Security: Licenses and SINs, A branciation from a Behind the Shadows Options Track this topic Email this topic Print this topic Download this topic Subscribe to this forum Display Modes Switch to: Outline Standard Switch to: Linear+

[Chrysalis]

Greets,

I was thinking about licenses and SINs, I am still unsure on how to play them. The way I play them is like this:

The Ronald Reagan Airport flashed along the display, a president who symbolized 20th century paranoia. The 21st century one was indicated through the AR display, that the threat level was cerulean and that all arrivals would go through a security check. The road had been blocked with concrete barriers and gray coloured APCs. Around the D.C. Metroplex guard swooped helicopter sized vector thrust drones with their missile racks and distended miniguns as if its was the stingers from a swarm of angry wasps.

Tyler's commlink licenses were scrutinized with excruciating detail. This was not some punk who was checking for gang affiliation but a government from a disunited UCAS, with CAS separatists, humanist policlubers, technomancers, and the Shdowrunner kind threatening its existence every day. A drone followed his movements as he navigated the serpentine road block, the sweep of a weapons lock before he was allowed to pass.

From a game mechanics side I would see the winning hand always being with security. How do fake licenses help? I mean obviously if you are at the stuffer shack and you want to buy a fag and you flash your electronic equivalent of a cardboard and stick figure photo ID drivers license that would be a License 1 and a hand wave by the GM.

However, what about airports, hospitals, and government buildings? Customs officials have special training to identify forgeries. Wouldn't this involve a similar four point system of verification (biometrics, checking the international system of SINs, interrogatory mathematical verification system, and old Mark I eyeball).

What about spells? Magecuffs have bacteria that glows when spells are to be cast. It is a simple, mostly fool-proof system. I would see the same technology incorporated in scanners in the sixth world. A little bar on the side which sets off an alarm when a mage walks through the scanner.

What about identity theft? What's to stop a character from mugging a person who is of roughly the equivalent size and gender, steal their commlink and go on an identity theft shopping spree? As technomancers are the new Al Qaeda, commlinks are rarely cranial.

[Mäx]

What about spells? Magecuffs have bacteria that glows when spells are to be cast. It is a simple, mostly fool-proof system. I would see the same technology incorporated in scanners in the sixth world. A little bar on the side which sets off an alarm when a mage walks through the scanner.

Wouldn't that only work if the mage was casting a spell while walking through the scanner?

[Chrysalis]

Wouldn't that only work if the mage was casting a spell while walking through the scanner?

Or an active spell.

[Critias]

Really, it all comes down to how important you want them to be versus how fast-and-loose an action movie sort of game you want to play. The tools are out there to make security checkpoints nigh-impossible to fool, to make building security invincible, and there are enough canon hoops to make characters jump through that you can make it really, really, tough to "make it" as a Shadowrunner.

Or, alternately, you can let them roll up an appropriate contact, pay enough nuyen for a maguffin/fake ID that will pass scanners, and just call it a day, so they can get through the checkpoint and on to whereever they need to be to get into their next gunfight.

It all depends on what sort of game you're out to play.

[Zurai]

Rules As Written, fake SINs and fake licenses are damned near useless for anything but going to the grocery store. In a scanner rating vs SIN/license rating test, straight up, with no modifiers, the scanner wins a significant amount of the time, even with a r3 scanner vs a r6 SIN. That's only 1 vs 2 "expected" hits, and don't forget that the scanner effectively wins ties thanks to the "suspicion" rules!

Frankly, the only way to make them viable is to use a house rule such as "SINs and licenses automatically win checks vs scanners of less than their rating". Even then, however, you're going to have a hellacious SIN turnover rate if you go anywhere near a decently high security area with any frequency ... like a megacorp site, a high-class area of town, etc. It's just completely mathematically unsound. It's one of the worst ideas in the book.

[kzt]

The issue I see is that they are trying to cover a huge range of verification.

At one level, you want to buy a syntha-burito at stuffer shack. Well, stuff shack doesn't really care WHO you are, they care care a lot that you have money. They might care a little bit about who you are so they can send you ads for the "new long-pig flavored syntha-burito" when you are walking near one, but they really don't care enough to put any money into it.

At the other level you are trying to get a security clearance or join the equivalent of the Mongols motorcycle gang. And they start out by getting your fingerprints and DNA, and get a list of everywhere you lived, every school you attended, every job you ever had and a list of people at each of these who can vouch for you. Then they run your biometrics and look for duplicates and pull your criminal history. Then they have people call or visit everything on your list and see what other leads turn up.

A MasterCard gift card can pass the first "ID check", but nearly all fake IDs will crash and burn on the second unless it's backed by a major national or megacorp agency. But the second is hugely expensive and time consuming.

[Tymeaus Jalynsfe...]

Rules As Written, fake SINs and fake licenses are damned near useless for anything but going to the grocery store. In a scanner rating vs SIN/license rating test, straight up, with no modifiers, the scanner wins a significant amount of the time, even with a r3 scanner vs a r6 SIN. That's only 1 vs 2 "expected" hits, and don't forget that the scanner effectively wins ties thanks to the "suspicion" rules!

Frankly, the only way to make them viable is to use a house rule such as "SINs and licenses automatically win checks vs scanners of less than their rating". Even then, however, you're going to have a hellacious SIN turnover rate if you go anywhere near a decently high security area with any frequency ... like a megacorp site, a high-class area of town, etc. It's just completely mathematically unsound. It's one of the worst ideas in the book.

There are even odds that the Rating 3 Scanner will Penetrate/Not Penetrate, the Rating 3 Fake SIN...
With a Rating 5 Fake SIN, your standard Rating 3 System will generally lose, all things being equal (0 Hits vs 1 Hit on the Autosuccess rule), and don't forget that the "suspicion" of an equal test only prompts more inclusive verification... They start to ask you relevant information included on the SIN, or ask for a different source of verification (Biometric), which SHOULD be included with your SIN anyways... it is kind of counter-productive to set up a SIN that does not include your Biometric data, or a way to bypass that data with relevant scans.

At Rating 6, with a 2 to 1 dice advantage your SIN will generally always defeat the "Standard" rating 3 Scanner... At Security Levels of Equipment (rating 4-5) the Fake SIN still has the advantage at Rating 6...

Now, I will say that a Rating 1 and Rating 2 Sin are pretty useless, but you get what you pay for... I would say invest the 6k Nuyen into the Rating 6 Fake SIN...

As for the Turnover of SINS... this is exactly the case, and what I believe that the develpopers wanted to protray with the system... You need to peneetrate a Megacorp facility as one of the people authorized to enter, you gotta shell out the bucks for the access ID, and you damn well are (or should) going to Burn that ID the second that you have completed the Run... That is the whole point of the Fake SIN situation...

I cannot tell you how many Fake SIN's/Licenses that I have burned over the year or so that I have played my current character... Just part of doing business in the Shadows...

Anyway, My Two Cents

[TeOdio]

As the GM, I only "check" ID's for game critical points, and mainly for drama. It's pretty ludicrous to think the local stuffer shack is going to check your ID every time you buy some nuke it burritos, they just want your cred. Even in high security public zones most drones and scanners are mainly seeing if you have a SIN, not really running a background check on every Tomas, Ricardo, and Enrique that walks the plex. Critias is dead on with the fact that you can make it as challenging as you want. There is no "fool proof" way to defeat all ID checks every time, but even a good fast talker might be able to get around any inconsistencies with the ID. I would suggest avoiding ID checks unless the players draw attention to themselves in some way or there is a reason for the scrutiny. If Lone Star thinks they look suspicious, run their ID. If they are impersonating a sarariman to get into MCT's offices in downtown Seattle, check their ID's. If they are crossing a "hot" border, check their ID's. Otherwise, let it sliiiiiide (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif) .
(IMG:style_emoticons/default/nuyen.gif) (IMG:style_emoticons/default/nuyen.gif) (IMG:style_emoticons/default/nuyen.gif)

[TeOdio]

I cannot tell you how many Fake SIN's/Licenses that I have burned over the year or so that I have played my current character... Just part of doing business in the Shadows...

Well, you're just paranoid, that's all (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)
(IMG:style_emoticons/default/nuyen.gif) (IMG:style_emoticons/default/nuyen.gif) (IMG:style_emoticons/default/nuyen.gif)

[Tymeaus Jalynsfe...]

Well, you're just paranoid, that's all (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)
(IMG:style_emoticons/default/nuyen.gif) (IMG:style_emoticons/default/nuyen.gif) (IMG:style_emoticons/default/nuyen.gif)

Perhaps, But I have not been "Caught" yet... ewven though you are an evil, manipulative, backstabbing, dictator of a GM...
(IMG:style_emoticons/default/grinbig.gif)

[Tymeaus Jalynsfe...]

As the GM, I only "check" ID's for game critical points, and mainly for drama. It's pretty ludicrous to think the local stuffer shack is going to check your ID every time you buy some nuke it burritos, they just want your cred. Even in high security public zones most drones and scanners are mainly seeing if you have a SIN, not really running a background check on every Tomas, Ricardo, and Enrique that walks the plex. Critias is dead on with the fact that you can make it as challenging as you want. There is no "fool proof" way to defeat all ID checks every time, but even a good fast talker might be able to get around any inconsistencies with the ID. I would suggest avoiding ID checks unless the players draw attention to themselves in some way or there is a reason for the scrutiny. If Lone Star thinks they look suspicious, run their ID. If they are impersonating a sarariman to get into MCT's offices in downtown Seattle, check their ID's. If they are crossing a "hot" border, check their ID's. Otherwise, let it sliiiiiide (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif) .
(IMG:style_emoticons/default/nuyen.gif) (IMG:style_emoticons/default/nuyen.gif) (IMG:style_emoticons/default/nuyen.gif)

Hey... No-one would ever impersonate an MCT Sarariman to gain access to their high security facilities for any reason that I could think of... why would you want to gain the equivalent of a "Day-Job", even for a week or so, just to perform some highly-illegal run; seems kind of dangerous to me...

(IMG:style_emoticons/default/grinbig.gif)

[Zurai]

At Rating 6, with a 2 to 1 dice advantage your SIN will generally always defeat the "Standard" rating 3 Scanner.

Not even remotely close to being true. With 3 dice to throw, you have a 31.25% chance to get at least 2 hits.

[TeOdio]

Perhaps, But I have not been "Caught" yet... even though you are an evil, manipulative, backstabbing, dictator of a GM...
(IMG:style_emoticons/default/grinbig.gif)

Hey, I'm just trying to foster those qualities in my players (IMG:style_emoticons/default/cool.gif)
(IMG:style_emoticons/default/nuyen.gif) (IMG:style_emoticons/default/nuyen.gif) (IMG:style_emoticons/default/nuyen.gif)

[TeOdio]

Not even remotely close to being true. With 3 dice to throw, you have a 31.25% chance to get at least 2 hits.

Sure, and what are the odds of getting at least 2 hits or more with six dice? One does not need to be a mathematician to see that 6 is bigger than 3, and generally will be reliable enough. But I agree that Ty's "always" is a bit strong as it is connotative with certainty where there is not any.
(IMG:style_emoticons/default/nuyen.gif) (IMG:style_emoticons/default/nuyen.gif) (IMG:style_emoticons/default/nuyen.gif)

[Zurai]

But I agree that Ty's "always" is a bit strong as it is connotative with certainty where there is not any.

That's what I was referring to. I wasn't saying that 3 dice is going to beat 6 dice most of the time -- just that it WILL tie or beat 6 dice a significant fraction of the time.

[TeOdio]

That's what I was referring to. I wasn't saying that 3 dice is going to beat 6 dice most of the time -- just that it WILL tie or beat 6 dice a significant fraction of the time.

And here I thought you were just being mean (IMG:style_emoticons/default/grinbig.gif) .
(IMG:style_emoticons/default/nuyen.gif) (IMG:style_emoticons/default/nuyen.gif) (IMG:style_emoticons/default/nuyen.gif)

[Tymeaus Jalynsfe...]

Not even remotely close to being true. With 3 dice to throw, you have a 31.25% chance to get at least 2 hits.

With 6 dice that chance to beat the 3 dice is significantly better as well... do not discount the averages for 6 dice as well...

[Tymeaus Jalynsfe...]

And I bend to the wisdom (becasue it does indeed happen) that ocassionally, the 3 dice will succeed over the 6 dice... just not a significant amount of the time...


And Te0dio... Paranoia keeps us alive...

[kzt]

At Rating 6, with a 2 to 1 dice advantage your SIN will generally always defeat the "Standard" rating 3 Scanner... At Security Levels of Equipment (rating 4-5) the Fake SIN still has the advantage at Rating 6...

This is the mindset behind the current rules. But it is terribly wrong.

Every time you roll the dice on your rating 3 ID you have a 1:216 chance of getting all ones. So about 99.5% of the time you do not get all ones. If you use that ID 20 time you have a significantly higher than 9% chance of a critical glitch in one or more of those tries. (Sorry, I can't remember how to do the math for a critical glitch , but all ones is clearly one of the many results that is a critical glitch)

However... (IIRC) you have about a 67% chance that any given die is a failure, so you have about a 30% chance on any given roll that you get no successes. If you use this ID 20 times you have a 0.09% chance of it not failing at least once.

With a rating 6 fake you have about a 9% chance per roll of getting no successes. Over 20 rolls you have a 16% chance that it doesn't fail at least once.

However your chance of getting all ones per roll is down to 0.002%, so your chance of getting an all ones roll at least once over 20 attempts is 0.05%. The odds of a critical glitch are significantly higher, but I can't remember how to calculate this.

[Tymeaus Jalynsfe...]

This is the mindset behind the current rules. But it is terribly wrong.

Every time you roll the dice on your rating 3 ID you have a 1:216 chance of a critical glitch. So about 99.5% of the time you do not critically glitch. If you use that ID 20 time you have about a 9% chance of a critical glitch in one or more of those tries.

However... (IIRC) you have about a 67% chance that any given die is a failure, so you have about a 30% chance on any given roll that you get no successes. If you use this ID 20 times you have a 0.09% chance of it not failing at least once.

With Dice probablilities, you will always have this problem, but do not forget, that the opposing verification system ALSO suffers this problem... so in the end, it is a wash...

Which is why, ideally, you are constantly changing your SIN's... and hopefully for the better ones at that...

[kzt]

The problem is that it isn't. If you fail it doesn't matter how the device did, you lose. If you succeed it starts to matter the relative success levels. And that is a lot more complex to calculate, but the numbers just get WORSE, as it is only reducing your probability of success.

[Dikotana]

You walk into a Stuffer Shack and wave your fake idea. The Stuffer Shack has no reason to care whether your ID is legitimate or not. They benefit from keeping the bums out, but a fake ID means you have money, so they'll happily sell to you either way. You're a criminal, but you can want to grab a bite too. And the same is probably true for most stores. Want clothes? The department store has very little interest in turning away your tainted nuyen.

ID checks only make sense in places where there is genuine interest in keeping the SINless out. Not the general, faceless, swarming mobs are dirty and disgusting street trash, who can be ejected by eye, but everyone who isn't entirely upright and who may have some shadiness to his character. Where is that? Likely shadowrun targets like corps, anywhere with police or military presence, and possibly the poshest of the posh establishments.

There may be more scanners around, but it does the bottom line no good for the employees to toss out paying but SINless customers out. They'll take your money and smile. Maybe they'll report you to Lone Star, but probably not; they'd rather have you come back and buy again.

[kzt]

The stuffer shack has every reason to care that when whatever you are using to pay says you have money that you really do. Other then that, they don't really care. They care a tiny bit because it means that stuffershack can't add useful data to the AR spam database, but that is typically a minor issue.

But that isn't how the rules work. It's easier to just handwave the whole thing and assume that as long as the PCs are doing whatever the GM thinks is appropriate to avoid having IDs blow the IDs are not blown. And when they obviously are blown the players do the correct thing.

[Tymeaus Jalynsfe...]

The problem is that it isn't. If you fail it doesn't matter how the device did, you lose. If you succeed it starts to matter the relative success levels. And that is a lot more complex to calculate, but the numbers just get WORSE, as it is only reducing your probability of success.

If you fail your roll and the verification fails it's roll, it is a wash (tie) and additional verification is called for... for verification, all you need is a single net over the system, and you are golden...

Unless, of course, I am missing something...

[kzt]

Hmm that does seem to be the case. Cleverly the game doesn't provide a mechanism to actually do the additional verification "based on the bearers history" that is supposed to result. The default in an opposed test is that on a tie the defender wins if stalemate isn't an acceptable result.

[Tymeaus Jalynsfe...]

Hmm that does seem to be the case. Cleverly the game doesn't provide a mechanism to actually do the additional verification "based on the bearers history" that is supposed to result. The default in an opposed test is that on a tie the defender wins if stalemate isn't an acceptable result.

I have always read it that if you tie, then you retest again... Seems to fit the fluff...

[kzt]

I have always read it that if you tie, then you retest again... Seems to fit the fluff...

No, what they should do is throw detailed questions at the character, which means the character with a new SIN every 2 days is screwed when they ask him what Junior High he graduated from and where his mother was born. The character with a stable fake ID that he doesn't burn and instead studies it can probably answer it.

Except that in SR option 2 is dumb.

[Tymeaus Jalynsfe...]

No, what they should do is throw detailed questions at the character, which means the character with a new SIN every 2 days is screwed when they ask him what Junior High he graduated from and where his mother was born. The character with a stable fake ID that he doesn't burn and instead studies it can probably answer it.

Except that in SR option 2 is dumb.

Agreed, but for the "rules" of interpretation, that would be resolved as either another test agains the Fake ID, or as a Judge Intentions Test vs. a Con (Possibly Fast Talking) Social Test...

It boils down to that fact that Players/GM's do not put that much into the Fake SIN process in my experience... Which is odd... I always liked putting together some background info, such as you are hinting at, to flesh out the data a little bit... Sadly, most Players/GM's don't care enough about it to put forth that kind of effort... so the Retest or Social Test is the way to handle it...

Either way works...

[Necro Sanct]

I prefer to use the following method for higher security purposes. To me such a check comes down to an item (ID) being verified using another item (computer databases). A fake ID is only useful until it is flagged at which point the player will have to pay the penalties along with getting a possible replacement ID. High security systems rely on things beyond just an ID check though so the following system only covers that aspect of it. A player best be prepared to pass any other method that may be employed.

ID rating > SIN Scan rating: Free pass
ID = SIN Scan rating: Even roll opposing test. Failure results in a 30 minute detention period per opposing test failure, max of 3 tests. Success leads to immediate release.
ID 1 < SIN Scan rating: Detained for questioning. 1 hour detention per opposing test failure. 3 opposing tests max. Success leads to immediate release.
ID 2 < SIN Scan rating: Detained for further interrogation. 1 hour detention minimum. 3 opposing tests max. Success leads to release. 3 failures results in 1 week detention +1 SIN Scan rating is added to future tests against that specific ID only.
ID 3+ < SIN Scan rating: Not good!

These methods are mostly passes with the occasional test leading to varied detention periods which may impede on some time sensitive things down the road. The more extreme types should rarely occur as long as the player owns a decent rated fake SIN. If the players are willing to take the chance against a SIN Scan in a known hot spot they must be willing to deal with the results.

[Tymeaus Jalynsfe...]

I prefer to use the following method for higher security purposes. To me such a check comes down to an item (ID) being verified using another item (computer databases). A fake ID is only useful until it is flagged at which point the player will have to pay the penalties along with getting a possible replacement ID. High security systems rely on things beyond just an ID check though so the following system only covers that aspect of it. A player best be prepared to pass any other method that may be employed.

ID rating > SIN Scan rating: Free pass
ID = SIN Scan rating: Even roll opposing test. Failure results in a 30 minute detention period per opposing test failure, max of 3 tests. Success leads to immediate release.
ID 1 < SIN Scan rating: Detained for questioning. 1 hour detention period per opposing test failure, max of 3 tests. Success leads to immediate release.
ID 2 < SIN Scan rating: Detained for further interrogation. 1 hour detention period minimum. 3 opposing tests allowed. 1 week detention if all result in failure. Success leads to immediate release. +1 SIN Scan rating is added to future tests against that specific ID only.
ID 3+ < SIN Scan rating: Not good!

These methods are mostly passes with the occasional test leading to varied detention periods which may impede on some time sensitive things down the road. The more extreme types should rarely occur as long as the player owns a decent rated fake SIN. If the players are willing to take the chance against a SIN Scan in a known hot spot they must be willing to deal with the results.

If you have to have hard and fast rules, I like this...

[twilite]

I've always liked the idea of making the Fake SIN's rating a threshold for the verification system to beat. Even if you give the system 2xrating in dice, odds are very good that you will get through all right, but it is not automatic.

[kzt]

I've always liked the idea of making the Fake SIN's rating a threshold for the verification system to beat. Even if you give the system 2xrating in dice, odds are very good that you will get through all right, but it is not automatic.

It sounds possible, but I'd want to see someone do the math first before saying it was good. A lot of these don't work the way it looks to the casual observer. And I'd probably want to go to something akin to the SR3 pricing on really good fakes,

[Zurai]

I've always liked the idea of making the Fake SIN's rating a threshold for the verification system to beat. Even if you give the system 2xrating in dice, odds are very good that you will get through all right, but it is not automatic.

That actually sounds like a reasonable system. It'd need a rating+rating roll for the scanner, but that's easy to ad hoc. It at least makes rating 6 SINs live up to their 18 availability code.

[DireRadiant]

GM decides if and when to bother with SIN verification.
SIN Verification is a multi step process. If the initial test fails, then there may be subsequent checks.

I typically allow the PC to come up with whatever inventive thing they want to try for the second verification. I've had Intimidation used, the security checkpoint really didn't want to ask that troll about his mamma, bribes made, hacking on the fly, violent distractions, seductions, cons, fast talk, and all the way to the start of a really big firefight.

It's also possible for the SIN checker to skip the second verification and go straight to whatever their planned response is.

SIN checks are a tool. It's up to the GM to use them well.

[FlashbackJon]

No, what they should do is throw detailed questions at the character, which means the character with a new SIN every 2 days is screwed when they ask him what Junior High he graduated from and where his mother was born. The character with a stable fake ID that he doesn't burn and instead studies it can probably answer it.

Under the assumption that the characters actually looked at their new SIN information when they received it, I call a Memory test here.

It seems like in the business of selling fake SINs, it would just be good business sense to have common verification Q&A included with the package. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif)

[Darkeus]

GM decides if and when to bother with SIN verification.
SIN Verification is a multi step process. If the initial test fails, then there may be subsequent checks.

I typically allow the PC to come up with whatever inventive thing they want to try for the second verification. I've had Intimidation used, the security checkpoint really didn't want to ask that troll about his mamma, bribes made, hacking on the fly, violent distractions, seductions, cons, fast talk, and all the way to the start of a really big firefight.

It's also possible for the SIN checker to skip the second verification and go straight to whatever their planned response is.

SIN checks are a tool. It's up to the GM to use them well.

Couldn't have said it better myself. Use em when you want to, how you want to. The rules are there to use or ignore. Plus, I see a lot of people obsessed with the dice. Too much rolling dice. I love mechanics too but a time and place for dice rolls is always needed.

[Kerenshara]

It boils down to that fact that Players/GM's do not put that much into the Fake SIN process in my experience... Which is odd... I always liked putting together some background info, such as you are hinting at, to flesh out the data a little bit... Sadly, most Players/GM's don't care enough about it to put forth that kind of effort... so the Retest or Social Test is the way to handle it...

I can't speak for everybody of course, but I have fifteen current active IDs. Each has diferent biometrics (Including fingerprints, and as soon as I can get my hands on it, retina prints). Each has full name, citizenship, place of birth, date of birth, employer (if any), clothing styles, language, food preferences, speech mannerisms, physical mannerisms, sexual orientation preferences, comlink type (you DID get a different comlink to RUN the fake ID, right?) and OS, firearm(s) with permit(s), and basic nuclear family information and marital status. (My GM says he's thankful I'm the one keeping track of them, but my best friend just insists I'm schitzo so it's not a problem. I can role play each of them, and most people can tell who I am playing just by watching and listening.)

I think this part of the game is at the heart of what makes Shadowrun what it is, especially in 2070.

As to tests, here is what our group has essentially settled on:

Level 1 = It's a bus pass. Stuffer Shack^TM probably won't quibble.
Level 2 = Minimum casual use.
Level 3 = Sufficient to pass a police traffic stop, assuming no other suspicion from the cop.
Level 4 = Enough to legitimately buy property (a house).
Level 5 = Will pass almost all "immediate" scrutiny.
Level 6 = Potentially enough to pass a security background check, but not in person.

For "immediate" security checks, we handle it with the ID level as a threshold for the "Scanner".

For an in depth check, duration varies by level. Initiative Pass for Level 1. Minutes for Level 2. Hours for Level 3. Days for Level 4. Weeks for Level 5. Months for Level 6. (At level 6, the details and data are so in depth, it takes real people real time to comb the mountain of data to find the tiny discrepancies and put them together.) The threshold there would be level*level. All fakes can be broken eventually. But imagine a flesh and blood investigator looking into a Level 6 (6k/18F) ID, if they just SUSPECT it's false, if the person is convincing in interviews (can you say: role play? Social skills to suplement?) they might give up after a while and say it seems legit? If they KNOW it's fake, it's only a matter of time.

If you haven't read it in depth, the Runner's Companion spends a LOT of time talking about this stuff and what a fake ID really entails and involves. Level 3 and higher IDs are putting full and legitimate information into governmental databases.

Please bear in mind these are just for baseline IDs. You want a faked access card for the Sader Krupp research facility to go with that fake SiN that claims you belong there as an employee? NOW we're up to a straight-up rating to rating roll off. And when the guard raises an eyebrow, that's when those sleaze skills come in handy to glide you right past him. "Oh, I just transfered in from the Ohio facility, and Mr. Tanaka said he was SURE they would get my paperwork straightened out by the end of the week, but I'm already running late, and you know how he is, don't you?" *Dazling smile and a dice roll*

Any thoughts?

It means IDs are important to put time into, but not really to take time to DEAL with in play once you set them up and as long as you actually adhere to them. Forget you're supposed to be a meek submissive Japanese wageslave and start sassing the guard with a Southern accent... well, you get the picture.

[Tymeaus Jalynsfe...]

Ths is the level of detail that I have used in the past, but honestly, my current group does not worry about it as much...

[kzt]

I can't speak for everybody of course, but I have fifteen current active IDs. Each has diferent biometrics (Including fingerprints, and as soon as I can get my hands on it, retina prints). Each has full name, citizenship, place of birth, date of birth, employer (if any), clothing styles, language, food preferences, speech mannerisms, physical mannerisms, sexual orientation preferences, comlink type (you DID get a different comlink to RUN the fake ID, right?) and OS, firearm(s) with permit(s), and basic nuclear family information and marital status. (My GM says he's thankful I'm the one keeping track of them, but my best friend just insists I'm schitzo so it's not a problem. I can role play each of them, and most people can tell who I am playing just by watching and listening.)

The drawback is that if you have lots of IDs with the same biometrics is that when you get stopped at the security checkpoint at the airport your prints get run against the central data base and are going to return 15 different people. These also match your retinal patterns and also look remarkably like you. Which means you are not making the 5:15 to NYC.

[Kerenshara]

The drawback is that if you have lots of IDs with the same biometrics is that when you get stopped at the security checkpoint at the airport your prints get run against the central data base and are going to return 15 different people. These also match your retinal patterns and also look remarkably like you. Which means you are not making the 5:15 to NYC.

*sassy grin*
Now who said they all have the same biometrics?
*checks her list*
Nano palm (and finger) print adjustment, check.
Nano retinal adjusters, coming... soon.
Facial Sculpt adept power, check.
Voice Control adept power, check.
Makeover spell, check.
Fashion spell, check.
Con / Impersonation at 4 with a high Charisma, check.

The only thing that could be tricky would be DNA, and in-utero Genewipe at least means trace evidence won't lead back.

So, we've got aparent height (the diference in preceived height between posture and heel height adjustments is amazing).
We've got apparent weight (and again clothing and posture can do a lot).
We've got fingerprints.
We've got retinaprints.
We've got facial recgnition.
We've got voice print.
We've got clothes and makeup.
And we've got a silver tongue with a disarming personality.

As I said in another post: there are always other ways, omae.

My main point was that I have a tremendous amount of detail for each ID, and that my CHARACTER is prepared to BE one of those for day at a time, at need. And if you've read Runner's Companion, high rating fake IDs eventually become a reality of their own if used for long enough and with enough consistency in shopping, reading, travel and so forth. The fact that it was originally a fake doesn't mean it lacks reality. First thing a flesh and blood investigator looks for is behavior patterns. "Why hasn't Ms. Parker bought anything at all for 23 days, then suddenly surfaced 2300 km away going on a shopping spree for clothes that don't seem to be her style?" That's why it's worth paying a cartel to KEEP your IDs updated with information like that over time. THAT is a large measure of what sets a Level 4 ID from a Level 6 ID.

[Critias]

Which'd all be fine and dandy if a level 6 ID was worth that amount of trouble, hassle, and financial expenditure. By RAW, it really isn't.

But it all comes down to a game by game basis -- if that level of effort is enough for your GM, the "happy medium" where the player works at having something cool and the GM rewards them by ignoring the way the rules work a bit, more power to ya.

[Kerenshara]

*considers that for a moment*

Critias:: you have a very good point. I guess I simply wouldn't put up with a GM who didn't. By the RAW, Shadowrunners shouldn't be able to order a pizza more than about a dozen times even with the very best of IDs, which would effectively put them out of business as a group, and that just doesn't seem to make a lot of sense if it's still going to be Shadowrun.

[DireRadiant]

The drawback is that if you have lots of IDs with the same biometrics is that when you get stopped at the security checkpoint at the airport your prints get run against the central data base and are going to return 15 different people. These also match your retinal patterns and also look remarkably like you. Which means you are not making the 5:15 to NYC.

There are multiple third party SIN authentication systems, so part of the SIN checking is checking against the system the SIN is associated with. A Renraku SIN and Aztechnology SIN could contain the same biometric data, but that won't be revealed unless those two systems check against each other, and why would they? When you present your Aztech SIN, the SIN checker checks against Aztechnology SIN database.

If the players pay for it, the SIN is worth it. If you weren't getting value from it, then why would anyone buy it?

[kzt]

There are multiple third party SIN authentication systems, so part of the SIN checking is checking against the system the SIN is associated with. A Renraku SIN and Aztechnology SIN could contain the same biometric data, but that won't be revealed unless those two systems check against each other, and why would they? When you present your Aztech SIN, the SIN checker checks against Aztechnology SIN database.

You can't authenticate with an ID that can't be checked. So you can't actually buy anything (or do anything at all) using a Renraku ID that Renraku won't authenticate. You might as well have drawn it in crayon on the back of a napkin.

It works fine the first time the character shows up at Renraku. But storage space is free. So the second time they show up with a different ID they match the first ID too, if the system does a check against the back end DB.

[DireRadiant]

You can't authenticate with an ID that can't be checked. So you can't actually buy anything (or do anything at all) using a Renraku ID that Renraku won't authenticate. You might as well have drawn it in crayon on the back of a napkin.

It works fine the first time the character shows up at Renraku. But storage space is free. So the second time they show up with a different ID they match the first ID too, if the system does a check against the back end DB.

Are you then assuming there is a local reference copy of all ID information that is used for checking SINs all the time? You'd still need to authenticate the SIN for the purposes of authorizing the nuyen exchange for the fiscal account transfers? That isn't going to happen without a trusted third party authentication.

[rathmun]

Not much of a news piece, but I went and did the math.

Rating 6 fake SIN vs rating 1 authentication system.


odds of fake SIN getting no successes, (2/3)^6
odds of rating 1 authentication getting 1 success 1/3

1/3*(2/3)^6=0.0292638317

That means that using a rating 6 fake SIN to, as someone said, "Order a pizza" has a 2.9% chance of failing and leaving the SIN burned. So, continuing with their example, ordering a pizza twelve times has a 30% chance of destroying the SIN.

24 uses is where the probability of the SIN lasting that long drops below 50% (this is against rating 1 verification. natch?)

a rating 6 fake SIN has less than a 5% chance of surviving 101 rating 1 tests. (at 5/day that's less than a month)

[Kerenshara]

Not much of a news piece, but I went and did the math.

Rating 6 fake SIN vs rating 1 authentication system.


odds of fake SIN getting no successes, (2/3)^6
odds of rating 1 authentication getting 1 success 1/3

1/3*(2/3)^6=0.0292638317

That means that using a rating 6 fake SIN to, as someone said, "Order a pizza" has a 2.9% chance of failing and leaving the SIN burned. So, continuing with their example, ordering a pizza twelve times has a 30% chance of destroying the SIN.

24 uses is where the probability of the SIN lasting that long drops below 50% (this is against rating 1 verification. natch?)

a rating 6 fake SIN has less than a 5% chance of surviving 101 rating 1 tests. (at 5/day that's less than a month)

I'm the one who mentioned the Pizza, and those odds are assuming you sat at home on your couch and just ordered pizza. Every time you board a bus, take a cab, try to enter a building with security medium or higher, you're going to get checked, and the latter is not a rating 1 scanner. If Stuffer Shack is 1, serious private security is 2; Cops carry a 3 on their belt, have a 4 in their cruiser and a back 5 back at the station. Domestic airports would probably have a 4 while international airports / spaceports would be rating 6, as would a major corporate background screening. That would mean a rating 6 ID would be burned within days of day-to-day use, whereas the fluff would seem to suggest ordinary use day-to-day adds depth to an ID making it more legit to low level checks in the first place.
I don't remember enough of my old statistics courses to agree or disagree with yout math, but it seems to make sense. Probably too late to have them address this in the dead tree release of SR4A but maybe one of their little electronic books like Digital Grimoire? The fluff in the BBB and Runner's Companion both seem to suggest a rating 6 ID is darned near bulletproof. And as I mentioned above, I can see a world of diference between a basic SiN / ID and a specific corporate ID / access to a facility. There I can see the high probability of failure being more appropriate.

[Critias]

That would mean a rating 6 ID would be burned within days of day-to-day use, whereas the fluff would seem to suggest ordinary use day-to-day adds depth to an ID making it more legit to low level checks in the first place...The fluff in the BBB and Runner's Companion both seem to suggest a rating 6 ID is darned near bulletproof.

Yup.

Which is why I've long been of the opinion that it's fine for some GMs to make players jump through the hopes the RAW requires of them (if that's the sort of paranoid, always on the go, nothing last forever, this life is hard, game they want)...and just as fine with GMs that fix it with a little handwavium, and just require players invest in a solid rating 4 fake SIN or two and leave it alone (for a more casual game that focuses on different aspects of the shadows, like combat or whatever).

It's not the first time, and not the first game, in which the fluff and the numbers just don't come to the same conclusion.

[Kerenshara]

Yup.

Which is why I've long been of the opinion that it's fine for some GMs to make players jump through the hopes the RAW requires of them (if that's the sort of paranoid, always on the go, nothing last forever, this life is hard, game they want)...and just as fine with GMs that fix it with a little handwavium, and just require players invest in a solid rating 4 fake SIN or two and leave it alone (for a more casual game that focuses on different aspects of the shadows, like combat or whatever).

It's not the first time, and not the first game, in which the fluff and the numbers just don't come to the same conclusion.

*sighs sadly*
Too true, I'm afraid. I guess if you played by the RAW on IDs you probably would use the optional rules for magic / essence loss from major injury and play with the deadlier combat options, because they are all VERY gritty.

[DireRadiant]

See Making Tests

"Th e gamemaster should not
require a player to make a test when the action is something
that the character should be expected to do without difficulty."

This should apply to SIN checks as much as Pilot Groundcraft checks

[Kerenshara]

See Making Tests

"Th e gamemaster should not
require a player to make a test when the action is something
that the character should be expected to do without difficulty."

This should apply to SIN checks as much as Pilot Groundcraft checks

Hmm, so what we've really been doing it trying to codify a system for when a GM will decide a check is really necessary in the first place? OK, I think I can deal with that.

[rathmun]

Still need a way (at some price) to get a false ID that has a better than 50% chance of not getting you killed when you try to walk into a high security area (infiltrating a corporate research facility for example.)

I understand not being able to get into a Z-zone with a fake ID, but then I'd put their security at a 7-8. Seriously, the current scale doesn't allow for enough of a security gap between stuffer shack and MCTs most secure research lab. It should be outright impossible for the former to even touch an ID that has the slightest chance of working at the latter.

[DuctShuiTengu]

Actually Rathmun, the odds are even worse. With ties going to the scanner, a Rating 6 SIN has a 17.6% chance of failure against a Rating 1 scanner. Which puts your odds of it still being good after 7 pizzas at just over 25% (it drops below 50% on the 4th one). After a second week of pizzas, you're looking at less than a 7% chance that your 6,000 (IMG:style_emoticons/default/nuyen.gif) SIN hasn't already been flagged.

For other ratings of SIN/License vs Scanners, the full run-down of the odds looks like this:

CODE

6   2.9%   7.8%  14.2%  21.7%  29.8%  38.0%
5   4.4%  11.0%  19.0%  27.8%  36.9%  45.6%
4   6.6%  15.4%  25.2%  35.4%  45.1%  54.1%
3   9.9%  21.4%  33.2%  44.4%  54.5%  63.3%
2  14.8%  29.6%  43.2%  55.0%  64.9%  72.9%
1  22.2%  40.7%  55.6%  67.1%  75.9%  82.4%
    1      2      3      4      5      6

Also, since other people expressed interest in seeing the numbers for the suggestion of using the SIN as a threshold for the scanner (having it roll twice its rating), those come out as follows:

CODE

6   0.8%   5.4%  18.1%  39.3%  63.2%  82.2%
5   1.7%  10.4%  29.9%  55.9%  78.7%  92.3%
4   3.9%  19.5%  46.8%  74.1%  91.2%  98.0%
3   8.8%  35.1%  68.0%  90.0%  98.2%  99.9%
2  19.8%  59.3%  88.9%  98.8% 100.0% 100.0%
1  44.4%  88.9% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%
    1      2      3      4      5      6

Edit: Fixed some issues with putting together fake tables here.

Further edit: both tables use SIN rating as the horizontal axis and scanner rating as the vertical.

[Kerenshara]

You know, I think I am ammused by the monster I have created, because somehow (I am not going to speculate as to why) the idea of ordering pizza seems to Grok for most of the people reading this thread, and brings home just how gritty the RAW realy are.

By the way, thanks for the math!

[TeOdio]

Simple question I have for you all. What makes you think an ID is burned simply because it fails a verification process? Even using RAW it does not say failure equals burned. I would say it might matter where it fails more than the fact it failed. If a GM wanted to check every time a character rolled into the Stuffer Shack they could, and even the rating 6 SIN COULD fail. Worst case scenario, the EXCEPTIONALLY WELL TRAINED and HIGHLY ETHICAL clerk refuses the sale or the auto-vendor just won't accept the payment transfer. I really don't see that as being burned. Now having your ID snooped by Lone Star because they caught you casing a building wearing an armored jacket in July at noon could result in bad times if the ID check fails. Even then, the ID might not be "burned" for every day use. That ID would simply become a known alias for the Star. Plus, in the era of competing law enforcement corporations I doubt Weapons World is sharing customer data with Lone Star.
As a GM I did recognized the need for the Iron Clad ID, so I made one up for my campaign. The ID comes in ratings 3 - 6 at double the cost. They can only be procured through specific contacts that are a part of the organization that create them. The benefit they have is that the player using them can re roll the failures once per test.
(IMG:style_emoticons/default/nuyen.gif) (IMG:style_emoticons/default/nuyen.gif) (IMG:style_emoticons/default/nuyen.gif)

[kzt]

Are you then assuming there is a local reference copy of all ID information that is used for checking SINs all the time? You'd still need to authenticate the SIN for the purposes of authorizing the nuyen exchange for the fiscal account transfers? That isn't going to happen without a trusted third party authentication.

It's like this. You show up in Yakutsk Russia with a US passport and a valid visa. Being the crazy paranoid Russians they take AFIS like electronic fingerprints, then let you in because you have a seemingly valid US passport and a visa and your fingerprints don't show anything odd.

Two months later you show up in Saint Petersburg with a British passport (on a different name) and a valid visa. Being the crazy paranoid Russians they take AFIS like electronic fingerprints. The passport looks fine, the visa is fine, but the AFIS database show you as having been in Yakutsk two months ago on a US passport with a different name, and several gentlemen from FSB want to have a long talk with you.

[Tymeaus Jalynsfe...]

Simple question I have for you all. What makes you think an ID is burned simply because it fails a verification process? Even using RAW it does not say failure equals burned. I would say it might matter where it fails more than the fact it failed. If a GM wanted to check every time a character rolled into the Stuffer Shack they could, and even the rating 6 SIN COULD fail. Worst case scenario, the EXCEPTIONALLY WELL TRAINED and HIGHLY ETHICAL clerk refuses the sale or the auto-vendor just won't accept the payment transfer. I really don't see that as being burned. Now having your ID snooped by Lone Star because they caught you casing a building wearing an armored jacket in July at noon could result in bad times if the ID check fails. Even then, the ID might not be "burned" for every day use. That ID would simply become a known alias for the Star. Plus, in the era of competing law enforcement corporations I doubt Weapons World is sharing customer data with Lone Star.
As a GM I did recognized the need for the Iron Clad ID, so I made one up for my campaign. The ID comes in ratings 3 - 6 at double the cost. They can only be procured through specific contacts that are a part of the organization that create them. The benefit they have is that the player using them can re roll the failures once per test.
(IMG:style_emoticons/default/nuyen.gif) (IMG:style_emoticons/default/nuyen.gif) (IMG:style_emoticons/default/nuyen.gif)

It sure does hurt, though, when one of these babies gets burned... But they are worth every penny...

[Writer]

Instead of doing the math, I used a spreadsheet. Using the equations =TRUNC(RAND()*6)+1 to duplicate a simple die roll, I set up 6 cells for the fake ID and 3 cells for the scanner. Then, I had a cell count the number of hits for the ID and for the scanner. I have a column to determine successes (ID hits > scanner hits), another to determine ties, and a third to determine failures (ID hits < scanner hits). I copied this row of equations into 10,000 rows. I then averaged each column into a percentage. I typed the percentage, then hit enter, which recalculates the whole sheet. I did this ten times, and averaged the typed percentages, which means my total sample size is about 100,000.

Here is what I came up with (+/- about 1%):

ID succeeds: 63%
Ties: 23%
ID fails: 14%

I tried the same thing with a Rating 1 scanner (only 1 cell for a simulated single die).

ID succeeds: 83%
Ties: 14%
ID fails: 3%

Against mid-level scanners, my 6,000 nuyen ID will fail 14% of the time, and of the hundreds of scans made by Rating 1 scanners throughout the week (or on a busy day) I will fail 3 of the scans.

I like the idea that the ID rating is a threshold, which also automatically incorporates the idea that an ID always wins against a lower rated scan. I like the whole espionage feel that fake IDs bring, but burning through 5,000 nuyen with any kind of frequency is not something I see starting runners being able to do. If a Rating 6 ID is supposed to be worth the time and money, I want to see a better something lower than a 14% failure rate.

[DireRadiant]

It's like this. You show up in Yakutsk Russia with a US passport and a valid visa. Being the crazy paranoid Russians they take AFIS like electronic fingerprints, then let you in because you have a seemingly valid US passport and a visa and your fingerprints don't show anything odd.

Two months later you show up in Saint Petersburg with a British passport (on a different name) and a valid visa. Being the crazy paranoid Russians they take AFIS like electronic fingerprints. The passport looks fine, the visa is fine, but the AFIS database show you as having been in Yakutsk two months ago on a US passport with a different name, and several gentlemen from FSB want to have a long talk with you.

That's when the follow up verification test comes in, whatever the test happens to be.

But if you want to make Fake SINS the players have paid a lot of nuyen for not work in your game, that's your game.

[DireRadiant]

When I ask for SIN checks I take into the account the odds of the test succeeding or failing for each time the check is asked for. Frankly I am not going to ask for a SIN check more then once a session if at all. I don't ask players to make Logic + Hardware test every time they walk through the door, or an Athletics Test to walk and chew gum at the same time. That's what cyberjaws are for. And ordering pizza is part of lifestyle costs, however it works, it doesn't need a SIN check, unless it's directly related to a run.

[Kerenshara]

I guess it boils down to table preference if you're not going for the gritty RAW. It also sounds like most people have some kinf of system in place for dealing with this at home, though the majority boil down to not worrying about it too much. I happen to thing the "ignore it" option loses a little too much of the flavor of being a runner, but a comment I saw in another thread about escapism has merrit: we're here to have fun.
My personal feeling, though, is that the more "real" the world "feels", the more deeply I can submerge into it and successfully escape from my own day-to-day grind. Like cryptography, identity fraud is a constant running and escalating battle between security and those looking to circumvent it. If the current trends hold, identity fraus should still be ahead of the cops in 2070. Having to "be" a different person any given day with this character is an interesting challenge, deeply exploring the whole "I don't care WHO you think you are, that's not what the COMPUTER says" aspect of life in 2070 where regular people tend to "trust the Computer" more than their own senses.

[DireRadiant]

The fluff talks about identity and SIN checks ubiquity. It also talks about Matrix ubiquity. There are also lots of vehicles and guns. There are mechanics for all of those items too.

Use the mechanics as appropriate to reinforce your imagination and level of immersion.

If you want to make people roll SIN checks more often to reinforce the importance of computer identity and authentication, then do so. Adjust the odds or subsequent test to make it easier or harder to pass the verification. This is built into the game. It's the GM who sets thresholds and how often a test is needed. You can do this without breaking the RAW. Automated SIN check fails, then set a threshold 1 test for the PC to "fool" the system and move on.

The mechanics don't create atmosphere and mood, the GM and players do. In fact, the more often you roll dice, the less dramatic and immersive a game can be.

[crizh]

Oddly I don't seem to be able to find price and availability for SIN verification systems.

The point I might try to make if I could find such information is that checking a SIN is not free. The whole system most cost an enormous amount and presumably everyone involved tries to recoup this cost by charging for access to their databases. The higher the systems Rating the more databases it must access and the greater the operating costs.

One might easily rule that immediate purchases made with certified cred would rarely if ever involve a SIN check. The vendor will most certainly read your SIN and relevant licence's but they won't pay money for the opportunity to lose a sale.

Purchases that involve giving credit might be an entirely different story but verification systems might only be sufficient to cover the short period the institution holds the debt before bundling it up and selling it on to someone better able to absorb the risk.

I've been thinking about this a lot lately with regard Matrix security. It is relatively straight forward to build systems that are virtually impenetrable given sufficient resources. There is guidance with regard how to scale system security but it pretty much boils down to 'eye-ball it'.

I suppose I'm getting a bit nostalgic having just re-read some of my favourite 1st Ed Scenarios. The system maps in Queen Euphoria caused me to break out in a big toothy grin and all that Red-4, Orange-3 stuff gave me a warm gooey feeling inside.

I think what I would like to see in SR4 is a Nuyen value placed on different Professional Ratings to allow a GM to build security systems that accurately portray the level of opposition PC's ought to expect.

If you look at the Tir Ghost Lieutenant template you should be able to back-trace what sort of system would be a realistic challenge for Professional Rating 6. Cost that out and use it as a basis for assigning a Nuyen figure for such a security level.

[kzt]

That's when the follow up verification test comes in, whatever the test happens to be.

But if you want to make Fake SINS the players have paid a lot of nuyen for not work in your game, that's your game.

There is a reason why people pay smugglers a lot of money to avoid people who want to run a biometric ID on them at the ports of entry.

[crizh]

Ooo Biometric ID, I forgot about that.

If I understand correctly most of such Biometrics rely on data points, a fingerprint for example is mapped by a number of points that are unique to that particular print.

I'm wondering if it is possible to take multiple data-sets from the same print which are unique to that print but that don't overlap?

This would allow one to have multiple prints in different repositories without immediately setting off alarms.

[Kerenshara]

The mechanics don't create atmosphere and mood, the GM and players do. In fact, the more often you roll dice, the less dramatic and immersive a game can be.

An excellent point. But then there is the problem that it's a long stretch to role play something when you can't back it up. If I role play that I have experience with shooting sniper rifles, I had better have some skill on the paper, or there's no "order" to the chaos. Same with IDs. I think a lot of people have been trying to come up with a way to stick to the "ubiquitous" nature of checks without the ugly RAW getting in the way. All the alternative answers boil down to trying to make things consistent. Inconsistency is the bane of good immersion. "Why did the GM make me roll for my ID at the Stuffer Shack^TM this time, but not last time?!" That sort of thing. A constant "hand wave" from the GM "cheapens" the idea of false IDs. The RAW are gritty to the point of insanity. But knowing your GM will accept your Level 4 ID as good enough for everything up to and including a traffic stop (except for dramatic emphasis used in moderation) will also let you role play apropriately. If you KNEW your ID would pop invalid 50% of the time on a traffic stop, wouldn't that make your character sweat, further enhancing the officer's "probable cause"? That's what I have been trying to get at. Maybe I finally articulated it right this time.

[Kerenshara]

Ooo Biometric ID, I forgot about that.

If I understand correctly most of such Biometrics rely on data points, a fingerprint for example is mapped by a number of points that are unique to that particular print.

I'm wondering if it is possible to take multiple data-sets from the same print which are unique to that print but that don't overlap?

This would allow one to have multiple prints in different repositories without immediately setting off alarms.

In a word, no.
The systems are programmed to identify certain features. No matter whose scanner it is, it looks for the same markings because that is how it used to be done by hand before scanners and automated checks. If the points are different, it's not the same print. It basically boils down to "relative position of changes of direction of swirls and whirls to each other".

[DireRadiant]

An excellent point. But then there is the problem that it's a long stretch to role play something when you can't back it up. If I role play that I have experience with shooting sniper rifles, I had better have some skill on the paper, or there's no "order" to the chaos. Same with IDs. I think a lot of people have been trying to come up with a way to stick to the "ubiquitous" nature of checks without the ugly RAW getting in the way. All the alternative answers boil down to trying to make things consistent. Inconsistency is the bane of good immersion. "Why did the GM make me roll for my ID at the Stuffer Shack^TM this time, but not last time?!" That sort of thing. A constant "hand wave" from the GM "cheapens" the idea of false IDs. The RAW are gritty to the point of insanity. But knowing your GM will accept your Level 4 ID as good enough for everything up to and including a traffic stop (except for dramatic emphasis used in moderation) will also let you role play apropriately. If you KNEW your ID would pop invalid 50% of the time on a traffic stop, wouldn't that make your character sweat, further enhancing the officer's "probable cause"? That's what I have been trying to get at. Maybe I finally articulated it right this time.

When presented in this way I classify it more of a problem in how the SIN check event is presented during the course of the game rather then something inherent with the SIN check mechanic itself. When I ask my player to make a SIN check when ordering pizza, do they feel it's because I'm about to introduce a cool scene involving the runners being tracked down via their Soy Pizza account, or do they feel I'm randomly screwing them over? (My players know I never randomly screw them over, I do it according to my nefarious plans.) This is one type of event that is purely in the hands of the GM and players to sort out whether or not it works for them.

However, the point about when to expect that a Rating 4 SIN should work versus when a Rating 1 is fine is certainly a bit more cloudy and could probably do with some setting of expectations. For example, I'd tell players that a Rating 4 SIN works fine walking around in AAA security areas almost always, and has a better then 50% percent chance of working when crossing standard security borders. A Rating 1 is going to struggle in a AAA neighborhood if it gets tested, but if you travel through and don't bring attention to yourself it's good, because in AAA it's important that you actually have one. But all of this doesn't need more mechanics. I simply want to promote that having a Fake SIN of any rating is needed to travel everywhere. I want all players to think having that Rating 1 SIN is useful and worth the nuyen. Having the Rating 1 SIN simply fail every time you actually us it is just counter productive. So I don't make them do SIN checks while doing "normal" life. If they go into AAA with a R1 Fake SIN and draw attention to themselves they expect the fake SIN to be useless afterwards.

[Chrysalis]

Biometrics refers to methods for uniquely recognizing humans based upon one or more intrinsic physical or behavioral traits. ...Biometrics is used as a form of identity access management and access control. It is also used to identify individuals in groups that are under surveillance.

Biometric characteristics can be divided in two main classes:

• Physiological are related to the shape of the body. Examples include, but are not limited to fingerprint, face recognition, DNA, hand and palm geometry, iris recognition, which has largely replaced retina, and odor/scent.
• Behavioral are related to the behavior of a person. Examples include, but are not limited to typing rhythm, gait, and voice.

-Wikipedia for the quick reference.

About fingerprints. The basis of the traditional fingerprinting technique is simple. The skin on the palmar surface of the hands and feet forms ridges, so-called papillary ridges, in patterns that are unique to each individual and which do not change over time. Even identical twins (who share their DNA) do not have identical fingerprints.

The most popular ten-print classification systems include the Roscher system, the Vucetich system, and the Henry Classification System. Of these systems, the Roscher system was developed in Germany and implemented in both Germany and Japan, the Vucetich system was developed in Argentina and implemented throughout South America, and the Henry system was developed in India and implemented in most English-speaking countries.

The FBI manages a fingerprint identification system and database called IAFIS, which currently holds the fingerprints and criminal records of over fifty-one million criminal record subjects, and over 1.5 million civil (non-criminal) fingerprint records. U.S. Visit currently holds a repository of over 50 million persons, primarily in the form of two-finger records (by 2008, U.S. Visit is transforming to a system recording FBI-standard tenprint records).

Most American law enforcement agencies use Wavelet Scalar Quantization (WSQ), a wavelet-based system for efficient storage of compressed fingerprint images at 500 pixels per inch (ppi). WSQ was developed by the FBI, the Los Alamos National Lab, and the National Institute for Standards and Technology (NIST). For fingerprints recorded at 1000 ppi spatial resolution, law enforcement (including the FBI) uses JPEG 2000 instead of WSQ.


There are points Vucetih and the Henry Classification systems that do not overlap. However as the question is about a ten card it would also mean that you would also receive a lot of false positives from latent prints as your finger prints are missing key unique identifying points. Key unique identifying points are points which make you unique from your neighbour.

[Chrysalis]

I have to say biometrics was the new sexy word of 2001 post 9/11. At the moment it is disunited and not very useful, since facial recognition software is not as advanced as it could be. It really depends on how accurate biometrics are, which measurements they use and how pervasive they are in each location.


I am GMing in Washington D.C. of the sixth world, which is not only the political capitol of the world, but safe because of draconian security measures. They are using the same systems in hand-held form as UCAS Customs and Immigration are. Why? Because a car bomb going off in D.C would place the UCAS economy into free fall.

[Kerenshara]

However, the point about when to expect that a Rating 4 SIN should work versus when a Rating 1 is fine is certainly a bit more cloudy and could probably do with some setting of expectations.

Exactly. Expectations. You're being even more generous that I was prepared to see, but you're still honoring the idea. You give them an idea "Level 4 should be fine in AAA as long as you don't start shooting" is great, because it tells them where the lines more-or-less are. That's something you can reliably role play around. Doesn't NEED to be a big table (unless you really want it to be).

[Dreadlord]

I sometimes had the players roll SIN checks in the past for making purchases, but mostly the only time I have them roll them now is when they are interacting with government in some way: traffic stops (and they were REALLY sweating that one, because there was a dead body in the RV's fridge!), losing a street battle and being picked up by the cops, getting past border patrol, etc.

Since it is no fun to incarcerate PCs in the middle of a campaign, I have had some fun with getting them out of those situations. I am running in Atlanta, CAS, where the APD is extremely corrupt. The worse the crime they are charged with, the more (IMG:style_emoticons/default/nuyen.gif) (IMG:style_emoticons/default/nuyen.gif) (IMG:style_emoticons/default/nuyen.gif) it costs to get them out. My players, despite getting handsome paydays around 100k (IMG:style_emoticons/default/nuyen.gif) each, are constantly broke. They fear the police mostly due to their impact on the bottom line!

I have also considered a prison break type mission, where some members are incarcerated, and the others have to figure out how to break them out, if they get busted again. I don't know why my players are having so much trouble staying out of legal trouble, but it sure is fun for me!

[Muspellsheimr]

At Rating 6, with a 2 to 1 dice advantage your SIN will generally always defeat the "Standard" rating 3 Scanner... At Security Levels of Equipment (rating 4-5) the Fake SIN still has the advantage at Rating 6...

Bullshit. One out of 7 times, your Rating 6 SIN will fail against a Rating 3 verification system.

One out of 35 times, your Rating 6 SIN will fail against a Rating one verification system.

A Rating 6 Fake, which is 'as good as real', will be flagged as a fake & rendered useless in a month of every-day activities with RAW (according to the fluff, your ID is checked every time you purchase something, regardless of what or from where; Rating 1 verification systems are what are usually used to determine if you even have a SIN, such as at Stuffer Shack).

[Tymeaus Jalynsfe...]

Bullshit. One out of 7 times, your Rating 6 SIN will fail against a Rating 3 verification system.

One out of 35 times, your Rating 6 SIN will fail against a Rating one verification system.

A Rating 6 Fake, which is 'as good as real', will be flagged as a fake & rendered useless in a month of every-day activities with RAW (according to the fluff, your ID is checked every time you purchase something, regardless of what or from where; Rating 1 verification systems are what are usually used to determine if you even have a SIN, such as at Stuffer Shack).

If you are forcing your PC's to roll for EVERYTHING, then Sure... it will have issues... but the Maximum that a rating 3 verification system can generate is 3 hits (at most, though generally it will Average 1 Hit), With an average of 2 hits for the Rating 6 SIN... ON AVERAGE, your rating 6 SIN will WIN vs the Rating 3 Verification... Will it fail occassionally? Sure, but generally as a "Tie" rather than a Failure outright, which just means more intensive verification procedures will commence...

The question you should ask Muspellsheimr, is whether you can live with the averages, or do you want more intensive results... as a lot of people have indicated, they prefer that the higher rating SINS should have some reliability to them...

Not necessarily arguing here, but I too prefer some baselines of reliability, and some indication of when even Rating 1 SINs would generally succeed vs. Failing, as Dire Radiant and Kerenshara have indicated... If you are forced to validate EVERY time you do anything, then SINs become generally useless...

[Writer]

Tymeaus Jalynsfein & Muspellsheimr, I think there is a slight disconnect between what you two are saying.

Tymeaus Jalynsfein, as I understand it, you are pointing out that the dice would fail frequently if the dice rolls were made, but they shouldn't be made every day. In fact, if there is in game down time, NO dice will be rolled for any ID checks, because the players won't be involved with the down time. The game won't be played during the down time. So, even the best IDs will fail once in a while, but only during those potentially dramatic moments when the GM decides the ID check could potentially fail. Chances are, it won't fail, and if it does, it is that one fluke that causes some havoc in an otherwise smooth plan of operations, and in the shadows, how often does "smooth plan" actually pan out?

Muspellsheimr, I think I was seeing it from your point of view. If the top IDs have a 3% chance of failing the most basic check, how does it pass through daily usage. In light of what Tymeaus Jalynsfein is saying, we should not look at the single moments chance of failure as a regular occurance. The ID passes perfectly, until in metagame, the GM decides a chance of havoc might increase the fun or drama of the situation. The one instance of failure (if it happens) does not indicate a recurring trend, but rather a single instance decided by the GM for the sake of plot complications.

I prefer to keep the reliability of the ID consistent during active play and during imagined downtime. If my ID works well enough that I can skate by through the shopping mall during daily living, I also want to do the same while grabbing some burgers on the way to a stakeout. If the GM wants to complicate that, I don't want it to be because my solid ID is compromised by a low level scan. Given the Availability and the Cost of high level fake IDs, I expect more out of them, and I want the game rules to more consistent through out the in game experience, whether it is down time or active play.

[Muspellsheimr]

If you are forcing your PC's to roll for EVERYTHING, then Sure... it will have issues... but the Maximum that a rating 3 verification system can generate is 3 hits (at most, though generally it will Average 1 Hit), With an average of 2 hits for the Rating 6 SIN... ON AVERAGE, your rating 6 SIN will WIN vs the Rating 3 Verification... Will it fail occassionally? Sure, but generally as a "Tie" rather than a Failure outright, which just means more intensive verification procedures will commence...

The question you should ask Muspellsheimr, is whether you can live with the averages, or do you want more intensive results... as a lot of people have indicated, they prefer that the higher rating SINS should have some reliability to them...

Not necessarily arguing here, but I too prefer some baselines of reliability, and some indication of when even Rating 1 SINs would generally succeed vs. Failing, as Dire Radiant and Kerenshara have indicated... If you are forced to validate EVERY time you do anything, then SINs become generally useless...

By the Fluff of the game (& common sense, if you actually think about it)

To put a real-world example to the SIN verification systems, I know what an ID for my state looks like. If I check to see if someone has an ID, I am also automatically checking if it's fake - probably equivalent to a Rating 1 system (the minimum). If I had training & equipment designed for the task, it would probably be equivalent to a Rating 3 system.

Such a check is made every time anyone does so much as check if you have a SIN.


To only check 'when it matters' is bullshit - it always matters if your ID will hold up or break. If your ID will ever be checked at the Stuffer Shack, it should always be checked at the Stuffer Shack. And not to check it goes against the fluff in the book.

The mechanics for Fake SIN's are fucking retarded - they cannot function without house rules if used 'as intended', and if you do not use them as such, & only when 'it's important', it breaks consistency within the game.




To show exactly how shitty the RAW Fakes are, here are the probabilities of a Rating 6 failing (this does not include ties - only failures).

Verification Rating / Probability of Failure

1 / 02.93% (1 out of 35)
2 / 07.80% (1 out of 13)
3 / 14.22% (1 out of 7)
4 / 21.70% (1 out of 5)
5 / 29.76% (1 out of 4)
6 / 37.97% (1 out of 3)

[kzt]

Given the Availability and the Cost of high level fake IDs, I expect more out of them, and I want the game rules to more consistent through out the in game experience, whether it is down time or active play.

Fake IDs are really not expensive in SR4. They were a LOT more expensive in SR3, but they were still not hugely expensive. And much cheaper and easier to get than really good fake IDs in the real world. I have been told by someone what a actual "real" fake ID cost in the late 60s, early 70s. $25,000. This was a genuine government issued passport & drivers license backed by genuine records created by a genuine government officer whose job it was to create/rebuild identifications for people. $25,000 then is equal to about $125,000 now. It still wouldn't stand up to something like a top secret security clearance background investigation, but it was perfect to anything short of that kind of expensive and slow investigation. (Or a fingerprint ID if you happened to already be in the FBI database.)

[TeOdio]

By the Fluff of the game (& common sense, if you actually think about it)

To put a real-world example to the SIN verification systems, I know what an ID for my state looks like. If I check to see if someone has an ID, I am also automatically checking if it's fake - probably equivalent to a Rating 1 system (the minimum). If I had training & equipment designed for the task, it would probably be equivalent to a Rating 3 system.

Such a check is made every time anyone does so much as check if you have a SIN.


To only check 'when it matters' is bullshit - it always matters if your ID will hold up or break. If your ID will ever be checked at the Stuffer Shack, it should always be checked at the Stuffer Shack. And not to check it goes against the fluff in the book.

The mechanics for Fake SIN's are fucking retarded - they cannot function without house rules if used 'as intended', and if you do not use them as such, & only when 'it's important', it breaks consistency within the game.




To show exactly how shitty the RAW Fakes are, here are the probabilities of a Rating 6 failing (this does not include ties - only failures).

Verification Rating / Probability of Failure

1 / 02.93% (1 out of 35)
2 / 07.80% (1 out of 13)
3 / 14.22% (1 out of 7)
4 / 21.70% (1 out of 5)
5 / 29.76% (1 out of 4)
6 / 37.97% (1 out of 3)

Not to bag too much, but what world do you live in? (IMG:style_emoticons/default/nyahnyah.gif) People get away with using their Spouse's Credit and Check cards all of the time in retail establishments. Those cards should not be taken unless used by the actual card holder. Heck, technically speaking, using a credit card that is not yours is considered Identity Theft, yet people get away with it ALL THE TIME. Guess what, occasionally the clerk follows policy and refuses the sale. 99% of the time they ask for some other form of payment and forget about the incident. I ask again, what makes folks think that failure equals burned? And as far as fluff goes, the vast majority of SINless don't go much further than whatever hell hole they are scraping a living in. They can't even scrape enough nuyen together to get even a Rating 1 SIN. And those that do use it to get on the bus to go to some menial crap job for a company that probably looked the other way when their ID's failed the background check. And as far as probability goes, if I made each one of my players check their ID against rating 3 scanners 7 times a game session they might choke me. It's a mechanic for a game to add some suspense and tension where needed. It certainly is not a simulation on real life ID theft, nor should it be. It is an abstract way of showing that data trails exist, and you can't close every hole, and sometimes that six grand worth of BS comes up short. I still say that does not mean you toss a six grand ID when you get flagged on the Metro and they don't let you board.
(IMG:style_emoticons/default/nuyen.gif) (IMG:style_emoticons/default/nuyen.gif) (IMG:style_emoticons/default/nuyen.gif)

[DuctShuiTengu]

After having thought about this a bit more, I think I may have found the reason for IDs being set up with such disproportionately high chances of failure compared to what the fluff would indicate.

There's a tendency to assume that cases where we're required to roll for something in game are intended to be a representative sample of all cases in which that situation arises (That is: if the dice and probabilities say that my character has a 90% chance of succeeding at a given activity, they will continue to succeed at that activity 90% of the time even when the dice aren't being rolled; if my character will be failing a roll half the time, they'll be continuing to fail at that task half the time when rolls aren't required). Most of the time, the mechanics seem to be built around such assumptions as well.

But let's assume for the moment that security, licenses, and SINs aren't built around that assumption? After all, in general, if the roll isn't being made, it's because success is being taken as a given. So, if on the rolls against a Rating 1 security system, a Rating 6 SIN has a 2.93% chance of failure, but we're only making that roll for 1 check in 20, with a 0% chance of failure for the others, that leaves a 0.1465% chance of failure (Roughly 1 in 683); much closer to what the fluff seems to indicate. If that same SIN being checked by a rating 3 security system only gets rolled 1 time in 5, that brings the over-all odds down to just a 2.844% chance of it failing any given roll.

Now, I find it a bit odd to consider a system (or part of a system) having been set up that way, but... it does seem to bridge the gap between fluff and mechanics fairly well in this case.

[Writer]

... [what DuctShuiTengu said] ...

That's the point I was trying to make.
You put it much better.
Thank you.

This debate is definitely more about point of view than game mechanics.

[Kerenshara]

Fake IDs are really not expensive in SR4. They were a LOT more expensive in SR3, but they were still not hugely expensive. And much cheaper and easier to get than really good fake IDs in the real world. I have been told by someone what a actual "real" fake ID cost in the late 60s, early 70s. $25,000. This was a genuine government issued passport & drivers license backed by genuine records created by a genuine government officer whose job it was to create/rebuild identifications for people. $25,000 then is equal to about $125,000 now. It still wouldn't stand up to something like a top secret security clearance background investigation, but it was perfect to anything short of that kind of expensive and slow investigation. (Or a fingerprint ID if you happened to already be in the FBI database.)

OK, that's just it. That isn't technially a "fake" ID any more, regardless if the person is real or not. Issued for REAL by a LEGITIMATE agency through legitimate channels, there was mention someplace of a rating 7 or 8 ID possible only with direct governmental support. One might say a level 7 or 8 ID is actually legit. In the real world, there is so much drek in my data trail, when I have to answer certain questions about my past, about a third of the time I get it wrong. That's those "whoops!" moments where you have to explain to the person on the other end: "No, I'm really me. Just there was a point where I literally fell off the radar so hard even the Fed didn't really know where I was." Made for a fun time when I was up for a security clearance. And that was my REAL - issued at birth - ID. Now, if you were forging a fake, would you intentionally put that in? IfI wanted to, I could take the time to get it cleaned up, but for now it actually works in my favor
So in a way, I am arguing against myself here. But I guess I was making the case for a legitimate ID haiving a "rating". And that would be part of why the price is SO high. The other thing you could do, n order to split the issue down the middle, is increase the price of the IDs. We talk about them being hard to get because of the availability code, but the price really doesn't reflect the fluff OR the availability. So why not make it the rating squared times 1,000Â¥? That would keep the "bus pass" at 1,000Â¥, take the level 3 to 9,000Â¥, and put the level 6 at a very pricey 36,000Â¥. A "Legit" level 8 ID would be around 64,000Â¥, much closer to the "modern" figures given.
And lest we forget, there is one last thing to remember: physical ID is virtually unused. Post-Crash 2.0, nearly all ID checks are against elctronics, so having a legit "seal" physically pass inspection is nothing against being in the right data base.

[Kerenshara]

After having thought about this a bit more, I think I may have found the reason for IDs being set up with such disproportionately high chances of failure compared to what the fluff would indicate.

*snip*

So, if on the rolls against a Rating 1 security system, a Rating 6 SIN has a 2.93% chance of failure, but we're only making that roll for 1 check in 20, with a 0% chance of failure for the others, that leaves a 0.1465% chance of failure (Roughly 1 in 683); much closer to what the fluff seems to indicate. If that same SIN being checked by a rating 3 security system only gets rolled 1 time in 5, that brings the over-all odds down to just a 2.844% chance of it failing any given roll.

Now, I find it a bit odd to consider a system (or part of a system) having been set up that way, but... it does seem to bridge the gap between fluff and mechanics fairly well in this case.

Ok, but there is one last bit in the fluff that's important to take in to account: the rating of the scanner represents not so much a "physical" quality, but the number of factors taken into account. A rating 1 scaner is going to check hit a public database relevant to the transaction at hand. A rating 2 scanner is going to hit the "Big 3" credit agencies and look for a fraud warning and reprise above. Rating 3 - the one on the cop's belt, will also check the fingerprint of the indivitual against the data stored with the ID and cross-check with a secure data base, plus do a quick scan against a "wanted" data base or something similar - and remember the basic Comlink from the BBB states it includes a fingerprint scanner. Rating 4, the one I postulated in the squad car, also can access corporate databases over a more secure connection, and it pulls up things like a criminal record and other data useful in "following up". A rating 5 system would probably have a retinal scanner and will run very thorough checks through all public records via some sort of agent program(s) and hit every co-operating secure or private database to build a full picture. The rating 6 would include DNA samples and probably check questions as a matter of course.
That is the reason I shake my head at there being ANY meaningful chance of a rating 6 ID crapping out against a level 1 scan. Those were the first details ANY forger would have taken care of.

[kzt]

And lest we forget, there is one last thing to remember: physical ID is virtually unused. Post-Crash 2.0, nearly all ID checks are against elctronics, so having a legit "seal" physically pass inspection is nothing against being in the right data base.

Thanks for dropping the color.

That is true. The data base is very important, but having someone physically show up and ask questions is still really difficult to counter. When your 'boss' doesn't recognize your name and can't pick out your picture it doesn't really matter how convincing your data base edits are. Luckily StufferShack doesn't usually do this. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

[Kerenshara]

Thanks for dropping the color.

That is true. The data base is very important, but having someone physically show up and ask questions is still really difficult to counter. When your 'boss' doesn't recognize your name and can't pick out your picture it doesn't really matter how convincing your data base edits are. Luckily StufferShack doesn't usually do this. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

OK, there's the perfect example of where your GM tossed you a curve, because then no amount of ID works. That's why your HACKER gets in and sends him a memo saying to expect somebody new transfering in from some ungodly place. And hope he's not from there too.

[Writer]

So you used to work at a warehouse in which the immediate supervisor has "moved on" to other career opportunities and her manager has 200 people under him. He wouldn't be able to pick you out of a crowd, and some of the old timers on the floor don't care. Just to mess with "The Man", they may say, "yeah, I think I saw that guy working here, but maybe it was a different shift."

One of the problems with my real life resume is that two of my previous positions are gone. In fact, the whole department for each job is gone, and all my co-workers are dispersed. While this would help if I wasn't actually at those positions and needed filler background, it doesn't help in the fact that I really was there, but no one is around will vouch for me.

By the way, Kerenshara, I had the same thoughts on pricing, in addiction to the idea that the rating is a threshold. Rating 6 would be MUCH tougher to burn, but it would also be much more expensive and harder to get.

[kzt]

So you used to work at a warehouse in which the immediate supervisor has "moved on" to other career opportunities and her manager has 200 people under him. He wouldn't be able to pick you out of a crowd, and some of the old timers on the floor don't care. Just to mess with "The Man", they may say, "yeah, I think I saw that guy working here, but maybe it was a different shift."

One of the problems with my real life resume is that two of my previous positions are gone. In fact, the whole department for each job is gone, and all my co-workers are dispersed. While this would help if I wasn't actually at those positions and needed filler background, it doesn't help in the fact that I really was there, but no one is around will vouch for me.

The payroll records are there. And if you can get your character to get paid for a job he's never shown up for why are you running the shadows? Just buy a stack of fake IDs and collect the money deposited to your accounts every other Friday.

[Kerenshara]

The payroll records are there. And if you can get your character to get paid for a job he's never shown up for why are you running the shadows? Just buy a stack of fake IDs and collect the money deposited to your accounts every other Friday.

Because running pays a heck of a lot better than being a wage slave. More importantly, you're living a lie that eventually will come unravelled. I was making reference to (as I believe was Writer) the idea of a means to gain entry for a short time in order to successfully accomplish a goal. Hackers can work wonders on individual targets regarding badge access and so forth, but those really aren't SiN checks at all.
A SiN really represents a broad profile of your "life", everything from birth records, employment history (including corroborating details in the apropriate corp data havens), shopping and eating patterns, where you have supposedly lived, even to the Trid you like watching. It is to this basic framework that licenses, permits, bank accounts and comcodes are attached. The value of the SiN itself is that when processing the Driver's Permit, a simple cross check gives a valid response, assuming the license is any good, and since those have to only be in one or two databases, they are MUCH easier to make solid.
*scratches head*
You know, maybe we've been coming at this wrong all along? Maybe we should be focusing on the "permits" and the attachments more than the core IDs? (And they really should be included in those "total cost" calculations a few posts back.) It's the BANK ACCOUNT that matters, and so long as that's legit... and for a simple "cash" bank account how hard will a bank really check the provided ID? They get your money, right? Driver's Permit or a Carry Concealed would be about the same then. I need to go think about that some more.

[Writer]

Kerenshara, I was thinking more about this, also. Actual ID checks occur in areas where the authorities are concerned about who is in the area and are they supposed to be there. This could be an AAA neighborhood, where local citizens want to know that only the "correct" type of people are wandering the streets. It could also be at a night club, where the owners want to make sure people of a certain age are present. And, of course, there is the high security areas.

I also believe there are two very distinct ID checks that are completely opposite from each other. There is the basic, "Are you who you say you are?" check, where the authorities have your ID and you, and they are verifying whether you are in the database. You could have the same fingerprints for five different fake IDs, but they are only looking at one. On the other hand, the other type of ID check is more of a forensics check. They have bits and pieces of your ID, such as hair color, height, metatype, but they don't know who it belongs to. So they run the information through a scanner. Unless they have some very unique information, like fingerprints, DNA, Face Recognition, or Retinal Pattern, they will get a number of responses, and all five of your IDs could show up. This is the real concern with multiple IDs.

As for day to day living, I believe we all agree that during shopping adventures, most commercial venues really don't care what your ID says, as long as the ID has a money account attached. The Stuffer Shack isn't going to check fingerprints against a database, they are just going to see if your basics show up in any database with an account attached. Shops probably won't go too indepth with verifying user and ID matches, unless there is a lot of nuyen on the table. Identity Theft Insurance will cover a few burritos, but if someone uses your ID to buy an SUV, the insurance company will give more responsibility to the auto dealer to verify the correct person used the money account. Of course, if the account is a blind number account, no one will care.

Then we get into licensing. To get around the numbered account's blindness, and the fact that many street jurisdictions probably require active AR vehicle IDs, in place of physical license plates, the auto dealers may be required to authorize driver's licenses, before they can release a vehicle onto the streets. This would be relatively simple for more legal purchases, even for expensive items, and the scanning gear might even be subsidized by the government. More sophisticated scanning technology would be in place for dealers of restricted items, but they would be checking licenses, which are tied to IDs. A low rated license on a high rated ID is like a back door to badness. If one is burned, so is the other. Legitimate IDs can also get fake licenses, but this just leads to fines and maybe community service, depending on the jurisdiction and the item licensed. A teenager getting a fake license of some kind to show he is old enough to get into a night club would get a slap on the wrist and sent home to daddy. He would be interrogated, first, however, on where he got the fake license, of course. The teen, however, would not need to pay 1,000 nuyen to fake his age by a few years, just to get into a bar. A 100 nuyen professional license for driving, locksmithing, or any other profession that uses restricted or registered tools would do just fine. (Most vehicles are restricted, but they are usually registered.)

[Muspellsheimr]

As for day to day living, I believe we all agree that during shopping adventures, most commercial venues really don't care what your ID says, as long as the ID has a money account attached.

Not as written.

Most importantly, a SIN is now required for any form of
legal travel - including just buying a bus ticket.

Whenever a character uses her fake identity to pass an ID
check (whether for buying a dress or crossing a border), she
must make an Opposed Test pitting her fake ID's rating against
the rating of the verification system.

[Kerenshara]

Not as written.

I was looking at your quoted passages, and thinking about it. In a real-world perspecive, I am suspicious that what would actually occur is the minimum "compliance" level check against the ID in question, probably not more than a level 1 equivalent for most purchases and escalating from there. Which still unfortunately brings us back to the math as discussed in the thread above at length, ad nauseum, so forth and so on.
WAIT!!!
Where was the old table that indicated what level of biometrics was needed to pass for a given level of certified credstick?! (I am away from my old books at the moment) THAT might be our answer, since those levels roughly correspond to the ratings of SiNs... (OK I know we're back off RAW at the moment, but NOBODY has actually said that's how they run them at home, so I don't feel but SO bad.)

IIRC it went like this:
Basic (R1 equivalent) Password
Silver (R3 equivalent) Password + Fingerprint
Gold (R4 equivalent) Password + Fingerprint + Verbal Authorization
Platinum (R5 equivalent) Password + Retina Print + Verbal Authorization
Ebony (R6 equivalent) password + DNA + Retina Print + Verbal Authorization

Figure DNA is a little OVERparanoid and takes too much time when cycling a LOT of people through an airport, so they would have R4 or R5 at best... Normal daily check R3 or lower, down to R1 for buying disposable clothes from a vending machine. And if you put in thresholds for the IDs combined with the scaled costs I tossed out earlier, now you have a system that is A) repeatable/consistent B) still allows for failures at key moments C) keeps IDs a central and important theme without getting gritty OR careless with them.

Say if your ID is of the equivalent level as the test, it's Scanner Rating + Scanner Rating(ID Rating)? If it's lower, there's not much issue. The real sticking point is that DNA sample at the very high end, but there we're getting into ultra-secure, low-throughput corporate and government compounds. Even a prison is wasting time on the DNA scanner when you get right down to if, except at initial processing. And if it's a minor offense, why bother? Remember, the cops are a corporation, too - the bottom line is everything, chummer. So then your Rating 6 is near bulletproof except against a rating 6 scanner, then you need a blood sample from somewhere. The GM is free to modify the point for requesting a check if you've been careless with the ID or somebody has a good reason to suspect and goes for a harder check. And a deeper check would be more RAW, with follow up you MIGHT be able to talk around.

"No, seriously, there was a glitch we've never been able to get fixed for some reason. My prints, voice and eyes always match, it's just so frustrating!"

Course then you could always pay for Masque^TM and prompt it to automatically ask for all the other tests, but force a skip on the DNA side... Just thinking out loud here.

[Writer]

As for day to day living, I believe we all agree that during shopping adventures, most commercial venues really don't care what your ID says, as long as the ID has a money account attached.

Not as written.

In reference to the commercial venues caring, I was refering to the details of the ID, not the verification. In fact, if your ID is false, then it cannot verify there is a valid money account attached, so it will be rejected. My point was more that if they can't verify you have money to spend, they are going to turn you away. They probably won't call the police and have you arrested, though. The fuss just isn't worth the Public Relations effort.

(As written, a Rating 1 fake ID is TOTALLY useless, as it will fail even the most basic test against an R1 scanner 22% of the time. Getting a bus to the grocery store, then a bus trip back home would incur at least three checks. For 1,000 nuyen, I have a 53% chance of having my ID fail on a simple trip to get bread. Yeah, I know I am beating a dead horse at this point.)

[Zurai]

In fact, if your ID is false, then it cannot verify there is a valid money account attached, so it will be rejected.

Not true, actually. You can have fake IDs tied to real bank accounts. Heck, real banks even, as opposed to shadow accounts.

[Writer]

Right on Zurai, but if the ID proves to be false, then the legitimate company might have some trouble come tax time when they show they received money from a false legal entity. The account might be real, as well as the nuyen, but if the ID is fake, it is probably against the law to complete such a transaction. I bet accounting in the 2070s is very complex and strict, since there is an expectation that you can instantly provide records of all transactions for the past year(s).

[kzt]

Right on Zurai, but if the ID proves to be false, then the legitimate company might have some trouble come tax time when they show they received money from a false legal entity. The account might be real, as well as the nuyen, but if the ID is fake, it is probably against the law to complete such a transaction. I bet accounting in the 2070s is very complex and strict, since there is an expectation that you can instantly provide records of all transactions for the past year(s).

It's worse than that. Banks are corporations. If you can connect any random ID to a bank account without a clear transaction trail you have the potential for fradulent transactions. As the bank would have processed this that would be due to the bank, which means the bank would be expected to make the defrauded entity whole. This impacts the bottom line. And could result in bad publicity. Anything that increases the risk to banks of fraud isn't going to be supported by the law or by the operational practices of the bank.

[Heath Robinson]

Unless they have some very unique information, like fingerprints, DNA, Face Recognition, or Retinal Pattern, they will get a number of responses, and all five of your IDs could show up. This is the real concern with multiple IDs.

In a world where you've had a pair of ID destroying international network failures (and probably forensic computing efforts to retrieve that data) as well as SIN amnesties, corporate SIN issuers, and extractions of high profile targets (and their families) from one corporation to another I have a hard time believing that anyone is going to make a big deal out of someone who has multiple SINs attached to their biometrics.

People make mistakes - a SIN that was meant to be invalidated or revoked ended up not. Blaming the SINner in this case is going to generate a Human Relations disaster, so even Cops are just going to let a suspect choose the SIN they're currently using and get the validity of the SINs checked if the arrest leads to a court case.

[Writer]

Good point, Heath Robinson, I hadn't thought of that. The problem is, if one SIN shows you graduated from college in 2063 and the other shows you have no college education, there may be a problem. One SIN should stop the same time another starts. Otherwise, you would be operating under two SINs at once and that is a big no-no in most places. A SIN is supposed to be a unique system marker.

[Heath Robinson]

SIN amnesties mean that you could have completed your college education, had your SIN vanish and then applied during a SIN amnesty and not have it added to your new SIN if your college hasn't gotten back to them yet - meanwhile the original SIN database was partially restored with your old SIN intact. As a nice handwave for an RPG, I'm going to say that colleges are untowardly worried about people getting academic qualifications they shouldn't, meaning that they are very slowly working their way through requests to validate the owners of new SINs that have passed through their halls and, therefore, there are still large piles of requests still in the air and nobody bats an eyelid at it.

Like I said - people make mistakes and a SIN might not be marked invalid or revoked when it ought to. You should also be able to have multiple SINs active at once if both your issuers allow it (like having dual citizenship today). Corps will totally let their employees keep their old SINs if it gets them more important hires, and I suspect that the dual citizenship permitted to US citizens would be inherited by UCAS and modified into dual SINnership.

[Kerenshara]

Right on Zurai, but if the ID proves to be false, then the legitimate company might have some trouble come tax time when they show they received money from a false legal entity. The account might be real, as well as the nuyen, but if the ID is fake, it is probably against the law to complete such a transaction. I bet accounting in the 2070s is very complex and strict, since there is an expectation that you can instantly provide records of all transactions for the past year(s).

*blinks*
Tax time?! You're kidding, right?
As KZT said "Banks are corporations", and since the big banks are direct subsidiaries of the AAA's, they have Extrateritoriality. That means NO taxes; In fact, it means no oversight by anybody but themselves and MAYBE the Corporate Court. But the individual MEGAS may have very strict INTERNAL regulations about that sort of thing.

[Kerenshara]

Good point, Heath Robinson, I hadn't thought of that. The problem is, if one SIN shows you graduated from college in 2063 and the other shows you have no college education, there may be a problem. One SIN should stop the same time another starts. Otherwise, you would be operating under two SINs at once and that is a big no-no in most places. A SIN is supposed to be a unique system marker.

Why? Same eaxct problem applies for the education mismatch: the records linking the one SiN to a college record got damaged or corrupted. Obvious answer is to query the school directly.

As to the "uniqueness" of SiNs to an individual... that's a little stickier, buy I recall when the Comonwealth of Virginia made the transition from Social Security Numbers for Driver's License number to a unique number sequence. I wound up taking advantage of that fact and for a time was running TWO separate credit files. Eventually they figured it out and consolidated, but if I could do it as a legitimate citizen taking advantage of a simple oversight, what could a criminal syndicate do with malice aforethought?

[Kerenshara]

Like I said - people make mistakes and a SIN might not be marked invalid or revoked when it ought to. You should also be able to have multiple SINs active at once if both your issuers allow it (like having dual citizenship today). Corps will totally let their employees keep their old SINs if it gets them more important hires, and I suspect that the dual citizenship permitted to US citizens would be inherited by UCAS and modified into dual SINnership.

I hadn't considered the dual-citizenship idea either. Nationality if born outside a Corp, the Corp once you're in. Great point.