[Aaron]

The Icon you change to with Change Icon has to obey the Matrix rules for Icons. So personas must be X devices must be y etc. Wrapper would allow you to make a persona Icon that looked like a device or vice versa.

Except that one of the Matrix rules for icons is that form must follow function. Your weapon can't look like a medkit unless you're running a Wrapper program.

To answer the original question, to the casual observer the icon would look like that of a medkit, but if anybody bothers to spend the time actually looking at it with a Matrix Perception Test, it would become clear that the icon's a fake. Kinda like when you're walking down the street wearing a decent wig; nobody's going to notice unless they give you a good look.

[Aaron]

Okay quick question, for the armorer skill or building in general, is there a standard or is it all left up to the GM? Is the price the same to build something as buying it, are there any restrictions caused by rarity? The book only lists modifiers but none of the other factors that go into it.

There aren't any guidelines for the cost of something you make or build yet, but I expect there will be Real Soon.

[Crunch]

The Icon you change to with Change Icon has to obey the Matrix rules for Icons. So personas must be X devices must be y etc. Wrapper would allow you to make a persona Icon that looked like a device or vice versa.

Except that one of the Matrix rules for icons is that form must follow function. Your weapon can't look like a medkit unless you're running a Wrapper program.

To answer the original question, to the casual observer the icon would look like that of a medkit, but if anybody bothers to spend the time actually looking at it with a Matrix Perception Test, it would become clear that the icon's a fake. Kinda like when you're walking down the street wearing a decent wig; nobody's going to notice unless they give you a good look.

Isn't that what I said?

[Mr.Trikorder]

I have some questions about Control Thoughts:
I take a complex action to give a command, but how is the command executed?
Does the target immediately act on the command, or on his next action phase?

[ChaosArmoury]

The Crack File action is an Attack, so using it automatically alerts the system that there's an intrusion. If I need to access and edit a protected file without leaving any evidence that something happened, what's the best course of action?

[Rotor]

Get a mark on the owner then spoof the device to send you the file? It wouldn't work if the file is in a host but if it's stored in a commlink or a camera?

[Daedalus]

Thanks.

I've seen the cyberware scanner and MAD scanner for cyberware, but how exactly would someone detect internal bioware?

Medical exam and a trained radiologist.

Assensing will get you the info as well.

[deek]

During my game tonight a question came up about Interrupt Actions and I haven't been able to find any information to support the ruling I made at the table.

Example #1:

In the first Initiative Pass, the enemy attacks at with a melee weapon on Initiative 10.  He is attacking a player that previously went on Initiative 17 (so the player has already acted).  Instead of taking his free defense, he chooses to Parry with his katana, thus dropping in Initiative score to 12.  At the end of the combat turn, I subtract 10 from all initiatives and the only one able to attack is the player (now at 2).

Any problem with that?

Example #2:

A player attacks at Initiative 10 and kills one guy, but now has to deal with two gangers coming at him with knives (one on Initiative 7 and the other at Initiative 3).  The player does a Parry against the first ganger attack (on 7), dropping his Initiative to 5.  The player does a second parry against the second ganger attack (on 3), dropping his Initiative to 0.

Any problem with that?

It seems that since the end of combat turn hasn't occurred and the -10 Initiative hits, that anyone with at least 5 Initiative in that final pass, would use these interrupts (if they could).  It seems like it may not be what was intended if you can do these interrupts after you have already acted in an Initiative Pass.  I can understand NOT doing it if you are going to lose an action in the next Initiative Pass (i.e. you already acted on 12 and by Parrying in the same Initiative Pass, you drop your score to 7 and at the end of the pass, you end up at -3, thus losing an action in the next IP). But barring that, it seems like you can use your high score to take extra Interrupt actions.

[Namikaze]

One of my players is a physical adept, and he's looking to initiate for the first time.  I know, I wanted to make him a cake or something.  Anyway, the 5th edition rules state that a character must roll Arcana + Intuition in order to successfully initiate.  Problem is, most adepts that I've played with don't even have Arcana.  I can easily house rule this whole thing, but I'm curious about if there has been any consensus on a method to allow adepts to initiate more easily.

[JackVII]

Initiative Questions

Those all look fine to me. Hell, the way the passage on initiative is written, it sounds like you can always defend yourself, even with a negative initiative.

A character with an Initiative Score of 0 or less can only take one Free Action during an Initiative Pass. However, a character with 0 or less Initiative is allowed one Free Action. She can also respond to attacks by dodging or defending herself.

[JackVII]

One of my players is a physical adept, and he's looking to initiate for the first time.  I know, I wanted to make him a cake or something.  Anyway, the 5th edition rules state that a character must roll Arcana + Intuition in order to successfully initiate.  Problem is, most adepts that I've played with don't even have Arcana.  I can easily house rule this whole thing, but I'm curious about if there has been any consensus on a method to allow adepts to initiate more easily.

Considering initiating involves discovering the higher mysteries of magic, I think one rank in Arcana is warranted as a prereq.

[deek]

Initiative Questions

Those all look fine to me. Hell, the way the passage on initiative is written, it sounds like you can always defend yourself, even with a negative initiative.

A character with an Initiative Score of 0 or less can only take one Free Action during an Initiative Pass. However, a character with 0 or less Initiative is allowed one Free Action. She can also respond to attacks by dodging or defending herself.

So you think someone could just continue to defend herself until they run out of defense pool (which they will eventually due to the -1 penalty per previous attack)? And none of that negative initiative carries over to the next initiative pass/combat turn?

[deek]

Another quickie: Do drones/vehicles suffer from the double recoil penalty for any uncompensated recoil or is that just for metahumans using heavy weapons?

[JackVII]

So you think someone could just continue to defend herself until they run out of defense pool (which they will eventually due to the -1 penalty per previous attack)? And none of that negative initiative carries over to the next initiative pass/combat turn?

The way it is written? I guess. The part I quoted seems really confusing. Going with the last sentence modifying the previous, it seems to say that a character with 0 or less initiative can dodge/defend themselves (of course, that begs the question of what that means, can you block?).

I don't think any of it effects Combat Turns, which seem to be self-contained. But it definitely would impact IPs. A character with a 21 initiative score who acts and then blocks three times in the first IP will lose their remaining IPs until the next CT.

[deek]

Yeah, I get that part, JackVII.  But if that same character had a 10 initiative score and already acted, it seems like the rules support taking two active defenses (say a pair of Parries) and then continued defenses way into the negative initiatives with no penalties in the next CT.

I would think there was a sort of limit meant to be there, hence the subtracting of 5 initiative each time, but that part you quoted really seems to go against that.  I suppose the -1 per previous attack is a way to limit that, so it won't go to infinity.