NEWS

[SR5] Quick question - Quick answer thread

  • 347 Replies
  • 115815 Views

brantlymedders

  • *
  • Newb
  • *
  • Posts: 21
« Reply #210 on: <01-05-14/1352:16> »
I have a quick question about Hosts and Mental Attributes:

I'm assuming that when one wants to perform an Edit File inside a host, you utilize the Host's rating in place of Intuition in the opposed Computer + Logic [Data Processing] v. Intuition + Firewall test. (Since I'm assuming files inside the Host are effectively owned by the Host).

However, how does this work with really high rating (7+) hosts?  Do they get their full Host rating or are they limited to the normal maximum of 6?

Michael Chandra

  • *
  • Catalyst Demo Team
  • Prime Runner
  • ***
  • Posts: 9944
  • Question-slicing ninja
« Reply #211 on: <01-05-14/1526:54> »
The maximum racial attribute rating has nothing to do with DR.
How am I not part of the forum?? O_O I am both active and angry!

brantlymedders

  • *
  • Newb
  • *
  • Posts: 21
« Reply #212 on: <01-05-14/2104:01> »
Good point. So the Security Host in Splintered State would get a whopping 17 dice to defend against an Edit File action?

S.K. Ren

  • *
  • Newb
  • *
  • Posts: 13
« Reply #213 on: <01-06-14/0819:00> »
Can you install an RCC into a cyberlimb like you can a Cyberdeck?

martinchaen

  • *
  • Guest
« Reply #214 on: <01-06-14/0853:18> »
According to RAW: unlikely. While the RCC is mentioned as being "like a deck", it is not a cyberdeck by the rules. As such, there's no corresponding RCC augmentation.

As a GM, I would personally allow it, using the same rules for the cyberdeck augmentation, but that would most likely be a house rule if anything.

Namikaze

  • *
  • Freelancer Ltd
  • Prime Runner
  • **
  • Posts: 4068
  • I'm a Ma'fan of Shadowrun!
« Reply #215 on: <01-06-14/1142:10> »
According to RAW: unlikely. While the RCC is mentioned as being "like a deck", it is not a cyberdeck by the rules. As such, there's no corresponding RCC augmentation.

As a GM, I would personally allow it, using the same rules for the cyberdeck augmentation, but that would most likely be a house rule if anything.

Ditto.  It seems totally reasonable to install a RCC inside a cyberlimb.  Maybe not in a skull, but a torso, arm, or leg sure.
Feel free to keep any karma you earned illicitly, it's on us.

Quote from: Stephen Covey
Most people do not listen with the intent to understand; they listen with the intent to reply.

Kanly

  • *
  • Omae
  • ***
  • Posts: 307
« Reply #216 on: <01-06-14/1213:30> »
Can drones substitue Electronic Warfare for Perception?

To be exact, can they substitue Electronic Warfare autosoft for the Clearsight, while using Sensor perception?

This would pretty much make Clearsight obsolete, so I'm guessing no. But hey, worth a shot.

Razhul

  • *
  • Omae
  • ***
  • Posts: 268
« Reply #217 on: <01-14-14/1356:39> »
According to RAW: unlikely. While the RCC is mentioned as being "like a deck", it is not a cyberdeck by the rules. As such, there's no corresponding RCC augmentation.

As a GM, I would personally allow it, using the same rules for the cyberdeck augmentation, but that would most likely be a house rule if anything.

Ditto.  It seems totally reasonable to install a RCC inside a cyberlimb.  Maybe not in a skull, but a torso, arm, or leg sure.

I don't know. A Cyberdeck is described as the size of 2 cards of decks. A RCC is described as briefcase sized. I cannot imagine cramming a briefcase into my arms or legs, to be honest.

Bariasu

  • *
  • Newb
  • *
  • Posts: 2
« Reply #218 on: <01-14-14/1427:56> »
Does a spirit have a armor = force ?

i know it has a Immunity to physical attacks AKA Hardened Armor = Essence * 2 = Force *2

but in the case that the spirit is hit with a Weapon Focus or a Fire Ball ... what's his effective Armor against those ?

thanks!
« Last Edit: <01-14-14/1547:24> by Bariasu »

Michael Chandra

  • *
  • Catalyst Demo Team
  • Prime Runner
  • ***
  • Posts: 9944
  • Question-slicing ninja
« Reply #219 on: <01-14-14/1828:53> »
None. Against Magical damage, a Spirit resists solely with Body.
How am I not part of the forum?? O_O I am both active and angry!

Bariasu

  • *
  • Newb
  • *
  • Posts: 2
« Reply #220 on: <01-15-14/0908:59> »
None. Against Magical damage, a Spirit resists solely with Body.

Thanks you!

JackVII

  • *
  • Prime Runner
  • *****
  • Posts: 2852
  • Ah-ah... Temper, Temper
« Reply #221 on: <01-24-14/0814:24> »
I feel like this has probably been addressed in a previous edition, but not yet clarified in 5E:

Does the Remote Operation specialization for the various Pilot skills apply to a rigger who has jumped in? Or is it intended for Control Device style operation?
|DTG|Place|Address in Brackets
"Dialogue"
PC/NPC Names
>>Matrix/Comm
"Astral"
<<Text/Email>>
Thoughts/Subvocal

Kanly

  • *
  • Omae
  • ***
  • Posts: 307
« Reply #222 on: <01-24-14/0822:42> »
My guess would be that "Remote Operation" applies if your body is not in the vehicle, whether you are using Control Device or Jumped In via wireless (I think that's possible? :S).

Question: how much does a weapon retrofitted with internal smartlink cost? I assumed 1*Weapon Cost (for the weapon) + 2*Weapon Cost (for the smartlink). But I saw a lot of posted character builds use 2*Weapon Cost for the whole retrofitted weapon (so sum is 2x, not 3x). Anyone knows which one it should be?

JackVII

  • *
  • Prime Runner
  • *****
  • Posts: 2852
  • Ah-ah... Temper, Temper
« Reply #223 on: <01-24-14/0831:02> »
I think the text in the accessory description is more clear than the table.

Quote
Retrofitting a firearm with an internal smartgun system doubles the weapon’s price and adds 2 to its Availability.

It seems like the text refers to purchasing the weapon and modifying it at the same time it is purchased. Given that the final two modifiers (cost and availability) apply to the weapon, I would go with (Weapon Costx2) for the whole thing.
|DTG|Place|Address in Brackets
"Dialogue"
PC/NPC Names
>>Matrix/Comm
"Astral"
<<Text/Email>>
Thoughts/Subvocal

Kanly

  • *
  • Omae
  • ***
  • Posts: 307
« Reply #224 on: <01-24-14/0837:10> »
Ooops, it seems I missed the text :D Thanks!