 Example Matrix Sites, Here you go... :) |
  |
 Jun 23 2007, 02:32 PM
Post
#1
|
|
|
Shadow Cartographer  Group: Members Posts: 3,737 Joined: 2-June 06 From: Secret Tunnels under the UK (South West) Member No.: 8,636  |
This is a draft. I haven't had time to finish it but given the flames that are starting to rise about the SR4 hacking rules, I thought I'd do my bit to cool things a little by presenting some sample matrix sites from my game. I'll finish it if there's sufficient interest here. The direct link is here and the link to my site is in my sig as usual. And yes, I'm afraid Example number four is going to be the return of my much dreaded home office set up. I hope these will be of use to some of you. As always, I request a little feedback from those who use it, in return for my hardwork (hey, it's better than your money, right? ;) ). I'll be offline for a little while now, but will respond to feedback when I'm back. -K. |
 |
 
|
|
Jun 23 2007, 02:36 PM
Post
#2
|
|
|
Running Target Group: Members Posts: 1,498 Joined: 4-August 05 From: ADL Member No.: 7,534 |
Well, I like the idea (and ive done it myself).
What I dont like are systems with more than 3 nodes. Thats not really streamlined . . . |
|
|
|
|
Jun 23 2007, 02:45 PM
Post
#3
|
|||
|
Shadow Cartographer Group: Members Posts: 3,737 Joined: 2-June 06 From: Secret Tunnels under the UK (South West) Member No.: 8,636 |
Then you may not like this. But I think I understand where you're coming from with your approach and although I have more than three nodes in the example so far (Example 3 has only one node, but I haven't written it up yet), it's very much not the old 1st-3rd edition dungeon crawl approach. I think my nodes make logical sense. Anyway, I'll be particularly interested in your feedback on my sites. -K. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Jun 23 2007, 02:47 PM
Post
#4
|
|
|
Running Target Group: Members Posts: 1,180 Joined: 22-January 07 From: Rochester, NY Member No.: 10,737 |
Looks good; my players will be cursing your name in the next month or so.
|
|
|
|
|
Jun 23 2007, 03:12 PM
Post
#5
|
|
|
Shooting Target Group: Members Posts: 1,711 Joined: 15-June 06 Member No.: 8,716 |
Why do people insist on using pdf's they are ugly!!
Is there an offical answer to what a node actually physically is. There is like a device node for example a toy car would have a node that just send and receives signals. But then what the hell is a matrix location for a corporation? A physical thing like a giant commlink server or something? I think it is relevant because there are "fake" nodes that just exist in the matrix for example a website. So would it be possable for a hacker to create their own "fake" nodes or to altar other people's "fake" nodes. For example destroy a website or totally rearrange how its connected. For example make all the security camera's connect to the front of the website so that anyone who goes to the website can look at everything going on inside the company. I'd like people or the game devs to go over specifically what raises red flags with IC and makes them look at you. I mean if i get user access, pass some analyze IC, and then start adding and deleting files for that user wil that make the IC take another look at me? What about if i start messing with other user's files. How much instruction are you allowed to give to agents/ic/drones/sprites? It seems like a bad idea to have IC just scan each person that enters its node because it would only get one shot at scanning you. But if you told the IC to scan any user who attempts to change things then that would be far superior. |
|
|
|
|
Jun 23 2007, 04:55 PM
Post
#6
|
|
|
Target Group: Members Posts: 15 Joined: 14-September 03 From: Belgium Member No.: 5,617 |
Nice work knasser! When designing networks, I always end up having more or less the same structure: public access node, office node and security node. Only the iconography in VR and AR overlay theme changes. I like the "Site Management" node in example 2. Ideal for hackers with a sense of humor :).
Example 5 seems like an ambitious undertaken. Looking forward to see the result! I also have a question. Suppose someone would want to subscribe a drone in example 3 to his commlink and operate it from outside the corporate site (further away than the drone's signal). Would you allow him to do so by subscribing the security system (node 8 ) to the public access node (node 1)? This will not go unnoticed off course, but it's about the idea. |
|
|
|
|
Jun 23 2007, 07:57 PM
Post
#7
|
|
|
Horror Group: Members Posts: 5,322 Joined: 15-June 05 From: BumFuck, New Jersey Member No.: 7,445 |
Knasser, you rock the shizznit.
|
|
|
|
|
Jun 24 2007, 04:41 AM
Post
#8
|
|||
|
Running Target Group: Members Posts: 1,246 Joined: 8-June 07 Member No.: 11,869 |
In real life, I work for a company that does exactly that right now in 2007. By 2070, IC will be nearly as smart as a human (probably a whole lot smarter) at noticing "weird" behavior in users. IC would be able to see something is strange just by where you wonder off to, just as a secretary would think it strange that Mr. Johnson suddenly wandered into a broom closet. A hacker should expect to be scanned repeatedly, even as an admin, until they shut down the IC in a system (and attempting to shut down IC would trigger more IC). BTW, thanks Knasser for the awesome pdf! |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Jun 24 2007, 06:25 AM
Post
#9
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 168 Joined: 23-April 07 From: Aurora, CO Member No.: 11,514 |
I like the systems a lot.
I look forward to the super #5 when it is done. :) |
|
|
|
|
Jun 24 2007, 06:42 AM
Post
#10
|
|
|
Target Group: Members Posts: 72 Joined: 12-September 04 Member No.: 6,654 |
Looks good knasser. After a quick read through it seems like you envision the Matrix very similarly to me. However, you seem to draw a pretty hard line between the different account levels and what they are capable of. For example, a hacker must obtain admin-level access (and take the corresponding penalty on his or her initial test to gain access to the node) to perform admin-level tasks. So, a hacker who currently has User access has no hope of editing a log file that requires Admin access unless they go back and obtain admin access.
The rules draw a distinction between using the Hacking or Computer skill depending on what a hacker's current level of access is. I thought that any account could perform any operation. Whether or not the operation in question is within the operator's current system privileges is what determines which skill is used, and how the system will react. In the above example, the hacker who currently has User access can edit that log file without hacking an Admin account, but doing so is much more difficult. The hacker would roll Data Search + Browse as normal to locate the file, but because the search is out of a normal User's privileges the hacker is going to be flagged by the system. To edit the log file once it has been found, the hacker rolls Hacking + Edit, again because the hacker's User account is not normally allowed to edit this particular file. Again, the system notices. If the hacker had gotten Admin access in the first place, he or she would have rolled Computer + Edit, because editing a log file is within an Admin's power. Most systems would not look twice at this operation. You can see where this is going. If the system sees too many (any?) anomalies it is going to investigate (I typically implement this like the SR3 security tally system, YMMV). The trade off really becomes, "Do I risk drawing a lot of attention to myself once inside a node to avoid a difficult initial hack, or do I do most of my hacking up front to have an easier time inside?" |
|
|
|
|
Jun 24 2007, 05:23 PM
Post
#11
|
|||||||||||||||||
|
Shadow Cartographer Group: Members Posts: 3,737 Joined: 2-June 06 From: Secret Tunnels under the UK (South West) Member No.: 8,636 |
Okay, I'll shortly upload the new version which will include either the Hacker Bar or the Home Office system. I'll post here again when it's available (the link will be the same). In response to the comments here (and thanks for all the feedback):
I consider this a reward in itself. I'm glad to have helped a noble aim. :) Abbandon: Lots of interesting questions. Answers as follows:
I don't really see how they can be more or less ugly than the document they are generated from. :? I use PDFs for a couple of reasons. Primarily because they are a fairly universal standard. I write this stuff on one of my housemate's Linux boxes so I'm aware that not everyone has Word (we don't). Also, I have to confess, there's a slight worry about seeing these suddenly reappear elsewhere without credit, and a PDF complicates this process. And finally, I can control exactly how a PDF looks when it comes out. If there were a reason for it, I could probably post a Word version. What is the problem with PDFs?
The most solid answer is that a node is a rules entity. It can be a lot of different things, but it's a node if it's something that you hack as a single object. So the SR4 BBB, pg. 216, defines a node as "any device or network that can be accessed." I place special emphasis on the word network, there. A node doesn't have to be a solid box sitting in a rack somewhere. If a group of devices, terminals or whatever share resources, functionality and user-access, you commonly treat it as a node. The "Drone Hive" in example #2 would probably be a good example of how to use this. It's a node that exists independent of physical space, as such, and represents a distributed management system for the drone security. It's perfectly acceptable by RAW and works very well. It may take players a go or two to get their head around it however.
I'm not entirely sure what you mean by fake nodes. I think from the website example, that you mean something that is a place you go to in the matrix, which isn't actually a node, such as viewing someone's webpage. If that's what you mean, then it's a good question, but I don't think that's how things are actually handled in the Matrix. I think the website is now actually a node that you can visit. This is why the matrix site nodes in examples #1 and #2 are separated out from the rest of the company networks - they have public user accounts that are available to all. Just like other sites, these nodes have higher access levels than user which would allow greater functionality, such as defacing the site. So to continue with your website example, the Legendary Scipt Kiddie (LSK) goes to the public matrix site of Boring Corp. Now it's public, so he can just log-in as a user and browse through their brochures in their corporate lobby, etc, but he wants more than that, so instead he tries to hack the site at Security level using the rules on pg 221. A couple of days later (he's using AR), his comm pings to let him know that he's in. Without stopping to consider whether he ever bothered to spoof his data trail (he did not), he quickly starts uploading his own matrix iconography turning the dull grey virtual reception room of the original site into a pornographic wonderland. As a security level account holder, carrying out changes on the site node is now one of his privelages. At least it will be on a node like this because such a node would require this functionality. It might not be on the node that manages drone guard systems for example.
IC, agents and pilot programs are generally very sophisticated within their areas of expertise. You can tell your car to pick you up at the restaurant at ten. You can instruct the house node to wake you up again if your daughter isn't in by midnight. It's a GM call how sophisticated the trigger conditions are that you can give the IC on your node, but I suggest tending toward the generous. You'll note that one possibility for the upper management node, is that the IC can even check with the known list of users for that node (as it's such a short list) and see if they're currently listed as being on site or not. That's a higher-rating IC mind you. Keep in mind that the IC first has to know that the hacker is there by defeating their stealth, and secondly, IC is not usually active all the time. It's explicitly noted in the nodes where the IC is continuously active and what conditions it uses for investigation.
Heh! That's why it's last on the list. ;)
Yes. This would be possible, but as you pointed out, highly unlikely to go unnoticed and it would require a pretty skillful hacker. Any player that pulled it off would be justifiably proud of themself. So long as you can build a bridge between your target and you then you can hack it in theory. The problem is that if you look at the way the site is set up, there isn't actually a direct link between any of the office systems and the security system, despite the fact they are both wirelessly operating in the same location. It's like two people with commlinks in the same room - you can't simply hop from one to the other if they're not communicating with each other. What you can do is try to make them communicate and this is where the fun starts. What you're trying to do when you bash your way in through the Matrix site node is subvert its wireless functionality to let you add a new subscription (the security node). Now some nodes will have that as a natural part of their functionality, but I'd argue that for the Matrix Site node, you would need Administrator access. You are essentially trying to use their "webserver" or phone exchange as a commlink, after all, so I'd say you needed to be able to reconfigure some basic settings. So to do what you're proposing, I think you would need to take the following steps. First the hacker must locate the matrix site or other matrix connection of the office complex to the rest of the world (easy) and then hack that node (a little more difficult) to such a degree that you could use it to access other nodes (administrator access +6). If we take a good hacker (Hacking 5, Relevant Programs at 5), then it's Hacking + Exploit (14). All this would be very different if there were a direct link between the security node and the matrix site node (or the office nodes which probably should connect). But there isn't so this is how the hacker is forced to play it unless they come on to the site themself, smuggle in a commlink they've already subscribed, etc. Anyway, the hacker is very good and likely to hack the matrix site though it will probably take five hours in pure VR and five days in AR with a chance of glitching even for Miss 5+5. Smuggling in the commlink would have been a much better plan. Once in however, the hacker can begin the real work of hacking the security node. Ironically, getting in will actually be easier than the Matrix Site node as administrator access wont be required. We're looking at a Hacking + Exploit (11) roll. That's going to add a few extra hours or days to the overall hack attempt and this is a good illustration of how GMs can use time limits to constrain hackers. You wouldn't want to be hacking a system like this on the fly. Once in (assuming no glitches or detection), the hacker is going to be very reliant on her stealth program to hide from both the IC and any other users on the system who might start asking "Hey, Bob! What are you doing at work today?". With the IC at the level it is, there's a fair chance that they could be noticed at this stage. The humans aren't likely to be running Analyze, however. Now from here you can jump to the Drove Hive node and try to hack this one. All of the drones are subscribed to this so you can manipulate any of them if you have hacked this node properly and dealt with the IC. I'd require Administrator access if you actually want to subscribe this node to the Matrix Site node directly, but other than for inviting your friends in to play or coming back later, you don't actually need to do that as you're currently in. A simpler method might be instead of going from the Matrix Site node to the Security Node, go directly to one of the drones or the Drone Hive node. They're all operating in Hidden Mode though, so you need to locate it with an Electronic Warfare + Scan (4) test and that assumes that you know that it is there. Remember that if the hacker is doing all this investigation herself, no-one will have told her how things are set-up. and the book recommends thresholds of 15+ on an extended test for finding things that you don't know are there. Shows the importance of good intel. Does that help, or does it just make things sound complex? It's probably a lot more complicated than expected because there wasn't actually a link between the security node and the rest of the site.
I generally agree with what you say. The effect of user access is a GM judgement call. Mostly where I have specified restrictions, they've been at a more fundamental level than file access. For example, the abilty to remove other users on the security node in Example #2 requires Administrator access, but I didn't put any restrictions in preventing people at user level from accessing files. In this area, I agree with you. The case of the Accounts system (Node 5, Example 2) which is probably what you're referring to, I guess I was envisioning it as a special case. I had in mind that the node iteslf was set up to preserve records of all transactions due to its nature and that to interefere with this process was more than a normal user would do. So you can alter the files with your normal hacking rolls, but to change the basic node process, requires more. On reflection, this could cause a shift in how the game plays, but you can now see where I was coming from. I think I like it in this instance, though I wouldn't apply it to every node. It makes a clear distinction between the skill of the job that the hacker does. Does he slip the fake data in and get out, or does he create fake archival data and alter historical records in case of a thorough investigation? This sort of gradiation can add a lot more detail to a run. So I agree with your take on things, but I'm offering some different options. What do you think? |
||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||
|
Jun 25 2007, 01:12 AM
Post
#12
|
|
|
Target Group: Members Posts: 72 Joined: 12-September 04 Member No.: 6,654 |
I like the idea of distinguishing between file access and basic node processes or functions (though one could argue that every process / function can ultimately be traced to a file somewhere) in special cases or on certain nodes. Options while hacking are definitely good, especially within the context of the Matrix where the rules are... well, abstract is a nice way of putting it.
Anyway, I'm glad that you posted this. Hopefully it will help people get a more concrete idea of what hacking is all about and how to implement it in-game. |
|
|
|
|
Jun 25 2007, 01:40 AM
Post
#13
|
|
|
panda! Group: Members Posts: 10,331 Joined: 8-March 02 From: north of central europe Member No.: 2,242 |
When sr4 first came out i made a argument for separating or sorting thing as either logical or physical items. I wonder if not i should pick up that plan again.
|
|
|
|
|
Jun 25 2007, 07:26 AM
Post
#14
|
|||
|
Shadow Cartographer Group: Members Posts: 3,737 Joined: 2-June 06 From: Secret Tunnels under the UK (South West) Member No.: 8,636 |
I think a lot of the difficulty arises not because there needs to be a distinction between logical and physical items, but because many are unfamiliar with the idea of the logical items in the first place. The way that I see things going (and which I see the Matrix as being the logical conclusion of), is distribution and non-locality. I can see that today in a primitive form with Google Office and its kin. The Matrix isn't the Internet, it is fundamentally different, and I see the user being very removed from the underlying infrastructure. And yes, I include hackers in this for the most part. If there is a distinction that needs to be made,I wonder if it's not between devices and nodes. It seems there are cases where it stretches the belief to "enter" some devices. It might also resolve some of the unintuitiveness of people's personas on commlinks as well. It's a lot easier to get your head around things thinking in AR terms than it is VR where devices are concerned. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Jun 25 2007, 07:40 AM
Post
#15
|
|||
|
Target Group: Members Posts: 15 Joined: 14-September 03 From: Belgium Member No.: 5,617 |
This is what I had in mind. The real question basically comes down to: will scanning for nodes find (if enough hits) any node within signal range of the node you logged in or just the ones within signal range of your commlink? In addition: suppose someone gives me the Access ID of one of the drones, will scanning from somewhere not nearby (e.g. in a pub downtown somewhere) find it? I'd guess you'll have to login to at least the public node and then scan and hope the drone is within signal range of that node? |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Jun 25 2007, 07:54 AM
Post
#16
|
|||||
|
Shadow Cartographer Group: Members Posts: 3,737 Joined: 2-June 06 From: Secret Tunnels under the UK (South West) Member No.: 8,636 |
With the qualification of "enough hits" that you mentioned, yes you can locate the drone directly within range of the node instead of your commlink. That's why I would require someone to get the administrator access if they were using the Matrix Site node for this purpose as they'd need to subvert it's basic configuration. The node doesn't have a connection to the security node, normally. If someone smuggled a commlink on site for you or you flew in your own drone, then it would become a lot easier. Still tricky to find the hidden drones however. I'd set the drone signal to 3 to prevent them being controlled from far away, but with signal 4 you could do this if you were near the site. The site isn't intended to be a player vs. GM site. It's just meant to be realistically secure and fun. If you wanted to be a bit more thorough, one thing to do would be place an additional IC on the security network with high track, analyze and stealth ratings. When a drone started misbehaving, instead of the bruiser IC that I put in the hive node coming in, the sneak IC stealths in and starts running track on the intruder. I very much like the Drone Hive node - it's like having all the other drones mentally ganging up on the rogue. :) |
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
Jul 1 2007, 04:57 PM
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 |
Thank you. It's feedback like that which makes me go back and finish Example #3. ;) The link in the first post is the same, but now includes an updated file. I'm focusing my efforts on another project now, so you'll probably see things posted on my site less frequently from here on. But I intend to finish off this document at any rate. As always, comments are appreciated, -Khadim. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Jul 1 2007, 05:59 PM
Post
#18
|
|
|
Shooting Target Group: Members Posts: 1,598 Joined: 24-May 03 Member No.: 4,629 |
You're pretty much a one-man force on this front for me, Knasser.
We gave up on the Matrix rules as written and now just kinda wing it. Maybe, just MAYBE, you can make some sense out of this. |
|
|
|
|
Jul 1 2007, 07:34 PM
Post
#19
|
|||
|
Shadow Cartographer Group: Members Posts: 3,737 Joined: 2-June 06 From: Secret Tunnels under the UK (South West) Member No.: 8,636 |
That's my aim with this. The Matrix rules work, but are chronically short of explanation. I think that I can justify everything in the examples as RAW and I'm very happy that it's balanced so far for good gameplay, with a view to integrating the hacker into a normal team in the first two examples. (The third is obviously and intentionally a character-specific environment). Thanks for the comments. -K. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Jul 1 2007, 07:48 PM
Post
#20
|
|
|
Running Target Group: Members Posts: 1,180 Joined: 22-January 07 From: Rochester, NY Member No.: 10,737 |
I dearly love the Hacker Bar; it'll be showing up in my game soon.
|
|
|
|
|
Jul 1 2007, 07:50 PM
Post
#21
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 556 Joined: 28-May 04 From: Moorhead, MN, USA Member No.: 6,367 |
Is it just me, or do a lot of your system and/or program & IC ratings exceed the response ratings? Isn't that a no-no? (Or at least waste of resources?)
|
|
|
|
|
Jul 1 2007, 08:26 PM
Post
#22
|
|||
|
Shadow Cartographer Group: Members Posts: 3,737 Joined: 2-June 06 From: Secret Tunnels under the UK (South West) Member No.: 8,636 |
Yes. You're absolutely right. I've just gone through it and counted four of them. The curse of 'cut and paste' strikes again! (Ha!-Ha!-Ha!) Have corrected this and re-uploaded. Thanks, -K. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Jul 1 2007, 08:36 PM
Post
#23
|
|
|
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 |
...nice resource, As a GM I usually have been avoiding much in the way of matrix activity when I run SR4 due of the lack of any framework and examples to work from.
This changes things. Thank you. |
|
|
|
|
Jul 1 2007, 09:01 PM
Post
#24
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 556 Joined: 28-May 04 From: Moorhead, MN, USA Member No.: 6,367 |
Nice work knasser. I plan on using your samples. They're well written and well thought out, but as long as I'm picking nits....
Small Company Office: Node 3: IC can't use Stealth 5. (4 would do.) " : Node 4: Agent Pilot rating needlessly high. (Also appears to be accidental cut and paste from node 1 as the node description lists no IC an no agent interface seems necessary for a security node with no user level access.) Caveat: perhaps this and other IC/Agents listed below and above are being run on a separate node and merely have icons present in these nodes. Large Corporate Site: Node 4: IC#2 should be listed as IC#1 (or 3) since it is replacing Node 3's IC#1. Also Node 4's system rating is lower than both IC's ratings and programs. (Goes double for the replacement IC that has Analyze, Attack, and Armor at 5s.) See above caveat about IC being run on a separate node. " : Node 5: IC#2 when there is no IC#1. Perhaps this is the same IC as in Node 4. Again with the ratings. All this, and maybe my browser is too stupid to update the cached PDF. |
|
|
|
|
Jul 1 2007, 10:41 PM
Post
#25
|
|||||
|
Shooting Target Group: Members Posts: 1,598 Joined: 24-May 03 Member No.: 4,629 |
The door test is still my benchmark. "You're running through a corporate compound, alarms are going off, red lights flashing, and, suddenly, your escape path is cut off by a security blast door dropping into place! The guards are hot on your heels ... what do you do?" "I hack the door!" For the life of God's green Earth, I can't figure out how this is supposed to happen, assuming that there's no pre-installed account from the hacker's part in the system, proper. I've gotten a few attempts tossed at me, ranging from, "You can open a door without a test, out they go" to "Try to find a node using Scan, get info from Sniffer, use Exploit to get in, use Exploit into the system, use Exploit to make an account while hiding from ICE, use Exploit to upgrade to Security. Use Exploit to upgrade to Administrator. Use Broswe to find where you need to be. Use Exploit to hack into teh door commands, proper. Use Command to unseal teh door. Use Command to open teh door. Use Edit to erase mention of this. Use Sniffer tofind teh cameas. Repeat above steps to erase camera. Log out." Which is something like twenty initiative passes, while the rest of the group is DYING and it takes forever and the whole mood is lost. The entire hacking system needs a serious, serious rewrite, aimed at those of us without computer knowledge. Several programs seem to do nearly the same thing and step on one another's toes, basic rules contradict one another, and the whole broadcasting your SIN around ... yikes. Everything else, I get. I get *easily*. Heck, I even understood the old way of decking, tho no one ever ran a Decker for the classic reasons, and I enjoyed it. But the modern Wireless version? Madness. IMHO, there should be two systems: A light, AR version, with quicker "Want to do this? Then roll this." speedy resolution, to keep the game flowing and to let Hackers hang out in realtime with everyone else. A heavy, VR version, where mostly only Hackers go, which is more complex but allows you to do things that you can't do in AR or that, at the least, would take a while. The AR version lets you run in, go, "Phoenix, we got cameras," he goes, "On it," the cameras shut down, you go past, an so on. The VR version has him on 'overwatch', scrambling communications, unlocking doors, keeping the Panicbutton signal from going through, and so on. I just can't figure out why my brain refuses to wrap around this. |
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 16th April 2024 - 06:28 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.