Printable Version of Topic
Click here to view this topic in its original format
Dumpshock Forums _ Shadowrun _ SGM Preview
Posted by: Serbitar Jun 6 2006, 12:03 PM
Just a small "work in progress" preview of my http://www.serbitar.de/stuff/SGM.pdf .
Im trying to get the SR4 matrix rules into a consistent picture and provide some stuff until Unwired is out. Lots of interpretation included, should be consistent with SR4 base rules.
Feedback is appreciated.
Posted by: UndeadPoet Jun 6 2006, 01:08 PM
Apparently I am not the only one creating the same topic on multiple boards... hehe.
You should definately catch a look; Serbitar has a very detailed, practical hacking example and brings useful houserules along.
Posted by: DarkCrisis Jun 6 2006, 03:15 PM
Im looking over it and I have a question:
In it it says that a hacker to hack in only needs to roll to beat the nodes Firewall (plus whatever account bonus).
Isn't is supposed to be Firewall+System(+Account bonus)?
Posted by: UndeadPoet Jun 6 2006, 03:25 PM
No, just firewall. Would be rediculous otherwise. System+Firewall from Serbitar's example-middleclass-house would have a treshold of six to hack it on the fly, so even the world's best hacker with the best programs would not be able to reliably hack it. On the fly.
Posted by: DarkCrisis Jun 6 2006, 03:34 PM
In this thread: http://forums.dumpshock.com/index.php?showtopic=13193&hl=
We talk about it. No one seemed to notice. I'm fairly sure in the book it's firewall and system. I dont have the book on hand but I'm REALLY sure thats right.
Plus as noted in the mentioned thread, a starting hacker can get upwards of 17 dice to roll vs the node to hack.
Posted by: UndeadPoet Jun 6 2006, 03:47 PM
Yeah, and a starting face can get 42 dice for his intimidation. I know.
But while it is a starting character, it still is a uber-leet-pro hacker/face.
Posted by: blakkie Jun 6 2006, 03:47 PM
The Threshold is Firewall + modifiers for the type of account. At the same time the system is rolling it's own Firewall plus Analyze against your Stealth. If as a GM you haven't determined the rating of the Analyze program you can just set it to the maximum, which is System. So that might be where your idea of Firewall+System comes from.
I haven't read Sebitar's document though, so maybe I have the context wrong here?
| QUOTE |
| To hack on the fl y, you spend a Complex Action and make a Hacking + Exploit (Firewall, 1 Initiative Pass) Extended Test. Th is will get you personal account access; if you want securitylevel access, increase the threshold by +3, or +6 for admin access. If you beat the threshold, you have bypassed the security and now have access to the node. Each time you make a test to hack in, however, the target node also gets to make a free Analyze + Firewall (Stealth) Extended Test. If the node detects you—whether you hack in or not—an alert is triggered (see Intruder Alerts, p. 222). |
Posted by: DarkCrisis Jun 6 2006, 03:56 PM
Probing is sys+firewall! I knew I saw that somewhere. I'll check more in depth when i have my book on hand.
Posted by: GrinderTheTroll Jun 6 2006, 04:58 PM
| QUOTE (Serbitar) |
| Just a small "work in progress" preview of my http://www.serbitar.de/stuff/SGM.pdf . Im trying to get the SR4 matrix rules into a consistent picture and provide some stuff until Unwired is out. Lots of interpretation included, should be consistent with SR4 base rules. Feedback is appreciated. |
Looks good so far, I like the examples, something often overlooked IMO.
My Wishlist - I'd really like a screamsheet for quick look-ups with SR4 references as well as to your own documentation.
Nice indeed!
Posted by: Serbitar Jun 6 2006, 06:02 PM
edited because dark is right
Posted by: DarkCrisis Jun 6 2006, 06:18 PM
Hacking on the Fly is just Firewall
Probing is Firewall+System
Posted by: mdynna Jun 6 2006, 07:50 PM
Right, and remember when you are Probing the target, the node only gets one test to detect you at the moment you actually "enter" the system. So, Probing the Target takes much longer but the chance of being detected is much less.
Posted by: GrinderTheTroll Jun 6 2006, 09:04 PM
| QUOTE (mdynna) |
| Right, and remember when you are Probing the target, the node only gets one test to detect you at the moment you actually "enter" the system. So, Probing the Target takes much longer but the chance of being detected is much less. |
General question about breaking in either Brute Force or Probed: How long does the successful attempt last? More specifically, how long if you successful Hack attempt go for? Book mentions something about paranoid systems changing passwords and such often, but what about Brute Force?
Posted by: Serbitar Jun 6 2006, 09:23 PM
I would say: Only for this try. Remember, you are not getting account data by hacking in, you are exploiting a weakness to get into the system.
Posted by: GrinderTheTroll Jun 6 2006, 09:53 PM
| QUOTE (Serbitar) |
| I would say: Only for this try. Remember, you are not getting account data by hacking in, you are exploiting a weakness to get into the system. |
I guess it's how you'd define the exploit then considering there are all sorts of exploits that could be either lasting (until patched) or just a repeatable process that takes time and has to be repeated.
Posted by: Serbitar Jun 7 2006, 02:10 PM
Hm of course, as everything in SR4 matrix, this is up to interpretation. But I think we need some "normaly it works lie this" guidelines.
Posted by: Gauvain Jun 7 2006, 05:58 PM
A slightyly off-topic question. Does anyone else get the impression that there aren't supposed to be individual 'nodes' to a system anymore? Some of the GM cheat sheets that I've seen seem to indicate some people think otherwise, but it really looks like RAW indicate that a host is now like one huge node instead of multiple subsystems. Much easier to deal with, but a real departure
Posted by: Serbitar Jun 7 2006, 06:57 PM
Every device and every comlink is a node. Appart from that I would minimize the number of nodes that a full blown matrix host system (like the system of a corp facility) consists of to about 2-3 out of gameplay reasons.
Problem is: You need some fluff reason for that. (No reason not to make corporate system out of 100 medium level comlinks)
Posted by: GrinderTheTroll Jun 7 2006, 07:18 PM
| QUOTE (Gauvain @ Jun 7 2006, 10:58 AM) |
| A slightyly off-topic question. Does anyone else get the impression that there aren't supposed to be individual 'nodes' to a system anymore? Some of the GM cheat sheets that I've seen seem to indicate some people think otherwise, but it really looks like RAW indicate that a host is now like one huge node instead of multiple subsystems. Much easier to deal with, but a real departure |
It's very general. You can make a system as complex or simple as you like.
What I'm discovering is it's really all about what a Admin, Security or Personal account lets you do with those nodes. If you make the accounts blanket the whole system, that is getting Admin gives you the keys to the whole place, then you have to make sure other things are in place like databombs, encryption or patrol IC (for example) to make up for the generality of the account types.
If instead you made each sub-system require it's own Account types, that is, Finance Node Admin can't access Security Node things unless they login as Admin there, then the multiple hack attempts should be factored into the security measures. Sure you'd have IC, Encryption and the like, but you've made the system "harder" to hack by including required re-login attempts.
Personally, I am trending towards using Access ID's or Passkey modules and using blanket type accounts (as in my first example). Yes you can hack those, but unless you've got some inside information chances are you'll be discovered.
Posted by: Serbitar Jun 7 2006, 07:21 PM
I would say that a hacked admin account is only valid for the hacked node. Remember: You do not get something like login and password when you hack in, you absue something tht gets you the targetetd account on that node.
So even if one admin account (same login, password, fingerprint, retina . . .) is valid on different nodes, you would have to hack into ech one seperately.
Posted by: GrinderTheTroll Jun 7 2006, 07:58 PM
| QUOTE (Serbitar @ Jun 7 2006, 12:21 PM) |
| I would say that a hacked admin account is only valid for the hacked node. Remember: You do not get something like login and password when you hack in, you absue something tht gets you the targetetd account on that node. So even if one admin account (same login, password, fingerprint, retina . . .) is valid on different nodes, you would have to hack into ech one seperately. |
Depends on how you'd like the thing built.
Forcing a hacker to re-exploit additional logins means they'll have more of a chance to trigger an alarm. I can see this in place of say, Patrolling Analyze-IC or something else designed to find illegal logins unless paranoia dictates the need for lots of account checking.
Posted by: GrinderTheTroll Jun 8 2006, 06:59 PM
Serbitar, I just noticed you use and define the term Matrix ID in this doc. Isn't this the same as Access ID per SR4?
Posted by: Serbitar Jun 8 2006, 07:14 PM
yes, I will call it thus in future releases, still in process of synchronizing everything
Posted by: Serbitar Jun 16 2006, 07:40 PM
http://www.serbitar.de/stuff/SGM.pdf out now!
Posted by: Serbitar Jun 19 2006, 11:22 PM
As lots of matrix related questions are coming up, I want to bump this thread and encourage discussion of my solutions. (constructive) Comments are always appreciated.
Posted by: Serbitar Jul 20 2006, 12:01 AM
some minor updates
Powered by Invision Power Board (http://www.invisionboard.com)
© Invision Power Services (http://www.invisionpower.com)