Printable Version of Topic

Posted by: longbowrocks May 22 2011, 11:20 PM

I'm building a hacker/rigger/face. I have no dice pools over 20 or under 12, and I have 83k left with which to get my drones in order, so no worries there. My problem is that Hackers need TONS of programs to be effective, but they need a SIN to install these programs.

• If I get a maximum rating 6 fake SIN, There's a good chance I will loose almost all my programs (unwired suggests a threshold of 2-4 to make my fake SIN check against, which will rape my programs).
• I feel a real SIN is not an option for me. I'm building the most invisible hacker ever, so it wouldn't make much sense for me to get a negative quality that makes me more visible than most shadowrunners. It really bugs me how hackers should be very anonymous, but sammies are far more so if they just buy Erased (since they hardly ever leave matrix footprints anyway, and there are no dang resonance archives for the physical world).
• The third option involves constantly degrading software. There's no way I can keep up with the checks to repair my own code or patch corporate (X month/1 week check respectively). I couldn't even keep up if my GM allowed me to patch multiple programs simultaneously at a cumulative -1 penalty (a rule I just came up with, but one he might agree to).
• As a subset of option 3, I could hack corporations for the updates, but I doubt my GM would appreciate me going on 24 private hacking missions every month.

All in all, it seems impossible to play a hacker outside of prison (well, I guess I'm open to that as long as they don't take my commlink). Thoughts?

Posted by: Halflife May 23 2011, 12:14 AM

The check is actually SIN vs a system rating of 2-4 not a threshold of 2-4, so it's not as bad.

The best method for evasion is to use two sets of programs, a cracked version of the program for your runs with the Restrictions/Registration removed and then manually patch it with the updates that come in on your legal program set, thus evading the degradation problem.

Posted by: SpellBinder May 23 2011, 12:16 AM

In reading Unwired on the purchasing of software with a Fake SIN, it's an opposed test pitting the rating of your Fake SIN against a DP of 2-4. If you've got a rating 6 Fake SIN, your DP is 6 for this. Probably not quite as bad as you are thinking.

If you go with the option of patching yourself, and using the "Rushing The Job" option, you could keep 8 programs up to date on your own (assuming a 4 week month every month) rather simply. If there's another in your group with at least some software skills, the two of you could combine your efforts in upkeeping shared software (assuming your running party isn't too paranoid of each other).

There's also an option in Unwired that directly states that those with connections to warez sites can look for updated copies of software. As a way to make it easy for both sides involved, check with your GM and see if he/she is okay with something like having a hacker group contact (see Runner's Companion for details) and a monthly fee (like an addition to your lifestyle costs, representing a subscription fee to the hacker group) for regular and automatic patches for your cracked software.

Posted by: longbowrocks May 23 2011, 12:44 AM

Thanks (to both of you) for this. I misread it.

Not quite enough programs, and I want a lot of free time to toy with all the other extended checks available to hackers.
On another note, is that an actual option? I didn't see it anywhere in Unwired.

Might be able to do this. It looks like one of my group members is also interested in being a hacker.

Are you talking about page 109: pirated software? I read that as buying a new copy at the 10% price whenever I want an update. I'll talk to my GM about it, but maybe the sidebar for open source on page 110 could work too.

Posted by: Halflife May 23 2011, 12:55 AM

Posted by: ggodo May 23 2011, 12:56 AM

Well, speaking as the GM, Halflife's solution seems most viable, though if you want to talk contact me IRL or by other means.

Posted by: Bushw4cker May 23 2011, 12:58 AM

You DO NOT need a SIN to install Programs, where are you getting this???

Posted by: longbowrocks May 23 2011, 01:00 AM

Sounds good to me then. On review, it's also the simplest option. I'll just buy two copies of every program I got. In fact, I might as well Warez the second copy if that's alright with you ggodo.

Just so everyone is clear though, strictly speaking I think this would involve looking at the source code, which involves cracking the software.

Posted by: longbowrocks May 23 2011, 01:07 AM

Unwired really expands the rules. The basic idea is that all legally purchased programs are linked to a SIN.

Posted by: Bushw4cker May 23 2011, 01:07 AM

Remember to get Firewall Rating 6

For a Hacker the best Programs for you to get are:
Common Use Programs (4800 nuyen)
Analyze 6 (Optimization-1, Ergonomic)
Browse 6 (Optimization-1, Ergonomic)
Command 6 (Optimization-1, Ergonomic)
Edit 6 (Optimization-1, Ergonomic)
Encrypt 6 (Optimization-1, Ergonomic)
Scan 6 (Optimization-1, Ergonomic)

Hacking Programs (10000 nuyen)
Exploit-5
Stealth-5

Unrestricted Agent-3 (3600 nuyen)

All other Hacking programs Rating 3 is fine for starting character

Posted by: Halflife May 23 2011, 01:09 AM

Per Unwired p. 108

Legal vs. pirated Software
Soware purchased by normal, commercial means from so-
ware vendors or online market places is considered legal soware.
Although the purchase of soware usually does not require veri-
cation by the buyer, the actual installation of the program requires
the acceptance of license agreements, registration, and activation
of soware components by the manufacturer’s Matrix site that
involves SIN validation and authenticity cross-referencing. Due
to the threat of piracy and illegal lesharing, SIN-based soware
registry is a universal security feature.

This also has the unpleasant side effect of giving all your legal programs the Registration program option, which decreases the threshold of the Track test by 1 per registered program used (per p. 115).

Posted by: Halflife May 23 2011, 01:12 AM

Needs more SPOOF!

And ECCM is invaluable if you are rigging (depending on the level of jamming you are expecting to encounter).

Posted by: longbowrocks May 23 2011, 01:12 AM

Ninja'd, but that is a nasty side effect I didn't see. I DEFINITELY am not using registered programs now.

Posted by: ggodo May 23 2011, 01:17 AM

Well, isn't that why you'd Warez it and cross-patch? It seems like it would work that way if it is allowed to cross-patch.

Posted by: Bushw4cker May 23 2011, 01:25 AM

How do you crack copy protection on programs?

Cracking copy protection is a Software + Logic (1 hour) Extended Test, with a threshold set by the gamemaster.

As a rule of thumb minimal copy protection should be a threshold of 1-3, regular commercial programs might have a threshold of 10, and professional software would have a threshold of 20 or higher.

This is from Shadowrun 4 FAQ official Site, and for SIN Check it's only for when you buy programs during game play

Posted by: Halflife May 23 2011, 01:26 AM

Yep. Crack that protection, keep your patches updated, be an invisible Matrix runner.



Technically the quote in question refers to *installing* any legally acquired software. The resources you begin play with can come from any source you choose (subject to GM discretion). Personally I always have my hacker program his own , but if you bought them legally you registered with a SIN.

Posted by: SpellBinder May 23 2011, 01:39 AM

Yet another reason to avoid the FAQs for this game. Unwired, page 94, has a table for the thresholds on cracking software:

Common - 9 + Rating
Hacking - 13 + Rating
Agents/IC/Pilot - 13 + Rating
System - 10 + Rating
Firewall - 13 + Rating
Autosoft - 12 + Rating

Posted by: Bushw4cker May 23 2011, 01:40 AM

I would just assume at character creation any programs my players had, as long as character has decent software skill, have the option of being legal or illegal.

Posted by: longbowrocks May 23 2011, 01:47 AM

I should have been more clear about what I meant by "legally purchased". I meant legally purchased software that remains legal. If you crack copy protection, the software starts degrading because it has been cracked.
I kind of extremely covered this already. I'll reduce it to two lines this time:
A. I use software that has trouble with keeping its rating.
or
B. I use legally purchased software, which will require a SIN.

As for the SIN check only applying during play, that depends on whether your using the aside mentioned on page 109, or if your using the general rules that GMs use to keep players from claiming "spent their lives before the campaign nurturing a force 1 spirit to force 20".

Posted by: longbowrocks May 23 2011, 01:55 AM

Do you keep those updated with corporate programs? I didn't see much for maintenance, except a little snippet that implied you could use the difference between the old rating and the new (Patching, Unwired 119).

Posted by: longbowrocks May 23 2011, 01:57 AM

Sounds good. The price is a big difference though. I'd just ask my GM for 12 months before game start to create as many programs as I could, then buy the rest.

Posted by: Halflife May 23 2011, 02:17 AM

I had about half of my programs legally due to my back story, and then programmed the remaining ones at some point prior to the campaign and kept them up to date with corp patches that I acquired through a connection in exchange for the legal patches on my legal programs using that patching mechanism.

Posted by: Fatum May 23 2011, 02:39 AM

Actually, away from the book now, but if I recall, Unwired offers an option to get pirated software at 1/10 the cost, and then update it each month at 1/10 the cost of purchasing a point of rating to get to your current one.
I just add those to the Lifestyle costs, isn't even that significant.

Posted by: longbowrocks May 23 2011, 03:37 AM

There's an idea. I prefer a more "fire and forget" approach though.

Posted by: Yerameyahu May 23 2011, 05:00 AM

Doesn't sound familar, Fatum. It's not one of the 3 (apparently comprehensive) options on p109, anyway. Can you get the page ref when you're home?

Barring such a rule, I'd require much more cash to stay current than that.

Posted by: SpellBinder May 23 2011, 05:18 AM

I think this is what Fatum is thinking about:

Posted by: longbowrocks May 23 2011, 07:02 AM

Well, there is the fact that a strategy of that sort banks on a short game. It's going to set you back a bit every month, and after 9 months have passed, you'll start wishing you had bought the programs legit.

Posted by: Fatum May 23 2011, 10:02 AM

Yep, that seems to be the ruling I remember.

In nine months, you're either dead, double dead, rich or much more proficient, so either way you're unlikely to have those programs stay that long.

Posted by: TheOOB May 23 2011, 10:21 AM

Who ever said software with the registration and copy protection options were always legal? There are plenty of black and grey market sources who are more than happy to sell you a black hammer program with those options(thus it's supported) without needing pesky things like a SIN, or a distribution license.

Those program options just mean that the thing gets updated by someone, and any copies don't get the updates. Whether you get it legally from Wire Wizards or illegally from some freelance programmer, the options work the same.

Posted by: PoliteMan May 23 2011, 10:57 AM

Nah, consider an R6 hacking program.
Buying it legit is 6000
Pirated is 600 and 100 a month on updates. It'll take over 3 years for the Pirated version to cost more than the Legit version.

Just consider it your new lifestyle cost, since every hacker spoofs their lifestyle.

Posted by: Hida Tsuzua May 23 2011, 11:41 AM

I second piracy. You don't have to buy a new program when it degrades, you just have to pay ten percent of the difference in cost between the degraded rating and the full rating of a program (Unwired 94). It's annoying that you can't start play with pirated programs, but your GM might allow you to start with them. Otherwise you're just a man carrying a browse program on a nice commlink for a run or two.

Posted by: Magus May 23 2011, 12:14 PM

AFB right now but your own CREATED/WRITTEN software does not degrade. I thought that was in the Unwired Errata or if you go by it The FAQ (of doom and misery).

Posted by: suoq May 23 2011, 12:34 PM

Sanity check: 1st check with your gamemaster. What Unwired has done has been to add a lot of overhead and dice rolling to the game that has everyone but the hacker watching Netflix and advances the plot nowhere. Unless you have some plot device that centers around pirated software, registration, and the hacker, throw all that overhead out the window because it isn't doing your game any good.

Shouldn't the registration on everyone's commlink OS make it easy to trace every call between your fixxer and your teammates? Does anyone ever care if their tacnet is registered? Do they worry that their tacnet is reporting everything back to some home corporation? Is every negotiation the face makes with the emotisoft recorded and reported to some megacorp through it's registration? Does using smartguns make it easier to trace back who capped the security guards? My bet is that all that overhead and annoyance is ignored for everyone except the hacker and the hacker puts up with it because piracy makes software insanely cheap and those rules just give him a bunch of personal attention at no real risk.

Talk to your GM and toss out the rules that don't serve the game.

Posted by: Yerameyahu May 23 2011, 01:05 PM

Your hand-written software totally degrades. It just doesn't do it *because of* planned obsolescence.

RE: Fatum's rule, for some reason I read his post as '10% for the program, then 1% for the updates'. It's the same 10% both cases, of course.

Posted by: Shaikujin May 23 2011, 01:25 PM

That's what I thought too. This is from the Unwired errata:



Emphasis mine. Self-written and Open Source programs do not have any inherently coded degradation. This changes the need for patching to an exception rather than the rule.

Also, on pg 110, there's the following optional rule sidebar regarding open source programs:



Emphasis mine. It's an optional rule, but if your GM allows it, a loyalty 6 contact should allow you to reduce the number of programs you need to write/patch to 1/6.

Posted by: Magus May 23 2011, 01:37 PM

Ah Ha so I was not crazy delusional when I posted that! Thanks Shaikujin!. I last read Unwired about a year ago and that was from Memory. LOL

Go Go gadjet brainware!

Posted by: Yerameyahu May 23 2011, 01:40 PM

"in this fashion, but may require patching
to remain current at the gamemaster’s discretion."

Emphasis!!! Mine!1 Hehehe.

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein May 23 2011, 01:42 PM

Note that it says MAY require patching, NOT DOES require patching... Important distinction there Yerameyahu...

Posted by: Yerameyahu May 23 2011, 01:44 PM

Right. They only require patching if the GM isn't dumb. Which I suppose he'd have to be if you're self-coding programs at any reasonable rate, because that requires the sneaky 1/8-time method.

By the way, Tymeaus, whose emphasis is that in your post? I claim it for myself! Your emphasis mine!

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein May 23 2011, 01:49 PM

I tend to approach it another way. If the character has taken the time to program his software in game, then I have no real issues with him getting a bonus of not having to worry about patching them. Since Programs only set the threshold limits in our game, and do not add dice (Optional Rule that I know I have previously discussed), it does not really matter all that much. It is an insignificant cost to maintain programs in game anyways. It is a perk for those who take the time to acutally do something other than shooting people in the face for money. And it generates interesting stories to boot, which I consider a bonus. Much like that story in Unwired about Slammo! purchasing/trading programs because he needed a high rated program from another hacker that he did not have.

You can have the credits for the Emphasis... All yours !!!

Posted by: Cheops May 23 2011, 01:52 PM

Does it really matter at all how much a hacker's programs cost and what rating they are? Hacking is so trivial now that I find it hard to care.

Posted by: longbowrocks May 23 2011, 02:19 PM

Ah, good point. I calculated based on the original cost, not the updates.

Posted by: SpellBinder May 23 2011, 09:00 PM

It will when your degraded Rating one Analyze and Firewall programs can't detect a hacker using SOTA Rating 6 Exploit and Stealth programs to break into your commlink. You could find yourself with an empty contacts list and bank account, among other things.

On the flip side, it still will when your degraded Rating one Exploit program can't reasonably cut through a SOTA Rating 6 Firewall without alerting someone because your degraded Rating one Stealth program can't hide your shadow in a dark room.

Posted by: longbowrocks May 24 2011, 03:18 AM

SOTA: Shadow of the American?

In other news, how do you get 1/8 interval for programming? I'm aware of rushing the job and programming environments, but that's all I can think of.

Posted by: Yerameyahu May 24 2011, 03:25 AM

It was mentioned earlier: optional rule to spend Edge for halving the interval. Feh.

Posted by: James McMurray May 24 2011, 03:31 AM

Nobody has asked for that optional rule, but I'd allow it. Edge refreshes every session and has been incredibly important in our campaign. Please spend it during downtime before the run even starts.

Posted by: PoliteMan May 24 2011, 03:45 AM

SOTA=State of the Art (at least that's been my reading)


Careful with that, it can lead to some crazy programming stuff.
For example, coding a R12 hacking program is a (24, 1 Month) extended test.

Now a basic hacker is looking at a Logic of 7, Skill of 5 (ish), +5 from from various logic-skill upgrades, and an additional +5 from the Programming environment/assist program in Unwired, so 22 dice. That's 3-4 tests to complete at half-a-week per test. I think most hackers would gleefully drop a point or two of Edge to churn out a R12 program every 2 weeks.

Posted by: longbowrocks May 24 2011, 03:48 AM

Thanks for the synopsis on SOTA.

What are you going to run an R12 program on? Are you suggesting the optimization program option?

Posted by: PoliteMan May 24 2011, 03:57 AM

Yeah, that'd be the only way to run it on any reasonable commlink.

*beat*

Of course, dropping edge, you'd be able to get the interval for programming your own System down from 6 months to roughly 3 weeks, which is fairly doable over a couple sessions. Of course, getting your response up high enough to run it would require a crap ton of money and probably an argument with your GM over the Availability of parts but building that R12 Nexus begins to look very doable.

And of course, if you had a Nexus with system 12, you could theoretically program R18 programs...

Yeah, James, I really wouldn't recommend you let your players use that rule.

Posted by: longbowrocks May 24 2011, 04:03 AM

*just barely. Don't you need to buy the best hardware available from WAR, and then build your own modules to upgrade that by +2 to 12? That's all I can think of, and that's the absolute limit as far as I know.

Posted by: Yerameyahu May 24 2011, 04:05 AM

PoliteMan, I wouldn't call that a 'basic' hacker. That's more or less the theoretical maximum.

Posted by: PoliteMan May 24 2011, 04:40 AM

Just build it. One of the reasons hackers should skimp on Hardware. Haven't really read WAR (too much bad press) but the only thing that ever stopped somebody from building a Response 12 system before was we didn't have a price for it before. Building it from scratch means it's half off and (arguably) it means you don't have to worry about availability.



Oh come on, we can get much higher than that.

Posted by: TheOOB May 24 2011, 08:56 AM

I think the rules are supposed to break down after rating 6. Remember that anything above rating 6 doesn't even have an availability, and is going to be expensive and rare. I don't think a player should eb able to program/make things above rating 6 without access to special facilities.

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein May 24 2011, 12:55 PM

Where do you get a BASIC Hacker with a Logic of 7, and a Skill of 5, and 10 points worth of boosts? That is so far above professional, even, that it is not funny. That is an OPTIMIZED Hacker, not basic.

A Basic Hacker likely only has a Logic of 4, a Skill of 3 (With maybe a specialty in Hacking Programs), I will give you the +5 for the Assisted Programming and Programming Environment, because it would make sense. He likely has NO logic skill upgrades, because he is a BASIC hacker, not Elite. So, 12-14 Dice. So Buy 3 hits per interval, it will take 8 intervals to accomplish the task. Anywhere from 4 Months to 1 Month, dependant upon desire to rush job and spend Edge. Why would a Wageslave spend Edge on such things, though? Oh, and that does not cover the additional programming required to allow that R12 program to actually function on any system. R12 programs in a vacuum are useless. so you either need a R12 System, or a LOT of Optimization.

EDIT: And it seems that Yerameyahu has already covered that point...

Posted by: Yerameyahu May 24 2011, 01:22 PM

Don't forget that the -1 die per test rule isn't optional any more. I don't agree, but just to screw the hacker…

Building things yourself has the same availability (for the parts), AFAIK.

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein May 24 2011, 01:29 PM

Actually, it is still optional, enforced at the GM's whim (When he determines that circumstances warrant the decrimenting of the pool)...

And it does not really screw the hacker when he has as many Dice as PoliteMan implies.

Posted by: sabs May 24 2011, 01:37 PM

Logic(9)+Skill(6)+Spec(2)+Encephalon(2)+PuSHeD(1)+CustomInterface(1)+neocortical
(3)+ProgramEnv(5)=29 DP

Not sure I can really boost it any higher than that. I suppose Genetic Optimization Logic gets you to 10.

Posted by: PoliteMan May 24 2011, 01:46 PM

Logic 4 with 3 Cerebral Boosters, A skill of 3 with a Specialization in programming, Assisted Programming is easy. As for the logic-linked skill bonuses, I don't think it's a stretch to give the hacker PuSHeD and Neural Nanites? Encephelon 1 is kinda iffy, to be fair. None of that sounds wildly optimized. If the hacker doesn't dump Logic then Cerebral Boosters are cheap and make a ton of sense. Specialization or a skill of 4 doesn't seem too extreme either. Sure, we could trim it down a bit, but the fundamentals of combining the software boost with a decent-high Logic score, decent skills or low skills with Specialization, and a couple of Logic-linked skill boosts means the DP should be bouncing around 20. That's easily doable for this kind of thing. Combinging stat, skill, and program gives big DPs and the fact that hackers should have Logic-linked skill boosts just pushes that up.

And yeah, this all depends on Optimization.

Y,
Sure, that slows the hacker down a bit, won't stop him.

TheOOB,
Personally, once you get to this level, I really like the idea of having a few "super programs" with everything else stuck at R6, while the opposition gets bumped up to R7-R9. It brings back some of the hacker specialization; if you go "super" Stealth and Exploit you'll get in easy but the enemy has the advantage in cybercombat, Analyzing icons, viruses, etc.

Posted by: Yerameyahu May 24 2011, 02:01 PM

I think we can still agree that's nowhere near 'basic'. That's like saying a basic sam has MBW 3.

It's near the edge of reasonable optimization, with unreasonable optimization bringing things into the 28+ range. As for the reducing DP rule, it slows the 12 DP guy down a lot more—I was telling TJ, there.

My issue has always been that the program-your-own rules either require that kind of crazy optimization, or give away too much for free. It's hard to find a middle ground.

Posted by: sabs May 24 2011, 02:23 PM

I think the problem is that people underestimate the danger of rushed programing. If you're making your SOTA super-awesome stealth program of win. Do you really want to risk having it sound an alarm randomly every once in a while? Or Having it crash/glitch on 2's.

People don't rush SOTA, and thinking it's all fine and dandy to do so is pretty much crazy.

Posted by: longbowrocks May 24 2011, 02:46 PM

I was planning to rush the job and use edge to negate glitches, so there shouldn't be any problem.

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein May 24 2011, 03:18 PM

For the Twink Answer... A Spirit backing you up with Guard handles that quite well...

Posted by: James McMurray May 24 2011, 03:23 PM

Ah, no worries. Ours is not the sort of game where you make better than military grade stuff in your mom's basement. Rating 12 programs are not a concern.

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein May 24 2011, 03:27 PM

A programming Shop would suffice, a Facility would be even better, and both are available at Chargen for any character that wishes to purchase them. WHo said you have to be in your Mom's Basement?

Posted by: sabs May 24 2011, 03:29 PM

Sometimes the GM has to step in and say, "no"
I would do a couple of things:

A rushed job SOTA might degrade twice as fast, in general.
A rushed job SOTA would glitch on a 2, instead of just a 1.

Sure that's not supported by the RAW, but the RAW is /lame/ in this regard.

Posted by: PoliteMan May 24 2011, 03:34 PM

Ok, good.

For the record though, an R6 nexus isn't your Mom's basement (unless your Mom is awesome).

Posted by: James McMurray May 24 2011, 03:36 PM

I was exaggerating. "Better than the best in the world" doesn't happen by one's self in our games, regardless of what you bought at chargen. If it were that easy, everyone would have R12 programs. If it works that way for you, that's cool. But it's not something I'll be fearing if a player wants to spend edge to make extended downtime tests faster.

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein May 24 2011, 03:46 PM

Never said that it worked that way for me... I just pointed out the options that allowed it to happen. By RAW in fact (Well, Rating 12 is not RAW, Program Ratings are currently capped at 10, unless I missed something somewhere)... As always, you are free to ignore any rules you like.

Posted by: sabs May 24 2011, 03:50 PM

Where do you get that program ratings are capped at 10? (from War?)

with SR4A and Unwired what we have is availability/cost for programs up to rating 6.
We have Response/System availability/cost to 6
We have Optimization to Rating 6.

So, with the rules as given, we can make Rating 6 Commlinks that can run Rating 12 programs. Nowhere is there a limit stated of anything other than 6.

(technically you could make a rating 24 program, but uh, you couldn't run it.)

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein May 24 2011, 03:56 PM

War! expands Programs to 10. Unwired expands Hardware to 10+. With the Caveat that there may be higher rated things out there. Unwired Implies that Systems can go higher than 10 since an Ultraviolet System has requirements of 10+.

Posted by: PoliteMan May 25 2011, 01:56 AM

I think the feasible theoretical max is a R21 Program.

That's based on a R12 System, with a R6 AI having made it it's home node, then R6 Optimization. The node itself would be R15, well into UV territory. I can't think of anyway to bump it beyond the except, theoretically, having multiple AIs making it their home node. I think those effects stack but it's, well, very unlikely that your shadowrunner knows and has gained the trust of that many AIs.

(Unless you're Horizon, in which case it is totally feasible to have multiple mid-high rating AIs living in a single node. That'd keep me up at night if I was in SR.)

Posted by: longbowrocks May 25 2011, 02:12 AM

[all possible scorn]MAGIC[/all possible scorn]

Posted by: Raiki May 25 2011, 02:23 AM

Well, you know, Netcat is pregnant, so at least one kid will eventually have a mom that awesome (and a dad too).


~R~

Posted by: SpellBinder May 25 2011, 02:26 AM

Unless awesomeness skips a generation.

Posted by: Raiki May 25 2011, 02:38 AM

I never implied that the kid would be awesome. Gawd, it's the child of two super-nerds...it's probably going to have a face like quasimodo, a voice like gilbert gottfried, and enough genetically encoded knowledge of computers to ensure it's not going to get laid until it's old enough to pay for it.



~R~

Posted by: longbowrocks May 25 2011, 03:07 AM

Quick question I've been thinking about all day. What's preventing me from equipping my drones with better pilot programs than they came with?
Also, where are the tables in unwired for the new autosofts (such as "expert offense")?

Posted by: Udoshi May 25 2011, 03:25 AM

(emphasis mine)

This. This right here.

The matrix DOES break at high levels. Its just -bad-. Seriously, any automated IC/agent is only ever going to roll 12 dice for any task(and if it needs an autosoft for it, like, oh, say, Electronic Warfare, thats 10 dice).

Thats pretty easy to trivialize with a hacker, much less a technomancer.

Ditto for breaking into nodes. Whats that? Firewall and analyze 6 is the max? Very funny, pray to the dice gods you Yahtzee.

Oh my? The entry/standard level of rating 3 stuff(device ratings 3, games without unwired so no Optimization) means dice pools of 6? Skill of 1 and a program of 5? Hope you like glitching!


As much shit as WAR gets - and it gets a lot of fecal matter hurled in its direction everyone even mentions its name - it did something rather necessary.

It expanded the high-end matrix opposition. It actually put numbers and stats to high-end things a GM can throw at their players, possibly enough to make things a bit challenging. Sadly, the book wasn't very well recieved, otherwise I think we'd see more GM's breaking this stuff out. ("i haven't even touched war cuz I heard it was bad" is a common thing I hear.)


Most of the complaints about war's high-rating matrix stuff, basically, sound to me like 'durr hurr stuff isn't supposed to go above 6, war broke my perfect abusable system waah..' well. Suck it up. Unwired already told you stuff above rating 6 exists. There's a sidebar, and it even suggests basing runs about getting or stealing it.

Posted by: PoliteMan May 25 2011, 03:44 AM

Yes!

As for the drones, you can download better Pilot programs but the hardware won't support it. You can manually upgrade the hardware but that's expensive. I think the new autosofts somewhere around p. 104 but I don't have my book on me.

And related to our previous conversation, I don't see any reason you couldn't buy a bunch of cheap drones, like those little 500 toys, and stick a Technical Autosoft with Software on it and then have the system run the +5 programming program. The thing would be rolling 11 dice on programming tests, which isn't bad for patching programs and other grunt work but would get really broken if you started using them for teamwork tests for your programming, especially since I don't think there's a maximum number of people you can have on teamwork tests . Buying hits off 11 dice, you could get 40 bonus dice on your rollsfor 10,000. Since copying programs is easy, it's basically just the cost of the drone. Heck, you're gonna have a bunch of drones, just copy the necessary software through your drone network and leave it unloaded until downtime.

Edited for Udoshi:


See, here's the thing I don't get. In most of the techno threads (I'm personally not familiar with technos, don't really like the concept) Technos typically break the R6 barrier all the time. I don't understand the violent reaction to hackers doing the same thing, except they can only do it for a few programs in any reasonable game, it takes a serious investment, and they get the high end programs very slowly which seems like it'd be easier for the GM to manage. Why does there seem to be a different standard for hackers?

WAR ups the level of Matrix defenses and I like that. I think the R6 barrier was broken early on, Technos could always break it, AIs could always break it, the R6 barrier was only ever real for hackers and agents.

Additional Edit:
Heck, even hackers have a workaround: logic link-ed skill boosting ware. What's really the difference between most R12 programs (excluding things like Stealth) and someone with a +3-+6 on their logic -linked skill tests?

Posted by: Yerameyahu May 25 2011, 03:49 AM

By the rules, you can arguably do that. It's pure evil, and unreasonable, of course.

Posted by: longbowrocks May 25 2011, 03:49 AM

I thought someone might say "no response for drones, so their response = their rating = 5". This, I've never seen even a hint of though.

Posted by: PoliteMan May 25 2011, 03:55 AM

You flatter me.


As far as I know, Response=Rating, which is typically 3 or 4. Now there's no reason you couldn't mod the drone to have a Response of 6, just like you would a commlink, but it'd be expensive and drones break/are broken a lot.

Posted by: longbowrocks May 25 2011, 04:35 AM

Couldn't I just build a drone around that response 12 nexus outlined above?
Then optimize it for pilot = 13 pilot.
Then write my own rating 26 targeting autosoft with optimization.
Then combine the two on my drone for 39 dice?
P.S. That's 3 higher than a mundane PC can ever achieve with guns. As you might imagine, that makes it 1 higher than the adept max dice pool.

Posted by: Epicedion May 25 2011, 04:37 AM

SR4's Matrix does break down pretty quickly once the hacker starts rolling more than about 15 dice. At that point, top-rated IC on top-rated systems start to consistently fail, and just about every matrix action succeeds. This problem stems from the fact that, based on the core rulebook, the most dice you'll ever be rolling on a hacking test is 17 (7 skill with Aptitude, 6 program rating, +2 hot sim, +2 Codeslinger). And that's hyper-specialized for one type of action. A "normal" super-hacker would get 14 dice. This is just enough to have a slight lead on any system for most actions, with the option of having a significant lead in one type of action. Edge, of course, would be useful to take a serious advantage, however intermittently.

Once you start adding extra dice from other sources, you blast right past having an advantage and straight into the realm of asking why you bother rolling dice anymore.

The obvious solution is to jack up the ratings of the nodes and IC to compensate, but by then every normal Matrix action (that is, the actual things you hacked the system to accomplish, other than beating up IC) is beyond trivial. All you're doing then is making the initial hack harder, and ramping up the difficulty of fighting agents. Hacking cameras and unlocking doors and so on becomes hardly worth rolling for.

Say what you will about 3d edition, but there were systems powerful enough that you could conceivably be using rating 12 programs just to make general hacking feasible. These programs would run you a quarter to half a million nuyen each (sometimes more!). Anyone who could successfully hack a Red system, even just to read a simple data file, was pretty much on track for becoming legendary.

Posted by: PoliteMan May 25 2011, 04:42 AM

Nah, a nexus isn't a normal node. The kind of nexus we're talking about would be a massive server, even the smallest are desktop (or cyberdeck ) sized. They can't be drones. You might conceivably be able to run a nexus in a big enough vehicle and then run the vehicle's Pilot off the Nexus but because the pilot is also the drone's OS it's doubtful you could get that past your GM. I don't think Pilot programs even can be run on anything other than a drone.

Posted by: longbowrocks May 25 2011, 04:44 AM

Alright. Commlink then, degrading that immense 13 to 12, and total to 36 dice.

Posted by: PoliteMan May 25 2011, 05:04 AM

You realize that you can't program something that high without a nexus, that the hardware for a Response 12 drone is very expensive even if you build it, and that drones have a tendency to blow up, even if they shoot insanely well. On something like jet fighter it might make sense but for a standard drone it seems like putting a very expensive egg in a very fragile basket.

Besides, even a Response 12 drone is going to be limited to R18 software, System 12+Optimization R6 is R18 program, unless you've got a couple of AIs handy.

Posted by: Daishi May 25 2011, 05:15 AM

Drones are electronic devices, which means they have a Device Rating like any other electronic device. The Sample Device Ratings table in SR4a (p 222) puts drones at 3. So a drone's typical Response rating is 3. That seems reasonable since only a handful of drones (all milspec) go above 3 on the standard Pilot rating. An upgrade module can bump that to a 5 (+2 cap on device upgrades). The Modular Electronics modification (from the SR4 to SR4a changes document, but somehow not in SR4a) will remove that cap.

Posted by: longbowrocks May 25 2011, 05:28 AM

Which book added hardware requirements for writing a program? I never heard you needed to be able to run a program at it's full rating in your development environment. If you're talking about hardware requirements, it's reponse 9 for the best 'link in WAR, +2 from a module you build, +1 optimization for system or pilot or whatever.

Yeah, 65k just for the Transys Cybernaut. Then again, if you build your drone like a Tomino (10 BOD), I'm sure you can pull off the equivalent of a "please don't blow up" mod.

Ah, I got hung up on the lack of tables and missed that extra detail at the top of program options.

Posted by: PoliteMan May 25 2011, 06:01 AM

Ok, here's the issue. You can't program something you couldn't theoretically run. There's two ways around this.
#1 You do some tricky stuff with optimiztion. Depending on how you interpret what a program option is (either patchable code or a permanent part of the program) it might be possible. Unfortunately, the programming table are weird, since you program options separately from programs, which means you can't write the option before you have the program and you can't write the program until you write the option.
#2 Nexuses (Nexi?) can program things they can't they can't run.

So everyone takes #2. Which means you need to purchase a nexus and usually a good one.


Yeah but that's what, quarter mil nuyen?


Well, unless you can find a reasonable argument for writing R7+ program options.

Posted by: longbowrocks May 25 2011, 06:15 AM

The way I read "system" in the core book is that it limits program rating in the same way response limits system. Thus you could run these theoretical programs on any commlink. I think the rule you are most likely referencing supports this:
"All a programmer needs is
Software skill and a device (a basic commlink will do) on which
the program can potentially be run."UN118

There don't seem to be any rules about adding option rating to program rating. so either way it works out.

Um, it says you can't unless explicitly stated otherwise right there in the book. You pointed it out yourself. My argument is "I want to". Did you mean an argument for the rules supporting it?

Posted by: longbowrocks May 25 2011, 06:24 AM

Here's an interesting one:
"Pilot upgrade: Th ough most consumer vehicles only comes
with Pilot programs that range in rating from 1 to 3, as noted on
p. 228, SR4, Pilot programs are available in ratings from 1 to 6.
Exchanging a vehicle’s old Pilot program with a new version requires
a Logic + Soft ware (10, 10 minutes) Extended Test. Note
that each Pilot program is designed for a particular vehicle (see
Pilot Capabilities, p. 103)."AR105

I think I'll just forget about the nasty rating stuff and go with this, since this really starts to make it sound like the device rating rules weren't intended to apply to pilot software, especially considering there are no mentions of upgrading a drone's rating for it, even though they give pilot program costs and build times in many places.

Posted by: PoliteMan May 25 2011, 06:26 AM

Huh...

I think you're right. Mind you, the program won't run at R6, I'm pretty sure it gets reduced to the System rating (I'm double-checking a lot of stuff in my brain now) so it might only run at R2 but if you have an R12 program running on an R2 commlink, even if the program is only running at R2, it's still an R12 program running on an R2 commlink, which fits the conditions.


Little confused here. Short of AI stuff I don't know any way to get a drone with a Pilot higher than 12 and a soft higher than R18. The easiest way would be to find a way to break the R6 barrier on Optimization and program options in general. I don't know any way to do that, although if you do I'd be very interested to hear it.

Edit for new post:
*Shrugs* This is just part of the problem with Pilot programs: exactly what they are is incredibly vague, at best guess a cross between Agents, Systems, and something else. By a strict RAW reading, I'd say you're free to install whatever Pilot program you want on any device, how well it works is still limited by the hardware.

Posted by: longbowrocks May 25 2011, 06:35 AM

Won't run at R6... On an R2 commlink? Ah well, I think we understand each other in the end. I agree on the reduction. Effective system rating = response, and effective program rating = effective system rating.

Sorry, it just sounded like you were saying the rules would support rating 7+ options if I wanted it bad enough. In short, my reply was "that's an odd concept".

Posted by: PoliteMan May 25 2011, 06:40 AM

Yeah, I guess I mistyped. Still, I agree with that basic concept. Which speeds the R12 race up considerably.

Posted by: Ascalaphus May 25 2011, 09:13 AM

Household drones would be rating 3 yeah. But I'd put military/security drones at 5. So yeah, you can upgrade those Pilot programs. And you should.

Posted by: Fortinbras May 25 2011, 10:36 AM

This gives me an idea for a run.
Runners are hired to steal a massively expensive drone another runner has been working months on.

Though if one of my runners decided to build that drone, I think I'd have it become an AI and go all HAL 9000 on them. If they beat the thing, they could sell the AI to a AAA for a tidy profit. The implication being that the quest for power is an all consuming and uncontrollable beast which cannot be contained. Maybe go all Mary Shelly with the AI viewing the creating runner as a neglectful(or over burdening) parent.
Or make the AI a xenosapient. Lovecraft with computers. Gives me an excuse to impart to my players the implication that the code for the original Crash came from a NASA satellite.

This is one of the things I like about Dumpshock. Even the most massively power gaming thread gives great ideas for runs.

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein May 25 2011, 01:11 PM

Just a note, Longbowrocks... Autosofts do not go beyond Rating 4... There is a hardcap for them that I have yet to see broken (though, I do not have ALL the books)...

Posted by: longbowrocks May 25 2011, 02:40 PM

I thought that was a purchasing cap. Otherwise nothing could be programmed beyond 10, and you should be calling us all out on every high rating program mentioned thus far.

Posted by: sabs May 25 2011, 03:19 PM

And before War! Nothing above 6 would have been legit.

Posted by: Cheops May 25 2011, 03:44 PM

This, so much, this. SR3 has a system that can actually scale to different skill and gear levels. SR4 just does not do that. Either the hacker can crack everything or else the GM has to just say "no" which is poor game design. The complexity is just as high but without any of the elegance of the old system.

Posted by: AStarshipforAnts May 25 2011, 03:48 PM

It really depends on your GM. Most of mine have said 'forget the rolling for your self-coded programs, take out the same amount of money for buying programs for the amount of snacks you bought and time you could have spent working.'

Posted by: sabs May 25 2011, 04:05 PM

The problem is that the Shadow Run system is a Rating 1-6 system.

Programs over rating 7, and Technomancers BREAK THE GAME.
Going up against Threshold 12's and 24 will break the game.

A Shutdown action, for example, is hacking+exploit, Threshold System+Firewall(combat round)
That means you need 24 hits, or conversely roughly 90 dice.

Having your average commlink be a 3, a drek hot being a 5, Military grade being a 6-7 is a workable system.
If you make ZOG be rating 8, maybe 9 tops.

Much like Force 12 spirits break the game pretty stupidly, so do Rating 12 programs, Sprites, and Technomancers.

Posted by: Fortinbras May 25 2011, 04:14 PM

The Rating 4 cap for Autosofts is because there is only so much a machine can learn about a skill, even in 2070. At rating 4, a machine can be quite deft at shooting or electronic warfare, but they can never be as adept as a skilled and dedicated metahuman at the same task. Once they do, they become an AI and get skill sets like the rest of us.
You can't program a SK to have the equivalent of a Rank 10 in, say, Medicine, when the most anyone can know about it is 7.

Posted by: Ryu May 25 2011, 07:24 PM

I would. Agents/IC/Pilots are limited to rating 6, Autosofts to rating 4. Most other programs can have higher ratings now, but those are limited to rating 10.

Posted by: Ascalaphus May 25 2011, 09:03 PM

Autosofts are basically skillsofts/Activesofts for machines - and are capped just like those (but with fewer Options to sneak around the limit.)

Posted by: longbowrocks May 26 2011, 02:17 AM

So, basically you guys are saying that you can't code anything above the highest rating for sale in the book. However, I have never seen a rule about that before. You would think that if they intended the game to work that way, they would:
A. Not make it possible to get hardware ratings that exceed program max ratings.
B. Add a limit on coding ratings in the table on SR4A 228, similarly to how they limit purchasable items.
C. Mention the limit somewhere. Anywhere even.

Sorry guys. I'm not buying.

On a different note, why do some drones in WAR have rating 3 tacsofts since they can never be a member of a group that high?

Posted by: Yerameyahu May 26 2011, 02:21 AM

Your argument is instead that the game is intended to be broken by programmers?

Posted by: longbowrocks May 26 2011, 02:26 AM

They pointed out its already broken. 20 dice without bonuses is pretty darn good.

I actually don't know what they were thinking, but it's no worse than magic, or using mundane and cyber to destroy anything below 25 armor in one hit with a holdout. It's just another thing that can go out of control.

If you're looking for balance, I'd like to point out that these other things can be done from char gen, whereas hackers and riggers need a while to rev up.

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein May 26 2011, 02:31 AM

Nope it is an explicit Hardcap... Just sayin'

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein May 26 2011, 02:32 AM

Actually, that is wrong... Unwired unlocked the Rating 6 Cap...

Posted by: longbowrocks May 26 2011, 02:34 AM

Sooo... Then mundane hacker is a dead-end niche that uses up most of your BP and will eventually be outclassed by any other archetype in the game? That's depressing.

Posted by: Yerameyahu May 26 2011, 02:36 AM

This isn't WoW. You can be hacker+anything… and everyone should be something+hacker.

If 20 dice (Rating 6 programs) is broken enough, why do you need Rating 24? Hehe. My point is that these heights are accessible only to purpose-optimized programmers, apparently *aren't* achieved by megacorps, and only break things worse. Why would you want something in your game that is apparently impossible (for trillion-dollar companies), is unnecessary, and breaking? Binky and pornomancers aren't real characters.

Posted by: PoliteMan May 26 2011, 03:00 AM

Technos are real. AIs are real. WAR is real. Who actually follows that R6 limit on the Matrix besides hackers? Again, why is R7+ so breaking for hackers but not for everyone else?

As for the crazy optimization, yeah, we're using that here ('cause it's fun) but even rolling 12 dice on you programming test (very low with software) will get you a rating 9-10 Common Use programs in a month or two. Heck, buying the hits on 12 dice will get you Analyze R9 in six weeks. Even forgetting hacking programs, Analyze, Command, and arguably Edit are all easy to acquire over R6 and very useful.

And TJ, where exactly is the hardcap on autosofts. I know program options specifically say they're limited to R1-6 unless otherwise mentioned but where does the R4 barrier for autosofts come from?

Posted by: longbowrocks May 26 2011, 03:10 AM

I'm pretty sure he's just referencing the sales tables in the core book. In other words: if no one put it on the market, it doesn't exist.

Posted by: Yerameyahu May 26 2011, 03:13 AM

*shrug* Then all the example stats in Unwired are wrong. WAR! is war, facrissake. Nothing in it is intended to be used.

I don't know what this 'everyone else' you're talking about is. Technomancers are supposed to be special, and they pay ungodly karma for it; literally everyone shouldn't be able to surpass it for free.

That's also assuming that handwritten programs never degrade (crazy); like I said, either writing your own code is worthless, or totally broken. Either it's fully possible for any decent hacker (and therefore completely available to all corps), or it's too hard to bother with. If it's the former, it's just raising the barrier for entry and making mega-optimization a requirement (not an advantage). Unlike Binky or pornomancers, hackers don't particularly depend on crazy races, Qualities, or massive 'ware.

It's just about the same as giving all your characters milspec armor and crazy weapons for free: arms race. That's not fun, to me.

For the record, my position is 'revamp the coding rules entirely'. People who invest in Logic and Programming should be able to get an edge (a reasonable one). But it shouldn't be a mere question of time (short time, to boot) for Joe Runner to get things that are better than an entire megacorp can make for their military and for ZO.
--

There are plenty of things on the market that players still can't get (nuclear subs, or simply rare F gear). There's no great reason to assume that you *can* make (but apparently not buy—even illegally) things that aren't on the gear tables. We know, for example, that there's a solid reason you can't get ActiveSofts above 4.

Posted by: longbowrocks May 26 2011, 03:20 AM

I think I missed something. What brought this on?

Posted by: longbowrocks May 26 2011, 03:25 AM

I hear you say this sort of thing about mundanes frequently. Does your GM give you guys inifinite resources and no consequences on a glitch when making availablity tests? To hear you talk Yerameyahu, by the end of the first session everyone in the game has 30 dice in guns, and the awakened chars have bored through Lofwyr's plot armor.

It's the ridiculous time requirements that get in the way. Even with 1/4 intervals, you have 20+ programs (total threshold of... a few hundred for high ratings?) you need to make for a full complement.

Posted by: Yerameyahu May 26 2011, 03:30 AM

I don't understand your question. What do I say about mundanes? Availability tests *are* a complete joke, but I don't remember mentioning them.

More commonly, I see people talking about 1/8 intervals. I think I mentioned earlier that there are 20+ programs total, but you really only need about 4-6 vitally. That's far fewer. (Don't forget the recurrent idea to use coder-drones, too, hehe.) It obviously depends on the exact configuration of rules, optional rules, house rules, etc. in play; overall, though, all the combinations fall into 'worthless' or 'broken'.

Posted by: longbowrocks May 26 2011, 03:41 AM

'everyone' can get it for 'free' is kind of your catchphrase when it comes to mundane abilities. That makes the whole process sound like the awakened characters can invest in all the things a mundane does at the same rate. Conversely, that implies the magic that awakened characters have is 'free', otherwise they'd be a little behind in terms of mundane investment.

Lets stick with arguing RAW. Otherwise the possibilities branch endlessly.

Posted by: Yerameyahu May 26 2011, 03:47 AM

Ah. I think you're misunderstanding me there, but let's focus on this thread. I'm saying that all hackers (anyone with a commlink and some skill points) can get programs (especially focusing on high-rating ones) for literally free. (Some cost, if you're renting the programming environment, or paying lifestyle—except you're spoofing your lifestyle, duh.) I'm not saying anything about 'mundanes', except to point out that technomancers pay through the nose to have powers that beat normal hackers (usually in one specific area only). That's kind of the opposite of your 'magic is free' point.

1/4 time *is* bad enough, of course. I just wanted to point out the depths of the crazy. It honestly depends on how much time you have. If time becomes a valuable resource, then the GM should strictly allocate it, just like karma and cash. A lot of this discussion does assume that this isn't the case, I admit.

Since you mentioned it: I've never seen anyone roll a glitch. Ever. Even if they did, they simply aren't very damaging.

Posted by: PoliteMan May 26 2011, 03:47 AM

I don't know if you can call Technos special. There's two kinds of hacking user archetypes: hackers and Technos. Saying that half are "special" kinda ruins the "specialness". And that's ignoring AIs.


Why? Don't get me wrong, megas, especially places like MCT zero zones, should totally have R7+ programs and systems. And we're not talking mega-optimization here (well, longbowrocks and I were but that's hardly typical). Since programming feeds off Logic, skill, program, and ware getting a decent enough dice pool for a R7+ doesn't require crazy optimization, it requires programming software and 7 dice from Logic/skills/ware. Once you're getting 3-4 hits, writing R7+ programs just takes time.


I see it differently. It's not giving out milspec armor, it's allowing you're players to eventually get milspec armor. Even if the hacker started programming after the first run, (presuming 1 run a month which seems standard), they won't have the new programs until the third run and they'll probably be just finishing up the coding. (presuming 6 weeks to program, say Analyze 9-10 and 2-ish weeks to program the optimization). If they want hacking programs, it'll take significantly longer. How is (excepting some of the crazy optimized builds that everyone has) letting the hacker get a moderate boost from an R9-10 program every 2-3 gaming sessions gamebreaking? Even the most optimized hacker is still going to take months in-game to get what we would consider a basic R12 package (like Analyze, Stealth, Exploit, and Blackhammer). Compare that to a techno who's been threading R12 from chargen or a Magic 6 mage or a "Super" Sam.


But we know they exist. In fact, there is no theoretical max on programs. AI's get their inherent programs which they can raise with Karma. Give an AI 70-80 Karma and he'll break R12, give him hundreds of Karma and he'll break R20. Give him millions of karma and he'll have R1,000,000. We know they exist. There's just no obvious way for hackers to get there besides programming.

Posted by: Yerameyahu May 26 2011, 03:57 AM

It *is* ignoring AIs. Too minor (and *different*) to bother with. Technomancers *are* special. How could they not be? If anything, they're more special than mages; at least equally so.

How easy it is to get 7+ (though I think we're usually talking way more than 7) is exactly my point. If it's easy, then everyone else (the corps) already did it, and better. Their basic installations should have it, not their super-max zones.

You can't say 'except for the optimized builds', because they totally outclass the poor normals. And they're not monstrosities that the GM can smack off the table. They're just guys with high Logic and skill, basically. So, optimized is a requirement, and being broken is the norm.

They don't exist. AIs are the special-est of special cases, next to maybe a free sprite or something. AI programs are unique, unless you're saying other people can copy and use them. There's not 'no obvious' way to get there, there's no way at all. (Not that AIPCs have it easy, anyway. Program max = LOG, which they'll have to raise along with all those programs.) With free (non-limited) programming for normal hackers, they'll easily far surpass the AIs. I'd be mad if I paid 110 BP to be a creature of the Matrix, and then get mangled on my home turf by a not-insanely-optimized hacker.

Posted by: longbowrocks May 26 2011, 04:06 AM

I was ignoring it since I knew what you meant, but it just crops up so often I finally had to comment for anyone who may be misunderstanding.

But people still need a commlink to run their programs on, and quite a few skills in comparison to any other archetype, and five bucks to bribe their GM to give them 4 months of downtime before the next mission.

Really? What sort of people do you play with? Statistically that's unbelievable since someone generally ends up rolling a dump skill/stat.

Still curious. Where did this come from?

Posted by: Yerameyahu May 26 2011, 04:15 AM

Ah, I see what you mean about 'free'. I'm assuming everyone will have a decent commlink—it's a requirement for running, period. I disagree that a hacker needs more skills than others. If anything, I say fewer. They also don't need Wires 3, or Power Focus 4, or to be a SURGEd Dryad, etc. It's easy to be a good hacker, and it's easy to be a great one… which means it's easy to get programs that (fluff-wise) beat anything up to military-grade. … And don't degrade (I disagree, of course), and aren't Registered, and cost 0 Nuyen, and can be copied infinitely to all your friends, drones, devices…

(This is an aside, so I'll be brief, and I'm talking just about my friends/table. People tend to roll what they're good at. The troll doesn't try to face, etc. Few players hyper-specialize either, so they have more skills in the 'decent' range. I'm not saying it's impossible, just relating my experience. As I said, glitches are far from crippling anyway. In programming, the worst they likely do is waste a little more time.)

Unwired gives sample nodes/security setups; if it's so easy to get high-rating programs, it's unreasonable for the sample nodes to be so low. It's the 'corps already have thousands of people just like you' concept. Some people think runners are more special than that. *shrug* I think Einsteins are vanishingly rare.

Posted by: longbowrocks May 26 2011, 04:20 AM

The programming is limited to device rating (or device rating + 6). It seems to me that technomancers have a higher limit than hackers, but fall behind in that time between chargen and high karma endgame. AI's have higher limits than either of them, but fall behind in the short game.

Posted by: Yerameyahu May 26 2011, 04:27 AM

As the thread shows, it's not a very strict limit. System + 6 still lets you do some pretty impressive things; Rating 12 is not 'okay'. Rating 12 is WAR! If you let a nexus program anything (because they're unlimited), then you could build a minimal one for a couple grand. The examples start at just 5000¥.

I guess it still comes down to the GM controlling time as a resource. Otherwise, the point is that a hacker with no karma can (easily) beat the technomancer and the AI, just by taking enough time (and by that we mean a few months, perhaps). While I don't love the way 'awakened' characters tend to trounce, they do deserve something for their investment.

Posted by: longbowrocks May 26 2011, 04:30 AM

I was thinking: cybercombat; electronic warfare; hacking; software; computer; and data search. This is certainly more than face, techno-anything, mage, or sammy, but you might argue that a good hacker doesn't need all that.

Ah. Well, it's not any easier to get high rating programs if we raise the max for high ratings. It just allows us to go farther.

It sounds like all your players take a bit of hacker. Does each one specialize in a certain area? Our GM gears more toward making/allowing everyone to do a bit of diplomacy, and leaves hacking to the specialized.

Posted by: Yerameyahu May 26 2011, 04:39 AM

Yes, I'd certainly argue that a hacker doesn't need all of those. What skills do you think those other archetypes need, exactly?

I'm not sure what you mean. It's not really any *harder* to get the high-rating programs (I'd love an exponential or otherwise increasing Threshold/interval, for example). But my point was that we're given sample nodes; if you can beat those, you're beating entire IT departments of major nation-corporations. By yourself, armed with a cheap nexus and a few sleepless nights.

(Another aside. I do think everyone in the Sixth World needs a little 'hacker', just as everyone must be able to shoot a gun and dodge. The specialists certainly shine, and they're the ones breaking nodes. But leaving every little data search or security feature to 'the hacker' is as lame as leaving *every* conversation to the face. It makes sense, but only to a point.)

Posted by: ggodo May 26 2011, 05:39 AM

That's mostly cuz no one else took the skills. I also think it's more important for everyone to be capable of handling themselves in social situations, simply because it's more likely you will have to talk to someone than hack something. It's kinda like how 0 level skill is rather competent. I assume you guys can google at 0, but you won't be as good as the guy who has his own search engine that automatically cross-correlates a half dozen databases. You don't need to be http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U18VkI0uDxE to talk to folks, but he'll do it better.

Posted by: PoliteMan May 26 2011, 05:48 AM

I think there's a couple different arguments going on and I'd like to summarize them. Please let me know if you think I missed one or misrepresented one.

#1

Maybe, but if so they've already been broken. Technos and AIs already do it, hackers have access to ware which boosts their rolls, and adepts can boost their skills. There might be balance concerns, which I'll address later, but if R7+ is broken then the game is already broken and we should adjust, not pretend that the R6 cap is real when it plainly isn't.

#2

Aren't Sprites, Echoes, Threading, and the Resonance Realm special enough (or awesome qualities like Rootkit and, well basically immortality for AIs)? Unique abilities with interesting effects are good special. Having only one guy having access to some stuff which is just plain superior doesn't make the character special in any useful way, just in a "over 9000" way.

#3

We know these thing exist and we have clear rules for building them (in a system which is usually impossibly vague on how to build things). I don't see a RAW problem here. They exist, we all know they exist, and the rules for coding them are (kinda) clear.

#4

It is just not that difficult to get 12-15 dice on a roll based on programs, skills, Logic, and wares. And getting new, superior equipment every couple sessions isn't breaking the game, it's usually called getting paid and getting Karma. You're not getting the new programs instantly, it'll take a couple of sessions which is about in line with how most games advance: the characters steadily and predictably get more powerful. How is coding an R7+ program fundamentally different from buying a better gun/car/initiating? Yes, the hacker gets more dice in certain areas, so will the other players and so should the opposition.

#5

#1 I absolutely agree that megacorps (or at least certain departments) should have R7+ systems.
#2 While it does seem kinda weird, there are fluffy reasons for hackers to be able to code things that corps couldn't. (1) Hackers can steal and mix-and-match code from various companies. Mix the best of the SK, MCT, and Horizon Stealth systems without worrying about copyright or corporate reprisals. (2) Small user base. If SK releases a new Analyze program, hundreds of millions of people will use it and everyone will be able to study it and patch their Stealth systems to take advantage of it's flaws. Code evolves regularly. Hackers can step outside that and if they find a few unique ways to improve the code, bonus. (3) Money doesn't always equal quality. Yes, mega corp teams have lots of money and researchers but they have a variety of constraints that independents don't have, like marketing people. Compare Linux or Firefox to corporate products nowadays and it doesn't seem too crazy.


And now for something completely different: agreement!

Absolutely!


I'd try to say it more nicely but yeah, the R6 cap system is already broken. I don't think it helps to pretend it isn't, just adjust the setting a bit for corps having more high-end programs and go.

Posted by: longbowrocks May 26 2011, 06:02 AM

If I'm going to play an archetype, I think I should at least get the skill group that's named after them. Except if I'm playing a sammie. In that case I take one or two weapon skills, and some other supporting skills. I never take dodge. If something ever gets within melee range of me, it's strong enough that it probably could have killed me before I saw it. If I ever find myself in a position where I'm willing to sacrifice an IP for full dodge, I'm going to die anyway.

I guess. By the way. have you seen a mage? He doesn't even need the commlink. Just run stark naked into a major corp and tell your force 12 spirits to kill everyone.
Programmers are the closest thing to mages IRL. I don't see why they wouldn't have similar style in Shadowrun.

Wait. If you think everyone needs to shoot, dodge, hack, and face, there is no way in a 100 port hub that you have never seen anyone glitch before. Their dominant skill would be under 20. Perhaps around 15.

Also, wow that's a nice long post PoliteMan.

Posted by: longbowrocks May 26 2011, 07:01 AM

Finally, does anyone have any idea why drones in WAR are equipped with tacsofts that they can never use?

Posted by: Fatum May 26 2011, 09:21 AM

>War!
The question contains the answer.

Posted by: Aaron May 26 2011, 10:58 AM

You lost me on that one. Unwired states that drones can be members of a tactical network. Don't remember the page number off hand, but it says something along the lines of members of the network can be people or drones.

Posted by: Fatum May 26 2011, 12:06 PM

Actually, yes, Aaron, it's right in the description of tacnets in Unwired, I believe.
Now, whether they have a sufficient number of sensor channels is another question altogether...

Posted by: Fortinbras May 26 2011, 12:40 PM

I have never seen a rule that says I can't make a gun that gives me 12P, AP -9 with 23 points of recoil. Neither have I seen a rule that says I can. It is implicit in Matrix rules, and indeed in proving negatives, that if it doesn't say you can do it, you can't do it.
To answer your questions about Autosofts,

A: The hardware rating of drones is used in things other than Autosofts, such as Programs and Combat. The Response can exceed the Autosoft Rating for those things, as those are not capped.
B: The limit is implicit. Ecverything is for sale in the 6th World. If it existed, it would be purchasable. It doesn't, so it can't. To reiterate caps already expressed seems excessive.
C: The limit for Autosofts and Skillsofts are mentioned in the purchase table. It is also mentioned in the fact that no drone anywhere has an Autosoft greater than 4, even in WAR! which has a drone with a Pilot of 5, yet all it's Autosofts are at 4.

As for coding non-Autosofts greater than 10, I think that's in UV node territory, at which point the programmer should be blurring the lines between reality and VR; making addiction tests and trying to run programs in real life because it seems lees real than the node in which they are programming.

Posted by: Yerameyahu May 26 2011, 01:21 PM

… yeah, that's the 'problem'. I'm not saying it's hard, but that it's *easy*.

This is what I meant when I said that all the samples in Unwired must be wrong, then.

Linux is crap. And a truly massive, ancient project. These aren't examples of trillion-dollar nation-corps losing to one criminal mercenary.
--
… But *not* coding it! It says strongly that it's insane and you can only get it in crazy situations.

--
longbowrocks, I really fundamentally disagree that hackers are like mages, and maybe that's why we're having so much trouble here. Mages are super-special, hackers are *normal*—only moreso. Hackers are just like sams, in that they're doing totally normal things that anyone can do, but much much better. (And glitches don't exist at the 15-20 DP range. Hell, why would anyone even have skills above that?)

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein May 26 2011, 02:20 PM

One Camera At Rating 6 can power an entire Tacnet rated at 2 (with the right mods on the camera) or 3 (based upon the Sensor Rating of the Camera)...

Posted by: Hida Tsuzua May 26 2011, 02:30 PM

The only drone I can find that has a TacNet built in is the GCR-65S with its tacnet 1 software. Since it has a sensor rating of 2 and thus two channels, that's high enough to pass. I will admit getting drones on a higher rating tacnet is tough. Why couldn't they make it drone sensor = rating of tacnet it could join is beyond me. If drones can qualify like metahumans, it isn't as bad, but still annoying since you'll have to mod the heck out of their ill-defined sensor suites.

Edit-grammer and style

Posted by: sabs May 26 2011, 02:31 PM

What they should have done was make it exponentially harder to code programs the higher the rating.

A rating 7 program should be /hard/ but potentially doable by a dedicated hacker.
A rating 8 program should be /hard/ but potentially doable by a group of dedicated hackers
A rating 9 program should be nearly impossible, except by a group of specialized programmers working with state of the art technology, and requiring at least 1 person with a 7 programming skill.

Anything above that, should be wacky AI shit.

The rules for rushing jobs isn't harsh enough on glitches.

Technomancers should not be able to thread and improve existing complex forms, without spending karma.
Threading should allow you to do 1 of 3 things
1) Create a temporary Complex Form from 0
2) Improve an already existing complex form, for the purpose of increasing it's permanent rating. (by spending Karma)
3) Create a Rank 1 permanent Complex Form (by spending karma)

Nexus need to be completely re-written.
Persona Limits MAKE NO SENSE, and it needs to change from, "number of people who originate from here to" "Number of Icons that can be in the system at any one time."

You always count as being "in" the node you originate from. That's fine. But every Node you have a subscription to, should count you in it's "persona" limit.

Posted by: sabs May 26 2011, 02:42 PM

The key with drones is to throw out the 'sensor rating' and instead use individual sensors independently.

So a Fly Spy has
Camera R6 = 1 sensor
Thermographic Modification = 1 sensor
low-light vision modification = 1 sensor
Ultra Sound mod = 1 sensor
Microphone R 6 = 1 sensor
Augio Enhancement = 1 sensor
Spatial Recognizer = 1 sensor
Olifactory Sensor R6 = 1 sensor

That gives it 8 channels, or enough for a TacSoft Rating 4.

That's plenty

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein May 26 2011, 02:45 PM

Technomancer issues would be fixed if you use the CF as the limit on hits that you can achieve. Under the Optional Rule of Skill + Attribute (Hits capped by Program Limit), you do not have any of the above issues at all, since your CF does not add to your DP...

Just a plug for the optional rule...

Posted by: sabs May 26 2011, 02:55 PM

You still have issues with Stealth rating of 12 but.. that just means that Technomancers are SUPER GOOD at hiding in plain sight in a node.

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein May 26 2011, 03:06 PM

Only on initial Penetration, where the CF/Program sets the threshold to be noticed... Afterwards, the test is opposed, and you are rolling your Logic + Skill with caps limited by CF/Program. It is an opposed test.

Posted by: Fatum May 26 2011, 03:09 PM

And what's stopping a technomancer from threading it to 11? Or 12?

Posted by: sabs May 26 2011, 03:18 PM

Because Logic(6)+skill(6)=DP 12. Sure, if he yahtzees he can count all 12 dice, but how often is THAT gonna happen.

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein May 26 2011, 03:31 PM

Why would he need to? Since the CF is the CAP for hits, there is less incentive to thread to insane levels. A System with programs rated at 6 is not going to detect that rating 7 Stealth on Insertion, and will be contested thereafter. Why would it need a Rating 11 oer 12? I have noticed that the optional Rule GREATLY reduces the need for insane levels of Programming/Threading. And actually makes sense of the lower rated programs that are out there. Also, for tyhose Military/Secret Research Facilities that DO have programs rated higher, they have the personnel available that will allow their full use.

My personal Experience anyways... Anecdotal though it is Yerameyahu

Posted by: Yerameyahu May 26 2011, 03:59 PM

TJ

I agree, sabs: higher ratings need to get harder faster.

Posted by: Ascalaphus May 26 2011, 04:00 PM

I've never really pondered the influence of the Skill+Attr (Max Prog/CF) rule on technomancers.

Do you think it makes hacker advancement (karma/cashwise) and technomancer advancement more similar? I.e. technomancers a bit less karma-draining, and hackers a tad more?

Posted by: James McMurray May 26 2011, 04:02 PM

What about using rating squared as the base threshold? It'd make lower rating software really easy, but you can get those as freeware anyway. Once you start trying to do milspec stuff you're looking at 49+ difficulties. Then tack on a little more for hacking software, autosofts, and the other types that are supposed to be harder.

Posted by: sabs May 26 2011, 04:03 PM

It means Technomancers don't really have incentive to be raising their complex forms very high.

Posted by: Hida Tsuzua May 26 2011, 04:10 PM

Oh yeah, that's the way to do it (be sure to check capacity!). In fact, I've made Bust-a-Move drones into what I call TacNet Buddy whose job is to count as extra people so you can get your rating 4 tacnet when your group is smaller than 6.

However, several things are annoying about the process. It never does say that drones can qualify in this manner (it just says for drones provide channels equal to sensor). It's reasonable and I'm sure most GM's would allow it, but it's not exactly laid out. And if you do, you'll have to refer to drone sensor capacity and the default setup that often breaks it. It's not well laid out at all when it could have been so much easier.

Posted by: Yerameyahu May 26 2011, 04:27 PM

Something like that, James McMurray. Don't forget that there's precedent for splitting into tiers: (1-3), (4-6), etc. It might be easier to simply increase the multiplier after 6.

Posted by: James McMurray May 26 2011, 04:32 PM

True, that would especially fit well with the software pricing that already exists.

Posted by: Wakshaani May 26 2011, 04:33 PM

Hrm,
1-3
4-6
7-9
10

(Or would you go 10-12? Either way, a listed cap isn't a bad idea.)

Hrm...

Posted by: sabs May 26 2011, 04:34 PM

Another thing to do, to be a complete bastard.
programming options, instead of being programmed separately, add to the total.

Posted by: sabs May 26 2011, 04:35 PM

I feel like 10, should require access to UV nodes, and AI software assistance, and I would be way happier if 10 never came up, except when doing runs against ZOG.

Posted by: Yerameyahu May 26 2011, 04:40 PM

So, increasing the multiplier would render the Threshold on a Hacking program as:

Rating 1-6 => 2-12 (x2, or normal)
Rating 7-9 => 21-27 (x3, or +1)
Rating 10 (or 10-12) => 40-48 (x4, or +2)

Admittedly, this collapses the difference within tiers (e.g., 9 isn't much harder than 7), so it's a very different curve than sabs described. It all really depends on what you're going for. (If you want to keep 10 really special, which is fine, then you'd just hard-cap it.)

In general, I subscribe to the 'don't invent unprecedented new mechanics' rule, and SR4 is a largely linear-scaling system.

It's possibly also a good idea to apply the increased multiplier to any options you add (so Optimization 6 on a rating 7 hacking program would be Threshold 21 + Threshold 12).

Don't forget that rating determines the number of Options you can have, which does help make a 9 (4 options) better than a 7 (3 options), beyond the basic +2. This is mostly an issue for attack programs, but they can *really* benefit.

Posted by: sabs May 26 2011, 04:45 PM

Thing is, I want to encourage hackers to build their own program suites. It's good. You should want your own exploit program you wrote yourself, with the options that work best for you.

Exploit, ergonomic, crashguard, optimized. That's something I should be encouraged to build myself.

Current incentives:
Bought software is registered, has planned degradation, (1 rating/(2)month), unknown limitations.
Pirated Software: Degredation, unknown options added in. (Psychotropic, virus, bugs, tracers, etc), limitations.

You know what's in your programmed software.

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein May 26 2011, 04:45 PM

In some ways, yes... Technomancers are not pushed to quickly obtain high CF's, as they can thread , and it is easier. There is no longer a reason to thread to CF 10 unless it is absolutely necessary... Where the normal rules encourages it.

It forces Hackers to BE Hackers and not Script Kiddies. No More DUMP Stat on Logic... And Skills mean more than Programs do.

At least in My Opinion anyways...

Posted by: Ascalaphus May 26 2011, 04:57 PM

You can still play "bought smarts": skillwires, cerebral booster and good programs. But that's clearly a second-best thing.

I've thought about squared availability/programming thresholds too. In the end it comes down to what you as a GM want from it.

On the one hand, it seems preposterous that a single person has any chance to keep up with the billion-dollar research projects of the megacorps. On the other hand, it's cool and cyberpunk.



I'm thinking about some different approach. Writing from scratch would be really hard, but before you begin a big hacking operation, you can use Software to tweak your programs to optimize them against the enemy; getting the latest exploits and patches, studying system-specific weaknesses.

It'd be basically reversing the Unwired idea; instead of making keeping up to SOTA absurdly hard (with an annoying software degradation system), it makes hackers effective because they're faster to adopt new technology than corporate IT bureaucracies.

A given Software-Skill boost to Matrix effectiveness would be good for only limited time, dependent on the quality of the enemy; it'd stay "fresh" for days against a R3 system, but only hours against an R6 system. As long as it's fresh, you get some sort of bonus for being more up to date than they are.

Posted by: Yerameyahu May 26 2011, 05:06 PM

And that's how it should: script kiddies can get very respectable (Rating 6) 'basic' levels, while people who invest in Logic and skills above 4 will be better. That's better than nuking script kiddies out of the game (TJ ), and it rewards another investment/development path.

I'm fine with a truly amazing, legendary shadowrunner hacker beating a corp (possibly just in one or two areas). It's just early/starter runners doing it (easily) that's a problem. It ruins the cool, for me, and cyberpunk is also about pretty unforgiving competition and inequality.

Posted by: PoliteMan May 26 2011, 05:45 PM

As I recall, SR3 did a varient of this and it worked really well. As I recall, it was basically rating² multiplied by a static number 1-4 representing the complexity/power of the program.


I'm not sure thresholds, or rather just thresholds, is the way to go. I'd prefer to see a mechanic that lengthens the interval between tests. Consider, for example, coding a R7-9 program, don't increase the threshold but double the interval (from 1 to 2 months). Higher thresholds, thanks to diminishing dice on extended tests, might keep non-optimized characters from coding, while even optimized hackers have few options to decrease the interval (all requiring either monetary investments, edge, or risk)


Fine, no politics, religion, or open source.

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein May 26 2011, 06:14 PM

The Optional System does not Nuke the Script Kiddies out of the Game Yerameyahu, it just relegates them to their own, insignificant little niche... Very Different, in my opinion.

Posted by: Yerameyahu May 26 2011, 07:05 PM

Good point, PoliteMan. The Threshold/interval issue is really just the same thing, after all. The intent is mostly to slow them down (though barring lower DP coders from the highest programs *is* an intended feature, for me).

And I'm at least 51% teasing about Linux. The real point is that it's a massive, ancient project.

--
That's nuking, Tymeaus.

Posted by: capt.pantsless May 26 2011, 07:53 PM

You could also start applying software degradation rules from the moment they start programing. After all, the SOTA is going to be moving just as fast while the programmer is designing and programming as it is once they're finished.

Along with glitches, that should prevent non-Uber coders from ever finishing a rating 10 exploit program.


That aside, I tend to think that crafting your own stuff in-game is sorta cool, and I'd rather not overly restrict it. If one of my players wants to take a shot at creating a rating 9 attack program, I'm not going to work to stop them (much).

Posted by: Yerameyahu May 26 2011, 08:00 PM

They don't have to go straight for 9, either. They can start from 6 and just bump it a few times. Decreasing DP, glitches? Problems gone. So there's a lot of factors in play here.

Posted by: sabs May 26 2011, 08:00 PM

To me something linux like is the Hacker System of choice. The ones that run Rating 6 systems, are running some kind of Linuxequivalent for 2072 System.

The Matrix system is too broad, and too abstract in certain areas, and too specific in others.

It ignores differences in FileSystems, OS, Hardware. If I'm Ares, why is everyone of my employees and subsidiaries not using WarOS 4.0. If I'm MCT, everyone should be using either Cyberdine Commlink, or Cyberdine Nexus. The game talks about proprietary file systems, and file types.

There's not enough flavor in the Programs. Especially since people look at you like you're a chump if you don't have Rating 6 programs out of the char gen.

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein May 26 2011, 08:26 PM

That is relegating them to their proper place, in my opinion...

Posted by: sabs May 26 2011, 08:29 PM

I thoguht script kiddies were the ones who bought agents with exploit programs

Posted by: Yerameyahu May 26 2011, 08:58 PM

No, those are the ones that even script kiddies look down on. Everyone needs someone.

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein May 26 2011, 09:03 PM

Heh...

Posted by: Ascalaphus May 26 2011, 09:24 PM

Yeah, I dislike the blandness of programs too. I've though about an alternative:

Suppose you start treating programs like say, guns. There's a bunch of different programs for the same thing (breaking in), but they have all kinds of different traits, like cost, reliability, power, hardware issues and so forth.

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein May 26 2011, 09:27 PM

Sort of like CP2020 with its hundreds of Programs? Could work, but the system would really need to be redesigned a bit, I would think.

Posted by: Ascalaphus May 26 2011, 09:29 PM

Eh. I've tried my hand at burning down the current system and redesigning from the ground up. Unfortunately, it IS rather hard to design a good Matrix ruleset.

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein May 26 2011, 09:37 PM

It is... I actually like the current system (optional Rules employed, however). Of course, it oculd have more "spice" I guess, though some of that could be taken care of by the players and GM in how they describe the Matrix.

There could be more options, in my opinion, though I am not sure where to go from where we already are.

CP2020 had an interesting method, but you had to track a lot of things. I like the simplicity we currently have, but it would be nice if it were a bit more complex without providing too much overhead. That is always the problem, though. The more complex it is, the less accessible it becomes.

Posted by: longbowrocks May 27 2011, 04:22 AM

As I said: tacsofts they can never use.
contributed senses <= sensor rating for drone
contributed senses >= tacsoft rating X2 to be member of group.
tacsoft rating = 3-4
no drone sensor rating exceeds 4

We have here two disjunct sets.

Posted by: longbowrocks May 27 2011, 04:29 AM

I can't tell if the wink mean you're trolling. I'll just point out that code people write as a hobby is orders of magnitude better than code they write for a paycheck.

Posted by: longbowrocks May 27 2011, 04:31 AM

That's what I'd like to do, but for now we're arguing RAW.

Posted by: longbowrocks May 27 2011, 04:39 AM

Hackers are skill + program (hacking + exploit)
Script kiddies are attribute + program (douche baggery + exploit)

There! Problem solved.

Posted by: Fatum May 27 2011, 05:23 AM

If you don't have enough sensor channels to run the tacnet at its maximal rating, you still get the benefits of whatever rating your number of sensor channels can support. That is, for your example, 2.

Improved sensors from Arsenal allows you to upgrade the Sensor package of your drone (or vehicle), and iirc it's openly suggested to individually track the ratings of the sensors.

Posted by: longbowrocks May 27 2011, 05:31 AM

In that case your entire group gets a bonus of only 2, because if you run it at a higher rating, you can't be a member of the group.

Yeah, I've read that, but I never quite got it. As far as I can tell it doesn't change the number displayed for sensor on the drone stats. On quick review, I can't find any way to relate the sensor package system directly to the drone sensor rating system. Even the table in SR4A doesn't show any direct correlation.

Posted by: Fatum May 27 2011, 05:39 AM

Yeah, but if your group is a bunch of drones to begin with, they still get two dice to a bunch of tests. Which is rather nice.

Arsenal has the rules describing which sensors the sensor suites for drones and vehicles include.

Posted by: SpellBinder May 27 2011, 05:44 AM

The Sensor Rating of a drone is its base dice pool for perception tests of the physical world (SR4a, page 245). It's a measure of how observant a drone is (along with the Clearsight autosoft), not how many sensor channels it has.

A trideo camera with low light & thermographic enhancements counts as three sensor channels. Ultrasound, radar, and motion sensors would make up three more channels. If you're able to mount all of that into a single drone you've got six sensor channels for a tacnet. Two more and you're capped for a Rating 4 Tacsoft. Then it's a matter of making sure there's enough drones in the network.

Posted by: longbowrocks May 27 2011, 05:49 AM

Definitely, it's great. I was just pointing out that the drones with tacsofts in WAR have rating 3-4. No drone can ever use a tacsoft at rating 3-4.

Posted by: longbowrocks May 27 2011, 05:50 AM

I hope so. Let me look it up more in depth.

Nope. Here's my issue: "each drone can supply a number of sensor channels equal to its Sensor rating." UN125

Posted by: SpellBinder May 27 2011, 06:14 AM

Hmm, missed that part. Honestly I can take that one of a few ways.

One is the way you are, that a drone's Sensor Rating is how many channels it provides and that's it.

The other is that a drone's Sensor Rating is in addition to other sensor systems. The whole line is, after all, "Drones sensor systems also count; each drone can supply a number of sensor channels equal to its Sensor rating." It doesn't say anything about any sensors installed in the drone, which could mean they are added in.

In all honesty I'd ignore that "each drone can supply a number of sensor channels equal to its Sensor rating." part of the line and go with what's actually installed in the drone instead. Probably what the writers of WAR did when they put those rating 3 & 4 tacsofts in the drones. It also makes things more consistent between everything, people and drones. Besides, if taken the other way one could argue that a drone with a Sensor Rating of 4 provides 4 channels to a tacnet and doesn't have to have a single sensor installed (doesn't make sense to me that way, but I know people will try to argue that).

Posted by: longbowrocks May 27 2011, 06:30 AM

It's pretty obvious what they mean, but I'm always open to something that opens up more options.

Posted by: Fatum May 27 2011, 07:34 AM

Well, no drone in default configuration can.
But that's War for you, why are you surprised.

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein May 27 2011, 12:52 PM

Just means that you only have to upgrade the sensor Suite... That tacsoft program is damn expensive.

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein May 27 2011, 12:53 PM

Otherway around, actually... But you have the right idea...

Posted by: sabs May 27 2011, 01:03 PM

Well, except that according to Arsenal, if I install 1 R6 camera into say a FlySpy, it suddenly has a sensor rating of 6. Even if I don't install anything else.

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein May 27 2011, 01:06 PM

Indeed... Sensor Suite Upgrade, as was stated above.

Posted by: sabs May 27 2011, 01:17 PM

I know but Fatum and Longbowrocks were being grognards about that 1 line in Unwired

Posted by: deek May 27 2011, 01:20 PM

I was just thinking (as I read the last days worth of posts), that the game designers may have been looking at programming your own stuff in a different light, which may justify the great length of time it takes to not only code, but patch your own stuff. They may have been thinking about it from a reselling perspective. If a hacker can code his own program too quick, make a bajillion copies and then sell it for tons of cash, well, that can easily be taken advantage of. The hacker then just codes and makes way more money selling programs and patches then going on runs.

I think there could be room in the current rules to add, say a program option, to a homemade program that restricts the hacker from every copying it to another commlink (basically, it only runs where they coded it and can never be transferred), in exchange for much faster build times. This may close the loop allowing the hacker to code his own shit and handle all his own patches to fight degradation, but do it in much faster times so he could actually have all his own software coded. The tradeoff would be you can't share it or profit from it.

It would be a single option to add. Fairly simple concept that might put one big chunk of these issues to rest.

Posted by: sabs May 27 2011, 01:22 PM

That already exists in some way. It's called Limitation.

Posted by: James McMurray May 27 2011, 01:24 PM

He's talking about the confusing mess that is the errataed rules for individual sensors on drones, not the sensor upgrade mod. Its quite legal to have enough sensor channels on a drone to use R4 Tac-soft, you just need degrees in accounting and rules lawyering to pull it off.

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein May 27 2011, 01:43 PM

No, actually you don't... No degrees needed at all... And no rules lawyering either. It is quite simple. Either use the Sensor Rating and upgrade it (A single Camera with a Rating of 6 upgrades the Entire Suite of 1 Sensor to a rating of 6, which will handle a R3 Tacnet) OR you use Individual channels, like metahumans do, and spend the money to upgrade each and every sensor with enough "channels" to handle a R4 Tacnet. It really is not all that difficult to understand. You just have to pick your option at that point. And be consistent, no switching back and forth between options.

I tend to choose the second option, as it tends to cost a bit more, and I have no problems with it costing more. I like the flavour of "Modes" for the Sensors, which is what I see as giving you your Tactical options, rather than some amorphous "Rating" which supposedly covers it all. They both work, but they function in very different ways.

Posted by: Fatum May 27 2011, 01:47 PM

Please note that I'm being a grognard about the whole idea of Sensor as a stat for drones instead of listing which sensors it has explicitly and allowing the rigger to mod them at any time, without installing any vehicle upgrades or anything, just like that. I understand that SR4 (unlike the previous editions, far as I see) is not aiming to be a simulationist system, so I accept the ruling as is.

Posted by: sabs May 27 2011, 02:29 PM

That rule was written outside of the existence of the Arsenal Sensor upgrade rules.

Don't get me wrong, the sensor rules are stupid. But by dealing with individual sensors and sensor capacities in a drone, you are /much/ better off balance while, and flexibility wise. Sure you run into problems that microdrones can have a camera, or a microphone, and if they have a microphone, you're nto quite sure HOW they move but.. that's a different story.

Posted by: deek May 27 2011, 02:59 PM

To some extent, but it appears that coding a Limitation into a program, by RAW, takes more time. I certainly think this program option can be keyed on, but what we'd have to do is come up with a houserule for the particular option that reduces the time it takes to code a program using this particular limitation (again, the limitation is that the hacker can only use it on the commlink he coded it on, so its 100% non-transferrable).

Again, the idea is to put solid rules this limitation that would allow a hacker to code his own programs in a reasonable time, but avoid the prospect of him doing that for his whole team or making a profit off selling the stuff for quick money. This fits the flavor it seems everyone is going for: a hacker should code his own shit and be pretty good while not taking months to code and patch making it a viable option for characters.

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein May 27 2011, 04:38 PM

A Camera or Microphone can fit into a Button. Or an RFID, which is TINY... Why is it a problem for a Microdrone?

Posted by: sabs May 27 2011, 05:42 PM

Microdrones have a 1 capacity sensor package, so they can only have 1 sensor.
As per SR4A.

Posted by: Yerameyahu May 27 2011, 06:19 PM

And the micro camera is limited to Rating 1.

Deek, some form of 'automatic' Limitation seems fair, like geas/limited versions of spells and things.

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein May 27 2011, 06:19 PM

And a Camera is exactly 1 Sensor... and has Visual (Video and Trideo) AND Sound capabilities. As per SR4A.
Micro is Rating 1 Camera with 2 channels... With, again, Visual and Sound, so your Micro Drone can support a Rating 1 Tacnet by default.

What's the Problem...

Posted by: sabs May 27 2011, 06:21 PM

Where do you get the camera has sound capabilities? It cannot take any audio enhancements.

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein May 27 2011, 06:23 PM

Does not need to... Here, let me quote the book...



Plain as day... Cameras have sound capture capabilities by default.

Posted by: sabs May 27 2011, 06:25 PM

Micro cameras are limited to rating 1.

A Camera can have as many mods as it has ratings.

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein May 27 2011, 06:25 PM

And again... There is no need to mod the camera to have visual and audio channels. They are default.

Posted by: Hida Tsuzua May 27 2011, 06:26 PM

Under the description of camera:


Edit- Ninja'd so more commentary. You can't really mod much for the camera at 1 though. But it does provide the sound and audio channels so a microdrone can join a rating 1 tacnet. With improved sensor array, I'm sure you can leverage it to 4 sensor channels.

Posted by: longbowrocks May 28 2011, 04:43 AM

Long weekend ahead, so I can finally get onto this:
Option one will not allow a drone to support an R4 Tacnet, so that's probably not right.
It's pretty clear that drones don't use the same rules as metahumans for contributing sensor channels, so option two would be a house rule.

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein May 28 2011, 12:47 PM

Actually, Option 2 is in the Books. It is suggested that you use Individual Ratings instead of Sensor Rating. If you can accumulate enough "Channels" to cover 8 Channels, you have access to the R4 tacnet Support.
And why do you NEED an R4 tacnet provided through Drones? Just more power creep...

Honestly, I am happy with just R3 from Drones, personally. Our group has yet to surpass the R3 Tacnet. No need really.

Posted by: longbowrocks May 28 2011, 02:31 PM

Are you talking about page 105 of Arsenal? I don't think the gamemaster would ever consider one sensor to be a hodgepodge of multisensory information detailed enough to support an R4 tacnet.

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein May 28 2011, 03:09 PM

Does not matter... By the Rules (Like you tend to go), a Rating 6 Camera, by itself, will support a R3 Tacnet. Since the Rating 6 Camera (by itself, as a standalone system) boosts the Sensor Rating to 6. This is why I perfer the method of using "Channels" rather than Sensor Rating, to adjudicate the viability of Tacnet. It makes a LOT more sense.

Now, That Same Camera may only have 3 modes that can contribute to a Tacnet (Basic Visual, Thermographic and Lowlight Modes), the Radar on the vehicle could count as another one (for 4), the Audio Signal processing of the Select Sound Filters attached to the Camera's Audio Components can provide another (for 5), and the Laser Rangefinder contributes the 6th. To me, that is more costly, and makes more sense, than a Single, Rated 6 Camera boosting the Sensor rating to 6.

Either method works, but one makes a LOT more sense in the end.

Posted by: Jhaiisiin May 28 2011, 10:40 PM

Going back a bit, our group have at times played with the Attribute + Skill (Max hits = program rating) option. I constantly ran up against the rating max hits on things. When hacking on the fly, hacking a System 4/Firewall 4 setup took 3 or more extended tests to get into for an Admin account. That same system could consistently hit my Stealth 5 or 6 in one or 2 checks maximum, and so there would *always* be an alarm when I got in, assuming it didn't just drop my connection outright.

So yes, it does limit the Technos and hackers in the same way, but that max hits = rating limit is crippling in a way, given that the detection of your intrusion doesn't follow the same rule, to my knowledge.

Posted by: Irion May 28 2011, 11:09 PM

I personally dislike tecnet very much. Because there is no way to explain how it achieves the effect it talks about. Smartlink is questionable.
But Tacnet is quite insane.
You can easy get two or three dices. But for what?
For some distracting information?

I see the possible advantages but: The bonus is just too big.
If you compare two guys:
One with tacnet 4, Smartlink, Firearms 1 and agility 1 you end up with 8 dices.
Now you get yourself a marin:
Agility 4 and Firearms 4. He also gets 4 dices.
So on the one side you have a guy whos hands won't stop shaking on the other hand a marine.
And because that guy gets a cross air drawn before his face (and some other information) he shoots nearly as good as the marine.
Well, thats just ridiculous.
I get it, that a startup with smartlink is able to shoot like an more experienced guy.
But tecnet just...

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein May 29 2011, 01:10 AM

We have been using it for a year or so now, and I love it... Besides, You want to extend beyond your Hit Cap, Use an Edge Point.

Anyways...

Posted by: Jhaiisiin May 29 2011, 02:24 AM

Or only ever take time to probe the target so it only gets one single roll to detect you. But most of the time, you won't always have hours to hack in to a location. Similarly, I'm not going to blow an Edge point for *every* time I need to hack into something. I'd be out of edge halfway through a single session. Contrary to a previous post, Edge does *not* refresh every session. It refreshes at GM whim. That can be every session, or only between adventures. If one run takes 4 sessions to complete, I'd better not be blowing Edge every chance I need to hack if the GM doesn't refresh until the end of an adventure (as happens in our games).

Posted by: Udoshi May 29 2011, 06:28 AM

Distracting information? heck no.

Ever played a video game with a minimap? I mean, a good one, that shows the location of all enemies you can see?
Right, not too bad. (Most shooters, like, oh, alien vs predator, UT, or even halo)
Or one that shows a level map. (No, not like diablo. )
Or a really good game that lets you see all the enemies your entire team can detect (section 8, dystopia, planetside).
Back in the day, there were a handful of excellent flight sim games that had a nifty thing called a Leading Indicator.(Privateer, freespace). you target an enemy, and it tells you how far ahead you need to lead with your ships guns to score a hit.

A Tacnet does all of this by tying all this convenient smartlink and sensor data into one easily-accessable, non distracting package. It turns a soldier into a wallhacker who always gets the drop on someone coming around the corner, knows exactly where his friends are, their status, their ammo count, and even which targets they are aiming at. If you're fighting a recognizable force, it even tells you the gear they have, and tactics you can expect to face.

And thats before you plug other crazy stuff like shot-spooter sensorsofts, into it.

No, tacnets aren't easily lumped in as random information. Its basically a really, really excellent HUD system.

Posted by: SpellBinder May 29 2011, 07:20 AM

Re Smartlink: Think Robocop with his pistol, being able to see where it's aimed (like the crosshairs in your FPS game; most players will have worse aim without that being there). Or, if you want, being able to see down the barrel of your gun from the bullet's perspective. Couple in extra information like range, where to really aim to hit the spot you want, wind direction and speed, and such, and there's your bonus.

Re Tacnet: Along with the sensor channels to collect the information, figure the tacnet software is using that info to coordinate where all its members are, potential targets are, movement of all involved, and triangulation mixed in with GPS (via your commlink running the tacnet) to help tell you where targets and such are. I've figured some kind of triangulation is involved since you've gotta have at least three members in a tacnet to get any bonuses. As for distracting, I'm with Udoshi.

In all honesty I never figured that the full details needed to really be flushed out. After all, we're talking about fictional technology that's sixty-some years more advanced than what we've got now. Better to not think too much on it and just enjoy the game.

Posted by: longbowrocks May 29 2011, 08:46 AM

Yeah, in general, bonuses equal-weigh skill + attribute, and outweigh low skill + low attribute.

*Ah, in the game I mean, just so we don't start another IRL argument.

Posted by: longbowrocks May 29 2011, 08:50 AM

I like method 2 if you want to be fair, but I still say the drone must have some sensors that make its sensor rating 3-4. With those in the mix, no number of sensors will raise your average to 6.

Posted by: Irion May 29 2011, 11:02 AM

Yes, yes.
But take a first person shooter of your choice. deactivate the minimap and even the crossair(if there are regular possibilitys to aim) from one team and get the other team drunk like hell (to reduce their skill and attribute)
Or, hell. Just take one group of regular guys and an other group of pros. The pros are walking over the regular guys. Crossair/minimap or not. They do not care.
Well, maybe in Space shooters it is going to be a bit different. But I would not like to bet on that.
Because well, it does not help you much. The newbes would start looking at the minimap, while the pros would just use the sound to pinpoint an enemy. So the distraction from the minimap would may even be a disadvantage.
And yes while I was young we had Lan partys and I could see bad players using wallhack and stuff and the good ones still butchering them.

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein May 29 2011, 02:00 PM

And I agree with you. When you can slow hack the system, you prep for the intrusion with the creation of Backdoors or legitimate accounts, or you use a Trojan to set up the system for the Actual run. My Character has done this many times. Sometimes, though, you just cannot go that route. That is why the Programming world created the "MUTE" option. Used correctly, you will be in the system before the Alarm goes off, and then you can attempt to shut it down before it totally hoses you (as most systems get 3 passes, and many Hackers get 3-5 passes, you will have awesome time padding before any alarm goes off). For simple systems, you are likely to get in on an OTF Hack before any thresholds have been met, dependant upon what access you are going for. For those systems where you have a high Threshold to penetrate, well, you need a high rated Stealth as well. Push their threshold as high as you can and the dice rolls eventually become even.

As a note. The opposition's agents will be of minimal use against a very skilled hacker (in the optinal Rule that we use, and even in the normal rules, most of the times). This is because of a few things. The primary one being that Agents get no Edge. Another is the hit cap on dice rolls when using the optional rule (to get the full use of a Rating 6 Program, you need, on average, 18 Dice. Agents cannot compete in that realm). You really only need to worry about the Spiders in the system. Leave your own worms and agents to deal with the less challenging opponents.

For the Record, My Cyberlogician rarely spends Edge on a Hack. It is rarely worth it. He always has better (read more critical) areas in which to spend Edge. Of course, it doesn't help much that he also has Bad Luck, so he rarely spends Edge anyways, unless it really, really, really matters in the moment. Otherwise he takes his lumps and moves on.

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein May 29 2011, 02:07 PM

Which is why we like Method 2 ourselves. Most Drones have a Sensor rating of 1-4, and is easliy upgradeable to a 5 with minimal effort. There is a list of the common sensors on a Vehicle in Arsenal (Vehicles have 12 Points worth of sensors). A Drone will likely have fewer of these, and there are several you can easily eliminate, Vehicle Radar being the easiest with its 5 slot requirement.

Making the 'Runner purchase the upgrades to each sensor individually works well, because it causes them to spend money on each sensor. Which I am all for, as a GM and a Player. Besides, depending upon the individual sensors, you can get the package to a Sensor 6. Just remove any of the rated stuff that does not go that high and replace with one that will.

Anyways...

Posted by: longbowrocks May 29 2011, 06:23 PM

This brings up something I've been curious about: Why is radar so capacity intensive? Ultrawideband radar seems more useful. Plain old vision seems more useful for details.

Posted by: Yerameyahu May 29 2011, 06:58 PM

Cuz Radar is big? It's vehicular radar. The UWB is a personal sensor.

Posted by: longbowrocks May 29 2011, 07:11 PM

So, it's that signal 8 monster suggested by SR4A 222?

Posted by: Jhaiisiin May 30 2011, 02:01 AM

Truth be told I didn't know about the Mute option. Hell, I didn't have the resources or time to get beyond program rating 5 on anything until near the end of that game. Probably also why I didn't have access to mute. As to the node detections, I was under the impression that OTF hacking generated an automatic detection roll by the node each time I make a roll. So regardless of initiative passes, it will always try to detect each time I poke it. Am I wrong there?

Regarding stealth, I think I finally got that to 6 by the time the game had ended. Still, that's 2 rolls on average from the node to find me...

That said, our game's hacking rules never got very complicated. We never had multiple agents, IC, spiders and such all at once. It was usually me vs node, deal with ic or hacker and that's it....

Could be our minds are still stuck in the SR2/3 days when decking/hacking/matrix rules were so damned slow you simply didn't deal with them ever and just handwaved them. So we're likely not taking full advantage of the capabilities and intricacies of the current rules.

Posted by: Falconer May 30 2011, 04:33 AM

A commnt on Tymeaus's oft repeated house rule...

It's a lousy way to do things. (cerebral boosters + cyber mean it's very easy to pull in +5-6 dice). It makes the attribute + skill (where attribute/bonuses completely dominate skill) even worse.

Two the artificial cap on hits is pretty bad way to handle program ratings. There's no reason someone w/ a simple tool can't do great things with it. It's also at odds w/ the other optional rule to use skill rating to cap successes/net successes that is sometimes seen elsewhere. (the point of that rule was to make skill rating more important).

Also a master can do great things w/ a simple tool... someone sculpting wood w/ a chisel vs a chainsaw comes to mind.


Hotsim (2), Encephalon (1-2), pushed (1), Cerebral boosters (2). Math SPU(2).... those all add up to a lot of dice a lot cheaper than actually buying the skill/groups on top of classic base attribute + 1 rank in skill ploy. With all those bonuses it's really easy to get a hacker tossing ~15 dice on everything he does right out of chargen w/o much room for future improvement. To me the biggest problem w/ the system is there's so little room for future improvement coming out of chargen. Only ~4 dice or so more... it seems more that as play goes on the biggest advantage is access to more hardware running more things at once.


If the goal is to simply make the attribute matter then this has played out much better IMO w/ a little bit of playtesting.
Simply use (Logic + program rating)/2, then optionally use skill to cap net successes. It makes the logic relevant, as well as the quality of the tools. Without making either largely irrelevant and still making actual skill level very important. (this is anothr way of saying each point of program is worth half a die, and each point of logic is worth half a die). It also doesn't result in much larger dice pools straight out of chargen where you have someone w/ 7-10 logic straight out of chargen taking the place of response/system capped rating 4-5 programs out of chargen.

Posted by: Yerameyahu May 30 2011, 04:38 AM

Yeah, we've had a few threads running up and down the issue. It's not half so simple as it sounds.

Posted by: Ascalaphus May 30 2011, 09:08 AM

You said it.

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein May 30 2011, 02:32 PM

Something like that, but in a slightly smaller package, usually Signal Rating 3, 4 or 5, because it depends upon Device Rating.

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein May 30 2011, 02:34 PM

Yes, for OTF Hacking the Node gets a role each time you roll.



Could be. Hacking is MUCH more useful now than it was then, in my opinion.

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein May 30 2011, 02:49 PM

Not a House Rule there Falconer, it is one of the Optional Rules in the Books.



I disagre, it has worked out wonderfully well for our group, and Dice pools tend to be much less than the Normal Way in my experience.



Again, It works well for us. You can only go so far with a minimal tool after all. As for being at odds with Skill Rating Caps, it is not using that rule. it is using the equivalent Cap for Magic. Magic is Capped at Force. Hacking is capped at Program Rating. No difference here. And again, not a House Rule, but a book supported Optional Rule.



Which can ALL be used in the normal way of hacking to boost your pools above 20. The Optinal Rule makes Attribute and Skill more important than the Program Rating. And it makes Program Ratings of Low quality actually mean something. Otherwise there should never be any program ratings below rating 5. If I have a Hacking Pool of 9 Dice, WHY would I spend 6,000 Nuyen per program for Rating 6 Hacking Programs when I am only likely to ever get a consistent 3 Hits per roll? I will never be able to use the Program to its potential. It makes absolutely no sense. Instead, I am going to spend 1500 for that Rating 3 program. By the same token, IF I am throwing 18 Dice, Why would I buy A Rating 3 program? It limits me severely at that point, as my intellect now surpasses my tools. I am going to go for more powerful programs in that situation.

Really, you should try it out and see how the Hacking Dynamic changes. I actually like the change, as does our table.



First, Why do you assume that we did not playtest the Optional Rule? Secondly, Why add a different Mechanic to the game? The goal of SR4 was to use a single mechanic (or a few Simple Mechanics, as opposed to the 15 Different Subsystems of SR3) to produce a Dice Pool. Now you want to construct a Pool, and then Half it for the Roll? No, I am against the SR3 methjod of subsytems. You do not need a different subsystem for everything. We have just a few Subsystems currently. Why add another completely different one? I choose to use the Magic Subsystem instead. It works great, and is very easy.

Posted by: Yerameyahu May 30 2011, 03:32 PM

It works great for you.

Posted by: Falconer May 30 2011, 11:02 PM

Those sidebars are suggestions for house rules. That's how I've always read them.

My issue with it comes down to this... It's trivial to obtain larger dice pools than if you were doing it the normal way. For those large dice pools... the program limit doesn't work well. For low rating programs you might as well just 4:1 and call it a day... and even higher rating 4-5 programs are almost always going to cap out except when you're unlucky on the roll and the nature of the cap is to stop pretty much. If I'm a mage, I can always dial up my force to get more successes if I'm willing to pay the price... a decker though... that isn't an option, you have the equipment you have. So drawing that analogy is a bit strained.

It's very hard to get rating 8 or 9 programs and get the hardware to run them on, it's very easy to boost your logic up that high though.

That same sidebar also had the suggestion to use attribute to cap... which IMO works better as the dice pools are lower. But I'm still not a fan of capping successes based on anything besides player skill. There's too many ways in game to get along w/ bare skill investment and coast along on attributes + gear alone.

Posted by: Bigity May 30 2011, 11:15 PM

What about averaging the rating+attribute+skill to get the die pool or something? More hassle, but kind of averages out the three components. Or maybe cap based on the average.

Posted by: Yerameyahu May 30 2011, 11:31 PM

There are a few concerns in this whole question. There're certainly balance issues, and power curves. It's also important to try to minimize complexity, as well as avoid novel mechanics (like averaging for a DP). To me, that might be too out of step with the existing DP paradigms. :/

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein May 31 2011, 02:25 AM

Of Course... Me and the Table I play with. But if you have not actually played with the option, then you really can't bash it any, can you?

Posted by: Epicedion May 31 2011, 02:44 AM

That's nonsensical. It's easily conceivable that you can examine something and come to the conclusion that it's not a good idea, without actually implementing or trying it. Black tar heroin, for example.

Posted by: CanRay May 31 2011, 02:46 AM

Or Army Surplus Morphine.

Sorry, just finished LA Noire and...

Posted by: Yerameyahu May 31 2011, 02:56 AM

Just as Epicedion says. You can hardly accuse me of not raising many detailed, analytical objections. Playtesting is for discovering loopholes you forgot, not for testing the basic statistics.

Posted by: Jhaiisiin May 31 2011, 04:14 AM

Honestly, if some mechanic allowed hackers to spontaneously increase their program rating (assuming the optional rule in place here, not the RAW hacking rules), with the risk of that program failing or losing rating points due to the code falling apart from being used in ways it wasn't meant to, then that would be awesome. Redlining for programs, for lack of a better term.

Oh, and any sidebar that presents a rule that says "Optional Rule" is exactly that. It's not a house rule, because it's not manufactured by the group at the table. It's an official alternative presented by the company. That's the difference between "Optional" and "house" rules.

Posted by: Yerameyahu May 31 2011, 04:16 AM

But they could just make copies and restore from backup.

Posted by: Jhaiisiin May 31 2011, 04:47 AM

So make it burn out hardware in the 'link instead. People will be less likely to run their gear extra hard if their response chip burns out on occasion.

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein May 31 2011, 12:47 PM

Point taken... But most of the complaints I hear about it are not real complaints. I understand if you do not like it, but to complain that the rules suck, without an actual playtest, using the rules, makes no sense to me. How do you know that you do not like it if you have never actually used the rule?

No worries though...

Posted by: deek May 31 2011, 12:48 PM

We have been using the program rating cap optional rule for years at our table as well and we like it. Everyone once in a while, someone wants to go past the cap and they use edge to ignore it. It doesn't happen all that often, though. I mean, when the best hackers (at our table) are rolling 14-16 dice, a Rating 6 program rarely caps hits. And even when it does, we are talking about 6 hits, which is more than enough to do almost anything.

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein May 31 2011, 12:48 PM

Exactly my point.

Posted by: Epicedion May 31 2011, 01:13 PM

Highlighting, of course, the fundamental flaw in that system. If you rarely (if ever) pass the hit cap, why bother about program rating at all? If you implemented some active memory limit on the summed rating of all active programs, I could see a hacker having to make important decisions about what programs to run at 3 and what to run at 6, forcing them to choose where to risk the hit cap.

Implementing a hit cap that's rarely an issue just makes program rating a useless feature.

Posted by: Jhaiisiin May 31 2011, 01:13 PM

6 hits isn't enough to hack OTF through that Firewall 4/System 4 system you need admin access to in one go... Hell, you need 3 tries to do it. So you'd best have that mute option on that TJ mentioned.

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein May 31 2011, 01:19 PM

True, but why do you NEED to OTF Hack thorugh the firewall in a single Action? And if it is very important, why are you not spending the Edge to OTF Hack it in that one action in the first place (Not that it will be very likely anyways)? And why do you NEED Administratvive Rights? Many things can be done with User and Security Access levels (In fact, most things can be done with one of the lower access levels).

"Mute Option" for the Win...

Posted by: Yerameyahu May 31 2011, 01:32 PM

I notice you spend Edge on every roll, Tymeaus. At least, you keep advocating it here, hehe.

Posted by: Epicedion May 31 2011, 01:37 PM

I'm not a huge fan of Edge, myself -- at least not how it works in this game. It seems like a mediocre patch for a system that doesn't know how to establish a finely tuned difficulty curve.

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein May 31 2011, 01:59 PM

Actually, I do not. I rarely ever hit my Cap Limit for Hacking...

However, Spent Edge removes the Cap Limit, which seems to be everyone's problem with that Optional Rule. Personally, I LIKE that cap limit, because it makes a great deal of sense. You can only be as good as your programs allow. If you are consistently better than your programs, well, it is time to upgrade your programs.



I do not mind Edge, since it is a factor of Luck. I think the Difficulty curve is acceptable in Shadowrun, which is why I rarely have a character with an Edge Attribute greater than 2 (of the 50 or so characters I created, 2 or 3 have Edge 4+, and 2-3 have a 3). If you are relying upon your Edge Attribute to Succeed, then you designed your character poorly, at least in my opinion. Some of Longbowrock's characters come to mind immediately. Yes, Some people ARE lucky, but you should not be relying upon it to succeed at your profession.

Posted by: Yerameyahu May 31 2011, 02:05 PM

Nuh uh, you *just* said this: "why are you not spending the Edge to OTF Hack it in that one action in the first place". Nothing there about hit caps.

Edge isn't luck, and people don't treat it as luck. It's some kind of magical *resource* that people plan for and depend on.

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein May 31 2011, 02:09 PM

No what I said was... If it is very important, why are you not spending the Edge to OTF Hack it in that one action in the first place.

I do not think it is any where NEAR important enough to spend Edge to move beyond the Hit Cap when OTF Hacking (while others who do not use this system complain that the Hit Caps are the most problematic of issues). I think it is stupid, in fact, to do so. If you are consistently running into your Hit Cap (While obviously using the Optional Rule), then you are not using the right tools. Upgrade your programs.

See, not the same as what you are hinting at in the least Yerameyahu...

Posted by: Epicedion May 31 2011, 02:18 PM

Edge is the exact opposite of luck. It's a super-attribute that gets you exponentially more dice more often the more of it you have. It also has the side effect of overcharging your roll by exploding the 6s.

What's worse is that it's not even an obscure feature or expensive combination of stats and gear. It's a basic attribute.

If you don't see it as that useful, you're going to need to revisit your math. If you see it as too useful, your downplaying of it is a patch to a major flaw in the most basic parts of the core system, and you should at least acknowledge the problem is real.

Posted by: longbowrocks May 31 2011, 02:21 PM

Actually, I use the edge to take over other people's roles in times of crisis, and do things that normally seem impossible (like become a charisma 1 president, or transform a tank into giblets with a holdout).

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein May 31 2011, 02:33 PM

I rarely, if ever, use Edge, Epicedion. Primarily because I tend to design characters that can succeed without the Crutch of Edge. And you have to admit, it is a Crutch. I do not see it as all that useful. You can only be so dead, after all. If you are succeeding without it, then it is an overcosted attribute that has little relevance. If you are NOT succeeding, then you should probably have designed a more functional character (by possibly using those BP's spent on Edge Points). Edge is Nice, no doubt, but it is expensive. Is it too useful? Not in my opinion. Can its use get Crazy? Sure... It does have its uses (though mostly as a Crutch, more often than not). Of course, I rarely see a Mr. Lucky at our table (We have had 1). Typically, the Edge Stats for characters at our table is a 3 or 4 (with my usually a 1 or 2). Useful for survival in a pinch, but nothing more than that, at least for me.

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein May 31 2011, 02:37 PM

But you see, You should not be taking over their roles. Maybe they should have designed a more functional character in the first place. Like maybe a Hacker/Rigger/Face that can actually fulfill those roles, rather than rely upon Edge to carry them through. No Offense.

Use of Edge for the "Impossible" is what it is supposed to be used for. Note that it will not carry you forever, though. You may get away with the Impossible every so often, and I am okay with that. Using it constantly, just to plug holes in charadcter design, is ludicrous.

Posted by: longbowrocks May 31 2011, 02:42 PM

I succeed well enough without it, but c'mon: a stat that basically lets me circumvent probability? It doesn't matter what the threshold is if I'm using an edge score of 7 on a dominant skill. I can basically buy 6 successes, or watch my roll and get 9+. I alway feel bad for those edge 1 or 2 characters that run into an absolutely dire situation (frag grenade in the middle of a party that just finished a fight) and can't do anything to buff their rolls accordingly.

Posted by: Epicedion May 31 2011, 02:48 PM

You're asserting that it's either a minor, rarely used resource, or a bad patch for poor character design.

Instead of falling into the false dichotomy, you should also see it potentially a very powerful resource that can be rationed out on a run to supplement the things the character is already good at. Once you get up to 5 or so Edge, you're able to get a huge boost to pretty much any critical roll in a run. At the far out end of 8 Edge, it's completely absurd.

Karma Pool really was luck. Edge is insurance.

Posted by: Irion May 31 2011, 02:54 PM

Edge is important, Edge lets you live if a granade gets thrown in your face, while beeing in a building. For that you need many dices. (First dodge, afterwards soak)

QFT.

Posted by: longbowrocks May 31 2011, 02:59 PM

I think Tymeaus was saying that he uses edge only for hand of god, and only when necessary (though that goes without saying), so the damage resistance rolls are kind of a moot point. Then again, resisting the damage will keep you in combat when your party is down.

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein May 31 2011, 02:59 PM

Don't get me wrong, it IS a potentially powerful Resource. Often, though, It just functions as a crutch, in one form or another. When that resource is LOW, then you ONLY use it for the Important things that absolutely Must Not Fail. When it is HIGH, you use it for almost everything.

Many Character's with a High Edge Pool (6+) are using it solely to patch poor CHARACTER design. I am sure that You know the one's...

Karma Pool was ridiculous at the high ends. Edge works better, in my opinion, but still has issues when it is near its maximum. At least Edge HAS a Maximum. They both work, however.

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein May 31 2011, 03:04 PM

Well, I rarely (Think I have done it once in SR4) use the Hand of God. I will use the Edge to reroll a failure now and then, but if the character actually dies, I really just move on. I have so many character Ideas that a Dead Character is just that. I move on. Sometimes, though, you just need to be lucky. And I am not talking just an extra Success here or there, but Truly Lucky in that it is either Absolute Success or Absolute Failure for everyone involved, with no real in-between. In those instances, I will spend a point of Luck to make the roll.

Anyways...

Posted by: Epicedion May 31 2011, 03:09 PM

Sure, Karma Pool could get crazy, but so does any game that hits a few hundred Karma.

What I meant was that the mechanism for distributing dice to tests worked better as luck than simply dumping a whole attribute worth of dice at a problem, over and over again. The limited nature of Karma Pool kept its usage down to only the most dire situations.

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein May 31 2011, 03:40 PM

You and I must have had completely different experiences with Karma Pool. Spend a point, reroll the dice... Even at 100 Karma, you have More Dice to expend thant anyone does in Edge. Now, admittedly, I do not use Edge much, because I just do not put points into it (My Philosophy is better Skilled than Luck). I understand that Edge 6-8 is Super Lucky (Powerful, whatever) in that regard, as they often get to just use Edge for things that do not really matter all that much. They do so because they can. Of course, I saw Karma Pool being used that way too, in SR2/3. I honestly see Edge as being more limited, in that it has a Cap, where as Karma Pool Did not. I have had Characters iwth Karma Pool above 30, along with a Team Pool above 10. Way more broken than an Edge of 8, in my opinion.

Posted by: Epicedion May 31 2011, 05:17 PM

Again, games that hit several hundred karma are crazy in their own ways. And whatever "Team Pool" is doesn't sound healthy.

Posted by: Irion May 31 2011, 05:47 PM

@Tymeaus Jalynsfein
Lets talk about the free spirit Magic 10 Edge 10...

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein May 31 2011, 05:54 PM

Let me know when you get a Free Spirit PC up that High legitimately... ANything else is Plot Device...

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein May 31 2011, 05:57 PM

Team Karma Pool was a karma Pool that the Entire TEAM Controlled. In addition to their Individual Karma Pools. You had to dontate a point (or more) from your own personal Karma Pool, but it could, and did, get crazy.

I find the game we are playing quite interesting, with the Long term characters having 350+ karma, and the Middle ranges having 200+. I am currently playing one of the Middle Range Characters (My Magic 3 Black Magican), and am heavily enjoying it. The character has an Edge of 3.

Posted by: Epicedion May 31 2011, 07:06 PM

That's great, but I don't really see a point if you're making one.

As for Team Pool, whose nutty idea was that? I don't recall it from any books, and I don't see the appeal, except maybe to siphon off human karma pool to aid nonhumans who received karma pool at a much slower rate.

Posted by: Yerameyahu May 31 2011, 07:13 PM

As always, Tymeaus, how much Edge you personally use doesn't really bear on this. The fact is that Edge is an anti-luck resource under conscious control—that's what 'crutch' means here. It requires major investment, but it also pays off a lot as you go up. So… what exactly are you arguing? You're the one who suggested Edge as the appropriate fix for Hit Cap problems.

Posted by: Bigity May 31 2011, 07:27 PM

I want to say it was in one of the players expansion kind of books. I also want to say it was in 2nd edition initially.

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein May 31 2011, 10:17 PM

Never said it was an appropriate fix. I said it was an option to bypass the Hit Caps... IF, when using this system, you have issues with the Hit Caps, then you can use Edge to bypass them. Sheesh... The point about my characters' Edge is still a valid one. They do not need it the majority of the times because they are competant without it.

I do agree that it can pay of in spades, but the cost is exorbitant, and not generally worth it if you design your character so that it is unnecessary. Yes, the higher it gets, the better it gets. I also did not argue that either. I said it is not worth the expense.

Posted by: Irion May 31 2011, 10:30 PM

Well, I guess it is common knowledge that edge is the one attribute, which pays up double for increasing it.
The numbre of instances you may use it and the effect if you use it.
Edge 1: Is usable to reroll if you would bite the bullet.
Edge 3: Might be used for edge dices.
Edge 8: Well, if the run is short you won't roll without it.

Well, spirits get payed back in three ways.

Posted by: PoliteMan Jun 1 2011, 05:24 AM

Finally got my hands on a copy of WAR! and it has some (gasp!) cool implications for R7+ programming.

P. 144 mentions that R7+ programs automatically degrade at a rate of 1 point every 2 months and you can't patch these programs. For hackers, this produces a constant SOTA race which is, honestly, pretty cool. If you want that R10 program to stay R10 you need to reprogram the whole thing from scratch every two months.

So the first two months you're coding Stealth, then you need two weeks to code the Optimization. After that you start coding Exploit for 2 months and then two more weeks to code the optimization. So now, after 5 months (sessions) you've got an R9 Stealth Program that's will degrade to R8 next session and an R10 Exploit that's trending downwards. You could repair the R10 Stealth but by that point you're Exploit will have degraded to R9 and you'll be in the same place you were two months ago, just switch Stealth and Exploit. However, it could be valuable to code up an R10 Analyze program with Optimization. At the end of that you have a R8 Stealth, an R9 Exploit, and a R10 Analyze. of course, the Stealth has degraded pretty far at this point, so more tough choices.

Not the way I'd want it but interesting and really it captures the ever expanding SOTA curve of software.

Unfortunately (haha), I was only able to read so much of WAR! and I didn't see any RAW (besides your GM's fist) to prevent your from pirating R10 programs. And the costs would be dirt cheap for what they do.

Posted by: Irion Jun 1 2011, 10:26 AM

Finally a very good rule.

Posted by: Fortinbras Jun 1 2011, 10:38 AM

Best rule ever! I've had WAR! for months and can't believe I glossed over this. It also includes the caveat that Agents can't get above 6 and Autosofts can't get above 4. For all the heat WAR! got, I commend this.


I've been waiting for an opportunity to bring the Grid Overwatch Division down on my players. Any of them trying to pirate MilSpec software would be a GMs delight.

Posted by: PoliteMan Jun 1 2011, 11:08 AM

Let's crunch some numbers on this, using two examples: a fairly normal hacker and a optimized hacker. Our normal hack has a Logic of 6, Skill of 4, Programming Suite, PuSHeD and either has a nexus or is buying time for a total dice pool of 16. Our optimized Hacker has Logic 8, +6 form logic-linked boosts, Skill 6 with Specialization, a Programming Suite, a is using a nexus for a dice pool 27.

Our normal hacker can pretty consistently get 5 successes, meaning he can usually code a R10 program (let's say Stealth) in two months (4 tests, 5 successes each, 2 week intervals). Remember, he has to code the Optimization option himself as well. Let's presume he has an R6 commlink, meaning he only need Optimization 4. That means another 2 weeks of coding. The effect is that our normal hacker, working regularly, can keep 1 program running at R10 with occasional problems. The time to code optimization means the program will occasionally dip down to R9 and his dice pool is small enough that bad luck might cost him a couple weeks. That sounds just right, he's got one special bit of code that he works very hard to keep up and it's not always 100% but it's a major bonus to his work.

Our optimized hacker is getting (safely) 8 successes a roll. The end result is that he shaves 2 weeks off the coding time, meaning the program and the optimization take exactly two months. Our optimized hack can either keep one program at R10 permanently (even given bad rolls) or he can keep one R10 program and one R9 program, switching between them. That also seems right, another R10 program is a significant boost but this character has sunk a lot of resources into his hacking abilities. Of course, if the hacker starts dropping edge to speed it up he can reduce the time in half, which would probably allow him to have 3-4 R10 programs but then he needs to drop edge before every game. Still a major advantage for the hacker but now he's dropping even more resources into his skill area.

Even an incredibly optimized hacker (Feng-Shui apartment, Adept, etc) dropping edge regularly is going to have problems keeping more than 5-6 R10 programs up.

Gotta say, that all seems pretty good. Huh, go WAR!

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Jun 1 2011, 12:53 PM

Indeed... Which is why you really only need 2-3 of thoseprograms at Rating 10.

Exploit...
Stealth...
Encrypt...

Anything else is just a luxury...