Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Metasapients should not be able to choose technomancers #3506

Closed
aga9 opened this issue Mar 18, 2019 · 5 comments

Comments

@aga9
Copy link

commented Mar 18, 2019

Describe the bug
As title: metasapients are inherently magical, with a MAG value (even if 0), and thus cannot emerge and become a technomancer. However Chummer5 allows metasapients to choose technomancy, thus allowing characters with both MAG and RES attributes.

Desktop (please complete the following information):

  • OS: Windows 10
  • Version 5.205
@Zitchas

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

commented Mar 18, 2019

As a GM, I enjoy the opportunity to create diverse opponents, including ones that by RAW shouldn't be able to exist, so I like having this option, and have used it. That being said, I think you're right that it shouldn't be allowed by default. (Allowed via option or houserule would be great, though)

@aga9

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Author

commented Mar 19, 2019

Personally, I agree with you 100% and support an optional rule for this. But as it stands, it's just wrong.
Even if there is an optional rule to allow metasapient technomancers, having RES should still disable MAG. It's rather fundamental to SR lore that awakening and emergence are mutually exclusive.

@SeanPGorman

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented Mar 19, 2019

I think that it is for this reason that you can check the box *"Ignore Character Creation Rules" when you create the character.

I certainly use the system for creating non-legal characters. I think the system exists to check the honest user who makes a mistake.

*Name may be different.

@chummer5a

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Owner

commented Mar 20, 2019

Hrm, this should be blocked by the forbidden entry <metatypecategory>Metasapients</metatypecategory>

From memory I never coded the priority selections to behave differently though; I'm assuming that's where the problem exists?

@Zitchas

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

commented Mar 20, 2019

I think it should be separate from "ignore character creation rules." There's a difference between allowing one specific situation and throwing out the whole ruleset.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
4 participants
You can’t perform that action at this time.