JustADude, I assumed you didn't do your research because assuming otherwise would mean you deliberately did not include all of the information about TLE-x and Move-By-Wire - i.e. you were stating your argument while carefully leaving out any evidence that would point to the contrary. Move-By-Wire, from its inception in 3rd edition - no matter what you or lurkeroutthere wish to believe - had as its inevitable conclusion attribute damage (to Intelligence or Quickness) and, if you left it in long enough, and especially at the higher levels, TLE-x. In 4th Edition, that condition becomes the
only negative possible consequence (i.e. no attribute damage), and even then it's not stated outright. Tech
has moved on; you no longer take attribute damage,
and they've developed a drug cocktail that helps keep your brain from developing the condition.
But neither of you concede the procession of consequences from 3e into 4e. Lurker either doesn't know the previous edition (which is possible), or he picks and chooses only the things that he finds support his argument and states that anything that doesn't is a matter of me (or whatever GM enforces both sides of the coin) being arbitrary and/or mean. In 3e, TLE-x
was a foregone conclusion; look at the frequency of the tests to see whether you contracted it, look at your target number; it simply was something you were eventually going to come down with if you kept the wires in that long. In 4e, it becomes something that
unless the player takes measures, the GM can decide - yes, arbitrarily- that the character's brain is finally, literally, throwing a fit. Please note that this does not apply
only to users of Move-By-Wire; I'd put people with
any high levels of DNI cyberware at risk - skillwires, wired reflexes, a vehicle rig, even a high level of 'ordinary' machine-brain linkage cyberware. It's just that users of Move-By-Wire are
especially susceptible to it.
Look at my first post:
This is not something I'd consult the player on; they knew the risks when they loaded themselves up with it.
Because I was not aware that the MBW description failed to include the high-risk warning, I didn't think it was necessary for the GM to state that risk; yes, I agree that that communication is necessary, even vital - as communication always is. It IS a risk, and by the disease description a high risk, insomuch that it costs 500/week to avoid it. Both you, JustADude, and you, lurkeroutthere, see this disease as being something that should be discussed with the player just before you inflict it on the character. I say, and have always essentially said, it's something that should be stated as a strong possibility when the player first considers move-by-wire - because in both the literature
and in the game history (both IC and editionwise) TLE-x is an eventuality that no upper-level Move-By-Wire user avoids except by removing the implant, and that lower-level MBW users run the risk of as well.
In regards to 'years of exposure', this is not a work-hazard chemical with people taking precautions not to inhale it; this is something that a character has implanted, and which is going to be a constant mid- to high-level direct exposure. JustADude, you want to express this as being a once-in-a-lifetime chance - 99.999% of most campaigns aren't going to ever have this happen to a MBW user. I disagree; the 3E game information, and to a strong degree the 4e game information, disagrees with you as well. I will concede that all of the things we're talking about can be stated by the GM as simply not being relavent to his campaign; everything is optional. But in-game, users of MBW have a high risk factor. And that, All4BigGuns, is why
my version of 'are you willing to explore being affected by this?' - which I thought was part of the MBW description - comes when the player is considering the cyberware. If they implant the cyber, they're saying 'yes'.
So I'd say the difference between you two and me is
when the discussion - or rather, for me, the statement-of-risk - happens. You want to discuss it just before you hit them with it. I want them to have their eyes open to that risk,
and accept it, ahead of time - especially if they don't take measures to avoid it, and if they DON'T take those measures, to blindside them. Read the disease again, though - the GM tells them at their next street doc checkup that they've finally 'contracted' TLE-x, "and you really should be looking at being careful in stressful situations - firefights, that sort of thing." And y'know, there's even a test (Body + Willpower (3)) to NOT have a shivering fit in a time of stress.
Hell, do you ask your players if they want to explore the condition of being a ghoul before you roll their infection chance during a fight with ghouls? HMHVV? Or even just VITAS, fighting frickin'
devil rats?? No, you aside it - and crap, maybe they ARE infected. The player's planned path for their characters is not the path they go down; a mage might find she has to confront whether or not she needs to use an implant to replace her lost-in-combat arm in order to keep up with the team, or if she has to find some other way. This isn't stuff that's planned. MBW and TLE-x at least gives the player lots of lead time.
JustADude, lurkeroutthere, If you see that as poor GMing, fine; but by no means should you be presenting your dictation of game play as being canonical, because the canon does not support your interpretation.
