One issue with the current Cyberdecks is the device rating sets the limit on the PAN size. Data Trails gives players a range of options for hacking devices, at a variety of costs and limits. But Cyberdecks are always the loser on PAN size. It's just one more reason to not take a Cyberdeck.
Options from Data Trails make it possible to build a bargain basement hacking device out of an RCC or Commlink. But their are trade offs. I'd like the Cyberdeck to be the clear choice if you've got the Nuyen.
As a Decker I shouldn't be comparing a Vulcan Liegelord, a Transys Avalon with a Sleaze Dongle, and a Little Hornet as equal choices for hacking with some secondary trade offs. The Cyberdeck should just win for a Hackers choice.
Anyway, around a 100k should be the starting point for something that lasts most of a Decker's career.
One issue with the current Cyberdecks is the device rating sets the limit on the PAN size. Data Trails gives players a range of options for hacking devices, at a variety of costs and limits. But Cyberdecks are always the loser on PAN size. It's just one more reason to not take a Cyberdeck.
Options from Data Trails make it possible to build a bargain basement hacking device out of an RCC or Commlink. But their are trade offs. I'd like the Cyberdeck to be the clear choice if you've got the Nuyen.
As a Decker I shouldn't be comparing a Vulcan Liegelord, a Transys Avalon with a Sleaze Dongle, and a Little Hornet as equal choices for hacking with some secondary trade offs. The Cyberdeck should just win for a Hackers choice.
Anyway, around a 100k should be the starting point for something that lasts most of a Decker's career.
Gearing wise you can probably fully equip a basic SamNot remotely competitively.
Gearing wise you can probably fully equip a basic SamNot remotely competitively.
| Device Rating | Current Cost | Proposed Cost | Reasoning / Parallel | ¥ Difference | % Difference |
| 1 | ¥48,500 | ¥10,000 | Boosted Reflexes | -38,500 | -79% |
| 1.1 | ¥58,000 | ¥12,000 | +20% | -46,000 | -79% |
| 2 | ¥110,250 | ¥39,000 | Wired I | -71,250 | -65% |
| 2.2 | ¥123,000 | ¥43,500 | +12% | -79,500 | -65% |
| 3 | ¥205,750 | ¥95,000 | Synaptic I | -110,750 | -54% |
| 3.3 | ¥214,125 | ¥104,500 | +10% | -109,625 | -51% |
| 4 | ¥345,000 | ¥228,000 | Synaptic II, Alphaware | -117,000 | -34% |
| 5 | ¥549,375 | ¥427,500 | Synaptic III, Betaware | -121,875 | -22% |
| 6 | ¥823,250 | ¥675,000 | 50% more than Resources A | -148,250 | -18% |
| Device Rating | % of Resources A | % of Resources B | % of Resources C | % of Resources D |
| 1 | 2% | 4% | 7% | 20% |
| 1.1 | 3% | 4% | 9% | 24% |
| 2 | 9% | 14% | 28% | 78% |
| 2.2 | 10% | 16% | 31% | 87% |
| 3 | 21% | 35% | 68% | 190% |
| 3.3 | 23% | 38% | 75% | 209% |
| 4 | 51% | 83% | 163% | 456% |
| 5 | 95% | 155% | 305% | 855% |
| 6 | 150% | 245% | 482% | 1350% |
If I were Wakshaani, I would want some hard numbers. Here's a draft I came up with for discussion.
Full disclosure: I don't have Data Trails and don't know all the ins and outs of dongles. I also don't play deckers, but I do GM them regularly, including both Street Scum and Prime Runner campaigns.
With that said, here's my table:
Device Rating Current Cost Proposed Cost Reasoning / Parallel ¥ Difference % Difference 1 ¥48,500 ¥10,000 Boosted Reflexes -38,500 -79% 1.1 ¥58,000 ¥12,000 +20% -46,000 -79% 2 ¥110,250 ¥39,000 Wired I -71,250 -65% 2.2 ¥123,000 ¥43,500 +12% -79,500 -65% 3 ¥205,750 ¥95,000 Synaptic I -110,750 -54% 3.3 ¥214,125 ¥104,500 +10% -109,625 -51% 4 ¥345,000 ¥228,000 Synaptic II, Alphaware -117,000 -34% 5 ¥549,375 ¥427,500 Synaptic III, Betaware -121,875 -22% 6 ¥823,250 ¥675,000 50% more than Resources A -148,250 -18%
I decided to use initiative boosters for comparison, as they are the defining trait of a samurai as surely as a deck is for a decker. (For discussion of this topic, in case the point is contentious, see Wak's Street Samurai Survey thread here (http://forums.shadowruntabletop.com/index.php?topic=21176.msg381290#msg381290).) Obviously the parallel is imperfect since cyberware and bioware have an Essence component in addition to nuyen costs, but it's a start.
As a GM, I want there to be a street-level deck option so that there can be street scum hackers that aren't technomancers. This is more for gameplay rather than fluff reasons. Boosted Reflexes (¥10,000) seemed like a good parallel for something an ambitious ganger might be able to scrape together. Costs could be even lower if the GM allows a deck to be bought used.
The differences between the devices within the same device rating (e.g. 1 vs. 1.1 in my table) are based on the price differences between those same steps in the current pricing scheme.
At the high end, I like that the Fairlight Excalibur is more than a runner can afford out of the gate. In previous editions it's always been an aspirational piece of tech, so I went with the same price increase over Resources A that we had in 3E (where the Excalibur was ¥1,500,000 vs. ¥1,000,000 for Resources A). With that in mind, here's a table with the proposed prices as a percentage of the various Resource priorities:
Device Rating % of Resources A % of Resources B % of Resources C % of Resources D 1 2% 4% 7% 20% 1.1 3% 4% 9% 24% 2 9% 14% 28% 78% 2.2 10% 16% 31% 87% 3 21% 35% 68% 190% 3.3 23% 38% 75% 209% 4 51% 83% 163% 456% 5 95% 155% 305% 855% 6 150% 245% 482% 1350%
Here we can see that a Resources A decker could afford a DR4 device with funds left over, or a DR5 device if they really broke the piggy bank. The Resources B decker could swing a DR3 deck without much issue but a DR4 only with severe restrictions elsewhere. Resources C would probably be looking at DR3 and Resources D (likely a street scum campaign) at DR1. To me, this feels like a good balance between runners coming out of chargen with good equipment but also having some new toys to shoot for, pun intended.
I am happy to be wrong if it promotes productive discussion. You've disagreed with my starting point but haven't said in which direction my conclusions are wrong. Too expensive, too cheap?Let try this again you compared a deck to 1 of many pieces of cyberwear that a street Sam would have. I feel a better comparison would be the group of cyberwear that a typical street Sam would start with, I.e. The total cost of all the street SAMs starting cyberwear not just a single item
If there's broad consenus around decks costing less then the next question is how much less. My opinion, based on GM experience, is a lot less at the lower end and just a bit less at the upper end.
I am happy to be wrong if it promotes productive discussion. You've disagreed with my starting point but haven't said in which direction my conclusions are wrong. Too expensive, too cheap?Let try this again you compared a deck to 1 of many pieces of cyberwear that a street Sam would have. I feel a better comparison would be the group of cyberwear that a typical street Sam would start with, I.e. The total cost of all the street SAMs starting cyberwear not just a single item
If there's broad consenus around decks costing less then the next question is how much less. My opinion, based on GM experience, is a lot less at the lower end and just a bit less at the upper end.
I am happy to be wrong if it promotes productive discussion. You've disagreed with my starting point but haven't said in which direction my conclusions are wrong. Too expensive, too cheap?Let try this again you compared a deck to 1 of many pieces of cyberwear that a street Sam would have. I feel a better comparison would be the group of cyberwear that a typical street Sam would start with, I.e. The total cost of all the street SAMs starting cyberwear not just a single item
If there's broad consenus around decks costing less then the next question is how much less. My opinion, based on GM experience, is a lot less at the lower end and just a bit less at the upper end.
The build-from-scratch rules of previous editions were popular, but build-from-scratch rules (for anything, in many RPG systems) always seem to have a blindspot that turns it into its own minigame.
I liked the pricing of the RCCs. Take those and double them for you decks.
That should be enough to make them still valuable but not so expensive that you have to quit your character once your equipment has been fried.
Of course that would mean that matrix combat would need some work, to actually make it attractive to use instead of being a foolish option to take as it is now.I can't think of any edition where matrix combat was a done well or worthwhile to participate in.
I can't think of any edition where matrix combat was a done well or worthwhile to participate in.
Street, lol, deck? Haha!! Prime, Deckers work fine.
Well, Street priority C is 25000 nuyen. There are two decks in Data Trails that you can buy for that, and none in Core. The expensive one is the only one of the two you can swap attributes on, and they go up as high as 2, which is quite a low limit. You can get that up to 3 with your one program, 4 with Overclocker quality, maybe 5 by reducing one of the 2's to 1 by upgrade. Either way you either have paper thin firewall when doing anything, or cannot do anything and have a weak firewall.Street, lol, deck? Haha!! Prime, Deckers work fine.
Rather than laugh and dismiss out of hand, it would be nice to have information as to why not. Looking at the list of decks, with a priority of C, there are a few decks which can work. Are you saying that they are completely unusable against even the most basic security? What is a low level decker missing at that level to make them viable?
Well, Street priority C is 25000 nuyen. There are two decks in Data Trails that you can buy for that, and none in Core. The expensive one is the only one of the two you can swap attributes on, and they go up as high as 2, which is quite a low limit. You can get that up to 3 with your one program, 4 with Overclocker quality, maybe 5 by reducing one of the 2's to 1 by upgrade. Either way you either have paper thin firewall when doing anything, or cannot do anything and have a weak firewall.Street, lol, deck? Haha!! Prime, Deckers work fine.
Rather than laugh and dismiss out of hand, it would be nice to have information as to why not. Looking at the list of decks, with a priority of C, there are a few decks which can work. Are you saying that they are completely unusable against even the most basic security? What is a low level decker missing at that level to make them viable?
Besides the lovely explanation to why given by Darzil.
Deckers and Street Samurai require funds to do there jobs, which are both gear based. Street level encourages MagicRun, because it is the only way to make characters that can survive. You dont have funds for it really otherwise. Prime Runners have the funds at most priority levels to be able to buy a deck.
A regular running group would be against 5-8 on average, 9-10 on the outside. Again are the hosts at that level equal of a challenge for the starting decks we're looking at?A deck with a limit of 2 isn't going to be much use against something with a dice pool of 6 to defend, which would be getting 2 hits on average.
A regular running group would be against 5-8 on average, 9-10 on the outside. Again are the hosts at that level equal of a challenge for the starting decks we're looking at?A deck with a limit of 2 isn't going to be much use against something with a dice pool of 6 to defend, which would be getting 2 hits on average.
Edit - Do yourself a favour and just play a Technomancer at Street level.
A regular running group would be against 5-8 on average, 9-10 on the outside. Again are the hosts at that level equal of a challenge for the starting decks we're looking at?A deck with a limit of 2 isn't going to be much use against something with a dice pool of 6 to defend, which would be getting 2 hits on average.
Edit - Do yourself a favour and just play a Technomancer at Street level.
Mmm, charts. I'll be chewing on THAT one later.
On a related note, while we discussed the fact that Samurai need multiple bits of gear, but Reflexes are key, so too do Deckers operate better with some extra goodies. Not as much as a Samurai *needs* them, but, relatable.
Which brings up the second, hidden, cost... skills. A Samurai can get by on just a handful if they must, and those same skills (A gun, a melee, sneaking, spotting, etiquette) are ones that everyone needs, but a Decker has a range of skills that they HAVE to have, which is a secondary cost to the mechanical (deck) one. How should this effect the overall cost, if at all? (Yes, design theory can go a bit meta here.I trust y'all can run with this!)
Might want to shuffle a point or two for Perception, but the overall point holds.
Pistol is the default Shadowrunner weapon, IMHO. Strong enough to drop Metahumans, concealable, lots of options ... it's just dang handy. Mages, Deckers, and Riggers have it as a main weaponShort range, limited firing options, low damage, low inherent AP. I don't see them as good for anyone except maybe pistol adepts.
Mages, Deckers, and Riggers have it as a main weapon, Sammies and Weapon Specialists carry it as a back-up ... it's just all-around useful. It covers legal weapons, like tasers, and restricted weapons, rather than restricted and forbidden, so you can be found in public armed and it won't cause a scene... it's just the all-around option of balance.I'd always carry an MP over a pistol.
Longarms is really only for 'runners with multiple combat skills.Longarms got muuuuuuch better with the addition of Hardwires.
Longarms is really only for 'runners with multiple combat skills.
To get us back on topic, I think that while the discussion of the mechanics of building a decker are interesting, we're missing the big problem with the decker as implemented in 5E: it's not very cyberpunk from a thematic stand point. Cyberpunk is about the people who live on the edges of a world dominated by corporations run amuck, they're the guys who scrounge the things that the happy shiny consumerist dystopia has thrown away. WHn you think "cyberpunk hacker" what comes to mind? I don't know about you, but "guy with a computer more expensive than a house in downtown Tokyo" doesn't really pop to the top of my list. That's the problem with the decker as conceived in 5E, he's the ultimate coporate consumerist, his entire live is dutifully spending hundresd of thousands of nuyen to line up in front of theAppleRenraku Store to buy the latest iHack 7S. Thet's the exact opposite of how I envision a hacker. In this matter, I think 4E, for its flaws, did deckers better. Deckers should by "Skills A, Resources 'whatever'" because a true hacker is defined by their matrix skills, not how shiny their deck is.
Do you actually need your deck with you? Barring the hacking issue, couldn't you use your commlink to control your deck remotely? If that is the case, then a deck doesn't need to be compact at all, or even a single device for that matter.Noise might be a bigger problem.
Do you actually need your deck with you? Barring the hacking issue, couldn't you use your commlink to control your deck remotely? If that is the case, then a deck doesn't need to be compact at all, or even a single device for that matter.Noise might be a bigger problem.
Agreed in full about the cobbled-together monsters that most deckers should be using vs the store-bounght shiny that we actually see. I wanted to see a real scratch-built look in the SR5 core, since everything was still in the "We have no idea what works" stage of thins, but a need for official security deckers put me out of that one.Would love to see it, but pretty much the minimum Matrix Attributes should be 3, and probably not that low on all four on one deck. Would still be a lower limit than the lowest firearms in the game. Having limits so low that they can't be used effectively seems a little unfortunate. That they are massively expensive for that is bizarre. It's as if the person balancing them didn't know how limits work.
Do you actually need your deck with you? Barring the hacking issue, couldn't you use your commlink to control your deck remotely? If that is the case, then a deck doesn't need to be compact at all, or even a single device for that matter.Noise might be a bigger problem.
Going both ways no less, so double noise. That and the matrix perception since the deck could only see what's around it without a matrix perception test, even if you're standing next to the device. With a datajack you probably wouldn't even need the commlink as you could access your deck via that I would think.
Do you actually need your deck with you? Barring the hacking issue, couldn't you use your commlink to control your deck remotely? If that is the case, then a deck doesn't need to be compact at all, or even a single device for that matter.Noise might be a bigger problem.
Going both ways no less, so double noise. That and the matrix perception since the deck could only see what's around it without a matrix perception test, even if you're standing next to the device. With a datajack you probably wouldn't even need the commlink as you could access your deck via that I would think.
This actually gives me an idea. What if we forked cyberdecks in mobile an workstation versions? Mobile cyberdecks are what we currently have, workstations are the large, self assembled, cheap monstrosities in someone's basement. You can run a workstation remotely, you have a new piece of software: VPN. VPN sits on the workstation and you comm-link, creating a connection with high Noise Reduction. It also acts like a tunnel, allowing your workstation to see everything that your comm-link does, and allowing you to access your persona and slave your devices to the workstation through your comm-link. To give people a reason to still have mobile cyberdecks, limit VR on remote, I'm not sure which would work better, disallowing VR full-stop, or just not allowing hot-sim.
Agreed in full about the cobbled-together monsters that most deckers should be using vs the store-bounght shiny that we actually see. I wanted to see a real scratch-built look in the SR5 core, since everything was still in the "We have no idea what works" stage of thins, but a need for official security deckers put me out of that one.
My initial suggestion list had six Decks, named things like "ScriptKiddie Scrounger" and "FrankenSlamm-0's Monster", with the intent that *real* decks would be included in the Matrix book down the line. That cobbled-together vibe made sense to me, but, not my call to make in the end.
Automatics shouldn't exist as a category, IMHO. Pistols and Longarms would do, but there needs to be a third in there for "firearms". I'd be tempted to stick heavy weapons in there as the other, but, not sure. But that's a tad off-topic, so. :)
I swear I just talked about this. Go with pistols (1 hand) long arms (2 hand) and then automatics isn't a weapon skill but rather a recoil compensation skill. Rather than using the default natural RC, you make an Automatic + Strength [physical] test to reduce the recoil penalty.Automatics shouldn't exist as a category, IMHO. Pistols and Longarms would do, but there needs to be a third in there for "firearms". I'd be tempted to stick heavy weapons in there as the other, but, not sure. But that's a tad off-topic, so. :)
I actually had this as a houserule before but heavy weapons made the Firearms group too strong. I'd put Gunnery in there instead, but still require a heavy weapons skill for heavy mounted weaponry. The big hip-fired machine guns, missile launchers and indirect fire grenade launchers are different enough that they should probably have their own skill pretty much all the time. Direct fire stuff that you look down the barrel of - pistols, rifles and mounted bullet-throwers with sights (or embedded camera in the case of remote control) all fit nicely into one group both logically and balance-wise.
I'd keep heavy weaponry out of any groups for the same reason exotic weapon (dart pistol) is on it's own. Too much potential power in one skill to allow volume discounts.
Sorry for following you down the rabbit hole, but I thought the playtest info would be useful.
I swear I just talked about this. Go with pistols (1 hand) long arms (2 hand) and then automatics isn't a weapon skill but rather a recoil compensation skill. Rather than using the default natural RC, you make an Automatic + Strength [physical] test to reduce the recoil penalty.Automatics shouldn't exist as a category, IMHO. Pistols and Longarms would do, but there needs to be a third in there for "firearms". I'd be tempted to stick heavy weapons in there as the other, but, not sure. But that's a tad off-topic, so. :)
I actually had this as a houserule before but heavy weapons made the Firearms group too strong. I'd put Gunnery in there instead, but still require a heavy weapons skill for heavy mounted weaponry. The big hip-fired machine guns, missile launchers and indirect fire grenade launchers are different enough that they should probably have their own skill pretty much all the time. Direct fire stuff that you look down the barrel of - pistols, rifles and mounted bullet-throwers with sights (or embedded camera in the case of remote control) all fit nicely into one group both logically and balance-wise.
I'd keep heavy weaponry out of any groups for the same reason exotic weapon (dart pistol) is on it's own. Too much potential power in one skill to allow volume discounts.
Sorry for following you down the rabbit hole, but I thought the playtest info would be useful.
I swear I just talked about this. Go with pistols (1 hand) long arms (2 hand) and then automatics isn't a weapon skill but rather a recoil compensation skill.
Has anyone done a breakdown of what the various parts of a deck cost? If we have an estimate for each device rating, program use slot, and ASDF point we'd be a lot closer to laying the foundation for build-your-deck adventures.
I thought you could reconfigure ASDF on the fly.
I haven't figured out why the +1 +2 +3 +4 is required. Why can't it be an even split? But related to the price question, how can you work out the price for each if they are reconfigurable.
I always thought of them working something like skills or attributes. Let's say you have six attributes to a deck:
Device Rating
Programs
Array 1
Array 2
Array 3
Array 4
Array costs something like - each level is 3xNew Level rating. So a level 1 is 3 Build points. Level 2 is a total of 9 build points. Level 3 is a total of 18 build points. Level 4 is a total of 30 build points.
Device Rating and Programs are both more expensive. On the order of 5xNew Level, so like attributes.
All cyberdecks have a place for a module and a place to wire a module in. So let's call each of those a 10 BP quality.
So, for this, a DR 3 with 3 3 3 3 and 1 program would be ...
30 + 72 + 5 + 10 + 10 = 127 build points.
A DR 3 with 5 5 1 1 and 1 program would be ...
30 + 96 + 5 + 10 + 10 = 141 build points.
Then you could do things like say - if you lock your array, it's 2xLevel to improve instead. So a locked 3 3 3 3 would be 30 + 68 + 5 + 10 + 10 = 113 BP?
Deckers don't really benefit from more flexibility on deck construction. You can already get almost whatever array you want with the current options, with a soft link to Device Rating and Programs. As Attributes get higher so does DR and # of Programs, along with increased cost. And I'm not sure that giving new players a complete custom deck construction option is a good idea, just too many traps for new players. All 5s with a DR1 and no programs for 200 BP for example. Or all 3s and a DR and Programs of 5 for 234? BP. Too much potential for overspending on one area and underspending on others, unless BP are trivial costs and every decker can start with a Fairlight Excalibur equivilant.
Personally I think that an even bigger problem is the cost of programs. They're far too cheap and definitely need some sort of revision in price but I've yet to tackle that one.Agreed. At present the choice is basically "take all of them", which is a bit crazy.
Oooh. I really dig it. It does a lot of interesting things. I think you'd want to pair it with an overall reduction in price for decks - which makes a lot of sense. The deck gives you raw computing power, but not much else. The code is what breaks into things.
The only quibble I would have is the Software Design knowledge skill. Hackers are already skill-intense enough. Keep it with Software on both tests - but make the Design test linked to Intuition and the Implementation test linked to Logic. The sales test, of course, is linked to Charisma.
Here's a related question for y'all:
Should there be a difference in how AR hacking and VR decking works?
Here's a related question for y'all:
Should there be a difference in how AR hacking and VR decking works?
Here's a related question for y'all:
Should there be a difference in how AR hacking and VR decking works?
The only difference I could think of that makes ... some measure of sense ... is that AR hacking, you can hack everything you see and VR decking requires you to actually be able to see the icon. This would actually be a significant buff for combat hacking in AR as one of the reasons it's not really viable is that you have to spend actions finding the gun in the first place to be able to hack it.
That's a pretty great idea since the device in question is effectively traced already. And that location data could actually ease finding the device rather than just being a criteria for ID like it is now.It does step on the toes of the I C U quality from Data Trails (p44). However, a ton of the qualities there just make sense as better rules for the Matrix.
I would either make MP a non-action for visual range (like normal perception) and/or give automatic MP hits or massive dice bonuses for purposes of detecting devices in visual range.
Here's a related question for y'all:
Should there be a difference in how AR hacking and VR decking works?
In essence, 'meltware' would be 'drugs for Decks', giving a short-term gain but at a cost, perhaps damage to be repaired later?
Certainly fits into the 5E mantra!
I have to say I really like the idea of 'meltware' and other such one shot only programs. It really fits in with my vision of what the matrix and decking should be. I also think I could combine this idea with some of the others I'm working on for my house rules quite easily. Definitely food for thought there.
What you guys are looking for is an "exploit". These are back doors and Trojans which others have put in place, but once used they get quickly patched.
Here's a related question for y'all:
Should there be a difference in how AR hacking and VR decking works?
That's sort of implemented in that beyond 100 m, there is a noise penalty.Except you can't move two inches without getting Noise reduction.
That's sort of implemented in that beyond 100 m, there is a noise penalty.Except you can't move two inches without getting Noise reduction.
Datajack? That's a noise reduction.
Signal Scrub? That's a noise reduction.
Second Datajack? That's a noise reduction.
Satellite Uplink? That's a noise reduction.
Third Datajack? That's a noise reduction.
Vectored Signal Filter? That's a noise reduction.
Fourth Datajack? That's a noise reduction.
Antennae? That's a noise reduction.
Fifth Datajack? That's a noise reduction.
Fresnel Fabric Clothes? That's a noise reduction.
Sixth Datajack? That's a noise reduction.
Decrease Noise Spell? That's a noise reduction.
Seventh Datajack? That's a noise reduction.
Quiet echo? That's a noise reduction.
Eighth Datajack? That's a noise reduction.
Reciever commlink dongle? That's a noise reduction.
Ninth Datajack? That's a noise reduction.
Nine Datajacks? Well, bully for you, still only 1 point of Noise reduction. If each one stacked with each other, then it would specifically state that they do.Nowhere says you can have more than one Smuggling Compartment, but people do it all the time! All the text says is that if you have the Datajack wirelessly enabled, you get Rating 1 Noise Reduction. It doesn't say anything about multiple copies not doing noise reduction.
And in all that he even missed one source - the Rigger Command console.I actually considered it, but then I figured that a hacker wouldn't probably be using an RCC. However, had I added that line in, I could have listed a tenth line for Datajacks ...
I actually considered it, but then I figured that a hacker wouldn't probably be using an RCC. However, had I added that line in, I could have listed a tenth line for Datajacks ...
A technomancer does get access to Signal Scrub, Quiet Echo, Decrease Noise spell, and Fresnel Fabric for noise reduction though. That's still a fair bit, especially considering that Fresnel Fabric is limited only by your cash.
You could get a Fresnel Fabric Cloak with Rating 10 noise reduction for just over 10k nuyen. That's probably all you ever need.A technomancer does get access to Signal Scrub, Quiet Echo, Decrease Noise spell, and Fresnel Fabric for noise reduction though. That's still a fair bit, especially considering that Fresnel Fabric is limited only by your cash.
Which could be quite a lot, since Technomacers dont have to spend a small fortune on a deck.
I think that decks do not have that much value in them. Everyone can deck and having a fancy deck does not really make you a better decker the way that having a control rig makes the rigger a better driver or a power focus makes the mage a better mage.This man, he gets what I hate about decks. If you upgrade your deck, you have better defenses and limits ... but your core competency doesn't change. You spend an astonishing amount of dough and it doesn't really help you outside of Attack damage.
I think an RCC with a Sleaze done is probably the better option.
I believe the RCC is described as all the functions of a commlink plus the rigger functions.
That said, you just need to mod on Sleaze 1 and run Smoke-and-Mirrors and you're fine. Since it's an RCC, you can do +5 Sleaze and offset the noise entirely due to Device Rating.Then you might as well take Like A Boss since you won't be using Attack actions.