could be a stupid one, but anyway:) So we had a discussion about how does programs with + MODs work. Do they provide that + MOD for ARO? Cause here is the wording thing that caused confusion. (From Maestro) EFFECTS In the Active Turn, the user may distribute two +3WIP Rolls among one or one or two targets.. It's basically same for any program that have +MOD. My thought that it's for Burst value only (Also it's the way, how Dice Calc do the math), but some people in my meta are disagree and says that in ARO it does not grant +3 MOD, as it's not the active turn.
That is the reason for that Active Turn. It might be worder better, but... So yeah, mods work in active and reactive, it's the Burst what changes (always 1 in reactive).
Do you have a source on that bit about the MOD applying in ARO? I'm trying to find one and so far I can't.
You won’t. It’s just how it’s played. Mods are the same in active or reactive and burst changes. Strict RAW it appears you can’t use it in ARO at all. But it uses the same language as Brain Blast (just with +3WIP), which can certainly be used in ARO.
So the rules text says "In Active Turn" explicitly and everyone has just chosen to ignore that without any kind of official confirmation?
For what it's worth, the charts make no reference to active and reactive turn for the Attacker's MODs and Opponent's MODs.
It's not ignoring, so much as application. People are choosing to apply the "In Active Turn" language to the "one or one or two targets", and not to the +3 MOD itself.
The chart also doesn't make a distinction between Active and Reactive for Burst value, so I'm not sure how that's a useful source on the issue?
As Mahtamori says, Burst is covered by the standard rules for active and reactive turn, so they give the normal Burst just like all weapon profiles do. Plus Zero Pain mentions being B2 in ARO in the charts...
Huh. I dislike how they chose to write this up for the hacking programs, I can see why this would be easily confused.
And here is 1 more question. About supportware cancellation. Hackers may voluntarily cancel an active Supportware program by declaring another and expending the corresponding Order. Does this mean I have to use another program (like CLAW or SHIELD) or another Supportware to cancel the previous one? So can I put assisted fire and then go to cybermask?
Yes you can Assisted Fire and then Cybermask. Bother Assisted Fire and Cybermask are Supportware so you can only sustain 1 at a time: declaring Cybermask cancels your Assisted Fire even if you fail. Using a different type of programme (CLAW, SHIELD etc) would not cancel the Assisted Fire. Read that line as follows:
Yeah. It feels like they specifically wanted to avoid mentioning Burst (as if it was to avoid us applying Burst mechanics to hacking?), or make most programs only usable during Active turn (which is not really the case since some of them have ARO label). Reference table goes contrary to that, but then it doesn't have all the necessary info, leaving us to wonder if we should take data from it instead or consider what's written there (flat +3 to your WIP, B) as similar simplification that we should not take instead of what's written in rules. Just musing though. I'm not questioning the way people play hacking rules (except I wanted confirmation on +3 to WIP for normal rolls and during reactive turn), but I wish these rules were worded a bit... better.
Got another question in our gaming group. I have an Interventor. My opponent have a repeater near my interventor and his hacker have no LOF to my Interventor. Interventor in his active turn declares Cybermask. His hacker ARO against Interventor. How we should resolve it? This becomes a FtF roll? Or it's 2 normal rolls and cybermask fails?
Cybermask does not affect the enemy Hacker so it does not satisfy the requirements for a face to face to. It will be normal rolls, and if your Interventor is forced to make an ARM or BTS roll then the Impersonation state will be cancelled.
Both - entering imp2 state and taking BTS rolls are made in resolution of an order. So , basically I can get an unconscious impersonator via cybermask for a second:) and then the null state will cancel Cybermask. I am asking as I didn't find anything regarding this situation.
Cybermask effect takes place after rolls have been made, impersonation won't run into cancellation clause and you could end up both unconscious and in impersonation state.
