mfb's SOTA:65 stuf Options

[mfb]

new rigger stuff, including stuff that allows for combining rigging and decking more easily, including decking through a drone network and controlling drones across the Matrix.

a new Matrix technique that makes validating a false account no longer an i-win button.

new operations and utilities that give deckers more realistic abilities when it comes to controlling hosts.

persona program subprocessors, which basically give your deck new abilities when you go into one of the various modes.

[Sphynx]

I think any +8 is too much. However, I think these tests should be resisted. Not a static TN, but one based on the appropriate attribute with modifiers based on softwares on both sides. After all, the Decker expects someone to trace them, that's why they don't deck from their house.....

[mfb]

well, keep all the negative modifiers in mind as well. if the decker validated an administrator account, that's a -8 TN. trace IC and Track programs can provide up to -12 TN. previous logs can provide another -8 TN.

i could halve all the modifiers. i'd like to keep this fairly high-stakes, though.

[Sir_Psycho]

Personally I like the extreme TN's, but that's just me, I guess.

[Sphynx]

Why make it too difficult though? +8 is suppose to mean 'nearly impossible'. However, a base TN of 4 with a +8 is rougly the same as a base attribute of 6 with a rating 6 software, however at least that way you're not seeing +16 or +24 TNs. And how does a Tracer IC work into this? Wouldn't it be simpler to just access the Tracer IC log and see where it was? I'm not top-of-my-game when it comes to 3rd edition Decking though, maybe that question sounds like non-sense....

[mfb]

Trace IC and Tracker programs tell you the decker's jackpoint. they don't tell you anything else, like what the decker did.

basically, if the decker does his job right, i think it should be nearly impossible to get much info. though i'm starting to think it might be too hard. base TN equal to DF could work, divide most of the penalties i've listed by 4?

that's a dramatic reduction, but the TNs are still going to be 6+ in most cases, and to get the really juicy info, you need a lot of successes.

[Sphynx]

I agree. I'm just concerned that if you create it too difficult nobody will use it and it'll be reminescent of the Cyberware Surgery rules..... I think +2 and +1 should be the only things we see.

[Sphynx]

Double Post.

[mfb]

[Sphynx]

But why make rules for things that are nearly impossible? I need to review and test this a bit more obviously, but the chance has to actually be there, 5 successes TN 9 isn't just nearly impossible, it's impossible. Threshold of 3 should be a cap I think....

[mfb]

they're only nearly impossible in cases where a good decker has taken extra time to cover his tracks. and even then, if the decker had some bad luck (ran up a high security tally, got into a lot of cybercombat), the TN can plunge dramatically. there is actually quite a bit more in the way of negative TN modifiers than positive modifiers.

as far as thresholds, i'm going by the pattern set by perception/assensing/etcetera.

re: general level of difficulty, this is not something that should be easy. if it were easy, then decking would be impossible to do without getting caught. it has to be harder, on average, than most other tasks because to do otherwise would make no sense within the context of the game world.

[Sphynx]

Ah, I think I'm starting to understand our mis-communications. This is to get exacting data on the actual decker mostly, right? I thought we were talking about just to trace back what exactly they'd done back to the point they jacked in. I agree that investigators should be able to see what files were touched, what commands were circumvented, what nodes were travelled through, and where he logged in at. Not sure about more exacting detail though. Investigators finding this out only see what 'Neo' has done, and no idea that "Thomas A. Anderson" is "Neo".... But you're saying that with these TN's they can know who Neo is? (Trying to understand how these tracing investigations make it difficult for the decker...)

[mfb]

hm. i don't think this technique would allow an investigator to connect a street name to a real name. i'd intended for it to allow an investigator to identify a decker as being one he's investigated before, though. how about this: at three successes, the investigator will find recognizable fingerprints in the decker's work. if he's ever seen those fingerprints before, he will recognize the decker ("hey, this is the same guy that stole those blueprints from Renraku last week!"). at four successes, the investigator can figure out what the invading decker's icon looked like. at five successes, the investigator can actually find out one of the decker's street names (GM determines which one, if the decker uses several). each success on the log tracing test grants a complimentary die to attempts to determine the decker's identity.

[Sphynx]

Curiosity though.... what does it hurt to see that Icon/Avatar of the decker, or recognize the decker from a past experience? I'd even think most Deckers would leave some sort of calling card just to make sure they were identified correctly.....

[mfb]

well, it's not all that hard to track a street name back to a meat body via street rumor. as for leaving calling cards, that's a stunt that only the really bad or really good deckers pull. and the bad ones don't pull it for very often.

it's fine and good to talk about how there's no profit in hunting down the runners who hit your company, but when they go to the trouble of actually mocking you with a calling card, there are a lot of people who will use that calling card to track you down and crap in your cheerios.

[Sphynx]

I would think it'd be harder to track a street name back to a meat body than to find the street name. However, moot point. Lemme know when you're finished adjust the rules so I can take a looksee at them?