Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: Marc Renouf renouf@********.com
Subject: Datajacks and Smartlinks
Date: Tue, 20 Apr 1999 11:30:02 -0400 (EDT)
On Tue, 20 Apr 1999, Sean McGrath wrote:

> Too easy to fudge that ... how does this spur of the moment thought grab
> you:
> 0.2 Essence 0.2 Essence

Okay, guys. I've seen this one go back and forth a lot in the
past few hours, so I'll throw in my 2 ducats.
Y'all are makin' this more complicated than it has to be. If you
look, there are actually two Essence costs listed for the smartlink. One
is 0.5 Essence, and is for the entire system. The other is 0.25 and is
the Essence cost paid when installing the smartlink in a cyberarm.
What does this imply? It implies that roughly half of the Essence
cost of the smartlink is the neural translation of the gun's signal and
optical feedback, while the other half is associated with the wiring
through the arm and the implantation of the subdermal induction pad in
the hand (which is free in the case of a cyberarm).
What does this mean? The headware associated with operating a
smartlink (including the neural control to eject clips, switch firing
modes, etc) costs only 0.25 Essence. As such, if the user wishes to have
an external connection to a datajack, so be it.
In other words, if you already have a full smartlink, you can run
it over a datajack link (which can be handy if your arm gets blown off or
if you're firing with the hand other than the one which has the induction
Similarly, if you don't want an induction pad or internal wiring
at all, you pay only 0.25 Essence (plus whatever Essence cost is
associated with your datajack). So for a minor savings in Essence, you
have a smartlink that *requires* an external link.

Easy, simple, and already more or less implied within the rules.


Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about Datajacks and Smartlinks, you may also be interested in:


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.