I said a long while back that the simple solution is "technology has gotten sophisticated enough such that you can remotely connect to data streams previously locked away in internal wires or skinlinks." Pair this with offline penalties ("you can place your gear into turtle mode to protect it at the cost of performance") and it's great.

Of course it's functionally equivalent to what exists now, just with taupe curtains instead of beige ones.

Its that way in SR4 too. Lag is a thing of the past in SR4, and you can hack a node on the other side of the planet without taking a hit to response, its only when you get off planet is when you start to notice lag.

The question, of course, then follows : Why the hell would any self-respecting shadowrunner -do- that.

I like your idea of offline penalties, however, it would need to come with a serious revision. Even the guy who wrote the current wireless bonuses as it stands said he was told that they were going to be bonuses for having stuff connected to any DNI, not the Matrix. Many of the bonuses as they stand right now don't make sense at all, because there is literally nothing the Matrix can do that a DNI connection couldn't for those features.

Overall, it's just another point of shoddy editing for SR5. Hopefully it gets cleaned up in the eventual cyber or matrix splatbooks, or at least errata'd.

The main problem most people have with the wireless bonuses is their implementation. They are senseless and illogical, and there is no reason that a DNI connection could not have the same functionality for a lot of things. Bricking is also poorly implemented, namely in how it can apparently cause permanent damage to cyberware and other electronic devices. This leaves archetypes such as street samurai in a precarious position, where they have to choose between basic functionality for things like wired reflexes + reaction enhancers, or smartlinks, vs. being vulnerable to attacks that can permanently damage their expensive augmentations, all but crippling them until they can get it repaired.

Things are less fun for deckers, too, because now they have to babysit the rest of the team, like the mage with counterspelling (although the latter is not as vital now, with spells being nerfed and spell resistance boosted). I am not a reflexive naysayer, I really wanted to like this edition, and had no problems with limits (even if the calculations were a bit wonky) or priority system character creation. But in some areas, they made serious missteps. I may still eventually pick it up, but it will definitely not be until they at least have some errata to fix the errors and contradictory rules.

It's all still part of the metaphor of the Matrix. Back in Real Life (well, Real Life video games), exploiting desynchronization is a thing. I remember a period in Star Wars: Galaxies (among other games) you could unplug your network to desynch, walk through a wall, and plug your network back in before the system realized you'd dropped connection, and the game would interpret your client's new reported location as your actual location in the game.



Hence what I said about "technology can remotely access data on wires." It's trivial to the game mechanics, but eases the anguish.

If you watched the new Battlestar Galactica, the humans had a ban on complex networks specifically because the Cylons could hack into anything more complicated than an isolated computer. In Shadowrun, it would be easy to say that the technology is so complex that once you start hooking systems together, even ostensibly over completely internal connections, there's no way to guarantee that all of the external access points are completely locked down. Remember that hacking is about exploiting the failures inherent to complex designs -- no system in the world (the real world or the fake world) has a port that says "hackers please illegally connect here."

If that was the case, how would you rationalize people still having the ability to turn it off? As far as the idea of "offline penalties" - to anyone coming in from SR4, they already are offline penalites, since getting a bonus to hit from a smartlink, or having your wired reflexes and reaction enhancers able to work together, is something they had in SR4.

If they wanted Ghost in the Shell-style 'ware hacking, they should have made it happen over ubiquitous tactical comms (which could give teams bonuses to perception and surprise checks, indirect fire, etc.) rather than having hackable internal hardware. And the concept works horribly with bricking (far too extreme, damage-wise; it should be able to take things temporarily offline, or feed false sensory data, but not permanently disable cyberware), and even more horribly with deckers as their own class. Hacking should be more like stealth - something every shadowrunner has (or should have) rather than the province of specialists. The wireless bonuses were very poorly implemented. I hope they revise and fix most of them, rather than giving a half-assed fluff explanation for them.

I feel that you should have at least some understanding of the rules, - maybe by hearsay, at least something! - when you decide to start arguing them.


It's like you aren't reading me at all. For the third time, is there any conceivable reason why your PAN would be unable to recognize your DNI impulse/hand sign/voice pattern without a Matrix uplink?

I'm saying that wireless should make sense.

They are not communicating directly: they can't communicate in a dead zone.

Computers are modular, people usually aren't, and implants typically reside in people, not computers.

Yeah, cause otherwise, evil hackers will hack your Signal 1 periphery devices.

All megas need to agree to invite strangers with admin access into their networks.

Do you remember what lead to Operation Reciprocation? That's the kind of stuff that prompts Corporate Court action, not normal sabotage work. CC does not even possess assets of its own, constituent corporations provide those. Runners are used to hide corp involvement from the target corp first of all - that's who is to be feared, not CC. And yeah, there are numerous types of action for which runners are simply not suited, such as long-term intelligence, for instance.

Excalibur plotline (SR5 canon, btw) makes (some) sense if the corps are not as omnipowerfully rich as you're trying to present.

How many foundational protocols changed for your automatic updates? Updating network protocols is not even changing an OS (good luck trying to autoupdate iOS into Android), it's changing hardware firmware on the fly.

DnD (from 3.0 over 3.5 to Pathfinder) had both roll generation systems and point buy system. Please, do yourself a favor and just read the PHB and the DMG. I quote directly from the DMG 3,5



You should really start with the habit of reading rules before commenting on them. You are not a German with the Nick Mercenario on the German SR Board, or? He has the same habit of commenting on rules he never read.

After we have cleared that up I am still waiting for an *argument* why a well made free distribution point buy system should be more problematic that a not so free distribution point buy system (did you know: the priority system is a point buy system as well, just with more categories, a little liike WoD). And please the argument why point is more error prone should have more substance then "the example game systems are unpopular".

They may be unpopular (for example DnD/Pathfinder is a very unpopular systems which is not played by anybody) but it was not a discussion aka "do point buy systems make a system popular". All these systems I mentioned use point buy systems and are known for simple and understandable character creation (even if it can take some time in the case of SLA or EP (which is not a Shadowrun in another setting as you claimed it). And really, if you claim that Feng Shui is a complicated system then we seem to have a very different understanding of the human mind.

Your claim was that inherently point buy stems are prone to error, miscalculation etc.

Please prove that.

With facts.



Yes? And?



Yes? And? I never commented on the deadliness of SR5 and I know that SR5 is deadly. Your claim was that in SR4 high damage is very rare ... with is simply wrong, as proven.



Answering someone who again commented on rules systems (now DnD) without knowing the rules can have these consequences, yes. It is this feeling about talking to a wall. Usually, there is some kind of Gentlemens Agreement of knowing the rules before evaluating them as good or bad. I now, strange concept.



Yes, if level 5 ares black ops dildo is connected to the matrix. If it is not connected than you need to be on sight. Your claim however was that there is no matrix and nodes are not connected and that you need to stand next to the node. Or did I misread/understood you?



No, it would have been the same shitstorm.

SYL

You're deflecting. Even if I'm mistaken about 3.5 ditching point buy in the PHB, it's not really an issue (though I seem to recall it not being in the PHB). You can't stand there either way and suggest that D&D is a point-buy game unless you diminish the meaning of "point-buy system" such that any game system in which you get points to put into things qualifies.

No, when we're talking about "point-buy" we're explicitly talking about a game where character generation is handled by purchasing stats/attributes/abilities/etc with linear or scaled relative costs out of a common pool.



This sort of thing is why this place isn't nice anymore.



Verification is harder. Exploiting expert knowledge of the relative value of things is grossly rewarded.



Then you're rudely misappropriating comments addressing the deadliness of SR5 as compared to SR4. You jumped in to attack comments I made directly at the assertion that SR5 wasn't more deadly than SR4. I'm not responsible for whose bandwagons you like to hop on.



Acting like a dick isn't a consequence. It's more of a lifestyle.

Funny, you were the one commenting the perceived popularity to dismiss the example that there are good point systems who, by there user, does not seems to have the below mentioned problems.



No. It depends on the quality of rules. 23 are not really more or less easier to check as 25 oder 32 to points. 1000 points may take longer, but it is still easy for a normal human being, if the rules are good and well explained (and the necessary information are well presented). There are of course bad point systems (DSA4 *shudder*)



Wells, lets make a recpa, shall we?



Well, yes, if you make an assumption or declare something as a fact and it is wrong I indeed have the habit on commenting that to correct it. If you see the correction of wrong things as a "dick move" or "attack on comments", well, you are always free to leave this board or put me on /ignore. Otherwise please live with the fact that I will correct you if I am interested in the subject and you state false things. You are of course encouraged to do the same (please after reading the rules). Usually it is called a discussion. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

SYL

If you care, my initial comment was that for everyone who loves point-buy, there's someone who hates it. The fact that you have to bring out unpopular, dead, or niche games to bolster arguments for point-buy sort of indicates that my initial estimation of one to one might be overly generous toward point-buy.



You're sort of begging the question here by saying that good rules make a good point-buy. It's entirely possible that point-buy is bad rules. Since you're trying to disqualify popularity, what's your metric?



Whatever that is.

In order:

1) Not mine. If you're going to list someone's arguments, attribute them correctly.

2) Points-buy systems are fiddly, calculationally intensive, and prone to error. Fiddly, meaning you have to compare spending X points to buy either Y oranges or Z apples (or XX kiwis, YY lima beans, or ZZ ounces of dashboard cleaner). Calculationally intensive, meaning that instead of adding up a short list of integers you generally have to multiply-add-multiply-add-multiply-add -- the difference between wanting an Attribute to be 5 and spending 5-1=4 Attribute Points to get there, versus spending (5-1)x10 = 40 Build Points, versus spending 2x5 + 3x5 + 4x5 + 5x5 = 70 Karma . Prone to error, meaning that a procedural error or misplaced digit is harder to notice in process and harder to check later (which sort of follows from how intensive the calculations are).

3) Covered elsewhere.

4) D&D isn't a point-buy game. Move on.



There's a line between correcting something (or even just flatly disagreeing) and suggesting that it's a lie, and you crossed it in your very first response to my post. "Cow to insults or leave" is a great defense, though. Keep it up.

I thought build points were very well implemented in SR4. They had a lot of hard limits (no more than half of your build points for Attributes, only one Attribute at maximum, no more than 50 points in resources, a maximum of one skill of 6 or two at 5, etc.) and soft limits (maximizing an Attribute point cost 25, rather than 10 points, etc.), as well as not only a step-by-step run-down of creating a character, but two examples to go with it. There were some pitfalls, but honestly, someone using a priority system for character creation is just as likely to take the uncouth quality, or forget to take perception, or nearly any other newbie mistake.

Priority character creation doesn't even save that much time, since making a character background and buying gear are the two most time-intensive parts of character creation. It is only useful for absolute newbies, who might be paralyzed by the sheer number of choices you can make in an open build system. For anyone else, it is a step backwards, flexibility-wise; you have more than you need in one area, less than you need in another area. That said, the priority system was not a deal-breaker for me, especially with the post-creation karma to smooth the rough edges. It isn't as flexible as build points or karmagen, that's all.

To add to Glyphs comment, if you limit the creation of SR4 to the same number of books SR5 currently has, it probably evens out, one thing that does add time besides gear is looking through all of the options.Once SR5 has more options, it will likely take a bit longer as well.

Stop it right here please. I did not comment the fact that there are people who love or hate point buy or priority systems. I commented your claim, that by their very nature, point buy systems are fiddly, prone to error, calculation intensive. I am asking for proof. Again, its not a popularity contest, which system is more loved, but simply your claim, that point buy systems are inherently bad. And that is something I would like to be proven/better explained by your.

Instead you are commenting the (un)popularity of examples for quite easy point buy systems - which was not even the point.

Again: I would like to here your arguments (and a little more then "they are prone to errors because they take long") why exactly point buy systems are "fiddly, calculationally intensive, and prone to error." if they are usually reduced to add 10 + 15 +2. Answering that with "they are unpopular" ... well, they may be unpopular but then again thats not the point I am asking you to prove. I am asking you to prove your own statement.

..

Oh, finally, arguments and not "they are not popular". Hurray. Lets see ..



This is part of almost all systems. Even in the beloved SR5 Point buy system you need to compare your 21 attribute points or your 46/10 skill points to what you actually buy. It may be more specific, but honestly, to distribute 30 skill points in SR4 (120 BP) is the same as buying 46/10 skillpoints with the corresponding "prioritty currency" and distributing the points. It is just another kind of conversion. You dont pay in BP, you pay in priority.



I cannot confirm that. I have used BP systems in their many forms over many years in many different sytems (popular and unpopular). Even with a priority system, if you have 46/10 points to distribute you want some sort of paper/pen, calculator, excel sheet, char creator (like Heros lab) or whatever. Lets take a very simple system as example: SR3 120 point buy (and please, dont even start with SR3 is unpopular - the compendium point system was very well received). You simply add up small numbers. 2 here, 1 there. 400 points are of course more to add up (or 1000), but then again you usually work then with 20 point steps, not with 2.

Perhaps you need a trick to make them easy. My usual steps are:
=> give the char the attributes and skill as you have imagined ("I image the characters with body 4 and charisma 6").
=> Sum up the points in their specific area (like attributes, spells etc) "whoops, 30 points in attribute, -8 for the starting points, that means 220 points distributed.
=> do not add the single cost of every single item, but only the sum of each area (dont calculate 30 for agility and 2 for specialisation and 3 for a spell, simply add 220 for attribute, 30 for advantages etc together).
=> With that you only need to calculate 3-6 numbers (like a number for attribute, skill, race, edge, money) at one time (and not dozens).
=> If you have distributed too much points, reduce one of the areas (hm, 220 attribute points, lets see if I can reduce some attribute by 3).

That is something a normal human being can do in their head if they have a good memory, but usually a paper with pen is absolutely sufficient. The only thing I find prone to error and fiddly is buying equipment for equipment heavy archetypes (hackers, riggers, sams etc). But then again this was already in SR1 the case. To spend 250 000 or 1 000 000 or 450 000 "points" on something small as "50¥" or something as crude as "475¥" is not quite fun. But except for "packs" I have no better solution for that.



Can you really spot easily if someone has really distributed only 46/10 skill points, used 20 karma points for skills etc?

See, that wasn´t so hard. You have made a statement and explained your thinking. Highly appreciated, even if I do not agree.

SYL

The point being made, though, was that the DESIGNERS of the system said that Wireless was ubiquitous and omnipresent and no one would ever turn their wireless devices off because REASONS. And then THOSE SAME DESIGNERS produced Missions and then said that their NPC's had Wireless turned off (ostensibly because having them on was stupid, risky, and provided no real benefit at all). Seems to me they realized after the fact that their REASONS for the Wireless bonuses embedded in the system were crap and they knew it, so they took steps to resolve it in the only way they could (because they had touted it as the bee's knees and later realized that it really wasn't).

Well, to be fair Missions takes place in Chicago, which has a constant noise rating of 2 or so, so they're gear would be useless anyway; since the noise would have drowned out their device rating.

Like wise, its the first missions. Its an introduction to the setting. Its designed to be EZmode. I'd recommend waiting to see how it shapes up in later Missions before you claim that, "wireless has failed and is so unplayable that Bull doesn't even use it."

It is an indicator, no more, but it is a very obvious one. *shrug*
Fact is that it is a poor design choice, and no professional would ever choose to expose himself to that risk, for the ignorant rewards that are supposedly provided. Especially since they can completely secure their devices 100% from ANY hacking that matters. You don't need the Matrix for communications, for example.

Just assume that ALL wireless signals are used for the new Matrix. So you're PAN talking to your devices is broadcasting on the same channel, frequency, etc as every other Matrix device. Likewise it's probably to phone home to GOD so that they can attempt to track any illegal Matrix activity. Not that they give a rat's ass if you're doing real illegal activity, but that they care if you are subverting Matrix protocols in your PAN's wireless communication.




Its all made from mass produced parts. Even a custom tailored suit, car, computer, etc are all constructed from mass produced parts.



Corporate Court makes it so they don't need to all agree. There was some Shadowtalk about how some smaller corps were in violation of CC rulings and were dissolved with no idea why. Does this sound like a democracy? This is a dystopian world where the CC is law, and even the Big 10 have to listen to the CC's rulings.



Why do Shadowrunners exist? You say it "hide corp involvement from the target corp." So why would they hide it? Why not send your own guys, who are probably better trained, who have better health, are equipped, and more loyal to the corp, to extract a researcher or prototype MacGuffin or whatever from a rival? There has to be a reason. A layer of bureaucracy makes sense, because this is a dystopian world of Mega Corporations. The layer of bureaucracy comes from the Corporate Court.



But the CC is made up of all the corps, and infact controls all the money of the world too. So their resources might be a bit more far reaching than Ares.



The new Matrix protocols are only changing software though, and how hardware interacts with other hardware through software. So your comparison of changing and iPhone to an Android isn't a valid comparison. Its more like going from IPv4 to IPv6. While a lot of legacy products will stop working, they're obsolete anyway, so it happens.

Why would you play Shadowrun if you are just going to ignore one of the cornerstones of its setting; namely the Matrix. While you can ignore Magic and Matrix, it defeats the entire purpose of the game world, setting, and genre themes to leave out one of the three rule systems.

A Street Sam would be dumb to expose his cyber to matrix hacking, plain and simple. For him, ignoring that aspect does not hurt him. A HACKER works the matrix. And a HACKER has better things to do than protect his team from Bricking. It does not defeat the purpose of the game world to secure yourself from extraneous hacking attempts. In fact, it is good business to do so. The clusterf#@% of Wireless bonuses and weaponized hacking was just dumb from the get go, and was attempted in SR4. The design team recognized that fact and backed off on it. Unfortunately (and sadly), JH decided he was going to ram that concept down everyone's throat in SR5. So, when I play in SR5, I will ignore Wireless access almost completely, since I see no benefit from it. I will make sure that I have a ZERO Matrix Presence on a run to be sure.

So? Change channel division, or encoding, or any of the other signal parameters. You'll have noise from the Matrix, but you should be easily able to build a p2p wireless comm system.

Oh woe is me, I'm a hacker who can code his very own milspec exploit software, and throw together cyberdecks to take on any corp host, but I can't close a leak in my firewall!

Please try to keep track. Or are you internationally trying to redirect the discussion? The issue is not whether you can find parts to replace the burned out ones, it's whether you can actually get into the victim's anatomy to do so.

The Big Ten are the ones making those rulings.

Because it's much more expensive, and risks not only the expensive assets, but also PR losses. Oh, and it risks revealing your involvement to the target, prompting counter-moves.

No, it doesn't control anything near that. So, what, all the corps suddenly have the money to replace their network infrastructure overnight, plus the public networks, plus the backbone lines? Is the CC paying for that?

Except modern cards are built with IPv6 support. So it'd be more like switching from TCP/IP to LAT or NetWare on the fly on the cards that support neither - completely unthinkable.
And that's without tackling the issue of moving the actual applications over to a new system that is not backwards compatible.

I imagine tracking matrix health for each piece of gear can also be rather underwhelming for a few players.

To say the least.

You are not forced to use online bonuses just to justify the matrix. Right now, even without online bonuses or combat abilities, the hacker/decker is one of the most powerful and versatile archetypes in SR, as he is able manipulate the entire world, from information brokering/gathering to security system override to delay and spoof alerts and information when the alerts triggers.

If the devs would have wanted to make combat hacking making sense, they should have simply used the systems already working and accepted in SR34 (tacnet, drones, radio communication, online links - every thing was already in place, the devs needed just to add some addition rules or better description of possibilities) and not ditching the old system while introducing something stupid, saying that is stupid, not using it for their own adventures and then wondering why some people would have preferred other systems, because they want to combine matrix with rules making sense.

Enforcing people and the entire world to act stupid just to justify stupid rules which are not liked by the devs either is ... stupid.

If you really want to see how combat hacking while influencing the ingame physical world, check out CP2020. And that was 230 years ago.

SYL