[All4BigGuns]

I like to answer questions, but my answers are not official and don't necessarily reflect the opinions of Catalyst Game Labs or its employees. I might even be wrong.

Emphasis mine.

[martinchaen]

1. Is your answers are "official" answers from the SR5 developer group?

They're as official as I can make them. I worked on the book and on the rules committee that came up with the rules before the book was written. I'm working on the Shadowrun FAQ that will be released once Line Developer Jason M. Hardy has a chance to look it over. Those answers I'm not 100% certain about I vet with Jason and the folks who work on Shadowrun. I never post an answer that I think might be contradicted in a future update. Other than that, you get what you pay for.

Make of that what you will.

[Kanly]

There is no way you get 25% off 100-200k decks for 0.1 essence and 4k nuyen *puts pole away*

[Top Dog]

Wait, since when do cyberlimbs not affect movement rate? Limits I'm aware of as per Aaron's reading in the FAQ thread, but movement rate? Why wouldn't cyberlegs influence movement rate, for example, when gear such as hydraulic jacks specifically aid in running tests?

Specifically, movement rate is listed as being "determined by metatype" on page 161, referring to the movement rate table on page 162. This table lists AGI x 2 and AGI x 4, making no mention of inherent attributes as the basis for the calculation. As per the Cyberlimbs chapter starting on page 455, you "take the average value of all limbs involved in the task", and I believe this to be critical since it's a task, not specifically a test.

I typed up a whole response on why you were wrong, but then I read over the line again and got your point. You're saying that, since it's not "used for a test" you refer to the second line ("In all other cases") which state you use the average.

I don't think that's what they mean by that line. I interpret it as using the limb's value when using a test with that particular arm. or using the average in all other cases - as in, when you're doing a test not just using that particular arm. But it's not very clearly written; It could certainly be read your way as well. Worthy of further discussion, but I used up all my pre-work time writing up my first response.

[martinchaen]

I agree, not clearly written at all. I'll post a question in the FAQ thread.

[Davidvs]

Thanks for this thread and the answers as it helped me find where I did things wrong. I don't post thank you's much, but this was a really big help.

[RHat]

As far as the whole internal deck thing goes, Bull's answer to the question is the same - the implant is what the deck goes into, and the cost changes do not apply to the deck.  Amongst other things, this means that you can't get a used implanted cyberdeck to circumvent normal cost and availability.

[SmilinIrish]

The headware table lists cyberdeck as $5,000+cost of cyberdeck.  Its seems logical that the $5,000 would be subject to deltaware cost increase, and then you add the straight cost of the cyberdeck.

[RHat]

The headware table lists cyberdeck as $5,000+cost of cyberdeck.  Its seems logical that the $5,000 would be subject to deltaware cost increase, and then you add the straight cost of the cyberdeck.

Which is precisely the official word.