 SR4 Matrix Dicepool Rules ReWrite, How can one get this done? |
  |
 Dec 9 2006, 12:53 AM
Post
#1
|
|
|
Runner  Group: Members Posts: 2,526 Joined: 9-April 06 From: McGuire AFB, NJ Member No.: 8,445  |
Freelancers, Dumpshockers, Admins,
How would someone go about trying to get the Matrix dicepool rules rewritten to fall in line with all the other dicepool rules for the game? Dicepool for Matrix = Skill + Program Dicepool for everything else = Attribute + Skill This makes no sense and also breaks other rules, like how to default, for example. There have been many suggestions for changing it to a Attribute+Skill (number of hits limited by program rating + 1 [to allow defaulting due to lack of program]) just like how magic works... why wasnt this done in the first place? Just to be 'different'? I'd rather have a ruleset that made sense and flowed with the rest of the book than just different for just the sake of being different... So I ask yet again, How would someone or a group of someones go about getting the core rulebook on Matrix actions rewriten? |
 |
 
|
|
Dec 9 2006, 01:00 AM
Post
#2
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 147 Joined: 4-December 06 From: Chicago, IL Member No.: 10,193 |
Well, with my 8 logic, I'd certainly have loved that.
|
|
|
|
|
Dec 9 2006, 01:06 AM
Post
#3
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 399 Joined: 27-May 04 Member No.: 6,361 |
While its strange that Logic has no bearing on the skill Hacking, the fact the program is used makes sense to me.
Personally, I see it like this; The program rating IS the base stat, and without this special stat, you are unable to perform the action related to it. Its very much like a drones pilot rating, since its really weird that a physical stat like reaction is used while hopped into what is essentially a different body. Without the proper tools, a person is essentially out of luck. However, you could house rule some program creation rules. Some sort of Software + Logic test would likely be involved. I'm not going to touch this though, its up to you really. |
|
|
|
|
Dec 9 2006, 01:11 AM
Post
#4
|
|
|
Runner Group: Members Posts: 2,526 Joined: 9-April 06 From: McGuire AFB, NJ Member No.: 8,445 |
If you reread the OP, you will see that programs are factored into the fix, as a limiter to the amount of hits 'just like the force of spells'
|
|
|
|
|
Dec 9 2006, 01:17 AM
Post
#5
|
|||
|
Bushido Cowgirl Group: Members Posts: 5,782 Joined: 8-July 05 From: On the Double K Ranch a half day's ride out of Phlogiston Flats Member No.: 7,490 |
...ditto [Violet] |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Dec 9 2006, 01:19 AM
Post
#6
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 399 Joined: 27-May 04 Member No.: 6,361 |
The "OP"? I must be out of the loop, I've no idea what you're talking about.
|
|
|
|
|
Dec 9 2006, 01:21 AM
Post
#7
|
|
|
Shadow Cartographer Group: Members Posts: 3,737 Joined: 2-June 06 From: Secret Tunnels under the UK (South West) Member No.: 8,636 |
It looks alright to me. I assume the attribute that replaces all of the programs is Logic in which case, Log + Skill limited by program looks fine to me. A brilliant person can still be badly constrained by a lack of software, realistically. But being intelligent needs to have a role in there somewhere. Heck, the way it stands right now you could use skill softs and have a pretty effective hacker with a 1 in every attribute. The only problem that leaps out at me with your adjustment is one of balance. You can't normally get programs rated higher than 6, but you will start to see a lot of hackers with Logic 8 or 9. I don't think the mild boost to their power level is a terrible thing, though. Caveat: I don't play with technomancers so I don't know if there are any balance issues there. -K. |
|
|
|
|
Dec 9 2006, 01:22 AM
Post
#8
|
|||
|
Immoral Elf Group: Members Posts: 15,247 Joined: 29-March 02 From: Grimy Pete's Bar & Laundromat Member No.: 2,486 |
OP stands for Original Post or Original Poster. ;) |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Dec 9 2006, 01:25 AM
Post
#9
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 399 Joined: 27-May 04 Member No.: 6,361 |
I'll throw something out there. (Edit: Now I know XD)
You could, again, keep the old system, but limit the Rating of the program by Logic (much like System). The same could be used in reverse. Either way, you're basically using the smaller of the two. Exceptional Attr, Codeslinger, and perhaps a new Hacker edge could be used to expand this. |
|
|
|
|
Dec 9 2006, 01:32 AM
Post
#10
|
|
|
Great Dragon Group: Members Posts: 7,089 Joined: 4-October 05 Member No.: 7,813 |
actually, the logic + skill, limited by program/CF model works very nicely to make technomancers not suck, imo. all of a sudden, rating 4 CFs is not the end of the world, and the TM already wanted a good logic anyways. what this does is make the TM have a similar dicepool to hackers, and the possibility to spread their points around a lot more on CFs rather than needing to have every single CF at as high a rating as possible.
of course, on the downside it means that they have to lose resonance to get their logic above their natural maximum (barring magical assistance, of course), but on the other hand anytime the program rating matters a lot they can still thread (for example, command and attack both benefit from a higher rating outside of adding to the dicepool) and really shine in those areas. the rule also has the effect of not absolutely needing to have the highest rating programs possible to start. it makes hackers capable of becoming better than agents more easily (previously they had to have skill 6, program 6, and a reflex recorder, or a natural skill of 7 via a costly special quality. now, they can be up to 4 dice better in their dicepool, or 3 without special qualities, right out of chargen). personally, i really like the rule. |
|
|
|
|
Dec 9 2006, 01:32 AM
Post
#11
|
|
|
Runner Group: Members Posts: 2,526 Joined: 9-April 06 From: McGuire AFB, NJ Member No.: 8,445 |
Xenith, your fix still doesnt fix the problem that it doesnt interface with some of the rules outside of the matrix, like defaulting... What exactly do you default to, and when do you default? When you dont have the skill or when you dont have the program?
Under the current rules, you would default to your linked attribute and that could be anywhere from 1-10... But still doesnt make sense in the rules that I could have a hacker with 1 hacking skill, no program, and default to a 10 Logic that is busted down to a 9 due to defaulting. Then you add on the +2 from being in hot sim, and you have 11 dice for defaulting... that isnt right, and it's my belief that the devs screwed the pooch on this one when they deviated from the normal dicepool rules. |
|
|
|
|
Dec 9 2006, 01:50 AM
Post
#12
|
|
|
Great Dragon Group: Members Posts: 7,089 Joined: 4-October 05 Member No.: 7,813 |
oh, also forgot to mention... normally, the limit to hits is actually program rating +1, so that you can theoretically default and accomplish something... just not something terribly impressive.
|
|
|
|
|
Dec 9 2006, 01:55 AM
Post
#13
|
|
|
Runner Group: Members Posts: 2,526 Joined: 9-April 06 From: McGuire AFB, NJ Member No.: 8,445 |
Ah, forgot that, will edit the OP to reflect. Thank you.
|
|
|
|
|
Dec 9 2006, 02:23 AM
Post
#14
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 619 Joined: 18-April 03 From: The UV Nexus Member No.: 4,474 |
In real life, the hacker with skill 6 + program 1 will outperform the hacker with skill 1 + program 6. The rules don't take that into account, probably to simplify game play.
Similarly, in RL, Logic 6 + program 1 will outperform Logic 1 + program 6. --------------------- Slight change of subject. From a number of posts, I get the feeling that the goal here is to create more powerful hackers "out of the box" and otherwise. |
|
|
|
|
Dec 9 2006, 02:37 AM
Post
#15
|
|
|
Target Group: Members Posts: 79 Joined: 18-September 05 Member No.: 7,758 |
I like the idea of making Logic + Skill rolls for hacking, but I don't see why Program rating shouldn't add to skill pools in the same way Device ratings do. Programs pretty much are little virtual devices.
This covers more ground for combinations of Logic, Skill, and Program too. might have to change systems to use: Response + System + Program for opposed tests though. |
|
|
|
|
Dec 9 2006, 02:42 AM
Post
#16
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 399 Joined: 27-May 04 Member No.: 6,361 |
Again, each program is in actuality a very focused special stat, like pilot or sensor. First time I ran I had never even looked at the matrix rules other than flipping through the pages really quickly. Once. I still used the Program + Hacking thing and it made sense to me.
A person should not be allowed to default if they don't have the program. Period. Thats my answer. Without the correct tools (even crappy basic ones) the task is not possible. Again, perhaps a Software + Logic test could change this. Making a program act very much like a spell seems silly to me, but if you want to use it that way no ones stopping you. I'm just here to give you suggestions and perhaps offer inspiration. *And TMs are powerful for those who know how to use them. Threading allows a Technomancer to exceed his Resonance (as System does not limit Complex Form ratings, Resonance does) to up to double the stat. Its not a complex form its a threaded complex form. Heh. |
|
|
|
|
Dec 9 2006, 02:45 AM
Post
#17
|
|||||
|
Shadow Cartographer Group: Members Posts: 3,737 Joined: 2-June 06 From: Secret Tunnels under the UK (South West) Member No.: 8,636 |
I can't speak for anyone else, but it's not my goal. But I find the proposed system more aesthetically pleasing. In one sense it also makes hackers less powerful out of the box because they can no longer hit their maximum potential straight out of char gen. For a player that wants to focus on hacking in the existing system, he will find that with the addition of about 20 karma to his starting character he has no where else to go. And that's not fun.
Maybe. There's a time issue to this. By writing macros in Excel I can duplicate a pivot table. And doing so, I can actually make it do more than Excel's standard functionality. But do you know how long that would take me? And how maintainable would it be for the next situation? I'm not saying that you're wrong, but I don't think you'd always be right. Really, a lot is going to depend on what we consider the SR term Program to mean. Is that little dictionary file of common passwords a program or not? It's probably below that level, but a hacker will have a whole tonne of things like that lying around - scripts, applications, pre-prepared SQL exploits, etc. Maybe all together they add up to a SR "Program." Who knows? But I think you can make a case for high logic and skill characters still being limited by their program rating so the proposed system can work very well in terms of fluff. |
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
Dec 9 2006, 03:05 AM
Post
#18
|
|||
|
Great Dragon Group: Members Posts: 7,089 Joined: 4-October 05 Member No.: 7,813 |
you know, i just typed up a huge post and decided not to use it 'cause that just annoyed the hell outta me, and it showed. (heck, i'm looking over this and it still shows, but at least this is shorter). so, long story short: i don't give a crap if a technomancer can become the grand high emperor of all cybercombat hackers, because he won't fragging be able to do a damn thing in every other area of his supposed specialty. technomancers are not crappy because they are unable to get high dicepools, they suck because they can't get any dicepool at all in over half of their supposed specialty area without risking fading for inconsistent returns, and to even reach the point of having good dicepools in their one area they have to cripple themselves completely and utterly in all areas that are not directly related. hackers are simply better because they can actually do their whole job, not just a part of it, and because they can cover other jobs to some extent as well. to put it another way: when was the last time you saw someone try to make a combat technomancer? compare to the number of combat hackers you have seen. the BP requirement gap is too big, and additional disadvantages of the technomancer too large. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Dec 9 2006, 03:10 AM
Post
#19
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 399 Joined: 27-May 04 Member No.: 6,361 |
Sorry. I disagree due to experience as a GM. Made a combat hacker. The technomancer, with an attack program of 1, took him down via threading and his edge (the hacker also used his group edge.. all of it..). And the combat hacker was basically at Runner skill level and the technomancer was a little less than that.
Yes, they pay in that they usually lack cyber. Oh well. Its all in how you use them. Hackers are by no means underpowered, frankly the drawbacks and karma cost of a technomancer balance them out with the hacker. |
|
|
|
|
Dec 9 2006, 03:51 AM
Post
#20
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 870 Joined: 2-October 06 From: Athens Ga Member No.: 9,517 |
There are alot of threads about this. Different people have their house rules from place to place. Personally I go with treating matrix actions just like any other action and roll atribute + skill. Then treat the programs as devices.
Keep in mind that a real hacker can and does hack without these specialty programs. They just make the job faster. I just say that a hacker can't fast hack without a program. Personally I think that hackers should have to write their own programs which would get rid of this sillyness about everyone getting hacking programs on the black market. THen it will be a function of skill not money. I would limit the usable program rating as equal to the skill rating that is using it. This means that you should not be able to default on hacking, or at least not allow fast hacking without the skill. I would also not allow someone to take hacking group skills without Computer and Software at least at 3. Now having the programs as devices doesn't necessarilly mean that you are going to end up with large dice pools. You can use the ratings in other ways. Have exploit negate it's rating in Firewalls. Have decrypt negate a certain level of encrypt. Try and find ways to make them static ratings instead of dice and you can use alot of programs in the course of 1 roll and make hacking much faster. |
|
|
|
|
Dec 9 2006, 07:32 PM
Post
#21
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 261 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Massachusetts Member No.: 2,115 |
Making changes like this to a game without unexpectedly changing a whole bunch of stuff is really hard.
A lot of people seem to be assuming that you can just drop in the spell mechanic in place of the current hacking mechanic and everything will work fine - this is blatantly false. There are two huge changes this makes in the game: - You can no longer get a bunch of hits at once. It becomes actually impossible to hack into admin access on the fly [in a single action] - even if you spend karma. - Low program ratings suddenly really, really suck. With the official rules, the difference between rating 3 and rating 6 is three dice on the test. With the "like magic" rules, a rating 3 program is really unusable - you can no longer get exceptional rolls at all. We have program ratings from 1 - 6, making half of those possibilities utterly useless is lame. I've been suggesting "Cap effective program rating at logic" as a potential house rule. It has most of the beneficial properties of the other suggestion without the disadvantages. But... I'm probably not going to use that either myself. What I'm more likely to use is some Software SOTA rules. If software ratings degrade but can be maintained with Logic + Software rolls and time - then both hackers and script kiddies both have their niches. [edit] clarify my point [/edit] |
|
|
|
|
Dec 9 2006, 08:20 PM
Post
#22
|
|||
|
Great Dragon Group: Members Posts: 7,089 Joined: 4-October 05 Member No.: 7,813 |
so limit the hits to hits per interval for extended tests. wow, that sure was hard to fix. and seriously, a rating 3 program lets you get 4 hits under the above rules. 4 hits is probably not enough for the dedicated hacker all the time (but neither will it always limit him), but then again... what the hell is the dedicated hacker doing with rating 3 programs? it's really not a big deal. those who have dicepools where they're expecting more than 7 hits on a regular basis are the only ones who are suffering, and quite frankly i'm not about to feel too bad about limiting them to "only" 7 successes (assuming they don't spend edge, of course, which eliminates the cap) so, sure... no professional is gonna be caught dead with a rating 1 program. but you know what? how many hackers have you seen with a rating 1 program so far? the people who take rating 1 programs are the people with crappy dice pools or who only want the program for the most basic tasks in the first place and probably won't be asked to roll it anyways. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Dec 9 2006, 09:53 PM
Post
#23
|
|||||
|
Runner Group: Members Posts: 2,526 Joined: 9-April 06 From: McGuire AFB, NJ Member No.: 8,445 |
I dont see where you come to the conclution that you cant hack in at admin levels using hacking on the fly...
I'm pretty sure extended test means you can have more than 1 shot at it...
Your second point makes little sense due to the fact that any plain hacker, not TM, wouldnt have just a rating 3 program at chargen... Even then, with the rules change, they would have a max of 4 hits on one test, and thats an exceptional effort by the book... TM's can thread on the fly, based off the new rules, and even if they didnt thread, they are better off due to the fact that they dont need to spend all that BP to have 4-6 in every rating CF at chargen... |
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
Dec 9 2006, 10:25 PM
Post
#24
|
|||
|
Great Dragon Group: Members Posts: 7,089 Joined: 4-October 05 Member No.: 7,813 |
woah, hold on there... most TMs only *wish* they were even allowed to have every CF out there at some rating at chargen (you know, that time where the cost of CFs isn't as incredibly painful). there's a maximum, you know, and it's typically less than half (closer to a third) of the total programs for any given TM. now, admittedly, some of those aren't absolutely critical, but still, you're not going to have every base covered, nor even anywhere near every base covered (well, you could get near if you severely hurt yourself i suppose, by taking 6 logic to start and cerebral booster 2... ). this change helps TMs in a few ways: 1) with no program, they can still make the test. they can even spend edge to be allowed to exceed the CF rating of 0. in other words, they don't need to take fading to decrypt, defuse, and so forth. 2) you are correct in that TMs can now get by with lower rating CFs and not be a cripple. this is very important, because the stuff the TM will be rolling instead just so happens to be the stuff they wanted anyways (logic determines system, which determines damage resistance iirc... and they already needed all the skills). 3) they no longer need to spend every drop of karma they get on boosting every single CF to 6. in other words, character advancement becomes meaningful to them in ways other than just catching up to the hacker 4) a loss of resonance (in small amounts) is no longer horribly, brutally crippling. a TM could actually accomplish something useful with a resonance of 4. certainly, not all TMs will jump at the chance to pick up some cyber or bioware, but at least now it doesn't horribly cripple them nearly as much. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Dec 9 2006, 10:38 PM
Post
#25
|
|
|
Runner Group: Members Posts: 2,526 Joined: 9-April 06 From: McGuire AFB, NJ Member No.: 8,445 |
The max # of CFs you can have a CharGen is Logic*2, which I understand and thought about during my last post.
1-3 I have no arguments, but one correction. Willpower is Firewall which is used for defense in cybercombat. 4 - you have to remember signal range is based solely on Resonance, Resonance/2 = Signal. So at 4 resonance you are only looking at a 100m range for your TM power, unless you do something smart like buy a Commlink with a Signal 4 and just use it as a repeater... Overall, you post some good reasons to go to the new system, just on the TM side. Thank you. |
|
|
|
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 3rd July 2025 - 02:39 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.