Rules Hacking the Hacking Rules, House Rule Options

[Epicedion]

I'm one of those people that is probably never going to be satisfied by certain parts of the rules, and for whatever reason is compelled to sit down for hours at a time and hack out new variations to try.

There was a thread a few weeks ago that made me think about the Matrix/Hacking rules. There were some optional suggestions (Logic + Skill, use Program rating to cap hits, et cetera) and I came up with one of my own (Logic + Skill, use Program rating like Reach is used in Melee). After a few sessions, I've decided I don't like that, and so I've come up with a new house rule that I'm going to give a go.

TL;DR: What follows isn't all that complicated, but it is rather long. You were warned.

Rule as Written: Contests are performed using the Program Rating + appropriate Skill, et cetera and so forth.

Previous House Rule: Contests are performed using Logic + appropriate Skill, with the Program Rating applying a modifier based on its comparison to the target’s program/firewall rating. This has brought up some complications. First, it lets the hacker know what the skill/firewall rating of the target is. Second, some tests don’t really have a comparative program (Data Search tests, some Electronic Warfare tests, etc). Third, it’s a little bit of hassle to compare program ratings.

Problems: Under Rules as Written (RAW), Logic is a dump stat for Hackers, which doesn’t make any sense. Being a successful hacker only involves having an expensive commlink and wiz programs.
Challenges: There are three things that should merge to create your dice pool: Attribute (Logic), Skill (Computer, Hacking, Data Search, Electronic Warfare), and Program Rating. Adding all three of these equally to create the dice pool will immediately skyrocket you into absurd dice pool ranges, and will also break a lot of the in-place systems. Adding only two leaves an odd man out, which is what RAW does by leaving the Attribute out of the equation, which doesn’t seem fair to hackers that take the time to be very smart. Leaving Skill out of the equation wouldn’t help, as that would make Skill worthless, and then anyone with decent Logic and some spare cash could be a good hacker. Leaving Program Rating out would make Program Ratings worthless, which would eliminate one of the primary barriers for hackers -- the need to have state-of-the-art software to be competitive. So, again, the challenge is a way to incorporate Attribute, Skill, and Program Rating in such a way as to make each worthwhile, yet not in such a way as to break all of the associated systems in such a way that they cannot be assessed intuitively from knowledge of RAW in the event of a rules question or a failure of the house rule to address an unanticipated event.

--------

House Rule: Contests are performed using Logic + appropriate Skill. Wherever below you see something like (+1/2 <program rating>), that means add 1/2 of the program rating (rounded up) to the number of hits on the dice roll to get your total hits.

Extended and Opposed Tests: Add half the appropriate Program Rating (round up) to the number of hits for each test. In the event of a tie, victory goes to the persona/agent with the higher Program Rating. On extended tests against flat thresholds (ie, where the threshold is not built from ratings but rather is simply a number like “10” as with some Track, Search, etc rolls), adjust those thresholds upward by +6.

Standard Tests: The vast majority of Hacking/Computer tests are either Extended or Opposed, but there are a few that don’t fit that mold (Edit, possibly others). For these tests, make them as described above in Extended and Opposed Tests, but the basic threshold for success is the Firewall rating of the device if applicable, otherwise against the listed threshold +2. Additional modifiers may be applied to the threshold corresponding to the degree of difficulty of the action, as usual.

Cybercombat: Attacking is done by performing a Logic + Cybercombat versus Response + Firewall (+Hacking or +Pilot while on Full Defense for persona or agents, respectively) opposed test. The attack program rating (Attack, Black Hammer, etc) serves only to provide the base Damage of the attack. Damage is equal to the rating of the attack program + net hits on the opposed test. Damage is resisted with a System + Armor test, with each hit reducing the damage of the attack by 1. Blackout and Black Hammer attack programs are instead resisted by Willpower + Biofeedback Filter, with each hit reducing the damage of the attack by 1. Additionally, Black attack programs make it difficult to jack out. That system remains unchanged (opposed Willpower + Biofeedback Filter vs Black attack rating + Response test). Note: There is one place where the Attack program is used outside of Cybercombat -- that is the Crash Program/OS action. Add ½ Attack rating to the Logic + Hacking extended test, as you would with any other extended test.

Agents and Nodes: Tests made by and Agent (IC, Sprite, etc) are performed using its Pilot Rating + the System or Firewall Rating of its originating node, depending on the action.

Breaking In: When Hacking on the Fly or Probing the Target (p221 SR4), the system usually gets a chance to detect you. For Hacking on the Fly, that test is usually an Analyze + Firewall (Stealth) extended test for every test made to hack in. For Probing the Target, that test is usually a single Analyze + Firewall (Stealth) test made at the point of actual intrusion. Modifications to the two cases below:
>Hacking on the Fly: Before you make the first attempt to hack a system, make a single Logic + Hacking test, adding your full Stealth program rating. This becomes the threshold for the target’s System + Firewall extended test, to which it receives a bonus of ½ its Analyze program rating.
>Probing the Target: When you perform the actual intrusion, make an opposed test of Logic + Hacking (+ full Stealth rating) vs the target’s System + Firewall (+ ½ Analyze).
>These are the exceptions to using ½ your program rating as bonus hits. In the event of a glitch, you receive only ½ your Stealth rating as a bonus, which is an exception to the glitch rule below.

Programs Running on Automatic: Some programs (Analyze, Browse, etc) can be set to run automatically while you’re doing other things. In such a case, it rolls its full Rating, which is then added back to ½ its rating. For example, if you hack a node and want to set your Analyze 5 program as a watchdog for other intruders while you look for some paydata, your Analyze program will roll 5 dice (+3) vs the intruder’s Logic + Hacking (+ ½ Stealth). (The system in the book is that the program just rolls its own rating vs the target’s Hacking + Stealth, or worse yet somehow co-opts your skill). If you set your Browse program to search the Matrix for a piece of information while you go have lunch, it will faithfully run a Browse (+ ½ Browse) extended test every minute until it completes the task or crashes.

Terminate Connection: This is supposedly a rare intrusion response method. Change this test to an opposed Firewall + System vs Logic + Hacking test. Rather than splitting hairs about what system program would correspond to this action, no programs apply to this test.

Glitches: While rolling 0 hits still provides you with a base result of ½ your program rating (on most tests), in the event of a glitch, you do not retain that bonus, netting only the hits you receive from dice unless otherwise indicated. In the event of a critical glitch, you net 0 hits (0 dice hits + 0 program rating bonus) and potentially have more severe consequences. A program that glitches while running on automatic will crash and lose any stored results. A program that critically glitches while running on automatic may instead return erroneous data.

-------------

Immediate Concerns:

I know that adding a set bonus equal to 1/2 Program Rating makes Program Rating worth somewhat more than an equivalent amount of Attribute or Skill (3 Rating is worth about 1 hit if it were just bonus dice, but gets you two automatic bonus hits). This makes Program Rating worth a lot, but it's usually only counting for 1-3 bonus hits, which turns out to be easy to work with. In Opposed Tests this more or less balances right out, providing perhaps a 1 hit advantage to the higher rating, and otherwise counting as a tiebreaker. In Extended Tests, this has the effect of quickly reducing the overall time it takes to complete an extended test. I'm cool with that. I think most Extended Tests in hacking take way too long, anyway.

The threshold modifiers (+2, or +6 for extended tests) are there to maintain expectations for an "average" program rating (3-4, or +2 automatic hits). On the extended test, that means an "average" program mitigates the threshold increase after 3 rolls. A higher rated (5-6) program does it after 2 rolls, and bleeding edge (7-8+) get there sooner. Since it's a simple threshold modifier, it has the added effect of causing weak programs (1-2) to be at a relative disadvantage to RAW, and good programs (5-6) to be at a relative advantage. The advantage is fairly slight. This difficulty could easily be adjusted upward to +3 / +9 if it turns out to be too weak. This could probably be combined easily with an optional rule that limits the number of rolls you can make on a single extended test, if you think it makes extended tests far too likely to succeed.

Cybercombat is actually largely unaffected by this. Programs like Attack, Armor, and Biofeedback Filter, etc all have intrinsic value for damage and damage resistance. Same goes for programs like ECCM out of combat.