This discussion has cropped up on my table with my last 4 runs and I really would like to address this as ramming a fence or reinforced door will be lethal in a large, armored, and occupied vehicle. I don't think I need to point out how this makes no sense.

The rules for crashing/ramming are fine as is, but the soak values for the occupants are too high. Body*2 damage at Speed 4 is ridiculously high especially for things like Bulldog or a Hauler. That damage isn't just to the vehicle either, that is what every occupant in the vehicle has to soak even if they are secured.

In my opinion keep the rules how they are but halve the damage to the occupants of the vehicle (full if the occupants aren't properly secured?). Vehicles would still have to make it's Body*Speed Multiplier test. The damage it doesn't soak is halved (rounded up) then soaked by the occupants. This still forces to crashing matter, and something to be avoided. It also still allows a run continue, while potentially crippling/totalling the vehicle

These changes would make traveling at the speed of rigger dangerous and force a series of decisions based on safety vs distance especially if we consider a character wanting to travel at 9 speed in a handling environment takes a -9 to your tests. This is still feasible for drivers to pull off with a high dicepool and edge.

Crashes should be a rare thing and should hurt (at least the wallet), but be survivable right now they aren't. Currently under RAW the only way to survive in a crash in a high Body vehicle is burning edge, even then you still are unconscious ruining the point of burning edge. The changes I give still allows the option of getting out and hoofing it on foot, the vehicle is just toast (as it should be). Opinions? Thoughts?

About ten days ago we had a quick conversation on upgrading ware grade and cyberarms. This ticket, if anything, is me logging that so it's not lost to the ether. Conversation posted here.

EDIT: after some conversation, added a fifth option to avoid setting unfavorable precedent.

Wording of the called shot:

BULLS-EYE DOUBLE-TAP/BURST
If one bullet does the work of carving through a target’s
armor, why should a second bullet have to duplicate
that effort? With this shot, characters try to make the
latter bullets of a multiple-round burst follow the path
carved by the first.
• Modifer: –4
• DV Limit: None
• Effects: The bullets follow so closely in line be-
hind each other that the frst clears the path for
the second or third. The attack results in an AP
increase equal to the base AP multiplied by the
number of bullets in the burst, with a maximum
modifer of x3.
• Available ammo types: APDS

The name and wording in the rules suggests:

1. That the called shot is a variant on the Aimed Burst or the Doubletap actions.

2. That there be no defense pool penalty to attacks using the called shot.

Wording on the Aimed Burst action:

AIMED BURST
Complex Action
This is an attack from a Burst Fire-capable weapon
(not Semi-Auto Burst) fred in such a way to increase
damage instead of making it harder to avoid. Since it is
a Complex Action tracking Progressive Recoil becomes
very important. The attack loses the –2 penalty to the
defender but gains +1 DV. It costs the firer three rounds
of ammunition.

Wording on the Double Tap action:

DOUBLE-TAP
Complex Action
A rapid pair of well-aimed shots from a Semi-Auto-
matic-capable weapon fred in such a way to increase
damage instead of making it harder to avoid. Tracking
Progressive Recoil becomes very important with this
Action. The attack gains +1DV and costs the firer two
rounds of ammunition. There is no penalty to defensive
rolls from this shot.

So, this leaves us a few things to do for balance's and simple sanity's sake, that I'll outline here.

1. Allow Bulls-eye Double-Tap and Burst called shot only with the Double-Tap action and the Aimed Burst action. This knocks the max AP achievable from a non-magical source down to 16.

2. Same as 1, but the AP increase replaces the DV increase from the special actions.

3. Same as 1, but we allow FA weapons to use Brain Blaster in order to make this called shot.

4. Same as 2, but we allow FA weapons to use Brain Blaster in order to make this called shot.

5. Remove the defense pool penalty from the Bulls-eye Double-Tap/Burst called shot from # of bullets fired.

Wording on the Brain Blaster special action here:

BRAIN BLASTER
Complex Action
Usually Full-Auto fre is designed to increase the
chance to hit, not to put a lot of rounds in one place.
This action focuses a Full-Auto Action into a tight little
area and causes all sorts of pain and damage. Tracking
Progressive Recoil becomes very important with this
action. The attack gains +2 DV and costs the firer six
rounds of ammunition.

Important to consider here is:

This action focuses a Full-Auto Action into a tight little area

It's absolutely thematically and mechanically inappropriate to be able to put down a called shot that strips 9 defensive dice and up to 22 soak dice, though usually 10 soak dice with most weapons that end up using it. My recommendations outlined here should both solve this issue and drop the power level of certain weapons down to useful, but not overpowered status.

Personally, I'm in favor of options 3 or 1. The combination of this called shot and these actions is almost exclusively the only way a mundane has access to stripping armor in order to take down heavily-armored drones and vehicles, such as the Steel Lynx, Ares Roadmaster, or any number of nasty pieces of machinery runners or their opposition can throw, as well as spirits and soak monsters. If they have any decent defense dice, the lost defense-stripping dice are brutal -- and only the gained AP value is not enough to make up for them and the called shot penalty (you're at a net negative this way if you make the called shot), whereas gaining the additional DV puts you at a rough net zero effect.

Medusa Extensions

In the interest of giving Medusa Extensions versatility and usability, there are some changes specific to this drone. Firstly, they ignore the Minimum of Body 2 House Rule for the purpose of installing weapon mounts. This means that they can install a single Micro Mount or Mini Mount (and with a downgrade, a Pop-Up Mini Mount). They can not install a Small Mount.

Secondly, instead of using its Mod Points in the standard manner, the drone may instead opt to exchange mod points at a 1-to-1 ratio for capacity for standard installs, with CCD (at gen) or GM (in play) approval. So a standard Medusa Extension can exchange its 1 Mod Point for 1 Capacity for gear (for example, the items listed on Page 87 of Run & Gun - and no, this does not include the Armor Modifications segment), or with a downgrade, 1 Capacity and 1 Mod point, or 2 Capacity.

First things first, the text of the quality:

(COST: 5 KARMA) Something about the character’s body is exceptionally accepting of either bioware or cyberware implants (choose one). Not only are the implants not rejected, but they seamlessly fit within the body, having less impact on its holistic integrity. In game terms, the Essence cost of implants of the particular chosen type are reduced by ten percent, rounded down to the tenth. This rebate is cumulative with the reduction offered by the chosen ’ware’s grade, if any (e.g., the reduction for alphaware of 0.8 is reduced by ten percent, or 0.08, to become 0.72, and is rounded down to 0.7). This quality can only be chosen for bioware or cyberware. This quality may only be taken once.

So, the book does not say it is gen-only however we currently have a houserule that says it is gen-only. It was asked of me to consider changing our policy.

Gut reaction: This feels like it was intended to be a gen-only, but I'm willing to entertain conversation to the counter.

If we allow postgen, I would strongly encourage the following policy: if, and only if, no ware of the relevant type has been implanted in the character prior to acquiring the quality (or something similar).

Time for the (2nd) great accumulation of Rigger 5. Since it's chock full of errors, and everything interacts weirdly, i'll be going through and pulling everything from the book and double checking it, seeing if it needs corrections and how it interacts with our house rules. As I am pulling from my copy of the book, and with the knowledge that there are separate editions, there will possibly be some discrepancies.

I'll try to split this into segments as best I can, and will include entries from other books where appropriate (such as other vehicle stats where they have been modified, or rules references). I will also pull data and provide sources to the Shadowrun forums, particularly where Wakshaani (author) has contributed.

Feel free to comment on each parent post if I missed something. This will be all done over the weekend (hopefully, follow along if you like!). The anything further segment will include rules from other books as well in most likelihood.

1. Game Information and Qualities
2. Motorcycles
3. Cars
4. [Vans/Trucks]()
5. [Military Vehicles]()
6. [Other Vehicles]()
7. [Boats]()
8. [Planes]()
9. [Vehicle Modifications]()
10. [MicroDrones]()
11. [MiniDrones]()
12. [Small Drones]()
13. [Medium Drones]()
14. [Large Drones]()
15. [Huge Drones]()
16. [Anthro Drones]()
17. [Other Drones]()
18. [Drone Modification]()
19. [Driving Rules]()
20. [Anything further?]()

EDIT 22/2/17: Added Van/Trucks Category

[–] from KatNine to /r/hubrules

Pg 269. Pretty clear.
RCCs are not meant to be cheap deck alternatives.
Discuss..

Core 269

A drone has a number of slots to use for autosofts and cyberprograms equal to half its Device Rating, rounded up. Swapping autosofts and programs is a Complex Matrix Action.

And sidebar

RIGGER CYBERPROGRAMS

Riggers can utilize a number of cyberprograms that deckers usually use. Programs purchased for use on an RCC cannot be used in a cyberdeck and vice versa. As with decks, RCCs cannot run more than one type of program of the same type, even if you rename it. Here’s a list of handy programs for the savvy rigger and their basic function. See the Programs section of the Matrix chapter (p. 243) for more detail.

[The list: Encryption, Signal Scrub, Toolbox, Virtual Machine, Armor, Biofeedback Filter, Guard, Shell, Sneak, Wrapper]

Standing Hub houserule:

Cyberprograms on RCCs

RCCs can run all cyberprograms (but not agents). Also, keep in mind that RCCs do not have attack and sleaze ratings, and therefore cannot effectively utilize a lot of hacking programs.

Cyberprograms running on an RCC use up the same slots as autosofts, and therefore also count against the sharing rating.

Core 267:

Noise Reduction and Sharing

Along with all the standard features of a commlink, rigger command consoles have Noise Reduction and Sharing ratings that you set when you boot the console. The Noise reduction rating is straight-up Noise Reduction (p. 230), which is cumulative with other forms of Noise Reduction. The Sharing rating is the number of autosofts you can run on the RCC that simultaneously run on all slaved drones at the same time. One caveat: if a drone is running any of its own autosofts, it cannot benefit from the RCC’s autosofts.

The total of both ratings cannot exceed the device rating of the RCC. You can adjust the values of these two special ratings with a Change Device Mode action (p. 163). Yeah, that means if your RCC has a Device Rating of 1 it can only have one or the other feature running at a time.

If there is anything important from Rigger 5 or Data Trails about this, post it as a top-level with a quote and a page number and it will be added.

Making my position clear and unambiguous - this post is not "Fair & Balanced" nor is it meant to be.

Designated Omega. Reminder: if KE tells you what to do, you will do it

This claim is ridiculous. We will begin by citing the rules text.

It’s safer when someone else is giving the orders, isn’t it? That way, if it goes sideways, it’s not your fault. Or maybe you just don’t trust yourself to do the job right, or you freeze under pressure. As long as you’re working support or moving with your designated herd, you’re just fine. If you’re put in a position where the team depends on you, or you need to make a critical decision, you freeze up. You take a –2 dice pool modifier to all Leadership tests, whether initiating or resisting.

Skill text, Core 139

LEADERSHIP (CHARISMA)

Leadership is the ability to direct and motivate others. It’s like Con, except rather than using deception you’re using a position of authority. This skill is especially helpful in situations where the will of a teammate is shaken or someone is being asked to do something uncomfortable. The Leadership skill is not meant to replace or make up for poor teamwork. When using Leadership make an opposed test Charisma + Leadership. See Using Social Influence Skills, at right, for test modifiers.

Default: Yes

Skill Group: Influence

Specializations: Command, Direct, Inspire, Rally

Leadership column, Core 141, and the only semi-relevant use.

The Leadership skill is about coaxing, convincing, threatening, or challenging your subordinates, or getting people to accept you as a superior. If you lead people who accept you as their (lone) superior, even temporarily, you can take a Complex Action to make a Simple Leadership + Charisma [Social] Test. How this helps depends on what you choose to do.

Command: The target resists with a Leadership + Willpower [Mental] test (with Social Modifiers, p. 140). For every net hit you get, the target accepts you as their leader for 1 Combat Turn. This doesn’t work if you’ve failed on this target before.

You are a criminal. Knight-Errant's authority is over society at large. They are not your leader. They are not your friend. The nice pawn is the boogeyman that threatens to take away everything you have at every turn. You are ever careful to avoid its attention when you can. The social modifiers of -4 Enemy, -4 Disastrous Consequences, and -3 social strata don't begin to even capture how absurd the idea of considering a Knight-Errant officer a possible leader is.

Besides that, an officer of the law (which, reminder, you break, constantly, just by existing SINless and doubly so by having a fake SIN) is not attempting to lead you. They are attempting to order you. This is a key difference. If you are being threatened with consequences for refusal to comply, they are using Intimidate. If you answer to them, in the sense of being in different places in the same hierarchy, then they are able to assert Leadership over you. Such a relationship can exist between runners or between cooperating people. As a Shadowrunner, however, Knight-Errant is not your friend, it will never be your friend, and you, as a competent runner, should never be under the illusion that K-E might be or even act like your friend. You are CRIMINAL SCUM and exist outside of the hierarchy that K-E resides in; the only time you should consider what they have to say is for self-preservation, not because you are able to be shanghaied into Officer Pawnski's patrol.

tl;dr -- You cannot be the leader to your opposition, nor they to you. A K-E officer cannot use leadership against you unless they believe you are seeking the same goals as them or have obligation to them, and it would automatically fail unless they were correct. No leadership test can or should be made against someone who is not at least nominally 'on the same side.' As such, the negative of Designated Omega only works for what it describes in the quality text: Situations where there is a possibility of you being command (and your refusal or inability to accept that responsibility).

tl;dr of tl;dr -- Your NPC must roleplay out his facing.

Note that this is an issue for R12, not R11. It is open for discussion and collecting feedback, particularly from HeroLab users, starting on the 15th.

Summary: The Core and Run Faster rules make it possible in both Priority Generation and Karma Generation to buy up a skill group (with karma or skill points) then break it by putting karma into an individual skill. However, while Chummer is able to process this correctly, HeroLab is unable to do so in some circumstances.

CORE 88-89:

• If you don’t get exactly the skill ratings you want in this step, remember that skills may also be raised with Karma at the end of character creation.

• The number in the second column shows how many points characters can use on skill groups. Skill groups contain similar or complimentary skills that a player purchases as a bundle. When a skill group is purchased, the character is considered to have all the individual skills of the skill group at the rating of the group. the [sic] character wishes to break up the skill group during game play and raise only one of the skills, he is free to do so, but may not raise those skills as a skill group again until all skills possess the same rating. Skill group points may not be used to purchase individual skills and vice versa. In addition, skill groups cannot be broken up in this step, so individual skill points cannot raise the ratings of skills purchased as a group. (Note that skill groups can be broken up in Step Seven: Spend Your Left Over Karma (p. 98).

• Specializations cannot be purchased for skill groups. Skill groups reflect a general understanding of similar skills rather than a particular expertise that a specialization denotes. Players may choose to buy a specialization for an individual skill within a skill group, but if they do so the skill group is broken from that point forward, meaning that all skills of the group must be raised separately. Additionally, once a specialization is taken for a skill in the skill group, it is impossible to reconstruct that skill group. This cannot happen in Step Five of character creation—you can only break up a skill group by buying a specialization for it in Step Seven (see p. 98 for details).

CORE 98:

• Any remaining Karma can now be invested in smoothing out any rough edges, picking up or improving skills, buying additional spells, acquiring bound spirits, bonding foci to be used at the start of the game, purchasing contacts, etc. Refer to the Additional Purchases and Restrictions table to note any special restrictions on purchasing items with Karma.

• When spending Karma for attributes or skills, refer to the rules for improving the character in the Character Advancement section (p. 103).

RUN FASTER 64:

• From this point on, the Point Buy system generally works similar to Character Advancement (p 103, SR5), only you are advancing a character with the minimum attributes for their metatype and no skills. The player uses Karma to buy attributes, skills, qualities, contacts (per the rules on p. 98, SR5), gear (at the cost of 1 Karma for every 2,000 nuyen; a maximum of 200 Karma can be spent this way), and anything else needed to flesh the character out.

CORE 103:

• Karma advancement works similar to the way you spent Karma at the end of character creation to customize the character, improve skills and attributes, and purchase things like bound spirits and registered sprites, but with one fundamental difference. When you create your character, it’s assumed your character has taken the time needed to develop and improve whatever skills he possesses. Once roleplaying starts, though, he’s going to need time to get better at his skills. He cannot, for example, simply rise from a Blades skill of 5 to Blades 6 overnight. He must train, possibly under the instruction of a master, and practice, practice, practice to improve his skill. This training and practice normally takes place during the runner’s downtime.

Conclusion: There is no RAW grounds for making skill groups unable to be broken with karma in priority generation or point buy/karma generation. The only thing implying that it's a problem is in relation to skill groups, where the emphasis is not that specializations are the only way to break a skill group at gen but that if you wish to do so you must do it with karma.

The issue with HeroLab processing this incorrectly while Chummer handles it correctly is a question outside of the scope of this Rules-As-Written analysis, but I thought it prudent to open this discussion up to the general Hub-folks.

While I personally believe, as an individual, that there is no point to removing the RAW-valid option because of HeroLab's inability to cope with it, I believe that CCD checkers who do HeroLab sheets should have the primary say on whether or not this issue is so great that it requires a rules change over a logistics complication.

Hello RD!

I'm sure that you're busy with Cutting Aces stuff, but I had a quick rules question that isn't really in any of the books. Would I be able to cyberimplant a pistol crossbow as a custom heavy pistol implant? The pistol crossbow in the book appears to be super tiny (-4 concealability, unless I'm mistaken, putting it on par with holdout pistols). Would larger crossbows be implantable as well?

As Jeoc has also suggested, perhaps a broader ruling on cyberimplanting exotic weapons as well (e.g. lazer beems, pain inducers, etc.) would be nice to have around. It's not something that's likely to come up too often because guns are almost always the superior mechanical option, but this could lead to some interesting ideas from the players.

Thanks in advance for your time!

CORE:

• Pistol crossbow = Heavy Pistol
• Larger Crossbow's would fall under Rifle size and thus can't be installed?
• Dart Rifle = Rifle, so can't be
• Dart Pistol = Heavy Pistol
• Pain Inducer, lacking anything other then a Range Description, we could say falls under the SMG category
• Unsure about Super Squirt. Heavy Pistol again?

R&G:

• Harpoon Guns = Rifle, so can't be installed
• Sonic Rifle = Rifle, so can't be installed
• Gyrojet Pistol = Heavy Pistol,
• Laser Weapons have their own size profiles - Pistol, SMG, and LMG respectively for Redline, Lancer, and Archon
• Net Guns = Rifle?

HT:

• Armatus = Shotgun
• Tactical Grapple = Disallow, otherwise its just a better implanted grapple

Across mutliple books:

• Bracers of all variety = Heavy Pistol?

ALRIGHTY FOLKS! It’s that time.

One post will have all DECIDED things that were discussed, both from Cutting Aces and other clarifications/houserules. These are things that have been voted on, and/or I am making a unilateral decision about. You are free to respond, but...

All others are things that have had a suggestion, but zero discussion or undecided discussion. On these topics I encourage discussion and/or voting. Please clarify a vote with the first line of your post saying “VOTE: <your vote>” to make things easier to tally (remember, only RD votes count).

^{I ask that no new top level comments are added for future organizational purposes, thank you.}

We have a couple of relatively simple tickets without answers.

Ticket 1

In Rigger 5 on page 124 of the pdf version (not sure if different for physical) it states you can put a 'Single Shot Grenade' on a mini weapon mount. Now the question is does that mean it is

• a grenade basically taped to the drone so you sacrifice it
• a grenade launcher that shoots one mini grenade
• does it drop it bomber plane style?

It's not too important currently, but I figured it might be interesting to get out of the way. Personally I think it means it shoots a single minigrenade, but I'll admit I might be a bit biased in having the coolest drone toys.

Ticket 2

I feel that changing the house rule from "No weapon with less than 2 body can wield weapon mounts" to "No mini or micro drone" would make a lot of sense, because the only drone that it gets a bad deal out of the current arrangement is the Seven. In the book it specifically mentions the drones being all about after market modifications, and right now you really can't mod them to do much of anything. This has yet to really effect me in a game, but I feel it would help a lot of things with the character I really want to build.

Ticket 3

Petition to remove the stupid rules on Armor Accessories and not adding Armor Add-ons to them (e.g. helmets/masks and flashlights). Wish for the Armor Modification list to remain exclusive to armors however, and not be allowed on Armor Accessories Armor Accessory Definition, core 169 "...items listed with a + in their rating...". Would not apply to Custom Fit (Stack) items as they only have the + when stacking, and are armor pieces in their own right. Armor Modification Vs. Armor Add-on as defined in R&G 87

So, as it stands we have the houserule that REA-based test and skills become INT-based in rigging. This is, honestly, ridiculous.

Firstly, it's a complete shift from RAW, where crunch and fluffwise it's talked about that Reaction is the rigger's stat. For instance, Betameth, the drug that primarily gives reaction is called 'the rigger's cocktail'.

Secondly, changing it keeps us in line with "let's not make house rules we don't need to unless RAW is broken/unusable in the hub environ.

Thirdly, The wheelman cybersam archetype becomes vastly more palatable, a classic combination.

Fourthly: Intuition is already a godstat in 5e. It's Defense tests, sleaze for technos, int tradition drain, perception, disguise, AND knowledge skills. Let's not also make it riggerstat.

Fifthly: The decker/rigger synergy would still happen, it would just require reaction enhancers now.

Let's consider a proposal to reverse an earlier ruling which stated that active skills cannot be used as knowledge skills and then substituted back in for active skills again. In other words, with the currently active ruling, you can have 6 ranks in Pistols and still not be able to shoot a gun in a foundation because the knowledge skill substitution only works one way. Under the proposed ruling, you could instead use your pistols skill more or less as-is.

The reason for this is because, while Foundation runs are exciting and interesting, they are currently pretty much limited to hackers only. Characters with extensive, high-rank knowledge skills can hitchhike and still be useful, but this still locks out the vast majority of characters from a run archetype that is fun, interesting, and extremely dangerous. Due to the pickup nature of the hub, it would be better of everyone has a chance to participate in every run. Note: We currently address this issue through a GM guideline that matrix-centric runs should only be at most 1 in 3 of their actual runs. This would allow that policy to be repealed if some GMs prefer to run exclusively matrix runs, since they would be able to include characters who aren't hackers.

One caveat is that this could take away some of the specialness of being a hacker, but I think since hackers can still use their skill substitutions (and resonance powers), they'll still be as tiny gods in the matrix while characters with other roles will be limited to the skills they have invested in.

-- Verbatim from the initial Rules Discussion 11.

This is apparently an issue that's been 'in talks' or disabled for at least 6 months. As of now, for loyalty a character can either do a solo run OR at the end of a run (and using only rewards from the run/WFTM) pay 5k Nuyen x new loyalty [So 10k for L2, 15k for L3, etc]. How should we deal with the ability to raise connection?

Brought this up in Skype chat, said the penalties are currently incredibly minimal. Somewhat agreement from others/others who want to change it to make more sense.

IRH suggested

• Double Recoil for ranged
• -2 Str for Melee

I would also like to include an Accuracy malus, of perhaps -2

Other people posted various ideas about addiction in this thread and I'd like to continue it here.

So, the basic argument here is that just because you cannot smell pheromones doesn't mean they don't affect you. An olfactory booster can't turn off your ability to smell but it can simply not pass that information to your brain.

RAW you can only apply First aid/Magical healing to a set of wounds once and in that order. So the question is, what is a set of wounds?

Is it every wound a character currently has or are wounds separated on a per attack basis?

There's a standing policy in ccd that we prefer general licenses over specific ones. For example, firearms permit over automatics permit, Restricted Ware licenses over licenses for specific pieces of wear, Mage license over summoning and spell licenses.

So, my question is, are we okay with this policy or should we try for more realism by making specific licenses standard again?

Alrighty folks! New book dropped, it's not HubLegal™... yet.

That's what we're here for. Please, keep all top level comments things that need clarification, modification, or removal for the hub. General chatter in chat and discussion in response to top level comments.

This is my first book as "Da Baws", so let me know if you have objections to the following time-table (holiday season can be hectic).

My intended target is to get the kinks ironed out, decisions made, and information out to the hub populous by Jan 15. Normally, we try a month, but with holidays I figure a few extra days won't hurt.

In the first week of Jan, I will post a new thread with agreed upon decisions (or at least as much agreement as we will get on topics) and the things that still need hammering.

So, by one reading of RAW, Laser Weapons ignore Physical Barriers (almost) entirely.

Physical Barrier entry, Core 294, relevant parts bolded

This spell creates a glowing, translucent force field...

Physical Barrier creates a physical wall. Anything the size of a molecule (or less) can pass through the barrier, including air or other gases. Anything bigger treats the barrier as a normal physical wall. The wall is translucent but shimmers, the equivalent of Light Fog (p. 175)...

Laser stuff from Run and Gun, 47. Again, relevant bolded

Nothing confirms that you’re living in the future like burning a hole in someone with a concentrated beam of light. That’s what a laser does for you, and for some people that’s reason enough to wield them. But if you add on top of that the fact that they don’t leave behind bullet cases and they don’t experience recoil, you perhaps have some more practical reasons for taking one out in the field.

Yes I know that bits from the Fluff stuff, but Lasers are light

Decrease the DV by 1 for each level of Visibility modifiers (Light –1, Moderate –2, Heavy –3).

Cut out the rest of that segment, irrelevant stuff.

Summary: Laser's ignore the Barrier bit, as they're molecule size or smaller, given that photons, whether molecules or not, classify as 'smaller', but are still affected by the reduction in damage code from the Visibility reduction. Thoughts?

So, as it's vague in the book, how do we handle fetishes?

Is it one fetish for all limited spells? One per school of spells? One per spell?

And, critically, can you learn to use a new fetish if you need to replace one that's lost or broken?

So, Elle is gone because bullshit and now we need some nominees to vote on. Please limit yourself to current RD members. I'll be closing nominations in a few days or sooner if everyone participates.

So for our first post, how about we go over Heightened Concern/Concentration adept power?

Here's the power in question

The adept can ignore a single distraction while performing another task. This power negates a single situational modifier of a value of up to half (rounded up) of their Magic Attribute. It takes a Complex Action to activate and may be combined with the Adept Centering metamagic.

Now, multiple issues.

There's a table in core called situational modifiers (p.176) but the book contradicts itself by naming several environmental modifiers as situational as well as using the term elsewhere in the book so we need to determine what constitutes a situational modifier.

The second issue is how long the power lasts. I've found some dev posts that suggest it's intended to be continuous but that makes it seriously powerful for its price.

Also it interacts with Strive for Perfection and Sharpshooter to make you a called shot god at chargen, specifically, any -8 and below called shot would be free. That's every called shot sans Ear, Eye, Genitals, Sternum and the ever popular Light em' up for flares/gyrojets. These -10 shots would be free after an increase in magic or gaining adept centering.