 Hacking Defaults, Why buy Hacking? |
  |
 Jun 28 2007, 07:14 PM
Post
#26
|
|||||||||||||||
|
Genuine Artificial Intelligence  Group: Members Posts: 4,019 Joined: 12-June 03 Member No.: 4,715  |
Okay, okay, I should make a more constructive post about this.
This is just a really weird example. (I edited this part 'cause my first response was less constructive)
Actually, a lot of people feel like a super genius should be a marginally better hacker than a complete idiot. If you feel that that is silly, we're just going to have to agree to disagree.
No it's not. It's not remotely like saying that. It's more like saying that a genius who takes a computer programming course will be a better programmer than an idiot who takes the class with him.
This is where the analogy really breaks down. You're bringing physical attributes and physical tasks into a discussion about mental attributes. Your icon might be miles away, but you're still doing your thinking in your head.
Okay, you're obviously in the pro-script-kiddie camp. And I'm not saying that there's anything wrong with that. It's supported by the rules, in fact. But some people would prefer a mechanic where the programs are simply a tool that a clever hacker uses to accomplish a task, rather than a complete do-it-yourself-automated-sweet-of-haxx0rness. To each his own.
Again, no it's not, and I think it's a silly analogy. It is simply saying that being an intelligent person is useful when doing a highly cerebral task, such as hacking. Some people feel that this is the way it should be.
There is nothing wrong with the rules as they are, but they create a certain feel and put more emphasis on programs and less emphasis on the person doing the hacking than some people like, so for those people, there exist house rules that put greater emphasis on the hacker and less emphasis on the programs. And that's....okay. :) |
||||||||||||||
 |
 
|
||||||||||||||
|
Jun 28 2007, 07:27 PM
Post
#27
|
|
|
Shooting Target Group: Members Posts: 1,711 Joined: 15-June 06 Member No.: 8,716 |
Being a genius would only help in hacking as far as making programs, cracking them, rewriting them. Your brain isnt doing anything in the matrix except making decisions IE using your experience(skill) and your program(attribute).
You guys are saying I can take my crappy little Attack 1 program that could barely scramble the words in a text file and damage anything and everything with it because im "smart". I cant take a calculator and make it hack into a website because im smart and i know how those two things work. The calculator is only programmed to do so much. I cant make it write HTML or type out text.. I guess we can disagree but even in the faq they talk about the proper use of logic + hack/computer. |
|
|
|
|
Jun 28 2007, 07:37 PM
Post
#28
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 633 Joined: 23-February 06 Member No.: 8,301 |
Abbandon, that's exactly the problem people have with the system as is. That it models what you are describing.
They don't like that hacking is the process of running programs well. So, to represent hacking being more cerebral, more about problem-solving and quick-thinking, they want to bring mental attributes in. Though I have not made these changes in my game, I can't fault them for wanting that. |
|
|
|
|
Jun 28 2007, 07:39 PM
Post
#29
|
|||
|
Genuine Artificial Intelligence Group: Members Posts: 4,019 Joined: 12-June 03 Member No.: 4,715 |
No one is disagree with you that that is exactly what the rules say. Okay? Everyone agrees that that is exactly how it works, according to the rules. We all agree about that. We're not talking about the way the rules work, we're talking about a different way the rules could work, for a particular group of people who would like a different emphasis/feel. A "house-rule", if you will. ;-) But some people would prefer a rule set in which it did not work like that. You could see hacking as simply unleashing your programs on others, guided only by skill (supported by the rules), or you could see hacking as a process that actually involves understanding data in front of you, and making decisions and manipulating code and programs are merely tools to help you do that, but you could potentially do these things without programs, because you're an awesome hacker. It's a completely different way of looking at hacking, but it is consistent with many examples from classic cyberpunk sources (although the RAW was has many of it's own examples) In a lot of ways it's much more consistent with "real-life hackers", although I hesitate to bring any discussion of "real-life hackers" into this. But in real-life (which I cannot stress enough is NOT Shadowrun, and is not obligated to function under the same rules, particularly for computers) a hacker is a hacker because they are smart and knowledgeable, and programs just help them do their things faster. There are also script-kiddies, who just take simple exploits that hackers write and use them without knowing what they're doing. My system makes hackers more like the former, the core system makes hackers more like the latter. It's okay, man, we know that the book says. My house rules are 100% wrong, according to the rules. I'm aware of that. It's just a different way of doing things that provides different results. Results which are, at my gaming table, preferable in the minds of those people who are gaming at said table, although perhaps not to you. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Jun 28 2007, 07:41 PM
Post
#30
|
|
|
Target Group: Members Posts: 24 Joined: 3-December 05 Member No.: 8,040 |
I think the logic for hacking argument has three very strong points.
One: Hacking isn't about using computers properly it's about causing them to break in ways that are favorable to your ends. That means that a high logic allows you to better understand the ways a program or device will do under different circumstances, and allows a hacker to understand code more quickly. Also it allows a hacker to infer how a devices code works from the outputs it gives to different inputs. All of these things are essential to hacking. Two: The best programs are never the easiest to use. You could have a super powerful hacking suite custom built but it's probably all in the matrix equivalent of a esoteric command line. Your skill with the program is what matters more than the program itself. You need experience (skill) and logic to use programs successfully. People can still suck at photoshop, programs rarely do everything for you. Three: It's more consistant with the rest of the rules and just plain easier to keep track of. I'd rather have people use their logic for hacking and then allow script kiddies to replace logic with program rating if they want to pay for ( or spend the time finding) their hacking programs. |
|
|
|
|
Jun 28 2007, 08:20 PM
Post
#31
|
|
|
Shooting Target Group: Members Posts: 1,706 Joined: 30-June 06 From: Fort Wayne, IN Member No.: 8,814 |
I'm just going to delete my DS account because Moon-Hawk basically replied to everything exactly as I would...and we don't need clones spending time on the same board:)
The only clarification I want to make is Abbandon's comment: You guys are saying I can take my crappy little Attack 1 program that could barely scramble the words in a text file and damage anything and everything with it because im "smart". I cant take a calculator and make it hack into a website because im smart and i know how those two things work. The calculator is only programmed to do so much. I cant make it write HTML or type out text.. No, I am not saying that, because the Attack program 1 limits the amount of hits, just like the force of a spell. So your average hacker rolls 8 dice, gets 2 hits, but only one count because then have a crappy little Attack program. The "smart" hacker rolls 12 dice, gets 3 hits, but still only one count, because they are using a crappy little Attack program. The difference is, when they start using better programs, the "smarter" hacker is going to be better able to utilize it...and for me (and some others around here) this is how we prefer it...not right, not wrong, just they way we like it!!! |
|
|
|
|
Jun 28 2007, 08:27 PM
Post
#32
|
|||
|
Genuine Artificial Intelligence Group: Members Posts: 4,019 Joined: 12-June 03 Member No.: 4,715 |
We don't need clones, but we definitely need more people who agree with me! :D Hey everybody, look, a smiley! I'm only joking. Nobody light me on fire. Please? :| |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Jun 28 2007, 08:55 PM
Post
#33
|
|
|
Cybernetic Blood Mage Group: Members Posts: 3,472 Joined: 11-March 06 From: Northeastern Wyoming Member No.: 8,361 |
I don't know, personally I'm leaning towards keeping the Dicepools Skill+Program Rating, but limiting hits based off the character's Logic.
|
|
|
|
|
Jun 28 2007, 09:17 PM
Post
#34
|
|||
|
Prime Runner Group: Banned Posts: 3,732 Joined: 1-September 05 From: Prague, Czech Republic Member No.: 7,665 |
This is true. However, when a program is not involved, you are allowed to default (according to the FAQ). Defaulting is defined as using the Linked Attribute of your skill with a -1 dicepool rating (p. 110). The linked attribute of Hacking is Logic (p. 124). As defined in the rules right now, if you don't have an appropriate program to add to your dice pool, you add your Logic or Logic -1 instead (depending upon what you think about the text on page 223 or the contradictory examples in the FAQ). And honestly, since programs only go up to 6 and Logic goes up to 10, even taking a -1 penalty still makes you incredibly not inclined to actually use programs (except for programs which provide threasholds like Stealth, damage values like Attack, or arbitrary additional dicepools like Armor). It is a serious hole in the rules, and there is no reading of the RAW that makes it go away. Personally, I'm lobbying for a reformat of the program concept where programs are treated as equipment and are always an additional dicepool to be added to the base tests (which are normally Attribute + Skill). But hey, I don't have the last word on this. -Frank |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Jun 28 2007, 11:03 PM
Post
#35
|
|||
|
Running Target Group: Members Posts: 1,246 Joined: 8-June 07 Member No.: 11,869 |
I definitely like this houserule the best. It makes the most sense, it's the easiest to keep track of, and is the most consistent with the rest of SR rules. What is your price for programs and time/thresholds for programming? (I'm going to add this to my houserules sheet) |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Jun 29 2007, 04:23 PM
Post
#36
|
|
|
Genuine Artificial Intelligence Group: Members Posts: 4,019 Joined: 12-June 03 Member No.: 4,715 |
My complete hacking house rules are posted earlier in this thread. This is #2 on my list. Anything not in that list is treated however the book says.
In my rules, Common Use and Hacking programs are effectively free. The problem was, the Hacker ended up paying for all these programs, and then cracking them and distributing them to the entire group. It just made sense. So why is the hacker bearing the full burden of something the whole group gets? (so goes my reasoning) Plus, "piracy is the rule rather than the exception." I learned that on page 228. I assume that Common Use programs either come with the OS, or maybe they're add-ons, but whatever. Regular people probably pay prices for them, which comes out of their lifestyle costs, and corporations likewise for hacking programs. But I really don't care. This isn't JoeAverageGoesToBestBuyRun. I assume runners can get the programs they want for close enough to free that I just don't care. Same thing with the OS listed in the book. But bear in mind, just because I let runners have programs for free, they're still important. The number loaded into active memory still matters, and their legality still matters, so Joe Average will not be running around with Black Hammer. For anything else; custom OS, obscure plot-related programs, skillsofts, etc, I just use the standard costs, standard programming times, etc. One result of this is that suddenly the hacker isn't shelling out all those BP for programs (neither is anyone else, but they weren't anyway), hence rule #5 on my list. Now everyone gets what they pay for, not more, not less. Someone who wanted a crappy commlink still pays the next-to-nothing cost, and the super elite hacker still ends up investing about the same number of BP into their commlink, and everyone in between gets what they pay for, not more, not less. |
|
|
|
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 11th February 2025 - 03:36 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.