 Hacking Tutorial, Running a Hacker for the first time |
  |
  Oct 18 2005, 02:14 PM
Post
#1
|
|
|
Moving Target  Group: Members Posts: 617 Joined: 28-May 03 From: Orlando Member No.: 4,644  |
Hi all,
I am running a hacker for our local gaming group out here in Orlando Fl. It does seem pretty easy and streamlined at first go and as we are taking it easy and exploring the new rules system. But I many questions on what my player can do. I have an upgraded Comlink/Firewall Sys/firewall Response/Signal all 5's. How many programs can I have running at one time without slowing down my response time? Can I switch out/upload new programs on the fly? Would it be possible for the dumpshock Matrix experts to run through a HackerMatrix tutorial such as Synner had for SR3 on the board? Thanks |
 |
 
|
|
Oct 18 2005, 02:30 PM
Post
#2
|
|||||||||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 715 Joined: 4-September 05 From: Metaplane GEPLK136 (The one with the lizards. You remember the lizards, don't you?) Member No.: 7,684 |
According to page 225, up to System programs can be run without issue. After that, you subtract 1 for each System number of programs running. Thus, for you, 1-5 is no reduction, 6-9 is -1, and 10-14 is -2, and so on. This seems odd to me, really, that 5 is included in the first penalty group, but 10 is not included in the second. However, this is how the rule is written, and it is even an example.
Yes. Shutting down a running program is a simple action. Running a new program is a complex action, according to the actions table on 219. (This also applies to starting / stoping agents)
Many people have expressed interest in this, I too would like to see it.
I lived there a while myself. Hopefully I'll move back to that general area again soon, my SR group is there still :) Don't miss the weather though... |
||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||
|
Oct 18 2005, 02:32 PM
Post
#3
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 112 Joined: 26-February 02 Member No.: 1,896 |
There was talk about a hacker tutorial like that in another thread, but I don't know what came of it...
|
|
|
|
|
Oct 18 2005, 02:40 PM
Post
#4
|
|
|
Decker on the Threshold Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 2,922 Joined: 14-March 04 Member No.: 6,156 |
Here's a question: System is (sorta) capped by Response, and all other programs are capped by System. So, if you have a System of 6 and a Response of 5 (basically the best you can get at chargen), how many programs can you run before your Response drops to 4?
So far by reading the rules, I can see arguments for 5, 6, 11, and 12. Which is it? Oh, and what would be a "standard hacker loadout" for the following? The question is suddenly more relevant, as it's no longer just a matter of having lots of (fairly) cheap Active Memory. -hacking a secured node (plenty of time to Probe the target) -hacking a secured node (building burning down around you) -stealing someone's car -Rigging -at a meet with a Johnson -doing a research project; legwork -doing a disinformation project; anti-legwork? :) |
|
|
|
|
Oct 18 2005, 08:33 PM
Post
#5
|
|||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 715 Joined: 4-September 05 From: Metaplane GEPLK136 (The one with the lizards. You remember the lizards, don't you?) Member No.: 7,684 |
System is capped by response, the only "sorta" is if you upgrade response, your system can function at it's full value. So, for all practical purposes, your System rating in your example is 5. With System of 5 (or System capped to an effective 5 by a response of 5), as I said, you can run the following number of programs with the following penalties: 1-4 programs: No Penalty, response 5. 5-9 programs: -1 penalty, response 4. 10-14 programs: -2 penalty, response 3. 15-19 programs: -3 penalty, response 2. 20-22 programs (there are only 22 programs): -4 penalty, response 1. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Oct 18 2005, 08:57 PM
Post
#6
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 617 Joined: 28-May 03 From: Orlando Member No.: 4,644 |
so you can have 4 programs/agents running at one time with no response loss and lets say 10 more in memory. Swapping out at need as a simple action?
|
|
|
|
|
Oct 18 2005, 09:12 PM
Post
#7
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 112 Joined: 26-February 02 Member No.: 1,896 |
Making a program not active is a Simple Action and activating a new one is a Complex Action. So it would take both a Simple Action and a Complex Action to swap two programs.
|
|
|
|
|
Oct 19 2005, 02:32 AM
Post
#8
|
|||
|
Decker on the Threshold Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 2,922 Joined: 14-March 04 Member No.: 6,156 |
It can't possibly work that way, because if System is really capped by Response then when Response decreases so does System: 1-4 programs: No Penalty, response 5. 5-7 programs: -1 penalty (System*1 programs active), response 4, System 4 8 programs: -2 penalty (System*2 programs active), response 3, System 3 9 programs: -3 penalty (System*3 programs active), response 2, System 2... but now you're running more than System*4 programs, so response decreases again to 1, which decreases System to 1... which decreases response again to 0, decreasing system to 0, and your Commlink crashes. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Oct 19 2005, 02:53 AM
Post
#9
|
|||
|
Target Group: Members Posts: 13 Joined: 13-September 05 Member No.: 7,735 |
Ah, the Cascade argument. You can't possibly think that's how it was meant to work, can you? |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Oct 19 2005, 03:08 AM
Post
#10
|
|||||
|
Decker on the Threshold Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 2,922 Joined: 14-March 04 Member No.: 6,156 |
No I don't think it does, which is why I was saying that Response doesn't actually cap System, at least in terms of limiting you to (System) rating in programs; it only limits you when you're actually rolling your System program rating for a test. So, for Response 5 System 6: 1-5 programs: No Penalty, response 5. System tests made with System rating 5. 6-11 programs: -1 penalty, response 4. System tests made with System rating 4. 12-17 programs: -2 penalty, response 3. System tests made with System rating 3. Etc etc. |
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
Oct 19 2005, 03:09 AM
Post
#11
|
|
|
Great Dragon Group: Members Posts: 7,089 Joined: 4-October 05 Member No.: 7,813 |
you could also have more than 22 programs running. sure, some of those would have to be IC/Agents/Autosofts maybe, but you could have that many running.
|
|
|
|
|
Oct 19 2005, 11:01 AM
Post
#12
|
|||||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 715 Joined: 4-September 05 From: Metaplane GEPLK136 (The one with the lizards. You remember the lizards, don't you?) Member No.: 7,684 |
It still does; it just isn't RE-capped every time response decreases from system load. Thus, when response is decreased by running programs, system stays the same. At least, that's how I interpret it -- the book, unfortunately, isn't especially clear on the matter.
Good point, I hadn't thought of that. Which brings me to an important point -- Agents seemingly let you get around the program limits. Agents count as one running program. Agents can run multiple programs themselves. Thus, you could load all your attack programs into one agent, and run that agent, counting as a single program. The only drawback is that then your utilities are limited by the agent's rating instead of your skill, and your programs are vulnerable to the agent being attacked. Of course, if you have sufficiently advanced agents, they may actually be better than your skill, thus leading to the various discussions around here of a "hacker in a box" -- an advanced agent that replaces your team's hacker entirely. |
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
Oct 19 2005, 02:09 PM
Post
#13
|
|||||
|
Decker on the Threshold Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 2,922 Joined: 14-March 04 Member No.: 6,156 |
Ugh, but that would create a functional difference between a commlink with Response 3 running System 6 software and a commlink with Response 4, lowered to Response 3 through program load, running the same System 6 software. I'm not sure that makes an ounce of sense; why would there be a difference between two commlinks that both have the same Response? Eh, I guess I can see where you're coming from, but with your idea you'll have to record three values for System: it's actual rating, the first modified rating when the "natural" Response slows it down (for determining max programs), and then the second modified rating when the "modified" Response slows the System down again. It just screams inelegance to me, I guess. |
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
Oct 19 2005, 02:25 PM
Post
#14
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 112 Joined: 26-February 02 Member No.: 1,896 |
If you re-capped each time response dropped due to load you would also have to drop active connections to hosts from your active subscriber list. If you simply cap System at the initial Response rating you figure out those limitations once and you're done. Much less bookkeeping that way.
|
|
|
|
|
Oct 19 2005, 02:45 PM
Post
#15
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 617 Joined: 28-May 03 From: Orlando Member No.: 4,644 |
So other than the system/response questions let's kinda steer this back to point. :wobble:
What about the other kind of tests? Attack encounters or just trying to hack Mr. J's commlink to find out some dirt? |
|
|
|
|
Oct 19 2005, 07:21 PM
Post
#16
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 286 Joined: 5-September 05 Member No.: 7,688 |
Yeah, this whole system/response debate that I've seen in other posts is kind of useless. That whole "cascading effect" is probably just due to poor wording.
I have been trying to construct a sort of flow chart for all sorts of combat to put in my GM screen/cheat sheet, but hacking has been where it's killing me. Cybercombat is no problem, though, and it's actually easier than everything else. Now could somebody please run through a scenario of a hacker, well, hacking something? I think everyone just wants to see one big long italicized piece of gameplay, which was sorely lacking in one of the most complicated (to most of us) areas of the book. |
|
|
|
|
Nov 8 2005, 01:38 PM
Post
#17
|
|
|
Great Dragon Group: Members Posts: 5,486 Joined: 17-March 05 From: Michigan Member No.: 7,180 |
Also, with Responce 5, System 6 (effectivly 5) can't you run 5 programs without losing responce?
IN the Core book it says something like "If the number of programs running is MORE than the system rating, then you reduce the responce by 1 for every system programs" (emphesis mine) So while they are equal, you are still good. |
|
|
|
|
Nov 8 2005, 02:30 PM
Post
#18
|
|
|
Target Group: Members Posts: 37 Joined: 31-October 05 Member No.: 7,915 |
Literally, system 6 and response 5 means you actually have system 5. If you therefore have 6 programs, your response drops to 4, which means you also now have system 4. Therefore, if you have 8 programs, your response would drop to 3, and also system 3, which mean 9 programs would drop you to 2, which would immediately drop you to 1, and then 0.
My conclusion would be that system is limited by response, but is in fact still the original system. So when the response drops, system can only act at the response level, but is still considered a system of the original rating in terms of supporting programs. But that's my guess. |
|
|
|
|
Nov 8 2005, 02:42 PM
Post
#19
|
|||
|
Great Dragon Group: Members Posts: 5,486 Joined: 17-March 05 From: Michigan Member No.: 7,180 |
Yes, but I was talking about running 5 programs on a commlink with System 5. Near as I can tell, that's just fine. I was referring ot the table someone else gave:
Even assuming that your System does count as 5 for EVERYTHING while running on a commlink with responce 5 - you can still run 5 programs without penalty, since the number of programs is not greater than the system rating. At least, that was my take after reading the rules. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Nov 8 2005, 02:43 PM
Post
#20
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 112 Joined: 26-February 02 Member No.: 1,896 |
You only calculate Response drops once. With Reponse 5, System 6, you would have no drop at 5 programs, a drop to 4 at 6-10 programs, a drop to 3 at 11-15 programs, etc. There is no cascading drop in Response.
|
|
|
|
|
Nov 8 2005, 02:46 PM
Post
#21
|
|
|
Great Dragon Group: Members Posts: 5,486 Joined: 17-March 05 From: Michigan Member No.: 7,180 |
Another question I had was, if responce does drop - and the system has to function at a lower rating... does that still limit the number of devices which can be subscribed. In other words, is it possible for a rigger to load up one too many programs and accidentally boot two of his drones off of his network?
|
|
|
|
|
Nov 8 2005, 03:24 PM
Post
#22
|
|
|
panda! Group: Members Posts: 10,331 Joined: 8-March 02 From: north of central europe Member No.: 2,242 |
my take:
response = cpu. basicly how fast you comlink is. system = os. better rating, more effective os. as in less cpu wasted on managing the programs that you run. therefor as the number of programs start to pile up, the os starts to eat cpu to keep all those programs managed. only other options is to crash out or refuse to load that program that would lead to a response drop. i dont see the logic in dropping system every time you drop response. basicly that will lead to a drop towards zero the moment you load that one program that goes over the limit. |
|
|
|
|
Nov 8 2005, 04:05 PM
Post
#23
|
|
|
Great Dragon Group: Members Posts: 7,089 Joined: 4-October 05 Member No.: 7,813 |
my, how short people's memories are, and how unwilling to do a search =P
for those of you who wanted to see a hacking scenario played out, i show unto you: Feshy's (Very Long) Hacking Example!! hope that helps. |
|
|
|
|
Nov 8 2005, 04:16 PM
Post
#24
|
|||
|
Great Dragon Group: Members Posts: 5,486 Joined: 17-March 05 From: Michigan Member No.: 7,180 |
I'm not sure I see how that post is relevant to the conversation (of programs bringing down response, bringing down system). Granted, I skimmed that post - because its frigging huge - but would you mind linking some quotes or response numbers or something? |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Nov 8 2005, 04:28 PM
Post
#25
|
|
|
Great Dragon Group: Members Posts: 7,089 Joined: 4-October 05 Member No.: 7,813 |
that post wasn't relevant to the system/response cascading mess argument. although, i believe feshy used the assumption that cascading doesn't happen, i don't believe he had a commlink with higher system than response anyways, so it wouldn't help.
what it would help, is all those people (i think there were at least three of them, anyways =P) who requested an example of hacking. which, i should point out, is pretty much what this thread was originally about =P |
|
|
|
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 10th June 2025 - 07:42 AM |
Topps, Inc has sole ownership of the names, logo, artwork, marks, photographs, sounds, audio, video and/or any proprietary material used in connection with the game Shadowrun. Topps, Inc has granted permission to the Dumpshock Forums to use such names, logos, artwork, marks and/or any proprietary materials for promotional and informational purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not affiliated with the Dumpshock Forums in any official capacity whatsoever.