| From: | Paul Gettle RunnerPaul@*****.com |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Headware Memory |
| Date: | Wed, 10 Feb 1999 00:35:06 -0500 |
At 10:31 PM 2/9/99 -0600, dghost@****.com wrote:
>>>According to Shadowbeat, Optical Memory Chips are the same size
>>>regardless of storage capacity with a possible implied limit of one
>>>gigapulse (Which, according to shadowbeat is equal to 1,000
gigapulses.
>>>;).
>
>>It should be noted that other parts of Shadowbeat seem to contradict
>>the notion of a 1 Gp limit
<<Snip>>
>I just took 1 Gp to be the limit because it was simple and neat. As
I
>said it was a *possible* implied limit.
And its the limit a lot of GMs go by. I just wanted to point out that
other parts of the book implied other things. (The interpertation I
use is that 1000 Gp was the limit as of 2052.)
Of course, since there is a lack of hard numbers to start with, that
means there's a bit of play in the final numbers that a GM chooses to
use for this. Headware chips might increment essence every 500 Mp
instead of every 100, for example.
<<SnipitySnip>>
>Well, a datajack has an Availability of Always and I would think that
a
>streetdoc would be about as likely to have headware mem as a
datajack.
The way I see it, there's a slightly bigger demand for datajacks than
there is for headware memory. You'll hardly ever see someone get
headware memory implanted without a datajack to access it, but someone
getting a datajack installed without having headware memory isn't that
uncommon. They're both in demand, but datajacks would be asked for
slightly more often. As I said in my last post though, there's not
much difference between "Always" and "2/24hrs".
<<Snip>>
>I had actually forgot a piece of cyber I had wanted to add to go with
>this ... thanks for reminding me.
>
>Headware CPU (DNI seperate)
>Essence Cost: .2
>Cost: 200 nuyen
>Availability: Always
>Street Index: .75
>Legality: Legal
This goes well with the rest of your stuff. One suggestion I might
make that might make this a bit more interesting: rated CPUs, with the
rating being tied to how much memory the CPU can address. I'd keep the
essence the same, but tie the cost to the rating. It's just a thought,
as this piece of ware stands well as is.
>>I'd say dividing the essence
>>cost by 3 had been considered and done by FASA. :)
>
>Actually, I was referring to dividing the BBB3 essence cost by 3...
so it
>divides the BBB2 essence cost by 9. :)
Exactly. They've already taken 2/3rds off the cost, and you want to do
it again?!? ;)
Going by the numbers for standard cyberdecks though, 9 is a more
resonable number than 3.
>>http://shadowrun.html.com/archive/ArchiveShowArticle.php3?IDA;
>Wasn't that or something similar posted a while back? I was
specificly
>trying to avoid infinite capacities, btw. :)
I think I mentioned it the last time the Headware Memory thread came
up. And anyway, Aaron's rule is hardly infinite. He caps it at the
(assumed) limit of an OMC, which he takes to be 1000 Mp. Even if that
limit wasn't there, there's still the nuyen to consider.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP Personal Privacy 6.0.2
iQCVAwUBNsEaF6PbvUVI86rNAQHiTQP+IWDnGT9K4SItbxWBGkAezSNAwtj16777
soyqdDvn3xiyX28d180TfBxDZJxrGsvx6/s3+AwaEocbdJ7oLtb82axz1xiMrY28
L4bmX3JLdAoWLCGBY6Eg/F05qmFUWQMq9YERh3MQd4LtC7Avc3qX9KV0zJqMet1V
C3Llhlv8yzw=5Op2
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
-- Paul Gettle, #970 of 1000 (RunnerPaul@*****.com)
PGP Fingerprint, Key ID:0x48F3AACD (RSA 1024, created 98/06/26)
C260 94B3 6722 6A25 63F8 0690 9EA2 3344
