Okay... some definitions are in order, because I don't think you're quite understanding what I mean by "rules-as-written" and "rules-as-intended".

Rules-as-written (RAW) is the letter of the law. It is the precise codification of the rules as laid out in the book.

Rules-as-intended (RAI) is the spirit of the law. It is the animus behind the rules, made evident by either a developer saying, "This is what this means" or by extrapolation based on the rest of the rules.

You keep talking about the RAW and acting as if it was the RAI. Numerous people have pointed out to you the plain intention of the rules (the RAI), but you keep going back to what is written (the RAW) to discount what seems, to most of us, to be obvious. That is either intellectually dishonest or personal naivete. If it is the latter, I apologize for suggesting you were insulting our intelligence. However, you seem to be a smart person, so I find it hard to believe you can't see the logic that's been laid out for you in this thread.

When you have rules-as-written that seem incomplete on a subject, sometimes you have to extrapolate what rules you do have in order to understand rules-as-intended. To that end, let's look at what rules we do have.

1. In the description of Cybernetic Arms, we find that multiples of the same bonus from cybernetic arms don't stack.
2. Such text was omitted from the description of the CBI.
3. A Cybernetic Brain Implant, however, is described as a unit that sits over the ears and wraps around the back of the head, melding with the being's brain.
4. Based on the description given (and the game item being modeled after Lobot's CBI from The Empire Strikes Back ), we can assume that there is no room on a being's body for more than one CBI. This is the likely reason for the lack of text referring to multiple CBIs stacking.
5. While it's possible that there are other models, we can only assume they would look and function similarly to the model provided in the core book. Otherwise, we would also be able to assume there were Heavy Blaster Pistols capable of being stored in a coat pocket with ease, or Laminate armor that looked and acted like normal clothing.
6. Fortunately, there is a system for upgrading items in Edge of the Empire : Mods.
7. Unfortunately, the CBI has no hard points for mods, and can therefore not be upgraded.
8. Further, the game was designed to limit the advancement of characteristics. There's no reason to assume the developers would be interested in providing an alternate advancement track for characteristics based on something as mundane as in-game money (which can be handed out by a GM like candy).

If you follow the rules-as-written in order to extrapolate rules-as-intended, the only logical conclusion is that no, the CBI doesn't stack with other CBIs, and for multiple reasons. I should emphasize that this shouldn't stop you from playing the game however you and your group wish. It's your game, have fun. But if you use the "I came up with my own model" excuse to do something the current items in the game can't do, just understand that you are creating a house rule, not playing according to the book.

We are going in circles at this point, yes the book says that, but there are descriptions in the book as to what the current models look like, either hand wave, house rule, flavor it, use narrative play to describe it, or have the players create it, it isn't hard, so why make it that way, your game.

I do recall like sources do not stack in most other cases...

Okay... some definitions are in order, because I don't think you're quite understanding what I mean by "rules-as-written" and "rules-as-intended".

Rules-as-written (RAW) is the letter of the law. It is the precise codification of the rules as laid out in the book.

Rules-as-intended (RAI) is the spirit of the law. It is the animus behind the rules, made evident by either a developer saying, "This is what this means" or by extrapolation based on the rest of the rules.

You keep talking about the RAW and acting as if it was the RAI. Numerous people have pointed out to you the plain intention of the rules (the RAI), but you keep going back to what is written (the RAW) to discount what seems, to most of us, to be obvious. That is either intellectually dishonest or personal naivete. If it is the latter, I apologize for suggesting you were insulting our intelligence. However, you seem to be a smart person, so I find it hard to believe you can't see the logic that's been laid out for you in this thread.

When you have rules-as-written that seem incomplete on a subject, sometimes you have to extrapolate what rules you do have in order to understand rules-as-intended. To that end, let's look at what rules we do have.

1. In the description of Cybernetic Arms, we find that multiples of the same bonus from cybernetic arms don't stack.
2. Such text was omitted from the description of the CBI.
3. A Cybernetic Brain Implant, however, is described as a unit that sits over the ears and wraps around the back of the head, melding with the being's brain.
4. Based on the description given (and the game item being modeled after Lobot's CBI from The Empire Strikes Back ), we can assume that there is no room on a being's body for more than one CBI. This is the likely reason for the lack of text referring to multiple CBIs stacking.
5. While it's possible that there are other models, we can only assume they would look and function similarly to the model provided in the core book. Otherwise, we would also be able to assume there were Heavy Blaster Pistols capable of being stored in a coat pocket with ease, or Laminate armor that looked and acted like normal clothing.
6. Fortunately, there is a system for upgrading items in Edge of the Empire : Mods.
7. Unfortunately, the CBI has no hard points for mods, and can therefore not be upgraded.
8. Further, the game was designed to limit the advancement of characteristics. There's no reason to assume the developers would be interested in providing an alternate advancement track for characteristics based on something as mundane as in-game money (which can be handed out by a GM like candy).

If you follow the rules-as-written in order to extrapolate rules-as-intended, the only logical conclusion is that no, the CBI doesn't stack with other CBIs, and for multiple reasons. I should emphasize that this shouldn't stop you from playing the game however you and your group wish. It's your game, have fun. But if you use the "I came up with my own model" excuse to do something the current items in the game can't do, just understand that you are creating a house rule, not playing according to the book.

I agree, but the rules can be altered per the rules, with good role playing and being creative. That is why I said all those careers and made the suggestion to have the players role play an invention, and keep using the term "hand waving" if you don't want to go through the trouble of having the PCs role play. It still isn't hard.

Want a CBI that is hidden, have the PCs create it, want to have arms that give +2 brawn, again have the players create it. Threats rolled? The CBI could have something that shows you have one, arms are out of proportion any numerous other things wrong with them.

The RAW and RAI, state you can invent things as players, if they didn't then why have an inventor talent that states "when constructing new items or modifying attachments, add boost or remove setback per rank of inventor".

The possibilities are only restricted by your imagination.

Okay... some definitions are in order, because I don't think you're quite understanding what I mean by "rules-as-written" and "rules-as-intended".

Rules-as-written (RAW) is the letter of the law. It is the precise codification of the rules as laid out in the book.

Rules-as-intended (RAI) is the spirit of the law. It is the animus behind the rules, made evident by either a developer saying, "This is what this means" or by extrapolation based on the rest of the rules.

You keep talking about the RAW and acting as if it was the RAI. Numerous people have pointed out to you the plain intention of the rules (the RAI), but you keep going back to what is written (the RAW) to discount what seems, to most of us, to be obvious. That is either intellectually dishonest or personal naivete. If it is the latter, I apologize for suggesting you were insulting our intelligence. However, you seem to be a smart person, so I find it hard to believe you can't see the logic that's been laid out for you in this thread.

Thanks for clarifying:) English is not my first language and I do not know all the terms(or even the correct grammar? )

Well then, based on the RAW I am only trying to underline the RAI. As I said, I can go either way with the rules. I get answers and I challange those answers with more questions, not necessary because I disagree, but because I want to see both sides of the arguement.

What this discussion developed into(for me) is that I think the entire game and the books incourage us to play around with the flavour and cosmetics of the mechanics. And I think it is a bit narrow to say that you should limit a blaster, for example, to only a few models when the text clearly tells you a blaster can look like any kind of model. Light Blaster Pistol and Heavy Blaster Pistol, for instance, are both very broad terms and can look like almost anything, as long as it looks like blaster pistols!

That is how I think it is intended. The corebook tells you you shouldn`t limit yourself to playing the species presented in the books, and I feel like that is an indicator of the games tone and intention.

But again, I can go either way with the mechanics! It wasn`t clear to me and it actually made sense to me that a droid or cyborg could have 4 arms(or more) in the SW universe.

But the last arguements I have made has all purely been about cosmetics and flavour.

Arms, hands, and legs would have to be covered up with synthetic skin or you have a Luke/Ani type deal, eye implant would also have to be handled the same way, the brain description has one model listed in the book and is what Lobot was wearing, immune implant is under the skin, Cybernetic weapon is retractable, implant armor can be seen under the skin as deformities, It is all in the books.

Want a different model that lends the illussion that the item is smaller or hidden? Have the PCs get together and create something better.

Want to house rule it, house rule it.

There will be different opinions on all of this, I like when members ask questions due to it giving me ideas or coming up with my own to present to my GM.

I don`t see reskinning and flavouring as house-ruling, houseruling would be to change the mechanics of the game system. And from what I read in the core book they incourage you to come up with your own models and cosmetic looks for equipment and gear, as for example saying that if you play a droid, why not flavour the gear as being part of them. The included models only seems to to be suggestions, not "this is what it has to look like". If that was the case, why would they write that blasters come in a seemingly infinite number of models and that some cosmetics are made to look real, while others are not, depending on if the wearer cares or what he can afford?

I think I sound more eager than I really am:p

Look at Synth skin under medical and it will talk about using it to cover up cybernetics.

We are going in circles at this point, yes the book says that, but there are descriptions in the book as to what the current models look like, either hand wave, house rule, flavor it, use narrative play to describe it, or have the players create it, it isn't hard, so why make it that way, your game.

Haha, very good point! My point was that I thought what you are calling current models were only intended as examples of some known models, since they say again and again that there are so many models of things.

I`m talking about how things look here, not the mechanics.

Yea, yea, whatever, you call it house-ruling, I call it doing what the book actually says. Doesn`t matter, maybe we are both right. House-ruling is all good, but I would only call it that if you changed the mechanics.

I do recall like sources do not stack in most other cases...

Thank you, that is helpful.

Look at Synth skin under medical and it will talk about using it to cover up cybernetics.

Ah, very cool! .. so that costs extra then? Hehe. It would be very cool to have a human with a rodian arm or a wookie leg, only being able to get certain species synthskin and prosthetics in some districts or shops!

My whole point is, there are rules to include creative thinking and creation limited only by imagination.

Want a Heavy Blaster the size of a Hold-out (re-skin)? Either have some creative role playing by the PCs to create it or pay extra for a NPC to do the same.

Want a Cybernetic Brain that can't be seen? See statement just above.

A GM or player wants to create unknown species, the home planet is in the unknown regions.

There are rules in RAW and RAI there to cover all of that.

Look at Synth skin under medical and it will talk about using it to cover up cybernetics.

Ah, very cool! .. so that costs extra then? Hehe. It would be very cool to have a human with a rodian arm or a wookie leg, only being able to get certain species synthskin and prosthetics in some districts or shops!

I would say the implant comes covered up, if damaged then you pay to fix it. Want a Dug with a Cybernetic Arm made to fit a Wookie, go for it.

There are rules in RAW and RAI there to cover all of that.

So RAW is all of the text, not just the mechanics? Then we are on the same page. Thanks the info and the input:)

RAW is what is written in the book, but there different ways to interpret what is written in the book, so RAI is what the devs or as clarified by the devs.

I think I am starting to become confused as to what game I'm playing now. Star Wars, or CP 2020?

It only becomes Cyberpunk if we get a Mister Studd™ add on.

I think I am starting to become confused as to what game I'm playing now. Star Wars, or CP 2020?

It only becomes Cyberpunk if we get a Mister Studd™ add on.

Okay, did you do the little trademark thing ? I'm afraid to Google it .

I would hope more of this is covered in either the Tech Spec book, or the Engineer book. i have not got the Lords of Nal Hutta book yet so im unsure whether there are any sidebars that cover this further.

so on to my thoughts.

all the descriptions of cybernetics talk about them replacing body parts or enhancing body parts.

1. Arms: these need some skeletal structure to attach to, as well as a neural pathway to control them so if replacing a lost arm then the supports already there. If a Player was adding additional arms then the cost would need to significantly increase if the GM was willing to let a player do it, this is to cover the extra artificial sockets and neural pathways to attach the arm to. Probably going to take a PC a while to "learn" how to use the new arms too
2. Cyber Brain: the description suggests this is bulky, it is not inside the skull. so to internalise it would require significant miniaturisation (massive expense), a thin layer spread right accros the skull just under the skin or locating it somewhere else in the body and running links up through the neck to the normal attachment points. Multiple? i guess it could either be a bigger unit on the outside or inside, but how much faster can a brain operate? more storage is great, but the over all benefits will be less and less each time. (what happens if you install a second droid brain in a droid?)
3. Eyes: again requires the socket and muscles and optical nerve to connect to, locating somewhere else in the body will require significantly more money.
4. Legs: says they come in pairs only. and adding more than 1 pair would require massive restructuring of a bipedal organic. a droid on the other hand could potentially do this, although as with eyes and arms there would need to be mounting sockets and neural connections installed at significant cost. of course the droid brain could be transplanted into a different chassis too, but thats going to cost a significant amount too.
5. Weapon implant: put 1 in each arm, sure, each leg as well? why not! but there goes 4 implants for you to carry around 4 light blaster pistols... Why?
6. Cyberscanner limb: no need for multiple, although there is the question of weather a cyber arm, with a cyber weapon and cyber scanner built in is possible (IMHO yes)
7. Imune Implant: i cant see how this could be improved upon to gain the benefit twice, it already protects against almost every known disease in the galaxy (on a side note, this seems useless to a droid)
8. Implant armour: sure it stacks, but everyone knows its under there, defeating the purpose of having it as armour does not stack remember and this is armour...
9. Prosthetic replacement: an exact mechanical replica of a lost body part, so no you cant have more than you originally had...

Basically the things that could stack would require significant additional resources and expertise to have more than your original body had. there are no rules for this... Yet. i seriously hope that rules are in the pipeline, in particular for droids as they seem to be the ones who could actually be modified to have more arms, legs, eyes or brain. also for a General Grievous style rebuild.

edit: published before i was finished

Not as long as you put your feet under my gaming table, Pal!

OK, maybe two repulsor fists for alternating punches, or two blaster implants. But that's it then!

I am very ok with the rules saying that likes don`t stack! But when people talk about real world physics and human anatomy and what would or wouldn`t work real life, I can`t help but laugh!

I am very ok with the rules saying that likes don`t stack! But when people talk about real world physics and human anatomy and what would or wouldn`t work real life, I can`t help but laught!

Well in real life you could not put a limb on your body and have it be able to do more than your normal limbs would. Because they would rip out of your flesh. But this is star wars so there is some room for fun.