No, but the only way for you to find out the information that is on the tables, is through a contact. Information the GM would have to come up with on his own, is available however he decides.

Or, the information is on the matrix, they just forgot to mention it.

Or it is not available on the Matrix, so there is no need to mention it.

Except it isn't, because the didn't mention it.

My point, the right way to do things, is like mission 4. It states what info you can get from contacts, and what you can get from a data search. Its how it should be broken out. Sadly, its the only one. Again, its a fault of the writer/GM to allow/disallow too much info on the matrix. Not of the mechanics.

I have done "legwork" by standing around outside a target building smoking cigarettes or reading newspapers (screamsheets) on a parkbench or coffee shop. Lots of legwork can be done without hacking. In my weekly game, I make sure everyone has the ability to do some legwork. And each person can get different info... which plugs into each other together.

I try to make sure everyone has the opportunity for some peice of info.

I quite agree that's one good way of doing it, but unfortunately it's not supported by the RAW. Just because they failed to mention something doesn't mean useful information on it doesn't exist on the matrix. What happens if you use a virtual Contact, for example? Searching a forum would entail the Data Search skill. Now, using Contacts is melded even further into the go-out-for-dinner problem of the grueling Data Search rolls.

When 5 different GM's have the same problem, then it's not a fault of those GM's. How many more will it take to convince you that this is a system issue, and not something you can blow off onto someone by saying "Bad GM, No Biscuit"? I'm not the only one who's reported this problem.

There are quite a few more than five different GMs in this thread alone (including more than one Commando) saying the exact opposite. How many more GMs will it take to convince you that this is indeed a GM problem?

To me, it is a GM problem when one GM or a very small percentage of GMs (about 5% or less) find it a problem, maybe due to the GM having comprehension problems, mentally unstable players, etc.

However, it is a problem with RAW when that percentage is larger, precisely because a significant number of people then finds it possible to game in an unsatisfactory manner. If more than 5% of road users find it possible to end up in a accident despite following the traffic rules/driving in a safe manner/etc and all other factors being the same, then perhaps the problem lies with the road.

In response, therefore, I would say that for every 1 of Cain's GMs, there has to be about 20 GMs saying the exact opposite.

Matrix Contacts are handled with the meat body Contact rules. I don't have the BBB in front of me to quote a page number but that is RAW.


Are those five different GMs part of the same gaming group or five different groups?

How is it not? GM Decides what info is available and where. Why? Because hes making up the adventure. Using mission 4, he didn't "forget" to mention anything, and quite explicitly stated what you can, and can get from the matrix. That is how I say it should be done. As Wesley said, matrix contacts are handled using normal contact rules. (Or in missions, their own houserules).

Enough guessing. Let's find out how many people agree with Cain.

Five different groups. Plus one or two that I heard from here.

I attribute hacking being so popular to the increase in electronic security. In first through third ed games if you were near the barrens, for example, you didnt have to worry about cameras. In 4th ed the street cams, ATM cams, and 50 bajillion other cameras all tied together really put a damper on walking around talking to gang members, drug dealers, etc. Hacking is clean if risky. Sure you may get your head fried but when you can do it on the interstate, dumpshock your hacker who just had his biomonitor detect a near fatality, and then divert to another roadway its a whole lot safer.

Now I know, naysayers, that this is a very specific example. My assertion is that its generally much safer to investigate with hacking so thats the path of least resistance most runners use.

Wow! (IMG:style_emoticons/default/eek.gif) You're a busy gamer! I barely have time for two. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

I agree with this statement in regards to playing a game in a surveillance society. But Data Search as a skill isn't hacking. There's no manipulation of code, be it legal or illegal. It's simply sifting through data and information for an answer to a question.

I go to Google and use various boolean queries, read message boards, listen to podcasts, watch streaming video; that's Data Search. I trick Microsoft's corporate mainframe into thinking I'm a legal user, take advantage of known flaws in Vista programming code, and divert Hotmail data packets to grab a piece of information; that's Hacking.

You are the boss of me!

(IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)

In all seriousness, I've lived in three cities in the last year alone. Before that, I was involved in two different regular gaming groups, plus irregular Missions games and conventions. I also burn out as a GM rather quickly, so I like to swap GM duties in a new group.


It used to be that to enter Shadowland, you had to perform a feat of hacking to get in the door, every time. We don't make people roll this out, however, since it'd be time-consuming. But at any event, there's no indication that it doesn't also encompass minor features of hacking. For example, properly using Google, you can find social security numbers.

With the prerequisite that someone had to be stupid enough to publish it on a webpage somewhere that google could index.

Or someone else posted it for you. There was an experiment a few months back, where a professor and team of research students were able to access people's SSN's, credit card information, mother's maiden name, etc., etc.

And how many people, out of the percentage with access to the web? So whats the likely hood that you can reliably get the info you need on your target via that method? I'm pretty sure its not good enough to bother.

Using Google isn't hacking. Hacking by its very definition requires rewriting code. Equating Data Search to Hacking is like equating my mother the librarian to Kevin Mitnick. There's no comparison. If I told my programmer co-workers that I was hacking right now they would laugh me out of the building. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif)

I have no useful programming skills, yet I've hacked passwords before. I cracked my Ex's credit card password, to see if she had been drawing money off our joint account after we split up. That's also a form of hacking, called "Social engineering". We're not allowed to discuss real-life hacking techniques here, but you know what I'm referring to.

I'm also capable of hacking wi-fi networks. (Legally, too, I might add.) Do I rewrite code? Hell no, I'm a script-grognard. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/cyber.gif) I have this little program that does it for me. I use it to scan my own home network for weaknesses, which is how it's legal. I don't rewrite a single line.

In other words, cain defaults on his hacking skill, but has a decent exploit program.

Guessing the password isn't hacking.

I'll go with that. The only reason I'm not a script-kiddie is because I'm way to old to be called "kid".


If it gets me into the computer without permission, it's hacking. Dictionary.com's definition is pretty clear on that point. Wikipedia isn't reliable, but according to it, Kevin Mitnick relied almost exclusively on social engineering. So, by deducing someone's password from talking to them, you are hacking in the same method as Kevin Mitnick.

Which still isn't Data Search.

Social engineering, in Shadowrun at least, can consist of a good chunk of Data Searching. In the first book (the so-called "braided novel" that introduced Wolf and Raven) a group called the Burkingmen make a living out of sorting and collecting garbage data. In that story, they uncover a key clue by finding a perfume receipt. Now, sorting out all the receipts and transactions is clearly a Data Search test. What that receipt then allowed them to do was crack a high-rating fake SIN.

So, if you scan enough of someone's transactions, you can find out a lot about them. You never know what you might turn up.