 How do you get a Meta Link or CMT Clip to function, RAW they crash with 1 program running. |
  |
 Oct 25 2006, 08:19 PM
Post
#26
|
|
|
Awakened Asset  Group: Members Posts: 4,464 Joined: 9-April 05 From: AGS, North German League Member No.: 7,309  |
Cite Calvin from Calvin&Hobbes:"I got loads of common sense, I just choose to ignore it". :)
Not all software is a program counting against the response limit. See knowsofts. |
 |
 
|
|
Oct 25 2006, 09:05 PM
Post
#27
|
|
|
panda! Group: Members Posts: 10,331 Joined: 8-March 02 From: north of central europe Member No.: 2,242 |
lets just say im waiting for the faq (as in, unwired).
|
|
|
|
|
Oct 25 2006, 09:10 PM
Post
#28
|
|||
|
Shooting Target Group: Members Posts: 1,754 Joined: 9-July 04 From: Modesto, CA Member No.: 6,465 |
Yeah but you don't need a commlink to run Knowsofts or Lingusofts. Don't these just plug into your datajack and are accessed directly? |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Oct 25 2006, 09:26 PM
Post
#29
|
|||
|
Immoral Elf Group: Members Posts: 15,247 Joined: 29-March 02 From: Grimy Pete's Bar & Laundromat Member No.: 2,486 |
That's pretty much what I thought. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Oct 25 2006, 09:28 PM
Post
#30
|
|||||
|
Immoral Elf Group: Members Posts: 15,247 Joined: 29-March 02 From: Grimy Pete's Bar & Laundromat Member No.: 2,486 |
That whole subject has been under dabate here for a week. Seems like the concensus is that Know and Lingua Softs do run on a Commlink, although arguments have been made for various other methods. |
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
Oct 26 2006, 02:33 AM
Post
#31
|
|||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 619 Joined: 18-April 03 From: The UV Nexus Member No.: 4,474 |
What debate? In SR3, chips could be plugged directly into a datajack. What's changed? |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Oct 26 2006, 02:40 AM
Post
#32
|
|||||
|
Great Dragon Group: Members Posts: 7,089 Joined: 4-October 05 Member No.: 7,813 |
you mean apart from the entirety of the rules for hacking, using computers, programs, and so forth? |
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
Oct 26 2006, 02:51 AM
Post
#33
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 870 Joined: 2-October 06 From: Athens Ga Member No.: 9,517 |
just use the following:
Response Instead of making you keep up with the number of programs you are running you just have to worry about a few programs. Agents are a resource drains. You can run one agent and one IC on your commlink. After that every agent, pilot, or IC on your commlink drops the response by 1. You can’t run more then one system on your commlink without immediately dropping the response by 1. Other then that the response won’t be an issue unless the GM says so. |
|
|
|
|
Oct 26 2006, 03:00 AM
Post
#34
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 753 Joined: 31-October 03 Member No.: 5,780 |
I guess my question is:
Where does it say a commlink/OS/whatever thingy crashes if you somehow get response to 0? How do you know it doesn't merely stop at Response 1, and you can't add any other programs since you hit the limit? That would mean the chips and such run a single program at a time. They do the one, get what they need, load the other, use that info as needed, back and forth, etc, etc. Since you can do actions faster on the matrix and programs obviously run a little faster too, it's not a big deal for the chips and such to be constantly switching programs around to function. Yes? No? Potatoes? |
|
|
|
|
Oct 26 2006, 03:25 AM
Post
#35
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 500 Joined: 4-September 06 From: Salt Lake UT Member No.: 9,299 |
if you're talking about switching (or SWAPING in sr3 terms) programs on a comlink then the process requires a simple action to quit one prog and a complex action to run the next one. Effectivly two iniciative passes.
In SR three there used to be a Swap action or something that took only a simple action I think. (books are boxed not geting them out now) but it was still required an action on the part of the operator. As far as 'softs go (data, lingua, know, active) they used to require loads of memory, since memory is gone now system responce is the limiting factor. (if the next cyber book doesn't bring my Chip Jack Expert Driver back in some form I'm going up to Chicago or where ever fanpro is to perform some claw hammer persuasion.) |
|
|
|
|
Oct 26 2006, 03:29 AM
Post
#36
|
|||||||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 619 Joined: 18-April 03 From: The UV Nexus Member No.: 4,474 |
What do knowsofts and linguasofts have to do with hacking, computers, programs, and so forth? |
||||||
|
|
|
||||||
|
Oct 26 2006, 03:35 AM
Post
#37
|
|||||||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 619 Joined: 18-April 03 From: The UV Nexus Member No.: 4,474 |
I noticed that the RAW carefully (or carelessly, depending on your point of view) distinguishes between Response and Response Rating. I would vote that the Response Rating is the nominal response of the commlink, and does not change, while the actual or effective response behaves according to the RAW. Unfortunately, this is not one of the poll choices. |
||||||
|
|
|
||||||
|
Oct 26 2006, 04:28 AM
Post
#38
|
|||||||||
|
Shooting Target Group: Members Posts: 1,754 Joined: 9-July 04 From: Modesto, CA Member No.: 6,465 |
There is no mention that 'Softs need outside processing power, they appear to link directly to your brain via the datajack, etc. Now skillwires (Active Skills much like 'softs for drones/vehicles) do take resources to function correctly. I never suspected 'softs required a comlink for use, just a pathway to your brain. |
||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||
|
Oct 26 2006, 04:46 AM
Post
#39
|
|||
|
Target Group: Members Posts: 14 Joined: 21-September 06 Member No.: 9,443 |
Yes, but it is also listed as Firewall (Software) and it is in the program list p 213: Firewall (Software) Firewall is the OS’s built-in security. p 213 System (Software) System also measures the OS’s ability to run other programs—an OS cannot run a program with a rating higher than the OS rating. ergo if the firewall is software and it's built-in to the System I would argue it is limited by the System just like other programs. It wouldn't effect the program limit becuase it is built-in. There is also the fact that there are no examples in the book of Firewall being higher than System which while not conclusive definately add weight to the argument. The fact of the situation is that the rules aren't particularly clear, but I think anyone trying to run a Firewall 6 on a Response 5, System 5 Commlink when it is clearly software / a program is just trying to take advantage of something not specifically stated is disallowed but which is otherwise implied. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Oct 26 2006, 04:57 AM
Post
#40
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 500 Joined: 4-September 06 From: Salt Lake UT Member No.: 9,299 |
Hmm, so 'Softs are run on your wetware? I like it for flavor.
Some thoughts about 'Softs vs. system responce threshold; I can't see a datasoft or lingua soft requireing as much power as a pilot OS to run. on the otherhand how can you access a datasoft without running an edit program. From my deep meditations on Cyberlimbs [/sarcasm] I'm convinced that the DNI in a cyberarm translates all of the sensory data collected by electronic/mechanical sencors in the limb to a signal that the CNS (central nervous system/brain) can understand and respond to. While there is a device rating, thus allmost certainly an operating system, for a cyberlimb The only interface device is the DNI. This leads me to believe that a DNI is simply a DEDICATED DataJack. An analogue would be the Linguasoft. The brain only needs to understand and respond to the instructions on the 'soft which is functionality that the Jack could provide. Finaly, I don't know what "chips" are in SR. It seems concensus that chips are like cd/dvds, nothing but memory, but if they are a "chip" that implies, (to my limited understanding of electronics) that they may have some processing power of their own. |
|
|
|
|
Oct 26 2006, 04:58 AM
Post
#41
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 261 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Massachusetts Member No.: 2,115 |
If firewall's a program, that means that it counts towards the limit for response degridation. That would suck.
|
|
|
|
|
Oct 26 2006, 05:00 AM
Post
#42
|
|||
|
Target Group: Members Posts: 14 Joined: 21-September 06 Member No.: 9,443 |
It wouldn't effect the program limit becuase it is built-in. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Oct 26 2006, 05:31 AM
Post
#43
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 870 Joined: 2-October 06 From: Athens Ga Member No.: 9,517 |
I don't like it effecting the program limit either but it is a program. It's just an important attribute so they list it.
I'm thinking about just getting rid of any commlink with a rating less then 3. |
|
|
|
|
Oct 26 2006, 09:16 AM
Post
#44
|
|
|
Runner Group: Members Posts: 3,009 Joined: 25-September 06 From: Paris, France Member No.: 9,466 |
I tend to consider that rating 1/2 commlink are simple cellphones : according to RAW, the standard rating for "standard personnal electronics" is 3.
But even this way it's quite strange : any commlink would need to use at least a "Scan" program to be able to see remote nodes (but every OS has a rating 1 Scan Program built-in) and an "Analyze" program to identify them. You would then need an "Edit" program to do something like sending an e-mail. So if you want to send an e-mail, you need at least 2 programs, requiring a rating 2 commlink. Of course, you can rule that any commlink runs rating 1 common-use programs built-in the OS without breaking game balance. |
|
|
|
|
Oct 26 2006, 09:23 AM
Post
#45
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 171 Joined: 5-February 05 Member No.: 7,053 |
I just assume the existence of a slightly unrealistic but useful for game purposes "...to a minimum of 1." clause on this sort of thing. So that makes the Meta Link the most resistant-to-degradation commlink on the market.
I justify it with "Things slow to a crawl, but never actually stop, they just become worthlessly slow.", and use the example of a modern copy of Word on a computer from five years ago to back it up. |
|
|
|
|
Oct 27 2006, 01:05 AM
Post
#46
|
|
|
Great Dragon Group: Members Posts: 7,089 Joined: 4-October 05 Member No.: 7,813 |
as far as system limiting firewall, system limits what the OS can run. firewall is part of the OS. it is not run by the OS, it *is* the OS.
and on a side note, i swear i remember seeing a comment about system not limiting firewall when i read through the whole book... i can't for the life of me find it now... |
|
|
|
|
Oct 27 2006, 02:31 AM
Post
#47
|
|||
|
Shooting Target Group: Members Posts: 1,754 Joined: 9-July 04 From: Modesto, CA Member No.: 6,465 |
You've hit it already. Firewall is not running as a program, but is part of the OS itself. (SR4.213) -- "System is the capability of the OS... System also measures the OS's ability to run other programs. (SR4.213) -- "Firewall is the OS's built-in security." Also, the Program list is give on SR4.225-227 and only "Common Use" and "Hacking" programs are listed. There is no reference to OS (System/Firewall) being called programs. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Oct 27 2006, 04:40 AM
Post
#48
|
|
|
Target Group: Members Posts: 14 Joined: 21-September 06 Member No.: 9,443 |
so if _is_ part of the OS why are you so adamant it should be able to go higher than the other core of the OS - the System? System is the OS - it is limited by Response. Firewall is the OS - you say it is not limited by anything.
a Response 1 | Signal 1 | Sytem 1 | Firewall 6 node is just stupid |
|
|
|
|
Oct 27 2006, 05:40 AM
Post
#49
|
|||
|
Shooting Target Group: Members Posts: 1,754 Joined: 9-July 04 From: Modesto, CA Member No.: 6,465 |
But still possible. Device ratings do not need to be equal. Reponse and System have a special relationship, not the other device ratings to each other. Firewall is build-into the OS it's outside the requirements for Response rating but System (the attribute that runs user programs) is dependant on Response. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Oct 27 2006, 05:50 AM
Post
#50
|
|||
|
Immoral Elf Group: Members Posts: 15,247 Joined: 29-March 02 From: Grimy Pete's Bar & Laundromat Member No.: 2,486 |
This quote might clarify things a little ...
... or it might not. :) |
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 19th April 2026 - 03:19 PM |
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.