightly valid. Atleast for stronger barriers like a brick wall. You'll do mor damage collapsing some brick on them than well...if you manage to get that katana through it.

Edit: Going back to the sledge/katana argument i think the sledge'll still do mor damage going through a wooden table than a katana but thats me.
Rotbart van Dainig
Given the Armor rating of a brick wall, you would usually have to destroy the barrier to attack whats behind, even when not doubling.
Shadow_Prophet
QUOTE (Rotbart van Dainig)
Given the Armor rating of a brick wall, you would usually have to destroy the barrier to attack whats behind, even when not doubling.

true...besides why stab them through a wall when you can open up point blank with a full auto burst biggrin.gif Far more effective if you ask me.
Rotbart van Dainig
QUOTE (p. 196 Indirect Combat Spells)
Indirect Combat spells are treated like ranged combat attacks; the caster makes a Magic + Spellcasting Success Test versus the target’s Reaction.
Ranged Combat is an Opposed test.

QUOTE (p. 238 Increased Resonance)
A technomancer’s natural maximum for the Resonance attribute is 6 + his grade of initiation. He will still have to pay normally to increase his Resonance attribute.

This should be 'submersion', shouldn't it? wink.gif
sapphire_wyvern
The list of Restricted Skills on page 75 should include the Resonance-only skills of Compiling, Decompiling and Registering as well as the Magic-only skills.
sapphire_wyvern
It appears that the price for the Sea Nymph yacht has lost a zero at some point. It should probably be 170,000 rather than 17,000.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Dumpshock Forums © 2001-2012