Printable Version of Topic

Posted by: Semerkhet Oct 12 2009, 04:23 PM

I'm still in the process of cannibalizing the "On the Run" adventure and I noticed that two of the prime runners statted out as opposition each have a Rating 3 handheld Radio Signal Scanner. The two happen to be the hacker and the rigger. This got me to asking myself why the author(s) thought anyone, much less the hacker and rigger, would need one of these devices. I would think that anyone with a commlink could pinpoint the location of another active or passive node. I base this on the fact that in 2009 my iPhone has "assisted GPS navigation" that uses cell towers and wireless hotspots to supplement the satellite navigation to pinpoint my own location. So why wouldn't a commlink in 2072 be able to pinpoint signal sources using this sort of triangulation with the equivalent of a 0.99 nuyen app?

For hidden nodes I can understand the rationale that an actual Electronic Warfare skill and a sniffer program would be required to do the job....maybe. Even then, a hacker/rigger could easily do the job with their own commlink without needing a separate Radio Signal Scanner.

So, is this a case of the author(s) of On the Run not understanding the rules and giving their NPCs unnecessary equipment or something else?

Posted by: MikeKozar Oct 12 2009, 04:52 PM

I absolutely love the RF Scanner, and build it into all my drones. For openers, it only costs 150 for an R6 version - that's less then an R6 camera, and helps move the average sensor rating on the drone to 6 for better hit chances. It acts as an additional sensor type when running a TacNet. It also does the same job as a Sniffer program at 1/20th the cost - an R6 Sniffer is 6000 .

Its application isn't as immediately obvious as an enhanced vision mode, perhaps, but it does give you a few more options for spotting enemies. "How much RF traffic is in the room?" "...I'm seeing 8 different signals and signal clusters - three signals near the walls, and five small clusters throughout the room." "Okay team, we've got at least five PANs running in there." "Wow, he's so awesome!"

Your mileage may vary.

The point is, for 150 , you really can't lose with this guy. Its of limited combat utility (outside of electronic warfare) so you shouldn't pass up something more important for it, but it's really an incredible deal.

Posted by: Semerkhet Oct 12 2009, 05:32 PM

Okay, I can totally see this is a useful part of a drone sensor package. You've absolutely sold me on that. I have but two remaining concerns.

1) The price differential between this item and a Sniffer program seems like a glaring oversight on the part of the designers. Then again, the program prices are more about game balance than any attempt on the part of the designers to guess at relative market value. So you end up with an end run around the need for a decent Sniffer program.

2) Why would the hacker and the rigger in On the Run each have a single-function Rating 3 handheld version of this device. At this point, I know my question is getting rhetorical. The answer is: because the author(s) didn't understand the rules.

Thanks for the advice. I'll let the hacker/rigger in my group know about this for when he starts modding drones. We've only played a few sessions and he's getting pretty frustrated with the off-the-shelf drones.

Posted by: Sengir Oct 12 2009, 05:39 PM

Commlink not included, I might add

Posted by: Neraph Oct 12 2009, 05:41 PM

It's effectively a really cheap program that runs without taking up processor limit. And it runs automatically, so you can scan for hidden nodes while checking your email.

Posted by: Marwynn Oct 12 2009, 05:49 PM

I'd imagine that a Radio Signal Scanner would also give off some sort of signal itself, whereas the Sniffer program simply scans and whatnot.

Like an active radar system, everyone'll know you're scanning.

Posted by: Semerkhet Oct 12 2009, 05:52 PM

Wouldn't the commlink you're running Sniffer on be counted as something transmitting a signal?

Posted by: Heath Robinson Oct 12 2009, 06:00 PM

Why? No, really. I would like for you to come up with a reason why a Radio Signal Scanner would give off a signal itself that a Commlink running Scan wouldn't.

WE HAVE THIS THING IN REAL LIFE! IT DOES NOT GIVE OFF A SIGNAL!

Posted by: Marwynn Oct 12 2009, 06:01 PM

It would, but that's just your normal commlink's signal. I figure it'd be analyzing what it's receiving, a passive signal analyzer if you will. It's in the Sniffer program description, the ultimate Matrix Spying Utility. So I figure some stealth would be involved.

The Radio Signal Scanner would be closer to an active sonar/radar thing. Yeah it detects them much like the program but it gives away its position in doing so.

That's not official or anything, just my take on it.

Posted by: otakusensei Oct 12 2009, 06:13 PM

Nope, radio signal scanners don't give off any signal. For that reason they also do not act to boost the Signal rating of a commlink or drone. They are basically just an ear for wireless traffic in the area and a built in Sniffer program to make sense of it. Absolutely great for being aware of traffic (your own included) but not much use beyond that, which is like saying a gun isn't much use outside shooting people.

Posted by: Cheshyr Oct 12 2009, 06:14 PM

I had assumed the handheld was a purely electronic device with no processor, commlink, or any of the other things that make a commlink both and asset and a liability. Single-purpose, invisible, cheap, disposable, and completely unassociated with your commlink subscription.

edit: removed redundant information

Posted by: brennanhawkwood Oct 12 2009, 06:28 PM

My guess is that it is an unintentional overlap resulting from re-using already existing mechanics ('Treat the scanner as if it were a Sniffer program...) without looking 'wider' and seeing some of issue that results in when you compare price and capabilities.

If my players ever note this I'd probably explain it away like this:

The sniffer program is software that can run on different platforms (different types of commlinks) rather than an application that has been specifically built for one piece of hardware (the RF scanner that it is installed on). That alone would probably make the software more expensive. That has the advantage of being able to use the same hardware (your commlink) as other tools rather than having yet another piece of equipment to haul around.

If I wanted to make up the difference mechanically, I'd say that its use is more limited...you probably can't use the RF Scanner to insert false traffic like the sniffer program on a commlink can and your off the shelf RF Scanner doesn't have decrypt software running.

Posted by: crizh Oct 12 2009, 06:31 PM

Exactly the opposite of the case and the real reason to buy one.

A radio signal scanner is the only method of mapping the enemies wireless nodes without risking counter-detection.

Telematics Infrastructure is not your friend.

Most secure facilities worth breaking into have wireless negating paint/wallpaper or a Faraday cage. Drill a hole in it and slip your Radio Signal Scanner through. You can take the time to detect all the nodes, even the hidden, non-standard ones that are running the TI.

You can then use directional wireless to hack those nodes before they have a chance to spot you.

Posted by: MikeKozar Oct 12 2009, 07:02 PM

I know this has been beaten into the ground already, but I wanted to explain why it works the way it does.

Take an Ultrasound Sensor. It's basically a sonar system that works above water - it sends out high-frequency pings and listens to the echos to determine what shapes are reflecting the sound, right? Now, if you check your book, you can run your Ultrasound Sensor in Active mode, where it pings frequently, or in Passive mode, where it only listens for the pings given off by other Ultrasound Sensors.

If you have an Ultrasound System, you can detect Motion Sensors without giving away your position - you don't need to send out a signal to detect signals given off by another system.

The RF Sensor works on the same principle - it's just picking up signals. This is where those Active/Passive/Hidden modes come into play - all the stealthtech in the 'verse isn't going to save your dwarven bacon if the facility's spider is watching you check your email via an RF sensor.


Now, as far as the cost difference, I always rationalize it as being a fairly cheap set of hardware components to assemble, or a very complex application of the components in the commlink. It could have two seperate antenna arrays to triangulate the signal, each optimized to pick up multiple frequencies simultaniously with dedicated chips for signal processing and triangulation. The Commlink has a very different antenna, and triangulating a signal without a second simultanious point of reference means tracking the small movements of the commlink and determining if there is enough data to triangulate the signal location based on that. Instead of hardware to pick out signal from noise, it has to run the signals through a analysis program (think SETI@Home) which is optimised enough to get the answer in realtime without bogging down the commlink. That's obviously just my unofficial opinion, but it makes me feel better about the Rules as Written.

Should the free market have corrected the cost imbalance, by virtue of nobody in their right mind buying a Sniffer program? Maybe, maybe not. Keep in mind that when you're first coming in the door and playing innocent, a Sniffer program in your Commlink is invisible and undetectable to building security, whereas a RF Scanner is a pretty big sign that the owner is equipped for Electronic Warfare. It's the same principle behind people buying cyberspurs instead of carrying a nice big knife - nobody can take it away from you, and most people won't see it coming until it's too late.

[EDIT]

I'm sorry, that was badly phrased. What I meant to say is that the RF Scanner is hardware, and could be spotted and confiscated by an alert security guard with the right equipment. A Sniffer program could only be detected as a commlink, which is not only permitted but practically required in most places.

Once you're inside the perimeter, things work differently - the Commlink will give your position away while the RF Scanner won't.

Posted by: Semerkhet Oct 12 2009, 07:27 PM

My thanks to everyone who has posted. I have a much better idea about what's going on now and why a hacker might carry an RF scanner.

Posted by: Marwynn Oct 13 2009, 04:18 AM

Okay I'll bow to everyone's experience and knowledge here.

But I just can't wrap my head around a Sniffer program, a great Matrix spying utility according to the book, being the one that's easily identified. Now, maybe I'm reading too much into the spying part, assuming stealth when it really means intense observation instead of discreet observation.

So there's no way to detect an RF Scanner?

Maybe it's me trying to balance the cost of the Sniffer program with a cheap hardware device, but why would the Sniffer program by trying to find RF sources be more 'visible'?

Either way, the Sniffer program's still going to be required for a hacker.

Posted by: shuya Oct 13 2009, 06:11 AM

per RAW, the only major difference between the two that i can tell is that a radio signal scanner cannot be used to intercept NON-wireless signals, or to analyze traffic in a node which you are present in (matrixally-present, that is) through a series of other nodes; it can only analyze radio signals that are within its range.

that being said, as a GM i would houserule an RF scanner to act as a Scan program instead of Sniffer, which would bring it SOMEWHAT more in line cost-wise with what it can do. a signal scanner shouldn't really be able to tell you anything ABOUT the digital information that is being broadcast, only the frequency and strength of the signal (IMHO).

the abilities of a modern-day packet analyzer (the contemporary equivalent of a Sniffer program) are far beyond those a modern-day RF scanner, and there's no logical in-system reason to allow someone an ergonomic R6 sniffer for a tiny fraction of the price of the actual software, no matter what it seems the rules say (compare it to the cost of a Fetch module, which pretty much *is* an ergonomic-browse black-box).

Posted by: DuctShuiTengu Oct 13 2009, 08:31 AM

You'd think it would be able to do this. Certainly, the description of the RSS indicates that it does. Except that detecting hidden nodes uses the Scan program, while the RSS uses Sniffer (used to capture wireless signals, pick out specific phrases in wireless traffic you've intercepted, or intercept signals).