Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: Marc A Renouf <jormung@*****.UMICH.EDU>
Subject: Re: Bio vs Cyber in Mages
Date: Fri, 18 Aug 1995 11:35:45 -0400
On Thu, 17 Aug 1995, Georg Greve wrote:

> Yeah - that's how it's said in the sourcebooks. But I hate it - this
> way it is MUCH more Magic-Friendly to take CYBERWARE instead of
> BIOWARE, which absolutely makes no sense to me !
> For those who don't believe me: Just take a look at the
> Shadowtech-sourcebook - 1/2 of the Body Index (round down) adds to all
> TN for magical healing. That means a Character with 2 points worth of
> Bioware has an essence of 4 and a +3 for all magical healings (+2 due
> to the essence loss and +1 due to the Body Index), while a character
> with 2 points worth of Cyberware only adds +2 to the TN of all magical
> healings... so to all magic-users: Forget this Bioware stuff, take the
> METAL !!

The way we work this is that Bioware in a mage does not reduce
his or her essence, it reduces his or her *Magic* attribute directly.
That gets around that annoying double whammy for mages with bioware. I
think that it's just an oversight on FASA's part to not clarify this, not
an intentional way to screw mages.
As far as actual modifications go, if you are given the choice,
go for bioware. Why? Because the body index costs are usually lower
than the analogous essence costs for the same increases. For example:
Muscle replacement (cyber) costs 1 full point of essence per level.
Muscle augmentation (bio) costs significantly less. You can get the same
bonus to your Strength and Quickness and still lose less magic. Better
still, the Quickness bonus adds to Reaction, which muscle replacement
doesn't offer. And it has the capability to heal itself if damaged,
which muscle replacement also does not offer.

Marc

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about Bio vs Cyber in Mages, you may also be interested in:

Disclaimer

These messages were posted a long time ago on a mailing list far, far away. The copyright to their contents probably lies with the original authors of the individual messages, but since they were published in an electronic forum that anyone could subscribe to, and the logs were available to subscribers and most likely non-subscribers as well, it's felt that re-publishing them here is a kind of public service.