Multiple Hacking devices

Short answer is no.

The intent is that the ability to ignore Firewall Mods is applied to the user of the KHD when using programs granted by the KHD.

Long answer is:

The ability to ignore Firewall Mods is granted to the KHD not the user of the KHD.
Firewall MODs affect the attacker not their Equipment.
The KHD is not the Attacker so the section is meaningless RAW (nothing grants the user of the KHD the ability to ignore Firewall Mods).
This is absurd, so we have to interpret it as per my short answer.

This discussion is buried in the New Tunguska thread somewhere.

 

Personally I prefer "nothing grants the User of a KHD the ability to ignore Firewall MODs" as the correct answer.

But I suspect I'm in the minority. [emoji14]

 

That was everyone telling me I was crazy for suggesting that Mary Sue could ignore Firewalls with her AHD and then @ijw pointing out that the subject of the ability ignore Firewall MODs is the KHD itself not the user of the KHD (compare MML2 for what a general ability to ignore MODs would look like).

Which is why I think that - RAW - users of KHDs are never allowed to ignore Firewall MODs.*

BUT that's absurd.

The simplest way to parse it is the way I first described as the 'short answer'.

*RAW KHDs are not like Multi Rifles where you declare a BS Attack with a particular ammunition, burst and mods that can change. The skill you declare changes depending on the program you choose: the KHD grants the user access to Sword 3 programs but doesn't 'fire' them. This means there's no explicit connection between the MODs applied by the KHD and the MODs applied to the user when they use a particular program. You can argue that there's an implicit one, which is how we get to the first answer.

 

Is that thread worth checking out? Because RAW seem to allow their combination.

Marksmanship is an automatic skill that specifically states, "The user may only benefit from this Special Skill when he declares a BS Attack." I don't know what relevance that has.

I don't see a corresponding rule for Killer Hacking devices. Here's what I see:

KHD is Automatic Equipment

• Always ignores Firewall MODs, even the ones from the Defensive and White Hacking Devices.

MSV2 is Automatic Equipment

• Does MSV stuff

We apply MSV effects to BS Attacks. What rule is preventing us applying KHD effects to any hacking program at our disposal?

 

The difference is that the ignoring of Firewalls makes no mention of 'the user', unlike Marksmanship or all the MSV rules.

 

It was Koni,

This question was asked when Mary was very first revealed and I can tell you with the strongest possible confirmation that CB absolutely mean that only using the KHD programs+upgrade does Mary ignore firewalls

 

Which is why RAW, Users of KHDs don’t ignore Firewalls. Simples :P

 

That's such b*******. You can't stick to the letter of the law, RAW, when it suites CBs intentions and ignore it when it doesn't. Do labels or structure mean anything? Or is it all about the wording itself? Because this thing that's happening right now where it's somewhere in between is incomprehensible.

Players can't be expected to read automatic equipment rules like,

• Always ignores Firewall MODs

And know it means ONLY when 'the user' is using hacking programs provided by this equipment. If effects have requirements, list the requirements. If they have conditions, list the conditions.

If equipment/skills are meant to be differentiated by effects granted to the user for use with other equipment/skills, differentiate them.

But pretending equipment X's lack of certain words, found on identically categorized equipment, indicates a rule/functon on that equipment, is beyond ridiculous. Omissions are not rules, period.

 

Dude chill. It's badly written. It's not even arguably clear: by clarifying it to prevent the obvious interpretation @ijw made it absurd. You'll note no-one has actually defended it on the text.

IDEALLY it should be written closer to the way I described it first.

BUT it hasn't actually been an issue for the last 2 years despite Bandit KHD's having Scavenger. It doesn't really affect gameplay that much (Mary Sue goes from being absurdly good to being absurdly good).

AND it's an easy option for including in the FAQ.

Aside: btw this is what a defensible position looks like. Reserve slope, with good lines of fire as people crest the ridge. ;)

 

You call it a defensible position only because its the first time this rule issue was raised and needed clarification. But it's no different from the other hill you're referring to. Both are rules by/of omission. The one I was talking about just had a very large community that already knew the answer for years in comparison. So those questions get brushed aside because they get answered quickly and offline as someone is just learning the game for the first time from experienced players.